Matthew Stafford and the Lions have agreed to work on a trade (Merge)

[danlhart87]

Just now, Defjamz26 said:

Yeah the cap is something to consider too. You have to pay Stafford like $30 mil and give up draft picks. Ballard did that with Buckner, but he was also only like 25 years old at the time. Stafford is 33 
 

A young guy is cost effective for at least 4 years. We don’t have as much cap space as people think when you factor in the upcoming  contracts of Nelson, Leonard, and Smith. 

Some think if we get Stafford we will sign Godwin or Golladay too or several high quality FAs and that simply isn't happening 

[MikeCurtis]

4 minutes ago, Defjamz26 said:

Yeah the cap is something to consider too. You have to pay Stafford like $30 mil and give up draft picks. Ballard did that with Buckner, but he was also only like 25 years old at the time. Stafford is 33 
 

A young guy is cost effective for at least 4 years. We don’t have as much cap space as people think when you factor in the upcoming  contracts of Nelson, Leonard, and Smith. 

I hate to disagree with you so much, you post really good thoughts, but....

 

Stafford is 20m this year, not 30m

10 for bonus, and 10 for salary

 

He is on a REALLY cheap contract as the front signing bonus has been paid out

 

He is cheap comparibly

[danlhart87]

I would trade down get Jones then trade 21 2  and 22 2 for Ramczyk 

[Colt Overseas]

6 hours ago, Defjamz26 said:

We don’t know if he has 5 years left. Again, not every QB is going to play until age 38. He could finish the last 2 years on his deal and call it quits. Plus who knows when he’ll start to decline. We’ve seen players like Rhodes (last year on the Vikings) and Brady just fall off a cliff out of nowhere.

 

But even if he did play for another 5 years, you’re spending a 1st on a 5 year player on top of whatever cap hit he has. Why not just throw in an extra first and see if you can’t go and get Lance? You get Lance, you’re getting him for 5 years (5th year option) plus another 5-6 on his second contract assuming he pans out. That’s a 10+ year plan for a QB who also has more upside and a higher ceiling than Stafford.

 

I like the plan, but it contains alot of risk in proportion to the certainty you get with a proven arguably top 10 QB in Stafford.

 

You also have to factor in Detroit becoming a critical need team at QB along with the Jets and Jags. Then teams like Falcons, Panthers, 49ers, Pats, Washington will also be interested in taking a QB, all with much better draft capital. The news of Stafford's trade almost certainly means Lance is drafted in the first 10 picks. A 2021 and 2022 1st probably won't do it.

 

Then you take on the risk on Lance working out. Just 1 full season playing college football. He probably needs a year to sit. He is a very good prospect, I'd love to get Lance but as Ballard said, he'll need luck.

[Colt Overseas]

.

[danlhart87]

3 minutes ago, Colt Overseas said:

.

agreed

[Defjamz26]

11 minutes ago, MikeCurtis said:

I hate to disagree with you so much, you post really good thoughts, but....

 

Stafford is 20m this year, not 30m

10 for bonus, and 10 for salary

 

He is on a REALLY cheap contract as the front signing bonus has been paid out

 

He is cheap comparibly

Does that mean Detroit would be paying some of what he’s owed? I could’ve swore I heard on a podcast he was due $30 mil this year. Some was his signing bonus, some was his roster bonus, and then his actual salary.

[Orioles22]

Picking up steam, it seems. I hope the Colts make it happen.

 

https://heavy.com/sports/detroit-lions/matthew-stafford-trade-rumor-colts/?fbclid=IwAR3fS--4YiW3zmVExfKOPlX1uegq_xFvftGHPjA0CcSgM6tNgxYTI6s7LEI

[danlhart87]

https://heavy.com/sports/new-england-patriots/matthew-stafford-qb-trade-detroit-lions-2/

[Orioles22]

1 hour ago, danlhart87 said:

There are pros and cons with both. I would rather take a chance on young guy and use the cap to get couple good guys

We have a young guy - his name is Eason. We need someone to win NOW.

 

 

 

[danlhart87]

1 minute ago, Orioles22 said:

We have a young guy - his name is Eason. We need someone to win NOW.

 

 

 

I don't care for that win now mentality. 

[BProland85]

5 minutes ago, Orioles22 said:

Picking up steam, it seems. I hope the Colts make it happen.

 

https://heavy.com/sports/detroit-lions/matthew-stafford-trade-rumor-colts/?fbclid=IwAR3fS--4YiW3zmVExfKOPlX1uegq_xFvftGHPjA0CcSgM6tNgxYTI6s7LEI

Please no overpay for a 33 year old Stafford. 

[richard pallo]

2 minutes ago, danlhart87 said:

https://heavy.com/sports/new-england-patriots/matthew-stafford-qb-trade-detroit-lions-2/

If Ballard loses Stafford to the Patriots after the McDaniels fiasco he will have a hard time living it down.  "The rivalry is back on"?  I guess we will find out.

[richard pallo]

6 minutes ago, BProland85 said:

Please no overpay for a 33 year old Stafford. 

Whatever we pay will not be overpaying in Ballards eyes. 

[Orioles22]

18 minutes ago, danlhart87 said:

I don't care for that win now mentality. 

It is our reality at this point. There is a time for rebuilding. It's not with the roster in place. We won 11 games last year. It's not the time to start over and that's what bringing in a rookie would do, unless you could get Lawrence.

[Orioles22]

I wonder if adding a player or two would cut our draft costs - perhaps someone like Hines. I'd hate to lose him, but we do have Taylor and maybe we could sign Mack if we did lose a back. Ya-Sin might need a change of scenery.

[poilucelt]

heard one wild rumor re: 3-way (!) trade w/ NE, SF and Detroit for Stafford--presumably Jimmy G would return to NE for a 1st which might go to Detroit w/ Stafford going to SF? Jeesh....convoluted, to say the least, but it does somehow sound faintly Belichickian

 

Irsay, Ballard and Reich IMO basically have to decide whether they feel the team actually is in a "SB window" or isn't. If they feel they're just a top 12-15 QB away, then it seems to me a Stafford trade becomes the most direct route. If they actually feel they're not yet in such a window, then I guess maybe re-signing Jacoby, or signing someone like Fitz, and having Eason as a 1- or 2-year backup is the most logical (and likely least expensive) way to go.

 

I am yet to be convinced that Jones will be an NFL QB who can lead a team to a Super Bowl, and I'm even less impressed with Trask. Frankly, Eason has more arm talent than either, and more NFL experience as well.

 

Personally I'd be hesitant to give up #21 and more for Stafford, and I absolutely would NOT give up #21 AND any sort of second rounder--that's just too much, and I think I probably have a higher opinion of Stafford than most on this board. Maybe I'd consider #21 and a future 3rd rounder (especially if I felt I could sign one of the UFA wide receivers and one of the UFA left tackles or edge defenders who are currently available).

[danlhart87]

37 minutes ago, richard pallo said:

If Ballard loses Stafford to the Patriots after the McDaniels fiasco he will have a hard time living it down.  "The rivalry is back on"?  I guess we will find out.

Id be ok with it cause a QB could drop

[danlhart87]

12 minutes ago, poilucelt said:

heard one wild rumor re: 3-way (!) trade w/ NE, SF and Detroit for Stafford--presumably Jimmy G would return to NE for a 1st which might go to Detroit w/ Stafford going to SF? Jeesh....convoluted, to say the least, but it does somehow sound faintly Belichickian

 

Irsay, Ballard and Reich IMO basically have to decide whether they feel the team actually is in a "SB window" or isn't. If they feel they're just a top 12-15 QB away, then it seems to me a Stafford trade becomes the most direct route. If they actually feel they're not yet in such a window, then I guess maybe re-signing Jacoby, or signing someone like Fitz, and having Eason as a 1- or 2-year backup is the most logical (and likely least expensive) way to go.

 

I am yet to be convinced that Jones will be an NFL QB who can lead a team to a Super Bowl, and I'm even less impressed with Trask. Frankly, Eason has more arm talent than either, and more NFL experience as well.

 

Personally I'd be hesitant to give up #21 and more for Stafford, and I absolutely would NOT give up #21 AND any sort of second rounder--that's just too much, and I think I probably have a higher opinion of Stafford than most on this board. Maybe I'd consider #21 and a future 3rd rounder (especially if I felt I could sign one of the UFA wide receivers and one of the UFA left tackles or edge defenders who are currently available).

Belichickian

 

[coltsfeva]

8 hours ago, Breeze said:

People complained that Rivers wasn’t someone who could take us to the next level... couldn’t win in the playoffs.  Same people complained we have a ton of holes to fill on this team.  Same people who wanted our coaching staff to go.  Suddenly Matt Stafford is the guy who can take us to the promise land?  Willing to give up 1st rounder(s)?  Proven franchise QB?  Proven winner?  Anything in the past 10 years at Detroit to indicate that he wins and can take us deep into the playoffs?

 Maybe not. But there’s something I’ve seen building over the last three years in INDY that leads me to believe he could have some of the best years of his career and that, could help us go deep into the playoffs. You have to take in to account the team he’s been playing with. 

[Smonroe]

10 minutes ago, coltsfeva said:

 Maybe not. But there’s something I’ve seen building over the last three years in INDY that leads me to believe he could have some of the best years of his career and that, could help us go deep into the playoffs. You have to take in to account the team he’s been playing with. 

I’m so tired of hearing that Stafford couldn’t lead the Lions to a playoff win.  How many available QBs have led their teams to a playoff win?   Do people want Cam, or Flacco?  
 

The only knock on the guy is his injury history, which he’s mostly played through.  Good guy, never controversial, great in his community, and he still has the arm.  
 

Opportunities like this don’t come around often. The only question should be does Ballard think his cost is detrimental to the team’s future.  

[Orioles22]

26 minutes ago, danlhart87 said:

Id be ok with it cause a QB could drop

We drafted a quarterback last year. I don't think we do it again.

[danlhart87]

1 minute ago, Orioles22 said:

We drafted a quarterback last year. I don't think we do it again.

I'm not putting all my faith in Eason just yet

[Orioles22]

I'm not putting my faith in any rookie quarterback not named Lawrence. That's why we need Stafford and let Eason develop for a few years.

[danlhart87]

4 minutes ago, Orioles22 said:

I'm not putting my faith in any rookie quarterback not named Lawrence. That's why we need Stafford and let Eason develop for a few years.

Depends what they give up 

[Moosejawcolt]

4 hours ago, Orioles22 said:

They kind of need a quarterback also. If the first round pick will fill that need, it sounds like a good idea to me. The Notre Dame offensive tackle was listed as a second- or third-round pick on at least one draft site. I think we could find a good one in the second round. Smith has done well as a second-round pick.

 

Eason maybe their guy. Ty is older. Pittman has not shown he can be the #1. Campbell is a walking MASH unit. Rhodes had a good contract year but is  getting older. Sin is at best a #2. Linebackers pretty set. The DE's r getting older and no real young DE talent in the wings to take over. Need a LT, as Castanzo just retired. So, I dont think we can go around giving away pics. Say u trade Stafford for the 1st rounder. Where do u pick up a LT? They usually demand a high pick. Ballard gets to much success for his draft success. U take away all of his free agent acquisitions and I dont think the talent is as impressive as most think. I give Ballard more credit for his free agents than his drafting.

[CR91]

It will be interesting if we do get Stafford if he would want Golladay as well. If that's the case, closes the door on Hilton returning unless he takes a hometown discount like 6-7 mil instead of 10-11 mil

[rockywoj]

On 1/23/2021 at 5:47 PM, CR91 said:

 

You do realize he'll be 33 this year with no playoff success and 7 losing seasons. You really think that's worth the 21st pick?

5 year elite QB for a mid to late 1st rounder which 50% og time will be just a guy off the team within 5 years, Yeah, I’d jump at giving up pick 21 for Stafford.  

[CR91]

31 minutes ago, rockywoj said:

5 year elite QB for a mid to late 1st rounder which 50% og time will be just a guy off the team within 5 years, Yeah, I’d jump at giving up pick 21 for Stafford.  

 

Elite? Elite is top 3 in the league which Stafford has never been in his whole career. Just stop.

[w87r]

3 minutes ago, CR91 said:

 

Elite? Elite is top 3 in the league which Stafford has never been in his whole career. Just stop.

I don't think Elite has a numerical notation.

[CR91]

1 minute ago, w87r said:

I don't think Elite has a numerical notation.

 

Ok. I'm done. I'm not answering anything about Stafford again.

[danlhart87]

1 hour ago, CR91 said:

It will be interesting if we do get Stafford if he would want Golladay as well. If that's the case, closes the door on Hilton returning unless he takes a hometown discount like 6-7 mil instead of 10-11 mil

Colts can't afford both 

[w87r]

Just now, CR91 said:

 

Ok. I'm done. I'm not answering anything about Stafford again.

I wasn't even saying he was/is elite. I'm just saying there isn't a number that quantifies it.

[CR91]

1 minute ago, danlhart87 said:

Colts can't afford both 

 

Depends what Golladay wants. 15-17 mil possible. 18-20 mil no

[rockywoj]

5 minutes ago, CR91 said:

 

Elite? Elite is top 3 in the league which Stafford has never been in his whole career. Just stop.

I have a looser definition of elite, than you.  Top 10 talent, for sure.  Plus methinks you are wrongly equating team success, or lack thereof, as being reflective of Stafford being meh.

I was listening recently (a few weeks ago) to Aaron Rodgers on the Patty Mac show and Rodgers was saying that the public just has no clue as to just how special Stafford is.  That he can make throws that blows Rodgers mind.  That there’s maybe one guy with the arm talent of Stafford, and we know who that is.

[CR91]

Just now, rockywoj said:

I have a looser definition of elite, than you.  Top 10 talent, for sure.  Plus methinks you are wrongly equating team success, or lack thereof, as being reflective of Stafford being meh.

I was listening recently (a few weeks ago) to Aaron Rodgers on the Patty Mac show and Rodgers was saying that the public just has no clue as to just how special Stafford is.  That he can make throws that blows Rodgers mind.  That there’s maybe one guy with the arm talent of Stafford, and we know who that is.

 

Like I told the other poster, I'm done talking about Stafford.

[New Zealands #1 Colts Fan]

3 hours ago, danlhart87 said:

I don't care for that win now mentality. 

So you would rather lose now??

[Zoltan]

4 minutes ago, New Zealands #1 Colts Fan said:

So you would rather lose now??

 

I believe he meant he doesn't like going all in but to build a team that is a contender every year. For example the Eagles went all in and made some bad contracts and now they are looking like a total rebuild because they are paying people like Alshon Jeffrey huge money.

[New Zealands #1 Colts Fan]

1 minute ago, Zoltan said:

 

I believe he meant he doesn't like going all in but to build a team that is a contender every year. For example the Eagles went all in and made some bad contracts and now they are looking like a total rebuild because they are paying people like Alshon Jeffrey huge money.

That makes sense. Thanks

[rockywoj]

14 minutes ago, CR91 said:

 

Like I told the other poster, I'm done talking about Stafford.

Okay.  I shall bid you adieu from this thread.  Oh, also, whether or not you are “done” with Stafford talk in no way precludes me from relying to what you said, for the benefit of the Colts Forum community.  No need for you to reply to this, though, as I have no problem with you being Stafford done.