Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Stafford-Goff swap is happening


Mr. Scot
 Share

Recommended Posts

Jared Goff is an average starting QB in the NFL and is being paid like he is top 5. Year one of his albatross of an extension starts this season.

Rams made out like bandits getting out from under that terrible deal and got an upgrade at QB in the process.

If the Rams weren't trading Goff to the guy who scouted him in college they would have never been able to move him.

  • Beer 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, stbugs said:

If you look at Goff’s contract (for the Lions, the old signing bonus is on the Rams), he’s only got $15M of dead cap to get rid of him after 1 year. Like Teddy, if they trade him after 2021, there is no cap hit in 2022. After 2022, he’s got no more dead cap no matter what. If the right QB falls, they could easily take him and have Goff be the 2021 starter and either find out Goff is solid or gone. If the rookie seems even better then you can trade Goff who’d have a Teddy like not so bad contract with 0 cap hit for a trade. You could also trade the rookie if Goff has cemented the job.

All that said, Detroit is absolutely less likely to take a QB than if they had made a deal with no QB coming back. That’s good for us because no way we can afford Watson if that’s what Stafford is valued at.

The Rams are going for broke and they gave up a ton but if Stafford is good, they gave up almost early 2nd picks. Not close to say us giving up #8.

I'm not real worried about the lions taking a quarterback at 7. Yeah, it's possible, but I'm not buying it.

Seeing them trade out of the spot to somebody who does need a quarterback seems like a lot larger possibility.

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, 45catfan said:

If the Jets stick with Darnold (50/50 proposition) and nobody trades up (still not buying the Falcons are moving on from Ryan) we could be sitting there at #8 with Wilson, Fields and Lance as options.  Yes, I still draft Lance. 😀

I think Tre has potential, but I don't think he fits into the offensive scheme we run. Could he adjust? Possibly. But it think #8 is to high on possibility. Most years you can count on one maaaybe  two QBs  becoming franchise talents

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, mav1234 said:

Seems high but maybe we also were trying to force them to take Teddy or something.

Of the teams they were talking to, we had the highest first round pick.

We probably offered more than just that, though I doubt it was multiple first rounders. Maybe an additional lower round pick or a player (or both).

Teddy being part of the deal isn't hard to imagine at all. Dan Campbell was on the Saints staff when he came in as a backup and won five games while Brees was injured.

Hell, I'd still call up the Lions and offer them Bridgewater for something.

Edited by Mr. Scot
  • Pie 2
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, La Pantera said:

I think Tre has potential, but I don't think he fits into the offensive scheme we run. Could he adjust? Possibly. But it think #8 is to high on possibility. Most years you can count on one maaaybe  two QBs  becoming franchise talents

And exactly what is that?  Dude can make every throw.  What offense wouldn't that be a perfect fit for?  I'm not exactly sure what you mean by our scheme.   I mean, he can hit a check down pass...that was the bulk of our 'scheme' last year

Edited by 45catfan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wanted stafford, but I will say, We're gonna find out REAL quick if McVay is the genius everyone made him out to be.  Jared goff for his faults has been between 4000 and 4500 yards per season the last 4 years and has a 2:1 TD/INT ratio.  he clearly was on pace to be a franchise QB and the rams have been kind of a dumpster fire, so I absolutely could see them having fuged this up too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, LinvilleGorge said:

A lot of y'all are overlooking that a good chunk of those draft picks were literally just to get the Lions to absorb Goff's contract. That's why a lot of us have been saying Teddy has negative trade value. We'd literally have to give up draft assets to get another team to take him off our hands.

Isn’t Goffs and Staffords guaranteed money about the same for the remainder?

That’s what you have to compare it to and in doing so it looks to be Rams got a slight, short term upgrade for way too much capital. Also looks like Goff could’ve been cut in 2022 without much significance.

Then you have to figure Rams are going to extend Stafford...

Maybe someone knows about contract number can chime in and break it down @stbugs. I’m trying to see an upside for the Rams other than they now have a QB who can make NFL passes.

Edited by onmyown
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mr. Scot said:

Believe it or not, Adam Schefter says that's still possible.

What worries me more though is we thought that somebody else who wants a quarterback badly trades up with them.

A couple of different sources of pointed out that the Lions would be in a really good spot to trade down now.

If the Lions were smart, they’d take a top QB in this draft with their high pick and solidify their future with a ton of capital. I wouldn’t rule them out whatsoever.

Now trading down and acquiring even more picks? I’d even say that is more likely than not taking a QB.

Edited by onmyown
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Sure it does, maybe not every position and not every draft.  You have to admit the hit rate goes down the further in the draft you get.  Would you more readily find a generational talent at the #2 pick or #19 pick?  High picks are considered "busts" if they doesn't pan out, whereas guys drafted later don't have that level of scrutiny upon them.  Different expectation levels.  If Styles does indeed go #2, I already listed the rarefied air that he would be in.  Maybe he doesn't set the League on fire, but my gut feeling is he does.  Again, you don't take an off-ball LB #2 if he is just a 'really good' player.
    • To illustrate my point, I watched (and commented on the Huddle) that Rozeboom would often wait a full second (or close to it) before taking his first step.  I assume that he probably had issues with false steps, a faulty practice that can take an ILB out of the gap completely.  Watch Luke and you see a step with the snap, and rarely was it a false step.  Rozeboom may have had 100 tackles (speculating) but initial contact was 2-3 yards on the defensive side of the ball.  Luke's 100 tackles were made 1-2 yards from the LOS.  Over the course of a year, Luke was much more productive (more fumbles, fewer long gainers, more OL penalties, fewer first downs, etc) that Rozeboom, but on the stat sheet, they both had 100 tackles.  In fact, Rozeboom's inefficiency kept him on the field more (more first downs, fewer OL penalties, turnovers, and punts) so he should have MORE tackles.   I would like to see stats that break down those things.   For example again, Josh Norman was slow--4.68 or so at CB.  However, his anticipation speed was incredible.  He made as many plays as a 4.4 CB.  I had one coach (college--later became the head coach at WCU) tell me that slower players have to use their brains more to still be around.  Elite athletes can just get by on their physical superiority.  He added, "Rarely does a football player run full speed.  Most of the time, they are not, so the 40 time is misleading stat.  Smart players overcome shortcomings--when the elite athlete becomes average (slows with age, advances in level of competition) they struggle against smarter (football IQ) competition.  
    • Obviously tongue in cheek hyperbole. But we do not need a first round RB to compete for a championship. We need intelligent roster building. That to me is the complete opposite of intelligent roster building because it is a prime resource at a devalued plug and play position when we have needs across the defense.
×
×
  • Create New...