Stafford is under contract for '26, no way they are trading for a QB with Stafford on the roster
Which QB should the Rams draft in the 1st Round next year?
- Thread starter RamsRock
- Start date
-
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.
Also….The Browns traded 3 first round picks, a third, and two 4ths for Deshaun Watson. Even if Stafford weren’t on the roster, we’d have to pony up significantly more than 2 first round picks to land Burrow.
Does not seem realistic ... too early for Cincinnati to move-on, salary cap implications are far too onerous and not nearly enough in trade compensation.
Now, one more non-playoff season in 2026; and both Burrow and the Bengals might consider a change ... salary cap implications not nearly as onerous in 2027; and, if an NFC team makes a sweet offer ... MAYBE.
Nice thing about him is we wouldn't have to move up. It's going to be interesting to see where teams slot him if he does come out.
More than 2 first round picks... Yeah I agree with that.
Though I don't know that the Browns stand as any sort of example for other teams. They got burned terribly by that move too. Market will get set by what teams are willing to pay of course. So there is no telling. But what Cleveland paid feels like too much.
For example if Stafford retires and the Rams were to call Cincy, I would expect their two first round picks this year and their 2027 first round pick feels appropriate for him. And if not, then go fuck yourselves Cincy. Because they should also be able to go get Mendoza, who may end up being the better QB anyway, for that price and also have team control with a cheap cap number for the next five years.
One of the biggest overpays in the history of the NFL. Not sure it means all that much.
I apologize, too, for beating a dead horse whenever this issue is raised.
Have you, in the entire history of the NFL, heard of an elite QB that was traded in his prime?
Maybe the closest examples are Deshaun Watson (was he elite? Would he have been traded without the misconduct?) and Stafford (past his prime at 33). Burrow is 28.
Also, if traded, it will cost much more than two 1sts. That's the price for an elite non-QB position. Micah Parsons or Jemuel Adams types. It would probably be closer to four 1sts.
If the Rams repeat as Super Bowl Champions and pick #32 they might not care what they give up.
But, I still believe the QB tax supersedes the draft trade chart guide even more when it comes to the top 3 selections. Especially, in a draft class with very limited superstar blue-chip talent. However, in a deeper draft class there's a better chance that the #12 player rated player on a team's board could be rated closer to the #32 rated player on a team's draft board which might make teams more willing to deal.
Micah Parsons just got traded for 2 first round picks. Joe Burrow would command way more than that. The Watson trade isn’t far off from what Burrow would command.
I'm making my comments after having looked at history.
There are a lot more trades where a team moved from picks 6-8 to 2-3 than there are where teams moved from late 1st to the 12 range. Most teams that have a top 12 pick have a chance at a blue-chip player and don't want to move all the way back to the end of the 1st.
Also, the QB tax is opposite to what you're describing. It is typically not that high in years where the top-rated QBs aren't considered super elite and/or the draft class has very limited blue-chip talent. At any rate, I looked at some historical trades from the 6-8 to 2-3 range, and the amount given up is on par with teams moving from late 1st to the 12 range. Since I'm basing my assertion on historical trades, the QB tax is already factored in.
Another big reason to make a move this year is that they have two 1sts. Maybe the Rams won't care what they give up, but teams trading down often don't like to wait for future draft capital. This is why we see a lot more day 1 trades when a team has an extra 1st or 2nd.
Take for example the Gibbs trade. The Lions got that done because they had our 1st (32) plus 34 and 66. It worked because they had basically the equivalent of two late 1sts. If they were promising a future 1st (which has the equivalent value of a current 2nd) rather than giving one of those 1st, it wouldn't have worked.
I'm all for the Rams targeting 2027 as the year to draft a QB, but if that's the plan, they need to do whatever they can to trade back with the Atlanta pick for 2027 draft capital. Because it's not realistic to move from a late 1st to top 12 without additional 2027 resources.
Being articulate is a sign of high IQ.
I think its a positive thing for a franchise QB.
I'll take your word for it. Maybe things have changed tremendously since the Rams got that haul for RGIII and only moved down 4 spots. Perhaps, that's the missing component to be considered. The competition derived from supply and demand of each draft class at the QB position.
But, for me I would rather see this team stand pat or maybe make a very small move and nab a potential successor at QB, if possible. But, it's my opinion that neither Mendoza or Simpson are worth packaging those 1st round selections to obtain.
BTW, you seem locked into the need for a top 12 selection in 2027. Supply and demand may not necessitate that high of a selection. For example, I believe Jaxson Dart just went #25 last year in a weak top rated QB draft class and he may be just about on par with Mendoza and Simpson to me.
Last edited:
I don't think much has changed. You're right that QB supply and demand play into it. In addition, the perceived talent of the QBs plays into it. Andrew Luck and RG3 were both considered generational talents. Snead leveraged that into an unprecedented haul. That trade is on several lists as one of the most lopsided of all time. That's not the normal #6 to #2 trade.
I'm fine if the Rams agree with you and don't feel that Mendoza or Simpson are worth moving up for. In that case, maybe there's someone later in the first they'd be sold on or try to accumulate 2027 draft capital.
Dart went #25 precisely because it was a weak top rated QB draft class. You're telling me that 2027 is a strong top rated QB draft class. If that's the case, it would be a mistake to assume they'll last to late in the 1st. Typically, in strong QB classes, the perceived elite types are gone in the first 15 picks. Supply and demand pushes the perceived elite types up the draft board.
What I know judging from the last 15 years of history, QBs selected from 16-32 have 20% odds of being with their drafted team long-term. 6-15 is 40% odds. 1-5 is 60% odds. My position is, align strategy with the odds, not against them. Most likely you will need a top 15 pick to simply have coin flip odds of finding a QBotF. If you get better odds from luck, great! But don't plan on that.
Watson was traded after all the legal stuff started. He may have even garnered more with the legal stuff.
Heck I remember plenty of Rams fans who were over the moon to get him
There is no way Cincy trades Burrow. The idea is just so silly.
I struggle with putting too much stock into those odds because they are skewed by organizational incompetence. Incompetence in the selections made and/or not having the necessary infrastructure to actually develop a QB.
For example let's take the 10 QBs selected in the 16 - 32 range over the past 15 years.
4 of the 10 QBs were selected by the Browns & Broncos alone. And each player had no business even sniffing the 1st round for one reason or another (Tim Tebow, Brandon Weeden, Paxton Lynch, & Johnny Manziel). Add Kenny Pickett, a one year wonder with very small hands and average tools drafted by a defensive minded head coach who gave him an inexperienced OC and that's already half the group.
I just can't get myself to believe that this organization is that incompetent and as long as McVay stays won't have the infrastructure to develop a QB.
I'm also not locked into the team having to select a so-called elite type QB.
Disagree that he was past his prime. I think Stafford hit his late. Stafford on the Rams > Stafford on the Lions
duanevalle22
Starter
I don't want to think about a new QB right now as Stafford is doing just fine, and if we can keep him protected I can see him playing two more seasons after this season.
I'd rather stay with veteran QB's while McVay is the Rams head coach when the time comes. I just don't think McVay at this point has the patience to deal with young QB's IMO.
IMO all draft picks should be focused on defense (DB's) and Offensive lineman.
It's extremely unlikely. However if they were to do so with an eye to reloading with another QB and using those picks to expedite the roster build, I think it would be possible.
Are the Bengals the type of org that would do that? Also extremely unlikely. But I don't like to say never on things unless never is an absolute certainty.
My expectation is they're going to fire Taylor and the new coach will need to get onboard with reloading behind Burrow. But if a team were to call them after they make their coach hire with an offer of a few first round picks would they hang up? Probably. But there is that chance maybe they open that door.
There's just no upside for the Bengals. They just signed Chase and Higgins to FA deals. They have tons of cap space in '26. Burrow is Mr Ohio and wants to win there.
A little help on the O-line and a slightly improvement on D and that team can compete with anyone in the AFC
Zero, zip, nada chance they move on from Burrow
WestCoastRam
Legend
100 percent, he could be a guy you try to develop for a year or two but he can't stop from falling over and hurting himself in stiff wind which makes him undevelopable.
Well, maybe but Stafford himself has said that as a Ram his arm has lost a little from his Detroit days.
He may be mentally better on the Rams, but likely physically better when he was 28 like normal human males. We see a better Stafford because he has a better team around him, including players, coaches, and scheme.