Roster Moves

[BarryTheBest]

1 hour ago, Karnage84 said:

I think in this situation you have to "hope for the best, prepare for the worst". The Goff that we have seen who did regress might be the real guy. It could also be that McVay started moving off of him, made some bad playcalls of his own, etc. and that he is better than what we've recently seen. 

You are certainly right there. My guess is that his first two seasons were skewed toward the best of Jared while the last two years were skewed toward the worst of Jared. If he can find some consistency right in the middle of these two versions, we will still have a very capable QB to work with. But yes, hope for the best, prepare for the worst... This is what we as Lions fans must always do. 😆

[Karnage84]

57 minutes ago, BarryTheBest said:

You are certainly right there. My guess is that his first two seasons were skewed toward the best of Jared while the last two years were skewed toward the worst of Jared. If he can find some consistency right in the middle of these two versions, we will still have a very capable QB to work with. But yes, hope for the best, prepare for the worst... This is what we as Lions fans must always do. 😆

As Lions fans it's always "hope for the best but you're getting the worst". 

[BarryTheBest]

2 hours ago, Karnage84 said:

As Lions fans it's always "hope for the best but you're getting the worst". 

Funny, but so true.

[SimbaWho]

19 hours ago, detfan782004 said:

I think it’s a good thing to restructure him. I may be in minority but I’d rather have a game manager type QB and build everything else up on team. 

Stafford had way more talent but can’t win when all your talent is at and rest of roster is blah.

Goff deal is friendly for what he brings to table IMO. 
 

my biggest issue with Stafford was he pushed too hard at times and it led to some of dumbest throws I’ve ever seen. 
 

im excited for a more balanced offense and better defense. Crossing my fingers 

 

This is not a cool argument cause in theory Lions were still signing players, drafting, using money they just did it all wrong around Stafford. It's not like they wanted to waste his best years. Stafford getting paid wasn't the reason the team sucked. Paying dudes like Coleman, drafting bad/average players in the early rounds did.

It's apples and oranges at this point cause Goff get's the benefit of a new regime with a bunch of draft capital and cost basically as much as Stafford. Not sure of the total savings honestly and Staffords cost but what I don't even think we're talking 10 million difference.

We'll see what the two 1st rdp's and the 3rd manifest themselves into. Thats the prize imo those picks/players vs anything Goff does. I just see him as a cap dump who fit our plans in a rebuild as a steady hand at QB.

Edited March 25, 2021 by SimbaWho

[jrry32]

On 3/24/2021 at 7:16 PM, SimbaWho said:

Tough sell that Goffs worth anything in the open market. Feel like Rams would of dealt him prior to the Stafford trade vs throwing him in a Lions deal. No ones buying he's turning this ship around( Unless you bought Quinn/Patricia... then I get it.. ) I think we should be prepaired for a Kirk Cousins/Nick Foles type performance.

Well, the Rams wouldn't have dealt him if one of two things are true: (1) the Lions would have picked the Carolina deal absent Goff or (2) Goff's worth to the Lions was more than what he was worth to the rest of the NFL. Additionally, I'll bust your balls here and say that there's a massive gulf between Kirk Cousins and Nick Foles in terms of performance. 😉

Quote

Rams organization proved that Goff isn't leading a team anywhere but can manage a good game and get you wins if the rest of the team is strong.

Well, he did lead the Rams to a Super Bowl appearance in a season where he threw for 4000+ yards and 30+ TDs. Just saying. Are the Lions getting that Goff? Who knows.

Quote

Feels like I just slammed Goff but he's average/slightly above,imo, which is pretty good for a league full of bad QB frankly. He's just stepping into some rough stuff year 1, hopefully the Oline really helps him out.

I think that's a fair take.

[Louis Friend]

4 hours ago, SimbaWho said:

 

This is not a cool argument cause in theory Lions were still signing players, drafting, using money they just did it all wrong around Stafford. It's not like they wanted to waste his best years. Stafford getting paid wasn't the reason the team sucked. Paying dudes like Coleman, drafting bad/average players in the early rounds did.

It's apples and oranges at this point cause Goff get's the benefit of a new regime with a bunch of draft capital and cost basically as much as Stafford. Not sure of the total savings honestly and Staffords cost but what I don't even think we're talking 10 million difference.

We'll see what the two 1st rdp's and the 3rd manifest themselves into. Thats the prize imo those picks/players vs anything Goff does. I just see him as a cap dump who fit our plans in a rebuild as a steady hand at QB.

But we have the draft capital from trading Stafford. Those extra picks would not be possible with Stafford still here. Instead, Quinn had to trade picks for players. 6th for Griffen, etc. Yes Goff will have a better FO this year than Stafford did the last 3 seasons, but having Stafford and his large cap contract is part of the reason we couldn't keep Suh and that 2014 playoff team together. Lets be honest here.

[diehardlionfan]

28 minutes ago, Louis Friend said:

But we have the draft capital from trading Stafford. Those extra picks would not be possible with Stafford still here. Instead, Quinn had to trade picks for players. 6th for Griffen, etc. Yes Goff will have a better FO this year than Stafford did the last 3 seasons, but having Stafford and his large cap contract is part of the reason we couldn't keep Suh and that 2014 playoff team together. Lets be honest here.

They could’ve kept Suh if they wanted to.

[BarryTheBest]

1 hour ago, diehardlionfan said:

They could’ve kept Suh if they wanted to.

I do not think Suh was interested in staying personally.

[Louis Friend]

2 hours ago, diehardlionfan said:

They could’ve kept Suh if they wanted to.

They wanted to keep him. Because of the money given to Stafford and Calvin, they couldn't front load Suh's contract the way Miami offered. 

[SimbaWho]

9 hours ago, Louis Friend said:

But we have the draft capital from trading Stafford. Those extra picks would not be possible with Stafford still here. Instead, Quinn had to trade picks for players. 6th for Griffen, etc. Yes Goff will have a better FO this year than Stafford did the last 3 seasons, but having Stafford and his large cap contract is part of the reason we couldn't keep Suh and that 2014 playoff team together. Lets be honest here.

No, common, that's not totally how it went either, be honest back with me. Lions/Mayhew restructured Suh contract so much, along with Calvin Johnson in an attempt to build a quality team to win games. It was a good team too their for a minute, no one was complaining while the winning was happening. They had to restructure those three juggling their HUGE rookie contracts right from the start cause there wasn't a rookie pay-scale. Who knows what we could of done with those three under a payscale instead of restructuring to create cap space.

Lions actually even gave Suh a solid offer he just chose to leave. His sister made comments that I think can be looked up even about how Detroit wasn't a long-term plan. 

It's not Stafford's fault the Quinn era specifically, spent money badly, spending a billion dollars on Flowers/Shelton/Williams/Collins and still couldn't have a successful pass rush or run defense is a huge problem. One Stafford's money didn't' create.

Don't blame Stafford being paid for everyone other bad move or move not made. He's not the guy in charge. Other players got paid not just Stafford, and they performed terribly. That's the simple truth through the Quinn era.

If we had Goff in Stafford situation the past few years, we could of had our QBOTF with the 1st/2nd picks overall. That's why I'm saying now, it's apples to oranges in comparison. Not fair to Stafford when Goffs getting a whole new regime that's freeing up money and has picks but the QB's are still paid relatively the same.

I understand you're point that maybe we're better offer though trading Stafford and going through the rebuild. In fact I agree cause of age only. It was a good deal, to make it worth it though Lions have to hit on those picks, cause Goff/Stafford straight up is meh. (Right)? This means nothing in 5 years if those picks suck.

Edited March 26, 2021 by SimbaWho

[SimbaWho]

9 hours ago, jrry32 said:

Well, the Rams wouldn't have dealt him if one of two things are true: (1) the Lions would have picked the Carolina deal absent Goff or (2) Goff's worth to the Lions was more than what he was worth to the rest of the NFL. Additionally, I'll bust your balls here and say that there's a massive gulf between Kirk Cousins and Nick Foles in terms of performance. 😉

Well, he did lead the Rams to a Super Bowl appearance in a season where he threw for 4000+ yards and 30+ TDs. Just saying. Are the Lions getting that Goff? Who knows.

I think that's a fair take.

Ha, ok, well I'm not going to elaborate too much... cause i don't think you believe your own sales pitch with Goff there at the end. 

I'll make a bet Goff doesn't throw over 3,500yards or 25 TD's and throws over 15 INTs. Loser buys the winner their favorite bottle. * MSG me if you make a friendly wager, nothing has to get weird.*

Edited March 26, 2021 by SimbaWho

[Sllim Pickens]

1 hour ago, SimbaWho said:

No, common, that's not totally how it went either, be honest back with me. Lions/Mayhew restructured Suh contract so much, along with Calvin Johnson in an attempt to build a quality team to win games. It was a good team too their for a minute, no one was complaining while the winning was happening. They had to restructure those three juggling their HUGE rookie contracts right from the start cause there wasn't a rookie pay-scale. Who knows what we could of done with those three under a payscale instead of restructuring to create cap space.

Lions actually even gave Suh a solid offer he just chose to leave. His sister made comments that I think can be looked up even about how Detroit wasn't a long-term plan. 

It's not Stafford's fault the Quinn era specifically, spent money badly, spending a billion dollars on Flowers/Shelton/Williams/Collins and still couldn't have a successful pass rush or run defense is a huge problem. One Stafford's money didn't' create.

Don't blame Stafford being paid for everyone other bad move or move not made. He's not the guy in charge. Other players got paid not just Stafford, and they performed terribly. That's the simple truth through the Quinn era.

If we had Goff in Stafford situation the past few years, we could of had our QBOTF with the 1st/2nd picks overall. That's why I'm saying now, it's apples to oranges in comparison. Not fair to Stafford when Goffs getting a whole new regime that's freeing up money and has picks but the QB's are still paid relatively the same.

I understand you're point that maybe we're better offer though trading Stafford and going through the rebuild. In fact I agree cause of age only. It was a good deal, to make it worth it though Lions have to hit on those picks, cause Goff/Stafford straight up is meh. (Right)? This means nothing in 5 years if those picks suck.

I agree with this.  Had we picked Aaron Donald instead of Ebron, there is a chance Suh stays because he sees the potential next to Donald.  If not we still would have one of the best D Lineman in the game.  If we draft anyone over Laken Tomlinson and Teez Tabor and Jarrad Davis and Tavai, and etc etc we would have had a good team and likely won.  The Chiefs hit on their picks, the Bucs hit on their picks and then got the QB to go with it. The Ravens have hit on their picks.  The Seahawks alwats seem to hit on their top picks.  The way to win is to pay rookie salaries to good players and instead we have had rookie salaries for average or below average players eating up our cap space.  And then as you mentioned the money spent on Coleman, Vaitai, Trufant, Flowers etc without the returns.  We had cap space and spent it on a guy who got us 1 sack last year. 

[Louis Friend]

2 hours ago, SimbaWho said:

No, common, that's not totally how it went either, be honest back with me. Lions/Mayhew restructured Suh contract so much, along with Calvin Johnson in an attempt to build a quality team to win games. It was a good team too their for a minute, no one was complaining while the winning was happening. They had to restructure those three juggling their HUGE rookie contracts right from the start cause there wasn't a rookie pay-scale. Who knows what we could of done with those three under a payscale instead of restructuring to create cap space.

Lions actually even gave Suh a solid offer he just chose to leave. His sister made comments that I think can be looked up even about how Detroit wasn't a long-term plan. 

It's not Stafford's fault the Quinn era specifically, spent money badly, spending a billion dollars on Flowers/Shelton/Williams/Collins and still couldn't have a successful pass rush or run defense is a huge problem. One Stafford's money didn't' create.

Don't blame Stafford being paid for everyone other bad move or move not made. He's not the guy in charge. Other players got paid not just Stafford, and they performed terribly. That's the simple truth through the Quinn era.

If we had Goff in Stafford situation the past few years, we could of had our QBOTF with the 1st/2nd picks overall. That's why I'm saying now, it's apples to oranges in comparison. Not fair to Stafford when Goffs getting a whole new regime that's freeing up money and has picks but the QB's are still paid relatively the same.

I understand you're point that maybe we're better offer though trading Stafford and going through the rebuild. In fact I agree cause of age only. It was a good deal, to make it worth it though Lions have to hit on those picks, cause Goff/Stafford straight up is meh. (Right)? This means nothing in 5 years if those picks suck.

Lions gave him a solid offer, same money as Miami in fact, but they could not match Miami front loading the contract. Let’s not re-write history here. Suh’s sister wanted out of Detroit, no doubt. And her fascination of him was borderline creepy. But if the Lions could have offered him more money up front, he would have stayed, even with Ebron. And please don’t get me started on that!! I was anti-Ebron and am still banging that drum. 

[BarryTheBest]

36 minutes ago, Louis Friend said:

Lions gave him a solid offer, same money as Miami in fact, but they could not match Miami front loading the contract. Let’s not re-write history here. Suh’s sister wanted out of Detroit, no doubt. And her fascination of him was borderline creepy. But if the Lions could have offered him more money up front, he would have stayed, even with Ebron. And please don’t get me started on that!! I was anti-Ebron and am still banging that drum. 

I do not think there is anyway of knowing if Suh would have stayed. That said, Ebron is one of the worst picks of the last 10 years.. Cannot stand him.

Edited March 26, 2021 by BarryTheBest

[diehardlionfan]

15 hours ago, Louis Friend said:

They wanted to keep him. Because of the money given to Stafford and Calvin, they couldn't front load Suh's contract the way Miami offered. 

The Lions mismanaged the cap but had the will been there it could’ve been done. Mayhew himself admitted he made mistakes in the Suh negotiation. Suh stated it wasn’t about money.

Edited March 26, 2021 by diehardlionfan