Don't give Stafford a chance to beat you

[kdp1980]

Because he will. This is becoming a common theme. If you think you're going to beat the Lions by 6 or less points, chances are...you FUCKED up. I keep saying Stafford doesn't do enough, blah blah fucking blah. When the game is close he is the man. Not CJ, not Tate, but Stafford. He is the man, sick of denying it. Stafford runs the show and it's uncontested. You fucking go Stafford, you are this franchise, nobody else.

 

[cheeno]

Stafford was 6-14 in games decided by a touchdown or less prior to this season.

http://www.detroitlions.com/news/li...-preview/c172d871-9ede-4af9-97f1-886fc567a35e

This year 3-1 so 9-15 career. But hey maybe he's turned the corner?

 

[adam86107]

Stafford was 6-14 in games decided by a touchdown or less prior to this season.

http://www.detroitlions.com/news/li...-preview/c172d871-9ede-4af9-97f1-886fc567a35e

This year 3-1 so 9-15 career. But hey maybe he's turned the corner?

The only season that matters is this one. The past is in the past.

 

[zyxt9]

Stafford was 6-14 in games decided by a touchdown or less prior to this season.

http://www.detroitlions.com/news/li...-preview/c172d871-9ede-4af9-97f1-886fc567a35e

This year 3-1 so 9-15 career. But hey maybe he's turned the corner?

The difference is not Stafford but Austin

 

[cheeno]

The only season that matters is this one. The past is in the past.

I have to disagree. Statistically 1 score games are a dice roll. We are on the good side of those rolls this year and in 2011. We were on the bad side 2012 and 2013. Bill Barnwell of ESPN has his own theory based on this and writes whole columns on 1 score luck.

 

[cheeno]

The difference is not Stafford but Austin

That surely accounts for some but I can remember quite a few in the past where we had the ball last and did nothing. The opposite ie the wins and the losses tend to stand out more because they are way more dramatic.

 

[inkfreq]

ESPN puts together a yearly column on "luck factor" in the NFL, and which teams caught lucky breaks and which didn't. They break luck down to math... which I really don't get, but hey I fix computers, not land people on the moon.

The last 8 years running, the SuperBowl has been won by teams that ranked in the top 5 in "lucky" breaks, and in that 8 years, 7 times both teams that played ranked in the top five.

I have no idea what the Lions "luck" factor is right now, but based on previous seasons.. I'll take all of it we can get.

 

[cheeno]

Not to say I'm not giving credit where credit is due. But this is hardly a long term or sustainable trend. We need to win by scoring early and often and avoiding mistakes and turnovers. We haven't done that. But hey football isn't played in simulation models, maybe we're a team of destiny?

 

[kdp1980]

The difference is not Stafford but Austin

Austin has been great, no doubt. But leaving Stafford with time on the clock has gotta be one of the most nerve racking situations in football. Guy is making this a regular thing. Nobody is safe. When he does this to Peyton, and Brady (next week), will you guys keep writing this off? He's quickly becoming that guy you want in close games. As a matter of fact, I wouldn't take ANYBODY else. Peyton isn't necessarily a comeback guy, Rodgers has less 4th quarter comebacks than Sir Matthew Stafford, Brees sucked our balls last week, and Rodgers normally just doesn't need to come from behind. Down 6 with 1 or 2 to play, I choose Stafford

 

[cheeno]

Austin has been great, no doubt. But leaving Stafford with time on the clock has gotta be one of the most nerve racking situations in football. Guy is making this a regular thing. Nobody is safe. When he does this to Peyton, and Brady (next week), will you guys keep writing this off? He's quickly becoming that guy you want in close games. As a matter of fact, I wouldn't take ANYBODY else. Peyton isn't necessarily a comeback guy, Rodgers has less 4th quarter comebacks than Sir Matthew Stafford, Brees sucked our balls last week, and Rodgers normally just doesn't need to come from behind. Down 6, I choose Stafford

Can we play the whole game like the last 2 minutes? I mean why not incorporate more hurry up and audible in the offense?

 

[inkfreq]

Austin has been great, no doubt. But leaving Stafford with time on the clock has gotta be one of the most nerve racking situations in football. Guy is making this a regular thing. Nobody is safe. When he does this to Peyton, and Brady (next week), will you guys keep writing this off? He's quickly becoming that guy you want in close games. As a matter of fact, I wouldn't take ANYBODY else. Peyton isn't necessarily a comeback guy, Rodgers has less 4th quarter comebacks than Sir Matthew Stafford, Brees sucked our balls last week, and Rodgers normally just doesn't need to come from behind. Down 6 with 1 or 2 to play, I choose Stafford

I feel ya man... there is no one I would rather have in close games.

I'd like to just blow some teams out and not have nail biters at the end. They don't all have to be close wins to make me happy, that's for sure.

 

[adam86107]

I have to disagree. Statistically 1 score games are a dice roll. We are on the good side of those rolls this year and in 2011. We were on the bad side 2012 and 2013. Bill Barnwell of ESPN has his own theory based on this and writes whole columns on 1 score luck.

You didn't post about luck. You made a post comparing Stafford's previous years with this one. What happened in previous years has absolutely zero relevance to this year.

 

[cheeno]

You didn't post about luck. You made a post comparing Stafford's previous years with this one. What happened in previous years has absolutely zero relevance to this year.

Sorry I wasn't more clear. Basically what I meant was that statistically we're due for some close score wins. Posting the record was to show that this isn't a long term trend for Stafford. And I did couch it by saying maybe he turned the corner. I know Stafford is some kind of god now so I better be more clear in the future. Thanks adam.

 

[adam86107]

Sorry I wasn't more clear. Basically what I meant was that statistically we're due for some close score wins. Posting the record was to show that this isn't a long term trend for Stafford. And I did couch it by saying maybe he turned the corner. I know Stafford is some kind of god now so I better be more clear in the future. Thanks adam.

It wasn't that you you weren't clear. There is no relation between what you posted and your argument about luck. If it were all from luck there would be no need to post records or comment that maybe Stafford is turning a corner. If Stafford were just getting lucky or had bad luck in the past then he would never be responsible as it would not be in his control, its all luck. Luck is not controllable.

 

[kdp1980]

I feel ya man... there is no one I would rather have in close games.

I'd like to just blow some teams out and not have nail biters at the end. They don't all have to be close wins to make me happy, that's for sure.

It's just something you can't overlook with Stafford. More often then not, he will make those 3-5 completions to win the game for your team. Time to embrace this kid for what he's done in close games this year. I'm honestly blown away, and I fuckin knew that it was going to happen. The force is strong with this one, that's all I'm sayin.

 

[cheeno]

You didn't post about luck. You made a post comparing Stafford's previous years with this one. What happened in previous years has absolutely zero relevance to this year.

Yeah you got me Stafford is garbage in one score games. He'll revert back to the mean this year so I think we better not have to come from behind on a weekly basis. This guy above thinks Stafford is Luke Skywalker. He was more like Hayden Christensen through 3 1/2 quarters.

 

[Monster]

I don't think Stafford's a good close game QB. I think he's a good winning drive QB. There's a huge difference. The biggest difference this year is that the defense is giving Stafford chances to win the game. I don't think it's quite that hard to figure out.

 

[adam86107]

I think the difference between this year and last year is Golden Tate. The D has been great this year but we are still in close games just like last year. Tate's ability to pick up YAC is what has been winning these close games.

 

[cheeno]

I don't think Stafford's a good close game QB. I think he's a good winning drive QB. There's a huge difference. The biggest difference this year is that the defense is giving Stafford chances to win the game. I don't think it's quite that hard to figure out.

He's Eli Manning. I'm cool with that. We keep the Defense rolling like those old Giants teams and I'll take Eli results.

 

[tinselwolverine]

I have to disagree. Statistically 1 score games are a dice roll. We are on the good side of those rolls this year and in 2011. We were on the bad side 2012 and 2013. Bill Barnwell of ESPN has his own theory based on this and writes whole columns on 1 score luck.

Man, I'm 54 years old, and I have seen me a lifetime's worth of come from ahead Lions' losses by one score, going back to even before lead foot kicked that 63,000 mile field goal for the Saints at Tiger Stadium.

I will take every "lucky" win Matt Stafford and the Lions get, six ways from Sunday - and that's every Sunday, too - or maybe even a Thursday.