Eagles at Lions

[Motor City Sonics]

46 minutes ago, chasfh said:

 

Because Barista Bob had to bring in Frat Boy Matt to run the team.      2 people that I am convinced never made a single decision in New England.  

[NYLion]

1 hour ago, KL2 said:

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? 

 

Agree to disagree then. You think 0-17 is fine for development, I don't. Kind of sad when a fanbase has this defeatist attitude but it is what it is. BTW, I'm not saying that it's absolutely necessary to win a few games but nobody, and I repeat, nobody wants the embarrassment of finishing 0-17. You might think winning a few means nothing but I'd wager a guess that it's important to a lot of the players, coaches and a good deal of fans too.

Young players that should be here for a few years at least? Swift, Hockenson, Sewell, Jackson, St. Brown, McNeil, Onwuzurike, Walker, Barnes, J. Okwara etc. so, there you go.

Edited November 2, 2021 by NYLion

[chasfh]

1 hour ago, KL2 said:

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. 

I don't mean to tell you anything. I'm just asking questions so I can understand better.

Do you know what other reported offers did Trey Flowers get before he signed with the Lions? I don't, which is why I'm asking.

[Sports_Freak]

23 hours ago, 1984Echoes said:

I believe CJ complained that he was just getting back the bonus $$$ he had been forced to give up and was against that...

It seems the simple solution would be for the two sides to negotiate and if it ends up as $1.8M or $2.4M for 3 years, or whatever, to make appearances... that the two sides could get to some type of agreement that would allow both sides to save face/ move on/ get to a comfortable safe space and:

That would be better for both the Org/ CJ in an all-encompassing way...

Johnson and others argue that other teams don't make their retiring players pay back any signing bonuses. My only questions are which teams? And were the players who are/were retiring in the middle of the contract and only earning part of the bonus?

[Sports_Freak]

23 hours ago, sabretooth said:

I'm pretty sure that you and Sports Freak agree on this one.

100%.

[Sports_Freak]

23 hours ago, Motown Bombers said:

If it's $113 million instead of $114.6 million is Calvin Johnson going to go bankrupt? Does it kill him that bad? 

He could have opened a few more marijuana dispensaries. We all lose...😆😆

[Sports_Freak]

3 hours 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've been using a timeline like this since the late '60's, early '70's. It still hasn't worked out. But yeah, this time it will....lol

[KL2]

5 hours ago, chasfh said:

I don't mean to tell you anything. I'm just asking questions so I can understand better.

Do you know what other reported offers did Trey Flowers get before he signed with the Lions? I don't, which is why I'm asking.

No, but turned down offers are rarely reported in any sport. That's why I mentioned he was among the top 10 free agents so it wasn't like there wasn't demand. 

And the "you tell me" was more a royal phrase. Just a turn to say, I can't imagine the lions were offering like 20 million more than let's say the packers, where the guy has to choose the crappier teams. 

Nfl players know they're careers are so short and most have one nfl free agent pay day, get all the money you can, if you don't have a ring there is usually a couple more years where you can go ring shopping

[KL2]

5 hours ago, Sports_Freak said:

Johnson and others argue that other teams don't make their retiring players pay back any signing bonuses. My only questions are which teams? And were the players who are/were retiring in the middle of the contract and only earning part of the bonus?

And 31 years old? 

Calvin would have more of a point if he was 37 played 15 years and we refused to trade him. None of that happened.

He left and wanted to keep the engagement ring. Then got all pissy when the lions took it back

Edited November 2, 2021 by KL2

[Sports_Freak]

1 hour ago, KL2 said:

And 31 years old? 

Calvin would have more of a point if he was 37 played 15 years and we refused to trade him. None of that happened.

He left and wanted to keep the engagement ring. Then got all pissy when the lions took it back

Yeah, he only earned the bonus for the years he played. I'm sure it was written that way legally, it's why he had to give it back. And I hear him say other players don't have to pay the bonus back, I was just wondering if anyone had any such players to compare to.

As for retiring at a young age? I really can't blame him for that. Pain sucks and living with it every day can really drain a person. He really got hammered, over and over, every time he went up to get a Stafford jump ball. 

But yeah, I still say that was a TD in Chicago.

[chasfh]

3 hours ago, KL2 said:

No, but turned down offers are rarely reported in any sport. That's why I mentioned he was among the top 10 free agents so it wasn't like there wasn't demand. 

And the "you tell me" was more a royal phrase. Just a turn to say, I can't imagine the lions were offering like 20 million more than let's say the packers, where the guy has to choose the crappier teams. 

Nfl players know they're careers are so short and most have one nfl free agent pay day, get all the money you can, if you don't have a ring there is usually a couple more years where you can go ring shopping

FWIW, I can easily imagine the Lions having to overpay to get top quality free agents. After all, two inner-circle Hall of Famers opted to cut their careers short and leave tens of millions on the table simply because they didn’t want to play for the Lions anymore.

I take your point about short careers and only one big FA payday, and my example hews to the extreme. And I agree with you, a lot of guys would take the money no matter what because that’s how they’re wired. That said, just about any player who’s accrued three or four seasons and is good enough to test the top end of the market has probably already pocketed several million dollars, many of them on their draft bonus alone. If they’re gonna make way into eight figures anyway, I could see someone signing with the Packers or Cowboys or Rams for $60 million, over signing with the Lions for $80 million. When you’re talking that much money, the extra isn’t going to make a difference to many or most people. You could live a few lifetimes on either pile, and a smart guy knows how to make money on his money. I think we’d be surprised how many guys go with the winner at a slight discount.

[KL2]

11 hours ago, chasfh said:

FWIW, I can easily imagine the Lions having to overpay to get top quality free agents. After all, two inner-circle Hall of Famers opted to cut their careers short and leave tens of millions on the table simply because they didn’t want to play for the Lions anymore.

I take your point about short careers and only one big FA payday, and my example hews to the extreme. And I agree with you, a lot of guys would take the money no matter what because that’s how they’re wired. That said, just about any player who’s accrued three or four seasons and is good enough to test the top end of the market has probably already pocketed several million dollars, many of them on their draft bonus alone. If they’re gonna make way into eight figures anyway, I could see someone signing with the Packers or Cowboys or Rams for $60 million, over signing with the Lions for $80 million. When you’re talking that much money, the extra isn’t going to make a difference to many or most people. You could live a few lifetimes on either pile, and a smart guy knows how to make money on his money. I think we’d be surprised how many guys go with the winner at a slight discount.

0 chance someone takes $60 million over 80

[Hongbit]

9 minutes ago, KL2 said:

0 chance someone takes $60 million over 80

Agree but I could easily see someone taking $60M with a respectable franchise over $64M from the Lions.  

[sabretooth]

On 11/2/2021 at 10:26 AM, 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 is how rebuilds happen in the NFL.....by definition if they are mediocre and hanging around a last playoff spot late in the season in 2022, that is at least fairly competitive....and by 2023 they are a winning team expecting to make the playoffs.

Show me one management team in the NFL that needed four f'ing seasons (until 2024) to become competitive as KL2 suggests and then maintained success....that is not how sustained turnarounds happen the NFL. 

[sabretooth]

21 hours ago, NYLion said:

Agree to disagree then. You think 0-17 is fine for development, I don't. Kind of sad when a fanbase has this defeatist attitude but it is what it is. BTW, I'm not saying that it's absolutely necessary to win a few games but nobody, and I repeat, nobody wants the embarrassment of finishing 0-17. You might think winning a few means nothing but I'd wager a guess that it's important to a lot of the players, coaches and a good deal of fans too.

Young players that should be here for a few years at least? Swift, Hockenson, Sewell, Jackson, St. Brown, McNeil, Onwuzurike, Walker, Barnes, J. Okwara etc. so, there you go.

There is a pro-tanking mindset that pretends that if some losing is good, more losing is awesome....both assumptions are wrong, with rare exceptions (like losing a game or two guarantees a generational draft pick talent)....but the devotees of tanking have a zombie-Moneyball concept that even Moneyball never contemplated.

[1984Echoes]

21 hours ago, NYLion said:

Agree to disagree then. You think 0-17 is fine for development...

Nobody thinks 0-17 is fine for development. Except for getting a #1 pick.

But I'm pretty certain the "fine" with 0-17 crowd thinks that 0-17 is...

Meaningless.

Not "fine for development"... meaningless.

[RedRamage]

23 hours 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?

Fernando Vina?

But yeah, you're right... I mean the only people who are coming to Detroit are those who can't get signed anywhere else.  Maybe someone who's looking to make a comeback or an aging veteran who's looking for one more pay check.

Given the nature of the NFL there's no one who's going to sign a long term deal right now hoping that he can ride the Lions up because any given game can be the last game played in the NFL.

[KL2]

37 minutes ago, sabretooth said:

This is how rebuilds happen in the NFL.....by definition if they are mediocre and hanging around a last playoff spot late in the season in 2022, that is at least fairly competitive....and by 2023 they are a winning team expecting to make the playoffs.

Show me one management team in the NFL that needed four f'ing seasons (until 2024) to become competitive as KL2 suggests and then maintained success....that is not how sustained turnarounds happen the NFL. 

Well, I showed have the 0-16 it took till the fourth (thinking the bad season is season 1, which i did in my post)

But, its all about the quarterback. Which I noted. If they take Matt Carroll and he is the second coming you can have a turnaround like the Bengals are currently doing. If you take him and he's Daniel Jones, the giants are still in suckitude. Youre timeline only applies if you find the quarterback this year. Most year there is a QB worth drafting that high. This is one of those odd years. Are you sure they can find a QB this year to put it on the three year timeline? 

You guys thinking this is a three year rebuild are a bit too optomistic. Not only are the Lions crazily devoid of talents, there is no Trevor Lawrence or Matthew Stafford to draft. Stop thinking its a standard turnaround, if you do you're gonna be disappointed. 

Edited November 3, 2021 by KL2

[KL2]

22 hours ago, NYLion said:

 

Young players that should be here for a few years at least? Swift, Hockenson, Sewell, Jackson, St. Brown, McNeil, Onwuzurike, Walker, Barnes, J. Okwara etc. so, there you go.

So two. Swell and Hockenson. As I said. 

The rest or mid round talent and not much. I mean if you're counting St. Brown as a key building block for a winning team in teh future... you don't see the problem with that? 

[KL2]

22 hours ago, NYLion said:

I'd wager a guess that it's important to a lot of the players, coaches and a good deal of fans too.

And at the expense of a higher draft pick I and the organization should not care about that at all. let's put it this way, its the Ryan Leaf/Peyton Manning draft would you be happy to win a game and let Houston have the top pick, I.e. manning, and we get Ryan Leaf just to win one game to make fans happy in a god awful year? 

Everything you're talking about is just immediate gratification and feeling good. That's not the way to build a winner, especially not in the cut throat NFL. You have to be cold, you have to be vicious and you need very high end talent at the key postion. Not win some meaningless game cause it will make Derrick friggin Barnes feel good.

[KL2]

46 minutes ago, sabretooth said:

There is a pro-tanking mindset that pretends that if some losing is good, more losing is awesome....both assumptions are wrong, with rare exceptions (like losing a game or two guarantees a generational draft pick talent)....but the devotees of tanking have a zombie-Moneyball concept that even Moneyball never contemplated.

You have yet to explain, ever, why tanking is bad other than "I doesn't make me feel good." 

I and other have given cold hard facts on why tanking is fine. It guarentees the highest draft pick possible. If you're gonna be bad what's the difference between being god awful and really bad? Set yourself up the best for the future that you can. It's silly just to win a game in football or five in baseball or spend a bunch of money for that extra win or five when you're still gonna be really bad. It does little for player development, it doesn't change the ticket gate, it doesn't save jobs. All it does is provide some insta-feels goods. Seriously if the lions were 2-15 instead of 0-17 would you think the season was better? Would you think its OK? Well at least they won a couple, you really think you'd say that?

And everytime all you respond with "it's bad"

Edited November 3, 2021 by KL2

[Motown Bombers]

Things lined up better for the 0-16 Lions. They did have Calvin Johnson already and there was a clear cut franchise QB available with the #1 pick. They were also lucky enough to get the 2nd pick the next season and St Louis took a QB instead of Suh. 

I also have to wonder though if the timeline for that 0-16 team would have been accelerated a year if Stafford wasn't injured his 2nd year? He only played 3 games that year and was pretty decent in those 3 games. 

[Stanley70]

This was a bad 5 win team when healthy and they have been devastated by injuries. The only Quinn first or second round picks that have been playing, from the last 5 drafts, are Hock and Swift. And they have the most dead money in the league this year.

Next year they will have some money to bring in free agents, 3 top draft picks, plus they will be getting key healthy players back. Even with Goff they could be around a 500 team.

 

[Hongbit]

How is everyone feeling about Hock?  

He confuses me.  No doubt that he’s been pretty good.  Had we taken him in the 3rd round then I’d consider him a great pick.   The problem is that I don’t see him ever becoming the Kelce or Waller super athletic game changer that was expected when picking him so high.  
It’s weird, he’s not a bust but he’s a bust for where he was taken in the draft.    How do they reconcile this when he comes due for his next contract?   Does he get a pay raise even though he has underachieved his draft position and the contract that goes with it?   

[NYLion]

1 hour ago, KL2 said:

So two. Swell and Hockenson. As I said. 

The rest or mid round talent and not much. I mean if you're counting St. Brown as a key building block for a winning team in teh future... you don't see the problem with that? 

I certainly do see a problem with the talent level of the team but I'm talking about who could be affected by what happens this season going forward. I expect all the guys I listed to be on the team in the near future at the very least, teams need depth players too to succeed.

I just don't think 0-17 is good for development, 2-15 is no picnic either but it would be nice for them to get at least a little taste of winning and the majority of this current roster is young, developing players. That's all I'm really saying.