QB Brock Purdy Thread

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by Hoovtrain:
Well clearly they think the picks are irrelevant. We've seen that with them and RBs, CBs, etc. they go with the guys that produce regardless of draft status or picks given up. My guess is if Trey can outperform Purdy then he will be the guy. But as it stands now his competition is darnold . That could all change of course

Another scenario. Jags.

drafted Lawrence he gets his 100 first passing attempts, which were complete dogs**t…then gets hurt. They dick around with Beathard as the starter. He gets hurt. In steps E. J. Perry and he played well for a couple games.

you trying to tell me that they're gonna let Perry develop and play bad football while Trevor Lawrence sits on the bench?

How often to they let those late day 3 guys suck and let them play through it…instead of going back with the highly invested player? Of course it's different for every position.

but yeah that's my opinion. I don't think any of them get to play bad football for a stretch. Not with the way this QB room is set up.

I don't find those situations remotely comparable unless we are trying to say Purdy is on par with Perry.
The reality of the situation is that they view Brock as the #1 guy and Lance is competing with Darnold for the backup role. This has been reiterated by the coaches, the FO, the players and the beat writers. Sucks for Lance and his development, but as I said if he can outperform Purdy then he can control hos own destiny. Right now though that doesn't appear to be in the cards.

Originally posted by tankle104:
Comparing lances situation with anyone else's is ridiculous,'specifically Lawrence's.. and you know it.

Why? how's it any different? Go watch Lawrence's first 100 passing attempts. It was horrible and a lot of it was on him. He simply couldn't process quickly enough and missed easy reads. Guys were open. Balls were inaccurate, mechanics weren't good, he was late on passes etc etc.

I don't see it differently at all. Both top 3 picks. Both get hurt after 100 passing attempts in this scenario. Then an unknown QB who's basically a UDFA plays well…only difference is in one scenario that guy gets to play through bad football and in the other it's unfathomable to let Trevor Lawrence sit the bench to let E. J. Perry plays through bad football.

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by tankle104:
Comparing lances situation with anyone else's is ridiculous,'specifically Lawrence's.. and you know it.

Why? how's it any different? Go watch Lawrence's first 100 passing attempts. It was horrible and a lot of it was on him. He simply couldn't process quickly enough and missed easy reads. Guys were open. Balls were inaccurate, mechanics weren't good, he was late on passes etc etc.

I don't see it differently at all. Both top 3 picks. Both get hurt after 100 passing attempts in this scenario. Then an unknown QB who's basically a UDFA plays well…only difference is in one scenario that guy gets to play through bad football and in the other it's unfathomable to let Trevor Lawrence sit the bench to let E. J. Perry plays through bad football.

He gave ya like 50 reasons in the rest of his post to answer your initial questions

Originally posted by Hoovtrain:
I don't find those situations remotely comparable unless we are trying to say Purdy is on par with Perry.
The reality of the situation is that they view Brock as the #1 guy and Lance is competing with Darnold for the backup role. This has been reiterated by the coaches, the FO, the players and the beat writers. Sucks for Lance and his development, but as I said if he can outperform Purdy then he can control hos own destiny. Right now though that doesn't appear to be in the cards.

We have no idea what Perry is…don't tell me you thought Brock Purdy was some elite talent coming into the draft. UDFA vs last pick in the draft.

it's the same situation in that scenario…but we're gonna let our Lawrence sit the bench while our E. J Perry plays bad football because he played well last yr? I'm also not saying Brock is gonna play bad football, it's just a situation or a possibility. Less TDs more INTs can equal more loses. How long does he get to play though it vs a top 3 pick? I don't think it's the same. I also think at this point with the way our QB room is set up, none of them get to make a bunch of mistakes.

Also before I get labeled as comparing Brock and Perry (which i know one poster will try to do). It's a hypothetical scenario. So that person can just shut it lol.

Originally posted by NYniner85:
Why? how's it any different? Go watch Lawrence's first 100 passing attempts. It was horrible and a lot of it was on him. He simply couldn't process quickly enough and missed easy reads. Guys were open. Balls were inaccurate, mechanics weren't good, he was late on passes etc etc.

I don't see it differently at all. Both top 3 picks. Both get hurt after 100 passing attempts in this scenario. Then an unknown QB who's basically a UDFA plays well…only difference is in one scenario that guy gets to play through bad football and in the other it's unfathomable to let Trevor Lawrence sit the bench to let E. J. Perry plays through bad football.

It's not remotely comparable because of the team situation around these players during their first 100 attempts, as has been pointed out to you ad nauseum. The Jags were rebuilding. The 49ers were Super Bowl contenders. The Jags haven't had any QB with a reasonable argument to play over Lawrence and the 49ers have had at least one in each of Lance's seasons.

Going into year three Lance is behind a guy who came in as a rookie and played well above average for a half season worth of games, while leading a top offense in the league and not losing a game. Got two playoff wins and went to the NFC championship game. You describe this as 'playing well for a couple of games'.

Not only does Purdy have a clear cut case over Trey to be the starter in the short term, but his play has been more promising in terms of future outlook. The team thrived with him at QB.

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by Hoovtrain:
I don't find those situations remotely comparable unless we are trying to say Purdy is on par with Perry.
The reality of the situation is that they view Brock as the #1 guy and Lance is competing with Darnold for the backup role. This has been reiterated by the coaches, the FO, the players and the beat writers. Sucks for Lance and his development, but as I said if he can outperform Purdy then he can control hos own destiny. Right now though that doesn't appear to be in the cards.

We have no idea what Perry is…don't tell me you thought Brock Purdy was some elite talent coming into the draft. UDFA vs last pick in the draft.

it's the same situation in that scenario…but we're gonna let our Lawrence sit the bench while our E. J Perry plays bad football because he played well last yr? I'm also not saying Brock is gonna play bad football, it's just a situation or a possibility. Less TDs more INTs can equal more loses. How long does he get to play though it vs a top 3 pick? I don't think it's the same. I also think at this point with the way our QB room is set up, none of them get to make a bunch of mistakes.

Also before I get labeled as comparing Brock and Perry (which i know one poster will try to do). It's a hypothetical scenario. So that person can just shut it lol.

Where did I say anything about my thoughts on him pre draft? Also not sure why his draft status keeps getting brought up. Who cares where he was drafted? I care about how he performs in real time . And so far he has performed very well and outperformed Lance
but you have said you expect him to play bad football. Isn't that why you keep bringing up the short leash and expected regression? It just seems like a lot of wasted effort . They all clearly view him as the #1 guy…by a large margin . But I also acknowledge that could change and really Hoping Lance balls out

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:
It's not remotely comparable because of the team situation around these players during their first 100 attempts, as has been pointed out to you ad nauseum. The Jags were rebuilding. The 49ers were Super Bowl contenders. The Jags haven't had any QB with a reasonable argument to play over Lawrence and the 49ers have had at least one in each of Lance's seasons.

Going into year three Lance is behind a guy who came in as a rookie and played well above average for a half season worth of games, while leading a top offense in the league and not losing a game. Got two playoff wins and went to the NFC championship game. You describe this as 'playing well for a couple of games'.

Not only does Purdy have a clear cut case over Trey to be the starter in the short term, but his play has been more promising in terms of future outlook. The team thrived with him at QB.

Again you clearly didn't watch Lawrence first 100 passing attempts. A LOT of that s**t was on him. It has nothing to do with the coach or the roster. It was flat out missing throws. He said it himself he couldn't process fast enough (because you didn't really have to in that Clemson offense). And none of it matters if Perry came in to the SAME offense and played amazing! That's the whole damn point.

Not shocking that the all in on Brock crowd can't even talk about a hypothetical scenario objectively.

Brock played at damn near the same level as Jimmy. There's a plethora of stats to back it up. One of the biggest difference was he got 20 defensive TOs to work with. You think he's gonna hit 80% of his passes in the 10-19 range forever? So he's just better than Brady lol. You think he will maintain his crazy TD%? Just gonna be best in the league no matter what? Come on man. Some of that s**t isn't sustainable over a longer sample size.

Originally posted by Hoovtrain:
Where did I say anything about my thoughts on him pre draft? Also not sure why his draft status keeps getting brought up. Who cares where he was drafted? I care about how he performs in real time . And so far he has performed very well and outperformed Lance
but you have said you expect him to play bad football. Isn't that why you keep bringing up the short leash and expected regression? It just seems like a lot of wasted effort . They all clearly view him as the #1 guy…by a large margin . But I also acknowledge that could change and really Hoping Lance balls out

My scenario is saying Brock and Perry played exactly the same. Lance and Lawrence played exactly the same, with the same amount of snaps.

so you're telling me Trevor sits the bench while Perry gets to play through bad football and develop? Yes?

You guys, at this point NY will say anything to support Lance and question Brock. He's even going off the rails comparing other examples of situations like a back up to Lawrence when that quarterback did not break rookie records like Brock Purdy did. That would not be the situation and Lawrence did have a few good games to show he has vast potential. Lance may not have so that example is unrealistic. Oh my s**t this is amusing. He won't concede to anything at this point and it's OK. He can have his opinions, even if they are very biased and quite often wrong regarding the situation.

We all want the best quarterback that gives us the best chance to win and sadly right now it is Brock Purdy. I would love Trey Lance to reach his full potential and the only way is more playing time. It just is a bad situation on a championship team. However, Lance has not looked great at all or even very good but I think all of us can agree he will improve.

We should look at it this way. Brock is going to start and if he plays even remotely as well as he did last year, let's say at a top 8 to 10 level even though he was playing at a top 1-2 level, we will most likely win a Super Bowl. If he falters then we have Lance and could move forward with him indefinitely. It's a win-win.

Sorry to call you out like that and why but your stance overall is genuine. We have to give a quarterback a bigger sample size to make a final determination. I think Brock has shown almost enough so we will see this year if he continues playing very well.

Originally posted by elguapo:
You guys, at this point NY will say anything to support Lance and question Brock. He's even going off the rails comparing other examples of situations like a back up to Lawrence when that quarterback did not break rookie records like Brock Purdy did. That would not be the situation and Lawrence did have a few good games to show he has vast potential. Lance may not have so that example is unrealistic. Oh my s**t this is amusing. He won't concede to anything at this point and it's OK. He can have his opinions, even if they are very biased and quite often wrong regarding the situation.

We all want the best quarterback that gives us the best chance to win and sadly right now it is Brock Purdy. I would love Trey Lance to reach his full potential and the only way is more playing time. It just is a bad situation on a championship team. However, Lance has not looked great at all or even very good but I think all of us can agree he will improve.

We should look at it this way. Brock is going to start and if he plays even remotely as well as he did last year, let's say at a top 8 to 10 level even though he was playing at a top 1-2 level, we will most likely win a Super Bowl. If he falters then we have Lance and could move forward with him indefinitely. It's a win-win.

Sorry to call you out like that NY but your stance overall is genuine just not all the back and forth and using different scenarios and examples of what if this and what if that. When the fact remains Brock played at an elite level. Stop referring to his almost interceptions because every single quarterback has those every single one. Mahomes has the most in the NFL so you can stop with that right there to diminish Brock and prop up Lance. We have to give a quarterback a bigger sample size to make a final determination, yes. I think Brock has shown almost enough so we will see this year if he continues playing very well.

Originally posted by NYniner85:
Again you clearly didn't watch Lawrence first 100 passing attempts. A LOT of that s**t was on him. It has nothing to do with the coach or the roster. It was flat out missing throws. He said it himself he couldn't process fast enough (because you didn't really have to in that Clemson offense). And none of it matters if Perry came in to the SAME offense and played amazing! That's the whole damn point.

Not shocking that the all in on Brock crowd can't even talk about a hypothetical scenario objectively.

Brock played at damn near the same level as Jimmy. There's a plethora of stats to back it up. One of the biggest difference was he got 20 defensive TOs to work with. You think he's gonna hit 80% of his passes in the 10-19 range forever? So he's just better than Brady lol. You think he will maintain his crazy TD%? Just gonna be best in the league no matter what? Come on man. Some of that s**t isn't sustainable over a longer sample size.

I'm not sure what your top paragraph has to do with anything I said. The point in highlighting the different team situations around them is that the Jags could afford to let Lawrence play through his growing pains without risking meaningful team goals, and that they didn't have alternative options that were better. If the Jags had a QB get an opportunity because Lawrence got hurt, and that QB took the Jags to 8 straight wins and a conference title game, while playing very well as an individual, that guy would be the starter going forward.

Brock played better than Jimmy as an individual… and he did it as a rookie. He is a better decision maker, he's a more accurate passer, he can extend plays in ways Jimmy cannot while negating negative outcomes and generating positive ones. He's more poised in the pocket. This is all over his film. Your stats, which in most cases are just as much team stats as individual ones, mean little. I don't think Brock is the guy because he had a high TD percentage. Brock can get better as a player and his TD percentage can go down at the same time.

Originally posted by tankle104:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by Hoovtrain:
Well clearly they think the picks are irrelevant. We've seen that with them and RBs, CBs, etc. they go with the guys that produce regardless of draft status or picks given up. My guess is if Trey can outperform Purdy then he will be the guy. But as it stands now his competition is darnold . That could all change of course

Another scenario. Jags.

drafted Lawrence he gets his 100 first passing attempts, which were complete dogs**t…then gets hurt. They dick around with Beathard as the starter. He gets hurt. In steps E. J. Perry and he played well for a couple games.

you trying to tell me that they're gonna let Perry develop and play bad football while Trevor Lawrence sits on the bench?

How often to they let those late day 3 guys suck and let them play through it…instead of going back with the highly invested player? Of course it's different for every position.

but yeah that's my opinion. I don't think any of them get to play bad football for a stretch. Not with the way this QB room is set up.

Comparing lances situation with anyone else's is ridiculous,'specifically Lawrence's.. and you know it.

does Lance have a crap team around him or numerous pro bowlers/all pros? Does Lance have one of the worst professional coaches in modern memory or one of the best? Does Lance have one of, if not thee, most qb friendly offense in the league? Does Lance play for a team that has an excellent culture and locker room or a complete zoo that's perennially a nightmare?

the main difference is everyone knows Lawrence was a stud and a generational talent, Trey is completely unknown what he is. Lawrence has a ton of experience in highschool and college - Lances overall pass attempts in his life is 31% of what Lawrence did in high school alone (not including pro attempts).

so I think that's a horrible comparison. One you know is a stud and the other is a complete unknown that hasn't inspired confidence in his team.

i agree that it's unusual to move off of a top 3 pick so quickly but I think it says more of the confidence Lance hasn't inspired around the facility. If Lance was dominating around the facility, being a general, etc. I'm sure it would be much different and not a situation where he's competing for QB2/3. At some point you have to admit Lance hasn't done anything to help himself.

Interesting point. I'm glad you guys brought up the Lawrence and Lance comparison. So in hindsight, we could say that we kinda overreached drafting for Trey. But it's not a total bad decision because the goal is to replace Jimmy G. with someone who we hoped can become a Mahomes type of player. But Trey's rawness and inexperience exposed him and due to the outstanding performance of Brock made Lance sort of borderline expendable. To your point again, if Lawrence was our QB, Purdy may never even set his feet on the field as the starting QB. Even if Purdy took over as the starting QB due to injury/injuries and played like he did last year, Lawrence will unquestionably gets his starting QB position back as soon as he gets physically cleared. If it's Lawrence, there won't be any discussion about who's your no.1 QB because Lawrence is obviously a much superior QB than Lance.

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by Hoovtrain:
Where did I say anything about my thoughts on him pre draft? Also not sure why his draft status keeps getting brought up. Who cares where he was drafted? I care about how he performs in real time . And so far he has performed very well and outperformed Lance
but you have said you expect him to play bad football. Isn't that why you keep bringing up the short leash and expected regression? It just seems like a lot of wasted effort . They all clearly view him as the #1 guy…by a large margin . But I also acknowledge that could change and really Hoping Lance balls out

My scenario is saying Brock and Perry played exactly the same. Lance and Lawrence played exactly the same, with the same amount of snaps.

so you're telling me Trevor sits the bench while Perry gets to play through bad football and develop? Yes?

Again, I don't care about Lawrence or Perry. I'm talking about the niners situation . And that situation is that Purdy has cemented himself as the #1 guy in the eyes of the coaches, FO and players and he will be allowed to play through some rough patches unless he is an absolute disaster and the season is going down the toilet . Those who desperately want Trey to start may not like it, and it may suck fit Trey, but that's the reality of the situation.

I think Brock being the "leader in the clubhouse" is a reflection on Brock and what he did. I think Lance having to compete with darnold for QB2 is a relegation on Lance. It's hard for me to believe that they believe in Lance when they're making him split reps with darnold.

if they really thought Lance was a potential superstar or were impressed with him, they'd be giving all the first team reps to him (or as many as possible) and letting it be known he could unseat Purdy. Not split reps with a bust journeyman for a backup job.

they can say whatever they want in the media but actions speak louder than words. That's the takeaway I get. Lance hopefully develops really nicely but I think their opinion of him is on full display.