Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
2 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

Brady will be a top 5 QB until he is physically incapable of throwing the ball. His last year with the Patriots he was surrounded with awful talent. I'll admit I thought he was done but I underrated how poor that offense was outside of Brady.

 

Stafford has had good talent around him and has never come close to winning a Super Bowl. If he was at that level I believe we would have seen it by now. Watson has played for a dumpster fire franchise and everyone still agrees he is a top 5 QB. The Saints had a few down years where everyone still agreed Brees was elite. You can still make judgments about a player irrespective of the team around him.

I don’t care about judging the player. 
 

All that matters is that a playoff team just got better. Period. They aren’t resting on their laurels or blowing it up. Whatever preconceived notions you have about them being good enough to beat Kansas City is irrelevant. The Eagles won the Super Bowl with a back up QB who had one monster game. It happens.

 

You have a playoff team and you take risks to get better. Better get used to it, because we are gonna have to do the same thing. We aren’t gonna hold pat and draft rotational safety depth and try to wait out the Chiefs. We are going to try to win.

Posted
29 minutes ago, dave mcbride said:

I’m basing it on his *extreme* arm talent (Mahomes-esque in his ability to throw from different levels; also a very good baseball player), mobility in the pocket, generally good accuracy, willingness to play through injury, and ability to make plays when things break down. 

 

He has all the talent in the world but something is missing there. To be an elite QB you have to be able to make a big play in crunch time. It's a quality that can't be quantified but it matters. Rivers is the prime example of a QB that can do everything right and still fail to win big games because he is bad when the chips are down. QBs like Allen and Watson and Mahomes and Brady play better in those situations. They make big plays in big moments. That's what I mean when I say Stafford isn't good enough to elevate the team around him. I know wins are not exclusively a QB stat but over a 10+ year career you still expect a QB capable of playing at an elite level to accomplish more than Stafford has. Throw Matt Ryan in that bucket too. It's an argument that can't be resolved because there's no number to prove what I'm talking about. Some QBs can put up great stats and still fall short in games that matter over and over again.

Posted
24 minutes ago, Logic said:


Please explain how he doesn’t fit McVay’s offense.


 

What we have seen from the offense is he likes PA roll out and mobility with quick decisions.

 

The offense at its best had a high throughput RB and Goff was hitting quick throws to RB/TEs outside and WRs on crossing routes.  Lots of misdirection and movement.

 

Stafford with his various injuries is no longer that mobile QB or a guy that can sprint out for wide handoffs.  He is more of a drop back - pocket passer that hits WRs outside the numbers and TEs on the seams.

 

The Rams offense maintained its strength attacking the edge and then bringing WRs across the field in the opposite direction of the motion into cleared out areas.  I think Stafford forces it back to a more conventional offense with drop backs and straight hand offs attacking the middle of the field.  Basically to me - Stafford brings more experience and a better arm, but you lose McVays creativity to scheme people open with motion and roll-outs.

 

Posted
2 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

He has all the talent in the world but something is missing there. To be an elite QB you have to be able to make a big play in crunch time. It's a quality that can't be quantified but it matters. Rivers is the prime example of a QB that can do everything right and still fail to win big games because he is bad when the chips are down. QBs like Allen and Watson and Mahomes and Brady play better in those situations. They make big plays in big moments. That's what I mean when I say Stafford isn't good enough to elevate the team around him. I know wins are not exclusively a QB stat but over a 10+ year career you still expect a QB capable of playing at an elite level to accomplish more than Stafford has. Throw Matt Ryan in that bucket too. It's an argument that can't be resolved because there's no number to prove what I'm talking about. Some QBs can put up great stats and still fall short in games that matter over and over again.

I'll throw this out there, too:  Stafford has never been in a situation where he's expected to win, and win big.  He's now in a major media market, albeit on a team with no real fan base, and the expectations are Super Bowl or bust.  It's not clear how he'll handle it, especially if things don't go well right away...

Posted
18 minutes ago, FireChans said:

You have a playoff team and you take risks to get better. Better get used to it, because we are gonna have to do the same thing. We aren’t gonna hold pat and draft rotational safety depth and try to wait out the Chiefs. We are going to try to win.

 

We can afford those risks because we have a QB capable of playing at a top 5 level. At this point it's about building the team around him and maximizing our chances before he has a massive cap hit. The Rams are in the opposite position. They have a Super Bowl caliber roster without a QB capable of taking advantage. I don't believe Stafford is that QB. And if I'm right they'll have wasted more assets that they could have maybe used to trade up for a young QB capable of becoming elite. And 3 years from now the Rams will still be in purgatory and they won't have a franchise QB and they won't have any young blue chip players to develop.

 

By the way I would love for Stafford to prove me wrong. I have nothing against him. If he can finally elevate his play to an elite level this will be a great trade for the Rams.

Posted
15 hours ago, TBBills said:

Only if the Rams end up sucking.

 

Why, you can find talent later in the draft and in the 3rd. Let's not forget, the Lions new GM was the Rams director of college scouting...

Posted
14 hours ago, Virgil said:

What would happen cap wise if the Lions turned around and traded Goff?

 

1 hour ago, No_Matter_What said:

Didn't have time to go throught the thread, so sorry if this was discussed...

 

Anybody has a clue if it is realistic for Lions to trade Goff now? Does it create any dead cap for them?

 

I swear I educate myself on these matters this offseason.

 

Actually a very good point.  IF Detroit can find someone who thinks Goff is worth an average of $26M per year they could make the

trade with no Dead Money.  Goff's contract if cut after next year is only $15M.

They just may find someone to trade with.  He wouldn't need to bring a lot in draft capital if Detroit is in full tank and just wants to

get rid of Goff's salary.

 

Per Spotrac.  Click the red X next to Goff's 2021 Salary year.

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/detroit-lions/jared-goff-18949/

Posted
41 minutes ago, Rochesterfan said:


 

What we have seen from the offense is he likes PA roll out and mobility with quick decisions.

 

The offense at its best had a high throughput RB and Goff was hitting quick throws to RB/TEs outside and WRs on crossing routes.  Lots of misdirection and movement.

 

Stafford with his various injuries is no longer that mobile QB or a guy that can sprint out for wide handoffs.  He is more of a drop back - pocket passer that hits WRs outside the numbers and TEs on the seams.

 

The Rams offense maintained its strength attacking the edge and then bringing WRs across the field in the opposite direction of the motion into cleared out areas.  I think Stafford forces it back to a more conventional offense with drop backs and straight hand offs attacking the middle of the field.  Basically to me - Stafford brings more experience and a better arm, but you lose McVays creativity to scheme people open with motion and roll-outs.

 


Thanks. I appreciate your view and your taking the time to respond.

 

Im not so sure that Stafford can’t do the things Goff did/does with regard to rollouts and the like. He was injured THIS year, sure, but we don’t know his prognosis for recovery.

 

Besides, I never really viewed Goff as being all that mobile anyway. If anything, I’d say their mobility is a push, but Stafford’s greatly superior arm strength will INCREASE the amount and variety of plays that McVay can dial up.

 

I know this: I’m buying big fantasy stock in Robert Woods and Cooper Kupp .

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
40 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

We can afford those risks because we have a QB capable of playing at a top 5 level. At this point it's about building the team around him and maximizing our chances before he has a massive cap hit. The Rams are in the opposite position. They have a Super Bowl caliber roster without a QB capable of taking advantage. I don't believe Stafford is that QB. And if I'm right they'll have wasted more assets that they could have maybe used to trade up for a young QB capable of becoming elite. And 3 years from now the Rams will still be in purgatory and they won't have a franchise QB and they won't have any young blue chip players to develop.

 

By the way I would love for Stafford to prove me wrong. I have nothing against him. If he can finally elevate his play to an elite level this will be a great trade for the Rams.

 

This is kind of where I am. 

 

I hear ya. All you People who are telling me that Matt Stafford >> Jared Goff.  I would love for Stafford to get a shot on a good team, out of fairness.

 

I don't see it, especially at 33 and after 12 years of taking ungodly #s of sacks.

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
4 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

This is kind of where I am. 

 

I hear ya. All you People who are telling me that Matt Stafford >> Jared Goff.  I would love for Stafford to get a shot on a good team, out of fairness.

 

I don't see it, especially at 33 and after 12 years of taking ungodly #s of sacks.

 

My digging tells me Stafford has made $203.8 million over his career. I wonder how much of that he would have given up to be on a decent team with a real chance to win without getting beaten like a piñata? 

 

It’s a shame that we’ll never know what he might have been had he landed in a better spot. 

Posted
1 hour ago, Groin said:

Good luck to the Rams.  This seems like a 2002 Billsy move.

Agreed. 
It usually doesn’t end well for teams that get into this “OMG our best players are moving out of their prime years and the salary cap hammer is awaiting, we have to go for it right now with the best player available” mode. 

  • Like (+1) 2
  • Dislike 1
Posted
26 minutes ago, ColoradoBills said:

 

 

Actually a very good point.  IF Detroit can find someone who thinks Goff is worth an average of $26M per year they could make the

trade with no Dead Money.  Goff's contract if cut after next year is only $15M.

They just may find someone to trade with.  He wouldn't need to bring a lot in draft capital if Detroit is in full tank and just wants to

get rid of Goff's salary.

 

Per Spotrac.  Click the red X next to Goff's 2021 Salary year.

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/detroit-lions/jared-goff-18949/

Unless someone discovers that Goff has a freakish ability to pick Powerball numbers with 90% accuracy, then no one on Earth will think he is worth 26 million.  Goff and a second for a backup punter and a fifth.....maybe.

Posted
31 minutes ago, Fan in Chicago said:

So Goff and Wentz both feel out of favor with the team that drafted them high. Unprecedented. 

mariota and jameis 

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Clyde Smith said:

Lions will probably fumble their draft picks with duds and busts anyway lol.

Their new GM Brad Holmes came from the Rams so ...  he has no idea what to do with draft picks 

 

but seriously, they also hired John Dorsey and he’s a very good talent evaluator. Just a mess as GM, but he doesn’t have that title. 
 

overall, I’m not sure you can lay the mistakes of the past at this entirely new regime. Even Chris spielman works for them now in a Personnel role. 

Edited by YoloinOhio
  • Agree 2
Posted
7 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said:

Agreed. 
It usually doesn’t end well for teams that get into this “OMG our best players are moving out of their prime years and the salary cap hammer is awaiting, we have to go for it right now with the best player available” mode. 

The 2001 Bills were terrible. The 2020 Rams were arguably a more physically gifted and experienced QB away from being 14-2. There is NO comparison.

  • Like (+1) 2
Posted (edited)
17 minutes ago, Augie said:

 

My digging tells me Stafford has made $203.8 million over his career. I wonder how much of that he would have given up to be on a decent team with a real chance to win without getting beaten like a piñata? 

 

It’s a shame that we’ll never know what he might have been had he landed in a better spot. 

We'll know now.  Elite offensive line, solid WR and TE options, a great system, young dynamic running backs, and a really good defense. 

 

The fact that Goff had a 20 to 13 TD to INT ratio is pathetic given what he had surrounding him.  He's just too indecisive, limited vertically, and also fumble prone.  The Rams thought so little of him they decided to start a backup in a playoff game ahead of him (if he's good enough to be a backup with a thumb injury he's good enough to start).  He was holding them back and Stafford will show that this year.

Edited by Doc Brown
  • Like (+1) 1
×
×
  • Create New...