What if we blew up the team?

Originally posted by fryet:
Hey, I get that my opinion is not going to be well received, and to be honest, I could easily be wrong. As for rebuilding around Brock Purdy, that is one approach, but he is going to want a huge contract, which will make it harder to get that bulldozer offensive line that I want.

Let me present the case for prioritizing OL over QB. As Jack Harbaugh has said, OL makes the entire team better including the defense which will get more time to rest. With a stronger OL, the running game would be much improved, the QB will have more time to throw the ball, which gives WR more time to get open. Average RB, WR, QB will look better behind such an OL. The Eagles imo have just shown the power of this strategy. Jalen Hurts isn't that great of a QB, but he looks great behind that OL. Shanahan has already demonstrated that he can take a mediocre QB and make him effective, and the same is true for RB. If we pay Brock Purdy big money, it is going to be very hard to get the OL that we want. But if we go the Seattle route of getting multiple journeyman QB (and a mid/low draft pick), and let them duke it out, we can have an effective offense once we have the OL that we need.

you know, he makes good points

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:

Originally posted by fryet:
Hey, I get that my opinion is not going to be well received, and to be honest, I could easily be wrong. As for rebuilding around Brock Purdy, that is one approach, but he is going to want a huge contract, which will make it harder to get that bulldozer offensive line that I want.

Let me present the case for prioritizing OL over QB. As Jack Harbaugh has said, OL makes the entire team better including the defense which will get more time to rest. With a stronger OL, the running game would be much improved, the QB will have more time to throw the ball, which gives WR more time to get open. Average RB, WR, QB will look better behind such an OL. The Eagles imo have just shown the power of this strategy. Jalen Hurts isn't that great of a QB, but he looks great behind that OL. Shanahan has already demonstrated that he can take a mediocre QB and make him effective, and the same is true for RB. If we pay Brock Purdy big money, it is going to be very hard to get the OL that we want. But if we go the Seattle route of getting multiple journeyman QB (and a mid/low draft pick), and let them duke it out, we can have an effective offense once we have the OL that we need.

you know, he makes good points

no not at all.

Seattle has won jack & s**t and the Eagles paid their franchise QB. so not only does that post contradict itself (PHI comments), it argues the team should strive to be middle of the pack like Seattle.

Let's see if the Eagles can maintain their dynasty. My guess is that within 2 years, their team will have a lot less talent, maybe 3 if they mortgage their future.

Originally posted by fryet:
Let's see if the Eagles can maintain their dynasty. My guess is that within 2 years, their team will have a lot less talent, maybe 3 if they mortgage their future.

One is not a dynasty

Originally posted by fryet:
Let's see if the Eagles can maintain their dynasty. My guess is that within 2 years, their team will have a lot less talent, maybe 3 if they mortgage their future.

yeah i wouldnt bet against Howie Roseman. might be the best FO in the NFL.

Originally posted by fryet:
Hey, I get that my opinion is not going to be well received, and to be honest, I could easily be wrong. As for rebuilding around Brock Purdy, that is one approach, but he is going to want a huge contract, which will make it harder to get that bulldozer offensive line that I want.

Let me present the case for prioritizing OL over QB. As Jack Harbaugh has said, OL makes the entire team better including the defense which will get more time to rest. With a stronger OL, the running game would be much improved, the QB will have more time to throw the ball, which gives WR more time to get open. Average RB, WR, QB will look better behind such an OL. The Eagles imo have just shown the power of this strategy. Jalen Hurts isn't that great of a QB, but he looks great behind that OL. Shanahan has already demonstrated that he can take a mediocre QB and make him effective, and the same is true for RB. If we pay Brock Purdy big money, it is going to be very hard to get the OL that we want. But if we go the Seattle route of getting multiple journeyman QB (and a mid/low draft pick), and let them duke it out, we can have an effective offense once we have the OL that we need.

The 2011-14 49ers, 2012-17 Chiefs, the early 2000 Bucs, the 2000-12 Ravens, and a few i am missing were all teams that went powerhouse team mediocre QB play. 20 years 3 SBs. Contrast that with the patriots and chiefs that got their QB and made a team work around them.
It took the Ravens having possibly the greatest defense of all time to win their 2 titles. With 2 borderline HoF RBs and a candidate for greatest LT of all time. The greatest LBer of all time, 1 of the greatest DBs of all time.

If they believe Brock is THE guy, they have to keep him. And yes throw a lot at the OL, multiple draft picks this year and next year. Then 2 every year and trade them if they are not generational, cut them if they are not up to the task.

QB is the hardest position to evaluate because his job is to know everybody else's job, and it is near impossible to know without actual game snaps in your system.

Originally posted by jdt84_2:

Originally posted by fryet:
Hey, I get that my opinion is not going to be well received, and to be honest, I could easily be wrong. As for rebuilding around Brock Purdy, that is one approach, but he is going to want a huge contract, which will make it harder to get that bulldozer offensive line that I want.

Let me present the case for prioritizing OL over QB. As Jack Harbaugh has said, OL makes the entire team better including the defense which will get more time to rest. With a stronger OL, the running game would be much improved, the QB will have more time to throw the ball, which gives WR more time to get open. Average RB, WR, QB will look better behind such an OL. The Eagles imo have just shown the power of this strategy. Jalen Hurts isn't that great of a QB, but he looks great behind that OL. Shanahan has already demonstrated that he can take a mediocre QB and make him effective, and the same is true for RB. If we pay Brock Purdy big money, it is going to be very hard to get the OL that we want. But if we go the Seattle route of getting multiple journeyman QB (and a mid/low draft pick), and let them duke it out, we can have an effective offense once we have the OL that we need.

The 2011-14 49ers, 2012-17 Chiefs, the early 2000 Bucs, the 2000-12 Ravens, and a few i am missing were all teams that went powerhouse team mediocre QB play. 20 years 3 SBs. Contrast that with the patriots and chiefs that got their QB and made a team work around them.
It took the Ravens having possibly the greatest defense of all time to win their 2 titles. With 2 borderline HoF RBs and a candidate for greatest LT of all time. The greatest LBer of all time, 1 of the greatest DBs of all time.

If they believe Brock is THE guy, they have to keep him. And yes throw a lot at the OL, multiple draft picks this year and next year. Then 2 every year and trade them if they are not generational, cut them if they are not up to the task.

QB is the hardest position to evaluate because his job is to know everybody else's job, and it is near impossible to know without actual game snaps in your system.

If you think you have a top 5 QB, then certainly pay them and ride them to the SB. If however, you have a 10-20 QB, who wants top money, trade them and build the rest of the team. In my opinion, the QB position is getting too expensive, and a team that embraces not paying a QB will have an advantage in the league. The replacement to Brock Purdy may not be another Brock Purdy for the 49ers, but I think a Nick Mullens is likely. Also, if we have a stronger OL, we could lean on our running game more.

Originally posted by fryet:
I know the 49ers are trying to run it back, but the 49ers have so many holes (thank you trey lance trade!), another approach would be to rebuild. I don't like that the team has tons of offensive skill players, but a poor offensive line. I would rather have the reverse. 49ers could trade some key players to get draft picks and invest them into the offensive and defensive lines.

Key Trade potential:
Brock Purdy - I like him, but now he wants a huge payday, and I don't know that the team will benefit with OL issues. I assume we could get at least a first round pick for him.
Deebo Samuel - I would love to trade him, but I doubt any team would want to pay his salary to get such limited production
Nick Bosa - This one I would be hesitant to do, but I don't know that we are getting value from his contract, and he would probably net at least a 2nd round pick. Considering that he is on the DL that we want to strengthen, I could go either way on this.

Go back and look how our D played when Bosa was out. It wasn't pretty,

Replace Brock with who? A year from setting the franchise passing record and taking us to OT in the SB and people want to get rid of him? Lord help me.

Originally posted by fryet:

Originally posted by jdt84_2:
You are not wrong, but you picked 2 of the players you would rebuild around.
If it is Brock Purdy, it would need to be a top 5 pick this year, 2nd, and 3rd, 1st + 2nd next and the following year. And no team will do that. And you will be hoping to find his replacement with atleast 2 of those picks.

Same with Bosa because he will then have a very cap friendly contract.

Moving on from Hufanga, Brown, McCaffrey, Trent, even Kittle, and/or Warner could be argued. The last two would be like convincing me to eat pufferfish at a Denny's.

Hey, I get that my opinion is not going to be well received, and to be honest, I could easily be wrong. As for rebuilding around Brock Purdy, that is one approach, but he is going to want a huge contract, which will make it harder to get that bulldozer offensive line that I want.

Let me present the case for prioritizing OL over QB. As Jack Harbaugh has said, OL makes the entire team better including the defense which will get more time to rest. With a stronger OL, the running game would be much improved, the QB will have more time to throw the ball, which gives WR more time to get open. Average RB, WR, QB will look better behind such an OL. The Eagles imo have just shown the power of this strategy. Jalen Hurts isn't that great of a QB, but he looks great behind that OL. Shanahan has already demonstrated that he can take a mediocre QB and make him effective, and the same is true for RB. If we pay Brock Purdy big money, it is going to be very hard to get the OL that we want. But if we go the Seattle route of getting multiple journeyman QB (and a mid/low draft pick), and let them duke it out, we can have an effective offense once we have the OL that we need.

And yet Shanahan has shown he can run an efficient offense with a center who has no business starting or even being a backup for that matter and scrubs at LG. 2 out of 5 linemen have been below average and McKivitz is league average which is Ok for his salary yet we still rank as a top 10 offense.

The key isn't to trade everyone who will make top dollar so we can have a top offensive line. It's somewhere in between.

We need balance throughout the roster.

Originally posted by Sask49erFan:
And yet Shanahan has shown he can run an efficient offense with a center who has no business starting or even being a backup for that matter and scrubs at LG. 2 out of 5 linemen have been below average and McKivitz is league average which is Ok for his salary yet we still rank as a top 10 offense.

The key isn't to trade everyone who will make top dollar so we can have a top offensive line. It's somewhere in between.

We need balance throughout the roster.

And yet he hasn't won a Super Bowl. But let's lean in to your suggestion that Kyle doesn't need a top OL to win it. So, if we want a mediocre OL, then lots not pay a ton for skill players or QB. Invest it all in the defense instead, now run by Saleh. Kyle just needs to work his magic and get 20 points a game, hopefully without any turnovers. It would be an interesting strategy. On the draft side, most of the top picks (1-3) would go to defense, and you would probably spend most of 4-7 on offense to try and find the gems that you can play 4 years and then trade/let them go for cheaper replacements.

Originally posted by fryet:
I know the 49ers are trying to run it back, but the 49ers have so many holes (thank you trey lance trade!), another approach would be to rebuild. I don't like that the team has tons of offensive skill players, but a poor offensive line. I would rather have the reverse. 49ers could trade some key players to get draft picks and invest them into the offensive and defensive lines.

Key Trade potential:
Brock Purdy - I like him, but now he wants a huge payday, and I don't know that the team will benefit with OL issues. I assume we could get at least a first round pick for him.
Deebo Samuel - I would love to trade him, but I doubt any team would want to pay his salary to get such limited production
Nick Bosa - This one I would be hesitant to do, but I don't know that we are getting value from his contract, and he would probably net at least a 2nd round pick. Considering that he is on the DL that we want to strengthen, I could go either way on this.

Having watched this team and others at various times struggling to find a half decent qb, I wouldn't even consider trading Purdy.

Deebo is pretty much untradable right now in my view.

Bosa! I am stunned that you are even open to speculation on this, and particularly in return for a 2nd. We need activity on the D line this spring/summer but trading Bosa would be a sheer panic reaction. I doubt Salah would stay with such a public announcement of tanking

Originally posted by fryet:
I know the 49ers are trying to run it back, but the 49ers have so many holes (thank you trey lance trade!), another approach would be to rebuild. I don't like that the team has tons of offensive skill players, but a poor offensive line. I would rather have the reverse. 49ers could trade some key players to get draft picks and invest them into the offensive and defensive lines.

Key Trade potential:
Brock Purdy - I like him, but now he wants a huge payday, and I don't know that the team will benefit with OL issues. I assume we could get at least a first round pick for him.
Deebo Samuel - I would love to trade him, but I doubt any team would want to pay his salary to get such limited production
Nick Bosa - This one I would be hesitant to do, but I don't know that we are getting value from his contract, and he would probably net at least a 2nd round pick. Considering that he is on the DL that we want to strengthen, I could go either way on this.

sweet and lets fire Shannahan and Lynch and bring in Jack Delrio and Balke and have a chance for the nummber one pick every friggin year for the next 30yrs.. maybe then they can find another qb as good as Purdy it only took them 30 years to find him by accident.

Originally posted by English:
Having watched this team and others at various times struggling to find a half decent qb, I wouldn't even consider trading Purdy.

Deebo is pretty much untradable right now in my view.

Bosa! I am stunned that you are even open to speculation on this, and particularly in return for a 2nd. We need activity on the D line this spring/summer but trading Bosa would be a sheer panic reaction. I doubt Salah would stay with such a public announcement of tanking

IF, the 49ers were to trade Purdy (they won't) he would bring a king's ransom, and all that would get you is a mess for the next three years at least.

According to an article in The Athletic, more teams need a QB than the combined free agent/trade market (Stafford, Carr. Geno, Cousins, Russell Wilson) can provide. To make matters worse, the best QB would rank only 14th in the top 100 players coming out of college, according to one draft expert. All of the six drafted last spring are better than the best of this year's group.

So, no, trading Purdy condemns the team to three years of constant fan revolt.

__PRESENT

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:
One is not a dynasty

Actually if they get one more in the next 2 years they'd be considered a dynasty. Most people think 3 super bowl wins within 10 years is a dynasty.

2018 Super Bowl Winner
2022 Super Bowl loser
2025 Super Bowl Winner
2026 ???
2027 ???

As much as i hate to say it, they are on the verge of a dynasty. Probably the weakest one but nevertheless still a dynasty
__PRESENT__PRESENT
__PRESENT

Originally posted by miked1978:
__PRESENT

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:
One is not a dynasty

Actually if they get one more in the next 2 years they'd be considered a dynasty. Most people think 3 super bowl wins within 10 years is a dynasty.

2018 Super Bowl Winner
2022 Super Bowl loser
2025 Super Bowl Winner
2026 ???
2027 ???

As much as i hate to say it, they are on the verge of a dynasty. Probably the weakest one but nevertheless still a dynasty
__PRESENT__PRESENT
__PRESENT

lol what? You really think that's a dynasty?

Does that mean the Big Ben Steelers are a dynasty if they beat the Packers? Or the Giants are a dynasty if they had gone on another run in 2016?

That's absurd lol. The general rule is 3 within 5-6 years and mostly the same core.