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