Or you can view it as Brock Huard does, and acknowledge that Geno has had one of the worst running games in the league this year, and worked with one that was comparable over the 2nd half of last year. We saw 8 games or so with our offense functioning as it should, with a reliable running game and solid protection. The numbers don't lie. If there wasn't such a sharp and obvious correlation between when Geno was best and not, and when our running game and blocking were effective / actually used logically and not, I'd be with you that he's on a downward slope.
But like Brock said ' how good (how much better) could Geno be if he had a running game ?...'
He's not off the charts talented. He's got great ball placement, a good arm and can process plays well enough.
He can't just take over a game on his own. But if he has the pieces around him, time to throw, and a logical plan, a lot of the talk about regression would be quited some.
That's a lot of IFs and so says he's not a top tier QB (Top 10). Which you can win with, but then it means you gotta put the money/talent around to make everything else work to essentially carry the QB who is not carrying the team. I don't think it's regression for Geno, I think its exposure. He is a mid pack QB who needs an offense to function for him to function. I think a top tier QB is a QB who can carry an offense and he can make it function.
Lets play hypothetical....if you put Geno on the Niners..that have all the pieces in play you would want for Geno to excel. Would he perform at the same level as Purdy, below or better?