The Josh Jacobs Decision

[true2form]

33 minutes ago, big_palooka said:

You keep craping on the roster and while it's a work in process Adams, Renfrow and Meyers are a top 5-7 WR unit in the league. TE is solid. Jacobs is a top 5 back in the league (and will be back when the money kicks in). Kolton Miller is a top 7-10 LT.

This roster looks better than at any point in the last 5 years easily. 

I've had that same thought a few times in the last 5 years.  Each year we ended up in the same place with a pretty good offense, a porous defense, an average record, and a little drama to a lot of drama. 

I'm really starting to think that the only reason that some people are positive is because Carr is gone.  He was the lone problem in their eyes when he was here and now that he's gone everything is better.

That's still a blind way of looking at things.

 

[bucksavage1]

The Team showing early signs of improvement and life for positions we struggle in and the last remnants of the Carr troop comes flying in with negativity pointing to past teams

 

LOL I swear there’s people just hoping to watch this team fail

[NCOUGHMAN]

46 minutes ago, big_palooka said:

Why ask a redundant question? Obviously the roster is still a work in progress and 11 wins is a lot to come by in the AFC. 

Cause you doing your classic bp flip flop play both sides of the fence thing.
 

Kolt a top 7-10? iirc you were on the kolt being overrated side? I could be wrong tho I’m getting old

[BackinBlack]

1 hour ago, NYRaider said:

But if their team was so great and Jimmy is so mid like you’ve said then why does he have the 7th best win % in nfl history? And why is Shanahan’s career record terrible without him? 

The Niners got better without Jimmy the last two seasons. 
I believe one of youre favorite quotes of old was, stop living in the past. 

The niners, and Shanahan, got better last season when jimmy went down.

[BackinBlack]

20 minutes ago, bucksavage1 said:

The Team showing early signs of improvement and life for positions we struggle in and the last remnants of the Carr troop comes flying in with negativity pointing to past teams

 

LOL I swear there’s people just hoping to watch this team fail

This was literally you last seson lol, now sitting pretending to be all hollier than thou lol. 

I only see one person who legit thinks we are now a bottom feeder. 
A lot of the critics of the team, are just not sold on the D which has been bad for 20 years. 

It was labeled as an excuse, for the Carr 'haters' but its just a concern about the team. IT has nothing to do with who is playing QB. 

Unless our D steps up big time, we will struggle to get above .500

[raidr4life]

5 minutes ago, BackinBlack said:

The Niners got better without Jimmy the last two seasons. 
I believe one of youre favorite quotes of old was, stop living in the past. 

The niners, and Shanahan, got better last season when jimmy went down.

Lol they got better when they got McCaffery and Jimmy played one game with him I believe.

[BackinBlack]

Just now, raidr4life said:

Lol they got better when they got McCaffery and Jimmy played one game with him I believe.

oh, so players on the team do matter? 
I thought only win % matters?

Im confused now, JIMMY is the 7th hgihest %, not his team, or rb. . . just jimmy I thought. . .
why does mccaffery matter? they were what 4-3 with Jimym and 10-0 with Purdy?

IF you say of course he matters, then is it not fair to question if having  the #1 D also helped his win percentage?

[raidr4life]

10 minutes ago, BackinBlack said:

oh, so players on the team do matter? 
I thought only win % matters?

Im confused now, JIMMY is the 7th hgihest %, not his team, or rb. . . just jimmy I thought. . .
why does mccaffery matter? they were what 4-3 with Jimym and 10-0 with Purdy?

IF you say of course he matters, then is it not fair to question if having  the #1 D also helped his win percentage?

Lmao what you smoking, they were 7-3 with Jimmy before he got hurt, Purdy went 5-0 not 10-0. Yeah you should get your facts straight before trying to argue. And yeah Jimmy probably could have went 5-0 down the stretch with the addition of all pro McCaffery because that's how it works bro you add more fire power good things tend to happen.

Edited August 11, 2023 by raidr4life

[BackinBlack]

1 minute ago, raidr4life said:

Lmao what you smoking, they were 7-3 with Jimmy before he got hurt, Purdy went 5-0 not 10-0. Yeah you should get your facts straight before trying to argue. And yeah Jimmy probably could have went 5-0 down the stretch with the addition of all pro McCaffery because that's how it works bro you add more fire power good things tend to happen.

lol damn, dont know why i thought that my bad. 
still, they got better without him. 

and ok glad we agree, winning is a team thing, not a qb thing. Better weapons make the game easier. 
Jimmy wont have the #1 D most likely anymore. 
At the moment, no more all pro RB. 
No more elite TE

Has the best WR in the NFL, but still could argue, niners O is more potent than ours, especially without Jacobs. 

[BackinBlack]

to summerize, I was answering the question of, how can the niners be so good while jimmy being mid with the 7th highest win percentage. 
I was implying the team was very good. 

are you saying that I cant compare Purdys win percentage to Jimmys, because Purdy had a better team? 

Do you see the problem with now arguing that lol? 
You, and others, have been ignoring the team aspect the whole time. 
But now saying it matters when against your point? 

[raidr4life]

25 minutes ago, BackinBlack said:

lol damn, dont know why i thought that my bad. 
still, they got better without him. 

and ok glad we agree, winning is a team thing, not a qb thing. Better weapons make the game easier. 
Jimmy wont have the #1 D most likely anymore. 
At the moment, no more all pro RB. 
No more elite TE

Has the best WR in the NFL, but still could argue, niners O is more potent than ours, especially without Jacobs. 

You need a QB who doesn't suck in the redzone. Your claim the niners got better with out Jimmy the last 2 seasons is false period and you want to forget about all the wins, before the all pro RB. They literally went 1-1 without Jimmy in 2021.

Purdy 5-0 with McCaffery 

Jimmy 5-1

Before Purdy Shanahan didn't win with any other QB when Garappolo was out.

Edited August 11, 2023 by raidr4life

[raidr4life]

3 minutes ago, BackinBlack said:

to summerize, I was answering the question of, how can the niners be so good while jimmy being mid with the 7th highest win percentage. 
I was implying the team was very good. 

are you saying that I cant compare Purdys win percentage to Jimmys, because Purdy had a better team? 

Do you see the problem with now arguing that lol? 
You, and others, have been ignoring the team aspect the whole time. 
But now saying it matters when against your point? 

I haven't ignored the team aspect at all, been saying our defense is bad and all that but I can also see when a QB doesn't have it. 

[BackinBlack]

5 minutes ago, raidr4life said:

You need a QB who doesn't suck in the redzone. Your claim the niners got better with out Jimmy is false period and you want to forget about all the wins, before the all pro RB.

Purdy 5-0 with McCaffery 

Jimmy 5-1

Before Purdy Shanahan didn't win with any other QB when Garappolo was out.

I agree with needing a qb who doesnt suck in the redzone. 

Truthfully, im not the one who is forgetting about "all the wins" im saying 7-3, you are saying 5-1, if anything you are trying to hide the losses, as 5-1 is better than 7-3.

We seem to be stuck, if you cant say that the niners record got better with purdy, 5-0 vs 7-3, but will continue to cling to win percentages as to why jimmy is the best. (excpet for Purdy, because he had the better team. Everyone else has had equal teams to Jimmy so you can compare their w/l records. But dont you dare do it to Purdy and Jimmy! thats just unfair!)
 

 

5 minutes ago, raidr4life said:

I haven't ignored the team aspect at all, been saying our defense is bad and all that but I can also see when a QB doesn't have it. 

As long as youre basing that on the QBs play and not W/L i have no problem with it! 
 

[raidr4life]

4 minutes ago, BackinBlack said:

I agree with needing a qb who doesnt suck in the redzone. 

Truthfully, im not the one who is forgetting about "all the wins" im saying 7-3, you are saying 5-1, if anything you are trying to hide the losses, as 5-1 is better than 7-3.

We seem to be stuck, if you cant say that the niners record got better with purdy, 5-0 vs 7-3, but will continue to cling to win percentages as to why jimmy is the best. (excpet for Purdy, because he had the better team. Everyone else has had equal teams to Jimmy so you can compare their w/l records. But dont you dare do it to Purdy and Jimmy! thats just unfair!)
 

 

As long as youre basing that on the QBs play and not W/L i have no problem with it! 
 

Lmao  I said Jimmy was 7-3 before he got hurt however with the addition of McCaffery he was 5-1.

Purdy was 5-0 with McCaffery in his small sample size, so with all things even it's pretty close.  Purdy hasn't played without the all pro RB so unless you can say Purdy would have went 8-2 or better in the first 10 games where Jimmy went 7-3 is he really better? Meanwhile we have picked Purdy off like 4 times already.

[BackinBlack]

Just now, raidr4life said:

Lmao  I said Jimmy was 7-3 before he got hurt however with the addition of McCaffery he was 5-1.

Purdy was 5-0 with McCaffery in his small sample size, so with all things even it's pretty close.  Purdy hasn't played without the all pro RB so unless you can say Purdy would have went 8-2 or better in the first 10 games where Jimmy went 7-3 is he really better? Meanwhile we have picked Purdy off like 4 times already.

my man, what you are doing right now, is the same as saying 
"so unless you can say Carr would have went 8-2 or better in the first 10 games where Jimmy went 7-3 is he really better"

It is why, I have always said, using win losses as an arguement isnt the end all be all, because its always different circumstances. 

I appreciate you making my point, that wins losses arent a great way at saying which qb is better.