NFL Preview: Can Aaron Donald bring the Rams back to the Super Bowl?

Welcome to The Debrief, Box Score’s freewheeling conversation about the sports we love.

Jim Trotter
Jim covered the NFL for The Athletic, ESPN, Sports Illustrated and The San Diego Union-Tribune. He is a Pro Football Hall of Fame voter and a former president of Pro Football Writers of America.

Farrell Evans
Farrell is a Box Score co-founder, former Sports Illustrated golf writer and the executive producer of The Land We Share, a documentary about the intimate bonds between the Shinnecock Hills Golf Club and the Shinnecock Indian Nation.

Future Hall of Fame defensive tackle Aaron Donald is returning to the Los Angeles Rams after a two-and-a-half-year retirement. The 35-year-old was enticed to come back by the chance to play alongside Myles Garrett and chase another Super Bowl title. Will Donald return to the form that made him one of the best ever at his position? 

Jim Trotter: I don't know that he will. No. 1: He's older. No. 2: He’s been out a couple of years. Watching the US Open and seeing Venus and Serena, you realize just how much time away can affect your abilities. I think it will take him a while to get back in the groove. There's no simulating NFL games, even practice doesn't simulate that. 

So I think it's going to take him a minute, but I think the Rams know that and that's why they're really counting on him for the end of the year, much more so than the beginning of the year. They want him to be an impact player in December and January and hopefully February as opposed to September. I will say this though, he has got a lot of help. Unlike when he was with the Rams previously, offenses will not be able to single him out. Because if they do, Myles Garrett and others will make them pay for that. I'm intrigued to see how that whole thing is going to work, and the Rams getting help on the back end with Trent McDuffie is a big deal for them defensively.

But my bigger concern with the Rams, honestly, is that I worry about Matthew Stafford at his age, knowing he's had some injury issues in the past. Are they asking a lot for him to remain healthy the rest of the way? The good thing is they may not have to count on him significantly if this defense lives up to billing. So they're going to be a fun team and an intriguing team to watch.

Farrell Evans: To Jim’s point, I don't think they need Aaron Donald to be what he was two-and-a-half years ago. Look at his 2023 stats. He had three passes defended, eight sacks, 53 total tackles, 16 tackles for loss, and 23 quarterback hits. He made his 10th Pro Bowl, and his ninth All-Pro selection.

In every sort of metric, he was right there at the top in 2023, but the Rams don't need him to be that level of impact player. They had a good defense last year, which had the seventh-lowest points allowed, less than 20 points a game. They’ve got Myles Garrett there now. That said, it's two-and-a-half years. Donald is only 35, and he’s never had significant injuries. I think we'll see a player, like Jim said, peaking in December, January, and February.

He won't be an every-snap player. He'll be in there on packages, and I think they'll keep him fresh. He'll be there in tough situations.

Aaron Rodgers is reuniting with Coach Mike McCarthy in Pittsburgh. They won a Super Bowl together in 2011 with the Packers. Rodgers has said that he will retire after the season. What do you think of the chances of this reunion succeeding and the Steelers continuing their run of 22 consecutive seasons without a losing record, an NFL record? 

Farrell: I'm a big Mike Tomlin fan so I watched all 19 games that the Steelers played last year. And Rodgers, he had a fine year. He can't move at all. With as many years as he played, he's been sacked 600 times. He’s the NFL leader in all-time sacks. He gets the ball out fast, but he's going to get hit. 

To the broader question, the reunion with Mike McCarthy, I don't see that necessarily being a great reunion. McCarthy did not have a great stint with the Cowboys. And it's been since forever that the Steelers have had a head coach who was not a defensive guy. Chuck Noll, defensive guy. Bill Cowher, defensive guy. Mike Tomlin. So they bring in this washed-up offensive guy to work with a washed-up quarterback. It's not setting up well for me.

Jim: Washed-up offensive guy and washed-up quarterback? Wow, you are tough. I wouldn't call them washed-up. I would say clearly that they're not the same as they were when they were together in Green Bay. But I'll say this: I don't know if there is a coach-and-Hall-of-Fame-quarterback pairing that was as disappointing as Mike McCarthy and Aaron Rodgers in Green Bay because with all the talent that Aaron had, they made only one Super Bowl appearance in 13 years together. I realize Aaron didn't start every one of those games. He sat behind Brett Favre for a little while. But I don’t think they ever got the maximum out of that pairing. 

Aaron is now 42 years old, and you could see the drop off in play last year. I don't think that they've upgraded that offense in any significant way, even with going out and getting Michael Pittman at wide receiver. The thing about the Steelers to me is that they're an aging group at the key positions in terms of their star players and I don't see those guys holding up over 17 games. So will they continue this non-losing streak that Mike Tomlin had? I don’t believe so. The only thing that plays in their favor is that the division is not as strong as it historically has been. So I think obviously there is a possibility, except their non-conference games are based on finish so they’ve got to play the first-place schedule in those three games. I just don't think that they're at that level now. So for me, I don't see them continuing the streak in terms of non-losing seasons. I don't see Aaron having a great year. And I see the age really starting to show on this team. But I'm not calling anyone washed-up.

Think about this though. When we talk about the Steelers, this is the stat that's more incredible to me. We can talk about Mike Tomlin’s non-losing season streak, but they haven't won a playoff game since 2016. It's been a decade. I always used to say to Steelers fans, be careful what you wish for because they always wanted to run Mike Tomlin out of there. And in order to have a chance to win a Super Bowl, you have to at least get to the playoffs. But all those non-losing seasons, there's nothing to show for it over the last decade. I mean, not a single playoff win. That's crazy.

Neither Buffalo Bills QB Josh Allen nor Baltimore Ravens QB Lamar Jackson has led their teams to a Super Bowl. They both have new head coaches. Which QB has the best chance of getting it done this season?

Jim: I think that's the easiest question you guys sent me and it's Josh Allen. Baltimore could be going through a transition. When you talk about losing John Harbaugh, who had been there forever, when you talk about losing your offensive coordinator, Lamar having to start over from that standpoint, when you talk about some of the attrition in terms of age and players that you lose, I think Baltimore is going to take a step back. And that's why I said earlier that the division isn't as strong as it once was. 

From that standpoint, I think clearly Josh Allen has the advantage here. The Bills are still one of the class teams of the AFC. Defensively, the Bills have got to improve their linebacker corps. They’ve got to get good play there. But offensively they should be very strong again. So, to me, this one's an easy one. 

And it pains me a little to say that because if there is one player that I want to see win a Super Bowl, it is Lamar Jackson. And I can say these things now that I'm out of the business. Lamar Jackson has always, from day one, been one of my favorite players, both because of his ability and because of his character and his attitude. I remember sitting down with him the day after he was drafted, after he went through that whole falling to the end of the first round. I can still remember the pain I felt with them putting the camera on him in the green room, and it's just him and his mother. 

But the next day to meet with him and ask him, "Okay, Lamar, you got a choice. You can have a gold jacket or you can have a Lombardi Trophy. Which one do you want? Which one are you taking?” And he didn't hesitate and he said the Lombardi Trophy. That's what this guy is about. He is about winning, and he lets the individual accolades take care of themselves. 

So when I watch someone who has been challenged in ways that few others have been challenged, to hear Bill Polian say he should not be a quarterback, that he should switch positions before the draft. Imagine that you're Lamar Jackson. You've won a Heisman as a college player. You're one of the best in the country. And one of the most prominent voices in the NFL says, “No, you're not good enough to play the position that you played your entire life.” And then you fall to the bottom of the first round after those words are spoken. From that point on, I became a real Lamar Jackson fan in terms of hoping that one day he does realize his dream and win a Super Bowl.

Farrell: Both teams have new offensive coordinators. Pete Carmichael Jr. is an experienced coordinator who'll be with Josh and the Bills. Lamar has this guy Declan Doyle, who's never called plays in the NFL. So it's like you've got Secretariat with a first-time trainer, basically. That is a little concerning. Obviously, he's looked at a decade’s worth of film and the Ravens are going to run an offense that suits Lamar. But I think the X factor is Derrick Henry. And I think if this new playcaller, Lamar, Derrick Henry and Zay Flowers can gel and they get those three pieces together with the coordinator, then I like Lamar’s chances because of the special player that he is. And he’s got Derrick Henry behind him.

Jim: Is Derrick going to hold onto the ball?

Farrell: That’s a good question, and that’s something we have to think about.

Jim: It’s a lot of miles on those tires.

Farrell: But Lamar can run it, too.

Jim: But remember last year? He didn't run it a lot. Why? Because he said he was injured. And when you get older in this league, it becomes tougher to come back from those injuries. Lamar is very underrated, still, in terms of his pocket-passing ability. He is one of the more effective quarterbacks in the pocket if you look at statistics. But his legs are what make him that threat and create certain opportunities. If he can't run the way that he has historically, it's going to be interesting to see how that impacts his game.

I think you're absolutely right, Farrell, about having an offensive coordinator who has not called plays in the NFL. There's not a lot of room for on-the-job training in the NFL.

Farrell: We all know that Harbaugh bent over backwards trying to please Lamar. He was anointed as the franchise guy, and he was never challenged. He’s a two-time MVP, so he’s never had to worry, “Hey, you could get benched if you have another bad series.” That wasn’t happening, and it is even more reinforced now. You have a first-time head coach and a first-time offensive coordinator. So who do you think is running the show? It’s probably Lamar.

Jim: This is what I have learned from three decades of covering the NFL. Coaches get into trouble when they think that they're the smartest one in the room, and when they think that they’re going to have a player run their system instead of adjusting their system to that player's talents. If the new staff thinks that they're going to come in and say, "Lamar, you run what we want," as opposed to saying, "What does Lamar run best? What is he most comfortable with? We are going to adjust to that,” then it's going to be an awful year in Baltimore. And to me that will show that they are not good coaches. They have to adjust to his skill set and what he does best. 

I don't think that's Lamar saying, “I'm running the show.” I just think that's smart football to say that we're going to do what Lamar does best. He's our most valuable player. He's the guy touching the ball on every offensive play (other than the center, obviously). And if you look at bad coaches and bad teams over the years and over the decades, it's typically when there's that coaching arrogance that says you're going to do it my way or no way. And typically it ends up being no way.

The Cowboys had a strong draft with Caleb Downs and Malachi Lawrence, two first rounders who will be great additions to a defense that was ranked 30th in total defense and 32nd (dead last) in passing defense last season. What are your thoughts on the Cowboys and their chances in 2026? What needs to happen for them to get back to their first Super Bowl appearance since 1996?

Farrell: The only way for me to explain this 30-year absence is Jerry Jones. He is the key man risking all of this promise because he's going to be involved in every decision. Jerry has to let other football people make the decisions over the season. For example, if they need to go out and get somebody through a trade, Jerry's got to be flexible enough to do that. And Dak Prescott has to stay healthy because they don’t have a strong backup. So for me, it’s Jerry’s decision-making over the course of the season and Dak Prescott. Those are the key people. I'm not even thinking about the head coach or the coordinators or anything else. It’s going to come down to the owner and the quarterback.

Jim: There's no question that Jerry is a common thread in all of this. Every decision of significance is made by him. I hear people say they had a great draft, and I guess I've been around long enough that I'm a little jaded. I need to see guys on the field as professionals before I sign off on them being great players. The draft is such a crapshoot. It's such an inexact science, which is why we see players who can be undrafted come in and sometimes be stars, and guys who are top-five picks flame out. You just don't know how they're going to perform once they get to this level. I think Dallas is one of those teams again that'll be competitive, that will be good, but I see their playoff drought and their Super Bowl drought extending.

As Farrell said, Dak is the key in terms of having to stay healthy. If they lose him, forget it. It's not like there's a Cooper Rush behind him anymore. This is not the same team. So from my standpoint, I just don't get excited about them. I know they draw a lot of attention because they're the Cowboys and Jerry is the master of marketing, but there's nothing that makes me look at them and say, "Man, that's a team I got to keep my eye on.”

NFL owners recently unanimously approved the sale of the reigning Super Bowl champion Seattle Seahawks from the Paul G. Allen estate to a family investment group led by tech investor Vinod Khosla and controlling owner Neeru Khosla for $9.612 billion. The price tag is more than $3 billion higher than the previous record set by the Washington Commanders in 2023. Only a handful of individuals globally possess enough liquid capital to close a $10 billion deal. Is private equity and mega wealth in ownership groups a good or bad trend for the NFL?

Jim: I think it was an inevitable trend. Because if we know one thing about NFL owners, they're greedy and they want more. There's never enough. 

Obviously, we're talking about billionaires here, and going into Covid they made their employees take pay cuts or froze their salaries. Then when it was over, the NFL announced that there were going to be layoffs, and it kind of irked me. Because you have people, for instance, in LA, where I was working, who could be making $50,000-$60,000 a year all because they love the NFL, and they want to be a part of the NFL. And then when this is over and they’ve suffered hardship during the Covid years, you turn around and say to them, "Thanks for everything. See you later." So I called up a couple owners or I messaged them. I said, "Hey, when is enough for you guys?" And I'll never forget that to a man each of them said, separately and independently, “That's a really good question.” And what that told me is that they will always place money before anything else.

So, to me, allowing private equity firms to come in was always inevitable, just like gambling was always inevitable with the NFL. Why? Because they see ways that they can make more money. And you're right, if you want to purchase an NFL team, their rules are that you have to put up 30% cash upfront. If you're talking about $10 billion, how many people do you know that have $3 billion liquid in their pocket that they can just write a check for? There aren't many of those people in the world. So again, am I surprised by this? No, I think it was always inevitable. I think that's why you'll see them go to 18 games shortly here, so that they can bring in more revenue. It's all about the dollar when it comes to the NFL and NFL owners.

Farrell: I look at this trend very personally. Jim grew up in the San Francisco area where the team was identified with the DeBartolo family. I grew up in the Atlanta area where Rankin Smith started the Atlanta Falcons franchise in the mid-1960s for $8.5 million.

You grew up knowing every team, but you also grew up identifying that team with the ownership group. It was almost like a game that you could play, like knowing your state capitals. Everybody remembers when the Baltimore Colts moved in the middle of the night to Indianapolis. We also remember the family who owned that team who moved them. So the Irsays were synonymous with the Colts, the Rooney family with the Steelers, the Maras with the Giants, the Hunts with the Chiefs, you can go on and on. So I'm nostalgic about that part of it.

The second point is, and Jim and I have been talking about this for years, with this escalation, it's getting longer and longer odds for us to have a Black owner or a Black ownership group in a league that's 60% Black. It's not going to happen. Robert Smith looked at buying the Broncos because he's from Denver. That didn't happen.

The third thing is the cost of going to a game for the typical family. Everything around the game is getting more expensive because private equity is maximizing revenue, from the cost of jerseys to a beer at the game to everything else. 

But the fourth thing though is that Jim and I always talked about being league-centric or player-centric, and we always agreed that we're going to be thoughtful and care about the players and what's good for the player and supporting them. Indirectly, all of this bigger money could help increase the salary cap, which means bigger salaries. 

Jim: The last point you made about the salary cap, there's a direct correlation because as part of the collective bargaining agreement, the players get a certain percentage of all revenue. So if franchise values are going up, the revenue is going to go up. Mark Cuban once said, "Pigs get fed, hogs get slaughtered." And he was referring to the NFL. This was years ago, and I just keep looking at the NFL and how everything again is about maximizing revenue.

They give lip service to fans about football being about family. But to Farrell's point, it is so cost prohibitive for many families to go to a single game. I wonder when that's going to catch up to them. Because before, even if you couldn't go to a game, you could watch it on television. Now, you’ve got to buy all these various streaming services to be able to watch games. So I don't know that you can make the argument anymore that the NFL is “fan friendly.” And I put that in air quotes because it is simply costing fans so much more to follow the game.

I wonder when you reach that point where you pushed too far and crossed that threshold. I don't know where that is. Fans will determine that. I know that I'm different from a regular fan because I covered the league for 30 years, but there are sometimes where I just say, I'm not going hunting for a game on a streaming service and I'm not buying a streaming service just to watch one game a week, especially if it's a game I don't even want to see. I wonder how many other fans at some point will reach that point and say it's just not worth it.

NFL owners are pushing for an 18-game schedule and there will be a record nine regular-season international games in 2026. Is 18 games too much and does all the international travel threaten the game in the US? 

Farrell: I think 18 games is too much, if they don't give the players a second bye week. And I think there ought to be some sort of salary increase. It’s like working a 40-hour week versus a 45-hour week. I think there ought to be some sort of commensurate pay increase if you're going to do that.

In terms of international play, I hate it. I'm not a football globalist. Look at the Premier League and the soccer leagues in Spain and Germany. They're not obsessed with having league play in US cities.

When we talk about American football and American cities, the NFL is ingrained in the fabric of American cities. And international games take away a home game from these cities. We’ve got nine games over there. Somebody is losing a home game. And the week-to-week economic impact in beer sales, in restaurant sales, how it trickles down to the regular Joe Blows who are hustling, doing whatever that's related to that game. If I go home to Atlanta right now, you can see how it funnels down to parking, to the lady who makes chicken plates when you walk into the stadium. All of that. Nine times now in this season, a local economy is going to get hurt by this. 

But when I talk to NFL people, they're boasting about this and how they want to have an NFL franchise in London. Why? Enough is enough.

Jim: Farrell is one of the smartest people I know, but his naïveté on this makes me chuckle. They don't care about the local economy losing a home game. Everything is about how best we can maximize our revenue and our dollars. In terms of the players, an 18th game is inevitable. They began talking about this prior to the last CBA. It is coming.

And for all the players who talk about the wear and tear on their body and all this, I have seen this year after year after year, ultimately, the players as well don't care as long as they get the money.

This discussion has already taken place when they went to 17 games. The owners said, "We pay you to play x number of games." And they said, "The 17th game will bring in more revenue.” Which means the salary cap increases, which means there is more money available for players. It’s the same thing they're going to say with 18 games. We're not paying you any more. Where you get your money is the increase in the salary cap, and then it will be up to the teams to determine where that money should be spent. 

Remember how many players said, “We are not playing 17 games. We are not.” And then what did the union do? It signed off on 17 games. The same thing's going to happen with 18 games.

Jim, you are a voter on the Pro Football Hall of Fame committee. Which players could cement their place in Canton with a great 2026 season? 

Jim: That's a tough question because as a voter, it's not based on one season, you look at the body of work. And again, I can only speak for myself. I can't speak for the other 49 voters. Everybody has their own thought process because the only instruction we're given as voters is the impact that someone had between the white lines. The way I look at it is that I never try to have things come down to one season because then you become a prisoner of the moment, so to speak. I look at the complete body of work. 

So with Eli Manning, it's no secret that I have spoken out against him. Why? Because he had two of the greatest postseason runs that I've ever seen, without question. I would never take that away from him. But then I look at the rest of his body of work and he's a .500 quarterback. He led the league in interceptions three times. He has never been a first-team or second-team All-Pro. He has never even received a vote to be an All-Pro. And yet we have people who are pushing him for the Hall of Fame because of his playoff runs. And my point is, if you're going to give him credit for that, then do you knock him down for having four one-and-dones in the playoffs where he did not play well? That's why when I look at the question about who needs a great season to cement their place in the Hall of Fame, I don't know from my vantage point that I can break it down.

Obviously, it helps if you are a quarterback and you win Super Bowls. I mean, there's no question that elevates the discussion. But even then, Jim Plunkett won two Super Bowls, just as Eli Manning did. And we tend to forget that in one of those Super Bowls the Raiders beat the Washington then-Redskins, a team that Sports Illustrated wondered whether or not it was the greatest NFL team ever. Jim Plunkett was the quarterback and he can't even get in the room for discussion in regards to the Hall of Fame, but we say that Eli Manning deserves to go in because of two Super Bowl runs against what were considered arguably two of the potentially greatest teams in NFL history. I know I'm being long-winded here, but I don't know that there's any one player who needs a great season.

You could take a guy like Lamar, if he wins the Super Bowl, absolutely it helps him. You could take a guy like Josh Allen, if he wins a Super Bowl, absolutely it helps him. Matthew Stafford winning a Super Bowl, without question, that helped his candidacy going forward. But it's not about one season to me, it's about the body of work.

Farrell: I don't think Lamar is a Hall of Famer right now. I know you can point to the two MVPs and the three All-Pros, but this whole body-of-work thing. How many Pittsburgh Steelers players from those four Super Bowl teams are in Canton who didn't have great stats? Or those players from the Cowboys teams of the 70s who are in Canton because they won championships? Lamar will get the votes to be in the Hall of Fame based on his body of work, but I think winning a Super Bowl will just cement it and there'll be no question about his career and him being one of the greats at the position.

Jim: The other thing is that you have to be careful with stats relative to the eras that these players played in. One of the arguments I make now about quarterbacks is that people want to talk about stats, and I'm saying that every quarterback should be putting up great stats. The rules of the game have been changed for quarterbacks to have success because the NFL realized that fans love scoring and one of the quickest ways to score is through the air. And so we had defenseless receiver rules, we had protecting the quarterback in the pocket, pass interference, all these things. Rules that were adjusted to protect quarterbacks and to enhance the passing game.

So I don't get caught up anymore about somebody throwing for 50,000 yards. They should. My question is, what impact did you have when you were on the field in terms of making your team better and winning games, those sorts of things. And the won-loss record is a red herring when it comes to quarterbacks. People talk about, “What's their won-loss record?” I can look at Lamar in the playoffs and say, "Yeah, he hasn't gotten to a Super Bowl, but there were a couple of those playoff games he played really well and it was not his fault that the Baltimore Ravens didn't win.” 

I think we do that with a lot of quarterbacks. You can go to Josh Allen and say there was a game that they lost that he didn't particularly play well in, right? Then there are other games where he did play well and they lost. And so, again, for me, it has to be the body of work. Does winning Super Bowls help? Unquestionably, without a doubt. 

Last question: What’s your Super Bowl matchup?

Jim: Everybody does this every year and I used to be fairly good at it. I can't pick games from week to week. I'm one of the worst prognosticators. But at the start of a season, predicting who's going to be in the Super Bowl, I used to be fairly good at that. I can't answer that now because I don't study it like I used to. Just looking at the surface view, obviously the Rams look very good with the changes that they've made. 

If you want to go with a darkhorse, I'm intrigued by two teams in the AFC. One is Houston because I think they have an incredible defense, and if they get quarterback play again like they have gotten in previous years under CJ Stroud, then I think there is a chance for Houston to make a run there. 

The other team, and I chuckle before I say this because I was around this team for so many years, having been a beat writer for it for eight years, is the Chargers. If they can stay healthy, right, there is talent there. The Chargers have two excellent offensive tackles who both got hurt last year. And they are premier tackles when healthy. So to me, they should be able to protect and run the ball. And we know about Justin Herbert and the talent that he has. Defensively, I'm intrigued to see what they do with coordinator Jesse Minter leaving. He was such a big part of that defense. But I think if they can stay healthy, I think they will be in the conversation come playoff time.

Farrell: I'm going to go old school. We need to see what Patrick Mahomes looks like coming off that injury, but the Chiefs have Mahomes, they have Andy Reid and they have Eric Bieniemy back as a game-plan installer/offensive coordinator. It's hard to ever bet against Patrick Mahomes and what he can do. So I think they will be a surprise pick from the AFC. Of course, when we do these picks at the beginning of a season, injuries are inevitable. But right now, I like the Chiefs and the Rams in the Super Bowl.

Jim: It’s interesting to me. You don't think that defenses started to catch up to the Chiefs even before Patrick got hurt last year?

Farrell: I think so. But the history of winning is there. Andy Reid knows how to do it and Mahomes is such a special player and they've brought in a running back.

Jim: Don't you find it fascinating that the Seahawks have not even been mentioned and they're the defending champions? And it's not like they're an old team. They're a young team. And yet I don't hear people mentioning them as contenders as prominently as other clubs including the Rams, who are in their division. If you're Mike Macdonald, you can walk into that locker room week one and say, "Gentlemen, we were the best team in football last year, right? We essentially have the same team back and yet no one's really talking about us." So if you're the head coach there, I would think you've got so much ammunition to work with to get your guys going. 🏈

We welcome your comments at [email protected]. And if you enjoyed this edition of Box Score, please pass it along to a friend and encourage them to sign up at boxscoresports.com. We’ll see you again on Wednesday.