RedRamage

I really hope I'm wrong, but I've all but written Levi off. It's entirely possible that he ends up coming back, being productive, and even being a star. I seem to remember some issues with a certain QB and injuries in his first couple of years. So again... hoping I'm wrong but I'm just not expecting anything from him.

Dude, can you promise me that there will be someone else in the house when you watch next weeks game? If the Lions lay and egg defensively like this did yesterday I'm going to be worried about you.

Here's some other idea that are swimming in the back of my head... just throwing them out there... no idea if they would work or make sense, but here they are: Add another bye week (not my idea, read it somewhere else). As much as I hate bye week when the Lions have them, it makes sense to have more rest time and it extends the length of the NFL season, which I suspect the NFL would like. Expand the roster? I'm somewhat unsure on this one... I don't want to see watered down talent, but would a bigger roster mean more substitutions and less hits per player per game? Snap limits? This might be SUPER controversial, but especially if we had bigger rosters might the NFL be able to put in a limit on the number of snaps for players per game? Soft-sided helmets? No idea if this makes sense, but it seems to me that a rigid helmet do as much to protect the player as the padding inside it does. I guess it helps spread out the impact a bit, but I wonder if they were able to develop a helmet that did this without being so rigid on the outside how that would change the game. Thursday games only after bye week (or first week of the season). This would mean fewer Thursday night games, which the NFL wouldn't like. But the extra bye week would help. I would allow Friday night games later in the season after HS football is done, without a previous bye week, as a compromise. (This would mean the Lions and Cowboys always have a bye the week before TDay.) Impact sensors in helmets?

I dunno... I'm not a doctor either, but I don't think A-Fib is the same as a concussion in the sense that I don't think i'ts generally causes by impact nor is as susceptible to repeat after the first incident. So I don't think there's the same danger, but again, not a doctor at all so just my best guess. That said, I do think there needs to be some level of medical personnel that are outside of the teams... heck, maybe even outside of the league, that have the power to step in here and say: "A-Fib is not a joke and not something to just ignore. Until we can run some tests and know that you're not on the verge of this happening again, you're sidelined." I just don't know exactly how to structure something like this. Football is a violent sport and some players will always be playing with some level of injury, so you don't want a medical staff that is too sensitive. But at the same time you need obviously need someone with the ability to step in who is not answerable to the team and maybe not even to the NFL.

Sure felt like more than 30! Every time it went for 8 yards or more.

Did Hutch do anything in this game?

At least the offense showed up??

I wonder sometimes if it's that all the armor gives you a feeling of invincibility... that you can just smash through and there's no danger of you getting hurt. If you don't have all that armor on your not going to go in for the same kind of hits. I don't claim to be any sort of expert on this, just an opinion.

I'm with Bombers here. Campbell ain't going anywhere this year. I mean, short of something spectacular like the Lions being reasonably healthy and losing out the rest of the season or Campbell going on some sexist or racist rant there is no way he's getting fired this season. He's built up way too much good will with the fans, he fits the culture of Detroit, the players love him, and he's taking over a complete tear down and rebuild (which provides an built in excuse for losing). Now, if the Lions end up with 5 or fewer wins this season (and again a reasonably healthy team) I think people will start to really question his coaching ability and that next year will be the "put up or shut up" year for him, but I will be more shocked if Campbell get fired this year than I will be if the Lions win the SB this year. (Again... assuming he doesn't do something super stupid to publicly embarrass the team and the Fords.)

Just read the end of the Vikings thread... you'll find them there.

If they don't win this game it will literally be impossible for them to get 15 wins during the regular season.

And see here's where my issue would be... I'd bet $10, win $5 and think: "Man...if I'd have bet $100 I would have won $50!" and so next week I'd be tempted to bet a lot more. Self-control in areas like this are NOT my forte, so I do my best to not get started.

For what's it's worth I think a lot of calls in the game, and especially passing related, are judgement calls. I suspect that some crews are much more nitpicky than others are and we ran into a nitpick crew. Now, that doesn't excuse Amani, but it could very well be that 9 crews out of 10 don't call those penalties or don't call as many of them penalties. It also could be that once it was called once the refs were specifically looking for it in the future. It seemed to me that there were other instances where there was just as much contact not involving Amani that weren't called. Additionally look at the last play where there was significant contact and not call was made. To me it look like the receiver turned into Amani and that it could almost have been called offensive PI because Amani was breaking for the ball and the receiver wasn't even looking for the ball when contact was made... but you saw how vehemently he campaigned for a PI by Amani. Makes you wonder if the Vikings were pressuring the refs. Again, all this doesn't excuse Amani. A good pitcher will pitch to the strike zone being called by the ump. A good CB needs to play to the level that the refs allow and back off when he's being flagged.

A thought I just had... was this a case of a team being too tight? Did they go into Minny with the idea that a win here would "prove" that they were for real? Did they go in hoping to cast out the "no road wins" tag and so from the coaching staff on down to the bottom go in here with a serious case of the nerves? I really felt like everything in the 4th quarter was all about: Don't lose! Don't lose! Don't lose! And when you play that like it's almost inevitable that you're gonna lose.

I didn't feel like there were serious coaching issues in the first two games. I did feel like there were some issues in this game so I'm not trying to excuse the coaching staff... just don't see it as a pattern yet. (This is certainly not to say that there weren't coaching mistakes in the first two games, just that they weren't serious issues/mistakes.)

For those of us who are gambling idiots, can you explain how a parlay works and what the advantages are vs. just "normal" bets? I have no intention of getting into gambling because I know that I'm a very weak willing soul with things like this and I would get addicted in no time at all. But I hear about parleys all the time and I'm just curious how it works.

I remember that Crowell play. Just one more great Lions memory. 😢

I think this is a very valid comment and it the appropriate rebuttal to my "sour grapes" attitude of "Well, we expected them to lose anyways, so..." I think we've all been trained to view the team as a bad team for a long, long, long time and so "well... we expected them to lose anyways, so..." But we shouldn't just expect that nor really accept that as fans. This one hurts a bit because it was clearly winnable and they found a way to lose. It would have been a nice statement game. Looking back 3/4 of a day later and I was probably just trying to psych myself out of feeling upset.

This. Before the season most of people put the Lions at 6-8 wins... not quite good enough to be average. The Vikings are an above average team so you'd expect them to lose. That's not to say I'm happy about it... I think they could have won if they'd just played a little bit better. But I guess I didn't expect them to win.

I think it was the wrong call to go for the FG for two reasons: It's unlikely he makes it, giving the Vikings short field position. But even if he does make it that doesn't stop the Vikings from winning on a TD. I think the choice there should be been between a punt and going for it on 4th down.

I think this was a complete team loss. I think you can point to problems everywhere. Goff wasn't perfect (though not bad either), choose to not run more seems puzzling to me. Receivers weren't getting open regularly. Injuries were piling up. The DL got very little pressure. #24 was sucking it up big time and the secondary in general wasn't great. ST made a number of mistakes (missed FG, less than great punts, take the ball out of the end zone and getting tackled before the 25-yardline too often). I honestly don't know that there was any one area that played really, really well... maybe the OL I guess??

https://www.reddit.com/r/minnesotavikings/comments/xk2cqi/this_is_the_lions_division_and_were_all_just/

Any references to knee caps?

Yeah it was 100% a joke at TripleSe7en's expense.