The Official QB Thread- JD5 taken #2. Randal 2.0 or Bayou Bob? Mariotta and Fromm battle for QB2 and so begins the Handsome Harem for Hartman

[Zim489]

3 minutes ago, Rufus T Firefly said:

LOL. Okay, guy who "loved" Lance as a prospect. 

Calling em like the I see em. The odds of a traded for QB being here with a completely new staff is between slim and none.

[Always A Commander Never A Captain]

I don't think the 49ers can afford to trade Trey Lance yet (unless it's a whopper offer), as there's a real chance Purdy won't be ready yet when the season starts.

 

 

[Rufus T Firefly]

7 minutes ago, Always A Commander Never A Captain said:

I don't think the 49ers can afford to trade Trey Lance yet (unless it's a whopper offer), as there's a real chance Purdy won't be ready yet when the season starts.

 

 

Yeah, my assumption remains that he won't be dealt unless they are really confident in Purdy's recovery or Jimmy G doesn't find another job and wants to come back for reasonable money (or maybe both). 

[JamesMadisonSkins]

Yeah with the likeliness of Purdy missing most of the off season there’s no chance they move Lance. He’s likely the starter to start next year. 

[JSSkinz]

1 hour ago, profusion said:

So, was I hallucinating when I saw the Eagles win a Super Bowl with Nick Foles at QB at few years ago?

Hostetler also came in for a Giants after Simms was injured and got himself a ring, it can happen but that wasn't the plan and those QB's never established any consistency in winning after those Superbowls.

 

2 hours ago, profusion said:

Build a good roster and draft aggressively for QB frequently. If you hit on the right guy, you've got your 4-5 year Super Bowl window with a packed roster before he becomes unaffordable.

This would be my pick.

 

 

[profusion]

6 minutes ago, JSSkinz said:

Hostetler also came in for a Giants after Simms was injured and got himself a ring, it can happen but that wasn't the plan and those QB's never established any consistency in winning after those Superbowls.

 

This would be my pick.

 

 

 

Wasn't just the Foles thing. The Eagles built a great team around Carson Wentz--so much so that even his mediocre backup was able to win a SB. Wentz was never in that "carry a team" category. The 49ers just took it a step further, by going this far with a third-stringer.

 

I agree with your pick, though. That's the same way I'd go. If I were in charge, I'd ride with Howell next season, with an unthreatening veteran backup. If he doesn't work out, then you draft another guy. Moving up wouldn't be bad if there's somebody they really really like; otherwise, go with what's available at their draft position. They're no more or less likely to wash out with the pick. It seems like drafting a QB is rarely better than a 50/50 proposition.

 

What I don't think will work is the Titans' method and what Rivera wants, which is to focus on the power run game and make the QB less important. That doesn't cut it anymore--it really hasn't since the 1960s, apart from a few teams with truly exceptional defenses. Even the Steel Curtain Steelers had a decent passing offense by '70s standards. Along those lines, I don't think a Lamar Jackson-style QB can win a SB, either. They get injured too often, and that style of offense shuts down in the playoff against the best teams.

[Voice_of_Reason]

7 hours ago, Zim489 said:

 

 

The people arguing you can win with lower tier QBs are just emphatically wrong and out of touch with modern football.

 

Now the next evolution is getting the people who agree with this to understand where you have to get these QBs most of the time. Rodgers was pre 2011 Rookie Wage scale which changed everything about QB drafting. So his spot is irrelevant. Hurts is an outlier but everyone else is a top 10 pick. Except for Lamar who hasnt gotten there yet so you maybe couldnt even include him. 

 

Essentially football now is if you dont have a top 10 drafted QB you have no chance of reaching conference championships unless youre Kyle Shanahan. 

 

If you dont have a top 10 draft QB find a way to get one. If youre not positioning yourself to have one youre doing your entire franchise building wrong.

I don’t necessarily think you need a top 10 draft pick to get a top QB.  And having a top 10 pick and selecting a QB still fails more than it works. 
 

The point is, you just have to keep trying until you find one.  And that could mean trading for a guy, selecting somebody in the draft, selecting several in the same draft, signing a FA, whatever.

 

I also opposed to tanking if you have good princes on your roster because if you trade good pieces for draft picks, there is no guarantee you will hit on draft picks.  So you might never actually recoup what you gave up. And the guy you tanked for has a greater than 50% chance of busting also.  
 

 

There are 3 top QB prospects in this draft.  
 

By the math, at least 1 will be a total bust.  More likely 2.  
 

Burrow was the first overall #1 #1 since Peyton Manning who looks like he’s going to be a legitimate long-term starter.  Well, maybe Luck and Newton had promise but neither were as good as Burrow early.  

So getting a top QB has to be the priority. 
 

which means continuing to throw darts at rhe board.  Without costing yourself too many future darts because the math says every dart you throw has a > 50% chance of failing.  

[lavar1156]

I'd rather us draft another QB than sign some rando veteran. Keep swinging until you find one.

[Voice_of_Reason]

8 hours ago, kingdaddy said:

But, look at yesterday's game, Hurts didn't have to do much at all because the talent around him is so great that the Eagles can beat any team in a variety of ways both on offense and defense

Except they lost both games when he wasn’t in the lineup.

 

In order to prove your point about cheap is better you are purposely ignoring the fact Hurts is actually the engine which makes the whole thing go, because while he is cheap, he’s also a top 5 QB.

 

Here’s something else: the bengals are going to pay Burrow and the eagles are going to pay Hurts $40+ million per year within the next 3 years. And they are both going to do it happily.  

[Voice_of_Reason]

1 hour ago, Always A Commander Never A Captain said:

I don't think the 49ers can afford to trade Trey Lance yet (unless it's a whopper offer), as there's a real chance Purdy won't be ready yet when the season starts.

They should trade Lance and re-sign Jimmy for a year.  
 

He’s more valuable to them than anybody else.  He might not do it, but that way they have 2 guys coming off of serious injury, one of them should be able to start the season, the other finish it….

[skinsfan66]

6 hours ago, JSSkinz said:

With all the great things they've done they have a messy QB situation and it's probably why they have no super bowls.

What if Hurts was not available like earlier this year.? Injuries happen, SF's top drafted QB Fields is at minimal 3rd string and Ist string is a 7th.  When Purdy left the game it was over.  As mentioned, Hurts was a 2nd. It's time to do great things in wash. build the team first and not just blow their wad on a QB.  No Tanking, You can win games without a top 3 QB pick and win SB;s too.  Stay healthy. get lucky, whatever?  Buf,CIN,Giants,SF,many more with top 10 drafted QB's, will be watching on TV.  If Mahones, KC loses it means no top 10 again this year.

[NoCalMike]

I'm not convinced Purdy was being handed the starting job for 2023 anyway.  Open competition between Purdy & Lance? Sure....but I don't think Shanahan ever ruled out Lance as still potentially being the starter, and now with Purdy's injury......

[mistertim]

2 hours ago, profusion said:

 

Wasn't just the Foles thing. The Eagles built a great team around Carson Wentz--so much so that even his mediocre backup was able to win a SB. Wentz was never in that "carry a team" category. The 49ers just took it a step further, by going this far with a third-stringer.

 

 

Foles was definitely a big part of their SB winning season. He was an utterly mediocre QB who went on a tear for a string of games and played at an elite level in the postseason. Same thing with Flacco when the Ravens won the SB. Eli was also along those lines. Very rarely played at an elite level during the regular season, but in the seasons they won the SB he played an an elite level in the playoffs.

 

So it seems you basically have two possibilities in the modern NFL:

 

1) Find a truly elite All-Pro level top 5 QB

2) Find a decent QB to build around and hope he has a year where he suddenly plays at an elite level in the playoffs.

 

A mediocre QB who continues to play at a mediocre level in the playoffs isn't winning a SB.

[Jericho]

23 minutes ago, mistertim said:

 

Foles was definitely a big part of their SB winning season. He was an utterly mediocre QB who went on a tear for a string of games and played at an elite level in the postseason. Same thing with Flacco when the Ravens won the SB. Eli was also along those lines. Very rarely played at an elite level during the regular season, but in the seasons they won the SB he played an an elite level in the playoffs.

 

So it seems you basically have two possibilities in the modern NFL:

 

1) Find a truly elite All-Pro level top 5 QB

2) Find a decent QB to build around and hope he has a year where he suddenly plays at an elite level in the playoffs.

 

A mediocre QB who continues to play at a mediocre level in the playoffs isn't winning a SB.

 

This is pretty spot on. And let's acknowledge that while guys like Eli, Flacco, and Foles went on heaters, there's plenty of teams like say Dallas (from Romo to Prescott) or the Chargers (from Rivers to Herbert) than haven't gotten that magical heater postseason and don't win Super Bowls (or even get there) despite generally good seasons overall for the last 20+ years. Hell, Brees only won 1 Super Bowl as did Peyton with the Colts (and his one in Denver was after he stopped being even average). Basically, it's really hard. And you kind of have to think of it like a lottery. Just keep getting chances and maybe it eventually pays off.

 

It's the main reason I've generally hated this team's QB decisions. Outside of Haskins, Griffin, and Shuler if we go back far enough,  it seems the team always aims as mediocre QBs towards the back end of their careers. In a best case scenario, you get a few competent years out of them, but this team has the great talent of picking up guys basically at the point where they stop being even mediocre. Buying 2-3 years isn't great unless you actually have a great roster in place. And this team has never had the great roster in place either. So the team compounds more strategy with bad choices and never goes anywhere.

[88Comrade2000]

1 hour ago, NoCalMike said:

I'm not convinced Purdy was being handed the starting job for 2023 anyway.  Open competition between Purdy & Lance? Sure....but I don't think Shanahan ever ruled out Lance as still potentially being the starter, and now with Purdy's injury......

Neither Lance or Purdy maybe ready when camp starts. I see them getting a vet. Tom Brady for a year.

[CapsSkins]

3 hours ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

They should trade Lance and re-sign Jimmy for a year.  
 

He’s more valuable to them than anybody else.  He might not do it, but that way they have 2 guys coming off of serious injury, one of them should be able to start the season, the other finish it….

 

Makes no sense for Jimmy to sign a 1 year deal when he could get a decently multi-year pay-day somewhere.

[Skinsinparadise]

 

 

[Skinsinparadise]

Can't wait for the Giants have a ton of cap space discussion to dissapear.   It amazes me how few talking about the Giants cap space account for that their QB and top player and arguably top WR aren't on the books right now among others so they are no factored in the cap.  So their cap number is pure BS unless their plan is to move on from Daniel Jones and dump their best player among other things.   

 

And yes we likely pay Payne.  But, they might have to pay Lawrence a similar contract.

 

 

 

Edited January 31, 2023 by Skinsinparadise

[veteranskinsfan]

Kevin Sheehan declared this morning on his radio show that Sam Howell is not the long term answer at quarterback.

He says Commanders need to draft a quarterback in the first or second round.  He mentioned Dak was drafted in 4th round

but as he looks around the league historically you are not going to find a franchise quarterback in the lower rounds.

He says just keep drafting quarterbacks each year until you hit on one.  The problem with that strategy is that each year

that you miss that means you could have drafted another player who would have helped the team such as an offensive lineman,

linebacker, etc.  Ron and company have proven they cannot evaluate quarterbacks so I prefer to go with Howell and draft some better players.

[Skinsinparadise]

29 minutes ago, veteranskinsfan said:

Kevin Sheehan declared this morning on his radio show that Sam Howell is not the long term answer at quarterback.

He says Commanders need to draft a quarterback in the first or second round.  He mentioned Dak was drafted in 4th round

but as he looks around the league historically you are not going to find a franchise quarterback in the lower rounds.

He says just keep drafting quarterbacks each year until you hit on one.  The problem with that strategy is that each year

that you miss that means you could have drafted another player who would have helped the team such as an offensive lineman,

linebacker, etc.  Ron and company have proven they cannot evaluate quarterbacks so I prefer to go with Howell and draft some better players.

 

Yeah I was listening to him.

 

Sheehan touted the heck out of Darnold two years ago.  Then barely mentioned he did the following season.  But is chesty because he called Wentz a bust and likes calling out fans on his radio show who called him out on it.   And I love Sheehan and his show.  But my pet peeve with him is when he rides with his Bayless I told you so, I can evalaute rap.   He's as hit and miss on this as anyone else.

 

Bringing that same logic to the Qb discussion.  I think the key variable is most teams miss at QB.  I like to cite Roseman on this when he was looking for a QB after some misses.  He didn't say crap we aren't good at doing this. It's OK to miss, most teams do.  He just kept going.  So I don't mind Rivera keep going either.  That's how this thing typically works.  So Sheehan's point about keep trying I agree with.  You got to keep at it. 

 

I don't agree with him going on and on about trade the farm for Aaron Rodgers.  While I am OK with Tom Brady, that's because it costs nothing.   I am not paying two first rounders to rent Aaron Rodgers, and consuming 50 million on the cap (I believe?) for a likely 1 year rental.  Brady on a 1 year rental for free and cheaper feels better to me.  Not that he'd come here but if we want to fantasize like Sheehan is doing, I'd rather go Brady.

 

The idea that its baked in the cake that Howell will likely fail because he's a 5th round pick.  I got the logic.  But as one of his callers told him, Howell isn't the standard 5th rounder.  He was quite the touted prospect the season before.  And while he says Jalen Hurts, Purdy, and Brady are unicorns.  He's sort of right on that.  But if they believe in Howell why not give it a chance?  Build your roster like the Eagles did and see what happens?  And if he's not the guy then get another guy.  

 

He talked about trading up in this draft.  But I hate the idea of just trading up to trade up for name that propsect.  Tell me for what player and why?  If there was a Joe Burrow level prospect in the draft, heck yeah try to trade for them.  But why would I give up the farm for Stroud or Levis?

Edited January 31, 2023 by Skinsinparadise

[KDawg]

21 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Yeah I was listening to him.

 

Sheehan touted the heck out of Darnold two years ago.  Then barely mentioned he did the following season.  But is chesty because he called Wentz a bust and likes calling out fans on his radio show who called him out on it.   And I love Sheehan and his show.  But my pet peeve with him is when he rides with his Bayless I told you so, I can evalaute rap.   He's as hit and miss on this as anyone else.

 

Bringing that same logic to the Qb discussion.  I think the key variable is most teams miss at QB.  I like to cite Roseman on this when he was looking for a QB after some misses.  He didn't say crap we aren't good at doing this. It's OK to miss, most teams do.  He just kept going.  So I don't mind Rivera keep going either.  That's how this thing typically works.  So Sheehan's point about keep trying I agree with.  You got to keep at it. 

 

I don't agree with him going on and on about trade the farm for Aaron Rodgers.  While I am OK with Tom Brady, that's because it costs nothing.   I am not paying two first rounders to rent Aaron Rodgers, and consuming 50 million on the cap (I believe?) for a likely 1 year rental.  Brady on a 1 year rental for free and cheaper feels better to me.  Not that he'd come here but if we want to fantasize like Sheehan is doing, I'd rather go Brady.

 

The idea that its baked in the cake that Howell will likely fail because he's a 5th round pick.  I got the logic.  But as one of his callers told him, Howell isn't the standard 5th rounder.  He was quite the touted prospect the season before.  And while he says Jalen Hurts, Purdy, and Brady are unicorns.  He's sort of right on that.  But if they believe in Howell why not give it a chance?  Build your roster like the Eagles did and see what happens?  And if he's not the guy then get another guy.  

 

He talked about trading up in this draft.  But I hate the idea of just trading up to trade up for name that propsect.  Tell me for what player and why?  If there was a Joe Burrow level prospect in the draft, heck yeah try to trade for them.  But why would I give up the farm for Stroud or Levis?

I don’t get the logic. Assuming a guy is cooked because of his draft selection is stupid. Why even have rounds after the first then?

 

Guys like Kam Curl don’t hit. They were drafted in the 7th. Can’t be good.

 

London Fletcher? Undrafted. Scrub.

 

Brock Purdy? Terrible. Liability. May as well be Josh Johnson.

 

On a crusade with this phrase here lately (not aimed at you but in general)…

 

”Context matters”.

 

Oh, and the League as a whole misses.

Edited January 31, 2023 by KDawg

[Thinking Skins]

38 minutes ago, veteranskinsfan said:

Kevin Sheehan declared this morning on his radio show that Sam Howell is not the long term answer at quarterback.

He says Commanders need to draft a quarterback in the first or second round.  He mentioned Dak was drafted in 4th round

but as he looks around the league historically you are not going to find a franchise quarterback in the lower rounds.

He says just keep drafting quarterbacks each year until you hit on one.  The problem with that strategy is that each year

that you miss that means you could have drafted another player who would have helped the team such as an offensive lineman,

linebacker, etc.  Ron and company have proven they cannot evaluate quarterbacks so I prefer to go with Howell and draft some better players.

I hate this kind of "reporting" by Sheehan because its just his opinion. In contrast, Galdi is the complete opposite saying that we should go with Howell and the only guy (I think) he would want over Howell is Richardson. He can name those stats that we've gone over through the years but just look at this year with Purdy, I'm not saying he's a franchise guy but he showed he is somebody you could win with. Look at previous years with other QBs and the question is really do you want to keep spending everything for these short term rentals and prayers that everything goes well with a known franchise guy with a super high ceiling, or do you want to go with a guy who is cheap and available and you can easily build around. First round Qbs didn't used to be in this crowd because of the heavy contracts they'd get (I think Stafford was the last one to get a big contract as a rookie), but now the rookies are all cheap and some have high ceilings. 

 

Then he compares the picks based on where they WERE drafted. Most of the draft picks had mocks that were similar to where they went. But Howell is a unique position (similar to Cousins, Prescott, and Wilson) because he was projected to go a lot higher and dropped for reasons beyond his control. There are other QBs who had high grades in mocks but dropped and were busts, but Howell is not just another Nate Sudfield and treating him as that is a lie to the listeners. 

[Warhead36]

I don't agree with drafting a QB every year. That's kind of overdoing it. Now if you clearly miss a guy, and have a chance at a stud the next year, you go for it(i.e. Cardinals drafting Murray after busting on Rosen). Otherwise, when you draft a guy you wanna commit to him and build around him and at least give him a couple years to figure it out, unless its OBVIOUS he just stinks(like we should have seen with Haskins, and draft Tua or Herbert at #2 overall in 2020).

 

Sheehan is a fan like us. And like many of us, he chooses strange hills to die on.

[Thinking Skins]

13 hours ago, lavar1156 said:

I'd rather us draft another QB than sign some rando veteran. Keep swinging until you find one.

Same here. I wouldn't want Richardson though. I'd want another guy like Zappe who is a guy who is projected to go low but has the makings of a good backup with a ceiling. 

[KDawg]

8 minutes ago, Thinking Skins said:

Same here. I wouldn't want Richardson though. I'd want another guy like Zappe who is a guy who is projected to go low but has the makings of a good backup with a ceiling. 

 

Zappe was drafted by the Patriots last year.