Trey Lance or Justin Fields ?

[snatchit 108]

Not being needed now, just a bench stash 

[MTSkiBum 1,605]

Justin Fields

The most accurate college passer of the last 15 years according to pff. He played at a big time college and can run.

Verse a guy who played 1 game for ND last year.

[Bier Meister 1,534]

Long term, I like trey.  i think Garappolo plays until he is hurt or has consistent poor performance.  SF is a much better situation than chi offensively imo.  Chi has talent but is a qb graveyard

 

Edit: I think fields looks better now, and should play sooner than lance.  Shanny stated that they have specific "trey" plays to get him into the games.

 

 

[Brutal Brutus 182]

I trust shanahan a lot more than nagy.

[weepaws 2,517]

Fields. 

[TBayXXXVII 2,215]

33 minutes ago, Brutal Brutus said:

I trust shanahan a lot more than nagy.

Interesting.  Why?

[Brutal Brutus 182]

5 minutes ago, TBayXXXVII said:

Interesting.  Why?

The past four years SF has averaged more passing yards, rushing yards and scored more points than Chicago. He's gone to a super bowl with Jimmy G, while Nagy is on his 2nd rookie QB. I heard SF has already designed an offensive package for Lance, which would lead me to believe they plan on trying to maximize his skillset. I think Chicago will try and make Fields a much more traditional QB, with limited rushing upside.

[lesjroza 70]

Lance for me, but go with whatever your gut is telling you because I think both are solid specs this year.

As for "why Lance?" in my case, there are lots of reasons actually but most are very debatable. I do think the idea that SF traded into that slot and had their choice of several QBs including Fields but they saw Lance as the best fit isn't in question. Conversely, Chicago needed a QB of the future desperately, and it was fortunate for them Fields fell to spot they could trade into because he has that kind of potential, but that isn't the same as him being their first choice of fit. 

[polecatt 405]

For this season, it's just gonna be which ever one gets in the starting line up first.

For the long run, like in a dynasty league, I would definitely take Trey Lance.

I think they could both end up being very good QBs, but I think Trey Lance has more talent. He's the better athlete and seems to be more polished. Plus, he doesn't have the curse of being the QB on the Bears.

Only time will tell...

[TBayXXXVII 2,215]

15 minutes ago, Brutal Brutus said:

The past four years SF has averaged more passing yards, rushing yards and scored more points than Chicago. He's gone to a super bowl with Jimmy G, while Nagy is on his 2nd rookie QB. I heard SF has already designed an offensive package for Lance, which would lead me to believe they plan on trying to maximize his skillset. I think Chicago will try and make Fields a much more traditional QB, with limited rushing upside.

• Nagy's been in Chicago for only 3.  Why are you holding him responsible for a year where Fox was the coach?  I'm sure your argument still holds true over the last 3 years though.
  • Maybe that holds true because Trubisky sucks... not because Nagy isn't a good coach.
• Matt Nagy never had a losing season, Shanahan has had 3.
• Trubisky had 2 seasons with a passer rating over 93, so did Garoppolo.
  • I'm more impressed by Nagy going 12-4 with Trubisky than going to a Super Bowl with Garoppolo.  I mean, Garoppolo will be a starter somewhere next year... Trubisky will never be signed as a starter ever again.
• Nagy isn't on his 2nd rookie QB, only his 1st (Fox drafted Trubisky)... but Shanahan is on his 2nd hand picked QB.
  • Interestingly, Trubisky has a 22-13 record as a starter.  I think that's extremely impressive for Nagy as a coach... especially since (at the risk of sounding redundant), Trubisky sucks.
• Why would Nagy try to make Fields a more traditional QB?  He has always been around mobile QB's... Trubisky, Mahomes, Smith, Vick, and McNabb.

[TBayXXXVII 2,215]

Fields.  He's a more polished prospect.

[Brutal Brutus 182]

5 hours ago, TBayXXXVII said:

• Nagy's been in Chicago for only 3.  Why are you holding him responsible for a year where Fox was the coach?  I'm sure your argument still holds true over the last 3 years though.
  • Maybe that holds true because Trubisky sucks... not because Nagy isn't a good coach.
• Matt Nagy never had a losing season, Shanahan has had 3.
• Trubisky had 2 seasons with a passer rating over 93, so did Garoppolo.
  • I'm more impressed by Nagy going 12-4 with Trubisky than going to a Super Bowl with Garoppolo.  I mean, Garoppolo will be a starter somewhere next year... Trubisky will never be signed as a starter ever again.
• Nagy isn't on his 2nd rookie QB, only his 1st (Fox drafted Trubisky)... but Shanahan is on his 2nd hand picked QB.
  • Interestingly, Trubisky has a 22-13 record as a starter.  I think that's extremely impressive for Nagy as a coach... especially since (at the risk of sounding redundant), Trubisky sucks.
• Why would Nagy try to make Fields a more traditional QB?  He has always been around mobile QB's... Trubisky, Mahomes, Smith, Vick, and McNabb.

I think there's a reason Nagy is on nearly every coaching hot seat list, while Shanahan isn't. They coach in two very different divisions, with the NFC West recently being a division with multiple super bowl contenders every year. Injuries also played a major factor in the 49ers season last year. 

Jimmy G. is 24-8 as a starter for the 49ers, and they still gave up three first round picks to move on from him. They obviously do not believe he is the reason for their success. Their in ability to trade him, also shows what other teams think of him. 

Nagy gave up a 4th rounder for Foles last year,  wouldn't that makes Fields his 2nd hand picked QB too? 

I think both are fine fliers, I just prefer Lance. If I'm picking a rookie QB to be a potential difference maker, I want the one with the higher rushing floor and I think that's Lance. Fields will get rushing yards, but I believe they will nearly all be from scrambling out of the pocket. I don't recall Nagy implementing a lot of designed QB runs or being all that innovative with his offense. On the other hand, I think Shanahan will have some spread option mixed in with Lance.

[Ray_T 604]

4 hours ago, Brutal Brutus said:

Nagy gave up a 4th rounder for Foles last year,  wouldn't that makes Fields his 2nd hand picked QB too? 

I hardly think a 4th round value counts as hand picked.

to me hand picked implies you can get any QB in the draft or the best free agent available.

neither of those applies here.

To me Foles was the best player they could get on the cheap.   That is hardly a hand picked scenario.

Likely the GM didnt wanna throw a lot of money or draft capital at the problem for whatever reason.

To me this is the first hand picked selection hes had.  I wouldnt count foles.

and as far as a coach goes, hes been good.  The Defense has been great.   Offense not so great,   but with an overall winning record, I would suggest hes done reasonably well with what hes had.   and on Offense its not like hes been loaded up with talent but he has gotten the run game going so its not all bad.

[Serenity Now 44]

30 minutes ago, Ray_T said:

I hardly think a 4th round value counts as hand picked.

to me hand picked implies you can get any QB in the draft or the best free agent available.

neither of those applies here.

To me Foles was the best player they could get on the cheap.   That is hardly a hand picked scenario.

Likely the GM didnt wanna throw a lot of money or draft capital at the problem for whatever reason.

To me this is the first hand picked selection hes had.  I wouldnt count foles.

and as far as a coach goes, hes been good.  The Defense has been great.   Offense not so great,   but with an overall winning record, I would suggest hes done reasonably well with what hes had.   and on Offense its not like hes been loaded up with talent but he has gotten the run game going so its not all bad.

Hand picked was just a retort to the number of qbs they’ve both traded for. Neither coach has had quality qbs. 

Nagy was supposed to be an offensive guru when he came in, so the defense being great but offense putrid, doesn’t help his case.

[Ray_T 604]

37 minutes ago, Serenity Now said:

Hand picked was just a retort to the number of qbs they’ve both traded for. Neither coach has had quality qbs. 

Nagy was supposed to be an offensive guru when he came in, so the defense being great but offense putrid, doesn’t help his case.

maybe so maybe not.

last time I looked roughly 50% of the game is defense. so it counts for something.

I think(believe it or not) this offense will be better under Dalton than it was under either of the QB's they used last year.

I acknowledge that the bar is low there, and being just better may not be enough.  but for what its worth, I think he is better than what they had last year.

The team has committed to Dalton for now and I think they will stick to this at least so long as the team is doing okay.  Early camp reports suggest Dalton has been sharp and has shown a good command of the offense.

I realize that means little if Fields blows the doors off, but I have not heard any reports of this to date, and the word was (at least initially) that he would be a QB prospect who could benefit from sitting in the early part of his career (subtext rookie season)

For now,  if I'm the owner/GM I'm willing to give him the latitude he needs to develop the kid properly.   if he fails on this, then its likely his head.

In the interim, It will be interesting to see how he does with Dalton.   If Dalton plays well, it would say a lot given the guy hasnt been highly productive for a while.

I will also say, this may also be the best Line Dalton has played behind since his early days in Cincy.   His career started going south when the line in Cincy went south.  I dont think this happened by accident.  Most QB's perform better behind a good line.

Dallas had a good line, but due to injuries last year they were terrible and Dalton never got the benefit of that.  

So Lets see where this goes.  I'm excited about situations like this because it could go either direction.   But I like it when a coach makes a gutsy call like this (starting Dalton) when its clear the mob wants him to do something different.

[polecatt 405]

18 hours ago, TBayXXXVII said:

• • Trubisky will never be signed as a starter ever again.

That may be jumping the gun a bit.

If Josh Allen is to get injured and Trubisky comes in and plays well, on a loaded team, he will likely get a chance to start somewhere.

I mean, if Teddy Bridgewater can keep getting starting jobs around the NFL, I wouldn't rule it out for Mitch Trubisky

[TBayXXXVII 2,215]

8 hours ago, Serenity Now said:

Hand picked was just a retort to the number of qbs they’ve both traded for. Neither coach has had quality qbs. 

Nagy was supposed to be an offensive guru when he came in, so the defense being great but offense putrid, doesn’t help his case.

Disagree.  If you pay a 2nd round pick for a player (and everyone  thought Belicheck gave him away cheap on purpose), then give said player a 5 year / $137M contract, that's hand picking a franchise QB.  Foles signed a 3 year/$24M deal to push an awful inherited QB.  The two are worlds apart.

Bruce Arians is an "offensive guru" yes?  What was his record in 2019 with Jameis Winston?  Playoffs aside, what was his record last year when he got a real QB?

[TBayXXXVII 2,215]

1 minute ago, polecatt said:

That may be jumping the gun a bit.

If Josh Allen is to get injured and Trubisky comes in and plays well, on a loaded team, he will likely get a chance to start somewhere.

I mean, if Teddy Bridgewater can keep getting starting jobs around the NFL, I wouldn't rule it out for Mitch Trubisky

"Loaded team"? 

The Bears and Bills both have good defenses.  Both have good OLines.  WR's aren't much different and backfields aren't much different.  The biggest difference is that Allen is an excellent and ascending QB and Trubisky's ceiling is a below average backup.  No doubt, in games played with Trubisky, the Bills have a losing record if he has to start a bunch of games (4+).  Trubisky's best case scenario is to be Nick Foles 2.0... bounce around from team to team signing backup money in hopes that the incumbent, stinks.  Basically, the reverse of the Bears 2020.

[polecatt 405]

9 minutes ago, TBayXXXVII said:

"Loaded team"? 

The Bears and Bills both have good defenses.  Both have good OLines.  WR's aren't much different and backfields aren't much different.  The biggest difference is that Allen is an excellent and ascending QB and Trubisky's ceiling is a below average backup.  No doubt, in games played with Trubisky, the Bills have a losing record if he has to start a bunch of games (4+).  Trubisky's best case scenario is to be Nick Foles 2.0... bounce around from team to team signing backup money in hopes that the incumbent, stinks.  Basically, the reverse of the Bears 2020.

Below average back up?

That's a bit of a stretch.

He was the 20th ranked QB in rating last season. Not great, but certainly not a below average back up.

He played exceptionally well in his first preseason game, led that Bills to 28 on their first 4 possessions.

I'm not saying he's gonna be the 2nd coming of Peyton Manning but there's not 50 QBs in the NFL better than him.

[TBayXXXVII 2,215]

1 minute ago, polecatt said:

Below average back up?

That's a bit of a stretch.

He was the 20th ranked QB in rating last season. Not great, but certainly not a below average back up.

He played exceptionally well in his first preseason game, led that Bills to 28 on their first 4 possessions.

I'm not saying he's gonna be the 2nd coming of Peyton Manning but there's not 50 QBs in the NFL better than him.

Fine.  Above average backup.  The dude isn't a starter in the NFL.

[Serenity Now 44]

2 hours ago, TBayXXXVII said:

Disagree.  If you pay a 2nd round pick for a player (and everyone  thought Belicheck gave him away cheap on purpose), then give said player a 5 year / $137M contract, that's hand picking a franchise QB.  Foles signed a 3 year/$24M deal to push an awful inherited QB.  The two are worlds apart.

Bruce Arians is an "offensive guru" yes?  What was his record in 2019 with Jameis Winston?  Playoffs aside, what was his record last year when he got a real QB?

2nd round pick isn’t the price for a franchise qb. He was the best they could get without giving up franchise draft capital and then have him a start contract.

His gun slinger offense is widely known to be difficult to grasp in the first year. Palmer, Big Ben struggled their first years, and even Brady wasn’t great the first half of last year. His coaching helped lift the Steelers to a Super Bowl with a 2nd year qb, and resurrected Carson Palmer career after he had retired and been left for dead in Oakland.
 

[Utilit99 4,099]

2 hours ago, TBayXXXVII said:

"Loaded team"? 

The Bears and Bills both have good defenses.  Both have good OLines.  WR's aren't much different and backfields aren't much different.  The biggest difference is that Allen is an excellent and ascending QB and Trubisky's ceiling is a below average backup.  No doubt, in games played with Trubisky, the Bills have a losing record if he has to start a bunch of games (4+).  Trubisky's best case scenario is to be Nick Foles 2.0... bounce around from team to team signing backup money in hopes that the incumbent, stinks.  Basically, the reverse of the Bears 2020.

Bears have had one of the worst olines in the league over the past few years. Including this year. 

[lesjroza 70]

39 minutes ago, Utilit99 said:

Bears have had one of the worst olines in the league over the past few years. Including this year. 

 

Correct IMO! They have  performed exceptionally poorly though the talent ratings, and perception seem have them middle of the pack.

Multiple comments to the contrary were what stuck out to me in this thread as well.

It isn't getting talked about, but while Fields has a better chance of making plays with the OL in its current state, there is also the chance that it stunts his development............. though that won't be a consideration when the jobs of NAGY and the whole from office are on the line.

[Brutal Brutus 182]

11 hours ago, Ray_T said:

maybe so maybe not.

last time I looked roughly 50% of the game is defense. so it counts for something.

I think(believe it or not) this offense will be better under Dalton than it was under either of the QB's they used last year.

I acknowledge that the bar is low there, and being just better may not be enough.  but for what its worth, I think he is better than what they had last year.

The team has committed to Dalton for now and I think they will stick to this at least so long as the team is doing okay.  Early camp reports suggest Dalton has been sharp and has shown a good command of the offense.

I realize that means little if Fields blows the doors off, but I have not heard any reports of this to date, and the word was (at least initially) that he would be a QB prospect who could benefit from sitting in the early part of his career (subtext rookie season)

For now,  if I'm the owner/GM I'm willing to give him the latitude he needs to develop the kid properly.   if he fails on this, then its likely his head.

In the interim, It will be interesting to see how he does with Dalton.   If Dalton plays well, it would say a lot given the guy hasnt been highly productive for a while.

I will also say, this may also be the best Line Dalton has played behind since his early days in Cincy.   His career started going south when the line in Cincy went south.  I dont think this happened by accident.  Most QB's perform better behind a good line.

Dallas had a good line, but due to injuries last year they were terrible and Dalton never got the benefit of that.  

So Lets see where this goes.  I'm excited about situations like this because it could go either direction.   But I like it when a coach makes a gutsy call like this (starting Dalton) when its clear the mob wants him to do something different.

I agree Dalton will be better and should be starting for them. As long as they're winning, I expect Dalton to hold that job, but the leash is short.

 I'm an Ohio State fan, so I've watched a lot of Fields. I like his long term prospects, but he did have flaws that need correcting. Primarily, I saw a QB that didn't trust what he saw at times, which made him hesitant to throw it when he should have. He'll have to learn to anticipate players being open. 

[PDX_EFF 3]

This topic really got off course so I'll make this quick and simple. Fields, not sold Lance will be a starter year 1 but can't imagine Fields sitting for more that 4-6 games if not just 1. It's quite possible the Rams make Dalton look like a chump week 1 and they just move onto Fields. Lance, I think, will need a Jimmy G injury to get the job. 

[snatchit 108]

43 minutes ago, PDX_EFF said:

This topic really got off course so I'll make this quick and simple. Fields, not sold Lance will be a starter year 1 but can't imagine Fields sitting for more that 4-6 games if not just 1. It's quite possible the Rams make Dalton look like a chump week 1 and they just move onto Fields. Lance, I think, will need a Jimmy G injury to get the job. 

Ya and they say Jimmy has been looking extra sharp in camp

[DrG 94]

JG has been inconsistent in camp and the 49ers are struggling to solidify RG. 2nd rd pick Aaron Banks has not showed well in camp. Trent Williams they are already managing his knee a little.

They will go as far as their D Line takes them and probably try more clock control than you would associate with Kyle Shanahan. I’m a 9ers fan and while I certainly hope they are a contender, I’m not sold that they are.

If Lance solidifies his reads and decision making after a few more months of tutelage and there’s any inconsistency from JG, you’ll see Lance. I think JG will have to play consistently ‘lights out’ to keep the job.