QB Sam Darnold is a Viking

I'm not looking forward to the Webzone crashing when Sam is named the Week 1 starter.

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:
I'm not looking forward to the Webzone crashing when Sam is named the Week 1 starter.

lol. I think the board has had some pretty funny moments around various developments with the QB position the last couple of seasons, but this would be something special.

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:
I'm not looking forward to the Webzone crashing when Sam is named the Week 1 starter.

And then tossing some INTs and making some horrible reads.

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:
I'm not looking forward to the Webzone crashing when Sam is named the Week 1 starter.

NY85 would be like....

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:
I'm not looking forward to the Webzone crashing when Sam is named the Week 1 starter.

Eh it'd be more fun if Trey wins the job and is the starter all year. The mental gymnastics on how the 9ers don't actually believe in the guy who they made the starter would be gold.

If Darnold wins the job I'll root for him and hope for best but prepare to see what we've seen for 50+ starts.

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:
Eh it'd be more fun if Trey wins the job and is the starter all year. The mental gymnastics on how the 9ers don't actually believe in the guy who they made the starter would be gold.

If Darnold wins the job I'll root for him and hope for best but prepare to see what we've seen for 50+ starts.

For most people, opinions aren't static and unchangeable with new information.

For Lance to become the starter all year that would mean he had a great camp and was playing great throughout the season. You think those developments wouldn't change the 49ers outlook for the player, or that fans wouldn't understand the change?

Pretty easy to understand that the team's plans for Lance could change based on his play and/or the play of the other QBs. This has already happened... just in the other direction.

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:
For most people, opinions aren't static and unchangeable with new information.

For Lance to become the starter all year that would mean he had a great camp and was playing great throughout the season. You think those developments wouldn't change the 49ers outlook for the player, or that fans wouldn't understand the change?

Pretty easy to understand that the team's plans for Lance could change based on his play and/or the play of the other QBs. This has already happened... just in the other direction.

The fans that have already written him off? No I don't think it would.

He's got the highest ceiling/potential in the QB room at the moment. I'm curious to see what he can do.

this is going to be the most intriguing pre-season that I can remember.

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:
The fans that have already written him off? No I don't think it would.

Well you see in the post I responded to you were talking about people arguing that the 49ers don't believe in him, not the fans themselves. The 49ers can believe in him, and fans that don't can acknowledge that while still not believing in Trey themselves. It's two different things.

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:
Well you see in the post I responded to you were talking about people arguing that the 49ers don't believe in him, not the fans themselves. The 49ers can believe in him, and fans that don't can acknowledge that while still not believing in Trey themselves. It's two different things.

But seeing as how none of us KNOW what the 9ers actually think of him currently him being named the starter would be a good hint those fans were wrong with said assessment that the team didn't. So the backtracking would be enjoyable.

No different than expecting Trey to be traded then rationalizing that he has no value when it doesn't happen.

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:
But seeing as how none of us KNOW what the 9ers actually think of him currently him being named the starter would be a good hint those fans were wrong with said assessment that the team didn't. So the backtracking would be enjoyable.

No different than expecting Trey to be traded then rationalizing that he has no value when it doesn't happen.

This is just flat out incorrect considering it would be based on his play in camp and preseason, and continuing through the season, rather than their feelings about him now. Those things have to happen first, and they haven't happened yet.

You can continue to opine that we don't know how they feel about him now, but as I've argued for quite a long time it's pretty clear through their actions.

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:
This is just flat out incorrect considering it would be based on his play in camp and preseason, and continuing through the season, rather than their feelings about him now. Those things have to happen first, and they haven't happened yet.

You can continue to opine that we don't know how they feel about him now, but as I've argued for quite a long time it's pretty clear through their actions.

It's not pretty clear through their actions at all. Kyle even pushed back on Rappapport.

All we know is Brock is the leader in the clubhouse. That doesn't mean they aren't committed to a possible future with Trey. It easily could mean they are hedging their bets for more data to know for sure on either guy.

Again it's convenient to say something is one way with no firsthand knowledge, just interpretation, then if the truth actually goes the other way its well they must've changed their mind.

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:
It's not pretty clear through their actions at all. Kyle even pushed back on Rappapport.

All we know is Brock is the leader in the clubhouse. That doesn't mean they aren't committed to a possible future with Trey. It easily could mean they are hedging their bets for more data to know for sure on either guy.

Again it's convenient to say something is one way with no firsthand knowledge, just interpretation, then if the truth actually goes the other way its well they must've changed their mind.

Let's just put this argument aside for a moment and use some basic reasoning:

Trey hasn't been named the starter now, and Brock has been deemed the 'leader in the clubhouse'. If Trey is named the starter going into the season and keeps the job, that would indicate a clear change in their thinking between now and then.

Opinions from fans concerning how the team views Lance now would expire in the future with new, previously unavailable, developments. You're acknowledging this by recognizing there would be new, or more, data. It's really simple.

Originally posted by krizay:

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:
I'm not looking forward to the Webzone crashing when Sam is named the Week 1 starter.

NY85 would be like....

Change of scenery for quarterbacks who start out bad is rare to see work out. Off hand, these are the most significant ones I can think of in the past 30 years:

Steve Young

Rich Gannon

Kerry Collins

Alex Smith

Geno Smith

Maybe you could say Jameis Winston.

But yeah, not many.

Since 2000, these are the guys who were first or second round picked guys who had a crappy or meh start and changed teams hoping for more success, and still were mediocre or bad:

Blaine Gabbert
Josh Rosen
Marcus Mariota
Brock Osweiler
Jason Campbell
Byron Leftwitch
David Carr
Mark Sanchez (let's be real, he was statistically horrendous his whole career and was carried by the running game and defense early on)
Rex Grossman (see above)