QB Brock Purdy Thread

Originally posted by TheWooLick:
Surpass Brock's performance from last year. The bar has been set.

What happens if Brock doesn't sustain or surpass his performance from last year? How many games does he get? Just curious.

Originally posted by TheWooLick:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by CharlieSheen:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by CharlieSheen:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by CharlieSheen:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by TheWooLick:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by eric_anthony:

Originally posted by RabidNiner:
Sir Lancelot the white knight is always working to ensure everyone knows that Trey is better, even though he lost to the worst team in the league in his only full game after being the anointed starter for a full offseason.

it's so damn old, and pathetic.

This post is pathetic and Lance wasn't the only reason they lost that game. How about Jimmy losing to the s**tty Broncos?

How about Deebo fumbling the ball away in the redzone? What about the defense giving up 2 deep TD's?

We're not allowed to discuss that

And god forbid we talk about Brock's tendencies and the things he needs to work on to stay ahead of the curve.

Sure, but dude hasn't lost a game and put up great numbers. Criticisms can come off as nitpicky.

Technically he did lose a game. He just hasn't lost a game he has finished. It is okay recognizing and discussing players strengths as well as weaknesses. There are some fans in here that refuse to accept that Brock does have weaknesses and DC's will find a way to take away his strengths and force him into his weaknesses. We saw that in the Dallas game and if it were not for Dak completely s**tting the bed, the outcome could very well have been different. Can't get away with putting up only 19 points against Patrick Mahomes or Jalen Hurts.

Can you locate these posts that claim Brock has no weaknesses?

Its the responses like the one just posted that call them nitpicking. Those posters are unable to accept and discuss them.

When you're over in the Trey thread acting like running it down the Seattles throat for 17 plays while Trey was in is something that's needs to be remembered and praised…..yea it comes off as nitpicking. People will not want to have that discussion when the motives are obvious

If you read through that thread, you will see posts of me discussing his strengths as well as his weaknesses. You will see me giving him praise as well as criticism. You will find the same thing in the Jimmy thread. I will also continue to do the same here and in the Trey thread. In fact, if you go through the weeks that Brock was starting, you will see a whole lot of praise and stats to back up the praise I expressed for Brock. So don't try to make this out to be that I am defending Trey while beating down Brock. I have said many times that I like both QB's and would love nothing more than for both to be successful.

Well there's a crowd that is much harder on Brock than Trey. They wanted Brock to win the SB to keep the starting job, but now as long as Trey gets carried to a few wins he's the starter. It's that kind of lopsidedness that turns people off to the Purdy nitpickers

Who said this? I remember having a discussion with someone about what criteria Trey would need to meet in order for Trey to keep the job when Brock was healthy. The response I received was far less than concrete and highly open ended so that the goal posts could continue to move. I don't want the team to carry any QB. I thought that was one of the biggest reasons why we moved on from Jimmy. I am, however, against inserting Brock inspite of Trey, if Trey is playing well and the team is winning.

Surpass Brock's performance from last year. The bar has been set.

Unfair expectations for even Brock. Example would be Brock's TD% which is well above elite and was even god level for a stretch of his games last season. Again, unfair expectations.

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by TheWooLick:
Surpass Brock's performance from last year. The bar has been set.

What happens if Brock doesn't sustain or surpass his performance from last year? How many games does he get? Just curious.

Great rebuttal.

Originally posted by NYniner85:
If Brock is actually healthy and able to participate in legit training camp. He's more than likely the starter. If he's not then Lance will be…after that it's anyone guess what happens.

that's the reality of the situation and anyone trying to argue that are the ones with a bias narrative to push…period.

Define legit training camp? I think he will participate, I just question if it'll be traditional 11-11/7-7. At least for the first part as his arm Ramps up. I think at least for the first few weeks of camp, Lance will get all the first team reps (which ultimately is a good thing for the team - gives him the best chance to improve his game). I think first team reps are super valuable for any qb and team chemistry (see Jimmie's for few games back without any first team reps all camp. It's very very rare someone does what Brock did).

even if Lance starts the first couple games and then they turn it over to Brock once they feel he's good to go, that benefits the team. The more we know about Lance, especially if he plays good ball or demonstrates large improvements from his previous starts, it does nothing but benefits us in the long term.

it'll either increase his trade value (much less dead cap when trading him in his final contract year - and we do roll with Brock) or we realize that he isn't the guy. At worst, it gives us a more experienced backup if we need him.

there really aren't many negatives to it. I just don't want him crowned starter without us seeing what Purdy can do again. I think he's earned that more than Lance has.

Originally posted by NYniner85:

If Brock is actually healthy and able to participate in legit training camp. He's more than likely the starter. If he's not then Lance will be…after that it's anyone guess what happens.

that's the reality of the situation and anyone trying to argue that are the ones with a bias narrative to push…period.

The ones that don't think Trey should have to compete with Darnold are the ones with bias narrative imo

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by TheWooLick:
Surpass Brock's performance from last year. The bar has been set.

What happens if Brock doesn't sustain or surpass his performance from last year? How many games does he get? Just curious.

Great rebuttal.

Depends on his overall play. Too many variables and generalization for me to give a good answer.

I'll say if he plays worse than last year, and I'm saying quite a bit worse, where we aren't as efficient and struggling in the redzone, I'd say we give Lance a shot.

but he would have to be struggling quite a bit. If he's struggling quite a bit cause of his UCL, then put him on IR to continue recovering and roll with Lance and darnold.

if he's playing at 80% or what he did last year and just shedding rust, I'd him in.

Originally posted by tankle104:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by TheWooLick:
Surpass Brock's performance from last year. The bar has been set.

What happens if Brock doesn't sustain or surpass his performance from last year? How many games does he get? Just curious.

Great rebuttal.

Depends on his overall play. Too many variables and generalization for me to give a good answer.

I'll say if he plays worse than last year, and I'm saying quite a bit worse, where we aren't as efficient and struggling in the redzone, I'd say we give Lance a shot.

but he would have to be struggling quite a bit. If he's struggling quite a bit cause of his UCL, then put him on IR to continue recovering and roll with Lance and darnold.

But what if Trey was playing well before you benched him for Brock? Brock would have to play way worse than Trey for Trey to get the job back? That is just madness.

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by tankle104:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by TheWooLick:
Surpass Brock's performance from last year. The bar has been set.

What happens if Brock doesn't sustain or surpass his performance from last year? How many games does he get? Just curious.

Great rebuttal.

Depends on his overall play. Too many variables and generalization for me to give a good answer.

I'll say if he plays worse than last year, and I'm saying quite a bit worse, where we aren't as efficient and struggling in the redzone, I'd say we give Lance a shot.

but he would have to be struggling quite a bit. If he's struggling quite a bit cause of his UCL, then put him on IR to continue recovering and roll with Lance and darnold.

But what if Trey was playing well before you benched him for Brock? Brock would have to play way worse than Trey for Trey to get the job back? That is just madness.

I think Trey Would have be playing nearly elite level of ball to not go back to Purdy. Since Purdy did play elite in every game and about every aspect, you rock with that till it proves you otherwise.

playing well wouldn't be good enough in my eyes. I actually expect him to play well. That wouldn't surprise me. I've said many times, I don't think he will be a bad qb in this league at all. I question if he can reach elite. He would also have to improve his accuracy a lot too. Just my opinion.

it's hard to discuss this because we aren't using definitive variables. If Purdy is playing 80% of what he did last year and it's clear he's shaking rust, keep him in.
If he's struggling and it's jeopardizing games consistently and making bonehead plays - you have to do what's best for the team.

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by TheWooLick:
Surpass Brock's performance from last year. The bar has been set.

What happens if Brock doesn't sustain or surpass his performance from last year? How many games does he get? Just curious.

It depends if the team is still winning. If he's not the same fantastic Brock as long as the team is winning he should be safe. It may take a year for that elbow to be 100%.

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by TheWooLick:
Surpass Brock's performance from last year. The bar has been set.

What happens if Brock doesn't sustain or surpass his performance from last year? How many games does he get? Just curious.

we are getting in the weeds here..

how about best guy for QB1 gets the job, which will be reality, thank you KS

Remember JG in 2017.. could be years before we see QB play on the level of BP last season, it doesn't happen every year

Originally posted by CharlieSheen:

Originally posted by NYniner85:
If Brock is actually healthy and able to participate in legit training camp. He's more than likely the starter. If he's not then Lance will be…after that it's anyone guess what happens.

that's the reality of the situation and anyone trying to argue that are the ones with a bias narrative to push…period.

The ones that don't think Trey should have to compete with Darnold are the ones with bias narrative imo

The ones who think Darnold should, clearly have the narrative. He's a failed QB for 5 years. He's got a resume of bad football that spans over 50 starts. SF could have signed Tim Tebow and you'd be saying the same thing…because your own bias anti-lance crap.

I think putting it this way would help explain my stance. If Purdy devolves to just being a game manager and isn't elevating our offense like he was, then I think it's fair to move back to Lance. I just think Purdy has earned that opportunity.

But it would depend a lot on why he's playing that way. This is almost a debate with no end and just different stances on it.

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by CharlieSheen:

Originally posted by NYniner85:
If Brock is actually healthy and able to participate in legit training camp. He's more than likely the starter. If he's not then Lance will be…after that it's anyone guess what happens.

that's the reality of the situation and anyone trying to argue that are the ones with a bias narrative to push…period.

The ones that don't think Trey should have to compete with Darnold are the ones with bias narrative imo

The ones who think Darnold should, clearly have the narrative. He's a failed QB for 5 years. He's got a resume of bad football that spans over 50 starts. SF could have signed Tim Tebow and you'd be saying the same thing…because your own bias anti-lance crap.

I would like Lance to think he has to compete with darnold and they push each other to be better, but I wouldn't realistically start darnold over Lance unless Lance is crapola. We have a much better idea of what darnold is as a player than Lance, Lance is extremely unknown still.

Darnold is more than enough of a talent to genuinely make Lance better in a competition. Darnold could win with this team too - he just wouldn't be the reason we were winning.

Originally posted by English:
Guys this thread is getting very narky and unpleasant. There is no need for it. Carry on like this and there will be time out's.

It's obnoxious, like what every other QB thread devolves into

Originally posted by tankle104:
I think putting it this way would help explain my stance. If Purdy devolves to just being a game manager and isn't elevating our offense like he was, then I think it's fair to move back to Lance. I just think Purdy has earned that opportunity.

But it would depend a lot on why he's playing that way. This is almost a debate with no end and just different stances on it.

I think it is bad team management and coaching to bench a guy if he is playing well in favor of a guy who may not have an off season, no live reps or 1st team reps who is coming off a major injury to his throwing elbow. If Trey is playing mediocre to poorly than by all means, get Brock back out there.