[AltiTude Ram]

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/613780 ... pp-future/

[PARAM]

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/613780 ... pp-future/

Can you copy and paste the article. I'm too cheap to subscribe to the NY Times.

[AltiTude Ram]

Jourdan Rodrigue

Assessing Matthew Stafford’s, Cooper Kupp’s situations with the Rams

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.

Advertisement


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.

That, in part, brings us to Kupp, whose situation has not changed much since he learned of the Rams’ intent to trade him this offseason. The move is the product of a combination of factors, including his expensive contract and struggles to stay healthy and the emergence of a tight-knit core of young players who have built their identity inside a locker room that is detached from the previous Super Bowl era, especially after Aaron Donald’s retirement.

Kupp’s issues with injuries over the past three seasons should also come with some context. His all-out physical and mental effort to secure the NFL’s triple crown in 2021 and help the Rams win a Super Bowl certainly altered him, and it always seemed like he had to play catch-up with his rehabilitation process in the offseason until he could fully train this summer. And he still missed four games with an ankle injury during the season.

Because the Rams previously designed much of their passing and running game to flow through Kupp, they found themselves reliant on his health and adjusted elements of their offense when he wasn’t able to play, including difficult in-season pivots. Especially over the past year, they leveraged young star Puka Nacua (whom Kupp has mentored) into the No. 1 receiver spot, and they need to improve their overall speed and get younger at the new Nos. 2 and 3 spots.

Could Kupp still be a No. 1 target somewhere else? He was openly dismayed by his No. 2/3 role by the end of the season, which might hint toward his hopes with a new team. Teams such as the Pittsburgh Steelers (who inquired about Kupp before the trade deadline), Kansas City Chiefs or Denver Broncos could be fits where he’d see a decent volume of targets. Kupp also noted that the Rams would work with him to find a trade partner, which means they might accept less (and take on some of his remaining salary) for the right fit.

Kupp has a $7.5 million roster bonus due March 17, so the situation has to be resolved by then whether he is traded or released.

[AltiTude Ram]

Can you copy and paste the article. I'm too cheap to subscribe to the NY Times.

Same here but for some reason it opened up on my phone.

[Dare]

OMG there is that pesky word "bridge" that some here don't understand!! Jourdain must be illiterate like me.

But realistically as I pointed out in a post the options belong lie with the Rams. They can simply tell Stafford to play for the $4M you wanted or retire. He can't retire then unretire with another team, not at least for a year by then his market is gone. Most see a maximum of 2 years left in Stafford regardless of what he says. Not everyone didn't notice how his performance dropped off after the Bills game and he needed a 2nd bye week. Then they watched how well he played after the rest when the Rams destroyed the Vikings. If the Rams felt secure he could play like he did in the Vikings game for another season there wouldn't be any questions. But it simply highlighted the problem with Stafford and it's why media is hyping his trade value. On the other hand don't think the teams who might be interested haven't taken notice. Most teams wouldn't hesitate to part with a second round pick but a first round pick is a hard sell. The only team of need with a low first round pick are the Vikings. At #24 it's not much more than a high second round pick. It simply comes down to their assessment of McCarthy vs Darnold long term.

Implicit in Jourdain's article is the understanding that the Rams don't have to trade him and still save millions of $$ by signing Jimmy to a two year contract and paying Stafford $4M this year to sit as #2QB. The Rams draft a QB and have one to two years to develop and assess him before making a long term decision on Jimmy. If they are sold on the young guy after a year they have Jimmy as prime trade bait in 2026.

Matt inadvertently destroyed his own leverage IMO by his stunt last year. Either way I see a new QB this year and perhaps next year as well. Jourdain only confirmed what I've known for a long time. Sean really likes Jimmy so Matt and Sean aren't joined at the hip.

[majik]

Dare’s line of thinking is eerily similar to the Mike Martz hubris of let me ditch Warner for Bulger because I am the QB whisperer with the let me ditch Stafford for Garrapolo to show everyone what a genius I am.

I hope McVay is not Martz’s 2.0z

[Elvis]

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.

This doesn't sound like it will get resolved all that quickly...

[Elvis]

Everyone is pretty much saying the same thing at this point: Rams want Stafford back but aren't sure they want to pay him.

Seems a little odd to me. I mean, pay him $80 mil guaranteed for the next 2 years and you books are relatively clean when it's time to pay the young guns.

Although Jourdan says McVay prefers vetrans:

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.

So i guess if they have a younger vet in mind for the future maybe they would rather be paying him?

[AvengerRam]

If this year’s QB draft class looked like last year’s, I might be inclined to consider the possibility that the Rams would move on from Stafford now and try to acquire their next QB1.

With only two QBs viewed as consensus first round picks, I don’t see that happening.

The Rams will likely “overpay” Stafford for 2025 in exchange for limiting their cap/dead cap commitment for 2026, thereby retaining the flexibility to move on in a year.

[majik]

Elvis” proposal is probably what will happen 2 years $80M guaranteed. Don’t think they want another situation like with Donald where they have to have dead cap carrying over for two years after he retired