11/8/09. Lions @ Seahawks. FOX, 4:05 pm. Week 9.

[PuNk42AE]

Originally Posted by jonjd

He had a 17-0 lead when he threw his 1st INT and threw his 2nd while we were still up by a decent amount. I don't buy it. There was no pressing, or forcing the issue in this instance.

I didn't watch today's game as they don't show a crapyp rteam like that out here. Saying overall for a rookie it's a bad situation to be in to have a chance.

[mtutiger]

I'm now convinced... for the third year in a row, the Lions two best players are Jason Hanson and Nick Harris.

[Johnny Mac]

Originally Posted by mtutiger

I'm now convinced... for the third year in a row, the Lions two best players are Jason Hanson and Nick Harris.

Hanson missed a pretty easy FG to start the game.

[ewsieg]

Originally Posted by mtutiger

I'm now convinced... for the third year in a row, the Lions two best players are Jason Hanson and Nick Harris.

3rd year in a row?

For my lifetime, Hanson and Harris probably both make my top 10 Lions and are probably joined but another kicker, Murray.

[Motor City Sonics]

Originally Posted by Johnny Mac

Hanson missed a pretty easy FG to start the game.

it was very windy and that stadium is a beeeyoch to kick in.....

[Ingefanclub]

Originally Posted by DTroppens

I thought it was a neutral zone infraction right away and figured thatw as going to be the call. If a defensive lineman jumps and then the offensive lineman does, it's a neutral zone infraction. It seems like yesterday, but the rule is probably 10 years old now. Once the offensive player moves, which used to be a false start, the play is called dead and neutral zone is called. If the offensive lineman didn't move, it wouldn't have been called and the penalty wouldn't have existed as long as the defender returns before the snap. I'm not sure why the rule was changed.

If that is the case then every time a defender goes offsides the entire offensive line should race across the line to get the penalty. I thought the defender was only offsides if the ball was snapped while he was offsides or if he made contact with an opposing player.

[mtutiger]

Originally Posted by Johnny Mac

Hanson missed a pretty easy FG to start the game.

But he made a 50 yarder too...

[Chopper]

Why does it always seem like this team is rebuilding? If this was a real business it would be bankrupt. Arghhhhh!!!

[Stormin' Norman]

Originally Posted by Buddha

Your definition of "terrific" must be different than mine.

Re watch the games. Stafford led long, 90+ drives. He didn't force one throw, he didn't throw the ball into bad coverage once in those two games. Stafford played excellently against Chicago in Washington.

I'm all for realizing that Stafford is a rookie and is going to have bad games, but damn Norman, the guy ties his shoes and you tell us that no one - NO ONE - has EVER made a bunny loop like that. A brilliant example of knot tieing this town has never seen! His shoes may NEVER come untied again!

There's no difference between people blaming Stafford for this loss and saying he's obviously bad and you crediting him for the Redskins win and saying he's obviously good.

I agree. Because Stafford IS to blame for this loss and WAS to credit for the Redskins win.

Baby steps to admitting that the Lions aren't very good at talent evaluation.

No. Why would I concede the CURRENT Lions administration is bad at talent evaluation when I look at the production of the guys they DID draft. Unlike most Lions fans, I am not going to point out the bad while ignoring the good.

No, you realize that Oher is really good and you need a left tackle.

Pettigrew will probably be fine, but Oher looks like the player they should have picked at this point. It's still early though.

Oher obviously does look like the player they should have picked, but so what? Nothing we can do will change that, and nothing the Lions can do will change that. If I am going to get to the point that I am going to dismiss an administration for passing on a single player that now, in hindsight, looks like the right pick - then I wouldn't bother to care in the first place.

Passing on Michael Oher was a mistake...untill they pick another player that can fill his void. And I see no reason to doubt the current administration for their ability to fill that void. I know others will, but their opinion doesn't effect my own.

You think they struck gold with a seventh round pick who couldn't make the team on a squad with one of the worst offensive lines in the league? Really?

Bill Parcells happens to think so.

You're the same guy who said Matt Millen left this team with a solid foundation on which to build a team! if that's true, then why does this front office need ANY time to make them into AT LEAST a five or six win team? Any NFL team with a solid foundation ought to be at or near .500.

I said Matt Millen gave this team more talent than his is credited for. I think the future of this team rests upon the Stafford-Johnson connection. Johnson was a Millen pick.

Your tendency to overrate every Lion player is coming back to haunt your logic.

Originally Posted by DTroppens

His first truly bad game? You must've missed last week's game at Ford Field. What about against the Saints? He's a rookie. You are right. He'll have bad games. That's a given. But to suggest this was his first truly terrible game makes me wonder what you think qualifies as a reasonable QB performance.

Last weeks game wasn't a good game by Stafford, but it wasn't horrible either. Stafford clearly got frustrated and his accuracy suffered for it, but he was still making good throws that were then dropped by his receivers. The Saints game wasn't that bad considering who we know the Saints to be. Poor performances, but not terrible.

This was the first game you can look at and identify Stafford play as a weakness for this team.

Okay, you have tackle covered. What about picking ANY POSITION on defense with those picks. I would've rather had a DLineman, a corner, a linebacker and a safety before selecting a QB or a TE with those two early picks. I never mentioned a single player. Apparently you have some insecurities about the Lions not selecting Oher.

I mention Oher because he was the only other option.

At the 20th pick you had the options of Peria Jerry, a player that has an injury history, is older than normal (25) and currently on injured reserved for the Falcons. Or you could have picked up Ziggy Hood, a smaller defensive tackle currently playing 3-4 end for the Steelers. He has showed potential, but Schwartz was looking for larger defensive tackles (like Sammie Lee Hill). Going for Ron Brace would have been a reach, though he would have fit Schwartz's style. SLH is a more athletic Ron Brace, but hampered with a history of lower competition.

At defensive end, the player I wanted (Robert Ayers) was drafted two spots ahead at 18. The only defensive end left worthy of first round consideration was Everette Brown - a small, speedy defensive end. Doesn't really fit Schwartz's profile.

At Cornerback, you had the option of Vontae Davis - a player with tremendous physical skills and tremendous red flags.

At Safety you had Delmas.

At Linebacker you obviously had options, but it's hard to complain about not picking up a player here given Levy in the 3rd round.

The pick, in hindsight, should have been Oher. But, again, this only hurts us if the Lions can't find a LT of the future in the next draft or two (or by adding a free agent).

Read my posts. I blame them for slecting a QB at a time that it made about as much sense as it does for the Detroit Tigers to draft a QB. This team isn't in any position to draft a QB high and have that QB succeed. Therefore I can blame the front office for a five-pick game. It's not in any position to be looking for that "final piece" that a TE can be.

The Lions NEEDED a QB. There was a franchise QB sitting there. You don't pass on a Franchise QB assuming another one is going to come along later. Success or failure of a QB is not dictated by his first season. Were the Lions a team that Stafford was going to come in and take to the playoffs year one? Obviously not. But Stafford isn't being negatively impacted by his experience in Detroit and, barring serious injury that could happen anywhere, won't be.

[LJK004]

Originally Posted by Chopper

Why does it always seem like this team is rebuilding? If this was a real business it would be bankrupt. Arghhhhh!!!

Rebuilding? When have we ever done any of that? I think collapsing would be the better choice of word.

I, admittedly, don't watch a ton of Lions game, but that had to be one of the worst collapses I've ever seen out of any team.

I think the quote that sums up the team was what Houshmandzadeh said when asked down by 17 and still thought they could win...

"It could be that we were playing Detroit," Houshmandzadeh said.

[Buddha]

Originally Posted by Stormin' Norman

Re watch the games. Stafford led long, 90+ drives. He didn't force one throw, he didn't throw the ball into bad coverage once in those two games. Stafford played excellently against Chicago in Washington.

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.

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.

No. Why would I concede the CURRENT Lions administration is bad at talent evaluation when I look at the production of the guys they DID draft. Unlike most Lions fans, I am not going to point out the bad while ignoring the good.

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.

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.

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.

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.)

Oher obviously does look like the player they should have picked, but so what? Nothing we can do will change that, and nothing the Lions can do will change that. If I am going to get to the point that I am going to dismiss an administration for passing on a single player that now, in hindsight, looks like the right pick - then I wouldn't bother to care in the first place.

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.

Passing on Michael Oher was a mistake...untill they pick another player that can fill his void. And I see no reason to doubt the current administration for their ability to fill that void. I know others will, but their opinion doesn't effect my own.

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.

Bill Parcells happens to think so.

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.

I said Matt Millen gave this team more talent than his is credited for. I think the future of this team rests upon the Stafford-Johnson connection. Johnson was a Millen pick.

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.

Last weeks game wasn't a good game by Stafford, but it wasn't horrible either. Stafford clearly got frustrated and his accuracy suffered for it, but he was still making good throws that were then dropped by his receivers.

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

This was the first game you can look at and identify Stafford play as a weakness for this team.

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.

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

[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?

[Buddha]

Originally Posted by Stormin' Norman

Washington is not a bad defense, neither is Chicago.

Washington is a really good run defense and a below average pass defense. Chicago was a decent run defense and an average pass defense (until yesterday, and their numbers will obviously show a drop).

Neither is a really great defense. Against each, Stafford had a good game. Not great, not amazing, he didn't singlehandedly win either game. He played well.

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.

Well, I don't have a problem giving Stafford credit for his success. However, I choose to see his success in the proper context: ie.: he had GOOD games, not great games, and he certainly didn't single handedly win anything.

I think I've been pretty fair to Stafford. I think you've been a sycophant. Nothing wrong with that if that's what you want to be, but to say you don't have rose colored glasses when it comes to Stafford is to deny reality.

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.

A talent like Shaun Smith? Really? You mean the guy who is so talented he's currently not on any NFL roster? That guy? Yeah, I imagine that Hill was so good he could beat out a guy who's not on anyone's roster at the moment. He must be the next Mean Joe Greene.

Does starting for a team that went 0-16 mean that Sammie Lee Hill is going to be an all star?

Not to ME it doesn't...

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.

Look, I like Hill! I like him a lot. But he hasn't shown much of anything yet. He's a project, because he's starting on this team with the worst defensive line in the league means very very very little.

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?

He's been ok! OK! He's not Lawrence ****ing Taylor for God's sake!

I never said he's a bust, I said it's not a big deal that he's starting over sub-par NFL players! He's shown flashes, that's an accurate assessment, IMO.

We shall see.

How much time has he seen so far?

Sure.

There you go! It's good to see you coming to your senses.

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.

ANNNNNNNNNNNNND STOP!

I agree with that. He has looked at times this season like a good NFL quarterback.

To me, that separates him from the 2% of the league that isn't named Jamarcus Russell and Derrick Anderson.

The kid has talent, we've seen some of it. He's also got weaknesses, the same weaknesses he had at Georgia. If he can improve on those weaknesses, he might be Phillip Rivers or Jay Cutler. If he can't, he'll be Jeff George.

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.

I don't see how you can say that a guy with a QB rating of 55 isn't a weakness on the team. FIFTY-FIVE! He's had two productive games (which were good games, not great games) and he's had four VERY subpar games. VERY SUBPAR.

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

Again, ********. I look at Stafford as a rookie with potential. You look at Stafford as more talented right now than Peyton Manning.

Who is being more realistic?

[DukeCityRadical]

Just a few thoughts here: 1) In his first two games, Stafford was missing receivers by overthrowing them. In this game, he missed several receivers by underthrowing them. Is this more of an indication that he's dialing in his accuracy, or that he can't hit the broad side of a barn? 2) Pettigrew and Delmas played well. This alone gives me more hope for the Lions under Mayhew (than under Millen, but there was never any hope for the Lions under Millen, so that's a pointless statement.) 3) Our coaching staff, which I also entertain some hope for, needs to step up. We just got beat up by a team running a West Coast offense and a Cover 2 defense. I don't remember seeing them do anything on offense or defense that was unexpected, but we couldn't handle it. Ugh. 4) I knew that Matt Millen was the Bernie Madoff of the Detroit Lions, but it's beginning to look like he's left a curse behind for us to deal with. This last game was the hardest loss I've ever had to swallow, personally. How the hell do we turn over the entire coaching staff (ignoring Kwan, which seems the best option) and 60% of the team and still play EXACTLY the same as last year? I could swear i was watching the Marinelli version of this team for the last 3 quarters. It was uncanny, and possibly paranormal.

[Buddha]

NFL Ranks:

QB Rating: Stafford is ranked 30th. Ahead of Russell, Anderson and Josh Johnson. Behind such luminaries as Jake Delhomme, Mark Sanchez, Matt Cassell, Trent Edwards, Kerry Collins, Mark Bulger, and Chad Henne.

Interceptions: Stafford is third in the league behind only Delhomme and Cutler. And that's with Cutler throwing almost 70 more passes.

Completion percentage: 29th. Ahead of only the aforementioned Russell, Anderson, Josh Johnson and Mark Sanchez.

FO rank: 34th coming INTO this week. He will surely drop to the bottom (the bottom being above Russell and Anderson, who are below the bottom). BTW: He's behind Culpepper, Ryan Fitzpatrick and Brady freaking Quinn.

How that is not a weakness on this team I do not understand. He's got TONS of potential, but it's POTENTIAL! He's not there, right now, he's not very good at being an NFL QB, and the Lions are suffering because of it.

[Buddha]

BTW: I like Jim Schwartz and think that if he's given talent, he'll succeed. I also think Mayhew has done ok, some good some bad. But that's a step in the right direction for this team.

I think they're both behind the 8 ball because they have a team that is devoid of good NFL talent at almost every position and they're starting a rookie at QB. That will doom almost anybody.

Next year the Lions should be a 5-6 win team. Two years from now they should be back to the usual 8-8. In three years they'll be competitive....just in time for the lockout!

[DukeCityRadical]

I'm actually pretty impressed with Mayhew to this point. He hasn't gotten us world-beater players, but I think Larry Foote is the best linebacker we've had since, god, Spielman? In terms of trading, I'm amazed that he was able to convince anyone last year that they wanted any player (except Calvin) off of this team. I really liked the Roy Williams trade. The draft has been solid. So given the situation that he walked into, I think he's done quite a bit to improve this team and its prospects. Which is why this last loss was so painful to me. I really believe that this team is better than last year's, but they damn sure didn't play better.

[Stormin' Norman]

Originally Posted by Buddha

Washington is a really good run defense and a below average pass defense. Chicago was a decent run defense and an average pass defense (until yesterday, and their numbers will obviously show a drop).

Neither is a really great defense. Against each, Stafford had a good game. Not great, not amazing, he didn't singlehandedly win either game. He played well.

Do you believe the Lions would have defeated the Redskins with Daunte Culpepper was QB?

Well, I don't have a problem giving Stafford credit for his success. However, I choose to see his success in the proper context: ie.: he had GOOD games, not great games, and he certainly didn't single handedly win anything.

I think I've been pretty fair to Stafford. I think you've been a sycophant. Nothing wrong with that if that's what you want to be, but to say you don't have rose colored glasses when it comes to Stafford is to deny reality.

Do I have lofty expectations for Stafford? Absolutely. Does that tint my observations of what he has done? No. What I expect Stafford to become is irrelevant to his play of today.

A talent like Shaun Smith? Really? You mean the guy who is so talented he's currently not on any NFL roster? That guy? Yeah, I imagine that Hill was so good he could beat out a guy who's not on anyone's roster at the moment. He must be the next Mean Joe Greene.

Again, you completely misunderstand (or intentionally misrepresent) exactly what I was saying.

Shaun Smith is a very intriguing physical specimen, especially for the weakest defensive line unit in the league (the Lions). For the Lions to feel like they could afford to get rid of a large, athletic defensive linemen (even with character concerns and a four game suspension pending) says something about Hill.

As I said in my last post, Hill's ability to start for the Lions as a rookie does not mean he is destined to be an all time great, or even a Pro Bowler. It does mean, however, that he is a player capable of out playing veteran lineman and that is impressive for a fourth round pick out of Stillman.

Not to ME it doesn't...

Not to anyone it doesn't.

He's been ok! OK! He's not Lawrence ****ing Taylor for God's sake!

I never said he's a bust, I said it's not a big deal that he's starting over sub-par NFL players! He's shown flashes, that's an accurate assessment, IMO.

I never said he was LT, but for you to dismiss his success (as you have done) to criticize the talent evaluations abilities of the current administration should be enough for anyone to question your objectiveness.

How much time has he seen so far?

None, which, as you must know, is completely irrelevant.

There you go! It's good to see you coming to your senses.

All you had to do was read what I have already written.

ANNNNNNNNNNNNND STOP!

I agree with that. He has looked at times this season like a good NFL quarterback.

To me, that separates him from the 2% of the league that isn't named Jamarcus Russell and Derrick Anderson.

The kid has talent, we've seen some of it. He's also got weaknesses, the same weaknesses he had at Georgia. If he can improve on those weaknesses, he might be Phillip Rivers or Jay Cutler. If he can't, he'll be Jeff George.

And I believe the biggest thing separating Cutler from George (and, to a lesser extent, Cutler from Favre) is all mental. Jeff George is a self centered ego maniac as he proves every time he complains that no NFL teams are calling him for his services. Cutler has a similar ego, but learned hot to be a leader while playing for the black hole that is Vanderbilt football.

I don't see how you can say that a guy with a QB rating of 55 isn't a weakness on the team. FIFTY-FIVE! He's had two productive games (which were good games, not great games) and he's had four VERY subpar games. VERY SUBPAR.

Stats don't tell the story.

Again, ********. I look at Stafford as a rookie with potential. You look at Stafford as more talented right now than Peyton Manning.

Who is being more realistic?

I felt replying with gross hyperbole with gross hyperbole was appropriate.

[djhutch]

Originally Posted by Buddha

I think they're both behind the 8 ball because they have a team that is devoid of good NFL talent at almost every position and they're starting a rookie at QB. That will doom almost anybody.

I could not agree more with this.

[Buddha]

Originally Posted by Stormin' Norman

Do you believe the Lions would have defeated the Redskins with Daunte Culpepper was QB?

Maybe. I don't know and neither do you.

Would they have beaten the Seahawks with Culpepper not throwing 5 picks? Who knows? Not me, not you (although I'm sure you think you know).

Do I have lofty expectations for Stafford? Absolutely. Does that tint my observations of what he has done? No. What I expect Stafford to become is irrelevant to his play of today.

Yeah, you keep saying this but I find it hard to believe given your comments on Stafford.

Again, you completely misunderstand (or intentionally misrepresent) exactly what I was saying.

Shaun Smith is a very intriguing physical specimen, especially for the weakest defensive line unit in the league (the Lions). For the Lions to feel like they could afford to get rid of a large, athletic defensive linemen (even with character concerns and a four game suspension pending) says something about Hill.

As I said in my last post, Hill's ability to start for the Lions as a rookie does not mean he is destined to be an all time great, or even a Pro Bowler. It does mean, however, that he is a player capable of out playing veteran lineman and that is impressive for a fourth round pick out of Stillman.

No it's really not. What veteran did he beat out? You keep talking about Shaun Smith, but Smith was cut for a reason and he hasn't been picked up for a reason. Why Smith was cut says more about Smith than it does about Hill. If anything, it says the Lions are looking to the future to develop Hill rather than taking on a short-term better solution in someone like Smith (although Smith getting cut, IMO, says he's a nut-job and that's why no one wants him, not even the team with the worst defensive line in the League, which, maybe to your surprise, is the Lions).

Not to anyone it doesn't.

It's good to see you come to your senses.

I never said he was LT, but for you to dismiss his success (as you have done) to criticize the talent evaluations abilities of the current administration should be enough for anyone to question your objectiveness.

How have I dismissed it? I've said he's shown flashes. That's all he's done! How is that dismissing him? Did I not include enough adjectives for you? Am I not gushing enough?

Pray tell, what's the appropriate evaluation of DeAndre Levy at this point in his career?

None, which, as you must know, is completely irrelevant.

Really? You would think that an amazing talent like Murtha could get a few reps with the first team.

All you had to do was read what I have already written.

I have read what you've written. Which post extolling the virtues of Matt Stafford do you want me to re-read?

The one where you mock people who compare him to Joey Harrington? The one where you said he was going to lead the Lions down the field to beat St. Louis? The one where you compared him to Peyton manning? The one where you said Stafford to Johnson was going to be the difference in this game with the Seahawks as opposed to the loss to the Rams?

How about the one where you said the Lions were going to be 8-8 this year? Should I go back and re-read that one?

And I believe the biggest thing separating Cutler from George (and, to a lesser extent, Cutler from Favre) is all mental. Jeff George is a self centered ego maniac as he proves every time he complains that no NFL teams are calling him for his services. Cutler has a similar ego, but learned hot to be a leader while playing for the black hole that is Vanderbilt football.

No NFL team is calling for Jeff George's services because he's older than me.

Cutler is a leader? Really? Have you watched any Bears games this season and seen Cutler whine and ***** and chew people out on the sidelines when things don't go his way? Cutler is a baby, not a leader.

Have you watched any Bears games this year?

Stats don't tell the story.

Apparently only stats against the Redskins and Bears tell the story. Well, they tell the story you want to believe.

On the contrary, other stats give a more complete picture as to how Stafford compares to other QBs around the league. I.E. not well. You can hide behind the two decent games he's had and ignore the other terrible games he's had all you want, but it just demonstrates your lack of objectivity.

I felt replying with gross hyperbole with gross hyperbole was appropriate.

Apparently you've felt like this since the day Stafford was drafted! Actually, I take it back, you've been gushing over Stafford since BEFORE he was drafted.

I don't like taking a seemingly "anti-Stafford" position. I think the guy is going to be fine. I think he has the physical potential to be very good. However, I don't think he's anywhere near being a good QB right now and to constantly say that he is ridiculous homer fan boyism.

To say that QB is not a weakness on the Lions THIS SEASON is ridiculous.

[Jason_R]

Tom Kowalski made the point that Stafford's godawful wildness on Sunday may have been related to his knee injury. Let's hope so, because some of those throws are incomprehensible otherwise.

In Stafford's favor, many of his receivers have played like tackling dummies for large stretches this season. I've only seen a few games, but it seems like he's been battling through 6-8 drops in some games. For the sake of argument, say his receivers had only been guilty of three drops per game. With 24 extra completions over the season, his completion percentage would be 65%. Granted, other teams' WRs drop balls, too, so drops are embedded into other QBs' stats as well, but it does seem like the WRs have really let Stafford down.

I don't think there is anything we can conclude but that the QB position has been a weakness. It's reasonable to expect it will get better as Stafford matures and as some stiffs at WR are replaced by more sure-handed players.

Still, even though the receivers have left a lot of yards on the field, and have let a lot of drives die, and have failed to make several big plays when they had the chance, the Lions have been within striking distance at the end of most games. There are just no offensive playmakers other than CJ, and maybe Pettigrew, and there is nobody on defense who can disrupt the other team.

[Stormin' Norman]

Originally Posted by Buddha

Yeah, you keep saying this but I find it hard to believe given your comments on Stafford.

*sigh*

No it's really not. What veteran did he beat out? You keep talking about Shaun Smith, but Smith was cut for a reason and he hasn't been picked up for a reason. Why Smith was cut says more about Smith than it does about Hill. If anything, it says the Lions are looking to the future to develop Hill rather than taking on a short-term better solution in someone like Smith (although Smith getting cut, IMO, says he's a nut-job and that's why no one wants him, not even the team with the worst defensive line in the League, which, maybe to your surprise, is the Lions).

Your right, the Lions are going out of there way to not bring in players that help them win now. It's quite clear that Schwartz is perfectly content keeping the roster as is and is disinterested in going out and acquiring available players to help this team.

The fact the Lions choose to start Hill over adding a free agent or a player (like Tank Tyler) is a good sign for hill. That doesn't mean he is destine for super stardom, but it is a good indication that he does have a future in this league.

It's good to see you come to your senses.

They've always been here.

How have I dismissed it? I've said he's shown flashes. That's all he's done! How is that dismissing him? Did I not include enough adjectives for you? Am I not gushing enough?

It's your willingness to dismiss the entire draft class that seems strange. You would rather harp on passing over Oher than feel good about picking up an instant contributor in Levy. I just don't understand that mindset.

Really? You would think that an amazing talent like Murtha could get a few reps with the first team.

You are clearly being an *** for the sake of being an ***. No one has even begun to argue that Murtha was ready to step on an NFL field as a left tackle this year. Does that mean he is no good? Does that mean he has no future? Of course not. I believe he is a tremendous talent that can be DEVELOPED into a good left tackle.

I have read what you've written. Which post extolling the virtues of Matt Stafford do you want me to re-read?

The one where you mock people who compare him to Joey Harrington?

Any comparison to Joey Harrington IS ridiculous simply because the two aren't remotely alike. It's like comparing Peyton Manning to Michael Vick.

The one where you said he was going to lead the Lions down the field to beat St. Louis?

Your right, it would have been far more logical to assume defeat

The one where you compared him to Peyton manning?

I will stand by that one.

The one where you said Stafford to Johnson was going to be the difference in this game with the Seahawks as opposed to the loss to the Rams?

I was wrong. Oops.

How about the one where you said the Lions were going to be 8-8 this year? Should I go back and re-read that one?

I misjudged the production Detroit was going to get from the running game and defensive secondary. I can admit that.

No NFL team is calling for Jeff George's services because he's older than me.

Cutler is a leader? Really? Have you watched any Bears games this season and seen Cutler whine and ***** and chew people out on the sidelines when things don't go his way? Cutler is a baby, not a leader.

You missed my point entirely.

I understand why no team is calling Jeff George. I am stating that the fact Jeff George doesn't understand why no team is calling him demonstrates a larger mental problem with George. A problem that Stafford has given no hint to.

I also pointed at that Cutler is restricted by his own problems that he demonstrated getting out of Denver. However Cutler, while a douchbag, is a leader. Look at the admiration he receives from his players. Look at the relationships he had in Denver. I haven't seen a single Bronco speak ill of a guy that bailed on them.

Have you watched any Bears games this year?

Several.

Apparently only stats against the Redskins and Bears tell the story. Well, they tell the story you want to believe.

I have never used stats from that game. Stafford's performance in that game is better than the stats indicate. You look at the footage and you can't find three passes that were bad decisions. Bad passes? Sure. But not bad decisions.

On the contrary, other stats give a more complete picture as to how Stafford compares to other QBs around the league. I.E. not well. You can hide behind the two decent games he's had and ignore the other terrible games he's had all you want, but it just demonstrates your lack of objectivity.

Apparently you've felt like this since the day Stafford was drafted! Actually, I take it back, you've been gushing over Stafford since BEFORE he was drafted.

I have never tried to deny the fact I see Stafford as one of the most impressive QB prospects coming out of college in a long time. That's why I am so excited about the possibility of him being in Detroit - a team, a city that desperately needs a sports icon.

I don't like taking a seemingly "anti-Stafford" position. I think the guy is going to be fine. I think he has the physical potential to be very good. However, I don't think he's anywhere near being a good QB right now and to constantly say that he is ridiculous homer fan boyism.

It really isn't.

To say that QB is not a weakness on the Lions THIS SEASON is ridiculous.

It's not. It was a weakness in Seattle.

[Buddha]

Originally Posted by Stormin' Norman

They've always been here.

They have? Well it's about time you started writing them down for us all to see! Keep it up!

It's your willingness to dismiss the entire draft class that seems strange. You would rather harp on passing over Oher than feel good about picking up an instant contributor in Levy. I just don't understand that mindset.

An instant contributor (if you say so) on a bad team. Stardom obviously awaits.

I don't dismiss the entire draft class, on the contrary, I see the draft class for what it is: some players with some potential. You've already gushed about how it's the greatest draft class of all time, we all know where you stand when it comes to overrating the Honolulu Blue and Silver.

I don't DISMISS anything. I have a more realistic and practical view of the Lions.

You are clearly being an *** for the sake of being an ***. No one has even begun to argue that Murtha was ready to step on an NFL field as a left tackle this year. Does that mean he is no good? Does that mean he has no future? Of course not. I believe he is a tremendous talent that can be DEVELOPED into a good left tackle.

With all the other seventh round massive talents that are around the league at left tackle?

Again, I have a realistic view of Murtha and everyone else the Lions took. You have shown no such ability to separate two tackles with superstardom.

Your right, it would have been far more logical to assume defeat

You could admit you were wrong about that. But that would require a little humility.

I will stand by that one.

Insanity.

I was wrong. Oops.

Baby steps.

I misjudged the production Detroit was going to get from the running game and defensive secondary. I can admit that.

Getting closer! How about you admit you overrated the ability of Super Stafford to lead the Lions to victories?

Or you just massively overrated the ability of the entire team.

Hey, don't worry, I said they'd win four games, obviously I am WAAAAAAAY too optimistic about this team. Then again, I'm a lot closer than you were.

Hell, man, even cruzer said this team wasn't very good. If I were cruzer, I'd be pissed that you've taken his job as the biggest Lions slappy on the board.

You missed my point entirely.

I understand why no team is calling Jeff George. I am stating that the fact Jeff George doesn't understand why no team is calling him demonstrates a larger mental problem with George. A problem that Stafford has given no hint to.

I also pointed at that Cutler is restricted by his own problems that he demonstrated getting out of Denver. However Cutler, while a douchbag, is a leader. Look at the admiration he receives from his players. Look at the relationships he had in Denver. I haven't seen a single Bronco speak ill of a guy that bailed on them.

So? How does that show he's a leader? Whining and crying about play calling, dropped passes and receivers is not being a leader. Cutler has shown himself to be an immature playboy, not a leader. He's got a great arm and gaudy stats because the Bears have no running game and are playing from behind in a few games (and getting to pick on the Lions and Browns), but he's no leader.

Several.

You know, if you really watch all the football you claim to watch, you'd have no time to do anything else but sleep.

Do you have a job other than Stafford's PR director?

I have never used stats from that game. Stafford's performance in that game is better than the stats indicate. You look at the footage and you can't find three passes that were bad decisions. Bad passes? Sure. But not bad decisions.

The footage of what game can't I find three bad decisions?

BTW: Do you have the coaches tapes? Do you have access to the downfield cameras that tell you who was open and who wasn't? I realize that you watch a lot of football, but I'm pretty sure you don't have the game tapes that show you all the downfield footage, and such, you saying he didn't make three bad decisions is unsupportable.

It's not. It was a weakness in Seattle.

And new orleans. And Minnesota. And St. Louis.

Again, there is 0 justification for this opinion other than pure fanboydom. A QB with a rating of 55 is not a weakness? That's insane. It's comically insane.

Seattle and St. Louis have two terrible defenses and Stafford looked like complete **** against each of them. If that's not a sign of weakness I don't know what is.

POTENTIAL. Not close to being there yet. Give him time, but be realistic about it.

[jonjd]

Quit while you're really behind Norm.

[DTroppens]

Originally Posted by jonjd

Quit while you're really behind Norm.

You have to admire Stormin Norman's whatever it is, but I've been thinking the same thing for about a day's worth of posts.

Stafford has potential. Right now he's been crap - no ifs ands or buts about it. Some of it has to do with the players around him. A ton of it has to do with what he's done himself. He's had good moments, but the bad have far exceeded the good. That's not to say that won't turn around one day. That's where he is right now.

Draft picks contributing after an 0-16 season/1-26 27-game stretch - If these players weren't playing, someone would have to be shot. It's like taking the 2003 Tigers, and trying to find upgrades in the 2004 offseason - it's virtually impossible not to improve. The team talent was so low (and is for the Lions), that virtually anyone selected in the first three to four rounds by ANY TEAM should've bad no issues making the Lions.The Lions are just that bad at every spot on the field. That said, will some become solid NFL contributors? It looks like some have a shot, including some that I have been very critical about selecting (more based on the position and what this team needs than based on the player's actual ability). If five players in last year's draft aren't making contributions on a team so void of talent, then you'd have a story. The fact that they are being given a chance to play, is what dang well better have happened. It's hard to think the Lions could've drafted players so pathetically bad that they couldn't even give their own draft class the benefit of the doubt over Millen leftovers or old retread vets that can't make other NFL teams. That better be happening. We're not talking about finding spots for 7 picks on a team like the Steelers. We're talking about the 1-26 Lions over their last 27 games entering this season. The fact that so many draft picks are finding some playing time shouldn't be rewarded - that was almost a total 100 percent given. If not, then the new front office would already have about 115 red flags flying around Ford Field. That's not to say some wouldn't have earned their spots if the talent level was higher when they were selected to come here. Maybe a couple are going to be Pro-Bowl level or near that level. But, I don't think there is any great conclusive evidence based on the play of any of them, that if an above average player was at their position, they would've certainly won the job against that guy. They are all learning and some may end up becoming productive NFL players. Don't let the fact that they are playing for the Lions immediately elevate them to above average levels of talent and ability.

[mtutiger]

Originally Posted by Jason_R

In Stafford's favor, many of his receivers have played like tackling dummies for large stretches this season. I've only seen a few games, but it seems like he's been battling through 6-8 drops in some games. For the sake of argument, say his receivers had only been guilty of three drops per game. With 24 extra completions over the season, his completion percentage would be 65%. Granted, other teams' WRs drop balls, too, so drops are embedded into other QBs' stats as well, but it does seem like the WRs have really let Stafford down.

Don't forget bad routes by recievers as well... one of his interceptions, I believe, was because the reciever ran the wrong route. I believe it was the final one, where CJ cut to the middle of the field and Stafford threw towards the sidelines.

[mtutiger]

Originally Posted by jonjd

Quit while you're really behind Norm.

Indeed... the lovefest is quite sickening.

[DTroppens]

The team is 1-7 this year and 2-34 over its last 36 games. There's a lot of blame to be handed to a lot of people from the past and the present. There are a lot of bloody hands from people in the front office, to the coaching staffs to the players from the past and present.

They aren't 1-7 this year entirely because of Matt Millen. Nope, changes were made since Matt (over a year ago now), and they still have won just one game since he's been gone. There are a lot of bloody hands in this mess.

[Buddha]

Originally Posted by mtutiger

Don't forget bad routes by recievers as well... one of his interceptions, I believe, was because the reciever ran the wrong route. I believe it was the final one, where CJ cut to the middle of the field and Stafford threw towards the sidelines.

Maybe. Or maybe the receiver ran the right route and Stafford read the play wrong and threw the ball to the wrong place.

[Buddha]

Originally Posted by Buddha

NFL Ranks:

QB Rating: Stafford is ranked 30th. Ahead of Russell, Anderson and Josh Johnson. Behind such luminaries as Jake Delhomme, Mark Sanchez, Matt Cassell, Trent Edwards, Kerry Collins, Mark Bulger, and Chad Henne.

Interceptions: Stafford is third in the league behind only Delhomme and Cutler. And that's with Cutler throwing almost 70 more passes.

Completion percentage: 29th. Ahead of only the aforementioned Russell, Anderson, Josh Johnson and Mark Sanchez.

FO rank: 34th coming INTO this week. He will surely drop to the bottom (the bottom being above Russell and Anderson, who are below the bottom). BTW: He's behind Culpepper, Ryan Fitzpatrick and Brady freaking Quinn.

How that is not a weakness on this team I do not understand. He's got TONS of potential, but it's POTENTIAL! He's not there, right now, he's not very good at being an NFL QB, and the Lions are suffering because of it.

EDIT: Stafford is now ahead of only Russell and Anderson (by far the worst QBs in the league) on FO rankings.

[mtutiger]

Originally Posted by Buddha

Maybe. Or maybe the receiver ran the right route and Stafford read the play wrong and threw the ball to the wrong place.

I'd give Stafford the benefit of the doubt here, since they needed an outside pass to get out of bounds. But you could be right. Either way, that's on Matty boy.

For the record, I'm not a Stafford slappy. But it wouldn't be the first time a Lion reciever ran the wrong route

[Buddha]

Originally Posted by mtutiger

I'd give Stafford the benefit of the doubt here, since they needed an outside pass to get out of bounds. But you could be right. Either way, that's on Matty boy.

For the record, I'm not a Stafford slappy. But it wouldn't be the first time a Lion reciever ran the wrong route

I agree. It very well could have been the receiver's fault.

[treyKemper]

Could we have beat the Seahawks with Cutler back there?

[ToledoTigerFan]

No game thread for today? Bummer. Did everyone jump ship? Too bad, because today the Lions are going to beat the snot out of Brett Fav-ray. He'll sustain an injury today that will snap his consecutive game streak next week. Final score today.......

Lions 23
Vikings 14

[Buddha]

Originally Posted by ToledoTigerFan

No game thread for today? Bummer. Did everyone jump ship? Too bad, because today the Lions are going to beat the snot out of Brett Fav-ray. He'll sustain an injury today that will snap his consecutive game streak next week. Final score today.......

Lions 23
Vikings 14

TTF! Coming strong!