QB Brock Purdy Thread

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:

Originally posted by YACBros85:
He also had one of the best rosters in the NFL, one of the best play callers and play designers in the NFL and a defense that never forced him to really have to play from behind. The team was beginning to hit its stride weeks before Brock got his opportunity. So while he did play great for most of that stretch, so was everyone else on the team.

lol lets get real on this..

MIA was loaded and lighting the NFL on fire
they started a 7th round rookie..

how did that experiment go? Similar coach to our stuff, elite skill guys..

their 7th round rook couldn't get the plays or the snap off
the wheels came off the wagon
google Skylar Thompson.. he of the 27 QBR

Now we want to bring up that Brock was a 7th round rookie? I thought that was one of those things that was a no no in here? I guess its okay if you are talking Brock up but just can't use it as a way to say we should hold the reins a little bit when referring to Brock's future or his ceiling?

why is mentioning Mr Irrelevant as a 7th rounder a 'no no'? what are you talking about?

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.

I wonder what a Joe Montana / Steve Young QB Thread would have looked like if the Internet had existed back in the day.

One thing is for sure: NY would be lecturing everyone about how to be a "true fan".

Originally posted by Kolohe:
How can I be over Lance when I was never a fan in the first place!!!

Lol well I'm glad you could finally admit that all your debates with Lance are rooted in the fact that you don't like him. Like I've been saying bias takes and narrative pushing. Bravo first step is admitting

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:

Originally posted by YACBros85:
He also had one of the best rosters in the NFL, one of the best play callers and play designers in the NFL and a defense that never forced him to really have to play from behind. The team was beginning to hit its stride weeks before Brock got his opportunity. So while he did play great for most of that stretch, so was everyone else on the team.

lol lets get real on this..

MIA was loaded and lighting the NFL on fire
they started a 7th round rookie..

how did that experiment go? Similar coach to our stuff, elite skill guys..

their 7th round rook couldn't get the plays or the snap off
the wheels came off the wagon
google Skylar Thompson.. he of the 27 QBR

Now we want to bring up that Brock was a 7th round rookie? I thought that was one of those things that was a no no in here? I guess its okay if you are talking Brock up but just can't use it as a way to say we should hold the reins a little bit when referring to Brock's future or his ceiling?

why is mentioning Mr Irrelevant as a 7th rounder a 'no no'? what are you talking about?

Charlie gets all bent out of shape if you bring up the fact that he was a 7th rd rookie.

Originally posted by tankle104:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by tankle104:
Joe Flacco played great in the 2012 playoffs, right? He had a great run capped off with a Super Bowl, but Joe Flacco wasn't a great player. He had stretches of great play, both can be true.

That's what I'm saying about Purdy. He is not considered a great player at this point, but when he has played, it's been great.

can we all agree on that? Understand what I'm saying when I said greatness in regards to him?

I never said he didn't play great. But its interesting that you brought up a guy like Joe Flacco in this thread. That alone should make you a little more apprehensive and perhaps a little more patient with the current QB situation. We are dealing with a lot of unknowns at this point. My entire argument is that you don't bench a player who is playing well just because another player was playing well for a short stretch the season prior. Because if you do and that other guy doesn't live up to those expectations, we might be flushing the entire season down the toilet. I mean could you confidently go back to Trey if Brock's game dips substantially? Which is a possibility coming off a major injury to a throwing arm. And what does that do to the locker room? If Trey is not playing well, than by all means put Brock back in there. If Brock is that damn great, we aren't going to miss the playoffs losing a game or two waiting for him to get healthy.

All I'm doing is explaining why I said "you don't bench greatness" - I wasn't saying he is an overall great player, but he did play great when he has. In my opinion, you rock with that until they show you it was a fluke.

Hope isn't a good business strategy - one has shown that they're capable of playing at an extremely high level for at least 7 games or so. One has showed you he can't for 3 games. Idc what you gave up for either, you start the qb that has displayed the most. That's my opinion.

i look at it a lot different than some people on here, it's not an open competition for QB1. It's Brock's and others will fill in for him until he comes in. If Lance all of a sudden starts playing at the same level as Brock, then we have a competition.

until then, darnold and Lance are backups. That's my opinion. I understand others may disagree or see it different. There is nothing wrong with that. We will find out in a few months.

You keep bringing up hope. There is no hope about it. If Brock cannot take 1st team reps through OTA's/TC/PS or any live reps at all this off season and Trey is playing well there is 0 reason to bench him and every reason to keep him in there until he proves otherwise. If Trey performs poorly, you put Brock back in when he is ready. I am not sure why that is such a difficult concept to understand.

No matter how great someone looked for a short stretch, you still have guys like Joe Flacco and Carson Wentz. Carson Wentz was a front runner MVP candidate before he suffered a major injury. He was never the same after that. Not saying that is Brock's projection but you are assuming its not all the same. I am simply asking folks to just be more patient with the QB situation and trust Shanahan no matter what he decides.

Originally posted by CharlieSheen:
Yes Sam can beat Brock out too. Based on Brock's play it's unlikely, but the best QB plays idk why you don't get this

Because I don't f**king believe you. I do not believe that you would allow Sam to take away first team reps and have a legit competition vs Brock. Not for a second do I believe you.

Originally posted by Koldo:

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.

I wonder what a Joe Montana / Steve Young QB Thread would have looked like if the Internet had existed back in the day.

One thing is for sure: NY would be lecturing everyone about how to be a "true fan".

We didn't have the internet so we actually talked and argued with each other in person. Imagine that. There were more sports writers then too so there were plenty of articles about who was better and who should Walsh go with.

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:

Originally posted by YACBros85:
He also had one of the best rosters in the NFL, one of the best play callers and play designers in the NFL and a defense that never forced him to really have to play from behind. The team was beginning to hit its stride weeks before Brock got his opportunity. So while he did play great for most of that stretch, so was everyone else on the team.

lol lets get real on this..

MIA was loaded and lighting the NFL on fire
they started a 7th round rookie..

how did that experiment go? Similar coach to our stuff, elite skill guys..

their 7th round rook couldn't get the plays or the snap off
the wheels came off the wagon
google Skylar Thompson.. he of the 27 QBR

Now we want to bring up that Brock was a 7th round rookie? I thought that was one of those things that was a no no in here? I guess its okay if you are talking Brock up but just can't use it as a way to say we should hold the reins a little bit when referring to Brock's future or his ceiling?

why is mentioning Mr Irrelevant as a 7th rounder a 'no no'? what are you talking about?

Charlie gets all bent out of shape if you bring up the fact that he was a 7th rd rookie.

It's instructive I mean did ppl watch Skylar? He was out there in the playoffs. They couldn't get the snap off.

NFL has a lot of different variables, but that's about as close to a lab experiment as you will find, both 7th rounders, both pressed into action due to QB1 and QB2 down, both rookies, both loaded teams, similar offense, etc.

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by CharlieSheen:

Yes Sam can beat Brock out too. Based on Brock's play it's unlikely, but the best QB plays idk why you don't get this

Because I don't f**king believe you. I do not believe that you would allow Sam to take away first team reps and have a legit competition vs Brock. Not for a second do I believe you.

I want Brady to start. Idk why you think I'm Brock or die

Originally posted by YACBros85:
You keep bringing up hope. There is no hope about it. If Brock cannot take 1st team reps through OTA's/TC/PS or any live reps at all this off season and Trey is playing well there is 0 reason to bench him and every reason to keep him in there until he proves otherwise. If Trey performs poorly, you put Brock back in when he is ready. I am not sure why that is such a difficult concept to understand.

No matter how great someone looked for a short stretch, you still have guys like Joe Flacco and Carson Wentz. Carson Wentz was a front runner MVP candidate before he suffered a major injury. He was never the same after that. Not saying that is Brock's projection but you are assuming its not all the same. I am simply asking folks to just be more patient with the QB situation and trust Shanahan no matter what he decides.

People who want Lance to play are definitely hopeful he will be good. There is no other explanation because he's never done anything great. you're hoping he works out. You're hoping he improves. You're hoping he can justify his draft slot. You're hoping he becomes more accurate.

You def can't think he is going to be great off of his film? If so, please share the film with me.

there is nothing wrong with hoping he works out, so do i. I just don't want him starting unless he can play better than Purdy (once healthy). If he does, then hell yeah, start him.

Originally posted by CatchMaster80:

Originally posted by Koldo:

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.

I wonder what a Joe Montana / Steve Young QB Thread would have looked like if the Internet had existed back in the day.

One thing is for sure: NY would be lecturing everyone about how to be a "true fan".

We didn't have the internet so we actually talked and argued with each other in person. Imagine that. There were more sports writers then too so there were plenty of articles about who was better and who should Walsh go with.

And the sports writers were immeasurably superior to what you see nowadays. So the arguments tended to have some basis to them. Joe supporters were pushing his coolness and Steve's inexperience, and the "deer caught in the car headlights" comment. Steve supporters tended to stress Joe's injuries and Steve's arm and his running ability. Both sides had their points.

One of the main differences I think, was that in the absence of the internet if you started to get all narky, as is frequently the case nowadays, you tended to get an offer of facial rearrangement, or at least a beer shower. Nowadays unfortunately you can be unpleasant without the same response.

All this talk of this is a SB team needs to stop. They just lost Demeco and have a new DC. They lost some key players on defense like Eman and Jimmie Ward so no one can say that this is a SB roster as of now. This defense may not be the top number 1 defense this year and we all know the strong suit of this team has been the defense.

It doesn't make any sense to me for someone to want to start Lance over purdy (once healthy).

saying "Purdy hasn't played enough to show he's great and might not keep it up, so go with Lance cause he has a higher ceiling (which I think the ceiling thing is nonsense)." Is asinine.

roll with the player who is the better QB. It's that simple.

talking about "higher ceiling" is also a form of hope. Lol hoping he can achieve some level of greatness because of physical traits and nothing else, is mind boggling to me.

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

He also had one of the best rosters in the NFL, one of the best play callers and play designers in the NFL and a defense that never forced him to really have to play from behind. The team was beginning to hit its stride weeks before Brock got his opportunity. So while he did play great for most of that stretch, so was everyone else on the team.

lol lets get real on this..

MIA was loaded and lighting the NFL on fire
they started a 7th round rookie..

how did that experiment go? Similar coach to our stuff, elite skill guys..

their 7th round rook couldn't get the plays or the snap off
the wheels came off the wagon
google Skylar Thompson.. he of the 27 QBR

Now we want to bring up that Brock was a 7th round rookie? I thought that was one of those things that was a no no in here? I guess its okay if you are talking Brock up but just can't use it as a way to say we should hold the reins a little bit when referring to Brock's future or his ceiling?

why is mentioning Mr Irrelevant as a 7th rounder a 'no no'? what are you talking about?

Charlie gets all bent out of shape if you bring up the fact that he was a 7th rd rookie.

Lol what?

Originally posted by English:

Originally posted by CatchMaster80:

Originally posted by Koldo:

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.

I wonder what a Joe Montana / Steve Young QB Thread would have looked like if the Internet had existed back in the day.

One thing is for sure: NY would be lecturing everyone about how to be a "true fan".

We didn't have the internet so we actually talked and argued with each other in person. Imagine that. There were more sports writers then too so there were plenty of articles about who was better and who should Walsh go with.

And the sports writers were immeasurably superior to what you see nowadays. So the arguments tended to have some basis to them. Joe supporters were pushing his coolness and Steve's inexperience, and the "deer caught in the car headlights" comment. Steve supporters tended to stress Joe's injuries and Steve's arm and his running ability. Both sides had their points.

One of the main differences I think, was that in the absence of the internet if you started to get all narky, as is frequently the case nowadays, you tended to get an offer of facial rearrangement, or at least a beer shower. Nowadays unfortunately you can be unpleasant without the same response.

lot of truth to this, particularly the free facial rearrangement..

also I didn't know narky was a word I thought you were misspelling snarky.. however it turns out both narky and snarky are words and they mean darn near the same thing.. someone messed up on this one.. English sucks sometimes.. not you, the language

on the Joe / Steve, imo, Steve won out thanks to his age and more of a champ window