turtle28 Posted November 15, 2017 Share Posted November 15, 2017 Steve Czaban on Espn 980 has a thought that the reason the 49ers aren’t playing Jimmy G and have no plan for playing him as Kyle Shanahan said is that they may offer him in a trade for Kirk Cousins in March. It seems pretty far fetched, but when you think about it, why would Kyle say they have no plan of playing Jimmy G? Obviously for this to work we would franchise or transition tag Kirk and they would franchise tag Garappolo and then each team would get something they want out of it. We would get a young marketable qb who was coached by Belicheck and learned under Tom Brady for four years to be our future at qb and we could sign him on a cheaper long term deal than what we’d have to give Cousins and Kyle and Kirk would be reunited with Garçon in San Fran to get that offense rolling! It probably won’t happen, but I guess it’s one of those “stranger things have happened” and “anything is a possibility!” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MKnight82 Posted November 15, 2017 Share Posted November 15, 2017 No. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forge Posted November 15, 2017 Share Posted November 15, 2017 8 minutes ago, turtle28 said: It probably won’t happen, but I guess it’s one of those “stranger things have happened” and “anything is a possibility!” This is my overall feeling on it. I think it's a fun little theory to have and debate on, but almost no chance at happening. I think the acrimony between Shanny and Snyder is still far too much to actually be able to be willing trade partners as well. Jimmy G will end up playing for the 49ers this year. My understanding is that Shanny's offense, and particularly the verbage, is particularly difficult and challenging. It would make sense not to play him while he's still getting up to speed. Also add in the fact that both of our starting tackles had been out until this last week as we were starting a back up center / guard at tackle and the rest of the line was just in shambles, and it made no sense to get him killed when you had a tough guy in beathard to use as a punching bag (which sounds mean as all get out, but it is what it is) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lavar703 Posted November 15, 2017 Share Posted November 15, 2017 You don't trade a second round pick for a guy you don't intend to play. As far fetched as it seems I think it's a real possibility. The whole Garrapolo situation is weird. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Draper Posted November 15, 2017 Share Posted November 15, 2017 51 minutes ago, turtle28 said: Steve Czaban on Espn 980 has a thought that the reason the 49ers aren’t playing Jimmy G and have no plan for playing him as Kyle Shanahan said is that they may offer him in a trade for Kirk Cousins in March. It seems pretty far fetched, but when you think about it, why would Kyle say they have no plan of playing Jimmy G? Obviously for this to work we would franchise or transition tag Kirk and they would franchise tag Garappolo and then each team would get something they want out of it. We would get a young marketable qb who was coached by Belicheck and learned under Tom Brady for four years to be our future at qb and we could sign him on a cheaper long term deal than what we’d have to give Cousins and Kyle and Kirk would be reunited with Garçon in San Fran to get that offense rolling! It probably won’t happen, but I guess it’s one of those “stranger things have happened” and “anything is a possibility!” why would SF do this they hold all the cards now what I could see happening is use Jimmy as a hedge in case Kirk gets an outrageous offer from say Buffalo ( ideal situation for cold weather QB like Kirk, great coach, committed to running game to set up Kirks strengths of play action passing and strong defense) as trade bait somewhere else like us for a 2. We will be desperate for a new name to market and if we don’t get a chance at Rosen or Darnold how will they get the fans to buy tickets? All in for Colt? Only if they also give us a case of Colt 45 too buddy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MKnight82 Posted November 15, 2017 Share Posted November 15, 2017 27 minutes ago, lavar703 said: You don't trade a second round pick for a guy you don't intend to play. As far fetched as it seems I think it's a real possibility. The whole Garrapolo situation is weird. They're going to play him next year. They're tanking for a higher pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeT14 Posted November 15, 2017 Share Posted November 15, 2017 darthvadernooooooooooo.jpg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MKnight82 Posted November 15, 2017 Share Posted November 15, 2017 Dan Snyder will never approve trading Cousins to Kyle Shanahan. It will never happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Draper Posted November 15, 2017 Share Posted November 15, 2017 I’m thinking he is Buffalo bound with my long shot being NE if they move Brady ( which will be a urprising but not Shocking as they sell high and buy low). Best managed team in football Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghostnote Posted November 15, 2017 Share Posted November 15, 2017 11 minutes ago, Doc Draper said: I’m thinking he is Buffalo bound with my long shot being NE if they move Brady ( which will be a urprising but not Shocking as they sell high and buy low). Best managed team in football Doc, I luv ya, but they are not getting rid of Brady until he calls it quits. Could this be something I could see happening, I guess anything is possible. They have the cap space for Cousins and could work out a long term deal in San Fran. I don't think Garoppolo is anythig to shake a stick at, but Bruce and his brain certainly think that Colt McCoy could do what Cousins has done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Draper Posted November 15, 2017 Share Posted November 15, 2017 29 minutes ago, mike23md said: Doc, I luv ya, but they are not getting rid of Brady until he calls it quits. Could this be something I could see happening, I guess anything is possible. They have the cap space for Cousins and could work out a long term deal in San Fran. I don't think Garoppolo is anythig to shake a stick at, but Bruce and his brain certainly think that Colt McCoy could do what Cousins has done. I don't think the Patriots make it to the Super Bowl this year. This is Pittsburgh's year. The Patriots win consistently and reload because they don't follow the normal safe approach. They trade players when they still have value. Think Logan Mankins, Milloy. Seymour, Welker, Collins, and Garoppolo. They may be considered heartless- but they view their players how Bill Walsh did- as assets and whats the current vs future value of the asset. You could sucker a team after the season to give a 1 for Brady and maybe even more For a 41 year old QB in 2018 for a chance to buy the potential at a Super Bowl. Youre right its a longshot, but hey Longshots sometimes come through and pay off 0ig. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MKnight82 Posted November 15, 2017 Share Posted November 15, 2017 Why would we want Garoppolo though? He isn't under contract either, and we'd be stuck in the same situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Draper Posted November 15, 2017 Share Posted November 15, 2017 our QB is either a Rosen, Darnold or Alex Smith in 18 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeT14 Posted November 15, 2017 Share Posted November 15, 2017 is this a rumor, or just speculation pulled from a butt? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Draper Posted November 15, 2017 Share Posted November 15, 2017 Interesting topic since talking about games, playoffs so depressing. My sense of this is rumor is Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.