Jared Goff 2016

[dieterbrock]

and you are a Ram fan with high hopes for a great year, no matter who is the QB

This is true, and I am trying to get there myself

 

[LACHAMP46]

I prefer wins gained and clipboard experience for now.

This assumes that Keenum gives us a better chance to win...and doesn't include Goff's chances to win now, and even more important, his improved abilities to win later....

 

[RamzFanz]

This assumes that Keenum gives us a better chance to win...and doesn't include Goff's chances to win now, and even more important, his improved abilities to win later....

Sometimes good QBs need time to develope from the sideline watching, hearing, seeing how things run, and thinking about what they would do. It sure didn't hurt Kurt Warner or Aaron Rodgers.

 

[FarNorth]

Can't disagree with that. One game last year soured me on Keenum. The 49er game. With Gurley out it was on his shoulders to prove he's a starting caliber quarterback. He couldn't make enough plays to beat a very beatable team and avoid a losing season. I have a feeling that game mighta sealed his fate as they gave up a lot to get the best QB in the draft.

It absolutely sealed his fate. They couldn't have traded up for Goff if they had gone 8-8. And rightly so-- Keenum's a good guy; he may be better with a better line and a couple of new receivers and a really ready Gurley; he may be better at the start of the year to help get the training wheels off an offense with a new scheme and new pieces-- but the offense won't take off until Goff starts and can make a defense worry about deep balls, quick and accurate medium passes, and pinpoint redzone throws. And, oh yes, it will happen.

 

[jrry32]

Do you still think that after Thursday?



Seattle in Seattle is weak?

Yes.

Straw man.

 

[dieterbrock]

Sometimes good QBs need time to develope from the sideline watching, hearing, seeing how things run, and thinking about what they would do. It sure didn't hurt Kurt Warner or Aaron Rodgers.

So the only reason why Rodgers rode the bench for his first 3 years was because he wasn't ready?

 

[Bluesy]

I'm gonna mention this again, if we were a 2-14 team last year, just like so many of the other teams who have taken QBs #1 overall in recent years, Goff would be starting. But we didn't earn the #1 pick, we acquired it.

Reality is, we have a legitimate shot at the playoffs and a coach who is on the hot seat. This means we aren't going to risk working with rookie mistakes from day one. Those other teams who got #1 QBs were basically throwing em in and hoping for the best. For their situations, their season couldn't turn out worse than the previous year. Can't say that for the Rams.

 

[bluecoconuts]

Seattle in Seattle is weak?

Case didn't play poorly, but he only had 103 passing yards... It's not like he carried the team.

 

[OldSchool]

This assumes that Keenum gives us a better chance to win...and doesn't include Goff's chances to win now, and even more important, his improved abilities to win later....

Those 140 yard passing games are pure win!!

 

[RamzFanz]

Yes.

Straw man.

Seattle in Seattle is a straw man? The least defeated home team in the history of recent football that I know of? OK, we shall see.

 

[RamzFanz]

So the only reason why Rodgers rode the bench for his first 3 years was because he wasn't ready?

No, I said it didn't hurt him. Starting him day one may have had different results.

 

[RamzFanz]

Case didn't play poorly, but he only had 103 passing yards... It's not like he carried the team.

No, he didn't. But he was enough and now he's had time to acclimate to starter and has more weapons. Big difference.

 

[jrry32]

Seattle in Seattle is a straw man? The least defeated home team in the history of recent football that I know of? OK, we shall see.

Me: "Keenum started during the weakest part of the Rams schedule."
You: "Oh, so Seattle is weak now?"

Do you see why that is a straw man?

To illustrate this, I'll point out that Foles started 8 games against playoff teams in his 11 starts. Keenum started 1 game against a playoff team in his 5 starts. Hence, the claim that Keenum started during the weakest part of the Rams schedule.

This is essentially akin to me saying that Trayvon Bromell ran the slowest 100 meter dash in the Olympic finals, and you responding with, "Oh, so now Trayvon Bromell is slow?"

 

[jrry32]

No, he didn't. But he was enough and now he's had time to acclimate to starter and has more weapons. Big difference.

I'm not seeing any difference. The weapons are nearly the same as last year.(Britt, Austin, Gurley, Kendricks, and Quick) The OC is the same one he had last year. Where is the big difference?

 

[Mojo Ram]

It was '14. But we did have Mason and fairly good D, two shutouts and holding Denver to 7. The problem was the QBs, teams figured Davis out and he became a turnover machine, many of those were returned for tds. And Hill was limited, game manager, made a few good plays- long td to Britt vs Den, and of course a few boneheaded plays-game losing int vs SD.

Yeah the 2014 defense was good enough. The Rams surrendered 102 points off turnovers that season(2nd worst in the league) generated by the ridiculous amount of untimely miscues from A.Davis, S. Hill at QB.

As a team the Rams allowed 354 pts.
102 of those came as a direct result of turnovers. Think about THAT for a minute.
----
And just in case you're curious, the Rams only gave away 46 turnover points last season with Foles/Keenum.

 

[RamzFanz]

Me: "Keenum started during the weakest part of the Rams schedule."
You: "Oh, so Seattle is weak now?"

Do you see why that is a straw man?

To illustrate this, I'll point out that Foles started 8 games against playoff teams in his 11 starts. Keenum started 1 game against a playoff team in his 5 starts. Hence, the claim that Keenum started during the weakest part of the Rams schedule.

This is essentially akin to me saying that Trayvon Bromell ran the slowest 100 meter dash in the Olympic finals, and you responding with, "Oh, so now Trayvon Bromell is slow?"

Nonsense. Strawman is setting up a scenario that didn't or couldn't happen. CK walked into a scenario that is as near a no win as could be conceived, and won. Tell me how many teams win against Seattle in Seattle?

CK has a winning record, lost his first Rams start against the Cardinals who went on to challenge in the conference championship, and put the Rams in a position to win his other loss but for missed field goals. No strawmen here.

You should consider getting behind him because he's our first winning QB in how long?

 

[jrry32]

Nonsense. Strawman is setting up a scenario that didn't or couldn't happen. CK walked into a scenario that is as near a no win as could be conceived, and won.

CK has a winning record, lost his first Rams start against the Cardinals who went on to challenge in the conference championship, and put the Rams in a position to win his other loss but for missed field goals. No strawmen here.

That's not what a straw man argument is.

Keenum didn't play the Cardinals. He lost his first Rams start against the Ravens, who ended up picking in the top 10.

And he stunk up the field against San Francisco in a winnable game. The defense and running game held up their side. Keenum and Zuerlein failed to hold up theirs.

The guy is our QB. I don't enjoy criticizing him. But let's not blow his contributions out of proportion. He did the bare minimum in our wins against Seattle and Detroit. The rest of the team carried us to wins in those games. The only game he was actually a net positive in was the Tampa Bay game. We had a winning record with him because we played a soft schedule when he was QB.

 

[RamzFanz]

That's not what a straw man argument is.

Keenum didn't play the Cardinals. He lost his first Rams start against the Ravens, who ended up picking in the top 10.

And he stunk up the field against San Francisco in a winnable game. The defense and running game held up their side. Keenum and Zuerlein failed to hold up theirs.

The guy is our QB. I don't enjoy criticizing him. But let's not blow his contributions out of proportion. He did the bare minimum in our wins against Seattle and Detroit. The rest of the team carried us to wins in those games. The only game he was actually a net positive in was the Tampa Bay game. We had a winning record with him because we played a soft schedule when he was QB.

So both games he lost were lost by a single field goal with missed field goals? Yep, sounds like he blew it.

I don't care if he's a "net positive" (he was) in the season we had last year, I care that we can win this season. New and better weapons in an offense he was a winner in already and set us up for a sweep if not for missed field goals. Sounds good to me. I'm not a fan, but he's a proven commodity for winning on this team. If they started Mannion, I could see it as high risk/reward, Goff, no way.

 

[jrry32]

So both games he lost were lost by a single field goal with missed field goals? Yep, sounds like he blew it.

Yea, he blew it. The offense scored 16 points against two teams that picked in the top 10 in those games. You really going to put all the blame on Zuerlein?

I don't care if he's a "net positive" (he was) in the season we had last year, I care that we can win this season. New and better weapons in an offense he was a winner in already and set us up for a sweep if not for missed field goals. Sounds good to me. I'm not a fan, but he's a proven commodity for winning on this team. If they started Mannion, I could see it as high risk/reward, Goff, no way.

It's very difficult to consistently win without a QB who is a net positive. But yes, it's the kicker's fault that we didn't go 5-0 with Keenum as a starter...despite the fact that the offense failed to score 20+ points in every game but the Tampa Bay game. That's Zuerlein's fault. Not at all the fault of the QB who accounted for 4 TDs in 5 starts.

If they started Mannion, they'd be batshit insane. I'm no fan of Keenum. I think he offers nothing more than a guy who avoids turnovers. But Mannion doesn't offer anything to our team as a starter imo.

Who are the new and better weapons? Rookies. Who may or may not be able to offer us good play this year.

 

[jap]

I am very surprised at all the faith some members are showing in Case as a starting QB. I just cannot see how he scares good teams. Todd needs a QB with a legitimate arm he can play with. He shouldn't have to be the entire offense. There's no point in Tavon running deep if his QB cannot find him or reach him with his [the QB's] arm. I doubt it will take very long before EVERYONE sees Case's limitations and how he is holding back the team.

Still, Jerad has a steep learning curve ahead of him and a lot of offensive wrinkles to get used to. Chris Weinke should be as close to a roommate to Jerad as a coach can be.