Rams should trade Mannion, not Foles

[Mackeyser]

Thursday can't get here fast enough.

What's Thursday? The Rams chose Goff weeks ago...

 

[kurtfaulk]

If somehow Mannion outperforms everyone in camp and we still start whoever we draft, consider me pissed. Not really even be of their stubbornness, but bc if Mannion had actually had reps last season we wouldn't have just given up six picks to aquire someone we didn't even need.

Let's get serious here. If he had shown them anything the Rams wouldn't have made the move to #1. He's best shot is back up duties.

.

 

[Mackeyser]

Let's get serious here. If he had shown them anything the Rams wouldn't have made the move to #1. He's best shot is back up duties.

.

When? What shot? What serious shot did he have? I challenge that. The timeline simply doesn't agree with that.

He may be a backup. He may not even be that. He may be a top 5 QB. We dunno. They dunno and now they won't know because any resources that could be spent finding out NEED to be spent making sure that Goff is in the best position to succeed. That's the right thing to do. You don't spend the #1 pick in the entire draft to play it like a pure meritocracy.

Set Goff up to succeed. Focus the resources on him. Trade Mannion. Keep Foles this year since he's already been paid and the 3rd stringer basically doesn't use much besides oxygen. Trade or dump Foles next year and pick up a mid-late round QB with intentions to develop him to replace Keenum.

THAT makes sense.

Trading Foles for next to nothing now and then keeping Mannion on the roster for 2 more years and then trading him when he's had next to no time for next to nothing or letting him walk like Chase Daniel? That's a plan?

 

[Akrasian]

Set Goff up to succeed. Focus the resources on him. Trade Mannion. Keep Foles this year since he's already been paid and the 3rd stringer basically doesn't use much besides oxygen. Trade or dump Foles next year and pick up a mid-late round QB with intentions to develop him to replace Keenum.

Keenum is gone after this season. And judging by this offseason, will be expensive to sign - certainly expensive enough to cost a quality position player with his contract. So there won't be time to develop anybody to replace him. Except Mannion, who is already on the roster.

The only realistic option for backup QB in 2017 who won't be expensive is Mannion. He will get more time to develop in OTAs and in preseason. He will get some reps in practice - if for no other reason, Keenum will get banged up at some point enough that they will hold him out of practice, or give him limited practice. Not to mention Wentz or Goff will likely get banged up and need a practice or two off at least. He already got in a game last year. He may this year. He will be developed. Not as fast as ideal - but there are limited options. But I can't see Keenum resigning with the Rams for 2017 - if he looks even sort of acceptable as a starter at the beginning of the season, he will get offers with a real chance to play. And I can't see the Rams paying Foles $12 million in 2017. So the alternatives are either signing another backup QB (which has gotten expensive); drafting a raw rookie; or going with Mannion.

 

[Mackeyser]

Keenum is gone after this season. And judging by this offseason, will be expensive to sign - certainly expensive enough to cost a quality position player with his contract. So there won't be time to develop anybody to replace him. Except Mannion, who is already on the roster.

The only realistic option for backup QB in 2017 who won't be expensive is Mannion. He will get more time to develop in OTAs and in preseason. He will get some reps in practice - if for no other reason, Keenum will get banged up at some point enough that they will hold him out of practice, or give him limited practice. Not to mention Wentz or Goff will likely get banged up and need a practice or two off at least. He already got in a game last year. He may this year. He will be developed. Not as fast as ideal - but there are limited options. But I can't see Keenum resigning with the Rams for 2017 - if he looks even sort of acceptable as a starter at the beginning of the season, he will get offers with a real chance to play. And I can't see the Rams paying Foles $12 million in 2017. So the alternatives are either signing another backup QB (which has gotten expensive); drafting a raw rookie; or going with Mannion.

I don't dispute that financially it makes the most sense to go with Mannion.

I was just saying that Fisher isn't going to do that. Decision matrices make figuring things out a lot easier. It's not magic and it's not predicting the future. It's more like simulating the weather. The logistics, incentives, limitations, resource allocation, etc will guide the decisions that have to be made. And while the intention will be there to get Mannion reps, they will end up saying something along the line of:

"we would have liked to get Sean more reps, but we're so limited on time. Plus, he was here last year and knows the offense already, so we wanted to get Jared up to speed and get him into the system."

And, yes, he does know the offense, but Mannion's had very few reps IN it... And that won't change much this year.

Which would mean entering 2017, having Goff, who may have only played part of a season and Mannion who barely has gotten reps in practice in two seasons of being on the roster as the backup QB, presuming Keenum doesn't stay past 2016 and Foles is gone.

 

[fancents86]

Let's get serious here. If he had shown them anything the Rams wouldn't have made the move to #1. He's best shot is back up duties.

.

That's why i said "somehow". Meaning the chance is slim to none.

 

[Gandalf]

Foles has no future with the Rams, he will be gone.
This is probably Keenums last year.
Mannion is signed for the next three years at low money, his contract is lower by $1mil than what Foles is still owed.
Mannion can still development, might have a future in this league and costs less than a veteran FA minimum. Why get rid of Mannion and then spend another draft pick next year on a QB? Unless, you can get a decent pick for him, which isn't likely right now.
Out of the three, Mannion should be the one you keep.

 

[Mackeyser]

So, in 2017, if Goff goes down, we rely on.... Mannion?

You mean the guy who's gotten...what? They will have given all the reps to guys who aren't here anymore... At best, he'll get 2nd team reps in 2017 preseason.

And that's the guy behind the guy? A total of 7 passes in the regular season and some garbage time in preseason because the Rams spent nothing developing him?

That's not a plan for winning. That's neglectful. Starting QBs go down.

Ask the Cowboys how it works when your #1 goes down and you don't have a #2 worth a damn. Or the Manning led Colts... it's not a good season...

I'm just saying if we're not going to develop him, let him go and PAY for the backup that we've already trusted and has already won us games. He may not be great, but he's good enough to be a solid backup and he's a known commodity.

Saying, "well Mannion is cheaper" might be an argument if they were developing him. They aren't. All they are going to have is a QB whose taken very few reps and will be essentially a rookie if something happens to the starter.

Heck, people were arguing we shouldn't trade to #1 because Fisher can't and hasn't developed a QB and now people are all giddy and excited that, of course...he can develop two... at once?

Since when? How about he develop one passer before we even start to make the argument that two's possible. In the meantime, any plans that include the development of two QBs at the same time just don't make any logistical, historical, rational, resource based or logical sense.

 

[blackbart]

Why would the Rams and this staff have to ask anyone else about losing their #1 QB, been there done that twice in back to back years. Thinking they are not preparing for that scenario is silly, they have been burned worse than anyone by that very disaster in a rebuild where there hadn't been time to flush all the trash and reload the talent.

Fisher may be the HC but he is not the one developing QBs for this team. He has input but they have hired people who are supposed to be doing that just like GW and the defense.

And why can't they get enough time off season to improve parts of Mannion's game? It may not be live fire reps but there is plenty to developing a guy that does not happen in game time. They are invested and so is Mannion.

Even if Goff starts this year he is not going to be Kurt Warner and this team is not going to be GSOT II, not in 2016 and probably not in the next two seasons either. Mannion will be the back up get reps and be able to do what the team asks of him should he need to play.

 

[Mackeyser]

They can't due to the CBA. Mannion's doing work on his own, but for a good amount of time, they weren't allowed to TALK with them. It's part of the CBA.

Edit: obviously the timeline stuff just isn't getting through for whatever reason. Time is limited. Period. The CBA limits practice time, limits meeting time, limits contact time. The NFLPA enforces it. The HCs of numerous times have openly complained that this negatively impacts their ability to coach up players. It limits reps. There ARE limited reps. There are situations in which they want to add reps and can't because?... CBA rules. So...someone gets aced or the team just has to do without or do with less. It just is that way because of the rules.

Mannion got a ton less reps than he should have as the 3rd QB because those got eaten up last year while Fisher decided between Keenum and Austin Davis for the backup position. This is known. With those fewer reps, he got less time in preseason games. This is known.

Foles is likely to be traded this off-season after the 2016 draft.

That means that Keenum as the starter going into OTAs will be getting starter reps. Goff will be getting reps commensurate with being the #1 overall draft pick. That's about the same as a starter because they will want to prepare him to start as soon as he's ready. Which means with two starter level amount of reps? Again, that places the #3 reps below that which is typical. And, it is very likely to lead to less pre-season game time, although he may see extended time in game 4 if only to protect the starter and "the future".

2017, either they sign Keenum to be the long term backup or they let him go because they don't want to pay for a long term backup OR they go with Mannion who will have had very few practice reps over two years and maybe...maybe some garbage time in 2016 preseason games... That's who will be the #2?

Why? Cuz he's cheap? He will have had NO playing time and we will have no idea if he can be any kind of backup. He could be great or he could be just awful. And we won't know prior.

And let's not say "they know" because they signed Foles to that extension after a few practices... How'd that work out, exactly...

 

[RamzFanz]

Annnnnd... that's not gonna happen.

 

[Akrasian]

So, in 2017, if Goff goes down, we rely on.... Mannion?

You mean the guy who's gotten...what? They will have given all the reps to guys who aren't here anymore... At best, he'll get 2nd team reps in 2017 preseason.

And that's the guy behind the guy? A total of 7 passes in the regular season and some garbage time in preseason because the Rams spent nothing developing him?

That's not a plan for winning. That's neglectful. Starting QBs go down.

Ask the Cowboys how it works when your #1 goes down and you don't have a #2 worth a damn. Or the Manning led Colts... it's not a good season...

I'm just saying if we're not going to develop him, let him go and PAY for the backup that we've already trusted and has already won us games. He may not be great, but he's good enough to be a solid backup and he's a known commodity.

Saying, "well Mannion is cheaper" might be an argument if they were developing him. They aren't. All they are going to have is a QB whose taken very few reps and will be essentially a rookie if something happens to the starter.

Heck, people were arguing we shouldn't trade to #1 because Fisher can't and hasn't developed a QB and now people are all giddy and excited that, of course...he can develop two... at once?

Since when? How about he develop one passer before we even start to make the argument that two's possible. In the meantime, any plans that include the development of two QBs at the same time just don't make any logistical, historical, rational, resource based or logical sense.

Let's look at the actual options for backing up their #1 choice in 2017.

There's Keenum. Except he is a free agent. If he looks good in preseason and in starting a few games in 2016, how much will he get in free agency in a world where Chase Daniel - who has a fraction of the playing time, basically the same rating going into this season - gets a $21 million contract, $12 million guaranteed? And why would Keenum take such a contract from the Rams if he could get it from a team where he'd be given a chance to start?

There is Foles - if the Rams keep him this year, and don't mind paying him $12 million for a year to be the backup. And ignoring that the Rams and Foles' teammates likely don't trust him to perform at this stage.

The Rams could sign another free agent - but who will be available, and how much will he cost? If he is at all desirable, he would cost a ton. Or the Rams could trade a valuable pick to get a backup QB from another team - but if he were desirable, it would take a high pick.

The Rams could draft a QB - except then he would be even more raw than Mannion. And would take a pick.

Either the Rams would have uncertainty at backup, would have a crappy backup, or would be paying the backup enough that it would be the cost of two (or more) quality starters at many positions. Or would cost them somebody like Brockers.

Or they can keep Mannion - who has played in one preseason already, and would have played in a second. Who has gotten a little game experience, and looked okay though not inspiring. Who has gotten some reps in practice, and would have gotten more in 2016. Who the Rams already have, and who is inexpensive.

Yes, the Rams traded up to the top of the draft - to get a QB who they think has a real chance to be a star. Mannion won't be a star, but unless they are convinced he would be a horrible QB, I can't see them giving up on him this early, knowing that to do so would cost 1-3 talented players at other positions. It would be an enormous waste of resources, and frankly, would not make ANY sense - unless the Rams not only have not developed him, but have realized that he is not capable of developing. But unlike Manziel, Mannion actually seems willing to work.

 

[blackbart]

I know what the CBA says but I don't believe there is no contact or that teams don't help give players especially QBs contacts and plans on what they should be working on.

 

[Mackeyser]

You do realize that because they didn't put much into him last year and because of the CBA they simply can't put much into him this year (it's just the limits of time and resources), that Mannion in 2017 in your scenario will be the #2 QB with very little development, 7 garbage time NFL snaps and some garbage time in preseason?

That's the QB situation for the Rams if Goff goes down?

Cool, sounds like a fool-proof plan. Lets run with that. I'm sure the Rams have never had a QB drafted #1 overall have health issues of any kind affect his ability to play on Sundays...

And as you stated, anyone with experience like Keenum will be too expensive. I disagree, especially since Goff will still be on his rookie contract. I think you need veteran experience behind him. It's worth the money for a few years.

And as I said, they don't have the resources to develop two QBs. Heck, last year, they didn't have the resources to develop ONE. That's just what happened (or didn't happen).

I know what the CBA says but I don't believe there is no contact or that teams don't help give players especially QBs contacts and plans on what they should be working on.

yeah, no contact. Nothing beyond saying hello. It's almost like the dang NCAA. It's gotten to the point of being ridiculous. Coaches don't even know where players are during the off-season and have to call agents and go through the ridiculous hoops to NOT violate the CBA. And, no, no game related materials can be sent. No playbooks, no tapes, etc. No contact. It's why some players take it upon themselves to work on things and former players like LeCharles Bentley have formed Academies to help players during this time. It's exactly FOR this reason.

Really stupid, but it's true! It's an overreaction to when coaches wanted guys to be doing stuff all the time and voluntary didn't really mean voluntary. Now, it's swung really far the other way, and it's hurting new players and players that change teams or are rehabbing.

 

[Juice]

So, there is somebody on the Rams coaching staff that can develop a QB?

 

[blackbart]

yeah, no contact. Nothing beyond saying hello. It's almost like the dang NCAA. It's gotten to the point of being ridiculous. Coaches don't even know where players are during the off-season and have to call agents and go through the ridiculous hoops to NOT violate the CBA. And, no, no game related materials can be sent. No playbooks, no tapes, etc. No contact. It's why some players take it upon themselves to work on things and former players like LeCharles Bentley have formed Academies to help players during this time. It's exactly FOR this reason.

Really stupid, but it's true! It's an overreaction to when coaches wanted guys to be doing stuff all the time and voluntary didn't really mean voluntary. Now, it's swung really far the other way, and it's hurting new players and players that change teams or are rehabbing.

I agree, they went way to far away from reasonable for the teams and players. If I was in Mannion's shoes I'd have something in place to get whatever I need from the new OC and no one would ever know about it. Its in his best interest and if it hampered my development I'd consider suing the "union".

 

[Akrasian]

Is it ideal?

No.

Are ANY of the options ideal?

Not even close. But Mannion will have some development, at least. And the Rams won't have had to sacrifice resigning multiple starters to keep him, unlike the options you seem to prefer.

I would rather the Rams take a reasonable gamble - that Mannion will have developed some (almost certainly the case) and that he can develop more in 2017 as the #2 with the extra preseason and practice time, before he is actually needed for any significant playing time. I'd rather they do that than lose several starters to free agency, while having given up a bunch of high picks to get Goff/Wentz in the first place.

In your scenario the Rams are almost certain to struggle heavily if the #1 pick gets hurt anyway. With a better supporting cast around him, there's a chance that a Mannion led team would be able to hold on until Goff/Wentz came back. Maybe do better than hang on. AND if Goff/Wentz stay healthy and perform well, then there would be a better team around him to help the Rams to get into the playoffs and maybe even deep.

 

[Mackeyser]

I agree, they went way to far away from reasonable for the teams and players. If I was in Mannion's shoes I'd have something in place to get whatever I need from the new OC and no one would ever know about it. Its in his best interest and if it hampered my development I'd consider suing the "union".

Well that's an interesting question. Do teams violate that? I tend to think no because if any relationship sours, they can always report you and the NFL will sanction the TEAM, not the player. That will result in fines and potentially loss of draft picks. Teams aren't going to risk that. Teams have to cut players all the time. What if they had to cut Mannion after doing this? Think Mannion is gonna sit on the street and just get a job selling insurance? He could, but he'd also be in a position to report the Rams.

Nah, I'm pretty sure after seeing how the Commish hammered the last coupla teams who got caught that teams are jumping through these hoops cuz getting caught is not worth any possible gains...

 

[Mackeyser]

Is it ideal?

No.

Are ANY of the options ideal?

Not even close. But Mannion will have some development, at least. And the Rams won't have had to sacrifice resigning multiple starters to keep him, unlike the options you seem to prefer.

I would rather the Rams take a reasonable gamble - that Mannion will have developed some (almost certainly the case) and that he can develop more in 2017 as the #2 with the extra preseason and practice time, before he is actually needed for any significant playing time. I'd rather they do that than lose several starters to free agency, while having given up a bunch of high picks to get Goff/Wentz in the first place.

In your scenario the Rams are almost certain to struggle heavily if the #1 pick gets hurt anyway. With a better supporting cast around him, there's a chance that a Mannion led team would be able to hold on until Goff/Wentz came back. Maybe do better than hang on. AND if Goff/Wentz stay healthy and perform well, then there would be a better team around him to help the Rams to get into the playoffs and maybe even deep.

The reason Cousins worked out for Washington is that he was able to step in. He got the #2 snaps relatively early and played well when given the chance. He also got real game time.

Mannion will have had NONE of that. He will be LESS experienced insofar as game experience than Goff come the 2017 season unless Goff sits out all season which I think is highly unlikely short of an injury in pre-season.

It helps the development of a rookie QB to have a veteran presence behind him. Retaining Keenum, while not cheap, would be better for Goff and better for the team.

AND, we could add more talent this year. Mannion is still young enough to want to TRY to be a starter in this league. He's just never been given a chance. There's no way in hell he's going to resign, so he's got 2016 and 2017, then you trade him and try to get something or keep him in a backup role and lose him after 2018 like KC lost Chase Daniel.

Point is that Keenum can help win games and help develop Goff in the short term and be that steady backup in the long term. Once Goff is well on his way, it makes sense to develop a backup like they continue to do every few years in NE.

But while Goff is a rookie, it makes sense to have a vet behind him.

 

[VegasRam]

How do I KNOW? Well, I can read. Mannion had very few reps in preseason because Fisher spent so much time dithering about the backup situation. It could be argued that that is why we saw no Sean Mannion during the season, even after the losing streak...because it would have been like starting a rookie.

And if he got very few reps in practice (fact, it was reported in numerous camp reports throughout camp) and almost no time in preseason (fact, we watched the games) and no snaps in games (fact, we watched the games)... other than classroom time, what development could possibly be happening with Mannion?

As Reagan said, "There you go again."

"And if he got very few reps in practice...blah and blah..."Therefore....

You were at every practice right?

"Other than classroom time", which as we all know is meaningless.

I guess you just can't help yourself. :headexplosion: