Jump to content

MAROTH4MVP

Browns Vs Lions CBS 1pm (est)

Recommended Posts

15 hours ago, Shelton said:

I think it’s definitely fair to say that the lions front 7 isn’t all that good. It was never going to be a force, and injuries haven’t helped things. So it isn’t incredibly surprising that the browns were able to rack up some rushing yards and eat clock.

I’m just not that concerned about it, though. Those scramble runs by kizer on third and long sucked but that’s also not something that is likely to be a big problem going forward.

also, that final drive of theirs saw them convert on 4th down three times.

They had that earlier 4th down conversion, too. Credit to the browns for converting on fourth down, of course. When you are 0-8 that’s the type of thing you should be doing and it worked. 

Anyway, this team is still going live or die with the performance of stafford and the offense. The defense is decent enough to keep them in most games. But this is far from a complete team. Luckily, the division is going to be there for the taking thanks to the Rodgers injury. 

It sure would be nice for the Vikings to lose this weekend so the thanksgiving game can be for the division lead.  

Ngata was a big loss. PFF was grading him really strong this year and I think this game most showed how he had been keeping blockers off Davis and co. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Motor City Sonics said:

Lions should get that Duke Johnson guy............he is EXACTLY the type of runner they need.    

Won't go down

 

"Hey.........Ray............I never went down, Ray................You never got me down, Ray"

I don't get it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Nastradamus said:

Ngata was a big loss. PFF was grading him really strong this year and I think this game most showed how he had been keeping blockers off Davis and co. 

Good point. He didn't show up much in the stat sheet until he wasn't there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a thought here. Maybe the browns aren’t that bad? Maybe they are getting better as their rookie QB gets more experience. 

They have a few close losses this year:

steelers by 3

colts by 3

jets by 3

titans by 3 in OT

and then of course this past game against the lions that all the lions fans are freaking out about. 

None of this is to say they are a good team, but they might not be 0-9 awful either. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just a thought here. Maybe the browns aren’t that bad? Maybe they are getting better as their rookie QB gets more experience. 
They have a few close losses this year:
steelers by 3
colts by 3
jets by 3
titans by 3 in OT
and then of course this past game against the lions that all the lions fans are freaking out about. 
None of this is to say they are a good team, but they might not be 0-9 awful either. 

All true. They have some young talent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Browns aren't 0-9 because they lack talent. Outside of QB, they may actually have more talent than the Lions. They have a lot of high draft picks on both sides of the ball. The Lions pretty much played a flawless game on the road in Green Bay and now fans start panicking because they won a game by 14 points in which they weren't flawless. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Motown Bombers said:

The Browns aren't 0-9 because they lack talent. Outside of QB, they may actually have more talent than the Lions. They have a lot of high draft picks on both sides of the ball. The Lions pretty much played a flawless game on the road in Green Bay and now fans start panicking because they won a game by 14 points in which they weren't flawless. 

My two concerns from the Browns game were: 1) Spotting yet another team an early two-score lead as a result of sloppy play; 2) the awful run defense. We've seen the first enough times that it is a trend, or even a habit. The second... let's hope that gets cleaned up for the Bears.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Jason_R said:

My two concerns from the Browns game were: 1) Spotting yet another team an early two-score lead as a result of sloppy play; 2) the awful run defense. We've seen the first enough times that it is a trend, or even a habit. The second... let's hope that gets cleaned up for the Bears.

I think the loss of Ngata really hurts, as was mentioned by Nastradamus earlier.  Ansah hasn't been what we hoped he would be, perhaps, but losing him doesn't help either.  The Lions have talent, they just don't have a lot of depth.  Austin has done a pretty decent job adjusting during games. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/14/2017 at 9:55 AM, John_Brian_K said:

Dude, semantics.  The Lions looked like crap for a good chunk of that game and thanks to the Browns ineptness we won.  The Browns were win less...I am all about the 'any given Sunday' thing in football, but it was the Browns.....and we were at home.  I think it boils down to expectation.  People were expecting the Lions to come close to winning out before that game, they looked pretty bad against a not good team and managed a win...it is bringing people expectations crashing back down again...just what the Lions do.

I feel like I'm dealing with constantly moving goal posts here... first I was arguing that the Lions weren't totally dominated, then I was arguing that just the defense was bad in 3 of 4 quarters, now it's that the Lions should have done better against the Browns...

I know it's because there are multiple people responding to me, but do note that my response wasn't that the Lions shouldn't do better against the Browns (they should have) or that the Browns didn't indeed move at will against the Lions a few times (they did) or a performance like won't be good enough against better team (it won't be good enough).

I'm just saying that I don't think it's fair to say the Brown dominated the Lions, or even that they dominated them for 3 quarters, or even that the defense was dominated/played poorly for 3 quarters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I feel like I'm dealing with constantly moving goal posts here... first I was arguing that the Lions weren't totally dominated, then I was arguing that just the defense was bad in 3 of 4 quarters, now it's that the Lions should have done better against the Browns...

I know it's because there are multiple people responding to me, but do note that my response wasn't that the Lions shouldn't do better against the Browns (they should have) or that the Browns didn't indeed move at will against the Lions a few times (they did) or a performance like won't be good enough against better team (it won't be good enough).

I'm just saying that I don't think it's fair to say the Brown dominated the Lions, or even that they dominated them for 3 quarters, or even that the defense was dominated/played poorly for 3 quarters.

Can’t keep spotting teams two scores...

 

Game would look completely different without those disastrous first two drives.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, RedRamage said:

I feel like I'm dealing with constantly moving goal posts here... first I was arguing that the Lions weren't totally dominated, then I was arguing that just the defense was bad in 3 of 4 quarters, now it's that the Lions should have done better against the Browns...

I know it's because there are multiple people responding to me, but do note that my response wasn't that the Lions shouldn't do better against the Browns (they should have) or that the Browns didn't indeed move at will against the Lions a few times (they did) or a performance like won't be good enough against better team (it won't be good enough).

I'm just saying that I don't think it's fair to say the Brown dominated the Lions, or even that they dominated them for 3 quarters, or even that the defense was dominated/played poorly for 3 quarters.

Yeah you are discussing the game with a few people.  I simply think we are all closer to thinking the same thing, but are using different words to describe it.  

Again, expectation.  People got excited about the rest of the schedule, maybe got their hopes too high and saw a pretty bad game against a bad team that we won.

That is why my first words were semantics.  I think we are all pretty much saying the same thing, but either focusing on different areas or simply using different words to describe the same things.

"look good" against a team like the Browns is never being behind...never being threatened to lose IMO.  We LOOKED like we were going to lose that game more than a couple times in the game.  It has people frazzled and possibly over reacting a little.

"look bad" is what we saw...regardless of how close other teams have played them.  MAYBE they are a little better than people give them credit for...maybe...the Steelers/Browns game is a rivalry game and I usually expect those to be close games..the Ravens, Vikings and Bengals all handled the Browns pretty easily.  I think people WANT the Lions to be better than they are and expected a laugher...we got it, but for most of the game it was the Browns laughing and it has people nervous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Jason_R said:

Can’t keep spotting teams two scores...

Game would look completely different without those disastrous first two drives.

I think we’ll likely see a few more ugly wins with this roster, but Caldwell has already shown he does pretty well against a soft schedule. I share the same concern though. They need to tighten up in a few areas or they’re going to get punched in the mouth again in the playoffs. If they even get there

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, number20 said:

I think we’ll likely see a few more ugly wins with this roster, but Caldwell has already shown he does pretty well against a soft schedule. I share the same concern though. They need to tighten up in a few areas or they’re going to get punched in the mouth again in the playoffs. If they even get there

Against the Browns, it was the result of Decker returning after half a season and being rusty, and Corey Robinson being thrown into a position he hadn't played since high school. They both looked bad those first few drives, but at least Decker got better. So I tell myself the OL will look better next week, but the Lions' problem is that each week it is something else that gets them off to a slow start.

That said, under Caldwell they have had slow starts in games and in seasons. And as much run as the Vikings are getting, I still think the Lions have the easier path to the division crown, if they play solid football. Minnesota gets the Rams at home this week, then is on the road against the Lions, Falcons, and Panthers. All due respect to Minnesota, but it is by no means out of the question that they come out of that three game road streak 0-3.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Jason_R said:

Against the Browns, it was the result of Decker returning after half a season and being rusty, and Corey Robinson being thrown into a position he hadn't played since high school. They both looked bad those first few drives, but at least Decker got better. So I tell myself the OL will look better next week, but the Lions' problem is that each week it is something else that gets them off to a slow start.

That said, under Caldwell they have had slow starts in games and in seasons. And as much run as the Vikings are getting, I still think the Lions have the easier path to the division crown, if they play solid football. Minnesota gets the Rams at home this week, then is on the road against the Lions, Falcons, and Panthers. All due respect to Minnesota, but it is by no means out of the question that they come out of that three game road streak 0-3.

At the moment the Vikings still have the easier path. If the lions can beat them next week, that will change things of course. All this talk about the easier path tends to assume the lions will win, but that’s still going to be close to a coin flip game. 

Even if the lions win, the Vikings will still be in better shape (assuming that both the lions and Vikings win this weekend). 

Only once we actually hold the tiebreak over the Vikings and have the same record is it safe to say the lions have the easier path. I guess that leads to a follow up question. If the lions lose to the Vikings but somehow still end up tied with them, what are the chances we could have the tiebreaker? I think the first tiebreak is division record, and for us to finish tied with Minnesota after losing to them, I think it’s safe to assume the lions sweep the rest of the division. Maybe we catch them because they lose to the packers at the end of the season. That would be enough. 

It would be very helpful for the Vikings to lose to the rams this week. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Shelton said:

At the moment the Vikings still have the easier path. If the lions can beat them next week, that will change things of course. All this talk about the easier path tends to assume the lions will win, but that’s still going to be close to a coin flip game. 

Even if the lions win, the Vikings will still be in better shape (assuming that both the lions and Vikings win this weekend). 

Only once we actually hold the tiebreak over the Vikings and have the same record is it safe to say the lions have the easier path. I guess that leads to a follow up question. If the lions lose to the Vikings but somehow still end up tied with them, what are the chances we could have the tiebreaker? I think the first tiebreak is division record, and for us to finish tied with Minnesota after losing to them, I think it’s safe to assume the lions sweep the rest of the division. Maybe we catch them because they lose to the packers at the end of the season. That would be enough. 

It would be very helpful for the Vikings to lose to the rams this week. 

By one measure, the Vikings have the tenth hardest remaining schedule, while the Lions have the second easiest. 

Maybe the Vikes go on the road three weeks in a row and beat Detroit, Atlanta, and Carolina, after playing the Rams. I'm expecting them to lose two of the next four. Remember what happened to them last season down the stretch after a hot start. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Jason_R said:

By one measure, the Vikings have the tenth hardest remaining schedule, while the Lions have the second easiest. 

Maybe the Vikes go on the road three weeks in a row and beat Detroit, Atlanta, and Carolina, after playing the Rams. I'm expecting them to lose two of the next four. Remember what happened to them last season down the stretch after a hot start. 

Yes, they have a tough remaining schedule, tougher than the lions for sure. But they also have a 2 game lead right now. No amount of easy/hard schedule will overcome a 2 game deficit in the standings with only 7 games to play when trying to project who will finish in first.

So yeah, the Vikings have a harder path ahead of them, but they also have a decent head start down that path. 

I think it’s fair to expect the Vikings to lose 2 of the next 4. But you probably also have to expect the lions to lose some, too. 

If they go 2-2 and we go 3-1, we are still behind them by a game with only three left to play (and possibly without the tiebreaker).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Jason_R said:

By one measure, the Vikings have the tenth hardest remaining schedule, while the Lions have the second easiest. 

Maybe the Vikes go on the road three weeks in a row and beat Detroit, Atlanta, and Carolina, after playing the Rams. I'm expecting them to lose two of the next four. Remember what happened to them last season down the stretch after a hot start. 

It is not the only thing they need to do, but win AGAIN against the Vikings and it is pretty much over for the Vikings.  Just based on SOS the rest of the way.  If Detroit does what it is supposed to do against the weaker schedule the Vikings would have to pretty much run the table after losing to us and we would have to drop a game we should have won.  If that happened then they would deserve the division for beating that schedule while we dropped a big game along the way.  Naturally that is what I expect to happen.  xD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, djhutch said:

I think the loss of Ngata really hurts, as was mentioned by Nastradamus earlier.  Ansah hasn't been what we hoped he would be, perhaps, but losing him doesn't help either.  The Lions have talent, they just don't have a lot of depth.  Austin has done a pretty decent job adjusting during games. 

To add on, I just read a tweet from a local writer saying we let up 130+ rush yards per game since Ngata went out. 76 per game with him in there. I'm sure he isn't the entire 60 yards, but that's telling. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Shelton said:

Yes, they have a tough remaining schedule, tougher than the lions for sure. But they also have a 2 game lead right now. No amount of easy/hard schedule will overcome a 2 game deficit in the standings with only 7 games to play when trying to project who will finish in first.

So yeah, the Vikings have a harder path ahead of them, but they also have a decent head start down that path. 

I think it’s fair to expect the Vikings to lose 2 of the next 4. But you probably also have to expect the lions to lose some, too. 

If they go 2-2 and we go 3-1, we are still behind them by a game with only three left to play (and possibly without the tiebreaker).

It really comes down to the head to head. If we can beat them, I think we probably have just as good of odds as them to win it from that point out due to the schedule differences. We would have the tie breaker at that point as well. If we lose and go 3 games out, we're probably screwed in terms of winning the division. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Nastradamus said:

It really comes down to the head to head. If we can beat them, I think we probably have just as good of odds as them to win it from that point out due to the schedule differences. We would have the tie breaker at that point as well. If we lose and go 3 games out, we're probably screwed in terms of winning the division. 

I guess we could look at the 538 projections. We are currently projected at 9.2 wins and Minnesota is projected at 10.9. Each of us are projected for .62 wins in this weekend’s games. We are projected for .54 on thanksgiving and Minnesota is obviously then .46. 

So let’s say we both win this weekend. That adds .38 wins relative to today’s projection. So we would be at 9.58 and they would be at 11.28. 

What happens on thanksgiving would have a big effect. If we win, we add .46, and Minnesota loses .46. So we would be at 10.04 wins and Minnesota would be at 10.82. These projections take into account the remaining schedules, so even if we win on thanksgiving we are still trailing. 

But if Minnesota were to lose this weekend, their post thanksgiving projection would be down to 9.82 if the lions win. 

If the lions lose on thanksgiving but the Vikings lose this weekend, we would be down around 9 and the Vikings around 11.

so yeah that thanksgiving game is basically the season. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Vikings also seem committed to throwing Bridgewater out there. He hasn't played in a season and a half. His mobility is likely limited now after his injury which was one of the strengths. It's also not like he was an all-pro prior to the injury. If the Lions beat the Vikings, I like their chances. 

What I'm really concerned about is the Vikings finishing with a winning record so that we can say Stafford beat a good team on the road. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/13/2017 at 10:15 AM, Shelton said:

I don’t think they look sluggish at home. I think they had a poor game yesterday. Their poor record at home seems more a factor of the teams they have had to play at home. Carolina and Atlanta and Pittsburgh are pretty good teams. 

Sure, the lions beat Minnesota on the road, but other than that they got smoked by New Orleans and then beat two bad teams in the giants and packers. 

Smoked?  The Lions had the ball with less than 8 minutes left with a chance to take the lead in New Orleans.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/15/2017 at 1:15 PM, Shelton said:

Yes, they have a tough remaining schedule, tougher than the lions for sure. But they also have a 2 game lead right now. No amount of easy/hard schedule will overcome a 2 game deficit in the standings with only 7 games to play when trying to project who will finish in first.

So yeah, the Vikings have a harder path ahead of them, but they also have a decent head start down that path. 

I think it’s fair to expect the Vikings to lose 2 of the next 4. But you probably also have to expect the lions to lose some, too. 

If they go 2-2 and we go 3-1, we are still behind them by a game with only three left to play (and possibly without the tiebreaker).

Vikings will get smoked by the Rams this weekend. Rams are good.  Lions should beat the bears. Then it comes down to thanksgiving.  After turkey day I predict lions and bears to both be 7-4 with the lions having beaten the Vikings twice.  Then the Vikings still have to go to Carolina and Atlanta.  

Vikings could easily find themselves 7-6 in 4 weeks time. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, T&P_Fan said:

Smoked?  The Lions had the ball with less than 8 minutes left with a chance to take the lead in New Orleans.  

Yeah I know what happened in the New Orleans game. It was a borderline miracle that they got to that point where they had the ball and a chance to take the lead (which they promptly turned into another defensive score for New Orleans if I remember correctly). 

I’m happy to retract the “smoked” terminology. The point of that post was to illustrate that I don’t think the lions are somehow a better team on the road than at home based simply on their record at home/road. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, T&P_Fan said:

Vikings will get smoked by the Rams this weekend. Rams are good.  Lions should beat the bears. Then it comes down to thanksgiving.  After turkey day I predict lions and bears to both be 7-4 with the lions having beaten the Vikings twice.  Then the Vikings still have to go to Carolina and Atlanta.  

Vikings could easily find themselves 7-6 in 4 weeks time. 

Yes, the Vikings could “easily” be 7-6 after the next four games. They could also be 11-2, or 10-3, or 9-4, or 8-5. They will probably be 9-4  

The lions could be 9-4, or 8-5, or 7-6, or 6-7. They will probably be 7-6.

But yeah, if the lions beat the Vikings and they are both 7-4, the lions will be in much better shape than the Vikings to win the division. Even if the Vikings lose this weekend, there is still a 50/50 chance that the Vikings are sitting at 8-3 and the lions are 6-5 after thanksgiving  

all this talk about schedule means nothing if the lions don’t beat the Vikings at home. I feel like the Vikings will be just as motivated to beat the lions and put a stranglehold on the division lead.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      95,488
    • Total Posts
      2,719,647
  • Who's Online (See full list)

  • Upcoming Events

    No upcoming events found
×