I wish I could post a poll in the comments section of this excellent discussion going on about our run game (or lack thereof) and whether it's even necessary because of how strong our pass offense is and how creative Linehan can be with our pass game and all our weapons.

But I do want to poll for an aggregate of the opinions at PoD on the matter.  Please feel free to say so if these answers suck or don't cover all points of view effectively.

So, looking ahead to the rest of the season, how much does Stafford have to hand the ball off, and how productive does it have to be when he does?

The long countdown is almost over.  If we can't trade out of pick 13, and these are the best players available, which player do you want us to draft of these guys:

S E V E N T Y - F I V E    W O R D S 

S E V E N T Y - F I V E    W O R D S 

S E V E N T Y - F I V E    W O R D S 

S E V E N T Y - F I V E    W O R D S 

Through the disappointment of so many close losses and late-game fall-aparts we've seen, it is, I believe, important to look at some of the positive aspects of the Lions' play to get an idea just how good this team could be if our single most important player didn't spend most of the season injured. 

I was going to look at our pass offense, rush offense, pass defense, rush defense, and special teams to highlight some of the most important measurable categories we're doing well and how much we've improved (or declined) compared to previous seasons...and then I realized how much work that would be, so I'll make this part one, and hopefully look at the others over the next few weeks. 

Passing Offense

Continue reading this post »

I know the Rams are 2-2 and the Lions are 0-4, but I have a great feeling about this weekend.  Just look at their schedule vs ours so far:

 - The Lions opened with three of four games on the road, against opponents who are a combined 9-6 right now (5-6 not including their games against the Lions).

 - The Rams opened with three of four games at home, against opponents who are a combined 5-11 right now (3-9 not including their games against the Rams).

(Continued after the jump)

Continue reading this post »

I apologize for pulling an "I know this should be a fanshot but nobody reads those", but this was a very encouraging read.  Cunningham is sometimes over the top, but when he puts Vanden Bosch ahead of somebody like Derrick Thomas, you know we just picked up a great player on our defense. 

LINK

Philly's receivers are a mismatch against our secondary.  We're going to need a D-Line that doesn't tire out or lose any aggression containing Vick and forcing him to make mistakes.  All it may take is one or two big plays against us and we're trying to fight back from a deficit.  We need 105% from Vanden Bosch & Co every single play.  I say this cautiously: I don't see them disappointing us.

I was curious what kind of contract to expect for Suh, so I looked up some numbers for comparison's sake of the #1 - #3 picks this year compared to last year.

Note: All of these contract $$ numbers are from Wikipedia, and don't take into account some of the crazy complexities of NFL contracts, which almost nobody except player agents and NFL lawyers probably understand.  Anyone who knows more than I do (which is very little) about NFL contracts, please help sort this out...

Continue reading this post »

Okay, it's Thursday morning.  Camp is imminent.  Suh still isn't signed.  What do you think is the biggest item, right now, keeping him from being signed?

S E V E N T Y - F I V E  W O R D S!  S E V E N T Y - F I V E  W O R D S!  S E V E N T Y - F I V E   W O R D S!

Given all the roster turnover that happens every year, and all the new players coming in, it takes me a few games before I can comfortably recall all the jersey numbers for new players who might be on the field.  I'd rather not have to look for a name on the back of a jersey, so in an attempt to get ahead of the curve, and out of some boredom, I put together flashcards on this "quizlet" site.

Directions:

1. Go here: http://quizlet.com/2351811/2010-lions-by-jersey-number-flash-cards/

2. Uncheck "Both Sides" in the top right

3a. Check "Term First" to guess the player by jersey number.

3b. Uncheck "Term First" to guess the jersey number by player name and position.

4. Click the "Shuffle Order" button to randomize (the one that looks like a wide X with right arrows)

5. Start the quiz.  Click the number if you don't remember the player.

How many can you get right?  The starting lineups, easy, but how many of the new guys?  If you got the entire practice squad and all of our free agent signings, congratulations, you need help.

I think the consensus, nearly everywhere I've read, is that the Lions are somewhere between "bad" and "average", better than last year, 'on their way up', etc, but 2010 isn't the year.  Somewhere between 4-12 and 8-8.

I'm going to challenge this a little.  Here's my question...Are the we not good enough to have a chance at making the playoffs this year?

Last year was the mother of all rebuilding years, new gm, new coach, new scheme, new oc, new dc, new qb, etc.  We couldn't possibly hope to win more games than we lost.  We were heavily dependent on rookies playing above any realistic expectations.

As I look at our starters at each position, and try to project whether their performance ought to be average, above-average or below-average compared to the rest of the NFL, I just don't see us as a below-average team.  Am I too optimistic with these:

Continue reading this post »

Who came away with the best value in the three-way trade?

S E V E N T Y - F I V E    W O R D S ?

S E V E N T Y - F I V E    W O R D S ?

S E V E N T Y - F I V E    W O R D S ?

S E V E N T Y - F I V E    W O R D S ?

I can't believe we're only 12 days away from the start of the draft.  I feel like a little kid waiting for Christmas, you know how it goes.

Anyway, of the guys we brought in who are expected to have a chance to start, who do you think will make the biggest impact for us in 2010?

S e v e n t y - f i v e   w o r d s !

Please, indulge me while I ramble.  Or don't, there are shorter fanposts to read...

What I like about Picking Okung

Okay, I'm going to have to turn off my knee-jerk "BPA Suh or Berry! BPA Suh or Berry!" impulse for this one a little bit, and look at the positional value teams put on elite left tackles in the draft, what that means in terms of us getting one in the future once we start winning (i.e. not getting top-5 draft picks), and also the actual value on the field of having an elite pass-protector when we face Jared Allen, Julius Peppers and Clay Matthews twice a year.

We need a long-term Left Tackle.  The top LT's in each draft are the second highest-valued positions in the draft after quarterback**, and they rarely fall out of the top 5 picks.  If you have faith in Schwartz like I do, we won't be selecting in the top 5 again for a long time.  We're building a winning team.

What this means is that, if he fits the consensus view that he is an elite blind-side pass-blocker, and if the Lions start winning and stop ending up with high draft picks, Russell Okung the is the single best Left Tackle we will have a chance to draft for a very long time.

Of course if Suh and Berry also fit the consensus view about them, then Ndamukong Suh is the single best Defensive Tackle we will have a chance to draft for a very long time (assuming St. Louis takes a QB).  Oh, and, of course, Eric Berry is the single best Safety we will have a chance to draft for a very long time.

But we're in a division, and a league, with some great pass-rushers, and I DO NOT WANT Stafford to struggle because, while he had all the talent and heart in the world that it took to be a great QB, he was not properly protected, and got beat up so bad that his lack of protection doomed us all to watching Culpepper/Stanton trot out there late in the season and throw games away, again.

Sliding Backus over, i.e. "two birds with one stone"

If we take Okung with our top pick, we'd likely either start him out at Guard and move him to Tackle soon after, or just put him at LT to start the season.  We'll even be able to debate who the LT should be.  If you enjoyed "Stafford vs Culpepper" on PoD, think of the fun we can have with "Backus vs Okung".  Maybe Okung is not quite as good a run-blocker as Backus, but I have no reason to suspect either guy couldn't fill that huge gaping hole at Left Guard.

Okung is very strong--he put up 38 reps at the combine.  That's 6 more than Suh, even with Okung's longer arms, for anyone who thinks bench press reps at the combine are meaningful (recalling some other discussions on PoD, bench press reps seemed like a significant reason for some to doubt Gerald McCoy's strength when comparing him to Suh).  I have no reason to believe he couldn't be a much better Left Guard than Loper or Ramirez if he wasn't ready to take over at Left Tackle immediately (which would be no red flag to me--even Jonathan Ogden started in the NFL at the guard position).

More likely, Backus would slide to Guard, and allow Okung to do what he does best--protect our QB against teams' best pass-rusher.

The thing I like most about this: We don't have to worry about that LG position any more for a few years!  We already know Backus is a decent starting lineman with good ability and excellent durability, he'd be fine at Guard, so we could stop scouring a thin FA market or hoping for a mid-round 2010 rookie to step up (both are dubious propositions if we hope to have a good O-Line in 2010).  We can save that third- or fourth-round pick to spend fixing our secondary, or whatever.  One less hole to fill.  yay.


What I don't like about picking Okung

BPA

Would Schwartz and Mayhew honestly tell all of us that Okung was higher on their draft board than both Suh and Berry, that he is likely to be a better football player than those two, and that's why we drafted him--because we always take the BPA over positional need--and expect fans to believe it?  I guess I'd have trouble with that one.  Maybe it's true, maybe Suh and Berry have been able to secure so much more hype because they get to do things like knock down the QB and run back interceptions for touchdowns.  On the other hand, offensive linemen can be such unsung heroes--it can be harder to notice non-sacks caused by a good OT than sacks caused by a good DT.  I guess I'll defer to the consensus I've heard for a few months now--that while Okung is clearly the best LT in this draft, Suh/Berry is "the next" Sapp/Reed, thus picking Okung over Suh/Berry would be a deviation from BPA, in favor of positional value.


Jeff Backus, you rock!  Now get out of the way and go play Guard

I also wonder how Schwartz would handle giving praise to an offensive lineman, saying he deserved to be voted to the Pro Bowl, and then immediately spending the second pick in the whole draft on somebody who plays his position.  Obviously Schwartz doesn't have to let things he said in the past affect his sound decision-making, but I wonder if there would be any credibility damage in sending those mixed signals.  Maybe not, but you'd have to wonder how he'd field those questions that are guaranteed to come about what he said about Backus if Okung is the pick.



**
Draft Position of FIRST Offensive Tackle drafted (2000-2009):
3,2,4,8,2,13,4,3,1,2 (Median = 3)

Draft Position of SECOND Offensive Tackle drafted (2000-2009):
6,14,7,20,16,19,39,5,12,6 (Median = 13)

   Number of Offensive Tackles gone before pick #15 (2000-2009):
   1,2,3,1,1,1,1,2,3,3 (Median = 1.5)

Draft Position of the FIRST Defensive Tackle drafted (2000-2009):
6,3,6,4,14,16,12,10,5,9 (Median = 7.5)

Draft Position of the SECOND Defensive Tackle drafted (2000-2009):
25,6,12,6,21,28,14,13,7,24 (Median = 13.5)

Draft Position of the FIRST Safety drafted (2000-2009):
34,37,8,16,5,34,7,6,31,33 (Median = 24.5)

Draft Position of the SECOND Safety drafted (2000-2009):
39,54,24,42,44,40,8,19,43,34 (Median = 39.5)


And, just for comparison...

Draft Position of FIRST Quarterback drafted (2000-2009):
18,1,1,1,1,1,3,1,3,1 (Median = 1)

Draft Position of FIRST 4-3 Defensive End drafted (2000-2009):
1,4,2,14,18,18,1,4,3,2 (Median = 4)



I forgot where I was going with these numbers, I like numbers, you can use them for the powerball, but anyway, how would you feel about the Lions taking Russell Okung?

How much of an upgrade over Bryant Johnson is Nate Burleson?

They both have been in the league since 2003, so they're about the same age.  Both have about the same number of career starts.

Burleson's career 13.5 yards-per attempt is an upgrade over Johnson's career 12.5.  Burleson has one season with more than 1000 receiving yards (1006 in 2004), another season over 800 (812 last year).  Johnson has been very consistent in the 400's-500's, with one exception--740 yards in 2006.

As far as touchdowns go, Burleson had two 9-TD seasons (2004 and 2007).  Otherwise, both receivers are in the 1-4 range for their careers.  Hopefully whatever worked for Burleson those two years he can recreate for us, and he can be more of a scoring threat.

Continue reading this post »

Ok, suppose we're hoping for better value from a trade-down, in terms of salary impact, and the number of guys we can pick in the first few rounds, than simply picking somebody at #2 and paying him #2-overall money.

Who does St. Louis have to draft at #1 to make our #2 pick more desirable to the the teams drafting after us?

I am assuming that there are only three players St. Louis would consider at #1: Jimmy Clausen, Sam Bradford, and Ndamukong Suh.  The Rams won't take Russell Okung (they took Jason Smith, LT, at #2 last year), Gerald McCoy (Suh is better), or Eric Berry (they're not paying a safety #1-overall money).

So, who needs to go at #1 to make an attractive trade-down from #2 most likely to happen?

Inspired by the great comments in Lostincali's post here, and because I like data, I'm curious to see just a snapshot of how we in the PoD community are spread out...

Sorry if there is overlap in these options, or if I missed your locale, I am not a geographer.

s e v e n t y - f i v e    w o r d s

s e v e n t y - f i v e    w o r d s

I'm going to challenge conventional wisdom, a little bit, that says trading down is usually good for rebuilding teams that have a lot of needs, while trading up is usually good for good teams that are "one player away" or teams who need a franchise QB.

My question is...are there any prospects in this draft who, if they slipped into the 20's-ish, you would be comfortable seeing the Lions trade UP for?

Keep in mind realistic value...

   Trading up from #34 all the way to #20 would probably cost us our high third-round pick.

   Trading up from #34 to #25 would probably require swapping our high-third for their low-fourth.

   Trading up from #34 to #30 would probably cost us our fifth and sixth (or swapping our fourth for their sixth)

If I there was one player I would trade up for, it would be Mike Iupati, G, Idaho.  I don't think he makes it past Dallas at #27, but if Baltimore or Arizona would trade us their #25 or #26 for our #34 (and we'd swap our high-third at #66 for their low-fourth--#120-ish depending on compensatory awards), I'd be happy with the trade.

I would support this for a combination of reasons.

1. There is probably not a Guard after Iupati who is worth #34, and since Mayhew will certainly go BPA, that means we probably won't take a Guard at #34.

2. If we then take a Guard in the 3rd or 4th round he may be better long-term than Manny Ramirez, the last G we took with a 4th round pick, but a rookie almost certainly will not be better in his first year--going up against NFL DT's every game.

3. With the thin crop of free agents, we could hope to get a Guard that some other team let go--but how would this strategy likely get us a better player than Daniel Loper?  I don't think it would.  Teams tend to hang on to good O-Linemen, and it will be easier than ever for them to do it this year with the 2010 FA rules and no salary cap.

4. Left Guard is an immediate need for the Lions.  We cannot be weak in the middle of the O-Line expect to generate a running game or protect the QB.  I don't want to go into another season worrying about Backus getting overwhelmed, Stafford getting beat up, and Calvin Johnson getting triple-teamed because our interior OL can't generate a push for the run game.

5. Mike Iupati looks like a damn dominant Guard.  He really impressed the coaching staff in the Senior Bowl practices (although he struggled a little bit when they moved him all around, so he should probably just settle into LG and stay there).  I think he would very quickly be an immediate improvement over Loper/Jansen/Ramirez/other.  There is probably a big drop-off after Iupati in terms of what kind of production we can expect immediately, and a drop-off in the long-term potential too.

6. His hair is like Fabio.  It's flowing.  It's beautiful.  no homo, but I bet he gets more hair action than Stafford. Well, maybe not quite.

I'd swap a high-third for a low-fourth to make this happen.  Would you?

Anybody else you'd like to see the Lions move up to get?

I didn't know this story until today, but it makes perfect sense.  This little nugget was in Killer's Q&A on MLive today:

(question): " ...  What is it about general manager Martin Mayhew's approach to the draft that is different than Millen's approach considering that there was very little turnover in the scouting department?"

Tom Kowalski:  "...I've often recounted the Brian Calhoun story, about how the Lions were debating about whether to take an offensive lineman at that spot in the third round. The argument was whether the Lions would be "reaching'' for him at that spot. They went back and forth without resolution and then, as the clock was about to expire, a coach yelled "Take Brian Calhoun.'' And that's what they did.

That situation won't happen with Mayhew running the show..."

So while some (coincidentally, more successful) teams would rely on their scouts' research, and iron out their draft board ahead of time, our previous regime would get everybody together to argue back and forth, and then draft the guy whose name was shouted at the right time.

I can't think of a more fickle, haphazard way to make critical decisions short of randomizing the whole thing.  unbelievable.

At this point in time, right after the end of the season, I'm curious to know which way the consensus is leaning in PoD's collective expectations that the player most of us want will still available at pick #2.  

There are some of us who are absolutely certain that there is no way in hell St. Louis passes on a potential franchise quarterback with the #1 pick, because a QB is so important and you have to draft one if you don't have one.  Likewise, there are others of us who don't see any possible way the Rams don't draft Ndamukong Suh, because he is such a dominant player and you have to draft somebody this good if you have the opportunity.

Assuming a trade-down doesn't happen and their only reasonable options are Suh or a QB, which player do YOU expect the Rams to take?

If not, sorry for the zillionth fanpost on the same subject, but I hope this poll can show us, generally, how everyone approaches the subject we've been debating.

I   N E E D   T O   H I T   S E V E N T Y - F I V E   W O R D S   T O   P U B L I S H   T H I S   P O L L .   A M   I   T H E R E   Y E T ?   H O W   A B O U T   N O W ?

Captain Obvious says: For the sake of our offense, it is very important for us to build a solid offensive line.  We know we have talent at a lot of skill positions, but to get the most out of Stafford, Johnson, and Pettigrew, we have to be able to pass-protect better.  To get the most out of Kevin Smith and Aaron Brown, we need to open holes for them.

So, what does everyone want to see our front five on offense look like heading into the future?

A few things I'm wondering about...

Continue reading this post »

(Note from Sean: Bumped to the front page for the interesting comparison and good research.)

Matthew Stafford had a really bad game yesterday.  Still, if you want a pick-me-up from some historical perspective, his overall performance through six games is very, very similar to that of another #1-overall rookie eleven years ago who turned out to be pretty good:

Continue reading this post »

Lions fan here...I just posted this on Pride of Detroit, in case anyone there is interested.  I picked what I thought were the most relevant stats and tried to stay unbiased, but it's not perfect.  Good luck on Sunday, but not too much...

...

Looking at this Sunday's game, I decided to cherry-pick thirty-six or so different overall stats from this season year-to-date to compare how the Lions and Rams stack up against each other.

For each stat, I decided to measure each team's "Advantage" by subtracting the other team's overall NFL rank from their own.  For example, St. Louis' Passing Offense ranks 27th in the NFL in Yards-per-Game, while Detroit's Pass Defense ranks 30th...therefore: Advantage: St. Louis + 3

Stats after the jump...

Continue reading this post »

Looking at this Sunday's game, I decided to cherry-pick thirty-six or so different overall stats from this season year-to-date to compare how the Lions and Rams stack up against each other.

For each stat, I decided to measure each team's "Advantage" by subtracting the other team's overall NFL rank from their own.  For example, St. Louis' Passing Offense ranks 27th in the NFL in Yards-per-Game, while Detroit's Pass Defense ranks 30th...therefore: Advantage: St. Louis + 3

Stats after the jump...

Continue reading this post »

Since we just had a "look forward to the draft" kind of game...

From seeing how horrible we've been doing on pass coverage, I wouldn't be disappointed if we drafted a corner in <em>both </em>of the first two rounds, or at least in rounds 1 and 3.  Get two young guys at the same position to motivate each other.

We will have, probably, somewhere between the 4th and 8th overall pick.  That's a position it's pretty easy to trade down from (unlike the #1 overall was).  For example, in 2009, Cleveland traded down from #5 to #17 and got an extra mid-second-rounder plus a handful of players.  In 2008, New England traded down just three spots from 7th to 10th and got a high third-rounder. 

Now that we finally have a front office and coaching staff where 2nd- and 3rd-rounders aren't a foregone waste of a pick, I would LOVE to pick up an additional future starting-material guy.  Lord knows we need it, we have so little depth at too many positions.

The average selection position of the top cornerback in the past ten drafts (2000-2009) was 12.3.  Obviously the value of Joe Haden or whoever the top CB ends up being could be valued anywhere, but if we assume historical averages, and we need to trade down to about the #12 spot, using the traditional draft value chart, and assuming the team with the 12th overall pick has the 12th pick in each round (a "mid-high" pick in each round):

If we end up at #4...Trading down from the #4 (1800) overall to the #12 (1200) overall would net us something like an extra mid-high 2nd-round pick (#44) and a 4th, 5th, and 6th.  Or, we'd trade down from #4 to #12, and we'd get the 2nd-rounder (#44) plus their 3rd (#76) for our 5th and 6th. 

This might be too optimistic.  The team at #12 would have to REALLY want somebody specific at #4 to give up all of that.  Heck, I'd trade from #4 to #12 and just take the extra 2nd rounder, but the more we could get, the better.

If we end up at #8...Trading down from the #8 (1400) overall to the #12 (1200) overall would net us something like an extra mid-high 3rd-round pick (#76), but we may have to bundle a 7th or 6th-rounder to make it happen.

I know, too much depends on who-wants-who and who's-available-where, but this is a scenario I'd really like to see, and it's not too far-fetched.  We move down a few spots in the first round, pick up an extra 2nd- or 3rd-round pick, take the top corner in the draft, use the extra 2nd- or 3rd-round pick on another starting-quality corner, and use our other 2nd- and 3rd-rounders on BPA D-Line, unless there's a big OL available in rounds 2-3 with a lot of upside who could play Guard until he eventually/hopefully replaces Backus.

Of course, I won't complain if we end up with a big lineman, like Okung or Suh, with our first pick.  But I really want some secondary players who can cover.  It shouldn't be too much to ask.  Plus, 4 picks in the first 3 rounds would be nice too.  Thoughts?

GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions

GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions GO LIONS go lions

After the Saints game, it seemed some of the most common attitudes expressed among fans centered around how it wasn't a shocker or a major disappointment that the Lions didn't win the game.  Points like:

"He's a rookie QB in his first game"

"They didn't draft much defense, so of course we couldn't stop them"

"It was a tough road game against a good team"

"At least we got 27 points"

"At least there were some bright spots, look at our return game"

"It's a rebuilding year"

"You can't fix 0-16 in a [season, offseason, game...insert time period here]"

etc. etc.

It's like the Lions were playing the game with a ready-to-go excuse for losing, at least in the minds of many fans.  As long as they showed some upside (like losing 45-27 instead of 42-7), many of us felt alright about the team going forward, just like we do every offseason.  The idea is that if they "shouldn't" beat a given team on paper, then it's acceptable to lose on the field, as long as they show "progress".  They're victims of a horrible past, and if they don't rise above, and win the game at hand, well, maybe next week...

Not me.

While I can understand a point of view centered around "reasonable expectations" is valid, it's not my point of view that it was okay to lose (again) last week, and I certainly don't feel that way about this coming Sunday.

I may be in the minority on this one, but I think it's their job to win. If there's a game the Lions play, it's their job to win the game.

New Orleans is in the past, so looking at this weekend against Minnesota...

If we lose, and Adrian Peterson rushes for 120 yards, I will not be happy about it.  at all.  Personally, I'm not going to accept for myself the attitude that "well, we kept AP to 120 yards after giving up 143 to Mike Bell, so we're actually improving our run defense...look at us, we're trying!" 

It's our job to stop the run, and if we give up 120 yards or 100 yards (I don't care if he's the best RB in the league), then our run defense is not doing what they're supposed to do.  I feel the same way about giving up 6 td's to one of the best QB's in the league last week.

Hell, if we hold the Vikings to 35 yards rushing and we don't win the game, I don't see the outcome as acceptable.  It means the team as a whole didn't do their job.  They didn't win.

It doesn't matter how good Favre has played against the Lions in the past.  It's their job to beat the Vikings this Sunday.

If Delmas returns two turnovers for touchdowns and CJ scores 3 td receptions and we don't win, then the team didn't do their job.  I expect the win, no matter how long it's been since they actually got one.  They're a professional team.

This Sunday matters even more because of the looming blackouts.  The Lions are teeter-tottering on the brink of not selling enough tickets for every Lions fan within a 17,671 square mile circle of the stadium from being able to catch the game on TV.  We just barely made it for the Vikings game.  The Redskins game in week 3, however, is a lot less compelling.  It's not a team we've played close in the past (like we did against Minny last year)--they've blown us out the last few meetings.  It's not a division game.  It doesn't feature big name players like Peterson and Favre.

If the Lions don't put together a winning product this Sunday, I don't blame fans who maybe would buy tickets to the Washington game for deciding to save their money.

If they can get their first win, however...if they can beat last year's division champ, then they certainly have a good shot at Washington, and that win makes a better case to come watch them week 3.

There is no excuse for losing this game.  For the sake of all the fans in the region who genuinely want to see the Lions this season, but can't afford or make it to a home game, the Lions need to win this one.

It's time to expect more than just "bright spots" and signs that the team "could" win a game in the future.  It's time to win some f***ing football games.  Starting right now.  Not week 8 against St. Louis, not at home against Cleveland, not in 2010.  This Sunday.

I'm done with this podium if anyone wants it :-)

via lastprice.files.wordpress.com

Our favorite subject, I know. 

One of the biggest reasons many Lions fans support starting Stafford right away, even if it's still not clear that he is a better NFL Quarterback than Daunte Culpepper right now (yet) during the preseason, is that more starting experience will help Stafford become a better QB later on.

That is, let him start more games, make some rookie mistakes this year, and he'll be a better quarterback in 2010 and 2011, his second and third years.

Based on my research, I don't believe this is true.

Continue reading this post »

I'm curious how everyone in the Pride feels about Favre signing with the Vikings.  Specifically, how it affects our chances of beating the Vikings this year and beyond.

On the one hand, he's a Hall of Fame-bound QB who probably still has ability, even way past his prime.

On the other hand, yeah, he's way past his prime.  Also, signing him could lead to locker room division on the Vikings, and ultimately disappoint and distract their other QB's.