Week 1: Chicago at Detroit

[Nnivolcm]

Just now, TL-TwoWinsAway said:

Yep. A better CB would have been an inspirational force on the sidelines, motivating the uninjured backups to prevent Trubisky from making those plays. I see the vision.

You need a response when comparing Patricia to Caldwell? I have already given it. (And I'll happily ignore the fact that we were without our best player for half of 2019.) Caldwell built on what was already here, and won... 9 games. Four seasons, and a 9-7 record. To a Lions' fan, that's incredible. Sign me up to barely making the playoffs every few years and getting smacked once we're there. To a Lions' fan, that's its own victory.

It's no surprise that Quinn got here and determined that a 9-7 coach wasn't good enough. He hired a guy that has actually had coaching success in this league, and allowed him to rebuild a mediocre roster. Rebuilding takes time.

Of course, if Swift caught the pass yesterday...

Again, why are you assuming Slay would be injured? He wasn't injured very often when he played here, and isn't currently injured that I'm aware of. I know the reality of being a Lions fan isn't the most fun thing ever, but concocting he'd be injured if he hadn't been traded makes no sense.

You made a claim Caldwell had the same issues Patricia has when he was coached. That doesn't appear to be the case at all. I was hoping you'd shed light on what you meant when you said: "It's the truth. It was the truth under Caldwell and is still true under Patricia" when speaking of the excuses for Patricia losing another close game. Yet in close games Caldwell was 22-15 and Patricia has been 6-13-1. Saying Caldwell and Patricia had the same excuses in close games isn't the truth. It's a lie.

If Swift had caught the pass yesterday it would have only been a band aid on the amputation that let the Bears get the lead after being down 17 points in the fourth quarter. The larger issue remains. 

[Karnage84]

23 minutes ago, Nnivolcm said:

The larger conversation is this regime's ineptitude and the excuses made for them. You pointed out the injuries to the CBs likely contributed to Trubitsky. I pointed out this regime had a better CB than all of them under contract and traded him for peanuts.

More ineptitude. More excuses.

Still waiting for a response on Caldwell's close game record vs Patricia's close game record.

Caldwell took over a talented but undisciplined team from Schwartz. The perennial 9-7 wasn't going to win any championships. Neither is 9 - 23 but had they stayed the course with Caldwell how many of us think that the Lions would have been in the NFC Championship game? How many of us would have expected us to be in the Superbowl or win it? Even if the probability would be higher under Caldwell (which could be argued) the answer is likely still going to be nobody. A few more regular season wins don't mean anything if we aren't trying to get into the playoffs and compete for championships. 

[Nnivolcm]

9 minutes ago, Karnage84 said:

Slay was causing an issue in the locker room and wanted a fat new contract to boot. We've all been down this road before and gone into the details on positions of who to blame, etc. At the end of the day, this is Patricia's team and you can't have someone in the locker room causing those kinds of disruptions. Patricia is going to have to wear it for how/why a star player was traded away. If they are successful without him, Patricia should be given credit for that. If the secondary just gets torn apart then Patricia is/should be blamed for it. 

A group of Trufant, Okudah, Coleman and Oruwariye is a nice foursome. It doesn't help that 3/4 were out with injuries. It would not have been any better of a situation if Slay had left with an injury of his own. 

 

 

Patricia was causing an issue in the locker room. Slay was vaguely tweeting he wasn't happy and wanted a new contract. A JV high school coach should be able to deal with that kind of locker room issue. 

The reality of the situation is three of our top four CBs left the game with injuries. The argument was made that reality led to the Bears being able to win because of it. Wouldn't a healthy elite CB impact that argument?

[Nnivolcm]

1 minute ago, Karnage84 said:

Caldwell took over a talented but undisciplined team from Schwartz. The perennial 9-7 wasn't going to win any championships. Neither is 9 - 23 but had they stayed the course with Caldwell how many of us think that the Lions would have been in the NFC Championship game? How many of us would have expected us to be in the Superbowl or win it? Even if the probability would be higher under Caldwell (which could be argued) the answer is likely still going to be nobody. A few more regular season wins don't mean anything if we aren't trying to get into the playoffs and compete for championships. 

We know Caldwell had peaked at 9-7 when the 1st time GM he was trying to work with had only been there for 2 seasons? 

As for the bolded, I can't believe it needs to be said but regular season wins are what get you to the playoffs. 

 

[Karnage84]

Just now, Nnivolcm said:

Patricia was causing an issue in the locker room. Slay was vaguely tweeting he wasn't happy and wanted a new contract. A JV high school coach should be able to deal with that kind of locker room issue. 

The reality of the situation is three of our top four CBs left the game with injuries. The argument was made that reality led to the Bears being able to win because of it. Wouldn't a healthy elite CB impact that argument?

Patricia wasn't causing an issue in the locker room at all. Slay carried his grudge from when Patricia took over the program in 2018 and was called out in front of the team which he didn't like. It was that combined with Slay wanting a new contract that led to his departure from the team. Patricia apologized for what he had said the year before and hadn't even realized it was such an issue until it was brought to his attention a year later. Then he was upset over Diggs' trade. On top of all of that he wanted a big new contract at age 29. 

The reality is that two of our top CB's left the game with injuries and one couldn't play because of an injury. Even then, we only carry 6 guys at CB. When over half of your guys aren't able to get on the field, it certainly does not help the case. 

[Sllim Pickens]

The argument made by TL is literally the same argument made after each loss the last 3 years (probably longer tbh). Yes it is a different player getting hurt or a different player dropping a pass, but its always the same result.  Injuries happen, blowing numerous 4th quarter leads should not despite the injuries.  I was hoping Patricia learned something, I was hoping Stafford would be allowed to play his game (even Vilma said it just before the collapse that Stafford should keep doing what he did to get us here and instead we went to the run, run, 3rd and long route).  I get it, there were some crazy things that happened this game.  The ejection, the injuries prior to the game, the injuries during the game, the dropped interception, the dropped TD.... but bottom line is we lost, and under Patricia we seem to do that a lot with all of these same excuses with just a different name next to it.  

[Nnivolcm]

17 minutes ago, Karnage84 said:

It is equally viable to consider that Slay could have been injured just as it is to assume that he wouldn't have been if he was still on the roster. These are all hypotheticals given that he isn't on the roster any longer. 

Why is it equally viable to think Slay would be injured? He's never been injury prone. He probably would have sat out TC being unhappy with his contract so it's unlikely he would have been injured there. If he's on the field one of the lesser CBs isn't going to be playing as much and are less likely to be hurt playing as they were without Slay, and therefore likely to be available when the Big Bad Trubisky threw all over this defense. 

[Nnivolcm]

4 minutes ago, Karnage84 said:

Patricia wasn't causing an issue in the locker room at all. Slay carried his grudge from when Patricia took over the program in 2018 and was called out in front of the team which he didn't like. It was that combined with Slay wanting a new contract that led to his departure from the team. Patricia apologized for what he had said the year before and hadn't even realized it was such an issue until it was brought to his attention a year later. Then he was upset over Diggs' trade. On top of all of that he wanted a big new contract at age 29. 

The reality is that two of our top CB's left the game with injuries and one couldn't play because of an injury. Even then, we only carry 6 guys at CB. When over half of your guys aren't able to get on the field, it certainly does not help the case. 

That's Patricia causing an issue! 

Slay did want a new contract. Neat. He was still under contract for 2020 at a very reasonable price. They aren't forced to give him a contract. A good GM would be able to take advantage of the comp pick system and get almost what they got for Slay and kept him on the roster to complete his contract, with the option to tag him. Especially a GM from NE where they get good camp picks consistently. 

[TL-TwoWinsAway]

12 minutes ago, Nnivolcm said:

Again, why are you assuming Slay would be injured? He wasn't injured very often when he played here, and isn't currently injured that I'm aware of. I know the reality of being a Lions fan isn't the most fun thing ever, but concocting he'd be injured if he hadn't been traded makes no sense.

You made a claim Caldwell had the same issues Patricia has when he was coached. That doesn't appear to be the case at all. I was hoping you'd shed light on what you meant when you said: "It's the truth. It was the truth under Caldwell and is still true under Patricia" when speaking of the excuses for Patricia losing another close game. Yet in close games Caldwell was 22-15 and Patricia has been 6-13-1. Saying Caldwell and Patricia had the same excuses in close games isn't the truth. It's a lie.

If Swift had caught the pass yesterday it would have only been a band aid on the amputation that let the Bears get the lead after being down 17 points in the fourth quarter. The larger issue remains. 

This... I just... what?

The conversation is that 3 of our top 4 CBs were hurt, which enabled Trubisky to do just enough to win. You can't say "Well, Slay wouldn't have gotten hurt, so trading him was a bad decision". That isn't reality. We don't know if Slay would've gotten hurt had he been on the field against the Bears, and it's pointless to pretend that this hypothetical matters.

Why are we still holding half of 2019 against Patricia? Caldwell was a 9-7 coach with a Stafford that started every single game. If you don't see how that might've altered the outcomes of some of those games, I don't know what to tell you.

Lastly, I love the last line here. Yes, HAD we won, winning is no longer enough. No way. Not for Patricia. When we lose, it's "Caldwell won more games, therefore the Patricia hire was the wrong hire, regardless of context". When we win, it's "Yeah, we won, but we lost a 4th quarter lead, so larger issues remain. Winning isn't enough". Selective context. It's impressive stuff.

[Karnage84]

3 minutes ago, Nnivolcm said:

Why is it equally viable to think Slay would be injured? He's never been injury prone. He probably would have sat out TC being unhappy with his contract so it's unlikely he would have been injured there. If he's on the field one of the lesser CBs isn't going to be playing as much and are less likely to be hurt playing as they were without Slay, and therefore likely to be available when the Big Bad Trubisky threw all over this defense. 

Because all we are doing is guessing on what would/wouldn't have happened had he been on the team. It would be easier to guess what would have happened if Slay and/or Okudah did have injury histories. I sure as heck wasn't expecting KG to be sitting out. Everything is hypothetical. 

[Nnivolcm]

Just now, TL-TwoWinsAway said:

This... I just... what?

The conversation is that 3 of our top 4 CBs were hurt, which enabled Trubisky to do just enough to win. You can't say "Well, Slay wouldn't have gotten hurt, so trading him was a bad decision". That isn't reality. We don't know if Slay would've gotten hurt had he been on the field against the Bears, and it's pointless to pretend that this hypothetical matters.

Why are we still holding half of 2019 against Patricia? Caldwell was a 9-7 coach with a Stafford that started every single game. If you don't see how that might've altered the outcomes of some of those games, I don't know what to tell you.

Lastly, I love the last line here. Yes, HAD we won, winning is no longer enough. No way. Not for Patricia. When we lose, it's "Caldwell won more games, therefore the Patricia hire was the wrong hire, regardless of context". When we win, it's "Yeah, we won, but we lost a 4th quarter lead, so larger issues remain. Winning isn't enough". Selective context. It's impressive stuff.

Limiting the conversation to 3 of our top 4 CBs getting hurt is a red herring. You're intentionally avoiding the actual issue of this regime being inept. 

 

[TL-TwoWinsAway]

14 minutes ago, Sllim Pickens said:

but bottom line is we lost, and under Patricia we seem to do that a lot with all of these same excuses with just a different name next to it.  

This. Right here. Losing is always the bottom line... unless we win. When we win, context starts to matter again.

Had Swift caught a basic, both hands on the ball, chest-high pass, we'd at least hear the context as to why winning is no longer enough, and why we should've lost. I enjoy those conversations just as much.

[TL-TwoWinsAway]

Just now, Nnivolcm said:

Limiting the conversation to 3 of our top 4 CBs getting hurt is a red herring. You're intentionally avoiding the actual issue of this regime being inept. 

 

... I was discussing the reality of what took place.

[Nnivolcm]

Just now, Karnage84 said:

Because all we are doing is guessing on what would/wouldn't have happened had he been on the team. It would be easier to guess what would have happened if Slay and/or Okudah did have injury histories. I sure as heck wasn't expecting KG to be sitting out. Everything is hypothetical. 

So you think Slay would have been injured for no articulable reason. Gotcha.

[Nnivolcm]

1 minute ago, TL-TwoWinsAway said:

... I was discussing the reality of what took place.

by refusing to discuss all but one aspect...