QB Brock Purdy Thread

Originally posted by SlipAndSlideBosa:

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?

I think he can increase his arm strength with conditioning, and I think the game can even slow down for him even more with more reps and familiarity with Kyles system. I think next year he should look better, although there always is that sophomore slump, but hopefully we see none of that during this playoffs.

It's tough to evaluate QB's in this system because Shanahan can make it very easy for a QB, and the surrounding talent helps a huge bit.
What I particularly like about Brock Purdy is that he's taking his shots at the big play opportunities that come up. Sometimes they don't pan out, but at the very least, they force a defense to be honest and have to defend the whole field... and not just the short/intermediate middle.

We don't have a lot of route combinations to the outside, but I'm not sure how much of that is Shanahan constructing route combinations catered to Jimmy, and now, Brock, who have a similar preference in their pass distribution.

Originally posted by boast:

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?

youre always trying to attribute Purdy's success to others. lol. while Jimmy did look good, Purdy has elevated the offense by about 10 pts per game against better defenses.

Exactly. Jimmy and Brock running the same offense, but Brock making it look much easier and has improved the offense's efficiency in ways Jimmy didn't. This isn't a Jimmy hater comment, it's quite obvious if you've seen him play these past few weeks. He stretches the field vertically and punishes the defense if they stack the box. With Jimmy, teams were daring him to beat them deep bc he refused to throw the deep or sideline pass.

I'm sorry but Brock is just a better quarterback at this point.

Originally posted by 49ersRing:

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:

Originally posted by DaleGribble:

Originally posted by 49ersRing:

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.

LMAO utterly ridiculous take,you couldn't be anymore transparent.

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.

Stevie Wonder can see your agenda from a mile away.

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?

What reasons are you talking about? The reasons people have demonstrated bias against Trey? I can't speak for them, but I suspect it's a mixture of their preference for the former QB and them preferring traditional QBs over athletic ones in the mold of Josh Allen, Mahomes, etc. I thought I stated that already though.

Progress, thanks. Your original statement was, "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." To me, your second reason ("preferring traditional QBs over athletic ones") is very clearly and directly related to football, so this does not jive with what you were implying in your original statement.

That leaves us with the first scenario ("preference for the former QB"). This seems unlikely because the person you locked horns with (Furlow) is a known Garoppolo supporter and is currently fanboying for Purdy. If you thought he was previously acting against Lance out of loyalty to Garoppolo, his same bias would have him acting against Purdy. See the incongruity?

Absent some other reason (which I invite you to make explicit), I don't see any other meaningful interpretation of your post. I think Furlow hit it on the head, and the mods appropriately shut you down.

Originally posted by DrEll:

Originally posted by boast:

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?

youre always trying to attribute Purdy's success to others. lol. while Jimmy did look good, Purdy has elevated the offense by about 10 pts per game against better defenses.

Exactly. Jimmy and Brock running the same offense, but Brock making it look much easier and has improved the offense's efficiency in ways Jimmy didn't. This isn't a Jimmy hater comment, it's quite obvious if you've seen him play these past few weeks. He stretches the field vertically and punishes the defense if they stack the box. With Jimmy, teams were daring him to beat them deep bc he refused to throw the deep or sideline pass.

I'm sorry but Brock is just a better quarterback at this point.

That's evident in the fact that we've scored 35 points 3 times in 4 Purdy starts while only hitting that mark 3 times in Jimmy's last 30+ starts going back to the start of 2020.

Originally posted by boast:

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?

youre always trying to attribute Purdy's success to others. lol. while Jimmy did look good, Purdy has elevated the offense by about 10 pts per game against better defenses.

I think all the talent helps but the guy himself needs to perform too. Brock seems to have a few things Jimmy lacks. He is more mobile, has calmer feet in the pocket, and doesn't shy away from the deep passes.

It seems that combination may be allowing us more opportunities to score.

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:

Originally posted by NCommand:
A ton of drops but his vision was pretty poor today (for him). He had some serious tunnel vision. Arm strength or timing/mechanics were off. Got lucky too.

But when needed, he came through. And he was tested a lot today.

It sure seems like Kyle avoids the outside when the heat is on. Everything in breaking. Oddly familiar.

No, again, that's due to personnel and opposing scheme. Purdy was not doing particularly well throwing downfield this game, the line was not doing particularly well protecting him, and they were bringing some blitzes. You can't do seven step drops when the QB is getting killed.

But the interception does prove that Kyle thinks differently of Purdy. That's one he calls for Lance. Same with the other play-action passes.

EDIT stupid new phone has terrible autocorrect AI.

Haha. Autocorrect gets me every day.

I agree about the personnel. They're built for short area quickness and feeding in the middle of the field. This is where Kyle likes to live.

The throwing outside the numbers seems to be more of a Kyle-design than a QB- thing; which we originally thought.

The INT to me is just one of Kyle's 1 or 2 calculated deep shots per game. He almost had it. Granted the QB still has to trust it, the receiver has to win and the play design has to beat the coverage. It didn't.

Did you mean the roll out to the left first? That Kyle would call that for Trey and not Jimmy?

Yeah no it doesn't. One need only look at Trey Lance to see that that is incorrect.



Now, is that the QB making decisions on where to throw? Sometimes it is. Regardless, when it's not, when the scheme avoids the outside, mostly it's because of who the QB is that is playing, as shown here.

And as for the shot, one need only look at the Bears game to see that the QB matters in how often those are called. Several were called in week 1. I think Trey was 3 of 4 on them.

TBF, those are Trey's strengths (arm). 1on1 outside and run run run, deeper shot. Notice how the middle disappears with him?

Yeah the point is both the execution of the play (where the QB goes with the ball) and the plays called depend on the personnel to a large degree. Kyle isn't just blindly running a system. Everything he does is dialed in to suit the personnel as best as he possibly can. Which means different QBs will have different plays, and when it's the same plays they'll be executed differently.

That's what I was saying. With Jimmy and Brock, when the pressure is on, Kyle prefers inside the numbers with these two. That tells you his comfort zone and what he believes are the strengths of those two. Remember all the complaints of in breaking routes with Jimmy? Kyle's doing the exact same with Brock. And I'll say the same thing...who cares...they still can't stop them even when they know this tendency.

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 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:

Originally posted by DaleGribble:

Originally posted by 49ersRing:

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.

LMAO utterly ridiculous take,you couldn't be anymore transparent.

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.

Stevie Wonder can see your agenda from a mile away.

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?

What reasons are you talking about? The reasons people have demonstrated bias against Trey? I can't speak for them, but I suspect it's a mixture of their preference for the former QB and them preferring traditional QBs over athletic ones in the mold of Josh Allen, Mahomes, etc. I thought I stated that already though.

Progress, thanks. Your original statement was, "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." To me, your second reason ("preferring traditional QBs over athletic ones") is very clearly and directly related to football, so this does not jive with what you were implying in your original statement.

That leaves us with the first scenario ("preference for the former QB"). This seems unlikely because the person you locked horns with (Furlow) is a known Garoppolo supporter and is currently fanboying for Purdy. If you thought he was previously acting against Lance out of loyalty to Garoppolo, his same bias would have him acting against Purdy. See the incongruity?

Absent some other reason (which I invite you to make explicit), I don't see any other meaningful interpretation of your post. I think Furlow hit it on the head, and the mods appropriately shut you down.

Christ.

Bad faith actors doing gymnastics to find the worst interpretation possible. Just not worth responding to anymore.

Originally posted by NCommand:
That's what I was saying. With Jimmy and Brock, when the pressure is on, Kyle prefers inside the numbers with these two. That tells you his comfort zone and what he believes are the strengths of those two. Remember all the complaints of in breaking routes with Jimmy? Kyle's doing the exact same with Brock. And I'll say the same thing...who cares...they still can't stop them even when they know this tendency.

Td shot to Jennings and throw to Kittle say differently. Just need to execute them a bit better.

Originally posted by 49ersRing:

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 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:

Originally posted by DaleGribble:

Originally posted by 49ersRing:

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.

LMAO utterly ridiculous take,you couldn't be anymore transparent.

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.

Stevie Wonder can see your agenda from a mile away.

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?

What reasons are you talking about? The reasons people have demonstrated bias against Trey? I can't speak for them, but I suspect it's a mixture of their preference for the former QB and them preferring traditional QBs over athletic ones in the mold of Josh Allen, Mahomes, etc. I thought I stated that already though.

Progress, thanks. Your original statement was, "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." To me, your second reason ("preferring traditional QBs over athletic ones") is very clearly and directly related to football, so this does not jive with what you were implying in your original statement.

That leaves us with the first scenario ("preference for the former QB"). This seems unlikely because the person you locked horns with (Furlow) is a known Garoppolo supporter and is currently fanboying for Purdy. If you thought he was previously acting against Lance out of loyalty to Garoppolo, his same bias would have him acting against Purdy. See the incongruity?

Absent some other reason (which I invite you to make explicit), I don't see any other meaningful interpretation of your post. I think Furlow hit it on the head, and the mods appropriately shut you down.

Christ.

Bad faith actors doing gymnastics to find the worst interpretation possible. Just not worth responding to anymore.

Gymnastics? You're the one trying to wriggle out of your own statement. I asked you for other reasons that could make this interpretation less compelling, but you haven't been able to provide any. This is why you've earned your reputation on this forum.

Edit: Thanks for not responding. I'll do the same.

This was his first game in what inexplicably ended up becoming a shootout. I'm not understanding how this was a less impressive game, to me it was the most impressive game. Listen to how BA was describing the way Brock was operating in the two minute drill and tell me that's not advanced AF for a rookie.

Originally posted by Pillbusta:
This being the Brock thread I want to celebrate him here and not be here to bash Trey. I believe Brock is now the leader in the clubhouse but I'm not a coach so I'll root for both guys but I thought here is where we discuss Brock and his play and not Trey so much

Heck I like both guys and they've not given me a reason not to root for them as Niners

I honestly can't understand why certain posters feel the need to choose between the two. Or put down one to prop up the other. It's crazy talk. ESPECIALLY now that it's Brock and Trey, who are both relatively cheap. Can't even use the contract excuse like they did with Jimmy. Next year is going to be awesome having Purdy as QB1 and Trey as the best backup in the league. If somehow Trey is able to unseat Trey then we'll still have the best backup in the league. And we'll have freed up a ton of money to re-sign Bosa and others.

In the meantime, we're witnessing a great stretch of QB play from Jimmy and now even better from Purdy. There is absolutely no doubt that Purdy has what it takes to win us #6. Yet some want to obsess over who's at fault for dropped balls and INT's in an epic come from behind win. Lol

Originally posted by 49ersRing:
I have no pro-Lance agenda. I supported Lance when he was the starting QB. I supported Jimmy even after he personally cost us two SB rings. I support Purdy. I was one of the original people on Purdy's bandwagon. I thought it was ridiculous back in October when people said our season would be over if Purdy had to play. I recognized that he was a better QB than Jimmy back then when a lot of people here thought that idea was crazy.

Well you see, this is where you get into problems. It's the old 'wins are a team stat but losses are all Jimmy's fault argument'. Yeah, Jimmy missed that throw to Sanders. If he had hit it he would have bailed out a defense that seemed to have forgotten they had 10 minutes left to play against one of the top QB's in the league who had some very dangerous deep ball threats.

How did Jimmy cost us a second Super Bowl ring? As I recall they got stopped short of making that game last year. Is it your contention that if they had beaten the Rams that the Bengals would have lost the Super Bowl or, conversely, if they had won it would have been because of something that Jimmy did?

The other issue is that if Tartt catches that pick the team might have actually gotten to the Super Bowl and then who knows what would have happened.

The last thing to remember is that Jimmy went through most of playoffs with an injured thumb and shoulder on his throwing arm. The latter of which ended up requiring surgery and yet the team STILL considered him to be a better option to start than Lance who was dealing with a less severe injury of his own.

If Jimmy's injuries had kept him out of the Ram's game in what universe is it that you could say without question, 'oh, Lance would have won that game'. The more likely scenario is that if he had been forced to play his lack of experience might have very well cost us the game.

A lot of posters in here like to say they are just offering 'valid criticism' of Jimmy's play and then use that as an excuse to denigrate his contributions to the team in any and every way they can think to do so.

'Oh, that TD he threw wasn't a very good pass.'

'Oh, it was Jimmy's fault that Kittle dropped that pass that hit him in the hands because it should have been 6 inches farther out in front of him, and here are 29 GIFS from different angles to prove my point'.

'Oh, eventhough Jimmy drove the team down the field with 45 seconds left on the clock and put his kicker in a position to win the game, which was then missed, its Jimmy's fault because he didn't score a TD instead of a field goal earlier.'

'Oh, it's Jimmy's fault he tore his ACL he shouldn't have been trying to pick up the extra yards'.

'Oh, it's Jimmy's fault that he broke his foot. He should have just given up instead of trying to keep the team in field goal range'. (Which for the record is not entirely the way I see it. The momentum of those two guys on either side was keeping him up and it looked a lot like he just had to ride it out)

Personally I think the bottom line of all of those people who like to say they are just offering 'valid criticisms' is that, like you, they're all still butt hurt that Jimmy missed that ball to Sanders and are bound and determined to continue to take it out on him as long as he is on the team.

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:

Originally posted by NCommand:
A ton of drops but his vision was pretty poor today (for him). He had some serious tunnel vision. Arm strength or timing/mechanics were off. Got lucky too.

But when needed, he came through. And he was tested a lot today.

It sure seems like Kyle avoids the outside when the heat is on. Everything in breaking. Oddly familiar.

No, again, that's due to personnel and opposing scheme. Purdy was not doing particularly well throwing downfield this game, the line was not doing particularly well protecting him, and they were bringing some blitzes. You can't do seven step drops when the QB is getting killed.

But the interception does prove that Kyle thinks differently of Purdy. That's one he calls for Lance. Same with the other play-action passes.

EDIT stupid new phone has terrible autocorrect AI.

Haha. Autocorrect gets me every day.

I agree about the personnel. They're built for short area quickness and feeding in the middle of the field. This is where Kyle likes to live.

The throwing outside the numbers seems to be more of a Kyle-design than a QB- thing; which we originally thought.

The INT to me is just one of Kyle's 1 or 2 calculated deep shots per game. He almost had it. Granted the QB still has to trust it, the receiver has to win and the play design has to beat the coverage. It didn't.

Did you mean the roll out to the left first? That Kyle would call that for Trey and not Jimmy?

Yeah no it doesn't. One need only look at Trey Lance to see that that is incorrect.



Now, is that the QB making decisions on where to throw? Sometimes it is. Regardless, when it's not, when the scheme avoids the outside, mostly it's because of who the QB is that is playing, as shown here.

And as for the shot, one need only look at the Bears game to see that the QB matters in how often those are called. Several were called in week 1. I think Trey was 3 of 4 on them.

TBF, those are Trey's strengths (arm). 1on1 outside and run run run, deeper shot. Notice how the middle disappears with him?

Yeah the point is both the execution of the play (where the QB goes with the ball) and the plays called depend on the personnel to a large degree. Kyle isn't just blindly running a system. Everything he does is dialed in to suit the personnel as best as he possibly can. Which means different QBs will have different plays, and when it's the same plays they'll be executed differently.

That's what I was saying. With Jimmy and Brock, when the pressure is on, Kyle prefers inside the numbers with these two. That tells you his comfort zone and what he believes are the strengths of those two. Remember all the complaints of in breaking routes with Jimmy? Kyle's doing the exact same with Brock. And I'll say the same thing...who cares...they still can't stop them even when they know this tendency.

Except that throw that was intended for Kittle deep outside the numbers late in the 4th quarter that ended up in Aiyuk's hands because of the pass rusher blasting Purdy as he threw it. Those rollouts will naturally target receivers on the outside more often. Jimmy wasn't very good rolling out, especially to the left. So there is that.

But to your point, when you have a guy like Jimmy or Brock who can hit those slants on time in tight windows, Kyle definitely feels confident calling them in crunch time. They are pretty much money with a decisive QB with a lightning quick release.

Originally posted by ninerjok:
This was his first game in what inexplicably ended up becoming a shootout. I'm not understanding how this was a less impressive game, to me it was the most impressive game. Listen to how BA was describing the way Brock was operating in the two minute drill and tell me that's not advanced AF for a rookie.

Each game has been impressive. But this one relied on him and he delivered.

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 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:

Originally posted by DaleGribble:

Originally posted by 49ersRing:

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.

LMAO utterly ridiculous take,you couldn't be anymore transparent.

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.

Stevie Wonder can see your agenda from a mile away.

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?

What reasons are you talking about? The reasons people have demonstrated bias against Trey? I can't speak for them, but I suspect it's a mixture of their preference for the former QB and them preferring traditional QBs over athletic ones in the mold of Josh Allen, Mahomes, etc. I thought I stated that already though.

Progress, thanks. Your original statement was, "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." To me, your second reason ("preferring traditional QBs over athletic ones") is very clearly and directly related to football, so this does not jive with what you were implying in your original statement.

That leaves us with the first scenario ("preference for the former QB"). This seems unlikely because the person you locked horns with (Furlow) is a known Garoppolo supporter and is currently fanboying for Purdy. If you thought he was previously acting against Lance out of loyalty to Garoppolo, his same bias would have him acting against Purdy. See the incongruity?

Absent some other reason (which I invite you to make explicit), I don't see any other meaningful interpretation of your post. I think Furlow hit it on the head, and the mods appropriately shut you down.

Christ.

Bad faith actors doing gymnastics to find the worst interpretation possible. Just not worth responding to anymore.

Gymnastics? You're the one trying to wriggle out of your own statement. I asked you for other reasons that could make this interpretation less compelling, but you haven't been able to provide any. This is why you've earned your reputation on this forum.

I made a mistake in giving you the benefit of the doubt and responding to you the first time, but you were dismissive of my reasoning purely so that you could choose to interpret it in a more negative light. Thanks, but I'm not compelled or required to engage with someone like that. Sorry.