Is Kyler Murray the answer at QB for next year and beyond?

[PJ1]

Yeah, it'd be a real tough break for Murray not to be part of this first-class, A+ winning machine the Bidwill Family has built in ARZ.

Missing my point. Drafting a QB and keeping Murray would never work. Not the type that would be motivated by it.

 

[PJ1]

It's never personal, it's just business

The team comes above any player first and foremost

Yes and KM would be good with that. LOL

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

I think we can all agree that having TE as the most secure position going into the off season is wild!

Right? It’s like upside down world

 

[TheCardFan]

Is Kyler next...

xc_hide_links_from_guests_guests_error_hide_media

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

You said "have the 49ers offense as effective." Yeah. I don't think Purdy is doing much special. The MVP is the quarterback of the best team/offense. But I think there are a lot of people who could orchestrate that offense really, really well. The evidence is the number of Shanahan disciples around the NFL orchestrating pretty good offenses with somewhat less talent.

“As effectively” would be at the mvp candidate level because that’s how effectively he was running the offense.

Don’t get me wrong, I fully recognize shanny’s ability. I was like one of two or three posters who were defending him back when the board was saying he was mid.

But I think you’re missing on Purdy. He’s made some spectacular plays and reads over his first two years in the league. And he hasn’t just managing the game (which in my mind connotes just keeping the train on the track and not making big splash plays, which he has all season). And let’s remember he’s only in his second season and was a legitimate MVP candidate and may have lead the niners to a championship his rookie season had he not been injured in the Philly game. I may be proven wrong, but many of you are failing to see the stud that he is.

 

[kerouac9]

“As effectively” would be at the mvp candidate level because that’s how effectively he was running the offense.

Don’t get me wrong, I fully recognize shanny’s ability. I was like one of two or three posters who were defending him back when the board was saying he was mid.

But I think you’re missing on Purdy. He’s made some spectacular plays and reads over his first two years in the league. And he hasn’t just managing the game (which in my mind connotes just keeping the train on the track and not making big splash plays, which he has all season). And let’s remember he’s only in his second season and was a legitimate MVP candidate and may have lead the niners to a championship his rookie season had he not been injured in the Philly game. I may be proven wrong, but many of you are failing to see the stud that he is.

That's fine. The guys I mentioned have all played at MVP levels in more demanding offenses with less overwhelming supporting casts, as well.

No one is going to confuse Brock Purdy with, like, Jeff Garcia. The metrics are hard to argue with outside of "vibes" and "eye test," which are obviously suspect. I've said that Purdy's game reminds me a ton of Kurt Warner, and I didn't think that Warner deserved his MVP awards because his supporting cast and system were so overwhelming, either.

I understand the argument that someone still has to throw the ball and put it in the right place.

 

[DVontel]

“As effectively” would be at the mvp candidate level because that’s how effectively he was running the offense.

Don’t get me wrong, I fully recognize shanny’s ability. I was like one of two or three posters who were defending him back when the board was saying he was mid.

But I think you’re missing on Purdy. He’s made some spectacular plays and reads over his first two years in the league. And he hasn’t just managing the game (which in my mind connotes just keeping the train on the track and not making big splash plays, which he has all season). And let’s remember he’s only in his second season and was a legitimate MVP candidate and may have lead the niners to a championship his rookie season had he not been injured in the Philly game. I may be proven wrong, but many of you are failing to see the stud that he is.

I agree that he’s clearly better than Jimmy G ever was & I think he would still play good ball under the Shanahan-tree guys like McVay, McDaniel, Slowik, etc, but I think he would be fairly average everywhere else.

 

[forever red]

STH since 1988.I have never been more bored with Cardinal football than right now. Kyler Murray will never take this team to the Super Bowl and right now its 50-50 they ever get to the playoffs with him as QB. Unless the Cards do whatever they need to to make the change at QB this franchise will continue to be mired in mediocrity

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

I know you didn’t just sit on the same post for 20 minutes editing & adding. Boyyyy, you felt really good about this.

Not sure why the length of the deals even matter. Actually, why does it matter to you? You basically telling me you would have been fine if Kyzir, Froholdt, Pascal, & Daley all got 4-5 year contracts instead of two?

By overpaying & falling on their ass. You’re telling me you’re cool with overpaying than underpaying.

You can read, correct? I literally said I took an L for this & the reason being was in the initial post to this.

It mainly worked because they were able to draft great, especially starting in 2019 & so on. Outside of Jusczcyk, the pieces you named, them guys didn’t do anything. It turns out they made the mistake of overpaying those guys’ value instead of their actually value.

In the off-season, the only difference between what Lynch & Monti did is Lynch signed guys for longer contracts, which obviously Lynch himself probably regretted. He didn’t sign any huge FA on the market, he didn’t massively overpay for guys passed their prime.

Damn, it’s almost like a reason I gave you the 49ers when you asked what team had a model like what Monti is following. Keep up.

Those other teams’ models are a bit different, but their standard is still the same.

Your reasoning is faulty. You’re arguing that because the outcomes were similar the intent of each franchise was the same. Cheese is pointing out the intent was different. In other words, different plans. And cheese is right.

Niners intent was to sign good players that they believed were for value for multiple years. Like a 1,000 yard receiver, eventual perennial pro bowl fullback, up and coming linebacker. Whether they worked out or not is immaterial to this discussion of what the intended plan of the niners was. The intent of the niners was tear down and rebuild at the same time.

Cards intent was to tear down and sign guys that were lottery tickets, at best, if they hit. They weren’t signing up and coming players. They weren’t signing players coming off career years. That’s why they are 1-2 year deals. They were slot fillers that weren’t being counted on for future years. If they busted - as was likely - it was no big deal to the program of tear down only that monti put in place.

And though you “took the L” with the jimmy G fact, you fail to recognize that it is further proof that the niners intent - their plan - was to rebuild during the tear down year, not to solely tear down as has been the plan of the cardinals.

In no way are these the same intended plan.

 

[kerouac9]

I have never been more bored with Cardinal football than right now

I totally understand the frustration and boredom right now. But I think playing out the string with Wilks was much worse than this. Wilks was a clear disaster from jump street, even if a lot of people here refused to believe it. Josh Rosen being the worst rookie QB in history made it even worse.

I agree that he’s clearly better than Jimmy G ever was & I think he would still play good ball under the Shanahan-tree guys like McVay, McDaniel, Slowik, etc, but I think he would be fairly average everywhere else.

This is an amazing way to look at this question. What team is better if you swapped their Week 1 starter with Brock Purdy?

 

[Cheesebeef]

Your reasoning is faulty. You’re arguing that because the outcomes were similar the intent of each franchise was the same.

Here’s the most ridiculous thing about the @DVontel argument that the outcomes were similar regardless of intent. The outcomes aren’t similar at all.

The Niners did enough in the 2017 off-season AND mid-season to improve from 2-14 to 6-10. That’s a four win difference. A big leap in year one from being the second worst team
In the league. The Cardinals were 3-14 last year, but this year, after “following the 2017
Niners blueprint” they’re going to be… 3-14. Maybe my math is wrong but I’m pretty sure a 4 win jump from
one season to another and a 0 win jump from one season to another are completely different outcomes.

Cheese is pointing out the intent was different. In other words, different plans. And cheese is right.

Niners intent was to sign good players that they believed were for value for multiple years. Like a 1,000 yard receiver, eventual perennial pro bowl fullback, up and coming linebacker. Whether they worked out or not is immaterial to this discussion of what the intended plan of the niners was. The intent of the niners was tear down and rebuild at the same time.

Cards intent was to tear down and sign guys that were lottery tickets, at best, if they hit. They weren’t signing up and coming players. They weren’t signing players coming off career years. That’s why they are 1-2 year deals. They were slot fillers that weren’t being counted on for future years. If they busted - as was likely - it was no big deal to the program of tear down only that monti put in place.


And though you “took the L” with the jimmy G fact, you fail to recognize that it is further proof that the niners intent - their plan - was to rebuild during the tear down year, not to solely tear down as has been the plan of the cardinals.

In no way are these the same intended plan.

It’s pretty clear the Cardinals didn’t do anything like the 2017 Niners, in the off-season (signing multiple big FA contracts) during the season (trading for its QBOTF and planning on giving him a huge contract that would end up the RICHEST DEAL IN NFL
HISTORY AT THE TIME) or with results on the field (4 win jump to 0 win jump).

Other than that though, comparing the 2017 Niners and 2023 Cardinals is like looking in a mirror!

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

Jerry Rice compared him to Joe Montana

@Krangodnzr - yeah I’m in pretty good company there. But the truth is I was just using your criteria. QB that made the right reads surrounded by Uber talent. Same-same there.

I’ll stand by my statement. Second year QB who likely takes team to super bowl in rookie year if not injured, playing at mvp level in second season

That's fine. The guys I mentioned have all played at MVP levels in more demanding offenses with less overwhelming supporting casts, as well.

No one is going to confuse Brock Purdy with, like, Jeff Garcia. The metrics are hard to argue with outside of "vibes" and "eye test," which are obviously suspect. I've said that Purdy's game reminds me a ton of Kurt Warner, and I didn't think that Warner deserved his MVP awards because his supporting cast and system were so overwhelming, either.

I understand the argument that someone still has to throw the ball and put it in the right place.

okay this sets better context for me. If you think Kurt didn’t deserve it we are playing with different decks. The fact that those performances are as rare as they are leads me to believe the driver of the Formula One car is just as valuable in the equation of winning.

 

[DVontel]

LOL… pathological inability to admit you’re wrong.

You can read, correct?

Answer is no.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

I totally understand the frustration and boredom right now. But I think playing out the string with Wilks was much worse than this. Wilks was a clear disaster from jump street, even if a lot of people here refused to believe it. Josh Rosen being the worst rookie QB in history made it even worse.


This is an amazing way to look at this question. What team is better if you swapped their Week 1 starter with Brock Purdy?

I think a lot of teams would be. That’s where you and I likely diverge.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

Here’s the most ridiculous thing about the @DVontel argument that the outcomes were similar regardless of intent. The outcomes aren’t similar at all.

The Niners did enough in the 2017 off-season AND mid-season to improve from 2-14 to 6-10. The Cardinals outcome is going to be just as bad this year as they were last year. 3-14 to 3-14.



Some people just can’t admit when they’re demonstrably wrong.

Dude this is why people lean into the coolbros narrative. This was just gratuitous piling on. And now in some peoples minds this comment will be attributable to me.

 

[DVontel]

This is an amazing way to look at this question. What team is better if you swapped their Week 1 starter with Brock Purdy?

I think this is a very broad question tbh, which will take a chunk of time to discuss.

I will say, MAYBE outside of Miami, I don’t think he comes anywhere near close to the production he has now.

 

[DVontel]

Here’s the most ridiculous thing about the @DVontel argument that the outcomes were similar regardless of intent. The outcomes aren’t similar at all.

The Niners did enough in the 2017 off-season AND mid-season to improve from 2-14 to 6-10. The Cardinals outcome is going to be just as bad this year as they were last year. 3-14 to 3-14.



Some people just can’t admit when they’re demonstrably wrong.

I don’t know if y’all are related or not, but one thing you need to stop doing is kissing Ouchie’s ass when even he knows he doesn’t need it. Nothing you love doing more is hopping in a convo(especially when it comes to Ouchie & another person) & trying to pile on when you come off looking desperate in the end.

Glad Ouchie pointed it out as well.

 

[Cheesebeef]

Answer is no.

LOL. Okay.

 

[Cheesebeef]

Dude this is why people lean into the coolbros narrative. This was just gratuitous piling on. And now in some peoples minds this comment will be attributable to me.

Actually, it wasn’t gratuitous piling on. It was adding even more context. @DVontel argued that the Cards and Niners situations are similar because of the outcome of their respective seasons. You countered his argument, positing it didn’t matter if the outcomes were similar because the intent was different. My post then pointed out that the outcomes themselves weren’t even similar, so BOTH arguments about similarities failed as far as intent and outcomes were concerned.

 

[DVontel]

Your reasoning is faulty. You’re arguing that because the outcomes were similar the intent of each franchise was the same. Cheese is pointing out the intent was different. In other words, different plans. And cheese is right.

Niners intent was to sign good players that they believed were for value for multiple years. Like a 1,000 yard receiver, eventual perennial pro bowl fullback, up and coming linebacker. Whether they worked out or not is immaterial to this discussion of what the intended plan of the niners was. The intent of the niners was tear down and rebuild at the same time.

Cards intent was to tear down and sign guys that were lottery tickets, at best, if they hit. They weren’t signing up and coming players. They weren’t signing players coming off career years. That’s why they are 1-2 year deals. They were slot fillers that weren’t being counted on for future years. If they busted - as was likely - it was no big deal to the program of tear down only that monti put in place.

And though you “took the L” with the jimmy G fact, you fail to recognize that it is further proof that the niners intent - their plan - was to rebuild during the tear down year, not to solely tear down as has been the plan of the cardinals.

In no way are these the same intended plan.

I still believe the intent was similar. The only difference was it not as extreme as the other. If the Kyzir & Froholdt also came off of productive seasons. You could see it as filler, but I also see it not overvaluing while they also filled positions of need. Monti just did not overvalue those guys like Lynch did with those guys.

 

[DVontel]

LOL. Okay.

Smart of you deleting that most recent post because you know you read it back & it made you looked silly, lol.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

I think this is a very broad question tbh, which will take a chunk of time to discuss.

I will say, MAYBE outside of Miami, I don’t think he comes anywhere near close to the production he has now.

That’s moving the goalposts. The question was which team would be performing better than at present, not at the same level of the niners. I agree that outside of Miami, Buffalo, Philly, Purdy wouldn’t replicate niners. But that’s because coaching and surrounding talent obviously matter.

I think if we take it back to the original question of which teams are likely better I think I’d say:

Cardinals
Seahawks
Broncos
Raiders
Bears
Giants
Commanders
Patriots
Browns
Steelers
Jaguars
Titans
Colts
Bucs
Falcons
Saints
Panthers

Maybes:
Miami (I think Purdy is superior to tua)
Jets (not sold on old man Rodgers)
Chargers (sheen is off Herbert a bit)
Vikings
Packers
Lions (though I’ve always thought goff was more talented than given credit for as well)

That’s 17 + 6 maybes

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

I don’t know if y’all are related or not, but one thing you need to stop doing is kissing Ouchie’s ass when even he knows he doesn’t need it. Nothing you love doing more is hopping in a convo(especially when it comes to Ouchie & another person) & trying to pile on when you come off looking desperate in the end.

Glad Ouchie pointed it out as well.

This isn’t necessary either. The two of you come off looking childish.

 

[Chopper0080]

Is Kyler next...

xc_hide_links_from_guests_guests_error_hide_media

No reason to hold onto Russ if you don't think he is it. Kinda similar to my mindset with Kyler. Getting busy living or get busy dying.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

Actually, it wasn’t gratuitous piling on. It was adding even more context. @DVontel argued that the Cards and Niners situations are similar because of the outcome of their respective seasons. Your countered his argument that it didn’t matter if the outcomes were similar because the intent was difference. My post was pointing out that the outcomes themselves weren’t even similar, so any argument about similarities fails as far as intent and outcomes are concerned.

Just the part I bolded was gratuitous piling on. I agree with the first paragraph.