Page 1 of 1
Browns or Lions
Posted: Sat Aug 17, 2013 10:27 pm
by Celtsfan1980
The only two teams around when the Super Bowl began that have yet to make a Super Bowl appearance. Which team do you think has the best shot at making the Super Bowl in the future?
Re: Browns or Lions
Posted: Sat Aug 17, 2013 11:07 pm
by Jake0890
Browns because of Richardson and the Lions offense is a complete mess (or at least it was last year with no running game). I don't see Stafford leading anyone to a Super Bowl.
Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2
Re: Browns or Lions
Posted: Sat Aug 17, 2013 11:16 pm
by Celtsfan1980
The teams had a rivalry in the 1950's and both have been losers in recent years. They have a lot in common, so I'd love to see both make their first Super Bowl in the same year. Browns have a very different coaching staff now, and an owner who finally wants to win. I'd love to think their future is bright.
Re: Browns or Lions
Posted: Mon Aug 19, 2013 1:20 am
by Icness
I'm a Lions fan from Cleveland. Imagine my pain.
The Browns are closer right now
Re: Browns or Lions
Posted: Mon Aug 19, 2013 1:42 pm
by Worm Guts
Jake0890 wrote:I don't see Stafford leading anyone to a Super Bowl.
As opposed to Brandon Weeden?
Re: Browns or Lions
Posted: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:12 pm
by Higga
Detroit for a couple reasons.
1. Way better QB. I'm not a huge Stafford fan but the kid's got legit talent. Weeden isn't winning anything in the NFL.
2. Easier division. Green Bay is great, but I'm not sold on Minnesota or Chicago. Cleveland on the other hand has to deal with Cincinatti who is loaded with young talent and you know Pittsburgh and Baltimore are almost always good.
Re: Browns or Lions
Posted: Mon Aug 19, 2013 7:22 pm
by Jake0890
Worm Guts wrote:Jake0890 wrote:I don't see Stafford leading anyone to a Super Bowl.
As opposed to Brandon Weeden?
Of course Stafford > Weeden, but I'll take Richardson as a franchise piece over Stafford all day.
Re: Browns or Lions
Posted: Mon Aug 19, 2013 11:32 pm
by Celtsfan1980
I know it's only pre-season, but Weeden has actually put up very good numbers for the two games. It's too early in his career to judge him.
Re: Browns or Lions
Posted: Tue Aug 20, 2013 3:03 am
by Worm Guts
Jake0890 wrote:Worm Guts wrote:Jake0890 wrote:I don't see Stafford leading anyone to a Super Bowl.
As opposed to Brandon Weeden?
Of course Stafford > Weeden, but I'll take Richardson as a franchise piece over Stafford all day.
I'll take Johnson over Richardson, Suh too.
Re: Browns or Lions
Posted: Tue Aug 20, 2013 3:15 pm
by LAKESHOW
what team does reggie bush play for? he may be the only guy on both teams with an actual superbowl ring!
Re: Browns or Lions
Posted: Tue Aug 20, 2013 5:08 pm
by OlDirtMcBert
Higga wrote:Detroit for a couple reasons.
1. Way better QB. I'm not a huge Stafford fan but the kid's got legit talent. Weeden isn't winning anything in the NFL.
2. Easier division. Green Bay is great, but I'm not sold on Minnesota or Chicago. Cleveland on the other hand has to deal with Cincinatti who is loaded with young talent and you know Pittsburgh and Baltimore are almost always good.
Completely agree on #2. As for #1, Brett Farve was trash too, until a real coach plugged him into a system he fit. Pat Shurmur couldn't plug in a effin blender.
Re: Browns or Lions
Posted: Fri Aug 23, 2013 3:39 pm
by No-Man
Detroit crystal clear.
Divisions are similar too me, Baltimore and Pittsburgh might struggle and Minnesota is improving, Chicago is solid, equal for me, Green Bay is great and Cincy is okay.
But Detroit have better defense and offense, RB is the only concern, but they grab Bush that should be a contributer right away.
Stafford+Johnson is money in the bank.