call me crazy but....

[49ers2015]

I get it with Jimmy, but we need to look at the flip side. Last year was a disaster without him right? 

He's growing and will continue to grow. Do I like all of his decisions...no. However, when needed he comes through. 

I said these on another topic but look at Aikman. In fact, let's look at his 92 stats from the SB year in the first 7 games:

Looks similar no? My point is let us put faith that he will improve and things at the QB can be way worse. 

 

WK	Game Date	Opp	Result	G	GS	Comp	Att	Pct	Yds	Avg	TD	Int	Sck	SckY	Rate	Att	Yds	Avg	TD	FUM	Lost
1	09/07	WAS	W   23-10	1	1	18	31	58.1	216	7.0	1	2	0	0	63.4	8	21	2.6	0	--	--
2	09/13	@ NYG	W   34-28	1	1	22	35	62.9	238	6.8	2	0	2	9	101.8	2	8	4.0	0	--	--
3	09/20	PHO	W   31-20	1	1	14	21	66.7	263	12.5	3	0	0	0	149.3	1	8	8.0	0	--	--
4	Bye			--	--	--	--	--	--	--	--	--	--	--	0.0	--	--	--	--	--	--
5	10/05	@ PHI	L   7-31	1	1	19	38	50.0	256	6.7	1	3	4	25	47.7	--	--	--	--	--	--
6	10/11	SEA	W   27-0	1	1	15	23	65.2	173	7.5	0	2	1	3	51.5	1	19	19.0	0	--	--
7	10/18	KC	W   17-10	1	1	21	29	72.4	192	6.6	1	2	1	9	72.8	--	--	--	--	--	--

Edited October 30, 2019 by 49ers2015

[TecmoSuperJoe]

54 minutes ago, Pandomonium said:

a QB that averages a at least one turnover a game isn't a glaring issue?

Meh. There have been some lackluster quarterbacks that have won chips. Worse than Jimmy has played thus far. Eli Manning in 2007 was horrendous. Joe Flacco was nothing special in 2012. They got hot in the playoffs, true. Few thought that would be possible at the time though. Why can't Jimmy do the same? Tony Banks and Trent Dilfer were unwatchable in 2000. Expired Peyton Manning and Brock Osweiler were good enough for a monster defense to win. There is still plenty of football left to be played. The team is 7-0. Here is Jimmy's projected base stats at the end of 16 starts:

3403 passing yards

7.9 average

21 TDs

16 INTs

93.5 rating 

22 sacks at 5.5%.

For a QB coming off an ACL injury, that's not horrible. Sanders just arrived too, and the team is getting other players back. No one knows what will happen, but at this point in time how things are going, I don't think there is a reason to be more pessimistic than optimistic. 

Edited October 30, 2019 by PapaShogun

[TecmoSuperJoe]

47 minutes ago, Pandomonium said:

This right here,
I don't think Jimmy has to be elite for us to win it all but he damn sure has to stop making stupid throws that cause interceptions. and he DOES make stupid throws at least 2 or 3 times a game with usually at least one of them winding up being a pick.

757 Is basically elaborating on my point. 
I don't feel confident enough in Jimmy yet to win a game for us. So far, we haven't had to ask him to do it because of our defense and our run game. but God forbid, one day neither one of those comes through for us and its all on his shoulders.

 

Don't you remember that 5 game stint in 2017 when Jimmy was looking like Warren Moon with scrubs? That's not normal. Even if you want to say it was two years ago, at least Jimmy is still a relatively young "has been" than a "never was". Maybe he's not a future superstar, but I'll put money down that he won't be the problem if the 49ers don't win it all this year. 

[757-NINER]

5 minutes ago, 49ers2015 said:

I get it with Jimmy, but we need to look at the flip side. Last year was a disaster without him right? 

He's growing and will continue to grow. Do I like all of his decisions...no. However, when needed he comes through. 

I said these on another topic but look at Aikman. In fact, let's look at his 92 stats from the SB year in the first 7 games:

Looks similar no? My point is let us put faith that he will improve and things at the AB can be way worse. 

 

WK	Game Date	Opp	Result	G	GS	Comp	Att	Pct	Yds	Avg	TD	Int	Sck	SckY	Rate	Att	Yds	Avg	TD	FUM	Lost
1	09/07	WAS	W   23-10	1	1	18	31	58.1	216	7.0	1	2	0	0	63.4	8	21	2.6	0	--	--
2	09/13	@ NYG	W   34-28	1	1	22	35	62.9	238	6.8	2	0	2	9	101.8	2	8	4.0	0	--	--
3	09/20	PHO	W   31-20	1	1	14	21	66.7	263	12.5	3	0	0	0	149.3	1	8	8.0	0	--	--
4	Bye			--	--	--	--	--	--	--	--	--	--	--	0.0	--	--	--	--	--	--
5	10/05	@ PHI	L   7-31	1	1	19	38	50.0	256	6.7	1	3	4	25	47.7	--	--	--	--	--	--
6	10/11	SEA	W   27-0	1	1	15	23	65.2	173	7.5	0	2	1	3	51.5	1	19	19.0	0	--	--
7	10/18	KC	W   17-10	1	1	21	29	72.4	192	6.6	1	2	1	9	72.8	--	--	--	--	--	--

The thing is, this isn't 1992 anymore. The game has changed. Is a great defense and a stout running game enough to win it all in todays game?? The Rams were in a similar position last year. Then Gurley got hurt, they couldn't run the ball effectively and their offense came to a stretching halt against a great defense in the Pats. And that defense is even better this year. So while I realize would could ride the defense and running game to get there. Eventually we're going to face a defense that will neutralize the our run. And then it will be on Jimmy's shoulders to deliver. Will he or will he pull a Goff?? That is the question.

[y2lamanaki]

32 minutes ago, Pandomonium said:

a QB that averages a at least one turnover a game isn't a glaring issue?

Thank you for elaborating, and no - it isn't. Teams have turnovers. Great teams overcome them.

2018 - Through 7 games in the regular season, Tom Brady had 7 INTs (same as Garoppolo this year). In the playoffs, he averaged one turnover a game. He didn't have the level of defense or run game we currently have. In fact, since our defense currently compares favorably with the 2000 Ravens, the best defense this century, it should be understood that it will always be the case in all of these.

2016 - Brady was incredible in the regular season, but averaged 1 turnover per game in the playoffs when the games counted.

2015 - Peyton Manning averaged 2 turnovers per game in the regular season and was so bad that he was left on the bench for Brock Osweiler, even when he returned to health. He only had one turnover in the playoffs, but the defense carried that team to a title.

2014 - Tom Brady averaged over 1 turnover per game in the playoffs. 

2012 - Joe Flacco averaged 1 turnover per game in the first 7 games of the season and miraculously had none in the playoffs. 

2011 - Eli Manning averaged 1 turnover per game in the first 7 games of the season but managed to stay under that in the playoffs. 

2010 - Rodgers averaged over 1 turnover per game in the first 7 games of the season, but managed only 2 in 4 games in the playoffs. 

 

So, the two quarterbacks who didn't look like Jimmy through 7 games nor averaged one turnover a game in the playoffs were Nick Foles in 2017 (who didn't play 7 regular season games) and Russell Wilson in 2013. 

Again, none of those teams have the defense that we do. Our defense allows fewer than 3 points per game off turnovers. None of those teams even come close to approaching our running game. And that's not even really a projection. We may pass some of those teams' rushing totals for the season in our next game or two. 

Two things that work well for teams in the playoffs- strong running games and defenses. And as for turnovers, if Joe Flacco and Eli Manning can cut back when it matters, then really anyone can. 

So no - Jimmy Garoppolo's one INT per game through 7 regular season games doesn't concern me in the slightest, especially when we are outscoring teams by an average score of 29.6 - 11.

[49ers2015]

31 minutes ago, 757-NINER said:

The thing is, this isn't 1992 anymore. The game has changed. Is a great defense and a stout running game enough to win it all in todays game?? The Rams were in a similar position last year. Then Gurley got hurt, they couldn't run the ball effectively and their offense came to a stretching halt against a great defense in the Pats. And that defense is even better this year. So while I realize would could ride the defense and running game to get there. Eventually we're going to face a defense that will neutralize the our run. And then it will be on Jimmy's shoulders to deliver. Will he or will he pull a Goff?? That is the question.

Understood. But what are we exactly wanting out of Jimmy? Just eliminating the one bad throw per game? Then what after that? If you take away the INT's then you still have mediocre stats. So do we want more stats? 

Last year when he went down..everybody had to of seen his value no?

[Chrissooner49er]

12 minutes ago, 49ers2015 said:

 

Last year when he went down..everybody had to of seen his value no?

Uh, most definitely! Mullens was fun to watch, but he is not Jimmy G. A good fill-in/back-up, but he cannot replace Jimmy long term.

Really, going 4-12 and getting the 2nd overall pick was a windfall or blessing or whatever you want to call it. A perfect storm of events led up to getting Bosa from the draft and Ford via FA. We had the rest. But some of those events were facilitated because of Jimmy G's injury. Who would have thought anything good could come from that?!

[Forge]

2 hours ago, Pandomonium said:

this is one, but not the biggest, 
the fact that we turn over the ball WAY too much is the biggest.

We still have the 6th best turnover margin on a per game basis in the NFL, I believe. Its only a problem if we cease creating turnovers, and one of those games, out of 7, saw us turn the ball over five times, which is a massive outlier and unlikely to be replicated. Even with that game, we are still only middle of the pack in turnovers as well. 

I'm far more concerned about the lack of redzone inefficiency than I am the turnovers at the current point in time. 

[y2lamanaki]

I think what is ultimately happening with this fan base is that there were three types of thoughts heading into the season:

-Group A: This is a playoff team that might win a game in the playoffs, but is a year away from truly contending.

-Group B: This is a fringe team that might go 8-8 or 9-7, but will likely miss the playoffs. 

-Group C: This team might be improved, but judging from last season it's still a team with a lot of holes and question marks. 6 or 7 wins is at least a step in the right direction. 

 

And after 4 games, we were all able to progress a little. 

Group A: Yeah, why can't we contend? Whose flaws are fewer than ours?

Group B: Better than I thought. Maybe the playoffs are a real possibility. 

Group C: Those flaws are going to really show later in the year, but maybe 8 or 9 wins should be the ceiling.

 

And now-

Group A: This is a championship-caliber team. Everything we pointed to before the year as reasons we could make the playoffs are even better than we thought. 

Group B: It's clearly a playoff bound team. Maybe we could make a real run. I'm cautiously optimistic. 

Group C: We might be playoff bound, but those warts still exist and we won't beat those good teams because of them.

 

The good news is, after 16 games, I think we'll all catch up. 

[J-ALL-DAY]

I don't totally disagree that turnovers are an issue. They are, and against other top teams that do a better job at protecting the ball, it can be the difference between winning a close one or losing a close one.

But I'm fine with the turnovers since Jimmy G is a bit of a risk taker.......However, we haven't produced nearly as much big plays through the passing game where you can be fine with an occasional INT here or there. Some of his INTs are bad decisions, others just possibly some bad luck. 

The lack of big plays in the passing game is a concern though. That needs to correct itself, especially when we play teams that can slow our run game, like the Rams did a few weeks back.

Lack of WRs stepping up is another potential concern. I say potential concern because we simply don't pass it enough so not a lot of opportunities are given to them. But when they do get limited opportunities, the results have been a mixed bag. 

[Chrissooner49er]

4 minutes ago, y2lamanaki said:

I think what is ultimately happening with this fan base is that there were three types of thoughts heading into the season:

-Group A: This is a playoff team that might win a game in the playoffs, but is a year away from truly contending.

-Group B: This is a fringe team that might go 8-8 or 9-7, but will likely miss the playoffs. 

-Group C: This team might be improved, but judging from last season it's still a team with a lot of holes and question marks. 6 or 7 wins is at least a step in the right direction. 

 

And after 4 games, we were all able to progress a little. 

Group A: Yeah, why can't we contend? Whose flaws are fewer than ours?

Group B: Better than I thought. Maybe the playoffs are a real possibility. 

Group C: Those flaws are going to really show later in the year, but maybe 8 or 9 wins should be the ceiling.

 

And now-

Group A: This is a championship-caliber team. Everything we pointed to before the year as reasons we could make the playoffs are even better than we thought. 

Group B: It's clearly a playoff bound team. Maybe we could make a real run. I'm cautiously optimistic. 

Group C: We might be playoff bound, but those warts still exist and we won't beat those good teams because of them.

 

The good news is, after 16 games, I think we'll all catch up. 

I am so Group A, every step of that stated progression. It's like you read my mind! Creepy.

[oldman9er]

8 minutes ago, y2lamanaki said:

The good news is, after 16 games, I think we'll all catch up. 

For me, and at this point...it really just comes down to 1 lone question.

Are we looking like a legit playoff candidate?

I think every single person should believe the answer is a hell yes... (and it's certainly their prerogative to not)

 ... yet IF every answer is a hell yes? Then kick the skepticism and worry off the cliff. That's poison to your soul. 

 

... and that's all I want. I want, year to year, to be a strong playoff contender. We all know that getting a seed doesn't mean you will win out. What getting that seed does mean? is that you are typically a good team, and have mostly enjoyed a good season. That makes me  and the rest will sort itself out later. 

[Pandomonium]

18 minutes ago, y2lamanaki said:

I think what is ultimately happening with this fan base is that there were three types of thoughts heading into the season:

-Group A: This is a playoff team that might win a game in the playoffs, but is a year away from truly contending.

-Group B: This is a fringe team that might go 8-8 or 9-7, but will likely miss the playoffs. 

-Group C: This team might be improved, but judging from last season it's still a team with a lot of holes and question marks. 6 or 7 wins is at least a step in the right direction. 

 

And after 4 games, we were all able to progress a little. 

Group A: Yeah, why can't we contend? Whose flaws are fewer than ours?

Group B: Better than I thought. Maybe the playoffs are a real possibility. 

Group C: Those flaws are going to really show later in the year, but maybe 8 or 9 wins should be the ceiling.

 

And now-

Group A: This is a championship-caliber team. Everything we pointed to before the year as reasons we could make the playoffs are even better than we thought. 

Group B: It's clearly a playoff bound team. Maybe we could make a real run. I'm cautiously optimistic. 

Group C: We might be playoff bound, but those warts still exist and we won't beat those good teams because of them.

 

The good news is, after 16 games, I think we'll all catch up. 

put me in group B

 

[y2lamanaki]

22 minutes ago, J-ALL-DAY said:

The lack of big plays in the passing game is a concern though.

I don't share in this concern. I think this is a psychological thing where it looks like there are a lack of big plays because of his yardage totals, but that's because we go up so quickly that we're no longer throwing the ball by the end of the 3rd quarter. 

Here's Garoppolo's pass attempts by quarter this season:

1st: 52 (we typically defer and kick first)

2nd: 64

3rd: 50 (we typically get the ball first this quarter)

4th: 23

 

The 49ers are dead last in 4th quarter pass plays (24 in total) and it's not even close. The Vikings are 31st with 43 and New England is 30th with 50. The 49ers are the only team in the league to run fewer than 100 second half pass plays. We've run 77 (Jimmy's attempts plus 4 sacks). The next closest team is the Raiders with 103.

It only looks like we are unable to move the ball in the air because we have yet to have a real need to do it. And there's some definite "let's not put Jimmy in harm's way" without both starting tackles in there as well. 

Jimmy is currently on pace for 432 pass attempts on the year. That's a very low number in today's NFL. That number jumps up to 530 if you prorate only the first half numbers. 

 

Have some faith, friends. Jimmy and the passing game will be there when it's needed.

[y2lamanaki]

28 minutes ago, Chrissooner49er said:

I am so Group A, every step of that stated progression. It's like you read my mind! Creepy.

Same, which is why it was the easiest to describe. 

But I like @oldman9er's philosophy. Let's make sure we all enjoy the ride.