[/zn/]

And I agree with all of this as well.

I hope he doesn't HAVE to face a lot of "tests" in that we are winning and don't need to come back to do so.

Good teams play good teams and face close games. You want your team to be confident in those circumstances. Confidence in those circumstances will always include the team's trust in the qb. Focusing on this has nothing to do with whether we see a game as more boring/exciting. It's just realism about the game.

It's just one more question to ask about the team and qb. Are they built to win late in close games. Because they WILL be in close games. You may get a series of games like Arizona, Indianapolis, Giants, and Houston, but you will also get games like the Eagles game.

Last year 66.4% of the games were within 7 points in the 4th quarter.

New England, for example, dominates not because they always steamroll opponents early, but also because they know how to play in the 4th quarter. Brady has at least 40 4th quarter comebacks in his career, which means he had to play at least 2.5 a year.

Rams this season had 6 games, both wins and losses, that were decided by 7 points or less.

Heck in the 99 conference game and superbowl combined, the Rams had a point differential of 17-11. They won one game by 7 and one game by 5.

So it's just another thing to know about your team. The only "motives" are pure football interest on the part of regular Rams fans.

...

[Elvis]

Gf and I will be at the 9er game. Hopefully you are there. And I will be hitting up our RFU tailgaters if at all possible.

Wait, did you say GF?

[aeneas1]

And I agree with all of this as well.

I hope he doesn't HAVE to face a lot of "tests" in that we are winning and don't need to come back to do so. Much rather protect a lead than come from behind - as boring as that may be for some. Lost in all of this is his ability to consistently avoid the big mistake - especially while staying pretty aggressive, and even when having to come from behind - Washington game notwithstanding. That is a benchmark of a smart QB to me.

and i agree with all of your posts in this thread... re tests, teams are 3-20 when trailing by 7 entering the 4th quarter this season, 92-356 dating back to 2000, not a recipe for success, fortunately the rams have led entering the 4th in 10 of their 14 games...and if it's important for fans to see goff book some 4qcb games, the rams have to be in a position to win it with a field goal, which drives a lot of these 4qcb numbers, and not be down by 14, 7, 6, late in the game, as they have been in 3 of their 4 losses, forcing a td score to tie or come out on top.

[dieterbrock]

honestly, i didn't think you could top your 31+ yards is a deep pass nonsense but this is right up there... so now it's td % inside the 10 that's the better measure than redzone stats, the real yardstick? good friggin' grief... cutler has the 3rd highest td% inside the 10, bfd, he also ranks 30th in qb rating inside the 10 - clearly cutler is better than goff inside the 10 because, you know, he has a higher td %.

back on planet earth, goff:

inside opponent's 5 - 7 tds, 0 picks (114.8 qb rating, 4th best)
inside opponent's 10 - 12 tds, 0 picks (105.2 qb rating, 7th best)
inside opponent's 20 - 20 tds, 0 picks (105.7 qb rating, 5th best)

Its amazing right? The lengths some will go to in order to down play Goff while conversely making up every excuse possible for Sam Bradford.
Its the flat earth philosophy

[aeneas1]

Its amazing right? The lengths some will go to in order to down play Goff while conversely making up every excuse possible for Sam Bradford.
Its the flat earth philosophy

not sure which is odder, the left-field premising or the doubling down... the latest, a "a more refined stat measures percentage of TDs per attempts inside the 10."

clearly q1 is the more productive inside the 10 because, you know, he's got that higher td %, which is a "refined" way to look at the picture... is there any wonder why he thinks sam was much better than he actually was?

[ramsman34]

Wait, did you say GF?

Yep, total stunner too! And now embracing my Rams fandom. In fact, she bought the tix!!

[ramsman34]

and i agree with all of your posts in this thread... re tests, teams are 3-20 when trailing by 7 entering the 4th quarter this season, 92-356 dating back to 2000, not a recipe for success, fortunately the rams have led entering the 4th in 10 of their 14 games...and if it's important for fans to see goff book some 4qcb games, the rams have to be in a position to win it with a field goal, which drives a lot of these 4qcb numbers, and not be down by 14, 7, 6, late in the game, as they have been in 3 of their 4 losses, forcing a td score to tie or come out on top.

Exactly. If he HAS to come from behind, then our chances of winning are low. Because of the stats in the subject, not his individual ability. I will take the alternative please.

[ramsman34]

Oh and Elvis, GF is Smokin hot girl friend. Not Georgia Frontiere

Lmao

[PARAM]

goff? he's a work in progress, unfinished, pretty sure most agree with this, hell his nfl resume alone, just 14 starts in a competent offense, a veritable rookie, underscores this, but that certainly doesn't preclude him from being capable of winning big games, showing up in spades on a big stage, in a tough sitch, he's already done it, in dallas, and he looked impressive as hell on the final drive in the first seattle game.


imo goff has played very well this season, has exceeded just about everyone's expectations (funny how when a guy does well no one brings up the "had to learn a new system" shit, eh?) and, most importantly imo, has shown promise in terms of being a solid, top tier qb for the rams looking forward.

Here! Here! I like him. I think he's a keeper. I really don't want to see him have to bring us back from a 4th quarter deficit but at some point that will be the situation. I prefer games like yesterday and the other 9 wins we had this year. I think he had a little bit to do with those in quarters 1-3 (and the 4th). And like you said, the Dallas game. No comeback, just solid QB play in the 4th.

3 drives in the 4th quarter:
#1: 3 of 7 (58 yards) 3 first downs (FG) 3:06 TOP
#2: 0-1 (FG) 1:19 TOP
#3: 2-3 (29 yards) 2 first downs (FG) 5:16 time of possession.

Starting the 4th quarter against Dallas on the road, we were leading by 2 at the start of the 4th quarter. Goff went 5 of 11 for 87 yards with 5 first downs and 9 points eating 9:41 of the clock. Game manager? Well he managed a 2 point lead pretty damn well IMHO. There's more to good quarterback play than 4th quarter comebacks. For instance if he didn't manage that 2 point lead quite so well, we may have needed a 4th quarter comeback.

Against the Seahawks in the 4th, trailing by 3 to start the quarter he was 6 of 14 (including a spike) for 117 yards, a pick and 5 first downs but he had the game winning incomplete pass on Kupp hands with 0:12 seconds left in the game. Throw out the spike and he's 6 of 13. Kupp catches that ball and he's 7 of 14 and we win. FWIW he was 6 of 10 (for 117 yards and 5 first downs) until the spike and the 3 incompletions to end the game. Yeah, he didn't win it for us in the 4th.

Like I said, I'll keep him. I'll feel good about our chances if we're trailing by 7 or less in the 4th quarter and he's got the ball in his hands. Some others won't feel good.

[/zn/]

Exactly. If he HAS to come from behind, then our chances of winning are low. Because of the stats in the subject, not his individual ability. I will take the alternative please.

Games with good teams get close and go into the 4th quarter. There is no such thing as the qb who always has a strong lead going into the 4th.

The alternative is worse. It's someone who can't play well in a close game.

And of course the assumption that the reason you;re behind in the first place is just the qb, makes no sense. Earlier I put up a list of great comeback qbs, like Montana and Marino, and you basically said, those were among the best qbs of all time. Yep and they all have a lot of comeback wins. Which means my list of qbs you said were all great had to come from behind a lot...yet they were among the best who ever played. If nothing else that means among the best who ever played were in a lot of games where their team was behind. That's because no one in the NFL can count on dominating everyone with early leads every game.

Actually there is no "alternative." What you want is someone who is BOTH. A strong qb who can pass against anyone and contributes to early leads, but who then also plays well in the clutch, cause those moments will come. They always do. I even pointed out the 99 team and its games against Tampa and Tennessee. I'm glad that 99 team knew how to play in the clutch in close games. It made a huge difference.

Want to know what a difference that makes? Imagine if the Rams had won just 2 of the 3 games where they were behind in the 4th but had the ball. Washington, Seattle, Phil. They would be 12-2 with the first seed in the NFC playoffs.