With reports that Matthew Stafford’s future with the Los Angeles Rams is questionable, some have suggested that New York may address their quarterback dilemma by trading for the 16-year veteran.
Let’s talk about the idea.
Could the Rams seriously consider parting ways with the 37-year-old? Would Stafford, at the conclusion of his career, want to play for a team that has gone 9-25 in the previous two seasons and has a head coach who is on the hot seat unless they win? What would it cost in terms of both monetary and commercial capital? Would that be a smart idea for the Giants, who are in need of a quarterback?
Would the Rams trade Stafford?
We know the Rams are “highly motivated” to deal veteran wide receiver Cooper Kupp. We know Stafford’s wife is not pleased with this.
We know Stafford has a contract for the next two years at $49 million in base pay, but it is essentially a placeholder. The sole guaranteed money is a $4 million incentive coming on March 19, assuming Stafford remains on the Rams’ roster. Last year, NFL expert Tom Pelissero wrote that “the quarterback and the Rams are likely to play out this season and then reassess.”
The Rams and Stafford are now in the appraisal stage. What will happen? Albert Breer, a Sports Illustrated NFL insider, is unsure. He has lately written this:
Stafford turned produced another Stafford year, guiding the team through offensive line difficulties, receiver injuries, and a 1-4 start. The Rams finished 10-7 and were the NFC West champions. Los Angeles thrashed the 13-win Vikings in the wild-card round then went down to the wire against the Eagles in a Philly snowstorm in the divisional round, rallying from a two-touchdown deficit with fewer than five minutes left, partly thanks to Stafford.
Stafford, who turns 37 this week, now approaches the table with the cards in his hand. Is the strain from last year’s negotiation still present? Is he going to seek another contract adjustment or, with only two years remaining on his term, a brand-new extension?
I know how his coaches feel about him and the work he’s done, and it’s apparent that the goal is to work everything out. However, these are legitimate questions.
Breer added that the Giants are at the top of the list of teams that will “certainly will pay attention to how this plays out.”
Would Stafford to the Giants be a good idea?
It’s absolutely a concept. A tremendously large idea.
The whole NFL community understands that the Giants must address their quarterback issue. If they don’t, coach Brian Daboll is certain to lose his job. Joe Schoen, the general manager, might do the same.
We know that the Giants’ strategy will most likely include an experienced mentor/bridge/placeholder and a draft pick, either a highly picked player hoped to be the franchise’s future or a development player drafted later as a potential answer.
Stafford is nobody’s bridge. If you take a chance on Stafford at this time, he will most likely be your quarterback until his body fails and he can no longer perform.
But, hey, if 36-year-olds Kirk Cousins and Russell Wilson are on your list of options, why not dream bigger and take a swing at the 37-year-old Stafford? He is a considerably greater player to Wilson or Cousins, and possibly to anybody else on the “bridge quarterback” list. In case you’re wondering, I don’t consider Sam Darnold a bridge quarterback.
I’ve seen conjecture—and I emphasize speculation; there has been no actual reporting or true evidence of Rams-Giants negotiations—that Stafford may be in the market for a new three-year, $150 million contract, with the first two years guaranteed. And it may require the Giants’ 2026 first-round selection to complete a transaction.
Can you pay that kind of premium in terms of dollars and draft capital for a man who will be 39 at the end of a new three-year contract? Would that be deemed a “Hail Mary” that Schoen has sworn to avoid in order to pursue a rapid remedy that would assist him and Daboll keep their jobs?
It would prevent the Giants from diving headfirst into a problematic quarterback selection class, pushing the can down the road.
Would Stafford want the Giants?
Stafford’s current contract with the Rams, as I understand it, does not have a no-trade clause. I have found no evidence of one. That means the Rams can theoretically move him anywhere they want.
You have to feel, however, that 16 years in the league and helping the Rams win a Super Bowl in 2021 have earned Stafford the right to choose where he plays. If he travels anywhere.
I can’t imagine Stafford would choose the Giants, regardless of what kind of adventure his wife says she’s up for.
Stafford spent the first 12 years of his career playing for a poor organization, the Detroit Lions, where he had eight losing seasons in 12 years.
The Giants finished 3-14 in 2014. They’ve gone 9-25 over the last two years. If things do not go as planned in 2025, their head coach will be fired. The Giants have perennial offensive line issues, and Stafford’s mobility and brittleness aren’t improving as he ages.
I can’t image the Giants being a desirable circumstance for Stafford to be plopped into. He just has a little time remaining in the league, and I have to believe he would prefer a landing position on a team poised to win rather than one trying to fight its way up from the bottom.
Final thoughts
I honestly believe Stafford’s signing with the Giants is a fantasy. It’s good offseason fodder for a desperate fan base to talk. I just don’t think it has a realistic chance of happening.
Leave a Reply