Jump to content
Karnage84

LIONS BRINGING PATRICIA AND QUINN BACK FOR 2020

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Sllim Pickens said:

If Patricia were to win 10 games next year and take us to the playoffs, I’d eat crow and admit I was wrong.  I don’t see it happening though.  Nothing got me excited this season and I don’t think we are a player away.  I’ve bought the “we almost won a bunch of games” hype before and it’s always false.  Good coaches find a way to win with what they have.  Especially when they have leads in games.  Bad coaches find ways to lose. 

I agree that we are bad and the coaching staff seems inept. Plus Quin, as ive started during the draft, is a wuss; he tries to hit a single everytime. He’s afraid to go for the home run or at the very least a triple and he doesn’t seem to to understand positional value. He also seems to draft 100% on need in the first round. 

Having said that I do think that Chase Young (plus a couple of pieces) could make the difference. I know that’s crazy but I think the roster has talent in spite of the coaching staff.  Flowers and young on the ends providing an actual pass rush would do wonders for this team.  I’d be willing to trade up to get him. Just not sure what I’d be willing to give up yet. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Sllim Pickens said:

If Patricia were to win 10 games next year and take us to the playoffs, I’d eat crow and admit I was wrong.  I don’t see it happening though.  Nothing got me excited this season and I don’t think we are a player away.  I’ve bought the “we almost won a bunch of games” hype before and it’s always false.  Good coaches find a way to win with what they have.  Especially when they have leads in games.  Bad coaches find ways to lose. 

That's an extremely reasonable answer. Thanks for that.

I'm a believer in the 3(ish) year rule: that a new coach, implementing a new scheme, should be successful in his 3rd year. I don't believe that, short of pulling a McDaniels and destroying a roster (or off-field issues), a coach should be fired before that mark.

In Patricia's case, I believe that there's enough context to shed light on the lack of wins. It has been widely reported how a number of players were upset that Caldwell was fired, and were resistant to Patricia as a result. Had Patricia stepped in and traded all of those players away immediately, this fan base would've lost their minds (more). I believe that he tried to make it work year 1, while building his preferred defense, and the 3 game slide is the end result.

Year 2 is even more justifiable to me, but that's more of a conversation of short term vs. long term perspectives. Does anyone believe that a win can be irrelevant, or even negative to an organization? Is there anyone here that would've preferred the Lions finish 8-7-1 this year?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just dont see how you can separate wanting certain players to play well and wanting to lose. 

If we had finished with that record, surely our young players would of played that much better thus were not as far from contending.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, detroitroar said:

I just dont see how you can separate wanting certain players to play well and wanting to lose. 

If we had finished with that record, surely our young players would of played that much better thus were not as far from contending.

See, but I really don't agree with that assumption.

We lost a significant number of these games by one possession. Had our opponents fumbled at the end, or missed last-second field goals, or thrown game-ending interceptions, we wouldn't have necessarily been playing significantly better... the ball just happened to bounce our way a few more times. Entering the 2020 draft selecting 15th wouldn't have put us in a better position for the 2020 season.

Teams tank. It's not pretty, but it's blatantly obvious. (The 2018 Raiders and 2019 Dolphins are two recent examples.) It's not wanting players to play poorly, but wanting "lesser" and/or "young" players to get "game experience". Blough Blough can play as hard and well as he wants, but starting him over all starting NFL QBs (and most backups) still puts us at a significant disadvantage. And Quinn could've shipped a 2020 3nd Round Pick for Mariota when Stafford went down, but those four additional wins that he may have netted us wouldn't have improved the state of the franchise moving forward nearly as much as that draft pick could/should.

Edited by TL-TwoWinsAway

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Scapegoats have been identified:

Quote

 

The Lions fired strength coach Harold Nash, special-teams coordinator John Bonamego and four other assistants Tuesday as they start what could be a significant offseason makeover.

Along with Nash and Bonamego, defensive backs coach Brian Stewart, linebackers coach Al Golden, tight ends coach Chris White and assistant strength coach Rodney Hill were let go Tuesday.

Defensive coordinator Paul Pasqualoni remains on staff.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Haha. Tubby couldn't even bear to fire the fossilized Pasqualoni because he's his mentor from 1000 years ago. Instead they sacrificed the assistant strength and conditioning coach and the LB and DB coaches who couldn't have coached up Deion Sanders and Ray Lewis to succeed with that absolute nothing of a pass rush.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, TL-TwoWinsAway said:

See, but I really don't agree with that assumption.

We lost a significant number of these games by one possession. Had our opponents fumbled at the end, or missed last-second field goals, or thrown game-ending interceptions, we wouldn't have necessarily been playing significantly better... the ball just happened to bounce our way a few more times. Entering the 2020 draft selecting 15th wouldn't have put us in a better position for the 2020 season.

Teams tank. It's not pretty, but it's blatantly obvious. (The 2018 Raiders and 2019 Dolphins are two recent examples.) It's not wanting players to play poorly, but wanting "lesser" and/or "young" players to get "game experience". Blough Blough can play as hard and well as he wants, but starting him over all starting NFL QBs (and most backups) still puts us at a significant disadvantage. And Quinn could've shipped a 2020 3nd Round Pick for Mariota when Stafford went down, but those four additional wins that he may have netted us wouldn't have improved the state of the franchise moving forward nearly as much as that draft pick could/should.

See I dont agree.

These plays you speak of dont just happen by themselves. Good players tend to make them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, detroitroar said:

See I dont agree.

These plays you speak of dont just happen by themselves. Good players tend to make them.

Meh. Good players don't cause opposing kickers to miss uncontested field goals. Sure, they can knock a ball out or tip a pass, but arguing that just one more of these isolated plays per game makes our team significantly better is something that I don't agree with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, TL-TwoWinsAway said:

That's an extremely reasonable answer. Thanks for that.

I'm a believer in the 3(ish) year rule: that a new coach, implementing a new scheme, should be successful in his 3rd year. I don't believe that, short of pulling a McDaniels and destroying a roster (or off-field issues), a coach should be fired before that mark.

In Patricia's case, I believe that there's enough context to shed light on the lack of wins. It has been widely reported how a number of players were upset that Caldwell was fired, and were resistant to Patricia as a result. Had Patricia stepped in and traded all of those players away immediately, this fan base would've lost their minds (more). I believe that he tried to make it work year 1, while building his preferred defense, and the 3 game slide is the end result.

Year 2 is even more justifiable to me, but that's more of a conversation of short term vs. long term perspectives. Does anyone believe that a win can be irrelevant, or even negative to an organization? Is there anyone here that would've preferred the Lions finish 8-7-1 this year?

If we finished 8-7-1 this year and we won more before Staffords injury then yes I would have fathered that.  Then I’d have hope that with Stafford back we have a team in place that can compete for a championship.  We weren’t great before the injury, we didn’t find ways to win, we couldn’t win without him meaning that again, this roster fully depends on Stafford to win.  
 

Now if you ask would I rather be 5-10-1 instead of 3-12-1 then no, I would rather have the higher draft pick, but 5 wins without Stafford would have still given me more hope about the rest of the roster 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Sllim Pickens said:

If we finished 8-7-1 this year and we won more before Staffords injury then yes I would have fathered that.  Then I’d have hope that with Stafford back we have a team in place that can compete for a championship.  We weren’t great before the injury, we didn’t find ways to win, we couldn’t win without him meaning that again, this roster fully depends on Stafford to win.  
 

Now if you ask would I rather be 5-10-1 instead of 3-12-1 then no, I would rather have the higher draft pick, but 5 wins without Stafford would have still given me more hope about the rest of the roster 

That's fair.

I believe the NFL is structured in a way that incentivizes both winning and losing.  The want to win is obvious, but, to me, the draft capital gained by finishing 3-12 is far more valuable than the "moral victory" of finishing 8-8. Draft value can be traded for quality, established players or used to acquire talented young players, which is truly tremendous value. (With the value of the 3rd overall pick, we could - in theory - trade down to the 14-18 range and acquire a very good player in the deal. A very good player, and still a mid 1st round prospect, acquired just from losing more than another unsuccessful team.)

If a team is knowingly unable to compete for a playoff spot, it's my opinion that "winning" draft value should be their next objective. (It doesn't feel good, but it's the best way to build the roster, in my opinion.) This is COMPLETELY the NFL's fault: they structured the draft process in this way, and teams would be dumb not to take advantage of it.

(My fix for the draft would be to arrange the draft order from the best to worst records of all non-playoff teams. That way, the worst team in the NFL picks 20th, and the best non-playoff team would draft 1st overall. There would only be an incentive to win, as losing would not net a reward. Tanking would no longer exist, which I would love.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/29/2019 at 6:02 PM, Superduperman said:

Oooooh what a sick burn. Mr. Blue Sky telling us off for having some degree of realism about the team and refusing to lick the boots for a 58th consecutive year. We're all mortified and ashamed of ourselves in the face of your perfect optimism. 

It's pretty interesting. I happened to come across this post, which you made after the Chiefs' game of THIS year:

Quote

It's ok. This is a way better team than last year. There's very very clear progress for Patricia's program. As long as they stay fairly healthy, I expect them to be in the playoffs.

It insane how a 1-2 record (one of those games that robbery against the Packers) and a Stafford injury caused you to change your tune towards Patricia so drastically. I guess it's to be expected with the overly emotional and irrational.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, TL-TwoWinsAway said:

It's pretty interesting. I happened to come across this post, which you made after the Chiefs' game of THIS year:

It insane how a 1-2 record (one of those games that robbery against the Packers) and a Stafford injury caused you to change your tune towards Patricia so drastically. I guess it's to be expected with the overly emotional and irrational.

What's amazing is how some people can take in new information, like 13 games worth, and adjust their opinions based on the new info. Others can't do that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Nnivolcm said:

What's amazing is how some people can take in new information, like 13 games worth, and adjust their opinions based on the new info. Others can't do that.

Groundbreaking new information alert: we aren't good without Stafford. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, TL-TwoWinsAway said:

Groundbreaking new information alert: we aren't good without Stafford. 

Way to ignore the context TL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, TL-TwoWinsAway said:

It's pretty interesting. I happened to come across this post, which you made after the Chiefs' game of THIS year:

It insane how a 1-2 record (one of those games that robbery against the Packers) and a Stafford injury caused you to change your tune towards Patricia so drastically. I guess it's to be expected with the overly emotional and irrational.

Nah, a whole season with the 31st ranked defense did it. We were under .500 with Stafford btw.

Going back and digging in someone's old posts, you realize, is the #1 way to show someone is getting under your skin with arguments you can't refute.

Edited by Superduperman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×