Lions fire HC Matt Patricia & GM Bob Quinn; Darrell Bevell to be interim HC

[Mr Bad Example]

2 hours ago, ET80 said:

IMO, the Chicago gig seems more attractive. Not by much, but it is.

How much longer is Chicago paying the piper for Trubisky/Mack? 

If we grant that QB is the premium, you have a competent QB in Stafford in place, which buys you 2-3  yrs to not have to place a premium on that position, and you can see what falls into your lap in the draft (current/recent very good QBs such as Brees, Prescott, Brady, Wilson were late 1st; mid-first was Mahomes, Allen, Roethlisberger. Jackson, Rodgers were 10th or later-ish) - you don't need to trade the farm to get a Wentz or Goff or whoever. 

I think any downtrodden team is an opportunity. I think most NFL jobs are do-able if you have a GM funneling you good talent. Houston has the best QB situation BUT they also are as bad talent-wise as anyone who's not the Jets, and BOB traded away their draft capital, so they are an exception where I feel like you basically have to hope to be mediocre for a bit and maybe spin some replaceable players into draft capital to recover. 

[ET80]

14 minutes ago, Matts4313 said:

What say you @ET80?

Bienemy/Borgonzi.

[Mr Bad Example]

1 hour ago, ET80 said:

Finding a Gardner Minshew - a starting calibur QB in the 3rd day of the draft - I'd incredibly hard. You're more likely to find a Ben DiNucci, a Jake Luton or a Garrett Gilbert.

Minshew might not be great, but he's a lot better than most 3rd round QBs you'll find.

The thing about draft capital is it's basically throwing darts - the more darts you have, the better your chance of success. So the Minshew's are rare, but is the miss rate all that much more than at any other position? 

The main issue with QB is it's all-or-nothing as far as playing time. You can't trot a late-round QB out as a slot QB/nickel QB/change-of-pace QB, so it's often tough to tell if these guys are, indeed, stiffs, or might flourish if given a real chance. 

[FrantikRam]

Just now, Outpost31 said:

You've found a single outlier and you're acting like you've just blown up my argument? 

 

Yep I did because your argument was awful to begin with.

You know how many franchises have won a Super Bowl since 1999 (the year if this outlier?) - Rams, Ravens, Bucs, Patriots, Steelers, Colts, Saints, Packers, Giants, Seahawks, Broncos, Eagles, Chiefs

13 teams in 21 seasons. The Patriots never really drafted high, Colts didn't either have drafting Peyton. 

Your argument is terrible because there are so few franchises that actually win Super Bowls. And if you go back to the beginning of the free agency era, which is relevant because the NFL became a lot more competitive, you only add the Cowboys and Niners to that list, although FA still wasn't close to what it is today.

Larry Fitz and Julio Jones both led their teams to the best seasons in franchise history, and both of them had their teams in position to win a Super Bowl. But because it didn't happen, you knock where they were drafted? That makes zero sense. They should be judged, if anything, relative to their franchises history - in which case LT, Julio, Fitzgerald were all EXCELLENT franchise altering picks.

Oh and btw, because of how hard it is to win a Super Bowl, I'd imagine most owners care more about just making money - so yes, Barry and ED were great picks too.

 

 

 

[FrantikRam]

12 minutes ago, Outpost31 said:

You've found a single outlier and you're acting like you've just blown up my argument? 

Remove Holt, add Bailey and you've still got a team that's going to win the Super Bowl.

Additionally, that was in 1999.  You're going to say I'm narrowing the goal posts here, but the game was different in 1999 than it is now. 

If you don't believe me, look at the numbers of 2nd-7th round receivers who are breaking out in today's NFL versus yesterday's NFL.

Jerry Rice was another one, too.  I've given you another one.  It's free.  Same rule applies.  Different era of football. 

 

Oof wrong. The NFCCG against the Bucs was a defensive struggle where the Rams barely gave up anything - make the offense worse and defense better, Bucs could have won that game.

There's a chance there's no GSOT without Holt.

[waterfish_21]

3 minutes ago, FrantikRam said:

 

There is no GSOT without Holt.

Fixed.  

[TL-TwoWinsAway]

20 minutes ago, Outpost31 said:

You've found a single outlier and you're acting like you've just blown up my argument? 

It's not even his outlier (although Jamal Lewis also runs counter to your argument). It's the fact that your argument is horrible in the first place.

You can't say "Picking [insert great player] was a bad pick because [insert other great player] might have gotten them more wins". It just... doesn't work. At all. Not only is it built on hindsight, you're relying on hypothetical outcomes to support it.

[MacReady]

Just now, TL-TwoWinsAway said:

It's not even his outlier (although Jamal Lewis also runs counter to your argument). It's the fact that your argument is horrible in the first place.

You can't say "Picking [insert great player] was a bad pick because [insert other great player] might have gotten them more wins". It just... doesn't work. At all. Not only is it built on hindsight, you're relying on hypothetical outcomes to support it.

Average draft position of teams that actually won the Super Bowl. 

My position isn't terrible, you just can't accept nor understand it.  I'm done with this conversation.  You tell your new GM to draft all them ILBs, WRs, IOLs and TEs because I celebrate every time an NFC North divisional rival does that. 

EDGE - 110
OT - 128
QB - 130
DB - 142
IDL - 142
ILB - 150
TE - 151
WR - 154
IOL - 176
RB - 180

[ET80]

18 minutes ago, Mr Bad Example said:

Houston has the best QB situation BUT they also are as bad talent-wise as anyone who's not the Jets, and BOB traded away their draft capital, so they are an exception where I feel like you basically have to hope to be mediocre for a bit and maybe spin some replaceable players into draft capital to recover.

I feel like this is a oversimplification of the situation in Houston.

- The Texans have talent. Their entire OL is full of 1/2 round picks who has improved significantly since the Bill O'Brien firing (10 sacks in the four BoB games, 6 sacks in the seven games post BoB). Both Will Fuller and Brandin Cooks are on pace for 1,000 yards; They would be the first Texans WR tandem to both eclipse the 1,000 yard mark in a single season (and this team once had Andre Johnson playing across DeAndre Hopkins). Defensively is where the focus needs to be, but there's a few guys that are looking foundational - Justin Reid and Lonnie Johnson are starting to show up at S (Johnson recently moved from CB to full time S and it's showing to be a smart move). Zach Cunningham is a Pro Bowl calibur ILB, Jacob Martin and Jon Greenard are reasonable situational edge rushers, PJ Hall, Charles Omenihu and Ross Blacklock are reasonable interior DL. The issue with the Texans D is the loss of DJ Reader, who left to Cincinnati; Losing a block eating, penetrating NT is killing everyone else around that hole.

Is it the BEST talent in the world? No, but it's a team you can win with, a team you can build around.

- The Texans have eight draft picks this upcoming draft; They don't have a single pick in the top 64, but they have picks. This is where the new GM has to put in work, making those picks count. Now, the biggest need on the team is CB, which you're probably not going to find in rounds 3-7. But, other needs (RB, NT, ILB, situational edge rusher) can be found later on in the draft.

It won't be easy, yes. But a GM can cement themselves into a legend by making something out of this draft, and if they don't... You'll get a mulligan for the 2021 draft and a full compliment of picks in 2022.

[Texansfan713]

well said @ET80

[Texansfan713]

Plus the division is terrible.  Texans can easily turn into a playoff team with the right HC in place similar to how the Niners did when they fired Singletary and hired Harbaugh.

[Xenos]

1 hour ago, Outpost31 said:

Larry Fitzgerald has won 0 Super Bowls.  I guarantee you the Cardinals are closer to a Super Bowl win if they'd taken Rivers. 

Tomlinson won 0 Super Bowls.  I guarantee you the Chargers got closer to winning one if they had taken Richard Seymour. 

Calvin Johnson?  Joe Thomas.

Adrian Peterson?  Patrick Willis.

Jamal Lewis?  Corey Simon.

Reggie Bush?  Ferguson. 

Literally all of those the team would have been better off picking another player.

You can sell more tickets by getting those players I guess. 

You're out of your mind if you think the Ravens wouldn't have won that Super Bowl without Lewis.  Priest Holmes was on that roster.  Add Corey Simon to that defense and the Ravens might have won if they knelt on every offensive play. 

And not necessarily on the IOL.

Look at Frank Ragnow.  The Lions are better off if they draft Wynn.  If Wynn busts at OT, he's probably still going to be a top guard.

 

A lot of this paragraph does not make any sense. A lot of conjectures on your part to prove a point. Calvin at least got the Lions to the playoffs while the Browns were nowhere close with Joe Thomas. Did I do that right?

[Vladimir L]

5 hours ago, ttitansfan4life said:

That team needs a deep cleanse. Stafford needs to be next. It’s time to move on.

Love me some alex smith but wft would take him

[jpaulthe1st]

2 hours ago, Outpost31 said:

No.  Like I said, once you get to 23/24 and the back half of the draft, once all the premium positions have been taken, it gets more acceptable.

But as a team you better be damn sure there's not a similar player at a more premium position or I don't care how good the player turns out, you're going to regret it.

The closer to 1st overall you pick those positions, the worse the decision is. 

If you disagree, I would like to see a single IOL, WR, RB, TE drafted in the top 12 of the first round that wasn't a terrible mistake. 

Quenton Nelson comes to mind 

[MacReady]

Just now, Xenos said:

A lot of this paragraph does not make any sense. A lot of conjectures on your part to prove a point. Calvin at least got the Lions to the playoffs while the Browns were nowhere close with Joe Thomas. Did I do that right?

Switch the teams.  How well do the Browns do with Johnson and how well does Stafford do with Thomas. 

Protection is always better than receiving. 

I'm sorry, but the numbers back me up, too. 

You can rationalize it all you want and convince yourself it's not true, but the fact is some positions in football are more important than others and if you draft less important positions before the important ones you're going to lose more often than win.