There are 338 users in the forums
Originally posted by thl408:
I don't no what your talking about it
Originally posted by Pillbusta:
I'm glad to hear Brock is talking to Jimmy about handling playoff atmospheres and I'm glad Brock will start here at home this postseason
Originally posted by dj43:
Originally posted by boast:
i'm 52 and have been watching the Niners nearly every week since 1980. this drive reminded me of late 80s Montana to Rice. im not saying either player is on the same HoF career trajectory just that the drive just felt eerily familiar.
All it took was 41 seconds. 3 connections with Aiyuk for Brock Purdy to lead the offense into field goal range . Here are the 3 throws .
— Socrates (@ITfactor00) January 2, 2023
He did this was ease . This is a rookie. Whos 4 games in. Not normal stuff here .#NFL #49ers #QB1 pic.twitter.com/II9GlWBXpB
I had the same feeling. It was eery.
Good QBs separate themselves from the ordinary by being able to rise above the fray and make the effort that allows their team to win. Even when the game has not been going their way, they somehow manage to get it together and carry the team to victory.
For the past four weeks, everyone was asking to see BP bring the team from behind to win. Check.
Originally posted by 49ersRing:
Originally posted by YACBros85:
Originally posted by 49ersRing:
Originally posted by YACBros85:
Originally posted by 49ersRing:
Originally posted by YACBros85:
Originally posted by 49ersRing:
Originally posted by NineFourNiner:
Originally posted by 49ersRing:
Of course it's going to get brought back up because it was egregious in the same way that a lot of Trey criticism has been egregious.
That said, how am I propping up my guy by pointing out areas where Purdy hasn't been perfect? Purdy is MY guy. I was on the "Purdy should be the #2" bandwagon during the preseason and people got mad when I recognized that he was better than Jimmy back in October. It's funny to see that some of those same people who were critical of that take back then are now mad that not everyone is in lockstep in regards to the consensus that Purdy has made zero mistakes.
Please show me who said Purdy made zero mistakes. I missed it. Thanks.
Nobody has to say it directly. It's implied when people throw tantrums over it being pointed out that the interception was Purdy's fault or that poor ball placement lead to a lot of the "drops" yesterday.
I am pretty sure we are all in agreement that the INT pass was late and severely underthrown. As far as the drops, if it hits the receiver in the hands or chest/stomach than it is on the receiver. It may be credited as an incompletion. But in all fairness, QB's get credited for INT's that are caused by dropped/tipped passes even if the pass was perfectly placed.
I just don't agree with you on the drops thing. It doesn't seem useful in the context of discussing Brock Purdy to say that if it touches the receivers hands then it should be caught, because that implies that the QB doesn't share some of the blame for not making it easier to catch. It was fair to criticize Trey last year for rocketing short passes, because even though they'd hit the receivers in the hands, it's still making things harder than they need to be.
Oh, is that what this about? Someone criticized Trey last year for rocketing short passes?
I am saying that if the ball hits a receiver, it is on the receiver. Stats get charged to QB's that aren't always the QB's fault. I have exampled a couple of scenarios that demostrate that. You choose to ignore them because it renders your argument useless.
That's not what I'm saying. I'm just using that as an example of when a drop is on the QB even if it hits the WR perfectly in the hands. In reality, no drop is 100% on the WR or the QB. If you ask Brock, do you think he'd say that there was nothing he could have done to make those passes more likely to be caught? I believe that he would take some of the blame.
Would he take some of the blame if asked in front of the press? Of course he would. That is what leaders do. In fact, I bet he would place all the blame on himself, even if much of it wasn't even warranted. It would also speak volumes on his maturity level. I have a hard time believing that while watching the film, the coaches would be blaming the QB for a pass that was dropped that hit the receiver in the hands or the chest. If it were the QB's fault they wouldn't record it specifically as a receiver stat.
Would you extend the same logic to interceptions? Are those all 100% on the QB since they're attributed to the QB?
I absolutely think that the coaches would critique both players. The goal is to try to ensure that the pass is completed, not assign blame. If the pass is placed better it increases the odds that the WR catches it and on the other end, it is expected that WRs should be able to make difficult catches.
Originally posted by OnTheClock:
This week was Brock's first noticeably less impressive games.
It's kind of funny though.. If you think about it. His worst start so far is one where, although he missed several guys and threw a pick, he still made some huge precision throws, scrambled out of pressure numerous times (he was pressured a lot), brought the team back from behind, drove the team down with just a minute left for a game winning field goal attempt, and ultimately won in a shootout where we almost put up 40 points -- something we rarely did these past few years.
And he's a seventh round rookie? Dang.
Is this a guy you can figure out? It seems like so far, the best you can do is hope to get pressure, which affects any QB, or bat balls down. He just seems to deliver in every other facet so far.
Pocket elusiveness/mobility
Quick release
Cool under defensive pressure
Calm in key situations
Adequate arm
Strong football IQ
Trusts his reads
Generally makes good decisions
Goes for the big play when available
Natural leader
Physically and mentally tough
Doesn't snowball after a mistake
High character player & humble
I have been cautiously optimistic and I'm still trying to keep some sense of that, although it's getting harder and harder to ignore the fact that the kid is checking off virtually every box there is for a franchise quarterback.
Next steps would be to be big time in big time games -- the playoffs.
Originally posted by VinculumJuris:
Originally posted by 49ersRing:
Originally posted by VinculumJuris:
Originally posted by 49ersRing:
Originally posted by thl408:
Originally posted by 49ersRing:
Originally posted by Furlow:
Originally posted by 49ersRing:
Originally posted by Furlow:
Originally posted by 49ersRing:
Originally posted by Furlow:
Originally posted by 49ersRing:
Originally posted by Furlow:
Originally posted by 49ersRing:
Originally posted by Furlow:
Originally posted by DaleGribble:
Originally posted by 49ersRing:Stevie Wonder can see your agenda from a mile away.
Originally posted by DaleGribble:
Originally posted by 49ersRing:LMAO utterly ridiculous take,you couldn't be anymore transparent.
Originally posted by YACBros85:
If you adjust for the dropped passes, Purdy would have completed 71.4% of his passes. He also had a 1st down rate of 42.9% which was his best yet and is well above league average. He also was 50% on 3rd down with a TD. We had 12 total drives and only faced 8 3rd down situations. We were Purdy damn efficient on 1st and 2nd down.
There's no reason to adjust for dropped passes since few of them were on accurate throws. People were calling that throw to Jennings a drop, but Purdy under threw it by a good 10 yards allowing the DB to break it up. Should not be considered a drop.
Transparent that the QB shouldn't be let off the hook for drops that are a result of poor ball placement? We don't need to make excuses for Purdy on those plays. I doubt he would blame the WR for them.
Seriously what's his deal? Is he a Trey-only supporter or just wants to see the world burn? Lol
Remember when you spent 2 months straight spending hours every day complaining about the slightest wobble in Trey's passes? You should really be quiet about any QB criticism.
You guys LOVE to hang onto that one. It was the off season with not much to talk about. I was firmly on the Trey wagon by the time the season started and he proved the wobble didn't matter. I blame Kyle for his injuries, not him. That said, he's light years behind Purdy and even Jimmy.
But this is the Purdy thread so let's get back on topic. He's leading the league in passer rating since taking over and passes any/all "eye tests." What is the purpose of your nonstop negativity? If you just want to cheerlead for Trey, go do that in his thread. But no, here you are in the Purdy thread making nonsensical criticisms just like you did with Jimmy, just to prop up "your guy." I'm assuming anyway, nothing else makes any sense.
Of course it's going to get brought back up because it was egregious in the same way that a lot of Trey criticism has been egregious.
That said, how am I propping up my guy by pointing out areas where Purdy hasn't been perfect? Purdy is MY guy. I was on the "Purdy should be the #2" bandwagon during the preseason and people got mad when I recognized that he was better than Jimmy back in October. It's funny to see that some of those same people who were critical of that take back then are now mad that not everyone is in lockstep in regards to the consensus that Purdy has made zero mistakes.
It was a two week span in the off season, and I wasn't even claiming that it WOULD be a detriment. I said it could. It was something to talk about when we didn't have any games to discuss. That is in no way, shape or form comparable to your season-long pursuit to disparage Jimmy and now Brock, during some of the best QB play we've seen in 20 years.
Not one person has said that Purdy has made zero mistakes.
When have I ever disparaged Jimmy? I'm one of Jimmy's biggest fans, but I could recognize the flaws in his game. Purdy is better than him, obviously, we all recognize that, but Purdy has flaws too and I don't see the harm in discussing those in the same way I didn't see the harm in discussing Jimmy's.
That's not the same as a lot of the ongoing criticism of Trey which only seems to be based in something that goes beyond anything to do with football. People get madder about someone pointing out that Purdy had two turnover worthy plays on the last drive yesterday than they do about SanDiego49er going into the Trey thread randomly at 2 AM to call him a "trash thug" a week after his injury. That kind of "criticism" was even more common during TC and your nonstop focus on something largely meaningless like wobble only added to it. Couldn't even post one clip of Trey throwing the ball without several pages of wobble discussion whether any passes wobbled or not.
Stop. We all know you hate Jimmy.
"Something that goes beyond anything to do with football." Is this the race card again? You think people like Purdy over Trey because of race? Ridiculous. I guess Michael Irvin is racist against Trey too.
I defended Trey from people who said stupid crap, to the point that I got a 30 day timeout. But thank you for clarifying why you're doing what you're doing with Jimmy and Purdy.
Stop that nonsense. Where did I say or imply that? I was implying that they hate Trey for reasons that don't have anything to do with his play, which is usually a result of them having weird pre-existing loyalties to the former QB (such as in your case). That said, I have no idea why SanDiego49er posted the kinds of things he did. You'd have to ask him.
So you're just going to hint at racism, but then act like that's not what you meant. WEAK and 100% trolling. Pathetic.
You're the one choosing to read it like that which says more about you.
nope.
Furlow, no need to respond to this crap.
What are you talking about? It's pretty damn clear that people hate on Trey for reasons that have nothing to do with football. That's not racism (no one said it was until Furlow brought it up), but it is based on biases they formed against him before he ever stepped on the field or ever got a chance to show what he could do. The tone in the Trey thread is toxic to the point it'd be easy to forget that he was on-track and exactly where the FO wanted him to be in his development until his ankle injury.
I have no intention of engaging on the racism topic, but I do wonder why you leave your argument open to interpretation. If these reasons are so clear to you, why not expressly state what they are? Why imply anything through thinly veiled accusations of bias? State it affirmatively so it can be discussed.
Should I have to? People shouldn't rush to interpret everything in the worst possible light. A lot of these discussions turn toxic when people never extend the benefit of the doubt and choose to roll with whatever is the most negative possible interpretation of a comment.
I'm not talking about the specific interpretation of others. I'm asking you why you fail to articulate your point with sufficient specificity to be understood, thereby leaving room for interpretation. If you want to create room for discussion, you need to provide enough substance to do so.
If you're not going to make your veiled accusations explicit, please let me know. I have no interest in engaging with you on any other topic.
Originally posted by random49er:
Originally posted by thl408:
I don't no what your talking about it
Lol I mean right now in Trey's thread we're disagreeing about Trey's ability to think his way out of a paper box, and it's the same guys saying such unwarranted stuff over and over in that thread but whatever.
Let's just talk football.
Originally posted by 5Jan2003:
Bump for a really positive thread box within a typically salty morning discussion.
This series of hits to BA was veteran money in crunch time. Purdy looks focused. Yeah, a bit Montana-like if you squint your eyes.
Could this imply he's got a "John Candy Intangible" in his toolbox?
Originally posted by 49ersRing:
Originally posted by VinculumJuris:
Originally posted by 49ersRing:
Originally posted by VinculumJuris:
Originally posted by 49ersRing:
Originally posted by thl408:
Originally posted by 49ersRing:
Originally posted by Furlow:
Originally posted by 49ersRing:
Originally posted by Furlow:
Originally posted by 49ersRing:
Originally posted by Furlow:
Originally posted by 49ersRing:
Originally posted by Furlow:
Originally posted by 49ersRing:
Originally posted by Furlow:
Originally posted by DaleGribble:
Originally posted by 49ersRing:Stevie Wonder can see your agenda from a mile away.
Originally posted by DaleGribble:
Originally posted by 49ersRing:LMAO utterly ridiculous take,you couldn't be anymore transparent.
Originally posted by YACBros85:
If you adjust for the dropped passes, Purdy would have completed 71.4% of his passes. He also had a 1st down rate of 42.9% which was his best yet and is well above league average. He also was 50% on 3rd down with a TD. We had 12 total drives and only faced 8 3rd down situations. We were Purdy damn efficient on 1st and 2nd down.
There's no reason to adjust for dropped passes since few of them were on accurate throws. People were calling that throw to Jennings a drop, but Purdy under threw it by a good 10 yards allowing the DB to break it up. Should not be considered a drop.
Transparent that the QB shouldn't be let off the hook for drops that are a result of poor ball placement? We don't need to make excuses for Purdy on those plays. I doubt he would blame the WR for them.
Seriously what's his deal? Is he a Trey-only supporter or just wants to see the world burn? Lol
Remember when you spent 2 months straight spending hours every day complaining about the slightest wobble in Trey's passes? You should really be quiet about any QB criticism.
You guys LOVE to hang onto that one. It was the off season with not much to talk about. I was firmly on the Trey wagon by the time the season started and he proved the wobble didn't matter. I blame Kyle for his injuries, not him. That said, he's light years behind Purdy and even Jimmy.
But this is the Purdy thread so let's get back on topic. He's leading the league in passer rating since taking over and passes any/all "eye tests." What is the purpose of your nonstop negativity? If you just want to cheerlead for Trey, go do that in his thread. But no, here you are in the Purdy thread making nonsensical criticisms just like you did with Jimmy, just to prop up "your guy." I'm assuming anyway, nothing else makes any sense.
Of course it's going to get brought back up because it was egregious in the same way that a lot of Trey criticism has been egregious.
That said, how am I propping up my guy by pointing out areas where Purdy hasn't been perfect? Purdy is MY guy. I was on the "Purdy should be the #2" bandwagon during the preseason and people got mad when I recognized that he was better than Jimmy back in October. It's funny to see that some of those same people who were critical of that take back then are now mad that not everyone is in lockstep in regards to the consensus that Purdy has made zero mistakes.
It was a two week span in the off season, and I wasn't even claiming that it WOULD be a detriment. I said it could. It was something to talk about when we didn't have any games to discuss. That is in no way, shape or form comparable to your season-long pursuit to disparage Jimmy and now Brock, during some of the best QB play we've seen in 20 years.
Not one person has said that Purdy has made zero mistakes.
When have I ever disparaged Jimmy? I'm one of Jimmy's biggest fans, but I could recognize the flaws in his game. Purdy is better than him, obviously, we all recognize that, but Purdy has flaws too and I don't see the harm in discussing those in the same way I didn't see the harm in discussing Jimmy's.
That's not the same as a lot of the ongoing criticism of Trey which only seems to be based in something that goes beyond anything to do with football. People get madder about someone pointing out that Purdy had two turnover worthy plays on the last drive yesterday than they do about SanDiego49er going into the Trey thread randomly at 2 AM to call him a "trash thug" a week after his injury. That kind of "criticism" was even more common during TC and your nonstop focus on something largely meaningless like wobble only added to it. Couldn't even post one clip of Trey throwing the ball without several pages of wobble discussion whether any passes wobbled or not.
Stop. We all know you hate Jimmy.
"Something that goes beyond anything to do with football." Is this the race card again? You think people like Purdy over Trey because of race? Ridiculous. I guess Michael Irvin is racist against Trey too.
I defended Trey from people who said stupid crap, to the point that I got a 30 day timeout. But thank you for clarifying why you're doing what you're doing with Jimmy and Purdy.
Stop that nonsense. Where did I say or imply that? I was implying that they hate Trey for reasons that don't have anything to do with his play, which is usually a result of them having weird pre-existing loyalties to the former QB (such as in your case). That said, I have no idea why SanDiego49er posted the kinds of things he did. You'd have to ask him.
So you're just going to hint at racism, but then act like that's not what you meant. WEAK and 100% trolling. Pathetic.
You're the one choosing to read it like that which says more about you.
nope.
Furlow, no need to respond to this crap.
What are you talking about? It's pretty damn clear that people hate on Trey for reasons that have nothing to do with football. That's not racism (no one said it was until Furlow brought it up), but it is based on biases they formed against him before he ever stepped on the field or ever got a chance to show what he could do. The tone in the Trey thread is toxic to the point it'd be easy to forget that he was on-track and exactly where the FO wanted him to be in his development until his ankle injury.
I have no intention of engaging on the racism topic, but I do wonder why you leave your argument open to interpretation. If these reasons are so clear to you, why not expressly state what they are? Why imply anything through thinly veiled accusations of bias? State it affirmatively so it can be discussed.
Should I have to? People shouldn't rush to interpret everything in the worst possible light. A lot of these discussions turn toxic when people never extend the benefit of the doubt and choose to roll with whatever is the most negative possible interpretation of a comment.
I'm not talking about the specific interpretation of others. I'm asking you why you fail to articulate your point with sufficient specificity to be understood, thereby leaving room for interpretation. If you want to create room for discussion, you need to provide enough substance to do so.
If you're not going to make your veiled accusations explicit, please let me know. I have no interest in engaging with you on any other topic.
To be honest, I have no idea what you're trying to say here. If you're saying that it's on posters to leave no room for willful misinterpretations by others acting in poor faith, that's realistically not possible.
Originally posted by random49er:
Originally posted by OnTheClock:
This week was Brock's first noticeably less impressive games.
It's kind of funny though.. If you think about it. His worst start so far is one where, although he missed several guys and threw a pick, he still made some huge precision throws, scrambled out of pressure numerous times (he was pressured a lot), brought the team back from behind, drove the team down with just a minute left for a game winning field goal attempt, and ultimately won in a shootout where we almost put up 40 points -- something we rarely did these past few years.
And he's a seventh round rookie? Dang.
Is this a guy you can figure out? It seems like so far, the best you can do is hope to get pressure, which affects any QB, or bat balls down. He just seems to deliver in every other facet so far.
Pocket elusiveness/mobility
Quick release
Cool under defensive pressure
Calm in key situations
Adequate arm
Strong football IQ
Trusts his reads
Generally makes good decisions
Goes for the big play when available
Natural leader
Physically and mentally tough
Doesn't snowball after a mistake
High character player & humble
I have been cautiously optimistic and I'm still trying to keep some sense of that, although it's getting harder and harder to ignore the fact that the kid is checking off virtually every box there is for a franchise quarterback.
Next steps would be to be big time in big time games -- the playoffs.
1) How much of it do you equate to the super-offense he has with CMac here and Kittle now healthy? Jimmy looked pretty darn good in this CMac-infused offense as well,...the best he ever has, and that's without a training camp. So this obviously is an open-ended question. And the more important question @ hand with a guy like Purdy is....
2) As teams get more used to his game, is he already relatively close to his peak? Or does he have alot more room for growth?
Originally posted by random49er:
Originally posted by OnTheClock:
This week was Brock's first noticeably less impressive games.
It's kind of funny though.. If you think about it. His worst start so far is one where, although he missed several guys and threw a pick, he still made some huge precision throws, scrambled out of pressure numerous times (he was pressured a lot), brought the team back from behind, drove the team down with just a minute left for a game winning field goal attempt, and ultimately won in a shootout where we almost put up 40 points -- something we rarely did these past few years.
And he's a seventh round rookie? Dang.
Is this a guy you can figure out? It seems like so far, the best you can do is hope to get pressure, which affects any QB, or bat balls down. He just seems to deliver in every other facet so far.
Pocket elusiveness/mobility
Quick release
Cool under defensive pressure
Calm in key situations
Adequate arm
Strong football IQ
Trusts his reads
Generally makes good decisions
Goes for the big play when available
Natural leader
Physically and mentally tough
Doesn't snowball after a mistake
High character player & humble
I have been cautiously optimistic and I'm still trying to keep some sense of that, although it's getting harder and harder to ignore the fact that the kid is checking off virtually every box there is for a franchise quarterback.
Next steps would be to be big time in big time games -- the playoffs.
1) How much of it do you equate to the super-offense he has with CMac here and Kittle now healthy? Jimmy looked pretty darn good in this CMac-infused offense as well,...the best he ever has, and that's without a training camp. So this obviously is an open-ended question. And the more important question @ hand with a guy like Purdy is....
2) As teams get more used to his game, is he already relatively close to his peak? Or does he have alot more room for growth?
Originally posted by VinculumJuris:
Originally posted by 49ersRing:
Originally posted by VinculumJuris:
Originally posted by 49ersRing:
Originally posted by VinculumJuris:
Originally posted by 49ersRing:
Originally posted by thl408:
Originally posted by 49ersRing:
Originally posted by Furlow:
Originally posted by 49ersRing:
Originally posted by Furlow:
Originally posted by 49ersRing:
Originally posted by Furlow:
Originally posted by 49ersRing:
Originally posted by Furlow:
Originally posted by 49ersRing:
Originally posted by Furlow:
Originally posted by DaleGribble:
Originally posted by 49ersRing:Stevie Wonder can see your agenda from a mile away.
Originally posted by DaleGribble:
Originally posted by 49ersRing:LMAO utterly ridiculous take,you couldn't be anymore transparent.
Originally posted by YACBros85:
If you adjust for the dropped passes, Purdy would have completed 71.4% of his passes. He also had a 1st down rate of 42.9% which was his best yet and is well above league average. He also was 50% on 3rd down with a TD. We had 12 total drives and only faced 8 3rd down situations. We were Purdy damn efficient on 1st and 2nd down.
There's no reason to adjust for dropped passes since few of them were on accurate throws. People were calling that throw to Jennings a drop, but Purdy under threw it by a good 10 yards allowing the DB to break it up. Should not be considered a drop.
Transparent that the QB shouldn't be let off the hook for drops that are a result of poor ball placement? We don't need to make excuses for Purdy on those plays. I doubt he would blame the WR for them.
Seriously what's his deal? Is he a Trey-only supporter or just wants to see the world burn? Lol
Remember when you spent 2 months straight spending hours every day complaining about the slightest wobble in Trey's passes? You should really be quiet about any QB criticism.
You guys LOVE to hang onto that one. It was the off season with not much to talk about. I was firmly on the Trey wagon by the time the season started and he proved the wobble didn't matter. I blame Kyle for his injuries, not him. That said, he's light years behind Purdy and even Jimmy.
But this is the Purdy thread so let's get back on topic. He's leading the league in passer rating since taking over and passes any/all "eye tests." What is the purpose of your nonstop negativity? If you just want to cheerlead for Trey, go do that in his thread. But no, here you are in the Purdy thread making nonsensical criticisms just like you did with Jimmy, just to prop up "your guy." I'm assuming anyway, nothing else makes any sense.
Of course it's going to get brought back up because it was egregious in the same way that a lot of Trey criticism has been egregious.
That said, how am I propping up my guy by pointing out areas where Purdy hasn't been perfect? Purdy is MY guy. I was on the "Purdy should be the #2" bandwagon during the preseason and people got mad when I recognized that he was better than Jimmy back in October. It's funny to see that some of those same people who were critical of that take back then are now mad that not everyone is in lockstep in regards to the consensus that Purdy has made zero mistakes.
It was a two week span in the off season, and I wasn't even claiming that it WOULD be a detriment. I said it could. It was something to talk about when we didn't have any games to discuss. That is in no way, shape or form comparable to your season-long pursuit to disparage Jimmy and now Brock, during some of the best QB play we've seen in 20 years.
Not one person has said that Purdy has made zero mistakes.
When have I ever disparaged Jimmy? I'm one of Jimmy's biggest fans, but I could recognize the flaws in his game. Purdy is better than him, obviously, we all recognize that, but Purdy has flaws too and I don't see the harm in discussing those in the same way I didn't see the harm in discussing Jimmy's.
That's not the same as a lot of the ongoing criticism of Trey which only seems to be based in something that goes beyond anything to do with football. People get madder about someone pointing out that Purdy had two turnover worthy plays on the last drive yesterday than they do about SanDiego49er going into the Trey thread randomly at 2 AM to call him a "trash thug" a week after his injury. That kind of "criticism" was even more common during TC and your nonstop focus on something largely meaningless like wobble only added to it. Couldn't even post one clip of Trey throwing the ball without several pages of wobble discussion whether any passes wobbled or not.
Stop. We all know you hate Jimmy.
"Something that goes beyond anything to do with football." Is this the race card again? You think people like Purdy over Trey because of race? Ridiculous. I guess Michael Irvin is racist against Trey too.
I defended Trey from people who said stupid crap, to the point that I got a 30 day timeout. But thank you for clarifying why you're doing what you're doing with Jimmy and Purdy.
Stop that nonsense. Where did I say or imply that? I was implying that they hate Trey for reasons that don't have anything to do with his play, which is usually a result of them having weird pre-existing loyalties to the former QB (such as in your case). That said, I have no idea why SanDiego49er posted the kinds of things he did. You'd have to ask him.
So you're just going to hint at racism, but then act like that's not what you meant. WEAK and 100% trolling. Pathetic.
You're the one choosing to read it like that which says more about you.
nope.
Furlow, no need to respond to this crap.
What are you talking about? It's pretty damn clear that people hate on Trey for reasons that have nothing to do with football. That's not racism (no one said it was until Furlow brought it up), but it is based on biases they formed against him before he ever stepped on the field or ever got a chance to show what he could do. The tone in the Trey thread is toxic to the point it'd be easy to forget that he was on-track and exactly where the FO wanted him to be in his development until his ankle injury.
I have no intention of engaging on the racism topic, but I do wonder why you leave your argument open to interpretation. If these reasons are so clear to you, why not expressly state what they are? Why imply anything through thinly veiled accusations of bias? State it affirmatively so it can be discussed.
Should I have to? People shouldn't rush to interpret everything in the worst possible light. A lot of these discussions turn toxic when people never extend the benefit of the doubt and choose to roll with whatever is the most negative possible interpretation of a comment.
I'm not talking about the specific interpretation of others. I'm asking you why you fail to articulate your point with sufficient specificity to be understood, thereby leaving room for interpretation. If you want to create room for discussion, you need to provide enough substance to do so.
If you're not going to make your veiled accusations explicit, please let me know. I have no interest in engaging with you on any other topic.
To be honest, I have no idea what you're trying to say here. If you're saying that it's on posters to leave no room for willful misinterpretations by others acting in poor faith, that's realistically not possible.
I'm asking you to name these reasons you keep alluding to. Will you do that? Or are you content with leaving your accusations vague?
Originally posted by Wubbie:
Originally posted by thl408:
Originally posted by Pillbusta:
Originally posted by thl408:
Lite is the key word. Just based off how this regime has moved. They don't just give up on starting QBs unless they get a draft haul. This is for all the trade Trey right now posters. We have 2 guys we like so we can keep both. I am not saying give both guys a yellow jacket but when you have 2 guys and one is leading in this instance Brock you can keep your 2nd guy too. Young was raw and undeveloped and so is Trey. Let him watch learn compete and push Brock and you keep them both because we see now we need multiple QBs in a season. Sean Payton just got through saying that 65 QBs have started games for teams this season. We have 2 of them in our long term plans and that is a good thing
I got your drift and agree about keeping both. I forgot where I heard, but only 11 teams have started one QB the entire 2022 season.
I think the GMFB crew or on Richard Sherman's podcast, it was mentioned that there have been 65 (?) or so starting QB's this season.
That seems like a really high number, considering all the emphasis on QB safety.
Originally posted by jreff22:
Originally posted by dj43:
Originally posted by tankle104:
Originally posted by thl408:I just heard that the league has had a record amount of QBs start a game this year - 68 or some thing like that. That's more than 2 per a team. INSANE
Originally posted by Pillbusta:
Originally posted by thl408:
Lite is the key word. Just based off how this regime has moved. They don't just give up on starting QBs unless they get a draft haul. This is for all the trade Trey right now posters. We have 2 guys we like so we can keep both. I am not saying give both guys a yellow jacket but when you have 2 guys and one is leading in this instance Brock you can keep your 2nd guy too. Young was raw and undeveloped and so is Trey. Let him watch learn compete and push Brock and you keep them both because we see now we need multiple QBs in a season. Sean Payton just got through saying that 65 QBs have started games for teams this season. We have 2 of them in our long term plans and that is a good thing
I got your drift and agree about keeping both. I forgot where I heard, but only 11 teams have started one QB the entire 2022 season.
A part of that high rate appears to be "running" QBs that are being injured while running. In addition to Lance, there is Jackson, Fields, Hurts, Allen, and Tua...the list goes on of QBs that have missed PT due to injuries while out of the pocket.
Is there enough evidence for coaches to trend back toward mobile, agile, quick QBs, yes, like Purdy, and away from QB power stuff that is resulting in QB injuries?
Roman is going to get Jackson killed.
Originally posted by random49er:
Where did you hear that? He brushed off the fact that he hadn't really talked to Jimmy lately about stuff like that rather coolly.
People are just looking for stuff to point @ division and he wasn't having it.
Dude is very good @ answering questions.
