SHE'S MY HUMBLE PIE
by rbanner on Nov 8, 2009 8:14 PM EST
135 comments
Alright people, get ready to pile on...the Humble Pie Express.
Here he is, Mr. 0, count 'em 0, second half TD passes in his NFL career. Longest pass occurred week 1. Only game near 300 yds., the Bears debacle. A 12-5 int. to TD ratio. Today, an underwhelming 4.83 yds. per pass play. Last week, a nearly as impressive 5.09.
54.1% completion rate. 0 TDs over 30 yds. But the worst is the W-L record. Winning forgives much, but today's performance? Rusty Hilger never threw 5 picks. Choke Mitchell did not throw 5 picks, even in that abyssmal Eagles playoff game.
This was a performance for the ages. I know, I know. BBBBBuuuuttt Sanchez threw 5. Not with a 17 point lead he didn't.
I cannot place the entire blame on the rook. But I return to my emphasis on responsibility. Today was not a case of the prior week, where Lion receivers caught a case of dropsideus. This was a case of trying to force balls into spaces that were not there. Under throws. Over throws. Throwing behind the receiver. Zipping the ball in where touch was required. Hell, the TDs were on drives started at the 2 and the 29.
3 times out of 4 at the end of the game, the Seahawks started drives (or scored) via a Stafford int.
Once again, Scott Schwartz, I triple dog dare ya to defend the indefensible.
This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of Pride of Detroit's main writer, Sean, or the site in general. FanPosts are valued expressions of opinion by passionate and knowledgeable fans.
0 recs |
135 comments
Email
Print
Comments
These games......
…..are goign to happen with rookie qbs…..Not a big deal……Whats with the post by the way?……Are you anti Lions?……I seriously dont get it……Rookies will be rookies…….Dont be down on the Lions QB of the future…..Geez.
by BennieBladesFan on Nov 8, 2009 8:26 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Also.....
……Oline was horrible…..Gota give the rook some time to throw guys.
by BennieBladesFan on Nov 8, 2009 8:27 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
O-line was not bad today at all...
everybody always goes right to the “give him a good o-line cause ours played terrible” line but the fact is Stafford had time to throw all day. He was terrible not the receivers, not the o-line, and not the RB’s. I don’t know why you said the o-line was terrible unless you didn’t physically see the game with your eyes. All that o-line shit is is you making excuses for Stafford being pathetic. O-line was above average in pass protection today and he still finds a way to put up one of the worst performances I have seen from a Lions QB.
by toled0lions on Nov 8, 2009 10:51 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
The Oline was not that good today....
……im not saying Staff played good either……Just becasue a team doesnt get sacks doesnt mean they arent getting pressure…….In the 2nd half especially that line did not play well…..1st half yes he had time…..2nd half was a way dofferent story……Yes im a Staff fan and Yes I want him to do good and yes he didnt play well……But he needs time to learn these coverages and he also needs time to throw……Hes a rookie!!!
by BennieBladesFan on Nov 8, 2009 11:10 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Don't blame the line it wasn't their fault
http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/2009110808/2009/REG9/lions@seahawks#tab:watch
Watch every Stafford pass they show. No pressure.
by toled0lions on Nov 8, 2009 11:44 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
What about the non existant running game?
I suppose that was not the offensive line’s fault either? I don’t suppose that had any influence on what the defense did against us either right? You are right and wrong toled0lions. You are right that the line did a pretty good job pass blocking. However, you are wrong that at least a portion of Stafford’s performance was on them. They could not open a lane for Smith (or anyone) to establish a ground game. The Seattle defense was able to key on the pass all day long after the first quarter. Yes Matt Stafford made some bad reads and threw a bunch of bad passes, and his performance was poor. However, I disagree that the same outcome would have occured if our offensive line could actually establish some consistency in run blocking.
If there were some lanes to run through, and we could actually establish a ground game, it would take a ton of pressure off of Stafford and the WRs. The play action passes would actually work as they were intended…..the defense would not be able to key on the pass…..our offense would have more balance…..Stafford would see less double coverage on his targets…..there would be less linebackers dropping into a zone and sitting on him. Were the 5 INTs all Stafford’s fault? Were they all the fault of the offensive line? The answer to both questions is no…..however, the lack of run blocking certainly did not help matters. Our offensive line SUCKED ASS yesterday…..and anyone who says different doesn’t know shit. On the same note…..Matt Stafford sucked too, but his mistakes can be justified as rookie mistakes and by the lack of run blocking which allowed Seattle to key on the pass. Stafford is a rookie…..what is the offensive lines excuse?
by KDawg on Nov 9, 2009 3:24 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Justified?
As rookie mistakes?
If KDawg continues to throw to the wrong colored uniform, does the Mic Mac coach say he is justified. Good lil’ Pee Wee, at least you tried.
PHfewe.
Staff had decent prote4ction, he simply could not get the job done.
Throwing behind the receiver is not the lines fault.
Quit the phony cover ups.
The kid stunk it up and all you Dom Jrs. cannot hide Joey Jrs. screw ups!
by rbanner on Nov 9, 2009 9:57 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Glad you finally get it...
Yes, he does get a pass because he’s a rookie.
No, there is no other QB on the team that gives the team a better chance to win.
No, he will not be benched.
Yes, you need to get over it.
Yes, I am rooting for Stafford to make as many mistakes a QB can make this season.
Yes, you are a tool.
No, I will not go out with you.
No, I will not call you any more.
Yes, we can meet in hell.
Later,
CLF
by CLF on Nov 10, 2009 6:48 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I love how
a guy gets a little critical (with due cause mind you) and you immediately call him an anti lions fan.
by supupeoples on Nov 9, 2009 9:51 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
There's a difference between being critical and being excited over your QB's bad game
Saying Stafford struggled mightily, made some terrible throws, and needs to make better reads is being critical.
Jumping for joy and coming on here after “your” QB struggles and exclaiming “I told you so” is not the same thing.
Pride of Detroit, SB Nation's Lions Blog
by Sean Yuille on Nov 9, 2009 9:56 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
+1
I agree Sean. We’re all open to criticism and debate on POD but outright bashing is just not cool. We all know the boat we’re in, overnight success wasn’t in the cards for 2009 anyway. I don’t relish in my teams 1-7 record nor should anyone else.
I spray paint my dog Honolulu Blue and Silver
Pic - me and the great Herman Moore
by NYCLionsfan on Nov 9, 2009 9:58 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
So you say Sean
but recently you called criticism of Staff insanity.
Why shouldn’t I throw “I told you so” out there as you seem to gutless to take it back?
by rbanner on Nov 9, 2009 9:59 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Please show me where I said that
I remember saying it’s asinine to call Stafford a below-average QB after only 4 games, which it is. I’m saying it right now that it is insane to call him a bust this early in his career. Please show me where I said criticism is insane.
Pride of Detroit, SB Nation's Lions Blog
by Sean Yuille on Nov 10, 2009 7:22 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
As I recall
it was when DET23 wanted you to throw me off the board, but I do not know how to retrieve that post on this board.
In what way is it asinine to state the facts?
Has Stafford been above or below average? It is a simple enough question.
by rbanner on Nov 10, 2009 7:54 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Thank you for putting words in my mouth then
http://www.prideofdetroit.com/2009/10/21/1095194/why-stafford-is-a-below-average-qb#23164128
This is what I said: “I’m not going to ban him for having an opinion, albeit a stupid one”
Again, please show me where I said criticism of Stafford is insane. As I have said before, If he is playing poorly, then he is fair game for criticism. Criticism would be to say he’s got to make better reads, get the ball off quicker over the middle, etc., not proclaim that he is a bust and a crappy quarterback who won’t make it in the league. That’s not criticism, that’s labeling him after half a season.
And define the word “facts” for me. In your post titled “WHY STAFFORD IS A BELOW AVERAGE QB!” you said he is one based on these four things:
1. decision making
2. accomplishments
3. leadership
4. value
Of those, only decision making was based on any factual evidence (i.e. stats), and even then it was based on his stats in college. The accomplishments thing you said he didn’t even make a BCS bowl, which isn’t true (2007 Sugar Bowl). The leadership thing is based largely on your opinion, not based on any factual evidence. And your point about value wasn’t accurate, either, as many evaluators had Stafford ranked #1 on their big board. The opinion of a bunch of Mel Kipers doesn’t even seem relevant to what he does in the league, so value based on their opinion seems like a pretty pointless discussion.
To answer your question, it’s asinine to state facts that are either 1) not actually facts, or 2) not even accurate. There’s no question that Stafford has lots of room for improvement, but your post was not about his play so far this season being below average. Your post was just in general saying he is a below average QB based on criteria that consisted largely of your opinion. If your post would have been titled “WHY STAFFORD IS PLAYING LIKE A BELOW AVERAGE QB,” then that would have been a different story. You just went ahead and labeled him as one, though, which is asinine, to me, at least, to do after only 4 or 6 games. The sample size simply isn’t large enough to label him one way or another. Just like the debate we have been having shows, some QBs that struggle in their rookie year turn out to be great, and some turn out to be busts. To put it bluntly, there is no way to know if Stafford will be a bust after only 6 games, and it is way to early to call him a below average quarterback. If he is still playing like this a year from now, then you would actually have a point, but it is way too early in any rookies career to make a determination about him after half a season.
Pride of Detroit, SB Nation's Lions Blog
by Sean Yuille on Nov 10, 2009 8:24 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Woo! You go boy!
rbanner…. you just got schooled….
by DrewsLions on Nov 10, 2009 8:45 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
"pretty pointless discussion"
When the facts don’t work in your favor, roll over, play dead, and maybe no one will notice.
Relying on the opinion of others (who are alleged experts) to back up one’s point is legitimate or, at the very least, better than using one’s own opinion. Thus, expert witness opinion in a trial versus an attorney’s own personal belief (which, boviously, would tend to be biased).
“to me”, again, you insert yourself with an opinion, while, in essence, bashing me for mine. You can play the symantics game if you wish, but it changes nothing.
Was it too early to say Carr, Couch, etc. was a bust after only a few games? Perhaps, but it fails to address the point, which is it would have been correct to do so.
My question merely required a yes or no. Apparently, that was too much to ask.
by rbanner on Nov 10, 2009 9:52 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
You didn't ask a yes or no question....
you ask if stafford’s play was above or below avererage.
I’d say based on FACTS and STATS from other ROOKIE QBs, that STAFFORD’S play is AVERAGE.
And answer you did not ask for, but the right one BASED ON STATISTICAL FACTS from other ROOKIE QBS.
NOW, here’s a couple of questions for you…
Do you think a rookie should be compared to a veteran? As an equal? (those ARE yes or no questions)
by CLF on Nov 10, 2009 10:11 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
That is a yes or no
question. A yes or no question is one that can be answered yes or no.
by rbanner on Nov 10, 2009 10:21 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
this comeing from you??
you cant answere the question… are you a lions fan??? and thats a yes or no and has been asked to you about 1000 times
Just Remember matt... what would Daunte do??
by det32 on Nov 10, 2009 10:51 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
rbanner. Are you talking about your question of
Has Stafford been below or above avg.? IMO he has been avg. There has been comparisons to other rookie QBs and Stafford posted on this site, Payton Manning for one that have like stats in their first 6 games. Would you have called them a bust after 6 games as well.
You also mention in your post that you don’t lay the blame of the loss at Staffords feet alone. I am curious who or what units should get the blame in your opinion. I guess it just sounds like you are throwing Stafford under the bus as a rookie but not holding anyone else accountable.
by Lead Hunter on Nov 10, 2009 10:51 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Are we talking
last game or all games in general?
by rbanner on Nov 10, 2009 3:01 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
In regards to
Whom gets blame, the last game.
As far as Stafford goes, I am just curious if you would have had the same opinion of Manning after his first six games in the league?
by Lead Hunter on Nov 10, 2009 4:55 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Old news
I have already been over this…
by rbanner on Nov 10, 2009 6:02 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Fair enough
I don’t recall you saying one way or the other on Manning but if you say so.
As for who else gets the blame besides Stafford in the last game, I don’t think you covered that in your post either.
My guess is you answer comments or post just to get a rise out of people. For whatever reason you do, you proved onething to me, you can’t just answer a question with a simple answer. There has to be drama, riddles, insults, or just something to get another rise out of someone.
Thats cool with me, I won’t bother you anymore with qustions of old news anymore. Its obvious you don’t have time to answer such simple straight forward questions.
by Lead Hunter on Nov 10, 2009 6:46 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I am happy to cover
whatever it is you like. I just wanted it qualified. Who else gets the blame:
1. As I already stated, I think the Lions got jobbed a couple of times by the officials. James pass interference call was bogus. The non-call on him being thrown to the ground was equally bogus.
2. When the othere team has returns of 41 & 46 yds. & you have no better than 32 as your long, you are losing that war.
3. Injuries, The Lions were the walking wounded with a plethora of injuries during the game. Smith had a 5.2 average but only 13 carries. If healthy, that alone could have been the difference in the game.
4. TOs. The Lions got them early, the Seahawks got them late. One more by the D in the late stages could have been the difference.
5. Coaching. Going for it on one 4th and 2 and then not going for it on 4th & 2 (maybe a long 1). I don’t get that. Some of the play calling was suspect at best.
Hope that answers your question.
by rbanner on Nov 10, 2009 8:17 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
"Has Stafford been above or below average?"
That is not a yes or no question, for the record.
Pride of Detroit, SB Nation's Lions Blog
by Sean Yuille on Nov 10, 2009 10:53 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Good point
Its the only question I could find from him, albeit it is not a yes/no question.
by Lead Hunter on Nov 10, 2009 11:03 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
It can be answered yes or no
that is not even debatable.
by rbanner on Nov 10, 2009 2:57 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
What?
How can a choice based question, with the choices give (IE above average or below average" be answered yes or no?
rbanner: “Has Stafford been above or below average?”
POD: Uhhhhh…..yes?
That does not answer the GD question! You can not answer that question yes or no and call it an answer! You are just digging yourself a deeper and deeper hole…..but you can stop it. Just shut your mouth and put the shovel down.
by KDawg on Nov 10, 2009 3:53 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Wow dude
So if you ask me did I vote for McCain or Obama and I respond yes, that will make sense?
Pride of Detroit, SB Nation's Lions Blog
by Sean Yuille on Nov 10, 2009 4:05 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
It makes as much sense
as what you previously posted.
Above or below would have to be the choices, but it is clearly one or the other and you never got to the answer.
by rbanner on Nov 10, 2009 6:04 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Way to completely ignore 95% of what I posted
And I’m still waiting to find out where I said criticizing Stafford was insane…
Pride of Detroit, SB Nation's Lions Blog
by Sean Yuille on Nov 10, 2009 10:17 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Fine, you pick and choose what I should respond to
and ignore that which I have. Right back at you…
by rbanner on Nov 10, 2009 10:22 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Why should I even bother responding to something...
…when it was one minuscule point I was making in a big write-up about how your post was off base? The bigger point was that you apparently don’t know the definition of what a fact is and that you weren’t calling Stafford a below average QB based on his stats from this year, you were just labeling him that in a general way.
Pride of Detroit, SB Nation's Lions Blog
by Sean Yuille on Nov 10, 2009 10:56 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
So you want to limit it
to the body of work to date? Then I choose to use the stats to date.
If you want to take it though out his career, we can do that too.
BUt don’t say it is largely my opinion, as I have formed this opinion based on the large body of work of others, much of which has been referenced.
Additionally, when you state “many evaluuators had Stafford ranked #1” this is your opinion.
To date, I have seen 1. And that one had Beanie ranked in the top 15, so I fail to find it very credible, however it is one.
I will state I did miss on the Sugar Bowl, which is a BCS bowl. It is one that never hosts the championship, so I may have needed to qualify that in the original post.
by rbanner on Nov 10, 2009 3:09 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Wrong again, the Sugar Bowl hosted the BCS championship once every four years, and in the new system it is hosted by the people behind the Sugar Bowl once every four years
As for your other points, aside from his stats in college, you were basing it on criteria that is your opinion. There is nothing factual about saying that he wasn’t a great leader or cracked under pressure. That is your opinion, and unless you played with Stafford at Georgia, it is not a very credible one. Another point was that he never won a big game. Aside from the fact that you were wrong in saying he never played in a BCS bowl, your opinion of a big game obviously differs from mine. Playing Florida in Jacksonville each year is a big game to me. Playing in the Capital One Bowl is a big game (and yes, I know he struggled initially in that one before getting it going in the second half). For your final point you bring up value, which is all based on opinion. There is nothing factual about a draft expert’s opinion. The only thing factual about value is when we all look back at past drafts about 5 years from now on comment on a player’s value. I’m not going to bother going to every draft website to see where Stafford was ranked, but I’m willing to bet he was #1 on more than 1. And I’m also willing to bet that you can find things like Beanie being ranked in the top 15 on virtually every big board. It’s tough for any of these sites or “experts” to have very much credibility when so much is based on opinion and we won’t know how the player’s NFL career turns out for at least a few years. It’s one big guessing game.
Pride of Detroit, SB Nation's Lions Blog
by Sean Yuille on Nov 10, 2009 4:14 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Not according to
Wiki…
Caital One Bowl? What’s next, the Poulan Weed Eater BowL?
Next you get to claims you say you bet exist but cannot provide?
How convenient.
To an extent, it is all one big guessing game, but the decisions the Lions have made in the past do not support them being right (on average) in the present.
by rbanner on Nov 10, 2009 6:08 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Capital One Bowl is the biggest non-BCS game
It’s payout is $4.25 million, which is the most of any non-BCS bowl.
Pride of Detroit, SB Nation's Lions Blog
by Sean Yuille on Nov 10, 2009 9:15 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Learn how to spell idiot.....
S-E-M-A-N-T-I-C-S…..say it with me……semantics……
I doubt you even know what the word means. Your mouth would have been a hell of a competitor for Bruce Jenner…..run run run run run…..and run some more, with no point other than just to run.
by KDawg on Nov 10, 2009 3:50 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
That was such an awesome tackle.
2009 = The start of the Lions Golden Age (We hope).
Zack Follett: he will hurt your mind.
by Hyperion Ecta on Nov 10, 2009 9:20 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
To be fair.
This isn’t rbanner’s first time being “critical”. Personally, I think his opinion is just as warranted as anyone else’s…but just so you know…there is a history here, and that probably plays as much of a role as anything he’s actually posted this time.
by Mushy on Nov 9, 2009 10:54 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks
For clarifying, that i did not know.
by supupeoples on Nov 10, 2009 8:32 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
True on that with Rusty and Scott.....
……..But Peyton, Steve Young and Dan Marino did……Those guys turned out just fine.
by BennieBladesFan on Nov 8, 2009 8:29 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
know ones killed you yet??
Just Remember matt... what would Daunte do??
by det32 on Nov 8, 2009 9:01 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
This will not end well
Pride of Detroit, SB Nation's Lions Blog
by Sean Yuille on Nov 8, 2009 9:07 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
All I will say is you seem a bit too excited that Stafford didn't play well
Pride of Detroit, SB Nation's Lions Blog
by Sean Yuille on Nov 8, 2009 9:08 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
Last time
you claimed insanity.
Not so insane this time, Yuille?
If it does not end well, more the merrier for you, right?
Look, I would not have used the 1st overall pick on a guy with a lot of question marks.
Some, that is inevitable.
This guy had far too many.
Now the Lions are stuck with this albatross around the neck for years to come.
Joey jr. sticks because the cap makes it so.
But quit with the excuses, because they just don’t fly anymore.
by rbanner on Nov 8, 2009 10:09 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
dude they all had question marks.
we were going to pick curry or smith if we didnt pick stafford
we where going to use curry as our MLB witch he had never played and we had no clue if it was going to work out..+ we have foote now
i dont think the staff consided smith but fans wanted him but he is playing RT now witch means he isnt ready for LT so he would not help ether…
so plez tell me what we should have got with that 1st pick
Just Remember matt... what would Daunte do??
by det32 on Nov 8, 2009 10:30 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
How do you know that?
Suppose Curry gets taken No. 1. Then Foote becomes available.
Voila. 3-4 defense. Foote plays the middle.
The Lions take Oher with the 20 pick and they are in better shape than they are today!
by rbanner on Nov 8, 2009 10:34 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
They werent going to play a 3 - 4.....
….not Cunnigham or Schwartz style
by BennieBladesFan on Nov 8, 2009 11:11 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Cripes
adopt to what you have. Who cares what their style is, you play the players who give you the best chance to win. Football 101.
by rbanner on Nov 9, 2009 6:43 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
They wouldnt have done that.....
…..thats what im saying…..besides there style was to draft a young QB who they mew was going to have a bumpy rookie season……Knowing theyd take some bumps with him this season……GO STAFF!!! GO LIONS!!!!
by BennieBladesFan on Nov 9, 2009 10:41 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
You don't hire BMW to build a jet
and you don’t hire Boeing to build a car.
If a guy did so well at his job that you want to hire him, why would you immediately ask him to change how he does his job?
by ATL Lion on Nov 9, 2009 11:51 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Additionally
Curry supposedly was willing to take less money than Long did,
If so, this means the Lions have more money to sign another free agent. All of you claim the Lions have holes to fill, correct?
If so, save money and do not sign the QB, sign another free agent. Develop a QB or draft one next year (Culpepper is gone) and your team is miles ahead.
by rbanner on Nov 8, 2009 10:38 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
we have levy who as a back up stats are all most as good as curry
+ Cunnigham said we will not go 3-4 as long as he is here.. ontop of all that how would playing the 3-4 with one 3-4 player help us??
Just Remember matt... what would Daunte do??
by det32 on Nov 9, 2009 10:02 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I agree with this post.....
……Curry didnt show me much last night…….Levy has proven to be a cheaper and better option
by BennieBladesFan on Nov 9, 2009 10:41 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
+1
I love Levy right now. Sure tackler, knows what he’s doing on the field, and has all the skills in the world to be a great LB in this league. Let’s just hope this franchise doesn’t kill his passion for the game like it has so many countless others.
by toled0lions on Nov 9, 2009 12:49 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I don't think we lost any free agents because we weren't willing to pay them
I think we lost them because they didn’t want to play for the Lions. How would drafting Curry have solved that?
by ATL Lion on Nov 9, 2009 2:18 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
You can't make an offer
to someone you do not have cap space for!
by rbanner on Nov 9, 2009 3:16 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
QB
I wouldn’t give up on him but the fact is he played terrible. You can’t win if your quarterback thows 5 picks. On a positive note I thought the Rookie tight end played very well. I thought we should have thrown to him even more.
by lions09 on Nov 8, 2009 10:07 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
From the days of the Bad Boys
I learned you ride the hot hand. If your player never does it again, you play out the streak. Make the other team prove they can stop what has worked.
Portland couldn’t stop the Microwave or Zeke.
The Lakers could not stop Joe D.
Play out the hand, even if the cards are getting cold.
by rbanner on Nov 8, 2009 10:12 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Hot Hand?
Was there a hot hand yesterday?
If by hot hand you mean, force the Seahawks to play with their heads up their asses, then yes, I agree, keep making them F’ Up! Otherwise…? What are you referring to?
by Mushy on Nov 9, 2009 7:47 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
You might try
reading the post with your eyes. The hot hand was throwing to the TE. Spoon feeding and burping on your schedule today, too.
by rbanner on Nov 9, 2009 1:13 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
This is why people don't like you.
I mean what is with this response? Going to childish insults (from one of the elders on this site mind you), when a legitimate question is being asked is something I would expect from my three year old nephew. Why so much hostility rbanner?
I apologize for not being clairvoyent enough to understand your relatively vague reference above. Maybe it was because I don’t recognize a TE who catches a few passes as “the hot hand”. Are you suggesting, implying or inferring that they lost this game because they didn’t throw the ball to Pettigrew on every down?
Based on the way Stafford finished that debacle yesterday he could have targetted Pettigrew 50 times and they still wouldn’t have won the game. One thing about “throwing to the hand hand” is that the throws still have to avoid the defenders on the field. My point being, Stafford to Pettigrew may have been working…Stafford to Seattle’s defense was not. I fail to see how strategy played in to throwing 5INT? It’s not like five turnovers is in the gameplan, I don’t believe it was muttered in the huddle “hey Pettigrew has been open a lot, let’s try throwing it to Trufant on the next play”?
Also:
Play out the hand, even if the cards are getting cold.
What is that a poker reference mixed in with several basketball references? Here’s some more obscurities not relevant to the game played yesterday: Never trump your partners Ace, Know when to hold ‘em, know when to fold ’em, know when to walk away, know when to run, it’s not cheating because it’s YOUR dog, shake what your mamma gave ya, and back that ass up. Oh, and so I don’t have to explain myself afterwards (since I’ll be busy spoon feeding and burping) I’m referring to how well Nick Harris was punting the ball yesterday. Obvious though, isn’t it?!
by Mushy on Nov 9, 2009 1:55 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
There are soooooo mnay reasons people don't like him
Why try to choose one.
by ATL Lion on Nov 9, 2009 2:14 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Number one reason.....
He is a pedantic, pontificating, patronizing, ignorant ASSHOLE!
by KDawg on Nov 9, 2009 3:31 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
That's not
1. That is several. But thanks for the deep thought process.
by rbanner on Nov 9, 2009 10:01 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
nope.....
It still boils down to one reason…..ASSHOLE.
The rest are just adjectives describing the type of asshole that you are.
by KDawg on Nov 10, 2009 3:56 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
For the record...rbanner...
I never said that you are any type of an asshole. I just think you talk out of yours.
have a nice day.
by JCruize on Nov 11, 2009 1:57 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
This coming from
Mr. F’Up.
Here is a hint: You cannot score on a Nick Harris punt. And we all saw the week before that even when Harris puts the D in good (Nay, great) position, the D can easily give it up.
by rbanner on Nov 9, 2009 3:15 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
You call a guy that you do not know from Adam "Mr. F'Up"??
I wish I could meet you in a dark alley dickface……
by KDawg on Nov 9, 2009 3:32 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I think he was referring to my post above...
…where I talked about making the Seahawks “F’Up”…but honestly I still don’t get his response (I am, afterall, still learning to read with my eyes)…and I have no idea why I would attempt to defend his point.
by Mushy on Nov 9, 2009 3:53 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Oops....I missed that.....
Thanks for pointing it out Mushy, because I was totally confused…..which made me quite angry. Still, it does not change the fact that rbanner is intentionally baiting everyone with his comments, nor the fact that his demeanor has forced a distinct feeling of dislike out of me.
by KDawg on Nov 9, 2009 4:53 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Dip stick? Really?
Do you live in Hazard County? Are you the secretly Roscoe P. Coltrain? Is that what the “r” in rbanner stands for… Roscoe? Yeah… that makes sense….
by DrewsLions on Nov 10, 2009 8:48 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
PPPPSSHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
Lost shepard to Bo Peep…. Looks like Rosco got in the moonshine again… PSSSSSHHHHHHHHH.
by CLF on Nov 10, 2009 9:11 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
PPPPSSHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
Lost shepard to Bo Peep…. Looks like Rosco got in the moonshine again… PSSSSSHHHHHHHHH.
by CLF on Nov 10, 2009 9:12 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Unlike like some of you
I perfer not to delve into vulgarities.
But if it puts a smile on your face…
by rbanner on Nov 10, 2009 9:54 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I don't dive into vulgarities either, but "dip stick"?
by DrewsLions on Nov 10, 2009 11:27 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
lol
Boss: “The Best offense is a bigger offense”
To which Rosco responded….
“And I tell ya, we are the most offensive people in these parts”
What a perfect fit……
by KDawg on Nov 10, 2009 4:06 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Please never refrence how you like to ride hot hands
The imagery is enough to put me off my feed.
by ATL Lion on Nov 9, 2009 11:52 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
All I Can Say Is.....
…..The Oline has to give him time also…….They were in his face the whole game…..Any QB would struggle with that.
by BennieBladesFan on Nov 8, 2009 10:13 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
It is the NFL
if he cannot handle the pressure, then management screwed up. If he can, he really screwed the pooch today.
by rbanner on Nov 8, 2009 10:16 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Wow.....
….I hope you wernt living in Indy when Manning was a rookie…….You woulda ran him outa town…..Very similar starts between the 2 qbs……He needs time!!!
by BennieBladesFan on Nov 8, 2009 11:12 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
STOP with the O-line excuse please.
They weren’t as bad as you assume today that is just a defense mechanism you use to explain away Stafford’s garbage he throws around. Watch the tape on the NFL rewind and watch only the O-line when he drops back to pass. He had good protection today. So I say again QUIT saying it’s the O-lines fault.
by toled0lions on Nov 8, 2009 10:55 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
LOL
Yeah okay.
BTW, Sanchez did throw his INTs in a similar situation. He was either up or tied the whole time. Stafford did not throw the entirety of his INTs while leading.
GO LIONS! RESTORE THE ROAR!
by Twon82 on Nov 8, 2009 10:46 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Once again
not by 17. The Jets only scored 13 he whole game.
And I am throughly disappointed none of you got my Scott Schwartz reference.
You are not my friend Flick!
by rbanner on Nov 8, 2009 10:54 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
STAFF IS THE MAN!!!!!
GO SRAFFORD!!!!! GO STAFFORD!!!! GO STAFFORD!!!!! Hes the qb of the future like it or not man…..May as well root him on…….GO STAFF GO LIONS!!!!!
by BennieBladesFan on Nov 8, 2009 11:14 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
You are a wierd, wierd dude, rbanner
I don’t get you and I doubt I ever will. Are you here simply to capitalize on every moment you think you can post an “I told you so”? I simply don’t get how you can be so pessimistic and still be a so-called “long-time Lion’s fan”.
I know your type. I’ve worked with people like you before. You’re the guy that when he comes around to chat, everyone pretends to be busy. You’re the blow-hard, the know-it-all, the “these young whipper-snappers ain’t got nothin’ on me” guy. You don’t work well with others, you don’t know how to have a civil conversation and you have to get the last word in. All of your life people have been giving you the hint that you’re an egotistic jerk-off, yet you keep coming ‘round. Just in case it’s the straw that broke the camel’s back, here’s from me… you’re an egotistical jerk-off.
As for your post…. blah. No one will argue that Stafford had a piss poor second half. I’ve got quite a few thoughts about his performance, but I’ll share them tomorrow. I won’t stick up for his outing, though. He played badly and takes the Lion’s share of the credit because he’s the quarterback. But your giddiness about his performance is disturbing. I am not excited that he had a bad game. But it’s also not nearly the end of the world and Stafford is not even close to being in Harrington’s league – i.e. at least Stafford understands the playbook and has leadership abilities. If you had any football acumen, you would stop the childish comparisons to Harrington… they could not be more different in style and substance. Stafford will have plenty of time to prove himself over the coming years. But you cannot say for certain anything other than what you have seen from a rookie QB to this point, so get off your soap box and get to bed… it’s a little late for you old timer. Take your Geritol and go to sleep.
by DrewsLions on Nov 8, 2009 11:18 PM EST reply actions 2 recs
What an excellent defense
On par with the strategies most of you throw at me. Not a single stat to support your claim.
You want me to go to bed? Fine. Get a brain!
by rbanner on Nov 9, 2009 6:45 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I don't need stats, because...
I agree that he had the bad game. It’s you and your posting style that I have an issue with. You are intentionally posting this stuff for your own weird jollies. There are much more constructive and friendly ways to disagree with someone or post comments critical of the team. You lack the eloquence to be able to do so, so you seem happy to simply wallow in the gutter. To each his own, I guess.
by DrewsLions on Nov 9, 2009 1:23 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
You're right, Drew
I’ve worked with guys like that. They usually have worked in maintenance or the toolroom for 20 years, and wear a shirt that has a patch with their name on it. And a big belt buckle.
I know your type. I’ve worked with people like you before. You’re the guy that when he comes around to chat, everyone pretends to be busy. You’re the blow-hard, the know-it-all, the "these young whipper-snappers ain’t got nothin’ on me" guy. You don’t work well with others, you don’t know how to have a civil conversation and you have to get the last word in.
What? He can’t block a dead gopher? Humph, details.
by GRLion on Nov 9, 2009 4:07 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I dont get it
Why rub it in ?
Why be so negative ?
Did you expect Stafford to come out and be the MVP or something, he’s a rookie, he’ll probably throw a lot more int’s before his career is over.
Whats your point ?
Proud Detroit Lions season ticket holder since.......2009 !!
by BoscoHB on Nov 9, 2009 1:34 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
CLF
Where do you find this stuff!!! Too funny!!!
I spray paint my dog Honolulu Blue and Silver
Pic - me and the great Herman Moore
by NYCLionsfan on Nov 9, 2009 8:56 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Rookie!
I’m a long-time Colts fan. You know who led the league in interceptions during Peyton Manning’s rookie year? Peyton Manning. How many games did the Colts win that year? 3.
Somehow, things turned out OK.
The thing to remember is that this kid is a ROOKIE. Things move so much faster in the NFL that there’s a lot of adjustment to do. You can force plays in the NCAA that you can’t in the NFL, because the secondaries move at light speed, the corners can actually catch, and the LBs can read your mind.
Stafford has great pocket awareness and a great arm. Becoming a true offensive threat in the NFL means being able to read the defense and know when to go for the big play—and both of those things come with experience, which Stafford doesn’t have much of yet.
If he still looks like this 2 years from now, then you have a right to complain.
by Fishmandude on Nov 9, 2009 8:45 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Rookie!
Rookie QB’s have many things to learn. Think of a season as a textbook with 16 chapters. Players on other teams have already read the book, but your rookie QB is reading that textbook for the first time. Soooo……say your QB has read chapter 8, expecting a quiz on that chapter. What he gets on Sunday is a quiz on chapters 8 and 16. He aces the questions on chapter 8, but blows the questions about chapter 16. The overall score looks bad. He fails the test. This is why rookie QB’s are inconsistent. This is why the progress line of rookie QB’s is never a smooth upward line. It’s completely unrealistic to expect each and every game to be better statistically than the last. But he’s actually made progress. He learned the chapter 8 stuff, and got a taste of chapter 16…..he now know what he needs to do, what he needs to learn (go read chapter 16).
Staff’s a rookie. For me, that’s an acceptable excuse. He’s learning. It’ll take all year. Get over it. I don’t care if he has more statistically bad games this year. I don’t care if he throws 10 INT’s next week. I don’t care what his overall season stats look like at the end of the season. Get over it.
QB learning takes place in small ways all during the course of a season. You may see progress in some areas on individual plays (like Staff showing more touch on some passes recently in certain situations), but other kinds of mistakes and learning will still happen on other plays in the same game, so "progress" won’t necessarily show up in the stat column at the end of a given game.
The rookie year is a learning year. That’s especially true for QB’s. Get over it.
Patience.
What? He can’t block a dead gopher? Humph, details.
by GRLion on Nov 9, 2009 3:56 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Rookie?
Couch was a rookie. Couch did not improve.
Carr, JR, Ware, Long….seems we have been here before.
by rbanner on Nov 9, 2009 10:04 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Some improve, some don't
You have to wait and see. Too soon yet. That’s how it works.
What? He can’t block a dead gopher? Humph, details.
by GRLion on Nov 10, 2009 2:22 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, Stafford played like shit...
we get it. And this game is on him. But you can’t declare the kid’s entire career a bust on a bad game his rookie year. Hell even Manning had a pair of 3 pick games and a 4 pick game in his FOURTH year. It happens. The coaching staff probably has some blame as well but that is hard to determine. I felt like they were intentionally working the TE more than necessary. Calvin needs to be worked in from the get go. CJ and Staff need more snaps together during the week. Some of these games look like the coaches are approaching it like pre-season, working the ball to certain people for developmental purposes rather than doing what’s logical to get and maintain a lead.
But it is to be expected that there will be a “regressive” game with a rookie. Missing the two weeks was pretty detrimental. How Staff responds will tell us a lot about him. He’s not the type to wallow around in misery. He will bounce back and get it registered in his head not to attempt certain throws. I still expect the Lions to steal a game or two this year before week 16 and end on a positive note.
by MusicCityDawg on Nov 9, 2009 8:45 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
This is what I think
1.) Yes – pin this loss on Staff. Clearly he played horribly but we have a lot of money invested in him so I hope Schwartz can coach him up and pray Staff becomes a pro bowl NFL QB.
2.) We don’t have much talent on this team, offensively or defensively. Face it. We need to build this thing from the inside-out. Its going to take time. We got a QB now the other peices must be put in place. I think Schwartz has the right idea. He better be drafting very non-sexy positions this draft.
3.) PLEASE fire Stan Kwan
4.) PLEASE get a return man
5.) PLEASE get RBanner a clue and some Prozac.
I spray paint my dog Honolulu Blue and Silver
Pic - me and the great Herman Moore
by NYCLionsfan on Nov 9, 2009 9:02 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Our return men would be fine....
….with a good blocking scheme in the return game.
GO LIONS! RESTORE THE ROAR!
by Twon82 on Nov 9, 2009 10:26 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
KWAAAAAAAAAN!
Our special teams are terrible.
by ATL Lion on Nov 9, 2009 11:56 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I'd rather Stafford throw
A bunch of picks this year than next year.
by CLF on Nov 9, 2009 10:35 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
+1 CLF
good point. Even Peyton said the game experience would be pricelss for Staff’s development.
I spray paint my dog Honolulu Blue and Silver
Pic - me and the great Herman Moore
by NYCLionsfan on Nov 9, 2009 10:38 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Is anyone else with me.....
….in that earlier rbanner likes curry and hed be a better and cheaper option……But id have to say that Levy is a better and cheaper option then Curry would have been at number 1…….Curry hasnt show me anything this year….watching him on directv league pass…….while Levy has shown just as much if not more then Curry….So id say better option was taking Staff at number one and getting Levy in the 3rd round.
by BennieBladesFan on Nov 9, 2009 10:43 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
I`m with you, Bennie.
Production-wise Levy seems to be the man
A. Curry D. Levy
G 8 8
GS 8 3
Comb 44 35
Total 38 28
Ast 6 7
Sck 2.0 0.0
SFTY - -
PDef 3 4
Int - 1 —
TDs -
FF 2 1
by Roustique on Nov 9, 2009 12:29 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Whatta... this think looked readable pre-post
by Roustique on Nov 9, 2009 12:30 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yet the point is made very clear
I didn’t realize Levy was having such a good year
by ATL Lion on Nov 9, 2009 2:23 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed Twon
Stan Kwan will hopfully not be here next year. D.Williams is also a rookie that needs a little time as well. The special teams changes that are needed are on the coverage side.
rbanner. True statements on your part of the INT passes needed to have some touch on the throws, under thrown, or just should not have been thrown at all. That is what a rookie does,17 point lead or not. Yes he probably felt pressure as a QB to get his team back in the game, or as you point out, hold a lead. That figures in as well towards his mistakes. To say the performance is indefensable is short sighted. He is a rookie and to excpect him to go out and carry an underaverage talent team on his shoulders is asking a bit much.
As far as passes being dropped, Fitzsimmons dropped some untimely passes in the second half. Would it have made a difference in the game, maybe. We will never know.
I don’t know what Staff ever did to you but being gleeful when he struggles is not good form. Sure you can bitch about it, I don’t think anyone would disagree with you that he played poorly in the second half. Comparing him to other QBs is not a totally fair measuring stick. Different teams, OCs, Schemes, and background all has an effect on a rookies development. Give him his time to learn how to put touch on a pass and read different defenses. He will be fine.
by Lead Hunter on Nov 9, 2009 10:50 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
He's a rookie
he was absolutely horrible yesterday. Every QB has horrible games. Kurt Warner had a 5-pick game last week. It happens.
This loss was all Staffs fault. His 1st qtr was great and then he went and shit the bed. To project his rookie season for an entire career rediculous.
I triple dog dare ya to lick a frozen flagpole.
by JazzyBBP on Nov 9, 2009 12:02 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
And next year
it will be the sophomore jinx. And the following he’s still learning…and so it goes. Year after year, decade after decade.
WCF is an Edsel, an atavism who has screwed up this franchise for 45 years. As long as he is around, excuses will reign.
Nice catch by Jazzy, though.
by rbanner on Nov 9, 2009 1:25 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Solved!
Since you have it figured out you can move on to something else. Stop wasting your time with the Lions. They will never improve. They have been and always will be shitty.
Don’t let the door hit you in the ass on your way out
by ATL Lion on Nov 9, 2009 2:25 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
That would be too easy
No, he won’t leave……he is having too much fun pissing in our cornflakes. Unless he gets banned, he will stick around just because he gets his enjoyment out of instigating.
by KDawg on Nov 9, 2009 3:41 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe we should just boycott everything he says
He thrives on attention…starve him of it, and he goes away.
2009 = The start of the Lions Golden Age (We hope).
Zack Follett: he will hurt your mind.
by Hyperion Ecta on Nov 9, 2009 9:29 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
So Ive Come To The Conclusion....
…….that whoever the Lions QB is it will never be good enough for rbanner…..I mean imagine if we had say a Mcnabb it would be well hes never won a super bowl cant win the big one…..If its Manning it would be well hes only won one super bowl with all his talent…..So dont be to hard on him becasue its not just Stafford its whoever plays QB for detoroit……Levy is better then Curry to rbanner….So im glad we didnt pay him all those bucks…..GO LIONS GO STAFF!!!!
by BennieBladesFan on Nov 9, 2009 11:03 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
