Los Angeles Chargers QB Trey Lance Thread

Originally posted by Hoovtrain:

He really should pay you royalties.

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:

Originally posted by TheWooLick:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:

Originally posted by TheWooLick:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:

Originally posted by TheWooLick:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:

Originally posted by TheWooLick:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:

Originally posted by TheWooLick:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:
LMAO

Yeah Brock losing Deebo in the middle of a game that was already a blowout is the same thing as:

-No Kittle
-Jeff Wilson Jr. instead of Christian Mccaffrey
-60% of the OL playing for the first time
-playing in the rain on the road
-week 1

Yeah, totally even.

notice the no Kittle, no CMC comments..
plus our OL is playing for the first time.. with HOF Trent btw
and again the infamous weather..

ppl can decide for themselves if this is anything worth discussing many months later or if it's just excuses for why we lost to a 3-14 team that earned pick #1
if JF can win with Pettis, EQ ST Brown, TL can win with Deebo, Trent, BA and put it in the endzone.. but he's got to improve

Dude. Your reading comprehension is painfully bad, or you are being intentionally obtuse.

That list is not a list of reasons/excuses why the 49ers lost. It is not a list of reasons why Trey didnt have a good game. It is literally just a factual list of differences between week 1 and the games Purdy played in. Period.

Stop changing the conversation or turning this into something it isnt.

You make it sound like Shanahan, Deebo, Aiyuk, Trent freaking Williams, Juice are all a group of chumps..

are they as good as the same with CMC / Kittle.. obviously no, that doesn't even need said, if that's your point..

you can't explain away the dif of how TL looked and how Brock looked through supporting cast.. that ignores how robotic TL was looking and how smooth BP was looking, that's not 100% on CMC, recall Baker played with CMC and got fired for example.

No I am not. YOU are doing that in your head.

You are making me want to stop engaging with you on this board. Its ridiculous that you are even arguing at this point. Literally all I said was the circumstances around Trey's week 1 start was vastly different than the circumstances Brock faced (and listed the circumstances). Why cant you just move along? You are literally creating an argument in your head, and arguing against facts.

if your point is the offense is better than CMC what kind of point is that.. that doesn't need said
my point stands that if you want to talk vast talent differences.. I saw one week 1, and TL had the talent around him, JF didn't.. we legit cut Pettis from our roster, ST Brown cut as well

what I hear is a lot of reasons for why BP did well and TL didn't and I don't buy it.. I will say of course we are better with CMC, but if JF can win with cut receivers no one wants vs the #1 D; then Deebo, BA, Shanahan, Trent are all filet mignon compared to what Fields had to work with..

I see 49er fans all around me disregarding our talent; for example I was laughed at when I called our tackles bookend tackles, meanwhile in the real NFL, Trent is going to Canton, and McG just got paid $87.5 million. We aren't a bad roster, even without CMC we are very very good. Bears would have traded talent with us in a heartbeat, and try imaging for a second TL with no Deebo, no BA, no Trent, no Shanny and EQ St Brown and Pettis.

Will you just stop? The conversation I was having had absolutely nothing to do with Fields and the Bears. Just stop. You are arguing with no one. This entire reply of yours is completely irrelevant to the discussion. Completely.

lol you mentioned week 1
you mentioned playing on the road in the rain

Yes. And for the 12th time, we were talking about Lance in week one compared to Purdy. Is this really that difficult a concept for you to grasp?

Comparing Lance to Purdy on the field is pretty lobsided at this point. One has been widely successful while the other has not.

You got me. This is the one post of the 15 I made trying to explain to Faithful what we were actually talking about where I didnt elaborate. The conversation was about the circumstances and supporting cast that Trey had in week 1 versus Purdy down the stretch. It wasnt a comparison of the two QBs. But all you would have had to do was read past that one specific post to see that, which you clearly didnt.

No one is going to sift through the garbage here to try to find referenced post.

LOL its all right here quoted in the post. And even if it wasnt, its generally a good idea to know what the conversation is about before you feel the need to insert yourself into it.

He literally said he was comparing Purdy to Lance.

Dude just stop. You are trying to play gatekeeper of this thread and you (admittedly) didnt read all of the discussion.

Moving on.

I guess I am not familiar with the sides you guys have drawn up and chosen for yourselves.

Here we go again. You complain about people not talking about football and talking about posters, and you go on about this.

You want to know what "side" I am on? I am on the side of being able to back up your opinion with consistent arguments. I am on the side of not contradicting yourself regularly. I am on the side of not flip flopping one day to the next. I am on the side of the 49ers. I am on the side of not making definitive statements about someone when you limited sample sizes to judge on.

Hope that clears it up for you.

NY has brought up They and We repeatedly and there have been multiple references to Sides.

I am assuming this is in reference to Trey or Brock fans, similar to the s**tshow we saw here with Alex and Kap.

Then maybe you should be asking him and not me.

But if you want my opinion, this whole Brock vs. Lance thing is not happening at all. It is not even close to the Alex vs. Kap debates. This time, its more of a "lets give Lance more time" vs. "Lance is a bust" debate. I havent seen much of anyone (if at all) say that Lance should be the starter if Brock is ready. I feel like almost everyone is either all in on Brock or cautiously optimistic. I havent seen anyone be anti-Brock like posters have been with other QBs.

Haven't seen much of the bold either. Some have expressed their displeasure on what they've seen so far. It's not too far fetched based on what was given up for him.

Originally posted by tankle104:

Originally posted by Bay2Bay9erAllday:

Originally posted by tankle104:
As someone who negotiates deals for a living, the most rational thing I can derive from the things Lynch said today - is that lance will be traded - or at least they're trying to if they can get what they want to.

otherwise, it really makes no sense. Why would you come out and say a recovering player from a rare surgery is QB1? Why would you say it's a competition and include darnold? We all know that's a joke (darnold can win the starting job).

he essentially said "we like lance and are prepared to keep him but show me your best offer".
I didn't think he would be traded but the more I'm looking into and read into the post June 1 trade/cut rules for the salary cap - that makes the most sense to me.

If I am correct, I hope lance goes to a good situation to help him continue to develop somewhere.

It actually makes sense if you watch the tape. I wouldn't read much more into that. Lynch is just saying what everyone here's agreed on, that if Purdy was healthy he'd be QB1.

Hmm I disagree - these guys don't go up there and start talking off the hip. They're prepped for it and know what they'll be asked (for the most part) so their responses are crafted a head of time.

our front office is very strategic. He put it in simple terms but said a lot more when you read between the lines, in my opinion.

Also, keep in mind - the very first thing Lynch says is "kyle and I were talking last night thought it was appropriate to…" aka he sat down and talked to Kyle about what he should say to the answers regarding QBs etc.

Originally posted by tankle104:
They're not horrible. It's still a good and well coached team. They could still upgrade the WR room.

i don't want Lamar. I don't like QBs who depend on running to be decent at throwing, they typically don't last long either. He's a special player but not the kind of qb I prefer.

Dude they have an awful WR room. Their OL is nothing special and they lost another starter. Andrews is a stud outside of that nothing.

I'll take Lamer in a heartbeat. The ravens are not a playoff team without him.

there's no reason to move Lance anyway

Originally posted by tankle104:

Originally posted by Bay2Bay9erAllday:

Originally posted by tankle104:
As someone who negotiates deals for a living, the most rational thing I can derive from the things Lynch said today - is that lance will be traded - or at least they're trying to if they can get what they want to.

otherwise, it really makes no sense. Why would you come out and say a recovering player from a rare surgery is QB1? Why would you say it's a competition and include darnold? We all know that's a joke (darnold can win the starting job).

he essentially said "we like lance and are prepared to keep him but show me your best offer".
I didn't think he would be traded but the more I'm looking into and read into the post June 1 trade/cut rules for the salary cap - that makes the most sense to me.

If I am correct, I hope lance goes to a good situation to help him continue to develop somewhere.

It actually makes sense if you watch the tape. I wouldn't read much more into that. Lynch is just saying what everyone here's agreed on, that if Purdy was healthy he'd be QB1.

Hmm I disagree - these guys don't go up there and start talking off the hip. They're prepped for it and know what they'll be asked (for the most part) so their responses are crafted a head of time.

our front office is very strategic. He put it in simple terms but said a lot more when you read between the lines, in my opinion.

They are usually pretty straight forward with their statements. They liked what they saw in Purdy and just saying what everyone else has been saying.

Originally posted by Hoovtrain:

Originally posted by Bay2Bay9erAllday:

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by Bay2Bay9erAllday:

Hoov meme game is better

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:
He really should pay you royalties.

I'm guessing you don't know what royalties are. You just sound butt hurt now. Move on. lol

Hopefully this if going to light a fire under Trey's ass. but it's not a good look to hear your GM say these things. Makes me think they question picking him as well. If so move on sooner rather than later. Chalk up the L and proceed forward.

Originally posted by Bay2Bay9erAllday:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:

Originally posted by TheWooLick:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:

Originally posted by TheWooLick:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:

Originally posted by TheWooLick:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:

Originally posted by TheWooLick:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:

Originally posted by TheWooLick:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:
LMAO

Yeah Brock losing Deebo in the middle of a game that was already a blowout is the same thing as:

-No Kittle
-Jeff Wilson Jr. instead of Christian Mccaffrey
-60% of the OL playing for the first time
-playing in the rain on the road
-week 1

Yeah, totally even.

notice the no Kittle, no CMC comments..
plus our OL is playing for the first time.. with HOF Trent btw
and again the infamous weather..

ppl can decide for themselves if this is anything worth discussing many months later or if it's just excuses for why we lost to a 3-14 team that earned pick #1
if JF can win with Pettis, EQ ST Brown, TL can win with Deebo, Trent, BA and put it in the endzone.. but he's got to improve

Dude. Your reading comprehension is painfully bad, or you are being intentionally obtuse.

That list is not a list of reasons/excuses why the 49ers lost. It is not a list of reasons why Trey didnt have a good game. It is literally just a factual list of differences between week 1 and the games Purdy played in. Period.

Stop changing the conversation or turning this into something it isnt.

You make it sound like Shanahan, Deebo, Aiyuk, Trent freaking Williams, Juice are all a group of chumps..

are they as good as the same with CMC / Kittle.. obviously no, that doesn't even need said, if that's your point..

you can't explain away the dif of how TL looked and how Brock looked through supporting cast.. that ignores how robotic TL was looking and how smooth BP was looking, that's not 100% on CMC, recall Baker played with CMC and got fired for example.

No I am not. YOU are doing that in your head.

You are making me want to stop engaging with you on this board. Its ridiculous that you are even arguing at this point. Literally all I said was the circumstances around Trey's week 1 start was vastly different than the circumstances Brock faced (and listed the circumstances). Why cant you just move along? You are literally creating an argument in your head, and arguing against facts.

if your point is the offense is better than CMC what kind of point is that.. that doesn't need said
my point stands that if you want to talk vast talent differences.. I saw one week 1, and TL had the talent around him, JF didn't.. we legit cut Pettis from our roster, ST Brown cut as well

what I hear is a lot of reasons for why BP did well and TL didn't and I don't buy it.. I will say of course we are better with CMC, but if JF can win with cut receivers no one wants vs the #1 D; then Deebo, BA, Shanahan, Trent are all filet mignon compared to what Fields had to work with..

I see 49er fans all around me disregarding our talent; for example I was laughed at when I called our tackles bookend tackles, meanwhile in the real NFL, Trent is going to Canton, and McG just got paid $87.5 million. We aren't a bad roster, even without CMC we are very very good. Bears would have traded talent with us in a heartbeat, and try imaging for a second TL with no Deebo, no BA, no Trent, no Shanny and EQ St Brown and Pettis.

Will you just stop? The conversation I was having had absolutely nothing to do with Fields and the Bears. Just stop. You are arguing with no one. This entire reply of yours is completely irrelevant to the discussion. Completely.

lol you mentioned week 1
you mentioned playing on the road in the rain

Yes. And for the 12th time, we were talking about Lance in week one compared to Purdy. Is this really that difficult a concept for you to grasp?

Comparing Lance to Purdy on the field is pretty lobsided at this point. One has been widely successful while the other has not.

You got me. This is the one post of the 15 I made trying to explain to Faithful what we were actually talking about where I didnt elaborate. The conversation was about the circumstances and supporting cast that Trey had in week 1 versus Purdy down the stretch. It wasnt a comparison of the two QBs. But all you would have had to do was read past that one specific post to see that, which you clearly didnt.

No one is going to sift through the garbage here to try to find referenced post.

LOL its all right here quoted in the post. And even if it wasnt, its generally a good idea to know what the conversation is about before you feel the need to insert yourself into it.

He literally said he was comparing Purdy to Lance.

Dude just stop. You are trying to play gatekeeper of this thread and you (admittedly) didnt read all of the discussion.

Moving on.

I guess I am not familiar with the sides you guys have drawn up and chosen for yourselves.

Here we go again. You complain about people not talking about football and talking about posters, and you go on about this.

You want to know what "side" I am on? I am on the side of being able to back up your opinion with consistent arguments. I am on the side of not contradicting yourself regularly. I am on the side of not flip flopping one day to the next. I am on the side of the 49ers. I am on the side of not making definitive statements about someone when you limited sample sizes to judge on.

Hope that clears it up for you.

NY has brought up They and We repeatedly and there have been multiple references to Sides.

I am assuming this is in reference to Trey or Brock fans, similar to the s**tshow we saw here with Alex and Kap.

Then maybe you should be asking him and not me.

But if you want my opinion, this whole Brock vs. Lance thing is not happening at all. It is not even close to the Alex vs. Kap debates. This time, its more of a "lets give Lance more time" vs. "Lance is a bust" debate. I havent seen much of anyone (if at all) say that Lance should be the starter if Brock is ready. I feel like almost everyone is either all in on Brock or cautiously optimistic. I havent seen anyone be anti-Brock like posters have been with other QBs.

Haven't seen much of the bold either. Some have expressed their displeasure on what they've seen so far. It's not too far fetched based on what was given up for him.

I promise there have been exponentially more people who think Lance wont ever be a good QB than people who think Lance should 100% be our starting QB.

As far as the some "who have expressed their displeasure on what they've seen so far" goes....dont you think with how limited the sample size is, that those people are being incredibly unfair? I feel like those people dont understand what it takes to develop a QB. They would have wanted Peyton Manning shipped out of town after his rookie year. Everyone who has their mind made up on Lance, or even are doing what you are saying, are being incredibly unfair IMO.

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by tankle104:
They're not horrible. It's still a good and well coached team. They could still upgrade the WR room.

i don't want Lamar. I don't like QBs who depend on running to be decent at throwing, they typically don't last long either. He's a special player but not the kind of qb I prefer.

Dude they have an awful WR room. Their OL is nothing special and they lost another starter. Andrews is a stud outside of that nothing.

I'll take Lamer in a heartbeat. The ravens are not a playoff team without him.

there's no reason to move Lance anyway

They did last year - I thought they picked up a guy or two? I'd imagine that's their main target this draft, but you're right - they sucked last year.

lamar is an awesome player, no doubt, I just don't want that play style for the 49ers. That's just me. Lol I understand others disagree.

I dont want Trey moved. lol I just thought it was an interesting fit and feel like the team may be leaning that way . With the way our QBs get hurt, literally every year kyles been here but one, we don't need that room thin.

Originally posted by Bay2Bay9erAllday:
They are usually pretty straight forward with their statements. They liked what they saw in Purdy and just saying what everyone else has been saying.

I think early on they were a lot more candid because John was new to it but they've become like foxes. A lot of smoke and mirrors - such as they try to not bring in guys for pre draft visits that they think others might be targeting a player earlier than them to throw teams off etc.

you may be right, I just feel like there is something going on from my experience of negotiating for a living.

Originally posted by Bay2Bay9erAllday:
I'm guessing you don't know what royalties are. You just sound butt hurt now. Move on. lol

Joke between me and Hoov. Feel free to be condescending though.

Interesting, Lynch does not give a flat out denial is regards to the prospect of trading TL.... we shall see by draft day

Originally posted by tankle104:
I think early on they were a lot more candid because John was new to it but they've become like foxes. A lot of smoke and mirrors - such as they try to not bring in guys for pre draft visits that they think others might be targeting a player earlier than them to throw teams off etc.

you may be right, I just feel like there is something going on from my experience of negotiating for a living.

They'll be straightforward or cryptic and even misleading depending on what they view is the best public message for the team... both on the field and as an organization.

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:

Originally posted by tankle104:
I think early on they were a lot more candid because John was new to it but they've become like foxes. A lot of smoke and mirrors - such as they try to not bring in guys for pre draft visits that they think others might be targeting a player earlier than them to throw teams off etc.

you may be right, I just feel like there is something going on from my experience of negotiating for a living.

They'll be straightforward or cryptic and even misleading depending on what they view is the best public message for the team... both on the field and as an organization.

I feel like his responses were more for other teams. I don't think the team is eager to trade lance, I really don't, I think they're going to see if they can get any offers that make them really think about it. It's just good business.