QB Brock Purdy Thread

Originally posted by NYniner85:
Not sure who the real doubters are? I think it's objectively fine to criticize a player when they have a horrible game and also say he played well when he does.

Not sure why people have to go extreme on either end? You don't have to blindly say he's great, blame everything else around him or not acknowledge some of his negatives. You also should be able to talk about what he does well and praise him when he does his job. Like most things, the truth is always somewhere in the middle.

I think it's pretty clear who they are since they come in here every day to post something about what a fraud Purdy is, and how they never should have paid him, and wouldn't we all be better off if Mac Jones was still playing. Not including you in any of that by the way, just saying that it's a pretty focal minority that is absolutely triggered by anything they can point to that will validate their position. Which is why they had a field day after the Carolina game. "Oh, Brock had three picks, see, he's terrible, put Jones back in."

Yeah, Brock had three picks against Carolina and still helped the team win. Stafford had three turnovers against Carolina and couldn't keep his team from losing. That kind of thing happens in the NFL. But I don't imagine Rams fans are arguing that Stafford should be benched. Sure, he has a more prolific stat sheet than Brock does and has played really well since he's been in LA, but Brock has his own modest pedigree to look back on and, this year especially, a win is a win for the 49ers and they should all be gratefully accepted at this point. But that doesn't mean you can't call Purdy out when he has a bad game. Just that there's a difference between pointing out things you would like to see him improve on and the full-fledged, wingnut rants that some people engage in.

Originally posted by NYniner85:
Not sure who the real doubters are? I think it's objectively fine to criticize a player when they have a horrible game and also say he played well when he does.

Not sure why people have to go extreme on either end? You don't have to blindly say he's great, blame everything else around him or not acknowledge some of his negatives. You also should be able to talk about what he does well and praise him when he does his job. Like most things, the truth is always somewhere in the middle.

Lol but I have acknowledged the negatives, I just don't go on and on about them in a very redundant type manner.
And say this is Jimmy G part two. Jimmy was good but had nowhere near the football iq/ general iq, mobilty, anticipation, processing that Brock has. No way. The positives far outweigh the negatives regarding Brock. It's cool to point out his mess ups but they are rarely done in a objective manner imo. They seem impulsive and going which ever way the wind blows.

And I don't blindly say this guy is great, he is great. Not perfect but no qb is. I just don't whine everytime this dude messes up..because I know the mess ups are temporary and that he will get back to playing like himself again:).

It's ok, next time he messes up..I will keep it real lol

For what was asked of him, it was a good game. Against a very good defense on the road, in windy conditions, there were no critical errors, converted some third downs and made a couple of big, crucial plays.

Originally posted by 49ers81:
I think it's pretty clear who they are since they come in here every day to post something about what a fraud Purdy is, and how they never should have paid him, and wouldn't we all be better off if Mac Jones was still playing. Not including you in any of that by the way, just saying that it's a pretty focal minority that is absolutely triggered by anything they can point to that will validate their position. Which is why they had a field day after the Carolina game. "Oh, Brock had three picks, see, he's terrible, put Jones back in."

Yeah, Brock had three picks against Carolina and still helped the team win. Stafford had three turnovers against Carolina and couldn't keep his team from losing. That kind of thing happens in the NFL. But I don't imagine Rams fans are arguing that Stafford should be benched. Sure, he has a more prolific stat sheet than Brock does and has played really well since he's been in LA, but Brock has his own modest pedigree to look back on and, this year especially, a win is a win for the 49ers and they should all be gratefully accepted at this point. But that doesn't mean you can't call Purdy out when he has a bad game. Just that there's a difference between pointing out things you would like to see him improve on and the full-fledged, wingnut rants that some people engage in.

Good post.

Originally posted by glorydayz:
Was that (Browns) the best defense in the league?

They probably would be in the running if not for their offense being so terrible. Houston is #1.

Originally posted by CatchMaster80:
Much of the talk I hear on the radio is about how Brock didn't throw an INT. That's something we never talked about with Joe or Steve. They threw their share of INTs but nobdy worried about it because we all knew they would make up for it with some big plays eventually.

When we are playing a team that is better than the Browns in better conditions, not throwing interceptions simply will not be enough.

BUT, for this particular game, not turning the ball over was THE most important aspect of the game.

Originally posted by Cisco0623:
Some people will never be happy. I would like to see his completion % improve, but that Cleveland D is very good.

He had 6 throwaways.

Originally posted by CatchMaster80:
I say good . You say great. Your idea of greatness is much lower than mine. Maybe it's because I saw real greatness in the 80s while attending evewry game.

Ooohhhh now wait just a second now lol....lol lol before you go all condescending and s**t about how you watched games in the 80s..well I did too lol. But I wouldn't use the fact that I did see the games in the 80s to write completely conceded s**t about myself LOL. But congratulations, we both have seen what greatness is.

And yes, I see some of that greatness in Brock..as have Montana, Rice, Marino, Brees, Steve Young, all pretty vocal about it too....but what the hell do those guys know? Lol

Originally posted by Fanaticofnfl:
That's fine. I disagree with "best QB in several years" though. Nobody in the last 20 years has been as good for us as Purdy so "several years" is underselling him IMO.

This
At least 20 yrs.

Originally posted by Montana:

Originally posted by Fanaticofnfl:
That's fine. I disagree with "best QB in several years" though. Nobody in the last 20 years has been as good for us as Purdy so "several years" is underselling him IMO.

This
At least 20 yrs.

Possibly the best we've had since Garcia Tbh, even though, that's not saying much considering who we've had at QB for the past 20 years 😭

Originally posted by Sickaa:

Originally posted by Montana:

Originally posted by Fanaticofnfl:
That's fine. I disagree with "best QB in several years" though. Nobody in the last 20 years has been as good for us as Purdy so "several years" is underselling him IMO.

This
At least 20 yrs.

Possibly the best we've had since Garcia Tbh, even though, that's not saying much considering who we've had at QB for the past 20 years 😭

I personally think he's better than Garcia. Jeff always took off running too early, while Purdy is looking to throw until the last second.

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:

Originally posted by CatchMaster80:
Much of the talk I hear on the radio is about how Brock didn't throw an INT. That's something we never talked about with Joe or Steve. They threw their share of INTs but nobdy worried about it because we all knew they would make up for it with some big plays eventually.

When we are playing a team that is better than the Browns in better conditions, not throwing interceptions simply will not be enough.

BUT, for this particular game, not turning the ball over was THE most important aspect of the game.

Joe Montana's first 4 seasons as QB: 52 TD and 32 ints on 1,130 attempts
Brock Purdy's first 4 seasons as QB: 73 TD and 34 ints. on 1,229 attempts

None of us knew back in 1983 that Montana was going to be one of the greats. He was a good young QB at the time. Lets give Brock some time to fully grow. I've seen so many QBs come in the league and not hit their stride until 4+ years.
__PRESENT
__PRESENT

Originally posted by miked1978:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:

Originally posted by CatchMaster80:
Much of the talk I hear on the radio is about how Brock didn't throw an INT. That's something we never talked about with Joe or Steve. They threw their share of INTs but nobdy worried about it because we all knew they would make up for it with some big plays eventually.

When we are playing a team that is better than the Browns in better conditions, not throwing interceptions simply will not be enough.

BUT, for this particular game, not turning the ball over was THE most important aspect of the game.

Joe Montana's first 4 seasons as QB: 52 TD and 32 ints on 1,130 attempts
Brock Purdy's first 4 seasons as QB: 73 TD and 34 ints. on 1,229 attempts

None of us knew back in 1983 that Montana was going to be one of the greats. He was a good young QB at the time. Lets give Brock some time to fully grow. I've seen so many QBs come in the league and not hit their stride until 4+ years.
__PRESENT
__PRESENT

Not sure if you are trying to refute what I said or you agree with what I said with this reply. Good info, but seems off topic.

Originally posted by Cosmo:
I personally think he's better than Garcia. Jeff always took off running too early, while Purdy is looking to throw until the last second.

Saying the quiet part out loud.
I have been back n forth on if he is better than Garcia but I think he is.

Ppl can flame me idc lol

Originally posted by Montana:

Originally posted by CatchMaster80:
I say good . You say great. Your idea of greatness is much lower than mine. Maybe it's because I saw real greatness in the 80s while attending evewry game.

Ooohhhh now wait just a second now lol....lol lol before you go all condescending and s**t about how you watched games in the 80s..well I did too lol. But I wouldn't use the fact that I did see the games in the 80s to write completely conceded s**t about myself LOL. But congratulations, we both have seen what greatness is.

And yes, I see some of that greatness in Brock..as have Montana, Rice, Marino, Brees, Steve Young, all pretty vocal about it too....but what the hell do those guys know? Lol

First of all you spelled condeded wrong The word you're looking for is conceited. It has nothing to do with bragging about seeing those games. I'm just pointing out that I see a difference between great and good. Montana was universally seen as great. There was no question. He may have had the best field vision ever. People tend to over use adjectives like great, unbelievable and fantasric now. It's the world we live in where everything has to be over the top . Just being good isn't enough anymore so every play is unbelievable. Every catch is unreal. Good QBs are called franchise players as if they can't be replaced.

Brock is really good at times and not so good at other times but very few people around the league would call him great. He works for Kyle and that's all that matters.