I’m just curious if there were any other teams that the Rams could have traded with that had a good QB and could have taken-on Goff’s contract like we did?
They probably would’ve attempted a mega offer for Watson and then would’ve traded Goff to Washington. Stafford is better than any other option they could’ve gotten, and we also could take Goff’s contract.
1 Like
I feel like we could trade Goff for a Went-like haul. I’d rather have Goff than him.
IMO, Watson is the only one that would have more upside than Matt that is available. All of the others are far behind Stafford. IMO, the only downside is Matt’s age difference (and he’s a LOT older than Goff).
I feel like other comparisons are apples-to-watermelons comparisons, for one reason or another.
The fact that we extended him tells me we plan to roll with him. He would have been easily tradable after this season, if I was understanding it properly.
In other words, there was no factor of “taking on Goff’s contract,” especially in the light of doing another team a favor. Goff has a fairly high trade value, and will be at least a middle their QB (better than 15 others). That means there are 15 people out of 333 million in our country that can do what he does better than him. Not garbage where you are rewarded with picks in order to acquire the “burden” of his contract. he will be worth his contract.
I think Rams could have traded Goff independently of the Stafford trade quite easily.
Rams got the best option available to them. Because of Matt’s age, I really do feel like the Lions came out of that deal very, very nicely.
Stafford is dope AF. No amount of winning the Rams did would surprise me.
Super-high ceiling over there.
Also a fairly low floor over there with Rams (injury, etc).
Rams have put al their eggs in one basket.
I wasn’t referring to our motive to take on Goff, I was referring to the other team basically having to take Goff to facilitate the trade anyway and keep both teams under the cap.
The Rams would have had to first move Goff to a team with the cap space to take him on, which they could’ve done, and then traded for Watson. They couldn’t have traded for Watson and then traded Goff. The money doesn’t work.
1 Like
I may be the worst salary cap dude here, truthfully. LOL.
I read posters trying to validate Stafford’s worth to what we got in trade from the Rams and I don’t think they are equal by no means. I mean, Stafford is a good QB in his own right but people try to make the claim that “well, if he wasn’t so great then why would the Rams give-up 3 draft picks for him!!!” …and that’s why I ask what other QB’s could the Rams have traded for that the Rams could get a decent QB and yet get rid of Goff’s contract.
I think they probably could have tried to have traded for Rodgers but he’s 37 and was GB willing to take-on Goff and his contract when they have Love in the wings? If I were the Rams and going all-in on making a Superbowl run for a year or two, Rodgers would have been my first choice by a land-slide…but again, it’s gotta work financially as well.
Trading for Watson seemed like a good idea, not so sure anymore with all the legal stuff coming down on him though.
I just don’t feel like the Rams had many good options…and Holmes knew that and was able to squeeze more out of them because of us being able to take-on Goff and his contract. And I’m not trying to take anything away from Stafford but all those picks weren’t just because of his ability but also for the situation for and our ability to take-on Goff’s contract.
1 Like
There really weren’t any other starting QBs available at the time that were equal or better to Goff. Who else was there?
It would have cost more to get Watson (this was before his troubles).
I suppose they could have tried to get Matt Ryan.
If they wanted a starting caliber QB, the only one that was available that would have met with McVay’s desires was Stafford.
1 Like
lol. in some ways, for sure
There’s a 300-post thread going where this has been discussed. You’re in a minority on that position. Perhaps you read too much PFT and it’s poisoned your thinking.
Of course, what you’re saying is understood everywhere outside of Detroit. In Detroit, we received 2 1st round picks and a 3rd round pick in addition to a QB who’s worth another 1st round and 3rd round pick. To sum up the 300-post thread, the Lions received, in essence, 3 1sts and 2 3rds.
There’s plenty of QB’s they could have traded for but why does it have to be QB for QB?
I think they could have easily traded Goff to NE, Wash, Car, Den, IND and CHI. I just don’t think they would want the QB those teams had in return.
I honestly don’t think the Rams would have traded Goff unless they felt they were upgrading.
Watson and Stafford were the only upgrades available. The Rams saw an opportunity to get better at QB and went for it.
1 Like