Rams Failed in 2026 Draft Approach

[Rmfnlt]

I simply think they ignored the need to improve in certain areas.

I am just sure that, if you keep saying the same thing 1,000 times, you'll win over the board!! I'm sure of it!!!

 

[Pupped]

So, in the end the thread is "the Rams could have done better". 18 pages of ducking and dodging with no alternative plan? No particular player instead of who we got? Sounds like a guy betting the field instead of a particular team or player. Real insightful. And a real easy, weak assed argument.

So.. I've already said.. this ain't about one particular player or one particular plan.

I'm pointing out *this* plan was the wrong one.

If you don't like taking a hard look at your team and its processes, don't. The need to get personal about it is, quite frankly, utterly childish.

You have a different perspective, that's fine.. but I feel solid about my reasoning in criticizing the approach they took.

I'm not a guy who makes up a bunch of bullshit reasons to criticize the Rams, in fact, my track record defaults to having faith in McVay and Snead at almost every turn.. but when I see an issue, I point it out on here... BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT WE DO HERE.. talk about our team.. why/what we like.. what we don't, etc.

So.. whatever your quirk is that needs to make this personal or about me.. is a YOU issue.

 

[Pupped]

I am just sure that, if you keep saying the same thing 1,000 times, you'll win over the board!! I'm sure of it!!!

Just as I'm sure that posting this makes you think you made a point.

 

[Pupped]

You really do struggle to separate your opinions and beliefs from facts.

What you probably meant to say was, because by my measure, those are desperate.

Again.. I think some things are objective truths.

Alex Bachman? Desperation.

I get your point and understand it. As I said in another post, try to view this (Bachman) from an evaluation standpoint, telling a boss.. "yeah, no.. that move was totally made in confidence and was just the best of many options"

I think your boss would have choice words for you.

 

[Pupped]

Not to mention, the post isnt a debate, its an outright insult to the Team
This is why vent threads are closed after 24 hours
Why this has been allowed to go one the way it has is imply mind boggling to me

"Outright insult to the Team"

And.. well.. there we have it. The inability to think that criticizing the team is akin to an effort to debase the character of McVay and Snead.. two guys I love and wouldn't want to have anyone else in charge of the Rams.

So.. thanks for proving one point.. that this isn't about an honest exchange of critique.. it's an emotion-based defense of the team at all costs.. for whatever reason.

 

[Coliseum Ram]

And I disagree on two basis..

I don't believe the roster was good enough and that at least one obvious failure point, WR, is already jeopardizing the season. I also believe there are ST issues that could've been helped as well.

As I've said.. there are other ways to get a QB, as shown clearly by the two current NFC rivals... and, there's simply no guarantee that Simpson is a SB quality QB. Conversely.. I understand that with better picks this year, a SB was not guaranteed either. I simply think they ignored the need to improve in certain areas.

Good stuff. But how does Les Snead and Sean McVay FEEL about Ty Simpson? If its 10-year Franchise Top 10 Quarterback, THAT'S the pick. They may love him more than ANY recent or upcoming draft Quarterback. Cant always just say "we can get a Quarterback," they wanted THIS one. Must be a good reason but that remains to be seen, obviously.

 

[Pupped]

The desire for attention is a powerful character flaw

More personal attacks and analysis.. and another post with no actual content about the discussion.

But.. I'M the one who's doing this for some personal reason. Sure, Jan.

 

[DzRams]

No.. I actually believe you can clearly identify failure points.

Now.. if you want to debate the approach to the WR situation, that’s one think. The status of the GROUP is seriously compromised in a way that was easy to see coming.

Seriously.. play it out this way… if Adams is out 10 weeks.. and they lose games because the offense stalls.. you really think there would be an argument that it’s one’s opinion that the group was not built in a sufficient way?

It looks like I can summarize your objection to the WR room by saying that it lacks sufficient depth.

I'll entertain your hypothetical and provide a multipronged response.

1) We could play out your "what if" scenario on a number of critical positions. What if Alaric Jackson missed 10 games? I'd hate to see Quessenberry for that long. What if Stafford missed 10 games? With the amount of resources that we've invested in the defense, we should still be competitive, so why not invest in the backup QB. An argument can be made that the resources should have been used for contingencies at those positions just as much, if not more, than at WR.

No team can plug all the holes; choices must be made. There may be some positions that don't have sufficient depth. Is depth at WR so important that it can't be the position to risk less depth? This leads to point #2.

2) Puka and Adams missed a combined 4 games last year. The offense averaged 33.25 points over those four games. It actually looked better and was more efficient. IMO, this is because Stafford and McVay are at their best when they're forced to spread the ball around. They both get a little too reliant on their top guys.

Their injuries are also when McVay found that he could produce a top offense with 13 personnel. This fact was likely a big factor when they decided on the team-building approach to this season and to innovate the offense by emphasizing 13 personnel.

3) How are you defining offense stalled? Identifying the reason for the offense stalling would depend on a number of factors. Did the offense continue their trend of moving the ball but failing to score points? (Note: they've lost 4 games with Adams playing, and the offense has already stalled some, having slipped to #11 in points per game.)

4) I didn't like this year's WR class and don't believe that anyone drafted at our 2nd round pick or later would be helping us much this year anyway. Based on history, even our 2nd round WR picks don't immediately start or produce results as a contributor that's high on the depth chart.

If you want to argue that we should have drafted a WR at 13 instead of Simpson, fine. I don't agree, but I'd get that. My preference would have been to draft an OT if they weren't selecting a QB.

5) I believe the team was built in a very sound way. We've been unfortunate with injuries. I'd have no problem defending the team build to the owner.

 

[Pupped]

Good stuff. But how does Les Snead and Sean McVay FEEL about Ty Simpson? If its 10-year Franchise Top 10 Quarterback, THAT'S the pick. They may love him more than ANY recent or upcoming draft Quarterback. Cant always just say "we can get a Quarterback," they wanted THIS one. Must be a good reason but that reminds to be seen.

I understand that. Completely.

I also understand that this year, based on contracts, roster, etc.. was *the* year in this cycle to go "all-in."

It's that simple.. and that's why it was a mistake to use the first two picks the way they did.

Nothing's guaranteed.. but there was clearly an opportunity to maximize *this year*.

An underlying part of my argument, btw.. is complete faith that Snead and McVay would be able to solve the QB problem. Because they're awesome.

 

[jrry32]

I understand that. Completely.

I also understand that this year, based on contracts, roster, etc.. was *the* year in this cycle to go "all-in."

It's that simple.. and that's why it was a mistake to use the first two picks the way they did.

Nothing's guaranteed.. but there was clearly an opportunity to maximize *this year*.

An underlying part of my argument, btw.. is complete faith that Snead and McVay would be able to solve the QB problem. Because they're awesome.

The problem with your stance is that's exactly what they sought to do when they drafted Simpson. And then they used future draft capital to acquire Myles Garrett. If they need to keep the draft capital to solve the QB problem, we don't get Garrett. And if we don't get Garrett, I'm not sure Donald comes out of retirement. So I find your argument to be less than compelling in that regard.

 

[Coliseum Ram]

I understand that. Completely.

I also understand that this year, based on contracts, roster, etc.. was *the* year in this cycle to go "all-in."

It's that simple.. and that's why it was a mistake to use the first two picks the way they did.

Nothing's guaranteed.. but there was clearly an opportunity to maximize *this year*.

An underlying part of my argument, btw.. is complete faith that Snead and McVay would be able to solve the QB problem. Because they're awesome.

I think it's pretty obvious they love Simpson.

 

[Pupped]

It looks like I can summarize your objection to the WR room by saying that it lacks sufficient depth.

I'll entertain your hypothetical and provide a multipronged response.

1) We could play out your "what if" scenario on a number of critical positions. What if Alaric Jackson missed 10 games? I'd hate to see Quessenberry for that long. What if Stafford missed 10 games? With the amount of resources that we've invested in the defense, we should still be competitive, so why not invest in the backup QB. An argument can be made that the resources should have been used for contingencies at those positions just as much, if not more, than at WR.

No team can plug all the holes; choices must be made. There may be some positions that don't have sufficient depth. Is depth at WR so important that it can't be the position to risk less depth? This leads to point #2.

2) Puka and Adams missed a combined 4 games last year. The offense averaged 33.25 points over those four games. It actually looked better and was more efficient. IMO, this is because Stafford and McVay are at their best when they're forced to spread the ball around. They both get a little too reliant on their top guys.

The difference between that and possibly ten weeks of one functional WR is night and day. One week after a 12 catch performance.. Puka had 5. Was that because of tape? Was Puka too beat up? Both? You're betting way too much on one guy at that point.

Their injuries are also when McVay found that he could produce a top offense with 13 personnel. This fact was likely a big factor when they decided on the team-building approach to this season and to innovate the offense by emphasizing 13 personnel.

Again.. the majority of which.. they had their top two WRs available.

3) How are you defining offense stalled? Identifying the reason for the offense stalling would depend on a number of factors. Did the offense continue their trend of moving the ball but failing to score points? (Note: they've lost 4 games with Adams playing, and the offense has already stalled some, having slipped to #11 in points per game.)

I think this is a fair argument.. but one that will be more borne out in coming weeks. Again.. my post was not solely about WR. I think the draft's impact on STs and depth.. especially quality depth.. and *competition* for roster spots is a factor you create with your draft. I think they took any roster competition out of play during the offseason, and I don't think that's healthy.

4) I didn't like this year's WR class and don't believe that anyone drafted at our 2nd round pick or later would be helping us much this year anyway. Based on history, even our 2nd round WR picks don't immediately start or produce results as a contributor that's high on the depth chart.

Again.. multiple ways to go.. could've traded for one, if it was only about WR. And there's a difference between IMPACT.. and making an impact with marginal improvements that are difference makers.

If you want to argue that we should have drafted a WR at 13 instead of Simpson, fine. I don't agree, but I'd get that. My preference would have been to draft an OT if they weren't selecting a QB.

That's not my argument. My argument is using the top two picks the way they did stole the opportunity to upgrade the roster in key ways.. I also don't like the overall approach. Trading up for Daniels? Why? Why weren't they taking a stab at a potential returner or gunner or ST contributor with that second 7th? Before you scoff.. Nick Scott & Benny Skow.

5) I believe the team was built in a very sound way. We've been unfortunate with injuries. I'd have no problem defending the team build to the owner.

I think the team has some incredible, potentially overwhelming strengths when healthy.. with obvious failure points at WR, OT and Special Teams.

 

[Pupped]

The problem with your stance is that's exactly what they sought to do when they drafted Simpson. And then they used future draft capital to acquire Myles Garrett. If they need to keep the draft capital to solve the QB problem, we don't get Garrett. And if we don't get Garrett, I'm not sure Donald comes out of retirement. So I find your argument to be less than compelling in that regard.

So.. do the alternate..
They don't get Garrett and would've had the draft capital to go after someone at the trade deadline and would've had Verse.
I could make that argument very easily.. and say it would be better "long term" because Verse is younger and they could've traded for someone younger than Donald.. like Jeffrey Simmons.

 

[Pupped]

I think it's pretty obvious they love Simpson.

No one's arguing they don't and I'm not arguing against him as a prospect.

 

[Coliseum Ram]

No one's arguing they don't and I'm not arguing against him as a prospect.

But IF thats a fact, wouldnt it completely negate your whole premisr? At least as far as Les and Sean are concerned?

As I stated earlier. Franchise Quarterback >>> ALL other needs.

 

[Pupped]

But IF thats a fact, wouldnt it completely negate your whole premisr? At least as far as Les and Sean are concerned?

I'm sorry.. but that's the whole premise..
That their decision to invest in the future came at the expense of the present.

I think that was a mistake. That's why you don't see me criticizing Simpson as a player or prospect. That's why I said their "approach" to this draft was wrong.

They could be right about Simpson.. and wrong about this year at the same time.

 

[Rmfnlt]

Just as I'm sure that posting this makes you think you made a point.

I am just sure that, if you keep saying the same thing 1,000 times, you'll win over the board!! I'm sure of it!!!

 

[Rmfnlt]

More personal attacks and analysis.. and another post with no actual content about the discussion.

But.. I'M the one who's doing this for some personal reason. Sure, Jan.

Take my advice.. call your mom and dad.. they'll tell you you're right and they love you!!

 

[Pupped]

Take my advice.. call your mom and dad.. they'll tell you you're right and they love you!!

I thought personal attacks were frowned upon here... Mods??

Same guy.

Lolz

 

[Pupped]

So.. I've responded to, I think, pretty much every approach.. (this isn't me saying.. "I win! I'm right!)....
So, I'm gonna take a break from this and we can revisit over the rest of the season and see how it plays out.