San Darnold signs with the 49ers

[Mr. Scot]

2 minutes ago, mav1234 said:

Darnold is at best a #2.  Signing him tells me they're long term banking on Purdy getting healthy as their answer. Otherwise maybe they try to go for a better backup.

Lance may not even be a #2, at least right now. He has looked the worst of the starting QBs on the niners.

The 49ers are good enough a #2 can look very good.

Dumping him this soon  after what they gave up to get him would be a huge moment of "Yikes"

[CRA]

 

 

51 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

The only thing I could comfortably say I know Darnold to be is a nice guy.

I am curious to see how he functions in Shanahan's offense though, partially because I don't think Brock Purdy is some diamond in the rough that everybody missed on. He just played well within the system.

Maybe Darnold can do that too.

think Brock worked so well because he has it between the ears.  Put a guy like that around crazy talent and good things just happen.    He processes things quick and does the right thing.   He reportedly had a crazy good cognitive test too coming in.  It's not like he was molded into it. 

That makes him basically the anti-Darnold.   That's what has always held Sam back.   

I think Sam Darnold's role is to be a good vet to come in and be a healthy arm/body to get ready for next season.   That's it.  That seems to jive w/ the contract.  Taylor Heinicke out their fetching much better deals than Sam at this point. 

[kungfoodude]

1 hour ago, Mr. Scot said:

The only thing I could comfortably say I know Darnold to be is a nice guy.

I am curious to see how he functions in Shanahan's offense though, partially because I don't think Brock Purdy is some diamond in the rough that everybody missed on. He just played well within the system.

Maybe Darnold can do that too.

He might perform better than he did here but he is still a fundamentally terrible QB. Purdy is leagues better than him.

[kungfoodude]

46 minutes ago, mav1234 said:

Darnold is at best a #2.  Signing him tells me they're long term banking on Purdy getting healthy as their answer. Otherwise maybe they try to go for a better backup.

Lance may not even be a #2, at least right now. He has looked the worst of the starting QBs on the niners.

The 49ers are good enough a #2 can look very good.

My guess is that Lance will start and the plan is for Purdy to be the #2. If Lance gets hurt before Purdy, returns that is basically what Darnold is for.

If Lance doesn't show he is "the guy" then Purdy will probably supplant him when he returns. 

But I highly doubt Darnold is much more than a safety net until Purdy returns.

[panthers55]

Darnold didn't fit Reich's scheme as much as Dalton did so he wasn't going to be the guy. That is fair. Reich is entitled to get his guy and do it his way. After Indy he wasn't going to make the same mistakes. Let's hope he is right and Dalton will do well in this offense so if it takes the rookie a few games to get ready we won't be in the hole already. 

[Mr. Scot]

From Albert Breer...

I guessed it might be Baker Mayfield, it wound up being Sam Darnold, but the idea, to me, remained the same in San Francisco—bring in a guy with some upside to compete with Trey Lance until Brock Purdy gets healthy. It’ll be interesting to see Darnold in Kyle Shanahan’s quarterback-friendly offense, too. A big part of the issue with him has been that he doesn’t play fast enough, which coaches think is because he thinks too much out there.

The Niners offense, conversely, takes a lot of the mental load off the quarterback (the center makes the Mike identification calls, for example). So that should help Darnold, who’s getting $4.5 million in base pay for 2023 ($1 million of that in per-game roster bonuses), with another $7 million out there in incentives for him.

Link

[PanthersGTI]

On 3/14/2023 at 2:59 PM, Mr. Scot said:

The only thing I could comfortably say I know Darnold to be is a nice guy.

I am curious to see how he functions in Shanahan's offense though, partially because I don't think Brock Purdy is some diamond in the rough that everybody missed on. He just played well within the system.

Maybe Darnold can do that too.

 

 

You know I used to think that too but there might be something to him : 

https://theathletic.com/4226466/2023/02/24/nfl-quarterbacks-s2-cognition-test/

 

He also has that "it" factor. Cool under pressure, get his teammates to rally.  I hope he can recover from the injury. 

[Mr. Scot]

5 minutes ago, PanthersGTI said:

You know I used to think that too but there might be something to him : 

https://theathletic.com/4226466/2023/02/24/nfl-quarterbacks-s2-cognition-test/

He also has that "it" factor. Cool under pressure, get his teammates to rally.  I hope he can recover from the injury. 

Either way I think it's one of those things that's more interesting to watch from a distance than to see close up

[PanthersGTI]

6 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

Either way I think it's one of those things that's more interesting to watch from a distance than to see close up

That's true. Apparently Bryce Young scored off the charts so....maybe a little relevant to the Panthers. 

[Obeg]

36 minutes ago, PanthersGTI said:

That's true. Apparently Bryce Young scored off the charts so....maybe a little relevant to the Panthers. 

Yes thanks for the link to the article.  This ending on it does push me back to the Young side of the fence for the moment..

 

[panthers55]

I don't think you can decide that a cognition test puts you over the top compared to other guys unless you have context and causality.  What are you actually measuring.? How much does that impact the ability for a QB to be successful? How much would a 10 point difference in score actually be in performance and how much does that translate to success?

IQ is positively correlated to speed of mental process but if high cognitive scores translated to QB success then why aren't there a bunch of  Ivy Leaguers playing QB who typically are very smart. Obviously like the Wonderlic any cognitive test is only useful if what you are measuring on the test is highly correlated to what you are using it for which is success as an NFL qb. In this case would the possible  increase in fast processing offset the likelihood of injury. And does fast processing matter more than athleticism or the ability to throw a ball 30 yards on a rope while falling down.

 

[Obeg]

9 minutes ago, panthers55 said:

I don't think you can decide that a cognition test puts you over the top compared to other guys unless you have context and causality.  What are you actually measuring.? How much does that impact the ability for a QB to be successful? How much would a 10 point difference in score actually be in performance and how much does that translate to success?

 

 

I would love to see the results of the QBs over the last few years and see how they have performed on the field.  All I know is I am tip-top on the fence about the top two - like most people - and if an anecdotal test separates the two by a margin - then that weighs heavy.

 

[panthers55]

50 minutes ago, Obeg said:

I would love to see the results of the QBs over the last few years and see how they have performed on the field.  All I know is I am tip-top on the fence about the top two - like most people - and if an anecdotal test separates the two by a margin - then that weighs heavy.

 

No one factor determines whether you take one guy over the other and certainly not a cognitive test with largely anecdotal evidence. The performance on the field, interviews, background checks and visits with the prospects far outweighs a score on a test with suspect validity and reliability. I have read the theory that they might like 2 guys and might want to get some picks to move back to 2 so they have to hold their cards close.