Several teams were interested in acquiring Matthew Stafford before the Detroit Lions traded him to the Los Angeles Rams on Saturday. Of those teams, it sounds like it would be fair to call Washington the runner-up.
ESPN’s Josina Anderson spoke with an NFL source who claims the offer Washington made for Stafford was “better” than what they ultimately accepted from L.A.
“The Rams were screwed with a bad contract on (Jared) Goff and the #Lions helped them and don’t even get a good pick this year,” Anderson’s source said. “The Washington offer was better.”
Why would the Lions take a worse offer? According to Nicki Jhabvala of the Washington Post, the offer from Washington would have been better for the Rams this year. It may have included a high pick in this year’s draft, whereas L.A. gave the Lions a third-round pick this year and two future firsts. There is also a possibility that Washington offered a starting-caliber player that could have helped Detroit right away.
Of course, we also shouldn’t rule out the possibility that the Lions legitimately believe they can win with Goff. The former first overall pick is just 26, and he already has multiple playoff wins and a Super Bowl appearance. If you heard the comments Goff made about the trade, you’ll get the impression that the Lions are actually excited about having him on board.
It makes sense that Washington is in the hunt for a quarterback. Dwayne Haskins quickly wore out his welcome and Alex Smith will turn 37 this offseason. Stafford would have been a nice addition to Ron Rivera’s team, but they will have to look elsewhere. A report from Saturday gave an idea of how much they are willing to spend for a veteran QB.
Photo: A Healthier Michigan/Flickr via cc-by-sa 2.0
