Jimmy G. or Shanahan... Who should shoulder more of the blame?

[Battlelyon]

 

[Myles]

You'll have to show support for the "clutch situations" part. But even so, that doesn't mean he's overall bad.



When the game is already out of reach, the pick doesn't matter.



Good thing I didn't do that then. I pointed out that Mahomes is the biggest reason KC won. There are a few people above Jimmy on that list.



I don't know what you mean by "limited". I already said I'd blame Mahomes and SF's D more than him. But what does Garoppolo calling timeouts have to do with it? Shanahan was responsible for the lack of timeouts at the end of the first half. He even explained why he didn't use them. Garoppolo could have called one, but by the time they got the ball, Shanahan had already cost them over 30 seconds and made it clear they weren't doing that.



Ah, good to see you're still using your usual tactics. Tack on a legitimate thing to go with the thing you already said, in order to make it sound legitimate too.

Yes, a lot of people are criticizing Garoppolo. No, no one is comparing him to Dilfer. Again, the fact that you are doing that in all seriousness means your opinion on football is worthless.



Oh, good, another bet. They were a powerhouse team. They went 13-3 and made it to the Super Bowl (without all that much trouble against Minnesota or Green Bay). They very nearly won the Super Bowl. Padded regular season or not, that's pretty damn good.

Maybe Garoppolo isn't the guy to carry the team in such situations. Maybe he needs a good team around him that is balanced...just like he has. He can be top-12 and not be Patrick Mahomes. But we also don't know whether any of that is true. He came up big against New Orleans in NO. So, this one time he missed a few passes. That's a tiny sample size. You might want to let it play out a bit more before condemning him (even though you were condemning him for no reason 2 years ago).

Good stuff. If San Fran would have run for a first down (or even passed for a first down, the 49rs would probably won the Superbowl and JG would be the MVP. San Fran won the 1st 3 quarters and KC won the 4th quarter.
I won't be surprised if either team makes it back to the Superbowl next year. Vegas seems to agree with KC at 7-1 and San Fran at 8-1. JG had a very good season and led his team to the Superbowl. Had 1 bad quarter. Can happen to any QB.

 

[Mofo]

You'll have to show support for the "clutch situations" part. But even so, that doesn't mean he's overall bad.

I never said he was "overall bad". Just that he doesn't merit the amount of money spent on him. The Titans were loving having Ryan Tannehill on their roster, for next to nothing, because it allowed them to spend at other positions. With no Mariota now, they can do all manner of things at that position and others.

When the game is already out of reach, the pick doesn't matter.

The game wasn't definitively out of reach until it was about 40 seconds left to play. All picks matter. You pull your goalie in every playoff game in hockey, even if you're down by 2. 3 even.

Good thing I didn't do that then. I pointed out that Mahomes is the biggest reason KC won. There are a few people above Jimmy on that list.

This was SF's game to lose, and they lost it. The defense played well enough through 3 quarters. KC was the comeback kid all through these playoffs, so you know you have to hold them off as long as you can, while continuing to put up points.

I don't know what you mean by "limited". I already said I'd blame Mahomes and SF's D more than him. But what does Garoppolo calling timeouts have to do with it? Shanahan was responsible for the lack of timeouts at the end of the first half. He even explained why he didn't use them. Garoppolo could have called one, but by the time they got the ball, Shanahan had already cost them over 30 seconds and made it clear they weren't doing that.

You think clock management is exclusively the responsibility of the sideline?

Ah, good to see you're still using your usual tactics. Tack on a legitimate thing to go with the thing you already said, in order to make it sound legitimate too.

Uh huh. You win. He's an "elite" monster.

Yes, a lot of people are criticizing Garoppolo. No, no one is comparing him to Dilfer. Again, the fact that you are doing that in all seriousness means your opinion on football is worthless.

49ers QB Jimmy Garoppolo misses chance to quiet critics in Super Bowl
How can Kyle Shanahan and Jimmy Garoppolo silence the doubters? Win the Super Bowl. - Niners Nation
Joe Montana defends 'dangerous' Jimmy Garoppolo against criticism
Trent Dilfer vs Jimmy Garoppolo playoff stats

Oh, good, another bet. They were a powerhouse team. They went 13-3 and made it to the Super Bowl (without all that much trouble against Minnesota or Green Bay). They very nearly won the Super Bowl. Padded regular season or not, that's pretty damn good.

Hooray for them. Garoppolo has an NFC championship ring that's just as pretty as a Super Bowl ring. The pr0n-stars'll all be mega-impressed.

Maybe Garoppolo isn't the guy to carry the team in such situations. Maybe he needs a good team around him that is balanced...just like he has. He can be top-12 and not be Patrick Mahomes. But we also don't know whether any of that is true. He came up big against New Orleans in NO. So, this one time he missed a few passes. That's a tiny sample size. You might want to let it play out a bit more before condemning him (even though you were condemning him for no reason 2 years ago).

I wouldn't put him in the same category with Lamar Jackson, for example. And neither would you.

 

[Myles]

I never said he was "overall bad". Just that he doesn't merit the amount of money spent on him. The Titans were loving having Ryan Tannehill on their roster, for next to nothing, because it allowed them to spend at other positions. With no Mariota now, they can do all manner of things at that position and others.


You think clock management is exclusively the responsibility of the sideline?

I wouldn't put him in the same category with Lamar Jackson, for example. And neither would you.

The Titans now have to decide what to do with Tannehill. He and D. Henry are free agents. My guess is that they franchise tag Ryan and sign Henry to a big ass contract.
The 49rs are certainly paying allot for JG (7th most in the league), but he was a top 10 QB in 2019. I know I would love it if the Colts could sign a top 10 QB even if it is for a huge bundle of cash.

 

[Robotech]

The Titans now have to decide what to do with Tannehill. He and D. Henry are free agents. My guess is that they franchise tag Ryan and sign Henry to a big ass contract.
The 49rs are certainly paying allot for JG (7th most in the league), but he was a top 10 QB in 2019. I know I would love it if the Colts could sign a top 10 QB even if it is for a huge bundle of cash.

Tannehill played excellent. Certainly deserving of a raise.

Shame about Andrew Luck. If he were still playing, he could be a top 5 guy.

Jimmy G certainly had the numbers of a top 10 guy. In addition to the SB 4th quarter, the critics would say that he had a good team around him and that it's really not that hard to put up good QB numbers in the modern NFL.

 

[HaroldSeattle]

Uh huh. As if I'm the only person calling out Garoppolo for sub-par play or comparing him to Trent Dilfer. Professional analysts are doing it.

History will note that SF was probably not a powerhouse team. They had a padded regular season, though won in the playoffs early on. Some QBs have the ability to put their team on their back and win in big situations. I'd expect a "Top-12" kinda guy to be able to do that.

Another comparison would be to see how he stacked up to Goff numbers last year. Both relatively inexperienced, both playing on teams with a strong running game. About the only stat Garoppolo is ahead in is completion %. Goff smokes him in completions, yardage, TDs and has fewer interception. Nobody is pounding their fist to insist Goff is a top ten QB, like some here are doing with Jimmy G.

 

[Myles]

Tannehill played excellent. Certainly deserving of a raise.

Shame about Andrew Luck. If he were still playing, he could be a top 5 guy.

Jimmy G certainly had the numbers of a top 10 guy. In addition to the SB 4th quarter, the critics would say that he had a good team around him and that it's really not that hard to put up good QB numbers in the modern NFL.

Yeah Luck screwed the Colts. We were set to be contenders.
The modern NFL does allow QB's to put up better numbers, but even with that, JG was top 10 in many categories.
Top 5 in record and completion %
12th in yards
7th in TD%
7th yards per completion
8th in rating
12 QBR
1 in 4th quarter comebacks (which I think is a BS stat)

 

[Robotech]

Another comparison would be to see how he stacked up to Goff numbers last year. Both relatively inexperienced, both playing on teams with a strong running game. About the only stat Garoppolo is ahead in is completion %. Goff smokes him in completions, yardage, TDs and has fewer interception. Nobody is pounding their fist to insist Goff is a top ten QB, like some here are doing with Jimmy G.

Certainly not this year, but Goff was top 10 the previous two years.

 

[HaroldSeattle]

Certainly not this year, but Goff was top 10 the previous two years.

Maybe, funny thing is I don't recall Rams fans saying anything about it. Maybe they just take a more realistic view on the subject. Jimmy numbers aren't special and at this point in time neither is Jimmy. With experience, maybe he takes a big step forward in the future, but his age says not likely.

 

[HaroldSeattle]

Certainly not this year, but Goff was top 10 the previous two years.

Check Bortles 2015 #s, similar to Goffs. Those #s also beat Jimmy G. stats in everything but completion %.
Just saying Robotech you got to keep things in prospective and stop getting carried away.

 

[Robotech]

Check Bortles 2015 #s, similar to Goffs. Those #s also beat Jimmy G. stats in everything but completion %.
Just saying Robotech you got to keep things in prospective and stop getting carried away.

I'm not carried away. I can't remember exactly where I ranked him in one of the other threads, but it was something like 8-10. Maybe that's on the upper, more optimistic end, but it's not unreasonable. He at least performed like one of the better QB's, but I've already conceded in other threads that he was helped by the talent and coaching around hm. Maybe he sucks somewhere else, but I think we could say that about almost all QBs (that they need a good team around them to be successful). And I have never said he's elite. Elite would be at least top 5, but probably more like top 3.

Where do you rank Jimmy? I think you had Winston over him because of passing yards, which I think is crazy. Winston couldn't be anything higher than 18 or so, IMO, but probably should be lower. His interceptions negate many of the yards he gains.

I looked up Bortles in 2015. No, Goff was much better in the 2017 and 2018 seasons than Bortles was in 2015, at least according to the statistics.

 

[Mofo]

The Titans now have to decide what to do with Tannehill. He and D. Henry are free agents. My guess is that they franchise tag Ryan and sign Henry to a big ass contract.
The 49rs are certainly paying allot for JG (7th most in the league), but he was a top 10 QB in 2019. I know I would love it if the Colts could sign a top 10 QB even if it is for a huge bundle of cash.

Tannehill would be happy with a mid-range, ~$12-15mil contract, maybe even incentive-laden. Signing Henry is a no-brainer, and roster management isn't too difficult now that the Mariota problem goes away.

SF's Garoppolo problem manifests in a big way after next season, since they have a lot of young, talented players (Samuel, Bosa, etc.) that will need to get locked into the next contract. Paying one guy $24-25mil a year requires a dividend to justify that kind of money.

Another comparison would be to see how he stacked up to Goff numbers last year. Both relatively inexperienced, both playing on teams with a strong running game. About the only stat Garoppolo is ahead in is completion %. Goff smokes him in completions, yardage, TDs and has fewer interception. Nobody is pounding their fist to insist Goff is a top ten QB, like some here are doing with Jimmy G.

I would tend to agree. But I dunno. Tom? Is Jared Goff an "elite", "top-12" QB?

How 'bout Bortles?

 

[Robotech]

Yeah Luck screwed the Colts. We were set to be contenders.
The modern NFL does allow QB's to put up better numbers, but even with that, JG was top 10 in many categories.
Top 5 in record and completion %
12th in yards
7th in TD%
7th yards per completion
8th in rating
12 QBR
1 in 4th quarter comebacks (which I think is a BS stat)

Yeah, Jimmy performed well this season, and that's all you can ask for. We always want to attach labels to people, but at the end of the day, it's all about the results.

 

[Robotech]

Tannehill would be happy with a mid-range, ~$12-15mil contract, maybe even incentive-laden. Signing Henry is a no-brainer, and roster management isn't too difficult now that the Mariota problem goes away.

SF's Garoppolo problem manifests in a big way after next season, since they have a lot of young, talented players (Samuel, Bosa, etc.) that will need to get locked into the next contract. Paying one guy $24-25mil a year requires a dividend to justify that kind of money.

I would tend to agree. But I dunno. Tom? Is Jared Goff an "elite", "top-12" QB?

How 'bout Bortles?

I'm not a cap expert, but I was guessing that as the years go by, Jimmy's contract wouldn't look super high compared to the next contracts that other QB's sign. There's also the expectation that the max salary cap will rise as the years go by, right?

I hope that top 12 isn't considered elite, if that's what is being discussed.

 

[Mofo]

I'm not a cap expert, but I was guessing that as the years go by, Jimmy's contract wouldn't look super high compared to the next contracts that other QB's sign. There's also the expectation that the max salary cap will rise as the years go by, right?

I'd have to look at Jimmy G's contract, but I think it was flat, with the same amount of cap hit each season. He could be cut at any time, I suppose, but I don't know how much has been paid out in incentives. Generally, with this type of contract, the guy plays to the end or is asked to rework it (generally if he has been stinking it up). You're correct that the cap space increases each year- it's a few million.

I hope that top 12 isn't considered elite, if that's what is being discussed.

It's @Tom Ace's descriptor, from a long time ago.

 

[Duffman]

Jimmy G is the NFC version of Andy Dalton.

 

[HaroldSeattle]

I'd have to look at Jimmy G's contract, but I think it was flat, with the same amount of cap hit each season. He could be cut at any time, I suppose, but I don't know how much has been paid out in incentives. Generally, with this type of contract, the guy plays to the end or is asked to rework it (generally if he has been stinking it up). You're correct that the cap space increases each year- it's a few million.

It's @Tom Ace's descriptor, from a long time ago.

Jimmy G. contract going forward according to OTC.



49ers can save a bundle by cutting Jimmy. Over 22 million

 

[HaroldSeattle]

Jimmy G is the NFC version of Andy Dalton.

Sounds about right, except the team he's on has studs every where and has a much better coach.

 

[Mofo]

Jimmy G. contract going forward according to OTC.

View attachment 231752

49ers can save a bundle by cutting Jimmy. Over 22 million

The real question is, is he a bust, and would bringing in a veteran backup-quality guy or rookie be the wise move? Kaepernick was a different story, since he wasn't only a bust, it's that he proved he wasn't capable of handling most of the load himself, with his style of play. No one wants to pay a QB a crapload of money, if the only way they're "good" is to have a bunch of high-priced RBs, WRs and linemen.

Myself, I think Jimmy G's serviceable, if overpaid. About the same level of talent as Dak Prescott. I wouldn't cut either guy at this juncture, just look for the supporting cast and coaching to play off the strengths.

 

[HaroldSeattle]

The real question is, is he a bust, and would bringing in a veteran backup-quality guy or rookie be the wise move? Kaepernick was a different story, since he wasn't only a bust, it's that he proved he wasn't capable of handling most of the load himself, with his style of play. No one wants to pay a QB a crapload of money, if the only way they're "good" is to have a bunch of high-priced RBs, WRs and linemen.

Myself, I think Jimmy G's serviceable, if overpaid. About the same level of talent as Dak Prescott. I wouldn't cut either guy at this juncture, just look for the supporting cast and coaching to play off the strengths.

Nobody that is a lock to be better seems available, so I expect they roll with Jimmy because like you said he’s serviceable.