Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by RedRamage

  1. 7 minutes ago, Mr.TaterSalad said:

    Valenti just said on 97.1 that he has "sources" telling him that Patrica didn't want Okudah at #3 he wanted Derrick Brown. He said that Player Personnel people and scouts wanted Tua or Simmons.

    I put little faith in things like this.  It reminds me of the whole Joey Harrington situation where supposedly Millen didn't want him, but 'Weg did.  And then later 'Weg didn't either, but Ford overruled them both...

    I very strong suspicion is that various people liked various players to varying degrees.  Maybe Patricia really did want Derrick Brown... but recognized that Okudah was better choice.  Maybe Player Personnel people did like Tua but were aware that secondary is a bigger need.  

    I find it highly unlikely that Patricia didn't like Okudah at all and that Player Personnel didn't like Okudah at all, but Quinn (I'm guess here... who else would have the say?) stepped in a grabbed a guy that both his coach and his scouts didn't want.

  2. So... how many points do the Packers need to spot the Lions for this to be competitive?

    Honestly, knowing the Lions, they'll win this one handily, which will get way too many of us excited and hopeful again, only to lose the next 5 games.

  3. 9 hours ago, Buddha said:

    if someone needed a pass rusher, why would they sign ansah?

    Because of the law of averages... I mean, a team can only be so unlucky right?  If they add Ansah to the IR list then sign another pass rusher, it's less likely that that other pass rusher will end up on IR because the team already has people there.  I'm pretty sure that's how statistics work.

  4. 38 minutes ago, Mr.TaterSalad said:

    I'd be curious to go back and look at their defensive coverage and if they blitzed more or less before the 4th quarter. I get that Trufant went down and that hurt them. But defensively speaking, it feels like they let up and let the Bears back into the game, as much as anything they did or didn't do on offense.

    I would agree.  The offense failed in some key moments, but over all I don't think the offense played horribly in the 4th quarter.  But anytime the defense gives up 3 TDs in a quarter... that's gonna do a lot to kill your chances of a win.

    Credit to the Bears: I think they took advantage of the injuries the Lions had in the secondary.

  5. 48 minutes ago, Motown Bombers said:

    Kind of funny how people wanted them to be more aggressive and I guess pass more when Stafford threw an interception when he did pass. Guess those runs made him throw an interception. I mean, why hand the ball off to a hall of fame RB averaging 8 YPC in the game? 

    Because it's predictable in that situation.  The Lions are looking to milk the clock, so Bear are going to be looking for runs... and the Lions respond by running up the gut twice for very short yardage, which means you're in third and long and been stuffed twice on runs... I wonder what's going to happen:  What? A pass? SHOCKING!

    The problem isn't handing off to a HOF RB... the problem isn't that Stafford's pass wasn't aggressive.  The problem is two predictable plays right into the type of defense that the Bears are likely going to be playing, followed by a play that that you're sorta forced into after the first two short runs.

  6. 13 hours ago, Aaron said:

    To me the game was lost when they ran the ball two times in a row after Chicago pulled within three.  

    Totally agree... I mean, there were plenty of moments you can point too, but this is certainly one of them.  run-run-pass... very original... very effective.  🙄

    • Thanks 1

  7. 2 minutes ago, Keepleyland2 said:

    So can we start the "Caldwell curse" yet? 

    You know we fired him and said 9-7 wasn't good enough. We haven't come close since. 

    No.  Don't get me wrong, I sure wouldn't mind some 9-7, but Caldwell was never going to get over the hump, unfortunately.  His in game management stunk.

    • Thanks 1

  8. Another observation... and again, this is based on just one game so it's probably too much of a conclusion based on little evidence, but I know I, at least, have long maintained that the OL just sucked at run blocking and that's why none of our RB ever really panned out (well, that and injuries).  Petterson is making me wonder if maybe the OL wasn't really to blame.

  9. Just now, Mr.TaterSalad said:

    So if we bring in another new regime you're forcing them to keep Stafford? You are letting them try and draft their own guy, if that's the direction they choose to go in?

    I think short of a stupendous turn around for the team and an MVP season from Stafford, the Lions will likely be drafting a QB very high this next draft, and that's regardless of whether the front office and/or coaching staff changes.

    I also think that in all likelihood you would not great a fantastic trade haul for Stafford... if that's wrong, I'm not necessarily against trading him as I fear we're headed for another "rebuild" (Yeah, perhaps an overreaction from one game, but still...).  But if you don't get a fantastic haul for Stafford, I think they should keep him, regardless of if the front office and/or the coaching staff changes.  Let the new guy learn a bit on the bench.

  10. 1 minute ago, Buddha said:

    doesnt matter.  thats the rule.

    it was a completely stupid unnecessary play that cost the lions one of their best defensive players and may get him suspended for multiple games.

    Is it the rule that he's ejected?  I mean, if so than that's a extreme but out of the hands of the refs then.

    I really hope the don't suspend him for multiple games.  I mean, I think it's questionable if he was even attempt to make contact and if he was he certainly wasn't intended to hurt.  I think that should come into consideration.

  11. So, any thought on Jamie Collins getting ejected?  I mean, to me it was pretty obvious what he was trying to do.  I don't *think* he was trying to make contact with the ref, but regardless he did and so I think the penalty is justified.  But ejection?  That seems pretty extreme.

  12. On 9/4/2020 at 10:55 PM, tiger337 said:

    My father remembers Greenberg and Gehringer.  If I could go back in time to any Tigers era, it would be the 1930s.  

    Especially the 1935-1936 would have been an awesome time to experience sports in Detroit.

  13. Okay, let's get the disclaimer out of the way:

    1. Yes, I know Power Rankings are just some people's opinion and they don't mean squat when it comes to anything in terms of playoffs at the end of the season.
    2. Yes, I know that the Tigers are only 8-5, that they play in the weak central, and that they hadn't played anyone who's "good" yet.

    Yes still, I gotta say I'm feeling a bit like the Tigers are being under valued at 26.  I'm definitely not saying that they should be top of the heap, but if nothing else I think they deserve to be at least middle of the pack.  Yes, I know they've only played the Pirates (ranked 30th) and the Royals (28th).  But they've also split with the Reds (12th).  So why so low?

    Consider the White Sox.  Who have they played? Twins (ranked 4th, but have a 1-2 record against), Red (1-2), Cleveland (Ranked 7th, 2-4 record against), Royals (2-1), and Brewers (19th, 2-2).  That doesn't exactly look like a wonderful record against quality opposition, and yet the Sox actually went up a spot to 13th place despite losing 2 of 3 over the weekend and having and 8-8 record.

    Here are some other notable teams ahead of the Tigers: The 2-3 Cardinals (14th), the 4-6 Phillies (16th), the 4-7 Nationals (17th), and the 5-11 Angels (20th).  All teams with a losing record who are ranked well above the Tigers.

    Again, I'm not advocating that the Tigers be ranked at the top... probably not even top ten.  But I think they've at least earned a middle of the pack ranking with what they've done on the field.


  14. Part of me says: $15 Million? For an entire league?!  That's crazy cheap.

    And part of me says: You spent $15 Million on a questionable league that still might be impacted by Covid when its' supposed to come back?!?

    • Thanks 1

  15. This shorter season might make for some interesting things like this... Would Verlander, in a 182 game season, sit out longer to fully heal his arm?  Will he rush back in a 60 game season because he knows he'll only have to pitch < 15 more times so not as much strain?

  16. 1 hour ago, Oblong said:

    The books I've read are adamant that there were no suicide pills.

    Honestly, I would have felt better if they were included.  I mean, maybe in the 60s that would be frowned upon, but consider what options did they have if they got stranded and didn't have suicide pills?  

    I haven't really read anything but I'd guess that oxygen would run out before they starved or died from dehydration.  They could of course killed themselves any number of other ways, but all would be various forms of ugly.  To me a suicide pill would be the most humane way.

  17. On 7/22/2020 at 11:54 AM, Oblong said:


    After that point in the video it's fake.  Chilling.


    Chilling is exactly the right word for it.

    I wonder, had that happened, what would future missions do re: the men left there?  Would they attempt to recover the bodies?  Would they just leave them there as is?  Would them attempt to entomb them somewhat on the moon?

    I wonder also what I would do if I was one of them who was stuck with no hope of recovery?  I believe I read/heard that they were given suicide pills in the event they were stranded.  Would I, in that situation, absolutely knowing that no rescue was even remotely possible... would I just say screw it and end it right away?  Would I linger on as long as I could, no matter how much I suffered?

  18. On 7/17/2020 at 4:23 PM, Buddha said:

    if it werent for covid, agnew was likely to get cut.

    Hmm... are you saying that in a normal year Agnew would have already been cut and it's just because things are shuttered that the Lions haven't gotten around to it yet?

    Or are you saying that because of Covid and the expected increased number of people who will be out for periods of time that there will be a higher importance of people who can step into multiple positions that Agnew might have more value?

  • Create New...