I know I'm going to stir up a hornet's nest with this one, but I happened to look at some numbers that really surprised me. During the Panthers and Lions game, they mentioned that Goff has played longer for Detroit than he did as a Ram, which made me curious to look at his stats.
If we compare Stafford's stats as a Ram to Goff's stats as a Lion, Stafford leads in one category, and it is the most important one: Super Bowl wins. I guess you could add MVP awards if you want to consider that to be a stat.
For their regular season stats, Goff is ahead of Stafford in almost every other meaningful statistic. A virtual clean sweep. Wins, completion rate, QB passer rating, TD/INT ratio, 4th quarter comebacks, game winning drives, PFR has a key stat called adjusted net yards per attempt. One reason this is surprising is that Stafford won the SB his first year with the Rams. Meanwhile, the Lions were terrible the 1st year Goff was there, they couldn't buy a win for the longest time. At one point that year the Lions had zero wins, 10 losses and a tie. I got the stats from PFR.
Stafford: 78 starts, 48-30-0 record. 1,763/2,701 (65.3% completions), 20,596 yards, 147 TDs (5.4%), 58 INTs (2.1%), 2.53 TD/INT ratio, 7.6 yards per attempt, 7.7 adjusted yards per attempt, 264.1 YPG, 97.4 QB rating, 7.0 ANY/A, 146 sacks (5.13%), 6 4th quarter comebacks, 8 game winning drives
Goff: 86 starts, 50-35-1 record. 2,013/2964 (67.9% completions), 22,665 yards, 158 TDs (5.3%), 47 INTs (1.6%), 3.36 TD/INT ratio, 7.6 yards per attempt, 8.0 adjusted yards per attempt, 263.5 YPG, 101.7 QB rating, 7.2 ANY/A, 165 sacks (5.27%), 12 4th quarter comebacks, 17 game winning drives
The Lions are struggling and their window to contend might have closed. Meanwhile, the Rams have hopes for capturing a 2nd SB with Stafford. There are no regrets from the Rams side of the trade. On the other hand, if I got in a time machine and went back to when the trade was made and told you that the stats would look like this, what percentage of Rams fans would have believed me? I bet the majority would have assumed that Goff would no longer be Detroit's starter and might not even still be in the NFL by this point.
If we compare Stafford's stats as a Ram to Goff's stats as a Lion, Stafford leads in one category, and it is the most important one: Super Bowl wins. I guess you could add MVP awards if you want to consider that to be a stat.
For their regular season stats, Goff is ahead of Stafford in almost every other meaningful statistic. A virtual clean sweep. Wins, completion rate, QB passer rating, TD/INT ratio, 4th quarter comebacks, game winning drives, PFR has a key stat called adjusted net yards per attempt. One reason this is surprising is that Stafford won the SB his first year with the Rams. Meanwhile, the Lions were terrible the 1st year Goff was there, they couldn't buy a win for the longest time. At one point that year the Lions had zero wins, 10 losses and a tie. I got the stats from PFR.
Stafford: 78 starts, 48-30-0 record. 1,763/2,701 (65.3% completions), 20,596 yards, 147 TDs (5.4%), 58 INTs (2.1%), 2.53 TD/INT ratio, 7.6 yards per attempt, 7.7 adjusted yards per attempt, 264.1 YPG, 97.4 QB rating, 7.0 ANY/A, 146 sacks (5.13%), 6 4th quarter comebacks, 8 game winning drives
Goff: 86 starts, 50-35-1 record. 2,013/2964 (67.9% completions), 22,665 yards, 158 TDs (5.3%), 47 INTs (1.6%), 3.36 TD/INT ratio, 7.6 yards per attempt, 8.0 adjusted yards per attempt, 263.5 YPG, 101.7 QB rating, 7.2 ANY/A, 165 sacks (5.27%), 12 4th quarter comebacks, 17 game winning drives
The Lions are struggling and their window to contend might have closed. Meanwhile, the Rams have hopes for capturing a 2nd SB with Stafford. There are no regrets from the Rams side of the trade. On the other hand, if I got in a time machine and went back to when the trade was made and told you that the stats would look like this, what percentage of Rams fans would have believed me? I bet the majority would have assumed that Goff would no longer be Detroit's starter and might not even still be in the NFL by this point.