Leader Posted September 4, 2019 Author Share Posted September 4, 2019 So Goff had two years remaining...... I had it wrong thinking this was his the last year under his rookie deal. Adam Schefter: With the two existing years he had remaining on his contract, Jared Goff is now tied to the Rams for six seasons and $161 million. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boratt Posted September 4, 2019 Share Posted September 4, 2019 1 minute ago, Leader said: So Goff had two years remaining...... I had it wrong thinking this was his the last year under his rookie deal. Adam Schefter: With the two existing years he had remaining on his contract, Jared Goff is now tied to the Rams for six seasons and $161 million. 26/year isn’t bad for a quality starting QB. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leader Posted September 4, 2019 Author Share Posted September 4, 2019 3 minutes ago, Leader said: So Goff had two years remaining...... I had it wrong thinking this was his the last year under his rookie deal. Adam Schefter: With the two existing years he had remaining on his contract, Jared Goff is now tied to the Rams for six seasons and $161 million. Historical note (for those keeping track of such things.......) Eagles gave Carson Wentz $107.8 million in guaranteed money this off-season; that was the NFL record until the Rams gave Jared Goff $110 million guaranteed tonight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Green19 Posted September 4, 2019 Share Posted September 4, 2019 41 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said: 1. When did we start judging moves on their intentions? I get we're all pulling for the new guy, but consistency is key here. 2. We have no guarantee at all that Savage can actually play. We may very well have moved on from Randall for Michael Huff 3. Getting bodies in free agency doesn't cancel out a bad trade. The trade could have been made for a different piece that would have added value if you're a hard believer in the needed to get treated camp. But that’s my point... the trade was based on their scouting of Kizer. They THOUGHT they were getting equal or better value for a QB prospect. Kizer was still a highly rated QB prospect to most in the nfl. Could we sit here and argue other assets we could of gotten? Sure, but we don’t know what Randall’s true value was in the nfl. My point is it was one of the first dominos in restructuring that safety room... that needed restructuring. And I get why they took a shot one kizer. GB isn’t figuring to be in a spot to draft a QB prospect high or giving up draft capital either. Randall gave them a unique chance to get a highly rated prospect (for them)... in their doors at QB. They swung and missed. It’s only bad because they missed. Which could of happened if they brought in say a WR prospect or a LB prospect or a hoggish draft pick that is then wasted on a bust. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlexGreen#20 Posted September 4, 2019 Share Posted September 4, 2019 2 minutes ago, Green19 said: But that’s my point... the trade was based on their scouting of Kizer. They THOUGHT they were getting equal or better value for a QB prospect. Kizer was still a highly rated QB prospect to most in the nfl. Could we sit here and argue other assets we could of gotten? Sure, but we don’t know what Randall’s true value was in the nfl. My point is it was one of the first dominos in restructuring that safety room... that needed restructuring. And I get why they took a shot one kizer. GB isn’t figuring to be in a spot to draft a QB prospect high or giving up draft capital either. Randall gave them a unique chance to get a highly rated prospect (for them)... in their doors at QB. They swung and missed. It’s only bad because they missed. Which could of happened if they brought in say a WR prospect or a LB prospect or a hoggish draft pick that is then wasted on a bust. So what you're saying is, they had a player who they knew was a competent DB. They traded him for a terrible QB, based on their evaluation that they could make him a not terrible QB. Bird in the hand and all that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OneTwoSixFive Posted September 4, 2019 Share Posted September 4, 2019 9 minutes ago, Green19 said: But that’s my point... the trade was based on their scouting of Kizer. They THOUGHT they were getting equal or better value for a QB prospect. Kizer was still a highly rated QB prospect to most in the nfl. The important part of the deal did not seem to me to be the value the Packers placed on KIzer, it was the value they placed on Randall. If they wanted him gone, his value could have been no more than a bag of chips and they took what they could get. It reminds me, somewhat tangentially of a quote attributed (I think) to Frank Sinatra. Someone wanted to engage him for a job. He turned it down with a comment that he didn't like the colour of the walls. When asked why he turned down the job for that reason, he said that "When you don't want to do something, any reason is good enough." Well, when the Packers want to get rid of Randall, any deal is good enough. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacReady Posted September 4, 2019 Share Posted September 4, 2019 I want to comment, but I am a man of my word. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacReady Posted September 4, 2019 Share Posted September 4, 2019 Please drop this discussion because this is like impossible for me. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OneTwoSixFive Posted September 4, 2019 Share Posted September 4, 2019 Actually, I'm not disagreeing with @Outpost31 that Randall had some talent, I'm just saying that he seemed to have no real value to the Packers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacReady Posted September 4, 2019 Share Posted September 4, 2019 2 hours ago, Leader said: Well, I think the positions become overpaid as it is - but this was the last year of his rookie deal no? So they had to do something and counting on the cap going up / extending him was probably better than the 5th year option plus possible FTs. Trade him. My theory never made more sense than with Goff. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaximusGluteus Posted September 4, 2019 Share Posted September 4, 2019 1 hour ago, Leader said: Ian Rapoport: The Rams and QB Jared Goff agreed to terms on a 4-year deal worth $134M, source said. He gets $110M guaranteed, a record. That is freaking comical. Jared Goff is NOT a good QB, McVay is just a really good puppeteer (until uncle Bill shows up and he ****s himself). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaximusGluteus Posted September 4, 2019 Share Posted September 4, 2019 1 minute ago, Outpost31 said: Trade him. My theory never made more sense than with Goff. This right here. They should have traded Goff for a 1st and 2nd rounder to some sucker and then they would have had a top 5 pick and could have gotten their next marionette for McVay to play with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
packfanfb Posted September 4, 2019 Share Posted September 4, 2019 1 hour ago, AlexGreen#20 said: So what you're saying is, they had a player who they knew was a competent DB. They traded him for a terrible QB, based on their evaluation that they could make him a not terrible QB. Bird in the hand and all that. Happens all the time. Smartest guys in the room mentality. Saw Kizer and said "we can make him a player even if no one else can." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Packer_ESP Posted September 4, 2019 Share Posted September 4, 2019 6 years 90M, 50M guaranteed for Zeke. Gonna be fun to see what they do with Dak. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VonKarman Posted September 4, 2019 Share Posted September 4, 2019 And Amari. 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.