Lions anti-homer thought processes

[dtroitlionsfan951]

"Stafford doesn't make receivers better like other quarterbacks"

Wtf is golden tate doing right now? The dude is on pace for....1600 yards!

I'm sure there will be some lame excuses. But if any of our receivers did better elsewhere stafford would be. Chewed up.

 

[LKP]

It's all Tate apparently, says the Stafford haters.

Ebron/Fuller/Ross obviously will take some time. Fauria hurt.

Pettigrew could be doing more but now he's hurt. Just doesn't have the speed.

 

[dtroitlionsfan951]

One of my other favorites is that qbs don't need weapons. Ask tom brady last year or phillip rivers in he middle of his career. Or matt ryan last year, or joe flacco after they traded anquan boldin how much weapons matter.

 

[tomdalton22]

"Stafford doesn't make receivers better like other quarterbacks"

Wtf is golden tate doing right now? The dude is on pace for....1600 yards!

I'm sure there will be some lame excuses. But if any of our receivers did better elsewhere stafford would be. Chewed up.

Stafford isn't making him better...he is just in a pass happy offense now. He already has 81 targets...he only averaged 83 over the past 2 seasons in Seattle.

 

[everyoneneedsasmil]

I've said something similar myself, but not the way you are phrasing it. I've said Stafford plays exactly to the level of his supporting cast. He doesn't elevate that cast like other GREAT players have/do. Big difference. Most QBs don't/can't elevate the play of their supporting cast.

Stafford is by no means a bad QB. He's just not an elite one either. That's fine so long as we keep him upright and sport a quality defense. However it would always be nice if an upgrade came along (which is unlikely unless the team lands another top 10 pick).

 

[LKP]

Stafford isn't making him better...he is just in a pass happy offense now. He already has 81 targets...he only averaged 83 over the past 2 seasons in Seattle.

Since we don't have a Lynch or run game at all, he needs the targets. And now Stafford/Tate carry the offense. At worst it's equal. Stafford does good with Tate, Wilson did good with Tate (when he needed). Shows Stafford doesn't need an elite WR only. But having multiple weapons in Calvin and Tate will only help him.

We really would never know how Stafford would do with Pats or Saints. Maybe a guy like Gronk or Graham would incredibly help Stafford. And if you gave Stafford 39 turnovers and a run game, he could be efficient like Wilson.

 

[zoombabyzoom]

Since we don't have a Lynch or run game at all, he needs the targets. And now Stafford/Tate carry the offense. At worst it's equal. Stafford does good with Tate, Wilson did good with Tate (when he needed). Shows Stafford doesn't need an elite WR only. But having multiple weapons in Calvin and Tate will only help him.

We really would never know how Stafford would do with Pats or Saints. Maybe a guy like Gronk or Graham would incredibly help Stafford. And if you gave Stafford 39 turnovers and a run game, he could be efficient like Wilson.

Give Dan Orlovsky that Seattle team last year and Danny-O would be sporting a super bowl ring.

But the whole argument over making certain receivers better is way more complex then at first glance. WRs that come out of nowhere and do well, then leave that place and do poorly can be accounted for many things besides the QB. Look at Eric Decker for instance. Young WR, that made out as the least payed attention to weapon on that Denver offense. He wasn't anyone before that, but then again hadn't ever had a chance to be anyone before that either. But, he leaves a pass offense, hall of fame QB, great all around supporting cast, and great coaching staff to go to the Jet's...

So did Peyton Manning make Decker great? Idk... Is Decker just bad since this year he is subpar in New York? By all accounts people believe that Larry Fitzgerald is a bonafide great WR. Even though without missing games the last two years his stats are Golden Tate esque from last year. And crappy Eric Decker will probably have numbers similar to those years by Larry Fitzgerald.

Fact, is QBs can make some WRs better, but not by some huge margin. Bad WRs won't make a team let alone start or have meaningful playing time. Can a great QB improve a WRs stats by say an extra 200yds and 4 TDs over a year? Of course. But, you don't normally see a scrub like for instance Jeremy Ross all of a sudden become Steve Smith Sr just because of a QB.

 

[mhughes0021]

One of my other favorites is that qbs don't need weapons. Ask tom brady last year or phillip rivers in he middle of his career. Or matt ryan last year, or joe flacco after they traded anquan boldin how much weapons matter.

you bring up a point and then use stupid examples to prove that point. Tom Brady and Phillip rivers had great years last year and took their teams to the playoffs. Flacco?...hes 11th in qbr. Stafford is 16th....oh weird...im pretty sure I said hes a top 16 qb before the season started. So you can call it anti homer.....most of us will continue to call it realistic. when you predict 16th....and hes 16th thru week 8....welp....that's just about dead on.

 

[mhughes0021]

Give Dan Orlovsky that Seattle team last year and Danny-O would be sporting a super bowl ring.

But the whole argument over making certain receivers better is way more complex then at first glance. WRs that come out of nowhere and do well, then leave that place and do poorly can be accounted for many things besides the QB. Look at Eric Decker for instance. Young WR, that made out as the least payed attention to weapon on that Denver offense. He wasn't anyone before that, but then again hadn't ever had a chance to be anyone before that either. But, he leaves a pass offense, hall of fame QB, great all around supporting cast, and great coaching staff to go to the Jet's...

So did Peyton Manning make Decker great? Idk... Is Decker just bad since this year he is subpar in New York? By all accounts people believe that Larry Fitzgerald is a bonafide great WR. Even though without missing games the last two years his stats are Golden Tate esque from last year. And crappy Eric Decker will probably have numbers similar to those years by Larry Fitzgerald.

Fact, is QBs can make some WRs better, but not by some huge margin. Bad WRs won't make a team let alone start or have meaningful playing time. Can a great QB improve a WRs stats by say an extra 200yds and 4 TDs over a year? Of course. But, you don't normally see a scrub like for instance Jeremy Ross all of a sudden become Steve Smith Sr just because of a QB.

I still don't know if its Lombardi I should be blaming or Stafford. But our offense is horribly predictable. Cover tate and the back out of the backfield and youll freak Stafford out 90% of the time. Its basically fact now that Stafford doesn't involve a 2nd wr much at all. tate didn't have huge games when he was a #2 to calvin. he had games with catches of 5, 6 and 6 all under 100 yards. Now that calvin is out his targets and catches went up....and NO ONE else is getting involved. Which was my argument against spending what little money we had in FA on tate and also spending a top 10 pick on a te we would barely use. Obviously, thank god we picked up tate cause calvin went down and now hes our savior.

Do you think its a coincidence that EVERY Wr big ben plays with becomes a star? Or is their front office just WaAAAAAYYYY better at continuously getting WRs for ben than our worthless GM is? Plax, santonio, Wallace, Antonio brown, Emmanuel sanders....now wheaton and Bryant are having huge games. Whens the last time ross, broyles, fuller had huge games....not ever is the answer.

 

[dtroitlionsfan951]

you bring up a point and then use stupid examples to prove that point. Tom Brady and Phillip rivers had great years last year and took their teams to the playoffs. Flacco?...hes 11th in qbr. Stafford is 16th....oh weird...im pretty sure I said hes a top 16 qb before the season started. So you can call it anti homer.....most of us will continue to call it realistic. when you predict 16th....and hes 16th thru week 8....welp....that's just about dead on.

You do realize that Brady's stats are almost equal to stafford from last year to this. You just justified his year because they won games. Which is also what is happening for stafford. You just made yourself look like a giant dumbass.

 

[dtroitlionsfan951]

I still don't know if its Lombardi I should be blaming or Stafford. But our offense is horribly predictable. Cover tate and the back out of the backfield and youll freak Stafford out 90% of the time. Its basically fact now that Stafford doesn't involve a 2nd wr much at all. tate didn't have huge games when he was a #2 to calvin. he had games with catches of 5, 6 and 6 all under 100 yards. Now that calvin is out his targets and catches went up....and NO ONE else is getting involved. Which was my argument against spending what little money we had in FA on tate and also spending a top 10 pick on a te we would barely use. Obviously, thank god we picked up tate cause calvin went down and now hes our savior.

Do you think its a coincidence that EVERY Wr big ben plays with becomes a star? Or is their front office just WaAAAAAYYYY better at continuously getting WRs for ben than our worthless GM is? Plax, santonio, Wallace, Antonio brown, Emmanuel sanders....now wheaton and Bryant are having huge games. Whens the last time ross, broyles, fuller had huge games....not ever is the answer.

Considering stafford rarely got sacked up until this year I have to think Lombardi has a huge part in this. Just continually watching your qb get hit and not adjusting is piss poor.

 

[dtroitlionsfan951]

you bring up a point and then use stupid examples to prove that point. Tom Brady and Phillip rivers had great years last year and took their teams to the playoffs. Flacco?...hes 11th in qbr. Stafford is 16th....oh weird...im pretty sure I said hes a top 16 qb before the season started. So you can call it anti homer.....most of us will continue to call it realistic. when you predict 16th....and hes 16th thru week 8....welp....that's just about dead on.

Also yes I get that flacco isn't dominating. But look at his stats compared to last year. He can't win without weapons.

 

[cheeno]

Tate was already a top wide out. How do I know? We're are paying him like one. He was probably the top FA WR in 2014. Stafford is elevating him in the same way he elevated him on that 70 yd reception against the Saints. Throw up a prayer and watch him go. Good thing Mayhew has a solid FA draft record to go with his piss poor drafting or we'd be pining for the Millen era.

 

[mhughes0021]

You do realize that Brady's stats are almost equal to stafford from last year to this. You just justified his year because they won games. Which is also what is happening for stafford. You just made yourself look like a giant dumbass.

stats like what? yards? Stafford will always get yards....especially when we cant run worth a lick. Tom Brady has ALWAYS been a better qb than Stafford. Tom finished top 10 in qbr last year...Stafford has never sniffed the top 10 in qbr. Stafford was 17. Stafford has an 86 qb rating this year and is bottom 10. tom has a 104.

 

[tomdalton22]

Give Dan Orlovsky that Seattle team last year and Danny-O would be sporting a super bowl ring.

Put Dan O on the Seahawks last year and Kaepernick has his first ring or Peyton has another. He is a terrible QB.

 

[brewer229]

"Stafford doesn't make receivers better like other quarterbacks"

Wtf is golden tate doing right now? The dude is on pace for....1600 yards!

I'm sure there will be some lame excuses. But if any of our receivers did better elsewhere stafford would be. Chewed up.

Breakdown what Stafford is doing to make Tate better outside of throwing the ball more?

YPA/YPC almost identical to prior years.

 

[cheeno]

Breakdown what Stafford is doing to make Tate better outside of throwing the ball more?

YPA/YPC almost identical to prior years.

Drops are up.

 

[grandy]

Stafford has been amazing this season, anyone that disagrees is just a hater

 

[brewer229]

Give Dan Orlovsky that Seattle team last year and Danny-O would be sporting a super bowl ring.

But the whole argument over making certain receivers better is way more complex then at first glance. WRs that come out of nowhere and do well, then leave that place and do poorly can be accounted for many things besides the QB. Look at Eric Decker for instance. Young WR, that made out as the least payed attention to weapon on that Denver offense. He wasn't anyone before that, but then again hadn't ever had a chance to be anyone before that either. But, he leaves a pass offense, hall of fame QB, great all around supporting cast, and great coaching staff to go to the Jet's...

So did Peyton Manning make Decker great? Idk... Is Decker just bad since this year he is subpar in New York? By all accounts people believe that Larry Fitzgerald is a bonafide great WR. Even though without missing games the last two years his stats are Golden Tate esque from last year. And crappy Eric Decker will probably have numbers similar to those years by Larry Fitzgerald.

Fact, is QBs can make some WRs better, but not by some huge margin. Bad WRs won't make a team let alone start or have meaningful playing time. Can a great QB improve a WRs stats by say an extra 200yds and 4 TDs over a year? Of course. But, you don't normally see a scrub like for instance Jeremy Ross all of a sudden become Steve Smith Sr just because of a QB.

So what is your point? QBs don't matter and paying the high price for one is a waste of money?

 

[LKP]

So what is your point? QBs don't matter and paying the high price for one is a waste of money?

Seattle had special circumstances compared to most teams on defense. It amazes me some of the conclusions that people jump too