Lions vs Texans GDT - The Defining Game of the Quinn/Patricia Regime

[Karnage84]

6 hours ago, Sllim Pickens said:

Why does this count but not last year? Both years our top offensive weapons were hurt which must have caused our D to struggle so bad they were only better than our 0-16 team yet one shouldn’t count against him. I mean when Kenny Golladay plays we win, and Swift was looking better so maybe we should wait and see if his D gets better when they come back.  

Because the QB is the straw that stirs the drink. They're the most important player on any team (good or bad). Stafford was on MVP levels before his injury and it was a lack of run game plus the defensive issues that led to the L's during that stretch. Then they lose him and have nothing at back up QB and the offense still performed well enough to be optimistic about the season. 

This year, KG has been out a bunch but that's where the rest of the team needs to step up and deliver. We were steamrolled by the Saints without Michael Thomas. When you have your franchise QB the expectation is that you should always have a chance to win the game. When you don't, it's going to be a tough day. When you don't have them for half of the season, you hope that you've found a gem in your back up but you're generally looking towards next season. 

[Karnage84]

22 minutes ago, TL-TwoWinsAway said:

I've absolutely beaten this poor, poor horse, but I'll give it another shot. Ready?

This is Patricia's third year.

I believe that a coach should be given three years. I believed that when we hired him, I said that repeatedly this off-season, and I said it this year as well.

It's also nothing close to last year, in terms of injuries. We have our starting QB. We have weapons, even without Golladay and Swift. If we don't have enough weapons, entering year three of Patricia and year five of Quinn, I blame both of them, and both of them should go. (They both probably should anyway.)

I really don't understand why we have to keep coming back to this time and again. 

It feels like there's a contingent that has been cheering for Patricia to fail from day 1. We just fired our 9-7 coach and then hired a Bellichick disciple, who don't have a track record of success as HC's. 

We seem to come back to the same well over and over... 9-7 isn't good enough, nobody said this would be a rebuild, fire Patricia in year 2 despite losing his QB, etc. I can practically cut and paste out conversations from September or probably from this time last year that will address the same items. 

Guess what guys, you win. @TL-TwoWinsAway and I are on the "Fire Patricia" bandwagon. It's time for healing and unity. 

[Karnage84]

7 minutes ago, Karnage84 said:

I really don't understand why we have to keep coming back to this time and again. 

It feels like there's a contingent that has been cheering for Patricia to fail from day 1. We just fired our 9-7 coach and then hired a Bellichick disciple, who don't have a track record of success as HC's. 

We seem to come back to the same well over and over... 9-7 isn't good enough, nobody said this would be a rebuild, fire Patricia in year 2 despite losing his QB, etc. I can practically cut and paste out conversations from September or probably from this time last year that will address the same items. 

Guess what guys, you win. @TL-TwoWinsAway and I are on the "Fire Patricia" bandwagon. It's time for healing and unity. 

By healing and unity, I really mean all of us getting to together to riot in the streets and calling for the jobs of Matt Patricia and Bob Quinn. 

[Lionized]

56 minutes ago, Karnage84 said:

By healing and unity, I really mean all of us getting to together to riot in the streets and calling for the jobs of Matt Patricia and Bob Quinn. 

What are we looting and burning down first? 😂

[Karnage84]

3 minutes ago, Lionized said:

What are we looting and burning down first? 😂

Green Bay

[diehardlionfan]

15 hours ago, TL-TwoWinsAway said:

My "assuming we fire Quinn and Patricia" was for the hypothetical question I asked. (Although I do think now is the time to move on.)

You didn't answer my question, which is fine. I'll try another angle: assuming the team is mathematically eliminated from the playoffs, would it be better for the franchise if the team won the rest of their games or lost the rest of their games?

It is always better for the organization to win. You’ve been one of the individuals talking about culture since Caldwell was let go yet you seem to think losing somehow benefits the team, You seem to be justifying that based in one aspect which is the draft. The draft is one consideration of many. 

Nothing breeds mediocrity like losing. Losing has never had a positive impact on culture, attitude, work ethic etc. 

You simply can’t build a proper culture if losing is thought of as an okay or as you suggest beneficial result. Trying to install a culture of hard work, accountability, performance, team first is totally erased when losing is an acceptable result.

[diehardlionfan]

1 hour ago, Karnage84 said:

I really don't understand why we have to keep coming back to this time and again. 

It feels like there's a contingent that has been cheering for Patricia to fail from day 1. We just fired our 9-7 coach and then hired a Bellichick disciple, who don't have a track record of success as HC's. 

We seem to come back to the same well over and over... 9-7 isn't good enough, nobody said this would be a rebuild, fire Patricia in year 2 despite losing his QB, etc. I can practically cut and paste out conversations from September or probably from this time last year that will address the same items. 

Guess what guys, you win. @TL-TwoWinsAway and I are on the "Fire Patricia" bandwagon. It's time for healing and unity. 

I can cut and paste conversations from the Millen era that talk about building the trenches first blah, blah, blah. We are going to repeat conversations as long as the issues generating discussion remain unchanged. 

As for you suggesting there is a contingent that WANTED Patricia to fail I think that’s unfair. I think people were sceptical of Quinn’s moves and nothing has happened to remove the skepticism. Questioning the moves of a GM or a coaches credentials is absolutely fair and it’s an unfair assumption to suggest that equates to hoping the team fails. Ironic since TL and yourself seem to be hoping the team loses out to secure a higher draft pick. 

I think it’s also fair to say those doubters were right and there’s three years of inadequate results to justify their position. 

You should prepare yourself because if you’re correct and Patricia gets fired no matter who his replacement is there will be some that question the move. The questioning, or doubt, isn’t rooted in some desire for organizational failure it’s a result of 60 years of incompetence. 
 

[TL-TwoWinsAway]

40 minutes ago, diehardlionfan said:

It is always better for the organization to win. You’ve been one of the individuals talking about culture since Caldwell was let go yet you seem to think losing somehow benefits the team, You seem to be justifying that based in one aspect which is the draft. The draft is one consideration of many. 

Nothing breeds mediocrity like losing. Losing has never had a positive impact on culture, attitude, work ethic etc. 

You simply can’t build a proper culture if losing is thought of as an okay or as you suggest beneficial result. Trying to install a culture of hard work, accountability, performance, team first is totally erased when losing is an acceptable result.

I'll never believe that a non-playoff 7-9 or 6-10 and a mid round pick is better for the franchise than 4-12 with a top 5 pick. Those 2-3 wins aren't worth nearly as much as the tremendous draft capital that separates a top 5 pick and a mid round pick.

But, of course, reasonable people can disagree.

[Karnage84]

2 hours ago, diehardlionfan said:

I can cut and paste conversations from the Millen era that talk about building the trenches first blah, blah, blah. We are going to repeat conversations as long as the issues generating discussion remain unchanged. 

As for you suggesting there is a contingent that WANTED Patricia to fail I think that’s unfair. I think people were sceptical of Quinn’s moves and nothing has happened to remove the skepticism. Questioning the moves of a GM or a coaches credentials is absolutely fair and it’s an unfair assumption to suggest that equates to hoping the team fails. Ironic since TL and yourself seem to be hoping the team loses out to secure a higher draft pick. 

I think it’s also fair to say those doubters were right and there’s three years of inadequate results to justify their position. 

You should prepare yourself because if you’re correct and Patricia gets fired no matter who his replacement is there will be some that question the move. The questioning, or doubt, isn’t rooted in some desire for organizational failure it’s a result of 60 years of incompetence. 
 

I am actually not calling for the team to lose out. It's more of a likely scenario going forward with or without Patricia. I just feel if you're going to fire him, rip off the band-aid and begin the process of moving things forward. I'd rather a higher draft pick for a rebuild (as most would) but I would rather that come organically as opposed to purposefully. I always want the team to try and play hard to win a game. 

I have not invested such time but it would not shock me if a lot of the Patricia detractors have been calling for him to a) not be the coach and b) to have been fired since the day he was hired. The organization went through a process and hired the people that were presented to be the best options in GM and HC candidates. I distinctively remember saying (paraphrase) re: Bellichick disciples "if it isn't going to happen here, it's not going to happen anywhere" (in terms of success). At the end of the day, the detractors were right in this case. 

There are always going to be questions when it comes to any candidate. Coaches are hired to be fired. If they haven't been a HC before, can they handle it? If they have been, why aren't they still with their original organization? What failures led to their dismissal? 

[Karnage84]

1 hour ago, TL-TwoWinsAway said:

I'll never believe that a non-playoff 7-9 or 6-10 and a mid round pick is better for the franchise than 4-12 with a top 5 pick. Those 2-3 wins aren't worth nearly as much as the tremendous draft capital that separates a top 5 pick and a mid round pick.

But, of course, reasonable people can disagree.

While I want a top 5 pick for rebuilding.. I also can't get on board with the team packing things in and just going through the motions. 

If it's going to happen, I'd rather it be (which is maybe more sad) because the team is just legitimately not good, as opposed to purposely tanking. 

[TL-TwoWinsAway]

8 minutes ago, Karnage84 said:

While I want a top 5 pick for rebuilding.. I also can't get on board with the team packing things in and just going through the motions. 

If it's going to happen, I'd rather it be (which is maybe more sad) because the team is just legitimately not good, as opposed to purposely tanking. 

Sure, that's better. I'm just saying that such a thing likely has very little bearing when GMs/HCs are considering the job, especially when compared to a significant difference in draft capital.

Edited November 27, 2020 by TL-TwoWinsAway

[Karnage84]

7 minutes ago, TL-TwoWinsAway said:

Sure, that's better. I'm just saying that such a thing likely has very little bearing when GMs/HCs are considering the job, especially when compared to a significant difference in draft capital.

It isn't and doesn't. Even if they finish in the top 10, I doubt someone will choose or not choose the job because they have the #8 pick instead of #5. Having the #1 or #2 pick would carry some more weight but once you're in the middle of the top 10 I doubt it makes a big difference. 

There is no such thing as a moral victory but I'd rather see some fight from the guys who should be here in a new regime and be the foundation to build off of. If guys are just quitting and shutting down then things are even worse moving forward. 

[TL-TwoWinsAway]

10 minutes ago, Karnage84 said:

It isn't and doesn't. Even if they finish in the top 10, I doubt someone will choose or not choose the job because they have the #8 pick instead of #5. Having the #1 or #2 pick would carry some more weight but once you're in the middle of the top 10 I doubt it makes a big difference. 

There is no such thing as a moral victory but I'd rather see some fight from the guys who should be here in a new regime and be the foundation to build off of. If guys are just quitting and shutting down then things are even worse moving forward. 

Yeah, I'm not even talking about the team playing hard. Of course I don't want them to quit. It's why I supported Patricia's 2019 approach: they were competitive with lesser players and earned a top three pick.

For a GM and coach stepping into a rebuild, the difference between a top 5 pick and a mid round pick matters far more than 2-3 wins from the year prior.

[Nnivolcm]

Quote

With eight minutes left in the fourth quarter, the Texans realized they had 12 players on the field on defense. Two players, A.J. Moore and Charles Omenihu, started to run off the field to avoid a penalty. Then Omenihu, realizing they were now going to be left shorthanded, just flopped onto the ground and pretended he was hurt. An official called an injury timeout and the Texans were able to get the right personnel on the field before the next play. The Texans weren’t penalized and didn’t lose a timeout.

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2020/11/27/texans-faked-an-injury-to-save-a-timeout/

[TL-TwoWinsAway]

4 minutes ago, Nnivolcm said:

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2020/11/27/texans-faked-an-injury-to-save-a-timeout/

Saw that during the broadcast. It's embarrassing and the team should be fined.