Next year @ QB, you want _______ under center:

It's got to be the kid - I think a year behind Jimmy did him some good.

Originally posted by DrEll:
I think you guys underestimate Kyle and Lynch's desire to win it all NOW. There's a reason why they desperately tried to sign every and any free agent quarterback last year. There's a reason why they sold out for Trey Lance.

What's telling is that despite giving up all that capital to draft a guy number 3 overall, they STILL didn't think he was worth starting over a guy that they'd been trying to replace for the past few months.

Even now in Kyle's latest press conference, he stated that he advised Trey to take some time off and work on his mechanics and technique. What does that say about how he feels about Trey going forward?

I think Kyle and Lynch will push hard for Aaron Rodgers. No way Kyle is going to accept losing to his apprentice in the NFCC game, and he knows a raw Trey Lance will likely not be enough to overcome the teams in our division. I'm thinking we package Jimmy in a deal to the Packers (that would make Jimmy happy as well) with Greenlaw and some draft capital for Aaron Rodgers. This sets up Rodgers to play here for next 3 years to end his career (giving us a legit SB shot in each of those seasons) while we groom Trey.

it's gonna happen. Watch !

Aaron Rodgers is leaving because Green Bay drafted his replacement. What makes you think he'd even want to come here now that we have Lance. Guys like Brady, Rodgers, Favre want to go out on their own terms. He's not coming here for us to tell him we'll give you 2 seasons then it's Lance's time.

This isn't happening.

Lance

Dance with Lance.

Originally posted by tjd808185:

Originally posted by DrEll:
I think you guys underestimate Kyle and Lynch's desire to win it all NOW. There's a reason why they desperately tried to sign every and any free agent quarterback last year. There's a reason why they sold out for Trey Lance.

What's telling is that despite giving up all that capital to draft a guy number 3 overall, they STILL didn't think he was worth starting over a guy that they'd been trying to replace for the past few months.

Even now in Kyle's latest press conference, he stated that he advised Trey to take some time off and work on his mechanics and technique. What does that say about how he feels about Trey going forward?

I think Kyle and Lynch will push hard for Aaron Rodgers. No way Kyle is going to accept losing to his apprentice in the NFCC game, and he knows a raw Trey Lance will likely not be enough to overcome the teams in our division. I'm thinking we package Jimmy in a deal to the Packers (that would make Jimmy happy as well) with Greenlaw and some draft capital for Aaron Rodgers. This sets up Rodgers to play here for next 3 years to end his career (giving us a legit SB shot in each of those seasons) while we groom Trey.

it's gonna happen. Watch !

Aaron Rodgers is leaving because Green Bay drafted his replacement. What makes you think he'd even want to come here now that we have Lance. Guys like Brady, Rodgers, Favre want to go out on their own terms. He's not coming here for us to tell him we'll give you 2 seasons then it's Lance's time.

This isn't happening.

Oh it's happening…

Come on. Only 4% for JG. I thought he was clutch.

Originally posted by BamaNiner:

Originally posted by Franchise408:

Originally posted by 91til:

I got your point but you don't know "for certain" that those two extra picks that we gave up (since we would have had to use one pick anyway, even if we picked someone else) would somehow make this huge difference in the talent on the roster as you contend.

Its two first round picks, which are valuable, I get it. But in the case of this year it's the 29th overall pick, far from a "sure thing." The draft as I'm sure you know is a crap shoot anyway.

We don't know how good Trey is going to be. The team is betting he'll be good enough to offset the two first rounders we used to move up for him. They showed their confidence in the player partly by how much they were willing to give up for him. You can disagree with that evaluation but we're just going to have to see how it works out. As others have pointed out, first round picks can just as easily turn into Solomon Thomas as Nick Bosa.

In addition you don't factor in the ~$27M savings from moving Jimmy, or the draft pick compensation from that eventual deal, which will both help to offset the loss of draft capital and allow us to add talent to the roster.

I'm not saying it wasn't a risk, but any pick is a risk. If we'd kept that pick 29 overall this year whoever we picked would be a risk. The FO is betting on Trey and only time will tell.

In addition to the extra 2 first rounders, there was also a 3rd rounder in there as well. It was a total of 4 picks, for 1 player, to give us an improvement from about a 12-15ish range QB, to a 7-16ish QB.

I don't think that sort of narrow gap is worth FOUR picks.

I am 100% on board with selecting a new QB to move on from Jimmy. I like him a lot, but I also recognize that he is - at best - around a 12ish range QB, and probably more consistently, lower than that. We had the #12 pick - a great opportunity to get a QB that we could develop behind him.

That #29 pick (and next year's first and third rounders) could have been depth for our secondary, which was probably our weakest unit all year. It could have been used for o-line depth, another area of need, especially considering Laken Tomlinson's pending free agency, the age factor of Alex Mack, and whatever happens with McGlinchey, if we retain him, or let him walk to try to get something better. That's 3 significant picks for a team that has far more than one position of need.

If we still had Brian Hoyer, or god forbid our best QB was someone like CJ Beathard, making a trade to move up would have been a lot different. But we have a good QB already, one that we are already Super Bowl contenders with. That doesn't mean sign him to another 5 year contract and keep him for the long haul, but it does mean that trading away a large amount of high draft picks to marginally improve the position at best is very short sighted. We may end up with a slightly better QB, but with less resources to address other positions of need, are very likely to have a weaker overall roster. The team then traded away assets to get weaker.

No, #29 is hardly a lock to be a sure fire hall of famer, sure. But we traded away 3 additional chances at good, quality players, on a roster that needs good, quality players.

You talk about Jimmy's cap #, and that is a great benefit. But now that we don't have draft picks, we need to use free agency to fill those holes on our roster, which can likely mean overspending.

I would have felt much more comfortable with the 49ers sticking at #12, selecting whoever fell there, whether it was Mac Jones, or even if Trey Lance fell that far as some people have speculated he could have, kept the future draft picks, and ensured a stronger overall roster, even if it meant having a slightly less exciting QB prospect.

Not to mention, how long is it going to take Trey Lance to even reach that 7-16 range? Because as it stands right now, we STILL have the worst QB in the division, and very likely have the worst QB on the field in any game we play next year. So we can probably just wipe out one entire year from our already dwindling window because of the decision to trade away everything to get off of Jimmy.

Beautiful post

Crying over spilled milk.

Kyle thinks Trey will be a top 10 QB for sure that's why he got him.
He got his year of seasoning and the 49ers had a good year as a team.
I think Kyle believes it is his time.

Originally posted by DrEll:

Originally posted by tjd808185:

Originally posted by DrEll:

I think you guys underestimate Kyle and Lynch's desire to win it all NOW. There's a reason why they desperately tried to sign every and any free agent quarterback last year. There's a reason why they sold out for Trey Lance.

What's telling is that despite giving up all that capital to draft a guy number 3 overall, they STILL didn't think he was worth starting over a guy that they'd been trying to replace for the past few months.

Even now in Kyle's latest press conference, he stated that he advised Trey to take some time off and work on his mechanics and technique. What does that say about how he feels about Trey going forward?

I think Kyle and Lynch will push hard for Aaron Rodgers. No way Kyle is going to accept losing to his apprentice in the NFCC game, and he knows a raw Trey Lance will likely not be enough to overcome the teams in our division. I'm thinking we package Jimmy in a deal to the Packers (that would make Jimmy happy as well) with Greenlaw and some draft capital for Aaron Rodgers. This sets up Rodgers to play here for next 3 years to end his career (giving us a legit SB shot in each of those seasons) while we groom Trey.

it's gonna happen. Watch !

Aaron Rodgers is leaving because Green Bay drafted his replacement. What makes you think he'd even want to come here now that we have Lance. Guys like Brady, Rodgers, Favre want to go out on their own terms. He's not coming here for us to tell him we'll give you 2 seasons then it's Lance's time.

This isn't happening.

Oh it's happening…

And if the 49ers don't win the Suoerbowl the team wouldn't have upgraded, would be worse off for wasting money on Rogers and will be older and less talented in 2024 when Trey would take over after a one year Rogers rental.

Dude folds most postseasons.

I don't see any way they could afford Rodgers. I wouldn't want him here anyway. He's near that time in hus career where he's always considering retirement.

Arch Manning

Originally posted by NinerBuff:

Originally posted by BamaNiner:

Originally posted by Franchise408:

Originally posted by 91til:
I got your point but you don't know "for certain" that those two extra picks that we gave up (since we would have had to use one pick anyway, even if we picked someone else) would somehow make this huge difference in the talent on the roster as you contend.

Its two first round picks, which are valuable, I get it. But in the case of this year it's the 29th overall pick, far from a "sure thing." The draft as I'm sure you know is a crap shoot anyway.

We don't know how good Trey is going to be. The team is betting he'll be good enough to offset the two first rounders we used to move up for him. They showed their confidence in the player partly by how much they were willing to give up for him. You can disagree with that evaluation but we're just going to have to see how it works out. As others have pointed out, first round picks can just as easily turn into Solomon Thomas as Nick Bosa.

In addition you don't factor in the ~$27M savings from moving Jimmy, or the draft pick compensation from that eventual deal, which will both help to offset the loss of draft capital and allow us to add talent to the roster.

I'm not saying it wasn't a risk, but any pick is a risk. If we'd kept that pick 29 overall this year whoever we picked would be a risk. The FO is betting on Trey and only time will tell.

In addition to the extra 2 first rounders, there was also a 3rd rounder in there as well. It was a total of 4 picks, for 1 player, to give us an improvement from about a 12-15ish range QB, to a 7-16ish QB.

I don't think that sort of narrow gap is worth FOUR picks.

I am 100% on board with selecting a new QB to move on from Jimmy. I like him a lot, but I also recognize that he is - at best - around a 12ish range QB, and probably more consistently, lower than that. We had the #12 pick - a great opportunity to get a QB that we could develop behind him.

That #29 pick (and next year's first and third rounders) could have been depth for our secondary, which was probably our weakest unit all year. It could have been used for o-line depth, another area of need, especially considering Laken Tomlinson's pending free agency, the age factor of Alex Mack, and whatever happens with McGlinchey, if we retain him, or let him walk to try to get something better. That's 3 significant picks for a team that has far more than one position of need.

If we still had Brian Hoyer, or god forbid our best QB was someone like CJ Beathard, making a trade to move up would have been a lot different. But we have a good QB already, one that we are already Super Bowl contenders with. That doesn't mean sign him to another 5 year contract and keep him for the long haul, but it does mean that trading away a large amount of high draft picks to marginally improve the position at best is very short sighted. We may end up with a slightly better QB, but with less resources to address other positions of need, are very likely to have a weaker overall roster. The team then traded away assets to get weaker.

No, #29 is hardly a lock to be a sure fire hall of famer, sure. But we traded away 3 additional chances at good, quality players, on a roster that needs good, quality players.

You talk about Jimmy's cap #, and that is a great benefit. But now that we don't have draft picks, we need to use free agency to fill those holes on our roster, which can likely mean overspending.

I would have felt much more comfortable with the 49ers sticking at #12, selecting whoever fell there, whether it was Mac Jones, or even if Trey Lance fell that far as some people have speculated he could have, kept the future draft picks, and ensured a stronger overall roster, even if it meant having a slightly less exciting QB prospect.

Not to mention, how long is it going to take Trey Lance to even reach that 7-16 range? Because as it stands right now, we STILL have the worst QB in the division, and very likely have the worst QB on the field in any game we play next year. So we can probably just wipe out one entire year from our already dwindling window because of the decision to trade away everything to get off of Jimmy.

Beautiful post

I guess it comes down to what your goal is. If being competitive and making the playoffs year in and year out, but never truly being a SB contender is adequate, then the Mac Jones / Jimmy Garoppolo' of the world will work.

If actually winning a championship is the goal, then you need more from your QB. Will Lance be that guy, who knows. But at a minimum, he has the potential to be a Josh Allen, Pat Mahomes, Justin Herbert type. The type of QB vying for championships over the next decade. The Pats with Mac will compete, but in similar fashion to Jimmy, when it comes down to it, the running game and defense won't get you all the way over the hump.

If we picked Jones at 12, we'd secure ourselves a decade of winning seasons and maybe even a few SB runs, but like Jimmy, those seasons would come up short when the run game and defense slips and the game is won or lost with the QB.

I hope Lance will get there, I'm assuming most here agree. Even if he fails, we at least took a shot with a QB that COULD get there, not settling for one that cannot, even if his floor is higher.

Unless it's Brady or Manning, the team around you is winning Super Bowls. Here are the active qbs that have done so:
Mahomes-he's shown the last two years you can't do it alone
Flacco
Foles
Wilson
Rodgers- almost in Brady and Manning's league

Jimmy G and Matt Ryan were a Kyle Shannahan 4th quarter away from a super bowl.
Now we have a qb who has a long way to go before being able to hit the intermediate, drive sustaining throws to even being a serviceable starter. And it costs 3 1st round and 1 3rd round chance to draft a starter ti strengthen the roster. They weakened a super bowl roster for a chance at a better qb in the future, it possibly cost us a championship this year/ could've drafted a starter at 12.

Originally posted by BamaNiner:

Unless it's Brady or Manning, the team around you is winning Super Bowls. Here are the active qbs that have done so:
Mahomes-he's shown the last two years you can't do it alone
Flacco
Foles
Wilson
Rodgers- almost in Brady and Manning's league

Jimmy G and Matt Ryan were a Kyle Shannahan 4th quarter away from a super bowl.
Now we have a qb who has a long way to go before being able to hit the intermediate, drive sustaining throws to even being a serviceable starter. And it costs 3 1st round and 1 3rd round chance to draft a starter ti strengthen the roster. They weakened a super bowl roster for a chance at a better qb in the future, it possibly cost us a championship this year/ could've drafted a starter at 12.

What likely makes the 9ers roster better, a bunch of rookies or FA's that we can sign now that we aren't paying Jimmy 25 mil next year?

Originally posted by NinerBuff:
I guess it comes down to what your goal is. If being competitive and making the playoffs year in and year out, but never truly being a SB contender is adequate, then the Mac Jones / Jimmy Garoppolo' of the world will work.

If actually winning a championship is the goal, then you need more from your QB. Will Lance be that guy, who knows. But at a minimum, he has the potential to be a Josh Allen, Pat Mahomes, Justin Herbert type. The type of QB vying for championships over the next decade. The Pats with Mac will compete, but in similar fashion to Jimmy, when it comes down to it, the running game and defense won't get you all the way over the hump.

If we picked Jones at 12, we'd secure ourselves a decade of winning seasons and maybe even a few SB runs, but like Jimmy, those seasons would come up short when the run game and defense slips and the game is won or lost with the QB.

I hope Lance will get there, I'm assuming most here agree. Even if he fails, we at least took a shot with a QB that COULD get there, not settling for one that cannot, even if his floor is higher.

What?

In Jimmy's 2 "healthy" seasons, the 49ers reached the NFC Championship game both seasons and the Super Bowl in one of those. That is literally the definition of "legitimate Super Bowl contender". They were contending for a Super Bowl each year that Jimmy played the majority of games.

If actually winning the Super Bowl is your goal, you need a complete team. Quarterback is the most important position, yes, but far too much credit is given to the position for wins and blame given for losses. Even in Super Bowls where an "elite" QB won, very often they still had poor games but won because of an overall team effort. Let alone the vast amount of less-than-elite QB's that have won Super Bowls.

Originally posted by Franchise408:

Originally posted by NinerBuff:
I guess it comes down to what your goal is. If being competitive and making the playoffs year in and year out, but never truly being a SB contender is adequate, then the Mac Jones / Jimmy Garoppolo' of the world will work.

If actually winning a championship is the goal, then you need more from your QB. Will Lance be that guy, who knows. But at a minimum, he has the potential to be a Josh Allen, Pat Mahomes, Justin Herbert type. The type of QB vying for championships over the next decade. The Pats with Mac will compete, but in similar fashion to Jimmy, when it comes down to it, the running game and defense won't get you all the way over the hump.

If we picked Jones at 12, we'd secure ourselves a decade of winning seasons and maybe even a few SB runs, but like Jimmy, those seasons would come up short when the run game and defense slips and the game is won or lost with the QB.

I hope Lance will get there, I'm assuming most here agree. Even if he fails, we at least took a shot with a QB that COULD get there, not settling for one that cannot, even if his floor is higher.

What?

In Jimmy's 2 "healthy" seasons, the 49ers reached the NFC Championship game both seasons and the Super Bowl in one of those. That is literally the definition of "legitimate Super Bowl contender". They were contending for a Super Bowl each year that Jimmy played the majority of games.

If actually winning the Super Bowl is your goal, you need a complete team. Quarterback is the most important position, yes, but far too much credit is given to the position for wins and blame given for losses. Even in Super Bowls where an "elite" QB won, very often they still had poor games but won because of an overall team effort. Let alone the vast amount of less-than-elite QB's that have won Super Bowls.

Brushing over his health issues doesn't fly for me. Availability is the best ability. I agree that he's a winning QB when healthy. But I also know that in both of our playoff runs, the supporting cast was the reason for our success until it came down to Jimmy needing to make a few plays. You cannot win without the QB making those plays. Flacco made those plays. Foles made those plays. Jimmy has been awful in every elimination game 4th quarter, other than the last drive against the Rams in week 18. I actually thought that we'd turned a corner there.

I agree you need a full SB quality team to win a SB. We've had that sans QB in two of the past three years. If we had better QB play, we'd probably be in the SB right now and would have probably won in 2019.

Unless Mac Jones gets dramatically better, he's shown to be the same type of QB as Jimmy. Trading Jimmy for him would have put us in the same position going into next season. We'd be a playoff team, but we'd have the worst QB in the division still and hope that our roster and good luck (like this year) would put us into the playoffs.

Lance may be a bust, he may be a decent QB like Jimmy with different positives and negatives. But he also could be an elite QB, unlike those guys. It's a risk. And I'm glad they pulled the trigger.

Would be quite something to pull this off but Red Grange