Matthew Stafford Contract Status
- Thread starter Merlin
- Start date
-
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.
- Status
I think you're dead on right. It's not about is he fading or is he injury prone and therefore, not worth the money. They want him for 3 years and a commitment he will be here. And they want it done yesterday so they can concentrate on other pieces. There may be 5 QBs in the NFL who are as talented or more than Stafford (and those numbers may actually be lower). It would be foolish to believe there is a better option out there through free agency or the draft. They could trade for one but who? Mahomes, Burrow, Lamar, Allen and Herbert ain't going anywhere. They could sign Rodgers and the dump truck full of his baggage. But I question whether he is as good as Stafford right now. In fact, I don't question it. I don't believe he is. And definitely nowhere near #9 with all that baggage. Yeah, smart move.....let's get Rodgers closer to Hollywood and see what new cleanses and retreats he can find. Get Stafford signed at the going rate for Franchise QBs and start adding more pieces around him.
69 pages… why is that appropriate for what’s going on in this thread?
That report sounds strange. I'm wondering if the Rams are having internal tension on the issue. My understanding is that it was the Rams that insisted on things being year to year. Typically, players want more guarantees, longer contracts...more security. It seems that would especially be the case if you're 37.
So if McVay and Stafford want more than a year, what's the issue? Unless, Demoff/Pastoors/Snead are wanting the year to year thing.
You know as bad as that is, when I looked at the number of pages, I knew someone was going to comment.
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #1,367
They just endured a rebuild. So it makes sense to want the QB in place for a three year window to ensure they make the most of it. Stafford has proven he's a stud on the biggest stage. His problems have been related to poor OL play in significant portions of the past two seasons, as well as a loss of weapon potency.
There's no reason to think he can't lead this team to playoff runs the next three years unless he wins another title this year or next and rides into the sunset to go out on top. A team with Stafford at QB has advantage against most opponents they'll draw.
Really the only reason this won't get done is because he wants too much. There is a point where the owner says "fuck this dude." I doubt our owner is at that point but you never know.
Elmgrovegnome
Legend
It’s a quarterback, whom, anccording to reports, isn’t looking for $60 million a year, like 16 other QBs in the league.
I wouldn’t advocate for the Giants to trade the third pick for any other position player. In fact, right now the trade for Burns doesn’t look so great considering the Giants may have a shot at another great college pass rusher in Carter.
Elmgrovegnome
Legend
The Rams don’t want to trade Stafford, but will listen to offers just like they do every year for their star players. In several offseasons we heard that teams inquired about Aaron Donald. Snead said himself that they always listen to and consider offers.
Elmgrovegnome
Legend
Elmgrovegnome
Legend
The point remains. A premium pass rusher in his prime wanting a big money contract couldn't net a 1st round selection of any kind. And it doesn't have to be $60 million per year. A payout $50 - $55 million per year for a 37 year old QB plus the #3 overall selection in the draft is ridiculous.
WestCoastRam
Legend
I'm paraphrasing, Robinson reports McVay just wants to make plans for future at QB and that he does not want to do 1 year at a time with Stafford but wants to know if he has Stafford for a couple years or they want to start pivoting to the future.
Robinson is the most dialed in reporter that I know of in the league - actually what I think that means is that he's not so worried on being the guy to break news so he doesn't hold back much of what he's told by front offices unlike other reporters who keep things back so that they get info on breaking news from front offices. At least, that's what I've been told about how the sausage is made.
I thought it was pretty clear that the Rams weren't open to trading Donald. However that clarity isn't the same with Stafford. Especially in a situation where both sides agree the year prior to play things by ear this offseason after last year's negotiation.
This all may be true, but if we are referring to the same podcast interview, Robinson began the Stafford discussion pointing out that there are differing opinions regarding Stafford and the Rams depending upon who he talks to and then went on to provide what he thinks McVay wants.
Again, he may be correct. But, instead of a clear report it sounded like just an opinion to me.
Elmgrovegnome
Legend
You are dancing around the discussion.
No good QB options in the draft
A desperate coach who may not get another shot as a head coach
Ditto GM
The Rams wanting to sign Stafford, per a few top reporters
The Rams always entertaining offers for any player on their roster.
I’ve already said that this would not apply to if it was last years draft. It wouldn’t apply in most drafts. But in this case there are enough variables for it to make sense.
WestCoastRam
Legend
That's my bad then, I didn't catch the opinion piece when he went into length of contract. I thought he said he had talked to a few diff people with the Rams.
I'm sorry you feel that way, but I'm not dancing at all.
No good QB options in the draft? Really? The only opinion on that which matters in regards to our discussion would be the team that holds the #3 overall selection. I can't speak for you, but I don't have access to what the Giants really believe about this draft class. An interest in Stafford could just be an option. They could also be weighing other options as far as moving up for one of these kids for all we know.
A desperate coach who may not get another shot as a head coach? Possibly. But with all the retreads that have been hired over the years and NFL GMs seeing that he was saddled with Daniel Jones, plus how the organization bungled the Barkley situation, I like his chances. Especially, if he can go elsewhere and have the success he had prior.
The GM? Not so much. But he can't make such or any deal without the owner signing off. An owner who knows that the other team in his city didn't pay anything close to what you are suggesting for another aging veteran QB with a better resume. And one who saw how that worked out. And I'm sure he knows the New York Media roasting him daily would make sure he didn't forget it.
This year's draft. Last year's draft. Any draft. While anything in this world besides God sinning is possible, it is highly unlikely that a 37 year old QB looking to sign a big contract is going to net the #3 overall selection in any draft in the salary cap era. Not without some VERY compromising pictures or some other form of blackmail.
Last edited:
The draft in 2026 is in Pittsburgh. Their #1 in 2026 isn’t available. No way.
At this point, whatever is gonna happen, I wish it would already.
This all feels very unsettling and it’s hard to really think of anything past Stafford’s situation because so many decisions can’t be made until we know his deal.
We can’t even really deep dive into the draft because if he’s gone, that changes everything. I’d rather they keep him and I’m over the wait.
It feels like there’s gonna be a huge announcement just before his bonus is due and we’re gonna be dangling until then.
This thread is disappointing and shows the hysteria boredom creates.
- Status