The Rams and Matthew Stafford are haggling over a new contract, and each day brings a new and different story or three. It's making those of us who doubted the Rams and their quarterback would actually part ways look bad. Today, we're forced to admit it might happen.
Stafford is 37 and there have been some signs of declining play, which explains why the Rams are hesitant to give him a lot of new money. But is it realistic that another team will be desperate enough to not only pay him a ton of money but meet whatever trade demands the Rams might have? That one is stretch. The Giants and Raiders are the latest teams to reportedly throw their hats into the ring, which could be true or could be agent-driven. All we can say for sure is neither of those teams has officially denied an interest, so maybe.
I saw a guy making a compelling case for the Giants. GM Joe Schoen and head coach Brian Daboll don't really have the time for a multi-year development project. They have a total void at quarterback, with no viable starter on the roster. New York has some talent on the defensive side of the ball, a legit No. 1 wideout in Malik Nabers, and a couple of viable running backs. Their offensive line isn't as bad as their sacks allowed (48) would suggest, given that Andrew Thomas (a 2nd-team All Pro two years ago) missed most of the season with a foot injury but should be healthy for 2025. With a strong veteran quarterback, maybe they can compete in the NFC East (but it's a stretch, with two of those teams having just met in the NFC Championship game and the Eagles winning the Super Bowl).
New York giving up a decent pick and a ton of money to sign a 37-year-old quarterback? Possible, but it seems really unlikely. (Ill-advised, one might say.)
The other one floated yesterday was the Raiders. I guess Stafford won't be turning down his last payday from anyone, but that seems even more far-fetched than the Giants. Besides being the clear 4th-best team in the AFC West, with the other three teams going to the playoffs last year and having franchise quarterbacks in place, what else about the Raiders doesn't make sense? They don't have a great looking roster at basically any position. If we were to list the top 5 teams staring at a long and lengthy rebuild, the Raiders would have to be mentioned. It feels like the kind of connection made because of this Tom Brady ownership stake, with the idea that Brady wants to make a big splash this offseason. Financially, OK, they could probably make things work. But the fact that bringing in Stafford doesn't really do nearly enough to make this team competitive makes this seem more like an agent- or media-generated pipe dream than a reality.
One team I haven't seen mentioned as a possibility (but the day is young) is the Colts. There was a story yesterday that they will be looking to bring in veteran competition for Anthony Richardson. Stafford wouldn't be that -- if he's brought in, it would be to start, with Richardson headed to the bench or off the roster -- but if the Colts have quietly given up on Richardson, he would make sense. There's some talent on the Indianapolis roster, especially at receiver -- we'd all be quite intrigued by the likes of Michael Pittman, Josh Downs and Adonai Mitchell with Stafford at quarterback -- and running back. And the AFC South seems pretty wide-open. Let's get this rumor out there.
But I still believe there's a chance that the Rams work things out with Stafford. It seems more likely than the other story to come out in the last day or two -- that the team is comfortable with veteran backup Jimmy Garoppolo at quarterback.
Garoppolo started Week 18 for the resting-starters Rams, a 30-25 loss to Seattle. He threw for 334 yards, 2 TDs and an interception. He somehow got the 49ers to the Super Bowl after the 2019 season, so maybe Sean McVay thinks the team can tap into that and make a playoff run. But that was 5 years ago, and Garoppolo's body of work since then doesn't make Los Angeles going with him as its No. 1 look likely.
Garoppolo has started 38 games since that Super Bowl campaign, for three different teams (two of which needed a starting quarterback, but moved on after letting him wear out his welcome). He's one of 36 players to start at least 30 games at quarterback the last five years, and in one key metric -- interceptions -- he's been the worst of those players.
Especially during his time in San Francisco, Garoppolo operated one of the most run-heavy offenses in the league. The five quarterbacks in this group that attempted fewer passes than he did all started fewer games. But Garoppolo still managed to throw 31 interceptions, getting picked off on just under 3 percent of his pass attempts. That was the worst rate in the league, worse than a whole bunch of quarterbacks who have also been benched the last few years: Mac Jones, Justin Fields, Carson Wentz, Zach Wilson. Another San Francisco passer, Brock Purdy, also grades out poorly in this area.
But Garoppolo has been a lot worse than the Rams' current starter, Stafford.
| QUARTERBACK INTERCEPTIONS, 2020-2024 (MININUM 30 STARTS) | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Player | GS | Cmp | Att | Cmp% | Yds | TD | Int | Int% |
| Aaron Rodgers | 67 | 1456 | 2184 | 66.7 | 16006 | 139 | 32 | 1.5 |
| Justin Herbert | 79 | 1945 | 2926 | 66.5 | 21093 | 137 | 45 | 1.5 |
| Tom Brady | 50 | 1376 | 2062 | 66.7 | 14643 | 108 | 33 | 1.6 |
| Ben Roethlisberger | 31 | 789 | 1213 | 65.0 | 7543 | 55 | 20 | 1.6 |
| C.J. Stroud | 32 | 655 | 1031 | 63.5 | 7835 | 43 | 17 | 1.6 |
| Deshaun Watson | 35 | 723 | 1101 | 65.7 | 8188 | 52 | 19 | 1.7 |
| Joe Burrow | 69 | 1748 | 2547 | 68.6 | 19001 | 140 | 46 | 1.8 |
| Patrick Mahomes | 81 | 2054 | 3072 | 66.9 | 22940 | 169 | 56 | 1.8 |
| Jared Goff | 80 | 1881 | 2777 | 67.7 | 20839 | 135 | 52 | 1.9 |
| Russell Wilson | 71 | 1446 | 2224 | 65.0 | 16401 | 123 | 43 | 1.9 |
| Daniel Jones | 57 | 1153 | 1782 | 64.7 | 11555 | 46 | 35 | 2.0 |
| Lamar Jackson | 72 | 1314 | 2015 | 65.2 | 15731 | 124 | 40 | 2.0 |
| Jalen Hurts | 66 | 1248 | 1939 | 64.4 | 14667 | 85 | 39 | 2.0 |
| Kyler Murray | 66 | 1515 | 2238 | 67.7 | 15776 | 95 | 45 | 2.0 |
| Derek Carr | 75 | 1645 | 2472 | 66.5 | 18452 | 114 | 50 | 2.0 |
| Geno Smith | 52 | 1198 | 1749 | 68.5 | 12961 | 76 | 36 | 2.1 |
| Tua Tagovailoa | 62 | 1387 | 2037 | 68.1 | 15506 | 100 | 44 | 2.2 |
| Ryan Tannehill | 53 | 1033 | 1567 | 65.9 | 11705 | 71 | 34 | 2.2 |
| Matt Ryan | 45 | 1091 | 1647 | 66.2 | 11606 | 60 | 36 | 2.2 |
| Matthew Stafford | 73 | 1615 | 2470 | 65.4 | 18784 | 121 | 54 | 2.2 |
| Dak Prescott | 58 | 1417 | 2088 | 67.9 | 15659 | 116 | 46 | 2.2 |
| Teddy Bridgewater | 31 | 674 | 997 | 67.6 | 7468 | 37 | 22 | 2.2 |
| Josh Allen | 83 | 1856 | 2847 | 65.2 | 21271 | 165 | 63 | 2.2 |
| Kirk Cousins | 71 | 1664 | 2484 | 67.0 | 18872 | 133 | 55 | 2.2 |
| Gardner Minshew II | 34 | 809 | 1259 | 64.3 | 8679 | 47 | 28 | 2.2 |
| Trevor Lawrence | 60 | 1288 | 2034 | 63.3 | 13815 | 69 | 46 | 2.3 |
| Jordan Love | 33 | 690 | 1087 | 63.5 | 8154 | 60 | 25 | 2.3 |
| Baker Mayfield | 74 | 1530 | 2375 | 64.4 | 17280 | 122 | 55 | 2.3 |
| Zach Wilson | 33 | 566 | 993 | 57.0 | 6293 | 23 | 25 | 2.5 |
| Carson Wentz | 38 | 774 | 1272 | 60.8 | 8219 | 56 | 32 | 2.5 |
| Brock Purdy | 36 | 722 | 1069 | 67.5 | 9518 | 64 | 27 | 2.5 |
| Sam Darnold | 47 | 931 | 1501 | 62.0 | 10494 | 62 | 40 | 2.7 |
| Andy Dalton | 35 | 757 | 1165 | 65.0 | 7906 | 49 | 32 | 2.7 |
| Justin Fields | 44 | 684 | 1119 | 61.1 | 7780 | 45 | 31 | 2.8 |
| Mac Jones | 49 | 1035 | 1570 | 65.9 | 10590 | 54 | 44 | 2.8 |
| Jimmy Garoppolo | 38 | 739 | 1099 | 67.2 | 8882 | 52 | 31 | 2.8 |
Data from pro-football-refence.com used in compiling this table, which is sorted by interception rate.
I can't argue with all the media, but I'm still slightly in the camp that the Rams and Stafford will come to some kind of agreement. He'll get a little new money, and the Rams will remain a playoff favorite in the NFC West. I just can't see enough compelling evidence that the Rams would be comfortable going into the season without him, or that some other team will be willing to meet Stafford's contract demands. We'll see.
--Andy Richardson