QB Sam Darnold is a Viking

Originally posted by TyCore:

Originally posted by English:

Originally posted by 9moon:
SAMMMM BAMMM BOOOO !! hereeee we GOO !! WOOOOO !!!!

All yours now baby!!! all yours !! B-ROCK not coming back !!! ALL yours !!!

If Purdy misses the Bengals game he will be back against the Jags. Bet on it. The only way he isn't coming straight back is if he picked up some sort of career ender.

Unless he goes all Chris Borland on us.

Originally posted by 49ersRing:
His career QB rating isn't that far off Jimmy's as a Raider, so maybe he'll get that nice KS bump and play at Jimmy's level (under KS).

If Darnold plays at Jimmy's level with us, great. But Brock should have no concern over losing his job to a player on that level.

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:
If Darnold plays at Jimmy's level with us, great. But Brock should have no concern over losing his job to a player on that level.

It's about the TEAM
never about one guy

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:
If Darnold plays at Jimmy's level with us, great. But Brock should have no concern over losing his job to a player on that level.

It's about the TEAM
never about one guy

Understood. And the team is better with Brock than with Jimmy G level of play.

If he can put up 250, 2tds, 1int I think it'll be enough to take out them bengals

Originally posted by MoistButtCheeks:
If he can put up 250, 2tds, 1int I think it'll be enough to take out them bengals

To me, its the 1INT that I question. He has a history of throwing the ball to the other team, forcing things, not being good in the pocket, etc. I dont doubt he can approach toe 250/2TD line. I just question if he will be able to do the other things needed from a QB.

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:
If Darnold plays at Jimmy's level with us, great. But Brock should have no concern over losing his job to a player on that level.

It's about the TEAM
never about one guy

Understood. And the team is better with Brock than with Jimmy G level of play.

I wouldn't say Darnold in SF, which we haven't seen before outside of preseason, is any level of play. Let's see it first, then judge. I wouldn't put JG and Sam in the same sentence. They are very different QBs to my eye test. Talking about their traits / abilities.

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:

Originally posted by MoistButtCheeks:
If he can put up 250, 2tds, 1int I think it'll be enough to take out them bengals

To me, its the 1INT that I question. He has a history of throwing the ball to the other team, forcing things, not being good in the pocket, etc. I dont doubt he can approach toe 250/2TD line. I just question if he will be able to do the other things needed from a QB.

Kyle talked about this, when you are down, picks happen. You have to force the action, and TOs happen. On a dumpster fire team, you are down a lot. We just saw two picks on the two final drives, having to throw and the D knowing we have to throw. I don't view the past Darnold turnovers as symptomatic of Darnold, I view them as symptomatic of a QB in a position, where the team is trailing the game. To try and win, you have to play hero ball, on bad rosters with bad coaching. Here we have a good roster, and good coaching, and hopefully aren't in a deep hole in the 4th.

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:

Originally posted by MoistButtCheeks:
If he can put up 250, 2tds, 1int I think it'll be enough to take out them bengals

To me, its the 1INT that I question. He has a history of throwing the ball to the other team, forcing things, not being good in the pocket, etc. I dont doubt he can approach toe 250/2TD line. I just question if he will be able to do the other things needed from a QB.

Kyle talked about this, when you are down, picks happen. You have to force the action, and TOs happen. On a dumpster fire team, you are down a lot. We just saw two picks on the two final drives, having to throw and the D knowing we have to throw. I don't view the past Darnold turnovers as symptomatic of Darnold, I view them as symptomatic of a QB in a position, where the team is trailing the game. To try and win, you have to play hero ball, on bad rosters with bad coaching. Here we have a good roster, and good coaching, and hopefully aren't in a deep hole in the 4th.

I really dont have the energy to break down all of Darnolds boxscores, but to dismiss his turnovers because you think he was down in the games is just an assumption at this point. Yes, I know his team was down a lot. But a lot of the time, he was the reason for that. When a QB averages more than a turnover a game, I find it much harder to give that guy the benefit of the doubt than you do.

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:
I really dont have the energy to break down all of Darnolds boxscores, but to dismiss his turnovers because you think he was down in the games is just an assumption at this point. Yes, I know his team was down a lot. But a lot of the time, he was the reason for that. When a QB averages more than a turnover a game, I find it much harder to give that guy the benefit of the doubt than you do.

don't listen to me, listen to coach:

"I truly see Sam talent-wise as a top pick in the draft, just like he was," Shanahan added. "You watch his whole career and there's no reason to think differently. He hasn't been in the best situations, so we're glad to have him here."

also

I don't think he's always been in the best situations, which is tough for quarterbacks. It's tough for all players, but it is one position, and it depends on the other 10 guys around you, too.

"And I think Sam has played and done some really good things in this league, but hasn't won a ton of games and been thrown in some situations where you're going to keep both teams in the game because you got to keep slinging that ball and give your team a chance to win. And so, you don't always have the best stats, but you see the ability. And he's always had that ability since his first year in college when we started watching him, and there's no reason he can't do it."

I would be in agreement with Kyle.

Going to be positive, it will be fun to see what Sam does against the Bengals, screw it..I am up for it lol. But yeah, agree, BP will defo be back for the Jags, unless something very serious injury wise.

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:
If Darnold plays at Jimmy's level with us, great. But Brock should have no concern over losing his job to a player on that level.

It's about the TEAM
never about one guy

Understood. And the team is better with Brock than with Jimmy G level of play.

I wouldn't say Darnold in SF, which we haven't seen before outside of preseason, is any level of play. Let's see it first, then judge. I wouldn't put JG and Sam in the same sentence. They are very different QBs to my eye test. Talking about their traits / abilities.

SMH. If you quoted the entire chain instead of just quoting my reply, you would see that the person I replied to was talking about if Sam played at Jimmy's level.

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:
I really dont have the energy to break down all of Darnolds boxscores, but to dismiss his turnovers because you think he was down in the games is just an assumption at this point. Yes, I know his team was down a lot. But a lot of the time, he was the reason for that. When a QB averages more than a turnover a game, I find it much harder to give that guy the benefit of the doubt than you do.

don't listen to me, listen to coach:

"I truly see Sam talent-wise as a top pick in the draft, just like he was," Shanahan added. "You watch his whole career and there's no reason to think differently. He hasn't been in the best situations, so we're glad to have him here."

also

I don't think he's always been in the best situations, which is tough for quarterbacks. It's tough for all players, but it is one position, and it depends on the other 10 guys around you, too.

"And I think Sam has played and done some really good things in this league, but hasn't won a ton of games and been thrown in some situations where you're going to keep both teams in the game because you got to keep slinging that ball and give your team a chance to win. And so, you don't always have the best stats, but you see the ability. And he's always had that ability since his first year in college when we started watching him, and there's no reason he can't do it."

I would be in agreement with Kyle.

Not a single thing you just posted backs up your claim that Sam was always playing from behind. Like I said before, maybe you are right. But you are assuming, and I have no energy to look through 55 boxscores to check to see if your assumption was accurate. Kyle certainly didnt explicitly say what you saying.

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:
Not a single thing you just posted backs up your claim that Sam was always playing from behind. Like I said before, maybe you are right. But you are assuming, and I have no energy to look through 55 boxscores to check to see if your assumption was accurate. Kyle certainly didnt explicitly say what you saying.

It's not so much that he was playing behind… moreso that he was the focal point of a bad offense (scheme and talent) in his first few years in the league. Similar to Josh Allen and your boy Elway.

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:
I really dont have the energy to break down all of Darnolds boxscores, but to dismiss his turnovers because you think he was down in the games is just an assumption at this point. Yes, I know his team was down a lot. But a lot of the time, he was the reason for that. When a QB averages more than a turnover a game, I find it much harder to give that guy the benefit of the doubt than you do.

don't listen to me, listen to coach:

"I truly see Sam talent-wise as a top pick in the draft, just like he was," Shanahan added. "You watch his whole career and there's no reason to think differently. He hasn't been in the best situations, so we're glad to have him here."

also

I don't think he's always been in the best situations, which is tough for quarterbacks. It's tough for all players, but it is one position, and it depends on the other 10 guys around you, too.

"And I think Sam has played and done some really good things in this league, but hasn't won a ton of games and been thrown in some situations where you're going to keep both teams in the game because you got to keep slinging that ball and give your team a chance to win. And so, you don't always have the best stats, but you see the ability. And he's always had that ability since his first year in college when we started watching him, and there's no reason he can't do it."

I would be in agreement with Kyle.

Not a single thing you just posted backs up your claim that Sam was always playing from behind. Like I said before, maybe you are right. But you are assuming, and I have no energy to look through 55 boxscores to check to see if your assumption was accurate. Kyle certainly didnt explicitly say what you saying.

talk about reading comp, no one is 'always playing from behind'
that's not anyone's statement, you said that, I didn't
when you are on teams that lose a lot of games, newsflash, you are often down in the 4th, that's when you aren't handing off or punting, you are throwing into a D that's ready for it, like on MNF, we had our final 2 drives in that circumstance, and 2 picks. Maybe BP gets a pass from the knock he took, but those game situations do lead to turnovers, you dodge the point with absurd reading comp