Matt Stafford Traded to Rams

[Akrasian]

Yeah I was mostly against the trade because of the two firsts we paid.

That's why I question it. The Rams haven't picked a first since Goff. They have holes. Even if they don't pick a first, they can trade for other high draft picks to get a center and another player (s) to fill holes. I think Stafford is better than Goff - but is he enough better to justify the cap hit, the age difference, AND the draft hit?

 

[OC_Ram]

[QUOTE="PhillyRam,
If a certified moron could put up 22 a game last yr, then Superman should be able to double it... especially if the defense remains a top 5 defense.
[/QUOTE]

Agreed

 

[FrantikRam]

Group think isn't always correct.

I am a staunch Villanova basketball fan. Maybe you dont follow college BB, but their coach, Jay Wright, was labled a choke artist and an overrated coach by the talking heads and so called experts. He had top teams get knocked out early 3-4 yrs in a row and he took a ton of heat in the CB world. Was considered a joke by some.

He ended up winning 2 NCAA titles since then.

Just saying there are often other factors that play a big role that many overlook or want to overlook.

I hope I am wrong. I hope he comes in here and wins a couple titles like Plunkett did. I just have concerns that the public and their group think might be wrong here. A little irrational exuberance if you want to call it that.

I get that, but in this case you have three distinct groups:

Rams fans - have a perspective of our own as (probably) the only NFL fans that watch every snap Jared Goff played

Other fans - most do not dislike the Rams or Goff - I saw several neutral fans rank Goff as a fringe top 10 guy after 2017/2018, many now have him as a bottom third starter

Rams coaches - they are the only ones that spent time with Goff


So you have these three distinct groups who all would agree that Stafford is a decently big upgrade. None of our opinions have been influenced by the other - several Rams fans said Goff was an issue before McVay spoke out after the Niners game.

 

[FrantikRam]

And keep thinking Goff was the only problem.

As I've said almost all season, he's not but the bad turnovers made it really hard to figure out what the other issues were, beyond Blythe getting beaten badly.

 

[PhillyRam]

I get that, but in this case you have three distinct groups:

Rams fans - have a perspective of our own as (probably) the only NFL fans that watch every snap Jared Goff played

Other fans - most do not dislike the Rams or Goff - I saw several neutral fans rank Goff as a fringe top 10 guy after 2017/2018, many now have him as a bottom third starter

Rams coaches - they are the only ones that spent time with Goff


So you have these three distinct groups who all would agree that Stafford is a decently big upgrade. None of our opinions have been influenced by the other - several Rams fans said Goff was an issue before McVay spoke out after the Niners game.

Not really... A lot of pundits called Goff a bust post the 16' season and a lot of them refused to acknowledge that they were wrong regardless of the great games he would have.

As I mentioned previously...this is a fascinating trade.

One guy has never accomplished anything from a team perspective, yet is given the excuse that the environment has prevented him from doing so and that player has universally been given a pass while also praised for his "greatness". His failures are not his fault we are told.

The other has accomplished a lot from a team perspective, especially for a 26 yr old. Won playoff games, 2nd most reg season games over the last 4 yrs, and a Conf Title. Yet he is treated with disdain, even mocked by national talking heads, called "Goof" by others. His success is never credited to his actions as they always provided to his coach.

So it will be interesting if those narratives were both correct.

 

[FrantikRam]

You come off as really arrogant, you know?

Thanks for the heads up. You've seemed pretty unhappy in a lot of your replies to me, so maybe ignore me? Hope you feel better

 

[FrantikRam]

Not really... A lot of pundits called Goff a bust post the 16' season and a lot of them refused to acknowledge that they were wrong regardless of the great games he would have.

As I mentioned previously...this is a fascinating trade.

One guy has never accomplished anything from a team perspective, yet is given the excuse that the environment has prevented him from doing so and that player has universally been given a pass while also praised for his "greatness". His failures are not his fault we are told.

The other has accomplished a lot from a team perspective, especially for a 26 yr old. Won playoff games, 2nd most reg season games over the last 4 yrs, and a Conf Title. Yet he is treated with disdain, even mocked by national talking heads, called "Goof" by others. His success is never credited to his actions as they always provided to his coach.

So it will be interesting if those narratives were both correct.

I'm talking about Rams fans, neutral fans and the Rams coaches. Left the media or pundits out because of that.

Part of the issue is crediting a QB with team success to begin with. It's an incredibly bad practice IMO.

Just as an example:

Years ago against the Vikings Goff had the most pass attempts ever to have a perfect passer rating. But late in the game, the Vikings had the ball near midfield down 7. Our defense couldn't stop them most of the game. If Franklin-Meyers didn't strip Cousins, it's very possible that the Vikings score a TD, and likely IMO that they would have gone for 2. There was a possibility there to lose the game even with Goff playing an almost literally perfect game. As it stands, I don't give the defense much credit for that game despite them ultimately forcing the turnover to win the game.

Had we lost, that would not have been Goff's fault, obviously - other losses I give him little to no blame for would be Saints in 2018, Eagles in 2017, Bills in 2020, Seahawks in 2019 - notice how against the Saints, Eagles and Bills he turned the ball over, but I still don't blame him for those losses.

On the flip side, there are also wins that he shouldn't get credit for. Or rather, games where you can plug in almost any QB and get the same result, such as the win over the Patriots earlier this year or the win against the Browns in 2019 where he threw three picks.

So I've never been a fan of using team success as a measure of anything. The Saints have the best record in the NFL over the past four seasons, but have a higher win percentage when QBs not named Brees start games.

Goff was better than Stafford in 17/18, but worse in 19/20 - despite the Rams winning 20 games while Detroit obviously wasn't close to that.

I just hate holding team success for or against a QB.

 

[badnews]

I think this trade makes sense on the field... but mostly its about the money.
The Rams offense wasn't going to improve much without any money to upgrade Center or elsewhere.
Stafford gives the Rams a QB they think is better for the short term future than whatever Goff may end up becoming. Better QB play PLUS more cash to address some issues is a big part of the equation.
Without this move, the offense likely doesn't improve much next year, other than an improved Cam Akers and Van Jefferson.
No doubt the Rams can find some quality players with the picks they have... but probably unlikely that they could draft a difference maker for their O.

 

[Mackeyser]

Can't wait to see this 45 pt a game offense that Stafford's going to put up.

I mean he is Superman and Goff is a certified moron if you look at these posts.

If a certified moron could put up 22 a game last yr, then Superman should be able to double it... especially if the defense remains a top 5 defense.

It's rare to see three straw men elements in the same argument.

No one is saying the offense will be double...anything.

No one said that Stafford is Superman

No one is saying that Goff is a moron.

The most critical thing said about Goff was that he'd regressed as a thrower of the ball as well as was not INCREASING his ability to read defenses, either at the LOS or post snap.

Is there a way to make legitimate criticisms of this trade? Sure.

Is it via hyperbole, straw man arguments and salt? Nope.

I mean, you do you, but this just comes off was whining. It's over. You don't like it. Cool. Snarky derision isn't an argument, one way or another.

 

[Mackeyser]

Oh I'm pretty sure all of us are behind Stafford and ready for a successful season. It is curious though the people telling others to drop their opinions of the trade and get over it and move on won't do the same to people who continue to shit on Goff. IMO both parties need to move on. Jared is a Lion now and not a Ram, people need to let it go and look forward for both camps. But only one of the two parties get criticized around here, might be why a lot of people are participating less and less.

I kinda disagree.

1) I think people are participating less b/c we were in the playoffs, losing sucked and the Super Bowl isn't great from most of our vantage points. If one were to take a break, this is a great time.

2) Who's shitting on Goff. I keep seeing this alleged, but no links or otherwise. I mean we all know what that looks like. Who's posting "Goff sucks! Dude couldn't hit the broad side of a barn...from inside the barn!" No one. Not only because that's empirically not true, but his issues have been known for some time. Just ask the Game Day Thread or for extra spicy, hit up the chat...

3) No one's criticizing those who defend Goff. What does get folks to say "move on" is when folks use hyperbole and snarky saltiness to just bitch and moan about shit none of us can do shit all about. Goff got traded away. Even if all of us were 100% against it... still happened. As the mods continually assert, this is a fan site to positively support the team... and while we certainly share our critiques and are allowed to do so in a fairly open matter as long as we don't go out of bounds, it's still a place with a purpose: support the Rams.

I guess what I mean to say is that this isn't really the place to vent. I mean, the mods allow a vent thread for losses and maybe they needed a Goff trade vent thread. I dunno. But that venting is limited in duration and still subject to all the rules of the place.

 

[Mackeyser]

Why is is a snide remark and not a joke? Part of understanding is discussion which will lead to acceptance for some. By and large people aren't allowed to discuss not being in favor of this trade or how things went down they're ridiculed.

Context can be difficult to discern, but patterns do exist. Intention can be easy to discern.

The 45ppg remark wasn't meant in light or a Haha. There's just no way to read that in any other way. And the lame "c'mon, I was joking" doesn't help when it's clear that's not true, by the next umpteen posts.

Trust me when I say that if I still maintained my initial fury, I'd be posting about it.

But if this forum has been consistent about one thing, it's that snark goes unappreciated and will get called out even when folks agree with the point made. That's been consistent since I got here, at least and that's years now.

Let's be real. We know when we mean a haha funny joke and when we mean to be snarky. Mea culpa. I know I've done it and it's usually an issue of being stuck in a dogmatic place.

Criticisms about "some guys just win" and a host of other arguments are valid and still have space. The snark and saltiness? Not so much.

 

[Mackeyser]

You come off as really arrogant, you know?

That's not cool.

 

[Mackeyser]

And keep thinking Goff was the only problem.

Okay. What language do I need to use. I'll fire up Google translate....


for real, NO ONE is saying Goff was the only problem. NO ONE... almost literally on the whole earth.

It's just a crazy straw man argument.

 

[PhillyRam]

Okay. What language do I need to use. I'll fire up Google translate....


for real, NO ONE is saying Goff was the only problem. NO ONE... almost literally on the whole earth.

It's just a crazy straw man argument.

Seems like McVay & Snead are saying that.

 

[Mackeyser]

Not really... A lot of pundits called Goff a bust post the 16' season and a lot of them refused to acknowledge that they were wrong regardless of the great games he would have.

As I mentioned previously...this is a fascinating trade.

One guy has never accomplished anything from a team perspective, yet is given the excuse that the environment has prevented him from doing so and that player has universally been given a pass while also praised for his "greatness". His failures are not his fault we are told.

The other has accomplished a lot from a team perspective, especially for a 26 yr old. Won playoff games, 2nd most reg season games over the last 4 yrs, and a Conf Title. Yet he is treated with disdain, even mocked by national talking heads, called "Goof" by others. His success is never credited to his actions as they always provided to his coach.

So it will be interesting if those narratives were both correct.

I think you're conflating the remarks of fans, most of whom barely know the shape of a football with those who make a living trying to win football games.

And for real, anyone taking the Florio-esque arguments seriously needs to stop. We all know the cadre of talking heads, some former players and some guys who know even less, who refuse to admit that they were wrong about Goff after his 2016 season. If, I, the casual fan, could write PRIOR to the 2016 about how the Fisher offense was structurally broken such that no one could succeed in it, it's flabbergasting to me that the idiots in the media couldn't see it or don't remember it enough to properly evaluate Goff. But that's been how it is and that's why their words mean nothing.

If it was as simple as you suggest, half of the NFL coaches and FO should be fired immediately. Fans have since the dawn of the newsletter where folks would get on a mailing list and there'd be a monthly or weekly mailer with articles and fan comments to the current day of interactive forums and social media, been making identical arguments.

I've heard an argument that Goff is the next Mark Sanchez. Now, I dunno about that, but Mark Sanchez's first 3 years were even more impressive than Goff's in that he went to back to back AFCCGs. Their records have to be pretty close, too.

The point is that just going by the resume isn't an argument.

 

[Mackeyser]

Seems like McVay & Snead are saying that.

Nope, not at all.

McVay has repeatedly fallen on the sword both with Goff and Wolford playing. He articulate exactly which play he should have done better on, as well, which is still a bit of a trick which freaks me out.

At no point has anyone in the Rams organization said that Goff was the sole problem and it's flatly a straw man argument to infer it based on entrenched biases.

 

[Mackeyser]

I'm talking about Rams fans, neutral fans and the Rams coaches. Left the media or pundits out because of that.

Part of the issue is crediting a QB with team success to begin with. It's an incredibly bad practice IMO.

Just as an example:

Years ago against the Vikings Goff had the most pass attempts ever to have a perfect passer rating. But late in the game, the Vikings had the ball near midfield down 7. Our defense couldn't stop them most of the game. If Franklin-Meyers didn't strip Cousins, it's very possible that the Vikings score a TD, and likely IMO that they would have gone for 2. There was a possibility there to lose the game even with Goff playing an almost literally perfect game. As it stands, I don't give the defense much credit for that game despite them ultimately forcing the turnover to win the game.

Had we lost, that would not have been Goff's fault, obviously - other losses I give him little to no blame for would be Saints in 2018, Eagles in 2017, Bills in 2020, Seahawks in 2019 - notice how against the Saints, Eagles and Bills he turned the ball over, but I still don't blame him for those losses.

On the flip side, there are also wins that he shouldn't get credit for. Or rather, games where you can plug in almost any QB and get the same result, such as the win over the Patriots earlier this year or the win against the Browns in 2019 where he threw three picks.

So I've never been a fan of using team success as a measure of anything. The Saints have the best record in the NFL over the past four seasons, but have a higher win percentage when QBs not named Brees start games.

Goff was better than Stafford in 17/18, but worse in 19/20 - despite the Rams winning 20 games while Detroit obviously wasn't close to that.

I just hate holding team success for or against a QB.

Agree.

And pretty sure almost no one's using the Texans' 4 wins against Watson.

It's not a great measure.

 

[CGI_Ram]

Every forum I’ve seen gets personal because people disagree. Why is this? Because dudes get defensive when others don’t join in on their sentiments.

I got banned for 24 hours last week because a dude said “F you” to me. Poster also said “you don’t know what I’ve gone through in my life,” and I said that “everyone goes through trials and tribulations”.

Banned.

Not making this about me. But this type of thing happens in every forum just because of disagreement. #truth #facts.

Yes. In discussion and debate we need to not make things personal so that healthy discussion can occur.

I want to address something; if your point is to address moderation about your ban, we have a rule for that, and it’s to be done in private.

That rule exists for a reason: our moderators, there are more than one... they read a lot. They have context perhaps you are missing and clearly misrepresenting.

So... back to why that rule exists; unless you read as much as a team of moderators, I suggest you take your feedback about any ban to PM in the future.

Long standing members know nobody is ever banned for just “that”. So why you’d suggest it, makes a person wonder the point.

 

[Ramstien]

I for one am glad to see that this Blow Heart was banned, saves me from using the ignore button.

 

[jacktheripper85]

Seems like McVay & Snead are saying that.

They are saying it and they are right. I am a big Goff fan-homegrown, good character and had success while he was here but he’s not a $35M a year guy and that’s the problem.

Look at Mahomes this year. Lost 2 lineman to Covid beginning of year and 2 to injury after that. So basically 4 new lineman all year and they were ranked in Top 5 and KC went 14-2. Now, did that line play great because they were top picks? Had time to gel? Hell no-Mahomes and his ability in the pocket is what made that line “look” like they played great. THAT’S what a $35M a year QB does. Think guys like Brady, Manning, Rodgers and Brees have always had great lines? C’mon.

The issue with Goff is that he does nothing to give the OL a break. If anything his poor pocket presence makes the line look worst than it is. I get Blythe leaves something to be desired but his erratic play isn’t why Goff is so bad. And what has Goff ever done to adjust to the pressure he knows he’s going to get up the middle? Nothing. Still can’t figure out how to maneuver to his left or right and step up in the pocket-frustrating.

Hate to see Goff go but it was the right move. In year 5 if your QB is still being “spoon fed” than how is he supposed to make others around him better? He can’t. And at $35M a year you can’t have that type of QB on your roster.