The Official QB Thread- JD5 taken #2. Randall 2.0 or Bayou Bob? Mariotta and Hartman forever. Fromm cut

[bowhunter]

2 hours ago, KDawg said:

Wait, people think Jimmy G was the reason the 49ers beat the Packers? I honestly don’t understand what football games some of you watch.

 

And Josh Allen is boring? Again, I don’t understand how you process these things.

I was only able to watch the 2nd half last night, and Mr. G was terrible. I only remember seeing one completion (a fluttering to duck to Kittle up the middle.) Every one of his passes just floated and two of them could have easily been picks. I did not see any sign of arm strength or great decision making. I don't see any reason to add an expensive option to our QB fold even if the cost was just a 2028 7th rounder. $20m could pay another team need. (Heiny, Corral, and a $20m FA MLB>>>>>>>> adding Jimmy G.)

[Llevron]

The entire point of the system SF runs is to minimize the impact of the QB and simplify  the game for him. Jimmy G plays his role ok but he’s not the answer for anyone. Not even them. 

[mistertim]

3 minutes ago, Llevron said:

The entire point of the system SF runs is to minimize the impact of the QB and simplify  the game for him. Jimmy G plays his role ok but he’s not the answer for anyone. Not even them. 

 

Good point. Even SF with their system catered around a mediocre QB's skills and a dominant defense realized that Jimmy G just wasn't it and gave up a king's ransom to draft their QB of the future. Same thing the Chiefs did. They went to the playoffs with Alex Smith and then turned around and gave up a bunch to move up for Mahomes.

 

Even teams that see some success with mediocre QBs eventually jettison them for someone with a much higher potential. And we're supposed to be happy about taking their castoffs?

[Silvernon]

8 minutes ago, Llevron said:

The entire point of the system SF runs is to minimize the impact of the QB and simplify  the game for him. Jimmy G plays his role ok but he’s not the answer for anyone. Not even them. 

I love the Shanahan system and the dude looks awful. You nailed it. Not even good enough for them. 

[Koolblue13]

I doubt anyone thinks that Jimmy G is any kind of answer to the long term top tier QB.

 

SF obviously doesn't, that's why they gave up so much to get Lance.

 

Jimmy G is the answer to the question "How do we become and stay competitive, while getting that QB".

[Leonard Washington]

15 minutes ago, Llevron said:

The entire point of the system SF runs is to minimize the impact of the QB and simplify  the game for him. 

THAT should be the goal of our coaching staff for all the players. I’m tired of hoping we luck into ready-made stars. We need to create stars for our system. 

[London Kev]

The number one priority for me is drafting one of the top rookie QBs and this will almost certainly cost us our 1st round pick. This will at least give us a chance at getting our franchise guy, and will also give the fanbase the type of boost that comes with a getting high-ceiling, shiny new toy. I'm sure that this is also something that the owner/FO would welcome during the name change transition phase.

 

I don't like the idea of also using a 2nd (if that is the cost) to get Jimmy G. He looked like a stronger armed Heinicke yesterday and IMO isn't that much of a step up from a Trubisky/Mariota/Bridgewater type FA. Getting one of these FAs makes much more sense to me, and at a far cheaper cost. We then go into camp and have a Rookie/FA/Heinicke QB battle for depth positions.

 

I will say again that although getting Wilson is going to be almost impossible, if (and it's a very big if) we could get him, then I would give up a truck load of picks and cash, and forget everything that I said above.

 

[mistertim]

12 minutes ago, Leonard Washington said:

THAT should be the goal of our coaching staff for all the players. I’m tired of hoping we luck into ready-made stars. We need to create stars for our system. 

 

You can't really "create" a star if the guy doesn't already have that potential in him. Jimmy G doesn't have that potential. Most players don't.

 

SF is not so much making Jimmy G a good QB with their system as they are trying to minimize how much damage he can cause and what impact he has on the game (though he still did his best to lose them the game last night).

 

And they obviously know that's not a long term winning solution or they wouldn't have given up a boatload of picks to move up for Lance.

Edited January 23, 2022 by mistertim

[Koolblue13]

I've said several times that Carr is the guy that I want to get. I'd send multiple 1rst round picks for him. 

 

 

[actorguy1]

My take:

 

Plan A: trade for Wilson, Rodgers or Carr for multiple first round picks. Not likely to happen.

 

Plan B: sign the best free agent quarterback that they believe fits the system and then draft the best QB they believe fits the system. In mini camp have a competition between the free agent QB, the rookie quarterback, and Heinecke. In training camp have the top two competitors (probably Heinecke and free agent) compete for the starter.

 

Plan C Trade picks and extended a mediocre QB like Garappalo. Please don't bother.

Edited January 23, 2022 by actorguy1

[rumplestilskin]

I bet Rodgers is getting sick of the cold and wondering if a move would allow him to play his game in decent weather in the playoffs.

 

[Daniel.redskins]

A lot of hate for Jimmy G. He is better than anyone we have. He has a strong arm and throws with anticipation. We would have been a playoff team with him. If SF would take a second for him i would pull the trigger. Use our first round on a lb. Playoff team next year. 

[88Comrade2000]

52 minutes ago, Koolblue13 said:

I doubt anyone thinks that Jimmy G is any kind of answer to the long term top tier QB.

 

SF obviously doesn't, that's why they gave up so much to get Lance.

 

Jimmy G is the answer to the question "How do we become and stay competitive, while getting that QB".

That’s the thing, you trade for Jimmy then he’s your 4-5 year starter. You aren’t looking for that guy in draft. Yeah, maybe you draft a developmental guy in the mid rounds but you aren’t looking for that long term guy.

 

 

The best move for us is to draft our qb in round one. If you want to be competitive while waiting for the rookie; then you get that 3rd tier qb in a one year deal. If the rookie busts; then you try again in 2-3 years. By then; you will on a new coaching staff.

[mistertim]

7 minutes ago, Daniel.redskins said:

A lot of hate for Jimmy G. He is better than anyone we have. He has a strong arm and throws with anticipation. We would have been a playoff team with him. If SF would take a second for him i would pull the trigger. Use our first round on a lb. Playoff team next year. 

 

That's because we basically have nothing right now.

 

When you're starving and have no food a half eaten dorito laying on the ground looks like a ribeye steak, but that doesn't change the fact that it's still a half eaten dorito.

 

And yes Jimmy G throws with anticipation...to the other team. He did his best to lose them the game yesterday but the defense and special teams bailed him out. 

Edited January 23, 2022 by mistertim

[MrJL]

the top rookie QBs are just not good enough to waste a major pick to trade for.  I think one of the top guys will easily be there at 11.  Hell, in this draft one of the top guys could easily be there at 43

[Koolblue13]

3 minutes ago, Rdskns2000 said:

That’s the thing, you trade for Jimmy then he’s your 4-5 year starter. You aren’t looking for that guy in draft. Yeah, maybe you draft a developmental guy in the mid rounds but you aren’t looking for that long term guy.

 

 

The best move for us is to draft our qb in round one. If you want to be competitive while waiting for the rookie; then you get that 3rd tier qb in a one year deal. If the rookie busts; then you try again in 2-3 years. By then; you will on a new coaching staff.

Why? Where is this rule written? We have to keep Jimmy G for 4-5 years without question? 

 

On what planet does Jimmy G mean you can't draft a rookie with a 1rst and prepare for the future? The 49ers did it.

 

We can easily trade for JG AND draft a QB this year and/or next year.

 

It sucks using that many resources to get a QB, sure, but so does losing football games constantly. 

[Burgold]

On 1/16/2022 at 1:47 PM, Spaceman Spiff said:

Howling have we been searching for a franchise QB? And you say there’s no reason to draft 2?

It's not going to be Red Wolves. Enough with this howling stuff.

[Est.1974]

Jimmy G isn’t coming here with the knowledge we are picking a QB round one. He’s getting that **** already in SF.

[KDawg]

5 minutes ago, Koolblue13 said:

Why? Where is this rule written? We have to keep Jimmy G for 4-5 years without question? 

 

On what planet does Jimmy G mean you can't draft a rookie with a 1rst and prepare for the future? The 49ers did it.

 

We can easily trade for JG AND draft a QB this year and/or next year.

 

It sucks using that many resources to get a QB, sure, but so does losing football games constantly. 

I’d actually argue that a restructure to Jimmy’s contract for an additional year + a rookie is a must if we trade for him. 
 

His mediocrity is frustrating, though. And will likely leave the rookie in a place where they could be called upon earlier if Ron doesn’t find success/quell the media and fan rebellion.

 

If he finds success… we’ll obviously be fine.

 

Jimmy should be a low end plan for us.

 

Having said that, again I reiterate, Jimmy’s value to SF likely exceeds what they can get for him and they’d only likely move him right now if someone pays way above what they should for him.

 

They can’t get him back after this upcoming season because his contract is up and then it has to be Lance’s show. Which means they have a year to develop Lance. Why rush it? 
 

 

[Burgold]

11 minutes ago, mistertim said:

 

That's because we basically have nothing right now.

 

When you're starving and have no food a half eaten dorito laying on the ground looks like a ribeye steak, but that doesn't change the fact that it's still a half eaten dorito.

 

And yes Jimmy G throws with anticipation...to the other team. He did his best to lose them the game yesterday but the defense and special teams bailed him out. 

I only watched the first quarter, but in that portion Jimmy G. through a couple of beautiful passes that were perfectly placed only to be dropped. So, I don't know that we should exaggerate too much. Seems like everyone had a bad offensive day on both teams.

[Est.1974]

My guess on our approach is :

 

a - offer a serious haul of picks for Wilson.

b - then try for Carr. Nowhere near the offer we make for Wilson.

c - if we miss on those two, we will sign Trubisky or Mariota and bring a rookie in.

[mistertim]

8 minutes ago, Burgold said:

I only watched the first quarter, but in that portion Jimmy G. through a couple of beautiful passes that were perfectly placed only to be dropped. So, I don't know that we should exaggerate too much. Seems like everyone had a bad offensive day on both teams.

 

Him having one or two nice passes doesn't change the fact that he had a crappy game overall. He ended up with a QBR of 11.8

 

That team won in spite of him.

[Burgold]

1 minute ago, UK SKINS FAN 74 said:

My guess on our approach is :

 

a - offer a serious haul of picks for Wilson.

b - then try for Carr. Nowhere near the offer we make for Wilson.

c - if we miss on those two, we will sign Trubisky or Mariota and bring a rookie in.

I can see this. 

 

I'd be willing to make a serious offer for Wilson. I suspect my serious offer is not enough to seal the deal. I'd also make a serious offer for Carr. This too, might fall short, but mainly because I think the Raider's will make the price too high.

 

If we that fails, I don't think I'd go for Trubisky, Mariota, or Jimmy G. I'd go with Heinike and blow the bank on a rookie QB if my scouts tell me there is a rookie QB who could become a star.

1 minute ago, mistertim said:

 

He ended up with a QBR of 11.8

 

Did he really?

 

That is truly awful. Rodgers must have had one hell of an awful showing to lose out to that!

[Koolblue13]

24 minutes ago, KDawg said:

I’d actually argue that a restructure to Jimmy’s contract for an additional year + a rookie is a must if we trade for him. 
 

His mediocrity is frustrating, though. And will likely leave the rookie in a place where they could be called upon earlier if Ron doesn’t find success/quell the media and fan rebellion.

 

If he finds success… we’ll obviously be fine.

 

Jimmy should be a low end plan for us.

 

Having said that, again I reiterate, Jimmy’s value to SF likely exceeds what they can get for him and they’d only likely move him right now if someone pays way above what they should for him.

 

They can’t get him back after this upcoming season because his contract is up and then it has to be Lance’s show. Which means they have a year to develop Lance. Why rush it? 
 

 

Does it worry you that the 2 of us seem to be in exactly the same place for QB this year? 

 

The year that nobody can agree on anything, we're step for step.

[KDawg]

25 minutes ago, Burgold said:

 

That is truly awful. Rodgers must have had one hell of an awful showing to lose out to that!

20/29 for 225.

 

So no, he didn’t. The Packers ST and the Niners ST decided the game. The Niners offense was truly bad all game long. The Packers couldn’t get in the end zone. Their running game was abysmal. 
 

13 minutes ago, Koolblue13 said:

Does it worry you that the 2 of us seem to be in exactly the same place for QB this year? 

 

The year that nobody can agree on anything, we're step for step.

 

Nope. We’re usually more aligned than not. Just where we differ we differ drastically.

31 minutes ago, mistertim said:

 

Him having one or two nice passes doesn't change the fact that he had a crappy game overall. He ended up with a QBR of 11.8

 

That team won in spite of him.

This is where off the wall opinions come from. Watch a play or two, miss context, get misled and talk in a forum. People will see that, reflect on it and think that maybe those comments are accurate. Next thing you know we have an avalanche of uninformed opinions.