QB Brock Purdy Thread

Originally posted by random49er:

Originally posted by BOI49er:

Originally posted by random49er:

Originally posted by BOI49er:
At $5.1m. I wonder if he shows up for the off season and all but the last 6 games of the season to get the season accrual.

The last 6 games to accrue?? Did you really mean to type August 5th?

Nope.

What makes u think you only need 6 games towards the end of the season to accrue a season?

The CBA states you need 6 games of eligible status.

For the purposes of calculating Accrued Seasons under this Agreement, a player shall receive one Accrued Season for each season during which he was on, or should have been on, full pay status for a total of six or more regular season games (which shall include any games encompassed in any injury settlement, injury grievance settlement or injury grievance award), but which, irrespective of the player's pay status, shall not include games for which the player was on: (i) the Exempt Commissioner Permission List, (ii) the Reserve PUP List as a result of a nonfootball injury, or (iii) a Club's Practice Squad.

https://overthecap.com/collective-bargaining-agreement/article/8

Originally posted by GoreGoreGore:

Originally posted by 49ers808:

Originally posted by Typecast:
Stop talking about the franchise tag. It's not the "win" or "leverage" you think it is. Thank you.

I'll talk about what ever I want to. Thank you.
It absolutely could be used if that scenario played out; not debatable

Unlikely. We've only had 3 QBs in the past 15 years get tagged. Brees, Cousins, and most recently Dak.

If our cap wasn't an issue, I could see it happening possibly if both sides aren't close. But with a franchise tag, it would cost us $40 mil cap space this year. I suppose it is possible we've been shedding some money and not signing anyone expensive for that reason tho.

No it wouldn't. It would cost us that in 2026. He's already signed for $5M this season.

Originally posted by BOI49er:
Google:

Q. "What constitutes and 'accrued season'? A. Six or more regular season games on a club's active/inactive, reserve/injured or reserve/physically unable to perform list".

We've been here before on people holding out. They've got to come back for 6 games or the contract doesn't roll over into the next year.

Hmmmm. You do realize he has to report to camp if it's gonna accrue, right?

Under the NFL's Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA), a player does not earn an accrued season if they fail to report to their team's mandatory training camp on time, even if they later play in 6 or more games.

I remember this guy showed up only a couple days late, played the necessary games, and didnt get his accrued season due the mishap:

According to the NFL's Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA), players on rookie deals must report to mandatory training camp on time to earn an accrued season. This requirement is stricter for rookies compared to veterans, who may have more flexibility in certain situations.

For rookies, the league emphasizes timely reporting to ensure they meet the conditions for free agency eligibility and other contract-related milestones. Bateman's delay in reporting caused him to miss this critical requirement, even though he played in enough games to otherwise qualify for an accrued season.

If player holds out his services for a "material period of time," he is also at risk of not accruing a season.
NFL.COM: 2023-nfl-free-agency-explainer-vital-information-on-franchise-tags-contract-term

Originally posted by random49er:
It's certainly leverage. Can you provide proof that it is not? Is it on record that players are sitting out multiple years to avoid it and somehow play again?

I mean I know I can provide the opposite of what you're saying:

The leverage is multiplied x10 in Purdy's case because Franchise Tag-type money doesn't even come until 2026, possibly. Until then, only $5M. If that doesn't bring you to the table to negotiate when you're worth alot more,...then I guess nothing would.

If Brock wants great press clippings where he's said to have the "highest paid contract in league history" or whatever, backloaded with a bunch of money he'll never see,...I have a feeling we could certainly accommodate him for that.

But in actual dollar amounts in GTD money,....I highly doubt the 49ers will back off from their stance and take the carrot off the string.

Originally posted by BOI49er:
At $5.1m. I wonder if he shows up for the off season and all but the last 6 games of the season to get the season accrual. That money is so far below his market value that it logically would not be worth the injury risk.

In other words, not gonna happen. So if practically speaking, if you can't hold him to it because that's not in his best interest, is he really under contract?

The $5.1m is no leverage at all, because Brock will not report at all, off season or regular season, until the last 6 games of the season to accrue the season. It works in Brock's favor, because since he Is under contract, you can't franchise him.

A man worth $50m+ per year is not going to risk injury for a tenth of that. Odds are he's better off watching the games on TV until the last 6 games, and then he's out of pracrtice and out of shape, and he still won't play.

Bottom line: The team caves, not Brock.

Originally posted by BOI49er:
The $5.1m is no leverage at all, because Brock will not report at all, off season or regular season, until the last 6 games of the season to accrue the season.

Please see above. This is misinformation.

Originally posted by random49er:

Originally posted by BOI49er:
Google:

Q. "What constitutes and 'accrued season'? A. Six or more regular season games on a club's active/inactive, reserve/injured or reserve/physically unable to perform list".

We've been here before on people holding out. They've got to come back for 6 games or the contract doesn't roll over into the next year.

Hmmmm. You do realize he has to report to camp if it's gonna accrue, right?

Under the NFL's Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA), a player does not earn an accrued season if they fail to report to their team's mandatory training camp on time, even if they later play in 6 or more games.

I remember this guy showed up only a couple days late, played the necessary games, and didnt get his accrued season due the mishap:

According to the NFL's Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA), players on rookie deals must report to mandatory training camp on time to earn an accrued season. This requirement is stricter for rookies compared to veterans, who may have more flexibility in certain situations.

For rookies, the league emphasizes timely reporting to ensure they meet the conditions for free agency eligibility and other contract-related milestones. Bateman's delay in reporting caused him to miss this critical requirement, even though he played in enough games to otherwise qualify for an accrued season.

If player holds out his services for a "material period of time," he is also at risk of not accruing a season.
NFL.COM: 2023-nfl-free-agency-explainer-vital-information-on-franchise-tags-contract-term

Holding in?

Whatever. He won't have to play.

His agent is paid to cross the "i's" and dot the "T's". It's not rocket surgery.

Originally posted by GoreGoreGore:

Originally posted by 49ers808:

Originally posted by Typecast:
Stop talking about the franchise tag. It's not the "win" or "leverage" you think it is. Thank you.

I'll talk about what ever I want to. Thank you.
It absolutely could be used if that scenario played out; not debatable

Unlikely. We've only had 3 QBs in the past 15 years get tagged. Brees, Cousins, and most recently Dak.

If our cap wasn't an issue, I could see it happening possibly if both sides aren't close. But with a franchise tag, it would cost us $40 mil cap space this year. I suppose it is possible we've been shedding some money and not signing anyone expensive for that reason tho.

The list of QBs that have been franchise tagged since 2010

• 2023 - Lamar - non-exclusive franchise tag by Baltimore.
• 2020 - Dak - non-exclusive franchise tag (procedural) by Dallas.
• 2019 - Dak - exclusive franchise tag by Dallas.
• 2017 - Cousins - exclusive franchise tag by Washington.
• 2016 - Cousins - non-exclusive franchise tag by Washington.
• 2012 - Brees - exclusive franchise tag by New Orleans.
• 2011 - Vick - exclusive franchise tag by Philly.
• 2011 - Peyton - exclusive franchise tag by Indy.

Purdy isn't a free agent in 2025, so he cannot be franchise tagged this year. He can be tagged next year, but the non-exclusive tag will be north of 45M. Since Paraag has been with the 49ers, the 49ers have franchise tagged Gould (2019), Goldson (2012), Franklin (2010), and Peterson (04 and 05). Before Paraag's arrival, they tagged Owens (99) and Young (93). As much as people here love the idea of vindictively using the tag (Aiyuk) or to wait-and-see (Purdy), the 49ers simply do not use the tag that way. Since Paraag has had control over contracts, the tag is seldomly used and typically to get a contract done with a player he wants to keep. Players Kyle/Trent want simply just get paid before the tag is needed.

Originally posted by BOI49er:
Holding in?

Whatever. He won't have to play.

Did you not read that line regarding withholding services straight from the source? The NFL can easily strip that "6+ games" threshold away and trash it based on the CBA verbiage that has been cited and recited time and time again.

You really think Brock is stupid enough to risk that by some "sitting in" fiasco when he's trying to get some major money by 2026?

Originally posted by random49er:
Did you not read that line regarding withholding services straight from the source? The NFL can easily strip that "6+ games" threshold away and trash it based on the CBA verbiage that has been cited and recited time and time again.

You really think Brock is stupid enough to risk that by some "sitting in" fiasco when he's trying to get some major money by 2026?

Yep.

Originally posted by BOI49er:
Holding in?

Whatever. He won't have to play.

His agent is paid to cross the "i's" and dot the "T's". It's not rocket surgery.

Originally posted by BOI49er:
Holding in?

Whatever. He won't have to play.

His agent is paid to cross the "i's" and dot the "T's". It's not rocket surgery.

Rockets have surgery??

j/k I know what you mean lol

Originally posted by 49ers808:

Originally posted by BOI49er:
Holding in?

Whatever. He won't have to play.

His agent is paid to cross the "i's" and dot the "T's". It's not rocket surgery.

Rockets have surgery??

j/k I know what you mean lol

Maybe he meant "brain science"

Nice Play Action, Nice Pocket Protection, Nice Route, Nice Throw, Nice Run After Catch.

Niner Football Perfection.

Originally posted by Typecast:
The CBA states you need 6 games of eligible status.

For the purposes of calculating Accrued Seasons under this Agreement, a player shall receive one Accrued Season for each season during which he was on, or should have been on, full pay status for a total of six or more regular season games (which shall include any games encompassed in any injury settlement, injury grievance settlement or injury grievance award), but which, irrespective of the player's pay status, shall not include games for which the player was on: (i) the Exempt Commissioner Permission List, (ii) the Reserve PUP List as a result of a nonfootball injury, or (iii) a Club's Practice Squad.

https://overthecap.com/collective-bargaining-agreement/article/8

hope you've read the above and realize that even if he reports to camp and tries to only play the last 6+ games for a failing team due to holding servicesz he can/will be punished severely.

For all the hurdles to clear trying to skip games, its just not worth it

Sure Brock come on in and play for pennies (in NFL contract terms) since you've already played for pennies in your previous years.

I think it's funny that we're still battling page after page over extreme case scenarios and yet I don't think I saw anyone post John Lynch's comments about how he didn't think it was too optimistic to expect a deal to be done before offseason workouts start in a few weeks.

Are we that bored that we need to make up extreme case scenarios with Brock's deal?