QB Brock Purdy Thread

Originally posted by genus49:
Jesus man are you so hung up on being right about trivial BS that you need to drill into definitions and ignore the clear context being talked about?

People throwing around market value…going rate better for you?

Contracts are negotiated outside of free agencies still use other contracts around the league. No matter how much you want to pretend otherwise it's still the case.

As far as what NY brought up it doesn't apply to the 49ers and Purdy so while it serves a purpose to showing a possible scenario it's in essence pointless because that's not going to be the same situation here.

People miss the human element of these things and the culture setting part.

Purdy saved this regime after the Trey miss, to throw him out there in a contentious negotiation would be a major black eye to the 49ers. Rams don't have that problem, yes Stafford won a SB with them but everyone understands he's older and regressing and he's made millions.

Purdy has played well above his contract and if the 49ers come off super cheap given what he's done it will not be a good look at all, especially after them paying Deebo, Bosa and Aiyuk the deals they got.

So a real world scenario that doesnt apply doesn't mean much in the discussions we have.

Why can't it be applied? We don't know what Brock is asking for…but if he wants to be the highest paid player in the NFL, why can't we say okay go find a team that's willing to pay you that and give us compensation? Let's actually see what your market value is. Teams would be lining up to give him a bag and give up picks if he's regarded as some young elite franchise changing QB. The Rams gave up multiple 1sts (and more) Goff and paid Stafford, who was like 8 yrs older at the time.

we did it with Buck, we did it with BA, they're doing it with Stafford currently. Good on LA for having the nuts to go that route.

Market value doesn't exist when they actually don't go to the market to be evaluated. So when someone saying oh that's the market value, that's simply not true. It's just a team bidding with themselves.

No one is saying he hasn't played above his contract. That doesn't mean he should be paid as much as Burrow/ Allen etc.

the GTD cash he's gonna ask for is gonna be double that of the highest paid contract in franchise history.

What human element? It's business, if the player wants to ask to be paid more than anyone else in the league….then the team has the right to determine if that's the route to go. The player asking for all that cash is also taking cash away that could go to other players on the team all the same.

IMO I don't see Brock being a hard ass over all this, if it does become like then this is an option. Hopefully they can come up with a fair and reasonable deal and move on to other stuff quickly.

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by genus49:
Jesus man are you so hung up on being right about trivial BS that you need to drill into definitions and ignore the clear context being talked about?

People throwing around market value…going rate better for you?

Contracts are negotiated outside of free agencies still use other contracts around the league. No matter how much you want to pretend otherwise it's still the case.

As far as what NY brought up it doesn't apply to the 49ers and Purdy so while it serves a purpose to showing a possible scenario it's in essence pointless because that's not going to be the same situation here.

People miss the human element of these things and the culture setting part.

Purdy saved this regime after the Trey miss, to throw him out there in a contentious negotiation would be a major black eye to the 49ers. Rams don't have that problem, yes Stafford won a SB with them but everyone understands he's older and regressing and he's made millions.

Purdy has played well above his contract and if the 49ers come off super cheap given what he's done it will not be a good look at all, especially after them paying Deebo, Bosa and Aiyuk the deals they got.

So a real world scenario that doesnt apply doesn't mean much in the discussions we have.

Why can't it be applied? We don't know what Brock is asking for…but if he wants to be the highest paid player in the NFL, why can't we say okay go find a team that's willing to pay you that and give us compensation? Let's actually see what your market value is. Teams would be lining up to give him a bag and give up picks if he's regarded as some young elite franchise changing QB. The Rams gave up multiple 1sts (and more) Goff and paid Stafford, who was like 8 yrs older at the time.

we did it with Buck, we did it with BA, they're doing it with Stafford currently. Good on LA for having the nuts to go that route.

Market value doesn't exist when they actually don't go to the market to be evaluated. So when someone saying oh that's the market value, that's simply not true. It's just a team bidding with themselves.

No one is saying he hasn't played above his contract. That doesn't mean he should be paid as much as Burrow/ Allen etc.

the GTD cash he's gonna ask for is gonna be double that of the highest paid contract in franchise history.

What human element? It's business, if the player wants to ask to be paid more than anyone else in the league….then the team has the right to determine if that's the route to go. The player asking for all that cash is also taking cash away that could go to other players on the team all the same.

IMO I don't see Brock being a hard ass over all this, if it does become like then this is an option. Hopefully they can come up with a fair and reasonable deal and move on to other stuff quickly.

I had it all written out as to why not.

The situations are not comparable which is why you never see teams doing that with QBs on rookie contracts. 49ers preach the culture they built, pulling that move with Brock after what he did to save our asses would be horrible for that. So yes it's a business but it's a people business. It would be an incredibly bad look for the 49ers to play hardball here considering they put the team around Brock this year. They delayed the deals with Aiyuk and Trent. They had Jake Brendel in there all year long. You setup a guy to fail and then play hardball with the contract after he likely saved your job from one of the biggest misses you can have? BAD look.

I also think you're letting your bias cloud your judgment on how much interest there would be for Brock IF they did that. Matt Stafford as good as he is is a declining player maybe a year or two away from retirement. The Rams don't have to worry about a PR situation since Stafford has made plenty of money and there is no room for growing with him as a player. He's not going to develop into a better version after 16 years in the NFL.

Purdy is in the prime of his career with lots of room for growth even with a physical talent cap he won't be able to get over at some point. All it would take is 1 team to throw money at him for that so called market value to jump.

So once again it's silly to get into the argument of definitions of market value vs going rate. We all know what's being talked about. 49ers aren't negotiating against themselves, they're going to have to deal with all the other contracts out there.

But yes in the end I believe this will not get nasty on either end so this back and forth is going to be for nothing.

Originally posted by genus49:
I had it all written out as to why not.

The situations are not comparable which is why you never see teams doing that with QBs on rookie contracts. 49ers preach the culture they built, pulling that move with Brock after what he did to save our asses would be horrible for that. So yes it's a business but it's a people business. It would be an incredibly bad look for the 49ers to play hardball here considering they put the team around Brock this year. They delayed the deals with Aiyuk and Trent. They had Jake Brendel in there all year long. You setup a guy to fail and then play hardball with the contract after he likely saved your job from one of the biggest misses you can have? BAD look.

I also think you're letting your bias cloud your judgment on how much interest there would be for Brock IF they did that. Matt Stafford as good as he is is a declining player maybe a year or two away from retirement. The Rams don't have to worry about a PR situation since Stafford has made plenty of money and there is no room for growing with him as a player. He's not going to develop into a better version after 16 years in the NFL.

Purdy is in the prime of his career with lots of room for growth even with a physical talent cap he won't be able to get over at some point. All it would take is 1 team to throw money at him for that so called market value to jump.

So once again it's silly to get into the argument of definitions of market value vs going rate. We all know what's being talked about. 49ers aren't negotiating against themselves, they're going to have to deal with all the other contracts out there.

But yes in the end I believe this will not get nasty on either end so this back and forth is going to be for nothing.

Hear hear It's not that difficult to understand

Originally posted by genus49:
I had it all written out as to why not.

The situations are not comparable which is why you never see teams doing that with QBs on rookie contracts. 49ers preach the culture they built, pulling that move with Brock after what he did to save our asses would be horrible for that.

Only problem is this is 100% a fan sitting at home view. These guys in the offices view the draft as gambling and hedging their bets. When they "strike",....they dont humble themselves at the mercy of their productive draft picks. They pat themselves on the back and give themselves the credit more than anything for a solid evaluation. Wash, Rinse, Repeat.

The super-thankfulness to a draft pick that happened to turn out well thus far is a lil too dreamy compared to the way this stuff is viewed.

Originally posted by genus49:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by genus49:
Jesus man are you so hung up on being right about trivial BS that you need to drill into definitions and ignore the clear context being talked about?

People throwing around market value…going rate better for you?

Contracts are negotiated outside of free agencies still use other contracts around the league. No matter how much you want to pretend otherwise it's still the case.

As far as what NY brought up it doesn't apply to the 49ers and Purdy so while it serves a purpose to showing a possible scenario it's in essence pointless because that's not going to be the same situation here.

People miss the human element of these things and the culture setting part.

Purdy saved this regime after the Trey miss, to throw him out there in a contentious negotiation would be a major black eye to the 49ers. Rams don't have that problem, yes Stafford won a SB with them but everyone understands he's older and regressing and he's made millions.

Purdy has played well above his contract and if the 49ers come off super cheap given what he's done it will not be a good look at all, especially after them paying Deebo, Bosa and Aiyuk the deals they got.

So a real world scenario that doesnt apply doesn't mean much in the discussions we have.

Why can't it be applied? We don't know what Brock is asking for…but if he wants to be the highest paid player in the NFL, why can't we say okay go find a team that's willing to pay you that and give us compensation? Let's actually see what your market value is. Teams would be lining up to give him a bag and give up picks if he's regarded as some young elite franchise changing QB. The Rams gave up multiple 1sts (and more) Goff and paid Stafford, who was like 8 yrs older at the time.

we did it with Buck, we did it with BA, they're doing it with Stafford currently. Good on LA for having the nuts to go that route.

Market value doesn't exist when they actually don't go to the market to be evaluated. So when someone saying oh that's the market value, that's simply not true. It's just a team bidding with themselves.

No one is saying he hasn't played above his contract. That doesn't mean he should be paid as much as Burrow/ Allen etc.

the GTD cash he's gonna ask for is gonna be double that of the highest paid contract in franchise history.

What human element? It's business, if the player wants to ask to be paid more than anyone else in the league….then the team has the right to determine if that's the route to go. The player asking for all that cash is also taking cash away that could go to other players on the team all the same.

IMO I don't see Brock being a hard ass over all this, if it does become like then this is an option. Hopefully they can come up with a fair and reasonable deal and move on to other stuff quickly.

I had it all written out as to why not.

The situations are not comparable which is why you never see teams doing that with QBs on rookie contracts. 49ers preach the culture they built, pulling that move with Brock after what he did to save our asses would be horrible for that. So yes it's a business but it's a people business. It would be an incredibly bad look for the 49ers to play hardball here considering they put the team around Brock this year. They delayed the deals with Aiyuk and Trent. They had Jake Brendel in there all year long. You setup a guy to fail and then play hardball with the contract after he likely saved your job from one of the biggest misses you can have? BAD look.

I also think you're letting your bias cloud your judgment on how much interest there would be for Brock IF they did that. Matt Stafford as good as he is is a declining player maybe a year or two away from retirement. The Rams don't have to worry about a PR situation since Stafford has made plenty of money and there is no room for growing with him as a player. He's not going to develop into a better version after 16 years in the NFL.

Purdy is in the prime of his career with lots of room for growth even with a physical talent cap he won't be able to get over at some point. All it would take is 1 team to throw money at him for that so called market value to jump.

So once again it's silly to get into the argument of definitions of market value vs going rate. We all know what's being talked about. 49ers aren't negotiating against themselves, they're going to have to deal with all the other contracts out there.

But yes in the end I believe this will not get nasty on either end so this back and forth is going to be for nothing.

Literally the Ravens just did it, so your first sentence is not accurate.

So you think SF is forced to pay Brock whatever he wants because you think he saved their asses? I mean that's not how it works. They kinda did that with Jimmy and we can all look back and say that probably wasn't the best route to go (and they missed out on going after better QBs).

I think you're the one with the cloudy judgement on this, not me. Name me a legit team that would pay him the most money in NFL history and give up all kinds of top end draft capital? If he's that franchise changing QB (and is only 25) then teams would be lining up to give up whatever we want and pay him. Objectively I don't think that's the case.

I think it's silly to debate market value, when he doesn't get to the market. How about we stop tossing that term out? Because the ONLY way to truly gauge his "market value" is to see what the actual market would pay him. Instead we're bidding against ourselves. Brock can develop into the next Brees or he could regress. That's the point. Not every player gets better as they play more….sometimes there's a ceiling there. Is what it is and I'm not saying that's Brock situation.

as far as the Rams go, it's business. They have a ton to lose if Stafford is gone. Who's gonna be their QB? Jimmy? rogers? I mean they could go from NFCW champs to last in the division. You think McVay is gonna stick around hoping to find another QB? He's already thought about calling it a day.

My point is if Brock wants to be paid more than anyone else or on par with Dak, I don't see the problem with telling him to go find it then (or saying we can figure it out a yr from now). Meeting in the middle with a good fair contract seems like a good option to me, not sure why that's controversial?

In here: Lots of inventing scenarios where Brock is the bad guy ("wants to be highest paid player in history") to justify cutting him loose and rolling the dice on a new guy / draft pick in the name of saving the team's salary cap.

Originally posted by random49er:

Originally posted by genus49:
I had it all written out as to why not.

The situations are not comparable which is why you never see teams doing that with QBs on rookie contracts. 49ers preach the culture they built, pulling that move with Brock after what he did to save our asses would be horrible for that.

Only problem is this is 100% a fan sitting at home view. These guys in the offices view the draft as gambling and hedging their bets. When they "strike",....they dont humble themselves at the mercy of their productive draft picks. They pat themselves on the back and give themselves the credit more than anything for a solid evaluation. Wash, Rinse, Repeat.

The super-thankfulness to a draft pick that happened to turn out well thus far is a lil too dreamy compared to the way this stuff is viewed.

You have an inside look at how the guys feel now?

You don't have to be a fan sitting at home to understand how coaches get fired. Losing and wasting the money of ownership.

Purdy helped Kyle/John hide one of the biggest misses in franchise history with Lance while keeping the team together and helping us win many games. This past season we didn't win as much but getting to the SB the year prior and making the big run with Brock as a rookie certainly bought Kyle/John time to fix things up.

I'm not saying they're going to throw a few million extra at Brock as a thank you but I bet they understand the optics involved if they play hardball given that Brock was getting less than his backups.

Originally posted by random49er:
Only problem is this is 100% a fan sitting at home view. These guys in the offices view the draft as gambling and hedging their bets. When they "strike",....they dont humble themselves at the mercy of their productive draft picks. They pat themselves on the back and give themselves the credit more than anything for a solid evaluation. Wash, Rinse, Repeat.

The super-thankfulness to a draft pick that happened to turn out well thus far is a lil too dreamy compared to the way this stuff is viewed.

💯 it's a fan pov.

also the whole build a culture thing has zero to do with contract negotiations. Look at what they did with all the other big name 49ers. It was ruthless stalemate negations that went the distance. Players got upset, the team was annoyed, trade requests etc etc.

I mean go look at what Pitt did with Bell coming off his rookie contract. There's all kinds of examples of that stuff.

it's the business side of football. Players want as much money as possible and teams want to win every contract negotiation.

Originally posted by captveg:
In here: Lots of inventing scenarios where Brock is the bad guy ("wants to be highest paid player in history") to justify cutting him loose and rolling the dice on a new guy / draft pick in the name of saving the team's salary cap.

So what do you think Brock wants?

I don't think either party is the "bad guy" in this scenario. I don't think you should just pay him whatever he wants just because he's our QB. I don't think SF should offer him peanuts either.

For me, I don't want to cut him loose. I think it's smart business to figure out what his worth might be across the league if negotiations go south.

I'm more of a met in the middle guy.

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by genus49:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by genus49:
Jesus man are you so hung up on being right about trivial BS that you need to drill into definitions and ignore the clear context being talked about?

People throwing around market value…going rate better for you?

Contracts are negotiated outside of free agencies still use other contracts around the league. No matter how much you want to pretend otherwise it's still the case.

As far as what NY brought up it doesn't apply to the 49ers and Purdy so while it serves a purpose to showing a possible scenario it's in essence pointless because that's not going to be the same situation here.

People miss the human element of these things and the culture setting part.

Purdy saved this regime after the Trey miss, to throw him out there in a contentious negotiation would be a major black eye to the 49ers. Rams don't have that problem, yes Stafford won a SB with them but everyone understands he's older and regressing and he's made millions.

Purdy has played well above his contract and if the 49ers come off super cheap given what he's done it will not be a good look at all, especially after them paying Deebo, Bosa and Aiyuk the deals they got.

So a real world scenario that doesnt apply doesn't mean much in the discussions we have.

Why can't it be applied? We don't know what Brock is asking for…but if he wants to be the highest paid player in the NFL, why can't we say okay go find a team that's willing to pay you that and give us compensation? Let's actually see what your market value is. Teams would be lining up to give him a bag and give up picks if he's regarded as some young elite franchise changing QB. The Rams gave up multiple 1sts (and more) Goff and paid Stafford, who was like 8 yrs older at the time.

we did it with Buck, we did it with BA, they're doing it with Stafford currently. Good on LA for having the nuts to go that route.

Market value doesn't exist when they actually don't go to the market to be evaluated. So when someone saying oh that's the market value, that's simply not true. It's just a team bidding with themselves.

No one is saying he hasn't played above his contract. That doesn't mean he should be paid as much as Burrow/ Allen etc.

the GTD cash he's gonna ask for is gonna be double that of the highest paid contract in franchise history.

What human element? It's business, if the player wants to ask to be paid more than anyone else in the league….then the team has the right to determine if that's the route to go. The player asking for all that cash is also taking cash away that could go to other players on the team all the same.

IMO I don't see Brock being a hard ass over all this, if it does become like then this is an option. Hopefully they can come up with a fair and reasonable deal and move on to other stuff quickly.

I had it all written out as to why not.

The situations are not comparable which is why you never see teams doing that with QBs on rookie contracts. 49ers preach the culture they built, pulling that move with Brock after what he did to save our asses would be horrible for that. So yes it's a business but it's a people business. It would be an incredibly bad look for the 49ers to play hardball here considering they put the team around Brock this year. They delayed the deals with Aiyuk and Trent. They had Jake Brendel in there all year long. You setup a guy to fail and then play hardball with the contract after he likely saved your job from one of the biggest misses you can have? BAD look.

I also think you're letting your bias cloud your judgment on how much interest there would be for Brock IF they did that. Matt Stafford as good as he is is a declining player maybe a year or two away from retirement. The Rams don't have to worry about a PR situation since Stafford has made plenty of money and there is no room for growing with him as a player. He's not going to develop into a better version after 16 years in the NFL.

Purdy is in the prime of his career with lots of room for growth even with a physical talent cap he won't be able to get over at some point. All it would take is 1 team to throw money at him for that so called market value to jump.

So once again it's silly to get into the argument of definitions of market value vs going rate. We all know what's being talked about. 49ers aren't negotiating against themselves, they're going to have to deal with all the other contracts out there.

But yes in the end I believe this will not get nasty on either end so this back and forth is going to be for nothing.

Literally the Ravens just did it, so your first sentence is not accurate.

So you think SF is forced to pay Brock whatever he wants because you think he saved their asses? I mean that's not how it works. They kinda did that with Jimmy and we can all look back and say that probably wasn't the best route to go (and they missed out on going after better QBs).

I think you're the one with the cloudy judgement on this, not me. Name me a legit team that would pay him the most money in NFL history and give up all kinds of top end draft capital? If he's that franchise changing QB (and is only 25) then teams would be lining up to give up whatever we want and pay him. Objectively I don't think that's the case.

I think it's silly to debate market value, when he doesn't get to the market. How about we stop tossing that term out? Because the ONLY way to truly gauge his "market value" is to see what the actual market would pay him. Instead we're bidding against ourselves. Brock can develop into the next Brees or he could regress. That's the point. Not every player gets better as they play more….sometimes there's a ceiling there. Is what it is and I'm not saying that's Brock situation.

as far as the Rams go, it's business. They have a ton to lose if Stafford is gone. Who's gonna be their QB? Jimmy? rogers? I mean they could go from NFCW champs to last in the division. You think McVay is gonna stick around hoping to find another QB? He's already thought about calling it a day.

My point is if Brock wants to be paid more than anyone else or on par with Dak, I don't see the problem with telling him to go find it then (or saying we can figure it out a yr from now). Meeting in the middle with a good fair contract seems like a good option to me, not sure why that's controversial?

Pretty sure the Ravens did that under the non-exclusive franchise tag, so he wasn't technically still under his rookie contract which is what I was referring to.

And Lamar I'm pretty sure didn't have an agent so this was a way for the Ravens to show him nobody else was going to give him a fully guaranteed deal like he wanted AND give Ravens draft picks.

And no, I don't think the 49ers should pay Brock whatever they want and I'm not even sure why you keep throwing this out there. You know fully well that's not going to happen. So this back and forth is pointless. IF IF IF.

Have we heard ANYTHING that makes it sound like Brock is going to ask for a Dak like deal or highest deal in the NFL without it being all fluff?

As for what team would trade for Brock and pay him? I don't know but we have several teams who don't have a proven QB and Brock is that a lot more than any of the guys in this draft class. So all it would take is one to hurt the 49ers but once again this is a moot point. The alternative is Brock plays out his contract and hits free agency. The 49ers waiting only hurts them and their team.

If they believe him playing lowers his value then they may as well be betting against themselves. You want your QB feeling secure and not playing scared. Not paying him now doesn't lead to many positives. May as well shoot yourselves in the foot as you're heading into a must bounce back season where the SB is being played in your stadium.

Originally posted by NYniner85:
💯 it's a fan pov.

also the whole build a culture thing has zero to do with contract negotiations. Look at what they did with all the other big name 49ers. It was ruthless stalemate negations that went the distance. Players got upset, the team was annoyed, trade requests etc etc.

I mean go look at what Pitt did with Bell coming off his rookie contract. There's all kinds of examples of that stuff.

it's the business side of football. Players want as much money as possible and teams want to win every contract negotiation.

None of those guys you mentioned were key pieces in getting the team to the NFCCG and then SB on bottom of the 7th round pick salary.

Bell is a RB. You know the comparisons are absurd. Show me a QB who accomplished as much as Brock has who didn't get extended by his team.

This is why this back and forth is dumb. You're making up scenarios that are extremes and there has been nothing to indicate the situation will get there.

Both sides have talked about the deal getting done quickly. So why are we here thinking up what the team should do in the worst case scenario?

Originally posted by genus49:
Pretty sure the Ravens did that under the non-exclusive franchise tag, so he wasn't technically still under his rookie contract which is what I was referring to.

And Lamar I'm pretty sure didn't have an agent so this was a way for the Ravens to show him nobody else was going to give him a fully guaranteed deal like he wanted AND give Ravens draft picks.

And no, I don't think the 49ers should pay Brock whatever they want and I'm not even sure why you keep throwing this out there. You know fully well that's not going to happen. So this back and forth is pointless. IF IF IF.

Have we heard ANYTHING that makes it sound like Brock is going to ask for a Dak like deal or highest deal in the NFL without it being all fluff?

As for what team would trade for Brock and pay him? I don't know but we have several teams who don't have a proven QB and Brock is that a lot more than any of the guys in this draft class. So all it would take is one to hurt the 49ers but once again this is a moot point. The alternative is Brock plays out his contract and hits free agency. The 49ers waiting only hurts them and their team.

If they believe him playing lowers his value then they may as well be betting against themselves. You want your QB feeling secure and not playing scared. Not paying him now doesn't lead to many positives. May as well shoot yourselves in the foot as you're heading into a must bounce back season where the SB is being played in your stadium.

He was still coming off his rookie contract. They tagged him specifically so teams could help justify his market value. The semantics of what he wanted doesn't really matter. It was just another form of negotiations by a team (one that you could say built a good culture all the same).

if you're a team that has nothing at QB and you think "insert name at QB" is a game changing FQB, then they will gladly pay and trade for them.

It's all speculation. Like I said what I'm pointing out to do is IF Brock wants that type of cash, there's examples of other teams (even this team) doing what I said is an option. I'm not saying go that route if the deal is a fair on both ends.

Also what would hurt this team? Having one NFL team saying they'd give up years of 1sts rd picks and pay Brock elite money? How does that hurt this team in any way? Now they have options. Take all the picks or pay Brock top end money that he already wanted in this scenario

Originally posted by genus49:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by genus49:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by genus49:
Jesus man are you so hung up on being right about trivial BS that you need to drill into definitions and ignore the clear context being talked about?

People throwing around market value…going rate better for you?

Contracts are negotiated outside of free agencies still use other contracts around the league. No matter how much you want to pretend otherwise it's still the case.

As far as what NY brought up it doesn't apply to the 49ers and Purdy so while it serves a purpose to showing a possible scenario it's in essence pointless because that's not going to be the same situation here.

People miss the human element of these things and the culture setting part.

Purdy saved this regime after the Trey miss, to throw him out there in a contentious negotiation would be a major black eye to the 49ers. Rams don't have that problem, yes Stafford won a SB with them but everyone understands he's older and regressing and he's made millions.

Purdy has played well above his contract and if the 49ers come off super cheap given what he's done it will not be a good look at all, especially after them paying Deebo, Bosa and Aiyuk the deals they got.

So a real world scenario that doesnt apply doesn't mean much in the discussions we have.

Why can't it be applied? We don't know what Brock is asking for…but if he wants to be the highest paid player in the NFL, why can't we say okay go find a team that's willing to pay you that and give us compensation? Let's actually see what your market value is. Teams would be lining up to give him a bag and give up picks if he's regarded as some young elite franchise changing QB. The Rams gave up multiple 1sts (and more) Goff and paid Stafford, who was like 8 yrs older at the time.

we did it with Buck, we did it with BA, they're doing it with Stafford currently. Good on LA for having the nuts to go that route.

Market value doesn't exist when they actually don't go to the market to be evaluated. So when someone saying oh that's the market value, that's simply not true. It's just a team bidding with themselves.

No one is saying he hasn't played above his contract. That doesn't mean he should be paid as much as Burrow/ Allen etc.

the GTD cash he's gonna ask for is gonna be double that of the highest paid contract in franchise history.

What human element? It's business, if the player wants to ask to be paid more than anyone else in the league….then the team has the right to determine if that's the route to go. The player asking for all that cash is also taking cash away that could go to other players on the team all the same.

IMO I don't see Brock being a hard ass over all this, if it does become like then this is an option. Hopefully they can come up with a fair and reasonable deal and move on to other stuff quickly.

I had it all written out as to why not.

The situations are not comparable which is why you never see teams doing that with QBs on rookie contracts. 49ers preach the culture they built, pulling that move with Brock after what he did to save our asses would be horrible for that. So yes it's a business but it's a people business. It would be an incredibly bad look for the 49ers to play hardball here considering they put the team around Brock this year. They delayed the deals with Aiyuk and Trent. They had Jake Brendel in there all year long. You setup a guy to fail and then play hardball with the contract after he likely saved your job from one of the biggest misses you can have? BAD look.

I also think you're letting your bias cloud your judgment on how much interest there would be for Brock IF they did that. Matt Stafford as good as he is is a declining player maybe a year or two away from retirement. The Rams don't have to worry about a PR situation since Stafford has made plenty of money and there is no room for growing with him as a player. He's not going to develop into a better version after 16 years in the NFL.

Purdy is in the prime of his career with lots of room for growth even with a physical talent cap he won't be able to get over at some point. All it would take is 1 team to throw money at him for that so called market value to jump.

So once again it's silly to get into the argument of definitions of market value vs going rate. We all know what's being talked about. 49ers aren't negotiating against themselves, they're going to have to deal with all the other contracts out there.

But yes in the end I believe this will not get nasty on either end so this back and forth is going to be for nothing.

Literally the Ravens just did it, so your first sentence is not accurate.

So you think SF is forced to pay Brock whatever he wants because you think he saved their asses? I mean that's not how it works. They kinda did that with Jimmy and we can all look back and say that probably wasn't the best route to go (and they missed out on going after better QBs).

I think you're the one with the cloudy judgement on this, not me. Name me a legit team that would pay him the most money in NFL history and give up all kinds of top end draft capital? If he's that franchise changing QB (and is only 25) then teams would be lining up to give up whatever we want and pay him. Objectively I don't think that's the case.

I think it's silly to debate market value, when he doesn't get to the market. How about we stop tossing that term out? Because the ONLY way to truly gauge his "market value" is to see what the actual market would pay him. Instead we're bidding against ourselves. Brock can develop into the next Brees or he could regress. That's the point. Not every player gets better as they play more….sometimes there's a ceiling there. Is what it is and I'm not saying that's Brock situation.

as far as the Rams go, it's business. They have a ton to lose if Stafford is gone. Who's gonna be their QB? Jimmy? rogers? I mean they could go from NFCW champs to last in the division. You think McVay is gonna stick around hoping to find another QB? He's already thought about calling it a day.

My point is if Brock wants to be paid more than anyone else or on par with Dak, I don't see the problem with telling him to go find it then (or saying we can figure it out a yr from now). Meeting in the middle with a good fair contract seems like a good option to me, not sure why that's controversial?

Pretty sure the Ravens did that under the non-exclusive franchise tag, so he wasn't technically still under his rookie contract which is what I was referring to.

And Lamar I'm pretty sure didn't have an agent so this was a way for the Ravens to show him nobody else was going to give him a fully guaranteed deal like he wanted AND give Ravens draft picks.

And no, I don't think the 49ers should pay Brock whatever they want and I'm not even sure why you keep throwing this out there. You know fully well that's not going to happen. So this back and forth is pointless. IF IF IF.

Have we heard ANYTHING that makes it sound like Brock is going to ask for a Dak like deal or highest deal in the NFL without it being all fluff?

As for what team would trade for Brock and pay him? I don't know but we have several teams who don't have a proven QB and Brock is that a lot more than any of the guys in this draft class. So all it would take is one to hurt the 49ers but once again this is a moot point. The alternative is Brock plays out his contract and hits free agency. The 49ers waiting only hurts them and their team.

If they believe him playing lowers his value then they may as well be betting against themselves. You want your QB feeling secure and not playing scared. Not paying him now doesn't lead to many positives. May as well shoot yourselves in the foot as you're heading into a must bounce back season where the SB is being played in your stadium.

i see NY trying to bring up the same old stuff i debunked with him. No player has been placed on a hook to catch market value as if they were truly free agents

Ravens had no offers, does that mean LJ is worthless ? They ended up making him the "highest" signed QB at the time

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by captveg:
In here: Lots of inventing scenarios where Brock is the bad guy ("wants to be highest paid player in history") to justify cutting him loose and rolling the dice on a new guy / draft pick in the name of saving the team's salary cap.

So what do you think Brock wants?

A fair market deal, and in exchange for that the team will want relatively easy outs if he stops being productive.

These deals happen all the time. No reason for us fans to wring hands over it.