Who Acquired Matthew Stafford?

The question lingers: did the Detroit Lions or the Los Angeles Rams come out on top in the trade involving Matthew Stafford? Now, five years later, it feels like the right time to dive into that. What exactly should we call this deal? Is it just the “Matthew Stafford trade,” or should it maybe be described as “Matthew Stafford for Jared Goff” or “Matthew Stafford in exchange for the likes of Jameson Williams, Sam LaPorta, and Jamar Gibbs”? Perhaps it could even be called “Super Bowl LVI of ‘Actually Good Roster’ Trades”?

Personally, I prefer to stick with referring to it as the Matthew Stafford trade. Why? Because the star quarterback, who led his team to a Super Bowl victory, is undoubtedly the focal point of this transaction. Sure, the Lions got a package that included two first-round picks (Williams and Gibbs), a second-rounder (LaPorta), and they’ve drafted some significant talents (Aidan Hutchinson, Jack Campbell, Brian Branch… impressive). In many ways, this trade has shaped up to be one of the most beneficial in sports history. The Rams celebrated a Super Bowl win, while the Lions laid the groundwork for their future. So, when pondering who won the trade… it seems like a draw, right?

Not quite. After giving it some thought, I’m ready to declare the Lions as the true winners here. Let’s face it, the outcome has been somewhat embarrassing for them. Despite acquiring a handful of franchise-caliber players, the Rams came out like thieves and have undeniably triumphed in this deal. Here’s my reasoning:

Now, a quick disclaimer: while some might call this an overreaction, evaluating trades with the wisdom of hindsight is essential. All trades carry risks, and I can’t fault the Lions for making the deal; it made sense then. Stafford had been a fixture for over a decade in Detroit, and moving on seemed like the right step for both parties. However, when assessing who won or lost, it’s vital to wear those hindsight glasses. Winners and losers aren’t determined on the spot; they’re judged based on long-term results.

What we have here is essentially a battle between a “win now” mentality versus a “rebuild.” A commitment to a star player versus the hope that a draft pick will blossom into several stars. It all appeared to work well for a while, but as we edge closer to 2025, the truth is glaring: the Rams have established themselves as the superior team compared to the Lions. They seem poised with a stronger roster and a better shot at another Super Bowl, boasting both a more efficient offense and a significantly improved defense. Back in 2021, everyone seemed to agree that the Rams were about “winning now” while the Lions were focusing on a “later” win. So, where do we stand now?

There’s a core disagreement about the approach to building a team. The Rams opted for a quarterback-first strategy with Stafford, while the Lions seemed to aim for development and later quarterback acquisition.

I think the order doesn’t matter as much as ensuring that the team realizes how crucial an elite quarterback is. The Lions traded Stafford away from a lacking roster, hoping to build something more substantial. The Rams, on the other hand, had a solid foundation and brought in Stafford to complete their vision.

Here’s where it gets tricky. The Lions believed moving Stafford would kickstart their rebuild. That includes finding a top-tier quarterback—not just anyone, but someone who can truly lead the team, which wasn’t Goff. Yet, the Lions progressed too fast to justify swapping Goff out, which left them struggling for a competent quarterback to support their ambitious roster. In key playoff games, like the 2023 NFC Championship and the 2024 Divisional Round, Goff’s performances were subpar, highlighting a pivotal disadvantage against top-tier competition.

That’s not to say they can’t occasionally snag a victory over a solid quarterback—they did beat Stafford and the Rams in the 2023 wild card round. But without making significant moves to secure a new QB, consistent success appears unlikely. So far, they’ve drafted only one quarterback, Hendon Hooker, who isn’t even a part of the team anymore.

I really can’t fault the Lions for trading Stafford for such a wealth of assets. Even if they positioned themselves for the future, their current struggle, which grows starker as they drift further from competition, comes from not using those assets to procure a successor to Stafford—someone who could offer competition to Goff. In today’s NFL, it seems like the mantra is clear: “Find the QB first, then sort out the rest.”

Of course, opinions vary in the league. There are numerous Goff-Lions-style scenarios playing out with teams relying on less-than-ideal quarterbacks leading talented squads. From Sam Darnold with the Seahawks to Daniel Jones with the Colts, these teams might find success, but could fall short when it counts most. The ultimate counterpoint here might be Nick Foles, whose surprising Super Bowl victory came against Tom Brady, backed by a strong assortment of talent.

But relying on Foles as a model for team success doesn’t quite fit; his playoff run defies conventional logic and shouldn’t set the standard for team-building strategy. In 2021, the trade seemingly made sense for both the Lions and Rams, but unfortunately, as time has elapsed, the outcome favors the Rams more. I’d be shocked if the Lions manage to snag a Super Bowl win with Goff, while I wouldn’t be surprised at all to see the Rams claim another title with Stafford this very year. Looking back, it’s clear: the Rams have unequivocally won this trade.