LeotheLion Posted March 20, 2020 Share Posted March 20, 2020 14 minutes ago, SaveOurSonics said: Yikes. This forum is extra sensitive these days. Are we now filing every critique of the Rams under "silly takes"? It was silly to say Goff would regress to his rookie form. Even this year where he wasn't particularly good and had a bottom 5 rushing attack he still dwarfed his rookie year. Goff's rookie years passer rating would be 15 points lower than the lowest qualified guy this year. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrry32 Posted March 20, 2020 Share Posted March 20, 2020 30 minutes ago, SaveOurSonics said: Yikes. This forum is extra sensitive these days. Are we now filing every critique of the Rams under "silly takes"? No, we're filing "Jared Goff will regress back to his rookie form" under "silly takes." And I was being generous. I could have said "so stupid that even Bill O'Brien is laughing at you." My patience for stupidity is just about gone. I should probably quarantine for the sake of my sanity from the NFL Gen/NFL News/NFL Comparisons forums for the foreseeable future. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pwny Posted March 20, 2020 Share Posted March 20, 2020 Going back to being as effective as he was as a rookie is a bit much. But I do think it’s fair to believe that Goff won’t be the QB he appeared to be with prime Gurley and that what we’ve gotten this year is more likely unless they find another top shelf RB to do things like Gurley did. Gurley’s usage rate dropped drastically in week 14 of 2018. At that point, Goff finished the regular season with a 76.2 passer rating over the last 4 games of the regular season. He then had a 71.7 passer rating in the playoffs, and then his whole of 2019 he had an 86.5 passer rating. He did turn it around at the end of the season and posted a 98.2 passer rating over the last 5 games. But we were chastised for using such a small sample size this time last year to call into question his play down the stretch, so it’s definitely not fair to use a smaller sample size the other way in defense of him now. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr LBC Posted March 20, 2020 Share Posted March 20, 2020 1 hour ago, SteelKing728 said: Who said I was trolling? I don't trust Goff at all. What do you call throwing out obvious intentional hyperbole then? Because if you honestly believe that a QB is going to revert back to rookie form, where he played under a completely different coach, OC, and scheme, simply because he lost a RB (one he was without for periods during his team's run to the Super Bowl) then you're not very knowledgeable about football. And if you are knowledgeable about football, then you went to hyperbole on that statement with the intent of trying to stir up a reaction from the members of a particular sub-forum... which would be the definition of trolling. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rocky_rams Posted March 20, 2020 Share Posted March 20, 2020 29 minutes ago, pwny said: Going back to being as effective as he was as a rookie is a bit much. But I do think it’s fair to believe that Goff won’t be the QB he appeared to be with prime Gurley and that what we’ve gotten this year is more likely unless they find another top shelf RB to do things like Gurley did. Gurley’s usage rate dropped drastically in week 14 of 2018. At that point, Goff finished the regular season with a 76.2 passer rating over the last 4 games of the regular season. He then had a 71.7 passer rating in the playoffs, and then his whole of 2019 he had an 86.5 passer rating. He did turn it around at the end of the season and posted a 98.2 passer rating over the last 5 games. But we were chastised for using such a small sample size this time last year to call into question his play down the stretch, so it’s definitely not fair to use a smaller sample size the other way in defense of him now. If Goff doesn’t turn get better then I’m almost certain he’s gone. If the rams are willing to depart with Gurley who was a much better RB than Goff was a QB, then rest assured, Goff will be dealt if the Rams think he can’t carry the team. Until that time comes, I’m curious to see how things pan out. If we make playoffs next year then it will almost certainly because of Goff because we lost a lot of talent on this team Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pwny Posted March 20, 2020 Share Posted March 20, 2020 29 minutes ago, rocky_rams said: If Goff doesn’t turn get better then I’m almost certain he’s gone. If the rams are willing to depart with Gurley who was a much better RB than Goff was a QB, then rest assured, Goff will be dealt if the Rams think he can’t carry the team. I’m not even sure on that. If he has another bad season, who is gonna trade for him when he has a $32M cap hit in 2020 and $30M in 2021? Even a restructure of his contract would just be moving around $43M in guarantees—and that’s after factoring in the Rams taking on the $15M in remaining signing bonus. That’s a lot for a guy who at that point would have ~2.5 years of poor play to his name. Are the Rams going to eat a huge portion of that to let him go? Without a first round pick to get a new guy? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrry32 Posted March 20, 2020 Share Posted March 20, 2020 (edited) 1 hour ago, pwny said: Going back to being as effective as he was as a rookie is a bit much. But I do think it’s fair to believe that Goff won’t be the QB he appeared to be with prime Gurley and that what we’ve gotten this year is more likely unless they find another top shelf RB to do things like Gurley did. Gurley’s usage rate dropped drastically in week 14 of 2018. At that point, Goff finished the regular season with a 76.2 passer rating over the last 4 games of the regular season. He then had a 71.7 passer rating in the playoffs, and then his whole of 2019 he had an 86.5 passer rating. He did turn it around at the end of the season and posted a 98.2 passer rating over the last 5 games. But we were chastised for using such a small sample size this time last year to call into question his play down the stretch, so it’s definitely not fair to use a smaller sample size the other way in defense of him now. Le sigh. Here comes the bad faith cherry picking. Gurley suffered the injury against Philly. He finished that game with 22 touches. You included the Bears game because it drags down the numbers. Gurley missed the final two games of 2018. Goff posted a passer rating of 126.7 without him. Gurley ran for over 115 yards against Dallas. Goff posted a passer rating of 74.4 in that game. Gurley barely played against NO. Goff posted a PR of 83.0 in that game (which does a poor job of conveying how well he played in that game). He then had a disastrous game against NE. Whether or not that was due to Gurley's absence is debatable. I don't think it's a fight worth having. Point being that Gurley's absence didn't seem to offer a real trend in 2018. We can argue over 2019, but I don't see that going anywhere. I will note, though, that I could easily cherry pick Goff's final 5 games where he posted per-16 game production of 5258 passing yards, 35 passing TDs to 13 INTs, a 7.6 YPA, and a PR of 98.2 to claim that all was fixed and that he'll be great in 2020. That would be on par with the arguments made against him last off-season, but I won't. I'll simply say that we'll see what happens. I think the OL is more important to Goff's success, so it'll hinge on that unit. Edit: And to be fair to you, I don't know if you were aware of when the issue arose, so my irritation may well be misplaced about the Bears game. But that game always seems to make it in, whether warranted or not, when people pick stretches to try and make Goff look bad. I hope that explains my frustration. Edited March 20, 2020 by jrry32 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteelKing728 Posted March 20, 2020 Share Posted March 20, 2020 1 hour ago, The LBC said: What do you call throwing out obvious intentional hyperbole then? Because if you honestly believe that a QB is going to revert back to rookie form, where he played under a completely different coach, OC, and scheme, simply because he lost a RB (one he was without for periods during his team's run to the Super Bowl) then you're not very knowledgeable about football. And if you are knowledgeable about football, then you went to hyperbole on that statement with the intent of trying to stir up a reaction from the members of a particular sub-forum... which would be the definition of trolling. No, I truly honestly don't believe in Goff. I believe he's the product of a coach who utilizes his RB perfectly in a way that helps protect his starting QB from himself. I remain adamant that the Rams would have been far better off not giving Goff a major contract and replaced him via draft or free agency. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pwny Posted March 20, 2020 Share Posted March 20, 2020 (edited) 25 minutes ago, jrry32 said: Le sigh. Here comes the bad faith cherry picking. Gurley suffered the injury against Philly. He finished that game with 22 touches. You included the Bears game because it drags down the numbers. Gurley missed the final two games of 2018. Goff posted a passer rating of 126.7 without him. It’s bad faith to say Gurley’s usage went down in a game he had 14 touches? It was his lowest usage rate in the entire regular season. His 11 rushes against the Bears and then 12 against the Eagles were his two lowest number of carries in the entire regular season. Yes, Gurley had 10 catches against Philly, but the argument has always been that Gurley as a runner forces teams to prioritize stopping the run at the expense of allowing the passing game to be more successful. Edited March 20, 2020 by pwny Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rocky_rams Posted March 20, 2020 Share Posted March 20, 2020 59 minutes ago, pwny said: I’m not even sure on that. If he has another bad season, who is gonna trade for him when he has a $32M cap hit in 2020 and $30M in 2021? Even a restructure of his contract would just be moving around $43M in guarantees—and that’s after factoring in the Rams taking on the $15M in remaining signing bonus. That’s a lot for a guy who at that point would have ~2.5 years of poor play to his name. Are the Rams going to eat a huge portion of that to let him go? Without a first round pick to get a new guy? I wouldn’t put anything past McVay Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr LBC Posted March 20, 2020 Share Posted March 20, 2020 33 minutes ago, SteelKing728 said: No, I truly honestly don't believe in Goff. I believe he's the product of a coach who utilizes his RB perfectly in a way that helps protect his starting QB from himself. I remain adamant that the Rams would have been far better off not giving Goff a major contract and replaced him via draft or free agency. Well, you're in the minority to a vast amount of NFL scouting departments. By all accounts I've heard, recalling the popularity of QB's who went #1, respective to when they were prospects and how staffs viewed them, Goff is like #2 second only to Andrew Luck. Most scouts believed in him more than Baker, more than Kyler (which, from the stuff I was seeing, there was more stock put into Kyler than into Baker), more than Jameis. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteelKing728 Posted March 20, 2020 Share Posted March 20, 2020 12 minutes ago, The LBC said: Well, you're in the minority to a vast amount of NFL scouting departments. By all accounts I've heard, recalling the popularity of QB's who went #1, respective to when they were prospects and how staffs viewed them, Goff is like #2 second only to Andrew Luck. Most scouts believed in him more than Baker, more than Kyler (which, from the stuff I was seeing, there was more stock put into Kyler than into Baker), more than Jameis. I think if the Rams weren't invested in Goff, they'd be much happier with Wentz or Prescott. But that's hindsight logic. I'm not a fan of the guy. Oh well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pwny Posted March 20, 2020 Share Posted March 20, 2020 13 minutes ago, The LBC said: Well, you're in the minority to a vast amount of NFL scouting departments. By all accounts I've heard, recalling the popularity of QB's who went #1, respective to when they were prospects and how staffs viewed them, Goff is like #2 second only to Andrew Luck. Most scouts believed in him more than Baker, more than Kyler (which, from the stuff I was seeing, there was more stock put into Kyler than into Baker), more than Jameis. I’m not really sure what scouts thought 4 years ago is too relevant to how a player would be viewed here and now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrry32 Posted March 20, 2020 Share Posted March 20, 2020 59 minutes ago, pwny said: It’s bad faith to say Gurley’s usage went down in a game he had 14 touches? It was his lowest usage rate in the entire regular season. His 11 rushes against the Bears and then 12 against the Eagles were his two lowest number of carries in the entire regular season. Yes, Gurley had 10 catches against Philly, but the argument has always been that Gurley as a runner forces teams to prioritize stopping the run at the expense of allowing the passing game to be more successful. Gurley's injury didn't occur until the second half of the Eagles game, and he still had 22 touches (nobody knew anything was wrong). He was his normal self against the Bears. So yes, it is extreme bad faith to try and lump those games in. He had 13 rushes against NO, 15 rushes against SF, and 12 rushes against KC. I didn't see you adding those games in (his PRs in those games were 117.1, 127.4, and 115.7). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrry32 Posted March 20, 2020 Share Posted March 20, 2020 1 hour ago, SteelKing728 said: No, I truly honestly don't believe in Goff. I believe he's the product of a coach who utilizes his RB perfectly in a way that helps protect his starting QB from himself. I remain adamant that the Rams would have been far better off not giving Goff a major contract and replaced him via draft or free agency. I'd take Goff over Kirk Cousins in a heartbeat. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.