ImageImageImageImageImage

Purdy-Torn UCL

Moderators: MHSL82, CalamityX12

Jikkle
Analyst
Posts: 3,065
And1: 261
Joined: Aug 24, 2014
         

Re: Purdy-Torn UCL 

Post#81 » by Jikkle » Mon Mar 6, 2023 5:02 am

Big J wrote:
Jikkle wrote:A couple of years ago I'd be ok with Brady but I think the combination of his age, the fact he'd have to learn a new offense, and how immobile he is I'd pass. Not to mention he's going to probably at least want 30 million to play in the first place.

Rodgers fits but he's an epic choker in the playoffs. He's another one that gets banged up and sure if he's healthy he'd likely win the MVP but he'd just choke in the divisional or championship game like he has for over a decade. Not to mention you'd have to put together a sizable trade package to land.


So what is the alternative? Have Lance stink up the joint, and waste this teams SB window?


Have to ride it out with Lance and hope he develops over the course of the season and fallback on Purdy if he doesn't.

People have been way too quick to write off Lance and he may very well suck in the long run but for whatever reason fans have lost their minds with the QB situation this past year.

Jalen Hurts should be a model for Lance as someone that can improve and develop if you commit to it.

I'm just afraid Lance just got drafted on the wrong team and the wrong coach because Shanahan unwilling to stomach the growing pains of developing a QB and can't help himself to sticking QBs that have little to no ceiling but are safe.

Gotta keep in mind if Lance is a big hit the SB window doesn't close but could be open for another 10 years as long as the team is smart with the roster.
CrimsonCrew
RealGM
Posts: 11,360
And1: 961
Joined: Aug 21, 2014
 

Re: Purdy-Torn UCL 

Post#82 » by CrimsonCrew » Mon Mar 6, 2023 5:47 pm

Jikkle wrote:
Big J wrote:
Jikkle wrote:A couple of years ago I'd be ok with Brady but I think the combination of his age, the fact he'd have to learn a new offense, and how immobile he is I'd pass. Not to mention he's going to probably at least want 30 million to play in the first place.

Rodgers fits but he's an epic choker in the playoffs. He's another one that gets banged up and sure if he's healthy he'd likely win the MVP but he'd just choke in the divisional or championship game like he has for over a decade. Not to mention you'd have to put together a sizable trade package to land.


So what is the alternative? Have Lance stink up the joint, and waste this teams SB window?


Have to ride it out with Lance and hope he develops over the course of the season and fallback on Purdy if he doesn't.

People have been way too quick to write off Lance and he may very well suck in the long run but for whatever reason fans have lost their minds with the QB situation this past year.

Jalen Hurts should be a model for Lance as someone that can improve and develop if you commit to it.

I'm just afraid Lance just got drafted on the wrong team and the wrong coach because Shanahan unwilling to stomach the growing pains of developing a QB and can't help himself to sticking QBs that have little to no ceiling but are safe.

Gotta keep in mind if Lance is a big hit the SB window doesn't close but could be open for another 10 years as long as the team is smart with the roster.


Yeah, people giving up on Lance blows my mind, and I wasn't a fan of Lance coming into the draft. I called hi ma second-round pick pre-draft. But there's no denying his physical talent, everything you hear about him off the field, in the film and locker room, etc. is exemplary. We just haven't seen much of anything.

Lance looked pretty good in the second half against Houston as a rookie. Last year he had his moments against Chicago, though he also had some misses before the weather turned that one on its head. He didn't do much of anything before his injury against Seattle, but certainly nothing to give up on him.

He's not the dynamic runner that apparently some were expecting. I think we can say that definitively at this point. But those people hadn't watched his tape. He was a good runner in a conference full of guys who will never sniff the NFL. He ran over small defenders constantly, and he can't do that in the NFL. He lacks the wiggle and explosiveness of Fields, and Fields himself isn't in the range of Lamar or Kyler. He also needs to learn how to protect himself. He's awful at that right now, and I think it's part of why he got hurt this year. He kind of did a quarter slide but didn't commit, then got bent back over the ankle. But his passing is still such a question mark. We need more sample size. And we have recently seen guys like Allen and Hurts, who were not accurate, really improve in that area in the NFL. That used to be a real rarity.

Having said that, I don't view Purdy as being a low ceiling guy, per se. Because of his physical ceiling, everything else will need to go right for him to become a true impact QB. But we should expect his arm strength to improve somewhat as he grows into his body a bit more. We should expect the mental aspect of the game to get easier for him, and he already looked like a seasoned vet at times as a rookie in a complex system. He processes extremely quickly. It might be "settling" to an extent to go with Purdy over Lance, but I don't think that means our SB window closes. And Purdy is almost certainly better to be playing behind what could be a somewhat shaky OL than Lance is at this point.

The bottom line is that we can't panic, and we just need to see where these guys go over this upcoming season.
Jikkle
Analyst
Posts: 3,065
And1: 261
Joined: Aug 24, 2014
         

Re: Purdy-Torn UCL 

Post#83 » by Jikkle » Tue Mar 7, 2023 4:10 am

With Lance's legs he's fast enough and effective enough to be a threat with them and to keep defenses honest. People go to the extremes with Lance and because he not Lamar, Kyler, or Fields with his legs they think he can't run at all and that's simply not the case.

In fact I don't want him to be Lamar or those guys with his legs. Pretty much every single one of those type of guys got hurt this season and missed games so it's not just a Lance thing it's just running a QB heavily isn't a sustainable model in the NFL if you want your QB to play every game.

I'd like to see him around Josh Allen in that regard and give him about 100 attempts or less and just run him enough each game that defenses have to respect it.

I understand Shanahan probably wanted to lean on his legs at first and ramp up his passing as the season went on but he just needs Lance to run the Purdy offense sprinkled in with some designed runs.

Lance could develop into Purdy but much more physically gifted and dangerous if they give him the reps and develop him.
CrimsonCrew
RealGM
Posts: 11,360
And1: 961
Joined: Aug 21, 2014
 

Re: Purdy-Torn UCL 

Post#84 » by CrimsonCrew » Tue Mar 7, 2023 6:16 pm

Jikkle wrote:With Lance's legs he's fast enough and effective enough to be a threat with them and to keep defenses honest. People go to the extremes with Lance and because he not Lamar, Kyler, or Fields with his legs they think he can't run at all and that's simply not the case.

In fact I don't want him to be Lamar or those guys with his legs. Pretty much every single one of those type of guys got hurt this season and missed games so it's not just a Lance thing it's just running a QB heavily isn't a sustainable model in the NFL if you want your QB to play every game.

I'd like to see him around Josh Allen in that regard and give him about 100 attempts or less and just run him enough each game that defenses have to respect it.

I understand Shanahan probably wanted to lean on his legs at first and ramp up his passing as the season went on but he just needs Lance to run the Purdy offense sprinkled in with some designed runs.

Lance could develop into Purdy but much more physically gifted and dangerous if they give him the reps and develop him.


Lance can absolutely threaten with his legs. He's just not as dynamic as those other guys. No major knock. Those guys are very unique, and Lance isn't in their ballpark.

For what it's worth, there has been some follow-up on Lance's S2 cognitive score, and apparently he also tested in the elite level, but not as high as Purdy. Estimates are in the low-90s percentile-wise, which is a strong number. Got to keep in mind that pretty much all NFL QBs would be expected to be above average in cognition speed.
CrimsonCrew
RealGM
Posts: 11,360
And1: 961
Joined: Aug 21, 2014
 

Re: Purdy-Torn UCL 

Post#85 » by CrimsonCrew » Tue Mar 7, 2023 6:46 pm

Apparently the percentiles are for 3,000-odd NFL players, not the average population. I would imagine NFL players in general score higher than the general population, though that's far from certain.
Pattersonca65
Analyst
Posts: 3,314
And1: 208
Joined: Aug 29, 2014
     

Re: Purdy-Torn UCL 

Post#86 » by Pattersonca65 » Tue Mar 7, 2023 7:12 pm

Jikkle wrote:With Lance's legs he's fast enough and effective enough to be a threat with them and to keep defenses honest. People go to the extremes with Lance and because he not Lamar, Kyler, or Fields with his legs they think he can't run at all and that's simply not the case.

In fact I don't want him to be Lamar or those guys with his legs. Pretty much every single one of those type of guys got hurt this season and missed games so it's not just a Lance thing it's just running a QB heavily isn't a sustainable model in the NFL if you want your QB to play every game.

I'd like to see him around Josh Allen in that regard and give him about 100 attempts or less and just run him enough each game that defenses have to respect it.

I understand Shanahan probably wanted to lean on his legs at first and ramp up his passing as the season went on but he just needs Lance to run the Purdy offense sprinkled in with some designed runs.

Lance could develop into Purdy but much more physically gifted and dangerous if they give him the reps and develop him.


Not sure anyone thinks Lance cannot run at all. What people have seen is he doesn't look as dominant a runner as he was in college against inferior talent. Lance could develop into Purdy but he is a mile away from that and Shanahan has a quagmire in trying to win while hoping Lance gets it.
User avatar
Big J
General Manager
Posts: 9,593
And1: 7,455
Joined: May 26, 2020

Re: Purdy-Torn UCL 

Post#87 » by Big J » Wed Mar 8, 2023 11:25 pm

Pattersonca65 wrote:
Jikkle wrote:With Lance's legs he's fast enough and effective enough to be a threat with them and to keep defenses honest. People go to the extremes with Lance and because he not Lamar, Kyler, or Fields with his legs they think he can't run at all and that's simply not the case.

In fact I don't want him to be Lamar or those guys with his legs. Pretty much every single one of those type of guys got hurt this season and missed games so it's not just a Lance thing it's just running a QB heavily isn't a sustainable model in the NFL if you want your QB to play every game.

I'd like to see him around Josh Allen in that regard and give him about 100 attempts or less and just run him enough each game that defenses have to respect it.

I understand Shanahan probably wanted to lean on his legs at first and ramp up his passing as the season went on but he just needs Lance to run the Purdy offense sprinkled in with some designed runs.

Lance could develop into Purdy but much more physically gifted and dangerous if they give him the reps and develop him.


Not sure anyone thinks Lance cannot run at all. What people have seen is he doesn't look as dominant a runner as he was in college against inferior talent. Lance could develop into Purdy but he is a mile away from that and Shanahan has a quagmire in trying to win while hoping Lance gets it.


I'd take my chances with Lance. Purdy is just too limited to win it all. Might as well keep Jimmy.
Pattersonca65
Analyst
Posts: 3,314
And1: 208
Joined: Aug 29, 2014
     

Re: Purdy-Torn UCL 

Post#88 » by Pattersonca65 » Thu Mar 9, 2023 8:30 pm

Big J wrote:
Pattersonca65 wrote:
Jikkle wrote:With Lance's legs he's fast enough and effective enough to be a threat with them and to keep defenses honest. People go to the extremes with Lance and because he not Lamar, Kyler, or Fields with his legs they think he can't run at all and that's simply not the case.

In fact I don't want him to be Lamar or those guys with his legs. Pretty much every single one of those type of guys got hurt this season and missed games so it's not just a Lance thing it's just running a QB heavily isn't a sustainable model in the NFL if you want your QB to play every game.

I'd like to see him around Josh Allen in that regard and give him about 100 attempts or less and just run him enough each game that defenses have to respect it.

I understand Shanahan probably wanted to lean on his legs at first and ramp up his passing as the season went on but he just needs Lance to run the Purdy offense sprinkled in with some designed runs.

Lance could develop into Purdy but much more physically gifted and dangerous if they give him the reps and develop him.


Not sure anyone thinks Lance cannot run at all. What people have seen is he doesn't look as dominant a runner as he was in college against inferior talent. Lance could develop into Purdy but he is a mile away from that and Shanahan has a quagmire in trying to win while hoping Lance gets it.


I'd take my chances with Lance. Purdy is just too limited to win it all. Might as well keep Jimmy.


Purdy isn't Jimmy G. Can't just focus on the physical traits. Lance might just as well have limitations that prevents this team from going anywhere.
User avatar
Big J
General Manager
Posts: 9,593
And1: 7,455
Joined: May 26, 2020

Re: Purdy-Torn UCL 

Post#89 » by Big J » Thu Mar 9, 2023 8:32 pm

Pattersonca65 wrote:
Big J wrote:
Pattersonca65 wrote:
Not sure anyone thinks Lance cannot run at all. What people have seen is he doesn't look as dominant a runner as he was in college against inferior talent. Lance could develop into Purdy but he is a mile away from that and Shanahan has a quagmire in trying to win while hoping Lance gets it.


I'd take my chances with Lance. Purdy is just too limited to win it all. Might as well keep Jimmy.


Purdy isn't Jimmy G. Can't just focus on the physical traits. Lance might just as well have limitations that prevents this team from going anywhere.


There is a reason that Purdy was Mr. Irrelevant, he is just physically limited. He was lucky the team had a bunch of playmakers that made him look good for a few games. There is just way too much hopium going on with him. Lance sucks too, but at least it looks like he has the physical tools to someday be a franchise QB.
CrimsonCrew
RealGM
Posts: 11,360
And1: 961
Joined: Aug 21, 2014
 

Re: Purdy-Torn UCL 

Post#90 » by CrimsonCrew » Thu Mar 9, 2023 10:13 pm

Big J wrote:
Pattersonca65 wrote:
Big J wrote:
I'd take my chances with Lance. Purdy is just too limited to win it all. Might as well keep Jimmy.


Purdy isn't Jimmy G. Can't just focus on the physical traits. Lance might just as well have limitations that prevents this team from going anywhere.


There is a reason that Purdy was Mr. Irrelevant, he is just physically limited. He was lucky the team had a bunch of playmakers that made him look good for a few games. There is just way too much hopium going on with him. Lance sucks too, but at least it looks like he has the physical tools to someday be a franchise QB.


There was a reason Tom Brady went with one of the last picks in the 6th round. And Tony Romo went undrafted. It's exceedingly unlikely that one of those guys will pan out, but it's not unheard of. And Purdy came in and outplayed Garoppolo as a rookie who spent the entire offseason as no better than the third QB.

I'm certainly not saying Purdy can be the next Drew Brees, but the early returns were about as good as anyone could have hoped. He at least earned the chance to show what he can do with more seasoning. And Lance shouldn't have lost that chance. Either way, we've got two young QBs who show promise in different ways. It's a good problem to have, and hopefully they can push each other and both show growth.
Pattersonca65
Analyst
Posts: 3,314
And1: 208
Joined: Aug 29, 2014
     

Re: Purdy-Torn UCL 

Post#91 » by Pattersonca65 » Thu Mar 9, 2023 10:33 pm

Big J wrote:
Pattersonca65 wrote:
Big J wrote:
I'd take my chances with Lance. Purdy is just too limited to win it all. Might as well keep Jimmy.


Purdy isn't Jimmy G. Can't just focus on the physical traits. Lance might just as well have limitations that prevents this team from going anywhere.


There is a reason that Purdy was Mr. Irrelevant, he is just physically limited. He was lucky the team had a bunch of playmakers that made him look good for a few games. There is just way too much hopium going on with him. Lance sucks too, but at least it looks like he has the physical tools to someday be a franchise QB.


Do you know what Mr Irrelevant even is? As if draft status is some surefire signal of one's success in the NFL. The NFL graveyard is littered with first round draft picks that look great on paper and physically gifted only to crash and burn in the NFL. The whole playmaker talk is so worn out and tired and just utter nonsense as if those players somehow get the QB throw his progressions. It also ignores the fact of how Purdy involved even the backup players in the offense.
Pattersonca65
Analyst
Posts: 3,314
And1: 208
Joined: Aug 29, 2014
     

Re: Purdy-Torn UCL 

Post#92 » by Pattersonca65 » Thu Mar 9, 2023 10:35 pm

CrimsonCrew wrote:
Big J wrote:
Pattersonca65 wrote:
Purdy isn't Jimmy G. Can't just focus on the physical traits. Lance might just as well have limitations that prevents this team from going anywhere.


There is a reason that Purdy was Mr. Irrelevant, he is just physically limited. He was lucky the team had a bunch of playmakers that made him look good for a few games. There is just way too much hopium going on with him. Lance sucks too, but at least it looks like he has the physical tools to someday be a franchise QB.


There was a reason Tom Brady went with one of the last picks in the 6th round. And Tony Romo went undrafted. It's exceedingly unlikely that one of those guys will pan out, but it's not unheard of. And Purdy came in and outplayed Garoppolo as a rookie who spent the entire offseason as no better than the third QB.

I'm certainly not saying Purdy can be the next Drew Brees, but the early returns were about as good as anyone could have hoped. He at least earned the chance to show what he can do with more seasoning. And Lance shouldn't have lost that chance. Either way, we've got two young QBs who show promise in different ways. It's a good problem to have, and hopefully they can push each other and both show growth.


And Joe Montana went in the third round. And there were front office personnel at the time that thought Walsh was picking him too high and he fall to later rounds.
CrimsonCrew
RealGM
Posts: 11,360
And1: 961
Joined: Aug 21, 2014
 

Re: Purdy-Torn UCL 

Post#93 » by CrimsonCrew » Fri Mar 10, 2023 6:24 pm

Reports are successful surgery and the shorter recovery time anticipated. Great news for the team and Brock!
Pattersonca65
Analyst
Posts: 3,314
And1: 208
Joined: Aug 29, 2014
     

Re: Purdy-Torn UCL 

Post#94 » by Pattersonca65 » Fri Mar 10, 2023 7:29 pm

CrimsonCrew wrote:
Big J wrote:
Pattersonca65 wrote:
Purdy isn't Jimmy G. Can't just focus on the physical traits. Lance might just as well have limitations that prevents this team from going anywhere.


There is a reason that Purdy was Mr. Irrelevant, he is just physically limited. He was lucky the team had a bunch of playmakers that made him look good for a few games. There is just way too much hopium going on with him. Lance sucks too, but at least it looks like he has the physical tools to someday be a franchise QB.


There was a reason Tom Brady went with one of the last picks in the 6th round. And Tony Romo went undrafted. It's exceedingly unlikely that one of those guys will pan out, but it's not unheard of. And Purdy came in and outplayed Garoppolo as a rookie who spent the entire offseason as no better than the third QB.

I'm certainly not saying Purdy can be the next Drew Brees, but the early returns were about as good as anyone could have hoped. He at least earned the chance to show what he can do with more seasoning. And Lance shouldn't have lost that chance. Either way, we've got two young QBs who show promise in different ways. It's a good problem to have, and hopefully they can push each other and both show growth.


I am ok with letting them battle it out
Jikkle
Analyst
Posts: 3,065
And1: 261
Joined: Aug 24, 2014
         

Re: Purdy-Torn UCL 

Post#95 » by Jikkle » Mon Mar 13, 2023 7:14 am

Pattersonca65 wrote:
Big J wrote:
Pattersonca65 wrote:
Purdy isn't Jimmy G. Can't just focus on the physical traits. Lance might just as well have limitations that prevents this team from going anywhere.


There is a reason that Purdy was Mr. Irrelevant, he is just physically limited. He was lucky the team had a bunch of playmakers that made him look good for a few games. There is just way too much hopium going on with him. Lance sucks too, but at least it looks like he has the physical tools to someday be a franchise QB.


Do you know what Mr Irrelevant even is? As if draft status is some surefire signal of one's success in the NFL. The NFL graveyard is littered with first round draft picks that look great on paper and physically gifted only to crash and burn in the NFL. The whole playmaker talk is so worn out and tired and just utter nonsense as if those players somehow get the QB throw his progressions. It also ignores the fact of how Purdy involved even the backup players in the offense.


It's true the NFL has had a lot of 1st round QB busts but still the odds of getting a high-end starter drop dramatically outside the 1st round and are extremely low once you get out of the 2nd round. Brady and Wilson are the only recent ones off the top of my head drafted outside the 2nd round that you could say have 1st ballot hall of fame careers.

Doesn't mean Purdy won't be one to punch that lotto ticket but I just fear with him he's always going to be just a scrappy overachiever that won't ultimately beat guys that are just more gifted than he is.

Either way I do feel he's an upgrade over Jimmy G and I don't see him being awful and he's shown at the very least he can be a capable starter.
CrimsonCrew
RealGM
Posts: 11,360
And1: 961
Joined: Aug 21, 2014
 

Re: Purdy-Torn UCL 

Post#96 » by CrimsonCrew » Mon Mar 13, 2023 3:46 pm

Yeah, though Jimmy himself looked pretty amazing in his first five starts, only to never achieve that level of success again.

Purdy has a high floor, and although his ceiling is somewhat limited, I don't think it's as low as some are making it out to be. He appears to have the processing speed and vision to have some real upside, as long as he has some talent around him. The questions are about his ability to lift the talent when he's not playing with the best group of skill players in the league.

We should all be hoping that Lance plays really well over the summer and actually makes this a tough decision for the coaches. Either way, that's the best outcome. Worst case, we see if we can trade one of these guys, or we have a superior backup for when the starter inevitably gets hurt.
User avatar
Cactus Jack
Forum Mod - Supersonics
Forum Mod - Supersonics
Posts: 28,194
And1: 14,495
Joined: Feb 25, 2015
   

Re: Purdy-Torn UCL 

Post#97 » by Cactus Jack » Sat Jun 10, 2023 5:27 pm

Dominater wrote:Damn Cactus jack takin over
Jikkle
Analyst
Posts: 3,065
And1: 261
Joined: Aug 24, 2014
         

Re: Purdy-Torn UCL 

Post#98 » by Jikkle » Mon Jun 12, 2023 5:51 am

Cactus Jack wrote:


The funny thing is a couple of days ago I said Purdy was basically a better Jimmy G and this video spells out the same thing.

I don't 100% agree with the video but it is mostly in line with my concerns with Purdy.

I think the part he misses with Purdy's mobility is it allowed the 9ers to run far more bootlegs and he was just mobile enough you could somewhat threaten the defense with a designed QB run whereas Jimmy G couldn't do any of those things.

For me the eyeball test plays a big factor in evaluation rather than raw stats which is why I think stats are useful I just don't like them as a sole reason to make your argument.

To me it's pretty obvious Purdy is a better overall QB than Jimmy G and Purdy is just a rookie. Now I don't expect a tremendous leap from Purdy but it's still fair to say he does have room for improvement with experience.

I just think the truth with Purdy is somewhere in the middle and that's my concern. I don't think he's Montana 2.0 but I don't think he's some dink and dunk QB. I just question when the defense he's up against is stingy is he going to be able to make difficult throws when things aren't as open as he's used to seeing? Not saying he can't be I just wonder if that's when he's going to slam into his limitations.
CrimsonCrew
RealGM
Posts: 11,360
And1: 961
Joined: Aug 21, 2014
 

Re: Purdy-Torn UCL 

Post#99 » by CrimsonCrew » Mon Jun 12, 2023 8:01 pm

Yeah, nothing earth-shattering about that video. What's that? One Shanahan QB and another Shanahan QB put up similar stats in a similar way in what was effectively the same offense? Wow.

That said, I think we need more context. First, Garoppolo does get a bad rap, as the video notes. He's a good - but not great - QB. That said, this video extrapolates what Jimmy has been historically, then compares Brock to the Jimmy of this past year. Here's the problem: this past season, Jimmy was probably playing the best football of his career. That's particularly true in terms of minimizing the boneheaded plays that have been such an issue for him historically. His interception percentage was less than half what it was in his next best season (1.3% vs. a career low of 2.7%). Other than the end of 2017, his sack percentage was a season low (5.5%). And Jimmy went 8-3 and was on a five-game winning streak when he went down. Then Brock came in, and the offense didn't skip a beat, and even improved.

Another issue with the comparison is sample size. Jimmy played 10 games to Brock's eight, yet Brock matched his TDs (they also both rushed for two TDs). One of Brock's INTs came in mop-up duty in a blowout loss to the Chiefs, a game that should not be considered in this comparison. That's 25% of his total for the season not coming in a full game, which is statistically significant. And Brock played two full playoff games. Things are inherently tougher in the playoffs, as we saw from Jimmy's repeated struggles. Yet that accounts for 25% of Purdy's sample.

The long and the short of it is that a rookie Brock Purdy was as good or better than nine-year-vet Jimmy Garoppolo playing at his best. That is damn impressive. Jimmy Garoppolo taking fewer sacks and throwing fewer interceptions is easily good enough to win the super bowl with a talented roster around him, and that's what Brock was last year. And yes, as I've repeatedly acknowledged, there is certainly room to question whether Brock can lead a successful team when he's accounting for tens of millions of dollar of cap space. But we've got at least two more years to sort that out. The early returns have been very promising. I think it would be a mistake to give up on Lance entirely, but it's also silly to assume that Brock has peaked.
Pattersonca65
Analyst
Posts: 3,314
And1: 208
Joined: Aug 29, 2014
     

Re: Purdy-Torn UCL 

Post#100 » by Pattersonca65 » Tue Jul 25, 2023 7:44 pm

Brock has been cleared to play without restriction.

Return to San Francisco 49ers