The Rams got Myles Garrett. The Seahawks still have the better roster
The mainstream media sees Myles Garrett. I see the rest of the roster.
By trading for Myles Garrett on Monday, the Los Angeles Rams added one of the NFL’s most dominant defensive players. Garrett is such a game-changing talent that he could shift the balance of power in the NFC West away from the Seattle Seahawks and back toward Los Angeles. Only a lack of common sense or pure homerism could lead a Seahawks fan to deny that a generational pass rusher like Garrett can help the Rams win the Super Bowl in 2026.
The question isn’t whether Garrett makes the Rams better. The question is whether the Rams were only one Myles Garrett away from becoming the next Super Bowl champions.
Seahawks fan Mina Kimes is one of many analysts now calling the Rams the best team in the NFL after Monday’s blockbuster trade. While I appreciate that she’s not blindly picking Seattle out of bias, her reaction highlights a potential blind spot: Aside from addressing cornerback, the Rams did little to solve the other weaknesses that prevented them from reaching the Super Bowl last season.
When you look beyond the star power on the Rams’ roster—the gap between Myles Garrett and Trent McDuffie on defense, the drop-off from Puka Nacua and Matthew Stafford to the rest of the offense, and the concerns across special teams—the cracks become impossible to ignore.
Especially when compared to the Seahawks, whose roster enters 2026 with fewer weaknesses and far more proven solutions.
The Rams are a sports car screaming, “Look at my shiny red paint job! Listen to my engine! Check out my horsepower!”
The Seahawks are a reliable everyday vehicle, capable of everything from a road trip across North America to dropping the kids off at soccer practice or picking up a hot date. They’re not as flashy, but they’re the vehicle you’d trust to still be running 30 years from now.
If next season is simply a race, the Rams could win. But if it’s a battle, the Seahawks still have as many advantages tomorrow as they had yesterday.
Most analysts looked at Monday’s trade and immediately crowned the Rams the best team in football.
I see it differently.
Garrett fixes one problem, but leaves many questions unanswered. The Seahawks had already addressed most of their weaknesses, meaning that they didn’t need to trade for Garrett.
Here are the five reasons the Seahawks still have the more complete roster.
1. The Rams are starting some legitimately weak players
I was dumbfounded by this tweet from a Rams fan saying that “this is the best roster I’ve ever seen”—not just because it’s an asinine claim to make on June 1, but especially after I took a closer look at the depth chart he tweeted out:
Yes, the Rams have Matthew Stafford, Puka Nacua, Myles Garrett, and Trent McDuffie. They could have the most STARS in the NFL.
But this particular depth chart also highlights these names as starters:
WR Konata Mumpfield
C Coleman Shelton
LB Omar Speights
LB Nate Landman
RT Warren McClendon
These are some of the most glaring differences between L.A.’s starters at quarterbacks and outside linebacker and the less talented players on the depth chart, but there are others who are still living off of reputation and draft pedigree too. Let me start with these five.
Keep reading with a 7-day free trial
Subscribe to Seaside Joe to keep reading this post and get 7 days of free access to the full post archives.