Why are we all bent out of shape with the things Chris Carter said about Calvin?  He was a Viqueen after all, so why would he say anything good about our team and players?  All Viqueens are scum (except those that have come to their senses and are Lions i.e. Burleson).  Geez, next we'll go all crazy about something a former Bear says about us.  And we all know they are even more messed up in the head than Viqueens.

Ok, so I've seen a ton of those that constantly whine and moan that the Lion's desperately need a run game.  However, I think many of you are just stuck in the past and unwilling to see the evolution of the game that is taking place today.

Team's no longer NEED a run game.  Sure, it is helpful, and there are teams that still base their identity on having a solid run game.  But the current offensive evolution is for a team to focus on having an elite QB who can be accurate and exploit match-ups, which are created by the offensive schemes.

In the past, as the WRs got bigger, taller, and faster, defenses started to roll over safety coverage to help the undersized CBs.  Think about the success of the Tampa 2 and the rampant use of 2 deep coverage schemes.  Offenses would then combat this by using the running game to bring up safeties to help stop the run.  This would, in their logic, bring back the advantage to the WR who could get one on one coverage.  But over the years, this was still not effective.  Defenses started to draft hybrid players, especially LBs and DEs, who could not only jam the run, but play pretty descent pass coverage.  So, defenses were still able to keep their safeties back to help the CB, while the LBs, and even some DEs, keyed on the run and pass.

Obviously, offenses noted this and also evolved to where we are today:  the use of two TE sets, where both TEs have speed, are taller, and are more adept at the pass game than the blocking.  This allows them to overcome the athleticism at the LB position.  Sure, there have been a ton of 2 TE sets over the years.  But it used to be teams had one pass catching TE and another for blocking.  This is definitely not the case anymore.  Now many successful teams use 2 pass catching TEs to exploit the LBs who are a bit behind them athletcially. A perfect example is NE's use of two TEs who are basically WRs.  Or Detroit's use of Scheffler and Pettigrew.  Heck, we even cut our fullback position so we could have a third TE to run 3 TE sets. 

What this accomplishes is the same as the old school logic of using the run game to set up the pass.  Though now, you use the pass to set up the pass.  Having more athletic and taller TEs run out into the middle puts a ton of pressure on the LBs.  This causes safeties to now have to make a choice, either help the CB or help the LB.  Either way, it's a lose-lose for the defense.  If the safety goes to the middle, then the WR has one on one on the sideline.  If the safety helps the CB, then the middle gets exploited.  In conjunction with this, as the LBs are drawn out into covereage, the flat and middle also allows the RB to get into space, where their speed can be better utilized.

The key to all this though is that a team needs a very smart QB who can break down the defensive scheme at the line and make sure he knows exactly where the mismatch is going to be.  Then, the QB needs to have the accuracy to throw into the small window that he is given (LBs are still athletic enough to cause problems while in coverage).   You will see, that the teams that don't have this type of QB will still focus on the run game to open up the outside.  But this really is not as effective since the chances for a big play are limited and you can't win in a shootout with one of the more evolved teams. 

As you watch a Lion's game, focus less on waiting for the run to set up the pass.  Instead, look to see which LB lines up to cover a WR, TE, or RB.  You'll notice Stafford will start to chip away at this mismatch.  Later in the game, you'll see Stafford attack which ever outside WR has one on one coverage as the defense moves coverage.   Either way, the pass set up the pass, and there is not the dire need to have a run game.

Ok, so each year after the draft is completed, there is some great quote from Schwartz about a guy he loves.  Two years ago it was the "thumper" comments about Zach Follett.  Last year, the buzz came when Schwartz related Best's runs to watching porn.  So what will he say this year?  Can't wait until after the draft and wondered if anyone had any picks they would like to make with an added funny Schwartz-like comment as well? 

Just read that Atlanta is serious about moving down to get either AJ Green or Julius Jones.  I don't think they would move into the top 5 in order to snag Green, since that is just way to high of a price.  But the Lion's pick at 13 is perfect for them.  Plus, if Green is gone in the top 5, like he is predicted to be, Jones will slide down to 14, which is where the Rams pick, and who are likely candidates for Jones.  So Atlanta would need to leapfrog them, which makes our 13 really, really juicy.  So lock it up, the Lion's will trade with the Falcons on draft day!

Why are so many people clamoring for us to take Ingram with our first round pick?  We have a starting RB in Best and also have some solid back ups.  In the NFL, the RB position has undergone a major change in the past 10 years.  You don't need a Stud RB anymore.  The game is more about passing and exploiting match ups or using shifty runners as receivers.  We have a change of pace/speed back in Best and north-south pounders with Smith/Morris/Felton.  Getting a vet through free agency would also be a better decision than taking one in the first round. They will be cheaper and we will know exactly what we are getting.

Plus, burning a first rounder for a RB is foolish since the shelf life of RBs are about 6 years now.  Since we already used a first round pick on Best, we shouldn't invest another high draft pick for a guy who will be around for only two contracts.  I'd rather we focus on the best player available, though on the defensive side of the ball.  I'd settle for the Offensive Line as well, though I also feel that this spot can be had in later rounds as well. 

Taking another RB in the first is just wasteful and for people who only like watching college RB highlight reels.  Didn't we go bonkers when Millen kept taking WRs with our first picks? Yet now some of you want to do this with RBs?  Nuts.

All I want for Christmas this year is for Favre to get healthy and come back to play that last Week 17 game at Ford Field.  I can't stand the dude and would love to see Suh and the boys crush him.  Plus, the Lion's haven't beaten him in like 40 years, so ending his career with a loss, plus erasing our losing streak to him would make a great end of the Lion's season gift. 

I know earlier in the year people were calling for Linehan's head.  But lately, the offense has really taken off.  The play calling has been more aggressive while also protecting the QB as much as possible (2 TE sets).  He's definitely a breath of fresh air now that we have seen the full spectrum of how he calls a game.

On the reverse, there is Martz.  Watching that Bear's game yesterday, it was clear he has no regard for the QB at all.  Which we all saw when Martz was with the Lion's.  So glad they are getting crushed and hopefully will drop out of the #1 spot in the NFC North.

Oh, and our rankings on sacks given up:

Detroit, Rank #23 with 11 sacks given up.

Chicago, Rank #1, with 31 sacks given up.

For some bonus perspective the best team in the league is the Chiefs with only 5 sacks.  We aren't that far off.  With some extra emphasis at the draft next year, we should be much better in 2011 (if there is a season).

Nothing ground breaking, but signs of improvement regarding our defensive unit.  I think if we had a good core of starting LBs, our rush D would be better.  But still we are making progress. 

2009 Lions D (Through 16 games)

Overall Ranking  32nd (392.1 yds/g)

Passing Rank 32nd (265.6 yds/g)

Rush Rank 25th (126.6 yds/g)

Total Sacks  26.0

Total INTs   9

Total Forced FUM  18

Pass Deflections  80

Takeaway/Givaway  Diff    -18

2010 Lions D (Through 6 Games)

Overall Ranking  25th, (362.8 yds/g)

Passing Rank 19th (224 yds/g)

Rush Rank  28th (138.8 yds/g)

Total Sacks  16.0

Total INTs   7

Total Forced FUM   8

Pass Deflections  31

Takeaway/Givaway  Diff    +1

Dear Tom,

First off, I want to say I generally like your articles and respect your opinions.  However, the recent article posted on MLive.com, September 28, 2010 titled, "Detroit Lions coach Jim Schwartz one loss from worst 20-game start in franchise history" really was off base. 

I know you grabbed the numbers and they are true.  There is no dispute over those.  But numbers can be twisted and misconstrued to serve the wrong purposes.  When taken out of context, like how you did in the article, it only serves to create unneeded speculation along with placing blame on the wrong person, namely Schwartz.  So I wanted to clear some things up for you and get you back on track with writing accurate articles, like those of the past.

You can't compare the win-loss numbers of each coach without also evaluating things like player personnel, GMs, schedules, etc.  You mentioned Ross and Fontes in your article. Don't forget they had Barry Sanders.  I've heard you field calls on the radio about how Calvin should be used like Herman Moore.  You responded that Barry was in the backfield forcing coverage to help stop the run, leaving Moore open.  You stated how Barry created such a dynamic option it opened up play calling and created offensive success. 

So why doesn't this same "Barry Logic" apply to the coaches records?  Schwartz did not have a RB worth a darn last year.  The offense was one dimensional.  So wouldn't it figure, that if Schwartz had a guy like Barry back there last year, then his record would have been better? This year, they did get a RB who looks to be dynamic.  But with so few games, he hasn't been around long enough for teams to game plan against him, thereby opening up other areas of the offense.  I think we all can agree how over time, if Best is able to continue his production, the entire offense will be dynamic enough to keep defenses guessing and hopefully, more wins.

Next, you can throw out all the coaches who came under Millen's watch.  Millen is basically the AIDS of the NFL.  Sure, during the first 8 years not much was happening.  The Lions seemed healthy and lacking the disease.  However, over time, as the Millen virus caught up, it left us vulnerable and weak.  With every draft and free agency period, he brought in just horrible, T-Cell eating players.  Eventually, the entire roster was filled with so many Millen-infected guys, that the core players, those who had any sort of talent, were eaten up by the garbage players around them.  What was left over after the firing of Millen was a team totally destroyed from the inside.  Shoot, even Schwartz and Mayhew came out last year and said many of the starters would be 2nd or 3rd string guys on other teams.  So it's going to take more than 20 games to cure the Lion's of the Millen AIDS term.

All the other coaches you mentioned from Harry Gilmer to Darryl Rogers need to be wiped out from the 20 game record comparison as well.  Why?  They didn't have to deal with free agency, which took effect partly in 1989, with the current system enacted in 1993.  These coaches had the advantage of signing and keeping marquee players for longer periods of time.  They could manage a core group and maintain a decent level of talent from year to year.  The team could stay mildly competitive and not suffer huge swings of wins/losses like those seen today.

So please stop the "Schwartz Needs to be Fired Fear Mongering" you started with that article.  Do some research on the subject and accurately evaluate what is going on.  Then, write an article which gives the fans the real picture, rather than using some hack record comparison trick to exploit fans anger after a tough string of losses during this hopeful 2010 season. 

You're a better journalist than this Tom. Write like it.

Erik

Anyone else see all the floaters these last two weeks by Shaun Hill?  Is that the only type of throw he knows to do when it's past 10 yards?  So many balls just aired out via a high arc.  It's probably good we had so many checkdowns to Best and the TE because if he throws anything deep, it's going to get picked off.  I wish I could gripe that we need to throw more to Calvin, but not with Shaun's wet noodle of an arm.  Unless it's a fade to the endzone with 1 on 1 coverage, he should keep checking down.

I would even say that a left handed throwing Stafford is better than Shaun Hill.  Or maybe we should have Calvin be the QB, throw the ball as high and far as he can, then run and catch his own pass.  It would be about the same thing, but Calvin at least could scramble if he needed to.

I was reading the Hard Knocks post and it gave me the idea for this post regarding Sanchez, who some "draft gurus" had ranked over Stafford. 

On the last episode of Hard Knocks, the QB coach had to pep Sanchez up.  He kept saying he needed to sit tall, not slouch, and take everything on like starting QB in the NFL would.  He said every play is for learning and getting better.  Basically, he called him out for being a baby. Yet Sanchez just kept slouched down, packing his bag.  It almost looked like he would cry. 

Also in the show, you can see him get on his offensive coordinator for yelling plays at him, which is another sign of immaturity.  Later, during the game, Sanchez threw that pick and came off the field looking devistated.  Brunell had to pep him up after that as well. For pete's sake, it's a pre-season game and the pick was deflected.  He should have came off grinning and going to the coach to discuss the play.  Not slouch on the sideline needing a vet to cheer him up.  It was the same thing his coach was saying earlier, he's a NFL QB and he should take every play as an opportunity to learn. But he wallowed in pity and defeat...over a preseason play!!

I remember all the "pundits" saying Sanchez will be a better leader than Stafford and that he exudes confidence.  However, I'm not seeing it at all.  His body language suggests he is lacking confidence, can't take the pressure, and is not decisive in his reads and throws. 

With Stafford, I see the total opposite.  When he makes a bad throw, he gets mad, comes to the sidelines and immediately is seen talking to Linehan about how he can get better.  In any interview or sideline look, I have never seen him slouched looking defeated.  He may look upset about his performance, but he seems to bounce back and get onto business.  I'm glad our GM and coach advocated for Stafford and didn't take the sexy pick in Sanchez.

Anyone else getting frustrated with the Rams? They should have had Bradford locked a long time ago. It's no mystery how much you'll have to pay.  Take last years #1 deal and bump it up a bit.  It's not like you just found out that the #1 pick costs a ton of money and now have to look through your organization to find the cash. 

It's holding us up from signing Suh and Best!  Step it up Rams!

Money talks. Since the draft, Vegas has the Lion's odds to win the Super Bowl at 80-1!  That's an improvement from last year where we were at 100-1. I believe the year before that, we were 150-1.  Even the wise guys are seeing us make some progress.  By the way, we beat out the Rams, Bills, and Bucs and we are in the same group as the Browns, Raiders, and Jaguars.

I like the Best pick, but think we would have had better options to wait it out until the 2nd round started:

- Best may have been at the 34th pick anyways.  The Vikings, Saints, and Rams don't need RB help.  The Vikings could have been targeting Best to replace Taylor, but I really doubt it.  So we could have waited and taken him in the 2nd. 

- If we did wait, I'm positive we would have been offered some sweet deals for our early 2nd rounder.  Tons of teams will sit around today and look over their draft boards, make calls, hear rumors, and then get antsy that other teams are creeping up the 2nd round.  Once that first trade up is made today, then I think things will get crazy.  The Lion's were poised to capitalize on all the teams clamoring up, but now they have nothing to bargain with.  By waiting, they could have fielded calls all day and if they didn't like the deals, they probably would have still gotten Best. 

- Why didn't we trade with the Jets for Wilson? That was a luxury pick for the Jets.  They already have Revis and Cromartie.  Wilson was considered a top 10 pick at times, so the Jets HAD to take them since he was more than likely at the top of their board.  Or that is how it seems.  So why couldn't we have traded up to get one of our biggest needs at CB?  I would love to know if we tried to make a deal and the Jets wouldn't budge.  And I'm still wondering why Wilson fell anyways?  Unless there is some major issue with Wilson that comes to light which we, Joe Public, didn't know about, I see no reason why we just didn't jump up and get him.

PFT recently posted an article where Pete Carrol has been giving clues via his Twitter account as to what they will do on draft day.  I posted my thoughts on the site, but wanted to run them by you.

First, here is the link to the article, and the copy of the text below:  http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/04/21/pete-carroll-gives-away-his-draft-plans/

PeCarrol Tweets Draft Strategyte Carroll gives away his draft plans Posted by Gregg Rosenthal on April 21, 2010 2:05 PM ET And now for Wednesday's reminder that 2010 is a strange time to live in.

Pete Carroll has started to tweet links to songs in an effort to give fans hints about his draft picks.  "Try 2 figure it out!" Caroll writes. 

Some of the selections so far include, "Jump Around" by House of Pain, "California Love" by Tupac, "Let the Beat Build" by Lil Wayne, "Back Door Man" by the Doors and "Smooth Criminal" by Michael Jackson.

The logical choice for the last clue: Florida's Carlos Dunlap.  One of our Twitter followers suggested it means the Seahawks will trade for Ben Roethlisberger.

We are eagerly anticipating Bill Belichick's draft clue tweets later in the day linking to Kid Cudi, Bon Jovi, and Wrecks-N-Effect.

 My thoughts are:

1. The "Try 2 figure it out" is referencing our #2 pick.

2. The "Jump Around" means they are jumping up, since you always jump forward, not back.

3. "California Love" references Clausen, who is from California.

4. "Back Door Man" means they got a back door deal already completed for draft day and will use the back door to get ahead of other teams needing a QB.

5. "Smooth Criminal" means they think they got a steal with the trade and pick.

6. "Let the Beat Build" means they will wait for draft day to pull the deal off, making everyone wait for the big reveal.

Also, Mayhew and Seattle have been swapping guys since last year, so there is a close relationship established between the two teams making it more likely this is a done deal.  Seattle also has two first round picks, so they can give up one, especially for a QB to replace Hasselbeck.  Guess we will cross our fingers and hope!

Though I would love to see the Lion's trade down in the 1st round and acquire more talent, especially since there are 2 guys rated about the same in multiple positions of need, I just don't see it.

 However, I do think that being at the top of the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th rounds makes those slots VERY valuable to other teams and fodder for trading.  Think of the Shonne Green deal of last year.  I also think that picking up all the 7th rounders gives us a little bit of extra deal making leverage.  And not having 5th and 6th round picks, I can see some swaps to get in these rounds as well.

I think the best chance of moving around would be with the Pats who have a ton of 2nd round picks to trade and if they saw a guy they wanted up at the top on Friday, they would move up to get them. 

I went over each draft for the past 8 years and looked at teams who drafted offensive tackles as their first pick.  I only used the first 10 picks for each year, because, let's face it, this range is where the Lion's would have drafted pretty much every year during this span.  And I noticed something interesting: the majority of teams who took tackles are still needing a franchise QB.  So for those who claim we should have gotten a LT with our first pick, well, they don't have any evidence to support it as far as this data suggests.  Teams went LT first, but still never got a franchise QB. They are still stuck in a rut.  The "wisdom" of protection, then passer isn't as lock solid as people claim.   But I'm sure you all can debate it. 

Sort of interesting how many people wanted us to skip taking Stafford last year since the 2010 draft was going to provide a whole flock of great QB's who were all projected to be better than Stafford.  Yet now, none are being slated to go early, except Bradford, but even he has question marks with taking hits on his shoulder. 

Last year, people were claiming how great Tebow, Bradford, Clausen, and McCoy will be. They were projected those guys to all go in the top 10.  Currently as things stand, Clausen may drop out of top 10, McCoy is late 1st round or early 2nd, then Tebow is 2nd or 3rd round.  So where are last year's naysayers now?

Watching the games, there is a guy who never leaves Schwartz's side wearing the same khaki pants, but with a Red shirt instead of the Lion's polo the rest of the coaches wear.  Who is this guy?

I've seen the officials who wear red during college games who let the coach know when TV timeouts are going to happen or are nearing completion.  But this guy is always with the team, home or away.  So it can't be an official who would rotate.  Plus, I don't see these "Red Shirts" during other games between different teams.  He must be a coach or some assistant valuable to Schwartz.  But who he is and what is role is to the Lions is a mystery to me.

One thing I have noticed this year is that each game seems schemed different than the last.  It just seems that our coaching staff have definitive goals set on how to approach each opponent and that these were practiced all week to prepare for the game.  For example, versus NO, they blitzed less and tried to cover more.  Then next week versus Minnesota, the blitzes were heavy and they definitely focused on controlling AP. For Washington, they ran the ball and utilized Calvin as a decoy.  

So I'm just wondering a few things. Does anyone else notice this difference?  Or is it because I just notice this since the games are so fresh in my mind?  I don't remember seeing any different type of play calling or adjustments from game to game during the Marinelli regime.  You would hear how they wanted to run the ball and stop the run.  That's it.  But Schwartz really talks like he had a unique plan, which an astute fan can decipher during the game.  However, it could be just a total difference in talent, thereby making the different game schemes more prevalent this year than years past.

What do you all see out there in regards to this?

Our offense didn't move the ball out of their own 15 during the last half.  Unless you expect our punter to boot one 80 yards, there wasn't much we could do from keeping the Bear's out of scoring position.  Obviously, our special teams unit sucked, that was plain to see.  But our lack of offensive production in the 3rd and 4th quarters didn't help either. 

The post by n4ry4 in the Time for Stan Kwan to go thread had some interesting stats showing our return game was solid, but stopping the other teams return game was really poor.  This makes sense since it mirrors the Lion's own offensive and defensive production.  We can move the ball nicely on offense, but on defense can't stop anything.  Since the same players are out there on the return team as on offense, we should move the ball on a kick or punt.  And since our defensive guys go out there on a punt or kick, it makes sense we can't stop anyone.

So I can't blame special teams for the entire loss.  I think it shows that our team lacks talent in some major areas and until this gets corrected, we'll continue to see games like this one.