00Stinger
100 - 7
unless they get Watson or Rodgers (which is highly un******* likely) then he is as good or better than any other gettable QB imo
Of course if you are trying to shred his salary I can understand
Teams Los Angeles Rams - The Rammers
- Thread starter Goedy
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Of course if you are trying to shred his salary I can understand
- Sep 6, 2005
- 144,893
- 94,761
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
The Athletic's Jourdan Rodrigue reports the Rams' "happiness with John Wolford is not fleeting."
The Rams have made it clear they are looking to shake up their quarterback room, and Rodrigue considers internal competition from Wolford the most likely scenario. Per Rodrigue, coach Sean McVay likes Wolford's "processing speed and the way he can extend plays with his legs." McVay is also reportedly intrigued by Wolford's ability to "move and to reset his launch point," thereby allowing longer-developing plays. Those were not an option for Jared Goff without a deep threat in 2020, as Goff is not a mobile quarterback or one who makes plays outside of structure. What we are probably seeing here is a team talking itself into Wolford since Goff's contract will make it extremely difficult to add legitimate outside competition. We would take it seriously, but it would be a competition Goff would probably still likely win.
RELATED:
SOURCE: The Athletic
Jan 28, 2021, 5:27 PM ET
The Rams have made it clear they are looking to shake up their quarterback room, and Rodrigue considers internal competition from Wolford the most likely scenario. Per Rodrigue, coach Sean McVay likes Wolford's "processing speed and the way he can extend plays with his legs." McVay is also reportedly intrigued by Wolford's ability to "move and to reset his launch point," thereby allowing longer-developing plays. Those were not an option for Jared Goff without a deep threat in 2020, as Goff is not a mobile quarterback or one who makes plays outside of structure. What we are probably seeing here is a team talking itself into Wolford since Goff's contract will make it extremely difficult to add legitimate outside competition. We would take it seriously, but it would be a competition Goff would probably still likely win.
RELATED:
SOURCE: The Athletic
Jan 28, 2021, 5:27 PM ET
- Sep 6, 2005
- 144,893
- 94,761
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
Rams acquired QB Matthew Stafford from the Lions in exchange for a 2021 third-round pick, a 2022 first-round pick, a 2023 first-round pick, and QB Jared Goff.
First-round picks remain purely theoretical in Sean McVay's Los Angeles. One of the biggest NFL trades in years is also one of the most complex. Stafford's cap number and dead money is one thing. Goff's is an entirely different dimension. McVay could no longer hide his disdain for Goff and his inability to generate instant offense, and he gets a quarterback in Stafford who has never hesitated to go big-play hunting. He has also gotten more efficient and less turnover prone over as he's aged, though his nearly decade-long iron man streak was interrupted in 2019 by a broken back before he played through a number of issues in 2020. Stafford has always seemed capable of something more. Now we will finally get to find out as he teams up with one of the brightest offensive minds in the league. A 2020 fantasy disappointment, Stafford inherits an intriguing Rams skill corps led by YAC monsters Robert Woods and Cooper Kupp.
RELATED:
SOURCE: Adam Schefter on Twitter
Jan 30, 2021, 10:09 PM ET
First-round picks remain purely theoretical in Sean McVay's Los Angeles. One of the biggest NFL trades in years is also one of the most complex. Stafford's cap number and dead money is one thing. Goff's is an entirely different dimension. McVay could no longer hide his disdain for Goff and his inability to generate instant offense, and he gets a quarterback in Stafford who has never hesitated to go big-play hunting. He has also gotten more efficient and less turnover prone over as he's aged, though his nearly decade-long iron man streak was interrupted in 2019 by a broken back before he played through a number of issues in 2020. Stafford has always seemed capable of something more. Now we will finally get to find out as he teams up with one of the brightest offensive minds in the league. A 2020 fantasy disappointment, Stafford inherits an intriguing Rams skill corps led by YAC monsters Robert Woods and Cooper Kupp.
RELATED:
SOURCE: Adam Schefter on Twitter
Jan 30, 2021, 10:09 PM ET
- Sep 6, 2005
- 144,893
- 94,761
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
McVay clearly all in on the next couple of years. Likely gonna be a bit of trouble past then with little draft capital if the Lombardi trophy isn't held.
- Sep 6, 2005
- 144,893
- 94,761
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
McVay and Snead are tied at the hip, both will be ushered out the door if we hit cap hell and no SB trophy. Think McVay is smart enough to "reload not rebuild", a good coach. Snead might take the fall tho for McVay. Seems Snead is more his right hand man than the other way around.
You're probably right. Glad Goff is out the door though, watching him this year was painful at times
- Sep 6, 2005
- 144,893
- 94,761
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
I was a massive Goff fan, out of UCLA, but hes gradually turned me into a hater. A change of scene/coaches/system might do him wonders, but Stafford regardless of system/etc is a gun, statistically up there in the top 20 QBs of all time, so that can only be a good thing.
- Sep 6, 2005
- 144,893
- 94,761
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Sep 6, 2005
- 144,893
- 94,761
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Sep 6, 2005
- 144,893
- 94,761
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Sep 6, 2005
- 144,893
- 94,761
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Sep 6, 2005
- 144,893
- 94,761
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
Film analysis on Jalen Ramsey, what makes him so great...
- Sep 6, 2005
- 144,893
- 94,761
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Sep 6, 2005
- 144,893
- 94,761
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Sep 6, 2005
- 144,893
- 94,761
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Sep 6, 2005
- 144,893
- 94,761
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
Exclusive Q&A: Rams QB Matthew Stafford reveals how he asked for a trade and more
Rams quarterback Matthew Stafford opened up in an interview, including his decision to ask for a trade and an eating contest he had with Clayton Kershaw.
www.latimes.com
SoFi Stadium will accommodate fans at full capacity, which is about 70,000 for football, the Rams announced. California announced last week that the state would remove stadium capacity limits on June 15. The Rams play the Chargers in a preseason game on Aug. 14. The Rams open the season Sept. 12 against the Chicago Bears.
- Sep 6, 2005
- 144,893
- 94,761
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
Super pumped for this season
Excited to see what Stafford will bring to our offense
Defense should still be pretty good on top of that. Can we make a SB?
Excited to see what Stafford will bring to our offense
Defense should still be pretty good on top of that. Can we make a SB?
- Sep 6, 2005
- 144,893
- 94,761
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
Yeah, we strong Lombardi chance
- Sep 6, 2005
- 144,893
- 94,761
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Sep 6, 2005
- 144,893
- 94,761
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
NFL suffers setback in Rams relocation litigation
Posted by Mike Florio on July 12, 2021, 6:06 PM EDT
The massive lawsuit filed by St. Louis against the NFL over the relocation of the Rams will (barring a settlement) culminate with a full-blown trial, which is due to begin just as the Rams prepare to host a Super Bowl in their new stadium. Along the way, the two sides will engage in many battles. Today, St. Louis scored a major victory in one of them.
Via Randy Karraker of 101 ESPN, a judge has ruled that the plaintiffs in the litigation shall have access to information regarding the financial worth of Commissioner Roger Goodell and five NFL owners: Rams owner Stan Kroenke, Cowboys owner Jerry Jones, Patriots owner Robert Kraft, Giants owner John Mara, and former Panthers owner Jerry Richardson.
The outcome has significance in large part because really rich people never want to be forced to disclose details about what they have. For a judge to tell six of the wealthiest men in America that they must turn over that information represents the kind of slap in the face that folks holding that kind of power and money rarely if ever experience.
The reason for the conclusion has significance as well. The judge, who made the ruling from the bench (which means the evidence pointing to it was clear), concluded that clear and convincing proof exists to support a finding that those individuals operated in a fraudulent manner. As to the rest of the owners, St. Louis has 10 days to present evidence supporting that they should be forced to surrender their financial information as well.
The financial information has relevance as to the question of punitive damages. If a jury ultimately decides that the NFL and one or more owners operated in a way that justifies an award over and above the money actually lost by the St. Louis plaintiffs because of the move, the financial worth of the defendant becomes critical to determining proper punishment. The more money someone has, the greater the award needed to punish those individuals for engaging in bad behavior and deterring others in the future from conducting themselves in a similar manner.
So, in other words, the judge is satisfied that enough evidence exists as to the individuals listed above for a reasonable jury to conclude that an award of punitive damages should be entered against them. That conclusion alone suggests that plenty of evidence exists to support that someone from the NFL and/or one of its teams said or did something that he shouldn’t have said or done in connection with the relocation of the Rams.
Part of the evidence includes a phone call from 2013 between Kroenke, Goodell, Mara, and Steelers owner Art Rooney (it’s unclear based on Karraker’s tweets whether Rooney is required to surrender his financial information at this point). During the conversation, Kroenke said, “I’m going to buy two parcels of land and build a stadium in L.A.,” and that he’s trying very hard to stay under the radar screen and keep it hidden. Goodell said, “We will respect your confidentiality.”
Rams COO Kevin Demoff later gave Goodell talking points regarding the land purchase for his pre-Super Bowl press conference in 2014. Here’s part of what he said, at a time when Goodell already knew that Kroenke intended to build a stadium on the land he had purchased: “Stan is a very successful developer. He has billions of dollars of projects that are going on around the country in real estate development. So I think instead of overreacting, we should make sure we do what’s necessary to continue to support the team locally as the fans have done in St. Louis. And make sure we do whatever we can to make sure that team is successful in the St. Louis market. . . . There are no plans to my knowledge of a stadium development.” (Emphasis added.)
Also, Jones admitted during his deposition in the case that he urged Kroenke to move the Rams. One day after the vote approving the move happened, the Rams signed a contract with Legends Hospitality (partially owned by Jones) to sell PSLs and luxury suites.
Karraker’s tweets have one other fascinating tidbit, in light of prior claims made by the NFL in the litigation. But since it’s sort of slow and because I’d like to keep these blurbs short, I’ll do a separate item on it a little later.
Posted by Mike Florio on July 12, 2021, 6:06 PM EDT
The massive lawsuit filed by St. Louis against the NFL over the relocation of the Rams will (barring a settlement) culminate with a full-blown trial, which is due to begin just as the Rams prepare to host a Super Bowl in their new stadium. Along the way, the two sides will engage in many battles. Today, St. Louis scored a major victory in one of them.
Via Randy Karraker of 101 ESPN, a judge has ruled that the plaintiffs in the litigation shall have access to information regarding the financial worth of Commissioner Roger Goodell and five NFL owners: Rams owner Stan Kroenke, Cowboys owner Jerry Jones, Patriots owner Robert Kraft, Giants owner John Mara, and former Panthers owner Jerry Richardson.
The outcome has significance in large part because really rich people never want to be forced to disclose details about what they have. For a judge to tell six of the wealthiest men in America that they must turn over that information represents the kind of slap in the face that folks holding that kind of power and money rarely if ever experience.
The reason for the conclusion has significance as well. The judge, who made the ruling from the bench (which means the evidence pointing to it was clear), concluded that clear and convincing proof exists to support a finding that those individuals operated in a fraudulent manner. As to the rest of the owners, St. Louis has 10 days to present evidence supporting that they should be forced to surrender their financial information as well.
The financial information has relevance as to the question of punitive damages. If a jury ultimately decides that the NFL and one or more owners operated in a way that justifies an award over and above the money actually lost by the St. Louis plaintiffs because of the move, the financial worth of the defendant becomes critical to determining proper punishment. The more money someone has, the greater the award needed to punish those individuals for engaging in bad behavior and deterring others in the future from conducting themselves in a similar manner.
So, in other words, the judge is satisfied that enough evidence exists as to the individuals listed above for a reasonable jury to conclude that an award of punitive damages should be entered against them. That conclusion alone suggests that plenty of evidence exists to support that someone from the NFL and/or one of its teams said or did something that he shouldn’t have said or done in connection with the relocation of the Rams.
Part of the evidence includes a phone call from 2013 between Kroenke, Goodell, Mara, and Steelers owner Art Rooney (it’s unclear based on Karraker’s tweets whether Rooney is required to surrender his financial information at this point). During the conversation, Kroenke said, “I’m going to buy two parcels of land and build a stadium in L.A.,” and that he’s trying very hard to stay under the radar screen and keep it hidden. Goodell said, “We will respect your confidentiality.”
Rams COO Kevin Demoff later gave Goodell talking points regarding the land purchase for his pre-Super Bowl press conference in 2014. Here’s part of what he said, at a time when Goodell already knew that Kroenke intended to build a stadium on the land he had purchased: “Stan is a very successful developer. He has billions of dollars of projects that are going on around the country in real estate development. So I think instead of overreacting, we should make sure we do what’s necessary to continue to support the team locally as the fans have done in St. Louis. And make sure we do whatever we can to make sure that team is successful in the St. Louis market. . . . There are no plans to my knowledge of a stadium development.” (Emphasis added.)
Also, Jones admitted during his deposition in the case that he urged Kroenke to move the Rams. One day after the vote approving the move happened, the Rams signed a contract with Legends Hospitality (partially owned by Jones) to sell PSLs and luxury suites.
Karraker’s tweets have one other fascinating tidbit, in light of prior claims made by the NFL in the litigation. But since it’s sort of slow and because I’d like to keep these blurbs short, I’ll do a separate item on it a little later.
- Sep 6, 2005
- 144,893
- 94,761
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
Commissioner’s testimony on NFL relocation policy creates another problem for NFL in Rams case
Posted by Mike Florio on July 12, 2021, 8:57 PM EDT
Earlier, we pointed out Commissioner Roger Goodell and several owners must surrender their personal financial information as part of the lawsuit regarding the relocation of the Rams. That decision, and the reasons for it, are not good for the NFL.
Also not good for the NFL is the fact that, at a time when the league hopes to get the case thrown out of court based on the argument that its relocation policy is voluntary, the plaintiffs in the relocation litigation introduced testimony from Goodell that clearly and directly contradicts the league’s position.
Last month, the league filed a motion for summary judgment based in part on the argument that the relocation policy represents a voluntary set of guidelines. On Monday (via Randy Karraker of 101 ESPN), the lawyers representing the plaintiffs in the lawsuit pointed out that Commissioner Roger Goodell has testified otherwise.
Via Karraker, the lawyers representing the plaintiffs asked Goodell if the relocation policy is “mandatory.” Goodell said in response, “Counselor, it says right here” that they are.
From the perspective of a corporate defendant, civil cases routinely get over-lawyered. The firm charging by the hour for the efforts of the entire team of lawyers assigned to the case have no incentive to be brief or incisive. Also, the fact that they’ll receive a passive-aggressive “did you argue this?” and “did you argue that?” grilling from colleagues at their law firms provides another reason to argue anything and everything that can be argued.
That said, it’s important that the arguments made find some plausible support in the facts. If the NFL claims the relocation policy is voluntary and the Commissioner of the NFL has admitted under oath that it’s not, that’s a problem. A big problem. The kind of problem that undermines the credibility of every claim the NFL is making in the case.
Indeed, if the league can’t be taken at its word on such a basic and clear question, what if anything that it says in that case can be believed?
Posted by Mike Florio on July 12, 2021, 8:57 PM EDT
Earlier, we pointed out Commissioner Roger Goodell and several owners must surrender their personal financial information as part of the lawsuit regarding the relocation of the Rams. That decision, and the reasons for it, are not good for the NFL.
Also not good for the NFL is the fact that, at a time when the league hopes to get the case thrown out of court based on the argument that its relocation policy is voluntary, the plaintiffs in the relocation litigation introduced testimony from Goodell that clearly and directly contradicts the league’s position.
Last month, the league filed a motion for summary judgment based in part on the argument that the relocation policy represents a voluntary set of guidelines. On Monday (via Randy Karraker of 101 ESPN), the lawyers representing the plaintiffs in the lawsuit pointed out that Commissioner Roger Goodell has testified otherwise.
Via Karraker, the lawyers representing the plaintiffs asked Goodell if the relocation policy is “mandatory.” Goodell said in response, “Counselor, it says right here” that they are.
From the perspective of a corporate defendant, civil cases routinely get over-lawyered. The firm charging by the hour for the efforts of the entire team of lawyers assigned to the case have no incentive to be brief or incisive. Also, the fact that they’ll receive a passive-aggressive “did you argue this?” and “did you argue that?” grilling from colleagues at their law firms provides another reason to argue anything and everything that can be argued.
That said, it’s important that the arguments made find some plausible support in the facts. If the NFL claims the relocation policy is voluntary and the Commissioner of the NFL has admitted under oath that it’s not, that’s a problem. A big problem. The kind of problem that undermines the credibility of every claim the NFL is making in the case.
Indeed, if the league can’t be taken at its word on such a basic and clear question, what if anything that it says in that case can be believed?
