Goff Trade Up

[RamWoodie]

For me it's not a Goff vs Wentz...IT'S ABOUT GROWTH. Goff has grown immensely because it's obvious when he steps to the line he understands what he sees in the opposing defense. He's now able to audible into better offensive situtations.

When you compare that to last year...it was obvious Goff really wasn't able to process at the LOS. There were times when I wondered if he even knew what he was looking at on the defensive side. A year later, that's no longer the case, because he wanted to be better...AND HE IS. He's THE PLAYER OF THE WEEK...'nuff said.

I think that credit goes to both McVay and Goff. To me it's obvious Goff has put in the work...film, playbook, practice and more film. That's the mark of a pro...and Goff is becoming and excellent pro. His best asset is he's sober and stays that way. You know that because he always says "WE"...it's never about him, it's about the team!

There was a post back in preseason where a Ram player said the growth in Goff was like night and day (or words to that effect)...some thought it was "player speak"...but as it turn out IT WAS TRUE!

The growth in Goff is a credit to him being willing to understand while he had the tools. he needed to "put in the work", which he has done and continues to do.

This ain't a Goff vs Wentz thing...it's about becoming a "REAL NFL QB"...and we see that in both guys. Naturally a true pro wants to measure himself against his peers, so I would think both guys are looking at each other...and both have to be pleased with what they see.

I'm just happy to see the Rams have "sunshine under the center" and a coach who can really help him.

 

[PhillyRam]

How many second year QBs are more than game managers to some degree? Unless your name is Marino, that is pretty much every young QB. Even Brady leaned heavily on their defense in his 1st few years. Wentz has been special, but he will turn 25 next month. I would argue Goff has been damn impressive as well thus far, kid just turned 23. Just some perspective.

So to knock Bridgewater who was very solid as a young QB and say they were questioning him, I don't recall that at all. Heck, he helped get them to the playoffs in year 2. They were crushed when he got hurt, that was huge NFL news.

Just seems like revionist history to me to support an argument.

 

[Memphis Ram]

How many second year QBs are more than game managers to some degree? Unless your name is Marino, that is pretty much every young QB. Even Brady leaned heavily on their defense in his 1st few years. Wentz has been special, but he will turn 25 next month. I would argue Goff has been damn impressive as well thus far, kid just turned 23. Just some perspective.

So to knock Bridgewater who was very solid as a young QB and say they were questioning him, I don't recall that at all. Heck, he helped get them to the playoffs in year 2. They were crushed when he got hurt, that was huge NFL news.

Just seems like revionist history to me to support an argument.

Sorry. No revisionist history at all PhillyRam as I try to follow the goings on of minority QBs. But, where the revision comes (your 2nd time with me in this thread) is somehow now my expectations of him are being questioned when I merely commented on how he had yet to match up with the prior expectations provided by another.

 

[PhillyRam]

Just the fact that you were somehow pigeon-holing a 2nd year QB, who was successful, helped get his team to the playoffs without Peterson I believe, that just speaks volumes. And its not like he was a top 3 pick. So he was progressing well as a late 1st rounder and he won games.

BTW, Who can make any definitive statement on a 2nd year QB unless the guy completely implodes or struggles or plays out of his mind. The kid was on schedule to be a good QB it would appear.

 

[Memphis Ram]

Just the fact that you were somehow pigeon-holing a 2nd year QB, who was successful, helped get his team to the playoffs without Peterson I believe, that just speaks volumes. And its not like he was a top 3 pick. So he was progressing well as a late 1st rounder and he won games.

BTW, Who can make any definitive statement on a 2nd year QB unless the guy completely implodes or struggles or plays out of his mind. The kid was on schedule to be a good QB it would appear.

The fact remains that you jumped into a discussion where you didn't have the info of the two parties involved. One of which who actually touted the QB to be good enough to be selected #2 overall by our Rams and replace the guy who eventually ended up being traded for by the Vikings when Bridgewater got hurt, btw (Bradford). You don't do that for a 2 year solid game manager on schedule to ....... Good grief.

Btw, Peterson didn't miss a game in 2015. He ran for 1,485 yards at a 4.5/ypc clip and the Vikings had the 5th rated rushing offense in the NFL that year.

 

[PhillyRam]

The fact remains that you jumped into a discussion where you didn't have the info of the two parties involved. One of which who actually touted the QB to be good enough to be selected #2 overall by our Rams and replace the guy who eventually ended up being traded for by the Vikings when Bridgewater got hurt, btw (Bradford). You don't do that for a 2 year solid game manager on schedule to ....... Good grief.

Btw, Peterson didn't miss a game in 2015. He ran for 1,485 yards at a 4.5/ypc clip and the Vikings had the 5th rated rushing offense in the NFL that year.

BTW, I have had a lot of respect for your postings over the years so this is not some personal pissing contest. In fact based on past posts I am really surprised your take on Goff in that you seem to be diminishing what he has done this year.

In regards to Bradford and Bridgewater.... The kid had a devastating injury. They said it could be a two year injury. The Vikes had a playoff team, likely a top seed caliber playoff team heading into last season.

So sure trading for Bradford made a lot of sense. So that again is just twisting a situation without providing context. I mean there was and still is no guarantee how Bridgewater comes back from this injury. They may have to draft another QB.

So unlike Fisher they did not sit back and just wait for their starter to return from a knee injury (and Bridgewater's was more than just an ACL) and start the likes of Kellen Clemons or Austin Davis if they could help it. So they sought out a real starter.

Kind of like the Colts trading a former #1 for Brissett and they were probably not even thinking about making the playoffs. So is that a knock on Luck that they made a trade for a QB??

 

[PhillyRam]

In the end, QBs get too much credit and too much blame. And it's clear to me that the Rams offensive resurgence has more to do with McVay/LaFleur, the Oline upgrade, and all the weapons than it has to do with Goff. I find it hard to believe that any average QB put in this situation couldn't thrive. In time, I hope Goff grows into being the clear difference, but he's not there yet.

Well, my point is you do seem to be diminishing Goff here. I don't see an avg QB stepping in and putting up 30 a game. Sure McVay with say Case Keenum, might be scoring 23 a game, but that is likely 2 more losses because this D has not started to hit stride until the last few weeks. I don't think they beat Dallas or Jax on the road with Keenum... and do not put up 41 on SF to win by 2. So at least 2 more losses, which means a 4-4 team.

 

[Adi]

I would give up 3 first rounders for a franchise QB, without one you can't win !

 

[Memphis Ram]

BTW, I have had a lot of respect for your postings over the years so this is not some personal pissing contest. In fact based on past posts I am really surprised your take on Goff in that you seem to be diminishing what he has done this year.

In regards to Bradford and Bridgewater.... The kid had a devastating injury. They said it could be a two year injury. The Vikes had a playoff team, likely a top seed caliber playoff team heading into last season.

So sure trading for Bradford made a lot of sense. So that again is just twisting a situation without providing context. I mean there was and still is no guarantee how Bridgewater comes back from this injury. They may have to draft another QB.

So unlike Fisher they did not sit back and just wait for their starter to return from a knee injury (and Bridgewater's was more than just an ACL) and start the likes of Kellen Clemons or Austin Davis if they could help it. So they sought out a real starter.

Kind of like the Colts trading a former #1 for Brissett and they were probably not even thinking about making the playoffs. So is that a knock on Luck that they made a trade for a QB??

I know the history and why they dealt for Bradford. See, you keep grabbing things and running to point out things in spite of the point being made. You are way off on the context regarding my mentioning of Bridgewater that is not even worth the hassle of trying to further explain.

 

[Memphis Ram]

Well, my point is you do seem to be diminishing Goff here. I don't see an avg QB stepping in and putting up 30 a game. Sure McVay with say Case Keenum, might be scoring 23 a game, but that is likely 2 more losses because this D has not started to hit stride until the last few weeks. I don't think they beat Dallas or Jax on the road with Keenum... and do not put up 41 on SF to win by 2. So at least 2 more losses, which means a 4-4 team.

I don't believe that I'm diminishing Goff. I believe that he's played well for his tenure and he's even making me money in daily fantasy football. I'm just not at the point where I can blindly say that he is the reason for the offensive turnaround when I see that that circumstances around him are what most, if not all, QBs would dream. And again, saying that any average QB would thrive under such a dream scenario (is this not so???) was not a direct comparison to the exact results provided thus far with the Rams. If one wanted to go there, some of these average QBs might have better numbers in Goff's exact shoes and some might not. But, that was besides the point for anyone not quick to want to defend Goff at all costs.

Sorry, but I'm just not convinced that this is a Andrew Luck, Deshaun Watson, Aaron Rodgers type of situation whereas if Goff went down the season would be over like it appears to be for the teams of those players.

 

[OC--LeftCoast]

I don't believe that I'm diminishing Goff. I believe that he's played well for his tenure and he's even making me money in daily fantasy football. I'm just not at the point where I can blindly say that he is the reason for the offensive turnaround when I see that that circumstances around him are what most, if not all, QBs would dream. And again, saying that any average QB would thrive under such a dream scenario (is this not so) was not a direct comparison to the exact results provided thus far with the Rams. If one wanted to go there, some of these average QBs might have better numbers in Goff's exact shoes and some might not. But, that was besides the point for anyone not quick to want to defend Goff at all costs.

Wasn’t you a Wentz Guy?

I can only imagine the narrative you’d sing if Nick Marshall was QB’n the Rams

Goff is the real deal, like any young QB, he needs a supporting cast...the Rams utterly failed Bradford, they didn’t make that mistake twice

 

[Memphis Ram]

Wasn’t you a Wentz Guy?

Actually, I didn't think either one of them were worthy of trading all that draft capital up for, but I did prefer Wentz to Goff and still believe that he was the better fit for a Jeff Fisher team as Goff is a better fit for a McVay team. But, McVay wasn't the coach when the selection was made.

And that's the rub. So many seem to be reading in between the lines while looking for ulterior motives instead of just reading and going with what has actually been stated.

 

[OC--LeftCoast]

Actually, I didn't think either one of them were worthy of trading all that draft capital up for, but I did prefer Wentz to Goff and still believe that he was the better fit for a Jeff Fisher team as Goff is a better fit for a McVay team. But, McVay wasn't the coach when the selection was made.

I can agree in a sense but hindsight is proving us wrong

I was Goff from day one...that being said I’ve seen better overall number 1 prospects, SB8 being 1

 

[PhillyRam]

I don't believe that I'm diminishing Goff. I believe that he's played well for his tenure and he's even making me money in daily fantasy football. I'm just not at the point where I can blindly say that he is the reason for the offensive turnaround when I see that that circumstances around him are what most, if not all, QBs would dream. And again, saying that any average QB would thrive under such a dream scenario (is this not so???) was not a direct comparison to the exact results provided thus far with the Rams. If one wanted to go there, some of these average QBs might have better numbers in Goff's exact shoes and some might not. But, that was besides the point for anyone not quick to want to defend Goff at all costs.

Sorry, but I'm just not convinced that this is a Andrew Luck, Deshaun Watson, Aaron Rodgers type of situation whereas if Goff went down the season would be over like it appears to be for the teams of those players.

That is a strawman as well as I have not seen anyone here say Goff is the reason for the turnaround.

So we will just leave it at that... some of us are just giving him a little more credit than you are...fair enough.

Now, I will take issue with your trade up comments... LOL!!

Seriously, can't see how any fan after watching the parade of Clemons, Davis, Hill, Foles, and Keenum not see the need to take a shot at Goff/Wentz.

It was the right move for both the Rams and Eagles because in this league without a QB you are not even relevant.

Look at Denver, should be a threat to win the SB the last few years and they simply do not have a QB... They were able to win a SB with a dead armed Manning, but can't sniff one now until they get a competent QB.

As it is Goff and Wentz appear to be doing better then the much celebrated Winston/Marriota combo of 2015 so if the opportunity arises, and it did since the top team picking already had their QB, it was worth the shot to go get him.

Years ago when their was no FA then it was tougher to give up those picks, but now you can supplement those lost picks with FA. In fact with a rookie QB you can have a cheap starting QB under contract for 4 years allowing you to step up FA spending in the short term. Plus, now when you hit on a pick, you still only have him for 4 years until you can lose him.

For example, the Rams lost Baily, for diff reasons, but he did not work out. Well, he was essentially replaced by Woods. Had Baily been a hit he would of been what Woods is now and on his 2nd contract.

Plus Rams were still a young team. If they were an older team like the Cards it would be tougher, but even they need a QB. If they identify a QB they really like this year, they should move up to get him and then fill holes in FA for the same reasons stated above.

 

[nighttrain]

"It was the right move for both the Rams and Eagles because in this league without a QB you are not even relevant."

 

[Memphis Ram]

That is a strawman as well as I have not seen anyone here say Goff is the reason for the turnaround.

So we will just leave it at that... some of us are just giving him a little more credit than you are...fair enough.

Now, I will take issue with your trade up comments... LOL!!

Seriously, can't see how any fan after watching the parade of Clemons, Davis, Hill, Foles, and Keenum not see the need to take a shot at Goff/Wentz.

It was the right move for both the Rams and Eagles because in this league without a QB you are not even relevant.

Look at Denver, should be a threat to win the SB the last few years and they simply do not have a QB... They were able to win a SB with a dead armed Manning, but can't sniff one now until they get a competent QB.

As it is Goff and Wentz appear to be doing better then the much celebrated Winston/Marriota combo of 2015 so if the opportunity arises, and it did since the top team picking already had their QB, it was worth the shot to go get him.

Years ago when their was no FA then it was tougher to give up those picks, but now you can supplement those lost picks with FA. In fact with a rookie QB you can have a cheap starting QB under contract for 4 years allowing you to step up FA spending in the short term. Plus, now when you hit on a pick, you still only have him for 4 years until you can lose him.

For example, the Rams lost Baily, for diff reasons, but he did not work out. Well, he was essentially replaced by Woods. Had Baily been a hit he would of been what Woods is now and on his 2nd contract.

Plus Rams were still a young team. If they were an older team like the Cards it would be tougher, but even they need a QB. If they identify a QB they really like this year, they should move up to get him and then fill holes in FA for the same reasons stated above.

I didn't say that anyone did Philly. But OK.

 

[Florida_Ram]

With this subject, I defer my answer to @Rams43, @LACHAMP46 & @den-the-coach. They have known me the longest on this subject

 

[jrry32]

Sorry, but I don't recall his pre-injury preseason play being much different than what he did in prior preseasons. But, I do recall some were questioning if he were the answer at the position as he had thus far proven only to be a game manager as the Vikings top rated defense & rushing attack carried the team to that 11-5 record. C'mon, the popularity contest, Pro Bowl injury replacement, threw 14 TDs vs. 9 INTs that sophomore season. And I do recall how many saw Bradford as clearly the better QB prior to his injury.

And sure, he's still young. And again, I'm rooting for him. I'm just saying the the expectations you presented back then (not mine) when you would have had the Rams select him #2 overall in that draft class hadn't shown up yet. That's all.

http://www.nfl.com/player/teddybridgewater/2543465/gamelogs?season=2016
He was dominant that preseason.

Hell yea, I would have had the Rams take him in the first round that year. He was a great fit for what we wanted in a QB, he ran a pro style scheme to perfection in college, and our QBs at the time were Bradford coming off his knee injury and Shaun Hill.

I'm glad we didn't take him, though, because we would have been stuck with Fisher still if we had.

As for Bridgewater's first two years, he doesn't seem to be in a bad club:
http://pfref.com/tiny/JJ7CA

His numbers are on par with Matt Ryan's. And that's who many people compared him to (along with Chad Pennington) when he was a prospect. You're moving awfully quickly to write a kid off who played well during his first two years in the NFL.

 

[kurtfaulk]

I don't believe that I'm diminishing Goff. I believe that he's played well for his tenure and he's even making me money in daily fantasy football. I'm just not at the point where I can blindly say that he is the reason for the offensive turnaround when I see that that circumstances around him are what most, if not all, QBs would dream. And again, saying that any average QB would thrive under such a dream scenario (is this not so???) was not a direct comparison to the exact results provided thus far with the Rams. If one wanted to go there, some of these average QBs might have better numbers in Goff's exact shoes and some might not. But, that was besides the point for anyone not quick to want to defend Goff at all costs.

Sorry, but I'm just not convinced that this is a Andrew Luck, Deshaun Watson, Aaron Rodgers type of situation whereas if Goff went down the season would be over like it appears to be for the teams of those players.

what is the point of all this and other contributions in this thread?

.

 

[PhillyRam]

I didn't say that anyone did Philly. But OK.

Wut???

You said you were not willing to say that "Goff was the reason for the turnaround"

That is suggesting that other people here are stating that.. So c'mon..