NFL Season 2020 Football • Page 1675

2018

 

Goff 100000 percent should've have gotten that extension.

 

This is basically my point. Disappointment, sure. But bust? That’s super harsh and more based on bad GM-ing than on Goff specifically.

 

Like, actual busts aren’t even close to scraping what Goff accomplished in his first few years.

 

Yeah. I don’t see how someone could be a bust if they could end up being the starting qb for another team.

 

Ok, so I can conflate Wentz and Goff in the same way; they are busts because their teams gave up a lot to get them, they had a modicum of success, and thus the team felt like they had to pay them like elite players. Had they made Goff play out 2019 without the extension...do they still pay him the massive deal after how he played in 2019? Or do they make him play 2020 on his 5th year option?

The trade of so many picks becomes self-fulfilling; so even a guy who has some success can be a bust. But maybe it needs a different term, since its very different that say, Haskins or Trubisky

 

So I guess we need two different words for these descriptions because someone being a bust implies they sucked whereas we need another word for someone who didn’t suck but the cost to get them was extremely high and they didn’t play up to that level.

 

Yeah, the net effect of trading up for Goff, and the follow-on effects compared to what they could have had, makes him the worst executive decision Ive seen. But if he's just taken as a normal 1st rounder, he's probably considered like Tannehill if he catches on with another team.

But, I feel like we can also consider Winston a bust even though statistically he produced a lot and was the 1st NFL QB with 4000+ yards in his first 3 seasons. I feel like if you are moving on from your QB within the window of what is their rookie deal, that fits "bust".

Rams just happened to pay $50mil more and 2 extra 1sts for the privilege of getting rid of Goff after his rookie deal

 

NFL Gameday: Super Bowl LV • forum.chorus.fm

 

Chargers gave up on Brees?

 

Sure, but they offered a big extension to Goff when the end of that season showed that the early season numbers may have been a mirage. When it was actually a mirage and he still had a bit more development to do, they were surprised Pikachu and hastily moved on from their 26 year old QB.

At this point, it was a sunk cost and its fine that they moved on, but buy high, sell low is normally the definition of bad GMing

 

Brees suffered a presumed career ending injury. Goff's career ending injury is his QB play

 

Goff being a bust is laughable.

 

But yeah, Goff is in the category of a Flacco more than "bust". Feels like "flacco" is even the term for it. The effect of having a guy who's good enough/had enough success that you have to pay them far beyond their worth. Seeming like Wentz is gonna be in that category. Jimmy G is comfortably in that category. Whatever team pays Derek Carr a massive deal will get Flacco'd for sure.

 

Yup, Superbowl will do it.

 

Anything short of a Super Bowl ring is a bust, I guess, right?

 

I mean they thought he was toast after the injury, completely different situations.

 

Trent Dilfer won a Super Bowl.

Goff was 59/106 (55%) with 1TD and 2INT in 3 games that playoffs. At least Flacco actually played well in his one big playoff run.

 

A bad executive decision doesn’t make somebody a bust because of who was picked with the picks the executive traded away, that is stupid.

He has played well enough to make it to a super bowl and make the playoffs several times. Definitely shouldn’t have been signed to such an expensive contract, but that’s something else, like Dinosaur said

 

Come on, you watch the games. I'm excited to find out if its McVay's problem or Goffs, but McVay runs the same look and if a defense locks in on it, there's nothing the QB can do because Goff had the shortest leash of any QB in the nfl.

Soon we will find out if that was justified or not.

 

Oh, I think its gonna blow up in their face for sure; nobody is gonna be a winner from this trade. I like Stafford a lot, but, he's genuinely in a SB or Bust situation, and Im not sure he's that good.

And the Lions could certainly be a 7-9ish team with Goff this year...and they have a bunch of picks and the Rams draft scout who helped them hit on a lot of picks...so, they could certainly could have a deep, young roster in two years. But feels like they picked the hilariously wrong coach and are gonna pull a Browns/RGIII and squander their haul.

I'll be genuinely shocked if two years from now we're looking at this as anything more than a really, really bad trade for the Rams, and the Lions looking for a new HC to make something of their 2023 draft.

 

That said, give me the Rams strategy any day. That's a team willing to do anything to win a Super Bowl. Compared to say, a Packers who are planning for 3 years from now and actively hurting their SB odds with an elite QB...

There's a reason the NBA offseason is a lot more fun and its because teams think in like, 2 year windows.

 

not only are you making excellent points but I endorse this usage of the word “flacco”

I think it can also be a verb. Like. I really hope Trevor Lawrence doesn’t flacco like Bortles did. lol

 

I dont endorse the Rams or Packers strategies.

 

Honestly though I think we’re going heavy on the semantics again.

I again say: drafting Goff wasn’t a bust but extending him was

Goff’s first four years were a great first four years overall