Rams Failed in 2026 Draft Approach

[Pupped]

Well, comprehension matters. I said lead the team to victory in Stafford's abscence
But again, what more info would you need when you've already proclaimed it was a failed plan?
Brock Purdy led San Fran to the NFC Champ game as a rookie, if Ty did the same? Yeah, I'd say it was damn good planning.

Was it?
Or luck?
Because if you listen to the Rams they say if they had any idea Puka would be that good they would’ve drafted him earlier.
Was it good planning to invest all that capital into Lance?

Because.., if you stand back.., you’re making my point more than you think.

 

[Rmfnlt]

Sweet baby Jesus

 

[PARAM]

I'm saying what they did in this draft, specifically using two firsts and a second on players who were more than unlikely to have any chance to contribute this season because of their position and the depth chart.

And for those saying Simpson might help, my response would be they could've easily brought in a vet like Jimmy to keep the ship stable.

They could've addressed other positions.. traded back to get more players and increase roster competition and depth.. or trade the pics for vets.

But this approach was wrong for this season.

They drafted guys we all KNEW would not contribute this season in any way.

They knew that. It's a purely *future* draft in an "all in" year.

Wrong approach.

As I've said.. they could've used the draft capital in trades as well. Imagine if they had that first rounder in their pocket right now!!

I mean.. there are multiple rookie WRs making plays.. All drafted after pick 20. So.. they could've traded down as well.. kept more draft resources and be able to make more picks or trades, etc.

Again, with the conclusion.. they did not HAVE to use the picks in the draft, right? Especially the 27 first rounder.. which could've been VERY valuable right now.

Nah.. you can't guarantee that QB will work out... especially at a Super Bowl level

It's the false paradigms in this conversation that I take exception to.

Who said they had to have a "game wrecking" WR from the draft? Functional would be great!! They've gotten almost nothing from the WRs after Adams and Puka. Mumpfield has 9 catches. Atwell has 3. Whit has 1. Bachman doesn't even see the field. Are you really defending this group and suggesting a draft pick couldn't do better???

And they would've had draft capital to trade for a D-tackle.. like Buckner.

I *KNOW* there's no guarantee that the WR would hit.. but I KNOW Simpson won't make an impact this year.. and if he does, it means Stafford is hurt and what are the Rams SB chances if he's down?

I'm talking about the approach of being fine with getting nothing this season from two first round picks and a second. Not an urgent mindset.

Speaking of false paradigms, from the beginning you were touting they basically wasted 2 first round picks and a second, when they got a CB with one of those first round picks and the future QB with the other. Can you see why people have fought back your premise? It's been faulty from the get go.

You never said a "savior" WR (as I said) but competent and asked, wouldn't they have been better than our WR group? Answer is "probably not". Here is the order of targets this year and last.....

2026 WR, WR, RB, TE, WR, TE, RB, TE, TE
2025 WR, WR, TE, RB, TE, TE, TE, WR, WR

You complain Mumpfield only has 9 catches but fail to acknowledge he only has 19 targets. The #3 WR from 2025 (ranked #8 in targets) had only 25 targets ALL FUCKING YEAR!!!! And guess what? They made it to the CCG with that approach. The ONLY reason Mumpfield has 19 to date is because Ferguson has been out for weeks. Additionally they've used Corum much, much more. I agree he has hands of stone but at least he's improving. Last year he had 14 targets, 8 receptions, 36 yards and 0 TDs. This year he has 14 targets, 10 receptions 99 yards and 1 TD. You are arguing this has been a "wrong approach" because they didn't draft a WR high but it's not the approach, it's the "system". McVay doesn't use WRs as much anymore. The days of 11P when we needed 5 or 6 competent WRs on the roster are gone. He uses 4 TEs, 2 WRs and 2 RBs with a 3rd WR bringing up the rear. So wouldn't drafting a WR with one of those first two picks....either the first rounder or the second rounder......be just as HUGE a mistake as you're touting the QB and TE are?

You accused me of being rigid and not processing contradictory information. I say, pot meet kettle.

You say "you can't guarantee a QB will work out" and I suggest you can't guarantee anybody will work out. Mendoza and Lemon are tearing up the fucking NFL aren't they?

Bottom line is this. You are entitled to believe whatever the fuck you want. But belief doesn't make FACT. Like I said, the days of heavy WR usage are over. It would be wise to accept that FACT.

 

[Pupped]

Speaking of false paradigms, from the beginning you were touting they basically wasted 2 first round picks and a second, when they got a CB with one of those first round picks and the future QB with the other. Can you see why people have fought back your premise? It's been faulty from the get go.

You never said a "savior" WR (as I said) but competent and asked, wouldn't they have been better than our WR group? Answer is "probably not". Here is the order of targets this year and last.....

2026 WR, WR, RB, TE, WR, TE, RB, TE, TE
2025 WR, WR, TE, RB, TE, TE, TE, WR, WR

You complain Mumpfield only has 9 catches but fail to acknowledge he only has 19 targets. The #3 WR from 2025 (ranked #8 in targets) had only 25 targets ALL FUCKING YEAR!!!! And guess what? They made it to the CCG with that approach. The ONLY reason Mumpfield has 19 to date is because Ferguson has been out for weeks. Additionally they've used Corum much, much more. I agree he has hands of stone but at least he's improving. Last year he had 14 targets, 8 receptions, 36 yards and 0 TDs. This year he has 14 targets, 10 receptions 99 yards and 1 TD. You are arguing this has been a "wrong approach" because they didn't draft a WR high but it's not the approach, it's the "system". McVay doesn't use WRs as much anymore. The days of 11P when we needed 5 or 6 competent WRs on the roster are gone. He uses 4 TEs, 2 WRs and 2 RBs with a 3rd WR bringing up the rear. So wouldn't drafting a WR with one of those first two picks....either the first rounder or the second rounder......be just as HUGE a mistake as you're touting the QB and TE are?

You accused me of being rigid and not processing contradictory information. I say, pot meet kettle.

You say "you can't guarantee a QB will work out" and I suggest you can't guarantee anybody will work out. Mendoza and Lemon are tearing up the fucking NFL aren't they?

Bottom line is this. You are entitled to believe whatever the fuck you want. But belief doesn't make FACT. Like I said, the days of heavy WR usage are over. It would be wise to accept that FACT.

I fucked up on the two firsts. Raising my hand…

I FUCKED UP.

I laugh at the other stuff about Mumpfield targets.

I’ll wait and see if you can figure out the problem with that argument.

 

[dieterbrock]

Was it?
Or luck?
Because if you listen to the Rams they say if they had any idea Puka would be that good they would’ve drafted him earlier.
Was it good planning to invest all that capital into Lance?

Because.., if you stand back.., you’re making my point more than you think.

So you wont answer the question
Got it.

 

[Memphis Ram]

Oh.. yeah.. you're right.. I'm oblivious to all consequence.. while the people who suggest the organization knows all and is always right are the sensible ones.
The people who think if a rookie WR isn't in the top 5 in the league right out the gate isn't someone who can contribute to wins.
The people who don't consider better depth, especially for special teams, could easily be the difference in at least one game.

Please.. get over yourself.
We're fans.. and we pay attention.. we just have different opinions.

Truth be told aren't these really strawman arguments? Especially the first one which is commonly used on this forum.

Understanding that the organization has more information about it's overall gameplan and the players doesn't mean someone thinks that one really believes the organization knows all and are always right.

And understanding that a rookie WR would still have a learning curve, depth chart, and/or target distribution issue (like players already on the roster that the organization seems to really like) given the way the offense is being run doesn't mean said player can't contribute to wins. Everyone on the team contributes whether they are active on gameday or not. These guys aren't practicing against air.

But how much can be questioned (if said player even pans out with the organization). ie. There's a chance the Rams could have drafted a WR and we could still be having the same conversation about his usage or lack thereof given McVay's admiration for Mumpfield and Whittington and the TE focus.

Finally is anyone really questioning if better depth, especially for special teams, could be the difference in at least one game in general? Or are they questioning how much and how and where that depth is obtained and whom that depth might be in comparison to the players selected from someone who blatantly states the teams approach was wrong? Usually, when someone states that something is wrong, people become curious as to specifics of what that party believes to be the the right answer.

And when that answer seem to lack specifics or seems questionable there is going to be push back.

 

[Pupped]

So you wont answer the question
Got it.

Sorry.. but you already pointed out that my argument is right.

9ers invested in their QB for the future…

Who’s their QB? How’d they acquire him?

Take care now… (pats head)

 

[PARAM]

I fucked up on the two firsts. Raising my hand…

I FUCKED UP.

Absofuckinglootly, you did. And when you start out on a rant about "approach" but have the information incorrect, how does that help your argument? I'll tell you. It makes it weak from the get go!

I laugh at the other stuff about Mumpfield targets.

Of course you are. Because you believe the WRs on this team are "incompetent" based on their target share, when in fact it's not a matter of their competence but the system the play caller has designed and how he uses that system. It wouldn't change with a first or second round WR instead of Mumpfield, Whittington or Atwell.

I’ll wait and see if you can figure out the problem with that argument.

Oh sure, I can imagine why you believe there's a problem with that argument. If it were some first rounder or second rounder, he'd be a much better WR than Mumpfield, so he'd have a lot more targets and reception. Except, in McVay's offense, he wouldn't. For a number of reasons. Would he have the offense down pat? Sure, maybe by midseason, maybe not. Would McVay suddenly go to a #3 WR before going to Puka OR Adams, Higbee, Allen, Parkinson, Kyren and Corum? Probably not. So since I can't figure out 'the problem with that argument' maybe you can enlighten me with some solid insight.

 

[Memphis Ram]

You complain Mumpfield only has 9 catches but fail to acknowledge he only has 19 targets. The #3 WR from 2025 (ranked #8 in targets) had only 25 targets ALL FUCKING YEAR!!!! And guess what? They made it to the CCG with that approach. The ONLY reason Mumpfield has 19 to date is because Ferguson has been out for weeks.

To be fair while Mumfield probably isn't the most sure-handed WR, one could argue that Stafford has probably missed Mumpfield on throws more than he has dropped the ball. Now whether or not he was where he was supposed to be on some of them I don't know. But Stafford has been off a bit more than I remember this season.

Edit: Take it for what it's worth, but PFF has him with only 1 drop so far this season.

 

[PARAM]

Truth be told aren't these really strawman arguments? Especially the first one which is commonly used on this forum.

Understanding that the organization has more information about it's overall gameplan and the players doesn't mean someone thinks that one really believes the organization knows all and are always right.

And understanding that a rookie WR would still have a learning curve, depth chart, and/or target distribution issue (like players already on the roster that the organization seems to really like) given the way the offense is being run doesn't mean said player can't contribute to wins. Everyone on the team contributes whether they are active on gameday or not. These guys aren't practicing against air.

But how much can be questioned (if said player even pans out with the organization). ie. There's a chance the Rams could have drafted a WR and we could still be having the same conversation about his usage or lack thereof given McVay's admiration for Mumpfield and Whittington and the TE focus.

Finally is anyone really questioning if better depth, especially for special teams, could be the difference in at least one game in general? Or are they questioning how much and how and where that depth is obtained and whom that depth might be in comparison to the players selected from someone who blatantly states the teams approach was wrong? Usually, when someone states that something is wrong, people become curious as to specifics of what that party believes to be the the right answer.

And when that answer seem to lack specifics or seems questionable there is going to be push back.

Really? Are you saying first or second round WRs don't hit the ground running in the NFL? Go figure!!! Are you telling me it's not as simple as draft this guy in the first and he's automatically better than anything we have behind our #1 and #2 WR?

Oh this thread is FULL of push back. Valid push back I might add.

 

[Pupped]

Truth be told aren't these really strawman arguments? Especially the first one which is commonly used on this forum.

Understanding that the organization has more information about it's overall gameplan and the players doesn't mean someone thinks that one really believes the organization knows all and are always right.

And understanding that a rookie WR would still have a learning curve, depth chart, and/or target distribution issue (like players already on the roster that the organization seems to really like) given the way the offense is being run doesn't mean said player can't contribute to wins. Everyone on the team contributes whether they are active on gameday or not. These guys aren't practicing against air.

But how much can be questioned (if said player even pans out with the organization). ie. There's a chance the Rams could have drafted a WR and we could still be having the same conversation about his usage or lack thereof given McVay's admiration for Mumpfield and Whittington and the TE focus.

Finally is anyone really questioning if better depth, especially for special teams, could be the difference in at least one game in general? Or are they questioning how much and how and where that depth is obtained and whom that depth might be in comparison to the players selected from someone who blatantly states the teams approach was wrong? Usually, when someone states that something is wrong, people become curious as to specifics of what that party believes to be the the right answer.

And when that answer seem to lack specifics or seems questionable there is going to be push back.

No, it’s not a straw man.. people on this post have literally said the same.

Are there others who are more nuanced in their criticism? Absolutely! And I tend to have better exchanges with them.

I also understand that even with all that information, they make mistakes. One of the beautiful things about being a Rams fan is that McVay often shares that he has made a mistake. He has less ego about this than the fans on this forum.

I feel comfortable about questioning the approach.

Write down to what they did with their seventh round picks this year.

But especially, what they did with their pics in the first two rounds, as opposed to the myriad of other possibilities that were out there to improve this roster.

Championships are often won on the margins… And between the four losses, there were opportunities for contributions that could not be met.

Does that help?

It is about choosing the wrong path this year. It happens.

 

[Pupped]

Absofuckinglootly, you did. And when you start out on a rant about "approach" but have the information incorrect, how does that help your argument? I'll tell you. It makes it weak from the get go!

Of course you are. Because you believe the WRs on this team are "incompetent" based on their target share, when in fact it's not a matter of their competence but the system the play caller has designed and how he uses that system. It wouldn't change with a first or second round WR instead of Mumpfield, Whittington or Atwell.

Oh sure, I can imagine why you believe there's a problem with that argument. If it were some first rounder or second rounder, he'd be a much better WR than Mumpfield, so he'd have a lot more targets and reception. Except, in McVay's offense, he wouldn't. For a number of reasons. Would he have the offense down pat? Sure, maybe by midseason, maybe not. Would McVay suddenly go to a #3 WR before going to Puka OR Adams, Higbee, Allen, Parkinson, Kyren and Corum? Probably not. So since I can't figure out 'the problem with that argument' maybe you can enlighten me with some solid insight.

The cognitive dissonance in building an argument where a better player wouldn’t create more opportunity for the play caller is staggering.

Also, he offers nothing on special teams in any way, shape, or form.

Wasted roster spot.

 

[PARAM]

To be fair while Mumfield probably isn't the most sure-handed WR, one could argue that Stafford has probably missed Mumpfield on throws more than he has dropped the ball. Now whether or not he was where he was supposed to be on some of them I don't know. But Stafford has been off a bit more than I remember this season.

So I'll ask, if Ferguson, Adams and Parkinson were healthy, would Mumpfield (or any WR taken with our first two picks) have the number of targets he currently has?

 

[Memphis Ram]

So I'll ask, if Ferguson, Adams and Parkinson were healthy, would Mumpfield (or any WR taken with our first two picks) have the number of targets he currently has?

Doubtful.

 

[Pupped]

So I'll ask, if Ferguson, Adams and Parkinson were healthy, would Mumpfield (or any WR taken with our first two picks) have the number of targets he currently has?

Hard to say?

If Adams took fewer snaps, would he be hurt?

 

[Memphis Ram]

No, it’s not a straw man.. people on this post have literally said the same.

Are there others who are more nuanced in their criticism? Absolutely! And I tend to have better exchanges with them.

I also understand that even with all that information, they make mistakes. One of the beautiful things about being a Rams fan is that McVay often shares that he has made a mistake. He has less ego about this than the fans on this forum.

I feel comfortable about questioning the approach.

Write down to what they did with their seventh round picks this year.

But especially, what they did with their pics in the first two rounds, as opposed to the myriad of other possibilities that were out there to improve this roster.

Championships are often won on the margins… And between the four losses, there were opportunities for contributions that could not be met.

Does that help?

It is about choosing the wrong path this year. It happens.

Sorry, but I just haven't seen that. But I have seen straw. But hey, maybe I've missed it.

But yes. McVay often shares when he makes a mistake. But I don't believe he ever has regarding rookie 1st & 2nd round selections only 7 games into a season which I believe is foolish and ignores that the player acquisition process didn't end after them.

Yes, Championships are often won on the margins. And yes, there were opportunities for contributions that could not be met. But the opponents (and refs) have a say as well. And incoming talent still have a learning curve, depth chart, and gameplan fit to offset to even contribute on game day.

And when one says that a team choose the wrong path as if they know the right path your get threads like this one.

 

[snackdaddy]

It wouldn’t exist.

Because the issues laid out here wouldn’t have existed.

So its basically a hindsight thread. Got it.

 

[OntarioRam]

The NFL has always been a year to year league. To use both your 1st round pick, and your 2nd round pick, on players that will not even suit up is beyond arrogant. Using 1 of those picks on a QB of the future, sure.

 

[Pupped]

Sorry, but I just haven't seen that. But I have seen straw. But hey, maybe I've missed it.

But yes. McVay often shares when he makes a mistake. But I don't believe he ever has regarding rookie 1st & 2nd round selections only 7 games into a season which I believe is foolish and ignores that the player acquisition process didn't end after them.

Yes, Championships are often won on the margins. And yes, there were opportunities for contributions that could not be met. But the opponents (and refs) have a say as well. And incoming talent still have a learning curve, depth chart, and gameplan fit to offset to even contribute on game day.

And when one says that a team choose the wrong path as if they know the right path your get threads like this one.

lol…

My point was that yes, in fact, they make mistakes.

Your inference that I think I know “the right path” is on you.

As I’ve said.. there are many other ways they could’ve utilized the 1st & 2nd, specifically… from trading down.. to trading for a player or players.. to drafting different players.. to a combination of those.

My point is drafting the way they did.. especially at the top, was a failure.

It was a failure at the bottom as well.. not doing more to potentially boost special teams.. something they’ve done very successfully in the past.

Not my fault you lack imagination.

 

[Pupped]

So its basically a hindsight thread. Got it.

You’re not very smart.

And haven’t read the thread.