Week 1: Chicago at Detroit

[TL-TwoWinsAway]

1 minute ago, Nnivolcm said:

by refusing to discuss all but one aspect...

When have I refused to discuss anything? The conversation at that time was the injuries to the CBs, and how - after Trufant left the game - Trubisky's stats improved significantly. That was the conversation.

But, whatever. I'm good on "forum logic" for the evening. See you guys after a win.

[LionArkie]

1 hour ago, TL-TwoWinsAway said:

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.

I'm going to be honest,  if we would have won yesterday with a TD catch by Swift, I wouldn't have felt good about this team.  I felt good when we started to look like we were taking over in the third.  I would have felt good if the coaching staff wouldhave stayed aggressive to close out the game.  This is not happening though. The Lions still seem to not know how to close out games and I think this has a lot to do with play calling. Even if they won yesterday, giving up 20 unanswered points to a Chicago offense, 14 in a minute and nine seconds, doesn't sit well with me. What happens when we play a team with a real offense?  Getting 4 DB's back helps, but doesn't overcome the lions inability to close out. This team is going to win and lose based on Stafford. The coaching staff needs to let Stafford be Stafford for 4 full quarters.

Also, on Slay, when Stockton brought up losing Slay, Vilma immediately said they needed to change the culture. He stated this in a way that sounded like he agreed with the decision.  Maybe I'm wrong, but this is how I understood Vilma.

Edited September 14, 2020 by LionArkie

[Nnivolcm]

17 minutes ago, TL-TwoWinsAway said:

When have I refused to discuss anything? The conversation at that time was the injuries to the CBs, and how - after Trufant left the game - Trubisky's stats improved significantly. That was the conversation.

But, whatever. I'm good on "forum logic" for the evening. See you guys after a win.

This very thread. You're continuing to fixate on 3/4 CBs and ignoring responses to that issue and other discussions that issue is a smaller part of. 

[Karnage84]

29 minutes ago, Nnivolcm said:

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

No, I'm just saying that Slay being on the roster wouldn't have guaranteed better play, lack of injuries to other players and/or to himself. If you're able to explain how Darius Slay would have prevented Justin Coleman and/or Jeffrey Okudah from being injured then maybe I can get on board with you. 

[Karnage84]

28 minutes ago, LionArkie said:

I'm going to be honest,  if we would have won yesterday with a TD catch by Swift, I wouldn't have felt good about this team.  I felt good when we started to look like we were taking over in the third.  I would have felt good if the coaching staff wouldn't have stayed aggressive to close out the game.  This is not happening though. The Lions still seem to not know how to close out games and I think this has a lot to do with play calling. Even if they won yesterday, giving up 20 unanswered points to a Chicago offense, 14 in a minute and nine seconds, doesn't sit well with me. What happens when we play a team with a real offense?  Getting 4 DB's back helps, but doesn't overcome the lions inability to close out. This team is going to win and lose based on Stafford. The coaching staff needs to let Stafford be Stafford for 4 full quarters.

Also, on Slay, when Stockton brought up losing Slay, Vilma immediately said they needed to change the culture. He stated this in a way that sounded like he agreed with the decision.  Maybe I'm wrong, but this is how I understood Vilma.

Yes, I actually had thought of that but didn't know who said it and also forgot to mention it. 

I was listening to the Move The Sticks podcast on the weekend. David Shaw was the guest and they were discussing the culture at Standford and culture change in organizations. What he said in a nutshell is that the way you do that is by bringing in like minded guys who think the same, work the same, etc. They already believe in the things that you believe. The guys that don't either adapt and fit in or they get moved out (on their own, contracts terminated, traded, etc.). This is precisely what has been happening in Detroit and why they have been bringing in Patriots guys. 

Patricia and Quinn are remolding the team in the Patriot way with their own twists. For right or for wrong, whether it will work or it won't.. that is their plan. Guys like Collins, Shelton and Harmon know and understand that culture. It doesn't mean it is going to work. 

[diehardlionfan]

1 hour 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. 

A 9-7 team with Caldwell and.a GM adding talent is certainly closer to the objective than anything from Patricia.

A few wins don’t matter? News flash, that’s all that matters at this point.

I expect had Caldwell stayed and they added more talent the team would be far closer than they are now. You speculate Caldwell couldn’t improve the team with more talent then argue for two individuals that haven’t proven anything but incompetence. 

Patricia is an ineffective coach. They added another three ex Patriots, wow, what a difference. I guess they just need a few more of, “his guys.”  Meanwhile the Pats let guys walk, grab a QB and the song goes on. Because Bill Belichick is Bill Belichick! Matt Patricia and Bob Quinn are not! 

The Lions will play all season and the excuses will be trotted out. Injuries, officials, blah, blah, blah.....and Groundhog Day continues.

[diehardlionfan]

Just now, Karnage84 said:

Yes, I actually had thought of that but didn't know who said it and also forgot to mention it. 

I was listening to the Move The Sticks podcast on the weekend. David Shaw was the guest and they were discussing the culture at Standford and culture change in organizations. What he said in a nutshell is that the way you do that is by bringing in like minded guys who think the same, work the same, etc. They already believe in the things that you believe. The guys that don't either adapt and fit in or they get moved out (on their own, contracts terminated, traded, etc.). This is precisely what has been happening in Detroit and why they have been bringing in Patriots guys. 

Patricia and Quinn are remolding the team in the Patriot way with their own twists. For right or for wrong, whether it will work or it won't.. that is their plan. Guys like Collins, Shelton and Harmon know and understand that culture. It doesn't mean it is going to work. 

Everything you’ve described is a cop out used by ineffective managers. I’ve managed through cultural change in a large organization and an effective manager can mold and change behaviours. It’s absolutely ludicrous to claim you can’t be successful without like minded individuals. If you have to move everyone out of your organization, you’re the failure not the individuals being moved. 

At this stage the plan has been pretty obvious. It’s pretty obvious that it hasn’t worked also.

[Karnage84]

30 minutes ago, Nnivolcm said:

This very thread. You're continuing to fixate on 3/4 CBs and ignoring responses to that issue and other discussions that issue is a smaller part of. 

Elaborate then. 

Because losing Trufant, Okudah and Coleman + Collins with 3/4 of those guys midgame is going to hurt. On top of that we don't have our starting RT and our top 10 WR. For week 1, that is a pretty hefty set of injuries to overcome. However, we were ahead by double digit points and let Chicago come back because we didn't keep our foot on the gas on offense and our rookie RB dropped a surefire TD. 

If you're going to say that coaching is/was the factor - I'd agree with you. Without question. Offensively and defensively. I just don't think we should ignore the injury factor and throw away the fact that we had a significant lead against a division rival. It is not a good look for this coaching staff. It doesn't mean that they won't win another game or that we should blow everything up today. However it does mean that we need to see things turn around over the next few weeks or I would want to see a change in HC.

[Karnage84]

1 minute ago, diehardlionfan said:

Everything you’ve described is a cop out used by ineffective managers. I’ve managed through cultural change in a large organization and an effective manager can mold and change behaviours. It’s absolutely ludicrous to claim you can’t be successful without like minded individuals. If you have to move everyone out of your organization, you’re the failure not the individuals being moved. 

At this stage the plan has been pretty obvious. It’s pretty obvious that it hasn’t worked also.

I did not realize you had coached at a Division 1 school like Stanford before. Maybe Daniel Jeremiah should give you a call and get your thoughts on how to run a team. 

People have to buy into the program or they don't. As the leader, you do have to be someone that is worthy of following and the program has to promote success. There have been several guys who have spoken about the extensive culture change in Detroit moving from Caldwell to Patricia/Patriots. It works for some guys and it doesn't for others. 

[Karnage84]

1 hour ago, LionArkie said:

I'm going to be honest,  if we would have won yesterday with a TD catch by Swift, I wouldn't have felt good about this team.  I felt good when we started to look like we were taking over in the third.  I would have felt good if the coaching staff wouldhave stayed aggressive to close out the game.  This is not happening though. The Lions still seem to not know how to close out games and I think this has a lot to do with play calling. Even if they won yesterday, giving up 20 unanswered points to a Chicago offense, 14 in a minute and nine seconds, doesn't sit well with me. What happens when we play a team with a real offense?  Getting 4 DB's back helps, but doesn't overcome the lions inability to close out. This team is going to win and lose based on Stafford. The coaching staff needs to let Stafford be Stafford for 4 full quarters.

Also, on Slay, when Stockton brought up losing Slay, Vilma immediately said they needed to change the culture. He stated this in a way that sounded like he agreed with the decision.  Maybe I'm wrong, but this is how I understood Vilma.

Agreed, 100%. 

[Karnage84]

Also, why has NOBODY mentioned that designed run for Stafford yet? That was one of my bigger WTF moments yesterday. Stafford can make plays on the ground when he has to but Bevell doesn't have Russell Wilson back there. 

[Sllim Pickens]

1 hour ago, TL-TwoWinsAway said:

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.

lol, what are you even talking about.  context matters in losing, but the fact there is just a lot of context and excuses for three years means that context may actually be the story.  Yes if Swift caught the ball we win, if Calvin's catch is called a catch, maybe we win and go to the playoffs, of we hold off the Chiefs last year  maybe it sparks something but the fact of the matter is we didn't, and almost doesnt count in football.  The context every year is explaining away a bunch of loses.  The context is that despite having Stafford almost lead us back (albeit with dumb short passes that ate up the clock and burned our TOs), Patricia still looks lost calling a defense.  The context is he still looks lost having a 4th quarter lead.  He still looks lost in putting together a gameplan that can prevent a quarter straight of 3 and outs and burn out our D and cause them to get hurt.  Had we won, we would have snuck by and I would have felt the same way about this season as I do now, just with the expectation we would be 7-9 instead of 6-10. Either way its not good enough for year three. 

[Nnivolcm]

1 hour ago, Karnage84 said:

Elaborate then. 

Because losing Trufant, Okudah and Coleman + Collins with 3/4 of those guys midgame is going to hurt. On top of that we don't have our starting RT and our top 10 WR. For week 1, that is a pretty hefty set of injuries to overcome. However, we were ahead by double digit points and let Chicago come back because we didn't keep our foot on the gas on offense and our rookie RB dropped a surefire TD. 

If you're going to say that coaching is/was the factor - I'd agree with you. Without question. Offensively and defensively. I just don't think we should ignore the injury factor and throw away the fact that we had a significant lead against a division rival. It is not a good look for this coaching staff. It doesn't mean that they won't win another game or that we should blow everything up today. However it does mean that we need to see things turn around over the next few weeks or I would want to see a change in HC.

[Karnage84]

16 minutes ago, Nnivolcm said:

a) Chazz Michael Michaels is figure skating

b) I'm interested to hear your response

[LionArkie]

1 hour ago, Karnage84 said:

Also, why has NOBODY mentioned that designed run for Stafford yet? That was one of my bigger WTF moments yesterday. Stafford can make plays on the ground when he has to but Bevell doesn't have Russell Wilson back there. 

Yes, I've been thinking about that the whole day. That play call helped turn the tide of the game.  Absolutely stupid imo.  Of course I'm an arm chair coach, but I did once sleep in a holdiay inn express.