DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Trades

I am sure Watson isn't pleased he couldn't get something done before this move.

I'd say the Stafford trade pretty much kills his shot at a trade.

Houston now has a STARTING point in any talks about moving Watson. Why would they take less? I wouldn't. If I couldn't find interest for Watson that was significantly higher, I would tell Watson he could pound salt while he sat out if that is what he chose.

If the Rams don’t win in the next two years their whole team is going to go down in flames. It’ll be fun to watch.

I think this was a last ditch effort by Les Snead to save his job.

I didn't think of that angle, but I doubt it'll scare off the really interested teams. Dedham Watson is a young fQB. He's worth giving up the farm.

I think the trade happened because McVay hated Goff. He spoke pretty publicly about Goff needing to be better, which almost never happens. It makes me think things in private were much worse.

Rams definitely have to win now or else. Their cap hit for this season just went up another 7.25 million in total.

Goff's original cap hit was 34.95 million

The trade creates:
22.2 million dead
and Stafford's 9.5 million base, 10 million roster bonus, and 500k workout bonus (20 million cap)

Pretty sure that leaves them about 39-ish million over the anticipated cap (with about 31 million of that total being dead money).

Guess they are hoping the NFL steps in an allows teams to drag out the 2021 overage for a couple seasons

No draft picks and no reasonable way to get the cap under control. They'd better win.

Lions are #7. With the draft capital they have now and Dorsey having input, there's nothing to keep them from tanking and rebuilding like the Browns did. They need to free up some cap space anyway.

The Rams finally realized what others already knew. Goff was limited and you weren't going to win with him. Yes they did make a Super Bowl with him but they took everyone by surprise that year and now they've caught up to them. With Stafforrd they can run their whole playbook. He can make all the throws. They need some O-line help. If they can get it they should be strong contender next year. The Rams have the D.

A little bit yes. They will end up about 12.5 million over the cap wit the dead money from this deal. Assuming they want to bring back that WR they have as a pending FA, they would have to probably move on from Justin Coleman's comically bloated contract, and their interior defenders (Danny Shelton and Nick Williams). But really, I doubt Lions' fans would blink too much at that.

They are in pretty decent shape regardless of whether thee NFL offers cap relief for 2021.

Stafford wanted out and they got a haul and a half for him. Think of how much dead money we took for a 2nd round pick a few years ago. This trade cost them an additional 14.15 million in dead cap. They got two 1st's and a 3rd and a QB to at least try to build around beefore inevitably moving on from.

Ah, thee heralded 2016 QB class. Goff, Wentz, Lynch and Hackenburg...

At least Dak is still balling...

Not likely considering this deal was in the works before he was hired plus the Lions new GM used to work for the Rams, the last 18 years.

He may not have had much to do with the trade - but man has Dorsey been fortunate with the gigs he has landed. Look at the Draft Capital he's getting in Detroit. Crazy.

OK... I am confused. Did Dorsey sign with the Eagles? Or is he with the Lions? I just saw a title in the everything else thread which I rarely go into and saw he signed with the Eagles? Or has he done both since 1/1/21?

Dorsey was with the Eagles for the 2020 season as a consultant and is now with the Lions under a more official capacity.

That was just a stupidly bad move by the Rams.

I don't know. It depends on how big the farm might be.

I don't know if Dorsey was with the Eagle in 2020or not. I know he signed...or was reported he did forthe 2021 season, but it turned out it wasn't a full time gig, so he then went to the Lions.

On the Rams end, they didn't get fleeced too horribly, but getting Goff in the package was pretty smart. If the Rams hadn't included Goff, they would have had to designate him post-June 1st and cut him anyway.

Supposedly, the "bidding" for Stafford was a 1st plus. I'm guessing a 1st and 3rd. Unfortunately for the Rams they did not have a 2021 1st, so they had to add the 2023 1st with next years.

Fair or not, it's still a Not For Long league and a 1st round pick 2 years down the line is about as valuable as a mid-2nd round pick this year. Next year's 1st only values at about the Bucs/Chiefs pick this year (end of the 1st). Primarily because not only do you not know what the pick will be but you have to wait a year on it.

In other words, it takes those two future 1st to make up the value of a 1st this year.

So that part of the trade was a push.

Getting Goff (while the Rams didn't "lose" anything by including him) makes the trade a pretty good win for the Lions. Like was said, if they decide to go QB this year, Goff is still tradable for even more capital and now doesn't really hurt your cap as the Rams had to absorb his escalated signing bonus monies).

It definitely looks like a fleece job on the surface until you remember that the other offers on the table included a 1st this year.

Guys like him almost never become available. If he does leave town, someone will pay.

Bears, Broncos, Panthers offered Lions first-rounder and more for Matthew Stafford, per report
The Rams were not the only team seriously interested in the quarterback

By Cody Benjamin

The Los Angeles Rams reportedly agreed on Saturday to pay a premium to acquire Matthew Stafford from the Detroit Lions, but at least three other teams were prepared to do the same. Hours after reports indicated that several others sought to trade for the 12-year veteran, NFL Network's Ian Rapoport reports that at least three clubs actually made offers for Stafford -- and every one of them included a first-round draft pick, plus more. Those teams, per Rapoport: The Chicago Bears, Denver Broncos and Carolina Panthers.

In total, according to Rapoport, the Lions had more than six formal trade offers for Stafford, who was the No. 1 pick in the 2009 NFL Draft. But Chicago, Carolina and Denver were "among a handful of teams" outside of the Rams who made the most aggressive plays for the veteran QB. The Indianapolis Colts, San Francisco 49ers and Washington Football Team were also in the mix, as NBC Sports' Peter King reported previously, but may or may not have offered first-round picks for Stafford.

While Stafford's now locked into Los Angeles, where he represents a clear upgrade over fellow former No. 1 pick -- and new Lions QB -- Jared Goff, the fact that the Bears, Broncos and Panthers reportedly all made legitimate attempts to acquire him speak to their respective desires for new signal-callers.

Chicago's former first-rounder, Mitchell Trubisky, is set to hit free agency in March, and 2020 acquisition Nick Foles appears destined for an expensive backup role. The Broncos have publicly supported former second-rounder Drew Lock, though his 2020 decline has seemingly reignited the team's hunt for a long-term answer. And the Panthers, despite signing Teddy Bridgewater to a lucrative three-year deal prior to 2020, have openly hinted at seeking a more reliable or higher-upside replacement this offseason.

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/bears...ord-per-report/

Rams tried to trade for Aaron Rodgers before acquiring Matthew Stafford, but Packers refused, per report
Just don't tell Aaron

By Cody Benjamin

The Los Angeles Rams are the talk of the NFL after reportedly agreeing to terms on a blockbuster trade for Matthew Stafford, but if everything went according to their plans, they would've ended up with an even bigger name under center. Appearing on NFL Network Sunday night to discuss the Rams' deal for Stafford, the Los Angeles Times' Sam Farmer said the team originally tried to trade for Packers star Aaron Rodgers, but Green Bay simply refused to entertain the idea.

"They wanted to upgrade from Jared Goff," Farmer said. "They felt like there were a certain number of quarterbacks who could do that. I think Deshaun Watson was out of their price range. They made a run at Aaron Rodgers, and the Packers were adamant that they weren't trading him."

While the news isn't necessarily surprising, considering how much Rams brass openly hinted at seeking an upgrade over Goff in 2021, it still rings loud in the wake of Rodgers' reported discontent in Green Bay. The Packers, for what it's worth, have repeatedly and publicly expressed faith in Rodgers as the club's QB of the near and even distant future, with Rodgers himself recently suggesting there's little reason he won't return in 2021. But the QB notably questioned his own future with the team after the Packers' NFC Championship loss and is reportedly unhappy with his current contract, leading to speculation about his availability.

There's also Rodgers' California connection. While it's clear Green Bay is serious about retaining No. 12 -- or simply didn't generate enough substantive trade proposals from the Rams -- Rodgers was born and raised on the West Coast, home of the Rams. In the end, L.A. targeting him as a potential Goff replacement will likely remain in the "what-could-have-been" file, with Rodgers' old NFC North rival in Stafford heading to the Rams instead.

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/matth...arterback-deal/

Orange County is actually somewhat Republican/Conservative.

I thought the Californians were fleeing to Austin. The blueberry city.

This is not true. At all. Joe Rogan does not represent all Californians.

I have no clue what this means.

This is 100% true. The problem is that Orange County is not close to where the Rams practice. I read that the Staffords already live in Newport Beach during the the off-season. That is in Orange County and it would be a 78 mile drive one way to the Rams training facility. The good thing is that where the Rams practice facility is is also pretty conservative. It’s not far from the Reagan Library.

/CaliforniaTalk

What does it say about someone who is pretty much saying, "I just can't stand to live where a lot of people don't think the way i do"?

It says "if mama ain't happy, ain't nobody happy". Happy wife, happy life.

That there is a pandemic?

The Rams gave up an awful lot for Stafford. They must feel their window is open now and they should go all in on a QB. They realized Goff can only take them so far and they had to make a move. Good luck to them unless they are playing us but if it doesn't work out some people n their FO will be losing their jobs, maybe McVey too.

I think what Houston is asking for Watson is ridiculous. I now he is probably one of the top 5 or 6 QB's in the league but man that is an awful lot. If the team that trades for him gives that up they better win or they may be down for a while without those draft picks. Something like the situation the Rams are in now.

Yeah, wow, that's a lot.

I think it is outrageous, even mores if the "list" isn't complete yet. They might want to be rid of him, especially if the asking price holds up. How many wins are needed to balance what you give up to get this guy? Just seems like somebody is getting bent on winning immediately in a situation plainly bad enough to warrant the deal. How much will be guaranteed money if the deal is this "flesh heavy" a trade?

I still don’t think it’s enough.

It worries me if the Steelers could get Watson for 2 #1s, 2 #2s, TJ Watt, and another defensive starter, according to that report. I have to believe Houston should be asking for 3 #1s, a #2, and a viable short term QB - at least.

Meh, the Dolphns might be able to get away with Tua (only one year in and a premium drafted QB at #5 last year), and their two number 1's this year (at #3-another ultra high pick- and at #18 I think). That's 3 immediate, legit 1st round talents to rebuild around.

Outside of that, why bother? You would have to assume that Watson would make any decent team a contender.

Four number 1's is nice, but they'll be like pick 26-ish for the next three years. At that point the talent level is pretty much the same as early day two guys and you are having to wait on them. Believe me, I'm hoping against hope that a player last until #26 for us this year.

Lol. I'm well aware.

Much more feasible than four 1st round picks though. A team can't afford to mortgage their draft future like that. Of course, I'm sure you would point out that those would be very low picks, as they're sure to begin a trilogy of Superbowls by year two.

There's no questioning his unbridled talent and the fact that Houston will be getting a helluva haul for him.

The Rams haven’t picked in the first round since 2016. If the team is set up for success with everything besides the QB then it’s worth four first round picks.

I think it's too much. any of these teams can get a top pick QB for the selection and build a team around them like we did with Baker.

Who said that?

As to your question, it doesn't say anything. It's a free country. People can choose to live anywhere they want or whatever reason they want.

Agreed. The most I would give Houston is a #1, 2 #2,s and a player at most. What is Houston going to do if DW says I'll sit out the year? Then they lose all their leverage. Be interesting to see how it plays out.