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!

Get Started
  • 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.

Stafford first Lion QB in 44 years.....

I think Rodgers is overrated and has had better support around him recently.

Rodgers was much better in 2010-2012 though but Stafford was younger and less experienced. Though 2011 Stafford was on par. The injured finger games kind of added up the ints that year.

Plus Rodgers in the same system since 2008.
i actually think that Rodgers is a bit over rated too. you take out the NFL's protectionist factor built-in for the Packers/Patriots/whatever team Manning is on, and he's not as good as he appears... don't get me wrong, Rodgers is still a very good QB, but i just don't think he's as good as the NFL makes him out to be. He and the Packers get the benefit of a LOT of favorable calls to extend drives (especially at home) where guys like Stafford and the Lions don't.

i am in no way saying that Stafford is better than, or even on Rodgers level... i just think that Rodgers is a little overrated and Stafford gets more sh*t than nearly every QB in the league (arguably justifiable based on salary and expectations).
 
You see UM? You tell us to not buy into the bait, and now you are arguing with him as well. It's a message board and it's just hard to ignore statements like that.

Ehh my engagements never last more than 2 or 3 posts with him. I've had my fun, and I'm not going to get riled up by him.
 
Ehh my engagements never last more than 2 or 3 posts with him. I've had my fun, and I'm not going to get riled up by him.

You lost the argument and now you are bailing. You know the game tape and support around each QB backs me up.
 
I was with you a bit until you dropped the favorable calls thing. There's absolutely zero way to determine that stuff unless you went back and reviewed game footage for the past 5 years to see which calls are bad/favorable.

But, protection or no, the guy has the best TD/INT ratio in the history of the NFL. And he's just a winner, plain and simple. Game against the Lions for the division, comes back with a busted leg and gets it done.
 
I was with you a bit until you dropped the favorable calls thing. There's absolutely zero way to determine that stuff unless you went back and reviewed game footage for the past 5 years to see which calls are bad/favorable.

But, protection or no, the guy has the best TD/INT ratio in the history of the NFL. And he's just a winner, plain and simple. Game against the Lions for the division, comes back with a busted leg and gets it done.

He had great protection. They just flat out allowed holding by their line. Not to mention Cobb getitng wide open most of the time. They scored 21 offensive points in that game. People are bitching about the Lions 20 PPG average this year.

Only pressured 7 times in that game. 42.9 % under pressure.
 
Last edited:
i actually think that Rodgers is a bit over rated too. you take out the NFL's protectionist factor built-in for the Packers/Patriots/whatever team Manning is on, and he's not as good as he appears... don't get me wrong, Rodgers is still a very good QB, but i just don't think he's as good as the NFL makes him out to be. He and the Packers get the benefit of a LOT of favorable calls to extend drives (especially at home) where guys like Stafford and the Lions don't.

i am in no way saying that Stafford is better than, or even on Rodgers level... i just think that Rodgers is a little overrated and Stafford gets more sh*t than nearly every QB in the league (arguably justifiable based on salary and expectations).

He gets more shit here. Outside of here Matt doesn't get near the shit he deserves.
 
Textbook you lost the argument response.

Middle school flashback going on right now. I've said since last year that your act is transparent. Sorry if I'm one of the few who calls you out on it. If you want to act like a juvenile though go for it. I wish you would stick to posting like a rational person though.
 
I was with you a bit until you dropped the favorable calls thing. There's absolutely zero way to determine that stuff unless you went back and reviewed game footage for the past 5 years to see which calls are bad/favorable.

But, protection or no, the guy has the best TD/INT ratio in the history of the NFL. And he's just a winner, plain and simple. Game against the Lions for the division, comes back with a busted leg and gets it done.
you don't think that GB gets more favorable calls than the Lions? esp at Lambeau? again, not taking anything away from his pure talent, but it helps when the league is backing him more than his competitors (late flags for PI based on the outcome of the play, or no flags, etc...). Rodgers is the NFL's cash cow when it comes to national media (nation wide state farm ads, vs local market ads), of coarse the NFL wants him to win, and does what it can to make sure that happens. winners make the NFL sh*tloads of money... the rest don't.
 
Stafford is a good QB, borderline elite. The game tape backs it up.

No and no. Borderline elite? Borderline elite qbs take over a depleted division like Stafford faced last year. What did he do?
 
No and no. Borderline elite? Borderline elite qbs take over a depleted division like Stafford faced last year. What did he do?

We whipped Green Bay at home 40-10 and swept Bears and beat Vikings in the game that mattered at the time n Week 1.

Lions were the injury depleted team in Week 5 and Week 17.

Still had to face 10 other tougher teams.
 
i actually think that Rodgers is a bit over rated too. you take out the NFL's protectionist factor built-in for the Packers/Patriots/whatever team Manning is on, and he's not as good as he appears... don't get me wrong, Rodgers is still a very good QB, but i just don't think he's as good as the NFL makes him out to be. He and the Packers get the benefit of a LOT of favorable calls to extend drives (especially at home) where guys like Stafford and the Lions don't.

i am in no way saying that Stafford is better than, or even on Rodgers level... i just think that Rodgers is a little overrated and Stafford gets more sh*t than nearly every QB in the league (arguably justifiable based on salary and expectations).

I would almost agree with you, in that the NFL does protect Rodgers, Brady, Brees, and Manning more than anyone else, with Luck headed for that list quickly.

The reason I have to disagree is because you stated he was overrated. They get that kind of protection from the league by being as damned good as they are. They catch every lucky break, and they get every flag their way, because they have the benefit of the doubt.

It comes with being the best, not just in football, but in every sport.

I can tell you now, greg Maddux started every game he ever pitched with an 18" strike zone. He ended every 5th inning he ever pitched with a 42" strike zone that extended into the opposite batters box.

He always got every close call, and he put the ball a little further out with every pitch, so it almost looked like the same exact spot as the last called strike.

Thats what you get when you are the best. You get the calls the mediocre guys don't. And you get them consistently.

So I agree they are protected, but they are so because they aren't overrated. They are absolutely as good as advertised.
 
Stafford faced 3rd and 8+ 88 times. Most in the league

Romo had that only 50 times. Rodgers 56 times. Life was harder for Stafford without a run game, proteciton and some holding penalties.
 
I would almost agree with you, in that the NFL does protect Rodgers, Brady, Brees, and Manning more than anyone else, with Luck headed for that list quickly.

The reason I have to disagree is because you stated he was overrated. They get that kind of protection from the league by being as damned good as they are. They catch every lucky break, and they get every flag their way, because they have the benefit of the doubt.

It comes with being the best, not just in football, but in every sport.

I can tell you now, greg Maddux started every game he ever pitched with an 18" strike zone. He ended every 5th inning he ever pitched with a 42" strike zone that extended into the opposite batters box.

He always got every close call, and he put the ball a little further out with every pitch, so it almost looked like the same exact spot as the last called strike.

Thats what you get when you are the best. You get the calls the mediocre guys don't. And you get them consistently.

So I agree they are protected, but they are so because they aren't overrated. They are absolutely as good as advertised.
fair enough... i was just meaning that Rodgers is a little bit overrated in that he gets treated like the best QB to ever play the game, when, as good as he is, he still has flaws.

again, i agree with you that he has earned a certain bit of protection for being extremely good. but when breathing on him warrants a 15 yd personal foul to extend a drive (extreme exaggeration, i know) instead of them punting, it seems the protection is being taken a little too far. would Big Ben (who is in that borderline elite category) get the same treatment? doubtful
 
Personally I don't think the NFL is like Greg Maddux or the stars of the NBA.
 
Isn't Stafford partially responsible for the amount of 3rd and 8+s?
 
Back
Top