Anyways, I gave you half-assed response this morning to poke fun at you and because I was about to go to bed. Here's my real response. Goff and Wentz both had things going for them that arguably made them more "pro ready." Wentz had his offensive scheme. Goff had his polished mechanics and mental acuity. From there, it all comes down to which one you think will be a tougher fix. Will it be tougher to get Goff up to speed on a NFL scheme or will it be tougher to fix Wentz's lower body mechanics and inconsistencies with mental processing speed?
For me, I chose the former as the easier fix. Frankly, I still don't believe it was the wrong decision. QBs like Goff typically take a little longer to get up to speed in the pros. It doesn't make them less pro ready. It just means there is a bigger learning curve. When you look at some of the best rookie seasons, you'll notice a common theme (outside of Dan Marino). The QBs are all supremely physically talented (RGIII, Russell Wilson, Marcus Mariota, Ben Roethlisberger, etc.). The thing about guys like that is they can come in and do damage quickly because NFL teams don't have film on them. NFL teams have to adapt to their style of play. Goff is a traditional pocket passer. NFL teams have seen that before. Goff is the one who has to adapt to NFL defenses. It's why guys like Jameis Winston, Peyton Manning, Derek Carr, Eli Manning, Joe Flacco, etc. weren't as great as rookies. When you win with your mind, skills, and mental acuity, the NFL is a big transition.
However, what you find is that the longer careers go, the more you separate the wheat from the chaff. The guys who made an impact early due to their physical talent either learn to win with their arms and minds or they never become effective starting QBs for the long haul. On the other hand, the guys who win their minds and their arms just continue to get better the more experience they have.
Look at where Marcus Mariota and Jameis Winston were last year, now watch their respective Week 1 games from this year. I'm not saying that Mariota is a bad player. I am saying that Winston started out well behind him and has now passed him because he overcame the mental learning curve.
In that vein, it is no surprise to me that Wentz is more capable of producing better numbers early on. He's an athletic QB with a rocket for an arm. The true test for how good each will be will come down the road when both guys have an opportunity to overcome the mental learning curve and defenses have film on both.
Basically, what I'm saying is that production, especially early in rookie years, doesn't always coincide with "pro readiness." Which seems paradoxical. However, I don't think anyone would argue with the assertion that Peyton Manning and Andrew Luck are perhaps the two most pro ready passers of the past 20 years. Yet, Marcus Mariota and RGIII were both far more effective rookies. However, Manning and Luck improved significantly once they overcame the NFL mental learning curve.
So as crazy as it sounds, I think "pro readiness" tends to show more in Year 2 than Year 1. Obviously, if a guy is terrible in Year 1, he wasn't very pro ready.(ex. Blake Bortles) But when guys tend to fall more in the middle of the spectrum, I'd say Year 2 is the better gauge.
The gist of this point is that I expect Goff to be an upgrade on Keenum when he plays. However, he might not perform better than Carson Wentz as a rookie. That all said, I would be hesitant to take that as an indictment of Goff's "pro readiness" because that sort of thing will be more ascertainable in Year 2. Now, if Goff comes out and doesn't play well at all while Wentz tears it up, that's a different story.