Stafford likely out for season

[Icness]

Just saw this:
http://www.mlive.com/lions/index.ssf/20 ... _matt.html

ALLEN PARK - The Detroit Lions fear that quarterback Matthew Stafford might be lost for the season, according to a source close to the situation, after preliminary tests showed that he has a Grade 3 separation of his right shoulder.

Stafford suffered the injury during the Lions' 23-20 overtime loss to the New York Jets on Sunday at Ford Field.

Stafford underwent an MRI test on Monday and it is not known if those results confirm the team's initial findings. Stafford is also expected to seek a second opinion with Dr. James Andrews, the surgeon who consulted with Stafford after the quarterback's first shoulder injury earlier this season.

Very bad news with Hill already done. Looks like 2-14 and now you have to consider if Stafford will ever be able to play 16 games. Or even 10 games. Sigh.

[ajaX82]

crap

this is awful. Stanton time means getting pounded time

[kellmellus50]

Quotes from other people in the det news article:

Oh well. Hopefully we can draft a QB next year that doesn't get hurt.
Can we please end the Stafford era?

From The Detroit News: http://www.detnews.com/article/20101107 ... z14npdeZcV

[Liqourish]

^ Obviously those "other people" are clueless about how a team operates. You don't give up on a young QB less than two years into his career. And you don't draft another QB when you've already have $42 million locked up in one. This is why fans don't run teams. They think with thier emotions instead of logic. Or they lgoic themselves into thinking they know more than real NFL personnel. As we can see in this foum alone.

Shaun Hill is more than capable to take over for the rest of the year, once he's ready to come back, which apparently is by next week against the Cowboys. Things aren't as dire as people are making them out to be. We weren't a playoff team with Stafford, and we're still not one without him. But we are a team capable of winning a few games and developing our youth while still focusing on the future. 4 or 5 wins is not out of the question. Add another top 8 draft pick and a good free agency, along with a rehabbed Stafford, and we should be a force next season.

[Piston Pete]

Good, shut him down and let him rehab the shoulder appropriately.

We're 2-6

Let Hill/Stanton play the rest of the way and let's get some good draft picks in here next season (DEFENSE) and let's look to make some REAL NOISE next season.

Stafford, Best, CJ, Nate, BPett, Sheffler on O...
Suh, Williams, VB, Avril, Levy, Smith, Houston, Delmas, and whatever draft picks we get on D...

We could be VERY dangerous next season

[TSE]

^ Obviously those "other people" are clueless about how a team operates. You don't give up on a young QB less than two years into his career. And you don't draft another QB when you've already have $42 million locked up in one. This is why fans don't run teams. They think with thier emotions instead of logic. Or they lgoic themselves into thinking they know more than real NFL personnel. As we can see in this foum alone.

We gave up on Andre Ware when we drafted him high. He didn't have the same salary but it was still a very high draft choice at the QB position. We just BMW-Chucked him to the garbage can after only 161 passes (5.7 rushing average)! Stafford so far has thrown 473 passes (5.0 rushing average). So he's had nearly 3x as much opportunity as another 1st round QB we gave up on.


The Lions officials haven't operated with a minimum acceptable level of logic ever in any year since I've been watching. So your argument against a fan not being logical doesn't really have any relevance to our team. Forget status of fan or not fan, that's not how you select a good GM. You just select somebody who IS logical, regardless of who they are, find the person who has the abilities, knowledge and skill to get the job done, and whatever their status is as a fan or not doesn't really matter. This is a thinking man's game at that job, and you can end up with the best team or the worst team purely as a result of whether you have a the best or worst thinker making the decisions. Having a deficiency there just opens up the door for ALL the problems that we complain about on a daily basis. That's where we have lost every year and continue to do so this year and will continue to do so in future years.

[TSE]

We could be VERY dangerous next season

We SHOULD be a sure fire playoff team and a top favorite to win the SB if Mayhew would have simply done a good job since being in charge. We should be right there already this year, but that's besides the point now since we've squandered our past yet again and can only look towards the future yet again. Our failures every year are just totally unacceptable to me with all of the gifts and opportunities we have had along the way.

[Piston Pete]

Dude,

You wanted us to claim Randy Moss and want us to trade Stafford for McCoy.....Can't take you seriously anymore.

[TSE]

Dude, I was speaking from the theoretical position that we ASSUME we are trying to make the playoffs, and from that perspective it would have been a very fair gamble. It's only money and we WERE desperate, and we lost the last game. If we go back in time and pickup Moss, the game could go different, and we still have a chance for the playoffs not broken apart just yet. I didn't WANT Moss, I didn't WANT this team and situation we have now. I'm just exploring an option under a specific premise, but if it was me and i took over on the day of the trade deadline then what i would WANT is not to fight out the season from that point with 100% of all of our resources, cause then i would have trade scalped away a lot of players to purposely take a big hit for the rest of THIS season so our next years can be better. We can't do trades now, so the only thing to argue about is making the playoffs or not, and in argument for making the playoffs I think it was a no-brainer to pickup Moss IF we wanted to increase our chances. If the Lions would rather save my money as a priority towards team profitability and take the added bonus of having a weaker team to get a high draft pick, then they could strategically have chosen not to pick him up for those 2 reasons.

You need to do a better job of understanding the context of a conversation and the caveats built into that discussion before you assign a label to me as a guy who wanted to pick up Randy Moss. Picking up Randy Moss on my team is something that makes me sick to my stomach and I would want to do anything I could to avoid doing just that, but at that moment in time there were no other choices of things we could do to make the playoffs and I was contributing an opinion for the benefit of those that aren't giving up on the season yet.

So I ask you, if you start with the premise that you want to make the playoffs this year as your number 1 goal above future goals, and you can choose to start with our team as it is now, or go back to the claim date and pick up Moss and replay the Jets game in a new timeline, which of the two do you think we have higher odds of making the playoffs? Because the only info we have is that 1 game, so far I've won on the scorecard on being right about my claim.

[TSE]

Dude,

You wanted us to claim Randy Moss and want us to trade Stafford for McCoy.....Can't take you seriously anymore.

Oh and I wanted to trade Stafford for McCoy, plus "x", where "x" is worth a LOT. You shouldn't reject an opinion of somebody on a different subject just because you disagree with an opinion on another matter, especially when you haven't even qualified what the opinion is that you are disagreeing with. Perhaps my minimum "x" is their 1st rounder next draft and the next one? How do I sell that? Well hey Cleveland, Stafford was #1 overall so 2 first round picks just isn't enough, and McCoy was a lousy 3rd rounder that doesn't add much to the total. Now that's a lot more than i would actually ask for, but you don't know what specifically I require to balance out a McCoy trade, yet you seem comfortable bashing me for wanting to do it. You make it really hard to take you seriously. If you have something to object to that I say, then try and come up with a quality post as opposed to just stating an out of context one-liner that is your go to thing forever to invalidate what anyone says.

[OB- wan]

I'm not sure Cleveland would trade two 1st round picks and their starting QB just because you say " hey Cleveland, Stafford was #1 overall so 2 first round picks just isn't enough, and McCoy was a lousy 3rd rounder that doesn't add much to the total."

Like you say that might not be specifically what you would ask for and frankly they would probably hang up on you before you finished the sentence but since you are so adamant that you could turn Stafford into gold by trading him, what exactly do you think the Lions can realistically get for him? Can you say what that is rather than getting offended and throwing out crazy trades that sound impossible that you admit at the time of saying them is impossible?

[TSE]

Don't know what I could get for him, it's not up to me to determine what he's worth to the other 31 teams, that's their choice.

[kellmellus50]

Quote:

Look at Stafford and you can see that he's injury prone. He's too soft to play in the NFL. Yeah sure the first two injuries had someone drive him to the ground with their weight on top of him. But this last injury (which is suppose to be new) came when he tried to scramble and was tripped up and fell on his shoulder. In other words, football players all over everywhere get tackled just like that, but somehow Stafford got injured. I just think that Stafford will not be able to stay in the NFL

From The Detroit News: http://apps.detnews.com/apps/forums/lio ... z154j5Xxo9

[ajaX82]

Quote:

Look at Stafford and you can see that he's injury prone. He's too soft to play in the NFL. Yeah sure the first two injuries had someone drive him to the ground with their weight on top of him. But this last injury (which is suppose to be new) came when he tried to scramble and was tripped up and fell on his shoulder. In other words, football players all over everywhere get tackled just like that, but somehow Stafford got injured. I just think that Stafford will not be able to stay in the NFL

From The Detroit News: http://apps.detnews.com/apps/forums/lio ... z154j5Xxo9

Be careful posting things like this, it is quite misleading. It makes it look like a DetNews writer wrote this, when it was just a forum posting, much like one of us

[kellmellus50]

When you open up the site it say lions talk. it's not misleading people,they just have to read.

it also says the next 15 letters . When i read it i knew what it was i don't see any problems .

Does anyone else think diffently?


CyberSurvey
Stafford hurt again
Is Lions quarterback Matthew Stafford injury-prone or just unlucky?

He seems injury-prone to me 75.61%
It's not his fault he's not well-protected 24.39


From The Detroit News: http://apps.detnews.com/apps/forums/lio ... z15AEbHHkw

[Icness]

His career arc right now resembles two QBs: Phil Simms and Chris Chandler. Simms missed at least 5 starts in each of his first 5 seasons (15 in his 4th year) , then played 15 games or more in 6 of the next 7. Stafford actually has better stats thru the same number of starts, but I was surprised looking at his career how mediocre Simms a QB Simms was. He won his Super Bowl in 1986 in arguably his worst year, threw 22 INTs to 21 TDs and his YPA was 6.2, which ranked dead last for every QB that started at least 14 games. But he's universally regarded for his leadership and for playing well in the clutch, and he won the same number of playoff games as Dan Marino while both were simultaneously active--including Simms winning a Super Bowl.

Chandler was statistically an above-average QB chronically dogged by injuries. The two seasons he was fully healthy he looked a whole lot like Jim Kelly, went to the Pro Bowl and an NFC Title game, but that's two out of 14 years on a whole lot of teams.

Jim McMahon also figures in that picture but Stafford has actually been far better than McMahon was to the same point. It turns out McMahon was barely an average QB even in their Super Bowl year, and he missed 3 games and parts of 3 others that year.

I like that he's better than Simms at the same point. Simms had a separated shoulder, a torn ACL, but the big one was when he broke the thumb on his throwing hand and it damn near completely broke off. That was his 4th season, and he didn't miss a game due to injury again until he broke his foot in the 14th game of his 12th season.

The lesson: be patient, and have a strong backup QB and defense.

[OB- wan]

I don't see any way the Loins could or should give up on Stafford, even if you take the money out of it. The guy has been very good this season when healthy, in only his second season, and projects to get even better. He is a potential pro-bowl, franchise quarterback and he represents the surest thing for them at that position.

Some guys are injury prone and some guys get unlucky. You really can't plan on guys getting injured. You can plan for potential injuries, which is what they did bringing in Hill, but anyone can get hurt at any time. He's not a pussy just because getting slammed into the ground shoulder first has resulted in injury.

I hate 'next year' talk but in this instance it applies to the Lions. They need to win as many games as they can this year to establish some credibility and confidence going into next season but the win total isn't as important at this point as the experience they will get. It's also important for them to see who they want to keep off this team. Which one of these guys in the secondary will prove themselves in the second half of this season and which ones need to be replaced.

Fill in the holes this off-season with another solid draft and some smart Mayhew moves and go into next season with Matthew ready to rock-n-roll and try to make a deep run. That's the smartest move in my opinion. Doing something drastic at the QB position based on Stafford's injuries this year is not.

[TSE]

The lesson: be patient, and have a strong backup QB and defense.

Well we don't have the guaranteed good franchise QB, yet we still don't have the defense. The lesson to me is to be patient, and have a g strong GM who will get you to where you need to be eventually and sooner rather than later. You can't get the strong QB and defense without the GM, so you need to cut to that step first, that's where it starts. So you need to hope for the stuff in place that creates the results you seek, can't just skip to the results without a connection to how they are triggered.

So the lesson is, be patient, and if you dont win or get the results you seek, then you need to do whatever it takes to find or figure out the solution, and if you can't do that then hire somebody or step aside for somebody more qualified than yourself to implement the proper solution. That's how problems in anything are solved, and we aren't doing any of those 2 options from what I can see, and so it's hard to ask people to be patient when there isn't a logical atmosphere or foundation here that is worthy to vouch for why we should be patient.

[Piston Pete]

Patrick Peterson, here e come!

[TSE]

We were 5th, and 3 of the 4 teams ahead of us won yesterday, now we're 3rd! The 2 teams ahead also have weaker tiebreakers for now too!

http://www.gbnreport.com/weeklydraftorder.html