Jump to content

Stormin' Norman

2015 Offseason

Recommended Posts

No hate. Just our opinion that he isn't going to win the big one for us.

Deal with it.

So we already know this at age 26? I remember when they used to say this about John Elway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So we already know this at age 26? I remember when they used to say this about John Elway.

Reading is fundamental. Opinion is not "knowing". An opinion is an expression of a person’s feelings that cannot be proven.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Reading is fundamental. Opinion is not "knowing". An opinion is an expression of a person’s feelings that cannot be proven.

I agree you do not know what you are talking about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Matt Stafford is now a Pro Bowler. Deserved it in years past, but not this year. Tate deserves to go. Levy definitely deserves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But Stafford wasn't the highest rated QB in the history of football in the playoffs like WIlson. Or Stafford doesn't have a postseason record of 8-1, or a Super Bowl victory. Wilson earns the benefit of the doubt for having a rare bad game, especially when he did lead them to a game tying, go ahead and game winning drive in OT and his two best throws of the game, happen to be his last two. THe bottom line is if Stafford had the resume Wilson has in the playoffs and big games I don't think people would say a thing about a performance like this.

Or if Stafford typically had a D that held Rodgers to 22 points despite 5 turnovers by their offense and a RB that rushed for 157 yards and made the game saving catch, he'd be more likely to be in position to have such a playoff record. That's not even getting into the fake FG, dropped onside kick and ridiculous 2 point conversion it took to win that game. Just sayin'.........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You Staffy lovers really make me laugh. So defensive.

How you bring up Stafford today is really, really funny.

It is a Lions thread after all....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That's an interesting reaction to say the least. If Stafford had that game, that exact game, he'd be SHREDDED here and called lucky by the likes of you.

Come back with that after Stafford has made it to two straight Super Bowls.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Come back with that after Stafford has made it to two straight Super Bowls.

The Lions would be making the Super Bowls. That's what the trolls fail to understand

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Lions would be making the Super Bowls. That's what the trolls fail to understand

What?

Do I think the Lions would be making Super Bowls with Wilson versus Stafford? I think it's more likely.

Edited by Jason_R

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
We were pretty dominant vs the run last year too

The Lions were a damn good defense against the run in 2013, yes, but they improved their run defense by almost 500 total yards and by 1.0 yds/attempt in 2014 (!!) That is just breathtaking in and of itself...but wait, there's more.

They simultaneously improved very substantially against the pass in 2014: 200 fewer yards, 0.7 fewer yds/attempt, and 5 more INTs.

There's always some give/take in defense, but not with the Lions in 2014...it was just awesome from top to bottom, and I really don't think it can be attributed to the personnel changes.

Absolutely amazing improvement across-the-board in all phases of defense from a good 2013 to a great 2014.

Edited by sabretooth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Stafford lovers know football.

Stafford haters don't.

This is a funny statement. Must not be many people outside of Detroit that know football. Dont hear much Stafford love nationally, consistently rated as average. I think you would be hard pressed to find any reputable expert or publication rank him and higher than 13th or 14th. Unless of course viewing a QB as league average is loving him in your book.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is a funny statement. Must not be many people outside of Detroit that know football. Dont hear much Stafford love nationally, consistently rated as average. I think you would be hard pressed to find any reputable expert or publication rank him and higher than 13th or 14th. Unless of course viewing a QB as league average is loving him in your book.

Yeah, this is pretty much where I am....although clearly 2011 proved that he has some serious upside. I wouldn't count out a major step up again, but if I were the Lions I would not bank on him being above average either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I wonder how good Russell Wilson would be if he had throw 150 more passes?

This is a useful contribution to the conversation. Clearly Seattle has a much better running game than Detroit, and Wilson does not have the same responsibilities or coaching as Stafford. (At the same time, Wilson has much less to work with in terms of offensive targets.)

My sense is that the Seahawks were ahead in games this season far more often than the Lions were. I'm sure there is some advanced stat for that somewhere, but for a proxy, let's just use Seattle's +140 net points against Detroit's +39. Seattle clearly got up early, and strangled their opponent with the pass rush. The Lions were unable to do this - partly because the defense often seemed to show up only a few drives into the game, but also partly because the offense couldn't execute. Part of this was the running game, part was the OL, but a big part was clearly Stafford just missing throws. Maybe he is asked to execute too much for the offense to run (and his improvements this year seem to stem from him being asked to execute less of the offense), but Wilson makes fewer mistakes, and bails the team out of more 3rd and longs.

My broader point in all of this is not to be a Stafford "hater" as some of the thinner-skinned of this board put it. It is to say that the team has a huge investment in a "franchise" QB, which led them to forego selecting (even considering?) a player who has now led teams to two straight Super Bowls - at a minuscule salary. In the NFL today, you pay the guy who has won, not the guy you think might get you there after his rookie contract is already up. This team also passed on Aaron Rodgers, apparently because they thought Jeff Garcia/Joey Harrington just needed "more weapons". Different front office, but perhaps the same mistake.

Now, a lot of other teams missed on them, too, but the fact of the matter is that the teams who make the fewest bad draft and roster decisions are going to win. One way of making a bad roster decision is to tell yourself you have a franchise QB when you don't. At least until Stafford wins a playoff game, hell, at least until he can beat a winning team on the road, he's just not a franchise QB. The team should leave the door open to upgrade him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Lions were a damn good defense against the run in 2013, yes, but they improved their run defense by almost 500 total yards and by 1.0 yds/attempt in 2014 (!!) That is just breathtaking in and of itself...but wait, there's more.

I don't normally like to use the "if you throw out this performance" argument, but considering the extreme conditions of the Philly game last year I think it's reasonable. In that game they gave up 300 yards rushing which skews the numbers quite a bit. Plus I think they probably faced better running backs last year, having to deal with Adrian Peterson twice, Leshean McCoy, Demarco Murray, Ray Rice and Leveon Bell. So all things considered, I don't think our rushing defense was that much better this year, but I do agree with everything else you posted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I wonder how good Russell Wilson would be if he had throw 150 more passes?

I wonder how good Wilson would be if he didn't have to face 3 of the best defenses in the league 6 times a year and play outdoors in the rain quite often because of his homefield? I'd like to see what he would do in the comfy confines of a dome on a fast track for atleast 9 games a season.(In the Metro Dome days) The bottom line is that there is not a single thing Stafford does better than him from a scouting standpoint, Wilson obviously is more mobile, has better vision, goes through his reads better, has better pocket awareness, much more accurate, better decision maker, and an equal if not stronger arm than Stafford(he can throw a baseball 98mph). If Wilson was 3 inches taller he would've likely been a top 10 pick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
....

My broader point in all of this is not to be a Stafford "hater" as some of the thinner-skinned of this board put it. It is to say that the team has a huge investment in a "franchise" QB, which led them to forego selecting (even considering?) a player who has now led teams to two straight Super Bowls - at a minuscule salary. In the NFL today, you pay the guy who has won, not the guy you think might get you there after his rookie contract is already up. This team also passed on Aaron Rodgers, apparently because they thought Jeff Garcia/Joey Harrington just needed "more weapons". Different front office, but perhaps the same mistake.

Now, a lot of other teams missed on them, too, but the fact of the matter is that the teams who make the fewest bad draft and roster decisions are going to win. One way of making a bad roster decision is to tell yourself you have a franchise QB when you don't. At least until Stafford wins a playoff game, hell, at least until he can beat a winning team on the road, he's just not a franchise QB. The team should leave the door open to upgrade him.

Absolutely. Nothing worse for a FO than to fall too in love with their own picks. Lions could learn a lesson from Dombrowski on that one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Peyton Manning was 0-3 in playoff games at age 26. It's a shame Indianapolis fell in love with him.

And the Colts still used low picks on a QB in 2004 and 2009.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...