49ers Post Game

[S197]

I guess we’ll see, all I know is we’re dead last in cap right now and eventually you pay the piper. NO kicked the can down the road with Brees and I think they’re going to regret it. They may very well be dealing with his dead cap well into his retirement. Restructuring only pushes the cap down the road, you still need to pay every cent.

We have a ton of coaching turnover. We may lose Paton now too. 2020 may be a good year to reset but I look forward to seeing what you put together.

Right I get what you're saying but if we could pay some players further down the road when maybe Cousins is no longer here wouldnt that make sense? Again, I love math but figuring salary cap is a whole different monster when it comes to math lol

I suppose it depends on how you feel about the current management. I think there's a pretty strong indication we'll likely need to move on and that being the case would prefer to take the lumps now then burden a new regime with the mistakes of the past.

If you're good with the status quo and feel we're still in the contention window then deferral makes sense.

[StumpHunter]

Let me ask you something. If Trubisky went down before the 2019 season with a possible career ending injury, the Bears had a 1st round pick next season and they decided to give it up to LA for Blake Bortles, would you consider that a good trade, or one born out of desperation that was destined to fail?

That is pretty much the context of the trade we made, and when you look at it as an outsider instead of a fan of the team that made the trade, it looks pretty bad in that context.

Look, I never said it was a good trade. History has shown us that it wasn't, but not because Bradford played poorly. I still remember Sean McDonough's "Bradford can't miss" call in the third quarter of our season-opening rout of the Saints in 2017. It was one of the most amazing displays of spinning a football I can remember. I also remember Dalvin Cook rushing for 127 yards and wondering who in the world was going to stop our offense. Unfortunately, that's when Bradford reverted to his alter ego, Sam Glassford.

All I'm saying is that I understood the trade at the time. It was a gamble that didn't pay off. And hey, if you were singing that "impending disaster" tune when the Vikings were 5-0, or when Bradford was racking up 346 yards and a 143 passer rating against the Saints, then congratulations ... you're far more of a Nostradamus than I am. Still, I'll politely disagree with your position that any reasonable person could see from the beginning that it was a certain disaster.

And for the record, I'm not sure Mitchell Trubisky is an upgrade over Blake Bortles. And neither would be mistaken for a healthy Sam Bradford (a rare occurrence, I'll admit), who had as much arm talent as anyone in the game. Bradford, it could be argued, was an upgrade over Teddy Bridgewater.

Now you have gone and done it.

You tell me which QB is the better QB:
QB A: 81 passer rating, 3.4 TD %, 2.3 INT %, 60.1 Comp %, 6.45 YPA and a 25-37 W-L record with 0 playoff appearances.
QB B: 85.8 passer rating, 3.8 TD %, 2.3 INT %, 63.4 Comp %, 6.7 YPA and a 23-18 W-L record with 1 playoff loss.
QB C: 81 passer rating, 3.9 TD %, 2.8 INT %, 59.3 Comp %, 6.7 YPA and a 24-49 W-L record with 2-1 in the playoffs.
QB D: 84.9 passer rating, 4.0 TD %, 2.4 INT %, 61.8 Comp %, 6.8 YPA and a 17-18 W-L 0 playoff appearances.

Now, QB D is the best QB statistically by a small margin over QB B, QB B has the best record and QB C showed the most promise in the playoffs.

QB A is the worst statistically, managed to never make the playoffs in despite 5 seasons of starting, had a horrible W-L record and are the stats for the QB we gave up a 1st round pick for at the time of the trade.

QB D is the guy who we couldn't possibly go a full season with as a starter.

QB B and C are Trubisky and Bortles.

That isn't hyperbole, that is cold hard facts. We traded a 1st for a guy who you can't really give a good argument for being better than Blake Bortles...or our backup that season for that matter.

Wins, stats, potential, nothing really there to argue for Bradford being the best of that group. That is fricken sad.

[Pondering Her Percy]

Leadership is an intangible quality.

Regardless, I’m not sure how you can question his leadership with any sort of validity behind it but it is what it is

Different scenario.

We could go around and around on this point but it's not worth it. It was just a hypothetical example intended to illustrate the point that Cousins isn't the kind of special QB Mahomes clearly is and (based on my observations anyway) doesn't appear to inspire his team in the same way. We can reasonably differ on the outcome of the hypothetical scenario but it can't be proven either way so there's no sense in continuing to debate it.

Ok but nobody is saying he is like Mahomes in that regard but it leads to the point above, if he wasn’t a leader and his team didn’t rally behind him when they were down, it would be clear as day. But it’s not. Not even close to be honest.

A journeyman is, by definition, a reliable but not outstanding or exceptional player.

It's worth noting that Cousins is on his second team and it won't be surprising if he's on a third in 2021.

Again, I have no idea where you are getting that definition.

A journeyman quarterback is a quarterback who plays short stints for several teams over a career. Such a player is typically signed to year-by-year contracts, and may be signed by a team to fill in for an injured starter.

The definition of journeyman in no way, shape or form is aligning with what you think it is. He’s on his second team in 8 years. Case Keenum has been on 5 teams in 7 years. Ryan Fitzpatrick has been on every team in the nfl at this point. Regardless, I would think you get my point here.

As for the defense: I see your point. I was focusing more on the QB and what I was saying is the Vikes are still built like that kind of team. Maybe that will change this offseason but I'm guessing they will direct their efforts primarily to the defensive side of the roster and their overall philosophy will change little. That said, there's a good chance you're right that next year's defense won't be good enough to carry them anywhere.

Yeah I’m looking at the team as a whole.

[Pondering Her Percy]

Let me ask you something. If Trubisky went down before the 2019 season with a possible career ending injury, the Bears had a 1st round pick next season and they decided to give it up to LA for Blake Bortles, would you consider that a good trade, or one born out of desperation that was destined to fail?

That is pretty much the context of the trade we made, and when you look at it as an outsider instead of a fan of the team that made the trade, it looks pretty bad in that context.

Look, I never said it was a good trade. History has shown us that it wasn't, but not because Bradford played poorly. I still remember Sean McDonough's "Bradford can't miss" call in the third quarter of our season-opening rout of the Saints in 2017. It was one of the most amazing displays of spinning a football I can remember. I also remember Dalvin Cook rushing for 127 yards and wondering who in the world was going to stop our offense. Unfortunately, that's when Bradford reverted to his alter ego, Sam Glassford.

All I'm saying is that I understood the trade at the time. It was a gamble that didn't pay off. And hey, if you were singing that "impending disaster" tune when the Vikings were 5-0, or when Bradford was racking up 346 yards and a 143 passer rating against the Saints, then congratulations ... you're far more of a Nostradamus than I am. Still, I'll politely disagree with your position that any reasonable person could see from the beginning that it was a certain disaster.

And for the record, I'm not sure Mitchell Trubisky is an upgrade over Blake Bortles. And neither would be mistaken for a healthy Sam Bradford (a rare occurrence, I'll admit), who had as much arm talent as anyone in the game. Bradford, it could be argued, was an upgrade over Teddy Bridgewater.

You couldn’t have said it better Kapp. Bradfords ability to throw the football was just as good as anyone in the nfl.

I’m with you by saying I understood the trade at the time. I said it earlier and for some reason guys tend to think I’m saying it was a “good” trade. I can also guarantee he wasn’t saying it was a mistake when we were 5-0. Bradford unfortunately couldn’t stay healthy though and it bit us. But I mentioned this a long time ago is the fact that just because you’re labeled “injury prone” doesn’t mean that’s how you will be your entire career. Rudy is a perfect example. This board was flooded with “he’s injury prone” comments. I wanna say I even saw that we needed to draft a new TE back then. But he’s played how many consecutive games now? Some guys make their way out of that phase. Unfortunately Bradford couldn’t.

[Pondering Her Percy]

Let me ask you something. If Trubisky went down before the 2019 season with a possible career ending injury, the Bears had a 1st round pick next season and they decided to give it up to LA for Blake Bortles, would you consider that a good trade, or one born out of desperation that was destined to fail?

That is pretty much the context of the trade we made, and when you look at it as an outsider instead of a fan of the team that made the trade, it looks pretty bad in that context.

Except Bortles is better than Sam bradford... worst pocket presence I've ever seen in my life.

Uh what?! I have no more words

[Pondering Her Percy]

Except Bortles is better than Sam bradford... worst pocket presence I've ever seen in my life.

And now we're throwing out hyperbole just to win an argument. Sam Bradford was one of the most gifted throwers of the football who has played in the last 25 years. He just couldn't stay healthy.

Plus, nobody was worse than Blake Bortles. Not Spurgon Wynn, not Akili Smith, not Ryan Leaf. Nobody.

See, I can sling it, too.

Again, agreed here. Using Blake Bortles to compare to Bradford is like comparing Kirk cousins to Christian ponder. It’s not even an argument

[Pondering Her Percy]

Look, I never said it was a good trade. History has shown us that it wasn't, but not because Bradford played poorly. I still remember Sean McDonough's "Bradford can't miss" call in the third quarter of our season-opening rout of the Saints in 2017. It was one of the most amazing displays of spinning a football I can remember. I also remember Dalvin Cook rushing for 127 yards and wondering who in the world was going to stop our offense. Unfortunately, that's when Bradford reverted to his alter ego, Sam Glassford.

All I'm saying is that I understood the trade at the time. It was a gamble that didn't pay off. And hey, if you were singing that "impending disaster" tune when the Vikings were 5-0, or when Bradford was racking up 346 yards and a 143 passer rating against the Saints, then congratulations ... you're far more of a Nostradamus than I am. Still, I'll politely disagree with your position that any reasonable person could see from the beginning that it was a certain disaster.

And for the record, I'm not sure Mitchell Trubisky is an upgrade over Blake Bortles. And neither would be mistaken for a healthy Sam Bradford (a rare occurrence, I'll admit), who had as much arm talent as anyone in the game. Bradford, it could be argued, was an upgrade over Teddy Bridgewater.

Now you have gone and done it.

You tell me which QB is the better QB:
QB A: 81 passer rating, 3.4 TD %, 2.3 INT %, 60.1 Comp %, 6.45 YPA and a 25-37 W-L record with 0 playoff appearances.
QB B: 85.8 passer rating, 3.8 TD %, 2.3 INT %, 63.4 Comp %, 6.7 YPA and a 23-18 W-L record with 1 playoff loss.
QB C: 81 passer rating, 3.9 TD %, 2.8 INT %, 59.3 Comp %, 6.7 YPA and a 24-49 W-L record with 2-1 in the playoffs.
QB D: 84.9 passer rating, 4.0 TD %, 2.4 INT %, 61.8 Comp %, 6.8 YPA and a 17-18 W-L 0 playoff appearances.

Now, QB D is the best QB statistically by a small margin over QB B, QB B has the best record and QB C showed the most promise in the playoffs.

QB A is the worst statistically, managed to never make the playoffs in despite 5 seasons of starting, had a horrible W-L record and are the stats for the QB we gave up a 1st round pick for at the time of the trade.

QB D is the guy who we couldn't possibly go a full season with as a starter.

QB B and C are Trubisky and Bortles.

That isn't hyperbole, that is cold hard facts. We traded a 1st for a guy who you can't really give a good argument for being better than Blake Bortles...or our backup that season for that matter.

Wins, stats, potential, nothing really there to argue for Bradford being the best of that group. That is fricken sad.

Dude Sam Bradford played the majority of his career in St. Louis. Who at the time was one of the worst managed, worst coached and just overall worst franchise in the game. You’re faulting a guy for playing on a team that was one of the worst franchises through those years that the league has ever seen. The rams were 6-42 in the 3 years before Bradford got there. Yes I repeat, 6-42. Then the 4 years Bradford was there they won 7 games 3 of the 4 years (yes one of the 3 years he got hurt halfway through but probably wouldve won roughly 7 if he didn’t get hurt) And the one year they didnt win 7 games was when he was also hurt. He won more games in 1 year than the rams won total in the 3 years prior and he did it 2 times no less, probably 3 if it wasn’t for injury.

But we can discount case keenums years in Denver and Washington right? But we can count cousins in Washington and Bradford in St. Louis? There’s the classic, “stump counts it only when it helps his argument”.

And then you sit there and compare statistics but will shoot down anyone that brings up any sort of statistic regarding cousins. Again, another “stump counts it only when it helps his argument”.

Bortles had a defense, Trubisky had a defense, Keenum had a defense and good skilled players on offense (in Minnesota and Denver), what in THEEE HELL did Sam Bradford have in St. Louis?? Steven Jackson? Woo. My father is a die hard rams fan and the only team I’ve watched more than them over my lifetime is the Vikings. That team couldn’t get any worse during that time span. Then pair the terrible players with a coach that has the most losses of any coach in nfl history in Jeff Fisher and Steve Spagnuolo who was 10-38 as a HC (7 of those wins coming from Bradfords rookie year) and hasn’t been hired again as one in 10 years. THAT’S how bad the rams franchise was at the time.

[CharVike]

Were is Wilson at right now? He got beat in the playoffs like Cousins. He was lucky drawing Philly or the Saints would have beat him. Regardless of what you think he did no better than Cousins. IMO if we played each other 16 times we would both be 8-8. Yes he beat Cousins this year in Seatle. Good for him. But our team in history always has a hard time in that Stadium. Why don't you point out Jimmy G and his big contract. Did that contract destroy the team? Like Cousins destroyed our team. Our problem is paying a guy like Rhodes as a shut down corner is stupid. He gets picked on from the word go. SF has a shut down guy and teams don't throw at him. I could go on but just look at who gets paid and what they do.

Seattle was half a yard away from a first round bye and a home game. It sucks for them they’re in the same division as SF but they had a very good year. Also, I already addressed Jimmy’s contract and why it’s different for SF. They won’t be able to pay those big contracts when all those 1st round rookie contracts end. Just like the Rams. And the Eagles short term benefiting from similar situations. But now I’m just repeating myself and I’d rather not do that. If you think it’s Xavier Rhodes keeping us from getting over the hump... well... I guess you’re entitled to your opinion.

I never posted Rhodes is the player keeping us from winning the Super Bowl if that's what you mean by getting over the hump. I stated the problem is we dumped a bunch of CAP on a guy that isn't living up to that amount. He's picked on. That's not a shut down guy. Why is that so hard to understand. So SF is screwed when all these 1st round contracts come up. What do they have like 5 1st round contracts that will come up in one year? The Hawks have SF in there division. We have Rodgers in ours. We are both screwed. And for Wilson IMO he has had a great career that's been proven. When he won the Super Bowl he had one of the top defense in the history of the game. If he had that same defense this year he would have beat out SF. Give us the LOB and we will be a much better team even with Cousins. Since we don't have a dominate defense our chance of beating out Rodgers is very small. That's only the beginning of getting over the hump. We won't have a dominate defense next year either. We need to many players to become that. Most think we can go into FA and just buy a defense. The players won't be there to sign.

[CharVike]

Brees has had a great career but don't forget he was injured. I don't blame us for skipping. I remember I was glad we skipped.

I remember the situation well. Brees didn't have the kind of injury from which he was unlikely to recover and Childress clearly didn't want to to keep Culpepper on the team. I thought (and still think) it was foolish not to make an effort to sign Brees.

Nine months after suffering a dislocation in his right shoulder joint and a tear of the labrum and rotator cuff, Brees signed with the Saints as a free agent in 2006. A torn rotator cuff is a bad injury for a right handed passer. That's why we passed and I was glad they did. Saints got it right. That same injury ended others career.

[Mothman]

Again, I have no idea where you are getting that definition.

A journeyman quarterback is a quarterback who plays short stints for several teams over a career. Such a player is typically signed to year-by-year contracts, and may be signed by a team to fill in for an injured starter.

The definition of journeyman in no way, shape or form is aligning with what you think it is.

Don't be ridiculous. The definition I gave you is literally what the word journeyman means. Look it up in a dictionary.

You can split hairs about how it applies to quarterbacks but I used the word properly.

[Mothman]

I’m with you by saying I understood the trade at the time.

Again, everybody understood the trade at the time.

I said it earlier and for some reason guys tend to think I’m saying it was a “good” trade. I can also guarantee he wasn’t saying it was a mistake when we were 5-0. Bradford unfortunately couldn’t stay healthy though and it bit us. But I mentioned this a long time ago is the fact that just because you’re labeled “injury prone” doesn’t mean that’s how you will be your entire career. Rudy is a perfect example. This board was flooded with “he’s injury prone” comments. I wanna say I even saw that we needed to draft a new TE back then. But he’s played how many consecutive games now? Some guys make their way out of that phase. Unfortunately Bradford couldn’t.

He was a bad gamble and that's part of the point but in the bigger picture, the entire scenario was characteristic of Spielman, as GM, mishandling resources and the QB position.

[StumpHunter]

Look, I never said it was a good trade. History has shown us that it wasn't, but not because Bradford played poorly. I still remember Sean McDonough's "Bradford can't miss" call in the third quarter of our season-opening rout of the Saints in 2017. It was one of the most amazing displays of spinning a football I can remember. I also remember Dalvin Cook rushing for 127 yards and wondering who in the world was going to stop our offense. Unfortunately, that's when Bradford reverted to his alter ego, Sam Glassford.

All I'm saying is that I understood the trade at the time. It was a gamble that didn't pay off. And hey, if you were singing that "impending disaster" tune when the Vikings were 5-0, or when Bradford was racking up 346 yards and a 143 passer rating against the Saints, then congratulations ... you're far more of a Nostradamus than I am. Still, I'll politely disagree with your position that any reasonable person could see from the beginning that it was a certain disaster.

And for the record, I'm not sure Mitchell Trubisky is an upgrade over Blake Bortles. And neither would be mistaken for a healthy Sam Bradford (a rare occurrence, I'll admit), who had as much arm talent as anyone in the game. Bradford, it could be argued, was an upgrade over Teddy Bridgewater.

You couldn’t have said it better Kapp. Bradfords ability to throw the football was just as good as anyone in the nfl.

It was?

Since he entered the league in 2010, there have been 37 QBs with 48 starts or more. Of those 37, he is 36th in TD%, 35th in YPA, 30th in passer rating and 19th in comp %.

He is right there with Blaine Gabbert in almost every stat. Bradford might be a good passer in practice, but on Sunday he was one of the worst. Which matters more?

[CharVike]

Rick wants safe at QB, and will avoid taking a risk on greatness to stay safe.

Just like it will come back to bite us after they make Cousins the highest paid QB yet again when they extend him for 5 more seasons.

My hope is that the Wilfs will be smart enough to not let a GM on the last year of his contract decide the future of the franchise by extending Cousins, but I think I am going to be greatly disappointed.

I think it all stems from the belief that you don't need a top tier QB to win in NFL, and you can win with a really safe QB. That's true if you do everything else correctly, but we know that they don't do everything else correctly, do they?

Unfortunately, unless something changed in his philosophy, I'm afraid you are very likely right, and we'll be seeing an extension this off-season. But, I'm also expecting the GM and coach to get extended first.

The Wilfs are very happy with how there investment is going right now. Look what they have accomplished from an investment stand point. We are lucky that they let the team spend money. He could tell them don't spend anything I want the money. His goal is to sell the stadium out. I think he's achieving that. He has a competitive team. Speilman is safe. He isn't going anywhere. He beat the Packers out for the title. Rodgers not playing helped a little bit. We don't have a Super Bowl insight but he's a Giant fan anyway. They have no choice but to extend Cousins. There's nothing in the hole at this point. I don't see a QB in this draft that would give us an advantage in our division. Burrow is a 2nd to 3rd round talent that will go number 1. Talk about a reach. But QBs are hard to find. Look at our losing partner the Lions. Why do they continue to stick with the QB they have? He can't pull that team out of the hole. That's been proven. At least Cousins got us in the playoffs. That's a cut above most teams. so yea Speilman will get extended. He has proven to put a competitive team out there. I'm sure he would like a QB that's better than Rodgers. Perhaps someone sees a guy out there. I don't see it. Even Burrow doesn't have Rodgers talent level.

[Pondering Her Percy]

Again, I have no idea where you are getting that definition.



The definition of journeyman in no way, shape or form is aligning with what you think it is.

Don't be ridiculous. The definition I gave you is literally what the word journeyman means. Look it up in a dictionary.

You can split hairs about how it applies to quarterbacks but I used the word properly.

You say I'm splitting hairs but you're saying you're using the word "properly" and teetering the line of questioning my intelligence because I'm not using the literal definition. But I'm being ridiculous? You're taking it as a literal definition out of the dictionary but you know just as well as I do, that's not what it means in football terms. Instead of me looking it up in the dictionary, google "what is a journeyman quarterback in the NFL" (since that's what we are referring to) and you'll get the exact definition I just posted for you. Cousins is not a journeyman QB in the NFL, not even remotely close.

[StumpHunter]

Now you have gone and done it.

You tell me which QB is the better QB:
QB A: 81 passer rating, 3.4 TD %, 2.3 INT %, 60.1 Comp %, 6.45 YPA and a 25-37 W-L record with 0 playoff appearances.
QB B: 85.8 passer rating, 3.8 TD %, 2.3 INT %, 63.4 Comp %, 6.7 YPA and a 23-18 W-L record with 1 playoff loss.
QB C: 81 passer rating, 3.9 TD %, 2.8 INT %, 59.3 Comp %, 6.7 YPA and a 24-49 W-L record with 2-1 in the playoffs.
QB D: 84.9 passer rating, 4.0 TD %, 2.4 INT %, 61.8 Comp %, 6.8 YPA and a 17-18 W-L 0 playoff appearances.

Now, QB D is the best QB statistically by a small margin over QB B, QB B has the best record and QB C showed the most promise in the playoffs.

QB A is the worst statistically, managed to never make the playoffs in despite 5 seasons of starting, had a horrible W-L record and are the stats for the QB we gave up a 1st round pick for at the time of the trade.

QB D is the guy who we couldn't possibly go a full season with as a starter.

QB B and C are Trubisky and Bortles.

That isn't hyperbole, that is cold hard facts. We traded a 1st for a guy who you can't really give a good argument for being better than Blake Bortles...or our backup that season for that matter.

Wins, stats, potential, nothing really there to argue for Bradford being the best of that group. That is fricken sad.

Dude Sam Bradford played the majority of his career in St. Louis. Who at the time was one of the worst managed, worst coached and just overall worst franchise in the game. You’re faulting a guy for playing on a team that was one of the worst franchises through those years that the league has ever seen. The rams were 6-42 in the 3 years before Bradford got there. Yes I repeat, 6-42. Then the 4 years Bradford was there they won 7 games 3 of the 4 years (yes one of the 3 years he got hurt halfway through but probably wouldve won roughly 7 if he didn’t get hurt) And the one year they didnt win 7 games was when he was also hurt. He won more games in 1 year than the rams won total in the 3 years prior and he did it 2 times no less, probably 3 if it wasn’t for injury.

But we can discount case keenums years in Denver and Washington right? But we can count cousins in Washington and Bradford in St. Louis? There’s the classic, “stump counts it only when it helps his argument”.

And then you sit there and compare statistics but will shoot down anyone that brings up any sort of statistic regarding cousins. Again, another “stump counts it only when it helps his argument”.

Bortles had a defense, Trubisky had a defense, Keenum had a defense and good skilled players on offense (in Minnesota and Denver), what in THEEE HELL did Sam Bradford have in St. Louis?? Steven Jackson? Woo. My father is a die hard rams fan and the only team I’ve watched more than them over my lifetime is the Vikings. That team couldn’t get any worse during that time span. Then pair the terrible players with a coach that has the most losses of any coach in nfl history in Jeff Fisher and Steve Spagnuolo who was 10-38 as a HC (7 of those wins coming from Bradfords rookie year) and hasn’t been hired again as one in 10 years. THAT’S how bad the rams franchise was at the time.

The bears won 11 games total in the 3 seasons before Trubisky got there. The jags also only won 11. Both made it to the playoffs within their first 4 seasons. Hill played the majority of his career on the Lions. All were more productive than Bradford.


I am not a Case apologist btw. While you were posting you would rather extend him than sign Tom Brady, I was arguing he was a very good journeyman who should not be considered the future of the franchise.