Attention Jerry and Stephen: THIS is what All in really means

[TheMarathonContinues]

Why are you policing people who like my posts? Guess what? It's only going to make them like me more!

I don’t police him all I did was ask the joke went over my head. I want them to like you that’s the objective. I need you fat off love.

 

[OGSixshooter]

You didn’t quote me you are trying to be a messy female.

"Get ya money Dak!" - TheBSContinues

 

[OGSixshooter]

I don’t police him all I did was ask the joke went over my head. I want them to like you that’s the objective. I need you fat off love.

I pictured you saying this with a lisp...ick. Welp...to each its own!

 

[Diehardblues]

They did. I remember well. He played good for a young qb but the key was the defense shutting Chiefs down. To say he’s the best qb in the league is nuts. Burrow has missed the playoffs more than he’s made it.

Didn’t say he was best. Just responding to comment of him not making playoffs.

 

[kskboys]

These are such ignorant takes, I don't know how to keep on replying that this is a team game and none of the quarterbacks played perfectly Not typically Do I have to keep pointing out that since we're talking about the Rams Matthew Stafford did not change from the old Lions quarterback that he was he was inserted into a Super Bowl ready team that had already been to a Super Bowl with Jared Goff And I still believe to this day Jared Goff would have also won that Super Bowl that's how great the rest of that team was from top to bottom coaching depth the players everything was aligned for them to win a Super Bowl,

Here's the kicker despite leading the league in interceptions and despite throwing two interceptions in the Super Bowl they won anyway.. Instead our defense does not pick up our quarterback our special team does not make big plays our coaching staff does not counter and neutralize other coaches with better play calls and strategy..

That is why they call it a team game if our defense would have caught that interception or made that hit on Kittles if our offensive line hasn't had 11 penalties if people would have gotten open when they should have are blocked when they should have or if there was a run game when it was needed and absolutely all matters and somehow you tune that out in other games that I've seen Troy Aikman throw interceptions and have terrible accuracy against the Buffalo Bills in the first half of one of those Super Bowls and when they do they came out in the second half and overcame his mistakes That's what teams do great teams do not ask quarterbacks to be perfect but the fan base here sure does you all pick apart his mistakes but when there's a dozen other by the rest of the team and the game plans and the coaching and the referees you just seem to leave that out when it's convenient for your narrative..

Then quit.

 

[CyberB0b]

Be patient. It’s a 3 decade rebuild.

 

[dupree89]

Be patient. It’s a 3 decade rebuild.

thank you bob .
we're gettin there though.
hang in my friend

 

[zekecowboy]

The LA rams have once again thumbed their nose at the draft and the old school ways that NFL executives traditionally have chosen to build the key elements of their team.

The aggressive and highly successful rams GM Les Snead has become the supreme river boat gambler of NFL executives by making a huge “all in” move to acquire two time Defensive player of the year and 5 time first team All Pro Myles Garrett from Cleveland. In exchange the rams gave up their talented young LB Jared Verse, a 2027 first-rounder, and a conditional 2029 3rd round pick.

Attention JJ and SJ: THIS is what you call “All in”.

What is admirable about this move is not just that Les Snead and the rams made this move. It was WHEN and WHY they did it.

• By making the move in the spring, both the rams and the browns have those players in place for all remaining OTAs, mini-camps, training camp, etc. (Unlike a week before the season…if you know what I mean)
• The rams have shown they are willing to take a big risk WHEN THEY ARE CLOSE TO WINNING IT ALL. Last year the rams were really close to making the SB, losing to the eventual champs, the Seahawks 31-27 in the NFC championship. It was clear they needed a better pass rush. And they got it.
• Now the rams have to be considered the NFC favorite going into 2026. They are (on paper) what appears to be a much better football team.

In short, the rams GM saw last year that if they didn’t “go for it” and make a big move, they would likely not be better in 2026.

And for everyone saying the rams are “mortgaging their future” by doing this - they have already done this in 2021, and have a Lombardi to show for it. No guarantees this trade will translate to a SB win, but it is a lot more likely now than it was last year.

When the Cowboys say they are not willing to take risks like this with draft capital to “go for it”, then they might as well say, “We’re just hoping we’re going to catch lightening in a bottle”. Les Snead is saying, “Hold my beer while we GRAB that bottle”.

Low risk, low reward.

And here’s the rams playoff record under Les Snead since he took over in 2017:

• 10-6, 2 NFC championships in 3 appearnces, and 1 Lombardi.
• Cowboys in that same period: 2-4 with a ton more draft picks and “financial responsibility”.

Who’s ALL IN?

• By making the move in the spring, both the rams and the browns have those players in place for all remaining OTAs, mini-camps, training camp, etc. (Unlike a week before the season…if you know what I mean). Could this comment be related to MP?

The Jones "ALL IN" Philosophy is to obtain 8 wins for the season.

 

[john van brocklin]

I would too but like I said I think highly enough of McVay that I’m not entirely sure if trading all those picks for Stafford was why they won. They made a SB with Goff. Stafford gets all the credit when they also had Von Miller, Ramsay and Donald. If they don’t draft Donald they may not win. I get why Rams do it. That’s the only team that should do it. Thinking if Cowboys did this they’d have more success is silly to me.

I don’t trust this front office to trade picks like the Rams do.
I don’t think they are savvy enough nor have the football acumen to be successful.
They are so risk adverse that they don’t sign significant free agents and are happy drafting offensive linemen in the first round.

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

I don’t trust this front office to trade picks like the Rams do.
I don’t think they are savvy enough nor have the football acumen to be successful.
They are so risk adverse that they don’t sign significant free agents and are happy drafting offensive linemen in the first round.

Yep. I'm still not even ok with having that many linemen that are 1st rounders on the line. I grew to like the BOoker pick because he does bring a nastiness and toughness we don't have. Not a fan of investing that much in offensive line. Can't be scary in both free agency and the draft.

 

[Whyjerry]

Stevie says there are lots of ways to do this.

 

[Diehardblues]

I don’t trust this front office to trade picks like the Rams do.
I don’t think they are savvy enough nor have the football acumen to be successful.
They are so risk adverse that they don’t sign significant free agents and are happy drafting offensive linemen in the first round.

Too bad we haven’t been as successful drafting DL in 1st round . Taco and Mazi bust probably a major factor in why we didn’t build a better defense .

 

[atlantacowboy]

Too bad we haven’t been as successful drafting DL in 1st round . Taco and Mazi bust probably a major factor in why we didn’t build a better defense .

That's no excuse. Every team can show you first round busts. The problem is that we become too attached to our draft evaluations even when they are clearly wrong. You can't go into every season assuming players are going to magically transform into the best version of who you think they can be. We need to move on faster.

 

[fivetwos]

That's no excuse. Every team can show you first round busts. The problem is that we become too attached to our draft evaluations even when they are clearly wrong. You can't go into every season assuming players are going to magically transform into the best version of who you think they can be. We need to move on faster.

Proof of that is how they like to sign/trade for recent high draft picks that are clearly busts with other teams, but they had a high grade on also.

Certain high draft picks bust, but they don’t seem to believe that. Mingo is one clear example. He was clearly on that list, but Jerry decides to give up a fourth because they had a second round grade on them and figures he is ahead. Same with Lance.

They don’t seem to want to realize that maybe their draft evaluations were inaccurate.

 

[blueblood70]

The Rams have been operating this way for quite some time, essentially trading away nearly all their first-round picks over the past 13 years, keeping only three, and even those players were later traded, except for the quarterback they drafted this year in a move that stirred controversy. They’re aggressive, always “all in,” unlike the New England Patriots, who built the greatest dynasty ever without making these kinds of moves. Sure, the Patriots’ situation was unique, but the Rams didn’t even make the Super Bowl last year. I respect their willingness to go for it, but I’m not a Rams fan and don’t care much for their decisions, especially since they overpaid. Still, being “all in” means sacrificing everything for a shot at a Super Bowl ring, and if it doesn’t work out, that’s the risk. Few teams commit to this extent—I’ve never seen another franchise trade away every first-round pick for over a decade, and they have had some success.

It didn’t launch them into New England mode, KC, not even the Cowboys. Where are the back-to-back Super Bowls? Where’s the climb up the ladder of all-time Super Bowl wins?

Still, it keeps them in the mix and makes them contenders, and I give them credit for that. Most teams aren’t willing to make those big moves, and the Cowboys are being singled out for not doing something the majority of teams also avoid—sacrificing high draft picks and wrecking the cap with void years a decade down the line.

Sure, maybe we’d love to see Jerry go all-in just once, and I get that. But it’s not like they haven’t tried, Jerry went after Dean and Crosby, and they missed out only because another team overpaid for Crosby and later backed out, asking for a refund.

But they were very aggressive to start this year it wasn't all in aggressive but they also went after trades for a queen for Brooks and others they were scouring the phone lines like people wanted from them to try to make these moves and they just didn't land them and it wasn't because of effort or because they were cheap, they actually made great offers...

No, Bob, this is what going all in actually looks like, and the Cowboys aren’t going to do it because most the league isn’t willing to. It’s definitely against the grain—a high-risk approach that they’re willing to take, but most teams won’t. What Bob doesn’t mention is that the Cowboys did take a similar approach at the start of this season and have been doing so for the past two seasons. Not fully all in, but more aggressive, working the phones, giving up some draft picks, trading up and down in the draft, making moves or at least trying to make the moves we’ve been hoping for. That’s all we’re going get, and if anyone thinks otherwise, grab your Rams jersey, because Jerry Jones will never go as all in as the Rams.

Let me know when the Rams actually become a dynasty, because right now they are not.

They’ve been at it for a while and only have one Super Bowl win to show for it. A true dynasty looks like what the Cowboys had—twice. You need at least two in a row and frequent Super Bowl appearances, like the Chiefs recently, who came close to what New England did. The Chiefs never had an offseason as aggressive as the Rams, yet found a way to win. New England also never went “all in” like the Rams but still built one of the greatest dynasties ever.

So, to Bob and everyone here talking about the Rams being “all in,” they’re not and have never been a dynasty. Kudos to them for what they’ve done, but one Super Bowl win isn’t a dynasty, it’s not impressive at all.

Seattle came onto the scene in two years by building a deep team without a top-heavy, single point of failure that could collapse if one player got hurt. New England and Seattle took different approaches, yet both reached the Super Bowl last year, with Seattle winning one without being overly aggressive, instead spreading their money across the roster. What the Rams are doing is something most teams won’t attempt. People keep wanting the Cowboys to follow that path, but most of the league avoids it, and two of the most recent dynasties didn’t operate that way. As I’ve said, show me where New England or Kansas City has been this aggressive, they haven’t.

In fact, Kansas City runs things a lot like the Cowboys, as seen this offseason when they let their two best corners go to the Rams, let ward walk, traded T.HILL, and more examples if you need them, trusting they could rebuild through the draft and allocate less money across different classes of free agents.

Again, as a Cowboys fan maybe it would be fun one time if they did it, I'm not saying they shouldn't do it.

I'm saying stop making the Rams the poster child for success in the NFL when they are not Seattle just came in in the first two years rebuilt their team in a different way and now, they have a ring with Sam Darnold at quarterback not Matthew Stafford. lmao

 

[Bobhaze]

The Rams have been operating this way for quite some time, essentially trading away nearly all their first-round picks over the past 13 years, keeping only three, and even those players were later traded, except for the quarterback they drafted this year in a move that stirred controversy. They’re aggressive, always “all in,” unlike the New England Patriots, who built the greatest dynasty ever without making these kinds of moves. Sure, the Patriots’ situation was unique, but the Rams didn’t even make the Super Bowl last year. I respect their willingness to go for it, but I’m not a Rams fan and don’t care much for their decisions, especially since they overpaid. Still, being “all in” means sacrificing everything for a shot at a Super Bowl ring, and if it doesn’t work out, that’s the risk. Few teams commit to this extent—I’ve never seen another franchise trade away every first-round pick for over a decade, and they have had some success.

It didn’t launch them into New England mode, KC, not even the Cowboys. Where are the back-to-back Super Bowls? Where’s the climb up the ladder of all-time Super Bowl wins?

Still, it keeps them in the mix and makes them contenders, and I give them credit for that. Most teams aren’t willing to make those big moves, and the Cowboys are being singled out for not doing something the majority of teams also avoid—sacrificing high draft picks and wrecking the cap with void years a decade down the line.

Sure, maybe we’d love to see Jerry go all-in just once, and I get that. But it’s not like they haven’t tried, Jerry went after Dean and Crosby, and they missed out only because another team overpaid for Crosby and later backed out, asking for a refund.

But they were very aggressive to start this year it wasn't all in aggressive but they also went after trades for a queen for Brooks and others they were scouring the phone lines like people wanted from them to try to make these moves and they just didn't land them and it wasn't because of effort or because they were cheap, they actually made great offers...

No, Bob, this is what going all in actually looks like, and the Cowboys aren’t going to do it because most the league isn’t willing to. It’s definitely against the grain—a high-risk approach that they’re willing to take, but most teams won’t. What Bob doesn’t mention is that the Cowboys did take a similar approach at the start of this season and have been doing so for the past two seasons. Not fully all in, but more aggressive, working the phones, giving up some draft picks, trading up and down in the draft, making moves or at least trying to make the moves we’ve been hoping for. That’s all we’re going get, and if anyone thinks otherwise, grab your Rams jersey, because Jerry Jones will never go as all in as the Rams.

Let me know when the Rams actually become a dynasty, because right now they are not.

They’ve been at it for a while and only have one Super Bowl win to show for it. A true dynasty looks like what the Cowboys had—twice. You need at least two in a row and frequent Super Bowl appearances, like the Chiefs recently, who came close to what New England did. The Chiefs never had an offseason as aggressive as the Rams, yet found a way to win. New England also never went “all in” like the Rams but still built one of the greatest dynasties ever.

So, to Bob and everyone here talking about the Rams being “all in,” they’re not and have never been a dynasty. Kudos to them for what they’ve done, but one Super Bowl win isn’t a dynasty, it’s not impressive at all.

Seattle came onto the scene in two years by building a deep team without a top-heavy, single point of failure that could collapse if one player got hurt. New England and Seattle took different approaches, yet both reached the Super Bowl last year, with Seattle winning one without being overly aggressive, instead spreading their money across the roster. What the Rams are doing is something most teams won’t attempt. People keep wanting the Cowboys to follow that path, but most of the league avoids it, and two of the most recent dynasties didn’t operate that way. As I’ve said, show me where New England or Kansas City has been this aggressive, they haven’t.

In fact, Kansas City runs things a lot like the Cowboys, as seen this offseason when they let their two best corners go to the Rams, let ward walk, traded T.HILL, and more examples if you need them, trusting they could rebuild through the draft and allocate less money across different classes of free agents.

Again, as a Cowboys fan maybe it would be fun one time if they did it, I'm not saying they shouldn't do it.

I'm saying stop making the Rams the poster child for success in the NFL when they are not Seattle just came in in the first two years rebuilt their team in a different way and now, they have a ring with Sam Darnold at quarterback not Matthew Stafford. lmao

The rams aren’t successful? They have won 10 playoff games, 2 NFC championships and a Lombardi within the last decade.

We have won two wild card games in that time.

I don’t love or favor the rams but I sure would like to see some of their success here. Would I trade what we have for what they have? Yes. In a heartbeat.

 

[Tabascocat]

The rams aren’t successful? They have won 10 playoff games, 2 NFC championships and a Lombardi within the last decade.

We have won two wild card games in that time.

I don’t love or favor the rams but I sure would like to see some of their success here. Would I trade what we have for what they have? Yes. In a heartbeat.

Yea, dynasties post-salary cap are very rare. Only the Chiefs and Pats did it because of one main reason: Mahomes and Brady kept restructuring deals and below-market extensions for the team to add good, key players.

I will take the Rams approach over Dallas ten times out of ten……in the post-salary cap era.

 

[Diehardblues]

The rams aren’t successful? They have won 10 playoff games, 2 NFC championships and a Lombardi within the last decade.

We have won two wild card games in that time.

I don’t love or favor the rams but I sure would like to see some of their success here. Would I trade what we have for what they have? Yes. In a heartbeat.

Don’t waste your time . Some of these homers think they have to defend the star from all criticisms .

And when they resort to personal insults or attempt to discredit they have nothing credible to offer in rebuttal. Debate over!!

 

[Diehardblues]

Yea, dynasties post-salary cap are very rare. Only the Chiefs and Pats did it because of one main reason: Mahomes and Brady kept restructuring deals and below-market extensions for the team to add good, key players.

I will take the Rams approach over Dallas ten times out of ten……in the post-salary cap era.

And there have been several successful models this era. Some franchises have figured out how to succeed in Cap era.

There was a time in Cowboys history when we compared our success to the greater franchises.

Now all we have is excuses muddling around mediocrity and in a group which haven’t rose to the top this era.

 

[blueblood70]

The rams aren’t successful? They have won 10 playoff games, 2 NFC championships and a Lombardi within the last decade.

We have won two wild card games in that time.

I don’t love or favor the rams but I sure would like to see some of their success here. Would I trade what we have for what they have? Yes. In a heartbeat.

They haven't even touched being a dynasty therefore how are they the blueprint when they weren't even in it last year they were not in the Super Bowl they have not gone on a run if this was working they would have been the old New England Patriots the Dallas Cowboys the San Francisco 49ers the Packers they haven't even won back to back sbs.. Have they even attended back to back we're talking about sporadically doing all this work to win a Super Bowl it's not about winning in the playoffs it's just about Super Bowls remember this is about titles they can't be title town by winning sporadically won and then having to reboot all the time...

Apparently you missed the point because you want to spread your narrative that this is supposed to work i'm telling you that other teams went on better runs not doing this The Kansas City Chiefs the New England Patriots were not poster child of this blueprint they were never all in as a matter of fact they always seem to be OK with letting stars walk and then using the draft to rebuild and also mid level free agents the Kansas City Chiefs have been doing this for a decade.

They even let guys go like Tyreek Hill when they didn't even have ACD Lam left and our fan base gets angry when we might lose Pickens when we have Lamb and yet, Keep trying to tell me the all in thing the Rams are doing is how it works that's what it's supposed to look like and I'm telling you some of the best teams that went on some of the best runs did not do these things..

You want to go back and compare the off seasons the last 10 years to the Kansas City Chiefs and the Dallas Cowboys and I'm betting there isn't a lot of differences they have let a lot of stars go how many corners have they let go lately that are supposed to be great the free agents that you said the Cowboys should pick up why don't the Chiefs just simply pay them aren't they cheap **** by not going all in?

. Help me understand how you didn't understand that I'm saying the Rams are not the blueprint Olin doesn't always work it's nice for the fan base but I'm telling you the successful dynasty teams don't do it that way.

It's the same way with the Eagles yes they're winning more with the aggressive nature of their GM and they've played this all in game but they are not a dynasty they are not one of the better teams in the history of the NFL that have won multiple championships in a short period of time but you start with back to back and going to Super Bowls 3 out of four years or 4 out of five years that's what a dynasty looks like and most of those teams have never used the all in blueprint..

I'm not saying I don't want the Cowboys to be more aggressive but they tried this offseason you keep writing about how missing doesn't count that effort doesn't count but it does they tried to go after Crosby and Dean and they lost they tried to pivot and most of the trade scenarios that they went after the teams declined even though the offers were very good they were not cheap.

Cowboys did try to do what you're talking about but just not to the extreme..

Those teams a majority wins here my argument will win because most teams do not do this there are very few that do you want to pick out a percentage there's 32 teams and maybe three teams have done this more consistently than others,

No mathematician but three teams out of 32, Tells me that while it's nice for the fan base to see your team being this aggressive it's not the blueprint for the dynasties of the past including the Kansas City Chase and New England which are not that far removed they did it within the way most teams do it and they were successful...


Again I'm not against the Cowboys being more aggressive and they tried and I'm not giving them all this patting on the back for trying but they literally went after these guys with great offers and great compensation and lost and then they tried to pivot and go after other guys it just didn't work but they were trying but they didn't want it to the extremists hawking their entire future for one player and giving up all their first round picks is not normal That is not what the majority do.

Matter of fact they're the only team that I remember that almost never utilizes their first round picks and again they have a Super Bowl recently, But they haven't made it consistent if this works so well they should have won three Super Bowls out of the last 4 years..

To my point I'm not saying to not do it i'm saying you think that this is what most teams do and I'm saying most teams do not do it this for good reason it's not because they're not cheap they're looking at it long term and not one year at a time..

they would have landed Crosby and Dean so we could just shut up about this but they did try to do this but just not to the extreme that you're demanding and that is not what the league does that is not the league standard a few teams have tried it and it may have worked out for a year but most owners or GMSI don't care if they're the same person do not do this,

They will not do it... What I'm saying and I'm going to make this bold because you don't wanna read the rest of it We have seen the better dynasties the better more consistent teams that are going to and winning Super Bowls not do it with the all in blueprint that you're speaking of They didn't do that at all... Actually did utilize paying their own players maximum money when they could some of them even made choices and let them go they used draft picks and they used more mid level free agents then they did the big ones they did not participate in those overpayment or ridiculous trades...

Again I hope Jerry one year does do that but you acting like the Cowboys are the only ones that don't participate when a majority of the league operates the same way the Cowboys do and the last two offseason the Cowboys have really try to make that effort and justice because it didn't work doesn't mean they weren't trying they didnt lowball offers.. To a real effort these were real offers And some people are saying that in Dean's case the contract might have been a little bit better but he didn't come here not because he didn't want to be here not because Jerry didn't try he chose to be a Raider because he didn't want to play the Eagles.

You lost out on Crosby because the Ravens were stupid and overpaid and then had regrets buyer's remorse if you will and they gave him back But if the Cowboys who gave a fair offer that wasn't quite that much I think they would have kept him we only lost out because of the Ravens were idiots... But now that they know his health issues teams are not going to offer that much and the Raiders are not going to let him go even though I know everyone wants the Cowboys to maybe go make another effort to go get him..