Does Kyle want a franchise QB

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:
The question may be along the line, would you rather have Burrow at $50-60m aav or BP?

I would say Burrow, as we saw with Watson or Wilson, you can flip those guys for a franchise altering pile of 1st rounders, so you can always move on at great profit.

But I do see ppl on hear with the logic of you don't want the high aav QB, as you won't win with that much tied to one guy, relative to your cap. I am not sure what the correct answer is.

Unless you have THAT guy you don't pay a QB just because he's a QB. Then the whole, well I'm next I want more is equally maddening to me.

That said, you need to have a system in place where it will work. Plus talent around that QB. Someone like Shanahan can make it work. Assuming we can keep our skilled players.

Now if you don't have a system in place like Kyle does and you don't have a plethora of talent then yes, you'll have to most likely pay the QB and hopes he can elevate the players around them.

I don't think every team could use this strategy, but I do believe Kyle could. Especially as we are currently constructed

People put way too much emphasis on the QB position, while also seemingly missing the boat on what makes a QB great. Couple that with completely unrealistic expectations and you get weird questions like this.

Is this even a question on this board if there wasn't conflicting opinions about Trey Lance? Highly doubt it.

We traded for a QB. Paid him big money after 5 good games. When he didn't pan out to the level we hoped, we took a massive swing by trading a ton of draft capital for a high 1st round pick and used it on another QB. Now that player's future is in jeopardy and the team is showing signs of committing to a QB who played outstanding in the time we've seen him.

The evidence once again here is pretty tilted in one direction, as far as this question goes. What's the evidence in the other direction? That we passed on great players in the draft in hindsight, or that there was a reported plan to acquire Kirk Cousins at one point? Maybe it's the thought of giving up on Trey Lance 'too soon'?

I chose the potentially option. I think Kyle wants one, but his systems success isn't contingent on having one. To me there's a difference between wanting one and actually finding one. I also think there is a difference between having a QB that can play at a high enough level to win a lot of games (Jimmy)and a Franchise guy. I think a true franchise QB is someone that can carry a team on his shoulders when you start to lose talent either due to injury (as Herbert did at times last year) , or the salary of the said franchise QB. I would guess that Kyle needs to see either continued growth from Brock and/or substantial growth from Trey before he'd consider either of them a quote unquote franchise guy.

Originally posted by krizay:
Unless you have THAT guy you don't pay a QB just because he's a QB. Then the whole, well I'm next I want more is equally maddening to me.

That said, you need to have a system in place where it will work. Plus talent around that QB. Someone like Shanahan can make it work. Assuming we can keep our skilled players.

Now if you don't have a system in place like Kyle does and you don't have a plethora of talent then yes, you'll have to most likely pay the QB and hopes he can elevate the players around them.

I don't think every team could use this strategy, but I do believe Kyle could. Especially as we are currently constructed

I'm not quite there with you. I completely agree that you don't overpay good QB's, but I'm fine to pay very good/great ones.

I'm interested to know where you would put Hurts? Would you have paid him what he got?

Kyler is about my cut off, for me he just about did enough for me to pay (and pray) and I would pay Lamar.

Tua would be another borderline where I (just) lean towards paying.

I do agree that we COULD make it work, but I'd rather not have to go back to the well. I'm still of the belief that a Jimmy level guy isn't enough, even with our talent, to overcome one of the elite guys.

I think he wants a franchise QB but doesn't care to have an elite one. Which is unfortunate. He still thinks his scheme is the star and that he can win a SB with a mid tier QB, aslong as they can run his offense. Though I do think you should never pay a QB big money unless he is a top 10 QB and one of your 5 best players.

Originally posted by 49erBigMac:
I'm not quite there with you. I completely agree that you don't overpay good QB's, but I'm fine to pay very good/great ones.

I'm interested to know where you would put Hurts? Would you have paid him what he got?

Kyler is about my cut off, for me he just about did enough for me to pay (and pray) and I would pay Lamar.

Tua would be another borderline where I (just) lean towards paying.

I do agree that we COULD make it work, but I'd rather not have to go back to the well. I'm still of the belief that a Jimmy level guy isn't enough, even with our talent, to overcome one of the elite guys.

Hurts hell no I don't pay him. He makes the jump after getting AJ Brown. Just so happens they also go all in on defense last year too. Plus his OL happened to play like best unit in the game. His passing numbers were similar to JG's career numbers. Where he separates is obviously his rushing. His rushing while nice could be replaced if you actually hand the ball off to the RB.

Philly already losing their defense and his salary hasn't even kicked in yet. IMO the stars aligned perfectly for Hurts this year.

I wouldn't have paid Kyler nor would I pay Lamar. I'm not about paying QBs who have to run to be considered elite.

0% chance I'm paying Tua giving his concussion situation. Now, if it was structured that I had an out after every year by a certain date and it was risk free then Tua would be a no brainer (pun intended)

I say this from the lens of the 9ers. Now those teams are constructed different. I think if I was Balt I almost have to pay him. Unfortunately for them though is they never really tried to have a legit backup to see what it would look like from a traditional style. They, seem to go after similar types to Lamar so who knows.

Lol

Originally posted by JTB1974:
I think he wants a franchise QB but doesn't care to have an elite one. Which is unfortunate. He still thinks his scheme is the star and that he can win a SB with a mid tier QB, aslong as they can run his offense. Though I do think you should never pay a QB big money unless he is a top 10 QB and one of your 5 best players.

I mean just take a step back and think this through. You're saying an NFL coach doesn't want an elite QB. It is completely nonsensical, and it's based on presumably two things: we haven't found one yet (because they're extremely rare) and because you have a preconceived idea of what an elite QB is and it doesn't line up with how you view Kyle's management of the position. Feel free to correct me if it's based on something else.

Originally posted by krizay:
Hurts hell no I don't pay him. He makes the jump after getting AJ Brown. Just so happens they also go all in on defense last year too. Plus his OL happened to play like best unit in the game. His passing numbers were similar to JG's career numbers. Where he separates is obviously his rushing. His rushing while nice could be replaced if you actually hand the ball off to the RB.

Philly already losing their defense and his salary hasn't even kicked in yet. IMO the stars aligned perfectly for Hurts this year.

I wouldn't have paid Kyler nor would I pay Lamar. I'm not about paying QBs who have to run to be considered elite.

0% chance I'm paying Tua giving his concussion situation. Now, if it was structured that I had an out after every year by a certain date and it was risk free then Tua would be a no brainer (pun intended)

I say this from the lens of the 9ers. Now those teams are constructed different. I think if I was Balt I almost have to pay him. Unfortunately for them though is they never really tried to have a legit backup to see what it would look like from a traditional style. They, seem to go after similar types to Lamar so who knows.

Good insight, it's very interesting to me.

You say that the stars alligned for Hurts, and you're probably right, but in this pass friendly NFL you still need one of a certain caliber to compete, even if you're stacked everywhere else.

I don't think you can do it by letting those types of players go. Who are the Eagles finding that they can win a Superbowl with if not Hurts? They pick as highly this year as they will for a long time, you taking Levis? That just won't cut it.

Originally posted by jays9ers:
Are the 9ers adopting the throw away QB model? Or are they actually in search of a franchise QB?

I believe Kyle thinks he can make any QB look serviceable. That he looks for very specific traits to fit his system.

They shot for the moon with Trey, but after what they accomplished with Purdy, I believe they have gone to the replaceable QB model. Find a low cost, or a rookie QB who can get the ball out quick and accurately. Let the playmakers do the heavy lifting and find a new QB when it's time to pay up.

Unless they find a sure fire Hof level QB they won't commit to any QB long-term.. unless it's Kirk Cousins😁

We traded three firsts. He wants a franchise guy. Good QBs do not grow on trees and the idea that you can just find a guy every 4 years is pure hubris.

He traded up that high to not want a FQB.
Having a stud at every level of the field makes the plug and play QB spot easy to fill. The hard part is having studs at every level of the field.

Originally posted by LifelongNiner:
We traded three firsts. He wants a franchise guy. Good QBs do not grow on trees and the idea that you can just find a guy every 4 years is pure hubris.

100 percent.

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:

Originally posted by JTB1974:

I think he wants a franchise QB but doesn't care to have an elite one. Which is unfortunate. He still thinks his scheme is the star and that he can win a SB with a mid tier QB, aslong as they can run his offense. Though I do think you should never pay a QB big money unless he is a top 10 QB and one of your 5 best players.

I mean just take a step back and think this through. You're saying an NFL coach doesn't want an elite QB. It is completely nonsensical, and it's based on presumably two things: we haven't found one yet (because they're extremely rare) and because you have a preconceived idea of what an elite QB is and it doesn't line up with how you view Kyle's management of the position. Feel free to correct me if it's based on something else.

Some are convinced that moving forward with Brock instead of Trey means he doesn't want an elite QB smh

Originally posted by 49erBigMac:
Good insight, it's very interesting to me.

You say that the stars alligned for Hurts, and you're probably right, but in this pass friendly NFL you still need one of a certain caliber to compete, even if you're stacked everywhere else.

I don't think you can do it by letting those types of players go. Who are the Eagles finding that they can win a Superbowl with if not Hurts? They pick as highly this year as they will for a long time, you taking Levis? That just won't cut it.

Well, this is where me viewing this from a 9ers lens comes into play. I'm not familiar with their coach or what other QBs look like etc... they very well may fall into the Baltimore category I stated in my last post.

As for who if not Hurts I can't answer that question. But if all things is equal. Top 5 defense and #1ish OL with AJ Brown, Devonta Smith and Goerdert I'm willing to bet there are quite a few QBs out there that could get their teams deep in the playoffs. Just like JG and that without a top tier OL.

And hell no to Will Levis for me. I think he's a worse prospect than Trey was. Anthony Richardson too for that matter

Now assuming they have a system in place... if I could traded Hurts to say HOU for #2 and was able to get Stroud/Young on rookie deal I'd rather that and keep my defense then pay Hurts

This thread and question is just silly