Broncofan Posted February 15, 2022 Share Posted February 15, 2022 1 minute ago, Soggust said: But otherwise, I agree with your take =p Ah yes, SB3...it was a year before I was born, so I tend to forget any SB then lol. But I stand corrected. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MWil23 Posted February 15, 2022 Share Posted February 15, 2022 2 hours ago, adamq said: They mortgaged the entire future to go all in for this year and next. It's really not that improbable. I was just coming in to say something like this. They literally haven't had a first round draft pick in over 6 years since Obama was in office. They've gone all in and given the "win now" window the green light since they trade up to #1 overall to get Goff. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soggust Posted February 15, 2022 Share Posted February 15, 2022 Just now, Broncofan said: Ah yes, SB3...it was a year before I was born, so I tend to forget any SB then lol. But I stand corrected. If you weren't a Broncos fan, I might have let it slip. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MWil23 Posted February 15, 2022 Share Posted February 15, 2022 2 hours ago, stl4life07 said: When I say improbable Im strictly talking about what history suggests what the Rams had to overcome. With respect, and kudos to the Rams for winning, but this is kinda funny. The OPOY, Matt Stafford, and 3 time DPOY did their thing. The Eagles a few years ago sans a starting QB suggests they had to overcome infinitely more. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Broncofan Posted February 15, 2022 Share Posted February 15, 2022 (edited) 5 minutes ago, jrry32 said: We went all in, but we're not going anywhere next year. We haven't used a first round pick since 2016, so that's nothing new. And we do have the last pick of the 3rd round this year. And we brought in Weddle because we lost both our starting safeties in Week 18. Sure, but going all-in is still correct. With restructures/extensions with voidable-years, teams who go "all-in" can contend for more than just 1 year. Even with the restructures without voidable years, it was a 2+ year window. The voidable years have changed the game, it's now at least 4+ years (LAR is now in year 2-3 of that). They could even scratch out 2024 without breaking up the core if they go all-out on restructures/voidable years. But it certainly doesn't change the fact LAR went all-in. And really was a co-favorite all year long - just the arbitrary "4 seed" pushed the perception down (along with the absolute bunk perception Stafford wasn't elite-level because of "0-3"). Edited February 15, 2022 by Broncofan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soggust Posted February 15, 2022 Share Posted February 15, 2022 Just now, MWil23 said: I was just coming in to say something like this. They literally haven't had a first round draft pick in over 6 years since Obama was in office. They've gone all in and given the "win now" window the green light since they trade up to #1 overall to get Goff. I 1000% agree with this take, but almost wonder - After like 6 years of "win now"....are you really 'mortgaging the future' or just NO Saints Salary Cap pushing it down into the infinite void? Like, I guess what I'm asking - If you can push the debt infinitely down the road, are you really ever in debt? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MWil23 Posted February 15, 2022 Share Posted February 15, 2022 Just now, Soggust said: I 1000% agree with this take, but almost wonder - After like 6 years of "win now"....are you really 'mortgaging the future' or just NO Saints Salary Cap pushing it down into the infinite void? You're in "WIN NOW" mode and basically at peace with understanding that within the next 5 years, you're going to probably completely suck when guys like Donald, Vonn, Stafford, and Ramsey decline/retire. Throw in dudes like Whitworth retiring, having to let other glue guys like Woods walk in free agency, etc., and some day they'll be sitting there with next to nothing on their roster and have to build from an expansionesque roster. Sure, they could rebuild and reload, or they could be the next Browns/Lions/Jets too. Just now, Soggust said: Like, I guess what I'm asking - If you can push the debt infinitely down the road, are you really ever in debt? Our country the past 20+ years racking up $30 Trillion in debt would agree with this take Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stl4life07 Posted February 15, 2022 Author Share Posted February 15, 2022 3 minutes ago, MWil23 said: With respect, and kudos to the Rams for winning, but this is kinda funny. The OPOY, Matt Stafford, and 3 time DPOY did their thing. The Eagles a few years ago sans a starting QB suggests they had to overcome infinitely more. Yes that Eagles team had to overcome more. They was so injured in particularly at the QB position and what we know now had locker room issues when it came to the QBs and who the players liked plus management issues when it came to Pederson. But as I said, seemingly every team that goes on a Superbowl run has a level of improbability. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MWil23 Posted February 15, 2022 Share Posted February 15, 2022 Just now, stl4life07 said: Yes that Eagles team had to overcome more. They was so injured in particularly at the QB position and what we know now had locker room issues when it came to the QBs and who the players liked plus management issues when it came to Pederson. But as I said, seemingly every team that goes on a Superbowl run has a level of improbability. IMO after Green Bay lost, they were the odds on favorite. Vegas mostly agreed with this as well. I guess I just don't think that somehow this is any more or less improbable than any other Super Bowl team and that somehow they had to overcome more than anyone else. I guess I'm not really sure what your point is in that regard/premise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrry32 Posted February 15, 2022 Share Posted February 15, 2022 1 minute ago, MWil23 said: Throw in dudes like Whitworth retiring, having to let other glue guys like Woods walk in free agency, etc., and some day they'll be sitting there with next to nothing on their roster and have to build from an expansionesque roster. That seems very doubtful, unless all our core players decide to retire basically at once. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Broncofan Posted February 15, 2022 Share Posted February 15, 2022 3 minutes ago, Soggust said: I 1000% agree with this take, but almost wonder - After like 6 years of "win now"....are you really 'mortgaging the future' or just NO Saints Salary Cap pushing it down into the infinite void? Like, I guess what I'm asking - If you can push the debt infinitely down the road, are you really ever in debt? The difference is with restructures AND extensions/voidable years - you can push the due date on the balloon payment to 4-5 years down the line. Instead of 2+, in the mid-2010's, when we started to see teams go all-in and create "cap hell". I don't think ppl realize "cap hell" is a future construct. It's a total present-year mirage with extension/voidable-year trick added to the GM's portfolio. It's not a complete mirage - for example, LAR traded Kenny Young to make enough room to fit Von/OBJ in. And eventually, the bill comes due. But it comes now pretty much exclusively AFTER a team's window to contend has passed - and a team's willing to eat 1-2 years of cap dead money and not "go for it". LAR's due date is more likely 2024-25 - but that will be likely when Donald/Stafford/Ramsey & co. will all be gone, or about to retire. Nothing wrong with that, it's already a winning equation with 1 flag in the bank. And to be clear - you only start "cap hell" once you are ONLY using restructures/extensions with voidable years now. The clock resets if you find mega-value in the draft, like NO did in 2017. It's what gave them 6+ years, they bought themselves 3-4 more years to keep doing it - until the 2017 draft class got expensive, now they're back in it - only to have extensions/voidable years enable them to push it 1-2 more years (but the bill's coming due again - unless they find magic in the draft). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stl4life07 Posted February 15, 2022 Author Share Posted February 15, 2022 1 minute ago, MWil23 said: IMO after Green Bay lost, they were the odds on favorite. Vegas mostly agreed with this as well. I guess I just don't think that somehow this is any more or less improbable than any other Super Bowl team and that somehow they had to overcome more than anyone else. I guess I'm not really sure what your point is in that regard/premise. My point was more so of the odds based off history like I pointed out that Brady in his career was (49-0) when his team has 4 takeaways. Stafford being (0-26) when his team trails by at least 10pts entering the 4th quarter. No team has overcame a 10pt lead in the 4th quarter to win the NFCCG. Like random stats like that the Rams overcame. That’s what I basically was pointing out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Broncofan Posted February 15, 2022 Share Posted February 15, 2022 2 minutes ago, jrry32 said: That seems very doubtful, unless all our core players decide to retire basically at once. A good GM can rebuild the franchise back from oblivion in 2 years, 3 years max - if they have the full draft arsenal when they start. It doesn't happen any sooner than 2, though. As long as Snead isn't trading away 2025 draft picks, let's say LAR pushes it for 2 more years (VERY doable with extensions/restructures) - they'll be fine even if they have to rebuild. The problem with sad sack franchises is they don't pick well at the top (when you can't miss), and they usually don't develop well (terrible HC / GM hires - I'm looking at you, JAX & Meyer/Bevell this year, and the guys you hired before). So they waste the leverage that should get them back out of mediocrity. It's also why teams that are well run only spend 2-3 years in mediocrity, then start bouncing back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
notthatbluestuff Posted February 15, 2022 Share Posted February 15, 2022 16 minutes ago, Broncofan said: Ah yes, SB3...it was a year before I was born, so I tend to forget any SB then lol. But I stand corrected. Actually, it was SB4. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Broncofan Posted February 15, 2022 Share Posted February 15, 2022 (edited) 4 minutes ago, stl4life07 said: My point was more so of the odds based off history like I pointed out that Brady in his career was (49-0) when his team has 4 takeaways. Stafford being (0-26) when his team trails by at least 10pts entering the 4th quarter. No team has overcame a 10pt lead in the 4th quarter to win the NFCCG. Like random stats like that the Rams overcame. That’s what I basically was pointing out. Eh, I get it - but that's the theme of almost every SB winning story. There's almost always 2-3 "improbable events" during the playoffs. TAM getting Drew Brees to go 4 TO's's after NO absolutely crushed TAM 2x in the year. TB12 throwing 3 picks on the road and still winning vs. GB. You can absolutely find the same type of improbabilites if you look hard enough. It doesn't make LAR some kind of feel-good underdog who did it story. It's a feel-good story for LAR, they went all-in to win, and they delivered. Doesn't have to be more than that. Edited February 15, 2022 by Broncofan 1 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.