Jared Goff

[hawknation2016]

I think all Rams fans should be rooting for him not to play this year or next.

He's at least two years away, IMO, from being averagely competent.

 

[Rob12]

Alice, there is not a football fan in America that is truly OK with their No. 1 overall pick, who is healthy, being made to sit in street clothes all season. There really is no reason to bullshit here.

I admire the effort, but I think you're honestly full of shit. No offense.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[RedAlice]

Alice, there is not a football fan in America that is truly OK with their No. 1 overall pick, who is healthy, being made to sit in street clothes all season. There really is no reason to bullshit here.

I admire the effort, but I think you're honestly full of shit. No offense.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

And I respectfully disagree with you and think your concept is BS. That's as much as I will type to you here.

I can't say much more to you without violating the rules of the board.

 

[RedAlice]

I think all Rams fans should be rooting for him not to play this year or next.

He's at least two years away, IMO, from being averagely competent.

I doubt it's two years. But, all Rams fans want our team to be able to win. As do fans of all teams.

I don't care what number anyone is drafted. I have lived through a #1 draft pick QB already - you will see him play w the Vikes now. It was a nightmare.

I fully and with my whole heart do not want Goff to play a single snap until he is ready. Be that week 2, or year 2.

I also think Goff will be good.

 

[Attyla the Hawk]

Just out of curiosity, I checked the starting QBs from last season. Here is the breakdown of QB (ones who started day one and ones that sat)

Started:

Peyton Manning
Matt Ryan
Andrew Luck
Russell Wilson
Ryan Tannehill
Cam Newton
Joe Flacco
Carson Palmer
Matthew Stafford
Sam Bradford
Jameis Winstson
Marcus Mariota
Andy Dalton
Derek Carr


Benched:

Aaron Rodgers
Drew Brees
Ben Rothlisberger
Tom Brady
Philip Rivers
Tony Romo
Teddy Bridgewater
Alex Smith
Eli Manning
Colin Kaepernick
Jay Cutler
Nick Foles
Ryan Fitzpatrick
Kirk Cousins
Blake Bortles
Josh McCown
Brian Hoyer
Tyrod Taylor


The odds do go down pretty drastically if you begin your career on the bench. Certainly it's not prohibitive. What's mostly telling is that the good QBs that began their careers on the bench -- are all very much older (pre CBA).

The list of QBs that started day one is a pretty stout list. Outside of Sam Bradford, they are all unquestioned #1 starters for their teams and other than the three rookies from 2015 -- all on their second contracts or later. Being able to start on day one is a very clear harbinger of future success.

It can work starting on the bench. But it's not encouraging by the numbers. And it's worth noting too, that if we did a composite over 5 years, the number of failed starting QBs who began their career on the bench would balloon considerably. Because those QBs -- once failed -- generally don't get a second pass. Whereas the number of successful QBs starting on the bench is going to remain largely unchanged.

 

[Ramfan128]

Just out of curiosity, I checked the starting QBs from last season. Here is the breakdown of QB (ones who started day one and ones that sat)

Started:

Peyton Manning
Matt Ryan
Andrew Luck
Russell Wilson
Ryan Tannehill
Cam Newton
Joe Flacco
Carson Palmer
Matthew Stafford
Sam Bradford
Jameis Winstson
Marcus Mariota
Andy Dalton
Derek Carr


Benched:

Aaron Rodgers
Drew Brees
Ben Rothlisberger
Tom Brady
Philip Rivers
Tony Romo
Teddy Bridgewater
Alex Smith
Eli Manning
Colin Kaepernick
Jay Cutler
Nick Foles
Ryan Fitzpatrick
Kirk Cousins
Blake Bortles
Josh McCown
Brian Hoyer
Tyrod Taylor


The odds do go down pretty drastically if you begin your career on the bench. Certainly it's not prohibitive. What's mostly telling is that the good QBs that began their careers on the bench -- are all very much older (pre CBA).

The list of QBs that started day one is a pretty stout list. Outside of Sam Bradford, they are all unquestioned #1 starters for their teams and other than the three rookies from 2015 -- all on their second contracts or later. Being able to start on day one is a very clear harbinger of future success.

It can work starting on the bench. But it's not encouraging by the numbers. And it's worth noting too, that if we did a composite over 5 years, the number of failed starting QBs who began their career on the bench would balloon considerably. Because those QBs -- once failed -- generally don't get a second pass. Whereas the number of successful QBs starting on the bench is going to remain largely unchanged.

Are we looking at the same lists? 4 of the top 6 QBs are on the bench list. In fact, everyone on the start from day 1 list has either been questioned or had a bad season, with the exception of Wilson and the guys that the jury is still out on (Winston/Mariota)

If anything, the list you provided has me more encouraged.

 

[mikeak]

Just out of curiosity, I checked the starting QBs from last season. Here is the breakdown of QB (ones who started day one and ones that sat)



The odds do go down pretty drastically if you begin your career on the bench. Certainly it's not prohibitive. What's mostly telling is that the good QBs that began their careers on the bench -- are all very much older (pre CBA).

The list of QBs that started day one is a pretty stout list. Outside of Sam Bradford, they are all unquestioned #1 starters for their teams and other than the three rookies from 2015 -- all on their second contracts or later. Being able to start on day one is a very clear harbinger of future success.

It can work starting on the bench. But it's not encouraging by the numbers. And it's worth noting too, that if we did a composite over 5 years, the number of failed starting QBs who began their career on the bench would balloon considerably. Because those QBs -- once failed -- generally don't get a second pass. Whereas the number of successful QBs starting on the bench is going to remain largely unchanged.

Great list - confusing conclusion

"odds go WAY down" - really - you excluded everyone who doesn't make it

You can't just look at it like that. Bad teams draft first, are more desperate, starts a QB more frequently. Good teams draft later, can sit the QB (Rodgers). So if they sit or not depends much more on their drafting spot and how desperate the team is.

Sitting a QB could be a sign of a mature organization that want to get the QB ready. That is how it normally was.

In this case it is because of a QB that pretty much can't play the game right now. The real question is if that is all on him or if it is on the organization for YET AGAIN failing to coach QBs

Either way I am COMPLETELY fine with failure for the organization...

 

[theENGLISHseahawk]

One other thing on Goff...

Couldn't help but think during the final Hard Knocks... as he's sitting in his massive house watching the TV with the rookie TE...

This is a guy with very little at stake here. A multi-millionaire vaulted into a position of absolute security because the Rams not only made him the #1 pick -- but they paid a fortune in picks to get to #1.

Contrast that to QB's who either pressured themselves and prepared themselves to start immediately, those who had a point to prove (eg Wilson, Romo, Brady) or those who had to sit and wait for their opportunity (Rodgers).

Has Goff got the stones to handle this situation? Is he motivated to be great in the way we all experienced when witnessing Wilson's relentless drive as a rookie? At any point during Hard Knocks did you think... 'wow, this guy gets it'?

 

[Laloosh]

This is a guy with very little at stake here. A multi-millionaire vaulted into a position of absolute security because the Rams not only made him the #1 pick -- but they paid a fortune in picks to get to #1.

I had a similar reaction to that scene mentioned. Not to say that he isn't working hard but he seems pretty relaxed for a #1 pick that is taking a back seat to the punter when it comes to the depth chart in week 1.

 

[Ramfan128]

This is a guy with very little at stake here. A multi-millionaire vaulted into a position of absolute security because the Rams not only made him the #1 pick -- but they paid a fortune in picks to get to #1.

I had a similar reaction to that scene mentioned. Not to say that he isn't working hard but he seems pretty relaxed for a #1 pick that is taking a back seat to the punter when it comes to the depth chart in week 1.

I would feel pretty confident that at some point during Wilson's rookie year (or any player's), he relaxed.

I don't see an issue with this.


We also need to stop with this "fortune in picks" stuff. Goff will forever be compared to former number 1 overall QBs and have higher expectations because we traded up to get him, but here are some pieces of info that make me not care about those things at all:

1. It has been said by pretty much everyone that he would be the 3rd best QB in last years class. In my mind he shouldn't be compared to them, and I myself am not comparing him to former 1st overall picks.

2. This fortune of picks talk - we traded half of our picks this year and what amounts to just our first in next years class. Barring future trades, we will have 7 draft picks next year. This is NOTHING like what happened to the Redskins.

3. We actually gave up LESS to move from 15 to 1 than the Redskins gave up to move from 6 to 2. That ties into both my first and second points.


So given that, here's what I do expect: for Goff to be at least a league average QB in the same range as Flacco/Matt Ryan/Tannehill. A "franchise" QB but not top 10.

Is it a disappointment that he's not starting? Yes and no. Few QBs have success starting their rookie years. Do I view it as a failure that he's not starting? No. Some people just need more time to adjust. With the move it probably made it even more difficult which is why I expect a subpar season. No need to get the kid killed or shatter his confidence. Guys can learn a lot from the sideline and in practice, and he'll play when he is ready.

 

[Laloosh]

^^ So, based on how things have progressed thus far, you're okay with the big spend to get a guy that doesn't seem remarkable in any way?

 

[theENGLISHseahawk]

I would feel pretty confident that at some point during Wilson's rookie year (or any player's), he relaxed.

Knowing Wilson, I doubt he would've been doing any relaxing if he'd just been named the #3 QB.

I'm trying to find the quote I saw from John Schneider on Twitter earlier this week... where he stated Wilson marched into camp in week one of his rookie year and knew all the plays and took control of the offense.

Let's not forget, Seattle paid Matt Flynn a fortune to be the QB that year. He never started a game for the Seahawks. Because of Wilson.

And while Goff sat in his big house relaxing is not per se an issue -- he just gives off a vibe of a man with very little at stake and perhaps that has shown in his inability to even win the backup QB gig.

 

[Attyla the Hawk]

Great list - confusing conclusion

"odds go WAY down" - really - you excluded everyone who doesn't make it

You can't just look at it like that. Bad teams draft first, are more desperate, starts a QB more frequently. Good teams draft later, can sit the QB (Rodgers). So if they sit or not depends much more on their drafting spot and how desperate the team is.

Sorry for the confusion. I simply wanted to show the relationship between the 2015 NFL starters and how they were initially handled. I didn't want to needlessly embellish the comparison with guys that never made it. We're just talking about starter quality QBs which is really the only conversation that Goff belongs in as the #1 overall pick. Anything less and he's an unqualified bust.

Clearly there are circumstances that factor in. Coach risk aversion, talent ahead of them on the depth chart etc.

Goff's career isn't written yet. But being unable to start day one, puts a QB on a different path. It's like a bust 'risk factor' of sorts. Doesn't mean he will bust. But makes it much more likely.

However if we want to account for factors of circumstance. Then one could hardly argue that LA wasn't desperate. They sold the farm for him. And while the team is good, Goff's competition at QB is replacement level at best. If anything it'd be easier to argue that a rookie of any real quality should have taken the Rams job quite handily. It's a team that sold it's future, is desperate to compete and has no talent barriers ahead of him to keep him on the bench (or in street clothes for that matter).

It's an inauspicious start to his career. And he has a much higher level of risk attached to him by the numbers. Allowing for the usual circumstances that would keep a rookie QB on the bench -- it's even worse. Because there aren't really that many outside reasons to suppress his ascension to the top of the depth chart. If anything that environment is downright ripe for a rookie to start.

I will concede though, that this is Fisher's MO with rookies. He kept both Steve McNair and Vince Young on the bench initially -- and by season's end they were starters. Fisher is an old school dude and he's established a pretty clear precedent. Goff could be an outlier for no other reason than Fisher is stubborn.

Overall, I think it's wise that LA doesn't start him if he's not ready. I just think the fact that he's not ready is an ill omen given the circumstances.

 

[mrt144]

For a complete picture, can we get a list of all QBs in the league who have been acquired via draft since the oldest current QB has been in the league, who weren't starters from day 1 and their respective careers?

I have the feeling that not starting your first game as a rookie let alone once in your first season, applied to every single QB who has ever entered the league, will give you a pretty strong correlation to length of career, if not quality.

Just trying to be clear here - it's insufficient to look at 'success cases' and then analyze their backgrounds, you also have to look at every failure too.

Anecdotally, Sam Bradford and Drew Luck seem to indicate that if you're the #1 pick in the draft, you're afforded more leeway in being mediocre for a longer period of time.

 

[mikeak]

Is it a disappointment that he's not starting? Yes and no. Few QBs have success starting their rookie years. Do I view it as a failure that he's not starting? No. Some people just need more time to adjust. With the move it probably made it even more difficult which is why I expect a subpar season. No need to get the kid killed or shatter his confidence. Guys can learn a lot from the sideline and in practice, and he'll play when he is ready.

I don't disagree on QBs sitting and learning. Part of that learning would be being on the sidelines during a real game.

The fact that he was QB No 2 in the first pre-season game and is now demoted to QB No 3 not even dressing should probably be a concern if it remains this way into the next few weeks. If you dress a guy he could play so if you have no intention of playing him I get the part of not dressing him but it also means he doesn't have to get mentally ready for the game and there is learning missed by this......

 

[Smelly McUgly]

It's not 1983 anymore. College and pro offenses are converging in terms of tactics and what QBs are asked to do, not diverging. QBs are more ready than ever to start as rookies, and they should be considering the changes to the game in both college and the pros.

If a QB in 2016 who is drafted in the first three rounds can't immediately start on a team that only has career backups at QB on its roster, he's probably going to end up busting. That's how I feel, no trolling meant toward Rams fans.

 

[HawkGA]

Is it a disappointment that he's not starting? Yes and no. Few QBs have success starting their rookie years. Do I view it as a failure that he's not starting? No. Some people just need more time to adjust. With the move it probably made it even more difficult which is why I expect a subpar season. No need to get the kid killed or shatter his confidence. Guys can learn a lot from the sideline and in practice, and he'll play when he is ready.

I don't disagree on QBs sitting and learning. Part of that learning would be being on the sidelines during a real game.

The fact that he was QB No 2 in the first pre-season game and is now demoted to QB No 3 not even dressing should probably be a concern if it remains this way into the next few weeks. If you dress a guy he could play so if you have no intention of playing him I get the part of not dressing him but it also means he doesn't have to get mentally ready for the game and there is learning missed by this......

Don't QB 3's technically dress but don't count against the active roster? I don't keep up with the rules on that much anymore but I seem to remember that being a rule at some point. And if they go in, none of the other QBs can come back in the game.

 

[RedAlice]

It's not 1983 anymore. College and pro offenses are converging in terms of tactics and what QBs are asked to do, not diverging. QBs are more ready than ever to start as rookies, and they should be considering the changes to the game in both college and the pros.

If a QB in 2016 who is drafted in the first three rounds can't immediately start on a team that only has career backups at QB on its roster, he's probably going to end up busting. That's how I feel, no trolling meant toward Rams fans.

Perfect post, and not trolling Rams fans at all. Just giving your opinion without insulting others who don't agree with you.

 

[RedAlice]

I will concede though, that this is Fisher's MO with rookies. He kept both Steve McNair and Vince Young on the bench initially -- and by season's end they were starters. Fisher is an old school dude and he's established a pretty clear precedent. Goff could be an outlier for no other reason than Fisher is stubborn.

Overall, I think it's wise that LA doesn't start him if he's not ready. I just think the fact that he's not ready is an ill omen given the circumstances.

I think this has a significant impact on him sitting. A lot of the current debate is not only Goff, but Fisher as a coach with the Rookie QB.

Currently, I'm more negative towards Fisher even though I'm trying not to be.

 

[Seahawkfan80]

Is it a disappointment that he's not starting? Yes and no. Few QBs have success starting their rookie years. Do I view it as a failure that he's not starting? No. Some people just need more time to adjust. With the move it probably made it even more difficult which is why I expect a subpar season. No need to get the kid killed or shatter his confidence. Guys can learn a lot from the sideline and in practice, and he'll play when he is ready.

I don't disagree on QBs sitting and learning. Part of that learning would be being on the sidelines during a real game.

The fact that he was QB No 2 in the first pre-season game and is now demoted to QB No 3 not even dressing should probably be a concern if it remains this way into the next few weeks. If you dress a guy he could play so if you have no intention of playing him I get the part of not dressing him but it also means he doesn't have to get mentally ready for the game and there is learning missed by this......

Don't QB 3's technically dress but don't count against the active roster? I don't keep up with the rules on that much anymore but I seem to remember that being a rule at some point. And if they go in, none of the other QBs can come back in the game.

That used to be the rule...but in the salary cap change, I THINK they can come back in as they are on the roster. I think that was before the practice squad ruling too and the enhancements there too. Also QB3 is usually a special teams player or some such that has limited activity. Et Al with Cable, probably our left guard or kicker...he he he