My way too early yardage prediction thread

[LKP]

Detroit was middle of the pack in 20+ yard plays allowed.

 

[tonyballs]

].

van noy is the only upgrade over last year. Ihedigbo is the only other new starter....and him and delmas are both mediocre at best. Like I said....they neglected the defense....[/QUOTE]

I guess you don't pay attention much. Willie Young was dogshit and a walking flag. Jones and Taylor are upgrades. Delmas was a running joke on this board for years. JI is a smarter hard nosed player. Throw in Van Noy and the defense not only looks better, but should be better. Maybe Lawson and Webster can contribute this year as well. Stop being so motherfucking ignorant. Just because you didn't get Dennard, it doesn't mean the D was neglected...get your head outta your ass.

 

[tonyballs]

Yeah to call it awesome is just a joke.

That's crazy lol

 

[inkfreq]

The NFL has been changing it's rules for years to cater to big scoring plays. It's the same reason running backs have been so devalued. There is no reason the run the ball for 4 yards when it's so easy to send everyone deep and draw and easy PI call, or land the big catch because the other team can barely defend.

The NFL wants NBA scores now, that's just the nature of the game. The Seahawks defied the odds last season and won with a great defense, I grant you. But the fact is, a good chunk of the teams that made the playoffs were offensively good, not defensively.

The Saints were better defensively than most might expect, ranking #4 defensively. San Fran is surprisingly defensive minded for a team coached by a former QB. Carolina was a surprising #26 in total offense and #2 in total defense, which you don't expect from a team built around Cam Newton.

But among playoff teams you have the Broncos, Eagles, Packers, Chargers, Colts, and Patriots who were all significantly better offensively than defensively, and one of those teams went to the SuperBowl as well.

In fact the Saints were the only "balanced" team in the playoffs last season, ranked #4 in total offense and #4 in total defense. Can't be much more balanced than that.

So some teams will build around defense. Some will build around offense. And the current trends suggest neither will do worse than the other.

Just as an example: New England ranked below Detroit in total offense, and 10 spots below Detroit in total defense. Yet the Patriots made the playoffs and the Lions didn't even walk away with a winning record.

The Seahawks won the Superbowl with a stifling defense. A year before Baltimore won it and their offense was more effective than their defense in the playoffs. The Giants won a year before that with a terrible defense. The Packers beat the Steelers the year before that on the arm of Aaron Rodgers. And the year before that the Saints beat the hell out of the Colts in a matchup of offensive minded teams, but the Saints had a top ranked defense to go with it.

So recent history suggests building an offensive powerhouse may be just as effective in winning games as a defensive powerhouse. So the Lions ignored defense and they will have to win games via shootout. It would be damned hard to argue they don't have the ability to do that.

This is the way the news coaching staff sees the team. Does it mean they are wrong? Hell no. It remains to be seen how successful they will be, but there is sound logic and reasoning to their game plan.

They used to say Defense wins championships. And for a long long time, it was true too. But the NFL has changed. Top ranked offenses and bad defenses win a lot of games too, and sometimes championships.


Note: I know someone is going to argue my comments about the Ravens defense. I didn't say it was a bad defense. I said it the offense was more effective. They held teams low, and they put up points. But they allowed 31 point in the SuperBowl, and had to hang on to stave off a late comeback. Their offense won them that game.

 

[mhughes0021]

The NFL has been changing it's rules for years to cater to big scoring plays. It's the same reason running backs have been so devalued. There is no reason the run the ball for 4 yards when it's so easy to send everyone deep and draw and easy PI call, or land the big catch because the other team can barely defend.

The NFL wants NBA scores now, that's just the nature of the game. The Seahawks defied the odds last season and won with a great defense, I grant you. But the fact is, a good chunk of the teams that made the playoffs were offensively good, not defensively.

The Saints were better defensively than most might expect, ranking #4 defensively. San Fran is surprisingly defensive minded for a team coached by a former QB. Carolina was a surprising #26 in total offense and #2 in total defense, which you don't expect from a team built around Cam Newton.

But among playoff teams you have the Broncos, Eagles, Packers, Chargers, Colts, and Patriots who were all significantly better offensively than defensively, and one of those teams went to the SuperBowl as well.

In fact the Saints were the only "balanced" team in the playoffs last season, ranked #4 in total offense and #4 in total defense. Can't be much more balanced than that.

So some teams will build around defense. Some will build around offense. And the current trends suggest neither will do worse than the other.

Just as an example: New England ranked below Detroit in total offense, and 10 spots below Detroit in total defense. Yet the Patriots made the playoffs and the Lions didn't even walk away with a winning record.

The Seahawks won the Superbowl with a stifling defense. A year before Baltimore won it and their offense was more effective than their defense in the playoffs. The Giants won a year before that with a terrible defense. The Packers beat the Steelers the year before that on the arm of Aaron Rodgers. And the year before that the Saints beat the hell out of the Colts in a matchup of offensive minded teams, but the Saints had a top ranked defense to go with it.

So recent history suggests building an offensive powerhouse may be just as effective in winning games as a defensive powerhouse. So the Lions ignored defense and they will have to win games via shootout. It would be damned hard to argue they don't have the ability to do that.

This is the way the news coaching staff sees the team. Does it mean they are wrong? Hell no. It remains to be seen how successful they will be, but there is sound logic and reasoning to their game plan.

They used to say Defense wins championships. And for a long long time, it was true too. But the NFL has changed. Top ranked offenses and bad defenses win a lot of games too, and sometimes championships.


Note: I know someone is going to argue my comments about the Ravens defense. I didn't say it was a bad defense. I said it the offense was more effective. They held teams low, and they put up points. But they allowed 31 point in the SuperBowl, and had to hang on to stave off a late comeback. Their offense won them that game.

theres no way in hell you can call the lions an offensive powerhouse until Stafford shows he can win consistently. It seemed like every other game last year we would get completely shut out on the scoreboard for an entire half. Not so sure tate and ebron even can fix that...

 

[inkfreq]

http://espn.go.com/nfl/statistics/team/_/stat/passing
http://espn.go.com/nfl/statistics/team/_/stat/receiving
http://espn.go.com/nfl/statistics/team/_/stat/total

3rd in the league in Passing. 3rd in Receiving. 6th in total offense.

Yes, there is a way in hell I can say it, and I can make a pretty good argument too.

We were 17th in the run game, but in pretty much every aspect of the passing game, the focus of the modern NFL, we were top 5. In a losing season.

Yep, I think a case can easily be made for being considered one of the offensive powerhouses, with or without an improved Stafford under center.

 

[mhughes0021]

http://espn.go.com/nfl/statistics/team/_/stat/passing
http://espn.go.com/nfl/statistics/team/_/stat/receiving
http://espn.go.com/nfl/statistics/team/_/stat/total

3rd in the league in Passing. 3rd in Receiving. 6th in total offense.

Yes, there is a way in hell I can say it, and I can make a pretty good argument too.

We were 17th in the run game, but in pretty much every aspect of the passing game, the focus of the modern NFL, we were top 5. In a losing season.

Yep, I think a case can easily be made for being considered one of the offensive powerhouses, with or without an improved Stafford under center.

0 points in the 1st half of the Minnesota game. our offense blows
3 points in the 1st half against the shitty giants....our offense blows
7 points in the 1st half of the BAL game. O blows
8 points in the 1st half of the eagles game. O blows
0 points in the 2nd half of the eagles game. 3 turnovers. O blows
7 points in the 2nd half of the bucs game. 4 Stafford ints. offense sucks ass.
0 points in 3 out of 4 quarters in the PIT game. holy bad offense...
7 points in 1st half of bears game. Stafford finished the game with 219 yards. yippie.
lost 22-9 to GB. wow we suck...
7 points in 2nd half of zona game....lost yet another 4th qtr lead

The offense had good games against 2 decimated defenses in GB and DAL. one good game vs the bears. nice offense game vs cinci but still lost....didn't win that "shootout."


Stafford had 6 games over 300 yards. He also had 7 games under 250....not good if youre trying to outscore teams to win.

So ya id have to go out on a limb and say our team isn't very well built to win "shootouts" considering our offense sputters in most every game we play. I can make a pretty strong argument im right too

 

[tomdalton22]

http://espn.go.com/nfl/statistics/team/_/stat/passing
http://espn.go.com/nfl/statistics/team/_/stat/receiving
http://espn.go.com/nfl/statistics/team/_/stat/total

3rd in the league in Passing. 3rd in Receiving. 6th in total offense.

Yes, there is a way in hell I can say it, and I can make a pretty good argument too.

We were 17th in the run game, but in pretty much every aspect of the passing game, the focus of the modern NFL, we were top 5. In a losing season.

Yep, I think a case can easily be made for being considered one of the offensive powerhouses, with or without an improved Stafford under center.

3rd in passing, 17th in rushing and 6th overall. Saying 3rd in passing and receiving sounds a little like LKP.

 

[LKP]

0 points in the 1st half of the Minnesota game. our offense blows
3 points in the 1st half against the shitty giants....our offense blows
7 points in the 1st half of the BAL game. O blows
8 points in the 1st half of the eagles game. O blows
0 points in the 2nd half of the eagles game. 3 turnovers. O blows
7 points in the 2nd half of the bucs game. 4 Stafford ints. offense sucks ass.
0 points in 3 out of 4 quarters in the PIT game. holy bad offense...
7 points in 1st half of bears game. Stafford finished the game with 219 yards. yippie.
lost 22-9 to GB. wow we suck...
7 points in 2nd half of zona game....lost yet another 4th qtr lead

The offense had good games against 2 decimated defenses in GB and DAL. one good game vs the bears. nice offense game vs cinci but still lost....didn't win that "shootout."


Stafford had 6 games over 300 yards. He also had 7 games under 250....not good if youre trying to outscore teams to win.

So ya id have to go out on a limb and say our team isn't very well built to win "shootouts" considering our offense sputters in most every game we play. I can make a pretty strong argument im right too

at Min/atGB No Calvin and one other weapon(Burleson or Pettigrew) and no Waddle against Minnesota or Green Bay
Philly game was a damn blizzard (no passing) without Bush and Waddle

Pittsburgh they scored 27 points. Power house. Really scored 30 but Schwartz opted for fake FG.
Baltimore/Bucs/Giants too many turnovers but they moved the ball. They did enough to beat the Bucs/Ravens if not for fluke turnover off Calvins hands and miracle FG.
And OT against Giants with a big second half
Zona no Bush in the second half. 21 points is enough against a tough Zona D. Especially when you factor in a missed FG and blocked Fg. Really scored 27 points based on what the offense did.

Healthy Lions O is a powerhouse. And since then we upgraded with Tate much more talented than Burleson and Ebron as a matchup nightmare. Plus coaching offensive gurus in Caldwell and Lombardi.

 

[dubbsco]

Excuse, after excuse, after excuse. Enough. Teams deal with adversity, bad luck, fluke plays all year. But believe it or not, they play through those things. The Lions don't, they wilt. You can throw all the excuses and stats to talk about how amazing this team can be, but the bottom line is they have NO clue how to win. Whether it be getting a big lead and blowing it, or making huge mistakes, there is no killer instinct on this team.

Green Bay played without Rodgers for damn near the entire year, and STILL found a way to win this division. That's because they are a winning organization. They know how to make things work, they can figure out how to adjust their team to win. Lions don't have a clue. Maybe when I'm 50 they'll figure it out, the Kool-Aid drinkers will continue to make excuses and talk about potential. And after all this time, after all the Draft Super Bowls, they haven't done crap. Stop covering up for this franchise.

 

[LKP]

Excuse, after excuse, after excuse. Enough. Teams deal with adversity, bad luck, fluke plays all year. But believe it or not, they play through those things. The Lions don't, they wilt. You can throw all the excuses and stats to talk about how amazing this team can be, but the bottom line is they have NO clue how to win. Whether it be getting a big lead and blowing it, or making huge mistakes, there is no killer instinct on this team.

Green Bay played without Rodgers for damn near the entire year, and STILL found a way to win this division. That's because they are a winning organization. They know how to make things work, they can figure out how to adjust their team to win. Lions don't have a clue. Maybe when I'm 50 they'll figure it out, the Kool-Aid drinkers will continue to make excuses and talk about potential. And after all this time, after all the Draft Super Bowls, they haven't done crap. Stop covering up for this franchise.

Green Bay went 2-5-1 without Rodgers. They wilted. Lions had just as important of injuries in their 2-6 stretch. Healthy Lions offense is a powerhouse in 2013 and guess what they upgraded it tremendously too with Tate,Ebron, coaching. Thrown in Calvin for 16 instead of 14 and Waddle for 16 instead of 6. And maybe some production from a number 3 WR but we will see on that.

I listed all the reasons they struggled. With Calvin/Waddle back and upgrades, I don't have to list any more reasons. It's clear they are a power house when healthy.

 

[dubbsco]

And yet they STILL found a way to win the division. Because they are a winning organization. When the Tigers win the division, do we look back in 3 years and say, "Man, the AL Central blows." No, we hang another banner so to speak. Michigan won the BT last season with an injured MSU, but I'm not going to remember that. Green Bay found a way to get it done, with the rest of the division throwing up on themselves. You look at the overall record without Rodgers. I look at them winning clutch games near the end of the season, and getting a HUGE win on the road at Chicago to win the division. That's a real franchise. They had a chance to make things happen in the end, and gasp, they did. The Lions had chance, after chance, after chance to lock this division up. They couldn't.

Since you like to make excuses for last year, why don't you go ahead and make excuses for the last 15? 20? The franchise is a joke. They are the laughingstock of the NFL. Our fan bases get "Lionized." Parents tell their kids, "Son, don't let the Lions ruin your Sunday." The only thing that's clear to me is that they haven't proven a THING for you to make any form of statement of confidence. I don't know how many more years this franchise needs to fail for you to understand what they are. But it will happen.

 

[LKP]

And yet they STILL found a way to win the division. Because they are a winning organization. When the Tigers win the division, do we look back in 3 years and say, "Man, the AL Central blows." No, we hang another banner so to speak. Michigan won the BT last season with an injured MSU, but I'm not going to remember that. Green Bay found a way to get it done, with the rest of the division throwing up on themselves. You look at the overall record without Rodgers. I look at them winning clutch games near the end of the season, and getting a HUGE win on the road at Chicago to win the division. That's a real franchise. They had a chance to make things happen in the end, and gasp, they did. The Lions had chance, after chance, after chance to lock this division up. They couldn't.

Since you like to make excuses for last year, why don't you go ahead and make excuses for the last 15? 20? The franchise is a joke. They are the laughingstock of the NFL. Our fan bases get "Lionized." Parents tell their kids, "Son, don't let the Lions ruin your Sunday." The only thing that's clear to me is that they haven't proven a THING for you to make any form of statement of confidence. I don't know how many more years this franchise needs to fail for you to understand what they are. But it will happen.

Green Bay did not find a way to get it done without Rodgers except against a more just as injured Falcons and shitty Dallas with Romo handing it to them. They had a one game lead with Rodgers really who went 6-2 in his games. Stafford was 5-3 and then 6-3. And a big reason Green Bay wasn't 4-3 when Rodgers got hurt is because Calvin/Burleson didn't play at Lambeau.

 

[dubbsco]

See? You have to justify everything about why Green Bay succeeds and the Lions fail. At the end of the day, you make your own breaks. You take advantage of what the other teams give you or what they are missing. Why couldn't the Lions win a home game against Tampa Bay, who finished 4-12? Why couldn't the Lions beat a very average NYG team at home, with the playoffs staring them in the face? How about a HUGE Monday night game against Baltimore with ALL of the marbles on the table, and they blew it. They don't know how to win. They have none of what makes a franchise great. NONE of it.

I don't know why you have to make excuses for them. Maybe it's what you are trained to do as a Lions fan. It's getting exhausting.

 

[LKP]

See? You have to justify everything about why Green Bay succeeds and the Lions fail. At the end of the day, you make your own breaks. You take advantage of what the other teams give you or what they are missing. Why couldn't the Lions win a home game against Tampa Bay, who finished 4-12? Why couldn't the Lions beat a very average NYG team at home, with the playoffs staring them in the face? How about a HUGE Monday night game against Baltimore with ALL of the marbles on the table, and they blew it. They don't know how to win. They have none of what makes a franchise great. NONE of it.

I don't know why you have to make excuses for them. Maybe it's what you are trained to do as a Lions fan. It's getting exhausting.

Reasons why they lost. Not an excuse. It's the direct cause why they lost. They can reduce the turnovers with the new QB gurus. Going forward you should see an extremely talented team that is going to win a ton of games.

 

[dubbsco]

Do you find reasons why every team loses every game? Or do you ever just give respect to the winning team for making things happen? You are going to drive yourself crazy if you have to find answers for every loss. Sometimes, believe it or not, the other team is just better. I always want this team to win, but if they don't, I hope you come to your senses.

I've heard every year about how there is an infusion of talent, and how they will win a lot of games. Hasn't happened. You have no idea how the new coaches will mesh with this team. You can say they are going to make it better, I can just as easily say they can make it worse. You don't know. Jim Caldwell doesn't exactly bring an incredible pedigree to the job. He was absolutely terrible at Wake Forest. He was choice B after Wisenhunt turned the team down. If he was in such high demand, people would have been knocking at his door. They weren't. Feels like the Brady Hoke to Michigan hire. Choice B and C.

 

[tomdalton22]

Green Bay went 2-5-1 without Rodgers. They wilted. Lions had just as important of injuries in their 2-6 stretch. Healthy Lions offense is a powerhouse in 2013 and guess what they upgraded it tremendously too with Tate,Ebron, coaching. Thrown in Calvin for 16 instead of 14 and Waddle for 16 instead of 6. And maybe some production from a number 3 WR but we will see on that.

I listed all the reasons they struggled. With Calvin/Waddle back and upgrades, I don't have to list any more reasons. It's clear they are a power house when healthy.

You can't compare Rodgers to any single player on the Lions. He is heads and shoulders more important to GB than any Lion. He is so much better than any player on the Lions they shouldn't even be compared.

 

[LKP]

Do you find reasons why every team loses every game? Or do you ever just give respect to the winning team for making things happen? You are going to drive yourself crazy if you have to find answers for every loss. Sometimes, believe it or not, the other team is just better. I always want this team to win, but if they don't, I hope you come to your senses.

I've heard every year about how there is an infusion of talent, and how they will win a lot of games. Hasn't happened. You have no idea how the new coaches will mesh with this team. You can say they are going to make it better, I can just as easily say they can make it worse. You don't know. Jim Caldwell doesn't exactly bring an incredible pedigree to the job. He was absolutely terrible at Wake Forest. He was choice B after Wisenhunt turned the team down. If he was in such high demand, people would have been knocking at his door. They weren't. Feels like the Brady Hoke to Michigan hire. Choice B and C.

I find reasons why the lions lose. And prove the lions were the better team most days. Going forward you should expect them to win a lot of games with normal health

 

[tomdalton22]

I find reasons why the lions lose. And prove the lions were the better team most days. Going forward you should expect them to win a lot of games with normal health

they did have normal health. Every NFL team gets banged up.

 

[dubbsco]

I've expected them to win a lot of games for however long I've been watching football. I'm a fan, I want them to win. But they haven't. So there's no reason for me to think otherwise until they show me. Until then, it's just a lot of false hope and excuse making. No reason to worry myself with them doing anything positive until it happens.

You can talk to me about coaching changes, how dynamic this offense will be, etc... until you are blue in the face. I've heard it throughout my entire tenure as a Lions fan. I remember when Millen and Morhenweig rode up to practice on their Harley's. "The bar is high." Mooch with his west coast offense. Drafting WR after WR to revolutionize the NFL. Lions have tried it all.