Sept27, 1:00PM Washington @ Detroit

[Bartender]

LMAO!!!!! I call my girlfriend a monkey. I call my brother a monkey. Anybody that says silly things, I call a monkey. How the fuuck am I supposed to be racist against you when I don't even know if you're a boy or a girl. The Lions forum is the most active forum out of all the NFL team forums and the reason MORE people don't come here is cuz of people like YOU! Don't get it confused. It's people that give biased opinions about other players and teams and use logic with NO REASONING and think you know **** about the subject is why people don't come here. It's people like me that call you out with LOGICAL REASONING and a little bit of humor is what make people WANT TO COME. lol


And ROFL *DEAD* LMAO SLDKGJSLDHGLSDJGKLJ @ racist. Still trippin' over that one. Makes it even funnier cuz I'm black!

[TSE]

As an impartial bystander I will supply my opinions on the racist remarks.

For one, Bartender, it doesn't matter if you know if he's a boy or a girl, because the accusation is one based on race, not gender, he/she is saying you made a racist remark, not a sexist remark.

For two, Kell, there are many different meanings of the word "monkey". There are some English definitions that represent a meaning similar to a "mischievous child", with a synonym of "rascal". There is also a slang term for a person w/minimal intelligence. The only way you could really have a shot at making a case of racism is if it was established what your race was and then it would still be a stretch, cause while it may be a poor choice of words for a person to pick, it does have other definitions that could apply.

Here is a good site that lists most of the definitions:
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/monkey

[Bartender]

LMAO!!!!! I call my girlfriend a monkey. I call my brother a monkey. Anybody that says silly things, I call a monkey.

There is also a slang term for a person w/minimal intelligence.

Yup, KThanksBye.

TSE, what do you think of Staffords performance so far and what is your opinion about the difference in situations in Mark Sanchez and Matt Stafford? Do you agree with my post i made on page one at the very bottom?

[TSE]

LMAO!!!!! I call my girlfriend a monkey. I call my brother a monkey. Anybody that says silly things, I call a monkey.

There is also a slang term for a person w/minimal intelligence.

Yup, KThanksBye.

TSE, what do you think of Staffords performance so far and what is your opinion about the difference in situations in Mark Sanchez and Matt Stafford? Do you agree with my post i made on page one at the very bottom?

I read all the comments in this thread but I don't have all of the points memorized and don't really want to go back through them as there was a lot of messy shouting back and forth on the issue.

First, I will say that Stafford has done a horrible job thus far and has not impressed. Does that mean he won't be a star QB later? No, but for the moment it is not encouraging. On the other side, Sanchez has impressed and has a lot of moxie from what I have seen and it's a bit frustrating to see him have the early upper-hand particularly because if I was the GM of the Lions I don't think I would have wound up with Stafford at #1. I am adamant in my belief that I would have found a trade-down opportunity even if I had to take much less value than typical chart values, which was totally fine with me because I have devised my own pick-value charts that are FAR different than the standard charts you find. I for one believe that every year in the draft deserves a fresh design of it's own unique chart to represent the value in that particular year based upon the players involved, salary slotting etc.

This year the only winning solution was to find a trade, and I know a trade had to exist. With the way that I perceived the value of the #1 pick, I would be almost inclined to think all 31 other teams would place a higher value on that pick than i would have myself, thus anybody could have theoretically been a trade partner and all it takes is 1 to execute said trade. There was NOT ANY PLAYER in this draft that made sense at the #1 spot. If the system was different and all rookies made a minimum salary by rule and I had to pick a player well i still would have taken Stafford because he was the higher rated QB slightly and the made the most positional sense to draft. But with the salary system the way it is, I would have refused to be forced to pick him at #1.

Why did I rehash all of that? Well I had to in order to digress into your question because if I traded down to say 5-10, then highly likely targets would have been Stafford at a lower spot, or if he got scooped up then we could have had Mark Sanchez at a lower spot. After the Jets selected him at 5, it would almost be better for us to have swapped straight up and taken a similar QB prospect and just pay less money for it to lower our risk factor and give us an opportunity for a much larger ROI opportunity. One of the ideas I posted on another thread was to negotiate with Sanchez to actually be the #1 pick provided he would agree to a low value that paid him like the number 3-5 pick, that way he could have the same money or possibly more than he actually got and been locked into that with a guarantee at number 1. So I can't say who we would have today if we did things differently, since everything hinges on the results of trade efforts to move out of the pick as well as negotiations with Sanchez at the #1 spot.

Long story short on that matter, I would have chose Stafford and stuck with Stafford in a scenario where they both cost the same, but I would rather have had a lower cost in terms of money and draft resources in Sanchez (or possibly several other players at other positions and draft a QB next year) over the higher cost of money and draft material required for Stafford. So to me, the Jets have the better QB for price paid, and that should have been a category for us to win with us having control over the flow of the draft by dictating how it would have played out from our first-mover obligation.

That being said, I also do agree that the Jets have probably had better protection for Sanchez early on, but to comment that specifically on that issue is impossible as I haven't watched the entire Jet's games to really analyze their OL w/respect to ours, so it is not possible for me to state any position of certainty w/o first reviewing those facts.

[Bartender]

But do you really think what appears to be the problems of Stafford are really his fault? On average, the amount of time Stafford has to throw was 2 seconds before getting hurried or hit. On average so far, Brees and Brady have gotten 4+ seconds to throw before getting hurried or hit. An average WR route takes 3 seconds to get to the spot where the ball should be. Stafford only getting 2 seconds means that the WR routes have to be shorter and when the routes are shorter, that means that the linebackers are in the way of most routes.
3 of the 5 interceptions thrown by Stafford were to linebackers. 2 to Greenway and 1 to Shanle. The other 2 interceptions were to Darren Sharper and one of those two, the receiver tripped up on the play. The interceptions to the linebackers were because the offensive coordinator was forced to make the WR routes shorter and quicker. A normal route is supposed to be behind the LB's and since they are shorter and quicker so Stafford has time to throw, most of the routes are right in the LB's district. That forces Stafford to either get sacked or try to force the ball in tight spots since that is the only possible way to throw it unless he bombs the ball to Calvin every time.

Sanchez on the other hand, has a top 5 offensive line unit and on average, 4.5 seconds to throw which is second in the league among starting QBs. He also has a great running game and a great defense which take so much pressure off him as a rookie. Any professional QB can make throws to wide receivers givin' the time to make a decision. Jon Kitna could take the Jets deep in the playoffs mainly because he is a smart quarterback and he has the time to make smart decisions.

I played 2 years of semi pro football and 7 games as a starting QB. I know what it's like to have a shittty o-line and to have to make decisions twice as fast as the 'best' quarterbacks in the league.

This is why I rank Peyton Manning the best QB in the NFL. He has just an average o-line and his QB IQ is far better than anybody else in the league. If you are a QB on a team with a crappy line that will force you to make decisions 2 times faster than the Drew Brees' and the Tom Brady's in the NFL, then you better be a QB that is twice as smarter as a QB than the Drew Brees' and the Tom Brady's in the NFL.

[TSE]

Well all of these pieces of evidence of seconds allowed to throw I can't self-verify. How do we know those are accurate counts on average? I wouldn't be able to speculate on those numbers unless I watched every play of both of Stafford's games and both of Sanchez's games to truly be sure that those numbers are accurate.

In terms of blame going to the OL, well I'm not going to blame them, they are doing just fine commensurate with the skill/talent that they have. It's the GM's responsibility to vouch for his personnel and he picked this OL over other OL combos we could have had. If it were me I would have made a strong effort to remove the old and expensive Backus and start finding a solution to find my franchise LT and to get him in there sooner than later so that we can have a solution there for the combo of QB/LT sooner than later. So the OL is not to blame nor is the OL coach. It's either Stafford's problem and Stafford's fault, or Mayhew's problem and Mayhew's fault. I would have cashed in 10+ guys on this team and turned them in for other material and used a complex end around to solve my OL needs and focus the problems all onto the defensive side in order to protect my high value Stafford and CJ and company outfit on offense first, and then used prospects and waiver claims and next year's draft and FA to patch up the defense later on. So the OL in this scenario is all on Mayhew and Stafford to make it work, to to accept that they have failed at their job.

Any way you slice it, we have a major need at OL and Defense, and we addressed NEITHER, we needed to shift around resources and make SOME improvement at one of those categories and we did neither, thus we fall back to the same spot of putting the onus on Mayhew for vouching for his OL, or putting the blame on Stafford if you feel that the OL backed up Mayhew's vouching for them.

[Bartender]

offensive coordinator's keep those stats. they use them for offensive line purposes. during film study, they count how many seconds until the QB gets hurried on each play. I personally went and averaged out the time before each stafford and sanchez gets hurried by the opposing defense... and i heard on the NFL network that sanchez is 2nd among starting QB's with the most time before hurried.

[TSE]

offensive coordinator's keep those stats. they use them for offensive line purposes. during film study, they count how many seconds until the QB gets hurried on each play. I personally went and averaged out the time before each stafford and sanchez gets hurried by the opposing defense... and i heard on the NFL network that sanchez is 2nd among starting QB's with the most time before hurried.

Edited more comments before you posted this, but that's all secondhand information any way you slice it. I don't assume anything unless the source is very clear on what they are saying and has credibility in the accuracy of the numbers. I'd have to see the link or the data for myself in order to speculate on that.

[Bartender]

I totally agree with you about finding the qb that fits our o-line the best... but Sanchez is doing the best he can do with the situation he's in. Stafford isn't an extreme athlete that can get out of pressure using his feet. That's what we need. I say make a move for vince young, personally. But knowing we need a mobile QB, we can say that mark sanchez wouldn't of been a better pick and better for us. i actually think that sanchez would be considerably worse than stafford has been.

[TSE]

There's a lot of QBs in this league that I would be willing to gamble on in the short term, but any move to do so would be contingent on finding a trade for Stafford first, we have too many eggs in that basket and would need to sell that asset off before worrying about bringing in another QB. Can we trade Stafford for Eugene Monroe for example, and then throw in Backus and whatever the leftover margin is, apply that to acquiring something else? That would be one hypothetical solution, but you would have to get a good deal on a trade first, and knowing the Lions mngmt, the last thing they would want to do is make some kind of a bold controversial move like that. I'm willing to bet trading Stafford isn't something they would bother to ponder for more than a few seconds. It's too risky for their reputations.

I on the other hand would consider it because I currently don't have a reputation and even if I did i would trade off my personal reputation equity in exchange for increasing the Lions statistical odds or arriving at a dynasty level as a team, because the team's interests are always more important to me than my personal interests, I don't know any other way other to behave other than to optimize the interests of the many at the expense of the few (I'm not a genius for figuring this concept out, I just stole it from Spock ). And the only way to do that is to think outside the box and consider all options and all scenarios and find the right unique math in order to maximize our overall resources for now and for the future.

[Bartender]

in all honesty, all the Lions need is a big mobile left tackle and a good right tackle. Backus would be pro bowl caliber if he was moved at left guard and gostar would be above average at right guard. if we had a pro bowl LT and a slightly above average RT that can carry his own, than we will have one of the best o-lines in the NFL.

[ElectricMayhem]

It seems like every sports reporter in the country is predicting a Lions win. If Detroit loses, don't expect them to ever be picked to win a game again.

[Liqourish]

Campbell hasn't been good. Clinton Portis might not play. Jim Zorn has been god awful. If ever there was a game Lions should be favored, it should be this game at Ford Field. Lions have lost both games so far, but both games were against very good teams. Saints have the best offense in the league and made our offense play from behind the whole game. Vikings have one of the best rush defenses in the league and the Lions abused them the first half of the game.

I'm not betting on the Lions, but I like their chances. I've seen improvements from the team, they just need a few more breaks their way to get some confidence in them. This could be that game.

[Icness]

I got the feeling around the Lions this week that the team is confident without being over-confident. That's precisely the midnset they need to have.

Washington's defense is more than capable of winning this game on its own, almost in spite of the offense. Stafford must not turn the ball over and the Lions must win the field position battle.

[Icness]

Outstanding 1st half. 9-11 on 3rd downs, 3 drives longer than 90 yards with actual points to show for it. Backus was great. Stafford missed a couple of throws but made good decisions. If Henry doesn't drop that INT it could be at least 17-0.

[Liqourish]

Great first half.... GREAT FIRST HALF!!

Our defense has given up some first downs but they are getting stops when they need to. Shutout the Skins at halftime. They have done a great job of redzone defense.

Stafford is protecting the ball more and open to throwing more which is keeping the Skins defense on their heels. Exactly what we've needed the first two games. Calvin hasn't gotten much looks because Redskins are draped all over him but other guys are stepping up. Kevin Smith with 82 yards already. Pettigrew, Northcutt and Bryant Johnson with some nice catches. Stafford also had a big carry of his own for a first down, showing his athleticism.

We need focus in the second half to not have another meltdown like last Sunday. I have a good feeling about this game. Our team looks sharp on both sides of the ball and Washington doesn't look like they know what to do.

GO LIONS!!!!

[Liqourish]

Lions have a chance to finish this one off. 4 minutes away form a Lions win!! So much for us not winning with Stafford at helm.

[Liqourish]

LIONS WIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Bartender]

O..........M..........G!!!!!!!!!!

[Liqourish]

21 for 36, 241 yards 1 TD 0 INTs, 87.8 rating (for those rating lovers out there)