QB Brock Purdy Thread

Originally posted by TD49ers:

Originally posted by CatchMaster80:

Originally posted by TD49ers:

Originally posted by Bringbackedjr:

Originally posted by TD49ers:

Originally posted by Bringbackedjr:

Originally posted by CharlieSheen:

Originally posted by TD49ers:

Originally posted by genus49:

Originally posted by 9erson3:

Originally posted by bvc49:
Florio may never become even an average reporter, so why should anyone care what he thinks?

What he says comes true…

Since when?

also what did I miss? Why are we talking about Florio?

Because he has a view that should be considered. He is not in a bubble.

You can say this about any young qb. Nobody is guaranteed to become great

I would argue his "view" is based on one thing and one thing only. He makes inflammatory remarks to get attention. He does this to remain relevant. It's all about the clicks. Clicks=$. Why does Bonilla assist him and others like him by basically reposting trash?

Nothing was inflammatory unless you are overly biased.

Wrong. The basis for all these stupid ass revelations is the same faulty argument. If the team around him is less talented then he can't overcome that on his own. That is plain stupid. Every QB on this planet will be less effective if he has less talent on the field. What QB was capable of overcoming all the s**t of last year? Nobody could. Brock is an easy target because some can't get over the fact that he was the last pick of the draft. If bias is at play then point your finger at these stupid ass commentators who are want to be journalists. They can't accept him in the top 10 because of his draft position. They will continue to drag his name down at every opportunity. The argument on its face is indeed inflammatory.

+ Show all quotes
No its not. Purdy isnt elite threfore he shouldnt be paid as such. Pretty straight forward and not necessarily a minority position. Blame everything else if you want but an elite QB has to overcome lack of talent on the roster, 2024 shows he cannot. That doesnt mean he should have taken this team to the SB but 6-10 just isnt good enough. Its not even the team record, he just didnt elevate the offense. I dont care where he got drafted, he needs to play better with less if he wants to be paid top dollar. End of the day, I want him to sign, just not for elite money and long duration. Its funny, Steve Young said as much awhile back stating Brock needs to not break the bank to allow the team to surround him with talent.

Whether you feel Purdyt is eleite or not that's not what will determine his salary. That's just not the way players are getting paid now. If you use that measure then there are a lot of players getting overpaid.

It pretty much comes down to team need and whether the HC is happy witht the player. Of course he has to be able fit into the salary structure. Whether he's a top 5, top 10 or top 15 QB is irrelevant.

And thats the lunacy of the QB market that the 49ers should not countinue.

It's not lunacy at all. This is the natural path that resulted from the implementation of the rookie wage scale. Rather than pay players a bag coming straight out of college, teams now get players cheap for 3-5 years to prove themselves. Those that prove themselves get a bag. Teams wanted this.

Stop being spooked by raw AAVs. Consider the salary cap.

Total Cash Spending / Total Cap on Contract Years (7% year-to-year projection on future caps, does not include void years)

1. 18.87% - 2023 - Lamar - 5 years - 260M / 1377.8M - unsigned franchise tag into extension.
2. 18.37% - 2021 - Dak - 4 Years - 160M / 870.9M - unsigned franchise tag into extension.
3. 18.16% - 2022 - Watson - 5 years - 230M / 1266.3M - trade then extended 146.54M/5.
4. 17.99% - 2024 - Dak - 5 years - 269M / 1495.0M - extended 29M/1.
5. 16.52% - 2025 - Allen - 6 years - 330M / 1997.2M - extended 129.6M/4.
6. 16.30% - 2020 - Kirk - 3 years - 96M / 588.9M - free agent signing.
7. 16.09% - 2024 - Goff - 5 years - 240.6M / 1495.0M - extended 26M/1
8. 15.76% - 2024 - Tua - 5 years - 235.6M / 1495.0M - extended 23M/1.
9. 15.67% - 2019 - Russ - 5 years - 157M / 1001.9M - extended 17M/1.
10. 15.61% - 2024 - Kirk - 4 years - 180M / 1153.0M - free agent signing.
11. 15.45% - 2024 - Love - 5 years - 231M / 1495.0M - extended 11M/1.
12. 15.35% - 2022 - Russ - 7 years - 296M / 1928.0M - extended 53.4M/2.
13. 15.12% - 2023 - Danny Dimes - 4 years - 160M / 1058.1M - pending free agent extension.
14. 15.08% - 2023 - Hurts - 6 years - 259.3M / 1719.8M - extended 4.3M/1.
15. 14.94% - 2019 - Big Ben - 3 years - 85M / 568.9M - extended 17M/1.
16. 14.93% - 2018 - Rodgers - 6 years - 176M / 1179.1M - extended 42M/2.
17. 14.86% - 2018 - Kirk - 3 years - 84M / 563.6M - free agent signing.
18. 14.81% - 2023 - Burrow - 7 years - 310M / 2085.8M - extended 35M/2.
19. 14.75% - 2023 - Rodgers - 3 years - 112.5M / 759.4M - adjusted.
20. 14.60% - 2022 - Rodgers - 5 years - 186.8M / 1266.3M - extended 36M/2.

Purdy getting a 305M/5yr extension (61M extension AAV) would bring his total contract to 310.4M paid out over 6 years of salary caps (1997.2M, 15.54%). That same contract in 2026 with no rookie contract to spread money onto would be 17.7% (1718.0M in total cap over 2026-30). The salary cap has been growing. The salary cap will continue to grow. The salary cap will see an extra bump in 2029 when the league opts out of the current media deal. The salary cap will see another extra bump in 2030 with the next CBA bringing improved revenue splits for the players.

Create a custom 49ers jersey ⇨
Purdy's price just went up with this domino falling

Originally posted by genus49:

Telling a team to walk away from a proven QB in their system because other teams overpaid guys who haven't done as much is pure fandom with nothing at stake.

Brock has proven that he can play in this system with a plethora of offensive talent and when that talent isn't there, he struggled. Yes, many QB's will struggle losing all those weapons, but when you're talking about paying one $55M a year, they'd have to be able to carry the team to an extent. If you look back on this season, if Brock was worth $55M, they would have been 9-8 at worst. There were 5 games in which they were down a score and had a final drive to win the game. He threw game ending interceptions in 3 of those games. Those games were against the Rams, Seahawks and Cardinals. If they won just those games, they would have been 9-8 instead of 6-11, it might have been good enough to win the division (Rams and Seahawks were both 10-7 and with those losses, would have been 9-8).

2023: 4280 yards, 31 TDs, 11 INTs, completion percentage of 69.4% and QBR 73.4
2024: 3864 yards, 20 TDs, 12 INTs, completion percentage of 65.9% and QBR 67.9

It's tough to pay a player who is coming off a worst season than the one before. It just is. Can you imagine one of your employees having a great first few months, but when more work was put on them, their performance began to significantly decline and couldn't handle the workload, then they asks for a huge raise? Would you give that person a raise? Probably not, right? Regardless of the situation Purdy was given, he didn't perform like a QB that deserves a huge raise.

Originally posted by Shakester:

Originally posted by genus49:

Telling a team to walk away from a proven QB in their system because other teams overpaid guys who haven't done as much is pure fandom with nothing at stake.

Brock has proven that he can play in this system with a plethora of offensive talent and when that talent isn't there, he struggled. Yes, many QB's will struggle losing all those weapons, but when you're talking about paying one $55M a year, they'd have to be able to carry the team to an extent. If you look back on this season, if Brock was worth $55M, they would have been 9-8 at worst. There were 5 games in which they were down a score and had a final drive to win the game. He threw game ending interceptions in 3 of those games. Those games were against the Rams, Seahawks and Cardinals. If they won just those games, they would have been 9-8 instead of 6-11, it might have been good enough to win the division (Rams and Seahawks were both 10-7 and with those losses, would have been 9-8).

2023: 4280 yards, 31 TDs, 11 INTs, completion percentage of 69.4% and QBR 73.4
2024: 3864 yards, 20 TDs, 12 INTs, completion percentage of 65.9% and QBR 67.9

It's tough to pay a player who is coming off a worst season than the one before. It just is. Can you imagine one of your employees having a great first few months, but when more work was put on them, their performance began to significantly decline and couldn't handle the workload, then they asks for a huge raise? Would you give that person a raise? Probably not, right? Regardless of the situation Purdy was given, he didn't perform like a QB that deserves a huge raise.

If I gave this employee more workload with some of the worst tools in the business, and he still finished top 10 at his position as a 25 year old, yes I would give him a raise

Originally posted by Shakester:

Originally posted by genus49:

Telling a team to walk away from a proven QB in their system because other teams overpaid guys who haven't done as much is pure fandom with nothing at stake.

Brock has proven that he can play in this system with a plethora of offensive talent and when that talent isn't there, he struggled. Yes, many QB's will struggle losing all those weapons, but when you're talking about paying one $55M a year, they'd have to be able to carry the team to an extent. If you look back on this season, if Brock was worth $55M, they would have been 9-8 at worst. There were 5 games in which they were down a score and had a final drive to win the game. He threw game ending interceptions in 3 of those games. Those games were against the Rams, Seahawks and Cardinals. If they won just those games, they would have been 9-8 instead of 6-11, it might have been good enough to win the division (Rams and Seahawks were both 10-7 and with those losses, would have been 9-8).

2023: 4280 yards, 31 TDs, 11 INTs, completion percentage of 69.4% and QBR 73.4
2024: 3864 yards, 20 TDs, 12 INTs, completion percentage of 65.9% and QBR 67.9

It's tough to pay a player who is coming off a worst season than the one before. It just is. Can you imagine one of your employees having a great first few months, but when more work was put on them, their performance began to significantly decline and couldn't handle the workload, then they asks for a huge raise? Would you give that person a raise? Probably not, right? Regardless of the situation Purdy was given, he didn't perform like a QB that deserves a huge raise.

The funny thing about attributing those losses to Brock is that two of those games Rams/Cardinals the defense blew a 10 point lead in the 4th quarter, both games had key special teams issues as well.

The Seattle game we literally lost after Bosa got injured and Seattle scored the go ahead TD with 12 seconds left in the 4th quarter.

The numbers you put up next to each other aren't even that much different outside of the TDs which will happen when your two best players from the prior season are out most of the year.

Your work analogy doesn't work since this is a team sport. Your job is individual. Brock had nothing to do with Nick Sorensen not being good at his job or special teams being a disaster. He didn't injury CMC who was going to be a huge part of their offense, especially in the redzone. He can't control injuries either.

So you can't claim he didn't perform like he doesn't deserve a huge raise. Guy had no consistency and very little support from the other units so what's the expectation there? To take it back to your work analogy if your boss gave you a computer build in the early 2000s and asked you to do the same work off that while also making you work off dial up internet? Would some of the lack of production be related to those moves?

Even $30M is a huge raise.

The poster was talking $55M+, however.

There's just no possible way to argue "FOR" Brock and stay away from the numbers discussion at the same time. No point in trying to "appear" that you have.

Originally posted by genus49:
The funny thing about attributing those losses to Brock is that two of those games Rams/Cardinals the defense blew a 10 point lead in the 4th quarter, both games had key special teams issues as well.

The Seattle game we literally lost after Bosa got injured and Seattle scored the go ahead TD with 12 seconds left in the 4th quarter.

The numbers you put up next to each other aren't even that much different outside of the TDs which will happen when your two best players from the prior season are out most of the year.

Your work analogy doesn't work since this is a team sport. Your job is individual. Brock had nothing to do with Nick Sorensen not being good at his job or special teams being a disaster. He didn't injury CMC who was going to be a huge part of their offense, especially in the redzone. He can't control injuries either.

So you can't claim he didn't perform like he doesn't deserve a huge raise. Guy had no consistency and very little support from the other units so what's the expectation there? To take it back to your work analogy if your boss gave you a computer build in the early 2000s and asked you to do the same work off that while also making you work off dial up internet? Would some of the lack of production be related to those moves?

I'm not blaming him for those losses and I don't think I did in my post. What I'm saying is that he had chances to win those games and failed. If I'm paying a guy to be one of the best QB's in the game, then I'd expect to win those games. And that's what we're talking about right? Making Brock one of the highest paid players in the league. A few years back, the Chiefs traded away Tyreek Hill and fans were confused. Then they went on to win the Super Bowl anyways. With all the injuries, it was Brock's chance to show that he deserves to get paid.

Originally posted by Shakester:

Originally posted by genus49:

Telling a team to walk away from a proven QB in their system because other teams overpaid guys who haven't done as much is pure fandom with nothing at stake.

Brock has proven that he can play in this system with a plethora of offensive talent and when that talent isn't there, he struggled. Yes, many QB's will struggle losing all those weapons, but when you're talking about paying one $55M a year, they'd have to be able to carry the team to an extent. If you look back on this season, if Brock was worth $55M, they would have been 9-8 at worst. There were 5 games in which they were down a score and had a final drive to win the game. He threw game ending interceptions in 3 of those games. Those games were against the Rams, Seahawks and Cardinals. If they won just those games, they would have been 9-8 instead of 6-11, it might have been good enough to win the division (Rams and Seahawks were both 10-7 and with those losses, would have been 9-8).

2023: 4280 yards, 31 TDs, 11 INTs, completion percentage of 69.4% and QBR 73.4
2024: 3864 yards, 20 TDs, 12 INTs, completion percentage of 65.9% and QBR 67.9

It's tough to pay a player who is coming off a worst season than the one before. It just is. Can you imagine one of your employees having a great first few months, but when more work was put on them, their performance began to significantly decline and couldn't handle the workload, then they asks for a huge raise? Would you give that person a raise? Probably not, right? Regardless of the situation Purdy was given, he didn't perform like a QB that deserves a huge raise.

So your employee example isn't that great. You are basically arguing that you wouldn't give Brock a raise at all. Just $5 million this next year which ranks 36th amongst quarterbacks.

And what if you let him play out the year and he has a year like he did in 2023? Guess what the contract will be even higher then it would have been this year and since you insulted him with your negotiations the price is even higher. You going to let him walk or are you going to pay him? He isn't top 5 QB but he's a lot better then half the QBs starting in the league.

Also you don't think Brock will improve any? He is what he is and thats it huh? Not going to get any smarter.

__PRESENT
__PRESENT__PRESENT
__PRESENT

Originally posted by Shakester:

Originally posted by genus49:
Telling a team to walk away from a proven QB in their system because other teams overpaid guys who haven't done as much is pure fandom with nothing at stake.

Brock has proven that he can play in this system with a plethora of offensive talent and when that talent isn't there, he struggled.

The problem with the team last year was not quarterback play. Yes, he didn't have "The Avengers". What he had was Deebo clearly affected by pneumonia the entire back half of the season, Kittle, Jennings, and Pearsall. The team started the season on their RB3...

Originally posted by Shakester:
Yes, many QB's will struggle losing all those weapons, but when you're talking about paying one $55M a year, they'd have to be able to carry the team to an extent.

Every quarterback will struggle when their weapons get injured, their starting left tackle gets injured, their defense struggles, and their special teams is non-existent.

No quarterback is being paid 55M a year. Only one quarterback is even on a contract that pays 55M a year on average. No quarterback is asked to carry the team year-in and year-out for their top-end compensation. Have you looked at the offensive talent on some of the teams with highly paid QBs? Lamar, Goff, and Hurts all have stacked offenses.

Originally posted by Shakester:
2023: 4280 yards, 31 TDs, 11 INTs, completion percentage of 69.4% and QBR 73.4
2024: 3864 yards, 20 TDs, 12 INTs, completion percentage of 65.9% and QBR 67.9

2023

• 16 games played, 267.5 ypg (4th), 69.4% cmp% (4th), 113.0 rating (1st), 72.8 QBR (1st).
• 9.6 Y/PA (1st), 9.92 AY/PA (1st), 13.9 Y/PC (1st), 9.01 ANY/PA.
• 8.2 IAY/PA (8th), 7.2 CAY/PC (2nd), 5.0 CAY/PA (1st), 6.7 YAC/PC (1st).
• 2.1% drop% (1st), 16.3% bad throw% (21st), 75.5% on-target% (16th).

2024

• 15 games played, 257.6 ypg (5th), 65.9% cmp% (17th), 96.1 rating (13th), 67.9 QBR (7th).
• 8.5 Y/PA (3rd), 8.18 AY/PA (8th), 12.9 Y/PC (3rd), 7.34 ANY/PA (6th).
• 8.4 IAY/PA (10th), 7.4 CAY/PC (3nd), 4.9 CAY/PA (1st), 5.5 YAC/PC (12th)
• 4.3% drop% (18th), 14.1% bad throw% (12th), 78.4% on-target% (11th).

Originally posted by Shakester:
It's tough to pay a player who is coming off a worst season than the one before. It just is. Can you imagine one of your employees having a great first few months, but when more work was put on them, their performance began to significantly decline and couldn't handle the workload, then they asks for a huge raise? Would you give that person a raise? Probably not, right? Regardless of the situation Purdy was given, he didn't perform like a QB that deserves a huge raise.

His contract was an average like 900k per year... Yes I would give him a raise because his numbers aren't as terrible as you think they are. lol @ "significantly decline" and "couldn't handle the workload"... Also, quarterbacks aren't paid off their past performance. The price for a franchise quarterback is simply expensive. Very few can actually be relied upon to give the team a chance to win a super bowl if the team gets there. Purdy is in that tier of franchise quarterbacks and he's due for a raise.

Originally posted by Shakester:
I'm not blaming him for those losses and I don't think I did in my post. What I'm saying is that he had chances to win those games and failed. If I'm paying a guy to be one of the best QB's in the game, then I'd expect to win those games. And that's what we're talking about right? Making Brock one of the highest paid players in the league. A few years back, the Chiefs traded away Tyreek Hill and fans were confused. Then they went on to win the Super Bowl anyways. With all the injuries, it was Brock's chance to show that he deserves to get paid.

Brock can't do it all on his own. If he's out there throwing to Ronnie Bell and he drops a key pass that's Brock not getting it done when he had an opportunity to do so.

If Brock is pressured and Jennings is interfered with but refs don't throw a flag and the ball is picked is that all Brock failing with a chance to win? What about Deebo dropping the ball for a TD earlier?

I'm also confused by what Chiefs trading away Tyreek Hill for first round picks has to do with this discussion? They didn't trade Mahomes or Kelce or their defense right? Is your point that Brock isn't like Mahomes? Cuz we know this.

However I imagine if the Chiefs that year dealt with the respective injuries to their players the way we did last season and Nick Sorensen was their DC they certainly don't win the SB.

Originally posted by Typecast:
The problem with the team last year was not quarterback play. Yes, he didn't have "The Avengers". What he had was Deebo clearly affected by pneumonia the entire back half of the season, Kittle, Jennings, and Pearsall.

If you're happy with QB play not being the "problem",...then you're happy with average play. The discussion has centered around giving him a contract for excellent play.

There is the disconnect.

Originally posted by random49er:

Originally posted by Typecast:

The problem with the team last year was not quarterback play. Yes, he didn't have "The Avengers". What he had was Deebo clearly affected by pneumonia the entire back half of the season, Kittle, Jennings, and Pearsall.

If you're happy with QB play not being the "problem",...then you're happy with average play. The discussion has centered around giving him a contract for excellent play.

There is the disconnect.

Burrow and Chase weren't the problem for the Bengals. That means they're average? Makes 0 sense lol

Originally posted by random49er:

Originally posted by Typecast:
The problem with the team last year was not quarterback play. Yes, he didn't have "The Avengers". What he had was Deebo clearly affected by pneumonia the entire back half of the season, Kittle, Jennings, and Pearsall.

If you're happy with QB play not being the "problem",...then you're happy with average play. The discussion has centered around giving him a contract for excellent play.

There is the disconnect.

The real disconnect is that you don't know what words mean. Not being the "problem" doesn't automatically mean his play was "average". The discussion has centered around giving him a contract. Nobody in the league consistently plays "excellent". Lamar and Allen are probably the closest and both are up-and-down through their careers. You pay quarterbacks franchise qb tier money because you believe they give you a shot to win the super bowl when the team gets there. Purdy is one of those guys.

Originally posted by CharlieSheen:
Burrow and Chase weren't the problem for the Bengals. That means they're average? Makes 0 sense lol

Both of those players are in completely different universes. They've shown for years to be very good players, and Burrow's proven to be a QB worth paying. I need to see ALOT more from Brock before I'm ready to put him next to either one of those Top 5 draft picks you just mentioned. If you can't find better comparisons than proven Top 5 picks,...that pretty much is a signal to me that your stuck in mud. Great time to make up something about Trey Lance now, right?

Originally posted by Typecast:

Originally posted by random49er:

Originally posted by Typecast:
The problem with the team last year was not quarterback play. Yes, he didn't have "The Avengers". What he had was Deebo clearly affected by pneumonia the entire back half of the season, Kittle, Jennings, and Pearsall.

If you're happy with QB play not being the "problem",...then you're happy with average play. The discussion has centered around giving him a contract for excellent play.

There is the disconnect.

The real disconnect is that you don't know what words mean. Not being the "problem" doesn't automatically mean his play was "average". The discussion has centered around giving him a contract. Nobody in the league consistently plays "excellent". Lamar and Allen are probably the closest and both are up-and-down through their careers.

Your response was "he wasn't the problem." This is contextual,...not a vocabulary test. The OP wanted to see a good year out of Brock,...and Brock "not being the problem" to you for a year -- after a very good year with a stacked team in-hand -- is enough for you to warrant some crazy contract. I'm just glad none of us here are in charge.

If you can link the action/reaction between you and the poster together regarding this, then you can clearly see how you're inferring "not being the problem" is good enough to dole almost $60M/yr. But no,...I didn't expect you to notice how you cross yourself up with stuff like this. That's the very reason I showed it to you.

Originally posted by Typecast:
You pay quarterbacks franchise qb tier money because you believe they give you a shot to win the super bowl when the team gets there. Purdy is one of those guys.

I can betcha the Seahawks and the Raiders think Geno and Darnold are guys that can give them a shot to win the SB if the team gets there,....so they are some of those guys as well...but they aren't getting top tier money.