Los Angeles Chargers QB Trey Lance Thread

Originally posted by Stanley:

Originally posted by genus49:
What's more embarrassing, people who think a young and talented QB the team selected after a big trade should be given a chance to compete for the job on an equal playing ground or guys who compete in mental gymnastics to bash the kid and call others "stans"?

Equal playing ground? Purdy has earned the advantage after last year. NOT ONCE did Lance look even remotely close to Purdy on the field. Stan

I don't know who tf you are but we've done this song and dance way too many times for me to get into it with someone who comes in like you just did.

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by mayo49:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by mayo49:

Plans change after Dirty appeared before us.

And what happens if Brock doesn't play well overall his next 170 passing attempts?

Then the door is wide open for Trey.

So you see my point. That could be like 4 games of football. It's not a ton of football and people are acting like we got a sure fire QB1 with top 5 upside in Brock. When in reality we have a young injured QB with 170 passing attempts of overall good play (with some question marks sprinkled in).

I think we need as many QBs on this roster and competition. IMO Sam has run his course as a starter though. I'm not giving him a bunch of 1st team reps at this point.

Ypu and Kyle see him differently, Kyle called him the real deal and ypu are calling him an injured QB who has question marks.

He earned more than 170 reps as the starter assuming he is the guy in week 1.

Originally posted by genus49:

Originally posted by Koldo:

Originally posted by tankle104:

https://youtu.be/v959NkGsG0o
david Lombardi def reads our forum. Listen to the beginning lmao

Lombardi basically said Trey stans are embarrassing.

What's more embarrassing, people who think a young and talented QB the team selected after a big trade should be given a chance to compete for the job on an equal playing ground or guys who compete in mental gymnastics to bash the kid and call others "stans"?

The playing ground has been quite equal. Everybody has been given a chance ot two and the top two qbs will get more chances this year.

Originally posted by tankle104:
I would only start Trey over Lance in effort to see how he would look and his development, but since his decelopment isn't a major priority anymore, Id actually have more confidence in darnold (just because he's a more known product than Trey) to win starts for us in a pinch.

the issue with the last part of your message is IF Trey was traded - we would most likely designate it post June 1 to help with the cap hit, meaning we wouldn't get any draft capitol for this season. It would have to be next or later.

Call me crazy but Trey usually goes before Lance.

As for Darnold...yes he's a more known product and that product is mediocrity

Compare some of these games. You and others are so quick to act like Lance sucked/stunk whatever adjective you want to use but then think Darnold would give us the best chance to win games

Look at these games...


That last one listed by the way was his most recent game!

Show me a game from Trey that resembled anything near those levels



Somehow it's easier to think that Darnold will magically turn into a consistent stud when he's got a big track record of being lose with the football and has been caught on tape talking about seeing ghosts.

Like logically that makes more sense for you guys than simply thinking Lance improves with time and guys like Kittle and CMC in the offense with him...

We got a f**k ton of mid level picks in a lack luster draft. I'll keep a QB with high potential for another year. Thanks.

Here's where I think we're at.

In the normal run of events, top qb draft picks go to crappy teams. They can run with his poor performance of low qbr and more int's than td's, because the whole team is rebuilding, and you have nothing to lose. In fact, losses aid your rebuild with subsequently better draft picks.

Occasionally, through injuries and trade ups, a good team drafts a top qb prospect. Great for him, huh. But the down side is that a team that can compete for a productive post season Must play the players that give them the best chance to win. If that's not him, his only chance to play is to show that improvement on the practice field to take that job, or perhaps getting probably short term starting opportunities through injuries.

Lance does not give us the best chance to win. Brock Purdy does. And now, we have picked up Sam Darnold, who will have an opportunity to even knock Lance out of the backup roll. It' natural to want to give Lance the opportunity to play and get better, but if he does not give us the best chance to win, it's not going to happen. Does he? My answer is No, he's no where near ready to compete and beat out a rising and maturing experienced Kyle favorite in Darnold. That, imo, is why he's here with a substantial contract.

We all want to see Lance, because he does have a lack of experience. I submit that Kyle and John probably already have a better picture of where he's at than we do, and the result of that is Darnold on the roster.

I've long thought we should keep Lance while on his rookie deal, and he will get a chance to start through injury at some point and if nothing else, he will have a chance to increase his trade value. That is now in question. Imo, he won't get a chance to start with Darnold here, and if he did, I've come to believe Kyle and John don't think his performance in any few number of games are going help his value.

On performance, Lance's trade value is not much. On need, someone might well take a chance on his potential and overpay. We're not going to give him away. But Lynch announcing that Brock is our starter is telling the league that the trade table is open for business.

Originally posted by TheWooLick:

Originally posted by genus49:

Originally posted by Koldo:

Originally posted by tankle104:
https://youtu.be/v959NkGsG0o
david Lombardi def reads our forum. Listen to the beginning lmao

Lombardi basically said Trey stans are embarrassing.

What's more embarrassing, people who think a young and talented QB the team selected after a big trade should be given a chance to compete for the job on an equal playing ground or guys who compete in mental gymnastics to bash the kid and call others "stans"?

The playing ground has been quite equal. Everybody has been given a chance ot two and the top two qbs will get more chances this year.

You I know so I'll engage.

This came up on my twitter feed this morning and goes along with what I've brought up here before but this adds a visual.


This is not me diminishing what Brock did, we all know how well he played in that game especially the rest of the way BUT it did give us a glimpse of Brock playing in poor conditions and it resulted in few very ugly passes and misses by Brock that we saw him make routinely in other games.

So is the logic of people who think Lance's game in Chicago when the weather was 10x worse and the OL had one of their worst games of the year...wasn't a "playing ground being equal" as far as evaluations go. Why is that a hard thing to come to grasp with?

I mean if we're looking at Seattle game alone. CMC had 136 total yards and 3 TDs. Mitchell had a TD as well.

Some of us simply want to see the guys compete under the same conditions. If Brock moves the offense that much better as we saw last year then I'm confident all or at least most of us will stop asking for Trey to get a chance.

But when you're comparing Brock getting to play in a seasoned roster that was mid big win streak after a critical mid season trade and his one start in poor conditions showed some of his worst throws and Trey's 1 full start in way worse conditions where the team played poorly across the board, no Kittle, no CMC and Mitchell was injured early in the game. Is that really a fair comparison of the two?

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by tankle104:
I would only start Trey over Lance in effort to see how he would look and his development, but since his decelopment isn't a major priority anymore, Id actually have more confidence in darnold (just because he's a more known product than Trey) to win starts for us in a pinch.

the issue with the last part of your message is IF Trey was traded - we would most likely designate it post June 1 to help with the cap hit, meaning we wouldn't get any draft capitol for this season. It would have to be next or later.

Only thing Sam has shown is he's a bad QB overall. There's years worth of film backing that up. IMO sam might not even make the final roster. We cut Sudfield last yr on a $2M gtd contract. I don't think they saved any cash cutting him either.

I see no reason to move Lance. Not unless it means they're landing a pro-bowl QB or stupid compensation.

I mentioned I'd start Lance over darnold in an effort to find out if he's more than what we've seen. This "high ceiling" thing is purely subjective with no proof besides optimism, but game planning for darnold would be easier than Lance at this point because he has so much film (And his ex head coach on the team) - so it's easier to put him in positions that you know he's good at, that's all I meant by that. That's not a knock on Lance

I didn't say dsrnold was a good qb, just known. You know what he's good at, especially after his 6 game run last season. To be fair, all we know about Lance so far is that he sucks too. Lol it's just a very small sample size so we are optimistic he will develop to be better. All we know right now about Lance is that if he isn't playing one of the worst team/defense in the league, we are lucky to score more than 10 points. That doesn't scream "we can win our division with him". Do I think Lance will improve more play time? Of course, but I don't think he's going to all of a sudden become a barn burner. Lol he can play all season and I think he would have maybe 4 good games and the rest he will have to be carried while he's figuring it out.

i hope we can get a pro bowl player for him or conditional picks based on his performance/potential, if he's traded. Trading him is big time speculation right now and I'm not saying I think/don't think he will get traded - there have been some moves that may indicate but also moves that indicate they won't. I think it only happens if it's a really good offer, otherwise, we need all the quality QBs we can get.

Originally posted by Cisco0623:
I agree, but the thing is we don't know much about either guy really. For me it makes sense Brock is "better" than Lance at this point given his experience in college compared to Trey. That being said Brock was amazing in his few starts. Way above anyone's expectations.

My fear is we go with Brock and he's good, but not as good as being projected and hyped right now. Because of that we never develop Lance who technically has the higher ceiling so it will be the ole "what if" that haunts fans.

Also I would imagine Lance will have a slow start, but the idea for me is take that step back and say is he improving week to week etc. I feel like Kyle may never give him that chance.

Because the team and organization is so impatient and desperate to find a FQB. They're just settling for someone who looks good but not great. They can win lots of games but they're never gonna win the big game cause they don't have an elite QB. You can have the number 1 defense but that's not enough for todays NFL. If Brock improves that would be great I just hope that what we saw wasn't his ceiling.

Originally posted by eric_anthony:

Originally posted by Cisco0623:
I agree, but the thing is we don't know much about either guy really. For me it makes sense Brock is "better" than Lance at this point given his experience in college compared to Trey. That being said Brock was amazing in his few starts. Way above anyone's expectations.

My fear is we go with Brock and he's good, but not as good as being projected and hyped right now. Because of that we never develop Lance who technically has the higher ceiling so it will be the ole "what if" that haunts fans.

Also I would imagine Lance will have a slow start, but the idea for me is take that step back and say is he improving week to week etc. I feel like Kyle may never give him that chance.

Because the team and organization is so impatient and desperate to find a FQB. They're just settling for someone who looks good but not great. They can win lots of games but they're never gonna win the big game cause they don't have an elite QB. You can have the number 1 defense but that's not enough for todays NFL. If Brock improves that would be great I just hope that what we saw wasn't his ceiling.

Lmao what are you guys talking about!? If brock plays at the same level as last season, that is elite? His stats in nearly every single way were elite and with the best in the league? The offense was literally top of the league in nearly every major category while he was starting.

There isn't much more you can ask for, especially in a balanced offense like ours.

there are things he can definitely improve on but acting like he was just "good"? My goodness, what did you rate lances few games? Tough critics. Lol

Originally posted by TheWooLick:
Ypu and Kyle see him differently, Kyle called him the real deal and ypu are calling him an injured QB who has question marks.

He earned more than 170 reps as the starter assuming he is the guy in week 1.

Love how you just pick certain words. I said he played well. He is now injured and got hurt multiple times. You're so black and white about that in here…so apply it to him all the same. Yes there was some question marks down the stretch, he's a rookie there's gonna be. Overall he played damn good though.

If he plays s**tty for his next 170 passing attempts, why has he earned more than that? Past performance shouldn't dictate all that imo. If he's playing bad over a similar stretch then changes should be made all the same. I know you would say it if it was the other way around.

Originally posted by boast:

Kyle Shanahan on 49ers QB1 role: "With Brock being hurt, (Trey Lance) has a chance to regain that."

— David Lombardi (@LombardiHimself) March 28, 2023

.

Originally posted by Waterbear:

Originally posted by boast:

Kyle Shanahan on 49ers QB1 role: "With Brock being hurt, (Trey Lance) has a chance to regain that."

— David Lombardi (@LombardiHimself) March 28, 2023

.

Dun dunn dunnnnn if Trey can beat him out, I'm all for it.

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by TheWooLick:
Ypu and Kyle see him differently, Kyle called him the real deal and ypu are calling him an injured QB who has question marks.

He earned more than 170 reps as the starter assuming he is the guy in week 1.

Love how you just pick certain words. I said he played well. He is now injured and got hurt multiple times. You're so black and white about that in here…so apply it to him all the same. Yes there was some question marks down the stretch, he's a rookie there's gonna be. Overall he played damn good though.

If he plays s**tty for his next 170 passing attempts, why has he earned more than that? Past performance shouldn't dictate all that imo. If he's playing bad over a similar stretch then changes should be made all the same. I know you would say it if it was the other way around.

I agree that Purdy hasn't got the starting job locked up. No young QB can do that based on 6 or 7 starts. In the NFL you constantly have to prove yourself until it's obvious that you're the best. We've all seen QBs that look great for a few games or even for a couple of years but eventually fall off.

There are a lot of people that are convinced that Purdy will get even better while they are convinced Trey is a bust. Both guys have relatively small samples. I'm not convinced that Trey won't get better and become the starter any more than I am that Purdy will continue to play at a high level. I need to see more of each of them.

Ideally both guys will get better and we end up with a good starter and a quality backup. Maybe we end up trading one. Whatever, I'm looking forward to the pre season and the early games next season.