The Los Angeles Rams were at a crossroads to start the 2026 offseason. They could choose between going “all in” and pushing for their second Super Bowl under Sean McVay or they could take a more measured look and attempt to sustain success longer term.
This is how I saw the path in front of them back in February:
The Rams must choose a path between:
Going “all in” again
Could mean trading draft picks for veterans who are able to contribute right away. Restructuring contracts and utilizing void years to max out the credit
card and make the most of Matthew Stafford’s career remainder. This approach risks jeopardizing the existing core and LA may not have salary cap space to retain all of their ascending players or could reduce their ability to add talent in future years.
Building for the future
LA has two first round picks. They can find two new cornerstones and lock them into rookie contracts that are cost-controlled for five years. It’s an appealing idea that would add to the young core of Puka Nacua, Jared Verse, Kobie Turner, Steve Avila, Byron Young, Braden Fiske, and others.
But rookies may not be able to contribute to the extent needed for the Rams to reach the Super Bowl in 2026. It’s a more methodical approach that may not help with short-term goals.
Which path will Rams choose?
Could the Rams chart their own path down the middle instead of choosing between the roads laid in front of them? Conceptually it seems possible to both build through the draft and load up on enough veteran talent to build a competitive roster in 2026.
But getting greedy does have consequences.
If the Rams end up falling short of their 2026 Super Bowl expectations, we could look back with regret and wonder why they didn’t fully commit to the all-in approach. Matthew Stafford is in the twilight of his career. LA should be doing everything possible to maximize their window with him, and instead they used the 13th overall selection on what they hope is his replacement.
Will Trent McDuffie and Jaylen Watson be enough to get them over Mt. Rainer and topple the Seahawks? Could a narrow focus on retooling the defense come at the cost of offensive regression?
Attempting to split the fork in the road rather than fully committing to one side or the other does come with consequences. While the Rams have taken wise steps to secure their future, there is no certainty of long-term success.
It may take multiple quarterbacks to replace someone as competent as Stafford. We’ve already seen McVay grow impatient with a quarterback early in his development and toss Jared Goff to the curb. Will he be able to see through Ty Simpson’s growing pains?
But, of course, in some ways shifting to a new quarterback timeline was necessary:
If Simpson successfully becomes the Rams’ next franchise quarterback, he will help solve a slew of problems for his new team:
- More salary cap space to re-sign ascending players
- Retaining premium draft capital
- Flexibility to add veterans through trades and free agency
- Ending the year-to-year cycle with Matthew Stafford
That’s a big “if”.
The Rams are an ambitious franchise. Not following either of the traditional paths is very on brand for them. They deserve credit for choosing their own future, although we cannot ignore the potential downside should both of these new era fail to bring another championship back to Los Angeles.
