Rams trade 2 future first rounders, a third rounder, and Jared Goff for Matthew Stafford

[StLunatic88]

12 minutes ago, stl4life07 said:

When we think of the Saints Payton first 4 seasons was (35-29) and won a Superbowl in the 4th season. McVay first 4 seasons with the Rams was (43-21) and went to the Superbowl in the 2nd season and beat Payton in New Orleans to get there. The only thing you have so far is the Saints have a Superbowl and the Rams don’t. It’s not far fetch to say that McVay start with the Rams is on par with Payton start.

Ok that’s fair, I took it as you were saying we are today on the same level as the Saints. That’s just these first 4 years makes him and us at that historical level that Peyton has earned and cultivated for a decade and a half. 

[stl4life07]

7 minutes ago, StLunatic88 said:

Ok that’s fair, I took it as you were saying we are today on the same level as the Saints. That’s just these first 4 years makes him and us at that historical level that Peyton has earned and cultivated for a decade and a half. 

No the Saints have 15yrs worth of body of work. I was definitely talking about being on the path. I feel extremely good about the hands this Rams organization is in moving forward based on what Ive seen so far in the first 4 seasons. 

[StLunatic88]

9 minutes ago, stl4life07 said:

I feel extremely good about the hands this Rams organization is in moving forward based on what Ive seen so far in the first 4 seasons

I don’t always agree when looking in the more long term view, but they sure have had one of the best turnaround/starts for a franchise that was completely in the dumps

[stl4life07]

12 minutes ago, StLunatic88 said:

I don’t always agree when looking in the more long term view, but they sure have had one of the best turnaround/starts for a franchise that was completely in the dumps

Well the Rams have definitely been deep in the dumps when Snead got there as GM. The Rams basically had an expansion team. 

[RamsFan24]

For me, I'm fine with this trade in general. At first I was like 2 Future 1st Rounders, a 3rd and Goff. But after I looked at it this way, I understand now and I'm ok with it.

Trade- 2022 1st Rounder (Possibly Late Rounder), 2021 3rd Rounder and Jared Goff

2023 1st Rounder (Possibly Late Rounder) to take on Jared Goff's Huge Contract 

I would of loved not to have lose our 2023 1st Rounder. But we traded for a a player that demanded a least a 1st Rounder plus another pick of some kind. And we had no 1st Round Pick in 2021 to offer to the Lions once so ever. So to expect a team to wait 1 and 2 full years before they can receive any real draft capital is just not fair in my eyes or realistic. 

[jrry32]

45 minutes ago, RamsFan24 said:

For me, I'm fine with this trade in general. At first I was like 2 Future 1st Rounders, a 3rd and Goff. But after I looked at it this way, I understand now and I'm ok with it.

Trade- 2022 1st Rounder (Possibly Late Rounder), 2021 3rd Rounder and Jared Goff

2023 1st Rounder (Possibly Late Rounder) to take on Jared Goff's Huge Contract 

I would of loved not to have lose our 2023 1st Rounder. But we traded for a a player that demanded a least a 1st Rounder plus another pick of some kind. And we had no 1st Round Pick in 2021 to offer to the Lions once so ever. So to expect a team to wait 1 and 2 full years before they can receive any real draft capital is just not fair in my eyes or realistic. 

I think it's better to look at it as trying to best the highest offer, which was the #8 pick and another pick, without a 2021 first. If they paid the Lions a first to take Goff's contract, that makes this deal look a lot worse imo. 

Edited February 2, 2021 by jrry32

[LeotheLion]

6 minutes ago, jrry32 said:

I think it's better to look at it as trying to best the highest offer, which was the #8 pick and another pick, without 2021 first. If they paid the Lions a first to take Goff's contract, that makes this deal look a lot worse imo. 

He's the only 1 reporting it, but Peter King did say a 2nd team offered 2 firsts in his column. Didn't say the team though but implied it was this year and next year. 

[btfd16]

31 minutes ago, LeotheLion said:

He's the only 1 reporting it, but Peter King did say a 2nd team offered 2 firsts in his column. Didn't say the team though but implied it was this year and next year. 

Using this and another report Washington’s offer was 2nd best, I think it was them to try and best #8. But why wouldn’t Detroit do that? I assume to please Stafford and not burn any bridges as it was reported they were taking into account where he wanted to be too.

[LeotheLion]

5 minutes ago, btfd16 said:

Using this and another report Washington’s offer was 2nd best, I think it was them to try and best #8. But why wouldn’t Detroit do that? I assume to please Stafford and not burn any bridges as it was reported they were taking into account where he wanted to be too.

Or they wanted Goff 

[Dr LBC]

3 hours ago, LeotheLion said:

Or they wanted Goff 

Yeah, I think it's entirely conceivable that Detroit wanted Goff.  No necessarily as their guy they're going to build the new incarnation of the franchise around, but rather for the flexibility he offers them.

Again, as I noted earlier, Dan Campbell is a tried and true Parcells guy - he was with Sparano (also a Parcells guy) when Bill was the special advisor or whatever the title was for the Phins, before he came onto Payton's staff in NO.

For sake of argument, I went and dug up the Parcells rules for a prospective franchise QB in the draft:

- 3-year starter
- Be a senior in college
- Graduate from college
- Start 30 games
- Win 23 games
- Post a 2:1 TD to INT ratio
- Complete at least 60% of passes thrown

Now if we (safely) assume the Jaguar take Trevor Lawrence, the remainder of the QB prospects the Lions would have considered at #7 would be as follows:

Justin Fields meets roughly 3/8 criteria
Zach Wilson meets roughly 2-3/8 criteria
Trey Lance meets 2/8 criteria
Kyle Trask meets 4/8 criteria
Mack Jones meets 2-3/8 criteria

Nobody that the HC would feel particular confident in taking in the Top 10 per what he's been taught all along.  Do they take a stab at a guy at #20 if he's there?  Maybe.  But Goff gives them the flexibility to not have to feel roped into taking a QB at #7, to go BPA at another position of need (Sewell could very much be in play for them if he's there, as could be Parsons, or any of the edge guys).  They could go the Dolphins/Jags route too (even if those teams didn't end up needing to fully use it) and continue to accumulate picks to have all the ammo they need to move for a QB in 2022 as well. 

[BStanRamFan]

 

 This one hurt to read. I jumped off the Goff bandwagon after the NYJ game, but even after that I never questioned his work ethic. I think that was a topic some weeks back and I couldn't sit in that camp. It's crazy all the info that leaks after the fact.

 

 

 

 The line of thinking makes sense.

[JonStark]

35 minutes ago, BStanRamFan said:

 

 This one hurt to read. I jumped off the Goff bandwagon after the NYJ game, but even after that I never questioned his work ethic. I think that was a topic some weeks back and I couldn't sit in that camp. It's crazy all the info that leaks after the fact.

You'll probably just roll your eyes, but I don't buy it. I honestly think that's there way of justifying one of two things:

1. The Rams know they did him dirty (like Warner and to an extent Sjax) and needed to save face. 
2. Goff was getting to the point where he wanted more freedom, like most vet QB do, and Mcvay refused to give up the reigns, leading to the turmoil. I think that one is more likely. 

Nothing about Goff's character, in his entire career with the Rams, pointed to him being a locker room cancer. From "I promise you I'll get it fixed" to snapping his broken thumb back in mid game, he's always been a team player.

I honestly don't want to harp too much on the Goff thing because the trade is done and I want to move forward with Stafford instead of keep an internal bias for the future, but I can't let the man's character be smeared without concrete evidence. 

[LeotheLion]

47 minutes ago, BStanRamFan said:

 

 This one hurt to read. I jumped off the Goff bandwagon after the NYJ game, but even after that I never questioned his work ethic. I think that was a topic some weeks back and I couldn't sit in that camp. It's crazy all the info that leaks after the fact.

 

 

 

 The line of thinking makes sense.

I'm going to need a better source than Gottlieb. That man has tripled down on his stance that George Kittle isn't a good blocker. 

[BStanRamFan]

17 minutes ago, JonStark said:

You'll probably just roll your eyes, but I don't buy it. I honestly think that's there way of justifying one of two things:

1. The Rams know they did him dirty (like Warner and to an extent Sjax) and needed to save face. 
2. Goff was getting to the point where he wanted more freedom, like most vet QB do, and Mcvay refused to give up the reigns, leading to the turmoil. I think that one is more likely. 

Nothing about Goff's character, in his entire career with the Rams, pointed to him being a locker room cancer. From "I promise you I'll get it fixed" to snapping his broken thumb back in mid game, he's always been a team player.

I honestly don't want to harp too much on the Goff thing because the trade is done and I want to move forward with Stafford instead of keep an internal bias for the future, but I can't let the man's character be smeared without concrete evidence. 

Someone discrediting something they don't like hearing on this forum, why would I roll my eyes? 

1. The Rams left little bread crumbs all season with their language on Goff starting with the SF loss at home to Nick Mullens. It was the first time McVay held Goff accountable in the public. He needed to show the lockerroom everyone will be held accountable regardless of status or salary. I think Snead could have handled it better than that end of season presser, but "did him dirty" is something I just don't agree with. ( I agree on Warner. That was wrong in hindsight. You never give up on a QB if they win you a SB, but I think people forget how good Bulger looked early on)

2. After the SuperBowl loss, there were rumors that Goff was really starting to feel himself and get into the Hollywood lifestyle. It never materialized into anything substantial, but there were talks he was out late and partying etc. I never cared because what would you expect from the quarterback of the LA Rams? McVay's refusal to give up the reigns is something I never heard before, but I'll actually believe  it(see how that works?). If he did hold back from Goff, he likely did it with the teams best interests in mind.

I agree with you on the harping point and realize I was the one who brought in these tweetsl so my bad there. I just think these bits of information only come out after the fact, which shows how good of an organization we are to keep it all in house. Aaron Donald is going to be on the Ryen Russillo podcast this week and I'm curious if he speaks on the Goff matter. Russillo is a good interviewer and not afraid to ask certain questions. 

Edited February 2, 2021 by BStanRamFan

[BStanRamFan]

1 minute ago, LeotheLion said:

I'm going to need a better source than Gottlieb. That man has tripled down on his stance that George Kittle isn't a good blocker. 

Lmao I'm going to need a list of "approved sources" from this group going forward.

Having a bad take (it is) has zero to do with relaying information from a source. There is no correlation what so ever.

"My opinion is {blank}"

"My friend told me {blank}"