There are 227 users in the forums

QB Brock Purdy Thread

Shop Find 49ers gear online

QB Brock Purdy Thread

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
Originally posted by Memphis9er:
Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
Originally posted by Chance:
Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
Originally posted by 49erKing:
Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
Originally posted by Giedi:
Originally posted by brodiebluebanaszak:
Originally posted by Giedi:
Originally posted by tankle104:

Arm is definitely stronger than Montana's.

No not really. They both throw extremely catchable balls on all their different types of throws though. Both elite there.

Disagree, I remember Montana's long balls had more arch to them. Early in Montana's career (Before Rice) he had long ball issues. Which are not a big deal during the early years as he had Wendell Tyler. That Aiyuk 40+ yard throw was a flatter trajectory than Montana's usual deep throws, as I recall it.
Having a lower trajectory on deep balls all the time means your arm isn't as strong, because you have to cut out the wasted motion. You think Russell Wilson has a weak arm? His deep balls are more tear drop than anyone's I've ever seen.

The second the ball leaves your hand, the only forces working on it are gravity and friction. A high arching ball travels a further net distance than a flattened one. It takes more arm to throw more distance. QBs who depend on a flat arc for deep balls probably do not have as strong an arm as those who don't.

HOWEVER, it could also merely be a preference. The QB maybe doesn't anticipate as much as the tear drop guy and has to sling it to get it there in time, or perhaps they're paranoid about the ball taking a long time to get there.

.
.
.
EDIT: before I get tarred and feathered, I'm not talking about Brock. His arm is plenty strong enough to hit every throw you need to wear a gold jacket. I'm just talking theoretically. If you HAVE to have a low trajectory to throw deep, your arm isn't as strong as someone who can easily do either.

Any science behind this? I think if someone wants to throw deep, if they have the time, and it makes sense, they "naturally" conform to throwing with a higher arc/higher trajectory. I mean that's how I feel when I play catch with the guys. If you're trying to laser it while going deep I think that actually means you have a stronger arm than most.

Yeah. Pythagoras (Extended to curves; the same principle applies, you just add up the infinitesimal distances via a line integral, but it's essentially the same thing. In Euclidean geometry, a straight line is the shortest path between two points.). A high arcing ball travels more distance. As the ball is not getting any additional force as it leaves (basic physics), what you put into it upon release is all it has. So throwing with a high arc doesn't give you some boost. That's not how physics work. Draw a free body diagram. Only gravity and friction are of any consequence once it's released.

So, the high arcing ball is thrown further in actual distance traveled than the low arcing one.

Which means, if you MUST throw with a low arc to get it there, your arm is weaker. (By arm strength I mean how far you can throw the ball, but I see no reason why velocity and distance would be different as a measure of arm strength unless the QB has mechanical problems which make one of either his distance or velocity throws more inefficient.)

Yes, but gravity is the main factor here. If a QB threw the ball on the shortest path, a strait line, it would be impossible arm strength to accomplish on a 40 yard throw. Likewise a QB throwing the ball as high as a skyscraper and it traveling 40 yards in distance. The real measure is ball velocity as it leaves his hands a a tight rope tends to have greater velocity than a moon shot.

Humor me. The critical point is 45 degrees, IIRC.

Horizontal distance is 40 meters.

One QB throws the ball with an angle of 45 degrees. The other throws with a height of 75 degrees. Who has the greater velocity?

The formula for horizontal distance is:
R = [v^2 sin(2α)]/(g)
So v = sqrt [Rg/(sin[2α])]

R = 40.

α for the low arc is: 45 degrees (calculated using the same formula)

α for the high arc is: 75 degrees.

So the HORIZONTAL velocities are, respectfully: sqrt [40m *g/(sin[2*45])] = 19.8 m/s, and sqrt [40m*g/(sin[2*75])] = 39.6 m/s.

The interesting thing with sin is that it's a periodic function. That means there are times when a LOWER trajectory would take more initial velocity than a higher one, and there are times when a HIGHER trajectory would take more initial velocity. You brought up the fact that a zero trajectory would take infinite velocity. That's true. So would a 90 degree trajectory.

So, if the QB is throwing with an arc greater than 45 degrees, each additional degree of arc requires more arm strength. If the QB is throwing with an arc less than 45 degrees, each additional degree of arc REDUCTION requires more arm strength. Russell Wilson appears to throw with greater than 45 degree arc, so the higher he throws it, the more arm strength it takes.

I think that the truth of the matter here is that the biggest factor in arc is QB preference, and if there's a weakness or a strength with a QB who chooses one or the other, it has to be related to vision and anticipation, not arm strength.

It totally has a lot to do with arm strength. It takes a lot more arm strength to throw a deep out on a rope than to throw a lofted pass. All it takes is throwing a few passes to understand that. The main reason to arc a throw rather than throw a frozen rope is catchability and layering the pass through coverage. It's all about velocity vs trajectory.

Again, it depends entirely on if the angle of throw is greater than or less than 45 degrees. I feel like you didn't read or didn't understand my post.

Just wanted to jump on the long (awesome) sub topic… essentially, in a simplistic model, it takes the least amount of arm strength to throw it x yards at 45 degrees. It requires more arm strength for every degree less and every degree more to throw it that same yardage. That required increased strength is mirrored for degree moving away from the apex

and then you can add in more environmental factors that will shift that model up, down, left, right and many other descriptive words.

Edit: to the person who said it takes more arm strength to throw it on a rope outside the numbers. It does take more arm strength to throw it in a rope outside the numbers but it would take the same amount atm strength to proportionally moon ball it.

the reason you go with a lower angle is that it'll take less time to get there, meaning less time for a defender to react while requiring the QB to be more accurate.

like wise there's time to moon ball it. It takes more time to arrive at the destination meaning you can be less accurate. But you better have a WR to protect you from the defense that'll converge.

I feel complete for getting to post on this :) but the horse is now officially dead.
[ Edited by Shorteous on Oct 3, 2023 at 8:28 PM ]
Originally posted by Montana:
Originally posted by tankle104:
Brock needs to keep doing what he is doing, scramble to buy time/avoid sacks. Run for a first when it's clear but slide down before contact.

and not that I've seen regarding the pat question.

Remember just this year, Young was getting slammed for his comments about Purdy, that he reminded him of Mahomes, that he had The Force? I guess the NFL has finally decided to back up Brock. Young was so criticized but I think he knows a thing or two when it comes to being a great qb..someone called him "a homer" and can't be relied on when it comes to seeing greatness in a player. No, not a homer but a HOFr who knows s**t. A lot of being a great qb is mental, and yeah, Young would be able to see Brock's mental skills and maturity pdq.

I got slammed here for saying he's a lot like Mahomes in that 12 yard window...
Originally posted by Chance:
Bwahahaha! Steven Ruiz just updated his silly QB rankings and has Purdy at 25. Dunning-Krueger called and want their effect back.

https://nflrankings.theringer.com/power-rankings

Paint by numbers offense... #1 passing offense with the 25th QB... makes sense.

Swap draft positions with Lance and he is the new coming of Brady in the media. Look at how they all hopped on Mac Jones when anyone with a football IQ knew the second defenses play man he would suck and be exposed. Oh but Daniel Jones looked like he always has and yet still above a QB that completes passes.
[ Edited by TheRickestRick on Oct 3, 2023 at 8:25 PM ]
Originally posted by Chance:
Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
Originally posted by Chance:
Originally posted by YACBros85:
Brock was 5 of 5 for 137 with a 118.8 passer rating when throwing the ball 10+ yards yesterday.

He is now 27/34 for 538 yards, 4 TD's, 0 INT's with a 123.3 passer rating for the season when throwing 10+ yards.

If I have to hear Butt Fumble call him a point guard one more time, I may just shoot a hole in my TV.

I mean some point guards are hall of fame legends. Steve Young once said that he finally understood quarterbacking when he realized his job was to get the ball out of his hands and into the hands of his playmakers. So, it's not necessarily an insult. Depends on the context .

Of course. But the subtext is that he's calling Purdy a game manager. Does anyone liken Mahomes to a point guard? I mean he's a maestro dealing the ball with no look throws, left hand tosses, etc. Nope, because it's not a compliment.

I mean I think of Mahomes as one of those point guards who dribbles between defenders' legs and makes no look assists, or jumps back and nails a three.
Originally posted by TyCore:
Originally posted by Chance:
Subjectively. I don't see the humor regardless of QB.

Absolutely.

We all know the kind of journalist who resorts to trash like that.

You don't find this big heads hysterical? And also the little short pass and giant bobble head breaking tackles?
Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
I mean I think of Mahomes as one of those point guards who dribbles between defenders' legs and makes no look assists, or jumps back and nails a three.

Mahomes is the Steph Curry to Purdy's John Stockton.
Originally posted by random49er:
Originally posted by NCommand:
Originally posted by GoreGoreGore:
Originally posted by SLCNiner:

Crazy what a good QB can do. He's also elevated the OL as well.

He didn't elevate it. He and Kyle made it nearly obsolete with Brock's TTT, play calling and Griese's focus on this in the off season coupled with our stellar YAC monsters winning instantly.

But at some point, they'll need to stand on their own when this formula isn't working. Then we'll know more. This weekend might be that test.

PS: That's not to take anything away from how well they've played either.


Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
You don't find this big heads hysterical? And also the little short pass and giant bobble head breaking tackles?

Wasn't that just the Toy Story broadcast for the game he ripped for that point.

That was pretty cool overall.
Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
Originally posted by Montana:
Originally posted by tankle104:
Brock needs to keep doing what he is doing, scramble to buy time/avoid sacks. Run for a first when it's clear but slide down before contact.

and not that I've seen regarding the pat question.

Remember just this year, Young was getting slammed for his comments about Purdy, that he reminded him of Mahomes, that he had The Force? I guess the NFL has finally decided to back up Brock. Young was so criticized but I think he knows a thing or two when it comes to being a great qb..someone called him "a homer" and can't be relied on when it comes to seeing greatness in a player. No, not a homer but a HOFr who knows s**t. A lot of being a great qb is mental, and yeah, Young would be able to see Brock's mental skills and maturity pdq.

I got slammed here for saying he's a lot like Mahomes in that 12 yard window...
This play here was very Mahomesian, if only BA had held onto it.
Originally posted by Chance:
Bwahahaha! Steven Ruiz just updated his silly QB rankings and has Purdy at 25. Dunning-Krueger called and want their effect back.

https://nflrankings.theringer.com/power-rankings

This stupid mother f**ker. I'm sorry, but jesus fn'ing tapdancing christ. 25th after a 20-21 game? For god'ssake man. Even if you argue Shanahan and the roster are a big part, there is NO WAY IN HELL ANY objective person can rank him below 20. Mother f**ker.
Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:
Mahomes is the Steph Curry to Purdy's John Stockton.

Maybe, but Purdy Boy Brock has more people he can get the ball to who can score.
Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
This stupid mother f**ker. I'm sorry, but jesus fn'ing tapdancing christ. 25th after a 20-21 game? For god'ssake man. Even if you argue Shanahan and the roster are a big part, there is NO WAY IN HELL ANY objective person can rank him below 20. Mother f**ker.

Might as well dig in. It's certainly not hurting him in terms of exposure among this fanbase, lol.
Originally posted by Shorteous:
Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
Originally posted by Memphis9er:
Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
Originally posted by Chance:
Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
Originally posted by 49erKing:
Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
Originally posted by Giedi:
Originally posted by brodiebluebanaszak:
Originally posted by Giedi:
Originally posted by tankle104:

Arm is definitely stronger than Montana's.

No not really. They both throw extremely catchable balls on all their different types of throws though. Both elite there.

Disagree, I remember Montana's long balls had more arch to them. Early in Montana's career (Before Rice) he had long ball issues. Which are not a big deal during the early years as he had Wendell Tyler. That Aiyuk 40+ yard throw was a flatter trajectory than Montana's usual deep throws, as I recall it.
Having a lower trajectory on deep balls all the time means your arm isn't as strong, because you have to cut out the wasted motion. You think Russell Wilson has a weak arm? His deep balls are more tear drop than anyone's I've ever seen.

The second the ball leaves your hand, the only forces working on it are gravity and friction. A high arching ball travels a further net distance than a flattened one. It takes more arm to throw more distance. QBs who depend on a flat arc for deep balls probably do not have as strong an arm as those who don't.

HOWEVER, it could also merely be a preference. The QB maybe doesn't anticipate as much as the tear drop guy and has to sling it to get it there in time, or perhaps they're paranoid about the ball taking a long time to get there.

.
.
.
EDIT: before I get tarred and feathered, I'm not talking about Brock. His arm is plenty strong enough to hit every throw you need to wear a gold jacket. I'm just talking theoretically. If you HAVE to have a low trajectory to throw deep, your arm isn't as strong as someone who can easily do either.

Any science behind this? I think if someone wants to throw deep, if they have the time, and it makes sense, they "naturally" conform to throwing with a higher arc/higher trajectory. I mean that's how I feel when I play catch with the guys. If you're trying to laser it while going deep I think that actually means you have a stronger arm than most.

Yeah. Pythagoras (Extended to curves; the same principle applies, you just add up the infinitesimal distances via a line integral, but it's essentially the same thing. In Euclidean geometry, a straight line is the shortest path between two points.). A high arcing ball travels more distance. As the ball is not getting any additional force as it leaves (basic physics), what you put into it upon release is all it has. So throwing with a high arc doesn't give you some boost. That's not how physics work. Draw a free body diagram. Only gravity and friction are of any consequence once it's released.

So, the high arcing ball is thrown further in actual distance traveled than the low arcing one.

Which means, if you MUST throw with a low arc to get it there, your arm is weaker. (By arm strength I mean how far you can throw the ball, but I see no reason why velocity and distance would be different as a measure of arm strength unless the QB has mechanical problems which make one of either his distance or velocity throws more inefficient.)

Yes, but gravity is the main factor here. If a QB threw the ball on the shortest path, a strait line, it would be impossible arm strength to accomplish on a 40 yard throw. Likewise a QB throwing the ball as high as a skyscraper and it traveling 40 yards in distance. The real measure is ball velocity as it leaves his hands a a tight rope tends to have greater velocity than a moon shot.

Humor me. The critical point is 45 degrees, IIRC.

Horizontal distance is 40 meters.

One QB throws the ball with an angle of 45 degrees. The other throws with a height of 75 degrees. Who has the greater velocity?

The formula for horizontal distance is:
R = [v^2 sin(2α)]/(g)
So v = sqrt [Rg/(sin[2α])]

R = 40.

α for the low arc is: 45 degrees (calculated using the same formula)

α for the high arc is: 75 degrees.

So the HORIZONTAL velocities are, respectfully: sqrt [40m *g/(sin[2*45])] = 19.8 m/s, and sqrt [40m*g/(sin[2*75])] = 39.6 m/s.

The interesting thing with sin is that it's a periodic function. That means there are times when a LOWER trajectory would take more initial velocity than a higher one, and there are times when a HIGHER trajectory would take more initial velocity. You brought up the fact that a zero trajectory would take infinite velocity. That's true. So would a 90 degree trajectory.

So, if the QB is throwing with an arc greater than 45 degrees, each additional degree of arc requires more arm strength. If the QB is throwing with an arc less than 45 degrees, each additional degree of arc REDUCTION requires more arm strength. Russell Wilson appears to throw with greater than 45 degree arc, so the higher he throws it, the more arm strength it takes.

I think that the truth of the matter here is that the biggest factor in arc is QB preference, and if there's a weakness or a strength with a QB who chooses one or the other, it has to be related to vision and anticipation, not arm strength.

It totally has a lot to do with arm strength. It takes a lot more arm strength to throw a deep out on a rope than to throw a lofted pass. All it takes is throwing a few passes to understand that. The main reason to arc a throw rather than throw a frozen rope is catchability and layering the pass through coverage. It's all about velocity vs trajectory.

Again, it depends entirely on if the angle of throw is greater than or less than 45 degrees. I feel like you didn't read or didn't understand my post.

Just wanted to jump on the long (awesome) sub topic… essentially, in a simplistic model, it takes the least amount of arm strength to throw it x yards at 45 degrees. It requires more arm strength for every degree less and every degree more to throw it that same yardage. That required increased strength is mirrored for degree moving away from the apex

and then you can add in more environmental factors that will shift that model up, down, left, right and many other descriptive words.

Edit: to the person who said it takes more arm strength to throw it on a rope outside the numbers. It does take more arm strength to throw it in a rope outside the numbers but it would take the same amount atm strength to proportionally moon ball it.

the reason you go with a lower angle is that it'll take less time to get there, meaning less time for a defender to react while requiring the QB to be more accurate.

like wise there's time to moon ball it. It takes more time to arrive at the destination meaning you can be less accurate. But you better have a WR to protect you from the defense that'll converge.

I feel complete for getting to post on this :) but the horse is now officially dead.

Thanks. You complete me.

LMAO but yes this was my point. Anyway, I was being pedantic because I like this sort of argument and derailed the thread. Regardless, Purdy doesn't have a noodle arm and he's also pretty accurate down the field. Dude is a complete QB.
Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:
Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
This stupid mother f**ker. I'm sorry, but jesus fn'ing tapdancing christ. 25th after a 20-21 game? For god'ssake man. Even if you argue Shanahan and the roster are a big part, there is NO WAY IN HELL ANY objective person can rank him below 20. Mother f**ker.

Might as well dig in. It's certainly not hurting him in terms of exposure among this fanbase, lol.

Honestly the more they doubt him the better anyway.
Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
Originally posted by Chance:
Bwahahaha! Steven Ruiz just updated his silly QB rankings and has Purdy at 25. Dunning-Krueger called and want their effect back.

https://nflrankings.theringer.com/power-rankings

This stupid mother f**ker. I'm sorry, but jesus fn'ing tapdancing christ. 25th after a 20-21 game? For god'ssake man. Even if you argue Shanahan and the roster are a big part, there is NO WAY IN HELL ANY objective person can rank him below 20. Mother f**ker.


s**tposting for engagement.
Search Share 49ersWebzone