I don't know where they come up with Goff and Wentz being #1 and #2.
I think Goff from a physical standpoint, is well behind Lynch and I would be worried about his hand size. He also played in the Pac-10 which is weak for defense and he had some quality receivers around him.
Wentz is about what you would want from a QB from a physical standpoint. But his mechanics are real inconsistent and he didn't throw the ball that accurately in college. He did play in tough weather conditions, but he also played against low competition. The transition in going from FCS to the NFL is a large one from a speed perspective. Romo was able to do it, but I question him in comparison to Lynch (and Goff).
Lynch played on a miserable offensive team. They dropped a ton of passes and the O-Line couldn't block. They had a couple of capable tailbacks and that was it. Meanwhile, he played against tough defenses like Navy, Temple (really great defense), Ole Miss, Houston, etc. The only thing I would think that takes away from Lynch is that he played in the spread offense. But, so did Aaron Rodgers (it just wasn't a hurry up, spread option).
The comparison to Flacco I find unfounded (and I like Flacco). I think he compares more to Aaron Rodgers (upside wise). Quick release, incredible arm and he moves and runs like Rodgers does. In fact, I think you can use spread option with Lynch due to his running ability and size.
If I needed a pocket passer that was ready to go today, I would go with Goff. But it's not like I would expect Goff to tear up the NFL right away or even in 2017. But if I'm looking at a long term development and probability of working out, I would go with Lynch-Wentz-Goff.
YR