[Stormin' Norman]

Originally Posted by Buddha

I've seen all of his games except for yesterdays. He's had moments where he looked good and lots of moments where he looked bad, just like most rookie QBs.

Obviously.

He's got a big arm, isn't consistent in his accuracy, and lacks touch on many of his short-range/intermediate passes. He's looked better against pressure than I thought he would.

To say he played excellently against two bad defenses doesn't say much to me. And I would dispute how excellent he played against Chicago. I think he looked ok, good for a rookie, but not a world beater at QB by any means.

Washington is not a bad defense, neither is Chicago. I can admit Stafford had a dreadful game on Sunday, but your unwillingness to give Stafford credit for his success is telling. For some inexplicable reason you seem to allow people that have a high opinion for Stafford (like cruzer and I) to foster some inane ill will against the kid. It's quite baffling, actually.

IMO, you overrate playing time on this team as some sort of barometer as to how good someone is. This team has very little talent I would label as "good." They have a few average players. As such, beating them out for playing time isn't indicative of how good they are, as much as it indicates how poor the team was when they showed up.

Sammie Hill is a good example. I liked the Hill pick, it was my favorite pick of the draft. However, the fact that he's playing now doesn't mean it was a good pick, it means they have NOTHING at DT.

Why can't it mean both? Sammie Lee Hill was good enough for the Lions to surrender a talent like Shaun Smith. Sammie Lee Hill is apparently better than all options in the free agency and low end trade bait. Sammie Lee Hill's appearance in the starting lineup is not simply a commentary about how he places on our team, but how he ranks against available talent in the league as a whole.

Does starting for a team that went 0-16 mean that Sammie Lee Hill is going to be an all star? Am I stating that Sammie Lee Hill is going to have Pro Bowls in his career? Absolutely not. What his starting does demonstrate, however, is that he is at least a player. He is at least, as a rookie, better than every veteran on the Lions - no matter how low that mark was. Gaining a contributor in the fourth round is ALWAYS a good thing.

Same with Levy (I didn't like the pick). He's shown flashes, but he's playing because Ernie Sims and Jordan Dizon aren't very good, not because he's some all-world talent. Follett is playing on special teams. Brown gets an occasional run-out as a third-down back. Murtha got snapped up before he could show us all his all-pro talent.

Levy's credit is not simply demonstrated in his ability to crack the starting line up, but by his production on the field. Why can you not admit the fact that a player that has played well, as Levy quite obviously has, did play well? Do you need for every player the Lions draft to be a bust? Would that satisfy you? Validate you?

These aren't signs of how great the Lions draft class was, it's signs that they had no talent on the roster to begin with.

Once again, you act like it's an either or.

And Stafford, Delmas and Pettigrew BETTER be starting to justify their draft positions (with the possible exception of Stafford because he's a QB, but again, the Lions are so bereft of talent at the QB position that Stafford has to start.)

Obviously. And there is no reason to believe, at this point, that either one of them won't.

Ok, this doesn't mean anything to me other than "I'm not going to question the Lions front office because if I did I shouldn't care." That doesn't make any sense to me. Of course you can look back in hindsight and say they should have drafted Oher. What does that have to do with caring about the team? Nothing.

No, it means I am not going to dismiss an entire organization for one mistake. If I am going to doubt the team at Allen Park simply for passing on Michael Oher, it would have been disingenuous for me to ever say that I had faith in them to begin with.

Based on what? This year's draft? Picking up old *** Anthony Henry for a solid back up QB? Picking up old *** Maurice Morris? Making a wash trade of Redding for Peterson? Picking up old *** Larry Foote?

I would say there is not enough evidence to judge the current administration positively OR negatively.

I would agree with that last assessment. If you were a fan of the talents Mayhew and Co. brought in before they became Lions, there is reason to be optimistic about the front office. If you were not, there is a reason to be negative about the front office. We have yet to seen enough for either to claim superiority.

He does? Dollars to donuts that Murtha never becomes anything in the NFL other than a practice squad player or a back-up tackle that plays in the last few games of a season due to injuries then is cut the next year.

We shall see.

That still flabbergasts me. The Lions have more talent than other teams at 0 positions, including wide receiver. They might be average at wide receiver because Johnson has ability, but the rest really weigh the unit down.

Let's not get into another Millen left this team with talent argument because I hate to see people taking shots at you and cruzer again.

I certainly wouldn't want to have my feelings hurt.

He was also making very ****** throws that they couldn't catch.

Sure.

That is literally an insane comment to make. You say you watch other games, and I'm inclined to believe you, but I can't imagine anyone watching 20+ teams in the NFL would say that Stafford and the QB position aren't a weakness for the Lions this season. It's OBVIOUSLY a weakness! He isn't very good at this point.

He's inconsistent at this point. He has flashes of brilliances, flashes of blunder. When Stafford is on - as he was against the Redskins, as he was against Chicago, as he was in the first quarter of Sunday's game he looks like a good NFL QB. When Stafford messes up, like he did the rest of the game Sunday, as he did against New Orleans, as he will do at times the rest of the year - he will look like a rookie.

But the QB has not been a weakness for this team. We need better receivers, we need improved play at guard, we need improved play from the defense - but the QB has not been a chronic weakness this year. Was it a weakness yesterday for three quarters? Absolutely.

Stafford could have 5 more games like the one he just had and you'd still say he was awesome.

And Stafford could have five 5 touchdown games and you would criticize him for not throwing 6, right?