RedRamage

Yeah, and that'll be a bummer in my humble opinion. I like my 1:00 Sunday afternoon games. I'm okay with 4:30 games... just hate the night stuff cause then I gotta stay up late and if they lose I go to bed angry and frustrated. If they win I go to bed jacked up (I said up, not off!) and excited.

Was it after his catch? What that what you were talking about? (see the twitter video here about half way down the page: https://www.si.com/nfl/lions/news/what-theyre-saying-lions-beat-vikings) If that's what you're talking about I think was Sewell just reacting and trying to get the Viking defender away from him who was trying to knock out the ball.

https://www.si.com/nfl/vikings/news/vikings-lions-recap-minnesota-abysmal-defense-wastes-great-kirk-cousins-game-34-23-loss I found this article interesting. It's obviously from a Vikings perspective, but the article talks repeatedly about how the Vikings defense was horrible and that the defense wasted a great game by Cousins and Jefferson. It goes on and on about the putrid defense. It doesn't make any mention at all about how the Lions offense is actually pretty darn good. Again it's a Vikings piece so I'm not surprised and I'm not even condemning them for this. Rather I'm pointing out that we has Lions fans have often done the same. We've often talked about how bad this or that aspect of the Lions are without necessarily giving credit the opposition. It's worth remembering when we lambast our team for their issues that sometimes you gotta give a little credit the team lining up on the other side of the ball.

Anyone else notice that there appeared to be a minor scuffle at the end of the game with a player or two? It was pretty brief but it looked like a Lions player was being pulled away/back from one of the Vikings by some coaches. I couldn't make out who it was though.

Yeah, I don't think we can automatically assume that Holmes was/is a guy who's pro-trading away picks. I mean, we also can't say he's anti-trading either. But I do seem to remember hearing one quote that the Rams were willing to trade away top picks because they felt comfortable that Holmes would find diamonds in the later rounds to losing those high picks wouldn't hurt as much.

FWIW, I would be nice to take a QB and NOT need that QB to be the starter that fall. It would be nice to take a QB either round 1 or round 2 and develop him for a year or so. Even if we take a QB with the Rams pick, I'd love to have that person next year because Goff is playing well enough that we're winning.

Yup. I've pretty much given up on him. He's got the physical skills, I just don't think he's got good decision making ability on the field.

Well, dang... not to shabby there Hongbit.

As someone who's never been personally high on Jiménez, I think the Tigers made a good deal too.

I miss the days and our RBs were Double-A and Double-Z...

Yeah, this as all the markings to me of a Lions team coming in and playing really tight because they are looking at this as a chance to prove they below and just not being comfortable or playing well. I hope I'm wrong. I hope that Campbell and Co. are hammering that this is a chance to go and steal one. They're playing a 10-2 team so no one is expecting a win despite what the media says. A 5-7 team shouldn't be expected to beat a 10-2 team. Just go out and play your best and if they steal one... that's fantastic. If they don't... come back with fire next year.

The key will probably be the Broncos/Rams game. If the Rams lose that they obviously move ahead of the Broncos. Assuming they lose all their rest (as Chicago will probably do), then there's a good chance the rams move up to #2. Looking at current standings all Chicago opponents (past and future) have a record of 118/87/2 (I'm assuming games played against division opponents count twice) while LARams opposition record is 103/104.

While Pro-Bowls aren't always a good measure of the skill of a player, I think they are important for a players HOF chances for two reasons: 1. It's an easy stat to point at and understand (ie, Lazy man research). More Pro-Bowls means better player, right? 2. It's a judgement of how the league sees a player. Players who get picked for the Pro-Bowl are viewed as the better player. The stats may not say that, but the feeling (whether correct or not... insert: unmeasurables comment here) is that that player is better. I would very much agree that Pro-Bowls aren't the best measurement of a player. But I do think Pro-Bowls contribute to the chance of a player making the HOF, meaning they should be included in the discussion of whether or not we think a player will make the HOF. (Note this is a different discussion than whether or not a player deserves to make it to the HOF.)

I watched a little clip of the MLB draft lottery and it looked pretty lame... and I think part of the reason for this is that it's all decided a head of time. There's no excitement. And part of the reason they don't do it live is that if you're doing the lottery and the #1 pick is decided first, it seems anti-climatic. So, why don't they do it in reverse? I'm not great with stats some someone might have to correct me here... but couldn't they do things in reverse is the changed out the number of balls for each team? A simplified example: Three teams: A, B, and C. A should have the best chance of getting the #1 so they get three balls in the bucket. B is next and gets two balls. C is last, they only get one ball. Mix up the balls, and draw out one of them. Because A has three, they have a 50% chance of getting the #1 over all. Here's my reversal: Team A gets just one ball, Team B gets two, and Team C gets three. Now we mix up the balls and draw out for the 3rd pick first. Because team C has the most balls they have the highest chance of getting the 3rd pick, A has the least chance of getting that pick. Would that work?

What's Matt Millen doing these days?

Could you imagine the hell the Rams would be in if McVay left? Stafford's a question mark moving forward (health), you don't have much depth due to giving away all your draft picks, you don't have a HC... man that franchise would be in for a few very rough years. Of course, they'd still probably rebuild and be back in a SB for the Lions made one.

The NFL is such a "what have you done for me lately" league. I mean here's a guy who been mostly a positions coach... he gets one year as an OC... granted a mostly successful year, but one year none-the-less.. and he's talked about as a legit HC candidate. But the league is so focused on the very recent past and I think there's such a fear of missing out on the next great coaching mind that people like Johnson are being poached with a relatively small track record, just in case! I'll also throw in the rant here that I firmly believe that success as a coordinator does NOT automatically equal success as a HC. Just in the last decade we've seen plenty of mostly successful coordinator who've bombed as HCs here in Detroit.

So... if he retired after the 2022 season... is he considered for the HOF? Off the top of my head I'd say no. He played in relative obscurity in Detroit... he had a great 2021 obviously and has a SB ring, but lots of players had one great year. Sure you can point to some good stats from his Detroit days, but I don't think that, combined with 2021, would be enough. Now, does this motivate Stafford to come back to prove that he wasn't just a one-hit wonder? I don't know if this matters to him or not. I think all professional athletes have some level of wanted to prove that they belong. I think they need that to be able to achieve the level they do. But there's also a difference between a 22 year old fresh in the league and a 30+ year old who's abused his body for decades and have a family now.

There was a point in another thread that if the Lions went 4-1 we'd need two other teams from the Seattle/NY/Washington group to only get one more win. That said, *if* the Lions win Sunday, I'd think they'd be favored to win out the rest of their games. @Jets the following week would probably be the hardest remaining game. @Carolina should be winnable. Bears at home should be easy. @Packers will potentially be tough just because it's outdoors in the middle of winter, but still should be winnable. All this said: I do NOT think the Lions are making the playoffs.

According to this site it may not be a hugely serious thing. The devil's in the details of course... how bad is the bruise? How bad are Stafford symptoms? It doesn't sound like a career ender, but then again this is just after 3 minutes of reading on some random medical website.

Given how poorly Stafford performed this year, maybe the Rams will want to trade Stafford for Goff?

On a side note... anyone else think the announcers were using the Jag's running back's initials for way too long?

Now tied for 7th in total receptions. He's 13th in total yards.

Yup... from a playoff perspective, that tie was the worst case scenario. That said, I don't really care about the playoff. All things considered I'd prefer they make them of course, but I would be shocked if they actually win a playoff game, let alone win three of 'em. I'm happy with what appears to be steady improvement through the season and I'm excited to see what 2023 will bring.

Not only will they be must wins, but the team should also lose to improve their draft position.