I hate this type of thinking. Garrapolo was highly touted in the draft, and many people saw his potential, myself included.
Essentially, what one says when "the verdict is not in", I read that as "well, we just need to stretch the argument out until I get the desired result." Objectively, one can look at what Joyner's ceiling is and his performance this year as well as the impact he makes a his position versus what a guy like Garrapolo relative to where he was drafted? I mean, seriously, if Joyner becomes the best nickel corner in the league, is there any scenario where having him on your team instead of Garrapolo, based on what we have seen thus far from him, is better? Garrapolo looks like a future stud in the league, and he fills an enormous NEED that this team has now, had in the draft, and had last season as soon as Bradford tore his ACL the first time around.
Just my .02, of course, and I don't mean to derail the conversation, I just do not understand this line of thought.