Rams Failed in 2026 Draft Approach

[Memphis Ram]

So… you’re argument is if everything went perfect, we wouldn’t be having this convo.

True.

But the thing is that the biggest failure points are spots everyone knew could be issues.

Adam’s health.
Smith’s shaky performance.
Whit & Mumpfield’s limitations.

Special teams.

I’d argue they’re still playing with fire with the OT depth… and no idea why Rivers is on the roster.

We also know that Stafford was 38 and has had back and other injury issues.
We knew that Higbee had missed 21 games the prior two seasons.
We know the difficulty NFL teams have in obtaining a possible franchise QB.
etc..

We also know that there is no such thing as a perfect NFL team.

And some of us know that McVay thinks highly of Mumpfied and Whittington (who has proven capable of playing WR, quasi TE and FB) and that most rookies typically don't make immediate impacts. And the difficulty in doing so is only increased from those coming from a weaker draft class. And the likelihood for their success increases during the back half of the season and not during the first 7 freaking games.

Also, some of us also know that supposed team needs don't influence player availability and that it would be absolutely STUPID to draft a lesser rated player at a so-called position of need just in an attempt to fill what one may be deemed as a hole.

 

[majrleaged]

Yet it's the #1 offense in the NFL via yards.
I'd argue redzone play-calling and Stafford missing some throws as the issue.
Not competition for roster spots or being ready.

You can't have watched all of every game and thought, wow, that offense is awesome. Stats can be a starting point for evaluation, but come on, you know it isn't the whole story. They play from behind in most games and are scrambling to win at the end. Plus they aren't the number 1 scoring offense.

 

[Memphis Ram]

The whole team has to perform so it isn't just about Stafford just like it isn't all Purdy. 49ers have executed better than the Rams so far. They haven't looked as great lately and hopefully thats a sign of things to come for the Whiners. Regardless of what we have going on in this debate, the Rams definitely need to play much cleaner football.

They've played better, but I wish the Rams had a shot at the Dolphins early, too.
Let's see how things go from here. The Falcons game might be a harbinger of things to come.

 

[Pupped]

We also know that Stafford was 38 and has had back and other injury issues.
We knew that Higbee had missed 21 games the prior two seasons.
We know the difficulty NFL teams have in obtaining a possible franchise QB.
etc..

We also know that there is no such thing as a perfect NFL team.

And some of us know that McVay thinks highly of Mumpfied and Whittington (who has proven capable of playing WR, quasi TE and FB) and that most rookies typically don't make immediate impacts. And the difficulty in doing so is only increased from those coming from a weaker draft class. And the likelihood for their success increases during the back half of the season and not during the first 7 freaking games.

Also, some of us also know that supposed team needs don't influence player availability and that it would be absolutely STUPID to draft a lesser rated player at a so-called position of need just in an attempt to fill what one may be deemed as a hole.

I’m sorry, but I disagree with the argument you’re presenting.

I’ve addressed the players available aspect..

I acknowledge the future QB issue and am comfortable saying I would’ve preferred to go all in this year. The roster construction and upcoming FA highlight this being the year to go for it,

“perfect nfl team” is a straw man.

“Thinking highly” doesn’t stand up to scrutiny.. and also doesn’t matter if they’re not producing.

You’re using “feelings” as an argument.. and my angle aims right at those “feelings” and questions them. “Feelings” isn’t an argument in favor of what they did, it’s an argument against it, based on results.

 

[Memphis Ram]

You can't have watched all of every game and thought, wow, that offense is awesome. Stats can be a starting point for evaluation, but come on, you know it isn't the whole story. They play from behind in most games and are scrambling to win at the end. Plus they aren't the number 1 scoring offense.

I didn't say that they were awesome. I just pointed out that they were #1 in the NFL in yards.
Points? See my next statement regarding the redzone play calling and Stafford's missed throws.
And despite all that those missed FGs are keeping them from sniffing the top 5 in scoring.

 

[Memphis Ram]

I’m sorry, but I disagree with the argument you’re presenting.

I’ve addressed the players available aspect..

I acknowledge the future QB issue and am comfortable saying I would’ve preferred to go all in this year. The roster construction and upcoming FA highlight this being the year to go for it,

“perfect nfl team” is a straw man.

“Thinking highly” doesn’t stand up to scrutiny.. and also doesn’t matter if they’re not producing.

You’re using “feelings” as an argument.. and my angle aims right at those “feelings” and questions them. “Feelings” isn’t an argument in favor of what they did, it’s an argument against it, based on results.

I wasn't attributing the perfect team comment as to something you have suggested. Just that they don't exist.

And you've completely lost me on the "feelings" stuff.

Anyway, your argument all along appears to be based upon possibilities when everyone knows that anything is possible.

My counter arguments have been solely based upon the likelihood of those possibilities, which in my opinion aren't very high.

No. I don't believe the team should blow off the opportunity to obtain a potential franchise QB.
Is it possible for the team to find someone they really like next year? Sure.
But, NFL History tells us how likely that doesn't happen minus the draft capital, available talent, and opportunity.
(Not to mention we are dealing with a head coach that traded Goff).

Is it possible the Rams could have used a 1st or 2nd rounder on a WR and that player provide a significant impact during the first 7 games? Sure.
But is it likely on a team with Adams, Nacua and despite your personal opinion, Mumpfield (whom McVay likes) and more of a TE centric offense? No. Especially, not during the first 7 games.

Is it possible that an OT could have beat out Jackson and McClendon? Sure.
Is it likely? No.

Is it possible that a more special teams approach to the 2026 Draft would have helped this team? Sure.
Is it likely? Maybe. Why? Those players would still FIRST have to pan out (when a good portion don't) and still have to be good enough to beat out veterans AND be active on game day.

Could the team have targeted a return specialist in the NFL Draft? Sure.
Is it possible that return specialist would have panned out? Sure.
But, it's also possible that player would not. See your earlier suggested example of Wetjen so far. And many considered him one of the best in the entire draft.

Again, anything is possible via the crapshoot we called the NFL Draft. But, NFL history tells us the likelihood. And it's not good at the bottom of rounds and as each round passes. And especially not for players during the first 7 games of their NFL careers.

And the pickings are even slimmer in a weaker draft class when players still have to be eliminated for character, medical, fit, etc...

 

[Pupped]

I wasn't attributing the perfect team comment as to something you have suggested. Just that they don't exist.

And you've completely lost me on the "feelings" stuff.

Anyway, your argument all along appears to be based upon possibilities when everyone knows that anything is possible.

My counter arguments have been solely based upon the likelihood of those possibilities, which in my opinion aren't very high.

No. I don't believe the team should blow off the opportunity to obtain a potential franchise QB.
Is it possible for the team to find someone they really like next year? Sure.
But, NFL History tells us how likely that doesn't happen minus the draft capital, available talent, and opportunity.
(Not to mention we are dealing with a head coach that traded Goff).

Is it possible the Rams could have used a 1st or 2nd rounder on a WR and that player provide a significant impact during the first 7 games? Sure.
But is it likely on a team with Adams, Nacua and despite your personal opinion, Mumpfield (whom McVay likes) and more of a TE centric offense? No. Especially, not during the first 7 games.

Is it possible that an OT could have beat out Jackson and McClendon? Sure.
Is it likely? No.

Is it possible that a more special teams approach to the 2026 Draft would have helped this team? Sure.
Is it likely? Maybe. Why? Those players would still FIRST have to pan out (when a good portion don't) and still have to be good enough to beat out veterans AND be active on game day.

Could the team have targeted a return specialist in the NFL Draft? Sure.
Is it possible that return specialist would have panned out? Sure.
But, it's also possible that player would not. See your earlier suggested example of Wetjen so far. And many considered him one of the best in the entire draft.

Again, anything is possible via the crapshoot we called the NFL Draft. But, NFL history tells us the likelihood. And it's not good at the bottom of rounds and as each round passes. And especially not for players during the first 7 games of their NFL careers.

And the pickings are even slimmer in a weaker draft class when players still have to be eliminated for character, medical, fit, etc...

The big picture is that there were multiple possible ways to improve the roster… leading to multiple possible paths for improvement.

And I’ve stated.. it’s for the season. Adams is out for 10 weeks.

In a scenario that doesn’t even cost them Simpson.. they end up with a better 3rd WR and a younger and more explosive kick returner… and a young athlete at TE to develop and possibly contribute on STs.

The scenario there is pretty clear.. you’d have a 3rd WR plus a KR, so you’d only need 5 WR active and could devote another player to Teams.

but.. yeah.. multiple approaches could’ve failed… I’m saying they chose the one with the least possibility for opportunity to contribute this season.

 

[snackdaddy]

Its also possible the Rams knew their starting roster was set. They had everyone returning from the number one scoring offense. So maybe they were thinking down the road. They were in a good position to think future because of the guys they had penned as starters. They really did not need immediate impact players on offense. Not to mention you never know if a rookie will be that or not.

Simpson is definitely a pick with the future in mind. Klare might have been. Its probably Higbee's last year. Parkinson will be a free agent. The use of 13 personnel works better if you have athletic tight ends who are capable of making big plays. Klare fits that. Along with Ferguson. So they had the luxury of picking players to help them next year and beyond. But injuries happen. You can't address every unit with one second round pick. And you don't have a crystal ball to think "This guy will be hurt so I need to draft someone who can take his place".

I have no problem with the draft strategy now that I know more things went into the thought process. The OP thinks it failed. I disagree with him. But in the end, its just opinions with the both of us. None of our opinions are fact.

 

[Coliseum Ram]

Its also possible the Rams knew their starting roster was set. They had everyone returning from the number one scoring offense. So maybe they were thinking down the road. They were in a good position to think future because of the guys they had penned as starters. They really did not need immediate impact players on offense. Not to mention you never know if a rookie will be that or not.

Simpson is definitely a pick with the future in mind. Klare might have been. Its probably Higbee's last year. Parkinson will be a free agent. The use of 13 personnel works better if you have athletic tight ends who are capable of making big plays. Klare fits that. Along with Ferguson. So they had the luxury of picking players to help them next year and beyond. But injuries happen. You can't address every unit with one second round pick. And you don't have a crystal ball to think "This guy will be hurt so I need to draft someone who can take his place".

I have no problem with the draft strategy now that I know more things went into the thought process. The OP thinks it failed. I disagree with him. But in the end, its just opinions with the both of us. None of our opinions are fact.

Agree

Personally, I'm of the belief you ALWAYS use the Draft for future use and NEVER use the Draft for the upcoming single season.

 

[Memphis Ram]

The big picture is that there were multiple possible ways to improve the roster… leading to multiple possible paths for improvement.

And I’ve stated.. it’s for the season. Adams is out for 10 weeks.

In a scenario that doesn’t even cost them Simpson.. they end up with a better 3rd WR and a younger and more explosive kick returner… and a young athlete at TE to develop and possibly contribute on STs.

The scenario there is pretty clear.. you’d have a 3rd WR plus a KR, so you’d only need 5 WR active and could devote another player to Teams.

but.. yeah.. multiple approaches could’ve failed… I’m saying they chose the one with the least possibility for opportunity to contribute this season.

From what I've read the forecast on Adams was 6-10 weeks but McVay said it was looking more like the short end of that one.

That potential better 3rd WR would still have to pan out, beat out Mumpfield, and earn Stafford's trust.

Besides WRs aren't interchangeable. For example. Not all can play X.

BTW, to date, the only drafted rookie WRs returning kicks with a better return average than Whittington are Josh Cameron (27.22) and Zachariah Branch (26.45) average vs. Whittington's (26.09 average). Not much difference and I have my doubts that Branch would beat out Mumpfield the way McVay talks about him.

The young athlete at TE to develop and possibly contribute on STs. That's Klare. But, again there are just so many active gameday spots.

 

[Pupped]

From what I've read the forecast on Adams was 6-10 weeks but McVay said it was looking more like the short end of that one.

That potential better 3rd WR would still have to pan out, beat out Mumpfield, and earn Stafford's trust.

Besides WRs aren't interchangeable. For example. Not all can play X.

BTW, to date, the only drafted rookie WRs returning kicks with a better return average than Whittington are Josh Cameron (27.22) and Zachariah Branch (26.45) average vs. Whittington's (26.09 average). Not much difference and I have my doubts that Branch would beat out Mumpfield the way McVay talks about him.

The young athlete at TE to develop and possibly contribute on STs. That's Klare. But, again there are just so many active gameday spots.

I think what our discussion comes down to is that I believe they chose a path where there was almost no possibility for rookies to contribute/improve the team.

And your argument is that there’s no chance any rookies they had the chance to draft could’ve made ANY impact this this year.

 

[Memphis Ram]

I think what our discussion comes down to is that I believe they chose a path where there was almost no possibility for rookies to contribute/improve the team.

And your argument is that there’s no chance any rookies they had the chance to draft could’ve made ANY impact this this year.

Nope. Now that's a strawman argument.

My argument is that it was very unlikely that a rookie they had a chance to draft could have made much of an impact during the first 7 games given the talent and experience already on the roster and how McVay/Snead (not you or anyone else) appear to feel about said roster.

 

[Pupped]

From what I've read the forecast on Adams was 6-10 weeks but McVay said it was looking more like the short end of that one.

That potential better 3rd WR would still have to pan out, beat out Mumpfield, and earn Stafford's trust.

Besides WRs aren't interchangeable. For example. Not all can play X.

BTW, to date, the only drafted rookie WRs returning kicks with a better return average than Whittington are Josh Cameron (27.22) and Zachariah Branch (26.45) average vs. Whittington's (26.09 average). Not much difference and I have my doubts that Branch would beat out Mumpfield the way McVay talks about him.

The young athlete at TE to develop and possibly contribute on STs. That's Klare. But, again there are just so many active gameday spots.

I laid out what I think the core arguments are.. so.. I'm just going to throw some stats.. because a repeated argument is that "McVay doesn't play rookies"... and I'd argue that's simply about quality of the rookie..

There's no rookie here who had a very quiet year.. that was followed by a particularly productive career..
The good players were good out the gate.
What's more.. if they had any promise to be moderate contributors, they showed it by their second year and the only guys who really fit that scenario seem to be Van and Reynolds.

Laying this out.. because I think they ignored *the possibility* of having a better WR prospect compete for snaps. And I think multiple guys they could've drafted in first 3 rounds would've made an impact this year.

Jordan Whittington
Snap counts as rookie 450 Off & St combined
22 Catches 293 Yards

Trending for lowest production of career

Puka Nacua
We don’t need to get into the details here

Tutu Atwell.. Zip.
But also pretty much zip for his career

Benny Skow
11 catches
200 snaps on STs

Konata
448 snaps.. 73 on STs
10 catches

Van Jefferson
19 catches 220 yards
256 snaps on offense 108 on Teams

Cooper Kupp 62 catches 869 yards

Josh Reynolds 11 catches

 

[Pupped]

Nope. Now that's a strawman argument.

My argument is that it was very unlikely that a rookie they had a chance to draft could have made a significant impact during the first 7 games given the talent and experience already on the roster and how McVay/Snead (not you or anyone else) appear to feel about said roster.

Let me make something very clear about my argument...

I don't care/believe what you or anyone else things about McVay/Sneads feelings about the roster.. because that's the point. They made a mistake, no matter what those "feelings" were. Your saying "that's how they felt" seems to be an effort to suggest that is an argument in favor of a failed draft class. That's strange. Who cares about their feels? I care about the performance.

And I completely disagree.. as I've mentioned.. Special Teams alone could've made the difference in one or two victories.
The difference between one victory and loss is "significant" in my mind.

 

[Memphis Ram]

Let me make something very clear about my argument...

I don't care/believe what you or anyone else things about McVay/Sneads feelings about the roster.. because that's the point. They made a mistake, no matter what those "feelings" were. Your saying "that's how they felt" seems to be an effort to suggest that is an argument in favor of a failed draft class. That's strange. Who cares about their feels? I care about the performance.

And I completely disagree.. as I've mentioned.. Special Teams alone could've made the difference in one or two victories.
The difference between one victory and loss is "significant" in my mind.

And that's the issue. You are going in this with a mindset that you know more about the current talent on the roster and the gameplan for success via that talent than McVay/Snead. And you don't. But that really matters because it plays a major role in the draft selections and the opportunities AND performance of the players selected.

It's no different than when fans say they should have traded up or down having no idea whether or not those opportunities existed even though it takes two to tango. Or when Joe Fan says they should have selected this or that player/position" with no regard to their fit, medical history, character, background check, ability to learn or anything. Just one size fits all somehow.

Oh that WR can return kicks and be the 3rd WR. Anybody has got to be better than the guys they apparently mistakenly like on the roster.

Never mind that one of them offers flexibility in his ability to play WR and a quasi FB/TE role. Never mind that not all rookie WRs can immediately play (if they aren't busts) and learn all the WR spots to give them a better shot at being active on gameday. Never mind that the team spent all offseason gearing up for a more TE centric approach lowering any need at the position.

Just do it my way and get me that rookie WR. Scrap the plans and change the offense to the more friendly WR offensive gameplan i want to see.

BTW, you are also ignoring the possibility that a rookie who MIGHT be active and helps the special teams, could also mess up his responsibilities on offense or defense and cost the team a game. It works both ways.

 

[Pupped]

And that's the issue. You are going in this with a mindset that you know more about the current talent on the roster and the gameplan for success via that talent than McVay/Snead. And you don't. But that really matters because it plays a role in the draft selections and the performance of the players selected.

It's no different than when fans says "well they should have selected this or that player" with no regard to their fit, medical history, character, ability to learn or anything. Just one size fits all. Or when fans say they should have traded up or down having no idea whether or not those opportunities existed given it takes two to tango.

BTW, you are also ignoring the possibility that a rookie helps the special teams, but messes up his responsibilities on offense or defense and costs the team. Works both ways.

There’s a difference in thinking I know better and taking in a wide range of evidence and making observations.

The data on roster construction shows an epic failure on special teams.. from a roster perspective.

Yes.. I don’t know what they knew.. but I know what the results show.

The bizarre defense that they know something magical about their WR group strains belief.

 

[Pupped]

And that's the issue. You are going in this with a mindset that you know more about the current talent on the roster and the gameplan for success via that talent than McVay/Snead. And you don't. But that really matters because it plays a role in the draft selections and the performance of the players selected.

It's no different than when fans says "well they should have selected this or that player" with no regard to their fit, medical history, character, ability to learn or anything. Just one size fits all somehow. Or when fans say they should have traded up or down having no idea whether or not those opportunities existed given it takes two to tango.

Oh that WR can return kicks and be the 3rd WR. Never mind that not all WRs can immediately play (if they aren't busts) and learn all the WR spots to give them a better shot at being active on gameday. Never mind that the team spent all offseason gearing up for a more TE centric approach. Get me that rookie WR and change the offense back to a more friendly WR offense.

BTW, you are also ignoring the possibility that a rookie who MIGHT be active and helps the special teams, but messes up his responsibilities on offense or defense and costs the team. Works both ways.

WR 5& 6 aren’t seeing snaps… soooooooo nothing to mess up!

Thanks for making my argument.

 

[Memphis Ram]

WR 5& 6 aren’t seeing snaps… soooooooo nothing to mess up!

Thanks for making my argument.

WR 5 & 6 wouldn't be seeing snaps in a more TE centric offense no matter who they were.

Thanks for missing my argument because that's where a rookie would probably initially land.
CJ Daniels is there now.

 

[Memphis Ram]

There’s a difference in thinking I know better and taking in a wide range of evidence and making observations.

The data on roster construction shows an epic failure on special teams.. from a roster perspective.

Yes.. I don’t know what they knew.. but I know what the results show.

The bizarre defense that they know something magical about their WR group strains belief.

I agree. Special teams is an issue.

But I disagree that a small rookie draft class would make that much of a difference because if they even panned out they would still be in a fight to be active on gameday. Again, as suggested earlier even though we don't have the injury stuff, try to forecast a gameday roster or inactive list.

 

[Memphis Ram]

I laid out what I think the core arguments are.. so.. I'm just going to throw some stats.. because a repeated argument is that "McVay doesn't play rookies"... and I'd argue that's simply about quality of the rookie..

There's no rookie here who had a very quiet year.. that was followed by a particularly productive career..
The good players were good out the gate.
What's more.. if they had any promise to be moderate contributors, they showed it by their second year and the only guys who really fit that scenario seem to be Van and Reynolds.

Laying this out.. because I think they ignored *the possibility* of having a better WR prospect compete for snaps. And I think multiple guys they could've drafted in first 3 rounds would've made an impact this year.

Jordan Whittington
Snap counts as rookie 450 Off & St combined
22 Catches 293 Yards

Trending for lowest production of career

Puka Nacua
We don’t need to get into the details here

Tutu Atwell.. Zip.
But also pretty much zip for his career

Benny Skow
11 catches
200 snaps on STs

Konata
448 snaps.. 73 on STs
10 catches

Van Jefferson
19 catches 220 yards
256 snaps on offense 108 on Teams

Cooper Kupp 62 catches 869 yards

Josh Reynolds 11 catches

Oh. I missed this one.

I never made an argument about McVay not playing rookies so this was a waste of time.

My point was in regards to potential opportunities due to the talent on THIS roster and the more TE emphasis on offense.

BTW, it appears that you STILL aren't considering what's going on today.

Why? The Rams were running about 90% or so 11 personnel back during these guys rookie seasons, THUS MORE OPPORTUNITIES (well the TE shift occurred during the middle of Mumpfield's rookie year). That's not what going on today.