Trey Lance?

[LinvilleGorge]

1 hour ago, La Pantera said:

Purdy will be the 9ers starter, regardless of how he plays against Philly. He's earned it.

Earned has nothing to do with it. The Niners are in a window right now and though Purdy has played very well for a 7th round pick QB is still their weakness. They're basically running an offense similar to our post-Rhule offense with Darnold. It's schemed to hide the QB as much as possible. If they have the opportunity to upgrade they will.

I'll be surprised if Purdy is their starter next year. It'll either be Lance or Rodgers. They go back to their young QB they have a ton invested in or they bring in the aging but still elite Rodgers and move Lance to recoup some of the draft capital they've spent in trades to get guys like Lance and CMC.

A lot of people are allowing the results on the field to sleep their perception of Purdy. When I watch the player instead of the team, I see a backup caliber QB in an ideal situation.

[Sgt Schultz]

My main concern about Lance is if the 49ers staff is willing to throw in the towel on him, do we think another staff can turn him around?

The devil is in the definition of throwing in the towel.  If they are wanting to move him because they are willing to put their eggs in the Purdy basket, that is different than moving him before anybody else figures out he is a very expensive bust.  But, if it is the former, the asking price is going to be higher than the latter.

The advantage we have is we have a near-empty QB room.  That does not mean we should go crazy and wind up with a room full of guys who struggle to reach mediocrity, but we aren't saddled with the existing contract of a guy we know will struggle to reach mediocrity. 

Honestly, this is a decision for a new staff to make along with Fitts. 

[kungfoodude]

12 minutes ago, 45catfan said:

Yep, which is the tell that they really want an offensive guy as HC.  Not that a defensive HC is completely out of the question, but the top of the list has to go completely wrong for that to happen.  Johnson staying in Detroit was the first hit, and the Saints asking a higher price for us for Payton than other teams likely knocks him out.  Wilks may end up getting this job by default.

 

TBH, I think the tell is that they might be keeping Wilks. 

There is absolutely no logic or reasoning behind interviewing a DC candidate without the head coach being involved. 

I couldn't think of a bigger red flag as a prospective HC candidate than the idea of a DC being forced on me.

[45catfan]

2 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

TBH, I think the tell is that they might be keeping Wilks. 

There is absolutely no logic or reasoning behind interviewing a DC candidate without the head coach being involved. 

I couldn't think of a bigger red flag as a prospective HC candidate than the idea of a DC being forced on me.

I'm not too sure about that as the model seems to be changing a bit, especially with an intact owner and GM.  If anything it's to give the new HC a leg up on starting his staff instead of walking in with the cupboard completely bare.  Not to say that Tepper/Fitterer will hire a DC first, but say 'okay, we've already done the preliminary leg work for DC candidates--here our notes and thoughts.  We will call back the guys you like the best for another interview.'  I see it going something like that. 

Getting back on topic, If they can land Lance for a reasonable price AND get a veteran backup/fall back guy too?  This job wouldn't be such a bad spot at all for a perspective HC.

[kungfoodude]

12 minutes ago, 45catfan said:

I'm not too sure about that as the model seems to be changing a bit, especially with an intact owner and GM.  If anything it's to give the new HC a leg up on starting his staff instead of walking in with the cupboard completely bare.  Not to say that Tepper/Fitterer will hire a DC first, but say 'okay, we've already done the preliminary leg work for DC candidates--here our notes and thoughts.  We will call back the guys you like the best for another interview.'  I see it going something like that. 

Getting back on topic, If they can land Lance for a reasonable price AND get a veteran backup/fall back guy too?  This job wouldn't be such a bad spot at all for a perspective HC.

I mean, I think any competent HC candidate should already have a list of guys they know or guys they want.

Remember 100% of the football knowledge is with the new HC's. Tepper and Fitt's actual football knowledge is next to nothing. 

I am not familiar with any HC hiring process being run in that manner.  I don't think that is going to work very well at all.

 

It could be a good landing spot for a coach if we have a clear plan at how to improve at QB. I think the biggest question is whether we are going to be able to attract a candidate because of Tepper and the QB situation. If we end up being spurned by most candidates, I think the problem is obvious and just simply not something that is able to be fixed.

If we are able to get a good candidate hired, we can go about the business of figuring out the QB situation(among other offseason issues). It's extremely difficult to make any future personnel plans with no coaching staff.

[Mr. Scot]

42 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

Earned has nothing to do with it. The Niners are in a window right now and though Purdy has played very well for a 7th round pick QB is still their weakness. They're basically running an offense similar to our post-Rhule offense with Darnold. It's schemed to hide the QB as much as possible. If they have the opportunity to upgrade they will.

I'll be surprised if Purdy is their starter next year. It'll either be Lance or Rodgers. They go back to their young QB they have a ton invested in or they bring in the aging but still elite Rodgers and move Lance to recoup some of the draft capital they've spent in trades to get guys like Lance and CMC.

A lot of people are allowing the results on the field to sleep their perception of Purdy. When I watch the player instead of the team, I see a backup caliber QB in an ideal situation.

There's a fair amount of chatter from reliable sources that he's already won the starting job for next year.

Whether that's true or not though (and I'm not a big believer) what he's shown is that he can effectively run what's known to be a pretty quarterback friendly system, and it didn't really take him much time to pick it up.

The 49ers have seen Lance in not only the few games he's played but in a couple of years worth of practices. If the stories about him not being able to pick up that same offense despite having much more time to do so are true, that's a huge red flag.

[LinvilleGorge]

23 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

There's a fair amount of chatter from reliable sources that he's already won the starting job for next year.

Whether that's true or not though (and I'm not a big believer) what he's shown is that he can effectively run what's known to be a pretty quarterback friendly system, and it didn't really take him much time to pick it up.

The 49ers have seen Lance in not only the few games he's played but in a couple of years worth of practices. If the stories about him not being able to pick up that same offense despite having much more time to do so are true, that's a huge red flag.

I wouldn't at all be surprised to see them move on from Lance.

[ForJimmy]

1 hour ago, Sgt Schultz said:

My main concern about Lance is if the 49ers staff is willing to throw in the towel on him, do we think another staff can turn him around?

The devil is in the definition of throwing in the towel.  If they are wanting to move him because they are willing to put their eggs in the Purdy basket, that is different than moving him before anybody else figures out he is a very expensive bust.  But, if it is the former, the asking price is going to be higher than the latter.

The advantage we have is we have a near-empty QB room.  That does not mean we should go crazy and wind up with a room full of guys who struggle to reach mediocrity, but we aren't saddled with the existing contract of a guy we know will struggle to reach mediocrity. 

Honestly, this is a decision for a new staff to make along with Fitts. 

Yeah if it is more of Purdy coming out of no where and proving he is the guy then they might just be flipping Lance for a 2nd round pick to build around their core players.  They don't have many (if any) picks in this draft.  Purdy and Lance also have tow totally different playing styles so even using Lance as a backup means the whole offense has to change if Purdy gets injured.  

I'm with you though.  If our new HC sees something he likes in Lance then maybe we pull the trigger on a deal.  I could see Steichen liking him and using him in a very similar offense Hurts in currently in.  

[ForJimmy]

2 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

I wouldn't at all be surprised to see them move on from Lance.

Yeah the less he plays and more he ages/sits on the bench the lower his trade value becomes.  Right now some teams are thinking he is still very young/raw and can be developed into a QB for their system.  Two years from now that could change....

[Catsfan69]

2 minutes ago, ForJimmy said:

Yeah if it is more of Purdy coming out of no where and proving he is the guy then they might just be flipping Lance for a 2nd round pick to build around their core players.  They don't have many (if any) picks in this draft.  Purdy and Lance also have tow totally different playing styles so even using Lance as a backup means the whole offense has to change if Purdy gets injured.  

I'm with you though.  If our new HC sees something he likes in Lance then maybe we pull the trigger on a deal.  I could see Steichen liking him and using him in a very similar offense Hurts in currently in.  

Sam Darnold is better and has more upside than Lance.

 

Trey Lance is a bust of epic proportions.

I wouldn't take him unless he was FA and rookie minimum 

[45catfan]

1 hour ago, Sgt Schultz said:

My main concern about Lance is if the 49ers staff is willing to throw in the towel on him, do we think another staff can turn him around?

The devil is in the definition of throwing in the towel.  If they are wanting to move him because they are willing to put their eggs in the Purdy basket, that is different than moving him before anybody else figures out he is a very expensive bust.  But, if it is the former, the asking price is going to be higher than the latter.

The advantage we have is we have a near-empty QB room.  That does not mean we should go crazy and wind up with a room full of guys who struggle to reach mediocrity, but we aren't saddled with the existing contract of a guy we know will struggle to reach mediocrity. 

Honestly, this is a decision for a new staff to make along with Fitts. 

We moved on from CMC.  Sometimes it's about getting at least something in return for a player that's no longer in your plans.   If the 49ers think they've found Tom Brady 2.0 (early returns) with Purdy, then keeping Lance with all that draft capital tied up in him on the sidelines is hard to justify.  They can get a cheap veteran backup in FA and recoup some draft capital by moving Lance.

[45catfan]

4 minutes ago, Catsfan69 said:

Sam Darnold is better and has more upside than Lance.

 

Trey Lance is a bust of epic proportions.

I wouldn't take him unless he was FA and rookie minimum 

I couldn't disagree more.  Sam just completed year 5 and barely qualifies as a starter in the NFL, more like a quality backup.  Calling Lance a bust after a few games is premature and sounds like personal bias.

[ForJimmy]

4 minutes ago, Catsfan69 said:

Sam Darnold is better and has more upside than Lance.

 

Trey Lance is a bust of epic proportions.

I wouldn't take him unless he was FA and rookie minimum 

Yeah but you have terrible takes…

Sam has more upside . Sam’s upside is a decent backup that can manage a game where everything is going well. He is in year 5 and will be on his 3rd team. The Jets picked Zack Wilson to replace him…

[ForJimmy]

1 minute ago, 45catfan said:

I couldn't disagree more.  Sam just completed year 5 and barely qualifies as a starter in the NFL, more like a quality backup.  Calling Lance a bust after a few games is premature and sounds like personal bias.

Yeah he hates QBs than can run. Unless it’s Steve Young or some other old guy…