QB Brock Purdy Thread

lol

Originally posted by libertyforever:

Originally posted by SinceXVI:

Originally posted by libertyforever:

Originally posted by SinceXVI:

Originally posted by libertyforever:

Originally posted by SinceXVI:

Originally posted by libertyforever:

Originally posted by SinceXVI:

Originally posted by q0c0p:
Jets will pay a lot for jimmy. They have a good team. Just missing the qb

Or they can just give up a high draft pick for either Trey or Purdy, and have a cheaper QB for three years with more upside.

Why pay $16 million + for a 31 year old vet with maxed out potential vs. $1 to $8 million for a younger more talented QB?

Jimmy was traded for a 2nd with only 2 starts under his belt, that's less starting experience than either Brock and Trey at this point.

Plus, Jimmy isn't a good fit for the Shanahan system, he'll do better in Las Vegas or New England.

When Jimmy was traded to SF, he was ready to play. And I think the Patriots could easily have gotten more in the trade if it was done during the off-season.

Trey is nowhere near ready to play. If a team wants to win and compete right away, they should trade for Jimmy and not Trey. Also, people know what Jimm G is, a top 15 QB or close to that.

Trey has a higher ceiling but also a very low floor. He can be a top 5 QB or a complete bust, or anywhere in between.

Trey's been in the league 2 years. He's ready to play, especially in Mike LaFleur's offense which is identical to the Niners.

He'd be taking over with 3 NFL offseasons, 8 preseason games (Assumed), and 3 starts under his belt, that's more experience than Jimmy when he got here.

And he has put to rest the possibility of him being a bust during his 1st offseason when he learned the playbook right away; threw a 71 yard td on his 1st preseason completion; maintained composure and converted tough 3rd downs even in losses; impressively won a must 'win' game in week 17; and the Niners out gaining opponents in each of his three starts.

QBs are busts when the game proves too much for them to handle both on and off the field and they are permanently out of the league within a 2-3 years.
Think Johny Manzel.

That's unlikely for Lance given that he's shown maturity, work ethic, and has had an impressive game and many eye popping plays.

The Jets would give up a #1 for him.

A bust can be someone completely out of the league in a few years, or (for a high 1st round pick), someone only good enough to be a backup in the NFL.

Yes he has more experience than Jimmy when Jimmy got here, but Trey is certainly nowhere near as ready to play than Jimmy at that time. He is still a project, and that is why he has been a disappointment so far. I doubt any team will give up a 1st round pick for him. Maybe a 3rd round pick.

I provided examples of why he's not a project. If you're going to say he's a project, then provide support.

For example, is there a deficient trait that he has such as the inability to read coverages, bad attitude, etc?

I'm curious as to why people say he's a project, raw, etc., when I don't see it?

What I do see is a talented but still inexperienced QB who has shown all the talent and skill to validate being drafted #3, but who didn't get to show it on a consistent basis due to an early season injury.

And yes, the Jets would give up a #1 for him, he's been in their offensive system for 2 years now and played under similar concepts in college unlike Wilson.

Any time you have an inexperienced, raw QB who hasn't shown much in the NFL, that is by definition, a project.

That is not how pro scouts or coaches would define a project.

Lance was actually considered more pro ready than other QBs who took more snaps coming out since he ran an offense with pro passing and pass protection concepts.

That's one of the reasons why he had already learned the playbook by the time his 1st training camp started.

Project means needing to learn basic concepts like setting protections, recognizing blitzes, reading defenses,etc. Those are things Lance already knew when drafted.

And in regards to experience, look at his improvement on slant passes.

He still misses some, but has improved significantly from the KC preseason game. He's not a project, but a quality QB who could win games immediately.

If we have a different definition of the term project. That is fine. Not a topic really worth continue discussing, at least for me.

Yeah, ultimately a difference of opinion.

Although I want Brock to continue to start if he finishes the season as well as he has been, I also don't want to trade Trey - makes no sense.

trey is still a young talent and a capable starter at worst, it never hurts to have as many of those as you can. Worst case, we would have an excellent back up option for a few year. Best case, Trey develops into what we want and we have a franchise QB.

Makes no sense to trade him for another 2 years at least, unless we got a ridiculous offer. I could see the falcons wanting to trade a lot for him - I heard they loved him during the draft - idk if the same front office is there though.

Originally posted by tankle104:
Although I want Brock to continue to start if he finishes the season as well as he has been, I also don't want to trade Trey - makes no sense.

trey is still a young talent and a capable starter at worst, it never hurts to have as many of those as you can. Worst case, we would have an excellent back up option for a few year. Best case, Trey develops into what we want and we have a franchise QB.

Makes no sense to trade him for another 2 years at least, unless we got a ridiculous offer. I could see the falcons wanting to trade a lot for him - I heard they loved him during the draft - idk if the same front office is there though.

https://www.sportstalkatl.com/inside-look-at-falcons-war-room-shows-revealing-reactions-during-draft-night/

Originally posted by Wubbie:
I don't think there's anything unfair about either one being QB2 if they have a fair training camp battle and one wins out over the other. This season has shown us we need depth at QB.

I'm curious about how many teams used backups this year to start games. Has the starting quarterback of any team played every game?

Originally posted by WestCoastForever:
I'm curious about how many teams used backups this year to start games. Has the starting quarterback of any team played every game?

Mahomes
Allen
Burrow
Trevor
Goff
Geno
Kirk
Herbert
Tom
Carr
Rodgers
Daniel Jones

Are only ones to start every game.

ATL
CLE
INDY

Used multiple QBs because of suspension or play.

Originally posted by krizay:

Originally posted by WestCoastForever:
I'm curious about how many teams used backups this year to start games. Has the starting quarterback of any team played every game?

Mahomes
Allen
Burrow
Trevor
Goff
Geno
Kirk
Herbert
Tom
Carr
Rodgers
Daniel Jones

Are only ones to start every game.

ATL
CLE
INDY

Used multiple QBs because of suspension or play.

NE
NYJ
Rams
MIA

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:
NE
NYJ
Rams
MIA

Originally posted by krizay:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:
NE
NYJ
Rams
MIA

Used multiple QBs because of suspension or play

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:
Used multiple QBs because of suspension or play

Tua was hurt
Stafford was hurt
Mac initially was hurt
Zach initially was hurt

Originally posted by krizay:

Originally posted by WestCoastForever:
I'm curious about how many teams used backups this year to start games. Has the starting quarterback of any team played every game?

Mahomes
Allen
Burrow
Trevor
Goff
Geno
Kirk
Herbert
Tom
Carr
Rodgers
Daniel Jones

Are only ones to start every game.

ATL
CLE
INDY

Used multiple QBs because of suspension or play.

Thanks!

Originally posted by krizay:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:
Used multiple QBs because of suspension or play

Tua was hurt
Stafford was hurt
Mac initially was hurt
Zach initially was hurt

he didn't say if injuries were due to the change

https://sports.yahoo.com/brock-purdy-win-49ers-qb-011254285.html

Originally posted by jobiwon:
https://sports.yahoo.com/brock-purdy-win-49ers-qb-011254285.html

Kyle texted Peter King telling him Purdy is just unbelievable.