Matthew Stafford (merge)

[Superman]

Just now, GoColts8818 said:

He played spot snaps but I would agree not a sustained role but the fact they went to Hill over him when Brees tells me what I need to know about how the Saints felt about Winston.  Arians has done good things with QBs over his career.  Yes he’s going to have the QB throw the ball down the field but Manning, Big Ben, and Luck didn’t put up the INT numbers Winston did under Arians.  I’ve always viewed Winston as a guy whose gotten by on natural ability and doesn’t want to put the work in.  Arians alluded to this at times last year.  So again I say hard pass.

 

They've been grooming Hill for several years, and paid him as such. I didn't really take that decision as an indication of their feelings on Winston, more how much they like Hill. 

[GoColts8818]

1 minute ago, Mel Kiper's Hair said:

You gotta give the Rams credit for going for it. I guarantee you that if they win a Super Bowl no one in Los Angeles is going to care what they gave up for Stafford.

I’d bet on no one in LA knowing they won’t the Super Bowl but that’s a different issue.

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

This is going to be a interesting month or two ahead.  How do we sign our own free agents of fo after any without a QB. Hopefully Ballard has a trick up his sleeve because things don’t look good.

[Superman]

Just now, GoColts8818 said:

I’d bet on no one in LA knowing they won’t the Super Bowl but that’s a different issue.

 

SMH

 

What did LA do to you?

[Sumo63]

5 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Four offseasons so far. One with an actual need at QB.

Permanence at the position is paramount 

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

1 minute ago, DougDew said:

So to reset the thread.

 

It looks like our starter is going to be one of the cast off QBs the teams higher up the draft let go after they know who they draft.  We may have to wait until draft day.

God I hope not. That would be a step backwards. If it is there better be the future behind that vet.

[GoColts8818]

1 minute ago, Superman said:

 

They've been grooming Hill for several years, and paid him as such. I didn't really take that decision as an indication of their feelings on Winston, more how much they like Hill. 

You don’t sign Winston if you are 100% sold on Hill.  The fact they still went to Hill after going to Winston in the game Brees went out tells me they saw something they didn’t like in Winston.  Again my theory is the book on Winston is that he doesn’t put in the work he needs to so I say hard pass.

[RollerColt]

Wow. That’s a haul. I’m guessing Ballard rightly backed away from that kind of bet. And I like Stafford. 

[danlhart87]

1 minute ago, Chloe6124 said:

This is going to be a interesting month or two ahead.  How do we sign our own free agents of fo after any without a QB. Hopefully Ballard has a trick up his sleeve because things don’t look good.

Deep breath Chloe

Lots of time to go

[NewColtsFan]

The pucks are a ‘21 third....   a ‘22 first...   and a ‘23 first.  
 

Rams paid full price.  
 

I don’t know how the two teams are going to handle the salary cap math, but...   wow!  

[danlhart87]

if Fields Jones or Lance falls to 13 or so I think Ballard trades up

[DougDew]

12 minutes ago, Chloe6124 said:

This is going to be a interesting month or two ahead.  How do we sign our own free agents of fo after any without a QB. Hopefully Ballard has a trick up his sleeve because things don’t look good.

But Chloe, things really don't look any worse than what they did this at any time this season.  Rivers was on a one year deal, and was a retirement risk, and Stafford wishes were just those.  

 

That is no plan. 

 

I assume Ballard has one, but from our point of view, the situation we are in now was probably going to happen the moment we signed a 39 year old Rivers to a one year deal.

[GoColts8818]

2 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

SMH

 

What did LA do to you?

There is a reason they went over 20 years without a team and no one went to Chargers games.  LA doesn’t care about the NFL.  This isn’t exactly breaking news.

[Sumo63]

6 minutes ago, danlhart87 said:

Rams gave up entirely too much for a 33 year old QB. Ballard made the right choice. 

For us 33 year old quality qb is 5 to 7 years of consistency as a sb contender.  Personally I'd take that.

[danlhart87]

Just now, Sumo63 said:

For us 33 year old quality qb is 5 to 7 years of consistency as a sb contender.  Personally I'd take that.

2 1s way way too much

I was reluctant about just a 1

[Hark]

No way Ballard was going for that deal

[GoColts8818]

1 minute ago, danlhart87 said:

if Fields Jones or Lance falls to 13 or so I think Ballard trades up

If it’s one of those three give me Lance.  I have no interest in Fields and I don’t trust Jones.

[colts89]

11 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Goodness.  The Rams are like the best team in the NFC right now, IMO.  They may not be in three years, but this is their window.

they better hope this is THE MOVE then because their cap space management is horrid due to trades for older veteran players (over the cap by $22,053,472 but I think Geoff contract helps a bit), and they don't have a lot of young good blue chip players because of so many high round trades they've made in the last few years. They are a good roster, and Stafford will help, but unlike us they don't have a good looking future after 2-3 seasons. Our team (and our best players) are not old for the most part and the cap space management allows us to improve when the correct opportunities are there (we got a faaar better player in his  position in Buckner for just one single first rounder for example). Let's see what GM strategy history favors more in a few years

[Fluke_33]

5 minutes ago, DougDew said:

So to reset the thread.

 

It looks like our starter is going to be one of the cast off QBs the teams higher up the draft let go after they know who they draft.  We may have to wait until draft day.

Sounds about right.  If the jets trade for Watson I could see darnold being likely predraft but we may be waiting a while. 

[danlhart87]

Why do the Rams hate 1st rounders so much 

1 minute ago, Fluke_33 said:

Sounds about right.  If the jets trade for Watson I could see darnold being likely predraft but we may be waiting a while. 

I would gladly take him for a 3rd 

[Four2itus]

7 minutes ago, Mel Kiper's Hair said:

I guarantee you that if they win a Super Bowl no one in Los Angeles is going to care what they gave up for Stafford.

If they win one and then suck for the 6 years following......they will absolutely whine, cry, moan, and leave in droves. Not saying anything other than "Cost does matter". 

[Superman]

3 minutes ago, GoColts8818 said:

You don’t sign Winston if you are 100% sold on Hill.  The fact they still went to Hill after going to Winston in the game Brees went out tells me they saw something they didn’t like in Winston.  Again my theory is the book on Winston is that he doesn’t put in the work he needs to so I say hard pass.

 

They paid Hill a lot of money, signing Winston wasn't about Hill, it was about having a backup if Brees couldn't play. 

 

But I'm not advocating for Winston, don't want him. Just saying I don't think he'd turn the ball over with the Colts, not like he did with the Bucs. And I don't think Arians is that good of a QB coach, despite his reputation. 

[Fluke_33]

2 minutes ago, danlhart87 said:

if Fields Jones or Lance falls to 13 or so I think Ballard trades up

Kelly mond is mvp of the senior bowl.  Ballard loves the senior bowl.  Just saying.  Lol. 

[w87r]

Rams cap:-$31.3m(negative, pre trade)

 

Goff trade saves $12.75m

 

While it adds $20m(Staffords cap hit)

 

New cap space: -38.5m

 

Donald restructure:$14.1m savings

Ramsey restructure:$13m savings

Kupp restructure:$6.1m savings

Woods restructure:$9.2m savings

 

Total savings:$42.4

 

New cap space:$3.9m

 

So these moves get them back to positive cap space. They could cut a couple people and restructure a few smaller deal to get more money, but man.

 

8 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

They paid them an extra pick to take Goff's contract. Now they're scheduled to have $70m in cap space in 2022, pending any new contracts this offseason.

 

They did okay.

These restructures above will push money back to 2022 and most likely will be reupping Stafford as well, but yeah I would say all in all the did ok.

 

 

 

Okay time to refocus on the Colts QB now.

[B~Town]

Would have liked Stafford but that is alot of draft capitol more that I would have liked Ballard to give up . 

[Fluke_33]

1 minute ago, danlhart87 said:

Why do the Rams hate 1st rounders so much 

I would gladly take him for a 3rd 

He sees ghosts and we have one for him!

[GoColts8818]

2 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

They paid Hill a lot of money, signing Winston wasn't about Hill, it was about having a backup if Brees couldn't play. 

 

But I'm not advocating for Winston, don't want him. Just saying I don't think he'd turn the ball over with the Colts, not like he did with the Bucs. And I don't think Arians is that good of a QB coach, despite his reputation. 

And Brees couldn’t play and they went to Hill after they tried Winston.  You just made part of my point.  If the idea was to have Winston incase Brees couldn’t play and then Brees couldn’t play and you didn’t play Winston that suggests you saw something you didn’t like in Winston.  
 

my issue with Winston is less turnovers (although that’s not good) and more that I don’t think he does the work.  

[DougDew]

1 minute ago, colts89 said:

they better hope this is THE MOVE then because their cap space management is horrid due to trades for older veteran players (over the cap by $22,053,472 but I think Geoff contract helps a bit), and they don't have a lot of young good blue chip players because of so many trades they've made in the last few years. They are a good roster, and Stafford will help, but unlike us they don't have a good looking future after 2-3 seasons. Our team (and our best players) are not old for the most part and the cap space management allows us to improve when the correct opportunities are there (we got a faaar better player in his  position in Buckner for just one single first rounder for example). Let's see what GM strategy history favors more in a few years

I thought the Rams were nearly in the AFCCG.  When Wolford went out they were sunk, but they would have won that game and gone farther if he was healthy.

 

Superman said they will have $70M in cap space come 2022.  Seems like they know how to draft and how to evaluate FA talent.

[danlhart87]

1 minute ago, Fluke_33 said:

Kelly mond is mvp of the senior bowl.  Ballard loves the senior bowl.  Just saying.  Lol. 

Mac Jones did well there 

[Mel Kiper's Hair]

1 minute ago, GoColts8818 said:

There is a reason they went over 20 years without a team and no one went to Chargers games.  LA doesn’t care about the NFL.  This isn’t exactly breaking news.

 

Los Angeles is a town that cares about winning and the Rams ownership knows this. If they win they will be the toast of the town. Right now there are 2 World Champions in Los Angeles so the Rams aren't high on the sports totem pole.

Just now, Four2itus said:

If they win one and then suck for the 6 years following......they will absolutely whine, cry, moan, and leave in droves. Not saying anything other than "Cost does matter". 

 

I would gladly trade 1 Super Bowl for 6 sucky seasons! I would rather win 1 championship than to go 8-8 or 9-7 every year and be continually disappointed. 

[Sumo63]

Just now, danlhart87 said:

2 1s way way too much

I was reluctant about just a 1

It's a matter of opinion.  Right now we have Eason under contract.  Maybe they believe in him, thatd be great.  But trading up to get a "sure thing" is gonna cost more and imo syafford was the best best mid term solution. 

I'm not devastated.  Its gonna be what it is but from the outside looking in we need to make a move.  And maybe we will.  Nobody moved the needle like Stafford tho (imo).

[GoColts8818]

2 minutes ago, Mel Kiper's Hair said:

 

Los Angeles is a town that cares about winning and the Rams ownership knows this. If they win they will be the toast of the town. Right now there are 2 World Champions in Los Angeles so the Rams aren't high on the sports totem pole.

 

I would gladly trade 1 Super Bowl for 6 sucky seasons! I would rather win 1 championship than to go 8-8 or 9-7 every year and be continually disappointed. 

We shall see I’ve always seen LA as a baseball and basketball team first and football is sorta an afterthought.  I mean the Dodgers and Lakers draw win or lose.  The Rams went to a Super Bowl a few years ago and the overall mood in LA was kinda enh towards them.

[gnet550]

Would have liked Stafford but have felt Darnold might be the sneaky choice

[danlhart87]

1 minute ago, Mel Kiper's Hair said:

 

Los Angeles is a town that cares about winning and the Rams ownership knows this. If they win they will be the toast of the town. Right now there are 2 World Champions in Los Angeles so the Rams aren't high on the sports totem pole.

 

I would gladly trade 1 Super Bowl for 6 sucky seasons! I would rather win 1 championship than to go 8-8 or 9-7 every year and be continually disappointed. 

I would rather win 6 in a row lol

[DougDew]

Reminder:  We already have a young developmental QB on the roster and under contract for a while. 

 

IIRC, he's 6'6 235 and has a cannon.

 

Not sure why any college player this year is assumed to be better.

[Superman]

4 minutes ago, GoColts8818 said:

There is a reason they went over 20 years without a team and no one went to Chargers games.  LA doesn’t care about the NFL.  This isn’t exactly breaking news.

 

There are four million people in LA. A lot of them care about the NFL. I'm one of them. Kinda tired of the LA hate.

 

And there are a lot of reasons the NFL wasn't in LA for 20 years. Fan indifference isn't really as high on the list as you claim.

[Fluke_33]

2 minutes ago, danlhart87 said:

Mac Jones did well there 

If the colts draft jones what will happen to you? Lol.  
 

[GoColts8818]

1 minute ago, gnet550 said:

Would have liked Stafford but have felt Darnold might be the sneaky choice

If the Jets will trade him.  Some feel part of getting him a new coach was because they were going to hang on to him.

[poilucelt]

5 minutes ago, danlhart87 said:

Why do the Rams hate 1st rounders so much 

I would gladly take him for a 3rd 

if they take him I may need a fifth (rim shot)

 

but who knows? if the "Gasetritis" can be cleansed out of him, and an outstanding DE or LT can be picked up at #21........

[Superman]

4 minutes ago, GoColts8818 said:

And Brees couldn’t play and they went to Hill after they tried Winston.  You just made part of my point.  If the idea was to have Winston incase Brees couldn’t play and then Brees couldn’t play and you didn’t play Winston that suggests you saw something you didn’t like in Winston.  
 

my issue with Winston is less turnovers (although that’s not good) and more that I don’t think he does the work.  

 

It was about having a backup if Brees couldn't play.