Jump to content

Mr.TaterSalad

Detroit Lions 2015 Predictions Thread

Recommended Posts

30 is a big ask, but 25 should be about the bottom end of acceptable output for that unit. They have the talent at the skill positions to put up 30. If the line holds up, they should get close.

So my question then is, if the offense doesn't hit your low watermark, the team doesn't make the playoffs (or at least doesn't win a playoff game). What would be your desired course of action? Every single year I hear, "this is the year Stafford has to bring it all together." Or, "this is the year that Mayhew has to prove he can construct a team that can win a playoff game." And it never happens and no one demands the change that matters i.e a change in the largely same front office that hasn't won a playoff game during their decade+ long tenure.

Edit:

This question goes out to all the more positive Lions fans on this board. If this team, in Mayhew's seventh season as GM and his 14th season as a front office executive, doesn't get it done (again) and doesn't win a playoff game who loses their job?

Edited by EchO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So my question then is, if the offense doesn't hit your low watermark, the team doesn't make the playoffs (or at least doesn't win a playoff game). What would be your desired course of action. Every single year I hear, "this is the year Stafford has to bring it all together." Or, "this is the year that Mayhew has to prove he can construct a team that can win a playoff game." And it never happens and no one demands the change that matters i.e a change in the largely same front office that hasn't won a playoff game during their decade+ long tenure.

Edit:

This question goes out to all the more positive Lions fans on this board. If this team, in Mayhew's seventh season as GM and his 14th season as a front office executive, doesn't get it done (again) and doesn't win a playoff game who loses their job?

It would depend on how the season went.

Did Stafford miss 12 games? Then that's bad luck. We didn't have many options at backup qb.

Does the just suck? Maybe LombardI goes. He's still a bit of a question mark in my book.

If the team falls apart and we have chaos, Caldwell goes. (I think this is highly unlikely.)

Mayhew has done his job. He's a great GM. I love what Caldwell has done with the team. The team is going to be good - but anything can happen. A string of bad injuries can cripple anyone - you can't overreact entirely based on Ws and Ls.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It would depend on how the season went.

Did Stafford miss 12 games? Then that's bad luck. We didn't have many options at backup qb.

Does the just suck? Maybe LombardI goes. He's still a bit of a question mark in my book.

If the team falls apart and we have chaos' date=' Caldwell goes. (I think this is highly unlikely.)

Mayhew has done his job. He's a great GM. I love what Caldwell has done with the team. The team is going to be good - but anything can happen. A string of bad injuries can cripple anyone - you can't overreact entirely based on Ws and Ls.[/quote']

So even if we don't count Mayhew's first 2.5 seasons (which should be more than enough time to make-up for the 0-16 team), his record as a GM is 32-32, with zero playoff wins, and has been unable to draft a single probowler outside of the first 2 picks. It would seem your criteria for "greatness" isn't the same as mine.

It ins't overreacting, wins and losses are literally the ONLY thing that matter in the NFL. You either win or you lose, period. You construct a winner, or you don't. You could have the most "talented" team constructed ever with a "historically good" practice squad, but if you don't win it means absolutely, positively nothing. The general manager is the driving force of the team, the decision maker, and the one whose success should be judged in wins and losses more so than any other member of the staff. The coach is only able to do with what they are given, they (more times than not) can't decide who is on their team, the players likewise can't decide who else is on their team; the GM is the only person involved in an organization who has control over the entire team. They have the ability to remove a player/coach at a moments notice, to change or tweak a team to fit their image.

And, to be fair, a string of injuries typically don't cripple the best organizations. I mean granted they lost in the wildcard game, but the Packers lost Rodgers (the #1 QB in the league) and still went 8-7-1; the Patriots are constantly battling through injuries (including losing Brady for 15 games in 2008 and still going 11-5) and are consistently Super Bowl contenders. That is largely the difference between the truly great GMs and the middling GMs like Mayhew. As opposed to Mayhew's very lackluster record, Ted Thompson is 98-61, with 8 playoff wins and a Super Bowl. Belichick, on the other hand is 175-65 and his success in the postseason is well documented. Those, IMO, are great GMs...and comparing them to Mayhew is an absolute joke.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fully agreed. I'd expect somewhere around 28 points a game.

We have plenty of tools and I expect Stafford to put up Andrew Luck numbers.

They better score 28 a game if they want to make the playoffs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That would certainly be nice, it would also make us one of the top one or two offenses in the league...last year only the Patriots scored more then 30 points per game with 30.4. Seem like fairly lofty expectations and would be a significant jump from the 20.1 we averaged last year.

Agreed, but I do expect it. I don't necessarily predict it though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So my question then is, if the offense doesn't hit your low watermark, the team doesn't make the playoffs (or at least doesn't win a playoff game). What would be your desired course of action? Every single year I hear, "this is the year Stafford has to bring it all together." Or, "this is the year that Mayhew has to prove he can construct a team that can win a playoff game." And it never happens and no one demands the change that matters i.e a change in the largely same front office that hasn't won a playoff game during their decade+ long tenure.

Edit:

This question goes out to all the more positive Lions fans on this board. If this team, in Mayhew's seventh season as GM and his 14th season as a front office executive, doesn't get it done (again) and doesn't win a playoff game who loses their job?

Its not a straight forward question. I'm not firing Mayhew for making the playoffs most likely, though a first round blowout would make you evaluate the situation. If Stafford plays terrible or even average all year, it puts him on the hot seat to some degree.

It all really comes down to how we look. Health, development of young guys, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So even if we don't count Mayhew's first 2.5 seasons (which should be more than enough time to make-up for the 0-16 team), his record as a GM is 32-32, with zero playoff wins, and has been unable to draft a single probowler outside of the first 2 picks. It would seem your criteria for "greatness" isn't the same as mine.

It ins't overreacting, wins and losses are literally the ONLY thing that matter in the NFL. You either win or you lose, period. You construct a winner, or you don't. You could have the most "talented" team constructed ever with a "historically good" practice squad, but if you don't win it means absolutely, positively nothing. The general manager is the driving force of the team, the decision maker, and the one whose success should be judged in wins and losses more so than any other member of the staff. The coach is only able to do with what they are given, they (more times than not) can't decide who is on their team, the players likewise can't decide who else is on their team; the GM is the only person involved in an organization who has control over the entire team. They have the ability to remove a player/coach at a moments notice, to change or tweak a team to fit their image.

And, to be fair, a string of injuries typically don't cripple the best organizations. I mean granted they lost in the wildcard game, but the Packers lost Rodgers (the #1 QB in the league) and still went 8-7-1; the Patriots are constantly battling through injuries (including losing Brady for 15 games in 2008 and still going 11-5) and are consistently Super Bowl contenders. That is largely the difference between the truly great GMs and the middling GMs like Mayhew. As opposed to Mayhew's very lackluster record, Ted Thompson is 98-61, with 8 playoff wins and a Super Bowl. Belichick, on the other hand is 175-65 and his success in the postseason is well documented. Those, IMO, are great GMs...and comparing them to Mayhew is an absolute joke.

I'm starting to love Mayhew more and more. Big fan of his. That said, I think you are correct in a lot of ways. I'll throw a few points out there.

1. 2.5 years as "more than enough time to rebuild an 0-16 team" is probably not entirely fair. Especially given Stafford's early injuries. Now,if he hadn't gotten healthy afterwards or his shoulder had been seen as a risk pre-draft, the story might be different. Neither of these things are true. You have to realize he was basically left with an empty roster, probably needing almost all new starters(22 players), but quality backups and developmental players throughout the roster. In a given year, you are probably lucky to add 6 starters if you are a top end GM(3 draft,3 FA) and even then,the FAs might be gone or non-impactful in 2-3 years when the rookies you drafted fully develop(Vanden Bosch, Burleson types, even if you didn't like those two particular players).

2. While I think making the playoffs in year 3 was pretty strong, his 2011 and 2012(which was more average than terrible like 2011)draft was one of the biggest reasons we fell off after that season. I don't mind risk in the draft, but as he said he took too many risks. He definitely has to take responsibility for that.

3. As I said above, I wouldn't fire him for a playoff season most likely. Yes, we all want a playoff win, but as a Lions fan I have a tough time firing a guy who would have made the playoffs 3/5 seasons.

4. A major factor relating to point #3 is how last year's draft is looking. You said the other day that it is looking terrible. Not sure if I agree, but at the very least they have shown almost nothing at this point. Swanson,Reid and Ebron need to do well in their roles and it would be nice to see something out of Lawson and Van Noy. I personally feel Van Noy's injuries are of the flukey variety, so I'm still open minded with him.

5. He simply cannot be called "great" as of right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So my question then is, if the offense doesn't hit your low watermark, the team doesn't make the playoffs (or at least doesn't win a playoff game). What would be your desired course of action? Every single year I hear, "this is the year Stafford has to bring it all together." Or, "this is the year that Mayhew has to prove he can construct a team that can win a playoff game." And it never happens and no one demands the change that matters i.e a change in the largely same front office that hasn't won a playoff game during their decade+ long tenure.

Edit:

This question goes out to all the more positive Lions fans on this board. If this team, in Mayhew's seventh season as GM and his 14th season as a front office executive, doesn't get it done (again) and doesn't win a playoff game who loses their job?

Good and fair question, but it's not a black and white answer. It would really depend on how we were losing games. If it's injuries robbing us of talent, particularly decimating us at one position, that can't be put on the GM. I remember Mariucci being astonished that he went through, like, 7 CBs his 1st year as a coach (due to injuries) and saying that he'd never seen anything like it. Which made me think, "what, you didn't watch our team last year?" Due to the 53 man roster, every team has a limited number of backups in the system at any position, which can't be helped. So if that's the case, then yeah, I don't can anyone in the front office or coaching staff. If the defense gives up big plays from being out of position, or takes stupid penalties that lose games, I might look at Austin. If the offense runs predictable and stupid plays that basic nullify whole halves of games, I look at Lombardi. If the team falls apart after a couple of losses and looks lethargic, I look at Caldwell. But if the team just underperforms my expectations, or can't overcome the loss of one player at one position, then I look squarely at Mayhew.

All that being said, I'm not going to advocate change for the sake of change. You mentioned several successful teams, look at the turnover rate in their coaches/management. It would suck to jettison Lombardi just as the team is adapting to his system. I'm only going to want to fire someone if I know I can upgrade at their job with someone else who's available. You say Stafford isn't Aaron Rodgers? Cool -- just as soon as Aaron Rodgers is available, let's go get him. Oh, wait, he's not available? Well, Tim Tebow is. So let's cut Stafford and make it Tebow Time! (I'm not saying that you personally post like this, but I often wonder what player/coach/GM the posters who want change are specifically advocating for. Not good enough to just say, "Not good enough" -- you have to be able to upgrade, not just change.)

So let's say we miss the playoffs and it would fall on Mayhew based on the standards I gave above. I would be in favor of firing Mayhew, assuming we could replace him with someone better. I would not be in favor of firing Mayhew to bring in Matt Millen, for example. If Stafford stinks up the joint, I would be in favor of looking for another QB, but I wouldn't make a change unless I was upgrading.

I think we're close. I think we're a contender. I also think the window is starting to close for Calvin, and I believe we're in win-now mode. So I don't really have any sacred cows that I wouldn't look at getting rid of, but I also want to recognize that we went 11-5 last year, made the playoffs, and handed Dallas their *** in their own house for much of that game. I'm not interested in change for change's sake. Show me someone else at the position who makes the team better, is available, wants the job and can be brought in under the cap and I'll sign off on the change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So even if we don't count Mayhew's first 2.5 seasons (which should be more than enough time to make-up for the 0-16 team), his record as a GM is 32-32, with zero playoff wins, and has been unable to draft a single probowler outside of the first 2 picks. It would seem your criteria for "greatness" isn't the same as mine.

It ins't overreacting, wins and losses are literally the ONLY thing that matter in the NFL. You either win or you lose, period. You construct a winner, or you don't. You could have the most "talented" team constructed ever with a "historically good" practice squad, but if you don't win it means absolutely, positively nothing. The general manager is the driving force of the team, the decision maker, and the one whose success should be judged in wins and losses more so than any other member of the staff. The coach is only able to do with what they are given, they (more times than not) can't decide who is on their team, the players likewise can't decide who else is on their team; the GM is the only person involved in an organization who has control over the entire team. They have the ability to remove a player/coach at a moments notice, to change or tweak a team to fit their image.

And, to be fair, a string of injuries typically don't cripple the best organizations. I mean granted they lost in the wildcard game, but the Packers lost Rodgers (the #1 QB in the league) and still went 8-7-1; the Patriots are constantly battling through injuries (including losing Brady for 15 games in 2008 and still going 11-5) and are consistently Super Bowl contenders. That is largely the difference between the truly great GMs and the middling GMs like Mayhew. As opposed to Mayhew's very lackluster record, Ted Thompson is 98-61, with 8 playoff wins and a Super Bowl. Belichick, on the other hand is 175-65 and his success in the postseason is well documented. Those, IMO, are great GMs...and comparing them to Mayhew is an absolute joke.

Mayhew succeeded in remaking the roster during those first 2.5 seasons, the problem is that Stafford was a rookie for year one and injured for most of year 2 (*hint* if your starting QB goes down, you're team is going to suffer). The third season, with a healthy Stafford, and the Lions were a playoff team. The fact that you actually criticize him for only drafting 2 Pro Bowlers, considering he has drafted players such as DeAndre Levy and Ziggy Ansah who aren't counted by that definition, demonstrates the weakness of your entire argument.

Wins and losses are obviously how you are ultimately measured in the NFL - but wins and losses also don't tell the full story. You can't settle for mediocrity, but you can't reduce a sport like football down to a simple box score.

Now yes, the GM is the decision maker - he builds the roster. But he doesn't call the plays. He doesn't lead the team after its been constructed. Anyone who watched the 2013 Lions will tell you that the talent on the roster wasn't the problem - it was the fact Schwartz lost control of the team. Now you're probably correct in asserting that Mayhew could fire Schwartz - and he did so after that year. Can we look back and ask "what could have been" if he'd been fired the year before? Sure - but I don't think it is very realistic to believe we'd fire a coach who brought the 0-16 Lions to the playoffs in year 3 after one mediocre year.

While a team should be judged by wins and losses, let's consider what a GM actually does. He acquires talent. In this regard, Mayhew has been a good GM - and a great one in the last few years. He has a strong draft record and has certainly grown as a talent elevator. Two of our three top tackles are UDFA's, demonstrating an ability to identify talent there. He also has two of the best free agent contracts in recent memory in the case of Quin and Tate.

Also, I'm entertained by the fact you throw quotes around "historically good" - as if I have ever tried to argue that our practice squad was one of the best in history. No. I've argued that Mayhew has a history of having players picked from our practice squad - which is the best measure of quality.

Here's the thing Echo, it's both easy and lazy to sit back, focus narrowly on Mayhew and jump up and down every time a decision he makes fails and holding it up as some example of why he sucks at his job. I've taken the time to actually compare the records of Mayhew with someone like Ozzie Newsome - you haven't tried.

You think Mayhew is a "middling" GM? Give me 10 GMs you'd take over Martin Mayhew.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2. While I think making the playoffs in year 3 was pretty strong, his 2011 and 2012(which was more average than terrible like 2011)draft was one of the biggest reasons we fell off after that season. I don't mind risk in the draft, but as he said he took too many risks. He definitely has to take responsibility for that.

A big key here is that Mayhew learned from his mistakes. And you need that. Failure makes you better, as long as you learn from it.

5. He simply cannot be called "great" as of right now.

Look at Mayhew's roster moves from 2013 to today and show me 4 other teams that have made better decisions. Mayhew has drafted well. He has signed UDFAs well. He has made excellent moves in free agency - Tate and Quin's contracts alone justify that. He has been able to turn people who weren't going to be on this team into draft picks (G. Johnson, Seisay, Williams).

To date, Mayhew has not had a great career. Mayhew has performed greatly since 2013.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All I've heard about the Bears is that they are a dumpster fire this year.

Can the lions really be worse than that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
All I've heard about the Bears is that they are a dumpster fire this year.

Can the lions really be worse than that?

I dont think the lions will be worse than the bears. But i think the bears will be one of the worst teams in football.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm optimistic, but can see a situation where we could finish anywhere between first and third in the division. However, anyone who says the Bears will finish above us saw a headline months ago that Suh, Fairley, and Bush left, and wrote their predictions that minute.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Us behind the Bears is just stupid. I don't expect the national guys to predict us doing well though. Its all on Stafford, who they don't believe in(arguably rightfully so)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was a stupid analysis. Typical barnwell. He made a few points that most of us non-kool aid drinkers would find correct (lack of pass rush, will really miss suh, defense will decline, oline needs to really improve), but he made so many comments that were obviously made by someone who doesnt watch the lions that it became obvious he looked at some stats and made the prediction based on those and not the actual team.

Like:

Said abdullah is no reggie bush like thats a bad thing. He obviously didnt watch the lions last year. Or nebraska.

Said lions oline would miss raiola. Which...ummmm....like....no.

It wasnt great.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It was a stupid analysis. Typical barnwell. He made a few points that most of us non-kool aid drinkers would find correct (lack of pass rush, will really miss suh, defense will decline, oline needs to really improve), but he made so many comments that were obviously made by someone who doesnt watch the lions that it became obvious he looked at some stats and made the prediction based on those and not the actual team.

Like:

Said abdullah is no reggie bush like thats a bad thing. He obviously didnt watch the lions last year. Or nebraska.

Said lions oline would miss raiola. Which...ummmm....like....no.

It wasnt great.

Not a fan of barnwell either. That was just sloppy.

I expect that from a run of the mill national writer or host, but barnwell is supposed to be the expert.

538 had their NFC north preview up today and it was reasonable. Focused on how the defense made a leap last year but that the two previous years were bad, and other teams with similar profiles regressed toward the previous state. Not exactly going out on a limb but still reasonable.

They projected the lions as the second best team in the division with 7.8 wins and a 30% chance of playoffs.

Bears were last at 6.5.

8-8 is a perfectly reasonable projection. It doesn't take much for that to become 10-6 or even 11-5. On the same token, it doesn't take much for that to become 6-10 either.

Honestly, it just feels good to have a team that is objectively pegged to be middle of the pack.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pete Prisco posted his predictions and has us going 10-6 but missing the playoffs. He has us losing week 17 at Chicago which would not only knock us out of the playoffs but cost us a home playoff game. If that were to happen that would definitely be "Sol".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pete Prisco posted his predictions and has us going 10-6 but missing the playoffs. He has us losing week 17 at Chicago which would not only knock us out of the playoffs but cost us a home playoff game. If that were to happen that would definitely be "Sol".

I don't wanna look at that game as a gimme, but...

I have pretty high hopes of getting a win out of that one. Long season so, we'll see as we get closer where we (and they) are really at...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mayhew succeeded in remaking the roster during those first 2.5 seasons' date=' the problem is that Stafford was a rookie for year one and injured for most of year 2 (*hint* if your starting QB goes down, you're team is going to suffer). The third season, with a healthy Stafford, and the Lions were a playoff team. The fact that you actually criticize him for only drafting 2 Pro Bowlers, considering he has drafted players such as DeAndre Levy and Ziggy Ansah who aren't counted by that definition, demonstrates the weakness of your entire argument.

Wins and losses are obviously how you are ultimately measured in the NFL - but wins and losses also don't tell the full story. You can't settle for mediocrity, but you can't reduce a sport like football down to a simple box score.

Now yes, the GM is the decision maker - he builds the roster. But he doesn't call the plays. He doesn't lead the team after its been constructed. Anyone who watched the 2013 Lions will tell you that the talent on the roster wasn't the problem - it was the fact Schwartz lost control of the team. Now you're probably correct in asserting that Mayhew could fire Schwartz - and he did so after that year. Can we look back and ask "what could have been" if he'd been fired the year before? Sure - but I don't think it is very realistic to believe we'd fire a coach who brought the 0-16 Lions to the playoffs in year 3 after one mediocre year.

While a team should be judged by wins and losses, let's consider what a GM actually does. He acquires talent. In this regard, Mayhew has been a good GM - and a great one in the last few years. He has a strong draft record and has certainly grown as a talent elevator. Two of our three top tackles are UDFA's, demonstrating an ability to identify talent there. He also has two of the best free agent contracts in recent memory in the case of Quin and Tate.

Also, I'm entertained by the fact you throw quotes around "historically good" - as if I have ever tried to argue that our practice squad was one of the best in history. No. I've argued that Mayhew has a history of having players picked from our practice squad - which is the best measure of quality.

Here's the thing Echo, it's both easy and lazy to sit back, focus narrowly on Mayhew and jump up and down every time a decision he makes fails and holding it up as some example of why he sucks at his job. I've taken the time to actually compare the records of Mayhew with someone like Ozzie Newsome - you haven't tried.

You think Mayhew is a "middling" GM? Give me 10 GMs you'd take over Martin Mayhew.[/quote']

Get off your high horse Norman, your comparison of Mayhew to Newsome was so biased it was laughable. It was done so using the "Stormin' Norman" talent scale, so please...spare me. My criticism of Mayhew, and his moves, has been anything but easy and lazy, I have very consistently used statistics to back up my opinions while you have used few, if any.

But, to answer your request; 10 GMs I would rather have and why:

1) Ted Thompson (Packers), the guy gets hired and year one selected Aaron Rodgers in the late first round on a team that had a franchise, hall-of-fame QB...that took balls of steel and worked out tremendously. Since he has built the team the right way, through the draft, and has very few, if any, busted drafts (which is an issue for Mayhew). All of have to do is go through the draft history and it's just hit after hit.

2) Bell Belichick (Patriots), he has a system and it works, period. You gave me the hint that losing your QB hurts the team's success, well the Patriots lost Brady and went 11-5...then flipped Matt Cassel who has been garbage after leaving the Patriots.

3) John Schneider (Seahawks), has worked in some of the best front offices in the league and I don't think it should surprise anyone the Seahawks took off after he was hired in 2010. His drafts are stellar, coaching hire has been equally stellar.

4) Ozzie Newsome (Ravens), I know in your world Mayhew is equal, or even superior to Newsome, but the rest of the football watching community doesn't agree. While his last few years drafting haven't been extraordinary his track record of success is there. He finds talent on both sides of the ball and does so with low draft picks year in and year out. He also has a knack of finding great coaches who get the best out of the talent given to them. I think you would be hard pressed to find ANYONE who would take Mayhew over Newsome.

5) John Elway (Broncos), talk about a guy who came in and made an impact. Signing Manning was obviously huge, but he also had quite a few other FA signings that worked out well (with some being more under the radar), you give Mayhew all the credit in the world for signing Tate, but Elway got Emmanuel Sanders for LESS money and he made an even greater impact. Throw in the fact he also signed Talib and Ward and has a few huge hits in the draft (Von Miller, Orlando Franklin, getting Chris Harris as an UDFA who was a pro-bowler last year) and it's no question he trumps Mayhew.

6) Steve Keim (Cardinals), Keim doesn't have quite the track record of the other GMs listed, but I am really impressed by him and his mentality. When he took over the Cardinals were 5-11 and struggling, he made some big, bold moves and they have worked out in a big way. I like how he isn't afraid to draft from small schools or look for guys in the mid rounds that other teams overlook (Mathieu, John Brown). They don't have a "franchise" QB by any stretch but are still winning games and have a very solid roster. His success so far via FA and the middle/late rounds has been huge.

7) Rick Smith (Texans), now he is one of these guys that does ALMOST everything right. I love what he has done with their defense and the skilled positions. He locked up J.J. Watt which is huge, all he needs to do is find a franchise QB and the Texans would be a Super Bowl contender. But finding Foster as an UDFA, the various pass rushers/defenders, and Hopkins as a #1 WR...he put together a very solid team that just is missing one piece.

8) Jerry Reese (NYG), like Mayhew he is very up-and-down in terms of success, the only difference is his success has been much, much greater. Their Super Bowl in 2011 was won largely by the moves Reese had made that year and the few years prior (Victor Cruz as UDFA, drafting Nicks, drafting Bradshaw in the 6th round, drafting JPP and him getting 17 sacks his rookie year, drafting Manningham, etc.) and while they haven't done much sense, I would gladly trade a few poor years for a run like they had during Reese's tenure.

9) Mickey Loomis (Saints), he put together one of the most exciting offenses in recent memory by taking huge gambles that paid off. Found a superb coach in Payton and did a great job drafting throughout his tenure so far. If there is a knock on him it would obviously be his defense. But in the last seven years he has been able to find 3 All-Pros in the third round or later, that, IMO is impressive.

10-14) These are all guys who are either young and don't have much of a track record or have had some glaring mistakes that brought them down a notch but I would still be interested in taking over Mayhew (barring an interview and more research): Mike Brown (Bengals), Dave Gettleman (Panthers), Ryan Gigson (Colts), John Dorsey (Chiefs), and Brian Xanders (Broncos/Lions).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rick Smith? What happened to Wins and Losses being the decider? Has he won a playoff game? Has Keim done something Mayhew hasn't?

I'm fine with loving Thompson, but he definitely has some ups and downs in his draft history. He doesn't have an all out miss of a draft I guess, but he has 3 drafts that basically landed one player each and a decent amount of blown firsts(Sherrod,Harrell,Raji,Hawk)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Week 1: @ San Diego Chargers WIN

Week 2: @ Minnesota Vikings WIN

Week 3: Denver Broncos WIN

Week 4: @ Seattle Seahawks LOSS

Week 5: Arizona Cardinals WIN

Week 6: Chicago Bears WIN

Week 7: Minnesota Vikings WIN

Week 8: @ Kansas City Chiefs WIN

Week 9: BYE WEEK

Week 10: @ Green Bay Packers LOSS

Week 11: Oakland Raiders WIN

Week 12: Philadelphia Eagles LOSS

Week 13: Green Bay Packers LOSS

Week 14: @ St. Louis Rams WIN

Week 15: @ New Orleans Saints LOSS

Week 16: San Francisco 49'ers WIN

Week 17: @ Chicago Bears WIN

11-5

You can BANK on this prediction. I say that because the team should be FULLY healthy this year. I didn't draft any Lions in my fantasy football team yesterday. Last year I had Calvin Johnson, and 2 years ago Reggie Bush. Both missed significant time with injuries, so now that I haven't jinxed anyone on the team by drafting them this year, we should be sitting pretty come December! :grin:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Get off your high horse Norman, your comparison of Mayhew to Newsome was so biased it was laughable. It was done so using the "Stormin' Norman" talent scale, so please...spare me. My criticism of Mayhew, and his moves, has been anything but easy and lazy, I have very consistently used statistics to back up my opinions while you have used few, if any.

No, my comparison looked at how many stars, starters and contributors Mayhew and Newsome got from their drafts. It placed production within context - which is obviously needed in a sport like football.

But, to answer your request; 10 GMs I would rather have and why:

1) Ted Thompson (Packers), the guy gets hired and year one selected Aaron Rodgers in the late first round on a team that had a franchise, hall-of-fame QB...that took balls of steel and worked out tremendously. Since he has built the team the right way, through the draft, and has very few, if any, busted drafts (which is an issue for Mayhew). All of have to do is go through the draft history and it's just hit after hit.

2) Bell Belichick (Patriots), he has a system and it works, period. You gave me the hint that losing your QB hurts the team's success, well the Patriots lost Brady and went 11-5...then flipped Matt Cassel who has been garbage after leaving the Patriots.

3) John Schneider (Seahawks), has worked in some of the best front offices in the league and I don't think it should surprise anyone the Seahawks took off after he was hired in 2010. His drafts are stellar, coaching hire has been equally stellar.

4) Ozzie Newsome (Ravens), I know in your world Mayhew is equal, or even superior to Newsome, but the rest of the football watching community doesn't agree. While his last few years drafting haven't been extraordinary his track record of success is there. He finds talent on both sides of the ball and does so with low draft picks year in and year out. He also has a knack of finding great coaches who get the best out of the talent given to them. I think you would be hard pressed to find ANYONE who would take Mayhew over Newsome.

5) John Elway (Broncos), talk about a guy who came in and made an impact. Signing Manning was obviously huge, but he also had quite a few other FA signings that worked out well (with some being more under the radar), you give Mayhew all the credit in the world for signing Tate, but Elway got Emmanuel Sanders for LESS money and he made an even greater impact. Throw in the fact he also signed Talib and Ward and has a few huge hits in the draft (Von Miller, Orlando Franklin, getting Chris Harris as an UDFA who was a pro-bowler last year) and it's no question he trumps Mayhew.

These are all good answers.

6) Steve Keim (Cardinals), Keim doesn't have quite the track record of the other GMs listed, but I am really impressed by him and his mentality. When he took over the Cardinals were 5-11 and struggling, he made some big, bold moves and they have worked out in a big way. I like how he isn't afraid to draft from small schools or look for guys in the mid rounds that other teams overlook (Mathieu, John Brown). They don't have a "franchise" QB by any stretch but are still winning games and have a very solid roster. His success so far via FA and the middle/late rounds has been huge.

7) Rick Smith (Texans), now he is one of these guys that does ALMOST everything right. I love what he has done with their defense and the skilled positions. He locked up J.J. Watt which is huge, all he needs to do is find a franchise QB and the Texans would be a Super Bowl contender. But finding Foster as an UDFA, the various pass rushers/defenders, and Hopkins as a #1 WR...he put together a very solid team that just is missing one piece.

8) Jerry Reese (NYG), like Mayhew he is very up-and-down in terms of success, the only difference is his success has been much, much greater. Their Super Bowl in 2011 was won largely by the moves Reese had made that year and the few years prior (Victor Cruz as UDFA, drafting Nicks, drafting Bradshaw in the 6th round, drafting JPP and him getting 17 sacks his rookie year, drafting Manningham, etc.) and while they haven't done much sense, I would gladly trade a few poor years for a run like they had during Reese's tenure.

9) Mickey Loomis (Saints), he put together one of the most exciting offenses in recent memory by taking huge gambles that paid off. Found a superb coach in Payton and did a great job drafting throughout his tenure so far. If there is a knock on him it would obviously be his defense. But in the last seven years he has been able to find 3 All-Pros in the third round or later, that, IMO is impressive.

10-14) These are all guys who are either young and don't have much of a track record or have had some glaring mistakes that brought them down a notch but I would still be interested in taking over Mayhew (barring an interview and more research): Mike Brown (Bengals), Dave Gettleman (Panthers), Ryan Gigson (Colts), John Dorsey (Chiefs), and Brian Xanders (Broncos/Lions).

The fact you have Rick Smith ahead of Martin Mayhew is pretty much makes the case for me.

Meanwhile, the Bengals front office record has been fantastic. Marvin Lewis is more of the GM than Mike Brown, but I have no problem putting what that organization has done ahead of Mayhew (I actually think they use a lot of crowd sourcing/Draft Twitter in their draft prep.) But the rest on that list isn't on Mayhew's level and it isn't close.

Grigson? Really? Haha.

Mayhew can realistically be no lower than 7th on that list.

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.


  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      96,709
    • Total Posts
      2,929,192
  • Who's Online (See full list)

  • Upcoming Events

    No upcoming events found
×
×
  • Create New...