This is absurd. Id argue Stafford coming in mid season, even with his familiarity w KOC, is going to require a learning curve and it’s JJs show next year. So we basically risk blowing up a 5-1 team for a what….half season rental? I want a DT that helps us now and helps us in the future.
@@DystopianUtopia8I’m not even sure Stafford of today is THAT much better than Darnold. Is that really worth potentially messing up team chemistry when our offense has been playing w Sam since training camp? Stafford’s fought injuries, he’s 10 years older plus everything we already mentioned above. Just doesn’t make sense
Y'all are crazy. I would not trade a 1st for Stafford under any condition at this point in his career. You're trading a prospective 10-year starter for a 1-2 year rental. Hard no! Judd is right on this.
Y'all are right, but they're still not going to trade a first-round pick for a temporary, broken down (let's be honest) .5-1.5 year rental. Even more so with the greatly diminished draft stock they're already playing with.
This crew playing both side of the fence on this topic is wild. Last I checked this is a 5-1 team and the motto of the show is one before I die. And yet here we are with an affirmative yes Stafford gives us the best chance at SB but still not sure I would do it. The window is open Stafford or Lawrence if either gives you a chance this season do it. Or I guess I can’t wait for them to draft a corner in 2026 for a defense that Brian Flores left long ago to be a HC….
But the point is he doesn’t give them the best chance at a SB. He gives them the best chance at this years Super Bowl. But a worse chance at future SBs because you’re spending draft capital on a rental. So if he takes your Super Bowl chances this year from 0.01% to 0.05% (for example) but reduces your Super Bowl window in subsequent years by 2% then it isn’t worth it. (Numbers exaggerated to make the point)
@@jamespratt7526 assuming the trajectory of a team is a dangerous game. Injuries, coaching changes, players retiring, prospects not panning out are all factors in your scenario fall the Vikings way. Go ask the 49ers how what was seemingly guaranteed championship trajectory pans out. The cake and eat it too approach is a good way to miss a championship window.
@@RobbyBJust1B4IDIE I’m not saying don’t do it for that reason only. If it gives you an appreciably better shot this year then go for it. But it needs to be appreciably better. The Carolina Panthers trading three firsts for Derrick Henry gives them a better shot at this years SB. But it improves them from an infinitesimally small number to a slightly larger number that is still essentially nil. That’s the point here. If you’re mortgaging the future it better be worth it with a tangible upside that can possibly happen. Personally I’m not convinced Matt Stafford is even better than Darnold. Obviously, in their prime Stafford is better and it’s not even a question. Yes, Stafford is suffering through injury but that’s a superficial analysis. He also looks… bad. I think he’s fallen off the age cliff as Matt Ryan did when Atlanta traded him to Indy and as Rodgers has done in NY
We don't want Stafford. The notion of trading Darnold and draft capital for him with a 5-1 record, and JJ McCarthy taking over next season is asinine. If a trade happens, it's for defensive upgrades to the Dline
This would be a stupid idea. Only way I entertain this is as followed. 1. Strictly a QB for QB trade no giving up draft picks. Darnold is a possible future asset for the Rams. Stafford is a 1 year Brett Favre play. 2. They then take the first round pick and go get Big Dex.
Calling it dumb is just wrong though. It would be dumb if Matt Stafford wasn't a better quarterback than Darnold, but he is better. The locker room at the end of the day wants to win a super bowl. They aren't interested in the "Sam Darnold career revival" trophy and a divisional round playoff exit.
@@rollerr nah At this point in his career he’s actually not better then Sam rn. Not to mention we already have our guy in JJ after this season. So we’d be making a trade for a more expensive QB to play the remaining 11 games even though we already have a good QB 😂🤷🏻♂️ yes it’d be a dumb trade.
@@Jderushia07If you honestly think Darnold is better I think you're totally crazy. How he's playing this season is irrelevant because his team is a total mess.
@@jiordone8563 Do you only look at box scores? Or are you taking into account that he's playing behind a below average offensive line with third and fourth string wide receivers? Like, I can't believe we're actually having a discussion on whether Matt Stafford is a good QB lol. You guys are legitimately ridiculous
Judd is crazy saying "I think the Vikings would balk at trading a conditional first based on making the Superbowl" and ALSO saying "I think we should trade a first for Simmons or Lawrence"
How does no one even mention that Stafford is probably washed. He has stated on podcasts how he has had to adjust his throwing because his arm isn't there anymore.
For chemistry reasons, I like the CB/DL idea more. Idk if you can mess with the offensive dynamic by dropping Matt Stafford into this - and Kelly’s irritating self chirping behind the scenes
I'm not sure he the piece that gets this team over the hump. Yes he's an upgrade from Darnold but bolstering the o-line or getting a Detxer Lawrence type DT should be more of a priority that will help for this season and years to come
@@eddiejones974 True, but if they can’t get an IDL and/or CB it won’t matter against the likes of Detroit and GB, which you will likely have to beat to make it to the NFC Championship. Let’s not even talk about Baltimore with Derrick Henry or KC, who just picked up D-Hop.
There's a quick rule of thumb called Betteridge's Law of headlines that applies here. Betteridge's law of headlines is an adage that states: "Any headline that ends in a question mark can be answered by the word no." If they were confident the answer is yes, they would have printed it as a statement of fact (eg. "The Vikings could/should trade for Matt Stafford")
Trading for Stafford makes no sense. Darnold is way more mobile and is doing pretty well. Trade for a def tackle or right guard. Those are definite needs. It would take a lot more than Stafford for the Vikings to win the SB this year.
If it was similar to the Goff trade where we give them Darnold and we get Stafford and a 1st or something, then sure. Don't think they'd go for that. But this year wasn't even expected to be this good. We have a bright future to build. I don't think this is the way to go. I'd really only want a big trade if it were for Dexter Lawrence. That guy is insane and young.
Adding stafford guarantees nothing. He was gifted a super bowl threw a terrible deep ball right to a san francisco 49er safety who flat out dropped it after it bounced off his hands and chest with no one near him and we are here talking about stafford finding jones in the flat and not throwing to addison lol
No way in hell we go for Stafford. It makes absolutely zero sense. One big reason is Staffords contract is massive and makes no sense to even sniff that
i would be slightly dissappointed if that went through, i think they would need to focus on the defense and continue to give darnold a chance we lose one game and people think all is lost, darnold would lose his spot regardless once jj comes back anyway so dont miss the bigger picture here
NO. Stafford to the Vikes is reckless stupidity, not reckless speculation. He's too old and too expensive. Florio's scoops are usually disjointed from reality.
Vikings fans are delusional if they prefer darnold over stafford for a potential superbowl run. Darnold literally never even played a playoff game and he's known to be terrible under pressure in REGULAR SEASON games. 😅
Stafford has like a million 4th quarter comeback, some against the Vikings. He's super clutch, Darnold is o.k. so far, but doesn't have the clutch factor. Kirk definitely didn't have that either
If I were the Vikings I would pass on a possible move for Stafford. Why upset the apple cart now? Instead, I would wholeheartedly inquire about a trade for Dexter Lawrence from the G-Men. That makes more sense! JMO ✌️
I think the most frustrating thing about Sam is when a play goes south, like a screen play gets blown up, he just dirts the ball after 2 seconds despite being under no pressure. It always seemed weird to me. You would hope he sits back for another second or two, or at least gives it a chance, and then throws it away if there's pressure or if nothing opens up. Seems like his brain just fritzes if he doesn't see what he wants off the snap, which will NOT carry a team to, and win, the Super Bowl
Ultimately by uplifting the qb plays uplifts the offense and had a ripple effect to not have the defense out there as much to help them. So instead of us relying on one part of the ball we would be great on both sides
Strike while the iron is hot eh? They arent getting Stafford. Would be VERY dumb. I make a trade for Simmons, Lawrence, or Horn, and thats it if the price was right.
Darnold the past 3 weeks has shown it’s gonna be tough to make a real run with him he’s holding onto the ball too long and not taking every shot he needs to
@@user-wj9bz8xi9u Stafford is no upgrade, get real and actually is results and play. Outside of the 1 season with the Rams, he's been just another QB his entire career.
@@jiordone8563 He absolutely is an upgrade over Darnold. Compare their careers. He won 1 superbowl, I am assuming that is the season you are talking about as his "1 season".... How many seasons of success has Darnold had? Darnold has thrown for 3,000 yards once in his career. Stafford has 9 seasons of over 4,000 yards and two years throwing 41 touchdowns with the most recent being 2021- he threw for 3900 yards last year which is nearly 1,000 yards more than Darnold's career best. Darnold's career high in TD's thrown is 19.
I'm with Judd, I wouldn't do a deal involving Darnold-Stafford unless Vikings come out of it with more picks in 2025 than they have now. That is under the assumption that the money isn't a real issue and the Vikings can jump ship on Stafford before 2025, with little penalty, if they want. I think, in a vacuum, Stafford is the better QB right now, maybe slow to adjust for a few weeks post-trade but ready for games that count in division/conference. If it helps the Rams rebuild and have a QB for the foreseeable future, I'd think the Vikings can get a good pick back, 3rd or 4th and maybe one of their 6ths for a reasonably priced, contract-extended Darnold. Not much would then prevent them from taking the acquired mid-rd pick and going after another player before the deadline.
SINGAPORE FAN’S VIKING VALKYRIE PROPOSITION You’re right. The Vikings need a better QB than Sam to reach the Super Bowl, let alone beat Mahomes and the Chiefs. But Stafford? Nope. The hunger just doesn’t seem to be in him. I doubt he will ever play the way he did to win another ring. YES, the QB is the first piece we need if we want to qualify for the big show this season. But if we wanna go full Rams, this is what we need, at a minimum. 1. A quality QB …and dare I say…Aaron Rodgers and Joe Flacco are the only QBs available now who can swing it for us. Rodgers? Unlike Stafford, he has the hunger. Yeah, Favre burnt us. But I bet a 3-month Rodgers is different because his use-by value, Anglo-Saxon work ethic, and acutely requisite super ego to go after a second ring remain intact esp if you throw in the prospect of proving everyone wrong. What better way to go out burnishing his legacy by beating Mahomes and jettisoning Pat’s obsession with achieving a unique hattrick of consecutive 3-peats. Flacco? Our insurance as a Nick Foles-like backup who knows how to figure out a win when the shit hits the fan. Sam should be in the right role of playing back up instead of crazy cowboy wanna be Mullens, whose high throw prob jeopardised Aaron Jones’ health in having to leap too high to snag a poorly executed pass in London. 2. We NEED Dexter Lawrence. Great as BFlo’s meshing of quality journeymen free agents, the Vikings need an Aaron Donald in the front four. And the only one who best fits the bill is Lawrence. 3. We need a Jaylon Johnson too to fortify the Viking border at corner. Gilly’s good sporadically but his heart somehow doesn’t seem to be in it 110 percent. If we have all 3, draining our cap space and burning our draft capital twice over, we can beat the Chiefs if we meet them in Las Vegas for the final game of the season….And I won’t have to die before we win one. SINGAPORE JOE🥂🇸🇬🇺🇸🇨🇳🇮🇳🇲🇾
we break up the chemistry, we give the Rams their younger QB... Rams give us Stafford and a 5th for Darnold, or the phone is hung up... Darnold doesn't have to beat Mahomes or Goff for that matter... that's Flo and the defenses job... can Darnold beat the Lions, Chiefs, Ravens defenses? yes, I believe he can...
If this was madden, the conversation would make sense. But this is the end of October with major logistics issues. Bringing in Stafford with your bye week already gone, with a winning record, never playing with these teammates, his external family events, his cap figures AND GIVING UP DRAFT ASSETS?? That’s a Jets, desperation and completely chaos dumpster fire kind of trade to make. It doesn’t make any sense whatsoever for this team. AND it doesn’t make sense for them in the future either. If there was any merit to the deal, it could have been done in the off season very easily because he’s always been available. Why? His cap figures are insane! This is a competent organization and just something to laugh about.
Id rather have Lawrence but a pro about the stafford trade that should be mentioned is this: McCarthy is a sponge right now. A sponge who is learning behind Sam Darnold. A positive about bringing Stafford in would be McCarthy being able to learn from him
Darnold's been pretty clutch this season, so I'm not sure if Stafford is a considerable upgrade, especially at the price. I sure didn't have us going 5-1 after the most difficult part of our schedule.
There is no way I'm giving any draft picks along with Darnold knowing JJ is our guy starting next yeah. If anything I'm asking for a 5th plus Stafford knowing Darnold is their plan for the next few years.
@@user-wj9bz8xi9uStafford is old and get banged up quite often. Stick it out with Darnold and upgrade the D-line and or O-line. Darnold has done enough for us to give him a shot the rest of the way. Once Hock comes back the offense is going to open up a lot more.
@@johnathanscott8009 proven winner though and he is tough- he injured his shoulder stayed in the game and threw game winning touchdown. We know he can win. We have a great defense, he could be the piece to get us a Super Bowl.
@@lukelee3 Correct, imagine what Darnold's performance would be if he was with this Rams team. Darnold is showing signs of regressing back to his old form. He needs to make decisions faster, quit holding the ball. Look Addison's way more often. KOC needs to quit calling all the long developing plays and just run some short throws to get Darnold in a rhythm.
Can you imagine if we trade for Stafford, beat Detroit in the NFC championship game and then win a Super Bowl before they do with the quarterback that they let go for the quarterback we just beat? Brutal.
I think, despite the fact that we need help on RG and DL, Stafford could give us a a better shot this year and he would be a better veteran in front of JJ. And 4 Million guaranteed 2025... would be nice to have Stafford in `25 on the roster as a starter or even backup for JJ.
How would this look to the team though? Would it be a locker room “wrecker”? Just gonna move on from a 5-1 QB? How would the team react? KOC has built a culture of trust and respect. Would the players feel douped if someone who has helped lead them to this start, is just shipped out. Would love to hear some thoughts.
@@Stiff_Richards really, based on exactly what, his stellar career? Do you actually watch him play this year? Do you actually look at his career numbers?
Can’t believe you guys didn’t spend time entertaining the idea of what Stafford role after this year would be if they want to start with JJ next season. What would that look like
I thought O'Connell's over the top praise of Darnold must ring somewhat false with Sam knowing he was only here for one year, turning around a few weeks later and bringing in another guy might not sit well with the team..
Judd is saying the more important player is a d tackle upgrade. The question is can we win the SB with a d tackle upgrade and keep Darnold. Or get the d tackle and Stafford. I would take Stafford IF we got the d tackle too and it doesn’t hurt us too much financially
I originally thought no way. But yesterdays show you guys mentioned that Darnold probably has reached his ceiling. Then i started thinking we have to think ahead to the playoffs - more than likely we play the Lions again in the playoffs. When that happens I would rather have Stafford then Darnold.
The Vikings have a long history of bringing in old, past-their-prime QB’s … and how has it worked out for them? Moon … fun to watch but never came close to the SB, McNabb … total joke, Favre … one great year and then off the cliff. What we’ve seen from Darnold this year is that he’s not perfect , but the team as a whole is good enough to go toe to toe with any of the best teams in the NFL (yes, as much as it pains me to say it, I think the Lions are the best team in the league right now). There’s no reason to make a panicked short-sided move like trading for Stafford. Lawerence or Simmons would be a much better addition in my opinion.
This is very doable. We shall see how each team plays these two possible trade assets tomorrow and that would give us a better understanding on the validity of this claim. Keep in mind…The Vikings or Rams have not rebutted these claims. 🤔
If you get Stafford and they win a superbowl or even if he just plays really well and they don't win a superbow, and he doesn't want to retire at the end of the year, the vikings can trade him in the off season for picks. I don't see a scenario where if they trade for Stafford now then the vikings are stuck with him for next year as well
Goessling and Alec Lewis both tweeted that they asked inside sourced, and that this is all horse shit. Move along.. and pray this isn’t a distraction before tomorrow’s game.
There is no question that Matthew Stafford is an upgrade over Sam Darnold. Matt was arguably the best QB last season and probably would have been MVP if he didn't miss three games (The Rams lost all three games he didn't play in and still had 11 wins). I think Stafford could win a ring with this team. Side note there is no way that the Giants trade Sexy Dexy, unless it was for multiple first round picks. We need them picks to draft Cornerbacks, a new Running back, and Safety. Yes, I'm saying draft a running back high because I don't want to see this offense with a bad running back after watching Aaron Jones, plus I think that running backs are going to see a resurgence in value with all the two high safeties being run and lighter linebackers. I want to keep the run game good to help a young QB in JJ when he starts.
Listen man, if we can trade Darnold & a 2026 3rd for Stafford as a rental. I'd be all in. McVey can have peace of mind that he has a competent QB for some years & can continue to mold him. We can go on a run with Stafford & imagine a playoff game against Detroit with Stafford. Then we can hopefully get Simmons from the Titans & let's friggin go boys!!! In the end JJ McCarthy is getting us a championship either way.
McCarthy is, in effect, a 2025 1st round draft pick. He'll be three years younger than rookie QB Jaren Hall was, and with a year of acclimating to Minneapolis, to the staff, to teammates, etc.
I don't think trading Sam for Matt is that outlandish I know the Vikings are 5-1 with Sam also Jared Goff took the Rams to the Super Bowl so.... The Vikings just let go of Kirk Cousins because they felt the rest of the team was great and Kirk was Good and they felt "Good" wasn't good enough.
Couldn’t we do both? 25 5th round with conditional 26 1st round for a SB win for Stafford? And then the 25 and 27 1st round for Lawrence? I still think I’d like McCarthy sitting behind Stafford for the sake of learning vs Darnold.
