Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

REPORT: 49ers Interested With Fournette At #2


Saca312

Recommended Posts

He's like the 5th guy they've came out and said they like at #2.  They need a QB badly.  They need help on the D.

Hyde is one of the top players they have (when healthy). So don't see them going RB round 1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, DaveThePanther2008 said:

They just said that the Notre Dame QB Kizer blew them away.   It would be a major gamble to let him try and make round 2.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000788907/article/john-lynch-deshone-kizer-blew-49ers-away-in-interview

    It's starting. If you don't have a QB, you're not really building your team. If an owner asks you "Are you planning on taking one of these QBs with our pick?", and you say no, what's the plan? Well, we hope to suck enough to get one next year with all the same issues. And if we don't suck bad enough, we will probably have to trade up to get one. Oh, and that puts us another year behind schedule. And you will probably fire me by year 3.

   I think at least two go before our pick. Plus, I think SF is trying hard for Cousins. If that happens, it puts WASH in that spot needing a QB badly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, ncfan said:

He's like the 5th guy they've came out and said they like at #2.  They need a QB badly.  They need help on the D.

Hyde is one of the top players they have (when healthy). So don't see them going RB round 1

The 9ers are not going to get better in a year. If they pick RB or QB they will still be picking top 10 next year and Fournette is better than any QB prospect IMO. SF also could trade for Romo and use him as a manager with Fournette and Hyde.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I doubt they do it but honestly I don't care if they do. If he isn't there at 8 someone else we need elsewhere will be. We will get a stud player in any event. Honestly I think Fournette is getting overhyped given he has an injury issue. He might be another Stewart honestly.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=/amp/s/www.seccountry.com/lsu/source-lsu-rb-leonard-fournettes-ankle-injury-a-chronic-problem/amp&ved=0ahUKEwjrz-KGsrrSAhVHQiYKHQn3C50QFggzMAM&usg=AFQjCNHWm7SNgSvC8Ba928nt_IjybZGHfg&sig2=xjDIyJrGmHJUYrLptP3QEg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, panthers55 said:

I doubt they do it but honestly I don't care if they do. If he isn't there at 8 someone else we need elsewhere will be. We will get a stud player in any event. Honestly I think Fournette is getting overhyped given he has an injury issue. He might be another Stewart honestly.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=/amp/s/www.seccountry.com/lsu/source-lsu-rb-leonard-fournettes-ankle-injury-a-chronic-problem/amp&ved=0ahUKEwjrz-KGsrrSAhVHQiYKHQn3C50QFggzMAM&usg=AFQjCNHWm7SNgSvC8Ba928nt_IjybZGHfg&sig2=xjDIyJrGmHJUYrLptP3QEg

When you have to break down scenarios where he falls two things will happen. Either we pass on him or he will no be there because he was that good. I'm hope we can snag McCaffrey in the 2nd by some chance. He would be awesome for what you need in the NFL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who cares?  If they take Fournete and Browns take a QB, this would be awesome for us.

Myles Garrett, Jamal Adams, Malik Hooker, Solomon Thomas, Jonathan Allen

It would guarantee we will have a chance to get one of those players at #8 (assuming someone takes Lattimore or someone else not currently being mocked to go in the top 10, which always happens).  Would losing Fournette suck?  I guess... depending on how much you like the guy.  But I'd be happy as hell to snatch up a top pass rusher or safety.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, DaveThePanther2008 said:

The majority of the defense up and retired after Harbaugh left.   SF knows they have to have a defense.   I think they'll go QB or Defense. 

QB is a super dicy game this year. If you are a QB guru head coach and are trying not to get fired after a year, a RB that can manage a game might be a better pick. There are more Blane Gabberts this year than anything else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Snake said:

QB is a super dicy game this year. If you are a QB guru head coach and are trying not to get fired after a year, a RB that can manage a game might be a better pick. There are more Blane Gabberts this year than anything else.

Well Shanahan is supposed to be that QB guru.   The Carolina QB would be a god pick.   I could also see Washington doing a sign and trade deal with Cousins.

I think this is nothing more than smoke and mirrors.

Let's not forget Lynch is a HOF safety.  Adams could be too much for him to Overlook.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Snake said:

QB is a super dicy game this year. If you are a QB guru head coach and are trying not to get fired after a year, a RB that can manage a game might be a better pick. There are more Blane Gabberts this year than anything else.

They already have a good RB, they need other skill players like TE/ WR/ or go defense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, cam1uvrxoxo said:

This report makes it clear

 

We need to trade up for the #2 pick. We NEED Fournette for a Super Bowl, no other way to slice it

And this is exactly what the 49ers are hoping to rope another GM into thinking. 

Game. Blouses. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Congratulations do they know who the father is?
    • In my opinion Fitterer was probably right about not paying McCaffrey. Now not wanting to "pay RBs" in my opinion isn't something you want to set in stone, to me it all comes down to the individual.
    • Maybe I'm just not understanding, but everywhere that I have read says that signing bonuses go against the cap prorated by as much as five years. The following example uses Andrew Luck's rookie contract as an example. "Take Andrew Luck, the first overall pick in the 2012 NFL draft. Luck signed a four-year contract with the Colts worth $22.1 million and included a $14.5 million signing bonus. Rather than a $14.5 million cap hit in 2012, the Colts spread out his signing bonus over the life of his contract. The hit against the cap would be $3.625 million per year over four years instead of a direct cap hit of $14.5 million directly in 2012. This gave the Colts more leverage and cap flexibility in signing other players." https://www.the33rdteam.com/nfl-signing-bonuses-explained/ I don't know why some of you think that signing bonuses aren't counted against the cap over the length of the contract, but whatever.   "The bonus with a signing is usually the most garish aspect of a rookie contract. Bonus is the immediate cash players receive when they ink a deal. It factors into the cap, but only for the whole contract duration, in terms of salary cap calculations. In the case of Bryce Young’s $24.6 million signing bonus, that’s prorated to approximately $6.15 million per season over a four-year deal. This format allows teams to handle the cap and provides rookies with some short-term fiscal stability, which is important given the high injury risk in this league." https://collegefootballnetwork.com/how-rookie-contracts-work-in-the-nfl/ I understand how signing bonuses can be a useful tool in order to manage the cap, and as one of the article suggests, signing bonuses may become important if you have a tight cap, but the bill is always going to come due. I'm not necessarily referring to you Tuka, but it seems to me that others simply don't want to understand that fact which is why they're reacting to what I'm saying negatively. How odd. In any event, I have a better general understanding of why signing bonuses are used now, and it's generally to fit salaries under the cap. Surely players, whether they be rookies or not, love a signing bonus because they get a good portion of their money up front. This in turn gives them more security and probably amounts to tax benefits as well. I also understand why teams would not want to use signing bonuses, particularly for players or draftees who have a higher probability of being gone before a contract even ends.
×
×
  • Create New...