JourdanRodrigue@jourdanrodrigue.bsky.social
Dan Duggan and I go back and forth on Stafford/Giants :

***

Would Rams really trade Matthew Stafford to Giants? Examining a potential deal

By Dan Duggan and Jourdan Rodrigue

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/6146076/2025/02/20/matthew-stafford-trade-giants-rams/

It’s no secret the New York Giants are desperate to find a quarterback. They literally don’t have one — there are no quarterbacks currently under contract.

General manager Joe Schoen announced after the Giants completed a 3-14 season that the team will “look at any avenue we can to upgrade the position.”

“We’ll look at free agency. We can also look throughout the draft, potential trade opportunities,” Schoen said.

The inclusion of “trade opportunities” was notable, especially with the expectation at the time that the Giants, who have the No. 3 pick, would most likely target a quarterback in the draft. As time has passed, there has been surprising buzz about a potential trade target: Los Angeles Rams quarterback Matthew Stafford.

There’s enough smoke around the Stafford-to-New York rumors that a deeper dive into the situation is warranted. So I enlisted colleague Jourdan Rodrigue, the most plugged-in Rams reporter there is, to find out if a Stafford trade is realistic.

Since any actual trade discussions will be initiated by the Giants, let me open our discussion with a simple question: Why on earth would the Rams be open to trading Stafford?

RODRIGUE In a sane and logical world, they wouldn’t be! But as we know, sometimes football gets weird …

Stafford had a dispute with his existing contract extension (signed in 2022, after he helped the Rams win the Super Bowl at SoFi Stadium in L.A.) as early as last spring, and his camp let that be known during the first round of that year’s draft. This dragged out all spring and summer and even into the first day of training camp, during which coach Sean McVay pushed back his opening news conference by three hours while working out the eventual adjustment with Stafford that morning. The adjustment effectively front-loaded most of Stafford’s remaining guarantees into 2024 and kept the door open to revisit the rest of the existing contract this spring.

Now we’re here: There’s no chance Stafford will play on just $4 million in guarantees in 2025, so the contract must be adjusted again. The Rams, on the other hand, didn’t commit publicly to the QB in their season-ending news conferences last month and will be hesitant to shell out a huge sum or a lengthy deal with Stafford turning 37 earlier this month. That’s why all of this is up in the air — and curious teams are undoubtedly sniffing around.

Know of any?

DUGGAN Funny you should ask! I can think of a certain team desperate for a quarterback with a GM and coach on the hot seat. The Giants’ rumored interest in Stafford makes perfect sense for this regime, especially if it’s not all-in on drafting a quarterback with the No. 3 pick (or earlier).

After suffering through two seasons of heinous quarterback play, it’s easy to see why the Giants would be interested in adding a proven winner who was tied for fifth in Mike Sando’s annual QB tiers ranking last summer. Schoen and coach Brian Daboll are under pressure from ownership to win or else in their fourth season. No (potentially) available quarterback offers a better path to winning than Stafford.

The question is the cost to acquire Stafford. Even if the Giants are convinced they’re a quarterback away from contending, there are still obvious holes in a roster that won three games last season. So they need to guard against mortgaging the future in a trade for a 37-year-old. So, the first part of the compensation equation: What do you think Stafford will be looking for in a new contract to facilitate a trade?

RODRIGUE Stafford would make most quarterback-needy teams much more competitive, which is why I genuinely believe the ready-to-win Rams would like to get something done if they can. But what would he accept? Back off, aggregators, because the following is my opinion: I think Stafford believes he has plenty more football left after two relatively stable seasons; I think he knows he’ll be a hotly-debated future Hall of Fame candidate (I believe he merits induction); and I think he got a taste of winning postseason football games too late in his career and wants more. When I watch him play when he’s feeling his best, there’s no question he’s got juice left.

There is a level of financial respectability owed to a quarterback of his stature. The fact that he wasn’t happy with last year’s number before the adjustment, especially the guarantees, is telling of where his floor is now.

However, I don’t believe the Rams want to make a long-term, high-cost investment in any quarterback they don’t know for sure is part of their future because they now feature a young roster with multiple high-dollar contract extensions soon due. They could be looking at shorter-term or flexible terms without shelling out top money.

While one side of that scale might be doable for another team, if it’s between the Rams and Stafford, then both sides will have to meet closer to the middle for this to get worked out. That means the Rams might have to pay more or pad guarantees or even increase the years, OR Stafford would have to accept less. Or both! The Rams are also likely asking themselves whether it’s worth facing this question all over again the next couple of offseasons, or would it be easier to cut ties now and pursue a bridge player en route to finding their long-term future at the position?

DUGGAN OK, so whatever the number is, I think we can end the fantasy of Stafford coming to the Giants on his eminently affordable existing contract. The other major question from the Giants’ perspective is, what do you think the Rams would be looking for in return if they do decide to deal Stafford?

RODRIGUE Funny thing about the Rams, they sometimes will ask for the moon — why not? — while ultimately expecting to land somewhere else in the atmosphere. They don’t have a second-round pick in 2025 because they used it to trade up last year for Braden Fiske. They also don’t like where they’re sitting in the first round (No. 26); GM Les Snead refers to picking in the 20s as “purgatory.”

In a deal for Stafford, acquiring a pick high enough to package and move up for a top receiver or offensive lineman, or acquiring enough picks to package together to go after a few need positions would probably be worth listening to. In this case, I look less at that tasty No. 3 overall pick and more at No. 34 (and then some) … though you’ve got to at least ask, right?!

DUGGAN The Rams definitely need to ask about No. 3, and the Giants definitely need to hang up the phone. No. 34 is where the conversation gets interesting. I don’t know how the Rams make the trade if they can’t get that second-round pick (plus more). Pick No. 34 would be a steep price to pay, but I don’t think a Giants offer will be taken seriously without their second-rounder. How much more they have to give up will depend on a combination of their level of desperation and the competition for Stafford.

Your point about Stafford clearly still having juice when he’s feeling his best raised my antenna to some nagging questions about a 37-year-old who has battled injuries. Have there been signs of decline? Strictly looking at the box score stats, there’s been a dip since that magical 2021 Super Bowl season. But what have you seen watching him every week?

And on a related note, how much of a concern is durability? He has only missed one start due to injury in the past two seasons, but he missed eight games in 2022 and, from afar, seems to be banged up often.

RODRIGUE Stafford wasn’t on the injury report all season, and you’re correct to note he has only missed one game due to injury over the last two. However, we annually seem to find out how much he was playing through either via allusions to this by McVay or, in the case of this year’s ribs injury, via his wife Kelly Stafford’s podcast. There’s no question he can still play. The arm talent is still so clear; he can make any throw you’d want and some you didn’t think were possible. He’s willing to move more in recent seasons to pick up easy yards when available, but he’s far from a mobile quarterback.

I’d add that through the back third or so of the 2024 season, he played poorer football than I have seen from him in his time in L.A.. He managed more games than he directly won during that span. He also admitted he didn’t play well. However, in the playoffs, he turned back into an absolute killer. Can you tell I am not quite done watching him here in L.A., yet?

DUGGAN I get it … which is why it’s so hard for me to fathom the Rams trading him! The last time we saw him, he was driving with a chance to beat the Super Bowl champion Eagles in the divisional round. Anyway, the Giants would be dreaming about being in that position if they make the trade. But it would need to happen fast, especially with the retirement talk that has swirled around Stafford in recent years. I know he said in an interview last summer that he hoped to play three or four more years. So, we’re down to two or three more years based on that timeline.

I don’t know if he’s said anything more about his future, or if you have a better sense for how much longer he’ll play. All I know is the Giants just traded a third-round pick for Darren Waller, and he retired a year later. They can’t afford that type of debacle with Stafford.

RODRIGUE Some of the retirement talk definitely seemed to help move the needle on previous contracts, I’ll just say that. And my personal opinion? That dude will throw the ball around until the wheels fall off, so long as he’s being paid a respectable sum to do it, he feels healthy and his team has a plan to win. Any team Stafford plays for will have to walk the line between top-level play, his march toward 40 and the risks that come with. If the Rams don’t want to pay top money in the context of that risk (and I don’t believe they do, even though I do believe they want Stafford to be their QB), and another team is OK with all of it, that team should make the call.

DUGGAN The whole “plan to win” thing seems like it could be a sticking point with the Giants. Stafford doesn’t have a no-trade clause, but he can effectively quash a deal if he says he doesn’t want to play for a suitor. So, here’s the (multi) million-dollar question from the Giants’ perspective: Do you think Stafford would be interested in coming to New York?

RODRIGUE That’s a big, big question. I can’t speak for him, of course, but I do think he absolutely thrives in the spotlight, so the market and the back pages aren’t a deterrent. The Giants also have a top receiver and an offensive-minded head coach, plus a defense that can hold its own especially if given half a chance by its offense. If they pay Stafford, that’s another factor in their favor. I don’t think it’s an accident (or subtle) that ESPN’s Adam Schefter recently noted Chad Hall, Stafford’s brother-in-law, now coaches in New York. You tell me, Dan, having watched every snap — is their offensive line respectable enough for a quarterback who isn’t exactly mobile?

DUGGAN The O-line progressed to functional when stud left tackle Andrew Thomas was in the lineup last season. And if the Giants are going to make the plunge for Stafford, I expect they’ll be equally aggressive to upgrade the protection in front of their investment.

Schefter adding that link between Hall and Stafford while breaking the hiring of the Giants’ assistant QB coach — surely a huge scoop in his world — was just another log on the fire of this smoldering rumor. Things will start to get real — or not — soon. So let’s finish up this speculation by setting the table for what’s to come.

Rams brass made it clear after the season that it wants a quicker resolution with Stafford than last year. You reported this week that the sides have had some initial conversations and plan to continue those in the near future. League-wide business will pick up at the NFL Scouting Combine next week. So, when do you expect we’ll find out if Stafford will be back in LA or on his way out?

RODRIGUE If I’m McVay, I want this resolved before the mandatory NFL combine interviews with the media take place (McVay and Snead won’t be in Indianapolis, per usual, but will speak virtually). I know the Rams will not let this situation drag out through the spring, as it did last year. I don’t believe this is contentious at all, and based on their initial conversation, everybody knows where everybody is at. However, if the Rams want to keep any leverage against a full payout, they’ll need to have a clear understanding of what their trade options (and their bridge QB options) are, and Stafford’s agent Jimmy Sexton will want a full picture of what he could stand to make elsewhere. That’s a long way of saying this could be figured out before next week, or it could take until after the combine. It’s fluid, for sure, and I’ve learned by now that you never can rest too easily at any time in the football calendar when the Rams are working on something.

DUGGAN Well, that five-week offseason was fun! It’s back to work, with Stafford’s fate looming as one of the biggest dominos in the league. We’ll have you covered from coast-to-coast on how this situation unfolds.

Rodrigue, from Assessing Matthew Stafford’s, Cooper Kupp’s situations with the Rams: https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/6137806/2025/02/17/rams-matthew-stafford-cooper-kupp-future/

LOS ANGELES — Though it has been clear over the past month that the Los Angeles Rams are ready to move on from receiver Cooper Kupp, quarterback Matthew Stafford’s situation remains fluid. The sides met to talk before the Super Bowl, although not much progressed after their opening conversations, and will pick back up in the coming weeks, a league source said.

It’s not a given that Stafford will remain with the Rams despite both sides’ initial openness to work out a deal. The Rams have to recognize that the most competitive path forward is for Stafford to return for another year and one more run while he continues to play at a high level. But the fact that coach Sean McVay and general manager Les Snead didn’t overtly commit to Stafford in season-ending news conferences basically signaled their open phone lines for a potential trade.

If there is a difference between Stafford and the Rams, it would likely be this: The Rams don’t want to make a significant financial commitment to a veteran quarterback whose long-term future or durability they can’t be certain about, and a youthful roster built through the draft is now their core identity.

Stafford’s ability — and availability — over the last two seasons is inarguable. He has missed only one game due to injury, and although he faced a couple of slumps this season, he especially excelled in the playoffs. Stafford has played some of his best football in postseason runs for the Rams, including this January and during their Super Bowl run in 2021-22. The Rams have one foot still in their previous team-building era of the early 2020s, when Stafford was the final major piece of their Super Bowl puzzle. They have another foot in their future after successfully drafting high-level starters in their previous two classes and rebuilding the core of their roster. Deciding when to step, and in what direction, is the key question of their offseason.

There are two truths: Eventually, the Rams need to secure a long-term quarterback who will grow with the roster and won’t prohibit them from paying their first- and second-year stars when those extensions are due (plus whoever comes next at quarterback). But also, their roster is ready to win earlier than many expected, so why wouldn’t they plug back in their elite quarterback and make another run?

Stafford’s wife, Kelly, recently said on her podcast that Stafford doesn’t want to “put the team in a bad situation,” but the Rams understand there is a certain level of financial respectability owed to a quarterback of his skill level and status. Would that be a sticking point for the Staffords?

An NFC executive who spoke to me on the condition of anonymity said if he were in the Rams’ position, he couldn’t get rid of Stafford because he’d be too hard to replace at his current level. An NFC coach said something similar, adding that he believed Stafford had at least one more year in him at his current level of play but noted if the Rams keep him, they’re only avoiding their future problem for that one additional year. An AFC executive said he could see the Rams trading Stafford if they could recoup enough assets (the implication was they haven’t hesitated to trade star players in the past), and a separate AFC executive believed Stafford would play one more year in L.A.

See? Things have been … up in the air, even in the perception of the broader league. The buzz around the quarterback exists for good reason: The Rams and Stafford couldn’t reach a multiyear agreement on his existing extension (signed in 2022) before training camp last summer so reworked it to frontload his remaining guaranteed money into 2024 with the expectation that they’d revisit the conversation now. Because that remains unresolved, Stafford’s future with the team remains in question, and trade speculation has only increased as the offseason has continued.

If the Rams move on from Stafford or even begin to imagine a world without him, they don’t have a viable backup plan in place. Jimmy Garoppolo, their backup last season, will be a free agent, and 2023 fourth-round pick Stetson Bennett was drafted specifically to be a long-term QB2.

McVay really likes Garoppolo — more than some league sources whom I spoke with expected him to — because of his amiability, work ethic and understanding of the offense. Garoppolo, though, would be a bridge to the next franchise quarterback, whether that player arrives via draft or trade. League sources were generally split on whether the Rams/McVay would work best with a rookie or continue McVay’s preference for a veteran’s experience in his constantly changing offensive scheme. Draft experts agree that this incoming quarterback class is somewhat thin and certainly top-heavy. As of now, the Rams don’t pick until No. 26 in this year’s draft.

Free-agent quarterbacks include Sam Darnold (who has ties to L.A. in a roundabout way through Minnesota Vikings head coach Kevin O’Connell and other staff) — though Darnold would not be cheap and the Rams would have to be certain of his long-term fit — Justin Fields, Jacoby Brissett, Drew Lock, Marcus Mariota, Daniel Jones and Mac Jones. Aaron Rodgers is also expected to be released by the New York Jets, and though Rodgers’ highly publicized television appearances are not a natural match for a head coach who only wants his players focused on football (and not weekly TV shows or podcasts), it should be noted that the Rams were interested in Rodgers’ potential availability before trading for Stafford in 2021. Also notable: Neither McVay nor Snead would cede any roster control to Rodgers, who has a history of bringing his friends to his new teams. Similar to Garoppolo, such a move would only serve as a bridge to whatever investment comes next at the position.

Overall, the Rams will not spend big money or trade/draft capital on a quarterback unless they believe he is their present and their future. The latter component is one of the reasons Stafford’s status even remains in question. My sense is that many within the organization want to get something done with Stafford but are also thinking about the ascending young group of players, including some with early contract extensions coming due over the next two years. There’s a financial point and/or term limit the Rams are unlikely to cross, even if Stafford undoubtedly gives them their best chance to make a run in 2025.

from https://www.profootballrumors.com/2025/02/rams-qb-matthew-stafford-likely-to-restructure-deal-again

FEBRUARY 17: Albert Breer of Sports Illustrated confirms Stafford’s intention is seen as being to remain with the Rams, although speculation to the contrary will likely continue until a restructure is worked out. How quickly team and player can reach an agreement will be key in shaping Los Angeles’ offseason plans.

Pat Leonard@PLeonardNYDN
Just had @AdamSchefter on Talkin’ Ball with Pat Leonard. He told me “there is no way in hell that the #Giants are giving up the third overall pick for Matthew Stafford” if trade talks ever occur. But it might not even come to that.

Schefter said the #Rams’ “first priority” is to re-sign Stafford, and they believe at the moment they can work something out. Plus, Stafford “would like to be back in L.A.”

Full interview here @YouTube & @BleavNetwork: https://youtu.be/4Jbrx3BGUCE

…

that interview quoted, from https://theramswire.usatoday.com/2025/02/14/matthew-stafford-giants-trade-rumors-rams-draft-pick/?taid=67b19b0cbbd52000018d77fa&utm_campaign=trueanthem&utm_medium=trueanthem&utm_source=twitter

more of what Schefter said about the situation.

“I think they’re committed to trying to work something out,” he said. “But it doesn’t mean that they actually will work something out, and that’s where Giants fans and people around the Tr-State New York area are getting curious and interested. Because if – if – they don’t get it worked out, then, obviously, the Giants become an option.”

…

Schefter isn’t ruling anything out right now when it comes to Stafford’s future. He says the Rams believe they can get something done with the veteran quarterback, but that doesn’t mean they’ll actually be able to – especially after last year’s negotiations dragged out for months until the start of camp.

“I think the Rams have sensed and believed that they think they can get it worked out. Doesn’t mean they will,” he said. “But if they can, then all this talk about Chad Hall and Matthew Stafford and New York doesn’t mean anything. If they don’t get it worked out, well, then we’ve got something to talk about leading into the combine and the start of the new league year and I would think we have an answer to that sooner rather than later because the Rams have to get clarity because they have to know, ‘OK, are we getting a deal done with Matthew Stafford and if not, then what are we doing about this particular situation?’ But I think their first priority, their interest is in re-signing Matthew and I think Matthew would like to be back in L.A., but the Rams have a price, Matthew has a price, and can they meet in a common ground and work it out, or not?”

joemad wrote:

Rams have the window open right now, just need a little more consistency from Rozeboom and Reeder.

Or to draft a true high caliber ILB.

Though what I’ve read so far says this is a weak draft for LBs.

It’s supposed to be a great year at WR and CB and good at OT.

This won’t post, so here’s the link. It’s Cowherd on the Stafford situation.

https://twitter.com/RamsTapes/status/1890104151163773357