PFFF ranks the Lions quarterbacks as No. 23 in the NFL

[kdp1980]

Defense was pretty stout though

 

[brewer229]

Defense was pretty stout though

Buffalo?

 

[brewer229]

He's nowhere close to Stafford

Ok. Where would you rank Stafford? Where would your rank Taylor?

 

[tbone413]

I tend to agree that the Lions would be worse with Taylor at QB than they would be with Stafford.

I would imagine if you asked every team in the league which QB they would rather have for the next 5 years, 95% would say Stafford.

Im not saying Stafford is an elite QB, because hes not - but I do think he is quite a bit better than Taylor.

 

[tbone413]

Just read their blurb on Stafford...

23. Detroit Lions
Starter: Matthew Stafford

Backup: Dan Orlovsky

Key stat: Stafford completed just 48.3 percent of his passes under pressure last season, the 21st-best rate in the NFL.

It sounds illogical, but losing Calvin Johnson may be the best thing to happen to Matthew Stafford?s career in a long time. Johnson was such a physically-dominant presence that Stafford understandably leaned on and would force the ball to. Without that crutch this season, Stafford will be forced to spread the ball around more and use the uncertainty of where the ball is going to go to open things up for everybody, including himself. It just might be the making of a quarterback who has shown the ability to be very good in the past. He is now coming off two straight seasons of sub-par play, but last season he was under assault due to his offensive line; when he was kept clean, he completed 75.2 percent of his passes and ended the year on a strong note.

Stafford had his second best season last year, and finished in the top 10 in total QB rating, yet apparently that's considered a sub-par season. Meanwhile Taylor finished a whole 2 percentage pts higher than Stafford and is lauded for his 'Impressive play'.

If they are going to make the case for Stafford being a bottom tier QB (which they are claiming with a 23rd ranking), at least write an argument that makes sense...these opinion pieces they have been churning out seem to have a strong 'anti-lions' bias.

 

[brewer229]

I tend to agree that the Lions would be worse with Taylor at QB than they would be with Stafford.

I would imagine if you asked every team in the league which QB they would rather have for the next 5 years, 95% would say Stafford.

Im not saying Stafford is an elite QB, because hes not - but I do think he is quite a bit better than Taylor.

Perhaps, but I'm thinking more than a handful would gamble on the more mobile, less experienced player that put up over a 3:1 TD to INT ratio as his first season as a starter.

Stafford is going to be middle of the road. Tyrod could be better, could be worse, or could be the same. If you factor contract into this, 3 million vs 22 Million more GMs may lean towards Tyrod. Id say 50/50 not considering contract.

 

[tbone413]

Perhaps, but I'm thinking more than a handful would gamble on the more mobile, less experienced player that put up over a 3:1 TD to INT ratio as his first season as a starter.

Stafford is going to be middle of the road. Tyrod could be better, could be worse, or could be the same. If you factor contract into this, 3 million vs 22 Million more GMs may lean towards Tyrod. Id say 50/50 not considering contract.

I am honestly not sure. I am trying really hard to not be a homer here, but I don't think its fair to say for certain that Stafford will be middle of the road going forward. He is only 1 year older than Taylor, and has had two very good season, with 2 average and 1 below average season sandwiched in between those.

If I had to put money on which QB would be more productive over the next 5 seasons, id go Stafford and sleep pretty well at night. Taylor has far more question marks than Stafford - and his upside honestly isnt that much higher IMO. He could turn into a Russel Wilson, but he could also end up being an RG3, or even worse.

You make a good point about the salary's - I hadn't thought of that originally - however if Taylor does have another top 10 year, he will get paid - probably more than Stafford.

I just think its silly to rank a player who hasnt even started a full season worth of games 9 spots higher than Stafford, especially when just had the best second half of the season in the league...

 

[brewer229]

I am honestly not sure. I am trying really hard to not be a homer here, but I don't think its fair to say for certain that Stafford will be middle of the road going forward. He is only 1 year older than Taylor, and has had two very good season, with 2 average and 1 below average season sandwiched in between those.

If I had to put money on which QB would be more productive over the next 5 seasons, id go Stafford and sleep pretty well at night. Taylor has far more question marks than Stafford - and his upside honestly isnt that much higher IMO. He could turn into a Russel Wilson, but he could also end up being an RG3, or even worse.

You make a good point about the salary's - I hadn't thought of that originally - however if Taylor does have another top 10 year, he will get paid - probably more than Stafford.

I just think its silly to rank a player who hasnt even started a full season worth of games 9 spots higher than Stafford, especially when just had the best second half of the season in the league...

Yea 23 seems a bit low for Stafford.

After the Rodgers, Brady, Newton, Brees, Rivers, Big Ben, Wilson group. I have Luck and Romo. Then the Eli, Dalton, maybe Ryan and Flacco.

You have a huge group of unproven or non difference makers. Stafford, tyrod, Winston, Mariota, Bridgewater, Cousins, Carr, sure there a couple others. Has Stafford looked the best of that group. Yes at times, has he looked the the worst? Yea at times.

If I we had any of those would I think we could get to 8-8 yea. Would I expect a deep playoff run. No. Thats why I sort of consider all those guys sort of interchangeable.

 

[Mitchrapp]

The thing is regardless of raw stats Matt fits about 23rd. Numbers are one thing but it's his lack of efficiency.

But this list doesn't rank Matt 23rd, it ranks the team 23rd in QB. That counts End zone Dan and the rookie.. I think it says more about our backups than Matt. At least in their eyes.

 

[LKP]

Stafford had great completion percentage and broke nfl record by having every game over 60 percent. He is very efficient despite the lions lack of run game and portrction. Stafford is top 10 borderline top 5

 

[brewer229]

Edit: Didn't realize who I was responding too. Wasn't logged in so I didn't have my block on.

 

[LKP]

Stafford was 5th in completion percentage and had 32 tds. Remember in 2013 when that is all you guys cared about

 

[tomdalton22]

Stafford was 5th in completion percentage and had 32 tds. Remember in 2013 when that is all you guys cared about

completion percentage is huge and he did a great job vs poor defenses last year. I would like to see him do better against good defenses as well. Hopefully his good 2nd half was because he just played better vs. just going against shitty defenses.

 

[brewer229]

completion percentage is huge and he did a great job vs poor defenses last year. I would like to see him do better against good defenses as well. Hopefully his good 2nd half was because he just played better vs. just going against shitty defenses.

I think the biggest thing was they stopped asking him to make throws. They essentially asked him to throw the ball no more than 10 yards. To his credit he played well doing that, yes against shitty teams, but it was refreshing to see him hit the throws he previously couldn't. I seemed the first 6.5 years, he would miss at least 1 out of every 5 easy short throws. To see him miss far less of the gimme throws is a step in the right direction.

Now if we could only translate that into being able to throw a deep ball accurately and show he can do it a full season then we could be talking about top 10ish.

 

[boogerlovejoy]

completion percentage is huge and he did a great job vs poor defenses last year. I would like to see him do better against good defenses as well. Hopefully his good 2nd half was because he just played better vs. just going against shitty defenses.

He was over 60% completion against ALL defenses last year.....including

Kansas City (2rd in QB rating against)
Seattle (3rd)
Denver (4th)
Green Bay (7th) TWICE
Arizona (8th)
Raiders (11th)
Minnesota (15th) TWICE
Rams (16th)

So 10 of the Lions 16 games were against the top half of the league in pass defense (statistical rating)......but everyone says his improvement was primarily because of soft defenses. I think a good portion of it was his improved play. I don't think CJ was as much of a "crutch" last year as he had been in the past. Calvin had two good games against Chicago and a was "good" the rest of the year. He certainly wasn't Megatron anymore.

I expect a good year from #9.

 

[tonyballs]

Ok. Where would you rank Stafford? Where would your rank Taylor?

I would put Stafford around the 9-10 range and Taylor around the low to mid 20's.

 

[boogerlovejoy]

I would put Stafford around the 13-15 tange and Taylor around the low to mid 20's.

I'd 2nd that.

I put Stafford slightly higher, though. I'd say he's 10-12. Granted, that based on nothing more than my opinion.

 

[tomdalton22]

He was over 60% completion against ALL defenses last year.....including

Kansas City (2rd in QB rating against) 64.2
Seattle (3rd) 83.4
Denver (4th) 74.5
Green Bay (7th) TWICE 87.8 / 102.1
Arizona (8th) 50.0
Raiders (11th) 88.0
Minnesota (15th) TWICE 79.6 / 126.4
Rams (16th) 84.1

So 10 of the Lions 16 games were against the top half of the league in pass defense (statistical rating)......but everyone says his improvement was primarily because of soft defenses. I think a good portion of it was his improved play. I don't think CJ was as much of a "crutch" last year as he had been in the past. Calvin had two good games against Chicago and a was "good" the rest of the year. He certainly wasn't Megatron anymore.

I expect a good year from #9.

I put his game QB ratings up there

 

[tonyballs]

I'd 2nd that.

I put Stafford slightly higher, though. I'd say he's 10-12. Granted, that based on nothing more than my opinion.

Top of my head I put him mid range.....I was wrong. I quickly looked at all the starting 32 QBs and completely changed my mind. I saw 8-9 QBs better than Staff with a few close calls. We should be lucky to have #9 on our team.

 

[kdp1980]

I would put Stafford around the 9-10 range and Taylor around the low to mid 20's.

Yep