RedRamage

Maybe if he'd stayed with the Lions, but he was only here five years.

I mean is sacks were an official stat in '78, and the 23 is accurate it would be an NFL record right now.

Baker was a little before I started watching football so didn't ever see him play, but yeah... 23 sacks in his rookie year? Looks like he might have gotten hurt in '81? His stats started dropping. Had a few decent years with St. Louis after he left the Lions, but was never the same as those first three years in Detroit.

Oh man, I completely forgot about Ansah. Yeah, health was an issue for him. Only two years did he play all 16 games. Porcher is who I was going to say too. I just looked back on this guys career briefly... poor dude probably thought he was coming into the Lions at just the right time. 1991: Lions make it to the Conference Championship 1992: Lions draft Porcher, but then go 5-11... okay, well, bad seasons happen... '93, '94, '95: Made the playoffs but bounced in out in the first game. Still, Lions did make the playoffs... 1996: Missed the playoffs, Fontes fired. '97-00: In and out of the playoffs under Ross, who quits mid-season. Then in comes Millen... Poor guy thought he was coming into an up and coming team which just sat in "middle of the pack limbo" for most of his career before bottoming out at the end of it.

Eh... yeah, kinda... I mean the number of times when the pitcher threw 4 balls and something happened (The batter swung at the pitch, the pitch was super wild, the catcher messed up the catch) AND that mistake effected the game was not zero, but super duper low. In the same sense onsides kicks that are successful are super duper low, so making that success rate even lower may not seem like a major deal, but... Even though the percentage of successful onsides kicks are low, it's still much, much higher than a mistake on an intentional walk causing a benefit for the other team. And it's a way to keep a team in a game and make it interesting for fans watching. In the end it's not something I'm going to be super upset about, it's just a little disappointing. But if the new rules can make returns more likely and more interesting on kickoffs, I'm okay with sacrificing surprise onsides kicks for that I guess.

I like the rule as far as kickoffs go. I think it will encourage more returns in a safer way. I just don't love the way it's (even more) nerfed the onsides kick.

Just thought this might be something interesting to do during the off season. Let's start a discussion about some of our players. The point here isn't to say that player-X is the best Lion ever or that he's the best player in the NFL ever, or even necessarily the best player in the NFL right now. It's more of a talk like: "I haven't see the Lions field a player of that quality since the 80s..." or something like that. We'll start with Hutch: Hutchinson is the best DE the Lions have had since __________________________ .

He needed a hobby after the presidency.

I just want them to add this somewhere...

Yeah, I wasn't sure on that either. The only thing I can think of is a situation where the offense holds a defender, the QB throws an interception, then on the return a defensive player does an illegal block in the back. I think by rule right now the penalties would off set and the ball would go back to the offensive team. This new rule would allow the defense to keep the interception maybe?

Yes, but it has to be declared ahead of time, and at least the original rule (don't know if it was modified before being passed) stated that it could only be in the 4th quarter by a team that was trailing. So no surprise on-sides kicks.

I guess it depends... I mean I don't see anyone faking an injury, sitting out a play, then going back in to try to cause a defensive player to get a fine. But if a player can fake an injury and get 15 yards consistently, then maybe. If it's just a fine if it happens in game with no injury but refs call it a penalty if there is an injury then I could potentially see it happening. Heck there's situations where it'd be a no brainer not to TRY if the tackle was even close to a hip-drop... Final seconds of the half or game... I'm running now the sideline within 50ish yards of the end zone and a guy tackles me and my leg is even slightly pinned. The clock says 0:00... I'm waiting on the ground for the trainer. Maybe I get the flag... my team gets 15 yards, that puts us in field goal range for one final play.

This is just so, as you said, bizarre. I wonder if he just sorta snapped... like: "Oh ****, oh ****, oh ****... what do I do, what do I do? I f'ed up bad." And then just sort of went home and hoped it all would just go away and the more he ignored it without police busting down his door the more he thought maybe it would all just blow over and so he just kept ignoring it. I mean, obviously this makes no sense logically, but that assumes he's thinking clearly and logically... and plainly he's not. To respond to @Hongbit, showing up in Allen Park doesn't make him more guilty, but the fact he left what could have been his best support structure AND hasn't turned himself in sure makes is seem like he's guilty. I mean if you believe your innocent or at least that there were mitigating circumstances, the Lions would be a great friend to have in your corner.

While I was reading some of the responses in the thread about the hip-drop ban, it reminded me of this version of football I heard about many years ago, so I just looked it up again. It's pretty niche football with just like 15-20 colleges that have teams playing it. In short, Spring football is just like regular football but there's a max weight limit (currently 178 pounds) for each player. This means that receivers, corners and QBs are the same size (more or less) as DLs and OTs and linebackers. There's a bigger emphasis on speed and agility vs. size and strength. And it would seem with all players being nearly equal in size there's a smaller risk of injury. Now, I really, really, really doubt we'll be seeing any expansion of Sprint Football at the college level, let alone any professional level Sprint Football. But it's an interesting concept and might make for a more entertaining game. On a purely hypothetical note, it could also co-exist better with the NFL given that the the weight limit. If you're a talented player, but just not large enough to make it in the NFL, a Sprint Football league might be the better alternative for you.

It sure seems like it's getting harder and harder and harder to play defense. I know this is supposed to be in the name of player safety... but if this is actually enforced on the field (and isn't just a "fine after the game" as @MichiganCardinal eluded to) I see this as being the whole "what is a catch" debacle that happened after the Calvin Johnson incident. Refs are doing to look at this differently and flag something and not others. Other refs will flag that thing but not the first. We're going to get a bunch of youtube clips of people saying: "Why is this a penalty but this one isn't?"

Oh yes... PLEASE more of that! It's literally the only thing that makes football watchable these days!

I guess that makes some sense. I suppose the NFL wants some oversite as well... like being able to say: No, you're plan sucks so we're not approving it. OR: No, you're already stretched too thin because you already have X, Y, and Z areas and we don't think you can do justice to yet another area. Still seems weird though how they're talking about "awarding" a team GMP "rights" to a country. Makes it seem like they were competing against other team and they won exclusive rights to market to that area.

I totally do not understand the Global Markets Program. I don't get why teams need to make a "bid" for certain countries given that there doesn't seem to be a limit on how many teams can get awarded a given country.

https://theathletic.com/5367020/2024/03/25/nfl-hip-drop-tackle-ban/ The NFLPA was against it. So my problems with this: 1. How easy is it going to be to determine if the hips "swiveled" or not? I guess we'll see how it plays out, but this seems like it could be very subjective and if a player gets flagged for it a few things will refs start watching that player in particular more closely? 2. I don't like that it's conditional on landing on and trapping a runner's legs. So if a defender does a hip drop trying to avoid the legs and the runner spins at the last second to try to get out of it and hey... look at that, a leg is trapped. 15 yard penalty because the runner did something the defender had no control over.

Do we have the exact question/answer? Seems like a lot of paraphrasing going on...

Yeah, I'm sorta starting to think the same thing. If he was dead I would expect that someone would have found his body at this point. I don't think suicidal people generally try to hide their impending death... like he's not going to travel to the middle of some swamp and kill himself there. And even if he did I would expect his family/friends/etc. to be saying: "We don't know where he is, we're worried about him, etc." like you're saying. I'm starting to wonder if he fled the country. What he allegedly did may not be something you flee the country for, but he also may not have been of sound mind when he did it. If he panicked at the time... maybe he thought he'd killed her? Maybe he just wasn't thinking straight?... if he ran then, now it's kinda hard to come back three weeks later.

It's the paid part that I have an issue with. It's a public black eye. Sure, you're not using him on your team (if this happens during the season) but you're still paying millions of dollars to an accused woman beater. And the team is penalized to an extent cause they may want to give the player the benefit of the doubt and a chance to defend himself, but if they keep him on they lose the money and if he ends up guilty they would have been better off cutting him early.

I still think the NFL needs a way that teams can put players in a "limbo" state where they're not paid, but also not cut. With how things have played out this would NOT apply to Sutton's situation, but in a hypothetical situation... let's say Sutton turned himself in, cooperated with police, and claimed he didn't do the things he was accused of. What would the Lions do then? Do you keep the player on the team? Did you suspend him, but keep paying him (if the legal issues extend into the season)? Do you cut him and risk losing him to another team it turns out the accessor lied? From a PR perspective the NFL should have a way to distance themselves from the player, without paying him, until the case is resolved. Once it's cleared up the Team has "retroactively" cut him and recoup the money in escrow, or keep the player and he gets his back pay.