There are 179 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 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.

I think of Mahomes like Jordan. He can wheel and deal, but when it comes down to it, he can elevate and dunk on the other team. I just think it's selling Purdy short, and kinda painting him into a distributer, when he can do that and more. We shall find out though.

Edit: Admittedly, I may be reading into this one too much.
[ Edited by Chance on Oct 3, 2023 at 8:48 PM ]
Speaking of people that BrockStar can get the ball to, can someone explain to me what a "game manager" is? The person I see managing the game is Kyle. He is setting forth a game plan. Kyle calls plays for down, distance, field position, and defense. What I see Purdy Boy doing is executing the game plan…very well. As I have mentioned before, Brock is calm in the pocket, he reads the defense, goes through his progressions and makes the right decisions. THAT IS A GOOD QUARTERBACK, not a game manager‼️. Some of you still have your drawers in a bunch because he was drafted last. If you can't SEE that Brock is a top tier Quarterback, then you need to get Stevie Wonder to start driving you to the store
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.

I am just going of the hundreds of throws I have thrown in my life most when I was trying get good enough to beat the coaches kid out for the QB position in high school. For me, it was easier to get distance on a lofted ball without straining my arm. Me and a couple of buddies spent hours in the afternoons after school running routes and working on passing accurately. It was much easier to throw deep with some loft on it, much less arm fatigue than trying to zip it in. Then I got a bass guitar for my 16th birthday and football became something to watch more than something to do. I can still spin it pretty good for an old guy though.
I never made it further than geometry in math, I just wasn't into it. Music, art,literature and history were more my things in school, and even then, school was almost 35 years ago. I'll take your word on the math, I was just speaking from my experience of actually throwing the football.
[ Edited by Memphis9er on Oct 3, 2023 at 8:52 PM ]
Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
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.

For sure! I was really responding to the person you responded to. Really I just wanted to post on the subject too.
Originally posted by Memphis9er:
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.

I am just going of the hundreds of throws I have thrown in my life most when I was trying get good enough to beat the coaches kid out for the QB position in high school. For me, it was easier to get distance on a lofted ball without straining my arm. Me and a couple of buddies spent hours in the afternoons after school running routes and working on passing accurately. It was much easier to throw deep with some loft on it, much less arm fatigue than trying to zip it in. Then I got a bass guitar for my 16th birthday and football became something to watch more than something to do. I can still spin it pretty good for an old guy though.
I never made it further than geometry in math, I just wasn't into it. Music, art,literature and history were more my things in school, and even then, school was almost 35 years ago. I'll take your word on the math, I was just speaking from my experience of actually throwing the football.

What was probably happening was that your lofted passes were at 45 to 55 degrees and your ropes were at 25-30 degrees. So ya in that scenario it would be less arm fatigue and require less strength to throw the same distance.

I would venture to say 45 -50 degrees would feel like a large lofted angle. I would be interesting to know what angle Russel Wilson is throwing his at.. I might guess 50 degrees.
Someone said this in the .net forum. BrockStar is the real deal.

"I hate myself for admitting it, but I've watched both the Whiners and Beagles play, and the SF team is near flawless thus far.

McCaffrey alone is an insane weapon behind that line, and like it or not, Brock Purdy, barring injury IS the next Tom Brady, there's really no way to watch the guy play and not see that.

May be our only hope of taking the niners down once and for all, will be once Purdy signs a cap eating contract, because that will come sooner than later if he keeps playing like he is.

What indication is there his game will slip? The guy is ridiculous. I HATE it, but Purdy is potential "GOAT" material. There's just no objective reality where that can be denied..."
[ Edited by braap49er on Oct 3, 2023 at 9:02 PM ]
I don't know if Brock is the real deal. Or what the real deal even means. If it means that he'll be a top half QB for the rest of his career, I'm sold. If it means he'll be the next Brady..well...I'm gonna need to see some more. I will say that if the 9ers win the superbowl this year, he will look every bit as impressive as Brady did his 2nd year. Arguably Brock does have a better offense surrounding him...but he's also performed at a higher level at this point.
Originally posted by braap49er:
Someone said this in the .net forum. BrockStar is the real deal.

"I hate myself for admitting it, but I've watched both the Whiners and Beagles play, and the SF team is near flawless thus far.

McCaffrey alone is an insane weapon behind that line, and like it or not, Brock Purdy, barring injury IS the next Tom Brady, there's really no way to watch the guy play and not see that.

May be our only hope of taking the niners down once and for all, will be once Purdy signs a cap eating contract, because that will come sooner than later if he keeps playing like he is.

What indication is there his game will slip? The guy is ridiculous. I HATE it, but Purdy is potential "GOAT" material. There's just no objective reality where that can be denied..."
sounds like someone here is being an imposter over there
Originally posted by braap49er:
Someone said this in the .net forum. BrockStar is the real deal.

"I hate myself for admitting it, but I've watched both the Whiners and Beagles play, and the SF team is near flawless thus far.

McCaffrey alone is an insane weapon behind that line, and like it or not, Brock Purdy, barring injury IS the next Tom Brady, there's really no way to watch the guy play and not see that.

May be our only hope of taking the niners down once and for all, will be once Purdy signs a cap eating contract, because that will come sooner than later if he keeps playing like he is.

What indication is there his game will slip? The guy is ridiculous. I HATE it, but Purdy is potential "GOAT" material. There's just no objective reality where that can be denied..."

What forum is this from?
Originally posted by Memphis9er:
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.

I am just going of the hundreds of throws I have thrown in my life most when I was trying get good enough to beat the coaches kid out for the QB position in high school. For me, it was easier to get distance on a lofted ball without straining my arm. Me and a couple of buddies spent hours in the afternoons after school running routes and working on passing accurately. It was much easier to throw deep with some loft on it, much less arm fatigue than trying to zip it in. Then I got a bass guitar for my 16th birthday and football became something to watch more than something to do. I can still spin it pretty good for an old guy though.
I never made it further than geometry in math, I just wasn't into it. Music, art,literature and history were more my things in school, and even then, school was almost 35 years ago. I'll take your word on the math, I was just speaking from my experience of actually throwing the football.

Well, first of all, body mechanics are not being considered here. Only VELOCITY. Consideration of body mechanics may change the calculus here. Second, I'd willing to bet that you're not throwing the ball with greater than 45 degrees of arc on a regular basis.

Here are the physical facts that are beyond dispute:

1. 45 degrees is the optimal angle for a throw that maximizes distance if initial velocity is held constant (aka arm strength).

2. If you're throwing with an arc angle below 45 degrees, each degree lower you throw with, the more initial velocity (aka arm strength) you have to have to get to the same distance you had with a 45 degree arc.

3. If you're throwing with an arc above 45 degrees, each degree HIGHER you throw with, the more initial velocity (aka arm strength) you have to have to get the same distance you had with a 45 degree arc.

Here's the nuance: In real football, usually the speed at which the ball arrives at the target is crucial. Because of this fact, QBs tend to throw almost every pass with an arc below 45 degrees. It's only on (some) fades and the real deep passes that you'll see tear drop throws. But even then, most QBs still throw even deep balls with an arc below 45 degrees. It's only the guys like Russell Wilson who throw deep balls with a true tear drop arc. And for THOSE guys, it takes more arm strength to throw the same distance when they throw with a higher arc.

But again, since most throws need to get there extremely fast, your experience will match reality. It's only when you're throwing with an arc higher than 45 degrees that it takes more arm strength to throw it farther. Otherwise it's reversed and is as your experience shows.
Originally posted by SanDiego49er:
Originally posted by braap49er:
Someone said this in the .net forum. BrockStar is the real deal.

"I hate myself for admitting it, but I've watched both the Whiners and Beagles play, and the SF team is near flawless thus far.

McCaffrey alone is an insane weapon behind that line, and like it or not, Brock Purdy, barring injury IS the next Tom Brady, there's really no way to watch the guy play and not see that.

May be our only hope of taking the niners down once and for all, will be once Purdy signs a cap eating contract, because that will come sooner than later if he keeps playing like he is.

What indication is there his game will slip? The guy is ridiculous. I HATE it, but Purdy is potential "GOAT" material. There's just no objective reality where that can be denied..."

What forum is this from?

Probably shecocks.net. I'm sorry. Seahawks.net.
Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
Originally posted by SanDiego49er:
Originally posted by braap49er:
Someone said this in the .net forum. BrockStar is the real deal.

"I hate myself for admitting it, but I've watched both the Whiners and Beagles play, and the SF team is near flawless thus far.

McCaffrey alone is an insane weapon behind that line, and like it or not, Brock Purdy, barring injury IS the next Tom Brady, there's really no way to watch the guy play and not see that.

May be our only hope of taking the niners down once and for all, will be once Purdy signs a cap eating contract, because that will come sooner than later if he keeps playing like he is.

What indication is there his game will slip? The guy is ridiculous. I HATE it, but Purdy is potential "GOAT" material. There's just no objective reality where that can be denied..."

What forum is this from?

Probably shecocks.net. I'm sorry. Seahawks.net.

Yes, both of these.
Originally posted by braap49er:
Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
Originally posted by SanDiego49er:
Originally posted by braap49er:
Someone said this in the .net forum. BrockStar is the real deal.

"I hate myself for admitting it, but I've watched both the Whiners and Beagles play, and the SF team is near flawless thus far.

McCaffrey alone is an insane weapon behind that line, and like it or not, Brock Purdy, barring injury IS the next Tom Brady, there's really no way to watch the guy play and not see that.

May be our only hope of taking the niners down once and for all, will be once Purdy signs a cap eating contract, because that will come sooner than later if he keeps playing like he is.

What indication is there his game will slip? The guy is ridiculous. I HATE it, but Purdy is potential "GOAT" material. There's just no objective reality where that can be denied..."

What forum is this from?

Probably shecocks.net. I'm sorry. Seahawks.net.

Yes, both of these.

I advise not putting the first one in your browser.

Hell, I advise not putting the second one in either.
Originally posted by Memphis9er:
Originally posted by Montana:
Originally posted by Nastastical:
He's already top 5. IMO he's right behind Mahomes, Allen, Hurts, and Herbert, and if he keeps playing like this he'll climb even higher.

I feel like people are really sleeping on what they're witnessing. This kid looks special. It's the exact same feeling that I had watching Steve Young. He makes the right decisions 9/10 and his ball placement is elite. Now you throw in his ability to extend plays with his legs and he's clearly already ahead of many of the league's young QBs. Who the hell is trading Purdy for Lawrence or Burrows? Would you dare take that gamble of trading away the next Tom Brady for someone with a bigger arm?

Yep, for those who didn't get to experience those days, if they are young whippersnappers, lol..this is what watching Steve Young was like. I was just thinking this yesterday, it's the exact feeling I had in the 90s. That excitement and feel good, fuzzy all over vibes haha. Not sure how to describe it haha just damn exciting lol. The football buzz, haven't felt that in a long time & almost forgot what it was like! This is Steve Young buzz feels! This is good times indeed lol.

For us even older guys, this kinda feels like watching Montana starting to look legit. Young never made me feel that way until the year they actually won the superbowl.

This is how it feels for me also.
I'm old lol so I saw all of Montana & young not getting over dallas or the packers pissed me off! Lol
Originally posted by braap49er:
Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
Originally posted by SanDiego49er:
Originally posted by braap49er:
Someone said this in the .net forum. BrockStar is the real deal.

"I hate myself for admitting it, but I've watched both the Whiners and Beagles play, and the SF team is near flawless thus far.

McCaffrey alone is an insane weapon behind that line, and like it or not, Brock Purdy, barring injury IS the next Tom Brady, there's really no way to watch the guy play and not see that.

May be our only hope of taking the niners down once and for all, will be once Purdy signs a cap eating contract, because that will come sooner than later if he keeps playing like he is.

What indication is there his game will slip? The guy is ridiculous. I HATE it, but Purdy is potential "GOAT" material. There's just no objective reality where that can be denied..."

What forum is this from?

Probably shecocks.net. I'm sorry. Seahawks.net.

Yes, both of these.

I put some posts in there. You guys should post some over there too and support the argument.
Search Share 49ersWebzone