QB Brock Purdy Thread

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:
Yeah if someone is struggling over and over costing us wins and playing poorly, that may be an issue. Is this a surprise?

most teams that have a young QB that they feel is their guy often let him develop which often requires struggles/loses along the way….if Brock or whomever struggles and loses a couple games. They will be benched more than likely. Imo it's stupid BUT we had a whole gaggle of people in here that weren't gonna let Lance develop and play though s**t because we might lose some games…s**t ain't gonna change for Brock or Sam either. Both who have next to nothing invested in them currently either.

This entire post is just some scenario you made up and what KS may or may not do in that scenario, we aren't there yet

Originally posted by Hoovtrain:
He's not going to play musical chairs with the QB. Unless Purdy cannot perform due to injury or absolutely sucks for a large portion of the season, he's going to stay with him. Some minor regression(s) is not going to constitute him getting benched for Lance.. now if Lance blows the doors off this offseason and forces their hand then sure.

And what proof of that do you have? This is the most balanced/talented QB room we've had…without having an established stud vet since kyle has come here. It's not like we got Rogers and a bunch of fluff behind him. None of these guys are established to play through bad play and if Kyle was cool with it then lance would have played year 1.

Him winning a couple games his rookie yr doesn't allow him a full season of up and down play imo. Especially since they were so "convicted" in lance they moved heaven and earth for the dude. Toss in only 100 random passing attempts to his name. Now he's basically a backup.

I don't think any of these QBs have a long leash to play up and down football on this roster. That was more my point. Regardless of it being Brock/Lance or Sam.

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:
This entire post is just some scenario you made up and what KS may or may not do in that scenario, we aren't there yet

Lol you don't get to point fingers about making up s**t in here. That's your M.O.

It's my opinion on the situation. You don't like it or disagree. Whatever I could care less. I could tell you the sky was blue and you'd argue with me about that all the same.

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:
This entire post is just some scenario you made up and what KS may or may not do in that scenario, we aren't there yet

Lol you don't get to point fingers about making up s**t in here. That's your M.O.

It's my opinion on the situation. You don't like it or disagree. Whatever I could care less. I could tell you the sky was blue and you'd argue with me about that all the same.

I just don't know why you would look at the most talented O in maybe 25 years of 49er football, around the QB, with KS as playcaller, and you're in here talking about the QB struggling.. needing to be benched, etc.

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by Hoovtrain:
He's not going to play musical chairs with the QB. Unless Purdy cannot perform due to injury or absolutely sucks for a large portion of the season, he's going to stay with him. Some minor regression(s) is not going to constitute him getting benched for Lance.. now if Lance blows the doors off this offseason and forces their hand then sure.

And what proof of that do you have? This is the most balanced/talented QB room we've had…without having an established stud vet since kyle has come here. It's not like we got Rogers and a bunch of fluff behind him. None of these guys are established to play through bad play and if Kyle was cool with it then lance would have played year 1.

Him winning a couple games his rookie yr doesn't allow him a full season of up and down play imo. Especially since they were so "convicted" in lance they moved heaven and earth for the dude. Toss in only 100 random passing attempts to his name. Now he's basically a backup.

I don't think any of these QBs have a long leash to play up and down football on this roster. That was more my point. Regardless of it being Brock/Lance or Sam.

I don't have proof, I'm going by past trends. Like I said he needs to bomb out to he benched imo. On the flip side What proof do you have they are going to bench Purdy at the first sign of any sort of regression or less than stellar play? Seems more like wishful thinking to me . Just my .02

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:
I just don't know why you would look at the most talented O in maybe 25 years of 49er football, around the QB, with KS as playcaller, and you're in here talking about the QB struggling.. needing to be benched, etc.

This isn't about why/how they would play bad. This is about if any of our QBs struggle and how long of a leash they have.

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by tankle104:
Which is fair, I understand what you're saying. I wouldn't say I'm giving up on him, I just think we have someone with better potential, but I still think Lance will be a good qb in this league - regardless of where he goes.

I'm excited to watch Lance this camp. I'm hoping we see a much improved version.

I don't think Brock has better potential. He currently has a better floor and is farther along understanding how to play the position. As far as potential and ceiling, lance is by far the better prospect there (hence where they were drafted) Which doesn't mean anything if he never gets to develop and grow.

I think Lance was vastly over drafted because people fall too in love with physical tools. We have absolutely no idea what treys potential is, at all. He's been in very few positions to show his potential in his life. We have no idea how he handles 2 min drills, how he handles game winning drives, how he handles back to back losses, how he handles the team relying on him and his arm etc.

to say Trey has a bunch of potential makes no sense unless you're saying he has the physical tools to make some really sexy plays. Unfortunately, there is a lot more to playing qb than that.

of course he has potential, but how much? No one knows. Taking him was purely hopefully projections with absolutely zero data to support it. That's not an opinion, it's a fact. He's thrown the ball 500 times in his life. You can't measure someone's potential off of that. Especially when you factor in that every QB there has done very well and won championships in the last 15 or so years. Most top 3 round picks are busts. Where you're drafted doesn't mean much besides pay and opportunity.

brock has shown how he plays in numerous situations, and almost always plays very well. He's lead programs to new heights. Etc. That's like saying Brady had low potential because of where he was drafted. Wilson had low potential because of where he was drafted. Bree's had mediocre potential because of where he was drafted. So on and so forth. Where you're selected doesn't determine your potential, it's a guess at your potential.

Originally posted by NYniner85:
This isn't about why/how they would play bad. This is about if any of our QBs struggle and how long of a leash they have.

The difference between people thinking Lance could have been benched for poor play last year and your theory about Brock having a short leash this year is who the backup quarterbacks are.

Jimmy G was Lance's backup last year, and it was already established that we could contend for a Super Bowl with him at QB. Darnold or Lance are going to have to show something in camp… demonstrate that the team would do well with them at QB and be capable of reaching their goals if Brock were to struggle. We're not going to move to a backup unless the staff thinks that backup gives us a better chance to win than our struggling starter.

When Lance went down last season, the 49ers Super Bowl odds improved. That might be uncomfortable to acknowledge but it should tell you something.

Originally posted by Hoovtrain:
I don't have proof, I'm going by past trends. Like I said he needs to bomb out to he benched imo. On the flip side What proof do you have they are going to bench Purdy at the first sign of any sort of regression or less than stellar play? Seems more like wishful thinking to me . Just my .02

I said any of those QBs not just Brock. I mean what happens if say Lance starts week 1 plays well for a couple games then plays "bad" for a game or two? Does he get benched? Do they go back to Brock?

I don't wish for any QBs to play bad…this is the problem with talking to a lot of you about this stuff. You think everything is personal or I have vendetta. I can think one QB might have a higher upside/ceiling long-term and not be an objective about the position overall. IMO I don't think any of these guys have a long leash to play through growing pains. None of them are established to be that and you'd think they would have allowed that to happen with Lance but never did.

If Brock Purdy is healthy he's the starter whenever that is. He throws touchdowns and wins games.

I really think that Jed, the FO, and the coaches are all thinking unanimously that this year is a SB window. That's why we retained most of our starting core, drafted the best free agent, hired the best available defensive coach and picked up a quality 3rd string QB who is allowed to compete for a more significant role. As far as the QB1 is concerned, I think that they will hand it to Purdy if he's ready and 100 percent healthy. I know that there's fierce argument in this forum regarding Lance and Purdy's, about who's ahead and whatnot. My point is in my opinion, Purdy is obviously much ahead and is the better QB right now based on the last 8(just correct me if I'm wrong) games he played. And those 8 games were not a fluke. He showed us he's the real deal right now. I've been saying "right now" because I agree that anything can happen anytime in the future. But right now, he's the one until he's not. And in my opinion, if you're the coach, you will give continuity to your current best QB if he's healthy and ready. I have nothing against Lance. I actually agree about drafting Lance as a future replacement for Jimmy G. But right now, again I said right now, in my opinion, he still needs a lot of time to develop which makes sense because of very little playing time as QB in high school and in college. He might be one of the QB's who is physically superior but mentally, I think, still needs to develop and in my opinion that's even harder and takes longer. In my opinion, he's still raw and needs time, time we can't afford right now because we are in the SB window.

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by Hoovtrain:
I don't have proof, I'm going by past trends. Like I said he needs to bomb out to he benched imo. On the flip side What proof do you have they are going to bench Purdy at the first sign of any sort of regression or less than stellar play? Seems more like wishful thinking to me . Just my .02

I said any of those QBs not just Brock. I mean what happens if say Lance starts week 1 plays well for a couple games then plays "bad" for a game or two? Does he get benched? Do they go back to Brock?

I don't wish for any QBs to play bad…this is the problem with talking to a lot of you about this stuff. You think everything is personal or I have vendetta. I can think one QB might have a higher upside/ceiling long-term and not be an objective about the position overall. IMO I don't think any of these guys have a long leash to play through growing pains. None of them are established to be that and you'd think they would have allowed that to happen with Lance but never did.

Depends on how bad he plays and where Brock is. They've said he's the starter period. So my guess is the leash is a hell of a lot shorter for Lance than Brock, that's just the reality of the situation whether you like it or not.
What did I say that makes you feel this is such a problem to discuss? They were pretty mellow, unbiased points and questions. No one said tin have a vendetta, but it's clear as day what your angle is when it comes to Lance vs Purdy.

LFG!

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:
The difference between people thinking Lance could have been benched for poor play last year and your theory about Brock having a short leash this year is who the backup quarterbacks are.

Jimmy G was Lance's backup last year, and it was already established that we could contend for a Super Bowl with him at QB. Darnold or Lance are going to have to show something in camp… demonstrate that the team would do well with them at QB and be capable of reaching their goals if Brock were to struggle. We're not going to move to a backup unless the staff thinks that backup gives us a better chance to win than our struggling starter.

When Lance went down last season, the 49ers Super Bowl odds improved. That might be uncomfortable to acknowledge but it should tell you something.

Again this is not what I'm debating…why you're trying to make it personal is beyond me.

IMO with the way our QB room is setup and with none of them being established as some stud vet. IN MY OPINION I do not think any of them have a long leash. Same goes for Lance and Sam.

you sound like the person that's uncomfortable acknowledging what could very well be a realistic setup.

Originally posted by ninerfan4life:
LFG!

The recent vibe coming out of #49ers headquarters suggests a belief Brock Purdy is the favorite to be the team's starting QB when the season opens Sept. 10 at the Steelers.

To read:https://t.co/IaK9QRYKnf

— Matt Maiocco (@MaioccoNBCS) June 5, 2023

Brock Purdy began throwing a regulation NFL football on May 29. If the anticipated 12-week ramp-up program holds true, he would receive full clearance on (or around) on Aug. 21 -- or 20 days before the regular-season opener.

— Matt Maiocco (@MaioccoNBCS) June 5, 2023

Great news. Hopefully he stays on track and we can start the season at full strength.