Matthew Stafford may be better than Aaron Rodgers, but Rodgers is still better than plenty
ProFootballTalk’s Mike Florio doesn’t get why the Rams would entertain going from Matthew Stafford to Aaron Rodgers, as was recently put out there by ESPN’s Adam Schefter to be a possibility.
Florio surely isn’t the only one who thinks that Stafford is currently better than Rodgers, but nonetheless he states the obvious:
“Right now, Stafford’s better than Rodgers I don’t think that’s even something that would be subject to a fair debate. Stafford is better than Rodgers, so you’re going to move on from Stafford and take somebody that’s four years older?…I just don’t get it. I don’t get why the Rams would do it.”
Maybe Rodgers will be healthy when he’s two years removed from his Achilles injury in September, but is he worth the risk?
If the Rams move on from Stafford, then I think the answer to that question is, yes.
If Les Snead, the team and Stafford come to an agreement, no.
Turf Show Times already wrote about the Rams trading Stafford now to add Rodgers, and before you hate on the idea read the darn article:
“Rodgers and Stafford threw the same number of big-time throws at 26 (4.2%) but the key difference is that Rodgers took much better care of the ball—this has been a trademark of his hall of fame career. Stafford put the ball in harm’s way 25 times this past season (3.7% of dropbacks). Meanwhile Rodgers halved that number at 12 turnover-worthy plays (1.8%).”
That right there is a fair critique of Stafford. He can be reckless with the ball. It’s also why he can make throws few others can. Rodgers might be one of the other guys on the planet who can though.
If the #Rams traded Matthew Stafford and Cooper Kupp on their current deals, they could jump from $32M in cap space all the way up to $84M. This would place them 3rd in the NFL, and they would be favorites to land Aaron Rodgers at the vet minimum ($1.25M). pic.twitter.com/MsmCmIkPgS
— JaredVerseFC (@jaredversefc) February 18, 2025
Matthew Stafford is better for the Rams
However, this would be Stafford’s fifth season with the Rams. He knows the system and despite Rodgers being willing to learn it, Stafford has more experience with McVay and that’s an advantage.
Dianna Russini of The Athletic shared on the Rich Eisen Show that she only could see the Rams moving towards Rodgers if nothing could be worked out with Stafford, which is also what everyone else said about the situation before her.
“I think an organization that has a very firm structure to not just the way they run things, but just their offense in general. Sean McVay to me is one of the best to do it, and it’s very clear that Sean is the voice of the Rams, and the decision maker, and has a tremendous ability to connect with all types of different personalities. And I know that Rodgers has tons of respect for Sean McVay, so that doesn’t seem completely off the grid if the Matthew Stafford situation doesn’t work itself out.”
The relationship could work with Rodgers coming in knowing that he doesn’t call the shots, something he was most likely promised when he went to the New York Jets. You get what you get with Rodgers, and that’s a certain level of unpredictability, but it can’t be denied on the field he can be a surgeon.
Imagine this scenario:#Rams trade Matthew Stafford for #Giants 2026 1st and 2025 2nd (34)
Aaron Rodgers signs a minimum deal with the Rams, goes on to win a Super Bowl and retires a Ram.
Giants pick becomes the 2026 1st overall pick, Rams select Arch Manning. pic.twitter.com/LWavurdxLn
— JaredVerseFC (@jaredversefc) February 18, 2025
Should L.A. move on from Stafford for Rodgers?
If Stafford wants more than one year, and if the Rams aren’t willing to do that, they’ll need to pivot. Even if Stafford is “better” than Rodgers, Rodgers has a one-of-a kind pedigree. He’s a future Hall of Famer.
McVay might be willing to work with that. Rodgers might love working with McVay, and if Stafford has to be moved, there may not be a better second option for the Rams.
