Skins/Eagles - Wentz

General Discussion Forum

Moderator: Uplandram2

TBUX
Veteran
Posts: 2173
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2016 2:32 pm

Wed Oct 25, 2017 6:12 am

Latest post of the previous page:

Cromwell I'm sure you watched all those N Dakota St games and just knew Wentz was a stud right? LOL

He has the jump on Goff- 2 years in system and older- lets see when Goff catches up. Also judging after a stellar game by Wentz. Tends to happen and people over react.

Kinda- We are the highest scoring team in the NFL- if you don't think the most important position has something to do with that- I cant help you- nobody can. Good day



Kindablue
Veteran
Posts: 1653
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2016 4:53 pm

Wed Oct 25, 2017 7:16 am

TBUX wrote:
Wed Oct 25, 2017 6:12 am
Cromwell I'm sure you watched all those N Dakota St games and just knew Wentz was a stud right? LOL

He has the jump on Goff- 2 years in system and older- lets see when Goff catches up. Also judging after a stellar game by Wentz. Tends to happen and people over react.

Kinda- We are the highest scoring team in the NFL- if you don't think the most important position has something to do with that- I cant help you- nobody can. Good day
You saying that Goff plays defense and special teams also.
They keep handing him great field position and he cannot score.

That must improve.
If you do not realize that the Rams have a red zone problem nobody can help you.
The Los Angeles Rams have a red zone problem
October 8

Our friend Ben B highlights how a full third of the Rams’ 12 offensive touchdowns came after drives of 20 yards or less. Thanks to its sturdy defense, Los Angeles has enjoyed the best starting field position on average in the league, and those short fields have been a big factor for L.A.’s scoring success: Ben notes how against Dallas Zuerlein also got field goals on “drives” of nine yards and four yards.

And despite these difficulties approaching the end zone, it’s not like Goff’s unit has scored a bunch of times from farther out either. The Rams have just one touchdown longer than 20 yards.

Lastly, Ben points out the Los Angeles offense benefited from playing just the 24th-hardest group of defenses this early in the season, further tilting the odds in favor of inflated results
.



sanbagger
Veteran
Posts: 814
Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2016 12:38 pm

Wed Oct 25, 2017 9:09 am

Can't believe there are pages of this nonsense about the Rams and scoring when they lead the league in points.

Every team in the league has areas they have to work on....I don't think I've ever heard a coach say "no need to look at film or even practice this week...we're good got it all down....maybe they can ride the stationary bike but that's all we have planned this week."

They go from averaging about 12 points a game last year to about 30 this year and some still find ways to moan about it? It's a new offense and guys are still working their way through it IMO.



ram_attack
Starter
Posts: 129
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2015 10:18 am

Wed Oct 25, 2017 10:00 am

Kindablue wrote:
Tue Oct 24, 2017 11:58 am
Dick84 wrote:
Tue Oct 24, 2017 11:05 am
Line has been great.
You don't see how many fewer stacked boxes the Rams face?
Are you watching the games?
Yes,
So we have a great offensive line like the Eagles. Top 5
Yet much less production from the QB position.
No better than Case Keenum. We'd be doing just as well with Case.
So at present the trade up was a mistake, given the foregone talent.
We're hoping Goff steps it up in the future to franchise level.
The opinions are based on hope.not performance from the QB position.

He was drafted because he was the most NFL ready QB in the draft.
On that basis alone the trade up is a mistake.
lol, that's the point I stopped taking your post seriously.



Ncromwell21
Starter
Posts: 252
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2016 8:48 pm

Wed Oct 25, 2017 2:15 pm

harley01 wrote:
Tue Oct 24, 2017 6:25 pm
I would love to hold a draft tomorrow. All 32 coaches need to pick between Goff and Keenum to be their starting QB to finish out the season.

I wonder who would win?

Hint: It wouldn't even be close.

Do the same with Wentz and Goff it wouldn't even be close there either...



User avatar
RamPower
Veteran
Posts: 901
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2016 1:52 pm

Thu Oct 26, 2017 8:41 am

sanbagger wrote:
Wed Oct 25, 2017 9:09 am
Can't believe there are pages of this nonsense about the Rams and scoring when they lead the league in points.

Every team in the league has areas they have to work on....I don't think I've ever heard a coach say "no need to look at film or even practice this week...we're good got it all down....maybe they can ride the stationary bike but that's all we have planned this week."

They go from averaging about 12 points a game last year to about 30 this year and some still find ways to moan about it? It's a new offense and guys are still working their way through it IMO.
Good Lord really. Yes, they've left points on the field => their League-leading point average could be even higher.

The Rams defense ranks 19th in yards allowed which should be a pretty good indicator regarding field position = it's our offense that has been more consistent regarding winning the field position battle. The Ram two narrow losses, I thought the defense was the bigger issue.

Yes, our defense has been improving under Wade (new system obviously) and is now looking more like the top 5/10 defense we expected. But any Goff bashing has been largely agenda oriented and/or ignorance. The barely 23 year old with very little NFL experience has moved up into the NFL top 10/15 range. He's a huge reason the Rams are perceived as a top 5 team currently.

Wentz looks awesome. Maybe someday the Wentz-Goff comparison will be the new Brady-Rodgers discussion...



User avatar
Jack85Youngblood
Starter
Posts: 400
Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2016 12:27 pm
Location: Lehigh Valley, PA

Thu Oct 26, 2017 9:25 am

This whole Wentz/Goff debate is so pre-mature. Also, why should anyone care who is better? The Rams have Goff. As long as he becomes the franchise QB the Rams need, I am satisfied. To consistently make the playoffs which gives you better chances of winning a SB, you need a franchise QB; but it STILL takes a TEAM effort. Look at Dan Marino, for example. HOF'er, who never won a SB, because the team around him was just not good enough. Another example: Same draft class- one can argue that Phillip Rivers is a better QB than Eli Manning; but Eli Manning won 2 SBs because he's played on better TEAMS than Rivers. Right now Snead/McVay are building a great TEAM. The franchise QB is an integral part of that team. I believe Goff will be that QB.


Image

Rammer
Veteran
Posts: 878
Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2016 12:17 pm

Thu Oct 26, 2017 10:02 am

Jack85Youngblood wrote:
Thu Oct 26, 2017 9:25 am
This whole Wentz/Goff debate is so pre-mature. Also, why should anyone care who is better? The Rams have Goff. As long as he becomes the franchise QB the Rams need, I am satisfied. To consistently make the playoffs which gives you better chances of winning a SB, you need a franchise QB; but it STILL takes a TEAM effort. Look at Dan Marino, for example. HOF'er, who never won a SB, because the team around him was just not good enough. Another example: Same draft class- one can argue that Phillip Rivers is a better QB than Eli Manning; but Eli Manning won 2 SBs because he's played on better TEAMS than Rivers. Right now Snead/McVay are building a great TEAM. The franchise QB is an integral part of that team. I believe Goff will be that QB.
Yes, it's premature, it';s just interesting talk. I rave about Wentz but at the end of the day. I'm happy with the Goff pick. This is just a snippet in time, who knows who will have the better career? A lot of factors involved in that.. We couldn't go wrong with either one of those picks.

I think at draft time, both were underrated. We kept hearing that these guys were the best available not like Winston/Mariotta qb draft. Now, I think I would take Goff/Wentz over those two and add in Prescott,. It's a great qb draft.
.



User avatar
RamPower
Veteran
Posts: 901
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2016 1:52 pm

Thu Oct 26, 2017 10:50 am

Rammer wrote:
Thu Oct 26, 2017 10:02 am
Jack85Youngblood wrote:
Thu Oct 26, 2017 9:25 am
This whole Wentz/Goff debate is so pre-mature. Also, why should anyone care who is better? The Rams have Goff. As long as he becomes the franchise QB the Rams need, I am satisfied. To consistently make the playoffs which gives you better chances of winning a SB, you need a franchise QB; but it STILL takes a TEAM effort. Look at Dan Marino, for example. HOF'er, who never won a SB, because the team around him was just not good enough. Another example: Same draft class- one can argue that Phillip Rivers is a better QB than Eli Manning; but Eli Manning won 2 SBs because he's played on better TEAMS than Rivers. Right now Snead/McVay are building a great TEAM. The franchise QB is an integral part of that team. I believe Goff will be that QB.
Yes, it's premature, it';s just interesting talk. I rave about Wentz but at the end of the day. I'm happy with the Goff pick. This is just a snippet in time, who knows who will have the better career? A lot of factors involved in that.. We couldn't go wrong with either one of those picks.

I think at draft time, both were underrated. We kept hearing that these guys were the best available not like Winston/Mariotta qb draft. Now, I think I would take Goff/Wentz over those two and add in Prescott,. It's a great qb draft.
.
I agree with all that from both of you, with the exception being that it's also too early to tell on Winston and Mariota. I've seen plenty of good from all of these guys, as all will have their ups and downs as the League will continue to study and game plan (defend) vs. these guys readjusting and adapting as well.



Post Reply