When the Rams used their first-round draft pick on quarterback Ty Simpson, questions were immediately raised: Shouldn’t they have spent that pick on a player who could help Matthew Stafford win another Super Bowl? Did Rams coach Sean McVay even want Simpson?
Simpson said he was aware of the reaction, but it didn’t matter to him.
“I really didn’t care, to be honest with you,” Simpson told SI.com. “Everybody can have an opinion, but it’s my job to take care of my business. So, the Rams took me with the 13th overall pick, so now it’s my job to be the best player I can be, the best Ty I can be, and go out there and prove them right. I don’t really listen to all that. My job is to make sure to do whatever my team needs me to do to win and that’s what I’m going to do.”
Simpson says Stafford has been a good teammate in the early part of the offseason program.
“It’s great. Just sitting there in the room with Matthew, it’s super, super fun. It’s awesome. He’s just an A-plus guy, A-plus player,” Simpson said. “I think it’s really, really cool to, one, be in the room with Matthew, who has done it at a high level for so long.”
With Stafford now signed through 2027, it could be years before Simpson takes over from Stafford as the starter. But Simpson is beginning the work now to be ready whenever his name is called.
Rams Clips
June 1 is eight days away. An A.J. Brown trade is as little as nine days away.
As of June 2, the Eagles can trade Brown and spread the dead-money charge over two years. Most believe it’s just a matter of time before the trade happens. Most believe Brown will be traded to the Patriots.
Watch the video attached to this post. Patriots safety Kevin Byard and receiver Romeo Doubs recently spoke openly about the arrival of Brown as if it’s a done deal.
It’s entirely possible that the deal is unofficially done. Trade terms agreed to, and both teams keeping their mouths shut until Brown passes a physical and both teams communicate the terms of the transaction to the league office.
The Maxx Crosby fiasco from March was a lesson to all teams about not letting the cart get in front of the horse. Say nothing until the deal is official.
Could another team swoop in with a better offer? If the Patriots and Eagles have unofficially worked out a deal, and if both sides honor a transaction that remains unofficial until it becomes official, it’s too late for that.
Some are still suggesting the Rams could make a run at Brown. That ship sailed in March, when the Rams decided not to proceed based on the available medical information — and when the Rams allowed $24 million in 2026 compensation for receiver Davante Adams to become fully guaranteed.
If the Rams had done the deal, they would have traded Adams. It’s not impossible for someone else to enter the A.J. fray, especially if the Chiefs are suddenly having misgivings about whether Rashee Rice can be trusted after his recent probation violation.
For now, all signs are still pointing to Brown becoming a Patriot as soon as June 2.
As his 13th NFL season approaches, receiver Davante Adams has a chance to make a big move on the list of all-time receptions.
His 60 catches in 2025, Adams’s first year with the Rams, put him at No. 16 on the career catch list with 1,017.
As noted by Evan Craig of SB Nation, Adams needs only seven catches to match Rams legend and Hall of Famer Isaac Bruce at No. 15. Beyond that, Adams needs seven more to catch Steve Smith Sr. at No. 14.
Another 60-catch season would put Adams in the top 10, one reception ahead of Anquan Boldin and one behind Terrell Owens. (Free-agent Keenan Allen, currently at 1,055 catches, may have something to say about whether Adams finishes 2026 at No. 10 or No. 11.)
It’s unclear how much longer the 33-year-old Adams will play. But he’s in position to eventually pass Hall of Famer Marvin Harrison Sr., who’s currently fifth with 1,102 receptions. Entering 2026, Adams is only 86 catches away from doing that.
Adams is already seventh in career touchdown receptions, with 117. He has led the league three times — and he’s the only player to do that with three different teams (Packers, Raiders, Rams).
Last year, he had 14 in only 14 games. With another 14 touchdown catches this year, Adams will occupy the No. 4 spot on the all-time list at 131, behind only Jerry Rice (197), Randy Moss (156), and Terrell Owens (153).
Already, Adams has put together a borderline Hall of Fame resume. By the time he’s done, it could be a no-brainer.
Making Matthew Stafford’s MVP season more impressive was that he almost didn’t play in Week 1.
In a recent appearance on the Bussin’ With The Boys podcast, Rams coach Sean McVay said Stafford’s preseason back injury nearly resulted in Stafford landing on injured reserve.
“What people don’t realize is how close -- [Stafford] and I sat down -- and I was like, ‘Hey, this isn’t responding the way we had hoped,’” McVay said, via John Breech of CBS Sports. “‘Let’s put you on temporary IR so we don’t put this, where we feel like this anxiety of having to hit a timeline to be ready to go.’”
Stafford, who tweaked his back in the downtime between the offseason program and the start of training camp, didn’t practice until August 18.
McVay previously said in a March appearance on PFT Live that other teams thought he was simply giving Stafford extended time off during camp. McVay shared in his more recent interview a story from Stafford.
“We’re playing in London against Jacksonville,” McVay said. “Matthew comes to me before the game, and he goes, ‘How about this?’ He goes, ‘I’m talking to the Jacksonville staff. Those guys are like, ‘Man, that’s pretty cool of Sean to let you have off of camp and use the back injury to do that.’ And he’s like, ‘The fuck you talking about, man? The back injury was real as shit.’ We were nervous as hell. I mean, it was a week before we’re playing Houston.”
Time in an Ammortal chamber helped get Stafford’s back where it needed to be. And everything worked out.
But here’s the reality. Back problems can return. With Stafford now 38, it can come back at any time.
Last year, the Rams got lucky. This year, the question of whether Stafford will have a relapse will linger. Which makes it even more important to have an understudy ready to go.
Whether that would be rookie Ty Simpson or Stetson Bennett or (if he decides to play again) Jimmy Garoppolo remains to be seen.
Four weeks after drafting quarterback Matthew Stafford’s potential eventual replacement, the Rams have reached a new deal with the latest NFL MVP.
The Rams have announced that Stafford and the team have signed an extension.
Adam Schefter of ESPN reports that the one-year extension has a base value of $55 million. It can be worth up to $60 million with incentives.
Stafford, 38, had been under contract for one more year, with a total compensation package of $40 million.
The Rams and Stafford have been operating on a year-to-year arrangement. It’s currently unclear whether the Rams have made a firm, two-year commitment. Even if the Rams can feasibly exit the deal after 2026, Stafford’s commitment keeps him from becoming a free agent after the upcoming season.
The structure will be the key. The amount of guarantees for 2027 will reveal whether the Rams are continuing to play it one year at a time, while also managing to keep Stafford from walking away, if he so chooses.
The first overall pick in 2009, Stafford has earned more than $400 million during his NFL career. He was traded by the Lions to the Rams in early 2021. In his first season in L.A., the Rams won the Super Bowl.
James Uthmeier probably won’t want to read this. Even if he should.
A recent article from Brent Schrotenboer of USA Today explores the lack of Black coaches at the college level. It includes pointed quotes from Hall of Fame running back Marshall Faulk, who is in his first year as the head coach at Southern University, regarding the inability of Black players to become coaches at the college or pro level.
First, the facts. As Schrotenboer notes, only 13 major-college programs have Black head coaches. That’s down from 17 out of 120 in 2011.
“Football’s the only sport that players struggle to come off the field and become a coach,” Faulk told Schrotenboer. “They look at us like if you’re successful at the game playing then you won’t be successful at the game in any other capacity. . . .
“I’m just gonna say what it is,” Faulk said. “Matt Ryan can be a G.M. Why do other players kind of go through and jump through the hoops to be a G.M.?” (Ryan is the president of football with the Falcons, one step above the G.M.)
“What’s the quarterback [coach] that’s now in Minnesota?” Faulk added, referring to former NFL quarterback Josh McCown. “He was in Houston. They were about to give him the [head coaching] job. . . . He barely played. Played a few games in the league. But it happens. You can be JJ Redick and never have coaching experience and get the Lakers job. But can Marshall Faulk get the Rams job? Hell no. It is what it is.”
The numbers don’t lie, and facts are stubborn things. As it relates to the current (and historic) numbers in both college and pro football, something is clearly off. The demographics of the coaching population don’t match the demographics of the player population.
The only way it will change is through litigation. Which is slow. And expensive. And detrimental to the career of the person who dares to stand up and say something about it — especially in the current political climate.
The current political climate is sufficiently hostile to the notion of diversity that Uthmeier is hassling the NFL for diversity efforts that have failed to move the needle. Beyond being wrong (and probably performative), it’s bizarre.
Hiring systems supposedly based on “merit” have created results that speak for themselves. And what those results are saying is that there has been, and continues to be, a very real problem. Even if some will insist it’s a problem to try to fix it.
The Rams’ trade of Jared Goff and two first-round picks to the Lions for Matthew Stafford worked out well for both teams in the end. But Rams coach Sean McVay says he regrets the way he handled it.
McVay said on Bussin’ With The Boys that he should have been forthright with Goff about why the Rams felt they needed to find a new quarterback and warned Goff in advance that he could be traded.
“I’m super sensitive to what an amateur I was with the Goff situation, trading him,” McVay said. “You want to talk about lack of courage, lack of clarity, lack of ability to be able to look somebody in the eye that you’ve had a lot of really cool experiences with and tell him, ‘Hey, not easy to say, but we might explore an opportunity to acquire Matthew Stafford, and you’ll be a part of a trade there.’ But instead, it’s like you kind of get frustrated, and it was more really about me than it was about him. I had a lot of things that I had to work through, and I didn’t handle that the right way. I’m not saying we wouldn’t have made the decision, but the handling of it was exactly the antithesis of how I would hope to handle things going forward.”
McVay says every player deserves to know where he stands with his coach, and McVay didn’t do a good enough job of telling Goff where he stood.
“The important thing is to operate with clarity for people,” McVay said. “Did I have the courage to sit him down after that season in 2020 and tell him there’s a possibility we might explore some avenues that might lead to you not being our quarterback going forward? No. Would I handle it different now? Absolutely.”
Goff has said it bothered him that the Rams never told him they were thinking of getting rid of him until just before the news of the trade broke. McVay said he heard what Goff said and learned he needs to keep it real with his players.
“I appreciate his honesty in all of that,” McVay said. “There was nobody to blame but myself.”
When the league first deliberately leaked the possibility of staging a game on the night before Thanksgiving, it should have been obvious that it was happening. To make it happen, however, the NFL had to think outside the officially-licensed wine box.
With the ban on televising Friday night and Saturday games still in effect in November, the league couldn’t have the two Wednesday-before-Thanksgiving teams play on the preceding Saturday. The only option was to pick two teams emerging from their annual bye week.
As explained once that possibility (or probability . . . or inevitability) hit the radar screen, this limits the bye for the two teams that get the Thanksgiving Eve assignment. For the Packers, who played at New Orleans the following Sunday, they’ll have more down time after their post-bye game than before it. The Rams, who host the Chiefs the ensuing Thursday night, will have a truncated bye, eight days off, and then the usual mini-bye following a Thursday night game. (That will give the Rams extra time to prepare for their rematch with the 49ers, which surely went over well with San Francisco coach Kyle Shanahan.)
Still, both the Packers and the Rams won’t have the usual, full-blown, once-per-year bye week. They’ll play 10 days (not 14 days) after their last game before the week off.
This will complicate the planning for their Thanksgiving Eve game. Under the labor deal, players must have at least four straight days off during the bye week.
Here’s the relevant portion of the Collective Bargaining Agreement, from Article 24, Section 2: “During any regular season bye week period occurring during the term of this Agreement, players will be given a minimum of four consecutive days off. Such four-day period must include a Saturday and a Sunday unless the Club is scheduled to play a game on the Thursday following the bye week, in which case players may be required to report to the Club on the Sunday preceding the Thursday game. In such an event, the four-day period shall be Wednesday through Saturday. Any injured player may be required to undergo medical or rehabilitation treatment during such four-day period provided that such treatment is deemed reasonably necessary by the Club’s medical staff.”
The CBA, as written, doesn’t contemplate teams being scheduled to play on the Wednesday after the bye week. The most obvious adjustment would be to give the players Tuesday through Friday off, with a return to work on the Saturday before the Wednesday game.
If that’s how it goes, the players who are supposed to get a weekend off won’t even get one day from their bye-week weekend off. They’ll have their four-day break during the week, and they’ll be back to work on Saturday morning, with Saturday essentially becoming the first day of the traditional in-season preparation cycle for Sunday games. (In weeks with Sunday games, the practices usually happen on Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday. For a Wednesday game after the bye, the primary work days could be be Saturday, Sunday, and Monday.)
It’s currently unclear whether the NFL and NFL Players Association worked out a side deal to modify Article 24, Section 2. Ideally, the league would have gotten permission to deviate from the settled terms of the CBA before setting the game. If that didn’t happen, there’s a ready-fire-aim quality to the effort to find yet another standalone window.
At this point, whether the league secured advance authority to shrink the post-bye period doesn’t matter. The game has been set — and, more importantly, the right to televise the game has been awarded to Netflix. The overriding question becomes the windows that both the Packers and Rams players will have for their mandatory four-day break.
For everyone on the outside, it doesn’t matter. For the players and their teams, it’s an important question. Will there be a “normal” workweek before the post-bye game, or will the players be back on Sunday for a truncated stretch of preparation for the first-ever game on the Wednesday before Thanksgiving?
If the question wasn’t addressed before the new window was selected and sold, it’s a question that needs to be resolved in the aftermath of the official schedule release.
When concerns first emerged that UCLA would break its lease at the Rose Bowl and move to SoFi Stadium, UCLA insisted that “no decision has been made.”
It sure seems like a decision was dangerously close.
Via Ben Bolch of the California Post, court documents from the litigation over the potential relocation strongly suggest that a move was on the verge of happening.
In August 2025, Rams and Kroenke Sports & Entertainment president Kevin Demoff texted this to UCLA vice chancellor Steve Agostini: “good luck tonight, next year at SoFi!”
The court filings also show text messages from February 2025 between Demoff and Agostini regarding a tour of SoFi by UCLA officials “to see how we would make next season work.”
Said Demoff, “Yes will make whatever work.”
Demoff’s employer, and SoFi Stadium, eventually were added to the ongoing lawsuit under the theory that these outside parties intentionally interfered with the contractual relationship between UCLA and the Rose Bowl. The argument is simple; it’s impermissible to induce someone to break a valid and binding agreement. UCLA has a lease that runs through 2043. That lease must be respected by anyone who would be tempted to persuade one of the parties to violate its terms.
The concept applies throughout American business. Any contract between two parties must be respected by the rest of the world. That means not saying “see you next year” but “see you when your contract ends.”
However it plays out, it’s the second time Demoff has landed in the middle of litigation regarding a relocation. When Rams owner Stan Kroenke bought the land that became SoFi Stadium, Demoff addressed concerns regarding a potential move from St. Louis to L.A. by saying it’s “not a piece of land that’s any good for a football stadium,” that there’s a “one-in-million chance” the Rams will move there, and that Kroenke “is still looking at lots of pieces of land around the world right now and none of them are for football teams.”
The St. Louis lawsuit resulted in the league paying a $790 million settlement. This time around, the Rose Bowl took the issue to court before the move happened. And while that may delay indefinitely SoFi’s ability to bogart the Bruins, it will also keep Kroenke from having to write another massive check for the financial harm resulting from the move.
At a time when NFL rules regarding game broadcasts have taken a back seat to the importance of flexibility to program a growing number of standalone windows, there’s at least one bright line.
Per the NFL, the absolute maximum number of prime-time appearances for any one team is eight.
More specifically, a team can be scheduled for up to seven prime-time games. That team then can be flexed into an eighth prime-time game.
This rule becomes relevant to the Rams in 2026. They have seven prime-time games on the schedule as published. In Week 17, their game at the Buccaneers could be selected for Saturday night on Peacock. Also, L.A.'s Week 18 game against the Seahawks could be selected for the final game of the season (or, in theory, the Saturday night window on ESPN).
In the end, it would be Week 17 or Week 18 — but not both.
Unless the rule changes. As the NFL focuses more and more on creating the most compelling configurations of games possible, eventually the rules will be there are no rules.
