mistertim

If we get slightly better production from another QB it won't matter how "good" the next QB class is. Those consensus blue chip prospects pretty much always go in the top 2 and we'll probably be sitting in the teens.

I'd be absolutely fine with Jimmy G if we got him for a lower round pick and a middling contract and we also draft a rookie. I just don't think it's a good idea to spend a high round pick on him and then give him a big new contract. That would likely mean we keep kicking the can down the road and spend the next 3-4 years in QB purgatory.

I wonder if he'll actually get offered something like that.

That's my point: he's had next to nothing to do with SF winning games in the postseason unless you consider handing the ball off an onerous responsibility. And I'm not judging him by one game. I'm judging him on all of his playoff games. There's a pattern...and that's him either doing next to nothing or playing crappy and having to be bailed out by the rest of the team. Can you really say that 2 TDs, 5 INTs and averaging under 150 yards passing over 5 games are impressive postseason numbers that immediately say to you "we should definitely give up a high draft pick for this guy"?

If you went back in time 10 years and told someone that there would be a virus that killed almost 1,000,000 Americans in 2 years and that there would be a bunch of people protesting and doing everything they can to stop proven life saving vaccines that had been developed for it...they'd absolutely call you nuts.

This is great to hear, but even if Trump is indicted, he'll never be convicted. There is a 100% chance there will be a Trump supporter on the jury, and there's a 0% chance they'll ever say Trump is guilty. If there was a crystal clear video of him literally murdering someone on live TV after yelling loudly "I am about to commit premeditated murder", they still wouldn't vote to convict. Maybe it should be a military tribunal instead.

Jimmy G hasn't been any better in his other playoff performances. He has 2 TDs and 5 INTs in the postseason. That's pretty awful. Even if you decide to remove the game vs the Packers for some reason (teams sometimes play in cold weather...it happens...but whatever) then he still has only 2 TDs and 4 INTs in 4 postseason games. The idea that he's anything even close to a reason for their postseason success is laughable.

This was something that stood out to me as well when watching Ridder and I was like "omg, Haskins" Luckily he doesn't seem to have the motivation and maturity issues that Haskins did, so I'm sure it's correctable. But still a big knock and one reason I wouldn't take him in the 1st. Worth a 2nd rounder though as long as you have patience.

And then Dan gets buddy buddy with his new toy and tries to do end-arounds on the coaching staff when his new toy isn't happy about something. We've seen this **** play out before.

Yeah I suppose the players might not have too much to **** about when it comes to Dan...well, as long as they're stars. He pays them a ton and then gets buddy buddy with them. But that's a whole different problematic issue.

Yeah I honestly don't understand why theoretical physicists keep mucking about with all that math when ES is clear, verifiable and reproducible evidence that Closed Timelike Curves actually exist in the universe.

I've seen similar sentiments about Corral's arm: basically "Its decent" I don't really agree. I think he has an excellent arm. It's not quite at Willis's level but it's not that far behind IMO. I've watched his games and I've seen him absolutely sling it and make very impressive far side hash out throws on ropes. Also seen him throw plenty of off-platform lasers into tight windows, etc. I think it's an underrated aspect of his game.

I think Heinicke is quite capable of not scoring a TD in a game. As far as Jimmy G, as most people know by now I'm not very high on him, but he's definitely better than Heinicke. How much better is where we have some disagreement. I think Jimmy G is overrated as he hardly has to do much and gets bailed out by the rest of his team with some regularity (2 TDs and 5 INTs in his playoff and SB appearances is pretty god awful). But at least he has a legit NFL arm. It's also abundantly clear, whether you agree with them or not, that the WFT coaches and FO don't believe in Heinicke and are absolutely hell bent on getting an upgrade this offseason. Sounds like the preferred choice is to trade for a stud like Wilson or Rodgers, but that's unlikely. Next up would be Carr if possible. Then they'd get to the decision about whether to go after FAs like Trubisky, Mariota, etc or trade for a mediocre guy like Jimmy G. I'm not a huge fan of the Jimmy G thing because I think we'd have to give up at least a 2nd and probably give him a new contract, which means IMO it's likely that we'd be kicking the can down the road again on drafting a guy and would still end up mediocre with Jimmy G. However, if we did that but still drafted a QB at least within the next year or two I'd probably be ok with it. He's definitely an upgrade to Heinicke though. Heinicke's weak arm really limits what an offense can even game plan for and that's a pretty major detriment to winning games. At least with a guy like Jimmy G we could try to stretch the field more.

I actually saw some Trumper in one of the tweet responses claim that Republicans only keep sending out stuff with misspelling, etc because it triggers the libs. That's like me kicking myself in the balls to make someone else flinch and then claiming it as a victory.

Yeah I think Watson is basically a complete non-factor at this point. Doesn't want to come here, may not even have his legal issues resolved by the time he could be traded, may also get suspended for up to a whole season by the NFL, has allegations that combined with those against the WFT not long ago would be a PR nightmare.

"All rise for the President of The Buffet Line"

Jimmy G is better than Trubisky but probably not by all that much. I'd say it would go Jimmy G is slightly better than Trubisky who is slightly better or around the same as Heinicke. Though Jimmy G and Heinicke seem to have more decisiveness and pocket presence than Trubisky. If it were between a 2nd for Jimmy G + a new contract for him + waiting another couple years for another crack at a QB or Trubisky in FA and drafting a QB in the 1st this year, I'd definitely go with the latter. Of course, that's assuming they actually do like one or two of the QBs in this crop and give them a 1st round grade. If our coaches and FO honest to god don't see any of these guys as being worth a 1st round pick then I guess you go with Jimmy G and hope it's enough to stave off being fired until a better QB crop comes along.

Yeah I never really understood that sort of black and white thinking when it comes to QBs vs the rest of the roster. Of course both are important, but the question is which comes first? If you get the stud supporting cast first then you've basically given yourself a small window of 3-5 years at the most to find your franchise QB. And if you draft a rookie QB it's likely that even if he turns out to be elite, it will take him a couple years to get there. So by the time he actually gets close to where he could be, the rest of your cast is probably going downhill since it's almost impossible to keep a star studded group together for more than a few years due to cap issues. If you get the stud QB first then you've basically given yourself 10-15 years (assuming you drafted him) for supporting roster development. And during that 10-15 year timespan you'll be able to refresh those supporting groups multiple times. With the way the modern NFL is, to me it's just a no-brainer. And it seems like pretty much all NFL coaches and execs think the same thing.

How in the world are we not even on the list? The Ravens are on there ahead of us? Seriously?

That seems like a lot to give up for a QB to bolster your running game and then mostly be a game manager with his arm. My guess as to why they'd pick a raw passer is because of his level of overall talent, especially arm talent. He's a big guy who can move well and has a cannon, much like the top QBs nowadays. That's the way the league is undeniably headed, and that's definitely not Mac Jones. Mac is the guy I'd expect them to take if they wanted to stick with the same system and have a game manager QB. And they knew they had Jimmy G for a couple more years so they didn't have to throw Lance to the wolves. I don't think Kyle is nearly as old school as his pops. I think he adapts his system to the talent he has; that's exactly what he did with RG3. I'm guessing if RG3 had actually morphed into a top notch NFL passer, the system would have evolved with that.

Then there's pretty much zero reason for him to give up 3 1st round picks for a supremely gifted but raw QB like Lance. IMO he's a run first coach now because that's the talent his roster has now. If he had an Allen or Mahomes he'd be a pass heavy coach because he'd have a guy who could do that. I assume that's what they hope Lance's ceiling is and exactly why they took him. They realize that the way they're doing things isn't a viable long term strategy and know they need a guy who can sling it if they want to be perennial contenders and not just an on again off again team.

I agree that he's definitely a peg better than Heinicke, I just question the cost and what it means. If we knew for a fact that Ron would either also draft a QB now or would still be willing to draft one in the 1st within the next year or so then I'd be ok with giving up a 2nd for Jimmy G (but never a 1st, that's ridiculous). However my main concern there is not so much that we'd have to give up a 2nd round pick, but that we'd almost surely have to give him a new contract as part of the trade. I'd assume he'd ask for at least a 3 year deal, but probably more like 5. So let's take something in the middle and say 4 years. If we give him a pretty good amount of money on a 4 year contract I think that makes it much more unlikely that we'll be drafting a QB any time soon unless we really want to have a $20-25 million backup sitting on the bench for a couple years. Yeah, we did it with Alex Smith, but that was a very different situation given his injury. So then we'd basically be stuck in QB purgatory again for another 4 years. Basically going from a pretty bad team to a ho-hum team. Then after 3-4 years we have to start the QB search over again, only now we're more likely to have lost some of our key pieces and who knows if Ron would even be around at that point. IMO that's a slow death. I'd rather just be killed nice and quick. I don't think this is necessarily true. I think his system produces what the QB is capable of, because he molds his system to fit whatever QB he has and what that QB's strengths and weaknesses are. I think a QB with more talent would produce more because Shanny would then change up his system to suit that talent level. IMO otherwise they wouldn't have spent 3 1st round picks on a hugely talented but raw guy like Lance.

I honestly wonder how much being owned by Snyder would play into a QB's willingness to come here. If I had to guess I'd say a decent amount. He's widely considered the worst owner in the NFL, not just because he's incompetent, but because he's also a narcissistic asshole who seems completely incapable of realizing that there are things he doesn't know. Having Ron and getting rid of Bruce and other cancers definitely helps. But I still have a feeling that Snyder directly hampers our efforts to get top talent to want to come here.

Eh, I probably should have picked up on it. Been a bit of a crazy day.

Ah, gotcha. My bad, I thought you were trying to maybe make a point that only wins matter when talking about QBs. Which I agree is a silly metric to measure a QB by, especially when talking about a small sample of games.