that article was...long and filled with obnoxious self-fellating sports journalist bullshit that can never help to turn a simple story about regular assholes into some sort of epic human tragedy. ....I made it 2 paragraphs. cliffs?
I think Stafford plays a more complete and poised game. Detroit has be a team of downtrodden bad players for years. Goff might be a just play action QB and teams know his tendencies far too well. Being just a play action QB could work in the 80s, but these days, all QBs need that WCO touch and be able to pass without much run support.
Kirk Cousins has mental makeup not fit for football, he’s a worry-wort. I don’t see that from Stafford.
I didn’t follow the Rams or football at all during their run, but the one playoff game I saw, I saw that Gurley was already worse than his backup and that I didn’t remember Goff do anything significant at all.
Belichick figured them out and popped their bubble forever.
Really?? In 3 years Goff has 2 playoff wins and a super bowl appearance. In 12 years, Stafford has 0 playoff wins.
Yeah, canceled because of covid.it's the Sun b4 the superbowl.
there's isnt touch football* on tv today?
was it canceled because of covid?
*aka Pro Bowl
Yeah, canceled because of covid.
I thought they were going to play video game football sometime today. I could be wrong.
I was looking last night at some twitter comments. I would have quoted them, but not sure how to do it. In any case, over the last five years (I believe it was), Stafford's record in many, many key areas: wins, QB rating, playoff appearances, record vs teams with winning record, (there were more, but I cant find the post now) was eerily similar to Cousins. I mean, they were practically identical. Granted Cousins seems to have some mental hang ups, and poor rapport with the team, that perhaps wont hinder Stafford, but as I think is was Bellicek said, in the end, you are pretty much what your won/loss record says you are. We will see though. Perhaps Stafford will flourish and make a lot of deep playoff runs, and even perhaps win a SB.I think Stafford plays a more complete and poised game. Detroit has be a team of downtrodden bad players for years. Goff might be a just play action QB and teams know his tendencies far too well. Being just a play action QB could work in the 80s, but these days, all QBs need that WCO touch and be able to pass without much run support.
Kirk Cousins has mental makeup not fit for football, he’s a worry-wort. I don’t see that from Stafford.
I didn’t follow the Rams or football at all during their run, but the one playoff game I saw, I saw that Gurley was already worse than his backup and that I didn’t remember Goff do anything significant at all.
Belichick figured them out and popped their bubble forever.
I was looking last night at some twitter comments. I would have quoted them, but not sure how to do it. In any case, over the last five years (I believe it was), Stafford's record in many, many key areas: wins, QB rating, playoff appearances, record vs teams with winning record, (there were more, but I cant find the post now) was eerily similar to Cousins. I mean, they were practically identical. Granted Cousins seems to have some mental hang ups, and poor rapport with the team, that perhaps wont hinder Stafford, but as I think is was Bellicek said, in the end, you are pretty much what your won/loss record says you are. We will see though. Perhaps Stafford will flourish and make a lot of deep playoff runs, and even perhaps win a SB.
The problem was that the price was *extremely* steep. Two first round picks, plus a starting QB (whatever you think of Goff) is the kind of compensation I would expect for a Deshawn Watsons/Aaron Rogers type of QB. Stafford *may* have potential to reach that level, but he certainly hasnt proved it yet.
Definitely agree with the last sentence. I feel sorry for Goff, actually, although he still will be financially set for life. But as far as improving and winning/making playoffs or super bowl, his prospects certainly took a nose dive when he came to the Lions.About the only potential upside I see for either team in this deal is that a change of scenery actually makes a major difference somehow. Stafford may be slightly better the Goff but it's sure tough to tell from results.
When the change in question involves the Detroit Lions I'd say the ONLY chance of a positive outcome would be for the guy leaving! (Stafford)
Definitely agree with the last sentence. I feel sorry for Goff, actually, although he still will be financially set for life. But as far as improving and winning/making playoffs or super bowl, his prospects certainly took a nose dive when he came to the Lions.
thought the Texans said they werent trading him?This is just gonna make the trade for Watson that much more pricier. Two firsts, two seconds and more.
it's the Sun b4 the superbowl.
there's isnt touch football* on tv today?
was it canceled because of covid?
*aka Pro Bowl
Cousins had a pretty good offensive supporting cast. Megatron was a long time ago and what have the Lions had since then? Golladay is okay but is he enough to outmatch Pierre Garçon or Desean Jackson? Trent Williams was pretty good at LT as well.I was looking last night at some twitter comments. I would have quoted them, but not sure how to do it. In any case, over the last five years (I believe it was), Stafford's record in many, many key areas: wins, QB rating, playoff appearances, record vs teams with winning record, (there were more, but I cant find the post now) was eerily similar to Cousins. I mean, they were practically identical. Granted Cousins seems to have some mental hang ups, and poor rapport with the team, that perhaps wont hinder Stafford, but as I think is was Bellicek said, in the end, you are pretty much what your won/loss record says you are. We will see though. Perhaps Stafford will flourish and make a lot of deep playoff runs, and even perhaps win a SB.
The problem was that the price was *extremely* steep. Two first round picks, plus a starting QB (whatever you think of Goff) is the kind of compensation I would expect for a Deshawn Watsons/Aaron Rogers type of QB. Stafford *may* have potential to reach that level, but he certainly hasnt proved it yet.
Seems it doesn't matter. Houston says they're keeping Watson.Sources confirm Watson has requested a trade.
Sources: Watson has asked Texans to trade him
Quarterback Deshaun Watson officially requested a trade from the Texans weeks ago, sources told ESPN, and hasn't spoken to new GM Nick Caserio or executive Jack Easterby.www.espn.com
So, which team does Watson find sexy?
This was my initial impression, but upon further reflection, I can at least understand what the Rams are doing. In their opinion/experience, Goff is a system QB who isn't getting any better, and arguably has regressed into a turnover machine since the infamous Super Bowl.It's an absolutely horrific trade for LA.
Goff plus TWO first rounders AND a third rounder? It should have been a straight up trade if anything. What's Watson going to get now? 7 first rounders?
I'm going to laugh my ass of when the Rams decline next year. Stafford has never passed the eye test in terms of being an "it" QB.
Yea, but the Rams gave up high draft choices to move up and get Goff, and three years later gave up two first round picks to get rid of him. Pretty inefficient management at best, since they also gave him a huge salary in between.This was my initial impression, but upon further reflection, I can at least understand what the Rams are doing. In their opinion/experience, Goff is a system QB who isn't getting any better, and arguably has regressed into a turnover machine since the infamous Super Bowl.
On paper, the draft picks sound crazy but simply reflect a huge trade market for Stafford's services. IIRC from SI.com, Carolina offered the #8 overall pick which is roughly as valuable as two #20ish picks. Also because the Rams already traded away this year's first rounder, the picks they're giving up are delayed by a year.
Whether Matt Stafford is deserving of this much trade interest is certainly debatable, but it was the reality and the Rams essentially went for it. It also makes a certain level of sense strategically. All that matters is winning a Super Bowl. With Goff, you're looking forward to 10-6 seasons with a short playoff run as a wild card. With a stacked defense and pretty good offensive tools, at least the theory is that if Stafford can play like an elite QB, that'll put them into serious contender territory. The Rams are constantly in salary cap hell, so this is their all-in move before their window of contention closes.
Finally although Goff is nominally a starting QB, he also carries a large salary cap hit for the next few seasons. The Lions can eat a dead cap hit after 2021 but either way you look at it, either they're paying a lot of salary for an average-ish system QB or they eat 8 figures by waiving him before 2022. So the Rams essentially had to offer a little bit extra juice because of the financial impact.
In regards to the draft, i heard someone point out how this is going to be a really strange draft, a lot of players opted out or have severely limited seasons, there's not a lot of tape available for some of these guys. Deferring your draft picks in the hopes of a regular season with better scouting and a long term rebuild appear to be the path that the Lions are taking
Heard this rumor too. As time goes on, seems like just more speculation. Both the coach and GM of the Vikings are getting on the hot seat, so not likely they would trade their starting QB without getting a QB and draft choices in return. Personally, I think Garoppolo has the potential to be at least as good as Cousins, but his injury history is concerning.It's tempting to take that Carolina offer of the 8th pick + Bridgewater(?) but instant gratification when building a football team/culture is probably the worst thing you can do, plus the uncertainty of drafting. I was also just reading that the 49'ers are making a play for Cousins...offering a 2nd&3rd pick but Vikings want a first?