Cowherd With the Wise Stafford-Talk. Like I've Been Sayin'

[CoachAllred]

What was that?
Anyway, I'm not referring to your average savvy ROD poster, in tune with the Rams situation.
You look at National media coverage, BSPN, etc. and the "Stafford is Old" mantra is crap we've had to hear for 3 years now. So flip your 80% ratio on it's head.

Don't sweat the kind posts that add nothing to the conversation. And that is exactly what it was.

I hit you with a thread winner because I and most others enjoyed your post and statement.
Even replied with thoughts on why I agree 100%.

Keep being you and once again loved the post!

 

[dieterbrock]

This is a bit of a devil's advocate argument given that I'm not against taking a QB before you need one, but is Green Bay a great example?

The last time they participated in the SB was 2011 when they won. They've played in 4 NFC championships in the last 14 years and they've lost them all. And even that was because of Rodgers.

It's certainly too early to brag about the transition to Love since he's done diddly squat.

He’s only been the starter for 2 years and they’ve made the playoffs in both.
He may not be in the Favre/Rodgers class but he’s in the Dak Prescott/Jared Goff level, proved he could win a playoff game
When you look at all the teams we historically bad qb play over the last decade, surely have to view him as a success.

 

[FrantikRam]

What he's really saying is that having to play a rookie once Stafford hangs it up is 1000% worth maximizing our window with Stafford. I.e. don't waste a premium pick on a QB when we can add a piece to improve the roster.

And I think that is spot on. We can figure out QB after Stafford retires

 

[PhillyRam]

What he's really saying is that having to play a rookie once Stafford hangs it up is 1000% worth maximizing our window with Stafford. I.e. don't waste a premium pick on a QB when we can add a piece to improve the roster.

And I think that is spot on. We can figure out QB after Stafford retires

All depends. Don't burn a first on a marginal QB prospect, but if you can land a guy that they really think highly of, take him when you can. There are a lot of organizations still looking for their franchise QB. They don't always grow on trees. And having a kid learn from Stafford is invaluable.

 

[fearsomefour]

I want to restate my view....
The odds of anyone they draft being as good as Stafford....should be a first or second ballot HOF QB by the time he is done....is very low.
That does not mean I am against drafting one however.

 

[gogoat1]

He’s only been the starter for 2 years and they’ve made the playoffs in both.
He may not be in the Favre/Rodgers class but he’s in the Dak Prescott/Jared Goff level, proved he could win a playoff game
When you look at all the teams we historically bad qb play over the last decade, surely have to view him as a success.

Goff is better than both those guys.

 

[dieterbrock]

Goff is better than both those guys.

 

[sloramfan]

i agree with ground chuck...

cowherd is the best until he comes in with his social comments (usually happened up to the election)...
he knows his audience doesn't like that...

go rams

slo

 

[Dodgersrf]

This is a bit of a devil's advocate argument given that I'm not against taking a QB before you need one, but is Green Bay a great example?

The last time they participated in the SB was 2011 when they won. They've played in 4 NFC championships in the last 14 years and they've lost them all. And even that was because of Rodgers.

It's certainly too early to brag about the transition to Love since he's done diddly squat.

It’s a better situation than being in QB purgatory.

We had a long stretch of failure between Bulger and Goff.

 

[majrleaged]

Yes go after a qb if you think he can be special. That doesnt mean rush Stafford out the door. As long as Stafford can steal souls you keep that prospect on the bench.

 

[DzRams]

It’s a better situation than being in QB purgatory.

We had a long stretch of failure between Bulger and Goff.

IMO, QB purgatory is directly tied to front office incompetence. We were the worst run organization in that time period.

That is no longer the case as now we're one of the best run football teams.

 

[Dodgersrf]

IMO, QB purgatory is directly tied to front office incompetence. We were the worst run organization in that time period.

That is no longer the case as now we're one of the best run football teams.

Having a good QB helps.

 

[DzRams]

Having a good QB helps.

Agreed. And I trust our very very competent decision makers to make that happen. I have no fear of QB purgatory.

 

[dieterbrock]

IMO, QB purgatory is directly tied to front office incompetence. We were the worst run organization in that time period.

That is no longer the case as now we're one of the best run football teams.

I agree whole heartedly with what you're saying, just need to consider that the best run teams have no control over when and what QB talent is available. The best run teams arent afraid to get the "right guy" even if the timing isnt ideal

 

[Loyal]

I could not agree with this more. Some VERY short term thinking from some here who would rather another potential superbowl run with a 38/39yo QB versus potentially shoring up the position for the long term. I just don't understand the logic.

Until 2021, only one Super Bowl win in over 50 years. I had enough of the Rams being a good team and winning nothing that mattered in the 70's.

 

[Merlin]

Until 2021, only one Super Bowl win in over 50 years. I had enough of the Rams being a good team and winning nothing that mattered in the 70's.

Yes the players need to be able to produce in the biggest moment. There's way more dudes who can get you to contender status than there are dudes who can get you the trophy.

 

[dang]

Until 2021, only one Super Bowl win in over 50 years. I had enough of the Rams being a good team and winning nothing that mattered in the 70's.

I’m going to say there were 0 QBs worthy of a R1 pick this year. They were picked because of a teams pressing need for a decent QB. So I’m all for the Rams picking one next year but don’t force a 2nd round (or worse) talent into the first round. I’d rather ride Stafford another year and line up for the next year. IMO They desperately need a starting caliber OT and DB in next years draft.

 

[Pupped]

I’m going to say there were 0 QBs worthy of a R1 pick this year. They were picked because of a teams pressing need for a decent QB. So I’m all for the Rams picking one next year but don’t force a 2nd round (or worse) talent into the first round. I’d rather ride Stafford another year and line up for the next year. IMO They desperately need a starting caliber OT and DB in next years draft.

Cam Ward is a first rounder any year.

 

[Merlin]

I’m going to say there were 0 QBs worthy of a R1 pick this year. They were picked because of a teams pressing need for a decent QB. So I’m all for the Rams picking one next year but don’t force a 2nd round (or worse) talent into the first round.

I agree. I think Cam was a reach as well as a top 5 pick, even as the top option in the class.

Funny thing though is you still gotta take shots on them, since it is purely driven by supply and demand. Also one or two from this class could hit, in which case all that reach BS goes out the window.

Way I see it reaching for a QB in the draft is not the worst thing you can do. That would be paying mediocre fuckheads second tier QB money. In other words if I didn't have a QB I would take one every year and refuse to pay the position until I find one in the draft who can do the job. And in that case I'd have four years of team control, maybe three, before the need to pony up the big bucks.

Since the Rams have the QB it means they don't have to take those shots. Or perhaps more accurately they don't have to actively position to take them. But there is a point where, with an older QB, you would be wise to approach the issue as if you don't have one and take the shot on them each year until you find one you think can take up the baton.

 

[dieterbrock]

Cam Ward is a first rounder any year.

Agreed
He needed 2024 to cement that, and be worthy of that #1 overall, which he absolutely is/was
To think, had he come out in the 2024 draft, a team may have been able to have drafted him in 2nd/3rd round. Having that additional year to hone his skills made a huge difference. That's how I look at the Rams situation. If a QB can sit back, watch and learn from 2 of the best to ever do it, that one year can catapult them from pretty good to possibly great.