TD alt

I mean, at this point that's all he can really do. Hell, if he cries and pouted fans would be all over him more than they are.

He cares; he just sucks. His game just didn't translate to the NFL.

I said three games was our ceiling. Well...maybe not.

The Panthers' all-time, which isn't surprising.

It's so hard to watch.

I really don't think you're going to get anything more than a day 3 pick, but that's something.

I mean, we gotta get a QB...and retreads ain't gonna do it.

I mean, you must base that on positivity because that's his shtick. For me, he hasn't done a damned thing yet, except get his ass out-coached the first damned game of his head-coaching career.

This is a clear tell: bad mechanics and too short to see. No way an offense can run efficiently like that.

At this point, it's semantics; call it what you want

To me, he said a lot of good stuff, but it's still obvious that he doesn't really know what's going on with the team. "Everybody's gotta play better," is about as general as it gets. He's acting like it's last season where Bryce had nothing to work with. I believe that a decent QB could make these skill guys work.

Pie for creativity. That's on time.

Not the only benefit. The season is still young (no pun intended). If he plays himself out of the mess extending from last season, and actually begins to look like a starter, then great. If he continues to suck, then we should be willing to take the hit so that he can play us into a draft position that will bring forth his replacement (much like Pickles did when his play afforded us Cam).

QBs not named Brady or Mahomes need a talented roster. I'm not going to ding Purdy for having talent. That's crazee.

They used the hell out of Mason, more than any player that Shanahan has used ever. His productivity was great, but keep in mind that Shanahan was going against his pupil, and knew all of Sala's weaknesses. The 49ers are a smart team, and they in fact DID spend that "kind of capital" on McCaffrey. Come on, man, suggesting that any RB is the same as another one and that smart teams don't invest in RBs is kinda simplistic. McCaffrey is still their most talented player, and teams game-plan for him for a reason. We're just going to disagree on this one.

Like I said, they may not want to pay for them, but prolific RBs are still valued. Detroit drafted Gibbs, the 49ers paid CMC. Philadelphia just paid Barkley. Baltimore just acquired one of the better backs in league history. Dallas would've drafted Brooks high had it not been for the ACL tear. There is no substitute for a great back. You can try to do things on the cheap, and might get away with it if you have a prolific QB, but great RBs are still valued. Teams just don't want to pay for them for fear of them getting injured. That's why you draft them if given the opportunity. Otherwise you have to pay for them later on.

I just disagree in some respects. RBs are still valuable, and that's why several of the top teams in the NFL have either drafted one high or paid for one. It's one thing to not want to pay one after their rookie contract, and an entirely different thing to refuse to draft one high.

The football gods hate the Panthers. Until we make penance to whatever football god that we offended, all hope is lost.

And yet teams still draft RBs fairly highly all the time. It just depends on the player. If Brooks hadn't torn his ACL, he was likely going to be drafted in the first round as opposed to the second. Teams are reluctant to pay for RBs because they get hurt a lot, not because they don't have inherent value. Sure, the modern NFL puts passing at a premium, but versatile three-down backs are still valued. Sure, mobile and running QBs can take some of the pressure off of the need for star backs, but then the risk to the QB is magnified exponentially, even having possible career-ending implications, so I think that shrewd FOs realize the importance of having legit three-down backs.

We were getting out-physicaled all day long. Hopefully it's just a product of rust and lack of cohesion due to trying to develop chemistry. I have my doubts though that time will help, especially with a QB playing as bad as Bryce.

I'm with you. I just don't see that. With the likes of CMC, Barkley and perhaps a few others---and even looking historically at many guys like LT and Sweetness, a prolific three-down RB is important. If a franchise can't maximize those types of skills and parlay that into a chip, that's a team problem. And, yes, I think that Brooks has that type of upside.