Dallas Cowboys QB Trey Lance Thread

For the 100th time, I have no idea if Trey is going to be good or bad. Not a single person on this board truly knows that either. Yet 100% of the posters who do "know" are all the ones who think he will never be good, which is ridiculous.

Trey is a complete unknown. That should be indisputable, but here we are.

Originally posted by eric_anthony:

Originally posted by krizay:

The fact that we are in year 3 and you are still asking if Trey can get there, as it relates to the staples of Kyle's offense. We should already know the answer to this. IMO we already do know the answer to this. Some people just refuse to believe it. At no point has he shown that he can. You don't need real game reps to know if some one can run the staples of your offense. That is exactly what training camp is for. Yes you need live game reps to improve upon your skill. You do not need it to evaluate. We as fans may because we can't see all the practices and what nots. The coaching staff however, they don't need the live game reps to know if the guy can lead your offense or not.

rather get rid of Trey for some reason? The reason ahs been stated ad nauseam. Again, some people just refuse to understand that reasoning. If the coaching staff does not feel you can lead their offense (not saying they do or don't because I don't know. speaking hypothetically) or feels the guy they just signed off the streets can run it jsut as good as you, why would you not trade him?

If we could trade any other backup for a pick that could possibly land us a starter would you pull the trigger? Especially if you feel that backup's replacement is already in the building.

In my personal opinion, the QB room will still be good even if Trey is traded. I promise you Trey lance does not make or break the QB room. I also promise you that SF will draft a QB, who by the way will more than likely have more experience than Trey. Allowing them to at the very least step in to the level he is leaving off at. SF would also likely bring in a vet QB if Trey gets traded. Even if it's just as a camp arm. But trust me we will be ok if Trey isn't in the QB room.

We would know probably know the answer to this if the kid started in 2021 after he was drafted. He operated the offense well in the second half of the Texans game considering it was his second start with limited experience and I don't care if it was against the Texans. It was an NFL team which is much different compared to what he faced at North Dakota state. We don't know if he can't operate the offense efficiently and consistently because he's hardly played and he got hurt in the second game this past season. So no it's a big enough of a sample size to know if he can or not. Game reps matter

We also don't know because he was running a different offense than we saw with Purdy.
Shanahan had him running as frequently as he was completing passes. It was gimmicky and a risk to his health.

I think Lance can run the offense that Purdy ran and hope he gets the same game plans we see for Brock.

Come on now people, we all know how this goes down.

Lance gets traded.
Purdy is injured within 6 games.
Darnold cant get it done.
Lance leads his new team to the playoffs.

This is the 49er way.

Originally posted by NinerPrideinNJ:

Originally posted by tankle104:

Originally posted by NinerPrideinNJ:
This board is so weird.

How some people can definitively and staunchly defend a rookie QB who's literally proven nothing other than that he gets hurt and is completely inexperienced (while some simultaneously have ripped Garoppolo for the same injury woes) baffles me.

The detractors of Lance (at least I think many of them) aren't attacking the guy, they're just saying that based off of injury history, lack of experience and reps at the college and professional level, and the actions/words of the front office and coaching staff signing Darnold and saying it's Purdy's job to lose....(coupled with a QB in Purdy who looked reallly good and didn't lose a game he finished as a 7th round rookie against some great teams, tough environments, and 2 playoff games), says all we need to know.

The Lance project really hit an end before it began for all those factors. His only realistic chance on this team is to completely WOW the team and coaching staff with other worldly play, on every play, in practice. And even then it's a long shot...because it's practice.

It's just a situational thing. And it sucks for Lance. I said it before, and I think others would agree, that I saw his career ending before it began in week 2 with that ankle snap. Even then, who's to say he'd have remained a starter the whole season. Most of the commentary from coaches and players were "he's getting there" "he's got a bright future" "we're excited to see what he has to offer".

Juxtapose that with what they said about Brock. It's not denigrating Lance; it's just that Brock delivered on a team of young vets that wants and are ready to win. It was very clear that those guys were concerned that they were going to slide through a 500 season or worse with Lance as he learned on the job and they didn't want that.

It's pretty simple and not a matter of liking or hating a guy. I literally have no feelings for Lance other than empathy and pity. But to blindly project this guy is going to suddenly blow people away and be an immediate star despite all the aforementioned just based on like 8 games at South Dakota State and his position as a #3 pick is kinda ridiculous. Zach Wilson went before him. JaMarcus Russell was #1. Nothing about draft position indicates who you are or will be. And the only reason people think he can be a huge talent is because of the 49ers' desperation, gross reach, and the 3 first-round price they paid.

And if you follow this team, you know that outside of Bosa (who everyone woulda picked except a few delusionals who thought Quinnen Williams was the guy), this team stinks in the first round/top of the first.

I agree 1000% with what you said, all of it. You articulated it very well.

it's not a matter of having anything against Lance. It's more of not having rose colored lenses on, looking at the situation objectively, while analyzing Lance and his situation.

If Purdy played like a normal 7th round rookie last year, our current QB room would be a complete joke and unknown.

it's not impossible for Lance to make a massive leap, assuming he stays healthy, but it is a long shot. It was always a long shot. Not something anyone should want to bank our season on. He's currently fighting for QB2 on the roster and until Brock shows he isn't the answer/bad recovery, that's the situation.

Agreed. While I didn't agree with moving up to no 3 in that draft for ANY QB given the price they paid and who was there...of the options, I wanted them to take Lance.

I'm not rooting against him by any means. I'll root for any Niners QB. If he sets the world on fire and looks unstoppable in camp, it's a good thing all around...for him and for the team.

I just can't possibly begin to foresee anything like that happening. It feels like an impossibility in SF given his trajectory and misfortune so far. His best shot is a fresh slate on another team. Even then, I just somehow don't see it because i feel like the injuries and early experience may have set him up for failure physically and mentally.

The most publicity this guy has is always in a disparaging light....Lance is hurt, Purdy took his job, Lance's future in jeopardy, is Lance a bust?

and the biggest, latest headline and his most viral so far, you ask?.....

A pic of the poor guy's woefully receding hairline at age 22 and commenters roasting him about early baldness and telling him to give it up and shave it.

That's A f**k TON for a 22 year old kid to overcome. Rooting for him but man, it's not reasonable or prudent to bank on him at this stage of the game.

Then again, him setting the world on fire with another team would be VINTAGE/TYPICAL 49ers' luck. So there's that.

I think he's mentally tough enough to power through it, especially the type of tight knit family he comes from. I'm not overly concerned about that.

to me, it comes down to patience from the team/coaches, teammates, and fan base. I really think his ceiling is a dak type player (not the dips**t mistakes dak makes) and he needs to play quite a bit before he gets there. He just has a huge lack of experience - seriously, 30 games in his life since his junior year in high school… that's nothing. He knows how to play ball but there is just so much he hasn't experienced on the field.

it doesn't help that someone came in and lit the game on fire from the get-go. Then because of his injuries, which swallowed up the time he was supposed to get to work through his inexperience, it's just unfortunate.

i do think his best shot is with another team who knows how to use a player of his skill set, and if he does leave, I'll follow his career and root for him. Same thing I did with smith, and I didn't want him starting over Kap.

best thing we can do right now as fans is just support him and hope he proves those of us that don't think he can light it on fire, wrong. Then we have a legit qb competition.

Originally posted by tankle104:
I think he's mentally tough enough to power through it, especially the type of tight knit family he comes from. I'm not overly concerned about that.

to me, it comes down to patience from the team/coaches, teammates, and fan base. I really think his ceiling is a dak type player (not the dips**t mistakes dak makes) and he needs to play quite a bit before he gets there. He just has a huge lack of experience - seriously, 30 games in his life since his junior year in high school… that's nothing. He knows how to play ball but there is just so much he hasn't experienced on the field.

it doesn't help that someone came in and lit the game on fire from the get-go. Then because of his injuries, which swallowed up the time he was supposed to get to work through his inexperience, it's just unfortunate.

i do think his best shot is with another team who knows how to use a player of his skill set, and if he does leave, I'll follow his career and root for him. Same thing I did with smith, and I didn't want him starting over Kap.

best thing we can do right now as fans is just support him and hope he proves those of us that don't think he can light it on fire, wrong. Then we have a legit qb competition.

That definitely isn't what is going on in this thread. Not directed at you BTW I think your takes are fair for the most part.

Originally posted by NDSU:
Come on now people, we all know how this goes down.

Lance gets traded.
Purdy is injured within 6 games.
Darnold cant get it done.
Lance leads his new team to the playoffs.

This is the 49er way.

When has this ever happened in niner history to make this the niner way

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:
For the 100th time, I have no idea if Trey is going to be good or bad. Not a single person on this board truly knows that either. Yet 100% of the posters who do "know" are all the ones who think he will never be good, which is ridiculous.

Trey is a complete unknown. That should be indisputable, but here we are.

He is absolutely an unknown. He hasn't played enough or been able to grow enough on the field to really know. We can say what he has been or where we think he's at right now, but it's such a small sample size that it's irrelevant in the big picture.

i personally take what I know and seen about him, extrapolate it out into what sort of future projection I think he will have, even though I know that's worthless to everyone but me.

i also understand that he's so inexperienced that we really don't know what he will or can turn into.

my projection of him isn't some bum. It's a 8-13 area - similar to dak/jimmy but different play style. I see him being a top game manager with some ability to make really nice plays (like dak does from time to time) but not someone you can put average players around and he will pick them up. He needs a really good team around him to compete at the highest level (like hurts. Where as players like Bree's/Brady/Rodgers etc could make average players better than they are). I could completely understand I could be 100% wrong though.

then the only question is, how long does he need to get to a point where we know. I truly think that's the biggest issue. Is it a full season? Is it two? Is it 10 straight games? I have no idea

Originally posted by JoseCortez:
What the hell has he done? Go 1-2. His lone win was against a s**tty texans team in which he got shutout in the first half and maybe had 4 good throws in the entire game. His sample size is nothing. He's done nothing.

Yet you have no issues bashing him for how he played vs the Bears who ended up with teh worst record this season. It's the NFL.

That same exact Houston team beat the Chargers the week prior, that loss ended up keeping them out of the playoffs. Guess Herbert sucks too?
Or Josh Allen who put up numbers just like Trey against them? He's terrible too cuz Houston is so bad right?

Show me a QB who lit it up out of the gate when they turned 21 a few months prior to the start of the season.

It's also funny to me that the sample size seems to be enough for you and others here to claim the guy isn't going anywhere with this team but not enough to say he's got a future here.

Originally posted by CharlieSheen:
It is ridiculous, which shows that the logic you use to say Darnold is worse than Trey isn't sound. I can easily apply that logic to my sister. Darnold sucked so I'm just going to assume my sister's better, even though there's 0 proof of that

Darnold has 55 starts in this league. 55...how many does your sister have?

4 starts for Lance is enough for you to think he's not a good QB but 55 starts from Darnold tells you he's better than Trey in this offense.

How did our Josh Rosen reclamation project work?

Originally posted by genus49:
Darnold has 55 starts in this league. 55...how many does your sister have?

4 starts for Lance is enough for you to think he's not a good QB but 55 starts from Darnold tells you he's better than Trey in this offense.

How did our Josh Rosen reclamation project work?

He'd take Jamarcus Russell over Trey

Originally posted by krizay:

Originally posted by genus49:
You can disagree with it all you want...we're past the pre-draft talk.

Shanahan wasn't drafting anyone he felt wasn't a fit for his offense. He's literally talked about getting someone who can do the things Trey can do. It's simply about staying healthy and becoming more consistent at those things.

Trey's offense at North Dakota was very similar to Kyle's. He's done a ton of the key concepts Kyle uses in the NFL as a 19 year old kid but we're supposed to pretend the guy is a lost cause?

Shanahan is not drafting anyone #3 overall who he thinks cannot play in his offense. The run aspect from Trey was simply an addition to Kyle's offense, not a change of the whole thing. It's called adapting and improving, not changing.

Do we forget that Kyle was apparently very high on Josh Allen before we gave Jimmy the big deal to keep him long term? Is Josh Allen not a fit for Shanahan's offense? Is Jalen Hurts not a fit for Kyle's offense?

The issue is can Trey get there and become more consistent at the stapes of Kyle's offense. The injury clouded his evaluation in a big way and Purdy gave them a guy who could run the offense at a very high level. The issue right now is we have no clue how Brock will come back. I'm sure we all thought after Garoppolo's ACL injury we'd be getting the 2017 Jimmy G but there were cracks in his game that showed up. He became more skittish in the pocket. I certainly hope that's not the case with Brock but that's why I'm seeing what Lance can do until Brock can come back and show he's the same guy we saw last year.

Some people would rather get rid of Trey for some reason. I'm keeping a strong QB room, insulating myself from the disaster of last season and hoping for the best case scenario where you have 2 franchise level QBs and we can trade one for much better draft capital that would come with moving Trey right now.

The fact that we are in year 3 and you are still asking if Trey can get there, as it relates to the staples of Kyle's offense. We should already know the answer to this. IMO we already do know the answer to this. Some people just refuse to believe it. At no point has he shown that he can. You don't need real game reps to know if some one can run the staples of your offense. That is exactly what training camp is for. Yes you need live game reps to improve upon your skill. You do not need it to evaluate. We as fans may because we can't see all the practices and what nots. The coaching staff however, they don't need the live game reps to know if the guy can lead your offense or not.

rather get rid of Trey for some reason? The reason ahs been stated ad nauseam. Again, some people just refuse to understand that reasoning. If the coaching staff does not feel you can lead their offense (not saying they do or don't because I don't know. speaking hypothetically) or feels the guy they just signed off the streets can run it jsut as good as you, why would you not trade him?

If we could trade any other backup for a pick that could possibly land us a starter would you pull the trigger? Especially if you feel that backup's replacement is already in the building.

In my personal opinion, the QB room will still be good even if Trey is traded. I promise you Trey lance does not make or break the QB room. I also promise you that SF will draft a QB, who by the way will more than likely have more experience than Trey. Allowing them to at the very least step in to the level he is leaving off at. SF would also likely bring in a vet QB if Trey gets traded. Even if it's just as a camp arm. But trust me we will be ok if Trey isn't in the QB room.

You think a season ending injury in week 2 year 2 and the first season he was supposed to be QB1 has something to do with the lack of evaluation? I mean you wrote that out like you were doing something. The kid is turning 23 next month and you're over here acting like he's a finished product.

And when did the team say they were going to get rid of Trey? They say the same BS they always say "we'll listen to any offer and take it if the right one comes along even if it's us being traded" those talking points seem to be ignored but other stupid tidbits are under a microscope and turned into "team has no room for Lance and he'll never get an opportunity to play here"

...as if we didn't just watch this team end up on QB5ish to end our season.

Trading a young QB with still so much growth potential on a rookie deal would be negligent. You think the QB room would be good? It would instantly go to this:
Brock Purdy - not cleared to throw yet. No clue if he'll be back for week 1
Sam Darnold - has his share of injuries and missing time, 55 games of inconsistency and some awful play...and someone who has never stepped foot in this huddle and never played with this team before.

Sounds like a recipe for success!

Originally posted by 49ers81:
I'm getting pretty tired of this take which is not only lazy, but inaccurate. Those games weren't meaningless as one content creator recently opined and they weren't garbage time wins. It isn't difficult to make the argument that it was that five game stretch that helped lead the team to where they are now. Three of those wins came against teams that were headed to the playoffs that year. As I recall only one of them came against a team that was maybe holding some of their starters out. It was that stretch of games that helped validate what Kyle had been trying to do offensively but hadn't been able to accomplish because of the poor play of everybody else he had at that position.

It also helped the players buy into what Kyle was trying to do and showed them if they stuck with the plan they could win. Arik Armstead has gone on record as saying that one of the reasons they locker room liked Jimmy so much was because he helped get them out of that cycle of losing. If you go back and look at some of the media clips surrounding those games you can see Jimmy on the sideline talking up his wide receivers, telling them that the opposing team can't handle what they're giving them. As a result of those five games Jimmy emerged as a leader on the team and gave them someone to rally around. The fact that they ended up going nowhere when he got hurt the next year and then went to the Super Bowl the following year probably only solidified his standing on the team.

I make no bones about the fact that I liked having Jimmy as the QB. He had his shortcomings but he helped the team win more than he caused them to lose and he always tried to represent the franchise like a pro. I have no complaints about his time here. I hated seeing him go to the Raiders because I don't think McDaniel is going to be a very good head coach and because I haven't liked the Raiders since the days of John Madden and Snake Stabler. I hope he has some success there though.

Now the team has a new QB room with some interesting components. The young gunslinger coming off a pretty bad injury, a big armed but inexperienced player with a lot to prove and a young vet who was in need of a fresh start to try and reclaim his career. Should make for an interesting off season. Go Niners!

Good post!

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by genus49:
Darnold has 55 starts in this league. 55...how many does your sister have?

4 starts for Lance is enough for you to think he's not a good QB but 55 starts from Darnold tells you he's better than Trey in this offense.

How did our Josh Rosen reclamation project work?

He'd take Jamarcus Russell over Trey

Russell was one of the most talented QB prospects of all time. He didn't work a day in the NFL. Did you hear the Kirk Morrison story on JaMarcus? He simply took the gtd cash. Back in his day, rook QBs at the top of round 1 were paid near or at the highest QB pay in the league. So imagine CJ Stroud coming in and getting $50m aav. TL didn't get nearly as much cash as Russell, and Russell was a long time ago. The reduction in rook payscale was a great thing for football.

Originally posted by genus49:

Originally posted by tankle104:

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:

Originally posted by genus49:
5/15 43 yards 0 TD 2 INT 6 rushes for 32 yards and 2 fumbles(not lost though)

If that's what you consider his best play...well yikes.

Nothing disingenuous at all about cherry picking someones worst statline from a single afternoon and putting it up as a fair representation of their 'best play'

Do you have any idea what happened in the game you refer to? Did you actually watch it? Or do you just post the stats?

I see he did get credit on that one for a GW drive. I think the season is more representative of his ability than your post is. TL would agree, I wouldn't watch the CHI game and say, that's TLs best ball. Far from it. Look at the HOU game.

I just don't understand how you can knock Darnolds play but praise Lance? Sure it's been a small sample size but it isn't like he's done well himself either.

why are people so threatened by darnold when it comes to Lance? If he's as special as some claim, he will blow darnold out of the water. Shouldn't even be worried about it.

I'm not praising Lance, I'm simply taking issue with the narrative by some of you guys who act like he played awful.

Darnold has had several awful games on tape and has a 55 game sample size showing he's not the guy he was thought to be at his draft spot.

Lance has had 4 starts, 3 where he actually finished and the single game where he wasn't a 21 year old rookie was in monsoon level game where nobody would look good passing the ball.

It's simply pointing out that Trey is far from a finished product. He may very well turn out to suck but there is a major difference in the two former 3rd ovearll picks. One has a much bigger sample size and a lot more games on tape which actually hurt teams from winning.

And as for "cherry picking" someone's worst statline...I assure you that wasn't his worst game.

That would be the 11/32 86 yards 0 TD, 4 INT -1 rushing yards 1 fumble lost game vs the Patriots(I believe that was the I see ghosts game)

The game I so called "cherry picked" was LITERALLY his LAST game.

And that's the point. Some of you guys are more comfortable going with Darnold if Purdy isn't healthy than Lance and yet from the two guys the one who has real stinkers on his resume is the one you're more confident in getting us wins.

Yet claim they have no bias against the kid.

Originally posted by WINiner:

Originally posted by genus49:

Originally posted by tankle104:

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:

Originally posted by genus49:
5/15 43 yards 0 TD 2 INT 6 rushes for 32 yards and 2 fumbles(not lost though)

If that's what you consider his best play...well yikes.

Nothing disingenuous at all about cherry picking someones worst statline from a single afternoon and putting it up as a fair representation of their 'best play'

Do you have any idea what happened in the game you refer to? Did you actually watch it? Or do you just post the stats?

I see he did get credit on that one for a GW drive. I think the season is more representative of his ability than your post is. TL would agree, I wouldn't watch the CHI game and say, that's TLs best ball. Far from it. Look at the HOU game.

I just don't understand how you can knock Darnolds play but praise Lance? Sure it's been a small sample size but it isn't like he's done well himself either.

why are people so threatened by darnold when it comes to Lance? If he's as special as some claim, he will blow darnold out of the water. Shouldn't even be worried about it.

I'm not praising Lance, I'm simply taking issue with the narrative by some of you guys who act like he played awful.

Darnold has had several awful games on tape and has a 55 game sample size showing he's not the guy he was thought to be at his draft spot.

Lance has had 4 starts, 3 where he actually finished and the single game where he wasn't a 21 year old rookie was in monsoon level game where nobody would look good passing the ball.

It's simply pointing out that Trey is far from a finished product. He may very well turn out to suck but there is a major difference in the two former 3rd ovearll picks. One has a much bigger sample size and a lot more games on tape which actually hurt teams from winning.

And as for "cherry picking" someone's worst statline...I assure you that wasn't his worst game.

That would be the 11/32 86 yards 0 TD, 4 INT -1 rushing yards 1 fumble lost game vs the Patriots(I believe that was the I see ghosts game)

The game I so called "cherry picked" was LITERALLY his LAST game.

And that's the point. Some of you guys are more comfortable going with Darnold if Purdy isn't healthy than Lance and yet from the two guys the one who has real stinkers on his resume is the one you're more confident in getting us wins.

Yet claim they have no bias against the kid.

My bias is I WANT WINNERS bias