Rams: (#13) 1st Round QB Ty Simpson

  • To unlock all of features of Rams On Demand please take a brief moment to register. Registering is not only quick and easy, it also allows you access to additional features such as live chat, private messaging, and a host of other apps exclusive to Rams On Demand.
Ram_Rally said:
The guy in the first clip said the rams offense lacks juice. The #1 offense in the NFL last year lol invalidated his whole segment.

As for the second video, i LOVE Mike Renner. He's one of the best draft guys out there. If he likes Simpson, I like Simpson.
Click to expand...
I think he meant we lack speed on offense, which is true.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheTackle
Memphis Ram said:
Let's say you are correct.

Who do you think the Rams should have selected instead?
Click to expand...
I’d have drafted the Freeling kid from Georgia to add o line depth or I would’ve traded back for more picks. The only WRs I really liked were Tate and Tyson, but they were long gone.
 
Spider2YB said:
Can you point to me where it says McVay has veto power? This isn’t a thing. The NFL has a rich history of coaches and GMs disagreeing on picks. Hell, sometimes an owner will swoop down and override both.

Do I think Snead consulted McVay and values his opinion. Of course. But short of McVay throwing a temper tantrum, this was always going to be the pick because that’s what Snead wanted.
Click to expand...
Multiple posters have shared Jourdan Rodrigue's tweet about McVay having a huge say in our first pick. You blew it off, despite the fact that Jourdan was our beat writer for years. You can keep doubling down on your theory because you hate the pick, but you aren't going to sell me on it. Snead was here during the Fisher years. McVay is responsible for the turnaround. McVay is responsible for the Super Bowl ring. If McVay and Snead have a power struggle, Snead is losing it. Snead isn't picking a QB that McVay vetoed. And if it came down to it, Kroenke would side with McVay. Enough said.
 
  • Thread Winner
Reactions: ScotsRam
1777006141181.webp

Manning is predicted to go as the first overall pick in 2027 and we got Simpson @ 13. I can live with that!
 
Last edited:
  • 4Like
Reactions: SWAdude, Flatlyner, Ramstien and 1 other person
jrry32 said:
Multiple posters have shared Jourdan Rodrigue's tweet about McVay having a huge say in our first pick. You blew it off, despite the fact that Jourdan was our beat writer for years. You can keep doubling down on your theory because you hate the pick, but you aren't going to sell me on it. Snead was here during the Fisher years. McVay is responsible for the turnaround. McVay is responsible for the Super Bowl ring. If McVay and Snead have a power struggle, Snead is losing it. Snead isn't picking a QB that McVay vetoed. And if it came down to it, Kroenke would side with McVay. Enough said.
Click to expand...
No I didn’t, I responded to that exact tweet several times. Sorry you missed it.

Successful NFL coaches, even ones that have rings, lose pissing matches to the front office and ownership all the time. Like it’s something that happens with regularity. You act like it’s an impossibility when that’s simply not the truth.
 
Spider2YB said:
I’d have drafted the Freeling kid from Georgia to add o line depth or I would’ve traded back for more picks. The only WRs I really liked were Tate and Tyson, but they were long gone.
Click to expand...
This really would've made me scream lol. At least Stafford is 38 years old. Alaric Jackson and Warren Mcclendon are both proven young tackles. I don't see why we'd want to replace either.
 
  • Cheers
Reactions: Ramstien
XXXIVwin said:
Just as a recent example-- McVay gave a lot of details about the personal conversation he had with Puka about his off-field incidents. About how Puka was remorseful and apologetic, and how McVay was going to put his arm around him and help him make more mature decisions, etc . etc.

IMO McVay only says "I'll keep that private and between me and the player" when things do NOT go well. As I recall McVay used the "I'll keep that between us" line when he was having troubles with Akers, and also after the Ernest Jones trade.

But when a personal conversation with a player goes well, McVay is happy to share details. If Stafford was enthusiastic about the Simpson pick, there would be no reason for McVay to decline to comment about it.
Click to expand...

View: https://www.instagram.com/reel/DWg9UOCjCde/


Nothing specific just generalities about what he wants from Puka. That's what I'm saying he'll say things like this that some will label coach speak but as far as divulging personal details I'm sorry I disagree. This we see the rest we don't that I can ever recall.
 
RamsSince1969 said:
View attachment 75430
Click to expand...
Okay, I'm all for giving Simpson a chance but what Arch is athletically and most likely will be next year as his mental game really improved will be heads and tails above Simpson.

If Simpson is a stronger armed Purdy, I'll be happy. That's his ceiling. We'll see. God, can someone go feed that kid a sandwich.
 
  • Cheers
Reactions: RamsSince1969
Shuie3225 said:
People saying McVay didn't looked pissed tf off are LYING to themselves. Why though? Was he unhappy they had to take Simpson, or was he unhappy with all the questions about Stafford, etc.? Wtf does he expect to get asked when you make a pick like that?
Click to expand...
Maybe he is pregnant.
 
Spider2YB said:
McVay almost retired 3 years ago, and all the scuttlebutt at the Super Bowl this year was that McVay is going to leave when Stafford does.

Snead has to think about a post-McVay future just as much as he does a post-Stafford one. And if Simpson is as good as Snead thinks he is, it will be much easier to attract a high quality replacement for McVay. But it doesn’t make the Rams better in the short term.

This was a classic GM move where they are thinking about their own job security 4-5 years down the road instead of giving their team the best possible chance to win this year.
Click to expand...
Nope.

McVay is a coach.

He’s going to be their coach for a long time.

There’s plenty to read out there about his personal journey.. if you look.
 
  • Like
Reactions: OldSchool and jrry32
I think this weirdly allows us to go all in more. Now we have contact security for Simpson once Stafford retires. So we can more easily spend our money on good players and keeping our own. Which makes a trade more likely, and signing our guys back even more likely.
 
  • 3Like
  • Cheers
  • High Five
Reactions: Flatlyner, Ramstien, Badfinger and 3 others
Spider2YB said:
I’d have drafted the Freeling kid from Georgia to add o line depth or I would’ve traded back for more picks. The only WRs I really liked were Tate and Tyson, but they were long gone.
Click to expand...
I was looking at Freeling, too. I expected them to draft Denzel Boston. But, I was on the Ty Simpson bandwagon early and only got off when it looked like it wasn't going to happen.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jrry32
Spider2YB said:
No I didn’t, I responded to that exact tweet several times. Sorry you missed it.
Click to expand...
This is the response from you that I saw:
Spider2YB said:
Yes I’ve seen that tweet several times. Do you think McVay is going to leak to Jourdan that he’s not on board with the pick? Seriously?
Click to expand...
As I said, you blew it off.
Successful NFL coaches, even ones that have rings, lose pissing matches to the front office and ownership all the time. Like it’s something that happens with regularity. You act like it’s an impossibility when that’s simply not the truth.
Click to expand...
Pissing matches with ownership are different from pissing matches with GMs. Snead isn't winning a power struggle with McVay. Snead isn't drafting a QB that McVay doesn't want to take. McVay isn't having a conversation with Stafford about us drafting a QB he doesn't want.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ramstien
Last edited:
  • 4Like
  • Thread Winner
Reactions: TheTackle, Dodgersrf, OldSchool and 2 others
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back