In hindsight...

**mr0zip0** · 02-06-2012, 09:49 PM

Would you still have rather played the Giants? Most of this board, and most of the Lions fans, were hoping to play New York in the wildcard round.

Looking back, do you think the Lions could have changed the outcome of the playoffs if they had beaten Green Bay in week 17?

I think we could have. I really think Matthew Stafford could have done exactly what Tom Brady did against the Giants, with the recievers actually catching the passes.

I also think that the defense would not have been embarresed by Manning like they were by Brees.

How about you?

**ben9753** · 02-06-2012, 09:56 PM

There's no doubt in my mind that the best team in the league was New Orleans in their dome. One of the Giants said last night that they were hoping the 49ers would beat the Saints. No team, including the Giants were going to beat the Saints at home. They were heads and shoulders over every other team in the dome, and the Lions didn't stand a chance.

**KleShreen** · 02-06-2012, 10:37 PM

Even as it stands today, I would have rather faced the Giants in the first round than ANY other team in the NFC.

**Motor City Sonics** · 02-06-2012, 10:56 PM

If the Lions would have beaten Green Bay it would have been Detroit 31, Giants 10. The Lions would have destroyed them (and then lost to the 49ers).

**RandyMarsh** · 02-07-2012, 12:02 AM

No disrespect to the Giants but they benefited GREATLY by the NFL's stupid scheduling. They had the worst record in the conference, there is no reason they should've hosted a playoff game just cause they won a crappy division(same thing as Sea last year). If the NFL went by records than they would've got stuck going to a red hot NO at the dome and I don't see them beating them there. And we would've got to go to Atlanta, where even though it would've been a tough game it certainly was something I think the Lions could've won. Instead we got the toughest possible matchup and the Giants got the easiest possible matchup(Matt Ryan rarely wins away from home) despite the fact we had the better record. Plus NYG then got to face a rusty GB team that they took advantage of. Then they lucked out at SF by their PR fumbling two kicks. So again no disrespect to the Giants, they obviously had to play well to win it all but if the NFL would've made them play the Saints in the first round like they should've I don't think they would've won that game. Who knows the Lions may have actually been the World Champs if they got to play the path that the Giants got to(ATL, rusty GB, SF(where their returner fumbles to returns) and NE).

**hail2mich** · 02-07-2012, 12:09 AM

I still have no idea how the Giants came away with the championship. I think they were the second weakest NFC team in the playoffs (Falcons were weakest). They didn't have a good season, barely made the playoffs, but got hot at the right time. I would have taken a matchup vs. the Giants over any of the other NFC playoff teams this year.

This is why I am very weary of a college football playoff system, but that's a different argument for a different day.

**Gehringer_2** · 02-07-2012, 12:42 AM

Originally Posted by hail2mich

I still have no idea how the Giants came away with the championship. I think they were the second weakest NFC team in the playoffs (Falcons were weakest). They didn't have a good season, barely made the playoffs, but got hot at the right time. I would have taken a matchup vs. the Giants over any of the other NFC playoff teams this year.

This is why I am very weary of a college football playoff system, but that's a different argument for a different day.

So for 50 years the mantra of the NFL has always been "On any given Sunday....(anyone can beat anyone else)" So why would we expect the best team to have anything more than a slight advantage over anyone else of winning out in the playoffs.

**djhutch** · 02-07-2012, 07:14 AM

Yes I think the Lions would have beaten the Giants in the WildCard round. And the bear would've caught the rabbit if he hadn't stopped to take a dump in the woods.

**RedRamage** · 02-07-2012, 10:41 AM

Originally Posted by RandyMarsh

No disrespect to the Giants but they benefited GREATLY by the NFL's stupid scheduling. They had the worst record in the conference, there is no reason they should've hosted a playoff game just cause they won a crappy division(same thing as Sea last year). If the NFL went by records than they would've got stuck going to a red hot NO at the dome and I don't see them beating them there.

I have no problem what so ever with the way the playoffs work. You win you're division, you get higher rank in the playoffs. Yeah, it stunk for us this time, but such is life.

You can talk all you want about luck or whatever, but there's no way to predict that. If the Lions got lucky against the Saints would you be decrying them saying they didn't deserve to advance past NO, but just got a couple of lucky breaks so it wasn't fair?

And the whole rust vs. rest argument is silly in my opinion. It's so easy to say: Oh, they lost because they didn't play last week or they won because they got time off to rest and heal up... If GB was rusty, why wasn't SF rusty or the Pats or the Ravens? Three out of the four teams with a first week bye were rested not rusty.

Look, I'm not trying to yell at you or anything, but I can't agree that the Giants had a cake walk schedule. They got Atlanta first, probably the weakest or second weakest NFC playoff team... but then they had to travel to GB to beat the team that just about everyone had penciled into at least the NFC Championship game, if the Super Bowl itself. Once the pulled the miracle win there, they still had to beat an on fire San Fran team that looked really strong and beat NO in a shoot out. They did NOT have any easy trip through the playoffs at all. They earned their right to play in the SB.

**Detroit Rock City** · 02-07-2012, 01:22 PM

I most certainly believe in my heart of hearts the Lions could have and would have beaten the Giants in the playoffs. Giants played a poor Atlanta team, a Packers team that was not the same team for the regular season, and an offensively challenged team in the 49ers who couldn't throw the ball downfield. From there who knows but I think the Lions would have given the Giants a ton of problems on offense.

Have to give the Giants credit for doing what they did but they were not the best team in the league let alone the conference.

**RedRamage** · 02-07-2012, 02:50 PM

Originally Posted by Detroit Rock City

I most certainly believe in my heart of hearts the Lions could have and would have beaten the Giants in the playoffs.

I'd like to think they would have, but I don't know for sure.

Giants played a poor Atlanta team,

I think "poor" is the wrong term. They qualified for the playoffs after all. They may not have been a super strong team, but they were in the playoffs and they did beat the Lions in our house earlier in the year so poor isn't a good term in my opinion.

[they beat] a Packers team that was not the same team for the regular season,

What do you base your opinion that they were not the same team as the regular season on? We only saw them in one post season game and the Giant defeated them in it. What's the say that the Giants didn't just out play the Packers? Couldn't the Giants have been the reason that the Packers didn't look the same?

...and [they beat] an offensively challenged team in the 49ers who couldn't throw the ball downfield.

An offensively challenged team that put up 36 points on the Saints (a team the Lions only put 28 pts on), including 299 yards passing and two 49 yard passes.

Have to give the Giants credit for doing what they did but they were not the best team in the league let alone the conference.

I beg to differ. They may not have been the great during the regular season (they did have a number of injuries they battled through), but they did enough to get into the playoffs, and then proved on the field that they were the better team each week.

I don't think you are giving enough credit to the Giants. You explain away everyone of their opponents as being a lesser team and that the Giants just got lucky. Sorry, I can't accept that personally.

**Detroit Rock City** · 02-07-2012, 05:42 PM

Originally Posted by RedRamage

I'd like to think they would have, but I don't know for sure.

I think "poor" is the wrong term. They qualified for the playoffs after all. They may not have been a super strong team, but they were in the playoffs and they did beat the Lions in our house earlier in the year so poor isn't a good term in my opinion.

What do you base your opinion that they were not the same team as the regular season on? We only saw them in one post season game and the Giant defeated them in it. What's the say that the Giants didn't just out play the Packers? Couldn't the Giants have been the reason that the Packers didn't look the same?

An offensively challenged team that put up 36 points on the Saints (a team the Lions only put 28 pts on), including 299 yards passing and two 49 yard passes.

I beg to differ. They may not have been the great during the regular season (they did have a number of injuries they battled through), but they did enough to get into the playoffs, and then proved on the field that they were the better team each week.

I don't think you are giving enough credit to the Giants. You explain away everyone of their opponents as being a lesser team and that the Giants just got lucky. Sorry, I can't accept that personally.

The Falcons and Matt Ryan are overrated. They were the sexy Super Bowl pick before the season from quite a few "analysts" and they just aren't that good.

The Packers in the playoffs were not the same in the sense that they looked completely out of it. Receivers dropped balls that they never drop, Rodgers missed passes he didn't miss at all in the regular season, missed tackles, and missed oppourtunities throughout the game. They couldn't make a mistake against the Lions or anyone else yet made tons in that game.

Yes the 49ers put up a bunch of points against the Saints when Alex Smith looked like the next big thing. And then he went right back into his normal game manager self. Wouldn't take chances when the Giants dared him to and was so afraid to make a mistake that he was completely ineffective. They are a rushing team and when the Giants slowed that down, the Niners were toast. Smith will never be an elite QB and that game was handed to the Giants on a silver platter.

The Giants caught a few breaks in that they got to play the worst team in the NFC playoffs at home to start their run, caught the Packers on an off day, avoided the Saints and Lions (both of whom would have beaten them imo) and got the least explosive team in San Fran. You have to catch breaks to win in sports and they caught theirs. It's happened for the Red Wings and Pistons in the past but that's how it goes sometimes. They capitalized on those chances and won the whole thing. Good for them, but in no way do I think they were better than the Packers or Saints.

**nd1377** · 02-07-2012, 06:23 PM

Originally Posted by RedRamage

An offensively challenged team that put up 36 points on the Saints (a team the Lions only put 28 pts on), including 299 yards passing and two 49 yard passes.

The Saints at home and on the road are a completely different team. If the Saints had home field advantage throughout playoffs, they probably make it to the Super Bowl.

Originally Posted by Detroit Rock City

The Giants caught a few breaks in that they got to play the worst team in the NFC playoffs at home to start their run, caught the Packers on an off day, avoided the Saints and Lions (both of whom would have beaten them imo) and got the least explosive team in San Fran. You have to catch breaks to win in sports and they caught theirs. It's happened for the Red Wings and Pistons in the past but that's how it goes sometimes. They capitalized on those chances and won the whole thing. Good for them, but in no way do I think they were better than the Packers or Saints.

I could not have said it better. Like any game in the NFL, a couple of plays could have doomed the Giants. If San Francisco's kick returner doesn't fumble a couple of times, Giants lose and if Welker catches the ball, the Giants probably lose.

Speaking of Welker, all week heading up to the Super Bowl, I heard and read people claiming that he is a top three receiver. There is no one in their right mind that would trade CJ, Fitzgerald, Andre Johnson etc for Welker. He is a WR that is part of a great system with a great coach and QB that could easily be replaced and the replacement would be just as good.

**Chaz** · 02-07-2012, 06:56 PM

I have told Giants fans we would of beat them in the first round without blinking!!!! after that, hmmmmmmm New Orleans ugh, SF who beat us at home, ugh, and GB on the road? when was the last time we won up there?????

**The Ghost of Neifi** · 03-14-2012, 08:14 AM

New York was probably the hottest team going into the playoffs and they were under the radar. I picked them to win it all before the playoffs and they sure as hell did.

Detroit was just happy to make the playoffs last year. Any hope I had of them potentially winning a game was dashed with their performance in week 17.

**nd1377** · 03-15-2012, 09:52 AM

Originally Posted by The Ghost of Neifi

New York was probably the hottest team going into the playoffs and they were under the radar. I picked them to win it all before the playoffs and they sure as hell did.

Detroit was just happy to make the playoffs last year. Any hope I had of them potentially winning a game was dashed with their performance in week 17.

Would you have picked the Giants if they had to play their first round game at New Orleans?

The Lions chance of winning a playoff game would have gone up if they played at New York compared to at New Orleans. The Lions pathetic defense cost them majorly at Green Bay.