Los Angeles Chargers QB Trey Lance Thread

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:

Originally posted by BOI49er:

Originally posted by English:

Originally posted by BOI49er:
A quarterback reaching his "ceiling" is a fantasy. It applies to physical skills, but in mental ability, it only exists to the extent that the player is currently improving.

For years, I listened on this board how Colin Kaepernick hadn't reached his ceiling yet, while I was arguing that if that was going to happen, we'd be seeing improvement now, and we weren't. Garoppolo got incrementally better, but within a very narrow range.

Game experience helps you improve, but so does everything else you do on a team, including practice, study, meetings, film study, and coaching exposure. Even if you are not playing, you still better be getting better, or you won't.

I don't know, but putting Trey on the block looks to me like disappointed coaches. Actions speaks louder than words, and that's action, and kind words now are suspect when they have an interest in keeping Trey's value up.

Brock learned like crazy, without playing. No reason to think that vector has stopped.

Who put Lance on the block, and when? Or are you just referring to the usual garbage internet rumours?

Yep. Just rumors. That smoke/fire thing is not 100 percent, but...

Brock looked pretty good. And we can't afford a lot of losses to get Trey Years of experience.

Lance hasn't played yet. Not even the 49ers know how good he will be. If Purdy didn't exist, Trey's future over the next two years would be fairly certain. The only reason anyone is even entertaining the idea of trading Lance is because of how good Purdy looked. That's where all of you guys miss the boat. It's not about Lance being "at his bust ceiling." It's that with Purdy there is no need to actually wait to see if he hits his ceiling. In other words, the jury is still out on Lance, but the jury is mostly in on Purdy. A dollar in hand is worth more than two dollars you might get in the future.

So Purdy has made Lance and his potential expendable, for the right price. It has almost nothing to do with Lance, who has not developed at a slower than normal rate compared to most other QBs. He hasn't played, so how can we talk about how fast or slow he's developing?

I disagree. If that were the case, how do you explain Kyle stating he'd just as soon get rid of preseason games, as he can learn everything he needs to know from practice. And now he has two full years of working with him.

Originally posted by BOI49er:

Originally posted by English:

Originally posted by BOI49er:
A quarterback reaching his "ceiling" is a fantasy. It applies to physical skills, but in mental ability, it only exists to the extent that the player is currently improving.

For years, I listened on this board how Colin Kaepernick hadn't reached his ceiling yet, while I was arguing that if that was going to happen, we'd be seeing improvement now, and we weren't. Garoppolo got incrementally better, but within a very narrow range.

Game experience helps you improve, but so does everything else you do on a team, including practice, study, meetings, film study, and coaching exposure. Even if you are not playing, you still better be getting better, or you won't.

I don't know, but putting Trey on the block looks to me like disappointed coaches. Actions speaks louder than words, and that's action, and kind words now are suspect when they have an interest in keeping Trey's value up.

Brock learned like crazy, without playing. No reason to think that vector has stopped.

Who put Lance on the block, and when? Or are you just referring to the usual garbage internet rumours?

Yep. Just rumors. That smoke/fire thing is not 100 percent, but...

Brock looked pretty good. And we can't afford a lot of losses to get Trey Years of experience.

"Getting experience" doesn't equate with losing. There may be losses, but there will be winning too Brock had a ton of experience in college, which enabled him to pick up what was being taught in the pros. Trey, on the other hand, lacks that fundamental experience that helps one absorb the lessons that come from experience. If you haven't graduated from Algebra and you get dropped into a calculus class you will need extra work to get up to speed. Is Trey putting in the work? Is he absorbing the lessons? We're about to find out.

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
Lance hasn't played yet. Not even the 49ers know how good he will be. If Purdy didn't exist, Trey's future over the next two years would be fairly certain. The only reason anyone is even entertaining the idea of trading Lance is because of how good Purdy looked. That's where all of you guys miss the boat. It's not about Lance being "at his bust ceiling." It's that with Purdy there is no need to actually wait to see if he hits his ceiling. In other words, the jury is still out on Lance, but the jury is mostly in on Purdy. A dollar in hand is worth more than two dollars you might get in the future.

So Purdy has made Lance and his potential expendable, for the right price. It has almost nothing to do with Lance, who has not developed at a slower than normal rate compared to most other QBs. He hasn't played, so how can we talk about how fast or slow he's developing?

Until one of these guys wins the Super Bowl and beats Mahomes we are keeping both guys on the cheap as long as we can. Purdy looking good or Lance looking good ain't the standard. Winning it ALL is the standard and until then nothing is settled at the QB position

Our stance is by how we did Jimmy is getting to two NFCCG and a Super Bowl ain't enough. You've gotta win the thing with this roster that we know is only hindered by the QB position. We have not been settled at QB since Steve Young for that very reason

Until Trey or Brock wins it all we keep both cheaply UNLESS we get a hella crazy offer to say otherwise. Meanwhile we have to let this QB battle play out this offseason

The Niners may have reached and spent too much draft capital but for a team like them that was already good it was the right thing to do. I don't have a problem with making a big move to try and get a guy you think can be a top 5 QB for the next 8-10 years. I would rather see that than playing it safe and signing middle of the road QBs. There's no doubt that it's risky but the rewards can be a guy like Mahommes.

Many of the best QBs in NFL history were overlooked early in the draft because there were some questions. Montana, Brady, and Rogers were passed over. Mahommes might have been if it wasn't for KC being willing to take a chance because they had Alex smith who was playing at a high level. Marino had questions about his knee coming out of college. He lasted until the end of the first round. Many more that were drafted higher were total busts.

In spite of all the sophisticated scouting, the combines and the pro days, drafting players in general and QBs in particular is still a crapshoot.

Originally posted by BOI49er:

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:

Originally posted by BOI49er:

Originally posted by English:

Originally posted by BOI49er:
A quarterback reaching his "ceiling" is a fantasy. It applies to physical skills, but in mental ability, it only exists to the extent that the player is currently improving.

For years, I listened on this board how Colin Kaepernick hadn't reached his ceiling yet, while I was arguing that if that was going to happen, we'd be seeing improvement now, and we weren't. Garoppolo got incrementally better, but within a very narrow range.

Game experience helps you improve, but so does everything else you do on a team, including practice, study, meetings, film study, and coaching exposure. Even if you are not playing, you still better be getting better, or you won't.

I don't know, but putting Trey on the block looks to me like disappointed coaches. Actions speaks louder than words, and that's action, and kind words now are suspect when they have an interest in keeping Trey's value up.

Brock learned like crazy, without playing. No reason to think that vector has stopped.

Who put Lance on the block, and when? Or are you just referring to the usual garbage internet rumours?

Yep. Just rumors. That smoke/fire thing is not 100 percent, but...

Brock looked pretty good. And we can't afford a lot of losses to get Trey Years of experience.

Lance hasn't played yet. Not even the 49ers know how good he will be. If Purdy didn't exist, Trey's future over the next two years would be fairly certain. The only reason anyone is even entertaining the idea of trading Lance is because of how good Purdy looked. That's where all of you guys miss the boat. It's not about Lance being "at his bust ceiling." It's that with Purdy there is no need to actually wait to see if he hits his ceiling. In other words, the jury is still out on Lance, but the jury is mostly in on Purdy. A dollar in hand is worth more than two dollars you might get in the future.

So Purdy has made Lance and his potential expendable, for the right price. It has almost nothing to do with Lance, who has not developed at a slower than normal rate compared to most other QBs. He hasn't played, so how can we talk about how fast or slow he's developing?

I disagree. If that were the case, how do you explain Kyle stating he'd just as soon get rid of preseason games, as he can learn everything he needs to know from practice. And now he has two full years of working with him.

You do realize that Trey Lance was anointed the starter last year, right? Shanahan hates preseason games. His plan was for Trey to develop during regular season games.

As for the claim he can learn everything from practice, that is incorrect. Especially when you consider the details: his main problem is accuracy. That is something you cannot fix in practice. It has to be fixed in the off-season. And he was dealing with a lingering injury his second off-season, which prevented as much work on mechanics that he needed. This is his first off-season where the only thing he had to worry about is his mechanics. If he doesn't improve his accuracy this season, then he's probably a bust (notice I said improve, not perfect; It took Allen two off-seasons to become accurate himself).

Lance's other problem is lack of experience, which only improves with game time.

Originally posted by Pillbusta:

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
Lance hasn't played yet. Not even the 49ers know how good he will be. If Purdy didn't exist, Trey's future over the next two years would be fairly certain. The only reason anyone is even entertaining the idea of trading Lance is because of how good Purdy looked. That's where all of you guys miss the boat. It's not about Lance being "at his bust ceiling." It's that with Purdy there is no need to actually wait to see if he hits his ceiling. In other words, the jury is still out on Lance, but the jury is mostly in on Purdy. A dollar in hand is worth more than two dollars you might get in the future.

So Purdy has made Lance and his potential expendable, for the right price. It has almost nothing to do with Lance, who has not developed at a slower than normal rate compared to most other QBs. He hasn't played, so how can we talk about how fast or slow he's developing?

Until one of these guys wins the Super Bowl and beats Mahomes we are keeping both guys on the cheap as long as we can. Purdy looking good or Lance looking good ain't the standard. Winning it ALL is the standard and until then nothing is settled at the QB position

Our stance is by how we did Jimmy is getting to two NFCCG and a Super Bowl ain't enough. You've gotta win the thing with this roster that we know is only hindered by the QB position. We have not been settled at QB since Steve Young for that very reason

Until Trey or Brock wins it all we keep both cheaply UNLESS we get a hella crazy offer to say otherwise. Meanwhile we have to let this QB battle play out this offseason

Yeah we'd only trade Lance if the offer is high enough (probably much higher than most "analysts" think). I don't think Purdy is tradable at all right now. He played too well for the 49ers to consider it, unless Trey or Sam actually play extremely well this year too. Both Trey and Darnold have physical talent Purdy doesn't, though. So if either one looks like they might turn the corner, I'm thinking Purdy might actually be the one traded. But probably not until the last year of his contract.

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:

Originally posted by Pillbusta:

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
Lance hasn't played yet. Not even the 49ers know how good he will be. If Purdy didn't exist, Trey's future over the next two years would be fairly certain. The only reason anyone is even entertaining the idea of trading Lance is because of how good Purdy looked. That's where all of you guys miss the boat. It's not about Lance being "at his bust ceiling." It's that with Purdy there is no need to actually wait to see if he hits his ceiling. In other words, the jury is still out on Lance, but the jury is mostly in on Purdy. A dollar in hand is worth more than two dollars you might get in the future.

So Purdy has made Lance and his potential expendable, for the right price. It has almost nothing to do with Lance, who has not developed at a slower than normal rate compared to most other QBs. He hasn't played, so how can we talk about how fast or slow he's developing?

Until one of these guys wins the Super Bowl and beats Mahomes we are keeping both guys on the cheap as long as we can. Purdy looking good or Lance looking good ain't the standard. Winning it ALL is the standard and until then nothing is settled at the QB position

Our stance is by how we did Jimmy is getting to two NFCCG and a Super Bowl ain't enough. You've gotta win the thing with this roster that we know is only hindered by the QB position. We have not been settled at QB since Steve Young for that very reason

Until Trey or Brock wins it all we keep both cheaply UNLESS we get a hella crazy offer to say otherwise. Meanwhile we have to let this QB battle play out this offseason

Yeah we'd only trade Lance if the offer is high enough (probably much higher than most "analysts" think). I don't think Purdy is tradable at all right now. He played too well for the 49ers to consider it, unless Trey or Sam actually play extremely well this year too. Both Trey and Darnold have physical talent Purdy doesn't, though. So if either one looks like they might turn the corner, I'm thinking Purdy might actually be the one traded. But probably not until the last year of his contract.

Man, I've got to disagree with you again, 5. I don't see a scenario where Kyle parts with Brock if you pulled out each one of his teeth and finger nails one at a time. He just demonstrated Way too much promise and aptitude. When you've got enough arm, and he does, an imcremental improvement does not begin to offset seeing the field and quick accurate judgement. That's going to get you more plays per game than an unusually rocket arm. Just being able to be aggressive and putting the play in the quarterback's hands in vulnerable situations is Huge for a smart play caller like Kyle. That's what he wants, and he's Never had that here. Having the confidence in his quarterback he has shown already is the hardest box to fill.

This is a mental position. It takes a serious weakness to trump that.

Originally posted by krizay:

Originally posted by tankle104:
Mahommes isn't a great qb because of his height, arms, and legs. He's a great qb because of all the intangibles like his mind/instincts etc. he just so happens to have an awesome arm and is mobile.

A great arm and leg is gravy. You don't try to take a great arm and leg and hope the rest adds up. You should initially look to see if you can identify the intangibles and then the arm and legs, IMO.

Physical traits don't make or break how great a qb can be. If they did, Brady and Montana wouldn't be the greatest ever. As long as their physical traits are good enough, the mind and heart (to simplify it) will take them the rest of the way.

that's why if you break out the top 10 greatest QBs of all time, they aren't necessarily gifted physically. Some have awesome arms but it kind of ends there outside of Steve young - which took him numerous years before he developed, but he had all the intangibles.

in my opinion, you can identify strong characteristics about every all time qb, but they don't have the best of anything overall, usually.

Watching Mahomes in college to me was the best thrower of the football I'd ever seen. Even with all of his poor mechanics and everything else against him he wa still a great passer in college.

I thought mahommes would be an interception machine in the NFL, boy was I wrong. Hahaha I didn't really study him and just made assumptions, but I missed that one by a mile. Hahaha

he is a very gifted athlete and great natural thrower, for sure. He's from Tyler, I've actually spent quite a bit of time there for work - smaller town in the middle no where. Hahaha he must be the best thing since sliced bread over there.

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:

Originally posted by tankle104:
yeah, it would be a fun topic on here.

Neither of my parents were into sports, but both are born & raised in The City. when I was maybe 9 - My mom had this really cool old school metal paper bin for an office. It had the old school 49ers Logo and Font on it, like the endzone during the playoffs. All red and then all the way around the bin it had all the super bowls we've won with that years superbowl logo/teams/scores. I just thought it was the coolest thing and from there I started looking into the team and reading all the history about them.

Then i became emotionally attached to them. hahahah I've always been someone who believes in studying history to understand the present, so I just did this super deep dive and read about all the coaches, players, seasons, ownership etc. Since the team has been bad a majority of my life, it was a great escape. hahaha

This is a good story. I'll give you a free one of about my own fandom as payment.

I'm one of those weirdos who isn't from the Bay Area. I lived in Washington State when I became a 49er fan, but was exposed to football when I was a kid in Los Angeles a couple years before. Probably by all rights I should be a Rams of Seahag fan, but I chose the good guys (the Rams were already in St. Louis, but they'd been in LA for ages; same with the Raiders being in Oakland). I was just playing an old football video game and picked the team with the coolest uniform colors and most bad ass QB name—for both their QBs: Joe Montana and Steve Young. Who doesn't want a QB named Joe Montana? That's the most badass QB name of all time.

This was around the time when Steve Young and Jerry Rice were all over the media, and something about a guy named Young throwing to a guy named Rice, and a previous guy throwing named Montana intrigued me. And that red and gold color was nice. I wasn't a fan yet, but I was curious about the team so I started reading about them. And that's when I was sold. Bill Walsh. The fact that the guy outsmarted everyone, using brains over brawn. That was the moment I became a 49er fan. It was some old kids book about the history of NFL dynasties that pulled me in (published years before, so the Cowboys weren't mentioned). Basically it broke down every team by a single phrase. For the 49ers it was "Trick play offense, big play defense." This resonated with me so much, because I was a chess loser. The 49ers basically brought chess to football.

So, uniforms, cool names, and brains are what brought me in. And the coolest thing is my brother and I and a couple of friends started emulating the West Coast Offense in street football, and basically dominated everyone we played, even older kids. The fact that the sneaky quick stuff worked even in pickup games just solidified my fandom all the more. Ah, to be a kid again just falling in love with the 49ers.

My only regret is I didn't get to see Super Bowl 29 live. I have several copies of the game (and many others), but I just missed that. Sucks.

That is an awesome story. Fun fact, Tony montana in Scarface was given the last name Montana because of Joe montana!

https://www.vogue.fr/fashion-culture/article/scarface-fun-facts-things-you-didnt-know-about-the-cult-film

so I agree, awesome name. Hahaha the colors were huge for me too. Haha red was always my favorite color, couple that with gold!? Hell yeah. Then the rich history and awesome ownership of Eddie D - I was sold.

I don't think we "should" trade any of our QBs because of our injury issues. My thought is that the one that will be traded, if anyone is at all, would be lance. Someone would just have to give us a lot for him. That's the catch in the whole thing. If Purdy continues to play at the level he has, or better, we will lose Lance eventually. His youth, talent, and contract would make him a target for some teams (I still think the falcons will try and get him).

i hope we keep everyone though because of our injury concerns. Especially if lance looks much better now than he has.

it's weird cause if he plays better, it increases his value, but also increases our rationale for keeping him. Lol If he's better then id rather keep him for insurance. It sounds like he's making large improvements

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:

Originally posted by napo:
The thing about Trey Lance is that he's played so little that we really don't know what he can be. One concern is the story about Lance being on the trading block and the fact that Shanahan has stated that Purdy-assuming he's healthy-will be the starter. Kind of sounds like the coaches have seen enough to make a judgment that Purdy is definitely better than Trey.

He's not on the trade block. They said they are taking calls on Lance. Taking not making. They take calls on all players. Unless they are named Bosa.

OK, but they seemed to leave the door open to offers, not something you would expect if they really liked him. Also, the strong statement that Purdy will be the starter tells us something about their thinking on Lance. It's clear that based on their observations over the last couple of years, they don't have a lot of faith in Trey. And that is based on many practices and scrimmages.
I'd like to see Trey in a few games before coming to a conclusion, but the coaches have seen a lot to base their judgment on.

Originally posted by eastie:

Originally posted by BOI49er:

Originally posted by English:

Originally posted by BOI49er:
A quarterback reaching his "ceiling" is a fantasy. It applies to physical skills, but in mental ability, it only exists to the extent that the player is currently improving.

For years, I listened on this board how Colin Kaepernick hadn't reached his ceiling yet, while I was arguing that if that was going to happen, we'd be seeing improvement now, and we weren't. Garoppolo got incrementally better, but within a very narrow range.

Game experience helps you improve, but so does everything else you do on a team, including practice, study, meetings, film study, and coaching exposure. Even if you are not playing, you still better be getting better, or you won't.

I don't know, but putting Trey on the block looks to me like disappointed coaches. Actions speaks louder than words, and that's action, and kind words now are suspect when they have an interest in keeping Trey's value up.

Brock learned like crazy, without playing. No reason to think that vector has stopped.

Who put Lance on the block, and when? Or are you just referring to the usual garbage internet rumours?

Yep. Just rumors. That smoke/fire thing is not 100 percent, but...

Brock looked pretty good. And we can't afford a lot of losses to get Trey Years of experience.

"Getting experience" doesn't equate with losing. There may be losses, but there will be winning too Brock had a ton of experience in college, which enabled him to pick up what was being taught in the pros. Trey, on the other hand, lacks that fundamental experience that helps one absorb the lessons that come from experience. If you haven't graduated from Algebra and you get dropped into a calculus class you will need extra work to get up to speed. Is Trey putting in the work? Is he absorbing the lessons? We're about to find out.

Trey lacks experience in general - he had less than 100 passes in highschool and 317 passes in college. We are talking about potentially the most inexperienced player ever drafted that high. Couple that with his 100 pass attempts in the nfl and Brock had more pass attempts than all of that in high school.

treys inexperience is real on a level we've never really seen. He needs playing time, and a lot of it, in my option. Before we can even start to figure out what he is and what he isn't. The question is how do you get him it with Brock playing at a high level

Originally posted by tankle104:
Trey lacks experience in general - he had less than 100 passes in highschool and 317 passes in college. We are talking about potentially the most inexperienced player ever drafted that high. Couple that with his 100 pass attempts in the nfl and Brock had more pass attempts than all of that in high school.

treys inexperience is real on a level we've never really seen. He needs playing time, and a lot of it, in my option. Before we can even start to figure out what he is and what he isn't. The question is how do you get him it with Brock playing at a high level

Cam Newton had 292 passing attempts in college, went #1 overall.

bringing up HS snaps is silly if you've watched HS football.

kid needs to play and imo he didn't look lost at all when he did play which given the lack of overall reps is impressive.

Originally posted by tankle104:

Originally posted by eastie:

Originally posted by BOI49er:

Originally posted by English:

Originally posted by BOI49er:
A quarterback reaching his "ceiling" is a fantasy. It applies to physical skills, but in mental ability, it only exists to the extent that the player is currently improving.

For years, I listened on this board how Colin Kaepernick hadn't reached his ceiling yet, while I was arguing that if that was going to happen, we'd be seeing improvement now, and we weren't. Garoppolo got incrementally better, but within a very narrow range.

Game experience helps you improve, but so does everything else you do on a team, including practice, study, meetings, film study, and coaching exposure. Even if you are not playing, you still better be getting better, or you won't.

I don't know, but putting Trey on the block looks to me like disappointed coaches. Actions speaks louder than words, and that's action, and kind words now are suspect when they have an interest in keeping Trey's value up.

Brock learned like crazy, without playing. No reason to think that vector has stopped.

Who put Lance on the block, and when? Or are you just referring to the usual garbage internet rumours?

Yep. Just rumors. That smoke/fire thing is not 100 percent, but...

Brock looked pretty good. And we can't afford a lot of losses to get Trey Years of experience.

"Getting experience" doesn't equate with losing. There may be losses, but there will be winning too Brock had a ton of experience in college, which enabled him to pick up what was being taught in the pros. Trey, on the other hand, lacks that fundamental experience that helps one absorb the lessons that come from experience. If you haven't graduated from Algebra and you get dropped into a calculus class you will need extra work to get up to speed. Is Trey putting in the work? Is he absorbing the lessons? We're about to find out.

Trey lacks experience in general - he had less than 100 passes in highschool and 317 passes in college. We are talking about potentially the most inexperienced player ever drafted that high. Couple that with his 100 pass attempts in the nfl and Brock had more pass attempts than all of that in high school.

treys inexperience is real on a level we've never really seen. He needs playing time, and a lot of it, in my option. Before we can even start to figure out what he is and what he isn't. The question is how do you get him it with Brock playing at a high level

I believe that playing time will show us what the team has, but the coaching staff already has a good feel for that. Also, it may turn out that in limited playing time this preseason, we will be surprised to see that Trey has progressed a bunch. We don't know if any of our speculations on here are accurate or not. but we will know much more pretty soon. It's gonna be an interesting preseason for Niner fans.

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by tankle104:
Trey lacks experience in general - he had less than 100 passes in highschool and 317 passes in college. We are talking about potentially the most inexperienced player ever drafted that high. Couple that with his 100 pass attempts in the nfl and Brock had more pass attempts than all of that in high school.

treys inexperience is real on a level we've never really seen. He needs playing time, and a lot of it, in my option. Before we can even start to figure out what he is and what he isn't. The question is how do you get him it with Brock playing at a high level

Cam Newton had 292 passing attempts in college, went #1 overall.

bringing up HS snaps is silly if you've watched HS football.

kid needs to play and imo he didn't look lost at all when he did play which given the lack of overall reps is impressive.

Incorrect - cam Newton left Florida to play at a JUCO where he had 204 pass attempts. So he had nearly 500 pass attempts in college. In highschool he threw for approx 2,600 yards as a senior. Trey had 1100 in his junior and senior year combined. I bring up hs stats because it shows experience. Especially if you played at a good program. It's relevant when you're as inexperienced as Trey is. It's astonishing how little experience he has playing qb. It's literally historical. cam had more experience before he entered the nfl than Lance does in his entire life, including his nfl reps as heads into his third year.

it's very fair to wonder how many reps he needs before he can get up to speed as someone Iike Purdy who had 900 pass attempts in highschool alone. Another 1,600 in college. those reps all matter. All ties into studying your own film and experience leading an offense and the ups/downs of playing qb in general.

cam Newton had a ton more reps in his life by the time he entered the NFL than Lance. Not even close. Also, cam was an exceptionally better athlete than Lance. That isn't a knock on Lance, cam was just special. He was the best player in the country in JUCO and best player in college football in general at Auburn

he also wasn't very good in the nfl, specially as a passer. If you break down his MVP season, 75% of his touchdowns came in 4 games (25%of the season) and was 1-1 TD-INT in 75% of the season. You can add in his rushing stuff but as a QB, he was never anything worth discussing. In 11 seasons, he had what 3 seasons where he was good? No thanks. Lol there is a reason why as he aged, he became useless as a QB. No one will even sign him rn. If Lance is anything like Cam, it'll be a major disappointment in my eyes. He isnt someone worth emulating.

i want Lance or Purdy to be a HOF caliber player. Not a glorified running back like Cam was. If anytbing, his inexperience as a Qb throwing the ball worries me even more. When the question "will Cam Newton make the HOF?" Is something laughed at and a "hell no". - I don't want Lance or Purdy to follow his in his footsteps. Lol