So which came first Garrett or Simpson

  • 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.

PARAM

Legend
Joined
Aug 3, 2013
Messages
5,691
ROD Credit 2025
33,460
How are a rookie QB and a HOF DE connected.....if at all? Lotsa interesting conversation about that. There are a couple of theories here.

Drafting Simpson allowed them to trade for Garrett. The Rams now have their future QB on a rookie deal for the next 5 years, so....they can go....I now hate this phrase....all in. Another school of thought is trading for Garrett allowed them to draft Simpson. Apparently, the Rams have been working on this trade since the Browns restructured Garretts contract in March and realizing they had the ammunition to get it done, took Simpson.

I don't know which and I'm not sure I care.

Getting a young stud QB to sit behind the HOF QB for a couple/three years, while also getting a HOF defending DPOY sounds so fucking nice, it doesn't matter which one allowed for the other. The talk is "the Rams were the SB favorite before this trade....now they are the overwhelming SB favorite". Sure they still have to get it done but I feel much better about their chances this afternoon than I did this morning. And that's nothing against Jared Verse. He's an excellent player with a bright future.

Either way. To have the best head coach in the league and probably the best GM, man it's a great time to be a Ram fan.
 
Last edited:
The drafting of Simson allowed the Rams to trade future high draft picks in this case for Garrett. They aren't just trying to build a team to win the Super Bowl they're trying to maintain that long term.

No edge available will match Garrett. And with Simpson on the roster they feel they can trade whatever they want to in picks to add the the roster with the future secure.

Next up? They'll sign Diggs.
 
The Simpson pick definitely makes more sense now. They wanted to turn those futures into a higher chance of a title, so they took the guy they preferred from the class at a spot they knew they could get him.

Basically you can't argue now that they should have just waited until next year's draft class and then position if they need to for the QB. So I'd imagine this was part of the plan going back before the draft.

All that aside we'll see how the QBs from this class play out around the league. And whether Simpson ends up better than some of the others who went after the early going.
 
The Simpson pick definitely makes more sense now. They wanted to turn those futures into a higher chance of a title, so they took the guy they preferred from the class at a spot they knew they could get him.

Basically you can't argue now that they should have just waited until next year's draft class and then position if they need to for the QB. So I'd imagine this was part of the plan going back before the draft.

All that aside we'll see how the QBs from this class play out around the league. And whether Simpson ends up better than some of the others who went after the early going.
Also see how the QBs drafted in 2027 do too.
 
Next up? They'll sign Diggs.
Who will the Rams bring in this offseason to counter their weaknesses?
everyone GIF
 
Not sure it matters but the Rams have been high on Simpson since Oct 2025. And remember, Snead is the one who influenced him to declare by telling his father IN JANUARY that the Rams had interest in drafting him with one of their 1sts.

Simpson is the piece that came first. Securing the future QB allowed them to use future draft assets now. The GM said as much after the draft.
 
At this point Simpson hitting is a potential future windfall. Hope it happens but for now all I care about is winning a title or two before 9 hangs 'em up. And it sure as hell feels like we have a great chance to do that.
 
At this point Simpson hitting is a potential future windfall. Hope it happens but for now all I care about is winning a title or two before 9 hangs 'em up. And it sure as hell feels like we have a great chance to do that.
And if Simpson DOES hit, we can go on another "F them picks" campaign to get him weapons to win a title after Stafford and Garrett are gone . Like we did with Goff, trading major high draft capital to get Sammy Watkins, Brandin Cooks, and Jalen Ramsey

Admittedly getting wayyyyy ahead of myself here
 
  • HaHa
Reactions: muggmeister
I don't know about everybody else but I ain't betting against Sean McVay and Les Snead. A first for Cooks. Two firsts for Ramsey. Two firsts + for Stafford. A 1st for Garrett. Sammy Watkins, Marcus Peters, Aqib Talib, Dante Fowler, Von Miller. When they call another team does the GM, think "okay how are they going to try to fleece me?" ?
 
  • High Five
Reactions: OldSchool
Heard that from multiple people today. They must be pretty sure they got the right kid. Which is nice for fans to hear.
Look at it this way, over these next 3 drafts 27', 28' & 29', the Rams could have mortgaged several high picks to obtain maybe 4th or 5th best QB in the 27' draft, who would be unproven. Or they could mortgage those same picks for Miles Garrett.

If Garrett can play effectively for 4 or 5 years, or just win a SB next year and play a few more years after that, it's a no brainer. Abd yes, I realize they gave up Verse, but they also removed one future high priced contract that will allow them to keep maybe two other players like Avila and Young.
 
Last edited:
I don't know about everybody else but I ain't betting against Sean McVay and Les Snead. A first for Cooks. Two firsts for Ramsey. Two firsts + for Stafford. A 1st for Garrett. Sammy Watkins, Marcus Peters, Aqib Talib, Dante Fowler, Von Miller. When they call another team does the GM, think "okay how are they going to try to fleece me?" ?
I imagine they pick up the phone to see what he’s got in mind. Les has said that in order to get other teams to work with you, you have to make things as close to a win win as possible. I think it’s partly why so many fans think he gets fleeced in a lot of these trades. Fans have an unrealistic expectation that we are going to be the obvious winners in any transaction and anything less means we got the raw end.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BC Ramfan
I imagine they pick up the phone to see what he’s got in mind. Les has said that in order to get other teams to work with you, you have to make things as close to a win win as possible. I think it’s partly why so many fans think he gets fleeced in a lot of these trades. Fans have an unrealistic expectation that we are going to be the obvious winners in any transaction and anything less means we got the raw end.
I remember some fans thought a 2nd and a 3rd for Von Miller was too high. But that was after he went to Buffalo. McSnead are not afraid to wheel and deal.

Picked up Sammy Watkins and a 6th (for EJ Gaines and a 2nd) in year 1
Cooks (1st) Peters (4th, 6th & future 2nd) and Talib (???) the next off season. Fowler (3rd and 5th) in season. Superbowl

Ramsey in season 2019 (for two 1sts)

Stafford before 2021 season (for two 1sts).
Sony Michel (6th round & future 4th round)
Von Miller in season (2nd & 3rd)................................................
Superbowl

Dotson after preseason in 2023 (for a 4th and future 5th)

McDuffie (1st, 5th, 6th and future 3rd) and Garrett in the off season (1st, future 2nd and 3rd). ????????

And that's just the trades. How about all the UFA's?

Andrew Whitworth, Robert Woods, Mark Barron, Ndamukong Suh, Clay Matthews, Eric Weddle, Leonard Floyd, A'Shawn Robinson, OBJ, Bobby Wagner, Cam Curl, Poona Ford, Davante Adams, Jaylen Watson and the list goes on.
 
I don't know about everybody else but I ain't betting against Sean McVay and Les Snead. A first for Cooks. Two firsts for Ramsey. Two firsts + for Stafford. A 1st for Garrett. Sammy Watkins, Marcus Peters, Aqib Talib, Dante Fowler, Von Miller. When they call another team does the GM, think "okay how are they going to try to fleece me?" ?
Thats the great thing about "win-win" trades. Thats what you WANT!

Stafford trade was classic win-win for both sides. Detroit wouldn't now NOT DO the trade because L.A. won the Super Bowl. That trade TRANSFORMED their team from perennial loser to perennial winner (for the most part). That's what WE want, we want teams who wanna deal with the Rams because theyre not worried we're trying to "fleece" them. If Goff busted, and they didn't cash in the 1st Rounders we sent them, who knows, maybe Cleveland doesn't make today's deal.

LET Cleveland win their side of the deal. As long as WE win our side.
 
Thats the great thing about "win-win" trades. Thats what you WANT!

Stafford trade was classic win-win for both sides. Detroit wouldn't now NOT DO the trade because L.A. won the Super Bowl. That trade TRANSFORMED their team from perennial loser to perennial winner (for the most part). That's what WE want, we want teams who wanna deal with the Rams because theyre not worried we're trying to "fleece" them. If Goff busted, and they didn't cash in the 1st Rounders we sent them, who knows, maybe Cleveland doesn't make today's deal.

LET Cleveland win their side of the deal. As long as WE win our side.
The Lions got Goff, Melifonwu, Jameson Williams and Jamyr Gibbs from that trade. They were happy.