Thread: Stafford requests a trade

Originally Posted by UnderArmour

If SF doesn't stick with him, odds are he can be had on a reasonable deal. I'm guessing New England would be the frontrunner for his services when/if he hits the open market. Jimmy G is just 1 season removed from reaching the Super Bowl, and there is a reason he was signed to that insane deal to begin with. He would be a good pickup for the Patriots, Texans, Lions, or The Football Team and I would expect him to get mid-level starter money in the open market.

I didnt say what teams will be stupid enough to sign him, i asked why would anyone want him. He misses more time than playing and in his lone SB appearance he choked in the 2nd half. He was never worth the money they paid him to begin with. I suppose if you want a "competent" starter it would make sense to sign him on the cheap but he is not a franchise QB to me.

Originally Posted by SmilinAssasSin27

All day. We can't be this spoiled to think we can just dismiss someone as talented as Stafford. He isn't old and has a crap team around him. He has never had a running game and played with some historically bad defenses and coaches.

#9 pick and I don't hesitate.

Stafford is kind of a mystery. It’s possible his lack of success in Detroit is due to the exact reasons you say, but take Peyton Manning away from the Colts of the early 2000s and they’re the same team Stafford had. Manning elevated his team. Stafford wallowed in failure with his.

It’s possible that a change in scenery/coaching staff/players I exactly what he needs. He has the physical traits. By accounts he’s a good leader and locker room guy. At this point, I really just don’t care. If you don’t have a QB, you need to get one. It’s possible that Lock will be that guy. It it’s also possible he won’t. Either way there isn’t a player we can get at #9 who is of Stafford’s quality. At 32 he’s not old for a QB and could easily play another 5 or so years. The league has progressed past having a good team and average QB play win a championship. The QB position is #1.

I wouldn’t hate bringing Stafford in if Paton and Fangio are sure he’s the best option, but giving up on Lock who has also shown potential, IMO (I know everyone doesn’t feel that way) is kind of jeopardizing the future. Also, absorbing Stafford’s contract, while not bad for a starting caliber QB, will also limit what we can do when it comes to re-signing guys like Simmons and Harris.

Originally Posted by HORSEPOWER 56

Manning elevated his team.

All this ^

Franchise QB's make players around them better.

Originally Posted by Northman

I didnt say what teams will be stupid enough to sign him, i asked why would anyone want him. He misses more time than playing and in his lone SB appearance he choked in the 2nd half. He was never worth the money they paid him to begin with. I suppose if you want a "competent" starter it would make sense to sign him on the cheap but he is not a franchise QB to me.

I completely agree. As Rod Smith loved to say, “you can’t make the club if you’re in the tub”. Garopollo is made of glass. You can’t trust him to be healthy. He couldn’t even stay healthy as a backup, now as a starter, he’s been a relative bust for SF. Yeah they got to a Super Bowl with defense and a running game. Then Jimmy G choked it away when it was finally his time to shine. No thanks. He’s Sam Bradford part 2.

Originally Posted by Northman

All this ^

Franchise QB's make players around them better.

Yeah I don't know much about Stafford personally, but it doesn't seem like he elevates the play of those around him. I honestly kind of lost track of him after Megatron left, and it feels like he made Stafford a better player and not vice versa. I wouldn't hate it, but it feels like an upgraded Flacco type move with a better QB. It doesn't fit with the youth movement that I've honestly kind of think is working on some weird level, especially on offense. I still say this stupid-ass season was a mulligan, I'd like to see what happens with some consistency. By all means, give Lock some competition but lets not jeopardize the future by going all in with a middle-of-the-road veteran QB in my opinion.

For me with a guy like Stafford I ask if his history is worth sacrificing Lock's potential. We know what Stafford is. We hope we know what Lock could be. If I'm the GM and I'm contemplating a move like that, I'm taking that in to consideration. If Dak, Watson, or Rodgers are available you pursue those guys because you hope that Lock is aware enough of what exactly those guys are and understand the move. Yeah, it would suck for Lock, but the GM's job is to put the team first and increase their chances of winning as much as possible.

Some game film analysis of Stafford. He looks a lot like what Lock could become to me... If the Lions were willing to trade him for our second rounder, I’d be okay with that.

Originally Posted by SR

For me with a guy like Stafford I ask if his history is worth sacrificing Lock's potential. We know what Stafford is. We hope we know what Lock could be. If I'm the GM and I'm contemplating a move like that, I'm taking that in to consideration. If Dak, Watson, or Rodgers are available you pursue those guys because you hope that Lock is aware enough of what exactly those guys are and understand the move. Yeah, it would suck for Lock, but the GM's job is to put the team first and increase their chances of winning as much as possible.

Honestly, I don’t see Dak as much of an improvement to Stafford. Dak has always had more weapons and one of the better Olines in the league. He’s obviously a better runner than Stafford, but he’s also coming off a major injury. I dunno. 6 of one half dozen of the other. Watson is the only “elite” QB who might be available (If the Texans even consider it). Rogers isn’t going anywhere. Why would he leave the best team in the NFC? I get it, he was pissed at some of the playcalling in the NFCCG, like punting or FGs on 4th down instead of letting him try to go for it, but I saw several times where he threw bad passes or made bad reads that took points off the board too.

Originally Posted by HORSEPOWER 56

Honestly, I don’t see Dak as much of an improvement to Stafford. Dak has always had more weapons and one of the better Olines in the league. He’s obviously a better runner than Stafford, but he’s also coming off a major injury. I dunno. 6 of one half dozen of the other. Watson is the only “elite” QB who might be available (If the Texans even consider it). Rogers isn’t going anywhere. Why would he leave the best team in the NFC? I get it, he was pissed at some of the playcalling in the NFCCG, like punting or FGs on 4th down instead of letting him try to go for it, but I saw several times where he threw bad passes or made bad reads that took points off the board too.

Couldn't disagree more with this. Dak is hands down better than Stafford and it's not even close to me. You mention his weapons, but look how lethal that offense was this year with him and how awful they were without him. And that was with Dalton, who has been a decent QB in this league who QBed playoff teams. Dak makes that offense go. Not to mention Dak is 6 years younger. Dak would fetch way more in a trade than Stafford, which would tell you what the league things of both.

Originally Posted by MasterShake

The advantage is, Stafford has requested a trade and the Lions have accepted. It’s open to everyone. Instead of there being a bidding war, I think this will drive the price down if anything. I think the going rate is probably a late first (if Indy wants him with their 1st), or 1 or more 2nds and/or players.

Maybe it’s the value of the pick, but it feels like if we give up #9 in the first, we’re committing to Stafford long term and casting Lock aside. If we only give them a second rounder, it feels like the door is still open for Lock to stay and develop behind Stafford. I just wish we knew what we had in Lock before we made the decision to move on or ride it out with him.

Originally Posted by BroncoWave

Couldn't disagree more with this. Dak is hands down better than Stafford and it's not even close to me. You mention his weapons, but look how lethal that offense was this year with him and how awful they were without him. And that was with Dalton, who has been a decent QB in this league who QBed playoff teams. Dak makes that offense go. Not to mention Dak is 6 years younger. Dak would fetch way more in a trade than Stafford, which would tell you what the league things of both.

First off, Dalton is terrible. Second, you’re openly biased for Dak (have been since day one) and openly biased against, as you call him, Stat Padford, so I just can’t take your opinion as unbiased. Nothing shows me from the outward appearance - not the stats, not the results, and definitely not the quality of the team, that Dak is any better a QB than Stafford.

Originally Posted by HORSEPOWER 56

First off, Dalton is terrible. Second, you’re openly biased for Dak (have been since day one) and openly biased against, as you call him, Stat Padford, so I just can’t take your opinion as unbiased. Nothing shows me from the outward appearance - not the stats, not the results, and definitely not the quality of the team, that Dak is any better a QB than Stafford.

Their contracts and trade return will tell you what the league thinks of both. Don't have to take my word for it.

Originally Posted by BroncoWave

Their contracts and trade return will tell you what the league thinks of both. Don't have to take my word for it.

It just goes to show how much talent, coaching, and even intangibles go into a QB's value. Very few hold up over the long run like Brady, Manning, etc. Just a few years ago I think most here including me would VERY MUCH have liked to have Stafford, Dak, Wentz, and now we are like, "Eh... does he have all his fingers and toes? Thats nice I guess..."

Originally Posted by BroncoWave

Their contracts and trade return will tell you what the league thinks of both. Don't have to take my word for it.

Dak’s not leaving Dallas. Of course they’ll pay him the market rate, they just saw how bad it is to have a guy like Dalton who was so in demand with QB needy teams that he took a job as a backup in Dallas. He’s just another Flacco now. Just because Cousins blew up the price of a starting QB combined with the fact that Dak is 6 years younger doesn’t mean if he gets a larger contract than what, Stafford negotiated 3+ years ago, that it proves he’s a better QB. C’mon the guy has had Zeke, Cooper, the best Oline in the game, and even Witten for a few of those years and he can’t even seem to win the lowly NFC East.