QB Brock Purdy Thread

Originally posted by Sask49erFan:

Originally posted by dj43:
And?

You ignore the incredibly more talented team the Eagles had this past season.

Give Brock the Eagles' OL, the 2021 version of Deebo, along with CMC and you get a ring...or did you forget Burford's blown assignment?

We lost the SB with arguably the best team full of superstars that the league has seen in many years with Purdy at QB.

Give Hurts that team, the 2021 version of Deebo, along with CMC and you get MULTIPLE rings.

Give the 49ers the calls that Philly got in the Super Bowl last season, for instance holding. Had the refs called holding on KC and the 49ers would've had two Super Bowl wins

Hurts takes the worst sacks behind the best line, and he's afraid to use the middle of the field. He would get benched in Kyle's offense. He could bring his whole loaded offense with him and Kyle would still have to change everything for him

Originally posted by NYniner85:
Are you guys arguing about two different things? One is talking about cap space, the other is talking about cash flow?

No. He claims he copied and pasted Hurts' earnings through three years when the 2023 number was the cap hit. I pointed out that the 2023 number was the cap hit and not his earnings (cash flow) for that year. Then he got upset about that.

Originally posted by TheWooLick:
Jones sucks as a starter but I am not hating on him as a backup.

i don't really know the appeal on mac. he doesn't really scream first round grade or talent. now darnold, you can see the talent in his arm and he's pretty darn athletic also. mac seems pretty basic. i suspect he was propped up in college playing with a bunch of all worlds. i would like to see at least one guy on roster at QB who is a dual threat. i don't really see it. now maybe if mac is called upon, the offense around him can do the heavy lifting if our key guys are active. i could see that, potentially.

to edit in here - another telling thing on mac, he took a two year deal is my understanding. so lets say he sees the field and does well, he's still locked in on a backup level contract. he's not exactly betting on himself.

Originally posted by genus49:
Let me ask you 3 simple questions.

Forget the whole NFL. In the SB.

Which team had the better QB?
Which team had the better OL?
Which team had the better defense?

Please don't add any extra. Just answer the 3 questions. It's either 49ers or Chiefs.

Overall the 49ers had the better QB, OL and D.

It wasn't until mistakes in the first game and a Greenlaw injury that helped the Chiefs rally in both games.

We should have won both games if we played a clean game and didn't have Greenlaw tear his Achilles on a fluke play.

We had a far superior roster in the last SB.

Originally posted by Sask49erFan:

Originally posted by genus49:
Let me ask you 3 simple questions.

Forget the whole NFL. In the SB.

Which team had the better QB?
Which team had the better OL?
Which team had the better defense?

Please don't add any extra. Just answer the 3 questions. It's either 49ers or Chiefs.

Overall the 49ers had the better QB, OL and D.

It wasn't until mistakes in the first game and a Greenlaw injury that helped the Chiefs rally in both games.

We should have won both games if we played a clean game and didn't have Greenlaw tear his Achilles on a fluke play.

We had a far superior roster in the last SB.

Originally posted by Sask49erFan:

Originally posted by genus49:
Let me ask you 3 simple questions.

Forget the whole NFL. In the SB.

Which team had the better QB?
Which team had the better OL?
Which team had the better defense?

Please don't add any extra. Just answer the 3 questions. It's either 49ers or Chiefs.

Overall the 49ers had the better QB, OL and D.

It wasn't until mistakes in the first game and a Greenlaw injury that helped the Chiefs rally in both games.

We should have won both games if we played a clean game and didn't have Greenlaw tear his Achilles on a fluke play.

We had a far superior roster in the last SB.

You are not a serious person with that.

Originally posted by genus49:

Originally posted by Sask49erFan:

Originally posted by genus49:
Let me ask you 3 simple questions.

Forget the whole NFL. In the SB.

Which team had the better QB?
Which team had the better OL?
Which team had the better defense?

Please don't add any extra. Just answer the 3 questions. It's either 49ers or Chiefs.

Overall the 49ers had the better QB, OL and D.

It wasn't until mistakes in the first game and a Greenlaw injury that helped the Chiefs rally in both games.

We should have won both games if we played a clean game and didn't have Greenlaw tear his Achilles on a fluke play.

We had a far superior roster in the last SB.

You are not a serious person with that.

You are just learning this?

Originally posted by random49er:
There was no context left out. Philly didn't win with a $51M/Yr QB. It ended up as $40M after bonuses. What could possibly have been left out?

The person youre replying to broke my post up into snippets as well. In fact, you replied to it. The difference is that he is pro-spending as you are, and I am pro-cautious.

And good job to him on doing so, though it never changes what I just said above and in the OP.

When the truth is stretched,... it shouldnt offend you when it's corrected.

Type-C got his typo correction on $6M.... I straightened out how Brock would in fact risk or forfeit his accrual season, et. al. No biggie, and nothing to do with snipping.

When people talk about contracts, they often talk about the reported topline numbers. Hurts' 255M/5yr contract extension is commonly referred to by its 51M AAV. Hurts had 4.304M/1yr remaining on his rookie deal that became part of his new total contract. Hurts' total contract is 259.304M/6yr, which has a total contract AAV of 43.217M. It's extremely rare this ever gets brought up. And as others have pointed out, these are averages over the contract years. When you factor in the spreading of bonus money across the contract and into void years, the cap hits shrink. People understand this. Nobody is disputing it.

Consider the Dak contract. How many people refer to it as a 60M AAV contract? Almost everyone. In reality, that AAV (extension AAV) reflects his 240M/4yr contract extension. His old contract had 29M/1yr remaining. That cash still exists in his new contract. Dak's total contract is 269M/5yr, which has total contract AAV of 53.8M. Have you ever heard of anyone mention Dak and 53.8M AAV? If so, who and how often? Note - If you view Spotrac's cash-flow for Dak, it will say 274M. 5M was paid to Dak in 2024 before he signed his extension and is not part of the current contract.

Consider the Allen contract. How many people refer to it as a 55M AAV contract? Almost everyone. Is that 55M the extension AAV? No. The 55M AAV for Allen refers to the total contract AAV. Allen's contract had 129.6M in cash and 4 years remaining on it. His contract extension added 2 years and 200.4M. That's an extension AAV of 100.2M. But that number sounds really stupid when you apples-to-apples compare it to guys like Dak (60M), Love (55M), The Prince (55M), Burrow (55M), Tua (53.1M), Goff (53M), Herbert (52.5M), Lamar (52M), Hurts (51M), and Mahomes (45M). Advertising his total contract as a 330M/6yr, makes it seem like Allen's "55M AAV" is "stabilizing the market" or "taking a discount" when he's actually resetting the market. Apples-to-apples comparing total contract AAVs for the top active QB contracts: Allen (55M), Dak (53.8M), Lamar (52M), Goff (48.1M), Tua (47.1M), Love (46.2M), Watson (46M), Cousins (45M), Burrow (44.3M), The Prince (43.8M), Hurts (43.2M), Herbert (42.3M), Mahomes (39.8M), Kyler (38M).

Just for completeness, we can discuss Purdy (again). Let's say Purdy gets a contract you probably think would be devastatingly bad.

• 305M in new cash - 2nd behind Mahomes (450M), ahead of Burrow & The Prince (275M).
• 61M extension AAV - 2nd behind Allen (100.2M), ahead of Dak (60M).
• 310.4M in total cash - 3rd behind Mahomes (477.6M) and Allen (330M), ahead of Burrow (310M)
• 51.7M total AAV - 4th behind Allen (55M), Dak (53.8M), and Lamar (52M), ahead of Goff (48.1M).
• 81M Signing Bonus - 1st ahead of Dak (80M).
• 150M Guaranteed at Signing - 2nd behind Watson (230M), ahead of Allen (147M).
• 250.3M Total Guaranteed - 1st ahead of Allen (250M)
• 220.4M four-year cash flow - 1st ahead of Allen (220M), Dak (219M), Mahomes (218M), and Lamar (207M).

Minimize the salaries from 2025-28. 81M Signing Bonus. Option bonuses of 39M, 42M, and 50.8M. 100k workout bonus and 750k total in per-game roster bonuses. His cap hits in the first four years would be 17.4M, 26.1M, 34.5M, 44.8M. No cap hits above 50M. The salary cap continues to grow ~7% year-to-year. and will be around 350M in 2029. The league will has option of terminating the current media deal in 2029 and recent reporting suggests the league will opt out. The current CBA goes through 2030. There will be new revenue sharing splits in the next CBA. The owners will push for the 18+2 schedule model (shorter preseason, 18 regular season games, 2 bye weeks). The cap will see another boom with those adjustments. The carousel of quarterback contracts are coming back around and Purdy on this contract is going to be a bargain when quarterbacks are getting 75M+ in a few years. The Ravens are already talking about making Lamar the highest paid quarterback before next offseason.

edit - Just to drive home this AAV discussion, for Purdy to match Allen, the 49ers would need to give Purdy a 324.6M/5yr extension (64.92M extension AAV) to bring the total contract to 330M/6yr (55M total AAV). The entire discussion around AAVs is stupid and is made worse when people aren't even discussing the same AAV type (extension vs total).

Originally posted by Typecast:

Originally posted by NYniner85:
Are you guys arguing about two different things? One is talking about cap space, the other is talking about cash flow?

No. He claims he copied and pasted Hurts' earnings through three years when the 2023 number was the cap hit. I pointed out that the 2023 number was the cap hit and not his earnings (cash flow) for that year. Then he got upset about that.

No upset stuff here. Just had to work to get you back on track to the original statement: Jalen Hurts has yet to become a $50M/Yr QB,...whether you're talking cap or total cash flow. It really stop and ends there.

Originally posted by Typecast:
When people talk about contracts, they often talk about the reported topline numbers.

Yes. This is why context is needed. Otherwise,...there can be a lot of following posters thinking things like a player cant be penalized so long as he shows up for 6 games, or Jalen Hurts has really crossed the $50M threshold and somehow, Philly managed to win one, even without a Top 5ish QB gettin that much.

Both statements are untrue, and that's where context comes in. It's a necessary evil to at least try to get things back on track, discussion-wise. Extremely long breakdowns regarding this is kinda unnecessary.

Originally posted by random49er:
No upset stuff here. Just had to work to get you back on track to the original statement: Jalen Hurts has yet to become a $50M/Yr QB,...whether you're talking cap or total cash flow. It really stop and ends there.

Chatter, let it go. You were wrong. You admitted to copying and pasting incorrect information then blamed that other website for you hitting the "Post This Reply" button. You can't be this thin-skinned about being wrong that you have to ignore reality and lie to yourself like this.

Originally posted by random49er:
Yes. This is why context is needed. Otherwise,...there can be a lot of following posters thinking things like a player cant be penalized so long as he shows up for 6 games, or Jalen Hurts has really crossed the $50M threshold and somehow, Philly managed to win one, even without a Top 5ish QB gettin that much.

Again with the 6 games to accrue a season crying? You wanted to know what made another chatter think 6 games was required. I pointed you to the CBA where it states 6 games is required. It wasn't some big gotcha. You asked a question. I provided the answer. Moving goalposts to satisfy your need to be right is off-putting.

You know what people are talking about when they say "51M AAV", you are just being annoying about it.

Originally posted by random49er:
Both statements are untrue, and that's where context comes in. It's a necessary evil to at least try to get things back on track, discussion-wise. Extremely long breakdowns regarding this is kinda unnecessary.

So it's necessary to have discussion but it's also unnecessary to have discussion? Make up your mind chatter... lol...

Originally posted by Sask49erFan:

Originally posted by genus49:
Let me ask you 3 simple questions.

Forget the whole NFL. In the SB.

Which team had the better QB?
Which team had the better OL?
Which team had the better defense?

Please don't add any extra. Just answer the 3 questions. It's either 49ers or Chiefs.

Overall the 49ers had the better QB, OL and D.

It wasn't until mistakes in the first game and a Greenlaw injury that helped the Chiefs rally in both games.

We should have won both games if we played a clean game and didn't have Greenlaw tear his Achilles on a fluke play.

We had a far superior roster in the last SB.

Originally posted by TheWooLick:

Originally posted by BOI49er:
Why is it hard to address what I actually said? He's going to play this year. If he didn't, it wouldn't be to raise his stock, but to preserve his health and earning power. And You, of All people, who's been derisively calling Jones "McCorkle" for half a decade now and railing against him, are now suggesting he's a threat to Brock? His comparative ability to avoid the rush alone takes him out of that competition. Yes, there is always the tag next year. In fact, while they can't tag him this year, they Could offer him that money on a one year contract, which would be a very large raise over $5m, and would certainly keep Brock from sitting out. If they did that, and I was Kyle, I'd be looking for a job. And yes, I did predict he would get signed, and merely suggested it would be for more than you want because he does have leverage you will not acknowledge.

Jones sucks as a starter but I am not hating on him as a backup.

I agree.

Originally posted by Typecast:
Chatter, let it go. You were wrong. You admitted to copying and pasting incorrect information then blamed that other website for you hitting the "Post This Reply" button.

I've copied incorrect information from websites plenty of times. How does this change the point that Hurts has never made $51M in a season?



Since you for some odd reason can't believe that articles are not always 100% accurate I'm, teaching you how someone can quote a source instead of being the source pretty easily.

Wait. Why are we on 2023, though, instead of 2024? Is this the best you've got for a smoking gun when he's still not made for $40M in a given year yet?

If you want to see MAIN POINTS that were completely false and bombed (perhaps due to an AI glitch?),..then here you go as a reminder:



You didn't simply get a detailed number from 2023 wrong by leaving a signing bonus out. You blew the ENTIRE CONCEPT here, showing a clear lack of understanding that AI cant cover for. I mean even without the denial of it a player can get from sitting games out, you didn't even know that not reporting to camp on time can cost guys an accrual. How could you miss that if these specifics is really your "forte" ??

I mean it's ok; Who hasnt been wrong? But yea, it does give me "lost without the 'bot'" vibes when you couple that with multiple paragraphs of nuanced details like you're writing college papers.

I appreciate your contributions, but, it's not that serious bro.

Ever since this correction tho, you've gotten into your feelings. You're better than this Type-C. I thought you said we've wasted enough space on this issue, and was moving on?

Originally posted by Typecast:
edit - Anyway, we've derailed this thread enough.

Why did you return to it?

Originally posted by random49er:

Originally posted by Typecast:
Chatter, let it go. You were wrong. You admitted to copying and pasting incorrect information then blamed that other website for you hitting the "Post This Reply" button.

I've copied incorrect information from websites plenty of times. How does this change the point that Hurts has never made $51M in a season?

If you want to see MAIN POINTS that were completely false and bombed (perhaps due to an AI glitch?),..then here you go as a reminder:

You are now overly parsing what you said because you got a simple response because you feel disrespected someone answered you.... this is sad.

Originally posted by random49er:
You didn't simply get a detailed number from 2023 wrong by leaving a signing bonus out. You blew the ENTIRE CONCEPT here, showing a clear lack of understanding that AI cant cover for. I mean even without the denial of it a player can get from sitting games out, you didn't even know that not reporting to camp on time can cost guys an accrual. How could you miss that if these specifics is really your "forte" ??

Why do I need to provide a detailed number from 2023? I gave you the number he "earned" that year. For someone that's been crying about extraneous discussion, why are you now asking for extraneous discussion? If I said "Hurts earned 24.304M that season", it should be clear that 24.304M is not 6.2M as "you claimed" (pasted?). If we did "basic math", as you keep insisting, the difference between his cash and signing bonus is 1.1M, which was his 2023 salary. 1.1M is still not 6.2M. Where did the 6.2M possibly come from? Oh, the 2023 cap hit... Perhaps you should get better sources to copy-and-paste from.

Originally posted by random49er:
I mean it's ok; Who hasnt been wrong? But yea, it does give me "lost without the 'bot'" vibes when you couple that with multiple paragraphs of nuanced details like you're writing college papers.

Exactly. Who hasn't been wrong? I've been wrong. I've admitted to it. I've moved on. It seems anytime anyone says something to you that doesn't align with how you feel, you must move heaven and earth to be right!

Originally posted by random49er:
I appreciate your contributions, but, it's not that serious bro.

It obviously is serious for you as you can't resist the urge to keep lying to yourself and others about this. You know we can read your replies in these posts, right?

Originally posted by random49er:
Ever since this correction tho, you've gotten into your feelings. I thought you said we've wasted enough space on this issue, and was moving on?

We are wasting space. But if you are going to ignore requests to squash this and you want to keep making a fool out of yourself, I'm more than happy to assist you in that effort.

Originally posted by random49er:

Originally posted by Typecast:
edit - Anyway, we've derailed this thread enough.

Why did you return to it?

Where did I say I was leaving this thread? I said we've derailed it enough. You may not be familiar with the Law of Holes. The First Law of Holes: If you find yourself in a hole, stop digging. The Second Law of Holes: When you stop digging, you are still in a hole. At some point, you need to put down the shovel. It doesn't really matter how you got in the hole, you are in that hole. So to recap, when you are in a hole, you are in a hole. Stop digging. Enjoy your hole.