As of right now, none of the top 5 QB's will be available at #12.

OaktownBear said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

Everyone is saying this is for a QB but consider this:

• After FA signings SF has solved most of it's most urgent needs
• Their remaining issues are RT where McGlinchy has trouble with pass protection, depth at CB depth, a WR that can stretch the field and they have an injury prone QB.
• If they get a QB with #3 they have only solved one of the 4.
• If they get Sewell (OT from Oregon rated #1 OL in the draft and top 5 talent overall), they can put him at RT and solve 2 of the above problems. By better protecting Garappolo, they essentially gain a QB as well. IOW they effectively gain an OT and a QB by picking Sewell at #3.

According to scouts and media reports Sewell is as close to a generational talent at OT as it gets these days. Those same media sources claim that Wilson is going #2 and that the other guys left (Lance, Fields and Jones) are not as good and are probably not worth a top 5 pick.

Also, largely from media and fan sources is the ongoing myth that Garappolo is not capable of winning the SB. This is just a theory and cannot be proven one way or another. What is known is that Garappolo is seen as an effective leader in the locker room and on the field and is well liked by the players. He almost won a SB in his first fully healthy year as a starter. KC was favored in that SB and won going away and their were several contributing factors to the loss. There is absolutely no evidence that Trey Lance or Justin Fields will make the difference between getting to the SB and winning the SB. In fact neither of the 2 QBs have played much against high level college competition let alone NFL competition. And Fields hasn't even had a pro day yet, so the evaluation on him is limited right now. Similar things can be said about Jones.

Of the 4 QBs (Jones, Fields, Lance and Garappolo), I think Garappolo is the most likely to get SF to the SB again.

It is true that SF is unlikely to be able to draft a QB before Garappolo's contract expires because of what they gave up, making it necessary for them to pick up a QB at #3. But, if Garappolo wins them a SB in 2022 (2021 season), they will want to resign him anyway.

It all comes down to how you assess the 4 remaining issues SF has (listed above) and how important they are. To me, the most important problem is the combined issue at RT and the QB injury issue. We don't know if Garappolo will stay healthy even with Sewell at RT and we don't know that he will get injured again with McGlinchy at RT. But I'd rather roll the dice on that one, then roll the dice on Lance, Fields or Jones. To me, that is much greater risk to take.

If SF gives Garappolo a RT in round #1 and a deep threat WR in round #2, Garappolo can win SF a SB.
If SF drafts a QB in round 1, they will have to get an RT in round #2 after many of the top ones are off the board. So how is SF going to protect their new QB. QB elusiveness only goes so far?

Remember the last SB when Mahomes wasn't protected because his OTs were injured? That will be what Lance or Fields look like with McGlinchy still at RT for SF.

---

Regarding Sewell, tell that to Tony Mandarich and Robert Gallery.

They didn't make this idiotic trade to draft an OL. Make no mistake. They are taking a QB.

As I said, historically speaking they have about as good a chance of getting a top QB with any of the 3 picks they gave up. They have mortgaged their future for the third QB in the draft and they will get either one of two guys who had a massive personnel advantage or a third guy who had a massive personnel advantage at an incredibly low level.

It is like buying a house. You do not fall in love.

They have a decent QB they can win with. Obviously they have chosen to roll the dice in the very unlikely event they get a generational talent. The NFL quarterback club is littered with busts that people who are supposed to know were convinced are special.

---

Regarding Sewell, Cal 21 Oregon 17

calumnus said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

mbBear said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

Everyone is saying this is for a QB but consider this:

• After FA signings SF has solved most of it's most urgent needs
• Their remaining issues are RT where McGlinchy has trouble with pass protection, depth at CB depth, a WR that can stretch the field and they have an injury prone QB.
• If they get a QB with #3 they have only solved one of the 4.
• If they get Sewell (OT from Oregon rated #1 OL in the draft and top 5 talent overall), they can put him at RT and solve 2 of the above problems. By better protecting Garappolo, they essentially gain a QB as well. IOW they effectively gain an OT and a QB by picking Sewell at #3.

According to scouts and media reports Sewell is as close to a generational talent at OT as it gets these days. Those same media sources claim that Wilson is going #2 and that the other guys left (Lance, Fields and Jones) are not as good and are probably not worth a top 5 pick.

Also, largely from media and fan sources is the ongoing myth that Garappolo is not capable of winning the SB. This is just a theory and cannot be proven one way or another. What is known is that Garappolo is seen as an effective leader in the locker room and on the field and is well liked by the players. He almost won a SB in his first fully healthy year as a starter. KC was favored in that SB and won going away and their were several contributing factors to the loss. There is absolutely no evidence that Trey Lance or Justin Fields will make the difference between getting to the SB and winning the SB. In fact neither of the 2 QBs have played much against high level college competition let alone NFL competition. And Fields hasn't even had a pro day yet, so the evaluation on him is limited right now. Similar things can be said about Jones.

Of the 4 QBs (Jones, Fields, Lance and Garappolo), I think Garappolo is the most likely to get SF to the SB again.

It is true that SF is unlikely to be able to draft a QB before Garappolo's contract expires because of what they gave up, making it necessary for them to pick up a QB at #3. But, if Garappolo wins them a SB in 2022 (2021 season), they will want to resign him anyway.

It all comes down to how you assess the 4 remaining issues SF has (listed above) and how important they are. To me, the most important problem is the combined issue at RT and the QB injury issue. We don't know if Garappolo will stay healthy even with Sewell at RT and we don't know that he will get injured again with McGlinchy at RT. But I'd rather roll the dice on that one, then roll the dice on Lance, Fields or Jones. To me, that is much greater risk to take.

If SF gives Garappolo a RT in round #1 and a deep threat WR in round #2, Garappolo can win SF a SB.
If SF drafts a QB in round 1, they will have to get an RT in round #2 after many of the top ones are off the board. So how is SF going to protect their new QB. QB elusiveness only goes so far?

Remember the last SB when Mahomes wasn't protected because his OTs were injured? That will be what Lance or Fields look like with McGlinchy still at RT for SF.

---

"Also, largely from media and fan sources is the ongoing myth that Garappolo is not capable of winning the SB." Okay, I don't know what a "fan source" is, but it' 2021, so the days of blaming the media for everything but your jock itch is over. The media didn't just trade up to be in the range of picking a notable QB. If they don't go that route, and pick like a Sewell, then that will be the loudest vote of confidence that Jimmy G. could receive.

---

There's no way around it, what SF does with the #3 pick will decide Garappolo's future one way of the other. I don't understand your comment about jock itch. The media didn't just trade up but they decided the trade was for a QB. But the #3 pick does not put them in the range of Wilson. It does put them in the range to get Sewell. So you decide. Who would do more to help SF win a SB in 2021, Sewell (replacing McGlinchy), Fields, Jones or Lance? I think the answer is pretty obvious.

---

So they either gave up 3 years of first round picks (and a 3rd round pick) for a single OT or for a gamble at QB.

They could have stayed at #12 and either gotten Lance, Fields or Mac Jones at QB or Slater or Darrisaw at OT. I just don't see anyone available at #3 that will be so obviously better than the guys available at #12 to make giving up the next two years' #1s worth it.

---

There no way the QB's under scrutiny by Shanahan will last until 12.

calumnus said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

Everyone is saying this is for a QB but consider this:

• After FA signings SF has solved most of it's most urgent needs
• Their remaining issues are RT where McGlinchy has trouble with pass protection, depth at CB depth, a WR that can stretch the field and they have an injury prone QB.
• If they get a QB with #3 they have only solved one of the 4.
• If they get Sewell (OT from Oregon rated #1 OL in the draft and top 5 talent overall), they can put him at RT and solve 2 of the above problems. By better protecting Garappolo, they essentially gain a QB as well. IOW they effectively gain an OT and a QB by picking Sewell at #3.

According to scouts and media reports Sewell is as close to a generational talent at OT as it gets these days. Those same media sources claim that Wilson is going #2 and that the other guys left (Lance, Fields and Jones) are not as good and are probably not worth a top 5 pick.

Also, largely from media and fan sources is the ongoing myth that Garappolo is not capable of winning the SB. This is just a theory and cannot be proven one way or another. What is known is that Garappolo is seen as an effective leader in the locker room and on the field and is well liked by the players. He almost won a SB in his first fully healthy year as a starter. KC was favored in that SB and won going away and their were several contributing factors to the loss. There is absolutely no evidence that Trey Lance or Justin Fields will make the difference between getting to the SB and winning the SB. In fact neither of the 2 QBs have played much against high level college competition let alone NFL competition. And Fields hasn't even had a pro day yet, so the evaluation on him is limited right now. Similar things can be said about Jones.

Of the 4 QBs (Jones, Fields, Lance and Garappolo), I think Garappolo is the most likely to get SF to the SB again.

It is true that SF is unlikely to be able to draft a QB before Garappolo's contract expires because of what they gave up, making it necessary for them to pick up a QB at #3. But, if Garappolo wins them a SB in 2022 (2021 season), they will want to resign him anyway.

It all comes down to how you assess the 4 remaining issues SF has (listed above) and how important they are. To me, the most important problem is the combined issue at RT and the QB injury issue. We don't know if Garappolo will stay healthy even with Sewell at RT and we don't know that he will get injured again with McGlinchy at RT. But I'd rather roll the dice on that one, then roll the dice on Lance, Fields or Jones. To me, that is much greater risk to take.

If SF gives Garappolo a RT in round #1 and a deep threat WR in round #2, Garappolo can win SF a SB.
If SF drafts a QB in round 1, they will have to get an RT in round #2 after many of the top ones are off the board. So how is SF going to protect their new QB. QB elusiveness only goes so far?

Remember the last SB when Mahomes wasn't protected because his OTs were injured? That will be what Lance or Fields look like with McGlinchy still at RT for SF.

---

Regarding Sewell, tell that to Tony Mandarich and Robert Gallery.

They didn't make this idiotic trade to draft an OL. Make no mistake. They are taking a QB.

As I said, historically speaking they have about as good a chance of getting a top QB with any of the 3 picks they gave up. They have mortgaged their future for the third QB in the draft and they will get either one of two guys who had a massive personnel advantage or a third guy who had a massive personnel advantage at an incredibly low level.

It is like buying a house. You do not fall in love.

They have a decent QB they can win with. Obviously they have chosen to roll the dice in the very unlikely event they get a generational talent. The NFL quarterback club is littered with busts that people who are supposed to know were convinced are special.

---

Regarding Sewell, Cal 21 Oregon 17

---

Sewell did not play in the 2020 season.

heartofthebear said:

---

mbBear said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

Everyone is saying this is for a QB but consider this:

• After FA signings SF has solved most of it's most urgent needs
• Their remaining issues are RT where McGlinchy has trouble with pass protection, depth at CB depth, a WR that can stretch the field and they have an injury prone QB.
• If they get a QB with #3 they have only solved one of the 4.
• If they get Sewell (OT from Oregon rated #1 OL in the draft and top 5 talent overall), they can put him at RT and solve 2 of the above problems. By better protecting Garappolo, they essentially gain a QB as well. IOW they effectively gain an OT and a QB by picking Sewell at #3.

According to scouts and media reports Sewell is as close to a generational talent at OT as it gets these days. Those same media sources claim that Wilson is going #2 and that the other guys left (Lance, Fields and Jones) are not as good and are probably not worth a top 5 pick.

Also, largely from media and fan sources is the ongoing myth that Garappolo is not capable of winning the SB. This is just a theory and cannot be proven one way or another. What is known is that Garappolo is seen as an effective leader in the locker room and on the field and is well liked by the players. He almost won a SB in his first fully healthy year as a starter. KC was favored in that SB and won going away and their were several contributing factors to the loss. There is absolutely no evidence that Trey Lance or Justin Fields will make the difference between getting to the SB and winning the SB. In fact neither of the 2 QBs have played much against high level college competition let alone NFL competition. And Fields hasn't even had a pro day yet, so the evaluation on him is limited right now. Similar things can be said about Jones.

Of the 4 QBs (Jones, Fields, Lance and Garappolo), I think Garappolo is the most likely to get SF to the SB again.

It is true that SF is unlikely to be able to draft a QB before Garappolo's contract expires because of what they gave up, making it necessary for them to pick up a QB at #3. But, if Garappolo wins them a SB in 2022 (2021 season), they will want to resign him anyway.

It all comes down to how you assess the 4 remaining issues SF has (listed above) and how important they are. To me, the most important problem is the combined issue at RT and the QB injury issue. We don't know if Garappolo will stay healthy even with Sewell at RT and we don't know that he will get injured again with McGlinchy at RT. But I'd rather roll the dice on that one, then roll the dice on Lance, Fields or Jones. To me, that is much greater risk to take.

If SF gives Garappolo a RT in round #1 and a deep threat WR in round #2, Garappolo can win SF a SB.
If SF drafts a QB in round 1, they will have to get an RT in round #2 after many of the top ones are off the board. So how is SF going to protect their new QB. QB elusiveness only goes so far?

Remember the last SB when Mahomes wasn't protected because his OTs were injured? That will be what Lance or Fields look like with McGlinchy still at RT for SF.

---

"Also, largely from media and fan sources is the ongoing myth that Garappolo is not capable of winning the SB." Okay, I don't know what a "fan source" is, but it' 2021, so the days of blaming the media for everything but your jock itch is over. The media didn't just trade up to be in the range of picking a notable QB. If they don't go that route, and pick like a Sewell, then that will be the loudest vote of confidence that Jimmy G. could receive.

---

There's no way around it, what SF does with the #3 pick will decide Garappolo's future one way of the other. I don't understand your comment about jock itch. The media didn't just trade up but they decided the trade was for a QB. But the #3 pick does not put them in the range of Wilson. It does put them in the range to get Sewell. So you decide. Who would do more to help SF win a SB in 2021, Sewell (replacing McGlinchy), Fields, Jones or Lance? I think the answer is pretty obvious.

---

"they decided"...please. It's nothing but logical speculation from media folks who are asked to do exactly that by you and anyone who cares about the sport. Fine, you don't believe the many reports...you are allowed that. But the media didn't "do" anything collectively.
You want me to decide? I'm doing whatever doesn't help the Niners win squat, but that's just me. I would GUESS that it's not only all about 2021 for the Niners, but that's just me. In other words both things can be true-they are looking beyond 2021 and also thinking that the team they have right now is ready to compete. In fact, to take a step further: they may believe Fields is a solid QB, and though just a rookie, they believe he can step in if Jimmy G. misses and few games. Not that Justin Fields is going to be Nick Foles, but still hopefully solid.
Even after yesterday, I can't sit here and say you are wrong. They can pick Sewell, and simply said they changed their minds...no one will care if they did.

mbBear said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

mbBear said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

Everyone is saying this is for a QB but consider this:

• After FA signings SF has solved most of it's most urgent needs
• Their remaining issues are RT where McGlinchy has trouble with pass protection, depth at CB depth, a WR that can stretch the field and they have an injury prone QB.
• If they get a QB with #3 they have only solved one of the 4.
• If they get Sewell (OT from Oregon rated #1 OL in the draft and top 5 talent overall), they can put him at RT and solve 2 of the above problems. By better protecting Garappolo, they essentially gain a QB as well. IOW they effectively gain an OT and a QB by picking Sewell at #3.

According to scouts and media reports Sewell is as close to a generational talent at OT as it gets these days. Those same media sources claim that Wilson is going #2 and that the other guys left (Lance, Fields and Jones) are not as good and are probably not worth a top 5 pick.

Also, largely from media and fan sources is the ongoing myth that Garappolo is not capable of winning the SB. This is just a theory and cannot be proven one way or another. What is known is that Garappolo is seen as an effective leader in the locker room and on the field and is well liked by the players. He almost won a SB in his first fully healthy year as a starter. KC was favored in that SB and won going away and their were several contributing factors to the loss. There is absolutely no evidence that Trey Lance or Justin Fields will make the difference between getting to the SB and winning the SB. In fact neither of the 2 QBs have played much against high level college competition let alone NFL competition. And Fields hasn't even had a pro day yet, so the evaluation on him is limited right now. Similar things can be said about Jones.

Of the 4 QBs (Jones, Fields, Lance and Garappolo), I think Garappolo is the most likely to get SF to the SB again.

It is true that SF is unlikely to be able to draft a QB before Garappolo's contract expires because of what they gave up, making it necessary for them to pick up a QB at #3. But, if Garappolo wins them a SB in 2022 (2021 season), they will want to resign him anyway.

It all comes down to how you assess the 4 remaining issues SF has (listed above) and how important they are. To me, the most important problem is the combined issue at RT and the QB injury issue. We don't know if Garappolo will stay healthy even with Sewell at RT and we don't know that he will get injured again with McGlinchy at RT. But I'd rather roll the dice on that one, then roll the dice on Lance, Fields or Jones. To me, that is much greater risk to take.

If SF gives Garappolo a RT in round #1 and a deep threat WR in round #2, Garappolo can win SF a SB.
If SF drafts a QB in round 1, they will have to get an RT in round #2 after many of the top ones are off the board. So how is SF going to protect their new QB. QB elusiveness only goes so far?

Remember the last SB when Mahomes wasn't protected because his OTs were injured? That will be what Lance or Fields look like with McGlinchy still at RT for SF.

---

"Also, largely from media and fan sources is the ongoing myth that Garappolo is not capable of winning the SB." Okay, I don't know what a "fan source" is, but it' 2021, so the days of blaming the media for everything but your jock itch is over. The media didn't just trade up to be in the range of picking a notable QB. If they don't go that route, and pick like a Sewell, then that will be the loudest vote of confidence that Jimmy G. could receive.

---

There's no way around it, what SF does with the #3 pick will decide Garappolo's future one way of the other. I don't understand your comment about jock itch. The media didn't just trade up but they decided the trade was for a QB. But the #3 pick does not put them in the range of Wilson. It does put them in the range to get Sewell. So you decide. Who would do more to help SF win a SB in 2021, Sewell (replacing McGlinchy), Fields, Jones or Lance? I think the answer is pretty obvious.

---

"they decided"...please. It's nothing but logical speculation from media folks who are asked to do exactly that by you and anyone who cares about the sport. Fine, you don't believe the many reports...you are allowed that. But the media didn't "do" anything collectively.
You want me to decide? I'm doing whatever doesn't help the Niners win squat, but that's just me. I would GUESS that it's not only all about 2021 for the Niners, but that's just me. In other words both things can be true-they are looking beyond 2021 and also thinking that the team they have right now is ready to compete. In fact, to take a step further: they may believe Fields is a solid QB, and though just a rookie, they believe he can step in if Jimmy G. misses and few games. Not that Justin Fields is going to be Nick Foles, but still hopefully solid.
Even after yesterday, I can't sit here and say you are wrong. They can pick Sewell, and simply said they changed their minds...no one will care if they did.

---

Essentially we agree except the semantics war you are waging. The point is that the idea that SF was taking a QB did not come from SF. It came from the media. Whether it is logical or not, everyone is putting down SF for making this trade because they are trading for a QB despite the fact that SF did not say that. And Sewell + Garappolo > Fields + McGlinchy for SF's future as well as present.

OaktownBear said:

---

71Bear said:

---

Radical Bear said:

---

I'm a little hesitant about picking a Ohio State QB.

---

I agree. And I don't like Lance either. Quite frankly, I think it was a bad trade. Had they been able to get Wilson, I would have made the deal but Wilson won't be available.....

---

It is an absolutely moronic trade. Following in the footsteps of the Rams. Giving way too much

---

Worked out fine for the Rams really. They still got to a Super Bowl and have been contenders for most years since the trade. Even post-Goff they're not really in a bad spot or anything since most consider them to still be in contention after making another big trade and mortgaging the future.

heartofthebear said:

---

mbBear said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

mbBear said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

Everyone is saying this is for a QB but consider this:

• After FA signings SF has solved most of it's most urgent needs
• Their remaining issues are RT where McGlinchy has trouble with pass protection, depth at CB depth, a WR that can stretch the field and they have an injury prone QB.
• If they get a QB with #3 they have only solved one of the 4.
• If they get Sewell (OT from Oregon rated #1 OL in the draft and top 5 talent overall), they can put him at RT and solve 2 of the above problems. By better protecting Garappolo, they essentially gain a QB as well. IOW they effectively gain an OT and a QB by picking Sewell at #3.

According to scouts and media reports Sewell is as close to a generational talent at OT as it gets these days. Those same media sources claim that Wilson is going #2 and that the other guys left (Lance, Fields and Jones) are not as good and are probably not worth a top 5 pick.

Also, largely from media and fan sources is the ongoing myth that Garappolo is not capable of winning the SB. This is just a theory and cannot be proven one way or another. What is known is that Garappolo is seen as an effective leader in the locker room and on the field and is well liked by the players. He almost won a SB in his first fully healthy year as a starter. KC was favored in that SB and won going away and their were several contributing factors to the loss. There is absolutely no evidence that Trey Lance or Justin Fields will make the difference between getting to the SB and winning the SB. In fact neither of the 2 QBs have played much against high level college competition let alone NFL competition. And Fields hasn't even had a pro day yet, so the evaluation on him is limited right now. Similar things can be said about Jones.

Of the 4 QBs (Jones, Fields, Lance and Garappolo), I think Garappolo is the most likely to get SF to the SB again.

It is true that SF is unlikely to be able to draft a QB before Garappolo's contract expires because of what they gave up, making it necessary for them to pick up a QB at #3. But, if Garappolo wins them a SB in 2022 (2021 season), they will want to resign him anyway.

It all comes down to how you assess the 4 remaining issues SF has (listed above) and how important they are. To me, the most important problem is the combined issue at RT and the QB injury issue. We don't know if Garappolo will stay healthy even with Sewell at RT and we don't know that he will get injured again with McGlinchy at RT. But I'd rather roll the dice on that one, then roll the dice on Lance, Fields or Jones. To me, that is much greater risk to take.

If SF gives Garappolo a RT in round #1 and a deep threat WR in round #2, Garappolo can win SF a SB.
If SF drafts a QB in round 1, they will have to get an RT in round #2 after many of the top ones are off the board. So how is SF going to protect their new QB. QB elusiveness only goes so far?

Remember the last SB when Mahomes wasn't protected because his OTs were injured? That will be what Lance or Fields look like with McGlinchy still at RT for SF.

---

"Also, largely from media and fan sources is the ongoing myth that Garappolo is not capable of winning the SB." Okay, I don't know what a "fan source" is, but it' 2021, so the days of blaming the media for everything but your jock itch is over. The media didn't just trade up to be in the range of picking a notable QB. If they don't go that route, and pick like a Sewell, then that will be the loudest vote of confidence that Jimmy G. could receive.

---

There's no way around it, what SF does with the #3 pick will decide Garappolo's future one way of the other. I don't understand your comment about jock itch. The media didn't just trade up but they decided the trade was for a QB. But the #3 pick does not put them in the range of Wilson. It does put them in the range to get Sewell. So you decide. Who would do more to help SF win a SB in 2021, Sewell (replacing McGlinchy), Fields, Jones or Lance? I think the answer is pretty obvious.

---

"they decided"...please. It's nothing but logical speculation from media folks who are asked to do exactly that by you and anyone who cares about the sport. Fine, you don't believe the many reports...you are allowed that. But the media didn't "do" anything collectively.
You want me to decide? I'm doing whatever doesn't help the Niners win squat, but that's just me. I would GUESS that it's not only all about 2021 for the Niners, but that's just me. In other words both things can be true-they are looking beyond 2021 and also thinking that the team they have right now is ready to compete. In fact, to take a step further: they may believe Fields is a solid QB, and though just a rookie, they believe he can step in if Jimmy G. misses and few games. Not that Justin Fields is going to be Nick Foles, but still hopefully solid.
Even after yesterday, I can't sit here and say you are wrong. They can pick Sewell, and simply said they changed their minds...no one will care if they did.

---

Essentially we agree except the semantics war you are waging. The point is that the idea that SF was taking a QB did not come from SF. It came from the media. Whether it is logical or not, everyone is putting down SF for making this trade because they are trading for a QB despite the fact that SF did not say that. And Sewell + Garappolo > Fields + McGlinchy for SF's future as well as present.

---

I don't know what you are reading. Shanahan and Lynch have been clear they are taking a QB. They both called Jimmy G to explain. Shanahan said Jimmy was professional but he believes he was pissed and Shanahan said he would be pissed too. Do you think Jimmy is pissed because they explained they traded up to get an offensive lineman to give him better protection?

The idea that they are picking a QB did not originate with the press.

71Bear said:

---

calumnus said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

Everyone is saying this is for a QB but consider this:

• After FA signings SF has solved most of it's most urgent needs
• Their remaining issues are RT where McGlinchy has trouble with pass protection, depth at CB depth, a WR that can stretch the field and they have an injury prone QB.
• If they get a QB with #3 they have only solved one of the 4.
• If they get Sewell (OT from Oregon rated #1 OL in the draft and top 5 talent overall), they can put him at RT and solve 2 of the above problems. By better protecting Garappolo, they essentially gain a QB as well. IOW they effectively gain an OT and a QB by picking Sewell at #3.

According to scouts and media reports Sewell is as close to a generational talent at OT as it gets these days. Those same media sources claim that Wilson is going #2 and that the other guys left (Lance, Fields and Jones) are not as good and are probably not worth a top 5 pick.

Also, largely from media and fan sources is the ongoing myth that Garappolo is not capable of winning the SB. This is just a theory and cannot be proven one way or another. What is known is that Garappolo is seen as an effective leader in the locker room and on the field and is well liked by the players. He almost won a SB in his first fully healthy year as a starter. KC was favored in that SB and won going away and their were several contributing factors to the loss. There is absolutely no evidence that Trey Lance or Justin Fields will make the difference between getting to the SB and winning the SB. In fact neither of the 2 QBs have played much against high level college competition let alone NFL competition. And Fields hasn't even had a pro day yet, so the evaluation on him is limited right now. Similar things can be said about Jones.

Of the 4 QBs (Jones, Fields, Lance and Garappolo), I think Garappolo is the most likely to get SF to the SB again.

It is true that SF is unlikely to be able to draft a QB before Garappolo's contract expires because of what they gave up, making it necessary for them to pick up a QB at #3. But, if Garappolo wins them a SB in 2022 (2021 season), they will want to resign him anyway.

It all comes down to how you assess the 4 remaining issues SF has (listed above) and how important they are. To me, the most important problem is the combined issue at RT and the QB injury issue. We don't know if Garappolo will stay healthy even with Sewell at RT and we don't know that he will get injured again with McGlinchy at RT. But I'd rather roll the dice on that one, then roll the dice on Lance, Fields or Jones. To me, that is much greater risk to take.

If SF gives Garappolo a RT in round #1 and a deep threat WR in round #2, Garappolo can win SF a SB.
If SF drafts a QB in round 1, they will have to get an RT in round #2 after many of the top ones are off the board. So how is SF going to protect their new QB. QB elusiveness only goes so far?

Remember the last SB when Mahomes wasn't protected because his OTs were injured? That will be what Lance or Fields look like with McGlinchy still at RT for SF.

---

Regarding Sewell, tell that to Tony Mandarich and Robert Gallery.

They didn't make this idiotic trade to draft an OL. Make no mistake. They are taking a QB.

As I said, historically speaking they have about as good a chance of getting a top QB with any of the 3 picks they gave up. They have mortgaged their future for the third QB in the draft and they will get either one of two guys who had a massive personnel advantage or a third guy who had a massive personnel advantage at an incredibly low level.

It is like buying a house. You do not fall in love.

They have a decent QB they can win with. Obviously they have chosen to roll the dice in the very unlikely event they get a generational talent. The NFL quarterback club is littered with busts that people who are supposed to know were convinced are special.

---

Regarding Sewell, Cal 21 Oregon 17

---

Sewell did not play in the 2020 season.

---

Did not know that, but doesn't that raise more questions than it answers?

OaktownBear said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

mbBear said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

mbBear said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

Everyone is saying this is for a QB but consider this:

• After FA signings SF has solved most of it's most urgent needs
• Their remaining issues are RT where McGlinchy has trouble with pass protection, depth at CB depth, a WR that can stretch the field and they have an injury prone QB.
• If they get a QB with #3 they have only solved one of the 4.
• If they get Sewell (OT from Oregon rated #1 OL in the draft and top 5 talent overall), they can put him at RT and solve 2 of the above problems. By better protecting Garappolo, they essentially gain a QB as well. IOW they effectively gain an OT and a QB by picking Sewell at #3.

According to scouts and media reports Sewell is as close to a generational talent at OT as it gets these days. Those same media sources claim that Wilson is going #2 and that the other guys left (Lance, Fields and Jones) are not as good and are probably not worth a top 5 pick.

Also, largely from media and fan sources is the ongoing myth that Garappolo is not capable of winning the SB. This is just a theory and cannot be proven one way or another. What is known is that Garappolo is seen as an effective leader in the locker room and on the field and is well liked by the players. He almost won a SB in his first fully healthy year as a starter. KC was favored in that SB and won going away and their were several contributing factors to the loss. There is absolutely no evidence that Trey Lance or Justin Fields will make the difference between getting to the SB and winning the SB. In fact neither of the 2 QBs have played much against high level college competition let alone NFL competition. And Fields hasn't even had a pro day yet, so the evaluation on him is limited right now. Similar things can be said about Jones.

Of the 4 QBs (Jones, Fields, Lance and Garappolo), I think Garappolo is the most likely to get SF to the SB again.

It is true that SF is unlikely to be able to draft a QB before Garappolo's contract expires because of what they gave up, making it necessary for them to pick up a QB at #3. But, if Garappolo wins them a SB in 2022 (2021 season), they will want to resign him anyway.

It all comes down to how you assess the 4 remaining issues SF has (listed above) and how important they are. To me, the most important problem is the combined issue at RT and the QB injury issue. We don't know if Garappolo will stay healthy even with Sewell at RT and we don't know that he will get injured again with McGlinchy at RT. But I'd rather roll the dice on that one, then roll the dice on Lance, Fields or Jones. To me, that is much greater risk to take.

If SF gives Garappolo a RT in round #1 and a deep threat WR in round #2, Garappolo can win SF a SB.
If SF drafts a QB in round 1, they will have to get an RT in round #2 after many of the top ones are off the board. So how is SF going to protect their new QB. QB elusiveness only goes so far?

Remember the last SB when Mahomes wasn't protected because his OTs were injured? That will be what Lance or Fields look like with McGlinchy still at RT for SF.

---

"Also, largely from media and fan sources is the ongoing myth that Garappolo is not capable of winning the SB." Okay, I don't know what a "fan source" is, but it' 2021, so the days of blaming the media for everything but your jock itch is over. The media didn't just trade up to be in the range of picking a notable QB. If they don't go that route, and pick like a Sewell, then that will be the loudest vote of confidence that Jimmy G. could receive.

---

There's no way around it, what SF does with the #3 pick will decide Garappolo's future one way of the other. I don't understand your comment about jock itch. The media didn't just trade up but they decided the trade was for a QB. But the #3 pick does not put them in the range of Wilson. It does put them in the range to get Sewell. So you decide. Who would do more to help SF win a SB in 2021, Sewell (replacing McGlinchy), Fields, Jones or Lance? I think the answer is pretty obvious.

---

"they decided"...please. It's nothing but logical speculation from media folks who are asked to do exactly that by you and anyone who cares about the sport. Fine, you don't believe the many reports...you are allowed that. But the media didn't "do" anything collectively.
You want me to decide? I'm doing whatever doesn't help the Niners win squat, but that's just me. I would GUESS that it's not only all about 2021 for the Niners, but that's just me. In other words both things can be true-they are looking beyond 2021 and also thinking that the team they have right now is ready to compete. In fact, to take a step further: they may believe Fields is a solid QB, and though just a rookie, they believe he can step in if Jimmy G. misses and few games. Not that Justin Fields is going to be Nick Foles, but still hopefully solid.
Even after yesterday, I can't sit here and say you are wrong. They can pick Sewell, and simply said they changed their minds...no one will care if they did.

---

Essentially we agree except the semantics war you are waging. The point is that the idea that SF was taking a QB did not come from SF. It came from the media. Whether it is logical or not, everyone is putting down SF for making this trade because they are trading for a QB despite the fact that SF did not say that. And Sewell + Garappolo > Fields + McGlinchy for SF's future as well as present.

---

I don't know what you are reading. Shanahan and Lynch have been clear they are taking a QB. They both called Jimmy G to explain. Shanahan said Jimmy was professional but he believes he was pissed and Shanahan said he would be pissed too. Do you think Jimmy is pissed because they explained they traded up to get an offensive lineman to give him better protection?

The idea that they are picking a QB did not originate with the press.

---

if this were an elaborate ruse, i might find the 49ers more interesting than i currently do

OaktownBear said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

mbBear said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

mbBear said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

Everyone is saying this is for a QB but consider this:

• After FA signings SF has solved most of it's most urgent needs
• Their remaining issues are RT where McGlinchy has trouble with pass protection, depth at CB depth, a WR that can stretch the field and they have an injury prone QB.
• If they get a QB with #3 they have only solved one of the 4.
• If they get Sewell (OT from Oregon rated #1 OL in the draft and top 5 talent overall), they can put him at RT and solve 2 of the above problems. By better protecting Garappolo, they essentially gain a QB as well. IOW they effectively gain an OT and a QB by picking Sewell at #3.

According to scouts and media reports Sewell is as close to a generational talent at OT as it gets these days. Those same media sources claim that Wilson is going #2 and that the other guys left (Lance, Fields and Jones) are not as good and are probably not worth a top 5 pick.

Also, largely from media and fan sources is the ongoing myth that Garappolo is not capable of winning the SB. This is just a theory and cannot be proven one way or another. What is known is that Garappolo is seen as an effective leader in the locker room and on the field and is well liked by the players. He almost won a SB in his first fully healthy year as a starter. KC was favored in that SB and won going away and their were several contributing factors to the loss. There is absolutely no evidence that Trey Lance or Justin Fields will make the difference between getting to the SB and winning the SB. In fact neither of the 2 QBs have played much against high level college competition let alone NFL competition. And Fields hasn't even had a pro day yet, so the evaluation on him is limited right now. Similar things can be said about Jones.

Of the 4 QBs (Jones, Fields, Lance and Garappolo), I think Garappolo is the most likely to get SF to the SB again.

It is true that SF is unlikely to be able to draft a QB before Garappolo's contract expires because of what they gave up, making it necessary for them to pick up a QB at #3. But, if Garappolo wins them a SB in 2022 (2021 season), they will want to resign him anyway.

It all comes down to how you assess the 4 remaining issues SF has (listed above) and how important they are. To me, the most important problem is the combined issue at RT and the QB injury issue. We don't know if Garappolo will stay healthy even with Sewell at RT and we don't know that he will get injured again with McGlinchy at RT. But I'd rather roll the dice on that one, then roll the dice on Lance, Fields or Jones. To me, that is much greater risk to take.

If SF gives Garappolo a RT in round #1 and a deep threat WR in round #2, Garappolo can win SF a SB.
If SF drafts a QB in round 1, they will have to get an RT in round #2 after many of the top ones are off the board. So how is SF going to protect their new QB. QB elusiveness only goes so far?

Remember the last SB when Mahomes wasn't protected because his OTs were injured? That will be what Lance or Fields look like with McGlinchy still at RT for SF.

---

"Also, largely from media and fan sources is the ongoing myth that Garappolo is not capable of winning the SB." Okay, I don't know what a "fan source" is, but it' 2021, so the days of blaming the media for everything but your jock itch is over. The media didn't just trade up to be in the range of picking a notable QB. If they don't go that route, and pick like a Sewell, then that will be the loudest vote of confidence that Jimmy G. could receive.

---

There's no way around it, what SF does with the #3 pick will decide Garappolo's future one way of the other. I don't understand your comment about jock itch. The media didn't just trade up but they decided the trade was for a QB. But the #3 pick does not put them in the range of Wilson. It does put them in the range to get Sewell. So you decide. Who would do more to help SF win a SB in 2021, Sewell (replacing McGlinchy), Fields, Jones or Lance? I think the answer is pretty obvious.

---

"they decided"...please. It's nothing but logical speculation from media folks who are asked to do exactly that by you and anyone who cares about the sport. Fine, you don't believe the many reports...you are allowed that. But the media didn't "do" anything collectively.
You want me to decide? I'm doing whatever doesn't help the Niners win squat, but that's just me. I would GUESS that it's not only all about 2021 for the Niners, but that's just me. In other words both things can be true-they are looking beyond 2021 and also thinking that the team they have right now is ready to compete. In fact, to take a step further: they may believe Fields is a solid QB, and though just a rookie, they believe he can step in if Jimmy G. misses and few games. Not that Justin Fields is going to be Nick Foles, but still hopefully solid.
Even after yesterday, I can't sit here and say you are wrong. They can pick Sewell, and simply said they changed their minds...no one will care if they did.

---

Essentially we agree except the semantics war you are waging. The point is that the idea that SF was taking a QB did not come from SF. It came from the media. Whether it is logical or not, everyone is putting down SF for making this trade because they are trading for a QB despite the fact that SF did not say that. And Sewell + Garappolo > Fields + McGlinchy for SF's future as well as present.

---

I don't know what you are reading. Shanahan and Lynch have been clear they are taking a QB. They both called Jimmy G to explain. Shanahan said Jimmy was professional but he believes he was pissed and Shanahan said he would be pissed too. Do you think Jimmy is pissed because they explained they traded up to get an offensive lineman to give him better protection?

The idea that they are picking a QB did not originate with the press.

---

No matter how many times that information is posted, people here refuse to believe it. Bottom line - SF will choose a QB, period. The only question is which one. After yesterday's workouts, I am now in the Fields camp.

Many people are in the Fields camp, but Mac Jones had top ranking in numerous key categories this past season, In addition, Fields was inconsistent this past year and his numbers when under pressure are much worse than when he is not.

I also think the 9ers have to be real careful about a running QB, especially given this past season when their starter was out most of the year and they tanked in part due to that.

Although people tend to like running QBs these days the all time best have been the pocket passers (e.g. Brady, Rogers, Brees, P. Manning, Marino, Montana).

Fields is an incredible athlete but I see Jones fitting into the 49ers scheme much better.

On another note, I would actually rather see the 9ers draft Kyle Pitts. He has NFL star written all over him from what I have read. I don't think they will do that with the #3 pick, however.

OaktownBear said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

mbBear said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

mbBear said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

Everyone is saying this is for a QB but consider this:

• After FA signings SF has solved most of it's most urgent needs
• Their remaining issues are RT where McGlinchy has trouble with pass protection, depth at CB depth, a WR that can stretch the field and they have an injury prone QB.
• If they get a QB with #3 they have only solved one of the 4.
• If they get Sewell (OT from Oregon rated #1 OL in the draft and top 5 talent overall), they can put him at RT and solve 2 of the above problems. By better protecting Garappolo, they essentially gain a QB as well. IOW they effectively gain an OT and a QB by picking Sewell at #3.

According to scouts and media reports Sewell is as close to a generational talent at OT as it gets these days. Those same media sources claim that Wilson is going #2 and that the other guys left (Lance, Fields and Jones) are not as good and are probably not worth a top 5 pick.

Also, largely from media and fan sources is the ongoing myth that Garappolo is not capable of winning the SB. This is just a theory and cannot be proven one way or another. What is known is that Garappolo is seen as an effective leader in the locker room and on the field and is well liked by the players. He almost won a SB in his first fully healthy year as a starter. KC was favored in that SB and won going away and their were several contributing factors to the loss. There is absolutely no evidence that Trey Lance or Justin Fields will make the difference between getting to the SB and winning the SB. In fact neither of the 2 QBs have played much against high level college competition let alone NFL competition. And Fields hasn't even had a pro day yet, so the evaluation on him is limited right now. Similar things can be said about Jones.

Of the 4 QBs (Jones, Fields, Lance and Garappolo), I think Garappolo is the most likely to get SF to the SB again.

It is true that SF is unlikely to be able to draft a QB before Garappolo's contract expires because of what they gave up, making it necessary for them to pick up a QB at #3. But, if Garappolo wins them a SB in 2022 (2021 season), they will want to resign him anyway.

It all comes down to how you assess the 4 remaining issues SF has (listed above) and how important they are. To me, the most important problem is the combined issue at RT and the QB injury issue. We don't know if Garappolo will stay healthy even with Sewell at RT and we don't know that he will get injured again with McGlinchy at RT. But I'd rather roll the dice on that one, then roll the dice on Lance, Fields or Jones. To me, that is much greater risk to take.

If SF gives Garappolo a RT in round #1 and a deep threat WR in round #2, Garappolo can win SF a SB.
If SF drafts a QB in round 1, they will have to get an RT in round #2 after many of the top ones are off the board. So how is SF going to protect their new QB. QB elusiveness only goes so far?

Remember the last SB when Mahomes wasn't protected because his OTs were injured? That will be what Lance or Fields look like with McGlinchy still at RT for SF.

---

"Also, largely from media and fan sources is the ongoing myth that Garappolo is not capable of winning the SB." Okay, I don't know what a "fan source" is, but it' 2021, so the days of blaming the media for everything but your jock itch is over. The media didn't just trade up to be in the range of picking a notable QB. If they don't go that route, and pick like a Sewell, then that will be the loudest vote of confidence that Jimmy G. could receive.

---

There's no way around it, what SF does with the #3 pick will decide Garappolo's future one way of the other. I don't understand your comment about jock itch. The media didn't just trade up but they decided the trade was for a QB. But the #3 pick does not put them in the range of Wilson. It does put them in the range to get Sewell. So you decide. Who would do more to help SF win a SB in 2021, Sewell (replacing McGlinchy), Fields, Jones or Lance? I think the answer is pretty obvious.

---

"they decided"...please. It's nothing but logical speculation from media folks who are asked to do exactly that by you and anyone who cares about the sport. Fine, you don't believe the many reports...you are allowed that. But the media didn't "do" anything collectively.
You want me to decide? I'm doing whatever doesn't help the Niners win squat, but that's just me. I would GUESS that it's not only all about 2021 for the Niners, but that's just me. In other words both things can be true-they are looking beyond 2021 and also thinking that the team they have right now is ready to compete. In fact, to take a step further: they may believe Fields is a solid QB, and though just a rookie, they believe he can step in if Jimmy G. misses and few games. Not that Justin Fields is going to be Nick Foles, but still hopefully solid.
Even after yesterday, I can't sit here and say you are wrong. They can pick Sewell, and simply said they changed their minds...no one will care if they did.

---

Essentially we agree except the semantics war you are waging. The point is that the idea that SF was taking a QB did not come from SF. It came from the media. Whether it is logical or not, everyone is putting down SF for making this trade because they are trading for a QB despite the fact that SF did not say that. And Sewell + Garappolo > Fields + McGlinchy for SF's future as well as present.

---

I don't know what you are reading. Shanahan and Lynch have been clear they are taking a QB. They both called Jimmy G to explain. Shanahan said Jimmy was professional but he believes he was pissed and Shanahan said he would be pissed too. Do you think Jimmy is pissed because they explained they traded up to get an offensive lineman to give him better protection?

The idea that they are picking a QB did not originate with the press.

---

Technically, I believe they called Jimmy to let him know they were trading up to #3. I'm sure the implication is that they are taking a QB and maybe they are. Maybe that is what Jimmy believes. But organizations leak things all of the time that turn out to not be true. The fact is that, whether or not SF is actually taking a QB, it does benefit them for folks to believe that because all of the other teams who really need a QB (Washington, NE, Carolina and Denver) to name a few, are going to value trading up more now than they did before. They might offer SF quite a bit and maybe more than SF gave up originally. So, the point is, why believe a team that has every reason to lie about it. I think they genuinely want Wilson but, if he isn't there, and he probably isn't, they would have the flexibility to do any number of things to make that trade worthwhile. And it's possible they already know that the Jets are taking someone other than Wilson.

I'll admit this: If the 49ers gave all of that up just to get Fields, Lance or Jones, then I agree that it is a stupid trade. But what I am saying is that we don't know that yet. There are other scenarios that make this trade understandable, although still kind of odd. And all we know is what people are saying. We don't know what SF will actually do. So I would reserve judgement on it. I'm happy to agree with others here if, on draft day SF picks one of those 3.

Now, if between now and draft day SF picks up a serviceable RT in free agency then I think it is very clearly going to be about a QB. We really have to wait and see.

79 Bear said:

---

Many people are in the Fields camp, but Mac Jones had top ranking in numerous key categories this past season, In addition, Fields was inconsistent this past year and his numbers when under pressure are much worse than when he is not.

I also think the 9ers have to be real careful about a running QB, especially given this past season when their starter was out most of the year and they tanked in part due to that.

Although people tend to like running QBs these days the all time best have been the pocket passers (e.g. Brady, Rogers, Brees, P. Manning, Marino, Montana).

Fields is an incredible athlete but I see Jones fitting into the 49ers scheme much better.

On another note, I would actually rather see the 9ers draft Kyle Pitts. He has NFL star written all over him from what I have read. I don't think they will do that with the #3 pick, however.

---

Fields had two rough games - Northwestern and Indiana. Otherwise, he was nails, especially v. Clemson (6 TD passes). I read a lengthy article (with video) about him at The Athletic that analyzed his decision-making. Overall, he does have some areas to focus on as he moves up to the next level but his athleticism sets him apart from Jones. Given the direction the game is headed, a QB who can pass first and run effectively when things break down is a must.

What I found interesting in your comment about the all-timers is that none are under 38. The next generation of all-timers will be led by guys like Mahomes, QB's who are premier passers and can make plays with their feet (and are durable enough to take some hits).

Note: Fields is 6'3" 227 lbs.

I'd guess there is an 80% chance niners take Fields, Lance, or Wilson (if the Jets pass on Wilson) and a 20% chance they take Jones. I don't think they traded up to take anyone else. When they eventually trade Jimmy G, either before or after the season, that will clear enough cap space for them to re-sign Bosa, Warner, and hopefully Deebo.

heartofthebear said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

mbBear said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

mbBear said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

Everyone is saying this is for a QB but consider this:

• After FA signings SF has solved most of it's most urgent needs
• Their remaining issues are RT where McGlinchy has trouble with pass protection, depth at CB depth, a WR that can stretch the field and they have an injury prone QB.
• If they get a QB with #3 they have only solved one of the 4.
• If they get Sewell (OT from Oregon rated #1 OL in the draft and top 5 talent overall), they can put him at RT and solve 2 of the above problems. By better protecting Garappolo, they essentially gain a QB as well. IOW they effectively gain an OT and a QB by picking Sewell at #3.

According to scouts and media reports Sewell is as close to a generational talent at OT as it gets these days. Those same media sources claim that Wilson is going #2 and that the other guys left (Lance, Fields and Jones) are not as good and are probably not worth a top 5 pick.

Also, largely from media and fan sources is the ongoing myth that Garappolo is not capable of winning the SB. This is just a theory and cannot be proven one way or another. What is known is that Garappolo is seen as an effective leader in the locker room and on the field and is well liked by the players. He almost won a SB in his first fully healthy year as a starter. KC was favored in that SB and won going away and their were several contributing factors to the loss. There is absolutely no evidence that Trey Lance or Justin Fields will make the difference between getting to the SB and winning the SB. In fact neither of the 2 QBs have played much against high level college competition let alone NFL competition. And Fields hasn't even had a pro day yet, so the evaluation on him is limited right now. Similar things can be said about Jones.

Of the 4 QBs (Jones, Fields, Lance and Garappolo), I think Garappolo is the most likely to get SF to the SB again.

It is true that SF is unlikely to be able to draft a QB before Garappolo's contract expires because of what they gave up, making it necessary for them to pick up a QB at #3. But, if Garappolo wins them a SB in 2022 (2021 season), they will want to resign him anyway.

It all comes down to how you assess the 4 remaining issues SF has (listed above) and how important they are. To me, the most important problem is the combined issue at RT and the QB injury issue. We don't know if Garappolo will stay healthy even with Sewell at RT and we don't know that he will get injured again with McGlinchy at RT. But I'd rather roll the dice on that one, then roll the dice on Lance, Fields or Jones. To me, that is much greater risk to take.

If SF gives Garappolo a RT in round #1 and a deep threat WR in round #2, Garappolo can win SF a SB.
If SF drafts a QB in round 1, they will have to get an RT in round #2 after many of the top ones are off the board. So how is SF going to protect their new QB. QB elusiveness only goes so far?

Remember the last SB when Mahomes wasn't protected because his OTs were injured? That will be what Lance or Fields look like with McGlinchy still at RT for SF.

---

"Also, largely from media and fan sources is the ongoing myth that Garappolo is not capable of winning the SB." Okay, I don't know what a "fan source" is, but it' 2021, so the days of blaming the media for everything but your jock itch is over. The media didn't just trade up to be in the range of picking a notable QB. If they don't go that route, and pick like a Sewell, then that will be the loudest vote of confidence that Jimmy G. could receive.

---

There's no way around it, what SF does with the #3 pick will decide Garappolo's future one way of the other. I don't understand your comment about jock itch. The media didn't just trade up but they decided the trade was for a QB. But the #3 pick does not put them in the range of Wilson. It does put them in the range to get Sewell. So you decide. Who would do more to help SF win a SB in 2021, Sewell (replacing McGlinchy), Fields, Jones or Lance? I think the answer is pretty obvious.

---

"they decided"...please. It's nothing but logical speculation from media folks who are asked to do exactly that by you and anyone who cares about the sport. Fine, you don't believe the many reports...you are allowed that. But the media didn't "do" anything collectively.
You want me to decide? I'm doing whatever doesn't help the Niners win squat, but that's just me. I would GUESS that it's not only all about 2021 for the Niners, but that's just me. In other words both things can be true-they are looking beyond 2021 and also thinking that the team they have right now is ready to compete. In fact, to take a step further: they may believe Fields is a solid QB, and though just a rookie, they believe he can step in if Jimmy G. misses and few games. Not that Justin Fields is going to be Nick Foles, but still hopefully solid.
Even after yesterday, I can't sit here and say you are wrong. They can pick Sewell, and simply said they changed their minds...no one will care if they did.

---

Essentially we agree except the semantics war you are waging. The point is that the idea that SF was taking a QB did not come from SF. It came from the media. Whether it is logical or not, everyone is putting down SF for making this trade because they are trading for a QB despite the fact that SF did not say that. And Sewell + Garappolo > Fields + McGlinchy for SF's future as well as present.

---

I don't know what you are reading. Shanahan and Lynch have been clear they are taking a QB. They both called Jimmy G to explain. Shanahan said Jimmy was professional but he believes he was pissed and Shanahan said he would be pissed too. Do you think Jimmy is pissed because they explained they traded up to get an offensive lineman to give him better protection?

The idea that they are picking a QB did not originate with the press.

---

Technically, I believe they called Jimmy to let him know they were trading up to #3. I'm sure the implication is that they are taking a QB and maybe they are. Maybe that is what Jimmy believes. But organizations leak things all of the time that turn out to not be true. The fact is that, whether or not SF is actually taking a QB, it does benefit them for folks to believe that because all of the other teams who really need a QB (Washington, NE, Carolina and Denver) to name a few, are going to value trading up more now than they did before. They might offer SF quite a bit and maybe more than SF gave up originally. So, the point is, why believe a team that has every reason to lie about it. I think they genuinely want Wilson but, if he isn't there, and he probably isn't, they would have the flexibility to do any number of things to make that trade worthwhile. And it's possible they already know that the Jets are taking someone other than Wilson.

I'll admit this: If the 49ers gave all of that up just to get Fields, Lance or Jones, then I agree that it is a stupid trade. But what I am saying is that we don't know that yet. There are other scenarios that make this trade understandable, although still kind of odd. And all we know is what people are saying. We don't know what SF will actually do. So I would reserve judgement on it. I'm happy to agree with others here if, on draft day SF picks one of those 3.

Now, if between now and draft day SF picks up a serviceable RT in free agency then I think it is very clearly going to be about a QB. We really have to wait and see.

---

I'm not seeing any advantage in lying unless some other team REALLY wants ONE of Fields, Lance or Jones. However, I don't even see why Trever Lawrence is everyone's #1. Mac Jones and Zach Wilson put up the numbers, Fields has a better passing rating and 4.4 speed....

My view is QB is too much of a crap shoot so usually trade down for more picks and take a promising QB lower and surround them with talent and a good defense. Tom Brady was a 6th round pick. Russell Wilson was a third round pick. Joe Montana was a third round pick.

71Bear said:

---

79 Bear said:

---

Many people are in the Fields camp, but Mac Jones had top ranking in numerous key categories this past season, In addition, Fields was inconsistent this past year and his numbers when under pressure are much worse than when he is not.

I also think the 9ers have to be real careful about a running QB, especially given this past season when their starter was out most of the year and they tanked in part due to that.

Although people tend to like running QBs these days the all time best have been the pocket passers (e.g. Brady, Rogers, Brees, P. Manning, Marino, Montana).

Fields is an incredible athlete but I see Jones fitting into the 49ers scheme much better.

On another note, I would actually rather see the 9ers draft Kyle Pitts. He has NFL star written all over him from what I have read. I don't think they will do that with the #3 pick, however.

---

Fields had two rough games - Northwestern and Indiana. Otherwise, he was nails, especially v. Clemson (6 TD passes). I read a lengthy article (with video) about him at The Athletic that analyzed his decision-making. Overall, he does have some areas to focus on as he moves up to the next level but his athleticism sets him apart from Jones. Given the direction the game is headed, a QB who can pass first and run effectively when things break down is a must.

What I found interesting in your comment about the all-timers is that none are under 38. The next generation of all-timers will be led by guys like Mahomes, QB's who are premier passers and can make plays with their feet (and are durable enough to take some hits).

Note: Fields is 6'3" 227 lbs.

---

I agree, I like Fields and would pick him if I had the third pick. I just wouldn't give up what they did to get the third pick just to take him.

calumnus said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

mbBear said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

mbBear said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

Everyone is saying this is for a QB but consider this:

• After FA signings SF has solved most of it's most urgent needs
• Their remaining issues are RT where McGlinchy has trouble with pass protection, depth at CB depth, a WR that can stretch the field and they have an injury prone QB.
• If they get a QB with #3 they have only solved one of the 4.
• If they get Sewell (OT from Oregon rated #1 OL in the draft and top 5 talent overall), they can put him at RT and solve 2 of the above problems. By better protecting Garappolo, they essentially gain a QB as well. IOW they effectively gain an OT and a QB by picking Sewell at #3.

According to scouts and media reports Sewell is as close to a generational talent at OT as it gets these days. Those same media sources claim that Wilson is going #2 and that the other guys left (Lance, Fields and Jones) are not as good and are probably not worth a top 5 pick.

Also, largely from media and fan sources is the ongoing myth that Garappolo is not capable of winning the SB. This is just a theory and cannot be proven one way or another. What is known is that Garappolo is seen as an effective leader in the locker room and on the field and is well liked by the players. He almost won a SB in his first fully healthy year as a starter. KC was favored in that SB and won going away and their were several contributing factors to the loss. There is absolutely no evidence that Trey Lance or Justin Fields will make the difference between getting to the SB and winning the SB. In fact neither of the 2 QBs have played much against high level college competition let alone NFL competition. And Fields hasn't even had a pro day yet, so the evaluation on him is limited right now. Similar things can be said about Jones.

Of the 4 QBs (Jones, Fields, Lance and Garappolo), I think Garappolo is the most likely to get SF to the SB again.

It is true that SF is unlikely to be able to draft a QB before Garappolo's contract expires because of what they gave up, making it necessary for them to pick up a QB at #3. But, if Garappolo wins them a SB in 2022 (2021 season), they will want to resign him anyway.

It all comes down to how you assess the 4 remaining issues SF has (listed above) and how important they are. To me, the most important problem is the combined issue at RT and the QB injury issue. We don't know if Garappolo will stay healthy even with Sewell at RT and we don't know that he will get injured again with McGlinchy at RT. But I'd rather roll the dice on that one, then roll the dice on Lance, Fields or Jones. To me, that is much greater risk to take.

If SF gives Garappolo a RT in round #1 and a deep threat WR in round #2, Garappolo can win SF a SB.
If SF drafts a QB in round 1, they will have to get an RT in round #2 after many of the top ones are off the board. So how is SF going to protect their new QB. QB elusiveness only goes so far?

Remember the last SB when Mahomes wasn't protected because his OTs were injured? That will be what Lance or Fields look like with McGlinchy still at RT for SF.

---

"Also, largely from media and fan sources is the ongoing myth that Garappolo is not capable of winning the SB." Okay, I don't know what a "fan source" is, but it' 2021, so the days of blaming the media for everything but your jock itch is over. The media didn't just trade up to be in the range of picking a notable QB. If they don't go that route, and pick like a Sewell, then that will be the loudest vote of confidence that Jimmy G. could receive.

---

There's no way around it, what SF does with the #3 pick will decide Garappolo's future one way of the other. I don't understand your comment about jock itch. The media didn't just trade up but they decided the trade was for a QB. But the #3 pick does not put them in the range of Wilson. It does put them in the range to get Sewell. So you decide. Who would do more to help SF win a SB in 2021, Sewell (replacing McGlinchy), Fields, Jones or Lance? I think the answer is pretty obvious.

---

"they decided"...please. It's nothing but logical speculation from media folks who are asked to do exactly that by you and anyone who cares about the sport. Fine, you don't believe the many reports...you are allowed that. But the media didn't "do" anything collectively.
You want me to decide? I'm doing whatever doesn't help the Niners win squat, but that's just me. I would GUESS that it's not only all about 2021 for the Niners, but that's just me. In other words both things can be true-they are looking beyond 2021 and also thinking that the team they have right now is ready to compete. In fact, to take a step further: they may believe Fields is a solid QB, and though just a rookie, they believe he can step in if Jimmy G. misses and few games. Not that Justin Fields is going to be Nick Foles, but still hopefully solid.
Even after yesterday, I can't sit here and say you are wrong. They can pick Sewell, and simply said they changed their minds...no one will care if they did.

---

Essentially we agree except the semantics war you are waging. The point is that the idea that SF was taking a QB did not come from SF. It came from the media. Whether it is logical or not, everyone is putting down SF for making this trade because they are trading for a QB despite the fact that SF did not say that. And Sewell + Garappolo > Fields + McGlinchy for SF's future as well as present.

---

I don't know what you are reading. Shanahan and Lynch have been clear they are taking a QB. They both called Jimmy G to explain. Shanahan said Jimmy was professional but he believes he was pissed and Shanahan said he would be pissed too. Do you think Jimmy is pissed because they explained they traded up to get an offensive lineman to give him better protection?

The idea that they are picking a QB did not originate with the press.

---

Technically, I believe they called Jimmy to let him know they were trading up to #3. I'm sure the implication is that they are taking a QB and maybe they are. Maybe that is what Jimmy believes. But organizations leak things all of the time that turn out to not be true. The fact is that, whether or not SF is actually taking a QB, it does benefit them for folks to believe that because all of the other teams who really need a QB (Washington, NE, Carolina and Denver) to name a few, are going to value trading up more now than they did before. They might offer SF quite a bit and maybe more than SF gave up originally. So, the point is, why believe a team that has every reason to lie about it. I think they genuinely want Wilson but, if he isn't there, and he probably isn't, they would have the flexibility to do any number of things to make that trade worthwhile. And it's possible they already know that the Jets are taking someone other than Wilson.

I'll admit this: If the 49ers gave all of that up just to get Fields, Lance or Jones, then I agree that it is a stupid trade. But what I am saying is that we don't know that yet. There are other scenarios that make this trade understandable, although still kind of odd. And all we know is what people are saying. We don't know what SF will actually do. So I would reserve judgement on it. I'm happy to agree with others here if, on draft day SF picks one of those 3.

Now, if between now and draft day SF picks up a serviceable RT in free agency then I think it is very clearly going to be about a QB. We really have to wait and see.

---

I'm not seeing any advantage in lying unless some other team REALLY wants ONE of Fields, Lance or Jones. However, I don't even see why Trever Lawrence is everyone's #1. Mac Jones and Zach Wilson put up the numbers, Fields has a better passing rating and 4.4 speed....

My view is QB is too much of a crap shoot so usually trade down for more picks and take a promising QB lower and surround them with talent and a good defense. Tom Brady was a 6th round pick. Russell Wilson was a third round pick. Joe Montana was a third round pick.

---

I totally agree. As you said: There is no reason for SF to lie unless some other team REALLY wants ONE of Fields, Lance or Jones. Don't you think there are teams out there that match that description? I mentioned some. And, at this point, we might want to add Houston to the list.

BTW, SF could really use Mitchell Schwartz. If they release McGlinchy, they could afford him. But then they are relying on a guy coming off a serious back injury. However, reports say that Schwartz should be ready for the season and there is some OL depth in SF.

heartofthebear said:

---

calumnus said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

mbBear said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

mbBear said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

Everyone is saying this is for a QB but consider this:

• After FA signings SF has solved most of it's most urgent needs
• Their remaining issues are RT where McGlinchy has trouble with pass protection, depth at CB depth, a WR that can stretch the field and they have an injury prone QB.
• If they get a QB with #3 they have only solved one of the 4.
• If they get Sewell (OT from Oregon rated #1 OL in the draft and top 5 talent overall), they can put him at RT and solve 2 of the above problems. By better protecting Garappolo, they essentially gain a QB as well. IOW they effectively gain an OT and a QB by picking Sewell at #3.

According to scouts and media reports Sewell is as close to a generational talent at OT as it gets these days. Those same media sources claim that Wilson is going #2 and that the other guys left (Lance, Fields and Jones) are not as good and are probably not worth a top 5 pick.

Also, largely from media and fan sources is the ongoing myth that Garappolo is not capable of winning the SB. This is just a theory and cannot be proven one way or another. What is known is that Garappolo is seen as an effective leader in the locker room and on the field and is well liked by the players. He almost won a SB in his first fully healthy year as a starter. KC was favored in that SB and won going away and their were several contributing factors to the loss. There is absolutely no evidence that Trey Lance or Justin Fields will make the difference between getting to the SB and winning the SB. In fact neither of the 2 QBs have played much against high level college competition let alone NFL competition. And Fields hasn't even had a pro day yet, so the evaluation on him is limited right now. Similar things can be said about Jones.

Of the 4 QBs (Jones, Fields, Lance and Garappolo), I think Garappolo is the most likely to get SF to the SB again.

It is true that SF is unlikely to be able to draft a QB before Garappolo's contract expires because of what they gave up, making it necessary for them to pick up a QB at #3. But, if Garappolo wins them a SB in 2022 (2021 season), they will want to resign him anyway.

It all comes down to how you assess the 4 remaining issues SF has (listed above) and how important they are. To me, the most important problem is the combined issue at RT and the QB injury issue. We don't know if Garappolo will stay healthy even with Sewell at RT and we don't know that he will get injured again with McGlinchy at RT. But I'd rather roll the dice on that one, then roll the dice on Lance, Fields or Jones. To me, that is much greater risk to take.

If SF gives Garappolo a RT in round #1 and a deep threat WR in round #2, Garappolo can win SF a SB.
If SF drafts a QB in round 1, they will have to get an RT in round #2 after many of the top ones are off the board. So how is SF going to protect their new QB. QB elusiveness only goes so far?

Remember the last SB when Mahomes wasn't protected because his OTs were injured? That will be what Lance or Fields look like with McGlinchy still at RT for SF.

---

"Also, largely from media and fan sources is the ongoing myth that Garappolo is not capable of winning the SB." Okay, I don't know what a "fan source" is, but it' 2021, so the days of blaming the media for everything but your jock itch is over. The media didn't just trade up to be in the range of picking a notable QB. If they don't go that route, and pick like a Sewell, then that will be the loudest vote of confidence that Jimmy G. could receive.

---

There's no way around it, what SF does with the #3 pick will decide Garappolo's future one way of the other. I don't understand your comment about jock itch. The media didn't just trade up but they decided the trade was for a QB. But the #3 pick does not put them in the range of Wilson. It does put them in the range to get Sewell. So you decide. Who would do more to help SF win a SB in 2021, Sewell (replacing McGlinchy), Fields, Jones or Lance? I think the answer is pretty obvious.

---

"they decided"...please. It's nothing but logical speculation from media folks who are asked to do exactly that by you and anyone who cares about the sport. Fine, you don't believe the many reports...you are allowed that. But the media didn't "do" anything collectively.
You want me to decide? I'm doing whatever doesn't help the Niners win squat, but that's just me. I would GUESS that it's not only all about 2021 for the Niners, but that's just me. In other words both things can be true-they are looking beyond 2021 and also thinking that the team they have right now is ready to compete. In fact, to take a step further: they may believe Fields is a solid QB, and though just a rookie, they believe he can step in if Jimmy G. misses and few games. Not that Justin Fields is going to be Nick Foles, but still hopefully solid.
Even after yesterday, I can't sit here and say you are wrong. They can pick Sewell, and simply said they changed their minds...no one will care if they did.

---

Essentially we agree except the semantics war you are waging. The point is that the idea that SF was taking a QB did not come from SF. It came from the media. Whether it is logical or not, everyone is putting down SF for making this trade because they are trading for a QB despite the fact that SF did not say that. And Sewell + Garappolo > Fields + McGlinchy for SF's future as well as present.

---

I don't know what you are reading. Shanahan and Lynch have been clear they are taking a QB. They both called Jimmy G to explain. Shanahan said Jimmy was professional but he believes he was pissed and Shanahan said he would be pissed too. Do you think Jimmy is pissed because they explained they traded up to get an offensive lineman to give him better protection?

The idea that they are picking a QB did not originate with the press.

---

Technically, I believe they called Jimmy to let him know they were trading up to #3. I'm sure the implication is that they are taking a QB and maybe they are. Maybe that is what Jimmy believes. But organizations leak things all of the time that turn out to not be true. The fact is that, whether or not SF is actually taking a QB, it does benefit them for folks to believe that because all of the other teams who really need a QB (Washington, NE, Carolina and Denver) to name a few, are going to value trading up more now than they did before. They might offer SF quite a bit and maybe more than SF gave up originally. So, the point is, why believe a team that has every reason to lie about it. I think they genuinely want Wilson but, if he isn't there, and he probably isn't, they would have the flexibility to do any number of things to make that trade worthwhile. And it's possible they already know that the Jets are taking someone other than Wilson.

I'll admit this: If the 49ers gave all of that up just to get Fields, Lance or Jones, then I agree that it is a stupid trade. But what I am saying is that we don't know that yet. There are other scenarios that make this trade understandable, although still kind of odd. And all we know is what people are saying. We don't know what SF will actually do. So I would reserve judgement on it. I'm happy to agree with others here if, on draft day SF picks one of those 3.

Now, if between now and draft day SF picks up a serviceable RT in free agency then I think it is very clearly going to be about a QB. We really have to wait and see.

---

I'm not seeing any advantage in lying unless some other team REALLY wants ONE of Fields, Lance or Jones. However, I don't even see why Trever Lawrence is everyone's #1. Mac Jones and Zach Wilson put up the numbers, Fields has a better passing rating and 4.4 speed....

My view is QB is too much of a crap shoot so usually trade down for more picks and take a promising QB lower and surround them with talent and a good defense. Tom Brady was a 6th round pick. Russell Wilson was a third round pick. Joe Montana was a third round pick.

---

I totally agree. As you said: There is no reason for SF to lie unless some other team REALLY wants ONE of Fields, Lance or Jones. Don't you think there are teams out there that match that description? I mentioned some. And, at this point, we might want to add Houston to the list.

BTW, SF could really use Mitchell Schwartz. If they release McGlinchy, they could afford him. But then they are relying on a guy coming off a serious back injury. However, reports say that Schwartz should be ready for the season and there is some OL depth in SF.

---

If the Niners trade the pick and get more for it than they gave up for it I will give them and you both kudos for their astute poker playing.

I am not holding my breath.

71Bear said:

---

79 Bear said:

---

Many people are in the Fields camp, but Mac Jones had top ranking in numerous key categories this past season, In addition, Fields was inconsistent this past year and his numbers when under pressure are much worse than when he is not.

I also think the 9ers have to be real careful about a running QB, especially given this past season when their starter was out most of the year and they tanked in part due to that.

Although people tend to like running QBs these days the all time best have been the pocket passers (e.g. Brady, Rogers, Brees, P. Manning, Marino, Montana).

Fields is an incredible athlete but I see Jones fitting into the 49ers scheme much better.

On another note, I would actually rather see the 9ers draft Kyle Pitts. He has NFL star written all over him from what I have read. I don't think they will do that with the #3 pick, however.

---

Fields had two rough games - Northwestern and Indiana. Otherwise, he was nails, especially v. Clemson (6 TD passes). I read a lengthy article (with video) about him at The Athletic that analyzed his decision-making. Overall, he does have some areas to focus on as he moves up to the next level but his athleticism sets him apart from Jones. Given the direction the game is headed, a QB who can pass first and run effectively when things break down is a must.

What I found interesting in your comment about the all-timers is that none are under 38. The next generation of all-timers will be led by guys like Mahomes, QB's who are premier passers and can make plays with their feet (and are durable enough to take some hits).

Note: Fields is 6'3" 227 lbs.

---

I agree that the game is trending toward QBs who can run and extend plays, with Russell Wilson, Lamar Jackson, DeShaun Watson and Mahomes being great examples. But I would also point out that if Brady, Rogers or Brees had been running QBs they might not have gotten to continue playing at 38, 40 and 41. It will be interesting to see how the QB in the NFL evolves. One thing that may not bode well for the running QB is the new 17 game season, which just takes even more of a toll on the players. I think it is ridiculous for them to extend the season given how many injuries there have been and will no doubt continue to be. I realize it's all about money but the only ones who will benefit is the owners. Does anyone know if this is a done deal? Do the players also have to vote on it?

79 Bear said:

---

71Bear said:

---

79 Bear said:

---

Many people are in the Fields camp, but Mac Jones had top ranking in numerous key categories this past season, In addition, Fields was inconsistent this past year and his numbers when under pressure are much worse than when he is not.

I also think the 9ers have to be real careful about a running QB, especially given this past season when their starter was out most of the year and they tanked in part due to that.

Although people tend to like running QBs these days the all time best have been the pocket passers (e.g. Brady, Rogers, Brees, P. Manning, Marino, Montana).

Fields is an incredible athlete but I see Jones fitting into the 49ers scheme much better.

On another note, I would actually rather see the 9ers draft Kyle Pitts. He has NFL star written all over him from what I have read. I don't think they will do that with the #3 pick, however.

---

Fields had two rough games - Northwestern and Indiana. Otherwise, he was nails, especially v. Clemson (6 TD passes). I read a lengthy article (with video) about him at The Athletic that analyzed his decision-making. Overall, he does have some areas to focus on as he moves up to the next level but his athleticism sets him apart from Jones. Given the direction the game is headed, a QB who can pass first and run effectively when things break down is a must.

What I found interesting in your comment about the all-timers is that none are under 38. The next generation of all-timers will be led by guys like Mahomes, QB's who are premier passers and can make plays with their feet (and are durable enough to take some hits).

Note: Fields is 6'3" 227 lbs.

---

I agree that the game is trending toward QBs who can run and extend plays, with Russell Wilson, Lamar Jackson, DeShaun Watson and Mahomes being great examples. But I would also point out that if Brady, Rogers or Brees had been running QBs they might not have gotten to continue playing at 38, 40 and 41. It will be interesting to see how the QB in the NFL evolves. One thing that may not bode well for the running QB is the new 17 game season, which just takes even more of a toll on the players. I think it is ridiculous for them to extend the season given how many injuries there have been and will no doubt continue to be. I realize it's all about money but the only ones who will benefit is the owners. Does anyone know if this is a done deal? Do the players also have to vote on it?

---

The 17th game was something that was built into the CBA that they players and owners agreed to.

heartofthebear said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

mbBear said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

mbBear said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

Everyone is saying this is for a QB but consider this:

• After FA signings SF has solved most of it's most urgent needs
• Their remaining issues are RT where McGlinchy has trouble with pass protection, depth at CB depth, a WR that can stretch the field and they have an injury prone QB.
• If they get a QB with #3 they have only solved one of the 4.
• If they get Sewell (OT from Oregon rated #1 OL in the draft and top 5 talent overall), they can put him at RT and solve 2 of the above problems. By better protecting Garappolo, they essentially gain a QB as well. IOW they effectively gain an OT and a QB by picking Sewell at #3.

According to scouts and media reports Sewell is as close to a generational talent at OT as it gets these days. Those same media sources claim that Wilson is going #2 and that the other guys left (Lance, Fields and Jones) are not as good and are probably not worth a top 5 pick.

Also, largely from media and fan sources is the ongoing myth that Garappolo is not capable of winning the SB. This is just a theory and cannot be proven one way or another. What is known is that Garappolo is seen as an effective leader in the locker room and on the field and is well liked by the players. He almost won a SB in his first fully healthy year as a starter. KC was favored in that SB and won going away and their were several contributing factors to the loss. There is absolutely no evidence that Trey Lance or Justin Fields will make the difference between getting to the SB and winning the SB. In fact neither of the 2 QBs have played much against high level college competition let alone NFL competition. And Fields hasn't even had a pro day yet, so the evaluation on him is limited right now. Similar things can be said about Jones.

Of the 4 QBs (Jones, Fields, Lance and Garappolo), I think Garappolo is the most likely to get SF to the SB again.

It is true that SF is unlikely to be able to draft a QB before Garappolo's contract expires because of what they gave up, making it necessary for them to pick up a QB at #3. But, if Garappolo wins them a SB in 2022 (2021 season), they will want to resign him anyway.

It all comes down to how you assess the 4 remaining issues SF has (listed above) and how important they are. To me, the most important problem is the combined issue at RT and the QB injury issue. We don't know if Garappolo will stay healthy even with Sewell at RT and we don't know that he will get injured again with McGlinchy at RT. But I'd rather roll the dice on that one, then roll the dice on Lance, Fields or Jones. To me, that is much greater risk to take.

If SF gives Garappolo a RT in round #1 and a deep threat WR in round #2, Garappolo can win SF a SB.
If SF drafts a QB in round 1, they will have to get an RT in round #2 after many of the top ones are off the board. So how is SF going to protect their new QB. QB elusiveness only goes so far?

Remember the last SB when Mahomes wasn't protected because his OTs were injured? That will be what Lance or Fields look like with McGlinchy still at RT for SF.

---

"Also, largely from media and fan sources is the ongoing myth that Garappolo is not capable of winning the SB." Okay, I don't know what a "fan source" is, but it' 2021, so the days of blaming the media for everything but your jock itch is over. The media didn't just trade up to be in the range of picking a notable QB. If they don't go that route, and pick like a Sewell, then that will be the loudest vote of confidence that Jimmy G. could receive.

---

There's no way around it, what SF does with the #3 pick will decide Garappolo's future one way of the other. I don't understand your comment about jock itch. The media didn't just trade up but they decided the trade was for a QB. But the #3 pick does not put them in the range of Wilson. It does put them in the range to get Sewell. So you decide. Who would do more to help SF win a SB in 2021, Sewell (replacing McGlinchy), Fields, Jones or Lance? I think the answer is pretty obvious.

---

"they decided"...please. It's nothing but logical speculation from media folks who are asked to do exactly that by you and anyone who cares about the sport. Fine, you don't believe the many reports...you are allowed that. But the media didn't "do" anything collectively.
You want me to decide? I'm doing whatever doesn't help the Niners win squat, but that's just me. I would GUESS that it's not only all about 2021 for the Niners, but that's just me. In other words both things can be true-they are looking beyond 2021 and also thinking that the team they have right now is ready to compete. In fact, to take a step further: they may believe Fields is a solid QB, and though just a rookie, they believe he can step in if Jimmy G. misses and few games. Not that Justin Fields is going to be Nick Foles, but still hopefully solid.
Even after yesterday, I can't sit here and say you are wrong. They can pick Sewell, and simply said they changed their minds...no one will care if they did.

---

Essentially we agree except the semantics war you are waging. The point is that the idea that SF was taking a QB did not come from SF. It came from the media. Whether it is logical or not, everyone is putting down SF for making this trade because they are trading for a QB despite the fact that SF did not say that. And Sewell + Garappolo > Fields + McGlinchy for SF's future as well as present.

---

I don't know what you are reading. Shanahan and Lynch have been clear they are taking a QB. They both called Jimmy G to explain. Shanahan said Jimmy was professional but he believes he was pissed and Shanahan said he would be pissed too. Do you think Jimmy is pissed because they explained they traded up to get an offensive lineman to give him better protection?

The idea that they are picking a QB did not originate with the press.

---

Technically, I believe they called Jimmy to let him know they were trading up to #3. I'm sure the implication is that they are taking a QB and maybe they are. Maybe that is what Jimmy believes. But organizations leak things all of the time that turn out to not be true. The fact is that, whether or not SF is actually taking a QB, it does benefit them for folks to believe that because all of the other teams who really need a QB (Washington, NE, Carolina and Denver) to name a few, are going to value trading up more now than they did before. They might offer SF quite a bit and maybe more than SF gave up originally. So, the point is, why believe a team that has every reason to lie about it. I think they genuinely want Wilson but, if he isn't there, and he probably isn't, they would have the flexibility to do any number of things to make that trade worthwhile. And it's possible they already know that the Jets are taking someone other than Wilson.

I'll admit this: If the 49ers gave all of that up just to get Fields, Lance or Jones, then I agree that it is a stupid trade. But what I am saying is that we don't know that yet. There are other scenarios that make this trade understandable, although still kind of odd. And all we know is what people are saying. We don't know what SF will actually do. So I would reserve judgement on it. I'm happy to agree with others here if, on draft day SF picks one of those 3.

Now, if between now and draft day SF picks up a serviceable RT in free agency then I think it is very clearly going to be about a QB. We really have to wait and see.

---

1. You don't trade 3 first rounds and a third to get a pick that you think you could trade for more value. Not going to happen.

2. If you aren't going to trade the pick, there is no reason to lie because the player you want is going to be there at 3.

3. You do not trade up to #3, and massively mislead everyone to believe you are planning to take your next franchise QB on some really weak gamesmanship ploy, and then stare your local media and your fan base and say "Just kidding. We gave up 4 draft picks for a tackle. That is career suicide.

4. Your whole argument is that the idea that they are taking a QB is coming from fans and media. Now you are saying the team could be lying or misleading. Well, if they are, the idea is still coming from them. They have been clear they are taking a QB. The fans and media have every reason to take them at face value.

5. The only thing that would make this trade dumber than taking one of the QB's would be taking anyone else.

heartofthebear said:

---

calumnus said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

mbBear said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

mbBear said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

Everyone is saying this is for a QB but consider this:

• After FA signings SF has solved most of it's most urgent needs
• Their remaining issues are RT where McGlinchy has trouble with pass protection, depth at CB depth, a WR that can stretch the field and they have an injury prone QB.
• If they get a QB with #3 they have only solved one of the 4.
• If they get Sewell (OT from Oregon rated #1 OL in the draft and top 5 talent overall), they can put him at RT and solve 2 of the above problems. By better protecting Garappolo, they essentially gain a QB as well. IOW they effectively gain an OT and a QB by picking Sewell at #3.

According to scouts and media reports Sewell is as close to a generational talent at OT as it gets these days. Those same media sources claim that Wilson is going #2 and that the other guys left (Lance, Fields and Jones) are not as good and are probably not worth a top 5 pick.

Also, largely from media and fan sources is the ongoing myth that Garappolo is not capable of winning the SB. This is just a theory and cannot be proven one way or another. What is known is that Garappolo is seen as an effective leader in the locker room and on the field and is well liked by the players. He almost won a SB in his first fully healthy year as a starter. KC was favored in that SB and won going away and their were several contributing factors to the loss. There is absolutely no evidence that Trey Lance or Justin Fields will make the difference between getting to the SB and winning the SB. In fact neither of the 2 QBs have played much against high level college competition let alone NFL competition. And Fields hasn't even had a pro day yet, so the evaluation on him is limited right now. Similar things can be said about Jones.

Of the 4 QBs (Jones, Fields, Lance and Garappolo), I think Garappolo is the most likely to get SF to the SB again.

It is true that SF is unlikely to be able to draft a QB before Garappolo's contract expires because of what they gave up, making it necessary for them to pick up a QB at #3. But, if Garappolo wins them a SB in 2022 (2021 season), they will want to resign him anyway.

It all comes down to how you assess the 4 remaining issues SF has (listed above) and how important they are. To me, the most important problem is the combined issue at RT and the QB injury issue. We don't know if Garappolo will stay healthy even with Sewell at RT and we don't know that he will get injured again with McGlinchy at RT. But I'd rather roll the dice on that one, then roll the dice on Lance, Fields or Jones. To me, that is much greater risk to take.

If SF gives Garappolo a RT in round #1 and a deep threat WR in round #2, Garappolo can win SF a SB.
If SF drafts a QB in round 1, they will have to get an RT in round #2 after many of the top ones are off the board. So how is SF going to protect their new QB. QB elusiveness only goes so far?

Remember the last SB when Mahomes wasn't protected because his OTs were injured? That will be what Lance or Fields look like with McGlinchy still at RT for SF.

---

"Also, largely from media and fan sources is the ongoing myth that Garappolo is not capable of winning the SB." Okay, I don't know what a "fan source" is, but it' 2021, so the days of blaming the media for everything but your jock itch is over. The media didn't just trade up to be in the range of picking a notable QB. If they don't go that route, and pick like a Sewell, then that will be the loudest vote of confidence that Jimmy G. could receive.

---

There's no way around it, what SF does with the #3 pick will decide Garappolo's future one way of the other. I don't understand your comment about jock itch. The media didn't just trade up but they decided the trade was for a QB. But the #3 pick does not put them in the range of Wilson. It does put them in the range to get Sewell. So you decide. Who would do more to help SF win a SB in 2021, Sewell (replacing McGlinchy), Fields, Jones or Lance? I think the answer is pretty obvious.

---

"they decided"...please. It's nothing but logical speculation from media folks who are asked to do exactly that by you and anyone who cares about the sport. Fine, you don't believe the many reports...you are allowed that. But the media didn't "do" anything collectively.
You want me to decide? I'm doing whatever doesn't help the Niners win squat, but that's just me. I would GUESS that it's not only all about 2021 for the Niners, but that's just me. In other words both things can be true-they are looking beyond 2021 and also thinking that the team they have right now is ready to compete. In fact, to take a step further: they may believe Fields is a solid QB, and though just a rookie, they believe he can step in if Jimmy G. misses and few games. Not that Justin Fields is going to be Nick Foles, but still hopefully solid.
Even after yesterday, I can't sit here and say you are wrong. They can pick Sewell, and simply said they changed their minds...no one will care if they did.

---

Essentially we agree except the semantics war you are waging. The point is that the idea that SF was taking a QB did not come from SF. It came from the media. Whether it is logical or not, everyone is putting down SF for making this trade because they are trading for a QB despite the fact that SF did not say that. And Sewell + Garappolo > Fields + McGlinchy for SF's future as well as present.

---

I don't know what you are reading. Shanahan and Lynch have been clear they are taking a QB. They both called Jimmy G to explain. Shanahan said Jimmy was professional but he believes he was pissed and Shanahan said he would be pissed too. Do you think Jimmy is pissed because they explained they traded up to get an offensive lineman to give him better protection?

The idea that they are picking a QB did not originate with the press.

---

Technically, I believe they called Jimmy to let him know they were trading up to #3. I'm sure the implication is that they are taking a QB and maybe they are. Maybe that is what Jimmy believes. But organizations leak things all of the time that turn out to not be true. The fact is that, whether or not SF is actually taking a QB, it does benefit them for folks to believe that because all of the other teams who really need a QB (Washington, NE, Carolina and Denver) to name a few, are going to value trading up more now than they did before. They might offer SF quite a bit and maybe more than SF gave up originally. So, the point is, why believe a team that has every reason to lie about it. I think they genuinely want Wilson but, if he isn't there, and he probably isn't, they would have the flexibility to do any number of things to make that trade worthwhile. And it's possible they already know that the Jets are taking someone other than Wilson.

I'll admit this: If the 49ers gave all of that up just to get Fields, Lance or Jones, then I agree that it is a stupid trade. But what I am saying is that we don't know that yet. There are other scenarios that make this trade understandable, although still kind of odd. And all we know is what people are saying. We don't know what SF will actually do. So I would reserve judgement on it. I'm happy to agree with others here if, on draft day SF picks one of those 3.

Now, if between now and draft day SF picks up a serviceable RT in free agency then I think it is very clearly going to be about a QB. We really have to wait and see.

---

I'm not seeing any advantage in lying unless some other team REALLY wants ONE of Fields, Lance or Jones. However, I don't even see why Trever Lawrence is everyone's #1. Mac Jones and Zach Wilson put up the numbers, Fields has a better passing rating and 4.4 speed....

My view is QB is too much of a crap shoot so usually trade down for more picks and take a promising QB lower and surround them with talent and a good defense. Tom Brady was a 6th round pick. Russell Wilson was a third round pick. Joe Montana was a third round pick.

---

I totally agree. As you said: There is no reason for SF to lie unless some other team REALLY wants ONE of Fields, Lance or Jones. Don't you think there are teams out there that match that description? I mentioned some. And, at this point, we might want to add Houston to the list.

BTW, SF could really use Mitchell Schwartz. If they release McGlinchy, they could afford him. But then they are relying on a guy coming off a serious back injury. However, reports say that Schwartz should be ready for the season and there is some OL depth in SF.

---

There is one team that matches that description. The 49ers.

Perhaps the plan is to draft a QB, let him learn for a year, hope Jimmy stays healthy and has a decent year, then trade one of the two qbs to get some picks back.

79 Bear said:

---

Perhaps the plan is to draft a QB, let him learn for a year, hope Jimmy stays healthy and has a decent year, then trade one of the two qbs to get some picks back.

---

That's crazy talk. How can you ignore all of the QB experts/soon to be NFL GMs in this thread and think that?

heartofthebear said:

---

mbBear said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

mbBear said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

Everyone is saying this is for a QB but consider this:

• After FA signings SF has solved most of it's most urgent needs
• Their remaining issues are RT where McGlinchy has trouble with pass protection, depth at CB depth, a WR that can stretch the field and they have an injury prone QB.
• If they get a QB with #3 they have only solved one of the 4.
• If they get Sewell (OT from Oregon rated #1 OL in the draft and top 5 talent overall), they can put him at RT and solve 2 of the above problems. By better protecting Garappolo, they essentially gain a QB as well. IOW they effectively gain an OT and a QB by picking Sewell at #3.

According to scouts and media reports Sewell is as close to a generational talent at OT as it gets these days. Those same media sources claim that Wilson is going #2 and that the other guys left (Lance, Fields and Jones) are not as good and are probably not worth a top 5 pick.

Also, largely from media and fan sources is the ongoing myth that Garappolo is not capable of winning the SB. This is just a theory and cannot be proven one way or another. What is known is that Garappolo is seen as an effective leader in the locker room and on the field and is well liked by the players. He almost won a SB in his first fully healthy year as a starter. KC was favored in that SB and won going away and their were several contributing factors to the loss. There is absolutely no evidence that Trey Lance or Justin Fields will make the difference between getting to the SB and winning the SB. In fact neither of the 2 QBs have played much against high level college competition let alone NFL competition. And Fields hasn't even had a pro day yet, so the evaluation on him is limited right now. Similar things can be said about Jones.

Of the 4 QBs (Jones, Fields, Lance and Garappolo), I think Garappolo is the most likely to get SF to the SB again.

It is true that SF is unlikely to be able to draft a QB before Garappolo's contract expires because of what they gave up, making it necessary for them to pick up a QB at #3. But, if Garappolo wins them a SB in 2022 (2021 season), they will want to resign him anyway.

It all comes down to how you assess the 4 remaining issues SF has (listed above) and how important they are. To me, the most important problem is the combined issue at RT and the QB injury issue. We don't know if Garappolo will stay healthy even with Sewell at RT and we don't know that he will get injured again with McGlinchy at RT. But I'd rather roll the dice on that one, then roll the dice on Lance, Fields or Jones. To me, that is much greater risk to take.

If SF gives Garappolo a RT in round #1 and a deep threat WR in round #2, Garappolo can win SF a SB.
If SF drafts a QB in round 1, they will have to get an RT in round #2 after many of the top ones are off the board. So how is SF going to protect their new QB. QB elusiveness only goes so far?

Remember the last SB when Mahomes wasn't protected because his OTs were injured? That will be what Lance or Fields look like with McGlinchy still at RT for SF.

---

"Also, largely from media and fan sources is the ongoing myth that Garappolo is not capable of winning the SB." Okay, I don't know what a "fan source" is, but it' 2021, so the days of blaming the media for everything but your jock itch is over. The media didn't just trade up to be in the range of picking a notable QB. If they don't go that route, and pick like a Sewell, then that will be the loudest vote of confidence that Jimmy G. could receive.

---

There's no way around it, what SF does with the #3 pick will decide Garappolo's future one way of the other. I don't understand your comment about jock itch. The media didn't just trade up but they decided the trade was for a QB. But the #3 pick does not put them in the range of Wilson. It does put them in the range to get Sewell. So you decide. Who would do more to help SF win a SB in 2021, Sewell (replacing McGlinchy), Fields, Jones or Lance? I think the answer is pretty obvious.

---

"they decided"...please. It's nothing but logical speculation from media folks who are asked to do exactly that by you and anyone who cares about the sport. Fine, you don't believe the many reports...you are allowed that. But the media didn't "do" anything collectively.
You want me to decide? I'm doing whatever doesn't help the Niners win squat, but that's just me. I would GUESS that it's not only all about 2021 for the Niners, but that's just me. In other words both things can be true-they are looking beyond 2021 and also thinking that the team they have right now is ready to compete. In fact, to take a step further: they may believe Fields is a solid QB, and though just a rookie, they believe he can step in if Jimmy G. misses and few games. Not that Justin Fields is going to be Nick Foles, but still hopefully solid.
Even after yesterday, I can't sit here and say you are wrong. They can pick Sewell, and simply said they changed their minds...no one will care if they did.

---

Essentially we agree except the semantics war you are waging. The point is that the idea that SF was taking a QB did not come from SF. It came from the media. Whether it is logical or not, everyone is putting down SF for making this trade because they are trading for a QB despite the fact that SF did not say that. And Sewell + Garappolo > Fields + McGlinchy for SF's future as well as present.

---

But then they did say that right? I haven't followed super closely, but didn't I see a headline saying that in fact they did trade up for a QB?
Please be aware that most owners, GM's, and coaches all have their favorite media person to talk to, meaning leak info to. I don't consider it a "semantics war," and didn't mean it to come off that way. I just don't think of "the media" as a single monolith, and react accordingly.
McShay in his latest mock has Sewell dropping much further than you or I believe he is going to go.

Urban Meyer, Trevor Lawrence and George Kittle. Sign me up!

Mac Jones.

Any 49ers fans should be praying it's to take Trey Lance IMO, I have serious questions about the other QBs. Zach Wilson had one dominant season against the weakest BYU schedule in decades -- notable since BYU usually only plays half a P5 schedule anyway. Justin Fields has issues moving past his first read. And Mac Jones is a Bama QB and Ken Stabler was the last one of them to have NFL success. I know Trey Lance is seen as a bigger project than the others, but after Trevor Lawrence is the guy I'd want my team taking a chance on... especially if the Niners are still planning to start Jimmy this season while they bring their young QB along.

The real Cal news out of this announcement is the impact on the Lions pick. The Dolphins traded back up to the Eagles' spot at 6 right in front of the Lions at 7. QBs are going 1-3 with the Jets either taking a QB at 2 or trading the pick to a QB needy team, and the Falcons could go for a QB at 4 too. Cincy is taking one of the top OL (either Sewell or Slater) and the Dolphins have a need at OL and also at WR, and could take the other top OL or one of Je'Marr Chase and Kyle Pitts with the Lions grabbing the other. That would be best for Jared and the Lions who need an elite receiving threat. If Atlanta takes Pitts/Chase or trades the pick to someone who does then it pushes the Lions onto second tier targets like WRs Waddle/Smith or the LB Parsons. All those guys have great talent but each have concerns too; Waddle is coming off a season-ending injury, Smith just won the Heisman but very few WRs with his build have been successful let alone true difference makers, and Parsons has off-field issues from HS and Penn State. The Lions were probably hoping that if it came to that they could trade back and take one of those guys but it would take Lance/Fields/Wilson falling or a 5th team enamored with Mac Jones to get good value to move back

Bearly clad: Have to give you props. You follow the draft very closely. me too. I've been preparing for the draft since 1951. Can't help it.

Speaking as a Niner fan, I hope they avoid Lance. The Wentz experiment was enough to convince me to stay away from FCS level QB's. You mentioned the BYU schedule. Heck, Lance played one game in the fall v. a bad team and struggled. No thanks.

I think they are down to Jones or Fields. Both of them come from big time programs. The bright lights of the NFL will not phase them.

I'm with ya, it's a hard habit to kick

This is to helltopay, 71, and anyone else who's a Mac Jones believer, what are you seeing that makes you comfortable taking him at QB in the top 5? Especially with the kings ransom the 49ers just paid to move up there that pick would make me very uneasy. I know enough about football to know I could easily be wrong here but I just don't see it with Jones.

It's not impossible for a QB to be on a stacked college team and still be the best prospect (see: Burrows, Joe) but guys on loaded rosters have to be taken with a grain of salt and recent history says doubly-so with Crimson Tide QBs.

Just my gut take and it might be way off but I think the Niners are pulling some gamesmanship sending John Lynch to Mac Jones pro day on the same day as Fields's. I think they want Fields and are hoping the Jets pass on him. Jags - Lawrence, Jets - Fields, 49ers - Lance/Wilson/Jones. None of those guys have perfect resumes so it's kind of a pick-your-poison situation but they all have great upside too. With Shanahan running the offense though I think you have to take the guy with the best pure quarterbacking ability and to me that's Lance

Yeah folks, since posting I did watch the press conference that Lynch and Shanahan had regarding the trade and it does seem pretty clear why they made the trade and what they are going to do with it. So, I stand corrected.

The points I was making were in lieu of better information that I now have. I was simply suggesting an alternative possibility about what could be going on.

I was not suggesting that the 49ers were full on lying and that they were not after a QB, primarily. I was suggesting that they may not be a done deal and that they could end deciding to trade the pick or take Sewell if Wilson was gone.

Also viewed since I last posted was the pro days of Jones, Fields, Lance and Lawrence. I had watched Wilson's earlier. I did not realize how impressive Lance and Fields are throwing the ball. And we know what they can with their legs. Jones did not look nearly as dynamic or athletic. So I definitely feel that SF is trading up to get Fields or Lance as a backup for now.

Lastly, having listened to the conference I have to change my opinion that trading all of that to get one of those 2 QBs is a stupid trade. They explained their rationale and I think it is well reasoned.

I realize that many people here like to knock SF and there are legitimate hard feelings going back to the Rodgers draft. But, while what then HC Nolan did was ridiculous, it is not the same regime now. I don't think SF operates on biases regarding Cal or stupid tricks to reveal hidden character flaws. I think they are trying to make the team better and I don't think they let anyone or anything, including unnecessary power trips get in the way. They have a philosophy of inclusion, meaning that they don't make a lot of top down decisions or impulsive decisions. Each major decision involves extensive and repetitive discussions including multiple people across the organization. They carefully evaluate the pros and cons of any decision and the timing of it. Additionally they are well respected as an organization and well liked by players. It is why they were able to retain so many of their players.

Furthermore, they recently picked up Alex Mack and don't be surprised if they acquire Mitchell Schwartz as well.

This particular decision (the trade to #3) was in the works with Miami going back to early March. They went in knowing that they would have to pay a premium. But they also wanted to jump ahead of the competition. They wanted to make this trade because of 3 major concerns:

• That Jimmy G, while adequate as a starter, is injury prone and the backups are not an adequate replacement.
• That this particular draft is projected to be the best draft in the next few years for grabbing a top quality QB
• That there would be a run on QBs early in the draft because there are several teams desperate for a starting QB and hence there would not be a QB at pick #12 because other teams would trade up to grab one.

Because of these 3 major concerns and the fact that SF was able to affordably re-sign most of their key players, making their needs for future draft picks less important than it would have and because they like Jimmy G. and feel his offseason is going well, the 49ers pushed most of their chips in and went for it.

Obviously it would have been a better trade if they did not give up as much or if they got pick #2 instead. But that wasn't going to happen so they did the next best thing.

When I look at it in that way, which is the way they described it, I have more confidence than ever that SF is in good hands.

To be clear, I am a 49er fan but not a 49er apologist. I have been very critical of them and various players. And I think they need to do something about their RT Mike McGlinchy. But I am confident that they know that as much or better than I do and I'm confident that they are working on it as well as any other remaining weaknesses.

Back in January, when rumors about Jimmy G. getting traded first started. I echoed what Lynch said then, that SF did need to improve at the QB position, but that could just mean improving the back-up. That has been the consistent position SF has held since.

It may seem ridiculous to do all this for a back-up until you realize that, had SF had Lance or Fields backing up Garappolo in 2020 instead of Mullins and Beatherd, SF would have won more games and probably would have made the playoffs. They lost 3 games to teams in the miserable NFC East that were winnable. And there were other winnable games as well. So, in SFs case, the quality of the back-up makes the difference between playoffs and last place.

The entire history of the NFL is a lesson in the impact of losing a starting QB to injury. Most teams take that seriously but most do it by upgrading the starting QB. Very few address it by upgrading the back-up QB. Still, either one can be critical.

I remember in 1970, George Blanda helped the Oakland Raiders to the playoffs several times after backing up injured starting QB Daryle Lamonica. He did similar things in later years backing up QB Kenny Stabler. He did all of that in his 40s with limited mobility and fighting his own injuries.

While Blanda was a rare bird, playing professional football over 4 decades, he is just one example of a great back-up. Let's not forget that Tom Brady started as Drew Bledsoe's back up. And, when Bledsoe got hurt, Brady's amazing and historic career began.

While drafting a QB early in the draft has less than a 50% chance of working out, the 49ers are not depending on their draft pick to be the answer or the starter. They only need their QB draft pick to able to make the difference between winning and losing the close games that Mullins lost last year by throwing interceptions and/or fumbling. Both Fields and Lance are historically good at protecting the ball. So, with that under consideration, I think the upside of this trade is greater than the downside.

And I think it will be Fields or Lance. I don't think SF even knows who it will be yet. And I think they will continue to evaluate and deliberate on all 4 of the top 5 QBs not taken #1 overall. That is why they made the trade when they did--so they would have a month to do that.

The upshot is, while this would have been a stupid trade to make for a QB that they were relying on to be their immediate starter, it makes sense for a team that is basically one good back-up QB away from the playoffs and maybe the SB.

Bearly Clad said:

---

I'm with ya, it's a hard habit to kick

This is to helltopay, 71, and anyone else who's a Mac Jones believer, what are you seeing that makes you comfortable taking him at QB in the top 5? Especially with the kings ransom the 49ers just paid to move up there that pick would make me very uneasy. I know enough about football to know I could easily be wrong here but I just don't see it with Jones.

It's not impossible for a QB to be on a stacked college team and still be the best prospect (see: Burrows, Joe) but guys on loaded rosters have to be taken with a grain of salt and recent history says doubly-so with Crimson Tide QBs.

Just my gut take and it might be way off but I think the Niners are pulling some gamesmanship sending John Lynch to Mac Jones pro day on the same day as Fields's. I think they want Fields and are hoping the Jets pass on him. Jags - Lawrence, Jets - Fields, 49ers - Lance/Wilson/Jones. None of those guys have perfect resumes so it's kind of a pick-your-poison situation but they all have great upside too. With Shanahan running the offense though I think you have to take the guy with the best pure quarterbacking ability and to me that's Lance

---

I'm not sure where you got the idea that I am a "Mac Jones believer". I would definitely rank him ahead of Lance but also definitely behind Fields. Since Wilson is heading to NY, I think SF will select either Fields or Jones and am hoping it will be Fields.

In my opinion, the top five are Lawrence, Wilson, Fields, Jones, Lance and will be drafted in that order (but not 1 through 5). I don't see any of them lasting beyond 10.

heartofthebear said:

---

Yeah folks, since posting I did watch the press conference that Lynch and Shanahan had regarding the trade and it does seem pretty clear why they made the trade and what they are going to do with it. So, I stand corrected.

The points I was making were in lieu of better information that I now have. I was simply suggesting an alternative possibility about what could be going on.

I was not suggesting that the 49ers were full on lying and that they were not after a QB, primarily. I was suggesting that they may not be a done deal and that they could end deciding to trade the pick or take Sewell if Wilson was gone.

Also viewed since I last posted was the pro days of Jones, Fields, Lance and Lawrence. I had watched Wilson's earlier. I did not realize how impressive Lance and Fields are throwing the ball. And we know what they can with their legs. Jones did not look nearly as dynamic or athletic. So I definitely feel that SF is trading up to get Fields or Lance as a backup for now.

Lastly, having listened to the conference I have to change my opinion that trading all of that to get one of those 2 QBs is a stupid trade. They explained their rationale and I think it is well reasoned.

I realize that many people here like to knock SF and there are legitimate hard feelings going back to the Rodgers draft. But, while what then HC Nolan did was ridiculous, it is not the same regime now. I don't think SF operates on biases regarding Cal or stupid tricks to reveal hidden character flaws. I think they are trying to make the team better and I don't think they let anyone or anything, including unnecessary power trips get in the way. They have a philosophy of inclusion, meaning that they don't make a lot of top down decisions or impulsive decisions. Each major decision involves extensive and repetitive discussions including multiple people across the organization. They carefully evaluate the pros and cons of any decision and the timing of it. Additionally they are well respected as an organization and well liked by players. It is why they were able to retain so many of their players.

Furthermore, they recently picked up Alex Mack and don't be surprised if they acquire Mitchell Schwartz as well.

This particular decision (the trade to #3) was in the works with Miami going back to early March. They went in knowing that they would have to pay a premium. But they also wanted to jump ahead of the competition. They wanted to make this trade because of 3 major concerns:

• That Jimmy G, while adequate as a starter, is injury prone and the backups are not an adequate replacement.
• That this particular draft is projected to be the best draft in the next few years for grabbing a top quality QB
• That there would be a run on QBs early in the draft because there are several teams desperate for a starting QB and hence there would not be a QB at pick #12 because other teams would trade up to grab one.

Because of these 3 major concerns and the fact that SF was able to affordably re-sign most of their key players, making their needs for future draft picks less important than it would have and because they like Jimmy G. and feel his offseason is going well, the 49ers pushed most of their chips in and went for it.

Obviously it would have been a better trade if they did not give up as much or if they got pick #2 instead. But that wasn't going to happen so they did the next best thing.

When I look at it in that way, which is the way they described it, I have more confidence than ever that SF is in good hands.

To be clear, I am a 49er fan but not a 49er apologist. I have been very critical of them and various players. And I think they need to do something about their RT Mike McGlinchy. But I am confident that they know that as much or better than I do and I'm confident that they are working on it as well as any other remaining weaknesses.

Back in January, when rumors about Jimmy G. getting traded first started. I echoed what Lynch said then, that SF did need to improve at the QB position, but that could just mean improving the back-up. That has been the consistent position SF has held since.

It may seem ridiculous to do all this for a back-up until you realize that, had SF had Lance or Fields backing up Garappolo in 2020 instead of Mullins and Beatherd, SF would have won more games and probably would have made the playoffs. They lost 3 games to teams in the miserable NFC East that were winnable. And there were other winnable games as well. So, in SFs case, the quality of the back-up makes the difference between playoffs and last place.

The entire history of the NFL is a lesson in the impact of losing a starting QB to injury. Most teams take that seriously but most do it by upgrading the starting QB. Very few address it by upgrading the back-up QB. Still, either one can be critical.

I remember in 1970, George Blanda helped the Oakland Raiders to the playoffs several times after backing up injured starting QB Daryle Lamonica. He did similar things in later years backing up QB Kenny Stabler. He did all of that in his 40s with limited mobility and fighting his own injuries.

While Blanda was a rare bird, playing professional football over 4 decades, he is just one example of a great back-up. Let's not forget that Tom Brady started as Drew Bledsoe's back up. And, when Bledsoe got hurt, Brady's amazing and historic career began.

While drafting a QB early in the draft has less than a 50% chance of working out, the 49ers are not depending on their draft pick to be the answer or the starter. They only need their QB draft pick to able to make the difference between winning and losing the close games that Mullins lost last year by throwing interceptions and/or fumbling. Both Fields and Lance are historically good at protecting the ball. So, with that under consideration, I think the upside of this trade is greater than the downside.

And I think it will be Fields or Lance. I don't think SF even knows who it will be yet. And I think they will continue to evaluate and deliberate on all 4 of the top 5 QBs not taken #1 overall. That is why they made the trade when they did--so they would have a month to do that.

The upshot is, while this would have been a stupid trade to make for a QB that they were relying on to be their immediate starter, it makes sense for a team that is basically one good back-up QB away from the playoffs and maybe the SB.

---

Forget Schwartz. They are fully stocked at OT with Coleman returning after opting out last season.