Signing him to extension without a strong history of winning is wrong move; Quinn’s future should be tied to QB
It’s a mistake.
Bob Quinn’s decision to pay Matthew Stafford’s ransom with a five-year contract extension that averages $27 million per year has come too soon.
It’s a mistake and I can prove it. At the next news conference Quinn holds — or at any news conference ever — he won’ t want to answer this question: Should his tenure as Detroit Lions general manager be directly tied to Stafford’s success?
It should. If Stafford goes, Quinn should, too.
There was no reason Quinn couldn’ t have waited to see how Stafford performs this season before doling out such a fortune that keeps Stafford with the Lions until 2022.
Quinn could have used the franchise tag this year and next with little consequence in the difference of money he would have paid.
More:
Matthew Stafford’s contract extension makes (dollars and) sense for Lions
No losers in Matthew Stafford’s contract extension with Lions
The few million dollars Quinn would have saved would have bought himself something more valuable: Surety, or something close to it. Stafford owns zero division titles, is 0-3 in the playoffs and has a 51-58 record.
Then there’s always the eternal question circling around Stafford: Is he elite? Let me put it this way, folks. If you have to ask, he’s not.
But maybe Quinn thinks he’s buying himself something else with Stafford’s contract, like time. Maybe he thinks this is a no-lose situation with Stafford. He gets to the be the person in the photo, shaking the hand of the bionic-armed, comeback hero, clean-cut quarterback and poster boy for all things Detroit.
Everyone’s smiling. Everyone’s happy. Everything’s great.
Yep. It’s all been great for 60 years, eh, Lions fans?
Where’s the urgency? There is almost no credible pundit anywhere who’s picking the Lions to win the weak NFC North this year. Quinn didn’ t sign any amazing free agents this off-season, and his first two drafts (I know it’s still early) haven’ t exactly taken the NFL by storm.
So, what did Quinn do? Did he wheel and deal for great players at a great price? Did he discover diamonds in the rough? Did he turn mid- to late-round picks into stars? Did he apply the same harsh scrutiny to your quarterback that you do to every other position?
Nope. He simply did the expedient thing and signed his own sub-.500 quarterback.
More: Former, current Lions react to Matthew Stafford huge contract extension
No one likes change because it always comes with a risk. The refrain you will hear about Stafford’s contract is that he’s been the best they’ ve had since Greg Landry played 40 years ago and he gives them the best chance of winning right now.
Yes, and I’ m sure the Patriots thought Drew Bledsoe gave them the best chance of winning before Tom Brady was forced to take over in 2001, or the Rams thought Trent Green gave them the best chance of winning before Kurt Warner took over in 1999.
Sometimes you don’ t know what you’ re missing until you’ re forced to do without it.
But there could be something more serious at play in the Stafford contract and something that’s a lot more concerning. It goes to the core of this franchise and how it has been too loyal and too forgiving under 50-plus years of Ford ownership. William Clay Ford was way too close to be objective about general managers like Russ Thomas and Matt Millen. Martha Ford literally said she loves coach Jim Caldwell.
Maybe the Fords feel this way, too, about Stafford. Maybe they feel this way about Quinn. There’s nothing wrong with caring about employees. But if that affection clouds the cold, hard, calculating stance an NFL owner has to take to dispassionately keep only players who produce strong resumes of winning, there’s only one way to describe that affection: A mistake.
Contact Carlos Monarrez: cmonarrez@freepress.com. Follow him on Twitter @cmonarrez. Download our Lions Xtra app for free on Apple and Android!
