Jump to content

Thoughts On Free Agency


Just Want A Title

Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, TL-TwoWinsAway said:

This nonsense again. A 3-4-1 record with losses against two playoff teams. Our second have schedule was poor. Reaching 9-10 wins wasn't a stretch at all.

Ignoring the opponents played doesn't make that sound any better.

You call it nonsense, but just posted about a theoretical 10 win season that didn't happen. Ignoring what actually happened doesn't make it go away.

The 3-4-1 record, with an 18 point 4th quarter collapse against a rookie HC and rookie QB making his first professional start, is not a good start to a season. 

9-10 wins with the pathetic excuse for a defense is a stretch when it's based on nothing other than homerism.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, LionArkie said:

If you picked up Clowney, Young falls to 3, what would you do? All options are on the board.

Thank the NFL gods, the stars, rub your rabbit foot and your lucky penny. 

Cause with no real strategy in playm, Lions go out and signed the best pass rusher, drafted the best pass rusher, and made a top 5 pass rushing front 7 without really going out and trying to do that.

It'd be amazing. (To me).

Edited by SimbaWho
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Nnivolcm said:

We didn't finish with 10 wins and we weren't on pace to finish with 10 wins when Stafford was injured. 

We did finished 3 wins, and we did tie for 2nd fewest sacks. We did have a non existent pass rush, especially when it mattered most. 

I'm not as confident as you are everyone's view on Flower's performance would shift so drastically if his play was exactly the same. 

Yep. This again.

Bears (x2), Cowboys, Redskins, Vikings, Buccaneers, Broncos, Packers. Those were our 2nd half opponents. It's no stretch to suggest that, with a healthy Stafford, we could have walked away with 5-6 wins from that group.

Linking the quality of our free agent signings to our team's 2019 record and ignoring that our best player missed half of the season isn't a reasonable way to evaluate their contributions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, LionArkie said:

If you picked up Clowney, Young falls to 3, what would you do? All options are on the board.

I do a happy dance and draft Young. It's hard to imagine a scenario where Young falls to 3 and I'm not happy about drafting him.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, TL-TwoWinsAway said:

Yep. This again.

Bears (x2), Cowboys, Redskins, Vikings, Buccaneers, Broncos, Packers. Those were our 2nd half opponents. It's no stretch to suggest that, with a healthy Stafford, we could have walked away with 5-6 wins from that group.

Linking the quality of our free agent signings to our team's 2019 record and ignoring that our best player missed half of the season isn't a reasonable way to evaluate their contributions.

Only homerism would make someone think 10 wins wasn't a stretch last season. Even with their 2nd half schedule. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, TL-TwoWinsAway said:

Yep. This again.

Bears (x2), Cowboys, Redskins, Vikings, Buccaneers, Broncos, Packers. Those were our 2nd half opponents. It's no stretch to suggest that, with a healthy Stafford, we could have walked away with 5-6 wins from that group.

Linking the quality of our free agent signings to our team's 2019 record and ignoring that our best player missed half of the season isn't a reasonable way to evaluate their contributions.

Your homerism truely knows no bounds does it? Yet you have the audacity to speak down to people after your proven wrong year after year after year after year.  The tie is basically a loss. 2 of the 3 wins came against teams picking in the top 6 and 3rd against that was completely depleted.  The wheels were coming off before Stanford got hurt everyone saw it in Oakland.  The fact that everyone got excited about this team based on 2 “close” loses to good teams tells how pathetic this team is.


 

 
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Nnivolcm said:

Only homerism would make someone think 10 wins wasn't a stretch last season. Even with their 2nd half schedule. 

I think you're wasting your energy man explaining a bunch to these guys. There's the same four posters; Cheer-leading everything. Most of the old time posters quit posting cause... well... 

I mean they've made a few good moves but aren't you like me at this point and just waiting for the next hire or fellas to run this ship? I mean short of wins on the field I have literally NO reason at all to believe in this coach, FO, and ownership right now. I mean only reason I'm wasting my time now is cause I'm fricken quarantining myself. I mean the only thing this mid-west patriot coalition has done for the Lions was push out talent, and churn out losses. That's just a fact, so far. Literally, we haven't been better since firing Caldwell, and if it was a rebuild then, they should of said so but the organization acted like it was a progressive move to get to the next level when infact it's brought us back to basically a rebuild with a franchise QB in place.... Oh, and coach is learning on the job too he's not veteran or natural. 

Edited by SimbaWho
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, BigC421/ said:

Your homerism truely knows no bounds does it? Yet you have the audacity to speak down to people after your proven wrong year after year after year after year.  The tie is basically a loss. 2 of the 3 wins came against teams picking in the top 6 and 3rd against that was completely depleted.  The wheels were coming off before Stanford got hurt everyone saw it in Oakland.  The fact that everyone got excited about this team based on 2 “close” loses to good teams tells how pathetic this team is.

Stanford was hurt earlier in the year, even before the Chiefs game.

It wasn't just me, of course. Read through some GDTs. Nearly all of the posters here were fully behind Patricia before they shut Stanford down. Ignoring Stanford's potential impact against those mediocre opponents, and using that to argue that past free agents haven't made a significant impact, is unfortunate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, TL-TwoWinsAway said:

Stanford was hurt earlier in the year, even before the Chiefs game.

It wasn't just me, of course. Read through some GDTs. Nearly all of the posters here were fully behind Patricia before they shut Stanford down. Ignoring Stanford's potential impact against those mediocre opponents, and using that to argue that past free agents haven't made a significant impact, is unfortunate.

You mean other posters were able to observe new information, absorb it, and form new informed opinions? 

Why is that an unfortunate thing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Nnivolcm said:

You mean other posters were able to observe new information, absorb it, and form new informed opinions? 

Why is that an unfortunate thing?

I, clearly, never said that was unfortunate.

It's unfortunate to ignore an injury to our most important player and argue that our record last year shows that our free agents have been ineffective.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, TL-TwoWinsAway said:

I, clearly, never said that was unfortunate.

It's unfortunate to ignore an injury to our most important player and argue that our record last year shows that our free agents have been ineffective.

It's even more unfortunate to assume things would have magically gotten better based on nothing other than homerism. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Nnivolcm said:

It's even more unfortunate to assume things would have magically gotten better based on nothing other than homerism. 

... is it "assuming things would have magically gotten better" to think that your best player being on the field gives you a significantly better chance of success?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, TL-TwoWinsAway said:

... is it "assuming things would have magically gotten better" to think that your best player being on the field gives you a significantly better chance of success?

We had seven games, and a losing record, with Stafford to base our opinions on. 

Going from where we were to 10 wins would be nothing short of magic. 

Edited by Nnivolcm
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...