QB Brock Purdy Thread

Originally posted by English:
Just seen Cohn's nonsense about the Niners trading Purdy for Stafford. And him saying Stafford is a significantly better qb than Purdy. What utter garbage he talks.

Like I said...as bad as Cohn is even he hasn't made a point to claim Purdy is asking for a mega deal. Which is why arguing about contentious contract negotiations solutions with Brock and the 49ers right now seem silly.

And Cohn has really gone all in on the clickbait stuff. It's a shame because despite his nepo status he actually could be a pretty good reporter since he's not afraid to push it with the tough questions but now that he monetized his youtube channel and twitter, it's just clickbait and over the top stuff.

Can't blame him either it's smart business. You either get fans upset at him yelling at him or the 49ers 'fans' who love to see the team fail so they can say I told you so basically worshiping the guy. He's getting interactions from both sides.

Originally posted by random49er:
Well his point was the whole "aging veterans" vs. "youthful roster" thing. Basically, what Stafford's last trade for another QB came down to,...and how it benefitted the Rams already (SB win). It wasn't a "hey let's get rid of this bum" type article. The overall question is how desperate are we to win right now?

"But would Stafford make the 49ers Super Bowl favorites? No, he wouldn't. And that's a big reason not to trade for Stafford." --Cohn

I don't think the Stafford/Goff+ trade came down to aging vets vs youthful roster thing. It came down to McVay understanding he can't get it done with Goff and Matt Stafford in his mid 30s gives them a lot more at the position.

And that's the thing about clickbait - you put out the attention grabbing headline that either pisses people off or excites people with the opposite opinion and then you can fill in details and paint it as an opinion piece.

Only time I'll read anything from Grant these days is his training camp reports because he does add interesting tidbits in there however even there you have to read other camp reports to sift through his bias. Reading his reports and then reading Lombardi's are always hilarious. They'll cover the same play and paint it as complete opposite.

Rumor obviously but some were talking market value

Originally posted by MucketyMuck:
Rumor obviously but some were talking market value

#Rams Matthew Stafford wants $50M per season.

The #Browns #Raiders and #Giants have reached out about a trade. pic.twitter.com/aws9E15trR

— NFL Rumors (@nflrums) February 24, 2025

Market value for an aging QB looking for mostly guaranteed money isn't the same as a young QB who will maybe get 70% guaranteed.

But it makes sense for us to sign Brock to eliminate another QB deal his agents can use to leverage.

Originally posted by genus49:

Originally posted by English:
Just seen Cohn's nonsense about the Niners trading Purdy for Stafford. And him saying Stafford is a significantly better qb than Purdy. What utter garbage he talks.

Like I said...as bad as Cohn is even he hasn't made a point to claim Purdy is asking for a mega deal. Which is why arguing about contentious contract negotiations solutions with Brock and the 49ers right now seem silly.

And Cohn has really gone all in on the clickbait stuff. It's a shame because despite his nepo status he actually could be a pretty good reporter since he's not afraid to push it with the tough questions but now that he monetized his youtube channel and twitter, it's just clickbait and over the top stuff.

Can't blame him either it's smart business. You either get fans upset at him yelling at him or the 49ers 'fans' who love to see the team fail so they can say I told you so basically worshiping the guy. He's getting interactions from both sides.

More on him in a minute.

Originally posted by Alfienator:
More on him in a minute.

Moron him every minute.

Originally posted by MucketyMuck:
Rumor obviously but some were talking market value

#Rams Matthew Stafford wants $50M per season.

The #Browns #Raiders and #Giants have reached out about a trade. pic.twitter.com/aws9E15trR

— NFL Rumors (@nflrums) February 24, 2025

the problem with stafford is his arm fell off late last year. rams know he's past his prime. otherwise they would pay him. the key takeaway is rams aren't gonna just pay their QB for past performance they are being critical of the recent results and want to be set up for future success.

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:

Originally posted by MucketyMuck:
Rumor obviously but some were talking market value

#Rams Matthew Stafford wants $50M per season.

The #Browns #Raiders and #Giants have reached out about a trade. pic.twitter.com/aws9E15trR

— NFL Rumors (@nflrums) February 24, 2025

the problem with stafford is his arm fell off late last year. rams know he's past his prime. otherwise they would pay him. the key takeaway is rams aren't gonna just pay their QB for past performance they are being critical of the recent results and want to be set up for future success.

lol, please no more Qb analysis

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:

Originally posted by MucketyMuck:
Rumor obviously but some were talking market value

#Rams Matthew Stafford wants $50M per season.

The #Browns #Raiders and #Giants have reached out about a trade. pic.twitter.com/aws9E15trR

— NFL Rumors (@nflrums) February 24, 2025

the problem with stafford is his arm fell off late last year. rams know he's past his prime. otherwise they would pay him. the key takeaway is rams aren't gonna just pay their QB for past performance they are being critical of the recent results and want to be set up for future success.

I'm sure you're trying to make an analogy to Brock's situation here...forgetting the whole 12 year difference between Brock and Stafford.

Like I mentioned before people are quick to say Purdy had a down year...what about Stafford? 49ers aren't paying Brock based on what he did, they're going to pay him based on what he did to show the team what he could do in the next X amount of years.

Career trajectory is important. Teams are hesitant to pay guys they feel are trending in the wrong direction.

Originally posted by genus49:
I'm sure you're trying to make an analogy to Brock's situation here...forgetting the whole 12 year difference between Brock and Stafford.

Like I mentioned before people are quick to say Purdy had a down year...what about Stafford? 49ers aren't paying Brock based on what he did, they're going to pay him based on what he did to show the team what he could do in the next X amount of years.

Career trajectory is important. Teams are hesitant to pay guys they feel are trending in the wrong direction.

wouldn't surprise me if LA was after daniel jones. he may cost 9m, when stafford costs 50m. stafford is going the way of rodgers, old and ineffective.

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:

Originally posted by genus49:
I'm sure you're trying to make an analogy to Brock's situation here...forgetting the whole 12 year difference between Brock and Stafford.

Like I mentioned before people are quick to say Purdy had a down year...what about Stafford? 49ers aren't paying Brock based on what he did, they're going to pay him based on what he did to show the team what he could do in the next X amount of years.

Career trajectory is important. Teams are hesitant to pay guys they feel are trending in the wrong direction.

wouldn't surprise me if LA was after daniel jones. he may cost 9m, when stafford costs 50m. stafford is going the way of rodgers, old and ineffective.

I hear they may go with Jimmy G. Perhaps a RamFaithful3 is in the works?

Originally posted by genus49:

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:

Originally posted by genus49:
I'm sure you're trying to make an analogy to Brock's situation here...forgetting the whole 12 year difference between Brock and Stafford.

Like I mentioned before people are quick to say Purdy had a down year...what about Stafford? 49ers aren't paying Brock based on what he did, they're going to pay him based on what he did to show the team what he could do in the next X amount of years.

Career trajectory is important. Teams are hesitant to pay guys they feel are trending in the wrong direction.

wouldn't surprise me if LA was after daniel jones. he may cost 9m, when stafford costs 50m. stafford is going the way of rodgers, old and ineffective.

I hear they may go with Jimmy G. Perhaps a RamFaithful3 is in the works?

i prefer jones, he really is a guy to watch this offseason. just needs a quality setup.

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:

Originally posted by genus49:

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:

Originally posted by genus49:
I'm sure you're trying to make an analogy to Brock's situation here...forgetting the whole 12 year difference between Brock and Stafford.

Like I mentioned before people are quick to say Purdy had a down year...what about Stafford? 49ers aren't paying Brock based on what he did, they're going to pay him based on what he did to show the team what he could do in the next X amount of years.

Career trajectory is important. Teams are hesitant to pay guys they feel are trending in the wrong direction.

wouldn't surprise me if LA was after daniel jones. he may cost 9m, when stafford costs 50m. stafford is going the way of rodgers, old and ineffective.

I hear they may go with Jimmy G. Perhaps a RamFaithful3 is in the works?

i prefer jones, he really is a guy to watch this offseason. just needs a quality setup.

Similar to Barkley leaving NY?

Originally posted by glorydayz:

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:

Originally posted by genus49:

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:

Originally posted by genus49:
I'm sure you're trying to make an analogy to Brock's situation here...forgetting the whole 12 year difference between Brock and Stafford.

Like I mentioned before people are quick to say Purdy had a down year...what about Stafford? 49ers aren't paying Brock based on what he did, they're going to pay him based on what he did to show the team what he could do in the next X amount of years.

Career trajectory is important. Teams are hesitant to pay guys they feel are trending in the wrong direction.

wouldn't surprise me if LA was after daniel jones. he may cost 9m, when stafford costs 50m. stafford is going the way of rodgers, old and ineffective.

I hear they may go with Jimmy G. Perhaps a RamFaithful3 is in the works?

i prefer jones, he really is a guy to watch this offseason. just needs a quality setup.

Similar to Barkley leaving NY?

yeah, he did well leaving. barkley is much better at RB than jones is at QB tho just imo. but i like jones physical abilities. he's more athletic than ppl think. when i was watching trey in the trey era, i thought he was kinda like d jones, course jones is like a far better version of that. arm to put it all over the field and plus runner with size. he'd be a great backup or a good starter, but only in a good situation. if he signs someplace that is a rough spot he will struggle. LA rams is a good spot cuz of the coach. we would be great also if he wants to be QB2 for a season.

Originally posted by genus49:

Originally posted by MucketyMuck:
Rumor obviously but some were talking market value

#Rams Matthew Stafford wants $50M per season.

The #Browns #Raiders and #Giants have reached out about a trade. pic.twitter.com/aws9E15trR

— NFL Rumors (@nflrums) February 24, 2025

Market value for an aging QB looking for mostly guaranteed money isn't the same as a young QB who will maybe get 70% guaranteed.

But it makes sense for us to sign Brock to eliminate another QB deal his agents can use to leverage.

If dogs**t teams like the Browns, Raiders and Giants are willing to give Stafford $50m a year, the posters who think there isnt a team out there that would give Purdy $55m+ are clearly wrong. Those teams arent winning anything anytime soon. So if thats the going rate for a QB who is 2 or so years away from retiring, then the rate for Brock logically is much more.