Eagles at Lions

[MichiganCardinal]

2 hours ago, 1984Echoes said:

I don't see the difference, with regards to the current admin (both coaches and Admin). I don't agree with this.

IMO, regardless of the record, even if 0-17... both coaches and admin will get a couple of years to (A) fix the talent level of the team and (B) Coach them up.

I watched Sundays game (as much as I could stomach) and Goff's plentiful errors shouldn't land on the coaches; Swift lining up on the line instead of off... is that coaching, or Swift making a mental error? Same with 10 men on the field: coaches, or did a player screw up? A lot of the mental errors or hitting the wrong gap, etc.: coaches, or inferior players making mistakes? And to someone else's point: Campbell feels like he has to take extra aggressive measures (all the 4th down attempts, instead of a few that should have been points (FG's) taken) due to the inferior roster.

There are some mental or other coaching errors... but I think they get the same two years to fix all of those as the Admin gets to fix the roster.

IMO.

I think at the end of the day, whether we finish 3-14 or 0-17, the regime will be given a couple of years. I just think it's hard to justify an 0-17 season to either the fans or free agents you are trying to court. Sure you inherited nothing, sure you are devoid of talent, sure you were a properly called delay of game penalty from a win, etc. etc.... But you couldn't muster one win in a 17-game season?

Maybe I am making too much out of it, but I just think the mark of a winless season is a hard pill to swallow and recover from. If you hire a Hue Jackson (which I don't think Dan Campbell is), you need to be able to recognize it before he's 3-36-1.

[sabretooth]

9 minutes ago, Motown Bombers said:

I'm just waiting for them to win a couple games and then the inevitable hand wringing about winning meaningless games cost them x draft pick. 

Just think of how awesome the Lions would be on the field if their fans were perfectly tuned on Message Boards.

[gehringer_2]

15 minutes ago, MichiganCardinal said:

I think at the end of the day, whether we finish 3-14 or 0-17, the regime will be given a couple of years. I just think it's hard to justify an 0-17 season to either the fans or free agents you are trying to court. Sure you inherited nothing, sure you are devoid of talent, sure you were a properly called delay of game penalty from a win, etc. etc.... But you couldn't muster one win in a 17-game season?

Maybe I am making too much out of it, but I just think the mark of a winless season is a hard pill to swallow and recover from. If you hire a Hue Jackson (which I don't think Dan Campbell is), you need to be able to recognize it before he's 3-36-1.

yeah - the problem with going 0-17 is someone will have to be sacrificed, and it may have nothing to do with whether that is the person that most deserves it. They will be forced into change for the sake of change and as always with the Lions, there is no guarantee change will be in the right direction.

[Motown Bombers]

I don't think they will be forced into any change. Everybody knows this is the fault of Quinn. We all knew this would be a long season. 

[gehringer_2]

 

4 minutes ago, Motown Bombers said:

I don't think they will be forced into any change. Everybody knows this is the fault of Quinn. We all knew this would be a long season. 

IDK, that might be easier to predict at 0-8 than it will be to maintain if they reach 0-17! 

All-in-all still more likely they do win one or two.

Edited November 1, 2021 by gehringer_2

[Motown Bombers]

1 minute ago, gehringer_2 said:

IDK, that might be easier to predict at 0-8 than it will be to maintain if they reach 0-17!

Campbell and Holmes signed 6 year contracts because they knew this would be a long process. This is Quinn's roster and they had to trade their franchise QB. They will be given some leeway even if they go 0-17. At worst I could see them firing Lynn. 

[Hongbit]

1 hour ago, Motown Bombers said:

Campbell and Holmes signed 6 year contracts because they knew this would be a long process. This is Quinn's roster and they had to trade their franchise QB. They will be given some leeway even if they go 0-17. At worst I could see them firing Lynn. 

This is correct.   Lynn will be the scapegoat if one is needed   

[Motor City Sonics]

2 hours ago, Hongbit said:

This is correct.   Lynn will be the scapegoat if one is needed   

Look at that receiving corps, and your best two experienced O-Lineman are both out and Goff is your QB.  How can anyone be measured with that?   This isn't on Lynn.  It's on Quinn. 

[gehringer_2]

5 minutes ago, Motor City Sonics said:

Look at that receiving corps, and your best two experienced O-Lineman are both out and Goff is your QB.  How can anyone be measured with that?   This isn't on Lynn.  It's on Quinn. 

my premise somewhere up-thread was exactly that that person wouldn't necessarily deserve it, but simply that 0/17 would require some kind of sacrifice to propitiate the football/media/fan gods regardless.

[KL2]

9 hours ago, NYLion said:

Sorry but 0-8 is unacceptable no matter what. I was on board with the competitive losses but getting blown out of the water in two straight home games especially when there was some "give up" in the players is completely unacceptable.

I expected struggles, I expected a few blowouts, but I did not expect to see a team that is worse in Game 8 than they were in Game 1. I'm not even going to touch on the coaching errors in the close losses. 

As I said before, all I wanted to see was some progression and if anything, the team is regressing and it appears that the coaches' message is growing a little stale. I get that there's a lack of talent, and injuries, but you still need to see compete every week (when you're trying to build a foundation) and I haven't seen it as of late.

Of course you don't fire Campbell anytime soon but I don't see why it's so taboo for him to be questioned.

They have less talent than they did in game 1. Why would you think that group would get better?

[KL2]

8 hours ago, NYLion said:

It's a fair take but I don't think they can afford to let this season go into the abyss and I think it's important, not necessary but important to win a few games just for their psyche going into the offseason because a lot of the team is made up of young players that will be here beyond this season.

Your whole premise is laughably stuck in 1972. 

THere is zero evidence that winning a few at the end of the year does anything to imrove the next year. It's even more true when you consider we have what like 4 guys that might be part of the team when they are decent. You really think TJ is gonna play better or worse in 2024 based on whether they win 2 or 0 this year? I don't think Calvin's career abiity was changed all that much by being part of 0-16
 

Even next year there are gonna be what 30 new players, so who are you building for? WHo are you teaching to win? Guys who won't even be good enough to play for the Lions? 

[NYLion]

9 hours ago, KL2 said:

Your whole premise is laughably stuck in 1972. 

THere is zero evidence that winning a few at the end of the year does anything to imrove the next year. It's even more true when you consider we have what like 4 guys that might be part of the team when they are decent. You really think TJ is gonna play better or worse in 2024 based on whether they win 2 or 0 this year? I don't think Calvin's career abiity was changed all that much by being part of 0-16
 

Even next year there are gonna be what 30 new players, so who are you building for? WHo are you teaching to win? Guys who won't even be good enough to play for the Lions? 

Nobody wants to go 0-17. Winning a few would surely boost morale and you may not want to believe it but getting a taste of winning, even if it's just a win or two, is important for young players. Laugh at it all you want but going 0-17 especially if they're getting blown out half the time isn't going to be good for anybody.

Also, if the timeline is 2024 to start being competitive then Brad and Dan are the wrong people for the job. 

[Hongbit]

1 hour ago, NYLion said:

Also, if the timeline is 2024 to start being competitive then Brad and Dan are the wrong people for the job. 

My timeline for Brad looks like:

2021:  Full rebuild. Among the worst teams in the league.   3-4 win expectation

2022:  Typical Lion season we’ve been used to.  Mediocre team that is around that hangs around the conversation for last playoff spot but ends up a few games below.500 when all is said and done 

2023:  Things start to click    Major talent difference from 2021 is obvious.  Make playoffs as wild card and challenge for division.

2024:  A dreamlike place of winning and respectability that this franchise has rarely seen. 

 

 

Edited November 2, 2021 by Hongbit

[Motor City Sonics]

31 minutes ago, Hongbit said:

My timeline for Brad looks like:

2021:  Full rebuild. Among the worst teams in the league.   3-4 win expectation

2022:  Typical Lion season we’ve been used to.  Mediocre team that is around that hangs around the conversation for last playoff spot but ends up a few games below.500 when all is said and done 

2023:  Things start to click    Major talent difference from 2021 is obvious.  Make playoffs as wild card and challenge for division.

2024:  A dreamlike place of winning and respectability that this franchise has rarely seen. 

 

 

I would agree with that, only adding a second 2022-type year.   I think they were so far in a hole from the previous regime of Bill Belichick Errand Boys that they have a harder road than even an expansion team.      I think ownership knows this too and that's why even if they do go 0-17, there won't be any major change.      If they do it right, it will take a little longer than it should.  It's all about the draft.    

 

Any trades for the Lions yet today?   They should trade anyone they can get a Top 3 round pick for.  Just gut it and do something that no Lion regime in recent memory has done -- draft really really well in the first 3-4 rounds, especially.   My goodness,  just hit on a 2nd rounder !

Edited November 2, 2021 by Motor City Sonics

[NYLion]

37 minutes ago, Hongbit said:

My timeline for Brad looks like:

2021:  Full rebuild. Among the worst teams in the league.   3-4 win expectation

2022:  Typical Lion season we’ve been used to.  Mediocre team that is around that hangs around the conversation for last playoff spot but ends up a few games below.500 when all is said and done 

2023:  Things start to click    Major talent difference from 2021 is obvious.  Make playoffs as wild card and challenge for division.

2024:  A dreamlike place of winning and respectability that this franchise has rarely seen. 

 

 

That lines up with my thoughts. 

One thing though, they have to get a QB if those 2023-2024 expectations are to be met. I know he went to a SB once upon a time but this broken version of Goff going on 3 seasons now ain't the guy.

In any event, there are no 4-5 year rebuilds in the NFL like you see in other sports, careers are too short, too much roster turnover from year to year. In the case of a full rebuild, if you're not showing significant improvement in Year 2 and are not, at the very least, making a serious wild card run in Year 3, you're not the right people for the job.

[chasfh]

People talking about how cutting such and such a player will free up cap space to sign FAs over the summer, but serious question: what premier free agent would sign a contract to come to Detroit anytime soon?

Edited November 2, 2021 by chasfh

[KL2]

2 hours ago, NYLion said:

Nobody wants to go 0-17. Winning a few would surely boost morale and you may not want to believe it but getting a taste of winning, even if it's just a win or two, is important for young players. Laugh at it all you want but going 0-17 especially if they're getting blown out half the time isn't going to be good for anybody.

Also, if the timeline is 2024 to start being competitive then Brad and Dan are the wrong people for the job. 

Again, cause you just ignored it, what young players matter? None are going to be here. Even next year the majority won't be here. Who the hell are you suggesting we win for? Who is important for? A bunch of guys who will be graduate assistants at NC State?

And your post is laughlably stuck in 1972 because "getting a taste of winning" is such a BS coach line. Why not keep you're eye on the ball while you're at it. There is no evidence that winning late has anything to do with the next season's results. Again, cause you ignored this too, do you think Calvin was a different player because he went 0-16? You think if he went 1-15 that year he plays another 6 years for us? 

 

Edited November 2, 2021 by KL2

[KL2]

and sorry you think 2024 is too long. It took three years to be competitive after 0-16. 2024 is, wait for it, three years away. 

Edited November 2, 2021 by KL2

[KL2]

17 minutes ago, chasfh said:

People talking about how cutting such and such a player will free up cap space to sign FAs over the summer, but serious question: what premier free agent would sign a contract to come to Detroit anytime soon?

It's teh NFL it's all about money. The top FA keep signign with Jacksonville every damn offseason and what have the won?

[chasfh]

7 minutes ago, KL2 said:

It's teh NFL it's all about money. The top FA keep signign with Jacksonville every damn offseason and what have the won?

Would a top free agent take $51 million to go to the Lions over taking $50 million to go to the Packers?

[KL2]

1 hour ago, Hongbit said:

My timeline for Brad looks like:

2021:  Full rebuild. Among the worst teams in the league.   3-4 win expectation

2022:  Typical Lion season we’ve been used to.  Mediocre team that is around that hangs around the conversation for last playoff spot but ends up a few games below.500 when all is said and done 

2023:  Things start to click    Major talent difference from 2021 is obvious.  Make playoffs as wild card and challenge for division.

2024:  A dreamlike place of winning and respectability that this franchise has rarely seen. 

 

 

This timeline only exists if you find the next Andrew Luck, which is crazy unlikely this year given this year's crop. 

Just think of normal QB development. 2022-gonna be bad, take lumps and throw as many picks and TDs. 2023-gets better but still doesn't have much around him. Yet youre thinking wild card team. 2024--OK maybe you have a pro bowl-esc level QB but you think they should be challenging for division crowns. 

Again that timeline only exists if you think we take Matt Corrall high or get lucky with the liberty kid being Lamar Jackson 2.0. If neither of those scerenios hold true, everything moves back in your timeline. 

Face guys, this team is so devoid of talent its gonna be a long rebuild. Just like the start of the year take off the Lions glasses, this team is absolutely devoid of talent. It has maybe two, two players out of 53. Unless Holmes has a 1974 Steelers draft class we might 3 guys from the draft class and another three in FA. We're now almost to double digits of respectable players! Still a crazy long way to go.

[KL2]

1 minute ago, chasfh said:

Would a top free agent take $51 million to go to the Lions over taking $50 million to go to the Packers?

In the NFL that appears to be the case. See reference Suh. 

(and to your sarcastic point, in that scernerio they might or they might not depends how much more they want the $1 million. But you ignored my entire point that in the NFL guys keep signing with bad teams all the time. I doubt if the cash is there the Lions will have too much difficulty landing some free agents)

Edited November 2, 2021 by KL2

[chasfh]

1 minute ago, KL2 said:

In the NFL that appears to be the case. See reference Suh. 

I find it hard to believe that a player would prefer to play for a directionless 0-17 team versus a perennial playoff contender for an extra 2% salary, but hey, teh NFL isn’t my strong suit, so I’ll defer to your assessment of this.

[chasfh]

 

[KL2]

Just now, chasfh said:

I find it hard to believe that a player would prefer to play for a directionless 0-17 team versus a perennial playoff contender for an extra 2% salary, but hey, teh NFL isn’t my strong suit, so I’ll defer to your assessment of this.

Let's just use Trey Flowers for example. When we signed him it was for 5 years 90 million at $17 million. That is actually below market a little bit for solid DE's especially ones that hit the FA market. You mean to tell me there weren't better organizaitons offering close to that kind of money? I find that hard to believe given he was in everybody top 10 of all free agents available that year.