Sun, 10/04 -1:00 PM Detroit at Chiago

TSE · Post #21 » by **TSE** » Sun Oct 4, 2009 11:50 pm

Well that's 4 TOs. 3 INTs, plus the fumble in the endzone that was recovered for a TD.

Also I can't believe Ajax said Stafford looked good today. He gave a horrendous performance. Absolutely killed us with bad throws, especially that INT to Harris. Even an earlier pass to CJ could have been a TD if he didnt underthrow the ball (the 1st quarter to CJ on the sideline when he had his man beat, that play a professional QB scores a long TD with a proper throw). Stafford had a really bad game and took us right out of it again unfortunately.

Liqourish · Post #22 » by **Liqourish** » Mon Oct 5, 2009 12:32 am

^ Stafford was real good today. He was moving the chains the whole first half and then got killed in the second half by penalties getting him into long 3rd downs.

Anyone who blames Stafford for this loss needs their eyes checked or their head examined. Our secondary and defensive line were responsible for the loss. Once again, another opposing team got great field position all game long. Including a long TD on a kick return.

As for Staffords injury, his knee popped out and then popped right back in. He should be good to go next week.

And I agree AJAX, Sanchez showed exactly what Stafford showed against the Saints in NO. Suddenly it's no big deal when it's the other way around though.

Stafford- 24/36 296 yds 1 TD 1 INT (and a 89.6 passer rating for those lovers out there).

Post #23 » by **ajaX82** » Mon Oct 5, 2009 12:55 am

TSE wrote:Well that's 4 TOs. 3 INTs, plus the fumble in the endzone that was recovered for a TD.

Also I can't believe Ajax said Stafford looked good today. He gave a horrendous performance. Absolutely killed us with bad throws, especially that INT to Harris. Even an earlier pass to CJ could have been a TD if he didnt underthrow the ball (the 1st quarter to CJ on the sideline when he had his man beat, that play a professional QB scores a long TD with a proper throw). Stafford had a really bad game and took us right out of it again unfortunately.

A horrendous performance? Took us out of it? You're blaming him for taking us out of the game?

Because the lack of pressure from the D-line, the lack of run or pass blocking from the O-line and the special teams giving them unbelievable field position all day were all non-factors. The penalties and having constant third and longs because we couldnt run didnt matter.Those didnt take us out of it. Completing 2/3 of your passes with a TD and one pick took us out of it.

Liqourish · Post #24 » by **Liqourish** » Mon Oct 5, 2009 1:43 am

^ I'm telling you Ajax, they just want to hate on the kid. Even when he does well it's all his fault. It's like they don't even watch the games.

Detroits special teams gave up 277 yards, including a 102 yd TD.

Cutler had 0 possessions in the second half that started more than 53 yards from the endzone. ZERO!! Because of this, he only had to throw for 141 yards in a blowout win for his team. 27 pts in the second half. On exactly ZERO long drives.

Stafford had zero possessions in the second half that started after his own 25 yd line. He had exactly two drives, ALL GAME, within 75 yards of the endzone. Both resulted in Lions touchdowns!!

What more can you ask of him? To not throw one interception? I admit, it was a bad pick. So what?!? He made a mistake that resulted in a tie game at halftime. It was not the sole reason, or even a top 5 reason, why we lost this game.

TSE · Post #25 » by **TSE** » Mon Oct 5, 2009 3:35 am

Don't include me as a hater. I want him to do well, but I'm not going to make a dishonest or inaccurate assessment of his play. He has contributed more than any single player on the team to each loss we have had this year, and that is the simple truth. If you cannot figure that out, then it sounds to me like you are inept in being able to evaluate his play correctly and the impact that it has had on our chances to win. If I'm so wrong on this, then why don't you enlighten us and name any player on the team that has done more to diminish our chances to win than Stafford has thus far.

CjayC · Post #26 » by **CjayC** » Mon Oct 5, 2009 2:10 pm

I don't think Stafford's INT was that bad.

It was a play where he was being rushed a bit, our DT Tommie Harris was on the ground, got up and made a head's up play.

Nobody should put the fault on Stafford. He and Megatron were the reason you were in the game in the 1st half. Stafford's gonna be awesome when he learns to put touch on the ball sometimes instead of always throwing laser bullets.

I know Delmas was Defensive Rookie of the Month, but he played horrible for you guys IMO yesterday. On both of Forte's long runs he got juked out of his shoes, by a guy that isn't known to be shifty.

Ernie Sims also seemed to be put of position numerous times yesterday

Liqourish · Post #27 » by **Liqourish** » Mon Oct 5, 2009 3:02 pm

^ Sims isn't best suited in the new 4-3 defense. I love Ernie, but he's getting exposed this year defensively. I think the Lions should trade him for a draft pick or two and start Levy who is better suited.

Delmas had a so-so game. He did get passed pretty easily by Forte, but he also applied alot of pressure on Cutler in the 1st half. Not his best game by any stretch though. but he's a rook also and will learn with experience.

Stafford gave up the INT in the 2nd quarter and then got down the field and scored a touchdown on the very next possession to go into halftime tied up. It doesn't matter though, it's been his fault before we even played a game. It's pretty bad when other teams can see how good he's been getting each game but a few of our fans grind him into the ground constantly.

Post #28 » by **Icness** » Mon Oct 5, 2009 4:55 pm

Sims was brutal. That early long run by Forte he completely abandoned his gap assignment and Forte ran right thru it. He also couldn't decide whether to drop or blitz ona pass play and it led to an easy completion. He just can't be patient enough to read a play and he guesses wrong too much.

I was real disappointed in the special teams, just an awful effort. You cannot continually give up short fields like that.

Early word on Stafford is that he won't practice until Thursday and they'll see after that.

Bartender · Post #29 » by **Bartender** » Mon Oct 5, 2009 6:19 pm

Ok Stafford haters.. the guy did great out there considering how Chicago has a great secondary and ruthless defensive front 7. I've watched every Dallas game this year and I can easily say that we have a better quarterback than Dallas.

YES I SAID IT!! STAFFORD > ROMO

Stafford went 24-36 against a defense that attacks the QB's. Yes he overthrew some receivers and had one bad judgement play, BUT HE'S A ROOKIE!! The sooner he makes these mistakes, the better. Some of you are acting like we have a team that can make playoffs right now. WE DON'T!!! We are not even close. Let these young guys play and make their mistakes now so when we have a team that is talented enough to compete, they don't make those mistakes.

Stafford did just fine and I was very happy to see his progress.

TSE · Post #30 » by **TSE** » Mon Oct 5, 2009 6:28 pm

Who are these Stafford haters here? You are the second person to bring up this supposed group of "Stafford haters". For the record, would you please establish the names of the people on this site that you are categorizing in this group? If you are NOT a Stafford hater, then you aren't doing Stafford any favors by giving acknowledgments that a "Stafford-hating" group exists. In actuality, YOU are contributing to the negativity regarding Stafford more than this group, which frankly I don't see any such group in existence here. Stop creating animosity for the team by trying to build a brand identity of an anti-Stafford group, when in fact no such group is present here!

Bartender · Post #31 » by **Bartender** » Mon Oct 5, 2009 6:44 pm

Kellemellus is a Stafford hater. from your post saying how stafford lost us the game, that seems like you are stafford hater. putting the blame on Stafford when he didn't in no way shape or form or hatin' on the kid. we lost the game because of lack of defensive pressure and not being able to control their defensive line.

kellmellus50 · Post #32 » by **kellmellus50** » Mon Oct 5, 2009 8:46 pm

Bartender you must have had another brainfart!!!
You again and liqourish are the only persons on this board that talks about hateing stafford.

This is the only thing i said about the last game ,and notice i just stated the facts :
( stafford also had 2 turnovers which lead to 2 bears scores)

Liqourish · Post #33 » by **Liqourish** » Mon Oct 5, 2009 9:07 pm

I feel like Kellmellus50 and TSE are the same person, just Jekyll and Hyde-like. TSE acts like a smart individual, even though "he" doesn't say much. Whereas Kellmellus is the slow one who doesn't care about sounding ignorant and just reinforces what TSE says. I would think it's a very cleaver act, but I doubt either are that smart to pull it off. It is quite intriguing though.

It amazes me how active this board is until these two start posting.

Post #34 » by **ajaX82** » Mon Oct 5, 2009 9:29 pm

Everyone:

Stop. No more of this. We dont need a discussion of who is a hater and who isnt.

This is a place to discuss football. Not argue petty names for each other.

Discuss the game.

-ajaX

Bartender · Post #35 » by **Bartender** » Mon Oct 5, 2009 9:45 pm

If we were all playing a game together, I'd knock the helmets off their head.

How's that ajaX?

TSE · Post #36 » by **TSE** » Tue Oct 6, 2009 12:41 am

Bartender wrote:Kellemellus is a Stafford hater. from your post saying how stafford lost us the game, that seems like you are stafford hater. putting the blame on Stafford when he didn't in no way shape or form or hatin' on the kid. we lost the game because of lack of defensive pressure and not being able to control their defensive line.

All I've done is given my perspective on why we lost. Stafford is the biggest reason we lost the 3 games, that is an honest and accurate assessment. Anybody that denies that has lost perspective and isn't paying attention. I brought it up because people were on here congratulating Stafford for what he has shown when he has been below expectations. And I know he's a rookie, but I don't expect him to be HOF performer yet. I have different expectation levels for him in Week 1 versus Week 4 versus Week 8 or Year 3 etc. And in each of the 4 games he has fallen below the set expectation level and that is not a good sign. That doesn't mean at all that he can't be a stud player for us, it just means that he's off to a below-than-expected start. I'm just interpreting what I saw that he has shown me, and he hasn't shown enough positives and has shown WAY, WAY too many negatives and made WAY too many bad plays in this early time for what I think he should have been able to do at this stage.

As far as the defense goes, yeah we have all kinds of problems there, but the defensive line consists of 4 players, and the totality of our play there has not been very good, same with the CB unit in particular. But the individual players there are not performing as subpar as individuals as Stafford has. There are different expectations for each player, and different amounts of shortages, and Stafford has individually come up short more than anybody w/respect to his expectation level in contrast to the others and their levels.

Post #37 » by **ajaX82** » Tue Oct 6, 2009 2:20 am

If you recieved a PM from me, please read it and keep it to yourself. Thank you

- ajaX

TSE · Post #38 » by **TSE** » Tue Oct 6, 2009 4:48 pm

ajaX82 wrote:If you recieved a PM from me, please read it and keep it to yourself. Thank you

- ajaX

If you sent PMs to some people, then why talk about that here? Couldn't you just PM them to tell them to keep what they are about to read to themselves? Seems kind of odd that you would give instructions to keep PM content a secret here in the public thread. Also, are there any objectives to hit to unlock the use of PMs? My PM ability has never worked.

Post #39 » by **ajaX82** » Tue Oct 6, 2009 11:30 pm

TSE wrote:
ajaX82 wrote:If you recieved a PM from me, please read it and keep it to yourself. Thank you

- ajaX

If you sent PMs to some people, then why talk about that here? Couldn't you just PM them to tell them to keep what they are about to read to themselves? Seems kind of odd that you would give instructions to keep PM content a secret here in the public thread. Also, are there any objectives to hit to unlock the use of PMs? My PM ability has never worked.

I only said it because in the past people often dont see them for weeks at a time. Honestly ive had people who didnt read them til a couple weeks after i sent it. I only said it to make sure people knew to look....nothing more.

PM sending for users is disabled still and has been for a while. Im not sure why it doesnt work, but you are not unique; its that way for everyone and has been since the new php. So i dunno

TSE · Post #40 » by **TSE** » Wed Oct 7, 2009 12:11 am

Well there are definitely some inherent flaws then within the design of this community if PM features exist but don't actually work. That is quite bizarre, and this is the first forum on the Internet I have ever seen that sends mixed messages that way. It's not really good for business to advertise those features but then actually have them disabled. It doesn't even explain anywhere in the FAQs about this situation to put the members at ease with their questions and concerns.

Anyhow, then with regard to any PMs that you send, that just puts you in no-mans land for purposes of trying to conduct your Mod duties. For example, if somebody was to contest any decisions that you made or object to them or want to inquire with you regarding them, they don't have any recourse. What if you overlook something or make a faulty judgment and the recipient wants to attempt to point that out, how should they proceed? Or if you direct somebody to contact another person if they have any issues, then they won't be able to do that either.

I guess it would depend on the content of your PMs are regarding this topic. But whatever you send to people, you should just make sure that you preface that if they want to contest anything that they should forget about it and not even bother, because doing so is not an option and let them know that you have been empowered as an irrefutable dictator of decisions with no chances for appeal. I would just recommend that you don't mislead anybody with your messages any differently since that is in effect the reality of how this community operates.