Jump to content

Week 17 - Rams vs Cardinals


Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, jrry32 said:

McVay implied Goff will be back for the playoffs if we make it. We shall see.

Winning a Super Bowl would be great, but Goff's career fizzling out would definitely not be great.

I'd trade a Super Bowl for it :|

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, btfd16 said:

I'd trade a Super Bowl for it :|

I wouldn't. I'd rather have McVay + a franchise QB than a Super Bowl this year + a bust QB. The latter is a short-term victory. The former is a long-term victory. I'd bet on the former combo bringing us more Super Bowls than the latter combo.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, jrry32 said:

I wouldn't. I'd rather have McVay + a franchise QB than a Super Bowl this year + a bust QB. The latter is a short-term victory. The former is a long-term victory. I'd bet on the former combo bringing us more Super Bowls than the latter combo.

I'm just speaking out of what I have seen from Goff and what I have seen from the Chiefs. I'll take a guarantee all day.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, btfd16 said:

I'm just speaking out of what I have seen from Goff and what I have seen from the Chiefs. I'll take a guarantee all day.

Well, I disagree, but it's a moot point. We're not getting a guarantee. My point was that Goff fizzling is bad for the Rams.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jrry32 said:

I wouldn't. I'd rather have McVay + a franchise QB than a Super Bowl this year + a bust QB. The latter is a short-term victory. The former is a long-term victory. I'd bet on the former combo bringing us more Super Bowls than the latter combo.

And THIS is the problem I have with the Goff homers.

The goal is a Superbowl. We have ONE in franchise history. Some franchises have none. Irks me to my core to even read someone say they would pass on a Superbowl trophy to potentially have more than one in the future? Just absurd. Way beyond a bird in the hand vs. two in the bush.

IDC who wins the Rams a Superbowl and if it means we're stuck with 2 years of dead money on Goff's contract. IT''S A SUPERBOWL.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, BStanRamFan said:

And THIS is the problem I have with the Goff homers.

The goal is a Superbowl. We have ONE in franchise history. Some franchises have none. Irks me to my core to even read someone say they would pass on a Superbowl trophy to potentially have more than one in the future? Just absurd. Way beyond a bird in the hand vs. two in the bush.

IDC who wins the Rams a Superbowl and if it means we're stuck with 2 years of dead money on Goff's contract. IT''S A SUPERBOWL.

And this is the problem I have with people who have no long-term perspective. We have one of the NFL's best HCs. Goff being a franchise QB is a guarantee that we will compete year in and year out for just about the next decade. Your goal might be A Super Bowl. My goal is a dynasty. A Super Bowl this year followed by Goff busting and us having to search for a new QB sounds terrible. In the NFL, you either have a franchise QB or you don't. There are only so many. If you don't have one, you're not going to compete year in and year out. So take your "Goff homer" rants to people foolish enough to trade long-term success for a short-term win. 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, jrry32 said:

And this is the problem I have with people who have no long-term perspective. We have one of the NFL's best HCs. Goff being a franchise QB is a guarantee that we will compete year in and year out for just about the next decade. Your goal might be A Super Bowl. My goal is a dynasty. A Super Bowl this year followed by Goff busting and us having to search for a new QB sounds terrible. In the NFL, you either have a franchise QB or you don't. There are only so many. If you don't have one, you're not going to compete year in and year out. So take your "Goff homer" rants to people foolish enough to trade long-term success for a short-term win. 

A dynasty? We haven't won a Superbowl in 21 years and you're saying " Yeah, I dont even want one, I want a bunch or nothing". There are very few actual dynasty's in ALL of sports ( 2000's Patriots, 80s Lakers, early to mid century Yankees, 90s Bulls). How delusional can you be? 

And like you said we have one of the best HC's in all of football who will be successful with or without Jared Goff and will be competitive the next decade regardless of Goff at the helm or not. A Superbowl this year means Wolford played well, we continue to attract low priced vets in FA, and our scouting department is one of the best in the league at drafting. Sickening to read from a "Rams fan" that he would prefer NOT to the win the Superbowl this year with Wolford cause it could stifle some one in a million shot of becoming a dynasty with Jared Goff. Christ man. In this hypothetical scenario, that actually played out 3 years ago in Philly, winning a SuperBowl is the best thing you can do in all of football. Ask any Eagles fan if they would trade their superbowl cause it means they wouldnt have to cut bait with Carson Wentz (like theyre about to).

Edited by BStanRamFan
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, BStanRamFan said:

A dynasty? We haven't won a Superbowl in 21 years and you're saying " Yeah, I dont even want one, I want a bunch or nothing". There are very few actual dynasty's in ALL of sports ( 2000's Patriots, 80s Lakers, early to mid century Yankees, 90s Bulls). How delusional can you be? 

And like you said we have one of the best HC's in all of football who will be successful with or without Jared Goff and will be competitive the next decade regardless of Goff at the helm or not. A Superbowl this year means Wolford played well, we continue to attract low priced vets in FA, and our scouting department is one of the best in the league at drafting. Sickening to read from a "Rams fan" that he would prefer NOT to the win the Superbowl this year with Wolford cause it could stifle some one in a million shot of becoming a dynasty with Jared Goff. Christ man. In this hypothetical scenario, that actually played out 3 years ago in Philly, winning a SuperBowl is the best thing you can do in all of football. Ask any Eagles fan if they would trade their superbowl cause it means they wouldnt have to cut bait with Carson Wentz (like theyre about to).

You're either illiterate or a liar. I said nothing like that. I'm not surprised that you're resorting to lying about my position because you are advocating for an option that is a long-term loser. The hypothetical was:

Option A

Wolford is our Foles and leads us to a Super Bowl + Goff busting

Option B 

Goff becomes a franchise QB but we don't win a Super Bowl this year

I chose and still choose Option B. Wolford as our Foles + a Goff bust leaves us with no decent starting QB after this year. The Eagles are currently in LAST PLACE in the worst division in the NFL and are considering whether or not to fire their HC. They're the best argument for why your plan is terrible. I think the world of McVay, but he's not going to be truly competitive without a franchise QB. And they don't exactly grow on trees.

Earlier in this thread, I was quite clear that winning a Super Bowl this year with Wolford would be great. But that poster also implied that it would be great to see Goff bust. And I disagreed with that because it would hurt the Rams long term. You're trying to twist a hypothetical into something that it's not. Don't come at me with dishonest bullcrap.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, jrry32 said:

You're either illiterate or a liar. I said nothing like that. I'm not surprised that you're resorting to lying about my position because you are advocating for an option that is a long-term loser. The hypothetical was:

Option A

Wolford is our Foles and leads us to a Super Bowl + Goff busting

Option B 

Goff becomes a franchise QB but we don't win a Super Bowl this year

I chose and still choose Option B. Wolford as our Foles + a Goff bust leaves us with no decent starting QB after this year. The Eagles are currently in LAST PLACE in the worst division in the NFL and are considering whether or not to fire their HC. They're the best argument for why your plan is terrible. I think the world of McVay, but he's not going to be truly competitive without a franchise QB. And they don't exactly grow on trees.

Earlier in this thread, I was quite clear that winning a Super Bowl this year with Wolford would be great. But that poster also implied that it would be great to see Goff bust. And I disagreed with that because it would hurt the Rams long term. You're trying to twist a hypothetical into something that it's not. Don't come at me with dishonest bullcrap.

 

2 hours ago, jrry32 said:

I wouldn't. I'd rather have McVay + a franchise QB than a Super Bowl this year + a bust QB. The latter is a short-term victory. The former is a long-term victory. I'd bet on the former combo bringing us more Super Bowls than the latter combo.

I can't twist this into anything other than what it says. Get defensive all you want on your moronic statement to make it seem like I changed it around, but it's right there. You would rather have McVay + Goff being the franchise QB(in this example) then a Superbowl (with Wolford) + busted Goff. There's no twisting that statement because those are the circumstances we currently have on this team heading into Sunday and we are in the game day thread.

The term franchise QB is far too broad these days to get into the weeds with. If we somehow win a superbowl with John Wolford, then Goff has busted to this organization. Then we sit him behind Wolford until we can move on from his dead money. And I would be 1000% OK with that if it meant we win a SuperBowl. We've seen plenty of players and contracts and trades (Sammy Watkins, Brandin Cooks, Todd Gurley, Jalen Ramsey) all threaten to hurt the Rams long term because of how we played it and yet here we are, one game away from the playoffs and the best defense in all of football.

And the Eagles will likely get back multiple picks or atleast a 1st rounder on Wentz, move forward with Hurts next year, and be back in the playoffs after a down, injury riddled season. Pederson is going nowhere.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, BStanRamFan said:

 

I can't twist this into anything other than what it says. Get defensive all you want on your moronic statement to make it seem like I changed it around, but it's right there. You would rather have McVay + Goff being the franchise QB(in this example) then a Superbowl (with Wolford) + busted Goff. There's no twisting that statement because those are the circumstances we currently have on this team heading into Sunday and we are in the game day thread.

The term franchise QB is far too broad these days to get into the weeds with. If we somehow win a superbowl with John Wolford, then Goff has busted to this organization. Then we sit him behind Wolford until we can move on from his dead money. And I would be 1000% OK with that if it meant we win a SuperBowl. We've seen plenty of players and contracts and trades (Sammy Watkins, Brandin Cooks, Todd Gurley, Jalen Ramsey) all threaten to hurt the Rams long term because of how we played it and yet here we are, one game away from the playoffs and the best defense in all of football.

That's the hypothetical, you illiterate fool. And I stand by that 100%. I want to win long term. McVay + a franchise QB Goff results in long-term winning. That's not me saying that I am opposed to us winning a Super Bowl this year with Wolford (because us winning a Super Bowl with Wolford doesn't guarantee Goff is going to bust). There are no guarantees of anything in real life. You conflated a hypothetical with real life and tried to use that to attack me. You were wrong. Look at this post from the first page of the thread:

2 hours ago, jrry32 said:

McVay implied Goff will be back for the playoffs if we make it. We shall see.

Winning a Super Bowl would be great, but Goff's career fizzling out would definitely not be great.

Quote

And the Eagles will likely get back multiple picks or atleast a 1st rounder on Wentz, move forward with Hurts next year, and be back in the playoffs after a down, injury riddled season. Pederson is going nowhere.

I wouldn't bet on that.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, jrry32 said:

That's the hypothetical, you illiterate fool. And I stand by that 100%. I want to win long term. McVay + a franchise QB Goff results in long-term winning. That's not me saying that I am opposed to us winning a Super Bowl this year with Wolford (because us winning a Super Bowl with Wolford doesn't guarantee Goff is going to bust). There are no guarantees of anything in real life. You conflated a hypothetical with real life and tried to use that to attack me. You were wrong. Look at this post from the first page of the thread:

I wouldn't bet on that.

You're shot man. You got caught looking like a Goff homer over a Rams fan for a minute and want to double down instead of admitting it may have come off wrong. Whatever enjoy youre delusion.

I just want to win. I don't care if it means we win ONCE in the next decade, I want to win a G'damn Superbowl. The Patriots have really spoiled football for some people thinking this type of dynastic success is feasible. It's not. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, jrry32 said:

And this is the problem I have with people who have no long-term perspective. We have one of the NFL's best HCs. Goff being a franchise QB is a guarantee that we will compete year in and year out for just about the next decade. Your goal might be A Super Bowl. My goal is a dynasty. A Super Bowl this year followed by Goff busting and us having to search for a new QB sounds terrible. In the NFL, you either have a franchise QB or you don't. There are only so many. If you don't have one, you're not going to compete year in and year out. So take your "Goff homer" rants to people foolish enough to trade long-term success for a short-term win. 

Just curious. If you win the lotto. Are you taking lump sum or the residual?

  • Like 1
Link to post
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.


×
×
  • Create New...