zn wrote:

Here;s the title of the PFF article that guy is quoting from: Ranking the most valuable non-first-round NFL Draft picks since 2016

Yes, well, that would contribute to the overall coherency, I think.

Zooey wrote:

wv wrote:

Top 5 Rams?
(Comments mentioned Faulk, Slater, Pace, Gabriel, Fears, Crazy Legs, Holt, Flipper, Cromwell…Fred Dryer )

I haven’t watched the video yet, and far be it from me to plow into a topic I haven’t given any thought to, but I will say Flipper is not worth a nod in this discussion. I liked Fred Dryer more than you did, but he doesn’t belong in the conversation, either.

Faulk would be a tough one for me because he spent his first 4? years with some other team. I can’t say anything about Fears or Hirsch because I never saw them play, and only know a bit, and the same is true for Gabriel, although I did watch him play, but I was like 6 – 10 years old, and what did I know about football while I was watching him, and obviously had no point of comparison at the time.

BTW, that list doesn’t include Dickerson, Deacon Jones, Olsen, Night Train, Warner, Youngblood, or Bruce.

At this point, I think I’m just going to say that I’m proud that the Rams have so many great players, cutting it down to five is practically impossible. It would be so much easier to do this if we were Seahawks fans like Nittany. They have Largent, Lynch, Kennedy, and Sherman. That’s about it. Can’t think of a 5th.

Oh. The video mentions Youngblood, Jones, Olsen, and Dickerson. So…okay. Shoulda maybe watched it before I opened my fat mouth. And I can’t believe I totally spaced Donald. JFC.

zn wrote:

Who would it be?

Merlin Olsen

• This reply was modified 6 hours, 55 minutes ago by Zooey.

Wow, thanks for that. I have seen the Ferragamo to Waddy 50x in my life, but that was the first time I noticed that the pass was tipped by a defender. And the F-W play is the only play that I remember. Watching that little summary was a fabulous trip. All those names. By golly, why do people prefer 38-35 to 16-12?

I always loved those games. I like the current games, too, but I loved the low-scoring, 1970s games at least as much.

Cullen Bryant, man. I loved that guy. I’m not sure he has any equivalent in the modern era.

zn wrote:

…

As it happens, CBS Sports’ Pete Prisco just dropped his three-years-later 2023 NFL Draft regrades last week. While Prisco gave the real-life Dallas Cowboys an “F” after first-rounder Mazi Smith didn’t work out, our re-draft aims to fix that, but along the offensive line. And Prisco was right to give an A+ to the Rams and Seahawks for their historic hauls

…

3. Houston Texans: Puka Nacua, WR, BYU
Drafted: No. 177 overall by Rams | My final big board: No. 154
Original pick: Will Anderson Jr., EDGE, Alabama

Will Anderson Jr. was such a good pick here, and the cost, it turns out, was not prohibitive either. But rules are rules, so instead, the Texans get Bryce Young a legit weapon in Puka Nacua.

You might argue that the Texans WR room is pretty deep, but we still don’t know when Tank Dell will be 100% — he was also in the 2023 class, so he’s technically a free agent in this exercise … as is sixth-rounder Xavier Hutchinson — and I love the idea of Nacua and Nico Collins on the field together.

18. Detroit Lions: Byron Young, EDGE, Tennessee
Drafted: No. 77 overall by Rams | My final big board: No. 65
Original pick: Jack Campbell, LB, Iowa

Young has 29 sacks in three seasons, including 12 in 2025 — which is tied for second among pass rushers from the 2023 class behind Tuli Tuipulotu. Young is an older player for the 2023 class (he’s 28, while Anderson is just 24), but that’s not necessarily a bad thing; sure, maybe his ceiling is lower — but it was already pretty high when he arrived in the league.

19. Tampa Bay Buccaneers: Kobie Turner, DL, Wake Forest
Drafted: No. 89 overall by Rams | My final big board: No. 224
Original pick: Calijah Kancey, DL, Pittsburgh

Kobie Turner was a combine snub, again showing that the combine isn’t a prerequisite to not only getting drafted (and Turner was a Day 2 pick) but also being one of the best players in your draft class. Also: this re-draft confirms just how good the Rams’ draft haul was — they have four players going in the first round here, none of whom were actual first-rounders in 2023.

25. Buffalo Bills: Steve Avila, OG, TCU
Drafted: No. 36 overall by Rams | My final big board: No. 60
Original pick: Dalton Kincaid, TE, Utah

O’Cyrus Torrence has been really good for the Bills, but Steve Avila has maybe been a little better in L.A. for the Rams, where he’s played solely at left guard. He’ll have to move to right guard in Buffalo, but I’d expect him to play close to the same level.

Any time you get 4 1st rounder players in a single draft, you consider that a good haul.

zn wrote:

I’m in a board war on twitter

That’s not a board war; it’s a massacre.

I don’t know.

The only time I watch any of those other QBs play is when they play against the Rams, or in the Super Bowl.

So while there are a couple of those guys that I like over Stafford in the Mobility category, I haven’t seen enough of them to know how well they find the open guy, throw the ball away instead of making a mistake, throw a dime, or make a no-look pass. I don’t know if any of those guys are better than Stafford at making pre-snap reads. I don’t even know how good Stafford is at that – although it appears to me that he is pretty damn good at that.

But I can’t see any way I would rate Maye, Prescott, Love, or Williams above Stafford. Give me an Effing break on that. And I’m skeptical of placing Burrow and/or Herbert over Stafford. And so far, Jackson and Allen have not demonstrated the Clutch element that Stafford has, afaik.

Matthew Stafford was the MVP of the NFL last year. I mean… how the hell do you put him at #10? No calculus delivers that result, imo.

wv wrote:

Well, fwiw, here it is. Middlekauf seems rather emphatic about it. About the 4 or 5 minute mark.

I dunno. That sounds to me like a guy who is just echoing what Shanahan said. And Shanahan did complain about it, and he cited the 49er fan attendance as a reason, but I can’t tell if that’s just smack talk or not. What would you expect them to say?

And how would Middlekauf know what Demoff is saying to the league office? You think Demoff just calls the switchboard and starts talking to the receptionist about why he’s calling?

I just… am skeptical. I work in public education, and I can tell you that NOTHING happens here administratively without the admins considering what could go wrong. Legally.

And the NFL, I am 100% certain, is simply not going to act in a way where their impartiality can be legitimately called into question.

As a teacher, I face this all the time. If a kid comes to me to ask for something, an extension on an assignment say, my first thought after considering whether it’s a reasonable request or not is to consider whether I can defend it. What will I do when another kid, or the whole class, says, “Hey, you gave her extra time. Give all of us extra time.”

I cannot imagine the league office saying, “Okay, sure, we can give you the 49ers” without knowing that every team in the league can then say, “We want to play the Lions on our frozen tundra in December” or whatever. Why are you conceding something to the Rams that you won’t concede to every other team in the league?

You just cannot do that kind of shit. Absolutely cannot. Especially when you serve at the pleasure of the people likely to be pissed off by your decision.

So I don’t buy it. I think Middlekauf is recycling what Shanahan said without thinking very deeply about it, and reinforcing it with his personal experience at SoFi several years ago. It seemed plausible to him.

FWIW, btw, I don’t think the 9er fan presence has been as strong recently, not since the Rams sent them out of the house early in the NFC Championship. But, you know, I don’t have data on that. Just an impression.

zn wrote:

Below is the Rams’ win probability for each game, as well as the projected score in parentheses.

Week 1 vs. 49ers: 76% (29.2-21.7)
Week 2 vs. Giants: 90% (31.0-17.7)
Week 3 at Broncos: 61% (24.5-21.3)
Week 4 at Eagles: 62% (25.2-21.8)
Week 5 vs. Bills: 79% (32.5-23.8)
Week 6 vs. Cardinals: 96% (33.2-14.3)
Week 7 at Raiders: 90% (29.6-16.5)
Week 8 vs. Chargers: 81% (29.5-20.3)
Week 9 at Commanders: 84% (31.1-20.5)
Week 10 at Cardinals: 93% (31.1-16.4)
Week 11: Bye
Week 12 vs. Packers: 83% (29.5-19.6)
Week 13 vs. Chiefs: 80% (28.8-19.8)
Week 14 at 49ers: 69% (28.2-22.8)
Week 15 vs. Cowboys: 78% (31.0-22.7)
Week 16 at Seahawks: 57% (24.5-22.5)
Week 17 at Buccaneers: 74% (27.4-20.4)
Week 18 vs. Seahawks: 71% (26.5-20.4)

So… 17 & Oh.

wv wrote:

Eight Teams That Got Screwed by the 2026 NFL Schedule

Conor Orr’s annual look at teams that have tough rest differentials, unwieldy stretches or other disadvantages.

Los Angeles Rams

This schedule is absurd. Seven prime-time games. A season opener in Melbourne, Australia. One of the worst net rest differentials in the NFL. Four 2025 playoff teams in the first five weeks. Thanksgiving Eve. Christmas in prime time against the Seahawks. Two Seahawks games in three weeks to end the season. This, for a team with a 38-year-old starting quarterback who couldn’t get through training camp last year without a space-age health trailer. This is how the NFL unwittingly vanquished the Chiefs last year and is seemingly attempting to do it again with the Rams. There’s a reason Sean McVay cautioned ESPN to hold their horses when talking about the Seattle games at the end of the season because it’s unlikely the Rams will get there totally unscathed. While it’s a reality of the business, it’s disappointing to see the league’s premier offense get absolutely picked apart by factors that are totally within the league’s control.

https://www.si.com/nfl/eight-teams-screwed-2026-nfl-schedule?utm_source=firefox-newtab-en-us

Are prime time games worse somehow? The only argument there is that they are later in the day, but is that really a disadvantage? And if so, isn’t the disadvantage washed out by the fact that the other team is also playing at an unusual time? Arguably the Rams will be more accustomed to weird times than their opponents.

They have 10 days or something to get ready for Thanksgiving Eve, and the Packers do also. Christmas seems like the same deal to me.

I don’t think the calendar dates are the problem, as erratic as they are. I think it’s that almost all of their games are against viable playoff teams.

wv wrote:

Rams have lost four in a row to the Eagles.

Rams have lost five in a row to the Packers.

Apparently both teams know how to deal with McVay.

“Nuts!”

17-0, baby.

zn wrote:

Pick up a loose ball in the end zone on a two-point conversion try on a Thursday night the week before Christmas, and it might well have been the Rams holding up the Lombardi Trophy six weeks later instead of their division rivals.

Also known as the Zooey Whathisface Hypothesis.

I don’t know how the Rams survive without the help of Tutu Austin von Canidate.

Rams mailbag: What drove GM Les Snead’s draft approach? Is A.J. Brown still a possibility?

By Nate Atkins
May 7, 2026 4:01 am PDT

The Los Angeles Rams were the talk of the NFL after this year’s draft. And that makes it a good time for another mailbag.

The Rams threw a few curveballs in the draft, first by taking Alabama’s Ty Simpson at No. 13 to sit behind Matthew Stafford as the quarterback of the future. Then, by selecting just five players in the class, with a heavy focus on depth and future needs.

It was an interesting approach to take in a year with Super Bowl goals. But the Rams still have the highest odds to win next year’s title.

With so much to discuss about the present and future, let’s get to it.

(Note: Questions have been edited for length and clarity.)

Can you explain what the heck Les Snead was thinking with that draft class? Why did he select Simpson with the 13th pick when there were clearly other needs? Does he know something about Stafford that we don’t? Not to mention that the rest of our picks were pretty bad as well. — Andrew S.

This Rams draft can be explained by three philosophies:

• Los Angeles generally sees free agency and trades as the way to address needs, whereas the draft is for depth and improving the talent base for future seasons.

• This team did not see itself as having any pressing needs entering the draft.

• The Rams did not see this as a particularly strong draft.

Had they seen a player at No. 13 as the missing piece to a Super Bowl, they likely would have pulled the trigger. They just didn’t get there with USC’s Makai Lemon or Oregon’s Kenyon Sadiq at the positions they played. They did spend a second-round pick on tight end Max Klare, so it’s worth scrutinizing that idea a little. But Klare is more of a future pick than a present one, with the chance that Tyler Higbee, Colby Parkinson and Davis Allen are off the team next year.

They’d rather get the growth process underway for a slow-developing position now than start it next year and expect that player to be a No. 2 option. Especially when this tight end class was as loaded as it was in the second round.

The Rams saw this year’s first round as a two-player haul, with the first being All-Pro cornerback Trent McDuffie. Because they added McDuffie via trade and signed his Kansas City Chiefs running mate, Jaylen Watson, to be their other outside cornerback, they believed they made the swing to address their biggest need. After that move, they saw the No. 13 pick as a bonus from the Atlanta Falcons. To them, that pick justified answering the quarterback question a year early rather than a year late.

I understand the logic. Not many franchises have the luxury of stashing a first-round quarterback and still being the odds-on favorite to win the Super Bowl. A backup quarterback was also a need they rated highly, with the time off Stafford needs in the summer to manage his degenerative back issue, plus the injury risk to a pocket quarterback who is 38 years old.

What still puzzles me is what made Simpson the player. The Rams have been muted on the topic out of respect for Stafford, even though he has no reason to fear Simpson threatening his job after an MVP season. The Rams like Simpson’s hunger and ability to learn, and they’ve hinted that his processing and mobility are key traits.

But every other team that has tried this model of stashing a first-round pick behind an incumbent — be it the Green Bay Packers with Aaron Rodgers behind Brett Favre, the Packers again with Jordan Love behind Rodgers, or the Chiefs with Patrick Mahomes behind Alex Smith — has done so to chase a future ceiling of special playmaking traits.

The success of the class hinges on how Simpson pans out, how much he plays on a rookie deal and whether the Rams can still win a Super Bowl while waiting on him. It can go a lot of ways.

The rest of the class was depth-focused, involving older and more experienced prospects. Missouri’s Keagen Trost can answer a couple of backup spots on the offensive line, Miami’s CJ Daniels can bring blocking and contested catches to the receiver room, and Alabama’s Tim Keenan III can offer snaps to take a load off Poona Ford.

Klare was the other upside pick, as the Rams envision a world where he and Terrance Ferguson stress defenses in personnel and matchups and lessen the need for wide receivers to be the engine, with Puka Nacua and Davante Adams entering contract years.

Have you heard anything about trades they may still pursue? The A.J. Brown speculation seems to have kicked up again. Any smoke there? — Kevin J.

One of the key reasons the Rams decided to take a quarterback in the first round rather than wait until next year, a team source explained, is that they don’t want to have to protect their 2027 draft picks in trades as they make this Super Bowl push. This team is always hunting for upgrades, so when a player it could use is on the trade block, it’s safe to assume the Rams will at least have conversations about it.

They had those about Brown, and they got fairly serious as the Rams explored a low-salary No. 1 receiver to own for the next four seasons. That salary benefit held more power in a pre-June 1 trade, and now Brown is headed for a post-June 1 trade. Additionally, the Rams decided they did not want to move off Adams just yet, thanks to the red zone cheat code he provided Stafford with 14 touchdowns in 14 games. They chose the present over the future here.

I’m hearing that discussions are over at this point. I never say never with the Rams and potential big moves, but the expectation in league circles for some time has been that Brown will wind up with the New England Patriots.

Other players who hit the trade block will be worth a look. It’s quieter right now, with a name such as Kayshon Boutte of the Patriots out there. That calculus will change come the trade deadline in October, when some struggling teams will look to cut their losses and plan for the future. That’s the window the Rams are likely gearing up for, as the time between now and then will also bring their needs more into focus — such as the third wide receiver spot.

It’ll be interesting to see if they’re willing to make a move for a receiver at that point if Adams and Nacua are healthy and playing great, as the biggest need is probably to protect against either going down, and that can’t happen much after the trade deadline passes.

I’d also keep an eye on Maxx Crosby. He seems to have mended things with the Las Vegas Raiders after the trade to the Baltimore Ravens was reversed, but the organization’s approach could change if the Raiders hit another tough start to a season.

The Rams want to be one of the rare teams willing to trade from an expectedly loaded 2027 draft class, with the idea that they’ll be picking at the very end of the first round. But those conversations are more likely in October than they are right now.

Can you break down the battle for WR3 between Jordan Whittington, Konata Mumpfield, Xavier Smith and CJ Daniels, and go over why each candidate might win it? — Jim E.

This will be the Rams’ liveliest battle in training camp. Los Angeles had a chance to make it a non-battle if it had taken a wide receiver in the first two rounds. But after selecting Simpson at No. 13, the board didn’t fall the way the Rams wanted on Day 3. So they turned three picks into one to move up in the sixth round to take Daniels.

That move up says something about what they see in him, and their track record on later-round receiver picks is strong. But it’s also worth noting that the list of hits includes players like Cooper Kupp and Nacua, who were taken before Daniels, whom they took just one round before Mumpfield last year.

I see Daniels, Mumpfield and Whittington entering camp in a dead heat. Each has a different case to offer coming in: Daniels is the new piece who can’t be held to last year’s depth failures down the stretch. Mumpfield is coming off a learning season and has the highest upside as a playmaker. Whittington is the most proven blocker and will need a game day role for what he offers on special teams, which can move the needle on this spot.

Smith is a return-focused player, and he probably won’t see as much of an offensive role.

Blocking will be a gigantic focus of this role. It was the top reason Tutu Atwell didn’t see the field much last season despite signing a one-year, $10 million deal. The Rams decreased their usage of a third receiver by moving to three-tight-end sets, and they are leaning more into that approach after bringing back Higbee and adding Klare in the draft.

They will want to live in 11 personnel with three wide receivers at times, especially to motion Nacua into the slot to create better matchups. But that player needs to be able to block so this team can continue to blur the lines between the run and pass in those sets to unlock the best in Stafford, as well as the Kyren Williams-Blake Corum backfield.

I see it as Whittington having the highest floor, Mumpfield having the highest ceiling, and Daniels having the best balance between blocking and receiving skills. The Rams will probably lean into that balanced skill set if it hits, because a threat to catch or block on a given snap fits the blurred approach they’re looking for.