Brian Peacock of LockedOn 49ers told the guys on the Locked On Draft podcast he doesn't think Shanahan moved up with all that draft capital to select Mac Jones.
He was in the room when Shanahan said Cousins was not his ideal QB, it is Mahomes and Elway. That's closer to Fields or Lance - not Jones. Peacock adds that the 49ers are not swinging for the fences to pick Jones. It doesn't add up to him. If you are spending that much it is to get something special, a high ceiling guy.
His opinion - it will be Justin Fields.
I linked to the podcast. He starts talking about the selection at 17:30.
Locked On Draft Podcast - 49ers - (
New Window )
perhaps. But he covers the team and I'll take his word over Simms.
Quote:
have said its jones
perhaps. But he covers the team and I'll take his word over Simms.
i'm referring to jeremiah and schefter
The buzz on Pitts is too strong to hope he will fall to us now. Too bad. I'd like to see it.
Even if not, looks like one maybe two of the OL are getting some better desire and Pitts is pretty sought after.
I have a hard time not seeing Surtain, Waddle, Smith, Parsons (at least one) making it to 11, probably at least two of them do.
QB Collective - ( New Window )
JonC - have you heard anything new on Parsons? Is he a possibility at 11 now or is he still off their draft board?
yup.. and another thing Peacock said:
The only QB Shanahan met with in person before trading up was Fields. Lance was a zoom call. And Mac Jones has had no meetings with the 49ers.
Quote:
Preach! I want one of Parsons, Smith, or Surtain at #11.
JonC - have you heard anything new on Parsons? Is he a possibility at 11 now or is he still off their draft board?
I've heard nada on Parsons, the tidbit came from Rico. I hope he's in the mix, I think he can play some Edge too.
It may not be Mac Jones, maybe he didn't show well at his pro day, but Fields would be a bit of a surprise to me.
He may be full of shit but his feathers are beautiful lol
LOL
Ha...that would be fabulous
I think its Fields.
Haha, such a good line.
I think its Fields.
I don't know if it is Fields, but if it is Jones, they likely wouldn't have had to trade up for him.
If they do take Jones, watch how Shanahan will get praise.
Quote:
and had the easiest job in college sports last season - I can't imagine moving up to #3 for a player like him but what do I know.
I think its Fields.
I don't know if it is Fields, but if it is Jones, they likely wouldn't have had to trade up for him.
If they do take Jones, watch how Shanahan will get praise.
And not just trade up, but pay an absolute premium.
Quote:
and had the easiest job in college sports last season - I can't imagine moving up to #3 for a player like him but what do I know.
I think its Fields.
I don't know if it is Fields, but if it is Jones, they likely wouldn't have had to trade up for him.
If they do take Jones, watch how Shanahan will get praise.
Yea I can't wait to see those that blasted the Giants for taking Daniel Jones at 6 applaud Shanahan for trading three 1st round picks to move up for Mac Jones. I would have loved to see Daniel Jones in college playing on that Alabama team.
I expect the 9ers to go Fields or Lance.
That's a lot of draft capital the 9ers would have given up for a QB with limited physical attributes.
Quote:
the rumors are that they traded up for him.
That's a lot of draft capital the 9ers would have given up for a QB with limited physical attributes.
and for a guy that many did not have rated as a first round talent until very recently.
I'll give Jones this - he was pretty damn good this year throwing long. Threw some beauties.
But so much of that offense was Sarkisian being a maestro play caller with the most talented skill players in the country. And Jones mostly enjoying a comfortable pocket to make pretty straightforward throws.
Quote:
the rumors are that they traded up for him.
That's a lot of draft capital the 9ers would have given up for a QB with limited physical attributes.
If it's a fit for Shanahan's offense it's a fit. There is a little bit of luck involved in becoming a good NFL QB. If you get drafted and don't fit a system, well it certainly might fuck up your development. I think he's certainly capable of being a solid starting QB in this league in that offense and they are essentially declaring they want to make a run under a rookie QB with the team they have.
Makes sense to me when you look at the roster. They have a deep WR bench, they just need a guy that shows good anticipation and accurately deliver those short and intermediate routes that's mobile. I certainly believe he's a better fit than Fields and Lance in that offense.
Kudos to him if it works but I’m highly skeptical.
Quote:
In comment 15215147 Zeke's Alibi said:
Quote:
the rumors are that they traded up for him.
That's a lot of draft capital the 9ers would have given up for a QB with limited physical attributes.
If it's a fit for Shanahan's offense it's a fit. There is a little bit of luck involved in becoming a good NFL QB. If you get drafted and don't fit a system, well it certainly might fuck up your development. I think he's certainly capable of being a solid starting QB in this league in that offense and they are essentially declaring they want to make a run under a rookie QB with the team they have.
Makes sense to me when you look at the roster. They have a deep WR bench, they just need a guy that shows good anticipation and accurately deliver those short and intermediate routes that's mobile. I certainly believe he's a better fit than Fields and Lance in that offense.
I don't see how that squares with one of the reported gripes Shanny had about Jimmy G, that he wasn't athletic enough to install a mobile component.
Physically, there is a lot to like - very good arm, fast, and excellent body type. I heard on the Pat McAfee show that Fields apparently tested very well on some sports psychology test recently (not the Wonderlic) that signals a higher change of success.
Personally, I like him better than Lawrence because he's just as gifted and, IMV, a higher ceiling.
Quote:
Has a good chance being very good.
Physically, there is a lot to like - very good arm, fast, and excellent body type. I heard on the Pat McAfee show that Fields apparently tested very well on some sports psychology test recently (not the Wonderlic) that signals a higher change of success.
Personally, I like him better than Lawrence because he's just as gifted and, IMV, a higher ceiling.
You've been consistently with this kid. I don't quite see it, but I like the upside. I'm more excited by Lance, but he's less finished for sure.
Quote:
In comment 15215171 bw in dc said:
Quote:
In comment 15215147 Zeke's Alibi said:
Quote:
the rumors are that they traded up for him.
That's a lot of draft capital the 9ers would have given up for a QB with limited physical attributes.
If it's a fit for Shanahan's offense it's a fit. There is a little bit of luck involved in becoming a good NFL QB. If you get drafted and don't fit a system, well it certainly might fuck up your development. I think he's certainly capable of being a solid starting QB in this league in that offense and they are essentially declaring they want to make a run under a rookie QB with the team they have.
Makes sense to me when you look at the roster. They have a deep WR bench, they just need a guy that shows good anticipation and accurately deliver those short and intermediate routes that's mobile. I certainly believe he's a better fit than Fields and Lance in that offense.
I don't see how that squares with one of the reported gripes Shanny had about Jimmy G, that he wasn't athletic enough to install a mobile component.
Shanahan had the RG3 experience, I'd think he was done with mobile qbs.
Shanahan had the RG3 experience, I'd think he was done with mobile qbs.
Well, his dad did coach one of the great QBs of all time - Jon Elway. Who was incredibly mobile. And his dad his still very much in his ear as an unofficial assistant coach with the 9ers...
Kudos to him if it works but I’m highly skeptical.
It's going to live and die by it anyway, he's sub500 after 4 years, but obviously well respected around the league and easy to understand why, but he needs to produce over the next few years or he's done. In fact this probably buys him a possible extra year if they are mediocre for the next 2. We'd have people here ready to run Shanahan out of town.
Quote:
Shanahans future in SF is going to live or die by it. Being a fit is great, but the physical prowess not being there means the margin for error is smaller. Just a really strange trade up.
Kudos to him if it works but I’m highly skeptical.
It's going to live and die by it anyway, he's sub500 after 4 years, but obviously well respected around the league and easy to understand why, but he needs to produce over the next few years or he's done. In fact this probably buys him a possible extra year if they are mediocre for the next 2. We'd have people here ready to run Shanahan out of town.
I think you give a talent like Shanahan extra time to work it out. He's already been to one Super Bowl after all.
If you can name one time Schefter has been wrong - lmk.
Only one better is Glazer who has exited the every day offseason insider game.
Jeremiah who is also very plugged in says Mac Jones is the pick.
You can bet against that all you want with a dude named “Peacock” on a podcast.
If you can name one time Schefter has been wrong - lmk.
Only one better is Glazer who has exited the every day offseason insider game.
Jeremiah who is also very plugged in says Mac Jones is the pick.
You can bet against that all you want with a dude named “Peacock” on a podcast.
Schefter was wrong when he said Plax wouldn’t sign with the Giants because he didnt like that hey wanted to talk business during dinner at a NYC steakhouse. What do I win?
Not really true. Jones can be deadly accurate but if he’s limited athletically that means he’s got to have upper echelon play diagnosis to make up for not being much of a ground threat. What if he can’t feel the pass rush well?
His sample size is so small I’d be very wary of thinking he can just fit right in with NFL pressure and not being able to really move well enough when he needs to.
Quote:
In comment 15215064 JonC said:
Quote:
Preach! I want one of Parsons, Smith, or Surtain at #11.
JonC - have you heard anything new on Parsons? Is he a possibility at 11 now or is he still off their draft board?
I've heard nada on Parsons, the tidbit came from Rico. I hope he's in the mix, I think he can play some Edge too.
I’d be so fired up if we took parsons. We need a dog on this defense to take it from from good or even very good to nasty. A LB like parsons.... dare to dream.
It may not be Mac Jones, maybe he didn't show well at his pro day, but Fields would be a bit of a surprise to me.
I don't think Mahomes is amazingly accurate. Better than Cousins and many other guys certainly.
But just an arm and mobility that can get to more open guys than just about anyone else in the league, maybe even Rodgers too.
Mahomes has very good accuracy, but Brees/Brady/Peyton/Montana/Young in their primes, he is not.
I think Rodgers in his prime and maybe even now might be more accurate than Mahomes.
Last two Super Bowls and his games against New England are the film I go by.