DRAFT Where do you stand on QB Ty Simpson?

[jrry32]

Nonsense. I think if you're going to build a belief system up for a slightly framed QB who can't win the job until his last year in college, it should factor in to your overall assessment.

A player who is content to sit on that bench as long as he did, when as a 5 star recruit he would have had other options... That's something you need to consider. It's something you need to ask the kid about. Because if he's that mentality that is quick to settle, it is the opposite of the competitive sumbish type I prefer at the QB position. That's the top trait you're looking for. In my book.

To each their own, but I think that's a very weird critique. Ty Simpson sat for three years behind Bryce Young and then Jalen Milroe. Tom Brady sat for three years at Michigan. Kurt Warner sat for four years at Northern Iowa. Joe Burrow sat for three years at Ohio State and would not have left if he had beaten out Dwayne Haskins for the starting job entering year four. Brady, Warner, and Burrow weren't guys who lacked competitiveness.

To put it bluntly, I think it's weird to penalize a QB for choosing to remain loyal to his team and compete, rather than transfer when he faces adversity. If anything, given the fact that we don't know when Stafford will call it quits, having a QB who has the character to keep showing up and doing the work when he's not the starter is a good thing for us.

 

[RamFan503]

I get that they're not accountable to anyone, and their main job at the end of the day is to generate clicks. But if they didn't have an entertaining personality, or demonstrate that they have good football knowledge and scouting abilities, or all of the above, they'd stop generating clicks and wouldn't be around long.

So in a sense they are accountable to the bottom line: money.

No one, not even the professionals, have a high hit rate on successful QBs. That's why every year 20-25% of the league is looking for a QB.

You ask how much more successful are they than board amateurs? I'd argue a fair bit more. In fact, they likely heavily affect the opinions of board amateurs. Only a very few of us get ALL of our opinions from pure film review.

(For example, I personally form my opinions by a complicated algorithm of watching *some* film, listening to a wide range of media experts, considering some analytics, reading board opinions, and rolling dice lol)

I'd say a just as relevant question is, how much less successful are they than the professionals?

Ultimately, this is my point. We can't compare them to a standard of batting 100. Say they're only right 40% of the time. Well, the professionals are only right 50% of the time.

For the ones that are right a decent amount, give them a little break.

Meh. I've already spent more time on something I really don't care about than I feel appropriate. I think they are way less successful than actual scouts when you look at the grand scheme of everything they do. They just need to be good talkers and include the latest A & B listers and they provide all the entertainment they need to keep their job. Meanwhile, scouts and GMs are based almost exclusively on the performance of not only their top picks but the entire draft, FA, contracts, and how all of these things favor each other. The hair dos and McShays of this world rattle on about shit they have time to look into that the average joe does not. So in that sense, yeah, we all watch what they come up with and that plays into a lot of the views around here. Many here might look at what they say and then look into it more with their own eyes. It's a mixed bag. In my opinion, they should have a much higher hit rate than GMs or casual fans because this is pretty much all they do. 40% is a pretty low bar if that is your profession. That's approaching meteorologist level incompetence.

 

[dieterbrock]

Nonsense. I think if you're going to build a belief system up for a slightly framed QB who can't win the job until his last year in college, it should factor in to your overall assessment.

A player who is content to sit on that bench as long as he did, when as a 5 star recruit he would have had other options... That's something you need to consider. It's something you need to ask the kid about. Because if he's that mentality that is quick to settle, it is the opposite of the competitive sumbish type I prefer at the QB position. That's the top trait you're looking for. In my book.

Couldnt win the job? Dude, you seriously need to follow football.
He joined Bama who already had Bryce Young and Jalen Milroe on the team
Thats how it works, its a depth chart
Had he stayed he would have been a 2 year starter
Again, he was at Alabama for god's sake where they had pick of the litter
Its not like a Cole Payton who "couldnt win the job" over guys who can barely get a tryout

 

[OldSchool]

Couldnt win the job? Dude, you seriously need to follow football.
He joined Bama who already had Bryce Young and Jalen Milroe on the team
Thats how it works, its a depth chart
Had he stayed he would have been a 2 year starter
Again, he was at Alabama for god's sake where they had pick of the litter
Its not like a Cole Payton who "couldnt win the job" over guys who can barely get a tryout

Like Jrry said Burrow couldn't win the job over Haskins. What a terrible player I wonder if this constitutes character concerns so we can make up more shit about Simpson hahaha

It's gotten so silly I really am losing interest in the draft as a whole and that's a shame because this is my favorite time of year for sports and one part of it is just toxic garbage now.

 

[RamFan503]

Come onnnnnnnn THURSDAY!!!

 

[Coliseum Ram]

To each their own, but I think that's a very weird critique. Ty Simpson sat for three years behind Bryce Young and then Jalen Milroe. Tom Brady sat for three years at Michigan. Kurt Warner sat for four years at Northern Iowa. Joe Burrow sat for three years at Ohio State and would not have left if he had beaten out Dwayne Haskins for the starting job entering year four. Brady, Warner, and Burrow weren't guys who lacked competitiveness.

To put it bluntly, I think it's weird to penalize a QB for choosing to remain loyal to his team and compete, rather than transfer when he faces adversity. If anything, given the fact that we don't know when Stafford will call it quits, having a QB who has the character to keep showing up and doing the work when he's not the starter is a good thing for us.

Not to mention, people need to hear Simpson talking about the character and team player attributes his Father drilled into him at a young age that has carried all the way through.

I'm starting to think the Simpson/Rams connection, however slight it may be, originated while we still had Pick 29 in addition to pick 13. Pick the Receiver at pick 13 then the "spec" pick Simpson at 29, a spot he is more apropot for anyway. Seems since we traded away the pick there's been way less smoke between us and Ty. And a great trade it was for us

 

[fanotodd]

Religious people who think.

Say, “Goodnight” Dick.
“Goodnight Dick.”

 

[gogoat1]

We are not drafting Ty Simpson. If we just stopped talking about this guy who has little chance of being a Ram it would be a improvement.
It was bad enough listening to it all in threads that were not dedicated to this guy.
Fact, McVays only 2 quarterbacks were #1 overalls. This guy is not in McVays wheelhouse, not talented enough.

 

[Merlin]

Couldnt win the job? Dude, you seriously need to follow football.
He joined Bama who already had Bryce Young and Jalen Milroe on the team
Thats how it works, its a depth chart
Had he stayed he would have been a 2 year starter
Again, he was at Alabama for god's sake where they had pick of the litter
Its not like a Cole Payton who "couldnt win the job" over guys who can barely get a tryout

Stop with the condescending BS. You know better than that.

He was a 5 star recruit. The fact he stuck around on that roster is something that I fucking guarantee you teams will ask him about. They're going to want to get to the bottom of that. So quit being naive and acting like teams don't check that shit. They absolutely check it as compete is a top concern and it's something you have to use the history of the player to piece together a picture.

Not saying it's perfect or that he's a shitter for sticking around at Bama. But as a top recruit for him to sit on the depth chart like that is something you want to get to the bottom of. And when he rattles off the "I'm so loyal" BS a smart team will keep digging. From there if you're happy with his approach, cool. But stop acting like it's some shit you just accept.

 

[fanotodd]

I believe we can't know if someone is overdrafted until the results are in. If the player is successful, they clearly weren't overdrafted.

Purdy and Brady were severely underdrafted. Nix looks like he was drafted where he should have been.

Agree 100% on both points.
1) nix is having a good career. Don’t know why people are still down on him. I saw him in college. He looked pro ready to me.
He might not end up in the HOF, but there are several teams that did not get as good of a year out of THEIR QB.

2) “overdrafted”? How so? When was mccarthy drafted? Imagine the vikings with nix instead. They’d be in better shape than they are now.

In general, I think terms like “over drafted” and “value” have little or a misconstrued meaning this time of year. Like you said, it comes down to how the player fares—so making that kinda statement before or right after a player is drafted means very little to me.

 

[Merlin]

We are not drafting Ty Simpson.

I wouldn't go that far. What we don't know is what the Rams internally feel about how long Stafford wants to play. You have what he tells the press and shit. And then you have the other stuff, all the things you see internally with him in his approach and his body and all that. Where teams inevitably are going to get a feeling one way or the other.

I tend to think they're all-in with Stafford for at least another couple years. At least as far as they can be given a dude of his age. But you never know and the Rams the only way to know what they're thinking is read their moves.

So if they take Simpson, especially if they take him at 13, it means they're thinking Stafford's probably closer to retirement than he is sticking around for a while. Also it gives them time to develop Simpson. Question though is whether he's good enough for McVay, and from that regard I think they are more likely to address QB in the 2027 draft even if it means they lose out on that year of dev time.

All that aside I also expect them to take a shot on a QB rounds 5-7. That doesn't affect their impact choices up top that should help them win a title. And that QB should be in play for the QB2 role which is what you want to look for from this particular class.

 

[Merlin]

To put it bluntly, I think it's weird to penalize a QB for choosing to remain loyal to his team and compete, rather than transfer when he faces adversity.

Disagree.

It's not penalizing him to consider it and get to the bottom of how it played out in his mind and decision making. Rather it is doing good diligence as it pertains to something that can be an indicator of compete level.

 

[Merlin]

It's gotten so silly I really am losing interest in the draft as a whole and that's a shame because this is my favorite time of year for sports and one part of it is just toxic garbage now.

I haven't made up one thing about Simpson.

What is actually toxic garbage is acting like someone's a fucking hater for having the discussions that you don't like. Instead of considering that maybe those issues are things teams do indeed consider, given the extent of investment in draft value and time coaching the player up that are required with QBs.

I think Martz had it right with QBs. If the QB is the most competitive MFer on the field for you, you are in great shape. If not, you're likely to come up short. So doing one's diligence on these matters is important. Certainly it is worth the discussion.

 

[Allen2McVay]

...

...

...