1984Echoes

That's why I'd rather hunt RFA's... who will be young enough to actually have a future (and hopefully some high-end talent as well...).

Gores said otherwise. But... I mean... I do get what it does for the team in the offseason. But... Also, Tom Gores DID say he wanted changes, and he wanted them "NOW". Which... I am taking to mean this season.

I don't want to look at this team as a peak. Or soon to reach a peak. I prefer looking at this team as riding waves. We may be able to get to the top of a wave. Sometimes we might be surfing that wave. Sometimes we may hit the bottom of that swell, but get right back to the top of that wave, or the next wave... within seconds. Waves move quick in the ocean. Longevity, or sustainability... will depend on Holmes. As long as he can keep pulling in good players for Dan Campbell to coach up into winners... we could have some of that elusive sustainability. A Belichick-type 25-year run would work for me. I look at the past 65 years as one long valley. With the team only a few times even getting up to a single foothill. I don't want to try to get to a peak and then fall into another long, deep, valley. I want this team to surf waves.

A loss next week would be sad. I'm expecting more from this team than 1 playoff win, which hasn't changed after this past weekend. A win next week would be gravy. And everything after that. But go all the way to the Super Bowl and it's not just gravy... it's icing on the cake! 😉

Conversely... I ate two migraine pills (acetaminophen, aspirin & CAFFEINE!!!) a few hours ago for a sore neck and inhaled a few glasses of Dr. Pepper during the game... So... I'm going to sleep very well tonight too!!!

STORY of the game: Lions 3 Red Zones, 3 TD's. Rams 3 Red Zones, 3 FG's. Lions win!

My take: EDGE of the Mother ****ing SEAT!!!

I wanted him too... In the 5th round even. But they went with Sorsdal OG and Antoine Greene in the 7th... Ce la vie...

Sweet win! 4-2 over Toronto on the road...

Oh... Well... Maybe that's why...

Yeah I don't understand why they're not trying more inside runs for Gibbs...

FTFY.

DITTO!

They depend on each other. It goes both ways. If you have a crappy secondary that can't cover anyone then the pass rush has zero time to be effective. Secondaries that cover like a glove improve the pass rush. That's why we GOTTA have BOTH. It can't just be one or the other: A) One speed rusher would be outstanding for this defense. I already have my eye on the guy I think the Lions should nab in the 1st round this year. I'm hunting for the next Danielle Hunter or Maxx Crosby. B) But... We GOTTA get better CB play. Whether that means 1 guy or 2... It's an imperative to both improve our defense as well as to improve our pass rush. Conversely, a great pass rush helps the secondary... But... NOT if they can't cover anyone. They need BOTH. Another pass rusher or two, and better CB's. My 2 cents.

I'd like to see a couple INT's to take the ball away from Stafford/ the Rams...

Do we have to try Melifonwu back at CB? Stick him on Nacua...? We have a couple other decent safeties so...

Except for the secondary.

Another Red Zone win. Well... we're looking like Green Bay so far so... I'm not worried about next year. And I'm not worried if we face them in the playoffs again. It'll be a good game.

Two red zone wins (score the TD, hold the other team to a FG) = 7-3 early lead for Detroit Blue Man Group.

PS: As for M&A as the only topic: Again, it depends on judgement. A lot of companies benefit hugely from M&A and it's a great benefit for all concerned. Both companies, stockholders, even the public. Usually there will be some employee losses; but that's my last concern because I'm of the mind of "be adaptable/ roll with the punches." And I say that with regard to myself as well... it's not an anti-employee stance. But I am pro-business entity efficiency proponent. Other company's... not so much. And that may go to your anti-M&A stance...

Well, you're talking about some of the "vulture financing" that exists... I don't know if that's good or bad... some companies are outmoded and dragging along each year and losing out to more modernized companies so... stripping them for value doesn't bother me too much. I mean... that sucks for the workers. But what bothers me even moreso, is when finance guys don't really have any idea what they've created (derivatives) and demand more supply for their monster so everyone says "Well **** the rules, and common sense"... With the Fed government just looking the other way. And then we have the Great Recession of 2008. "COCKY" and Finance do NOT go together very well.

I vote for using the offseason cap room on a "poison pill" offer to an RFA. My recommendation: Offer a $35Mill 2024 salary to Tyrese Maxey. With a lower salary thereafter. Can that be done in the NBA?

I can get on board with this.

I haven't seen anything that equates to hatred. More of a "It's time to move on" stream of messages, rather than abject hatred. I'm taking that video above as... comedy. And it is pretty funny. As long as Matt & Kelly are not subjected to anyone at the game who is a true A-Hole but rather just people who "rib" them good-naturedly... would be my preference. I expect us to win. But if we lose, I could get behind another Stafford/ Rams Super Bowl run... Or maybe the 49'ers? I could get behind a "Underdog Mr. Irrelevant Purdy" run too... Undecided. But I still love Matthew Stafford and have no ill feeling towards him. But, again, my QB/ Team today is Jared Goff/ Lions... not Stafford.

Rebuttal: A) Having terrible finance guys can destroy a company (Enron, Arthur Anderson, etc...); or at the very least can lose sight of the long-term deleterious effects of misunderstanding Costs versus Profit (the Big 3 automakers, who lost out to the UAW, and to pension funding expenses, in lieu of absolutely required Manufacturing/ Engineering flexibility and Cash Flow & Expense Containment/ Cost/ Funding in (wildly) general. B) There are Finance guys who have become CEO's and been just as successful as any: Engineer/ Sales/ Marketing/ etc. guy. C) On the bolded part... It's the Stock Market, not the Federal government's fault, that the bottom line can often override good business decisions. Whether that's Engineering or an investment in Sales/ Marketing or Capital Expenditures... etc. D) After reading Romad... Yeah... Engineers "Want" to do something is not necessarily smart either. In fact, it can often be quite dumb when it is simply a waste of money that doesn't help the company in any way. BTW: That's what "outside" R&D is for: Universities or nuclear research facilities or what not. But... I've had my engineering teams get "stars in their eyes" sometimes and sorry... but my response will end up being: "sorry dudes... that just costs too much." Read: Try getting a Research Grant for that instead... I absolutely take exception to what we do not being useful to the larger society. Incorrect. But what you've described, or what you've taken exception to: is actually BAD finance rather than smart finance. I take exception to BAD finance as well. If the bottom line (or extraction profit in your parlance) overrides productive capacity or ANYTHING else that weakens a business... Then it's bad business decision-making, no matter where that comes from.