Los Angeles Chargers QB Trey Lance Thread

Originally posted by Young2Rice:
Even without the cap, yorks wouldn't do it.

Originally posted by random49er:

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:
Daniel Jones, he of the 4.81 40 time was clocked at 21.23 mph. Are you going to argue that Daniel Jones is more explosive than Lamar Jackson? Of course not.

Uhmmm....but the word you used was fastest tho,...and you directly correlated your meaning to one guy catching another by "chasing down" (i.e., speed). Speed isin't everything,...just ask The Footwork King.

Based one everything we have, tagging Russ as faster is just flat out false. You can be extremely nimble and not really be fast at all.

Honestly Dak Prescott might be the best comp for Lance in terms of athleticism and Dak certainly isn't any kind of slouch when it comes to his mobility

No he isin't,...never seen Dak move like Trey. But honestly, a comparison isin't required. We can resist the urge to "put these guys in a box and seal it off" as early as possible.

Originally posted by ChaunceyGardner:

Originally posted by 49erBigMac:

Originally posted by brodiebluebanaszak:

Originally posted by CatchMaster80:
You want to start Sudfield? Why? What purpose would that serve? Trey wouldn't get the needed experience and we would almost assuredly lose the game.

No, what I said was we should have a real "#3" option on the roster, who was really a #2, so we would not have to put a whole game on trey.

The whole reason for this is that we are supposedly in our super bowl window, so we need to win now.

So you want to pay $27 mil for one QB, trade up for a rookie AND pay for a "real QB3", which team in history has done that?

49ers 89-90
Montana, Young and Bono

Originally posted by brodiebluebanaszak:

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:

Originally posted by brodiebluebanaszak:

Originally posted by CatchMaster80:
You want to start Sudfield? Why? What purpose would that serve? Trey wouldn't get the needed experience and we would almost assuredly lose the game.

No, what I said was we should have a real "#3" option on the roster, who was really a #2, so we would not have to put a whole game on trey.

The whole reason for this is that we are supposedly in our super bowl window, so we need to win now.

You only get 53 roster spots. That is an unacceptable roster plan.

what are you talking about. we roster three qbs for the last 5 years.

Originally posted by brodiebluebanaszak:

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:

Originally posted by brodiebluebanaszak:

Originally posted by CatchMaster80:
You want to start Sudfield? Why? What purpose would that serve? Trey wouldn't get the needed experience and we would almost assuredly lose the game.

No, what I said was we should have a real "#3" option on the roster, who was really a #2, so we would not have to put a whole game on trey.

The whole reason for this is that we are supposedly in our super bowl window, so we need to win now.

You only get 53 roster spots. That is an unacceptable roster plan.

what are you talking about. we roster three qbs for the last 5 years.

Originally posted by RishikeshA:

Originally posted by 49erBigMac:
So you want to pay $27 mil for one QB, trade up for a rookie AND pay for a "real QB3", which team in history has done that?

A team with serious management dysfunction.

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by RishikeshA:

Originally posted by 49erBigMac:
So you want to pay $27 mil for one QB, trade up for a rookie AND pay for a "real QB3", which team in history has done that?

A team with serious management dysfunction.

An honestly what "legit" QB is gonna play for peanuts and be the 3rd string QB? No one that's who

Originally posted by 49erBigMac:

Originally posted by brodiebluebanaszak:

Originally posted by CatchMaster80:
You want to start Sudfield? Why? What purpose would that serve? Trey wouldn't get the needed experience and we would almost assuredly lose the game.

No, what I said was we should have a real "#3" option on the roster, who was really a #2, so we would not have to put a whole game on trey.

The whole reason for this is that we are supposedly in our super bowl window, so we need to win now.

So you want to pay $27 mil for one QB, trade up for a rookie AND pay for a "real QB3", which team in history has done that?

Originally posted by Niners99:
Nick Foles.

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by RishikeshA:

Originally posted by 49erBigMac:
So you want to pay $27 mil for one QB, trade up for a rookie AND pay for a "real QB3", which team in history has done that?

A team with serious management dysfunction.

An honestly what "legit" QB is gonna play for peanuts and be the 3rd string QB? No one that's who

Originally posted by NYniner85:
Foles had to restructure his contract (he got way more in GTD money) when traded. He wasn't brought in to be the 3rd string at first. Dalton's cap hit is $5M, fields $3.5M. So what is that for 3 QB. $15M this yr lol? Doesn't even touch Jimmy's cap hit. Bears spread out their QB cash. SF didn't.

Again no legit QB was gonna come in and be a 3rd string QB for like $1M.

Originally posted by Sickaa:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by RishikeshA:

Originally posted by 49erBigMac:
So you want to pay $27 mil for one QB, trade up for a rookie AND pay for a "real QB3", which team in history has done that?

A team with serious management dysfunction.

An honestly what "legit" QB is gonna play for peanuts and be the 3rd string QB? No one that's who

Being too dependent on an Injury prone QB Is what could cost us when It's all Said and done.

Hoping Lance shows us some potential tomorrow would be nice too.

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:

Originally posted by Sickaa:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by RishikeshA:

Originally posted by 49erBigMac:
So you want to pay $27 mil for one QB, trade up for a rookie AND pay for a "real QB3", which team in history has done that?

A team with serious management dysfunction.

An honestly what "legit" QB is gonna play for peanuts and be the 3rd string QB? No one that's who

Being too dependent on an Injury prone QB Is what could cost us when It's all Said and done.

Hoping Lance shows us some potential tomorrow would be nice too.

That has already cost us two of the last three seasons.

Originally posted by brodiebluebanaszak:

Originally posted by NinerBuff:
Here are the four possible outcomes I see happening on Sunday:

1) Trey struggles, niners lose bad, Shanahan - "trey's not ready, Jimmy was hurt but he's still the starter when heathy and will start after bye"

2) Trey plays well, flashes big play potential but they lose - I think it's a toss up for who starts after the bye, but nod to Jimmy as "he's the winner"

3) Niners win (regardless of how Lance plays), Lance remains as QB1 because that's Jimmy's claim to fame, so if Trey can win against one of the best teams on the road (regardless of circumstances), he'd stay QB1.

4) If Lance lights it up (regardless of winning or losing, like 4+ total TDs and 1 or 0 turnovers) he stays QB1 because the media hype would deafening

Honestly, I don't know how it goes.