I liked Goff but since I live in the Detroit area I knew Stafford was better and was a very experienced and rock-proven warrior.
In hindsight we can say "hell yeah" it was worth it. But if my memory serves me correctly, at the time Stafford had had a couple bad games and more INTs then expected. His record was like Goff's tenure with the Rams. So it was a fair question to ask.
I believe all of us felt that the proof was in the pudding, i.e. that we needed to go to the SB or NFC champ. game, to prove that it was worth it. My bar was getting to the NFC championship game. Other people felt that getting to the SB was the bar. Clearly he met or exceeded all expectations.
I'm also very glad that Stafford silenced his critics who made such laughable arguments like, "he's never won a playoff game," or "he's just "Stat Padford," or "he's never accomplished anything."
Stafford isn't the greatest QB, but, given the team and the coaching, for me, it is reasonable to expect less INTs next year and more production out of him.
