The Goff-season Thread

[Merlin]

$27M in savings does coincide nicely with our projected cap deficit too btw. That's a lot of cash to just wait a few months.

 

[OldSchool]

My understanding is if we trade him prior to June it costs us a net $10M in cap. But if we wait until June we get cap relief (not sure how much). So maybe I've got a bad set of variables but that's why I think they hold the trade for June.

We'll be charged for 3 years of a signing bonus for $15 million total. We'll be charged for 4 years of a restructure for $7.2 million. We'll have paid his roster bonus of $2.5 million. So that's $29.7 million if my math's are all correct. Then we have to pay a QB to take his place.

People are dreaming of Watson. His base pay next year is $10.54 million so that means we'd pay Watson and Goff $42.24 million. Watson also starts to make a lot of money the following years with $37 million in 2022 and $32 million in the following 2 years then we get to pay him again.

The other pipe dream is Aaron Rodgers. He's very cheap right now since the vast majority of his cap hit is signing bonus making it so a team will have to pay out the ass to acquire him in players and picks. But salary wise he is very cheap to trade for though he's said he wants a new deal and who can blame him if he's traded his cap hit the next 3 years is $15.5 million then $25.5 million the following 2 years. Both he and Watson will need a new deal by 2023 to avoid lame duck years and Jared the year after.

Whoever trades for Jared will be on the hook for basically $25-26 million a year for 4 years.

So long winded but $10 million is not accurate.

If we were to cut him like some have mentioned (I won't apply angry adjectives to this line of thought but we all should know that's not a very good idea) his 2021 salary is fully guaranteed the remainder of his signing bonus and restructure as well as his roster bonus this year and next year for a total of $65.5 million. I think we can all agree cutting him is not an option.

 

[MachS]

Think this is where I got a net $10M in cost. $22M hit with $12M savings.

Yea that was a good call . Hard to imagine a team waiting until after June to trade for Goff, after OTAs and right before trading camp...but I guess it's possible. You would think a team wants their QB situation sorted out ahead of time.

But with all the media smoke lately and McVay/Snead's tone regarding Goff...makes you wonder if a trade isn't imminent or currently being discussed.

And to me there's just no way Goff doesn't take all this stuff as disrespect and a huge slap in the face. I don't see his relationship ever being the same with McVay or the Rams after the last couple weeks.

 

[NJRamsFan]

At this point I kinda hope they have a plan to move on from him I’m worried what this will do to our locker room otherwise

 

[MachS]

$27M in savings does coincide nicely with our projected cap deficit too btw. That's a lot of cash to just wait a few months.

Can a trade be agreed upon now and locked in... but not processed until after June 1st? Is there a risk for the agreeing team to back out with it not being finalized?

 

[NJRamsFan]

Goff is indeed butt hurt about not starting against Seahawks he needs to get over it. He was clearly not ready to play that game, and we probably lose if he starts.

I’m genuinely curious how you came to this conclusion. Wolford completed 3 passes for 29 yards before Goff came in and we still won. Are you saying we lose if we didn’t have those 29 yards from Wolford first?

 

[NJRamsFan]

Can a trade be agreed upon now and locked in... but not processed until after June 1st? Is there a risk for the agreeing team to back out with it not being finalized?

If you’re trading for Goff you believe he will rebound and you would want him in the building learning your offense as soon as possible. I can’t see this scenario playing out

 

[payote75]

I still say the colts fit best. They can afford him and he becomes reasonably priced when traded. Their offensive line will be a wall they have a run game they are in a dome and Frank Reich is somewhat familiar with him and a qb whisper.

They can afford to give up a first rounder and maybe even squeeze a third or fourth swap with our fifth etc.

Houston wants 3 1st rounders we would have them. As well as plenty of 3rd rounders this year and probably next year as well. We can also (I cringe) trade kupp in a package but I'd want more than what I said above.

Realistically you give Miami Watson they won't be picking high in drafts and yes Miami can give back pick 3 but they can't or won't maybe they want to only give 18 or feel Tua has a lot of value. Saleh loves Darnold and with no lawrence it's speculated the jets will go wide out Smith or trade out. The niners same thing they can give there 7th but the rest will be just as low as ours. So not far fetched we actually will have extra thirds and maybe a player of interest. With fuller possibly leaving.

Last thing for them to be this angry or public I wonder if something went down behind the scenes. Or they trying to file him up to play better but at this point if they were trying to do that they might have gone a bit too far.
Bad blood will more than likely exist.

 

[Shuie3225]

View: https://twitter.com/TampaBayTre/status/1354164616255983618?s=20

 

[NJRamsFan]

I swear this feels like a poor mans version of our Kurt Warner story. I say poor mans because obviously Goff didn’t win us a Super Bowl or dominate as much as Warner but I swear to god if I have to watch Goff go to the colts and light it up like Kurt with Arizona idk if I could continue to support this team

 

[FrantikRam]

Lot of words for evading the question, not to mention failing to give a satisfactory answer.

Let's do this again, and don't both responding if you can't come up with answers:

1) of the 13 other teams that made the playoffs, which ones had an OL that was less than or equal to ours?
2) of the 7 other teams that played in the divisional round, which ones had an OL that was less than or equal to ours?
3) of the four teams that played for a conference championship, whose OL was less than or equal to ours?

I'll give my own answers:

1) Seattle, and perhaps Chicago had OLs that were *maybe* less than or equal to ours. So at best, the Rams OL ranked 12th out of 14 teams that made the playoffs. And still, the Rams advanced to the divisional round.
2) Of the 7 other teams that played in the conference finals, all of them had an OL better than ours. Blythe wouldn't have been a starter on any of them, and on some, only Whit would have stood a chance.
3) The Rams OL isn't even close to any of those of the teams that made the final four.

I think our OL was better than Pittsburgh's (couldn't run the ball), Seattle's and Chicago's for sure.

Our OL is extremely similar to the Chiefs: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.ar...he-chiefs-offensive-line-in-the-weeks-to-come

Not a lot of sacks, some success running - but can't seem to run in crucial situations.

And then how are we judging this? The Rams OL had a bad game against the Packers but generally played well during the season.

The Packers OL got beat up the Bucs pretty badly. Same for the Bills against the Chiefs - and the Bills really can't run the ball without Allen.

I'd say the Rams OL was probably average amongst playoff teams.

 

[thirteen28]

I swear this feels like a poor mans version of our Kurt Warner story. I say poor mans because obviously Goff didn’t win us a Super Bowl or dominate as much as Warner but I swear to god if I have to watch Goff go to the colts and light it up like Kurt with Arizona idk if I could continue to support this team

Yep. Like I said, this franchise never learns with QBs. The Colts would be a great situation for Goff and one where he would likely get his career back on track, and we will have gotten rid of him instead of trying to create those same conditions for him here, while hampering our ability to create them for whoever his replacement is.

Assuming this hypothetical happens, if Goff lights it up with the Colts, it's going to be a very poor reflection on McVay and Snead. And if Goff's replacement doesn't improve their offense or their W/L record, it's going to look even worse for those two. I won't be able to continue to support McVay or Snead if that scenario happens. And I'm keenly aware of how things went for Mike Martz and this franchise when they unceremoniously dumped Warner.

 

[FrantikRam]

.

I have come to terms with the fact Jared won't be with the Rams next season.

After all this bullshit from Mcvay and Snead there's no way he will return to the team.

Imagine if they trade him away and roll with wolford? I don't think I'd be able to watch them play again.

.

The thing is, well never really know why. McVay won't spill. Hes always taken responsibility when things go wrong though - what if McVay asked Goff to put in extra time to work on some of his issues and Goff said no?

There's so many things well never know - but if McVay is done with Goff, I have to think there's a good reason for that.

 

[thirteen28]

I think our OL was better than Pittsburgh's (couldn't run the ball), Seattle's and Chicago's for sure.

Our OL is extremely similar to the Chiefs: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.ar...he-chiefs-offensive-line-in-the-weeks-to-come

Not a lot of sacks, some success running - but can't seem to run in crucial situations.

And then how are we judging this? The Rams OL had a bad game against the Packers but generally played well during the season.

The Packers OL got beat up the Bucs pretty badly. Same for the Bills against the Chiefs - and the Bills really can't run the ball without Allen.

I'd say the Rams OL was probably average amongst playoff teams.

Chiefs didn't have a RB as good as Akers, which contributed a lot to their problems running the ball. I'd take their line (assuming their starting LOT is healthy) over the Rams any day.

The Packers OL still did good enough to run all over us, and even though AD was only at 50%, the Seahawks weren't able to take advantage of that after he left in that game.

Bills still managed to move the ball and score points against the Chiefs, their OL wasn't the reason they lost.

And none of those teams has a link as weak as our C, not by a long shot. A link that weak can negate the rest of the unit, and did for much of the year. It definitely did in almost every game we played against a stout DL, with the exception of the Bucs game ... and who else played well in that one? It's not a mere coincidence.

 

[jrry32]

$27M in savings does coincide nicely with our projected cap deficit too btw. That's a lot of cash to just wait a few months.

The problem with this is that the Draft is before June 1. We can just move the additional $15 million into future years via other means.

 

[Merlin]

Yea that was a good call . Hard to imagine a team waiting until after June to trade for Goff, after OTAs and right before trading camp...but I guess it's possible. You would think a team wants their QB situation sorted out ahead of time.

But with all the media smoke lately and McVay/Snead's tone regarding Goff...makes you wonder if a trade isn't imminent or currently being discussed.

And to me there's just no way Goff doesn't take all this stuff as disrespect and a huge slap in the face. I don't see his relationship ever being the same with McVay or the Rams after the last couple weeks.

Goff is not Rodgers. He's got two consecutive years of bottom third production and that matters in a situation like this. He's also not a selfish or dramatic player and he knows he's been well paid and treated by the team and if they want to go another direction he'll be a pro and roll with it.

And either way back to the cap... It seems to me that trading him before June would be tough to pull off when they also have to trim cap space. That would definitely be preferable to all parties but I would think they want those big cap savings so they can at least have all this shit also help them not have to cut dudes to get to the cap.

 

[FrantikRam]

Chiefs didn't have a RB as good as Akers, which contributed a lot to their problems running the ball. I'd take their line (assuming their starting LOT is healthy) over the Rams any day.

The Packers OL still did good enough to run all over us, and even though AD was only at 50%, the Seahawks weren't able to take advantage of that after he left in that game.

Bills still managed to move the ball and score points against the Chiefs, their OL wasn't the reason they lost.

And none of those teams has a link as weak as our C, not by a long shot. A link that weak can negate the rest of the unit, and did for much of the year. It definitely did in almost every game we played against a stout DL, with the exception of the Bucs game ... and who else played well in that one? It's not a mere coincidence.

By who else do you mean Goff? Because Goff also played horribly at times when not under pressure. Which is what makes bringing our OL down so funny. I have no issue with Goff not performing well when our OL got destroyed - what everyone should have a problem with are the unforced turnovers - INTs against the Jets, Seahawks, Niners, fumble against the Niners - and then even if a QB is under pressure, the QB can't just throw the ball without looking like Goff's pick 6 against the Niners or either INT to the Dolphins.

It was a good unit - when just about every statistic paints them in a good light, they're a good unit. This will be ridiculous but bear with me for a minute: imagine for a second Goff was the OL - and each offensive lineman was a part of Goff's game. He's above average in literally every category, yet he struggles with the deep ball (we will call that Blythe). Sometimes that struggle killed drives and lost a game or two - but overall, statistically, he was above average in every statistical category (except deep ball accuracy) - now imagine people saying he was the reason we lost. C'mon.

 

[thirteen28]

By who else do you mean Goff? Because Goff also played horribly at times when not under pressure. Which is what makes bringing our OL down so funny. I have no issue with Goff not performing well when our OL got destroyed - what everyone should have a problem with are the unforced turnovers - INTs against the Jets, Seahawks, Niners, fumble against the Niners - and then even if a QB is under pressure, the QB can't just throw the ball without looking like Goff's pick 6 against the Niners or either INT to the Dolphins.

It was a good unit - when just about every statistic paints them in a good light, they're a good unit. This will be ridiculous but bear with me for a minute: imagine for a second Goff was the OL - and each offensive lineman was a part of Goff's game. He's above average in literally every category, yet he struggles with the deep ball (we will call that Blythe). Sometimes that struggle killed drives and lost a game or two - but overall, statistically, he was above average in every statistical category (except deep ball accuracy) - now imagine people saying he was the reason we lost. C'mon.

Ok, so let me ask you this then (my disagreement with your assessment notwithstanding):

1) Would you be happy rolling with the same OL next year as we did this year? Same 5 starters?
2) Would you be happy with McVay continuing to run the offense the way he did this year, with no deep threat and with a much shorter, condensed passing game that quickly reduced to dink-and-dunk and surrender on 3rd and long with those ridiculous WR screens that go for little if any positive yardage?

Apparently you believe that the only thing we need to do to improve the offense is get rid of Goff, am I right?

 

[badnews]

I'm not positive Goff will take the Rams to the promised land and win us Super Bowls in the future if we hold on to him.

But I am convinced if we send him packing he will be a thorn in our side and an embarrassing example on why you shouldn't give up on young QBs.
I can see him being damn good for a long time.

 

[jrry32]

By who else do you mean Goff? Because Goff also played horribly at times when not under pressure. Which is what makes bringing our OL down so funny. I have no issue with Goff not performing well when our OL got destroyed - what everyone should have a problem with are the unforced turnovers - INTs against the Jets, Seahawks, Niners, fumble against the Niners - and then even if a QB is under pressure, the QB can't just throw the ball without looking like Goff's pick 6 against the Niners or either INT to the Dolphins.

It was a good unit - when just about every statistic paints them in a good light, they're a good unit. This will be ridiculous but bear with me for a minute: imagine for a second Goff was the OL - and each offensive lineman was a part of Goff's game. He's above average in literally every category, yet he struggles with the deep ball (we will call that Blythe). Sometimes that struggle killed drives and lost a game or two - but overall, statistically, he was above average in every statistical category (except deep ball accuracy) - now imagine people saying he was the reason we lost. C'mon.

I'll grant you the Wilkins INT. He got fooled and did not expect Wilkins to drop out. But claiming that on the other two INTs is bullshit. On the SF INT (Kinlaw), he got hit while he was throwing the ball, which caused it to go straight to Kinlaw instead of Kupp. On the Miami INT (Rowe), the free rusher hit his arm as it was coming forward, which caused the ball to float straight to Rowe. If Goff made a mistake on either play, it was trying to throw instead of taking a sack and living to fight another down.