Big Blue View mailbag: Matthew Stafford fallout edition

Gregory DiDonato asks: Aaron Rodgers rumors are flying. With the brutal schedule this year, and potential to be drafting near the top again in a better QB class, which path would you best prefer and why?

Option 1: sign Rodgers for 2/$50M and take the best available player at 3rd overall ( Hunter, Carter, Graham, Campbell) and take a flier on a later round QB on day 2 or 3.

Option 2: sign a lesser QB (flier on Fields, Jameis Winston short term deal) and draft a QB at 3 or move up if necessary for Ward or Sanders.

Ed says: Sign someone else. Anyone else other than Rodgers. Sign the best bridge you can and take the big swing for Cam Ward in the draft.

I am not going to go deep into my reasons for that here. I spent 12 hours driving home from Indianapolis on Friday and haven’t had time to do it yet, but I am going to post all of my quarterback thoughts at some point on Saturday or Sunday. including my reasons for not wanting anything to do with Rodgers.

Andre Banks says: “Thank God Matthew Stafford has signed? with the Rams” would be a statement that I would make with an exuberant heart… if the next thing I read wasn’t now they’re pivoting toward Aaron Rodgers. Now that I’ve gotten that off of my chest, can you tell me what UPSIDE there would be bringing a 40 something year old quarterback (who doesn’t mentor young talent)? Wouldn’t Russell Wilson be a far better option on a short list of not very good options?

Ed says: Aaron, I know what Dianna Russini reported and I know that she is well-sourced. I don’t, and won’t, believe the Giants would sign Rodgers until it happens. The information I have is that the Giants are doing their homework on every available quarterback. Adam Schefter’s report is exactly what I was also told. Also, to my knowledge it has been Rodgers trying to kick down the Giants’ door.

Still, anything is possible. Until it’s not.

Anthony Cantore asks: I read your recent mock draft. In it you pick several developmental players. What young players has Brian Daboll developed — Hyatt, Banks, Schmitz, Neal, Ezeudu, etc. Even players previously drafted that had some success have regressed Thibodeaux, Bellinger, etc. Do you have any confidence that Daboll will be able to now begin to develop players and players will actually get better as the season goes on?

Ed says: Anthony, every draft pick is a developmental player at some level. When you blame Brian Daboll for lack of development, you have to understand that the coordinators and especially position coaches work more closely with these players and are more responsible for their day-to-day work.

Sometimes, the fact that players don’t develop is their own fault. Sometimes it is scheme, situation, coaching. There is no one-size-fits-all answer.

I would take issue with a couple of the players you mentioned. John Michael Schmitz was far better in Year 2 than Year 1. Kayvon Thibodeaux didn’t regress — he got hurt. Daniel Bellinger didn’t regress — he got replaced by a player in Theo Johnson the Giants think is going to be better.

Myung Lee asks: There seems to be frequent changes to Brian Daboll’s coaching staff. Any guess as to why this is so? Is Daboll considered a difficult HC to work for among assistant coaches?

What is your view of Daboll’s ability to attracting veteran coaches who can develop draftees and FAs into competent NFL players. Do you see the current coaching staff capable of developing another Zeke Mowatt or David Diehl?

Ed says: Myung, I would be curious to know why you choose Mowatt and Diehl for your examples of players developed in years gone by. But, that is really beside the point.

Brian Daboll and ex-defensive coordinator Wink Martindale has a personality clash, and Martindale didn’t want to treat Daboll like he was the boss — which he was. There has been some discussion that Daboll is hard, maybe too hard, on assistant coaches. That is criticism I know he is aware of.

Coaching in the NFL is a vagabond lifestyle. Many of these assistant coaches move every couple of years when their contracts end. They do it for what they see as career advancement opportunities. They do it simply to go back to a place they are more comfortable, or to work with a head coach they might have a pre-existing relationship with. They might do it for family reasons. It doesn’t always mean they dislike working for the head coach.

From everything I know and have heard, there are a lot of highly-regarded position coaches on the Giants’ staff.

John Kozel asks: Since Tennessee sits in the catbird seat to get a QB if they really like one, why don’t the Giants make a play for Will Levis? He seems like the big, gunslinger to a fault, Josh Allen type who we hear Brian Daboll can mold and win with. Should be able to get him for cheap and if it doesn’t work, they are looking for a quarterback next year when the choices are better. Then they can take best player or trade back this year. Thoughts?

Ed says: Why wouldn’t the Giants make a play for Will Levis? Because he isn’t very good. Daboll and Schoen are in a situation where there is a lot of heat on them entering 2025, and I can’t see them putting their futures in the hands of a kid Tennessee seems to be trying to replace just two years after they drafted him.

Vincent Moody asks: It seems almost certain that the Giants will be bringing a veteran quarterback onboard. When do you think that happens? If they miss out on Stafford, do they make signing a quarterback a priority in the first day of free agency?

Ed says: Vincent, nothing can happen officially until free agency starts. The negotiating window opens March 10, and the signing period starts March 12. I think we will know by the time the signing period starts. Before that if they go for Aaron Rodgers.

Erick Voronin asks: Once it became apparent last season that the Giants would have a top pick in this years draft, I started watching the top college QB prospects. I understand the debate with Sanders. His body type, arm strength, taking sacks and some uneven performances gives me reason to rank him below last year’s class. However after watching 5 or 6 of Cam Ward’s games, I can’t understand why he doesn’t get the love from the “so called experts”. I’m not one to watch tape or evaluate his progressions, decision making or leadership qualities but the eye test tells me he has the potential of being a star in the NFL. He’s excelled at multiple schools with multiple offensive schemes. Why is he downgraded as compared with the 2024 draft QB’s which included Penix, who has had injury history, McCarthy who was nothing more than a game manager and Nix who was inconsistent.

Ed says: Erick, I don’t know why Ward hasn’t gotten the kind of love you think he deserves — although I do think that is changing. If it make you feel better, NFL Films analyst Greg Cosell told Big Blue View at the Combine he believes Ward is worth the No. 1 pick in the draft. At this point, mostly analysts also believe he is QB1. Kevin Clark of ESPN recently said of Ward:

“I think he’s the guy that saves that franchise.”

At this point I would be all-in on the Giants trading up to No. 1 to make sure they get Ward. Of course, that means the Tennessee Titans would have to be willing to play ball.

Jacob Michelman asks: Brian Daboll has historically worked with mobile QBs like Mahomes and Allen where he had most of his success. Why are we considering QBs like Stafford or Cousins who have no mobility?

Ed says: Jacob, let me start by clearing up a couple of things from your question. To my knowledge, there is nothing right now connecting the Giants to Kirk Cousins. Secondly, Daboll has never coached Patrick Mahomes.

Why were the Giants considering Matthew Stafford? Because there is no other veteran quarterback available who is as good as Stafford. An immobile Stafford is still a better quarterback than a mobile Justin Fields. And better than Aaron Rodgers at this point in his career.

Spencer Gross asks: If QBs go picks 1-2 in the draft and the Giants go (Abdul) Carter at 3, what would be the plan with current rushers? Would Thibodeaux get traded? I admit I just read the current mailbox edition with you mentioning picking up his fifth-year option but if we get Carter, how does everyone get on the field? Bonus question: What do you think Thibodeaux’s trade value would be?

Ed says: Spencer, I don’t know exactly what the plan would be, but I do know the Giants wouldn’t draft Carter without having one. It takes more than two edge defenders, anyway, and if you field a better team that gets more leads you can have your pass rushers on the field and turn them loose.

I don’t know what Thibodeaux’s trade value would be. Besides, I don’t think the Giants would trade him.

ctscan123 asks: I’m a little surprised by the relative lack of interest for one relatively old guy and the excitement over the prospect of a different old guy. Old guy number one, Rodgers, was not the reason that the Jets were bad. PFF, and again, grain of salt, thinks he played better than the other old guy. additionally, he will not cost us two second round picks and $50 million. is he mobile anymore? No, but perhaps better than he was last year a year out from the Achilles injury. That said, Matthew Stafford is no Josh Allen either. Given the steep cost both in terms of cap space and draft capital and the rough equity of their play, why is Rodgers not being topped up more? Is it his personality? Are people squinting and seeing Stafford as more then a bridge? In recent history, wasn’t there a situation where a franchise convinced themselves that an aging quarterback was five years younger than he actually was, gave up a bunch of draft picks and paid that player a bunch of money only to have him miss a full season with a torn Achilles?

Ed says: CT, I keep saying it but everybody knows trading for or signing a quarterback in his later 30s or early 40s is not ideal. The reality is that Rodgers is four years older than Stafford, comes with a lot more baggage, has had that major injury, did not exactly show leadership with the Jets and is clearly not the player he used to be. Signing him would be a desperation play. Sadly, it might be one the Giants feel forced to make.

Ray Castiglione asks: I have a question about the state of the recuperation of both Andrew Thomas and Theo Johnson. Both suffered Lisfranc injuries, and we all know how tricky they can be, I would think especially for a man of AT’s size. Also are they expected to be reay for camp, both could present problems for next season, and it could influence the way we address the FA’s and the draft.

Ed says: Ray, at his Combine press conference GM Joe Schoen said Thomas is doing well. He said the left tackle is out of the walking boot, is doing his rehab at the team facility in New Jersey and looks “humongous.” He did not offer a time frame for when Thomas would practice, but he seems to be on track. Johnson’s injury occurred almost two months later, so he should not be expected to be ready nearly as soon as Thomas will be. Schoen did not offer an update on Johnson.

Submit a question

Have a Giants-related question? E-mail it to [email protected] and it might be featured in our weekly mailbag.