[/zn/]

This whole thing about the high and low skewing things does not work logically and does not erase the actual games that are below average for Goff. I already said leave the Chicago game out of it if you want and you still have 4 games at the end of the season that are below average both for Goff and as measured against a general standard. That's 4 combined games with a completion percentage of 56.6%, 1 TD v 3 INTs, & an avg. qb rating of 69.2. If you don't believe that's below avg. then wish it on Goff to play every single game this year at that level. That would be good?

Now on the other side you can take out the Vikes game if you want---but a qb rating of 69.2 is still going to be lower than the average of the other better games combined, even with the Vikes game taken out of it. And by a lot.

And Mokler I disagree--the Saints game was a good outing by Goff in difficult circumstances and counts on the upside of what he did. I don't think any other argument works.


....

....

[R4L]

Why is it so unbelievable to criticize a player who played 20+ points below his average? Is Goff above any criticism?

It's ok to criticize, but you guys are beating a dead horse. Did Goff have a few subpar games? Sure. No one is denying it that I've read.

Now show me one QB that had 16 great games. I'll wait because I have spare time. This isn't Madden.

Even Warner had subpar games in 99 and 2001 when the team still won those games. Was he elite? He fumbled to much and threw to many ints, was he elite?

So I throw out the Lions and Broncos games as subpar games for Goff because the Rams won those games easily.

The only games that really stick out are Chicago and NE, when they failed to score a TD. The defense gets paid too...

[aeneas1]

Why is it so unbelievable to criticize a player who played 20+ points below his average? Is Goff above any criticism?

in your case wouldn't "goff "be more accurate than "a player"? unless of course i've missed your even-handed criticism of other rams players and coaches?

but to answer your woe is me question, it's unbelievable that a rams fan would be so hell-bent on criticizing the success of the current rams qb at every turn, including his clutch performance in the cc game against one of the best that's ever played, that helped the rams to their biggest win in close to 20 years and land the rams in the super bowl, while rarely (if at all?) giving any credit where credit's due.

but of course you and i both know that this is more about a past allegiance than anything else, don't we? speaking of which, did you catch what one of sando's 50 nfl coaches and exces said about sam? forgot which year, easy enough to google, hopefully goff will never warrant this type of ugliness from those who clearly know, eh?

"I'd put him in the 4s," the personnel director said. "He is a statue in the pocket, he is always hurt -- just not somebody that I would want to put back there and give to my team and say, 'Hey, this is your franchise quarterback, he is going to take you to the Super Bowl.' You are setting yourself up to fail."

[moklerman]

in your case wouldn't "goff "be more accurate than "a player"? unless of course i've missed your even-handed criticism of other rams players and coaches?

but to answer your woe is me question, it's unbelievable that a rams fan would be so hell-bent on criticizing the success of the current rams qb at every turn, including his clutch performance in the cc game against one of the best that's ever played, that helped the rams to their biggest win in close to 20 years and land the rams in the super bowl, while rarely (if at all?) giving any credit where credit's due.

but of course you and i both we know this is more about a past allegiance than anything else, don't we? speaking of which, did you catch what one of sando's 50 nfl coaches and exces said about sam? forgot which year, easy enough to google, hopefully goff will never warrant this type of ugliness from those who clearly know, eh?

"I'd put him in the 4s," the personnel director said. "He is a statue in the pocket, he is always hurt -- just not somebody that I would want to put back there and give to my team and say, 'Hey, this is your franchise quarterback, he is going to take you to the Super Bowl.' You are setting yourself up to fail."

I know that you love bringing up Sam Bradford far more than it's healthy to do.

The execs and coaches think what they think. I believe the quote you're referencing came after the '16 season and after two ACL tears, I don't think many people would be arguing that he was mobile at that point and after being traded twice in two years, his reputation wasn't at it's zenith.

So does that mean that you're agreeing with 1/3 of the league's coaches and execs polled thinking that Goff is a 3rd tier QB and most of the others polled thinking he's 2nd tier?

As far as being hell bent on anything, I think it's been pretty clearly established by NFL coaches, execs and statistics that Goff, just as I've said from the beginning, is a 2nd tier QB. There's nothing wrong with that. I hope you find a way to cope with it.

The Rams got to the Super Bowl with 2nd tier at QB so it's not like it's an insult. You were just wrong about where he's ranked. Now, tell us all why it was Sam Bradford's fault.

[aeneas1]

So does that mean that you're agreeing with 1/3 of the league's coaches and execs polled thinking that Goff is a 3rd tier QB and most of the others polled thinking he's 2nd tier?

well i'm pretty sure i've made myself perfectly clear in terms of where i think goff ranks among current qbs, no? i could certainly repeat it if you would like.

you on the other hand find sando's polls credible in terms of goff, telling even, so by extension you obviously agree with his years of polls that rank bradford bottom 3rd of the league (23rd through 28th), 3rd tier while also garnering plenty of 4th tier votes, right? behind the likes of keenum, bortles, taylor, osweiler, fitzpatrick, etc., etc., right?

altho i obviously don't agree with sando's stuff, but respect the fact that you do, i think we can at least agree that it sure is nice that knowledgeable nfl coaches and execs don't think of our current qb as 23rd or worse, or 4th tier vote worthy, no?

[moklerman]

well i'm pretty sure i've made myself perfectly clear in terms of where i think goff ranks among current qbs, no? i could certainly repeat it if you would like.

you on the other hand find sando's polls credible in terms of goff, telling even, so by extension you obviously agree with his years of polls that rank bradford bottom 3rd of the league (23rd through 28th), 3rd tier while also garnering plenty of 4th tier votes, right? behind the likes of keenum, bortles, taylor, osweiler, fitzpatrick, etc., etc., right?

altho i obviously don't agree with sando's stuff, but respect the fact that you do, i think we can at least agree that it sure is nice that knowledgeable nfl coaches and execs don't think of our current qb as 23rd or worse, or 4th tier vote worthy, no?

Not this year they don't. Goff moved up into the 2nd tier from the 3rd/4th range.

And I do think the list puts QB's where they should be pretty accurately. By the time all 55 guys vote and their opinions are averaged, it seems pretty accurate. But I've never argued that Bradford should be considered top tier. I would have imagined him higher than 3rd/4th tier but it doesn't surprise me. After his improvement statistically after leaving the Rams and after his first season with Minnesota, I thought he was in the 2nd tier.

But no one who is oft-injured is going to be revered and Goff certainly has a much better history of staying on the field than many other QB's. He may not be elite but he's good and he's on the field every week. That's something you can build around.

[dieterbrock]

Well, if you don't need to exclude a damn thing, quit excluding things! I don't really care what is common in accounting because we aren't talking about accounting. As far as the data points skewing because of one high and one low example, that doesn't make sense either. If anything, they would balance each other out and would be an example of why you wouldn't exclude them.

In averages and statistics the number of examples is important. With less than 20 pieces of data, I question the validity of excluding any of the data. There is precious little of it to begin with. Maybe that is actually enough for statisticians but it's gotta be close to the minimal line. I mean, if you have 3 pieces of data, you wouldn't throw out the high and the low extremes, right?

So, maybe you don't agree that less than 20 pieces of data is too few to exclude examples, that doesn't warrant you being a condescending jerk that acts as if I don't understand the concept of a mean average.

Classic. You are completely incapable of reading. I exclude NOTHING.
I don’t even know why I bother with you.
Here’s what I did exclude, Goff is 100x better than your crush Sam Bradford.
So you can keep playing your trolling game, but I’m done with you.

[dieterbrock]

It's ok to criticize, but you guys are beating a dead horse. Did Goff have a few subpar games? Sure. No one is denying it that I've read.

Now show me one QB that had 16 great games. I'll wait because I have spare time. This isn't Madden.

Even Warner had subpar games in 99 and 2001 when the team still won those games. Was he elite? He fumbled to much and threw to many ints, was he elite?

So I throw out the Lions and Broncos games as subpar games for Goff because the Rams won those games easily.

The only games that really stick out are Chicago and NE, when they failed to score a TD. The defense gets paid too...

Yeah man, great post as usual.
Unfortunately it’s impossible to get thru to some people who don’t want to get it.
He’s the 2nd best QB we’ve had in 40+ years, trailing only the HOF Warner.
But when folks have an agenda, it doesn’t matter.
The kid is only 24 years old today, which is how old Tom Brady was when he became the starting qb for the Pats

[PARAM]

Yeah man, great post as usual.
Unfortunately it’s impossible to get thru to some people who don’t want to get it.
He’s the 2nd best QB we’ve had in 40+ years, trailing only the HOF Warner.
But when folks have an agenda, it doesn’t matter.
The kid is only 24 years old today, which is how old Tom Brady was when he became the starting qb for the Pats

Much is being made of his last 8 games (Detroit to New England). 5 games under a rating of 80. Inconsistent. Showing signs of being a 3rd year QB. 2nd tier.

As I've postulated, the games get tougher towards the end of the season. More is on the line or at least teams know the numbers game; what they need to do to make the postseason; what they need to do to keep their job the following season.

Here's the ratings for Brady, Brees and Goff the last 6 games of their respective seasons.

Brees (115.7 rating over 16 games) last 6? 88.7 with 2 games under 80. 4-2 record
Brady (97.7 rating over 16 G) last 6? 89.7 with 3 games under 80. 5-1 record
Goff (101.1) Last 6 G? 85.9 with 3 games under 80. 4-2 record

Wow!!! He's clearly less consistent than the 2 future HOFers!!! Just a 3rd year QB showing his inexperience!!!

[/zn/]

As I've postulated, the games get tougher towards the end of the season. More is on the line or at least teams know the numbers game; what they need to do to make the postseason; what they need to do to keep their job the following season.

Here's the ratings for Brady, Brees and Goff the last 6 games of their respective seasons.

Brees (115.7 rating over 16 games) last 6? 88.7 with 2 games under 80. 4-2 record
Brady (97.7 rating over 16 G) last 6? 89.7 with 3 games under 80. 5-1 record
Goff (101.1) Last 6 G? 85.9 with 3 games under 80. 4-2 record

Wow!!! He's clearly less consistent than the 2 future HOFers!!! Just a 3rd year QB showing his inexperience!!!

So none of your other 2 examples show anywhere near the same degree of "below avg." games as Goff. Whose numbers you get wrong because you exclude the Detroit and Chicago games. (Or don't do the post-season, not sure which).

And here's more qbs. How below avg. games (measured by the 80 cut-off) in the last 8, including post-season? I do Brees and Brady over again to get in 8 games.

Luck: 2.
Rivers: 2.
Wilson: 2.
Prescott: 1
Brees: 2
Brady: 3

Goff: 5

If games get harder at the end of the season, you want your qb to be enough of a solid veteran to handle that. Even Prescott handled it in 2018. That's what we can expect from Goff as he improves in terms of being consistent that way.