Dallas Cowboys QB Trey Lance Thread

Originally posted by 49erBigMac:

Originally posted by ritz126:

Originally posted by 49erBigMac:
Why base anything on college tape? Especially old college tape.

You also don't start him because he's a high pick, you start him because he's by far the most physically gifted QB in the room, and the smartest.

Only thing he lacks is experience, well there's a quick way of getting him that. Play him.

what?

because hes a rookie and thats the only tape we have of playing him

the most common busts are physical specimen who dont have the technique. If we didnt have a chance to win the SB i would say start him for experiance but this is a SB ready team now and Lance will have a great opportunity when hes ready but if youre telling me hes ready now there is 0 evidence for that

find one person pre draft who said Lance was ready to start. People are just saying hes ready to start because now hes a 49er not based on rationale just emotion

It's about what you can already see with his physical ability, and what everyone is saying about his mental acumen.

College football is practically a different sport, yes you use it to project how a prospect might do, but it's really irrelevant once they get into the league.

The most common busts are guys who go onto bad teams and are leaned on before they're ready.

It's not emotion, it's logic. Kyle wants a new element to his offense, he's said it about 10 times this off-season, and he gave it as a reason for not drafting Mac Jones.

Jimmy doesn't give him that element.

It's the Trey era in the Bay area, embrace it.

fine one post not just by me but by anyone who didnt say it isnt the trey era

I am saying i want to win a SB and have the best opportunity to succeed long term and imo i think that is starting Jimmy G this year sprinkle Lance in packages throughout the year and increase his playing time over time and let him be the full time starter late this year or next year

We will see what Kyle thinks the actions he has shown i think he will not be the starter on day 1 and his college tape did nothing to convince me that he should start day 1. A lot will be determined in TC but how is it not based on emotion? can you show me film showing he should be a day 1 starter in nfl? Just being athlethic is not enough in the nfl

College tape is also not irrelevant. It becomes irrelevent after they play in the nfl but until then its very relevant thats how you draft players and ball placement and accuracy were his biggest problems in college and those issues carry on to NFL and are the most important trait in a qb.

Originally posted by Waterbear:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by Waterbear:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by 49ersRing:
The "sit Trey until Jimmy dies of old age" crowd like to imagine that if the Chiefs had had the audacity to play Mahomes his rookie season that they would have imploded and Mahomes would be out of the league by now.

Right? If sitting lead to more success every single QB drafted would be sitting year one.

Only way Trey isn't starting at some point this yr is if Jimmy is playing like the league MVP (doubtful) or his mechanics/understanding of the playbook aren't up to par…which from everything we're hearing/seeing isn't the case either.

Let's stop pretending like Jimmy is some elite QB, he's an okay starter, dude is gonna be gone in a year tops….honestly I don't see this massive downgrade between Jimmy and rookie Lance.

what Lance was asked to do in NDSU is gonna be damn near the same Kyle will ask of him in yr1 (maybe not running so much). Tons of play-action, boots/rollouts, half reads, slants, RPOs, get the ball in play-makers hands on 1st reads, and handing the ball off like 500x.

There's a huge myth going around about potentially "wasting" the season with starting a rookie QB. I've seen many posters say it so it's not just random trolls either.

The elephant in the room is the rookie wage scale. If you take a step back and just look at the super bowl winners over the years after the rookie wage scale you'll notice that unless you're Tom Brady, you have a much higher chance of winning the Super Bowl if your QB is on his rookie deal. Before the rookie wage scale, you have a bad teams having to pay their rookie QBs an absurd amount of money before they prove anything which almost always results in a bad season.

So there is an argument to be made that we would have a better chance to win the Super Bowl if we somehow traded Jimmy G's contract. That doesn't mean Jimmy can't win the Super Bowl this year and that doesn't mean it's certain that Lance would play better than Jimmy did in 2019. And I also don't hate the strategy we're using by keeping Jimmy. I think it's smart to have two potential quality starting QBs on the roster given our history with injuries.

But to argue the same old adage "rookie QBs never win super bowls" is beyond ignorant given what we know about teams that win Super Bowls post wage scale. Our team's success with regards to QB play is predicated on their ability to play, period. Nothing more and nothing less. And there's plenty of examples of rookies being more productive than Jimmy's best season.

So to claim we would be wasting the season starting Lance over Jimmy is basically saying it's impossible for him to play better than Jimmy when there's no you can assume that. We're in a very unique situation with a really good roster. You could make the argument this is the best team to draft a QB in the top 5 of the draft in NFL history. Whoever starts this season will be set up for success and I'll be rooting for them.

A rookie has never won a SB. Lance won't be a rookie next year and we still have 4 years of his contract left

^^Exhibit A.

I'm embarrassed for you that you just responded with that.

Originally posted by Waterbear:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by Waterbear:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by Waterbear:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by 49ersRing:
The "sit Trey until Jimmy dies of old age" crowd like to imagine that if the Chiefs had had the audacity to play Mahomes his rookie season that they would have imploded and Mahomes would be out of the league by now.

Right? If sitting lead to more success every single QB drafted would be sitting year one.

Only way Trey isn't starting at some point this yr is if Jimmy is playing like the league MVP (doubtful) or his mechanics/understanding of the playbook aren't up to par…which from everything we're hearing/seeing isn't the case either.

Let's stop pretending like Jimmy is some elite QB, he's an okay starter, dude is gonna be gone in a year tops….honestly I don't see this massive downgrade between Jimmy and rookie Lance.

what Lance was asked to do in NDSU is gonna be damn near the same Kyle will ask of him in yr1 (maybe not running so much). Tons of play-action, boots/rollouts, half reads, slants, RPOs, get the ball in play-makers hands on 1st reads, and handing the ball off like 500x.

There's a huge myth going around about potentially "wasting" the season with starting a rookie QB. I've seen many posters say it so it's not just random trolls either.

The elephant in the room is the rookie wage scale. If you take a step back and just look at the super bowl winners over the years after the rookie wage scale you'll notice that unless you're Tom Brady, you have a much higher chance of winning the Super Bowl if your QB is on his rookie deal. Before the rookie wage scale, you have a bad teams having to pay their rookie QBs an absurd amount of money before they prove anything which almost always results in a bad season.

So there is an argument to be made that we would have a better chance to win the Super Bowl if we somehow traded Jimmy G's contract. That doesn't mean Jimmy can't win the Super Bowl this year and that doesn't mean it's certain that Lance would play better than Jimmy did in 2019. And I also don't hate the strategy we're using by keeping Jimmy. I think it's smart to have two potential quality starting QBs on the roster given our history with injuries.

But to argue the same old adage "rookie QBs never win super bowls" is beyond ignorant given what we know about teams that win Super Bowls post wage scale. Our team's success with regards to QB play is predicated on their ability to play, period. Nothing more and nothing less. And there's plenty of examples of rookies being more productive than Jimmy's best season.

So to claim we would be wasting the season starting Lance over Jimmy is basically saying it's impossible for him to play better than Jimmy when there's no you can assume that. We're in a very unique situation with a really good roster. You could make the argument this is the best team to draft a QB in the top 5 of the draft in NFL history. Whoever starts this season will be set up for success and I'll be rooting for them.

A rookie has never won a SB. Lance won't be a rookie next year and we still have 4 years of his contract left

^^Exhibit A.

I'm embarrassed for you that you just responded with that.

Embarrassed, Is it not the truth ?

Just admit you read nothing I wrote.

An adage is "a proverb or short statement expressing a general truth". Yes, it is a fact that no rookie QB has won the super bowl.

The whole point of my post was to explain why that is the case, the affect of the rookie wage scale 10 years ago and it's impact on rookie QBs pre implementation.

Today, unless you're Tom Brady, you're much more likely to win the super bowl with a QB on his rookie contract than a QB on a max deal like Jimmy.

We're seeing rookie QBs every year put up top 10 numbers and having huge impacts and statistical seasons Jimmy could never dream of. Being a rookie or second year or third year doesn't matter. The only thing that matters is your ability to play within your teams system. Especially for a team like us that wins with defense and a complex run game, If Lance started he wouldn't be asked to do much just like Jimmy G in 2/3 playoff games.

What's embarrassing is stating "no rookie QB has ever won the Super Bowl" without understanding the context of that statement and believing it has any barring on who gives us the best chance to win.

No matter what context you try to add , it has never happened and mostly likely not happen this year.

I don't care how much you hype a 10k/1 bet, I'm not banking on it.

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:
No matter what context you try to add , it has never happened and mostly likely not happen this year.

I don't care how much you hype a 10k/1 bet, I'm not banking on it.

why is it most likely not going to happen, though? Probably the same reason that it's most likely Tampa Bay winning back to back Super Bowls even with Tom Brady is most likely not going to happen, too? 100%, odds, not actual causation, right?

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:
Where is this jimmy is elite talk?

winning is what matters, but you want to throw in a guy who hasn't even played the in the NFL.. extreme takes there

Lol y'all talk like Jimmy is the only dude that can win games in SF which is complete b******t.

Originally posted by Waterbear:
There's a huge myth going around about potentially "wasting" the season with starting a rookie QB. I've seen many posters say it so it's not just random trolls either.

The elephant in the room is the rookie wage scale. If you take a step back and just look at the super bowl winners over the years after the rookie wage scale you'll notice that unless you're Tom Brady, you have a much higher chance of winning the Super Bowl if your QB is on his rookie deal. Before the rookie wage scale, you have a bad teams having to pay their rookie QBs an absurd amount of money before they prove anything which almost always results in a bad season.

So there is an argument to be made that we would have a better chance to win the Super Bowl if we somehow traded Jimmy G's contract. That doesn't mean Jimmy can't win the Super Bowl this year and that doesn't mean it's certain that Lance would play better than Jimmy did in 2019. And I also don't hate the strategy we're using by keeping Jimmy. I think it's smart to have two potential quality starting QBs on the roster given our history with injuries.

But to argue the same old adage "rookie QBs never win super bowls" is beyond ignorant given what we know about teams that win Super Bowls post wage scale. Our team's success with regards to QB play is predicated on their ability to play, period. Nothing more and nothing less. And there's plenty of examples of rookies being more productive than Jimmy's best season.

So to claim we would be wasting the season starting Lance over Jimmy is basically saying it's impossible for him to play better than Jimmy when there's no you can assume that. We're in a very unique situation with a really good roster. You could make the argument this is the best team to draft a QB in the top 5 of the draft in NFL history. Whoever starts this season will be set up for success and I'll be rooting for them.

.

Originally posted by ritz126:
Starting someone just because he is high round rookie is not a recipe for success. Let him start when hes ready TC and preseason will determine that because based on his college tape i dont see how anyone believes hes is ready to start now and all the talk pre draft regarding Lance supports that theory as well

How does sitting him make him ready?

You couldn't literally looking at every QB prospect and say they're not ready…NO ONE is ready to play, they only get better by playing.

there's actually been plenty of talk that he's more ready to start then what people in here think

Originally posted by ronniefreakinlott42:
And if he sits all year, next year he still won't have ever played in the NFL. By that rationale he never should LOL.

Originally posted by random49er:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:
No matter what context you try to add , it has never happened and mostly likely not happen this year.

I don't care how much you hype a 10k/1 bet, I'm not banking on it.

why is it most likely not going to happen, though? Probably the same reason that it's most likely Tampa Bay winning back to back Super Bowls even with Tom Brady is most likely not going to happen, too? 100%, odds, not actual causation, right?

Anything can happen, But patience is a virtue

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:
Anything can happen, But patience is a virtue

Which is why Jimmy will probably take snap #1 unless he's hurt or Trey is just absolutely lights out.

Originally posted by random49er:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:
Anything can happen, But patience is a virtue

Which is why Jimmy will probably take snap #1 unless he's hurt or Trey is just absolutely lights out.

That's what I've been saying this whole time lol

but Trey will be the first to win a SB so I've been told

Originally posted by NYniner85:
How does sitting him make him ready?

You couldn't literally looking at every QB prospect and say they're not ready…NO ONE is ready to play, they only get better by playing.

there's actually been plenty of talk that he's more ready to start then what people in here think

no

Lawrence, Wilson and Fields are more ready to play in this draft based on body of work in college. Players who arent ready mechanically will not get better by playing they engrain bad habbits which are even harder to remove

again you may be right we will see in TC and preseason but what i have been saying is that based on his college play he isnt ready and i bet if i looked at your post pre draft you said the same thing. the only thing that has changed is hes been drafted by the 49ers

Originally posted by ritz126:
no

Lawrence, Wilson and Fields are more ready to play in this draft based on body of work in college. Players who arent ready mechanically will not get better by playing they engrain bad habbits which are even harder to remove

again you may be right we will see in TC and preseason but what i have been saying is that based on his college play he isnt ready and i bet if i looked at your post pre draft you said the same thing. the only thing that has changed is hes been drafted by the 49ers

Being ready today in July,....vs being ready in late September or October, though, are completely different things.

I can't see Lance beating out Jimmy in camp to start week 1 if we're keeping it simple and saying it's about who gives the team a better chance to win. Now if we're not winning games or JG gets hurt than it's an easy decision lol.

Originally posted by NYniner85:
How does sitting him make him ready?

You couldn't literally looking at every QB prospect and say they're not ready…NO ONE is ready to play, they only get better by playing.

there's actually been plenty of talk that he's more ready to start then what people in here think

Hey NYniner85, I'm just curious of your opinion. You may have mentioned in this thread but it's a lot to read and may have missed it. Just being a football fan, no rose colored shades when or what do you think would be Treys' or the teams best outcome for him to start? First quarter or the season, after the bye week? Just curious, you put a lot into your post and don't just ramble on calling people idiots simply because their opinion may be different.