This whole line of discussion is pretty pointless. If someone doesn't want to believe that the Bears and Packers both losing their starting QBs was not an advantage for the Lions, then there's no convincing him. You can't just say "the Lions would have done _______" or "the Packers would have done _______". Nobody knows what would have happened at all, so why argue about it like it's a fact?
Welcome to Detroit Sports Forum!
By joining our community, you'll be able to connect with fellow fans that live and breathe Detroit sports just like you!
-
If you are no longer able to access your account since our recent switch from vBulletin to XenForo, you may need to reset your password via email. If you no longer have access to the email attached to your account, please fill out our contact form and we will assist you ASAP. Thanks for your continued support of DSF.
NFC Playoff Thread
- Thread starter grandy
- Start date
Most of those things you listed fall squarely on the Lions shoulders. It's lucky for the Bears and Packers that we keep turning the ball over that's for sure. It's lucky for the Bears and Packers that we can't protect a FG attempt. It's lucky for the Bears and Packers we give up so many big plays.
Do the Lions not deserve any sort of blame for being in the position they're in? It's all just bad luck for us, and good luck for the Bears and Packers?
That is exactly what I am saying. They give Packers/Bears wins but the Lions injury losses stay losses somehow. Hypocrites and jaded fans.
Lions deserve the credit for being in first in division if they win tonight. Why? because they are 4-1 in the division with the one loss without Calvin.
I just said the Lions have some blame. But they had injury problems too for some of their losses. And weather, nobody else had 8 inches of snow in a loss. There are many factors, some blaming Lions (turnovers/big plays), some things Lions can't control. Injuries were a part of Loins losses too though.
Bears didn't have players step up to beat the lowly Rams, lowly Vikings. The Giants freaking blow this year and Packers lost to them. Chicago had a backup QB when Rodgers went down so it was backup vs backup. Falcons luckily blow this year, Bucs are better than them. And Cowboys blew it against Lions and Packers now though the Lions dominated most of their Cowboys game.
tomdalton22
Senior Member
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2011
- Messages
- 25,381
I am not giving them any wins. What I am saying is the Bears and Packers are still right in the hunt for the division when they had more significant losses due to injury than the Lions.
They did not have more significant injury losses especially compared to the teams they played.
Bears played Clemens and Ponder/Cassell. They still could easily lose those games with Cutler. McCown played better!!!!!! Plus they got swept by Lions. Loins are the better team. All Bears had to do was beat the Lions, couldn't.
Packers played Foles(technically a backup), McCown backup, Romo (in December he plays like a backup), a very down Falcons team and Giants with Eli having his worst year ever and Ponder. Packers defense (mainly healthy) decided to blow in alot of those games. Plus Lions game it evened things up since we missed Calvin in game 1.
Pack/Bears are the lucky ones with a variety of reason the Lions went 1-3. Lions still in control thanks to winning division games. They must maintain control taken when the Lions won 4 division games.
- Thread Author
- #268
grandy
Senior Member
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2011
- Messages
- 11,699
Week 2 vs Arizona - a 2nd half with Bush might've been the difference
Week 3 vs Washington - won without Bush
Week 5 vs Green Bay - CJ would've helped a lot, although I don't think it's certain they would've won that game with CJ
Week 14 vs Philadelphia - don't see Bush making much of a difference in the snow, the defense simply collapsed in that game
Green Bay
Week 9 vs Chicago - lose 27-20, Wallace 11/19 114 yards 1 int
Week 10 vs Philadelphia - lose 27-13, Wallace and Tolzien combine for 29/44 305 yards 1 td 2 ints
Week 11 vs NY Giants - lose 27-13, Tolzien 24/34 339 yards 3 ints (including 1 pick-6)
Week 12 vs Minnesota - tie 26-26, Tolzien and Flynn combine for 28/53 316 yards 1 td
Week 13 vs Detroit - lose 40-10, Flynn 10/20 139 yards 1 int
Week 14 vs Atlanta - win 22-21, Flynn 24/32 258 yards 1 td 1 int (including 1 pick-6)
Week 15 vs Dallas - win 37-36, Flynn 26/39 299 yards 4 td 1 int
Record 2-4-1
Combined QB play: 152/241 (63.1%), 1770 yards (253 yards/game), 7 tds, 9 ints (2 pick-6s)
Rodgers in the first 8 weeks (7 games)
Record 5-2
Record 168/251 (66.9%), 2218 yards (317 yards/game), 15 tds, 4 ints
I think Rodgers would've made a huge impact in those games, except for Thanksgiving
tomdalton22
Senior Member
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2011
- Messages
- 25,381
The Lions couldn't beat Foles (technically a backup) & Glennon (technically a rookie backup)
They could have if they had Bush and didn't have 5 turnovers. Nothing to do with the defense there. Plus Foles was not good in the snow either. 50% passing, a coupld circus Riley Cooper catches.
Bush could do what McCoy did. Huge loss in that game. Greatly changed the game IMO. We'll never know.
And giving us that Arizona game means everything. Lions 8-5 right now and with a huge lead.
Injuries played a big role in a lot of Lions losses among other things. Same with the Packrs losses. some injury and some their defense sucking. Bears McCown played better so I don't think Rams or Vikings game change.
Injuries played a big role in a lot of Lions losses among other things. Same with the Packrs losses. some injury and some their defense sucking. Bears McCown played better so I don't think Rams or Vikings game change.
And saying Bush out wouldn't have mattered. Well that's just dumb. You must not have watched any Lions games with Bush this year.
Lions had 0 offensive points in second half and Bell fumbled twice. Maybe that doesn't happen. Maybe Bush has a day like McCoy taking advantage of the snow.
Vikings just proved Eagles D is terrible in regular conditions.
Lions had 0 offensive points in second half and Bell fumbled twice. Maybe that doesn't happen. Maybe Bush has a day like McCoy taking advantage of the snow.
Vikings just proved Eagles D is terrible in regular conditions.
tomdalton22
Senior Member
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2011
- Messages
- 25,381
I was just stating a fact. The Lions couldn't beat Foles (technically a backup) & Glennon (technically a rookie backup)
I'm not making any excuses or what ifs....just the fact that the Lions couldn't manage to beat those two teams with their QBs.
- Thread Author
- #274
grandy
Senior Member
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2011
- Messages
- 11,699
Did you happen to see the Pittsburgh game when Bush played in shitty conditions?
I'm not saying he would've played that bad, but I highly doubt he would've had a McCoy type impact.
It's all just hypothetical, but I really don't see anyone making a difference considering how inept the defense was in the 2nd half against Philly.
The Lions defense did enough. The Lions couldn't beat McCoy in the snow or overcome 5 turnovers and a FG drive extended by the refs. But the fact the Lions lost to them means Foles could have beat Rodgers too. And maybe Packers got lucky facing Falcons instead of revived Bucs under Glennon.
Romo/very injured Cowboys D or Matt Ryan couldn't beat Flynn.
Bush has had several good games in his career in shitty conditions. I love how you people assume he played bad in one game means that is how he plays in every shitty condition game. Different conditions as well. A RB who is shifty like Bush would have helped tremendously. Bush had 4.7 YPC just like McCoy. I say the Waddle injury hurt too throwing Fox in there.
McCoy even followed up his snow game with a terrible game against the Vikings.
Last edited:
Bush was injured to start with before the Philadelphia game. There's no way he would've had anywhere near as good a game as McCoy even if he hadn't aggravated an injury while warming up.
Snow plus an injured running back who relies on jump cuts does not lead to a good game for Bush.
Injury is an injury. Coming in hurt or hurt in warmups is still a loss to injury. This team needs a healthy Bush.
I completely agree that we need a healthy Reggie Bush. He makes a huge difference when completely healthy in good playing conditions.
But life isn't fair. Every team doesn't get the same amount of injuries. This entire discussion is based on the fact that basically everyone but you understands that the Packers and Bears have survived their injuries and taken advantage of opportunities they've been given by the Lions. The Lions on the other hand, have not taken advantage of the opportunities given to them by the Bears and Packers. It's as simple as that.
I'll be happy if the Lions make the playoffs and win a playoff game, but I'll still be disappointed with their performance in the regular season. They lost too many winnable games. Period.
- Thread Author
- #280
grandy
Senior Member
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2011
- Messages
- 11,699
I don't doubt the impact of Bush when healthy, he's exciting to watch.
I just don't see him having a huge impact in the Philly game with 8 inches of snow on the ground. Bell wasn't all that bad either, 27 touches 127 yards 1 TD in that game, how much better would Bush have been? Sure the fumbles hurt, but Bush hasn't exactly been sure handed this season either with 8 drops and 3 fumbles. Once again, this is all hypothetical and all opinion so we'll never know, I just don't see Bush being a 2-3 TD difference in that game.
I was also frustrated with the 2nd half defense more than anything. By my count, Foles was 7/12 144 yards 1 TD in the 2nd half of that game. In addition to McCoy going off, Philly was also effective in passing the ball. Total collapse by the defense.
Last edited:
Affiliates
