[dieterbrock]

The idea here is to have open minded discussions that considers not only the positives but also potential negatives.

You want pure homer talk? Put me on ignore cause you’ll never get pure homer talk from me.

You want probing discussions that consider potential issues that could cause us problems then count me in.

The irony of this post is fascinating.
You have been spewing the same bullshit for months. Open mind? Lol.
Too rich.

[/zn/]

Any analysis that treats a perfect passer rating as a negative because it increases variance makes zero sense to me...

To me what does not make sense is trying to downplay and ignore evidence of qb having an inconsistent final run in the 2018 season. That did happen. It's something that can be fixed and probably will be, in part, if nothing else, because the team is not going to ignore it. They aren't going to nitpick it and act like it did not happen. They're going to look at it and address it. It's in Goff's nature to do that and it's in McVay's nature to do that. I trust in that and as a longtime Rams fan it's a good feeling.

[dieterbrock]

Slamming a fellow fan as opposed to having a real argument? That's all too easy to do but doesn't really accomplish anything, except raise the tension level.

I think it goes without saying that discussion, which is what you say you want, includes allowing for the fact that people see some things differently...without pretending to question the other guy's fandom.

That's my 2 cents on that. Obviously I can't do anything about it if you keep it up.

...

Slamming? No, I’m pointing out the obvious.
It’s the same shit over and over and over.
Kind of like you thinking you are some sort of authority on board etiquette, despite the fact you get banned from everywhere for not being able to adhere to the board rules.

[/zn/]

zn should have said no one is talking EXCLUSIVELY about a one game to one game variance.

As I said, that is only one element of the story. Just a piece of a bigger puzzle. But you knew that.

Fair enough.

[/zn/]

Slamming? No, I’m pointing out the obvious.
It’s the same shit over and over and over.
Kind of like you thinking you are some sort of authority on board etiquette, despite the fact you get banned from everywhere for not being able to adhere to the board rules.

It's slamming. It's aimed at the poster. Making it about the poster is slamming. And on top of it, every person's "obvious" is to the rest of us, just one more opinion.

And I don't get "banned from everywhere," that's a bs myth. And it's not banned from a "bunch of sites" either. That whole thing is just a myth that excuses some bad behavior.

Keep it up though if you want...I am not going to follow you there. I would rather just use the ignore feature.

So if you want to judge posters and then attack a guy for judging you, you can live in that hypocrisy if you want. Not my problem.

To be fair I expanded this a bit through edit, but I'm done. Moving on to real football talk.

....

[dieterbrock]

It's slamming. It's aimed at the poster. Making it about the poster is slamming. And on top of it, everyone person's "obvious" is to the rest of us, just one more opinion.

And I don't get "banned from everywhere," that's a bs myth.

Keep it up though if you want...I am not going to follow you there. I would rather just use the ignore feature.

....

its not everywhere it’s just a bunch of sites. Lol. Good defense.

I am slamming the post, because it’s repetitive bullshit that divides the board.
If the mods want to discuss that with me, that’s up to them
When you’re a mod, feel free to moderate, otherwise stfu

[max]

Any analysis that treats a perfect passer rating as a negative because it increases variance makes zero sense to me...

That’s a fair point.

I think what it does is not so much portray a negative as show how good a QB Goff can be at his best and contrasts that with the fact that he is inconsistent enough to have a very bad game. When I combine that with the other elements of his game, the 4 games over 120, and the 3 games under 60, it says potentially elite but inconsistent.

My view on Goff is that he has shown the ability to be an exceptional QB, one who can routinely produce games at a higher level than just a solid QB. But still, his down performances last year show that he displayed enough inconsistencies to keep him from being put in the tier 1 category.

This is my honest assessment. One that is probably more positive than any neutral evaluator, if there is such a thing. Maybe Matt Waldman.

[/zn/]

Because it isn't honest to act as if the Rams had no running game with Gurley out of the lineup. CJ Anderson easily replicated Gurley's usual production and things were about as "right" for Goff as possible in those games. And Goff still wasn't looking like he was ready to get back on track.

He didn't look in sync even though the Rams offense was piling up rushing yards and points. I think the fact that they played him the entire game against the Cardinals in a blowout and against the 49ers when SF wasn't even playing their starters on defense the 2nd half supports the idea that McVay was trying to get him back on track.

I don't think it's a matter of discrediting those wins, just not succumbing to hyperbole and overstating their importance or difficulty. Trying to paint a picture that Goff was in a more difficult situation than he actually was doesn't help the conversation.

Goff was good in those games, and so was the running attack. He was also good in the Saints game, on the road in a tough place.

And in that 8 game stretch he was below average in 5 games, including the last one.

It wasn't just him but he was part of it.

So by definition he was inconsistent. The ups were there, but the below avg. games were there. That's being inconsistent. The up games show a high ceiling, the below avg. games show a young qb who needs to be more solidly consistent from game to game.

And I have no question that they will fix that. IMO down the road we'll look back on that as a third year, young qb thing.

....

[max]

It's something that can be fixed and probably will be, in part, if nothing else, because the team is not going to ignore it. They aren't going to nitpick it and act like it did not happen. They're going to look at it and address it. It's in Goff's nature to do that and it's in McVay's nature to do that.

And thank goodness they will. And they won’t sit around listening to a bunch of us jamokes thinking they are already there.

[snackdaddy]

Remind be again of who those 2 impressive performances were against. what were their combined records? And who were their QBs?

Lets see.... AZ and SF, 7-25 and Rosen and Mullins. Wow. I'm blown away.

Hey, I was very happy with Goff's performance in those 2 games, but let's not make it out that they were this huge challenge.

Goff's numbers weren't all that great in those two games. Not much over 200 yards per game. But they scored a lot of points because of the run game. You see, Goff didn't have to win with his arm. Those games he became more of a game manager. Did what was needed to win games.

Some times a quarterback has to throw more to win. Sometimes he has to be smart and do what is needed. The 4 games before the Superbowl they averaged 33 points per game and won all 4. Goff averaged around 225 yards per game. Well below his first half numbers. But they still scored points and won. All part of what winning quarterbacks have to do to win games. And he has proven they can win with him. We saw that in New Orleans.