What Would You Give Up To Move Up For Jared Goff?

[FrankenRam]

If Goff is as good as some in this thread are making him out to be, there's no way there only 3 teams would consider taking him....
- Dallas - Romo will be 36 when the season starts and he has back trouble.
- San Diego - Rivers will turn 35 during the '16 season. Would not surprise me if they opted to do a Favre/Rodgers kinda thing.
- Jacksonville - Bortles appears to be turning a corner to being a good QB (or so I hear, haven't seen a game of theirs all year). But is Goff's upside higher? It wouldn't surprise me to see them take someone of Goff's quality and trade Bortles. It's always all about getting better.
- Miami - Tannehil - See Jacksonville/Bortles

If some of the likely contenders have 'other needs', so what. Every team does. The Rams do as well. But if the guy is 'RG3 Deal' worthy, somebody will take him long before pick 15...even if not an immediate need.

Personally, I would NEVER risk an RG3 deal on any draft suspect. If I were going to give up that much, it would have to be for a proven NFL QB. Giving up that much for a suspect just reeks of complete & utter desperation.

 

[Memphis Ram]

Keep your picks and draft Wentz

 

[jrry32]

If Goff is as good as some in this thread are making him out to be, there's no way there only 3 teams would consider taking him....
- Dallas - Romo will be 36 when the season starts and he has back trouble.
- San Diego - Rivers will turn 35 during the '16 season. Would not surprise me if they opted to do a Favre/Rodgers kinda thing.
- Jacksonville - Bortles appears to be turning a corner to being a good QB (or so I hear, haven't seen a game of theirs all year). But is Goff's upside higher? It wouldn't surprise me to see them take someone of Goff's quality and trade Bortles. It's always all about getting better.
- Miami - Tannehil - See Jacksonville/Bortles

If some of the likely contenders have 'other needs', so what. Every team does. The Rams do as well. But if the guy is 'RG3 Deal' worthy, somebody will take him long before pick 15...even if not an immediate need.

Personally, I would NEVER risk an RG3 deal on any draft suspect. If I were going to give up that much, it would have to be for a proven NFL QB. Giving up that much for a suspect just reeks of complete & utter desperation.

Are you high?

 

[FrankenRam]

Are you high?

No. You?

 

[jrry32]

No. You?

I apologize. I just figured you had to be impaired to say that the Jaguars should consider trading up to draft an unproven prospect to replace their 2nd year QB. Do you realize that Bortles is one of two NFL QBs in the history of the league to throw for 4000+ yards and 30+ TDs as a first or second year QB?(to be fair, Derek Carr was 13 yards off from joining that group) The other QB? Dan Marino.

He's 23 years old. Why in the hell would they move on from him?

Actually, I recommend they move on from him. We'll give them two first round picks for Bortles and they can use those plus their first to move up for Goff. Sounds like a good deal to me.

 

[jrry32]

Giving up that much for a suspect just reeks of complete & utter desperation.

Would you have given it up for Luck or Peyton Manning as a prospect? I would have.(well, I didn't evaluate Manning...he was before my time but based on what I know, I would have)

 

[FrankenRam]

I apologize. I just figured you had to be impaired to say that the Jaguars should consider trading up to draft an unproven prospect to replace their 2nd year QB. Do you realize that Bortles is one of two NFL QBs in the history of the league to throw for 4000+ yards and 30+ TDs as a first or second year QB?(to be fair, Derek Carr was 13 yards off from joining that group) The other QB? Dan Marino.

He's 23 years old. Why in the hell would they move on from him?

Actually, I recommend they move on from him. We'll give them two first round picks for Bortles and they can use those plus their first to move up for Goff. Sounds like a good deal to me.

I didn't say they should. I just suggested they might consider it....for pretty much exactly the reason you mention. "OK...we've got 2 QB's we'll consider trading. Take your pick and Let's Make A Deal'.

 

[jrry32]

I didn't say they should. I just suggested they might consider it....for pretty much exactly the reason you mention. "OK...we've got 2 QB's we'll consider trading. Take your pick and Let's Make A Deal'.

Why would they consider it? They have their QB. If anything, it makes sense for them to trade down with a team like the Rams if Goff falls. They need to build a defense if they want to win.

 

[FrankenRam]

Would you have given it up for Luck or Peyton Manning as a prospect? I would have.(well, I didn't evaluate Manning...he was before my time but based on what I know, I would have)

At the time, no. Would that have been the wrong decision. In hindsight, of course it would. But it could just as easily have turned out to be RGKnee or RLeaf with what was known at the time.

 

[jrry32]

At the time, no. Would that have been the wrong decision. In hindsight, of course it would. But it could just as easily have turned out to be RGKnee or RLeaf with what was known at the time.

That's true. Risk you take. But the risk is worth the reward to me. You have to get an average QB or worse for the trade to be a failure. Anything more than that and you come out equal or ahead.

 

[FrankenRam]

Why would they consider it? They have their QB. If anything, it makes sense for them to trade down with a team like the Rams if Goff falls. They need to build a defense if they want to win.

Is that a serious question? If Goff really is 'the second coming', you'd better believe Bortles is as well to not consider it. I don't care how good your current player is at any position, if you think there's a better alternative, why would you not consider it?

 

[jrry32]

Is that a serious question? If Goff really is 'the second coming', you'd better believe Bortles is as well to not consider it. I don't care how good your current player is at any position, if you think there's a better alternative, why would you not consider it?

Because the risk isn't worth the reward. Goff isn't the "second coming" of anything. He's an extremely talented kid that I think will be a great QB. Yep, he has sky-high potential. But it's potential. You don't trade a kid who has shown flashes of being the next Big Ben/Favre at the NFL level for a draft prospect who you think could be the next Philip Rivers/Peyton Manning. It's nuts.

It would be like trading Le'Veon Bell so you could draft Todd Gurley. Or trading Geno Atkins so you could draft Aaron Donald. Or trading Robert Quinn so you can draft Joey Bosa.

It makes no sense.

It would be a different story if we were talking about Jay Cutler or Matt Stafford or Ryan Tannehill. But not a guy that showed what Bortles did as a second year pro.

Your argument isn't even making logical sense. The Rams don't have a Blake Bortles.

 

[Stel]

If Goff is as good as some in this thread are making him out to be, there's no way there only 3 teams would consider taking him....
- Dallas - Romo will be 36 when the season starts and he has back trouble.
- San Diego - Rivers will turn 35 during the '16 season. Would not surprise me if they opted to do a Favre/Rodgers kinda thing.
- Jacksonville - Bortles appears to be turning a corner to being a good QB (or so I hear, haven't seen a game of theirs all year). But is Goff's upside higher? It wouldn't surprise me to see them take someone of Goff's quality and trade Bortles. It's always all about getting better.
- Miami - Tannehil - See Jacksonville/Bortles

If some of the likely contenders have 'other needs', so what. Every team does. The Rams do as well. But if the guy is 'RG3 Deal' worthy, somebody will take him long before pick 15...even if not an immediate need.

Personally, I would NEVER risk an RG3 deal on any draft suspect. If I were going to give up that much, it would have to be for a proven NFL QB. Giving up that much for a suspect just reeks of complete & utter desperation.

I think Goff is a better prospect than RGIII was. I wouldn't have made the trade Washington did to get RGIII. I might have for Goff.

 

[FrankenRam]

Because the risk isn't worth the reward. Goff isn't the "second coming" of anything. He's an extremely talented kid that I think will be a great QB. Yep, he has sky-high potential. But it's potential. You don't trade a kid who has shown flashes of being the next Big Ben/Favre at the NFL level for a draft prospect who you think could be the next Philip Rivers/Peyton Manning. It's nuts.

It would be like trading Le'Veon Bell so you could draft Todd Gurley. Or trading Geno Atkins so you could draft Aaron Donald. Or trading Robert Quinn so you can draft Joey Bosa.

It makes no sense.

It would be a different story if we were talking about Jay Cutler or Matt Stafford or Ryan Tannehill. But not a guy that showed what Bortles did as a second year pro.

Your argument isn't even making logical sense. The Rams don't have a Blake Bortles.

It may not make 'logical sense' to you, but even if their plan all along would be to keep Bortles, it would make sense for them to consider just because they could probably trade the pick to someone who really wanted Goff and pick up some extra picks to help their ailing defense.

 

[FrankenRam]

I think Goff is a better prospect than RGIII was. I wouldn't have made the trade Washington did to get RGIII. I might have for Goff.

Interesting.

 

[jrry32]

It may not make 'logical sense' to you, but even if their plan all along would be to keep Bortles, it would make sense for them to consider just because they could probably trade the pick to someone who really wanted Goff and pick up some extra picks to help their ailing defense.

Which is the scenario I laid out. But that's a far cry from them trading up or getting rid of Bortles. It makes total sense for a team like San Diego, Dallas, or Jacksonville to consider trading Goff to a team like the Rams if he gets past Cleveland. It does not make sense for a team like Jacksonville to replace Bortles with Goff.

 

[NJRamsFan]

It may not make 'logical sense' to you, but even if their plan all along would be to keep Bortles, it would make sense for them to consider just because they could probably trade the pick to someone who really wanted Goff and pick up some extra picks to help their ailing defense.

You said yourself you have t watched bortles at all this year so that may be the disconnect. Bortles has shown he can be as good as any qb in the league. The jags found their franchise qb...why would they want to move him just because someone else might be as good as he's shown he can be? When you find a franchise qb you build around him you don't look for another franchise qb

 

[iced]

But I disagree that TA is a gadget player. I think he's more and that'll become more apparent when we have a better QB under center.

Eh I think he still has a lot more growing to do as a receiver, particularly as a route runner. Something AB excels at, as well as his ridiculous ability to get open regardless of coverage.

 

[NateDawg122]

I didn't say they should. I just suggested they might consider it....for pretty much exactly the reason you mention. "OK...we've got 2 QB's we'll consider trading. Take your pick and Let's Make A Deal'.

There is no way in hell Jacksonville would even consider getting Goff. Makes absolutely zero sense and suggesting that they will is a bit unlettered.

 

[FrankenRam]

There is no way in hell Jacksonville would even consider getting Goff. Makes absolutely zero sense and suggesting that they will is a bit unlettered.

Unlettered is not considering if only to pick up extra picks if he's taken purely as trade bait.