Big issue with the concept that "Goff gave you four yrs of a lot of success" - JJ is a better safety than Goff is a QB. Saffold a (much) better guard.
Saffold left and our OL went down the toilet. JJ leaves and our defense goes from first to "WTF" so far.
Goff leaves and we improve on offense across the board. But people are stuck on the fact that he was somehow responsible for the success.
It's always been pretty questionable to me that so many took issue with Goff being shipped out but all those same people got over better players in JJ and Saffold leaving pretty quickly. Doesn't make a ton of sense.
I get what you're trying to say, but this is sort of a shit comparison to be honest.
JJ and Saffold both left in FA because we couldn't afford them, that's not really the same as Goff being traded. The reason why our offences is elevated is because we traded Goff for an upgrade, while JJ and Saffold left without a better replacement coming in to take over for them. We also couldn't have traded either of them for one of the better players in their position.
If anything, a better comparison would be Ramsey. We traded Peters and Talib so we could upgrade at the position with Ramsey and our defence got better. Ramsey was a better player and a better scheme fit, just like Stafford is a better player and better scheme fit.
Also Goff did bring us some great football over the last four years, why are we pretending like he didn't? Especially 2017 and 2018. His backslide in 2019 and 2020 doesn't erase the good things he did the first two years, it just helps demonstrate why the team felt taking the risk for Stafford was worth it.