There are 203 users in the forums
Originally posted by thl408:
49erRing, have you ever been on a podcast? Just wondering what kind of credentials you have on QB evaluation. I have never been on one so don't take what I say seriously.
Originally posted by JoseCortez:
Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:
Originally posted by 49ersRing:
Every QB that has played with this iteration of the offense (CMC, Kittle, Aiyuk, Deebo, etc.) has had instant success.
That's a sample size of two.
Originally posted by 49ersRing:
Originally posted by thl408:
49erRing, have you ever been on a podcast? Just wondering what kind of credentials you have on QB evaluation. I have never been on one so don't take what I say seriously.
I'm trying to hide your posts, but it's not working. Seems like a flaw in the design.
Originally posted by 49ersRing:
Originally posted by thl408:
49erRing, have you ever been on a podcast? Just wondering what kind of credentials you have on QB evaluation. I have never been on one so don't take what I say seriously.
I'm trying to hide your posts, but it's not working. Seems like a flaw in the design.
Originally posted by thl408:
Originally posted by 49ersRing:
Originally posted by thl408:
49erRing, have you ever been on a podcast? Just wondering what kind of credentials you have on QB evaluation. I have never been on one so don't take what I say seriously.
I'm trying to hide your posts, but it's not working. Seems like a flaw in the design.
Lol you can't hide mods. Don't be mad now. Just don't post stupid s**t.
Originally posted by 49ersRing:
I don't think we have. Nick Mullens, CJB didn't have nearly this level of talent around them. Not that I think those guys are particularly good, but they'd look better than they did on the roster we have today compared to the scraps they had to work with.
Originally posted by 49ersRing:
Originally posted by thl408:
Originally posted by 49ersRing:
Originally posted by thl408:
Originally posted by 49ersRing:
Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
Originally posted by 49ersRing:They ranked him 10 spots below Jimmy G and below Colt McCoy. I'm sorry, but that's just a bad ranking.
Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
Originally posted by 49ersRing:
Updated QB rankings for the playoffs: https://qbrankings.theringer.com/
Always interesting to see how impartial analysts from outside the fan base see things.
WHAT'S AT STAKE
At some point over the next month, the 49ers will need Brock Purdy to make a play in a big moment. Kyle Shanahan's offense has protected him throughout his surprise run during the regular season, but playoff football is different. The best defenses make it harder to hide a flawed quarterback—even for a play-calling genius like Shanahan. How Purdy responds to that challenge will likely determine his fate in San Francisco. He's probably done enough to earn a shot at a starting job next year—even if it's on another team. But with a few more wins, the 49ers might be willing to give him theirs.
Purdy isn't the 33rd best QB. I'm going to say it right now: He is better than Jimmy. He's a straight up better QB.
The thing these rankings tend to get wrong is forgetting how important just finding the open guy is. Burdy is ahead of Jimmy at that, and he's ahead of many QBs at that which are ranked above him in this list.
These "outsiders" aren't familiar enough with Shanahan's scheme to know when the QB plays above the scheme. For example, Kittle's second TD against the Seahawks. That play was designed for McCaffrey, and McCaffrey was opened, and Jimmy is throwing that 100% of the time. But the Seahawks busted the coverage, and Brock had the VISION to see it, and and nerve to pull the trigger.
I don't know. I give the outsiders the benefit of the doubt, because they're not invested in the result. I think Purdy is better than 33, but I haven't watched film of every other QB in the league and I'm not impartial. I'll defer to those that have watched every QB and don't have a specific rooting interest to put things into context.
UNLESS the reason they have him low is because they believe his play will DIP. If they believe he will turn into a pumpkin, that's different. If the ranking is based on how he's played so far, then it's a laughable ranking of him.
I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and assume that he's adjusting for supporting cast and play caller. Purdy has the best supporting cast of any QB in the league and it's hard to separate what he's doing from that. The only QB you can really directly compare him to is Jimmy, and he's played better than Jimmy, so I'd put him ahead of Jimmy, but I haven't watched enough of everyone else to be able to say where he compares league wide.
Actually, it's not hard to separate a QB's play from the talent - unless you don't watch them play. A good read is a good read. A bad read is a bad read. An accurate throw is an accurate throw. An inaccurate throw is an inaccurate throw. A 30 yard screen pass is different than throwing a 30 yard Post. It's actually not that difficult to see the difference.
Yet, all of those things are impacted by the supporting cast. If the QB is constantly under pressure or there's nobody open or if the WRs run the wrong routes, etc. is it easy to evaluate that QB vs. one that is on a well coached team that doesn't have those problems? If it is, then why do NFL teams repeatedly fail at evaluating QBs?
No idea what you are talking about.
You asserted that it's not hard to accurately evaluate and compare QBs independent of their supporting cast. I don't agree and the amount of times that NFL teams fail at doing that, seems to indicate that it's not easy.
Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:
Originally posted by 49ersRing:
I don't think we have. Nick Mullens, CJB didn't have nearly this level of talent around them. Not that I think those guys are particularly good, but they'd look better than they did on the roster we have today compared to the scraps they had to work with.
"Better than they did" is still a long ways off from performing the way Purdy has. I don't care if your team is filled with All Pro's, no one expects a late 7th round rookie to come in and ball out like he has, especially not in this offense which even veteran QB's have struggled to pick up quickly.
Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
Originally posted by 49ersRing:
Originally posted by thl408:
Originally posted by 49ersRing:
Originally posted by thl408:
Originally posted by 49ersRing:
Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
Originally posted by 49ersRing:They ranked him 10 spots below Jimmy G and below Colt McCoy. I'm sorry, but that's just a bad ranking.
Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
Originally posted by 49ersRing:
Updated QB rankings for the playoffs: https://qbrankings.theringer.com/
Always interesting to see how impartial analysts from outside the fan base see things.
WHAT'S AT STAKE
At some point over the next month, the 49ers will need Brock Purdy to make a play in a big moment. Kyle Shanahan's offense has protected him throughout his surprise run during the regular season, but playoff football is different. The best defenses make it harder to hide a flawed quarterback—even for a play-calling genius like Shanahan. How Purdy responds to that challenge will likely determine his fate in San Francisco. He's probably done enough to earn a shot at a starting job next year—even if it's on another team. But with a few more wins, the 49ers might be willing to give him theirs.
Purdy isn't the 33rd best QB. I'm going to say it right now: He is better than Jimmy. He's a straight up better QB.
The thing these rankings tend to get wrong is forgetting how important just finding the open guy is. Burdy is ahead of Jimmy at that, and he's ahead of many QBs at that which are ranked above him in this list.
These "outsiders" aren't familiar enough with Shanahan's scheme to know when the QB plays above the scheme. For example, Kittle's second TD against the Seahawks. That play was designed for McCaffrey, and McCaffrey was opened, and Jimmy is throwing that 100% of the time. But the Seahawks busted the coverage, and Brock had the VISION to see it, and and nerve to pull the trigger.
I don't know. I give the outsiders the benefit of the doubt, because they're not invested in the result. I think Purdy is better than 33, but I haven't watched film of every other QB in the league and I'm not impartial. I'll defer to those that have watched every QB and don't have a specific rooting interest to put things into context.
UNLESS the reason they have him low is because they believe his play will DIP. If they believe he will turn into a pumpkin, that's different. If the ranking is based on how he's played so far, then it's a laughable ranking of him.
I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and assume that he's adjusting for supporting cast and play caller. Purdy has the best supporting cast of any QB in the league and it's hard to separate what he's doing from that. The only QB you can really directly compare him to is Jimmy, and he's played better than Jimmy, so I'd put him ahead of Jimmy, but I haven't watched enough of everyone else to be able to say where he compares league wide.
Actually, it's not hard to separate a QB's play from the talent - unless you don't watch them play. A good read is a good read. A bad read is a bad read. An accurate throw is an accurate throw. An inaccurate throw is an inaccurate throw. A 30 yard screen pass is different than throwing a 30 yard Post. It's actually not that difficult to see the difference.
Yet, all of those things are impacted by the supporting cast. If the QB is constantly under pressure or there's nobody open or if the WRs run the wrong routes, etc. is it easy to evaluate that QB vs. one that is on a well coached team that doesn't have those problems? If it is, then why do NFL teams repeatedly fail at evaluating QBs?
No idea what you are talking about.
You asserted that it's not hard to accurately evaluate and compare QBs independent of their supporting cast. I don't agree and the amount of times that NFL teams fail at doing that, seems to indicate that it's not easy.
Given a play where the QB has a clean pocket, it's easy to see when he's accurate, regardless of the talent of his skill position players. The difficult arises when bad offensive line play makes a QB more willing to use unconventional mechanics, or when a bad defense makes a QB more likely to take chances. The most obvious case here is Mahomes, and these are two of the many reasons NFL teams whiffed on him. Had they taken note of the fact that his defense was terrible and his line was suspect, they may have noticed that his decision making was forced upon him, and then perhaps whey would have noticed that a great many of these "bad mechanics" plays and aggressive decisions were actually being made because they were necessary.
Where they failed most, however, is noticing how incredibly fast of a processor he was in all that chaos. And they might draft a bust on the next QB that runs around and takes chances, but fail to recognize those subtleties, and most of all, fail to recognize the difference in the QUICKNESS from which the best QBs are going from "see it" to "throw it" in awkward situations. They're going to mistake the next scrambler and big play guy for the next Mahomes because they won't recognize the subtleties that they missed in the first place when 9 teams failed to draft him.
It's not just about making unconventional throws or scrambling and making big plays. In and of themselves, those neither mean the QB can't play in structure, nor do they mean he's automatically going to be a star. Processing is still king for QBs, and you could tell with Mahomes he was lightning fast in going from seeing what the defense was doing to reacting to it, for a college QB, when he was given the opportunity to do so. Some QBs who are NOT great processors have found ways to play as if they are, but getting good at pre-snap reads and having a fast enough release to be right even when they are wrong (exhibit A: Jimmy G, who can excel in the quick game but is apt to fail to see wide open guys and defenders moving into the passing lane).
And there are some college QBs right now making spectacular plays that make me a bit nervous because they don't have that one thing that Mahomes had: speed in the mental process of converting vision to a throw.
.
.
But for the record, you know who is really good at going from "see it" to "throw it?" Brock Purdy.
Originally posted by Furlow:
Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
Originally posted by 49ersRing:
Originally posted by thl408:
Originally posted by 49ersRing:
Originally posted by thl408:
Originally posted by 49ersRing:
Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
Originally posted by 49ersRing:They ranked him 10 spots below Jimmy G and below Colt McCoy. I'm sorry, but that's just a bad ranking.
Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
Originally posted by 49ersRing:
Updated QB rankings for the playoffs: https://qbrankings.theringer.com/
Always interesting to see how impartial analysts from outside the fan base see things.
WHAT'S AT STAKE
At some point over the next month, the 49ers will need Brock Purdy to make a play in a big moment. Kyle Shanahan's offense has protected him throughout his surprise run during the regular season, but playoff football is different. The best defenses make it harder to hide a flawed quarterback—even for a play-calling genius like Shanahan. How Purdy responds to that challenge will likely determine his fate in San Francisco. He's probably done enough to earn a shot at a starting job next year—even if it's on another team. But with a few more wins, the 49ers might be willing to give him theirs.
Purdy isn't the 33rd best QB. I'm going to say it right now: He is better than Jimmy. He's a straight up better QB.
The thing these rankings tend to get wrong is forgetting how important just finding the open guy is. Burdy is ahead of Jimmy at that, and he's ahead of many QBs at that which are ranked above him in this list.
These "outsiders" aren't familiar enough with Shanahan's scheme to know when the QB plays above the scheme. For example, Kittle's second TD against the Seahawks. That play was designed for McCaffrey, and McCaffrey was opened, and Jimmy is throwing that 100% of the time. But the Seahawks busted the coverage, and Brock had the VISION to see it, and and nerve to pull the trigger.
I don't know. I give the outsiders the benefit of the doubt, because they're not invested in the result. I think Purdy is better than 33, but I haven't watched film of every other QB in the league and I'm not impartial. I'll defer to those that have watched every QB and don't have a specific rooting interest to put things into context.
UNLESS the reason they have him low is because they believe his play will DIP. If they believe he will turn into a pumpkin, that's different. If the ranking is based on how he's played so far, then it's a laughable ranking of him.
I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and assume that he's adjusting for supporting cast and play caller. Purdy has the best supporting cast of any QB in the league and it's hard to separate what he's doing from that. The only QB you can really directly compare him to is Jimmy, and he's played better than Jimmy, so I'd put him ahead of Jimmy, but I haven't watched enough of everyone else to be able to say where he compares league wide.
Actually, it's not hard to separate a QB's play from the talent - unless you don't watch them play. A good read is a good read. A bad read is a bad read. An accurate throw is an accurate throw. An inaccurate throw is an inaccurate throw. A 30 yard screen pass is different than throwing a 30 yard Post. It's actually not that difficult to see the difference.
Yet, all of those things are impacted by the supporting cast. If the QB is constantly under pressure or there's nobody open or if the WRs run the wrong routes, etc. is it easy to evaluate that QB vs. one that is on a well coached team that doesn't have those problems? If it is, then why do NFL teams repeatedly fail at evaluating QBs?
No idea what you are talking about.
You asserted that it's not hard to accurately evaluate and compare QBs independent of their supporting cast. I don't agree and the amount of times that NFL teams fail at doing that, seems to indicate that it's not easy.
Given a play where the QB has a clean pocket, it's easy to see when he's accurate, regardless of the talent of his skill position players. The difficult arises when bad offensive line play makes a QB more willing to use unconventional mechanics, or when a bad defense makes a QB more likely to take chances. The most obvious case here is Mahomes, and these are two of the many reasons NFL teams whiffed on him. Had they taken note of the fact that his defense was terrible and his line was suspect, they may have noticed that his decision making was forced upon him, and then perhaps whey would have noticed that a great many of these "bad mechanics" plays and aggressive decisions were actually being made because they were necessary.
Where they failed most, however, is noticing how incredibly fast of a processor he was in all that chaos. And they might draft a bust on the next QB that runs around and takes chances, but fail to recognize those subtleties, and most of all, fail to recognize the difference in the QUICKNESS from which the best QBs are going from "see it" to "throw it" in awkward situations. They're going to mistake the next scrambler and big play guy for the next Mahomes because they won't recognize the subtleties that they missed in the first place when 9 teams failed to draft him.
It's not just about making unconventional throws or scrambling and making big plays. In and of themselves, those neither mean the QB can't play in structure, nor do they mean he's automatically going to be a star. Processing is still king for QBs, and you could tell with Mahomes he was lightning fast in going from seeing what the defense was doing to reacting to it, for a college QB, when he was given the opportunity to do so. Some QBs who are NOT great processors have found ways to play as if they are, but getting good at pre-snap reads and having a fast enough release to be right even when they are wrong (exhibit A: Jimmy G, who can excel in the quick game but is apt to fail to see wide open guys and defenders moving into the passing lane).
And there are some college QBs right now making spectacular plays that make me a bit nervous because they don't have that one thing that Mahomes had: speed in the mental process of converting vision to a throw.
.
.
But for the record, you know who is really good at going from "see it" to "throw it?" Brock Purdy.
Video feed of you
Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:
Originally posted by 49ersRing:
I don't think we have. Nick Mullens, CJB didn't have nearly this level of talent around them. Not that I think those guys are particularly good, but they'd look better than they did on the roster we have today compared to the scraps they had to work with.
"Better than they did" is still a long ways off from performing the way Purdy has. I don't care if your team is filled with All Pro's, no one expects a late 7th round rookie to come in and ball out like he has, especially not in this offense which even veteran QB's have struggled to pick up quickly.
Originally posted by NineFourNiner:
Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:
Originally posted by 49ersRing:
I don't think we have. Nick Mullens, CJB didn't have nearly this level of talent around them. Not that I think those guys are particularly good, but they'd look better than they did on the roster we have today compared to the scraps they had to work with.
"Better than they did" is still a long ways off from performing the way Purdy has. I don't care if your team is filled with All Pro's, no one expects a late 7th round rookie to come in and ball out like he has, especially not in this offense which even veteran QB's have struggled to pick up quickly.
I read that anyone can do it because of the scheme.
I rank Purdy at number 45 out of 40 QBs.
disclaimer: I don't have a podcast.
Originally posted by NineFourNiner:
Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:
Originally posted by 49ersRing:
I don't think we have. Nick Mullens, CJB didn't have nearly this level of talent around them. Not that I think those guys are particularly good, but they'd look better than they did on the roster we have today compared to the scraps they had to work with.
"Better than they did" is still a long ways off from performing the way Purdy has. I don't care if your team is filled with All Pro's, no one expects a late 7th round rookie to come in and ball out like he has, especially not in this offense which even veteran QB's have struggled to pick up quickly.
I read that anyone can do it because of the scheme.
I rank Purdy at number 45 out of 40 QBs.
disclaimer: I don't have a podcast.
