PDA

View Full Version : Will Mark Sanchez Be a 49er or Jet?


BBIB
02-28-2009, 02:19 PM
Those are the only other two logical teams left for him to go now that the Chiefs are obviously not going to get him.

YAYareaRB
02-28-2009, 02:24 PM
Although QB is a minor problem, we have bigger holes to fill.

gpngc
02-28-2009, 02:26 PM
TB or CHI? + SEA has scheduled a visit with him.

RaiderNation
02-28-2009, 03:05 PM
I see either St. Louis, Seattle or a team trades up for him around picks 5-9. He will be a 49er if he drops to them IMO

Babylon
02-28-2009, 04:06 PM
TB or CHI? + SEA has scheduled a visit with him.


I didnt think he showed enough at the combine to get him into that Seattle range. I guess the likely dropoff points would be Niners, Jets, Bucs. Seems to have Brady Quinn potential for this draft.

Paranoidmoonduck
02-28-2009, 04:07 PM
I think that him being a Jet is more likely.

Crickett
02-28-2009, 04:26 PM
I think that him being a Jet is more likely.

I'd prefer a wide receiver for our current QB's to throw to.

GET LOOSE
02-28-2009, 04:29 PM
I truley feel that our FO sees the same thing as us Jets fans right now. That we have to give our young QBs a chance this year to see what they got. If they dont have what it takes we can draft a QB next year. We just have to get another wr and I think 1 of the 3 can be a good QB

gpngc
02-28-2009, 04:30 PM
I guess I'll stir this up here because 49ers and Sanchez are in the thread title.

To all the Shaun Hill supporters: What does it tell you that Kurt Warner had in depth conversations with the 49ers? Do you really think the team is 100% committed to Hill going forward even after these Warner conversations?

Splat
02-28-2009, 04:35 PM
I don't think in any way the 49ers would trade up for him but if he is sitting there at 10 they would have to think about.

WMD
02-28-2009, 04:40 PM
Speaking of Mark Sanchez.. Can someone make a highlight video of him set to this song?

1aATSUKu0jI

Menardo75
02-28-2009, 04:40 PM
They will think about it they won't pull the trigger though.

abaddon41_80
02-28-2009, 04:50 PM
Hopefully not.

Scott Wright
02-28-2009, 05:00 PM
Or a Buccaneer...

Tampa is really trying to get a top quarterback.

Paranoidmoonduck
02-28-2009, 05:07 PM
Or a Buccaneer...

Tampa is really trying to get a top quarterback.

It would seem to me that Josh Freeman would be a great possibility in that range as well.

WMD
02-28-2009, 05:08 PM
Tampa has Josh Johnson, they don't need any other Quarterback!

phlysac
02-28-2009, 05:28 PM
I guess I'll stir this up here because 49ers and Sanchez are in the thread title.

To all the Shaun Hill supporters: What does it tell you that Kurt Warner had in depth conversations with the 49ers? Do you really think the team is 100% committed to Hill going forward even after these Warner conversations?

1) The Warner conversations are more of a ploy to get his price up for the Cards.

2) You're forgetting Scot McCloughan's love affair with Alex Smith.

3) I don't think anything that has ever came out of the 49ers camp is a strong endorsement for Shaun Hill being part of the long-term plan.


I look at it like this...

If Kurt Warner is in the picture, he becomes a good 2 year option while either Alex Smith or newly drafted QB waits in the wings. If Kurt Warner isn't in the picture, Shaun Hill becomes the "Kurt Warner/ short term" answer for the 49ers while either Alex Smith or newly drafted QB waits in the wings.

If Alex Smith doesn't restructure his contract, he will not be a 49er and then #10 becomes a more obvious position for QB

YAYareaRB
02-28-2009, 05:40 PM
QB is never a minor problem

It is when you have a guy who can get the job done, no right tackle, no consistent pass rushers, one of your starting corners is one of the oldest people on the team, and your starting FS has not had a interception in 2 seasons.

abaddon41_80
02-28-2009, 05:43 PM
and your starting FS has not had a interception in 2 seasons.

And only 5 in 101 career starts. LOL Mark Roman

YAYareaRB
02-28-2009, 05:46 PM
Speaking of Mark Sanchez.. Can someone make a highlight video of him set to this song?

1aATSUKu0jI

I would actually prefer John Esposito's You're the best AROUND!!!

ninerfan
02-28-2009, 05:56 PM
This whole QB at #10 theme seems a polariser.

9er fans dont think there merit to it and see needs elsewhere more of a priority. RT and pass rush mainly though Safety also.

Non 9er fans thinks its legit talk and Sanchez (or Stafford) is a no brainer

Guess we wont know the correct answer for 2-3 years.

gpngc
02-28-2009, 05:57 PM
This whole QB at #10 theme seems a polariser.

9er fans dont think there merit to it and see needs elsewhere more of a priority. RT and pass rush mainly though Safety also.

Non 9er fans thinks its legit talk and Sanchez (or Stafford) is a no brainer

Guess we wont know the correct answer for 2-3 years.

There are two correct answers.

1) what they will do.

2) what they should do.

We won't know 2 for 2-3 years. I think most of the "Non 9er" fans you are talking about believe 1, not necessarily 2.

keylime_5
02-28-2009, 06:02 PM
The 49ers will pass on him and I think someone will try to jump ahead of the Jets' pick, so neither. Chicago or Tampa Bay or Minnesota will try really hard to get in between picks 10 and 17 IMO to land Sanchez. Throw in Detroit if they take a guy like Jason Smith #1 overall instead of Stafford.

635
02-28-2009, 06:04 PM
The 49ers will pass on him and I think someone will try to jump ahead of the Jets' pick, so neither. Chicago or Tampa Bay or Minnesota will try really hard to get in between picks 10 and 17 IMO to land Sanchez. Throw in Detroit if they take a guy like Jason Smith #1 overall instead of Stafford.

If they take Smith instead of Stafford, then that would simply throw Stafford into this whole QB limbo

ninerfan
02-28-2009, 06:07 PM
If Stafford doesnt go #1 then where's he go ? Does that effect Sanchez and Freeman ?

gpngc
02-28-2009, 06:08 PM
Moot point?

Kurt Warner is scheduled to visit the 49ers, possibly on Monday.
This is getting more interesting, although we'd still expect Warner to return to the Cardinals. Apparently some within the 49ers organization share our skepticism, but others believe they have a legitimate shot to sign the veteran. Feb. 28 - 7:03 pm et
Source: Santa Rosa Press Democrat

635
02-28-2009, 06:11 PM
If Stafford doesnt go #1 then where's he go ? Does that effect Sanchez and Freeman ?

for sure...especially if something happens in free agency with Warner or Garcia..It just means if the Lions or 9ers don't take stafford, then at least 2 if not all three QBs could fall..More than likely however, Josh Freeman will fall to the second, and Sanchez will be a mid first round pick to one of the aforementioned teams

ninerfan
02-28-2009, 06:15 PM
Warner - 9ers just a smoke screen, he'll be back with cards. What would he like in SF ? He's got Fitz, Boldin and a team on the rise now or he can come in and look to start again with 9ers. No brainer imo

gpngc
02-28-2009, 06:18 PM
Warner - 9ers just a smoke screen, he'll be back with cards. What would he like in SF ? He's got Fitz, Boldin and a team on the rise now or he can come in and look to start again with 9ers. No brainer imo

Smokescreen for Warner, not SF.

What is in it for SF to host a FA with no intentions of signing him?

keylime_5
02-28-2009, 06:18 PM
Stafford could go to St.Louis, Seattle, Jacksonville, or San Fran. I don't see him dropping out of the top ten. If he did then that could be just like the Brady Quinn situation two years ago (Browns take a tackle, pass on Quinn, trade up and get Quinn later in the first round).

635
02-28-2009, 06:19 PM
Smokescreen for Warner, not SF.

What is in it for SF to host a FA with no intentions of signing him?

exactly...

if anything that would tip their hand, as teams would know they were interested in a QB

GBahDunka
02-28-2009, 06:20 PM
i can see texans wanting sanchez

ninerfan
02-28-2009, 06:20 PM
Have no idea why we'd have him visit other than to drive his price up for the Cards

gpngc
02-28-2009, 06:22 PM
Have no idea why we'd have him visit other than to drive his price up for the Cards

While that does make sense on the surface, it's very unlikely that the 49ers are worrying that much about the Cardinals fiscal endeavors at this point.

Borat
02-28-2009, 06:29 PM
I guess I'll stir this up here because 49ers and Sanchez are in the thread title.

To all the Shaun Hill supporters: What does it tell you that Kurt Warner had in depth conversations with the 49ers? Do you really think the team is 100% committed to Hill going forward even after these Warner conversations?

I'm not going to explain to you all the fine points of negotiation, but to put it simply, if you want your current team to increase their contract offer, you should try and engage in contract talks with a division rival. You're capable of understanding that right?

And for the millionth time, I think Mark Sanchez is going to end up being the best QB in this year's class, but the way the 49ers are currently constructed, he isn't a good fit.

gpngc
02-28-2009, 06:33 PM
I'm not going to explain to you all the fine points of negotiation, but to put it simply, if you want your current team to increase their contract offer, you should try and engage in contract talks with a division rival. You're capable of understanding that right?



Yes. Warner wants more $.

What do the 49ers want? Warner to get more $ from Arizona? Or Kurt Warner? I would go with Warner- I don't think a team would go through the trouble of a FA visit if they didn't actually want the player.

Borat
02-28-2009, 06:38 PM
Yes. Warner wants more $.

What do the 49ers want? Warner to get more $ from Arizona? Or Kurt Warner? I would go with Warner- I don't think a team would go through the trouble of a FA visit if they didn't actually want the player.

So you think the 49ers want Warner and Sanchez?

Also, teams bluff by bringing players in all the time. That's not a difficult concept to grasp.

gpngc
02-28-2009, 06:40 PM
So you think the 49ers want Warner and Sanchez?

No no. My point was just to show that the 49ers are obviously not 100% sold on Hill going forward, as evidenced by their interest in Kurt Warner.

Because of this interest in a QB, I think it is more possible that they'll look at Sanchez than we previously thought.

Menardo75
02-28-2009, 06:43 PM
And our point is that Warner is putting pressure on the Cardinals to give him more money.

gpngc
02-28-2009, 06:43 PM
Also, teams bluff by bringing players in all the time. That's not a difficult concept to grasp.

Yes it is.

What is in it for the 49ers to "bluff" that they want Kurt Warner. "HAHA we showed you- we never wanted a QB! Now we took Everette Brown instead. HAHA- what a great bluff!"

gpngc
02-28-2009, 06:44 PM
And our point is that Warner is putting pressure on the Cardinals to give him more money.

So the reason you are inviting this player for a visit is to drive up his price (basically working WITH him), and you have no intention of signing him?

Menardo75
02-28-2009, 06:46 PM
Warners agent contacted us. Kurt is trying to get the Cardinals to raise their price.

635
02-28-2009, 06:48 PM
I'm not going to explain to you all the fine points of negotiation, but to put it simply, if you want your current team to increase their contract offer, you should try and engage in contract talks with a division rival. You're capable of understanding that right?

And for the millionth time, I think Mark Sanchez is going to end up being the best QB in this year's class, but the way the 49ers are currently constructed, he isn't a good fit.

That works on the players' side, but what the hell would the team bring a player in for if they are not interested in signing him?
I understand your point, but it doesn't work on the team side of the negotiations

Borat
02-28-2009, 06:49 PM
Yes it is.

What is in it for the 49ers to "bluff" that they want Kurt Warner. "HAHA we showed you- we never wanted a QB! Now we took Everette Brown instead. HAHA- what a great bluff!"

The 9ers are also trying to bluff the billion-dollar-baby that currently sits their bench. They want him to take a pay cut.

And yes, if they can get a division rival to overpay for their own player and in essence, bid against themselves, then yes, I could envision them doing that. And Everette Brown at #10 would be sweet.

Menardo75
02-28-2009, 06:50 PM
They have already begun talks with Alex on redoing his deal, this is probably a way of speeding it up.

gpngc
02-28-2009, 06:59 PM
So the bringing in of Kurt Warner for a visit is for two things:

1) A ploy to scare Alex Smith into re-structuring.
2) A ploy to make the Cardinals pay more money for their QB.

Rather than:
1) Trying to steal the Super Bowl QB of a division rival by signing him.

That is one snakey way to run an organization if it's true. Something tells me they're leaning more towards the second option than the first. But we can all believe what we want.

Menardo75
02-28-2009, 07:00 PM
So the bringing in of Kurt Warner for a visit is for two things:

1) A ploy to scare Alex Smith into re-structuring.
2) A ploy to make the Cardinals pay more money for their QB.

Rather than:
1) Trying to steal the Super Bowl QB of a division rival by signing him.

That is one snakey way to run an organization if it's true. Something tells me they're leaning more towards the second option than the first. But we can all believe what we want.

Warner would be crap in our offense, and a waste of money anyway.

PuppyPuncher
02-28-2009, 07:59 PM
I feel sorry for the team that would take a RT at #10.

Smokey Joe
02-28-2009, 08:15 PM
neither... hes gonna be a seahawk.

CJSchneider
02-28-2009, 08:15 PM
1. Yes, the talks with Warner are more for Warner then for the 49ers.

2. If you look at Hill's per game production, he ranks in the top 1/3rd of the league and that with an O-line that gave up 54 sacks?

I really don't see them going after QB with the #10 pick. I see OT personally.

BBIB
02-28-2009, 08:25 PM
Tampa has Josh Johnson, they don't need any other Quarterback!

Unfortunately Josh is not guaranteed to get a shot at the starting job seeing how he was taken in the 5th round. Not exactly that financial obligation to give him a shot.

BBIB
02-28-2009, 08:28 PM
The 49ers will pass on him and I think someone will try to jump ahead of the Jets' pick, so neither. Chicago or Tampa Bay or Minnesota will try really hard to get in between picks 10 and 17 IMO to land Sanchez. Throw in Detroit if they take a guy like Jason Smith #1 overall instead of Stafford.

Wow I could definitely see something like that happened.

Kind of reminiscent of recent years eh? If the Lions tried to do the Cleveland Browns and take an OT and a QB in the 1st. Or how like how the Ravens traded back up to get Sanchez.

Hmm Bears, Bucs, Texans, I guess there are tons of teams that would be interested. Basically no Aaron Rodgers like fall for Sanchez eh?

Unless a team took someone like Davis/Freeman before him which would really throw this draft for a loop

Borat
02-28-2009, 10:11 PM
I feel sorry for the team that would take a RT at #10.

Comment fail.

Arizona just took a RT with the 4th pick. Arizona was just in the Super Bowl.

SolMan
02-28-2009, 10:15 PM
Comment fail.

Arizona just took a RT with the 4th pick. Arizona was just in the Super Bowl.

Arizona did it for Leinart, whos left handed.

At #10, i dont see anything wrong with getting a RT that you believe will be a probowler for years to come. Is there something wrong with drafting a RB with 10? Its done all the time and RBs are just as easy to get as a RT.

If you draft at 10, and its a starter who helps both phases of the offense for years to come, than its a great pick in my eyes. The problem might be that if the T is that good, he may want to leave when contract is up to try out LT for LOTS of $$.

GBahDunka
02-28-2009, 10:17 PM
Comment fail.

Arizona just took a RT with the 4th pick. Arizona was just in the Super Bowl.

touche. the chiefs really need to trade out of this pick i believe. They dont want to spend that kind of money on curry and theres nobody else they really need there.

If stafford goes past number 1 and 2 the chiefs could have a lot of leverage with a team like tampa bay or the 49ers

Borat
02-28-2009, 10:18 PM
Arizona did it for Leinart, whos left handed.

At #10, i dont see anything wrong with getting a RT that you believe will be a probowler for years to come. Is there something wrong with drafting a RB with 10? Its done all the time and RBs are just as easy to get as a RT.

If you draft at 10, and its a starter who helps both phases of the offense for years to come, than its a great pick in my eyes. The problem might be that if the T is that good, he may want to leave when contract is up to try out LT for LOTS of $$.

I have no problem taking either RT or LT at any spot in the draft. People act like RT isn't important.

gpngc
02-28-2009, 10:21 PM
touche. the chiefs really need to trade out of this pick i believe. They dont want to spend that kind of money on curry and theres nobody else they really need there.

If stafford goes past number 1 and 2 the chiefs could have a lot of leverage with a team like tampa bay or the 49ers

The Chiefs are great at #3. They have to give up big bucks sure but Aaron Curry is the closest thing to a sure thing we've seen in years and if they go Crabtree he's worth the money too.

I think after investing pick #34 on O they're all but a lock to take Curry at #3.

BaLLiN
02-28-2009, 10:24 PM
Curry at #3 or Sintim at #34, that is the question

GBahDunka
02-28-2009, 10:25 PM
The Chiefs are great at #3. They have to give up big bucks sure but Aaron Curry is the closest thing to a sure thing we've seen in years and if they go Crabtree he's worth the money too.

I think after investing pick #34 on O they're all but a lock to take Curry at #3.

but do they really need another top first round inside linebacker? They have Derrick Johnson. I think they just may be better suited trading out and getting more than one starter out of that number 3 pick. That would be more of the pioli thing to do I think.

GMoney
02-28-2009, 11:37 PM
I am one of the very few 49er fans who is pro sanchez to the niners at pick 10.

The way I see it is:

1. The QB who is going to take the niners to the SB in NOT currently on the roster.

2. If you aren't taking Stafford or Sanchez in this draft, the guy you are getting is also not the QB that is going to take your team to the SB.

3. I believe rookie QBs should sit their first season (maybe 2) and learn - Shaun Hill is a capable starter until he gets beat out.

The arguments against a QB at pick #10 - along with my reasons these arguments fail are:

1. Alex Smith is the QB of the Future - I think 3 or 4 seasons is enough to know he is NOT that man.

2. Shaun Hill is actually a top 10 NFL QB - while his win loss ratio is pretty good, he does not have the deep ball to really scare teams or be considered a top tier QB.

3. If Alex and Shaun both prove they are not the 'guy' this year, we can take a QB next year - problem with this if we take a QB in 2010 (a) we may not be in a position to take a top echelon signal caller (if the team improves as expected) (b) the '10 QB then needs to sit for a year (or 2) and probably wont be ready to make a push into the playoffs until 2013 or 2014, at which time Gore, Clements, J Smith, W Harris and M Lewis will very much be on the decline and our team overall may be worse and (c) that 2010 QB probably won't be any better than Sanchez anyways.

4. We have way too many immediate needs to be drafting a player in the first round just to sit him for a season. Unfortunately that does NOT solve the QB problem, you can't ignore it and hope it goes away. Id rather start the season with Roman at FS or Franklin at NT or Snyder at RT or Haralson at OLB than continue to ignore the most important position in the game.

There is my rant.

P.S. I too am skeptical that Warner will in fact choose to go to the Niners but I have NO DOUBT whatsoever, that if Warner said the word, the Niners would pay him 15 mill a season for 2 years and count their lucky stars.

P.S.S. I don't think a Warner signing solves eliminates the QB problem described above, and would still advocate a pick of Sanchez.

gpngc
02-28-2009, 11:48 PM
I am one of the very few 49er fans who is pro sanchez to the niners at pick 10.

The way I see it is:

1. The QB who is going to take the niners to the SB in NOT currently on the roster.

2. If you aren't taking Stafford or Sanchez in this draft, the guy you are getting is also not the QB that is going to take your team to the SB.

3. I believe rookie QBs should sit their first season (maybe 2) and learn - Shaun Hill is a capable starter until he gets beat out.

The arguments against a QB at pick #10 - along with my reasons these arguments fail are:

1. Alex Smith is the QB of the Future - I think 3 or 4 seasons is enough to know he is NOT that man.

2. Shaun Hill is actually a top 10 NFL QB - while his win loss ratio is pretty good, he does not have the deep ball to really scare teams or be considered a top tier QB.

3. If Alex and Shaun both prove they are not the 'guy' this year, we can take a QB next year - problem with this if we take a QB in 2010 (a) we may not be in a position to take a top echelon signal caller (if the team improves as expected) (b) the '10 QB then needs to sit for a year (or 2) and probably wont be ready to make a push into the playoffs until 2013 or 2014, at which time Gore, Clements, J Smith, W Harris and M Lewis will very much be on the decline and our team overall may be worse and (c) that 2010 QB probably won't be any better than Sanchez anyways.

4. We have way too many immediate needs to be drafting a player in the first round just to sit him for a season. Unfortunately that does NOT solve the QB problem, you can't ignore it and hope it goes away. Id rather start the season with Roman at FS or Franklin at NT or Snyder at RT or Haralson at OLB than continue to ignore the most important position in the game.

There is my rant.

P.S. I too am skeptical that Warner will in fact choose to go to the Niners but I have NO DOUBT whatsoever, that if Warner said the word, the Niners would pay him 15 mill a season for 2 years and count their lucky stars.

P.S.S. I don't think a Warner signing solves eliminates the QB problem described above, and would still advocate a pick of Sanchez.

Great post. I think #1 on your list is what is most important and what some people are in denial about.

Menardo75
03-01-2009, 01:42 AM
Great post. I think #1 on your list is what is most important and what some people are in denial about.

And you still forget the fact that none of us know anything about the guys that are coming in, and it's ridiculous to just come out and say someone won't do something without any facts. Both of you fail. I'll tell you what I know Shaun Hill 7-3 as a starter undefeated at home. He wins games and that's what it's all about. Alex is finally going to be healthy and is just reaching his prime. Therefore QB is NOT A FIRST ROUND NEED!

TT Gator
03-01-2009, 03:10 AM
I truley feel that our FO sees the same thing as us Jets fans right now. That we have to give our young QBs a chance this year to see what they got. If they dont have what it takes we can draft a QB next year. We just have to get another wr and I think 1 of the 3 can be a good QB

I agree with you and it seems the Jets feel the same way too. They feel confident in Clemens and the way I see it is give the guy a chance pick up an elite WR this year to give him a target. If it doesn't work out you got a solid QB class coming out of the 2010 Draft. The Rams are possible but I have a feeling they'll go OL and stick with Bulger. I don't see the Seahawks drafting him since Hasselback was hurt last year, a Pro Bowler the year before, and it seems their set on Crabtree. If he falls to the 49ers I think its a sure thing. If we say Stafford goes #1 then the only teams I can see picking up Sanchez before the 49ers are the Bengals or Rams. If Stafford doesn't go #1 or Sanchez just isen't picked by the 49ers then I think he could go anywhere it'll turn into Brady Quinn 2 with him prob getting picked up by a team who moves up in a trade (like the Vikings). A trade could happen before the 49ers pick as well though it's more unlikely. With KC getting Cassel it's really mixed up Sanchez' pro prospects.

edgrenade
03-01-2009, 03:17 AM
Two words.....

Jason
Boltus

Crickett
03-01-2009, 08:29 AM
Two words.....

Jason
Boltus

Your post lacks the prerequisite number of the letter z. Please try again.

Smokey Joe
03-01-2009, 08:42 AM
Arizona did it for Leinart, whos left handed.


Arizona did it becuase they had no OLine, and needed to take the best available linemen, regardless of position, at no. 5.

I guarantee you if the Cards had the choice between Levi Brown or lets say Eugene Monroe, they'd pick Monroe every time.

abaddon41_80
03-01-2009, 09:04 AM
I am one of the very few 49er fans who is pro sanchez to the niners at pick 10.

The way I see it is:

1. The QB who is going to take the niners to the SB in NOT currently on the roster.

2. If you aren't taking Stafford or Sanchez in this draft, the guy you are getting is also not the QB that is going to take your team to the SB.



And you know for a fact that Sanchez or Stafford could take the 49ers to the Super Bowl. We have seen that Shaun Hill can win games and be successful, why do you think that Sanchez or Stafford will be any better?

The arguments against a QB at pick #10 - along with my reasons these arguments fail are:

1. Alex Smith is the QB of the Future - I think 3 or 4 seasons is enough to know he is NOT that man.

Rookie Season - Shouldn't really count against him. 20 years old, no help around him, tough schedule, terrible coaching

2nd season - Did about as good as other second year QBs and better than some elite QBs did in their second year

3rd season - Played 3 games before getting hurt with the worst OC in the league and still managed to go 2-1

4th season - Didn't play

I personally see more evidence supporting Smith than I do against him.

2. Shaun Hill is actually a top 10 NFL QB - while his win loss ratio is pretty good, he does not have the deep ball to really scare teams or be considered a top tier QB.

You do not have to be able to throw it deep to be a good QB. Chad Pennington was being considered for MVP last year.

3. If Alex and Shaun both prove they are not the 'guy' this year, we can take a QB next year - problem with this if we take a QB in 2010 (a) we may not be in a position to take a top echelon signal caller (if the team improves as expected) (b) the '10 QB then needs to sit for a year (or 2) and probably wont be ready to make a push into the playoffs until 2013 or 2014, at which time Gore, Clements, J Smith, W Harris and M Lewis will very much be on the decline and our team overall may be worse and (c) that 2010 QB probably won't be any better than Sanchez anyways.

Next year's QB class looks much stronger at this point than this year's, imo. So Alex Smith doesn't prove himself as the QBOTF, we already know what Shaun Hill can do and he can hold down the fort in 2010 after we draft a QB in the 2010 draft.

4. We have way too many immediate needs to be drafting a player in the first round just to sit him for a season. Unfortunately that does NOT solve the QB problem, you can't ignore it and hope it goes away. Id rather start the season with Roman at FS or Franklin at NT or Snyder at RT or Haralson at OLB than continue to ignore the most important position in the game.

If you would rather have Mark Roman at FS, Snyder at RT, Franklin at NT, or Haralson at OLB than Shaun Hill at QB I don't want to say something is wrong with you but...

Rjspartan
03-01-2009, 09:06 AM
i think that tampa might try to move up to get him but if not i am thinking the jets will end up with him

derza222
03-01-2009, 10:22 AM
For those that give Chad Pennington as an example of QB's not needing to have a strong arm to have success in the league, I say that Pennington's teams have always struggled to get deep into the playoffs against the better and more aggressive defenses because they can get great pressure, play wideouts tough, and stack against the run since he can't threaten with the deep ball. Look at Baltimore last year, and every playoff season with the Jets. He's never proven he's a guy that can get you deep in the playoffs, just a guy who can get you there with some regular season success.

And to answer the original question, I say neither. The 49ers probably are going to give Hill some time, and the Jets seem to think they can win with the guys on their current roster. The 49ers could maybe stand to let Hill play and have somebody else behind him, but their other needs will probably have value at 10 and at this point Alex Smith's contract is a complicating factor. With the Jets they'll be starting a young guy in a nice situation at some point this year, and they have 2 or 3 guys at least that have showed some nice potential. Beyond that, WR needs to be addressed for any QB to have a really solid situation and there will be some guys that really fit them very well available at 17.

Grizzlegom
03-01-2009, 10:42 AM
prolly in the minority but i think Jacksonville has Sanchez very integrated into their thought process.

Menardo75
03-01-2009, 01:57 PM
4. We have way too many immediate needs to be drafting a player in the first round just to sit him for a season. Unfortunately that does NOT solve the QB problem, you can't ignore it and hope it goes away. Id rather start the season with Roman at FS or Franklin at NT or Snyder at RT or Haralson at OLB than continue to ignore the most important position in the game.

Ummm I really hope your joking do you just not want us to get better?

Brent
03-01-2009, 02:07 PM
2. Shaun Hill is actually a top 10 NFL QB - while his win loss ratio is pretty good, he does not have the deep ball to really scare teams or be considered a top tier QB.
What Niners fan on this forum said he was a top 10 QB? I can guarantee you that none of us believe that.

Borat
03-01-2009, 02:09 PM
What Niners fan on this forum said he was a top 10 QB? I can guarantee you that none of us believe that.

Shhhhh Brent, exaggerations make his point stronger.

MenOfTroy
03-01-2009, 02:12 PM
Although QB is a minor problem, we have bigger holes to fill.

Really disagree with this. Shaun Hill and Alex Smith at QB aren't going to take you anywhere.

QB is the 49ers' #1 priority bar none.

MenOfTroy
03-01-2009, 02:15 PM
1. Yes, the talks with Warner are more for Warner then for the 49ers.

2. If you look at Hill's per game production, he ranks in the top 1/3rd of the league and that with an O-line that gave up 54 sacks?

I really don't see them going after QB with the #10 pick. I see OT personally.

Shaun Hill has a terrible arm, though, probably the weakest arm of any starting QB. He's a decent game manager but he'll always be a weak link in the offense. Good stopgap, but nothing more than that.

gpngc
03-01-2009, 02:22 PM
Shaun Hill has a terrible arm, though, probably the weakest arm of any starting QB. He's a decent game manager but he'll always be a weak link in the offense. Good stopgap, but nothing more than that.

Doesn't matter!

He beat Buffalo 10-3 ON THE ROAD, St. Louis TWICE (shows he can even overcome when an excellent defensive team has film on him), Washington and the New York Jets (Brett FAVRE!) to end the season with a STELLAR 5-3 record as the starter!

nepg
03-01-2009, 02:24 PM
Not a fan of the 49ers or Jets going QB in Round 1. I do feel Sanchez's stock is taking a hit because of Leinart's failure and that Sanchez is the better prospect between he and Stafford. Sanchez gets it done. He's a better overall QB than Stafford, especially when it comes to intangibles and leadership. The big advantage for Stafford was size, which is now moot since they measured out the same...
________
Lenybigcock (http://camslivesexy.com/cam/lenybigcock)

Borat
03-01-2009, 02:26 PM
Doesn't matter!

He beat Buffalo 10-3 ON THE ROAD, St. Louis TWICE (shows he can even overcome when an excellent defensive team has film on him), Washington and the New York Jets (Brett FAVRE!) to end the season with a STELLAR 5-3 record as the starter!

And Sanchez has 1 YEAR OF COLLEGE STARTING EXPERIENCE ... playing with one of the most talented teams in the nation ... against a lot of suspect defenses. What's your point?

abaddon41_80
03-01-2009, 02:48 PM
QB is the 49ers' #1 priority bar none.

The 49ers didn't lose any games because of Shaun Hill this year but lost 9 of them because of terrible right tackle and free safety play and no pass rush.

gpngc
03-01-2009, 02:55 PM
And Sanchez has 1 YEAR OF COLLEGE STARTING EXPERIENCE ... playing with one of the most talented teams in the nation ... against a lot of suspect defenses. What's your point?

Not talking about Sanchez. Simply pointing out that Shaun Hill is probably not the best route to go at QB.

But since you gave me the opening...

We don't know what kind of NFL player Sanchez will be. We do know what type of NFL player Shaun Hill is (average QB at best). Sanchez unquestionably has superior talent than Hill. End.

Menardo75
03-01-2009, 02:57 PM
Really disagree with this. Shaun Hill and Alex Smith at QB aren't going to take you anywhere.

QB is the 49ers' #1 priority bar none.

Once again you know nothing.

Menardo75
03-01-2009, 02:58 PM
Not talking about Sanchez. Simply pointing out that Shaun Hill is probably not the best route to go at QB.

But since you gave me the opening...

We don't know what kind of NFL player Sanchez will be. We do know what type of NFL player Shaun Hill is (average QB at best). Sanchez unquestionably has superior talent than Hill. End.

But he really hasn't shown that he is as good of a football player.

Borat
03-01-2009, 03:04 PM
We don't know what kind of NFL player Sanchez will be.

Exactly. SF isn't going to risk paying for 2 top 10 QB busts.

We do know what type of NFL player Shaun Hill is

A winner? He's shown that so far.

BBIB
03-01-2009, 03:05 PM
prolly in the minority but i think Jacksonville has Sanchez very integrated into their thought process.

That would be a bit of a head scratcher if they took a QB that high given all the other needs that team has and all the money they just invested in Garrard.

A team like the Bears, Bucs, or even the Texans wouldn't surprise me.

But the Jags, yeah that would be weird

Exactly. SF isn't going to risk paying for 2 top 10 QB busts.



A winner? He's shown that so far.

Yeah that's why he could definitely fall out the top 10 now. 49ers could be gun shy about taking another underclassmen QB that high in the draft off the heels of Smith.

Kind of like the reason why the Chargers didn't take Mike Vick right after they just dealt with Ryan Leaf.

abaddon41_80
03-01-2009, 03:06 PM
We do know what type of NFL player Shaun Hill is (average QB at best).

7-3 record, 2:1 TD:INT ratio, 90+ passer rating, and 64% completion > average

Sanchez unquestionably has superior talent than Hill. End.

Alex Smith unquestionably has superior talent than Hill as well, he should get a fair shot.

Shahin
03-01-2009, 03:06 PM
Exactly. SF isn't going to risk paying for 2 top 10 QB busts.



A winner? He's shown that so far.

You aren't seriously comfortable going into next season with Shaun Hill possibly starting, are you?

BBIB
03-01-2009, 03:07 PM
You aren't seriously comfortable going into next season with Shaun Hill possibly starting, are you?

Yeah they may not be but they may trade down for a QB or consider taking one in the 2nd round.

I think the whole taking a QB that was a bust may definitely make a team gun shy about taking a QB that high again so soon

gpngc
03-01-2009, 03:09 PM
Exactly. SF isn't going to risk paying for 2 top 10 QB busts.





You can't be scared. That's a risk you need to take if the reward is potentially a franchise QB (The only singular player who can make your team a perennial contender). If the Falcons applied that logic last year based on their experience with Vick, they'd probably have Glenn Dorsey and be looking at Stafford or Sanchez right now.

Brent
03-01-2009, 03:10 PM
You aren't seriously comfortable going into next season with Shaun Hill possibly starting, are you?
I don't know about the rest of the Niners fans on this forum but I'll come right out and say it: I feel comfortable heading into March with Shaun Hill at the top of the depth chart.

Borat
03-01-2009, 03:11 PM
You aren't seriously comfortable going into next season with Shaun Hill possibly starting, are you?

I have to be. I don't want Alex Smith starting. And if they get Sanchez, I wouldn't want him starting either. The guy has barely played one full season since high school. Would you be comfortable starting him?

gpngc
03-01-2009, 03:11 PM
7-3 record, 2:1 TD:INT ratio, 90+ passer rating, and 64% completion > average





Wait, so you really believe that Shaun Hill is an above average QB in the NFL?

BBIB
03-01-2009, 03:12 PM
You can't be scared. That's a risk you need to take if the reward is potentially a franchise QB (The only singular player who can make your team a perennial contender). If the Falcons applied that logic last year based on their experience with Vick, they'd probably have Glenn Dorsey and be looking at Stafford or Sanchez right now.

That's a terrible analogy. The comparison with Vick is the Chargers not taking him because of Ryan Leaf.

The Falcons weren't gun shy on QB because their starting QB was a colossal bust like Ryan Leaf, instead he got caught dog fighting.

The chances of Matt Ryan running a dog fighting ring weren't exactly high

AS11toFG21
03-01-2009, 03:12 PM
You can't be scared. That's a risk you need to take if the reward is potentially a franchise QB (The only singular player who can make your team a perennial contender). If the Falcons applied that logic last year based on their experience with Vick, they'd probably have Glenn Dorsey and be looking at Stafford or Sanchez right now.

Ryan was a 23 year old senior who started for 3 years. Sanchez is a junior with less than 20 career starts.

gpngc
03-01-2009, 03:12 PM
I have to be. I don't want Alex Smith starting. And if they get Sanchez, I wouldn't want him starting either. The guy has barely played one full season since high school. Would you be comfortable starting him?

Yikes. Belichick or Pioli would be.

abaddon41_80
03-01-2009, 03:12 PM
You aren't seriously comfortable going into next season with Shaun Hill possibly starting, are you?

I'm more than comfortable with Shaun Hill starting the next two seasons if Alex Smith doesn't win the job this year and we wait until next year to draft a QB.

Brent
03-01-2009, 03:13 PM
If the Falcons applied that logic last year based on their experience with Vick, they'd probably have Glenn Dorsey and be looking at Stafford or Sanchez right now.
What are you talking about? It was his character issues that created the biggest problems, not his performance on the field. That's why they didnt have a problem taking Ryan.

Crickett
03-01-2009, 03:13 PM
You can't be scared. That's a risk you need to take if the reward is potentially a franchise QB (The only singular player who can make your team a perennial contender). If the Falcons applied that logic last year based on their experience with Vick, they'd probably have Glenn Dorsey and be looking at Stafford or Sanchez right now.


And if the Chargers had applied the logic of always having to take the franchise QB, they would have burned a second time by Michael Vick instead of drafting the best running back of this decade and perrenial pro bowl QB Drew Brees.

BBIB
03-01-2009, 03:13 PM
Wait, so you really believe that Shaun Hill is an above average QB in the NFL?

He was adequate enough for them last year. Did you think Tom Brady was worth anything before Bledsoe went down? Did you think Kurt Warner was worth anything before Trent Green went down? The list goes on and on. NO one knows how good Hill could potentially be.

He was good enough to warrant them not spending a pick as high as 10th overall on QB, which is why they shouldn't take him although I think they will seriously consider it

Borat
03-01-2009, 03:14 PM
Yikes. Belichick or Pioli would be.

Wait, what? You referring to Cassel? The guy that was sitting the bench in NE for a couple of years before getting his shot? If so, that analogy is garbage.

gpngc
03-01-2009, 03:15 PM
That's a terrible analogy. The comparison with Vick is the Chargers not taking him because of Ryan Leaf.

The Falcons weren't gun shy on QB because their starting QB was a colossal bust like Ryan Leaf, instead he got caught dog fighting.

The chances of Ryan Leaf running a dog fighting ring weren't exactly high

You are reading way too deep into it.

Falcons had a bust (reason for bust doesn't matter) QB who screwed them financially and in every other way.

49ers have the same situation with Smith.

Falcons weren't scared, felt this kid was the franchise, and took him.

49ers....

That's all. It's a comparison in situations, not players.

Brent
03-01-2009, 03:15 PM
Yikes. Belichick or Pioli would be.
Cassel also sat on the bench for several years in the same system for cheap. Not the price of a top 10 pick.

gpngc
03-01-2009, 03:16 PM
Wait, what? You referring to Cassel? The guy that was sitting the bench in NE for a couple of years before getting his shot? If so, that analogy is garbage.

Why? What's wrong with letting your guy Hill start for a year or so then hand the keys to the future (Sanchez)?

BBIB
03-01-2009, 03:18 PM
Why? What's wrong with letting your guy Hill start for a year or so then hand the keys to the future (Sanchez)?

Shaun Hill has proven more than Mark Sanchez right now.

Chances are he started more than one year in college. And he started half a season and played very well in the NFL.

Mark Sanchez is a one year starter with the supporting cast of USC vs a weak defensive conference


There is no need to draft Sanchez for the 49ers if Hill can be their guy for the next 3+ years. And it doesn't even have to be Hill. It can be another QB in another round or they could trade down in the 1st.

The top 10 is too high to take Sanchez, even though again I think they will seriously consider it

abaddon41_80
03-01-2009, 03:18 PM
Wait, so you really believe that Shaun Hill is an above average QB in the NFL?

What evidence is there that would lead someone to believe otherwise?

Borat
03-01-2009, 03:18 PM
Why? What's wrong with letting your guy Hill start for a year or so then hand the keys to the future (Sanchez)?

Because the context of the previous commenter was something to the effect of me being comfortable with Shaun Hill as my starter next year as opposed to Mark Sanchez. Now you're taking it beyond next year. You're pulling my comment out of context.

gpngc
03-01-2009, 03:20 PM
Mark Sanchez is a one year starter with the supporting cast of USC vs a weak defensive conference

OK. New idea.

Here is the situation you are presented with (I know it's not realistic at all but it's an interesting question)...

The Patriots have drafted Mark Sanchez at pick #34 and offering his draft rights to the 49ers in exchange for Shaun Hill.

49ers fans, do you or do you not make this trade?

Borat
03-01-2009, 03:20 PM
What evidence is there that would lead someone to believe otherwise?

Because Shaun Hill doesn't have the one thing necessary to be a good QB: 1st round selection.

abaddon41_80
03-01-2009, 03:24 PM
OK. New idea.

Here is the situation you are presented with (I know it's not realistic at all but it's an interesting question)...

The Patriots have drafted Mark Sanchez at pick #34 and offering his draft rights to the 49ers in exchange for Shaun Hill.

49ers fans, do you or do you not make this trade?

No. Right now Sanchez is unproven and worth nothing while we know Hill has what it takes to win. The 49ers aren't a team like the Lions or Chiefs, in rebuilding mode, they have what it takes to win the division next year. Heck, if Shaun Hill had been starting since week 1 this year they probably would have won it.

Brent
03-01-2009, 03:25 PM
The Patriots have drafted Mark Sanchez at pick #34 and offering his draft rights to the 49ers in exchange for Shaun Hill.

49ers fans, do you or do you not make this trade?
I cannot conceive a scenario like this because there are so many things wrong with it but nice attempt to change the conversation now that every one has made you look silly.

Borat
03-01-2009, 03:31 PM
OK. New idea.

Here is the situation you are presented with (I know it's not realistic at all but it's an interesting question)...

The Patriots have drafted Mark Sanchez at pick #34 and offering his draft rights to the 49ers in exchange for Shaun Hill.

49ers fans, do you or do you not make this trade?

So now Sanchez is dropping to pick #34? I thought he is elite?

gpngc
03-01-2009, 03:33 PM
I cannot conceive a scenario like this because there are so many things wrong with it but nice attempt to change the conversation now that every one has made you look silly.

IMO Sanchez is a better option than Shaun Hill. IMO Shaun Hill is at best an average NFL QB and will never lead a team deep into the playoffs (as a starter). = silliness.

LOL All I want to know is if you'd rather have Hill or Sanchez. Why can't you just answer that?

Here is what I think...

Most of you hate Sanchez because you would have to take him at #10 and as draftniks you would much rather use that pick to improve your team and make them better at another spot (hence "we have greater needs"), by adding a sexy rookie like E. Brown or B. Raji.

You think Shaun Hill can be an adequate QB despite physical deficiencies based on a half of a season in which he played well with wins against 0 playoff teams (and two wins against the Rams).

I believe that if your front office values Hill as much as the fans here do and you don't add a quality QB this offseason, it will take half of next season to realize that he's NOT the future at QB and the Colt McCoy, Tim Tebow, Jevan Snead, and Sam Bradford hunt will ensue.

Crickett
03-01-2009, 03:37 PM
IMO Sanchez is a better option than Shaun Hill. IMO Shaun Hill is at best an average NFL QB and will never lead a team deep into the playoffs (as a starter). = silliness.

LOL All I want to know is if you'd rather have Hill or Sanchez. Why can't you just answer that?

Here is what I think...

Most of you hate Sanchez because you would have to take him at #10 and as draftniks you would much rather use that pick to improve your team and make them better at another spot (hence "we have greater needs"), by adding a sexy rookie like E. Brown or B. Raji.


.........


*raises hand*


Ummmmm, since when did d-linemen become the "sexy" pick and quarterback become "not the sexy pick"?

Also, doesn't everyone want their team to use their draft picks to improve their team?

AS11toFG21
03-01-2009, 03:40 PM
You think Shaun Hill can be an adequate QB despite physical deficiencies based on a half of a season in which he played well with wins against 0 playoff teams (and two wins against the Rams).

I think it's interesting that you find Hill's lack of experience concerning but don't think the same way about Sanchez. How many quarterbacks declared with as little starting experience in college and had any type of prolonged success in the pros?

gpngc
03-01-2009, 03:43 PM
I think it's interesting that you find Hill's lack of experience concerning but don't think the same way about Sanchez. How many quarterbacks declared with as little starting experience in college and had any type of prolonged success in the pros?

Don't care about his lack of experience- that's not what I was talking about. I care that everyone is citing his record when in reality none of those wins were all that impressive.

Menardo75
03-01-2009, 03:46 PM
I am more than content with letting Alex Smith and Shaun Hill battle it out for the job in TC, and I speak for the 49ers coaching staff as well.

gpngc
03-01-2009, 03:46 PM
.........


*raises hand*


Ummmmm, since when did d-linemen become the "sexy" pick and quarterback become "not the sexy pick"?

Also, doesn't everyone want their team to use their draft picks to improve their team?

Improve their team NEXT YEAR. Everyone does seem to want that (hence plugging needs and not every taking into consideration aging players or upcoming free agents), when in reality teams use the draft to build for the future, not plug needs for NEXT SEASON.

The DL is the sexy pick because it fills a need for next season whereas the QB does nothing to help the team next year and is instead a move for the future.

AS11toFG21
03-01-2009, 03:47 PM
Don't care about his lack of experience- that's not what I was talking about. I care that everyone is citing his record when in reality none of those wins were all that impressive.

I guess I'll take "unimpressive" wins over a kid who has just over 1 season's worth of starting experience in college.

Menardo75
03-01-2009, 03:51 PM
Don't care about his lack of experience- that's not what I was talking about. I care that everyone is citing his record when in reality none of those wins were all that impressive.

Leading the team to back to back fourth quarter comebacks isn't impressive? Guess I better raise my standards to your level.

thetedginnshow
03-01-2009, 03:55 PM
I find it funny that a Seahawks fan is campaigning for the Niners to get Sanchez.

But the "sexy" picks aren't the DL in this case.

Borat
03-01-2009, 03:58 PM
I find it funny that a Seahawks fan is campaigning for the Niners to get Sanchez.

But the "sexy" picks aren't the DL in this case.

Seahawks fans would know great quarterbacking ... I mean ... they've had like 1 before. :)

Crickett
03-01-2009, 04:07 PM
Improve their team NEXT YEAR. Everyone does seem to want that (hence plugging needs and not every taking into consideration aging players or upcoming free agents), when in reality teams use the draft to build for the future, not plug needs for NEXT SEASON.

Thats because very few if any teams interested in competing (as opposed to rebuilding) have the luxury of drafting players for the future early in the draft. In fact, if the Jets sign Jim Leonhard and draft a WR early, they're one of the few teams that can afford to go BPA for the rest of the draft after filling many of their major needs in free agency.

The DL is the sexy pick because it fills a need for next season whereas the QB does nothing to help the team next year and is instead a move for the future.

I think you don't quite understand what the "sexy pick" means. Its not the need pick. Its the pick at the high profile position. Like QB.

Grizzlegom
03-01-2009, 04:10 PM
That would be a bit of a head scratcher if they took a QB that high given all the other needs that team has and all the money they just invested in Garrard.

A team like the Bears, Bucs, or even the Texans wouldn't surprise me.

But the Jags, yeah that would be weird


There are many reasons i have the Jags taking Sanchez. Firstly, from everything i've read, they are really big on Sanchez to the point where they have him as the top QB in this draft and a top 10 player. In addition to that, Garrard has had one mediocre year which was sandwiched between two poor seasons and a bunch of others where he couldn't scratch play time away from a declining Brunell and Leftwich, who Del Rio never seemed to like despite drafting him. I know they have a lot of money invested in him but they could take Sanchez, let him sit and learn for a year or two and then Garrard will be well into his deal to the point where it will no longer matter (also if the cap goes away, it REALLY won't matter what kind of money they have invested in anyone).

The Jaguars began to throw a lot more last season because their defense was no longer controlling games like Baltimore's and Tennessee's can. This really exposed Garrard's weaknesses and with the release of Taylor i believe they will be relying even less on the run game as Jones-Drew can only have so many carries. This calls for an overhaul of the passing game and while the o-line and receivers have been less than stellar, one could point to the QB situation not being adequate enough for these players to succeed, while its probably a combination of all three.

In no way am i saying they definitely should take him but i definitely don't think its out of the question that he is at least going to be on their minds, especially if Monroe, J. Smith, Crabtree and Maclin are off the board.

Brent
03-01-2009, 04:31 PM
IMO Sanchez is a better option than Shaun Hill. IMO Shaun Hill is at best an average NFL QB and will never lead a team deep into the playoffs (as a starter). = silliness.
What I believe is silly is your adamant attempts to convince Niners fans on this forum we should agree with you and say Sanchez is the obvious, logical pick at number ten.

All I want to know is if you'd rather have Hill or Sanchez. Why can't you just answer that?
Then ask it, rather than creating some stupid scenario that is incredibly unlikely. Don't get so upset about others expressing an opinion based upon their observation of the team because it is different than yours. If every one agreed, this would be a rather boring place.

Most of you hate Sanchez because you would have to take him at #10 and as draftniks you would much rather use that pick to improve your team and make them better at another spot (hence "we have greater needs"), by adding a sexy rookie like E. Brown or B. Raji.

You think Shaun Hill can be an adequate QB despite physical deficiencies based on a half of a season in which he played well with wins against 0 playoff teams (and two wins against the Rams).
Yeah, I forgot all about Mark Sanchez's quality wins in NFL games. Silly me.

Many of the Niners fans here do not like the idea of picking Sanchez with the 10th selection because of several reasons which have been expressed prior to this post, not to mention the feeling among those in the organization is that Mark Sanchez is not top 10 talent.

I believe that if your front office values Hill as much as the fans here do and you don't add a quality QB this offseason, it will take half of next season to realize that he's NOT the future at QB
I am going to assume an organization who is around these players day in and day out knows better than you.

gpngc
03-01-2009, 04:40 PM
I am going to assume an organization who is around these players day in and day out knows better than you.

Then why invite a QB for a visit?

And I don't think Sanchez is THE logical pick. I just think it makes sense and should be considered, as should adding a Kurt Warner or Byron Leftwich.

Brent
03-01-2009, 04:47 PM
Then why invite a QB for a visit?

And I don't think Sanchez is THE logical pick. I just think it makes sense and should be considered, as should adding a Kurt Warner or Byron Leftwich.
There are several reasons why you bring in a guy for a visit but the main one is due diligence. The Niners have said several times that they wouldn't mind bringing in a veteran QB this off-season to increase competition at QB. It doesn't harm the 49ers to negotiate with Warner's agents. It accomplishes three things:

1) Warner's asking price goes up, further depleting a division rival's salary cap
2) It creates friction between Warner and the Cardinals
3) This puts more pressure on Alex Smith to sign his own reworked contract.

Sure, the 49ers would benefit if Warner left Arizona for San Francisco but it would also be to the teams benefit if Warner gets frustrated by all this negotiation stuff and retires.

gpngc
03-01-2009, 04:49 PM
There are several reasons why you bring in a guy for a visit but the main one is due diligence. The Niners have said several times that they wouldn't mind bringing in a veteran QB this off-season to increase competition at QB. It doesn't harm the 49ers to negotiate with Warner's agents. It accomplishes three things:

1) Warner's asking price goes up, further depleting a division rival's salary cap
2) It creates friction between Warner and the Cardinals
3) This puts more pressure on Alex Smith to sign his own reworked contract.

Sure, the 49ers would benefit if Warner left Arizona for San Francisco but it would also be to the teams benefit if Warner gets frustrated by all this negotiation stuff and retires.

OK. So they do not want to sign him, they just want to bring him in for reasons 1-3?

Brent
03-01-2009, 04:51 PM
OK. So they do not want to sign him, they just want to bring him in for reasons 1-3?
I have no idea if those are the exact reasons why they brought him into San Francisco, as I am not in the organization. Those are simply logical reasons why such a move makes sense. What about that do you not understand?

phlysac
03-01-2009, 04:54 PM
Alot depends on Alex Smith. If he restructures his contract, I don't see the 49ers drafting a QB in round one. If he doesn't the chances increase. What few seem to realize is that Shaun Hill is 7-3 as an NFL starter and Alex Smith was 8-8 in his last 16 starts prior to being injured. That doesn't look like a QB situation that ABSOLUTELY necessitates a QB change.

gpngc
03-01-2009, 04:54 PM
I have no idea if those are the exact reasons why they brought him into San Francisco, as I am not in the organization. Those are simply logical reasons why such a move makes sense. What about that do you not understand?

Just trying to point out that I think the more logical assumption is that they are bringing in Warner with the intention to attempt to sign him to be the starter and thus improve their QB situation.

But I guess the entire visit could just be a ploy to mess with Arizona's financial situation. Doesn't seem like something a team would be focusing on during free agency, but apparently they love Shaun Hill so much they feel their best course of action right now is to screw Arizona, not attempt to sign free agents to help their team.

gpngc
03-01-2009, 04:56 PM
Alot depends on Alex Smith. If he restructures his contract, I don't see the 49ers drafting a QB in round one. If he doesn't the chances increase. What few seem to realize is that Shaun Hill is 7-3 as an NFL starter and Alex Smith was 8-8 in his last 16 starts prior to being injured. That doesn't look like a QB situation that ABSOLUTELY necessitates a QB change.

Good point.

My entire argument is not that they ABSOLUTELY need a QB change. It is that they PROBABLY COULD USE one or in other words they DON'T ABSOLUTELY NOT need a QB change (triple negative!!!!).

phlysac
03-01-2009, 04:59 PM
The 49ers organization hasn't exactly jumped on the Shaun Hill bandwagon. They would like to increase the talent level at the QB position. But as I've mentioned before, the signing of Kurt Warner could mean 2 things...

1. Warner will be the starter as the newly drafted QB gets seasoned and they have a more-than-capable backup QB in Shaun Hill.

or

2. Warner will be the starter as Alex Smith is groomed to once again be the QBOTF. Urban Meyer said that he needs a long time to get comfortable but once he does he's great. They would still have Shaun Hill as a more-than-capable backup.

Brent
03-01-2009, 04:59 PM
Just trying to point out that I think the more logical assumption is that they are bringing in Warner with the intention to attempt to sign him to be the starter and thus improve their QB situation.

But I guess the entire visit could just be a ploy to mess with Arizona's financial situation. Doesn't seem like something a team would be focusing on during free agency, but apparently they love Shaun Hill so much they feel their best course of action right now is to screw Arizona, not attempt to sign free agents to help their team.
I am sure they wouldn't mind bringing in Kurt Warner but they certainly aren't going to shell out a lot of cash to do so. When the GM comes out and says plainly that they don't plan to make a huge splash in free agency, signing someone who just quarterbacked a team in the Super Bowl isn't what I would call "not making a big splash."

OneToughGame
03-01-2009, 07:02 PM
He will go to Seattle. He will have to to learn from Hasselback before he gets too old.

Nah.......:)