There are 452 users in the forums

QB Brock Purdy Thread

Shop Find 49ers gear online

QB Brock Purdy Thread

Originally posted by TheWooLick:
I do not. I always have judged players based on a wide range of statistics.

Why do you have a problem with the statement that Purdy had better playoff stats than Cousins?

If you have no opinion on that, why bother to reply?

I honestly can't remember a single post you have ever made here, why would I? I read your posts and reply to them based on their content.

You are really hung up on commenting on posters rather than players, rhe 49ers or posts.

You're breaking the forum rules about posting about posters instead of posts.

Your statement about Purdy being better because of playoff stats is fine. It just doesn't jive with past positions you've taken with other players. What Random and ATT were getting at.
Originally posted by tankle104:
Originally posted by WildBill:
We don't know how Brock is going to play after the injury. Plus will he suffer the sophomore jinx after teams have a enough film to dissect his play. Only time will tell.

With that said, all this talk about Aaron or Kirk is just chatter for the media. They need to resign Bosa for one and just signed Hargrave. The other is that they are old.

No to either as far as I am concerned.

If we signed either cousins or Rodgers, it would go against everything the front office/Jed/Kyle have said - which is they want to take advantage of the cheap qb contracts.

if Purdy comes back and plays well, he will be the best contract in the league, literally. Very similar to when Russ Wilson was a rookie and won the SB. It enabled SOO much. Especially when you forecast three more seasons of $1M salary.

Exactly-they got a plan its how you can pay people. they just signed Hargrave (which did surprise me), but a QB is whole different tamale and double the trouble.
Originally posted by WildBill:
Originally posted by tankle104:
Originally posted by WildBill:
We don't know how Brock is going to play after the injury. Plus will he suffer the sophomore jinx after teams have a enough film to dissect his play. Only time will tell.

With that said, all this talk about Aaron or Kirk is just chatter for the media. They need to resign Bosa for one and just signed Hargrave. The other is that they are old.

No to either as far as I am concerned.

If we signed either cousins or Rodgers, it would go against everything the front office/Jed/Kyle have said - which is they want to take advantage of the cheap qb contracts.

if Purdy comes back and plays well, he will be the best contract in the league, literally. Very similar to when Russ Wilson was a rookie and won the SB. It enabled SOO much. Especially when you forecast three more seasons of $1M salary.

Exactly-they got a plan its how you can pay people. they just signed Hargrave (which did surprise me), but a QB is whole different tamale and double the trouble.

Lol I meant "rookie contract and win the super bowl". Not that he won the super bowl as a rookie.

hahaha tamale. That's funny. He's a HUGE signing. The biggest signing (impact wise hopefully) we've made in as long as I can remember. Maybe since Justin smith? Him alongside bosa is going to be like madden on rookie mode 😍😍
Originally posted by 9ers4eva:
Originally posted by TheWooLick:
I do not. I always have judged players based on a wide range of statistics.

Why do you have a problem with the statement that Purdy had better playoff stats than Cousins?

If you have no opinion on that, why bother to reply?

I honestly can't remember a single post you have ever made here, why would I? I read your posts and reply to them based on their content.

You are really hung up on commenting on posters rather than players, rhe 49ers or posts.

You're breaking the forum rules about posting about posters instead of posts.

Your statement about Purdy being better because of playoff stats is fine. It just doesn't jive with past positions you've taken with other players. What Random and ATT were getting at.

My statement was that Purdy's playoff stats are better than Kirk's playoff stats.

It is a straightforward statement. It is weird to try to make it about some past comments about other QBs instead of talking about the statement itself.
Talking about posters while ignoring the topic at hand or the content of the post is against the rules and weird.
[ Edited by TheWooLick on Apr 6, 2023 at 7:55 AM ]
Originally posted by TheWooLick:
Originally posted by 9ers4eva:
Originally posted by TheWooLick:
I do not. I always have judged players based on a wide range of statistics.

Why do you have a problem with the statement that Purdy had better playoff stats than Cousins?

If you have no opinion on that, why bother to reply?

I honestly can't remember a single post you have ever made here, why would I? I read your posts and reply to them based on their content.

You are really hung up on commenting on posters rather than players, rhe 49ers or posts.

You're breaking the forum rules about posting about posters instead of posts.

Your statement about Purdy being better because of playoff stats is fine. It just doesn't jive with past positions you've taken with other players. What Random and ATT were getting at.

My statement was that Purdy's playoff stats are better than Kirk's playoff stats.

It is a straightforward statement. It is weird to try to make it about some past comments about other QBs instead of talking about the statement itself.
Talking about posters while ignoring the topic at hand or the content of the post is against the rules and weird.
Which stat is Purdy better than Kirk in ?
Originally posted by 49ersRing:
Originally posted by genus49:
Originally posted by 49ersRing:
Originally posted by genus49:
Originally posted by 49ersRing:
Originally posted by TheWooLick:
Originally posted by 49ersRing:
Originally posted by TheWooLick:
Originally posted by 49ersRing:
Originally posted by TheWooLick:
Originally posted by riverrunzthruit:
BCB is gonna be back... if we get Cousins then there is no rush to bring him back too quickly and let his elbow heal properly

Cousins is old mediocre and expensive.

Brock >>> Cousins

Cousins has played in 16 or more games in 8 straight seasons. Brock already has had more significant injuries than Cousins has had during that time. If we can trade for Cousins, we should do it. He may be only slightly better than Jimmy, but at least he's reliable which is more than any other QB in the KS era can say.

He folds like cheap suit in big games.
Paying top dollar for a QB should get you top qb play, not average play.

No different than the other QBs we've had under Kyle. At least he stays healthy.

Brock never folded.

He kind of did against the Eagles. Part of winning big games is staying in them. We can say its a fluke injury, but its the kind of fluke that Cousins has avoided for 8 straight years whereas Brock was injured twice in 8 games.

This is such a dumb comment.

QBs can get injured at any point. That injury was super friggin flukey and Cousins sucking in big moments is way worse than Brock getting injured. Brock played in more games this season than Kirk did his first 2 years in the league anyways.

Not to mention Brock literally didn't fold. Hell if he folded on that play he wouldn't have gotten injured. Dude stood in there and took a hit.

QBs can get injured at any point, but some QBs clearly get injured more often than others. Brock also turned the ball over on that play, which was not exactly a great sign even before it turned out he was injured.

This is the same stupid logic that had people calling Bosa injury prone after his ACL tear. I don't care who you are but if you get hit at a certain point in the right spot or get enough weight on you in a certain spot you're getting injured.

Brock took a shot to the perfect spot at his most vulnerable point during the delivery. I highly doubt any QB is able to hold onto the ball there.

You equating an injury to folding is beyond crazy. If anything he didn't get the ball out with anticipation or spotted Reddick in time to try to protect himself and live to play another down.

That's more of a rookie mistake and not even anything crazy than anywhere near "folding". Like I said before folding actually would've been better on that play.

Cousins hasn't shown anything he can do better than what Brock did as a rookie and that's kind of crazy to think about given how many more games Kirk has played. Yes he's stayed healthy so perhaps there's a feather in his cap there but the way our season went last year…Cousins probably walks away on a stretcher as well. Then again maybe because he actually folds hed manage to stay healthy.

But no matter how you slice it…Brock > Cousins.

Brock already had two more injuries in 8 games than Cousins had in the last 8 years. You'd think that 49er fans, more than anyone else, would appreciate the value of durability. Sure, Purdy's injury in the NFCCG was fluky. All of Jimmy's injuries were pretty fluky on their own too, but they still kept happening. Some guys are clearly either more durable or do a better job of avoiding injury than others. The book is still open on Purdy's durability, but Cousins has proven to be durable over many years. QBs can do a lot to reduce their chance of injury including getting rid of the ball quickly, sliding, etc. Neither Trey or Purdy have demonstrated that they're particularly good at self-preservation.

Whether Purdy is better than Cousins is irrelevant (but its debatable since Purdy has such has a small sample size and played on a team with more talent than Cousins has ever played with.) I feel pretty confident that Cousins would have given us a better chance of winning the NFCCG than a mix of Purdy and Josh Johnson. I just want a QB that stays on the field.

First of all Brock played on a short week through the ribs injury. You mentioning that is pointless as Cousins and most other QBs have been dinged up through the season but played through things.

The UCL injury is so friggin bad luck related it can happen at any point. We've seen Kirk Cousins go to the Vikings team that had them go to the NFCCG with Case Keenum. He was supposed to be the guy to put them over the top.

They have just 2 playoff trips since then and never got past the 2nd round. Total choke job last year to a mediocre Giants team at home.

It's laughable to think Cousins makes the 49ers better than Brock did last year...better than Josh Johnson? That's not a shocker.
Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:
Which stat is Purdy better than Kirk in ?

If I remember correctly, Cousins has only won one playoff game. Unless we're not considering W/L as stats. Also, I think Cousins has thrown at least one interception in playoff games. I don't think Purdy has yet. I'm sure there are stats that Cousins has that are better than Purdy.
Originally posted by genus49:
First of all Brock played on a short week through the ribs injury. You mentioning that is pointless as Cousins and most other QBs have been dinged up through the season but played through things.

The UCL injury is so friggin bad luck related it can happen at any point. We've seen Kirk Cousins go to the Vikings team that had them go to the NFCCG with Case Keenum. He was supposed to be the guy to put them over the top.

They have just 2 playoff trips since then and never got past the 2nd round. Total choke job last year to a mediocre Giants team at home.

It's laughable to think Cousins makes the 49ers better than Brock did last year...better than Josh Johnson? That's not a shocker.

Kirk cousins is one of the better game managers in the league with deceiving stats. I'd be pretty bummed if we went and got him.

id rather start Lance. Lol and we all know how I feel about him. At least there is hope and optimism with him. You know exactly what you're getting with Kirk - a guy who will let you down when you most need it.
Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:
Originally posted by TheWooLick:
Originally posted by 9ers4eva:
Originally posted by TheWooLick:
I do not. I always have judged players based on a wide range of statistics.

Why do you have a problem with the statement that Purdy had better playoff stats than Cousins?

If you have no opinion on that, why bother to reply?

I honestly can't remember a single post you have ever made here, why would I? I read your posts and reply to them based on their content.

You are really hung up on commenting on posters rather than players, rhe 49ers or posts.

You're breaking the forum rules about posting about posters instead of posts.

Your statement about Purdy being better because of playoff stats is fine. It just doesn't jive with past positions you've taken with other players. What Random and ATT were getting at.

My statement was that Purdy's playoff stats are better than Kirk's playoff stats.

It is a straightforward statement. It is weird to try to make it about some past comments about other QBs instead of talking about the statement itself.
Talking about posters while ignoring the topic at hand or the content of the post is against the rules and weird.
Which stat is Purdy better than Kirk in ?

LOL...Why not present a counter argument?

TD/INT
TD%
Y/A
AY/A
Y/C
Passer rating
QBRec
Originally posted by TheWooLick:
My statement was that Purdy's playoff stats are better than Kirk's playoff stats.

It is a straightforward statement. It is weird to try to make it about some past comments about other QBs instead of talking about the statement itself.
Talking about posters while ignoring the topic at hand or the content of the post is against the rules and weird.

Its more weird to moderate threads like a hall monitor.
Originally posted by TheWooLick:
Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:
Originally posted by TheWooLick:
Originally posted by 9ers4eva:
Originally posted by TheWooLick:
I do not. I always have judged players based on a wide range of statistics.

Why do you have a problem with the statement that Purdy had better playoff stats than Cousins?

If you have no opinion on that, why bother to reply?

I honestly can't remember a single post you have ever made here, why would I? I read your posts and reply to them based on their content.

You are really hung up on commenting on posters rather than players, rhe 49ers or posts.

You're breaking the forum rules about posting about posters instead of posts.

Your statement about Purdy being better because of playoff stats is fine. It just doesn't jive with past positions you've taken with other players. What Random and ATT were getting at.

My statement was that Purdy's playoff stats are better than Kirk's playoff stats.

It is a straightforward statement. It is weird to try to make it about some past comments about other QBs instead of talking about the statement itself.
Talking about posters while ignoring the topic at hand or the content of the post is against the rules and weird.
Which stat is Purdy better than Kirk in ?

LOL...Why not present a counter argument?

TD/INT
TD%
Y/A
AY/A
Y/C
Passer rating
QBRec
I'm still waiting, listing categories doesn't help

funny how you care about those now, but i digress
[ Edited by 49AllTheTime on Apr 6, 2023 at 10:52 AM ]
Originally posted by 9ers4eva:
Originally posted by TheWooLick:
My statement was that Purdy's playoff stats are better than Kirk's playoff stats.

It is a straightforward statement. It is weird to try to make it about some past comments about other QBs instead of talking about the statement itself.
Talking about posters while ignoring the topic at hand or the content of the post is against the rules and weird.

Its more weird to moderate threads like a hall monitor.

I am not doing that, I replying to replies to my post that are off topic and meaningless.
Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:
Originally posted by TheWooLick:
Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:
Originally posted by TheWooLick:
Originally posted by 9ers4eva:
Originally posted by TheWooLick:
I do not. I always have judged players based on a wide range of statistics.

Why do you have a problem with the statement that Purdy had better playoff stats than Cousins?

If you have no opinion on that, why bother to reply?

I honestly can't remember a single post you have ever made here, why would I? I read your posts and reply to them based on their content.

You are really hung up on commenting on posters rather than players, rhe 49ers or posts.

You're breaking the forum rules about posting about posters instead of posts.

Your statement about Purdy being better because of playoff stats is fine. It just doesn't jive with past positions you've taken with other players. What Random and ATT were getting at.

My statement was that Purdy's playoff stats are better than Kirk's playoff stats.

It is a straightforward statement. It is weird to try to make it about some past comments about other QBs instead of talking about the statement itself.
Talking about posters while ignoring the topic at hand or the content of the post is against the rules and weird.
Which stat is Purdy better than Kirk in ?

LOL...Why not present a counter argument?

TD/INT
TD%
Y/A
AY/A
Y/C
Passer rating
QBRec
I'm still waiting, listing categories doesn't help

funny how you care about those now, but i digress

LOL, that us dumb. You asked for a list of playoff stats where Purdy was superior and I answered with a list.

Those are all postseason statistical categories where Purdy is superior.

I have always cared about these things. I have cited all of these stats before.
[ Edited by TheWooLick on Apr 6, 2023 at 11:20 AM ]
Originally posted by TheWooLick:
Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:
Originally posted by TheWooLick:
Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:
Originally posted by TheWooLick:
Originally posted by 9ers4eva:
Originally posted by TheWooLick:
I do not. I always have judged players based on a wide range of statistics.

Why do you have a problem with the statement that Purdy had better playoff stats than Cousins?

If you have no opinion on that, why bother to reply?

I honestly can't remember a single post you have ever made here, why would I? I read your posts and reply to them based on their content.

You are really hung up on commenting on posters rather than players, rhe 49ers or posts.

You're breaking the forum rules about posting about posters instead of posts.

Your statement about Purdy being better because of playoff stats is fine. It just doesn't jive with past positions you've taken with other players. What Random and ATT were getting at.

My statement was that Purdy's playoff stats are better than Kirk's playoff stats.

It is a straightforward statement. It is weird to try to make it about some past comments about other QBs instead of talking about the statement itself.
Talking about posters while ignoring the topic at hand or the content of the post is against the rules and weird.
Which stat is Purdy better than Kirk in ?

LOL...Why not present a counter argument?

TD/INT
TD%
Y/A
AY/A
Y/C
Passer rating
QBRec
I'm still waiting, listing categories doesn't help

funny how you care about those now, but i digress

LOL, that us dumb. You asked for a list of playoff stats where Purdy was superior and I answered with a list.

Those are all postseason statistical categories where Purdy is superior.

I have always cared about these things. I have cited all of these stats before.
I'm still waiting, listing categories doesn't help. show the numbers.. and who cares about attempts lol
Originally posted by genus49:
Originally posted by 49ersRing:
Originally posted by genus49:
Originally posted by 49ersRing:
Originally posted by genus49:
Originally posted by 49ersRing:
Originally posted by TheWooLick:
Originally posted by 49ersRing:
Originally posted by TheWooLick:
Originally posted by 49ersRing:
Originally posted by TheWooLick:
Originally posted by riverrunzthruit:
BCB is gonna be back... if we get Cousins then there is no rush to bring him back too quickly and let his elbow heal properly

Cousins is old mediocre and expensive.

Brock >>> Cousins

Cousins has played in 16 or more games in 8 straight seasons. Brock already has had more significant injuries than Cousins has had during that time. If we can trade for Cousins, we should do it. He may be only slightly better than Jimmy, but at least he's reliable which is more than any other QB in the KS era can say.

He folds like cheap suit in big games.
Paying top dollar for a QB should get you top qb play, not average play.

No different than the other QBs we've had under Kyle. At least he stays healthy.

Brock never folded.

He kind of did against the Eagles. Part of winning big games is staying in them. We can say its a fluke injury, but its the kind of fluke that Cousins has avoided for 8 straight years whereas Brock was injured twice in 8 games.

This is such a dumb comment.

QBs can get injured at any point. That injury was super friggin flukey and Cousins sucking in big moments is way worse than Brock getting injured. Brock played in more games this season than Kirk did his first 2 years in the league anyways.

Not to mention Brock literally didn't fold. Hell if he folded on that play he wouldn't have gotten injured. Dude stood in there and took a hit.

QBs can get injured at any point, but some QBs clearly get injured more often than others. Brock also turned the ball over on that play, which was not exactly a great sign even before it turned out he was injured.

This is the same stupid logic that had people calling Bosa injury prone after his ACL tear. I don't care who you are but if you get hit at a certain point in the right spot or get enough weight on you in a certain spot you're getting injured.

Brock took a shot to the perfect spot at his most vulnerable point during the delivery. I highly doubt any QB is able to hold onto the ball there.

You equating an injury to folding is beyond crazy. If anything he didn't get the ball out with anticipation or spotted Reddick in time to try to protect himself and live to play another down.

That's more of a rookie mistake and not even anything crazy than anywhere near "folding". Like I said before folding actually would've been better on that play.

Cousins hasn't shown anything he can do better than what Brock did as a rookie and that's kind of crazy to think about given how many more games Kirk has played. Yes he's stayed healthy so perhaps there's a feather in his cap there but the way our season went last year…Cousins probably walks away on a stretcher as well. Then again maybe because he actually folds hed manage to stay healthy.

But no matter how you slice it…Brock > Cousins.

Brock already had two more injuries in 8 games than Cousins had in the last 8 years. You'd think that 49er fans, more than anyone else, would appreciate the value of durability. Sure, Purdy's injury in the NFCCG was fluky. All of Jimmy's injuries were pretty fluky on their own too, but they still kept happening. Some guys are clearly either more durable or do a better job of avoiding injury than others. The book is still open on Purdy's durability, but Cousins has proven to be durable over many years. QBs can do a lot to reduce their chance of injury including getting rid of the ball quickly, sliding, etc. Neither Trey or Purdy have demonstrated that they're particularly good at self-preservation.

Whether Purdy is better than Cousins is irrelevant (but its debatable since Purdy has such has a small sample size and played on a team with more talent than Cousins has ever played with.) I feel pretty confident that Cousins would have given us a better chance of winning the NFCCG than a mix of Purdy and Josh Johnson. I just want a QB that stays on the field.

First of all Brock played on a short week through the ribs injury. You mentioning that is pointless as Cousins and most other QBs have been dinged up through the season but played through things.

The UCL injury is so friggin bad luck related it can happen at any point. We've seen Kirk Cousins go to the Vikings team that had them go to the NFCCG with Case Keenum. He was supposed to be the guy to put them over the top.

They have just 2 playoff trips since then and never got past the 2nd round. Total choke job last year to a mediocre Giants team at home.

It's laughable to think Cousins makes the 49ers better than Brock did last year...better than Josh Johnson? That's not a shocker.

Every injury is bad luck, but some guys seem to get more unlucky than others. It remains to be seen whether Brock is one of those unlucky ones (like Jimmy and possibly Trey), but so far the signs are not good. The rib injury was more than just a minor nick as Brock couldn't practice leading up to the game and was in a lot of pain during it and if we had someone other than Josh Johnson as the backup, he probably would have sat.

Cousins for a full game certainly would have given us a better chance in the NFCCG than what we got out of Purdy and Josh Johnson. It doesn't matter if Purdy is overall the better player (debatable due to him having a much smaller sample size) if he isn't on the field.

The FO needs to value durability more. It burns us every year and every year they just hope for it to become magically better without changing anything.
Open Menu Search Share 49ersWebzone