13 posts
  • 1 / 2
  • 1
  • 2
 by elmendorf
2 weeks ago
 Total posts:   174  
 Joined:  Apr 29 2016
United States of America   Pennsylvania

Ok, I think the intentional avoidance of drafting OL/C or C is central to the narrative that we are out to prove that Goff was the problem. There is no other explanation, IMHO. OK, so you can wander in and out of theories about who we have on board right now and who we think might add to the OL mix in the coming year, but the overall consensus has to be along the lines of, ok, we need help here. If not starting quality help, then at least developmental help. I see a bare hint of this in this draft.

Henceforth, my thesis.

I believe the narrative is that Goff was the problem, not the OL. So. Every pick and every evaluation was based on the narrative that we need to build elsewhere, not the OL, since the problem was always Goff. Always. This is about spite.

A risky proposal, I think, and one that didn't have to be that extreme in its execution.

2 weeks ago
 Total posts:   7147  
 Joined:  Jul 15 2015
Barbados   Just far enough North of Philadelphia
Hall of Fame

Interesting theory. Is it possible they'd risk their jobs to spite Goff? This is one Ram fan who hopes it was Goff.

 by AvengerRam
2 weeks ago
 Total posts:   6526  
 Joined:  Oct 03 2017
Israel   Lake Mary, Florida

So did we draft no safeties to spite John Johnson?

 by moklerman
2 weeks ago
 Total posts:   7615  
 Joined:  Apr 17 2015
United States of America   Bakersfield, CA
Hall of Fame

Interesting theory and the pieces fit, but I really hope it's not the case. I really don't know why they essentially ignored the OL and on top of that drafted so many receivers but if McVay and Snead are so petty that it was to somehow stick it to Goff, we've got some problems.

 by Hacksaw
2 weeks ago
 Total posts:   19247  
 Joined:  Apr 15 2015
United States of America   AT THE BEACH

Yeah could be, , or not. Of course this would have to mean that McVay is irrationally upset with Goff. I don't know if something else happened off the field but to think coach would risk the team's well being just to stick it to a former player doesn't add up. Goff as a player may have some warts, but nothing that should make coach nuts.

 by majik
2 weeks ago
 Total posts:   793  
 Joined:  Aug 31 2015
United States of America   New Jersey

I don’t think the OP thinks it is to spite Goff, they just honestly believe that the OL provided adequate protection (contrary to the eye test in numerous contests) and that it was the bad decisions of Goff (can’t read defenses, process fast enough) that caused the issues.

I look at the huge potential hole at LT once Whit is gone and hope they are right. Is Noteboom capable, will they extend him for a below market adequate LT rate this summer? Or will they spend on the FA market for an LT? Teams don’t make trades for players where the next 1st pick they get is two years out

 by /zn/
2 weeks ago
 Total posts:   6047  
 Joined:  Jun 28 2015
United States of America   Maine
Hall of Fame

majik wrote:Or will they spend on the FA market for an LT? Teams don’t make trades for players where the next 1st pick they get is two years out

The hole in that plan is that rarely if ever is there a good LOT in the free agent market. In fact the Rams were lucky in 2017 that Whit was out there because the Bengals made a mistake.

 by Elvis
2 weeks ago
 Total posts:   29515  
 Joined:  Mar 28 2015
United States of America   Los Angeles

The other fallacy is that you draft Whit's replacement and give him a year or two to develop and that's that. Maybe the pick pans out, maybe he doesn't. It's hardly even close to certain the plan will work...

 by safer
2 weeks ago
 Total posts:   1011  
 Joined:  Feb 03 2016
United States of America   LA Coliseum
Pro Bowl

LT depth has got to be focus point now UNLESS they are comfortable going all in with Noteboom in a year. Rodger Saffold had a bunch of early injuries too, and so did Isaac Bruce.

  • 1 / 2
  • 1
  • 2
13 posts May 17 2021