Matthew Stafford is a better QB than John Elway was.

[DefenseWinsChampionships]

Congratulations on your SB. 

Your Front Office knew what they were doing when trading away not one but two 1st round picks for this guy. 

No one wants to believe me when I claim if Matthew Stafford wins another SB he becomes the NFL's next version of John Elway (two former 1st round QBs who ended up winning multiple SBs during the end of their careers). 

People forget about John Elway's awful 1997 SB game vs. GB where TD carried him and/or his atrocious 1998 AFC Championship Game vs my Jets where Terrell TD Davis and his elite Denver D carried him (Elway was awful). Without Terrell Davis and Denvers D? John Elway retires with 0 SBs. 

☆ John Elway never had a better season than Matthew Stafford's 2021-2022 regular season and postseason (combined). Ever. 

(Regular Season + Postseason Combined).

499/741 (67.3%).

6,074 Passing Yards. 

50 TDs/20 INTs.

4 4th Quarter Comebacks. 

6 Game Winning Drives. 

QB Rating of 101.8.

Not ever. Not never. 

And Matthew Stafford despite less years already blows John Elway out of the waters within almost every single QB Statistical category known to (QB) mankind. 

Matthew Stafford: 182 games.  

4,302/6,825

(63.0 % completion percentage). 

49,995 Passing Yards (274.7 per game).  

(7.3 yards per pass attempt).

323 TDs.

161 INTs. 

(2.4 INT%).

(2.00 TD-to-INT Ratio).

QB Rating of 91.1. 

Vs. 

John Elway: 234 games. 

4,123/7,250. 

(56.9% completion percentage).

51,475 Passing Yards (220.0 yards per game)..  

(7.1 yards per pass attempt).

300 TDs. 

226 INTs. 

(3.1 INT%). 

(1.3 TD-to-INT Ratio).

QB Rating of 79.9. 

_______________________

▪︎ Completion Percentage = Stafford. 

▪︎ Passing Yards per Game = Stafford.

▪︎ Yards Per Pass Attempt = Stafford.  

▪︎ TDs thrown = Stafford. 

▪︎ Fewer INTs thrown = Stafford. 

▪︎ INT% = Stafford.  

▪︎ TD-to-INT Ratio = Stafford.  

▪︎ QB Rating = Stafford. 

Etc.

And I could just as easily post their per game postseason statistics where Matthew Stafford dominates him in that regard too. 

Etc. 

But yea. Ok. Right.

Let's just sit here and let NFL experts pretend to convince everyone on how John Elway was "so much better" than Matthew Stafford while completely underrating Matthew Stafford (@ the same time).

I've always believed in Matthew Stafford. On another Jets forum heading into wildcard weekend vs. Arizona I was telling everyone how Matthew Stafford was going to win the Super Bowl while a guy a Jets fan from Detroit Michigan was telling everyone how he's "nothing more than a choke artist" and can never win a SB). WRONG. 

Enjoy your Quarterback guys.

He's awesome and I've always believed in his arm talents. If not for being stuck within an atrocious Detroit Lions Franchise (that made both Barry #20 Sanders and Calvin Megatron Johnson quit during their primes) this kid would've gone down as an All-Time great Quarterback and the 1st year he escaped Detroit? They went 3-13-1 without him, while he won a SB without them. 

It's no fluke on how both Calvin Johnson and Cooper Kupp now rank #1 and #2 in All-Time single season (most) receiving yards within NFL History (while Matthew Stafford was the common denominator).

Sorry for the long winded post but as a Jets fan I'm a fan of the underdogs and Matthew Stafford is probably my favorite NFL QB of All-Time (outside of Joe Namath) because I've never believed in a QBs arm talents + physical toughness as much as I've believed in Matthew Stafford's. 

Continue to build an O-Line and replace Odell Beckham Jr. (ACL) and he'll bring you guys another SB Championship.  

Edited February 17, 2022 by DefenseWinsChampionships

[rocky_rams]

You’re like a much more organized @stl4life07

Just become a Rams fan at this point 

[DefenseWinsChampionships]

1 hour ago, rocky_rams said:

You’re like a much more organized @stl4life07

Just become a Rams fan at this point 

No way man. I'm born and raised in South Ozone Park (Queens, NY) and win or lose (mostly lose) I'll always and forever bleed Green and White. 

I have three favorite teams. 

1.) New York Jets. 

2.) Anyone who plays N.E/Miami/Buffalo. 

3.) Anyone who plays Indianapolis (old AFC East rivalry).

I just love Matthew Stafford's game man. His A+ rocket of an arm. His toughness and willingness to play through injury and his underdog mentality; I just love the guy since he was just a kid QB. 

And I just can't stand fans telling me John Elway was a better QB than Matthew Stafford (when I know the truth about John Elway).

PS: I'm a big believer in Zach Wilson too. Reminds me of a younger Matthew Stafford a lot.

Enjoy Matthew Stafford moving forward. The best has yet to come as a Ram (hard to believe after a SB win, right? Wrong) because with more experience within this Offense he's going to become even more unstoppable to stop.  

Edited February 17, 2022 by DefenseWinsChampionships

[Dr LBC]

To be fair, different eras and emphasis from both coaching approaches and QB approaches between now and when Elways was playing.  Elway's actually one of the guys I'd be interested to see how he would produce in the current NFL because of how he approached the position - and this is coming from someone who does feel he's been a bit overrated by history.

That said, the reason our front office traded (2) 1st's for Stafford was very much to also get Detroit to take back Goff's contract as part of the transaction.  Maybe... maybe you hedge friendly on the argument and adjust the "Brock Osweiler Rate for Terrible Contracts" for inflation which probably only removes the D3 comp pick that the Texans got back from the Browns, and flattens the value to a 2nd round pick to take on a crappy contract.  And, long story short which is really just me nitpicking, we probably paid in the neighborhood of a 1st and 3rd or 4th for Stafford and a 2nd-plus to get the Lions to take on Goff.

[jrry32]

11 hours ago, Dr LBC said:

That said, the reason our front office traded (2) 1st's for Stafford was very much to also get Detroit to take back Goff's contract as part of the transaction. 

I will die on this hill. That's not correct. 

[JonStark]

6 hours ago, jrry32 said:

I will die on this hill. That's not correct. 

Yeah I thought that has been proven? Teams were calling us about Goff, but the Lions wanted him (probably the Holmes connection) and we needed to get the deal done before the 49ers. 

[BStanRamFan]

11 hours ago, jrry32 said:

I will die on this hill. That's not correct. 

Rams initial offer was a 1st round pick(590), Goff + additional pick(~140). =730 + Goff

WFT offered 19 overall(875) + additional pick 3rd?(~140) = ~1015

Carolina offered 8(1400).=~1400

SF never made a formal offer.

Final offer was 2022 1st (590), 2023 1st(~680)  3rd (~140) + Goff= 1410

To edge out Carolina's offer, we needed add an additional 1st. Goff was essentially a throw in. Based strictly on the draft value chart, Goff held no value in this deal. His contract may not have been a hinderance, but they were doing us a favor by taking him on.

https://www.nbcsports.com/bayarea/49ers/nfl-rumors-49ers-matthew-stafford-trade-offer-lions-never-happened

[LeotheLion]

9 minutes ago, BStanRamFan said:

Rams initial offer was a 1st round pick(590), Goff + additional pick(~140). =730 + Goff

WFT offered 19 overall(875) + additional pick 3rd?(~140) = ~1015

Carolina offered 8(1400).=~1400

SF never made a formal offer.

Final offer was 2022 1st (590), 2023 1st(~680)  3rd (~140) + Goff= 1410

To edge out Carolina's offer, we needed add an additional 1st. Goff was essentially a throw in. Based strictly on the draft value chart, Goff held no value in this deal. His contract may not have been a hinderance, but they were doing us a favor by taking him on.

https://www.nbcsports.com/bayarea/49ers/nfl-rumors-49ers-matthew-stafford-trade-offer-lions-never-happened

I'm pretty sure the Panthers offer was 8 + 5th round pick + Bridgewater. 

Carolina did us a favor in the sense that we obviously couldn't have Goff on the roster and if we did this transaction and then had to move Goff, we'd have little leverage. But if Wentz fetched a 1st, I cannot imagine we had to attach assets to take Goff off our hands. Which at the very least, he was a neutral asset in the trade. The key is that an immediate #8 overall pick is a lot more than we could have offered without a 2021 first.

 I also am not sure the 680 for a 2023 1st is completely accurate. Or not sure why the 2023 first holds more value than the 2022. If anything it should hold less.

[jrry32]

16 minutes ago, LeotheLion said:

I'm pretty sure the Panthers offer was 8 + 5th round pick + Bridgewater. 

Carolina did us a favor in the sense that we obviously couldn't have Goff on the roster and if we did this transaction and then had to move Goff, we'd have little leverage. But if Wentz fetched a 1st, I cannot imagine we had to attach assets to take Goff off our hands. Which at the very least, he was a neutral asset in the trade. The key is that an immediate #8 overall pick is a lot more than we could have offered without a 2021 first.

 I also am not sure the 680 for a 2023 1st is completely accurate. Or not sure why the 2023 first holds more value than the 2022. If anything it should hold less.

Yeah, Carolina offered #8, a 4th or 5th, and Teddy.

29 minutes ago, BStanRamFan said:

Rams initial offer was a 1st round pick(590), Goff + additional pick(~140). =730 + Goff

WFT offered 19 overall(875) + additional pick 3rd?(~140) = ~1015

Carolina offered 8(1400).=~1400

SF never made a formal offer.

Final offer was 2022 1st (590), 2023 1st(~680)  3rd (~140) + Goff= 1410

To edge out Carolina's offer, we needed add an additional 1st. Goff was essentially a throw in. Based strictly on the draft value chart, Goff held no value in this deal. His contract may not have been a hinderance, but they were doing us a favor by taking him on.

https://www.nbcsports.com/bayarea/49ers/nfl-rumors-49ers-matthew-stafford-trade-offer-lions-never-happened

Your pick valuations are a little off. NFL teams generally discount future picks. Our 2022 1st would be worth 580 points (not much of a difference), while our 2023 1st would be discounted even more (I'll say mid second round - 420 points). Based off of that, comparing our offer with Carolina:

Pick #8 (1400) + 5th (29) + Teddy (16) = 1445

2022 1st (580) + 2023 1st (420) + 3rd (140) + Goff (????) = 1140

305 = Late 2nd

Now, since Stafford preferred LA, Holmes might have given us a discount. In any case, Goff had positive value in the trade, and Detroit seems happy enough with him that they're going to give him another year. Not that it matters that much. It just grinds my gears when people say we had to throw an extra 1st in to get rid of Goff. I bet there were teams that would have traded for him if Detroit didn't want him. Hell, the Broncos would have made the playoffs this year if Goff was their QB.

[JonStark]

40 minutes ago, BStanRamFan said:

Rams initial offer was a 1st round pick(590), Goff + additional pick(~140). =730 + Goff

WFT offered 19 overall(875) + additional pick 3rd?(~140) = ~1015

Carolina offered 8(1400).=~1400

SF never made a formal offer.

Final offer was 2022 1st (590), 2023 1st(~680)  3rd (~140) + Goff= 1410

To edge out Carolina's offer, we needed add an additional 1st. Goff was essentially a throw in. Based strictly on the draft value chart, Goff held no value in this deal. His contract may not have been a hinderance, but they were doing us a favor by taking him on.

https://www.nbcsports.com/bayarea/49ers/nfl-rumors-49ers-matthew-stafford-trade-offer-lions-never-happened

The problem with using strictly valuations is that teams value players differently. Holmes was a big part of the organization's plan of getting Goff, and if he wanted him to be their QB after Stafford left, he may have valued him higher than the charts suggest. Until I see a report saying that he was a throw in, I'm going to believe the report that he had teams interested in him as well, so why would the Rams just throw him into the Lions deal instead of getting something for him after acquiring Stafford? 

1 minute ago, jrry32 said:

It just grinds my gears when people say we had to throw an extra 1st in to get rid of Goff. I bet there were teams that would have traded for him if Detroit didn't want him. 

There was a report confirming the Rams were getting interest in him. There is no reason to just "throw him in" the Lions offer if they didn't want him. 

Per that report, "This wasn't some throw-in. The Lions wanted him. He had a market. Around [the] NFL, Goff is regarded well."

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2929134-jared-goff-trade-rumors-qb-had-a-market-rams-took-calls-before-stafford-swap

[duke2056]

Comparing QB stats from the 80s-90s to right now is...............to be nice......................dumb.

[BStanRamFan]

On 2/18/2022 at 1:00 PM, LeotheLion said:

. Which at the very least, he was a neutral asset in the trade. 

I believe he was viewed as neutral. Nice to have. Not a deal breaker.

On 2/18/2022 at 1:27 PM, jrry32 said:

Now, since Stafford preferred LA, Holmes might have given us a discount. In any case, Goff had positive value in the trade, and Detroit seems happy enough with him that they're going to give him another year. Not that it matters that much. It just grinds my gears when people say we had to throw an extra 1st in to get rid of Goff. I bet there were teams that would have traded for him if Detroit didn't want him. Hell, the Broncos would have made the playoffs this year if Goff was their QB.

It's a weak QB class. If there was a top tier QB in the top 3, he would be competing for his job this year. They're too far from being competitive for a FA to consider. I hope he makes the most of it, but Goff getting another year him has less to do with him and more to do with what's available/financial implications.

 

On 2/18/2022 at 1:27 PM, jrry32 said:

Hell, the Broncos would have made the playoffs this year if Goff was their QB.

I would say the same thing about Gardner Minshew.

On 2/18/2022 at 1:36 PM, JonStark said:

The problem with using strictly valuations is that teams value players differently. Holmes was a big part of the organization's plan of getting Goff, and if he wanted him to be their QB after Stafford left, he may have valued him higher than the charts suggest. Until I see a report saying that he was a throw in, I'm going to believe the report that he had teams interested in him as well, so why would the Rams just throw him into the Lions deal instead of getting something for him after acquiring Stafford? 

There was a report confirming the Rams were getting interest in him. There is no reason to just "throw him in" the Lions offer if they didn't want him. 

If we trade for Stafford and then try to trade Goff his value tanks to nil. He held more value in that deal then if we trade for Stafford and then try to move Goff. 

Holmes did and said all the right things as a first time GM. He drafted/scouted this guy and clearly likes him. The Lions got the picks they wanted and a great stop gap in the process. If we could have gotten more for Goff on the market than this deal suggests, then I'm honestly disappointed we didn't. However, I don't believe that was the case.

You make the point that teams value players differently. I think we traded him to a GM that valued him more than anyone else out there.

[JonStark]

1 hour ago, BStanRamFan said:

I believe he was viewed as neutral. Nice to have. Not a deal breaker.

It's a weak QB class. If there was a top tier QB in the top 3, he would be competing for his job this year. They're too far from being competitive for a FA to consider. I hope he makes the most of it, but Goff getting another year him has less to do with him and more to do with what's available/financial implications.

 

I would say the same thing about Gardner Minshew.

If we trade for Stafford and then try to trade Goff his value tanks to nil. He held more value in that deal then if we trade for Stafford and then try to move Goff. 

Holmes did and said all the right things as a first time GM. He drafted/scouted this guy and clearly likes him. The Lions got the picks they wanted and a great stop gap in the process. If we could have gotten more for Goff on the market than this deal suggests, then I'm honestly disappointed we didn't. However, I don't believe that was the case.

You make the point that teams value players differently. I think we traded him to a GM that valued him more than anyone else out there.

His value would never have been nil, but you're right it would've taken a hit if we had already got Stafford. My point is, Goff had suitors and was regarded well around the NFL so he wasn't just a throw in or especially needing an extra 1st rounder to take him. The reason we gave so much was because our picks were future ones (the Panthers offered the 8th pick in last year's draft in their package). The Lions wanted him as well and probably thought he was the best stopgap they could get that still has potential to be something. 

[BStanRamFan]

1 hour ago, JonStark said:

His value would never have been nil, but you're right it would've taken a hit if we had already got Stafford. My point is, Goff had suitors and was regarded well around the NFL so he wasn't just a throw in or especially needing an extra 1st rounder to take him. The reason we gave so much was because our picks were future ones (the Panthers offered the 8th pick in last year's draft in their package). The Lions wanted him as well and probably thought he was the best stopgap they could get that still has potential to be something. 

I think we're haggling over semantics, but we generally agree on the same principles.

1. We did not need to attach a pick to his contract.

2. He is a stop gap.

I don't believe he had many suitors or at least ones that valued him the way the Lions did (Holmes connection). If Stafford was staying put I'm genuinely curious what would have transpired. McVay really liked Wolford and if there were in fact "suitors", what would Goff's stand alone value be? I'm thinking possibly a 3rd with 2nd round potential based on hitting incentives. But that's just my guess. Wentz went for more, but he was a legit MVP candidate at one point coming off a team with the worst injury luck in the league. I dont think Goff would fetch as much as Wentz. 

[LeotheLion]

5 minutes ago, BStanRamFan said:

I think we're haggling over semantics, but we generally agree on the same principles.

1. We did not need to attach a pick to his contract.

2. He is a stop gap.

I don't believe he had many suitors or at least ones that valued him the way the Lions did (Holmes connection). If Stafford was staying put I'm genuinely curious what would have transpired. McVay really liked Wolford and if there were in fact "suitors", what would Goff's stand alone value be? I'm thinking possibly a 3rd with 2nd round potential based on hitting incentives. But that's just my guess. Wentz went for more, but he was a legit MVP candidate at one point coming off a team with the worst injury luck in the league. I dont think Goff would fetch as much as Wentz. 

The fact that there is an alternate universe where Goff is dealt for a day 2 pick and Wolford is the day 1 starter puts in perspective how crazy the NFL is lol.

I think you have his value right. He'd be below Wentz and it didn't help that it was a great QB rookie class. If we were trading Goff this year then his value would be higher like Jimmy G's will likely be.