Kirby Jackson

For me, I would want to see indicators to suggest that. Someone used the Kincaid example earlier. There was a guy on WGR last week talking about how good his separation numbers were, his YAC and how many off target throws he saw (most of any TE). That is an indicator that it will likely improve. He probably won’t be last in on target throws next year. That should normalize. There wasn’t anything like that with Coleman. I saw the exact guy that I expected.

The conversation started with, “we should expect him to improve.” I asked, “why?” We all “hope” that he improves but he largely looked like the exact same guy that he has been (good and bad). We all hope that some of his strengths get stronger and his flaws diminish. We shouldn’t “expect” it. We are “hoping” that happens. He didn’t show anything, good or bad, that was different than what we expected last year. I’m not assuming that he won’t either. All that I’ve said is that he looked almost exactly as the scouting reports indicated (good and bad). Maybe he is the player that the scouts thought (good and bad)? I’m HOPING that he exceeds it but there hasn’t been any signs, imo, that we should assume he looks different (good or bad).

Why are you assuming he will? Obviously we all want it and hope for it but using logic, there’s no reason to believe that he will or that he won’t. To this point, he looks exactly like the guy that the scouting community thought. He doesn’t get open. He’s good with the ball in his hands. He high points well. He has too many contested catch situations. There was nothing surprising in a good or bad way as a rookie. To this point in his football life, that’s the player that he has been (predating the NFL too). We all hope that those strengths become stronger and those weaknesses can be masked. Maybe who he always has been is who he will always be?

I’m not assuming that he will and I’m not assuming that he won’t. So far, he’s been exactly as advertised. His strengths coming out were his strengths and his flaws were his flaws. I HOPE he improves. I’m not assuming it or not assuming it.

Those are interchangeable to me. He’s probably somewhere between 15-20ish IMO. That’s off the top of my head. If I have time later I’ll think it through and make my list.

100% agree.

Why assume he will? That’s what his chart looked like from college too. We all HOPE that Keon improves. I don’t think that we all EXPECT Keon to improve. He was a high ceiling and low floor prospect coming out. His physical skills could make him a very good WR. His flaws are significantly greater than those guys drafted around him. His ceiling is a Pro Bowl receiver. His floor is out of the league in a couple of years because he can’t get open. Through 1 year, he was exactly as advertised. He’s a poor route runner who gets no separation. He’s a big target that runs well after the catch. He has good ball skills when the ball is in the air. He is in way too many contested catch situations because he doesn’t get any space. All of that is true. Who he ends up as a player is TBD. I don’t expect him to improve or not improve. I hope that he improves because the Bills absolutely need him to grow into a quality WR.

Yeah, he’s an interesting case because I think Baker is better than that whole tier I listed earlier and he makes less than all of them. Yep!! Absolutely agree. That’s the point. If they aren’t impacting winning in a significant way, the less you’re paying the better. The irony is, as of last week, Purdy was the best contract in football. The 49ers had a window because he’s a pretty good QB that made nothing. I thought @BillsFan130 hit it a little earlier on the guys that you win because of or can win a Super Bowl.

The Steeler fans and people that follow them hated that decision. He has a starting role this year. Again, he’s not Peterman. You’re better off paying him $20M than Purdy $53M. There are 3 tiers of QBs: guys you win because of, guys you can win with, and young / unproven guys. The worst place to be is having “a guy you can win with making guy that you win because of money.” That’s Purdy

Yeah, it’s wild. You really don’t have a choice but that’s an awful place to be. I’d much rather need a QB than pay a guy that’s just okay. I do agree on the Tua comparison. Purdy is good in that system.

Justin Fields was 4-2 last year. He didn’t set the world on fire but he was relatively efficient and won. That was my point. He’s not Peterman. He’s a little more like Tyrod was. He can make a few plays and if he manages mistakes (which Tyrod did better than Fields) you can win with him. Again, I think Fields is probably a bottom 5 starting QB. The point that I’m trying to make is that I’d rather have QB 28 at $20M than QB 21 at $53M. Your ceiling is the exact same with either guy calling the shots. You can maybe get to the WC round. Purdy is a better player than Fields but not by a lot (especially last year). Give me the slightly worse player that’s way cheaper, every day.

I actually think he’s pretty good too. I also think, that he played with the NFL’s best roster for a year and a half. This past year, the roster was a little worse and he was below average to bad IMO. That tweet doesn’t necessarily say it but he didn’t impact winning at all. The focus turned to him and he went 6-9. I know that they had injuries, but you could have had LOTS of QBs win at least 6 games in that situation. With this contract, he will never have rosters as good as his first couple of years again. Their rosters will look more like 2024 when he steered them to 6 wins. It’s a tricky situation though. I don’t know what you would do differently? As the 49ers GM, you had to pay him. You could do a lot worse than him as a player. The problem is, the second you sign him to that deal, you’re resigned to mediocrity until you can get out from the contract. It’s not just Purdy either. It’s Tua, Derek Carr, it’s Cousins, it’s Geno, it’s Watson, it’s Darnold and maybe even Murray, Love, Goff and Lawrence. They’re all a little different but committing to a mediocre QB, above $25M AAV is bad business.

With the exact same roster, you believe that Purdy is “several wins better?” Okay. I’m not even saying that Fields is good. I’m basically saying, anyone that would rather have Purdy at $53M AAV than Fields (or whatever bridge QB) at $20M AAV is an idiot. Purdy is fine. That franchise just gutted their roster to keep an average QB. The biggest mistake an NFL front office can make is paying an average QB, top QB money. The numbers are so big now, it just can’t work. You’re 100x better with a bridge guy or starting over with a young QB. The day that you pay Tua or Purdy or Carr is the day that you’re officially no better than a WC contender for the life of their contract. That was Purdy on a rookie deal. It was the best contract in football. If you can get middle of the road QB play, from a guy picked last, and on a rookie deal, you won the lottery. Now that you’re paying him Josh Allen money, you’re done. That’s the point. I do agree on the Baker deal. I also agree on Lawrence, Goff, Tua, Kyler and a whole bunch of others. I’m not yet sure on Love. Fields wasn’t horrible last year. He isn’t a traditional QB. They won with him and he was effective. I’m not saying that he’s great or even good. I’m saying that he’s in the tier with those overpaid middle guys (or at worst a tick below). Your record isn’t much worse with him than Purdy. Maybe a game or 2. Your ceiling is the exact same.

What will the 49ers record be? If you switched Fields for Purdy what would it be? Would it be more than a game different? Honestly, it might not be. That’s the exact problem with these mid QBs. If you don’t win 1 more game because you have them, why give them their 2nd contract? Draft a guy and you aren’t really worse. Sign Fields or Carr or Cousins or Wilson or whomever. It doesn’t matter. You either have a guy or you don’t. If you don’t, they are all the same just in different contracts.

OMG, you don’t win a game because you have either of them. If you switched teams between the 2 of them, the records wouldn’t be more than a game or 2 different. If you could win 7 games with Fields, I wouldn’t pay more than 2.5x that to have Purdy and maybe win 8. 🤣🤣🤣 I am shocked that anyone disagrees. Maybe I’m not explaining it well. Let’s try it another way. If you don’t have a QB that you win BECAUSE OF (that’s a relatively small list) you are WAY better off with a bridge QB at $20M than a QB that you DONT WIN BECAUSE OF on a big contract. Purdy on a rookie deal was awesome value. That’s why the 49ers were loaded. Purdy making Josh Allen money is franchise crippling. The 49ers would be WAY better off with Fields at $20M AAV than Purdy at $53M AAV.

My goodness. It’s not complicated. His AAV is $20M. Purdy’s is now $53M. I’m not even sure that Purdy is better. He certainly doesn’t deserve more than 2.5X what Fields makes. 🤣🤣 They are pretty much the same. You can win some games with them. You don’t win because of them. You won’t win a championship with either of them. The same goes for a ton of the overpaid mid QBs. I’m actually shocked that people aren’t seeing that.

That’s kind of the point. Paying Purdy $53M is WAY worse than paying Fields $20M. These teams are getting crippled paying these game manager top of the market money. There are so many awful deals on here: https://overthecap.com/position/quarterback Yep, they can’t possibly get stuck with him. They did have to gut the roster already to get this done. 🤣🤣 What a nightmare

Because he makes $20M a year AAV and Brock Purdy makes $53M a year AAV. If you don’t have a guy on a rookie deal, I’d WAY rather have a bridge type guy like Fields than a game manger making $50M plus. Might want to google how the cap works…. Exactly!! If neither is the reason that you win, give me the guy at 1/2 price. It’s not complicated and honestly not really debatable.

I’d rather have Justin Fields than Brock Purdy or Tua or Goff.

Morning of the game, you’ll be able to get in for under $100 or sit downstairs under $150

I personally like it there. Most years I try to get there for a session. It just feels a little old school in a good way. It feels very “Packers players on the back of bikes” to me. Obviously Rochester is a huge part of the Bills fan base but it’s beyond that. It just feels right.

The Carolina Bills Backers Group is pretty large. I went to the last game there and it was a good time. Hyperbole aside, 60% of the stadium may be be Bills fans. That’s a realistic estimate. We may have 40,000 Bills fans there. There have been Nashville games that look like that but this game will rival that. I’d say AT LEAST 25,000. The point being, it won’t be hard to be around Bills fans. Sometimes the Backer Groups have blocks of tickets. You can also go through the Fans of Buffalo group. I try to get to a couple of road games a year and I wait until the morning of the game (usually) to buy my tickets. That seems to be when the pricing is best. The few weeks before the game and now are usually the worst IMO.

You really have a way with moms not feeling appreciated at home. 🤣🤣 JK, she was an 8 and willing to entertain it.

Fun fact: went to the last ATL game with @boyst and we sat like 3 rows in front of Chris Tucker. We talked $**t to him the whole game. 🤣🤣

Saw that and deleted the post