Stafford in WFT Plans? He’s Available

[Schneed10]

The Rams may think that was a good move for their team, I don’t, but I can see an argument for pushing their chips in and trying to win in Donald’s window.

But this is definitely not a price the WFT should have met and I’m glad it didn’t go that way. We’re better off with the 3 in 2021, and two ones in 22 and 23 than we would be with Stafford.

Onward and upward

[SkinzWin]

Originally Posted by skinsfaninok

Drafting around TH is not in their plans clearly. They haven't even said he'll be back yet. Ron and the new regime are hell bent on finding a QB because they know the window is open now.

Good Defense
Solid weapons on O
CAP Room
Good staff.

All the ingredients of a win now team. The truth is Taylor is a nice story but he isn't the answer at QB.

Bite your tongue. You will not speak in such a manner. Grounds for being banned. 😉

[Chico23231]

NBC Sports' Tom Curran reports Matthew Stafford told the Lions they could trade him to any team but the Patriots.
Curran cited a league source "whose team was heavily involved in Stafford trade negotiations but failed to land him." Stafford, of course, landed with the Rams, who dealt Jared Goff and a load of draft picks to Detroit. Apparently Stafford, 32, wanted nothing to do with Bill Belichick's ongoing quest to replace Tom Brady. Probably it didn't help that the Patriots have the worst pass-catching group -- and possibly the worst roster of skill position players -- in the entire league. Failed former Lions head coach Matt Patricia retreating to the Patriots could have influenced Stafford's request to land anywhere except New England, the least appealing destination for veteran free agents in the post-Brady era


Matt Patricia was a deterrent for Stafford...so that narrative was false


Agree with S10 above, Rams org is a mess now. not being able to add great young talent with low cap numbers on 5 years deals as well as being in cap salary hell (check over the cap.com, it’s a terrible situation with Goff gone) is gonna limit trying to build and maintain talent around Stafford.

Side note if you to over the cap, please check out the eagles. It’s the only team that rivals Rams in terms of terrible cap situation...they completely mismanaged several big contracts

[mooby]

Originally Posted by Chief X_Phackter

Wait! Are you saying that we should draft our quarterback of the future, rather than trade for him? Are you sure?

I tend to lean on this logic too. Drafting a qb of the future is way more cost effective than trading for one. Not to mention how much your roster will be set back if the qb you trade for doesn't pan out.

Unless Watson could be had for a fair price I'm not mortgaging the future to win now.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by mooby

I tend to lean on this logic too. Drafting a qb of the future is way more cost effective than trading for one. Not to mention how much your roster will be set back if the qb you trade for doesn't pan out.

Unless Watson could be had for a fair price I'm not mortgaging the future to win now.

It’s absolutely more cost effective. But it’s also absolutely a crapshoot.

The premium you pay for a guy like Stafford, multiple picks and a high dollar contract, you’re paying that premium for the certainty that you’ve got a QB you can build around, someone who allows you to move on and focus on building out the rest of the roster.

But like anything else, you have to decide whether the premium price was worth it. It was worth trading for, but not at this price.

We should explore other options. It beats rolling the dice on a rookie.

[Meks]

Originally Posted by skinsfaninok

Drafting around TH is not in their plans clearly. They haven't even said he'll be back yet. Ron and the new regime are hell bent on finding a QB because they know the window is open now.

Good Defense
Solid weapons on O
CAP Room
Good staff.

All the ingredients of a win now team. The truth is Taylor is a nice story but he isn't the answer at QB.

They definitely need to upgrade WR, CB, LB, OL .. while there's a good foundation I place I wouldn't use the phrase open for this window. We have a lot of work to do

[SkinzWin]

No idea if accurate but...

@BangRadioHour

“Speculation is WFT offered 2021 1st and 3rd, then the Lions checked back with the Rams and they went crazy. SO if this is true, GOOD, we took a swing but maintained sanity.”

[skinsfan69]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

Right, so the point is valid. If your strategy is solely to jump up to grab the kid that looks like a sure thing, it is a dumb strategy. If you have an NFL provenstarter you can get for a first round pick or even 2, that is a better deal becau se as you said 50% of the 1st round drafted qbs are gonna bust.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

why would it be dumb? i would rather draft someone and have them on a rookie deal. rams made it w/ goff on a rookie deal to the SB. same w/ mahomes, seattle made it twice w/wilson. sure there are examples the other way. but breer's example just makes no sense to me. 1st round qb's change teams after a period of time. even greatest QB's change teams.

in this instance how much better is stafford than goff? can the rams continue to stay a contender w/out 1st round picks?

[KI Skins Fan]

Originally Posted by SkinzWin

No idea if accurate but...

@BangRadioHour

“Speculation is WFT offered 2021 1st and 3rd, then the Lions checked back with the Rams and they went crazy. SO if this is true, GOOD, we took a swing but maintained sanity.”

I would have applauded that Deal by the WFT if it had been accepted. OTOH, I think the Rams offer was bad business. Who could have imagined that the Rams would make a Watson level offer for Stafford? If the Rams were willing to go as high as they did for Stafford, they should have offered Houston a little more for Watson.The Texans might have taken it.

[Chief X_Phackter]

Originally Posted by mooby

I tend to lean on this logic too. Drafting a qb of the future is way more cost effective than trading for one. Not to mention how much your roster will be set back if the qb you trade for doesn't pan out.

Unless Watson could be had for a fair price I'm not mortgaging the future to win now.

That was a joke. I know where he stands, it's painfully obvious if you take the time to read his books.

I'd rather sign a FA and draft our future QB too. That is my preferred method of solving the QB situation. I wouldn't hate it if they signed Dak, then you can wait on that future QB thing.

I also wouldn't hate it if they traded for Carr if it was a reasonable (not Stafford-like) offer.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by skinsfan69

why would it be dumb? i would rather draft someone and have them on a rookie deal. rams made it w/ goff on a rookie deal to the SB. same w/ mahomes, seattle made it twice w/wilson. sure there are examples the other way. but breer's example just makes no sense to me. 1st round qb's change teams after a period of time. even greatest QB's change teams.



in this instance how much better is stafford than goff? can the rams continue to stay a contender w/out 1st round picks?

Breer's time frame isn't random. 2016 is the end of the 5 year rookie deal. Take it for what you want, but for me i will take a proven vet IF the deal is sane over a shot in the dark for a 1st rd rookie qb.

As to your question about the Rams remember they gave up a boatload of picks to get Goff and they have been a contender the past 4 years and with Stafford they will be mentioned in the top 3 for next few years.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

[Monkeydad]

Unfortunately, I think the Rams just did a disservice to every team wanting Watson. This should drive his price up significantly with the haul they have Detroit for Stafford.

That's a price I'd be leery of paying for Watson!

[MTK]

Man the Rams sure gave up a haul for Stafford. I like him but not at that price. Way too steep but good for LA if they think they got the guy that can put them over the top. Win a SB and nobody is going to care about what you gave up. I'm glad we were interested, I thought our offer was more than reasonable.

[skinsfaninok]

Originally Posted by MTK

Man the Rams sure gave up a haul for Stafford. I like him but not at that price. Way too steep but good for LA if they think they got the guy that can put them over the top. Win a SB and nobody is going to care about what you gave up. I'm glad we were interested, I thought our offer was more than reasonable.

What was our offer?

[skinsfaninok]

Albert Breer says

"Stafford had 3 teams in mind, Rams, SF , Colts in that order"

So he never even wanted to come to DC