[ramsman34]

Guys, Max's original premise was NOT about 4th qtr comeback abilities. It was, in his opinion, that Goff wasn't ready for a game of the magnitude the Seahawks game appeared to be. He also referenced Goff's 4th qtr stats - not at the end of the quarter, the entire quarter. Goff was ready for that game. He didn't have to do a lot but still delivered 2 TD passes. He turned the ball over trying to make a play but Seattle did nothing with that possession and we scored a TD on our next one.

Do you not think that the threat of Goff, the play calling in the pass game, and the receivers had something to do with the run game being so affective? McVay makes his plays "look" the same. The hawks guessed we were passing at times and we ended up running and gashing them.

Bottom line; Goff was ready, offense, defense, STs were ready, coaches were ready, Seattle wasn't at all ready.

A Rams ass-kicking ensued.

[/zn/]

Bottom line; Goff was ready, offense, defense, STs were ready, coaches were ready, Seattle wasn't at all ready.

Well if you told me in advance that Goff was going to throw for 120 yards and asked, do you think they will win under those conditions? I would have said, yes. They have a running game, a defense that while not always consistent can play well for long stretches and certainly has always played Seattle tough, and top special teams. They don't need to be pass crazy to win, and with a young qb, sometimes best not to be.

Saying Goff is developing, and hasn't arrived, is no sin. I personally think that's true. I think the he will be much further along fully realizing his talent and being consistently strong next year, after another off-season. Right now I still see him as being a little green around the edges but he also clearly has some major gifts and the right mindset and has already come a long way.

Meanwhile, even if it wasn't Max's intent--which is not necessarily the deciding factor anyway (threads take on a life of their own)--I think the 4th quarter comeback issue is an interesting one. Personally it IS something I look for in qbs. It's not the only thing (as some seemed to assume) but it's a fairly important thing to me.

Was he ready to win THIS game? What game? Seattle didn't show up. Gurley practiced running the ball for a while against air. The real surprise of the game was how dominant the secondary was. Seattle may have been ready to play A game but they were not prepared for THAT game.


...

[ramsman34]

"Saying Goff is developing, and hasn't arrived, is no sin. I personally think that's true. I think the he will be much further along fully realizing his talent and being consistently strong next year, after another off-season. Right now I still see him as being a little green around the edges but he also clearly has some major gifts and the right mindset and has already come a long way."

I agree, that future development notwithstanding, I think he is "ready" to win the remainder of games this season...all the way to and including the Super Bowl. It's going to take a Herculean TEAM effort to get that far. This is the playoffs after all and the NFC is loaded.

As far as Seattle not being ready; no way Max could see that in advance. his premise was based on it being a back n forth game. Goff had a little something to do with the outcome. How many runs do you think he checked into? He did throw 2 TDs as well. He did what was necessary to win, therefore, he was ready.

[/zn/]

As far as Seattle not being ready; no way Max could see that in advance.

Yeah I wasn't putting that on anyone. Just making conversation. It was a kind of lighthearted joke segue. I just had fun with the word "ready." I liked saying that Seattle was not ready for THAT game. The only way they saw the other side of the 50 yard line was from swapping fields at the quarter.

So I was not saying "max erred most egregiously when he failed to predict that in fact it was SEATTLE that turned out to be unprepared for that game, and I laugh derisively at his monumental mistake."

Personally I was kind of pleasantly taken aback at how demolishing that win was. At the half the announcers said (which you may have heard) that the Rams have not led by a 34 point margin on the road in their entire history as a franchise.

...

[PARAM]

Who do I want? The guy who is a good qb every quarter AND a winner in comeback situations.

Well you didn't answer but gave a 27 paragraph explanation instead. Off point, throwing in distractions and strawmen. As I figured.

I said Sanchez or Warner....who would you take and I knew the answer. The point I was making was Sanchez has more 4th quarter comebacks than Warner, which ought to suggest to even the casual fan, it's OVER RATED.

Obviously it's worthy of 7 pages of a 14 page thread though.

Here's the facts: Goff hasn't done it yet
Here's the eyeball test: He will but he might not have nearly as many chances as some QBs. (Just a hunch)

[/zn/]

Well you didn't answer but gave a 27 paragraph explanation instead. Off point, throwing in distractions and strawmen. )

Man, I am just not taking this particular conversation seriously enough to even care about comments like that. Really. It's not worth endless replies to me. It really is simple. I value qbs who can win in comeback situations. I can't help it if that bugs you. When you posed your false dichotomy choice, I just cut through that and basically said how I feel about the issue. You're acting like there's a "win possibility" here on what is really a value judgment clash. That's almost invariably a recipe for bad conversation. So I;m done.

[PARAM]

It really is simple. I value qbs who can win in comeback situations. I can't help it if that bugs you.

That doesn't bug me at all. I love QBs who can come back. I just happen to think it's over rated to some degree.

So I;m done.

Oh come on now......if I had a dollar for every time you've said that....

[ramsman34]

Yeah I wasn't putting that on anyone. Just making conversation. It was a kind of lighthearted joke segue. I just had fun with the word "ready." I liked saying that Seattle was not ready for THAT game. The only way they saw the other side of the 50 yard line was from swapping fields at the quarter.

So I was not saying "max erred most egregiously when he failed to predict that in fact it was SEATTLE that turned out to be unprepared for that game, and I laugh derisively at his monumental mistake."

Personally I was kind of pleasantly taken aback at how demolishing that win was. At the half the announcers said (which you may have heard) that the Rams have not led by a 34 point margin on the road in their entire history as a franchise.

...

My remark was sarcastic regarding Max. And I follow you on all this. Specifically, and for the record, I and probably everyone wants a QB who can more often than not mount a comeback and win being down late in the 4th. I think I speak for all of us when I say the "alternative" - having a lead and protecting it - is a much more desirable and advantageous position. 10-4 bears out that fact.

[/zn/]

My remark was sarcastic regarding Max. And I follow you on all this. Specifically, and for the record, I and probably everyone wants a QB who can more often than not mount a comeback and win being down late in the 4th. I think I speak for all of us when I say the "alternative" - having a lead and protecting it - is a much more desirable and advantageous position. 10-4 bears out that fact.

On Max. I misread irony sometimes. Ironically.

The other issue. To me it's not either/or and in fact as I said I see that as a false dichotomy. So I don't see having a lead as something that stands opposed to the ability to win at the end in a close game. I see them as just 2 different kinds of game scenarios, and also keep pointing out that good teams will play good teams and that often leads to close games.

Yeah they went 10-4 by dominating a lot of teams.

If they could have pulled out even just 2 of the 3 close losses (Washington, Seattle 1, Phil) they would have been 12-2. In all 3 cases it;s mistakes them cost them in potential game-winning drives at the end.

No one who says they like comeback clutch players is saying all games should or would be like that. BUT close games DO HAPPEN. And when they happen you want a team that can take those.

So which would I rather have?

Both.

You need both.

I think it's false to frame it as a choice as if the 2 things were mutually exclusive.

....

[PARAM]

On Max. I misread irony sometimes. Ironically.

The other issue. To me it's not either/or and in fact as I said I see that as a false dichotomy. So I don't see having a lead as something that stands opposed to the ability to win at the end in a close game. I see them as just 2 different kinds of game scenarios, and also keep pointing out that good teams will play good teams and that often leads to close games.

Yeah they went 10-4 by dominating a lot of teams.

If they could have pulled out even just 2 of the 3 close losses (Washington, Seattle 1, Phil) they would have been 12-2. In all 3 cases it;s mistakes them cost them in potential game-winning drives at the end.

No one who says they like comeback clutch players is saying all games should or would be like that. BUT close games DO HAPPEN. And when they happen you want a team that can take those.

So which would I rather have?

Both.

You need both.

I think it's false to frame it as a choice as if the 2 things were mutually exclusive.

....

LOL, my god. Nobody is saying pick one or the other. I presented it that way ....." Mark Sanchez had 10 fourth quarter game winning drives and Warner had 9, who would you rather have? ".... to show how ridiculous 4th quarter comebacks are classified and by being classified in that fashion, over-valued when it comes to comparing QBs, to a certain degree. Nobody in their right mind would pick Sanchez over Warner....even today!!! Nobody would say, "given a choice in who's hands I want the ball with 5 minutes left in the game needing a score to win, you can have Warner, I want Sanchez"!!!! Can that actually be misread?

But somehow you've turned it into "its a false dichotomy". You're smarter than that. Nobody was saying that. What's false is the way 4th quarter comebacks are classified....taking your team to a win in the 4th quarter.....could be with 2 minutes gone in the 4th or 12 minutes. It's ridiculous if a guy takes his team down to score with 13 minutes left in the game and being the final score, it's considered a "4th quarter comeback" in the sense most value it. Hell, he still has to manage the game and the lead for the last 13 minutes anyway, which could be one possession, two or three and kinda makes him more like a game manager than "captain comeback"!!

When I think of 4th quarter comeback capable quarterbacks, I think of the guy who gets the ball with 4 minutes left (or less) and takes the team down to score. That's a game winning drive (but so is the one that occured with 13 minutes left in the game). But it's the difference between the game winning hit occurring in the 5th inning and the ninth inning. Their both game winning hits but they ain't nothing alike.

Here's one from "PFR" Peyton is credited with: The score occurred 7 seconds into the 4th quarter and the funny thing is Joseph Addai threw the pass to Reggie Wayne. Now isn't this all just a bit ridiculous? The winning score wasn't 1 minute into the 4th. Hell the drive obviously started in the third quarter!!! Doesn't it make you wonder how many other 4th quarter comebacks listed were like that? Even a little bit? You seem to be a smart guy.

Sure it's important to have a QB who can bring you back from a 4th quarter deficit. Who said "I don't want a guy like that?". Show me a quote of somebody saying, "I don't want a guy who can bring us back late in games". They might have said, "I'd prefer to have the lead and not face a late deficit" and that really can't misread into some "false dichotomy" either. Like I said, you seem to be a smart guy. Goff has played 21 games and hasn't done it yet, so I guess nobody can say he's the guy. But the opportunity will present itself again and we'll see if he can win a game late.

My god. What's that line from Shawshank Redemption?