Lynch???

[Mitchrapp]

I must have missed where Wilson and Mariota are leading their teams to the playoffs this year. Or even next year by the looks of it. And I would have loved seeing the Lions draft Mariota. Wilson...i just don't like that guy, if Lions got him I literally would have never watched them even if they went to the SB.

But they both had good rookie years which is the point. Tenn. just has the worst team in the league by far .. yep, worst than us. And Wilson went to the playoffs in year one. And even won a game.

 

[Mitchrapp]

It is one thing to say that and another to name who that QB should be. I'm just not seeing the names. However, if Lions traded for Colin, I'm definitely good with that, I just am asking for the names of viable options. If that option saves $10+M then I can see that money spent elsewhere to improve the team, I'm good with that too...even a rookie...provided they build up the D and run game to overcome the mistakes that QB will make.

So not saying Stafford has to be the QB, just trying to find a name I can comfortably support.

The point being it could be anyone. They have one win.. Dan O. gets one win but saves us a ton of money. Money for other players.

 

[kdp1980]

And the 1 win is the only game that would be considered a winnable game. Who could watch that shit? I'd tune in for the one game we play a lesser team, and follow a different team. Bott of the barrel qb would just be unwatchable. Stafford is struggling mightily this season, but I still wouldn't consider him the bottom quarter of league as far as qbs go. Dan O gets un 3-5 wins last year.

 

[Mitchrapp]

And the 1 win is the only game that would be considered a winnable game. Who could watch that shit? I'd tune in for the one game we play a lesser team, and follow a different team. Bott of the barrel qb would just be unwatchable. Stafford is struggling mightily this season, but I still wouldn't consider him the bottom quarter of league as far as qbs go.

His efficiently rating year after year doesn't cross top 20. Maybe not bottom quarter but bottom third. We should be able to draft a youngun mid round that has a chance to do as well.

 

[kdp1980]

His efficiently rating year after year doesn't cross top 20. Maybe not bottom quarter but bottom third. We should be able to draft a youngun mid round that has a chance to do as well.

I don't trust this team to draft a solid kicker, let alone a qb in the middle rounds. The good qb drafted in the middle rounds will be taken 2 picks after we draft a worthless p.o.s. qb.

 

[Mitchrapp]

I don't trust this team to draft a solid kicker, let alone a qb in the middle rounds. The good qb drafted in the middle rounds will be taken 2 picks after we draft a worthless p.o.s. qb.

Maybe but you have to hope one day we get a GM that can pick a good one. Can't keep it at status quo..

 

[brewer229]

Everyone knows Matt is not the answer. You need to replace him. You can get by with average to below average at a lot of positions. QB is not one of them.

We are to the point we are arguing if there are 20 starting QBs better then ours or 24 QBs better then ours. It does not matter. We need to improve. Drafting a kid is our best option. If they think the best option is #1 overall, you take your guys there. Getting the same results from the QB and saving 15 million is improving your team. If you get better QB play as well, you just improved more.

With our O-line wouldn't you rather have a Big QB that has mobility and can escape pressure vs a average size QB with below average mobility and panics? The difference between winning and losing the Seattle game was a few plays made by each QB. Wilson was able to extend plays and find open guys. While stafford would panic and take a sack or throw it away.

 

[brewer229]

What is going on in Dallas should show you the difference between a good to great QB to a below average QB. They still have a great line, but you lose Romo, suddenly you are not winning games. Also, don't fool yourself, Romo is head and shoulders above Stafford, not sure there are people that would still defend this, but there was a belief around here that they were at the same level or Stafford was better.

 

[tomdalton22]

What is going on in Dallas should show you the difference between a good to great QB to a below average QB. They still have a great line, but you lose Romo, suddenly you are not winning games. Also, don't fool yourself, Romo is head and shoulders above Stafford, not sure there are people that would still defend this, but there was a belief around here that they were at the same level or Stafford was better.

I think the only one who believes that is LKP...I wonder if he got banned or something? I haven't heard any of his delusional rants in over a week. It has been kind of nice!

 

[Mitchrapp]

I think others kept going back to the playoff flub. Putting the choke label on him. But Romo is so much better.

 

[zyxt9]

What is going on in Dallas should show you the difference between a good to great QB to a below average QB. They still have a great line, but you lose Romo, suddenly you are not winning games. Also, don't fool yourself, Romo is head and shoulders above Stafford, not sure there are people that would still defend this, but there was a belief around here that they were at the same level or Stafford was better.

Dallas barely beat Detroit last year in the playoffs. Detroit wins that game, do you still say Romo is head and shoulders better than Stafford?

The stat line in that game shows they are very similar. QBR favors Stafford, Rating favors Romo. Completion % and total yards favors Stafford, YPA favors Romo. Rushing yards and sacks favors Stafford, TDs and TOs favor Romo. Furthermore, yards per play favors Detroit, ToP favors Dallas. Rushing favors Detroit, Penalties favors Dallas.

Despite the TO advantage for Dallas, Detroit was absolutely capable of winning that game. Was Stafford a big reason why they lost? Yes! However, they were in position to win and failed to execute. How much of that does poor coaching/playcalling factor in?

 

[Mitchrapp]

Dallas barely beat Detroit last year in the playoffs. Detroit wins that game, do you still say Romo is head and shoulders better than Stafford?

The stat line in that game shows they are very similar. QBR favors Stafford, Rating favors Romo. Completion % and total yards favors Stafford, YPA favors Romo. Rushing yards and sacks favors Stafford, TDs and TOs favor Romo. Furthermore, yards per play favors Detroit, ToP favors Dallas. Rushing favors Detroit, Penalties favors Dallas.

Despite the TO advantage for Dallas, Detroit was absolutely capable of winning that game. Was Stafford a big reason why they lost? Yes! However, they were in position to win and failed to execute. How much of that does poor coaching/playcalling factor in?

Detroit could win a SB and Dallas go 0-16 and Romo is still better. By a lot. Not sure how one game changes that. Just look at the numbers.

 

[tomdalton22]

Dallas barely beat Detroit last year in the playoffs. Detroit wins that game, do you still say Romo is head and shoulders better than Stafford?

The stat line in that game shows they are very similar. QBR favors Stafford, Rating favors Romo. Completion % and total yards favors Stafford, YPA favors Romo. Rushing yards and sacks favors Stafford, TDs and TOs favor Romo. Furthermore, yards per play favors Detroit, ToP favors Dallas. Rushing favors Detroit, Penalties favors Dallas.

Despite the TO advantage for Dallas, Detroit was absolutely capable of winning that game. Was Stafford a big reason why they lost? Yes! However, they were in position to win and failed to execute. How much of that does poor coaching/playcalling factor in?

That is one game. Overall, over the course of their careers, Romo has been significantly better than Stafford...and it isn't even close!

 

[zyxt9]

Again, I'm NOT saying the Lions need to keep Stafford. I just do not want the team going into full rebuild mode, so if they can get a QB who is better, then absolutely they need to do it. If they can get one who is similar, but far cheaper and the money goes toward improving the team, especially on D, then do it.

I just do not agree with the blanket statement of blindly getting rid of Stafford is the solution. I need to know who is replacing him and how that change improves the team. Saying we will apply the money in FA is one thing, but identifying who we will get and the perceived improvement is something else. Hopefully the new GM will be a much better judge of talent while not getting pushed around at contract time.

 

[Mitchrapp]

Again, I'm NOT saying the Lions need to keep Stafford. I just do not want the team going into full rebuild mode, so if they can get a QB who is better, then absolutely they need to do it. If they can get one who is similar, but far cheaper and the money goes toward improving the team, especially on D, then do it.

I just do not agree with the blanket statement of blindly getting rid of Stafford is the solution. I need to know who is replacing him and how that change improves the team. Saying we will apply the money in FA is one thing, but identifying who we will get and the perceived improvement is something else. Hopefully the new GM will be a much better judge of talent while not getting pushed around at contract time.

The question or post was that Romo was a ton better. Not that getting rid of Matt.

I don't think many are saying get rid of Matt without a plan. But they better get someone for down the line.. Dan O. is not the answer for the number 2.

 

[zyxt9]

Career wise, Romo has better completion % and YPA, Stafford has more total yards.

Don't forget thought that Romo has benefitted greatly from having a better run game and (career wise) better D. These are major factors.

Ironically, half way through this shitty season, Stafford has actually improved his comp% relative to prior years.

One of my biggest complaints is the low YPA, but to me that is as much a coaching issue as anything else. What play calls are being made and within those playcalls, what are the WR/TE/RBs routes? If everything is designed to be thrown short, then the YPA will drop.

There are a large number of factors that go into these numbers. I'm not saying Stafford is better than Romo, and if I had to choose between the two I would start Romo; however, the "Head and Shoulders" is not very accurate. Romo is not on par with Brady/Manning/Rodgers. Currently the asset and reason I'd go with Romo is years of experience, not a perception that Romo is better athletically.

I just don't put Romo as a top tier QB, sorry. The bigger differences in why Dallas has been better than Detroit are Run Game and Defense. Put Stafford on the Cowboys and Romo on the Lions, I don't think there is a dramatic outcome in those teams yearly performances.

And if it is fair to knock that Stafford is 0-2 in the playoffs, then it is fair to knock Romo for going 1-5 prior to last year's game vs Lions and now being 2-6. Romo hasn't been known for being great in the playoffs. Lions get a break on the PI non-call/picked up flag and Stafford is likely 1-3 in the playoffs while Romo is 1-6.

Romo just isn't "Head and Shoulders" above Stafford. They are far closer than what you guys are making it out to be, especially considering the huge benefit Romo has had in Run Support and Defense.

 

[zyxt9]

I think there is a misperception that I'm trying to claim Stafford is as good as Romo. I'm not. I'm saying Romo is nearly as bad as Stafford. Neither are elite, and Romo has benefitted more from his team than Stafford, along with more years of experience, and the perception is Romo is "far better"/"tons better"/"head and shoulders above"...those comments don't hold up.

 

[tomdalton22]

Career wise, Romo has better completion % and YPA, Stafford has more total yards.

Don't forget thought that Romo has benefitted greatly from having a better run game and (career wise) better D. These are major factors.

Ironically, half way through this shitty season, Stafford has actually improved his comp% relative to prior years.

One of my biggest complaints is the low YPA, but to me that is as much a coaching issue as anything else. What play calls are being made and within those playcalls, what are the WR/TE/RBs routes? If everything is designed to be thrown short, then the YPA will drop.

There are a large number of factors that go into these numbers. I'm not saying Stafford is better than Romo, and if I had to choose between the two I would start Romo; however, the "Head and Shoulders" is not very accurate. Romo is not on par with Brady/Manning/Rodgers. Currently the asset and reason I'd go with Romo is years of experience, not a perception that Romo is better athletically.

I just don't put Romo as a top tier QB, sorry. The bigger differences in why Dallas has been better than Detroit are Run Game and Defense. Put Stafford on the Cowboys and Romo on the Lions, I don't think there is a dramatic outcome in those teams yearly performances.

And if it is fair to knock that Stafford is 0-2 in the playoffs, then it is fair to knock Romo for going 1-5 prior to last year's game vs Lions and now being 2-6. Romo hasn't been known for being great in the playoffs. Lions get a break on the PI non-call/picked up flag and Stafford is likely 1-3 in the playoffs while Romo is 1-6.

Romo just isn't "Head and Shoulders" above Stafford. They are far closer than what you guys are making it out to be, especially considering the huge benefit Romo has had in Run Support and Defense.

OVer the past 5 full seasons, From 2010-2014, Dallas had the better defense one time. Their average ranking was 21 compared to 15 for the Lions. As far as rushing offense...in that time frame Dallas was better 3 of 5 years. Average ranking, Dallas 18, Detroit 24.

 

[tomdalton22]

I think there is a misperception that I'm trying to claim Stafford is as good as Romo. I'm not. I'm saying Romo is nearly as bad as Stafford. Neither are elite, and Romo has benefitted more from his team than Stafford, along with more years of experience, and the perception is Romo is "far better"/"tons better"/"head and shoulders above"...those comments don't hold up.

Career QB rating
Romo 97.6
Stafford 83.7

YPA
Romo 7.9
Stafford 7.0

TD %
Romo 5.7
Stafford 4.2

Int %
Romo 2.6
Stafford 2.8

Comp %
Romo 65.3
Stafford 60.1

There isn't one meaningful stat that Stafford is even close to Romo except maybe INT%

 

[brewer229]

The point is, you take romo off the team and suddenly they cant win. It was an attempt to show why a QB is so much more important than anything else in this game.

I was just trying to avoid the "if Stafford had what romo had argument".

Even with an above average line essentially his entire career (per PFF for pass blocking) stafford did nothing more then slightly below average.