In a recent review of NFL offseasons, ESPN’s Seth Walder put the Detroit Lions’ actions among the lowest ten, owing primarily to quarterback Jared Goff’s four-year $212 million contract extension. However, Jeremy Reisman of Pride of Detroit makes a persuasive counter-argument, supporting the Lions’ decision and offering a more upbeat outlook on their offseason approach.
Walder’s Critique on Goff’s Extension with the Detroit Lions
Walder’s criticism focuses on Goff’s financial commitment, arguing that his contract could become a substantial burden for the Detroit Lions in the long run. “It’s not a move I can recommend at that price,” Walder said. He questioned Goff’s ability to maintain his performance and suggested that Detroit’s offensive success is primarily attributable to the brilliance of offensive coordinator Ben Johnson.
Goff’s Proven Performance and Value for the Detroit Lions
Reisman opposes Walder’s assessment, noting Goff’s significant progress and role in the Lions’ offensive revival. He claims that attributing Detroit’s success primarily to Johnson diminishes Goff’s tangible accomplishments on the field.
Reisman displays Goff’s amazing achievements since Week 9 of the 2022 season, when he had 7,109 yards, 47 touchdowns, and a passer rating of 100.0. These stats rank Goff among the league’s top quarterbacks, indicating his abilities and justifying his contract deal.
Comparisons of Other Quarterbacks and Contract Strategies
Walder’s study compares Goff’s deal with that of Jacksonville Jaguars quarterback Trevor Lawrence. Walder justified Lawrence’s five-year, $275 million contract extension despite his recent problems, citing wage cap inflation as a compensating factor. Reisman considers this contradiction troubling since it appears to devalue Goff’s demonstrated track record in favor of a less experienced player.
Reisman also responds to Walder’s claim that the Detroit Lions should have used the franchise tag on Goff rather than extending his deal. He contends that using the franchise tag numerous times would have resulted in annual distractions and might have destroyed the team’s cohesion and culture, which the Lions have worked hard to develop.
