NFL Snooze News: Volume Four, Por Favor

[swede700]

On 4/24/2021 at 12:36 PM, babababa said:

Would Matt Stafford be the #1 all time loser? How that guy has been a starting quarterback since 2009 is beyond me.

Matt Stafford has kept that team from being a 4-win team every year since 2009.  When they have a competent head coach, they were a 9-11 win team.  While certainly not an elite QB, I'd probably still take Stafford over half of the QBs starting in the league. 

[babababa]

4 hours ago, swede700 said:

Matt Stafford has kept that team from being a 4-win team every year since 2009.  When they have a competent head coach, they were a 9-11 win team.  While certainly not an elite QB, I'd probably still take Stafford over half of the QBs starting in the league. 

By my observations Stafford has had the propensity to do 2 things really well:

1) 2 minute offense -- off-script. He's actually pretty great at this.

2) Racking up garbage stats against prevent defenses. 

He typically squanders crucial drives throughout the game until he's under intense pressure to right the ship. He doesn't beat good teams in these instances. He has a record of coming back against bad teams that are bad for a reason if he gets the ball down by a score in 4-down territory. 

Do you recall a transcendent moment for Stafford beyond when he was 19 y/o against a bad Browns team? Neither can I -- and whether or not part of that is the Lions doesn't change the fact that the guy hasn't gotten it done at any point.

[swede700]

You have to be in the position to have a transcendent moment to get one.  I think that one season alone where they won something like 9 games in the final 2 minutes is about as transcendent as one who plays for the Lions can get.      

[Guest]

19 hours ago, babababa said:

By my observations Stafford has had the propensity to do 2 things really well:

1) 2 minute offense -- off-script. He's actually pretty great at this.

2) Racking up garbage stats against prevent defenses. 

He typically squanders crucial drives throughout the game until he's under intense pressure to right the ship. He doesn't beat good teams in these instances. He has a record of coming back against bad teams that are bad for a reason if he gets the ball down by a score in 4-down territory. 

Do you recall a transcendent moment for Stafford beyond when he was 19 y/o against a bad Browns team? Neither can I -- and whether or not part of that is the Lions doesn't change the fact that the guy hasn't gotten it done at any point.

I think you are a little tough on Stafford.  Swede700 is correct in that Stafford was the reason that the Lions didn't have the first pick in the draft every year!  

[babababa]

8 hours ago, Virginia Viking said:

I think you are a little tough on Stafford.  Swede700 is correct in that Stafford was the reason that the Lions didn't have the first pick in the draft every year!  

That's a very heavy handed opinion. It's hard to argue with anyone who broadly sets up an individual to be the hero of an entire organization for over a decade. By this proclamation you're assuming the Lions were completely devoid of talent or inspirational play outside of Stafford. 

Remember -- since the Lions drafted Stafford they've been a pass-first team so they've always set him up with receiving talent. Stafford's gaudy passing stats are largely derived from consistently getting behind teams who play soft coverage at the end of games. I've seen him do almost nothing for 3 quarters in many games and then march up the field on 3 drives when they're in scramble mode so he ends up throwing for 300-400 yards. He has the worst winning percentage of any modern QB against playoff record teams. Think about that. To me it means he isn't very good at executing the game plan. The man rarely experiences being ahead of opponents in football games.

A lot of comparisons have been made between Cousins (.495 win percentage) and Stafford (.443 win percentage) being unable to win the big games until Cousins proved he could 2 years ago. Keep in mind Stafford has started in 60 more games than Cousins -- wow.

Stafford has had talent across the board to work with and the defense has also had their moments. During the Schwartz era, the team had a good defense. They also had an adequate defense when Caldwell was their head coach. Yes, the Patricia era produced awful defenses -- this is true, but the set-up on offense was there. 

In terms of being a hero, he has at points been the opposite -- just one example: He had a horrible final game against the Giants with the playoffs on the line in 2016 where he threw away their season late in the 4th quarter. Score: Lions 6 Giants 17. Caldwell was subsequently fired even though Stafford choked.

I was ready to let this argument go. But I'm not at all being tough on Stafford. He has been given a break at several points throughout his career as his play wasn't that great at a few junctures. He's also been extended at some of those curious points. He's had some good coaches, coordinators, and help. As we all know he also had the next best thing to Randy Moss playing with him for many years. Those who continue to marvel at his heroics against teams like the Browns back when they were a joke have just as many examples of Stafford coming up empty and/or throwing the ball away like he did against Chicago on Thanksgiving 3 years ago.

My point is that Stafford has been playing NFL football for a very long time and has nothing but empty stats to show for it.

https://www.footballdb.com/stats/qb-records.html

 

 

[vike daddy]

6 hours ago, babababa said:

My point is that Stafford has been playing NFL football for a very long time and has nothing but empty stats to show for it.

and Archie Manning says so what...?

[babababa]

28 minutes ago, vike daddy said:

and Archie Manning says so what...?

Right...I don't know if I'm laughing with you for the same reason or not. 

If Cousins makes the HOF then Stafford can too.

If Daunte Culpepper makes the HOF then Stafford can too. If Brad Johnson makes the HOF then Stafford can too. If Randall Cunningham makes the HOF then Stafford can too.

So many good and successful QBs like Rich Gannon, Steve McNair etc...etc...haven't made the HOF. 

I suppose I can be proven wrong if Stafford wins in LA he would turn my opinion completely around. He's completely out of excuses though. 

[wcblack34]

7 hours ago, babababa said:

Right...I don't know if I'm laughing with you for the same reason or not. 

If Cousins makes the HOF then Stafford can too.

If Daunte Culpepper makes the HOF then Stafford can too. If Brad Johnson makes the HOF then Stafford can too. If Randall Cunningham makes the HOF then Stafford can too.

So many good and successful QBs like Rich Gannon, Steve McNair etc...etc...haven't made the HOF. 

I suppose I can be proven wrong if Stafford wins in LA he would turn my opinion completely around. He's completely out of excuses though. 

Who ever said that Stafford was going to the Hall of Fame? I don't think anyone sees Stafford as a Hall of Famer. I think the point VD was making is that there have been many very good QBs that just played on terrible teams. 

Steve Young looked like a bust in Tampa and became a Hall of Famer in San Francisco.

Jim Plunkett looked like a bust in New England and won Super Bowls in Oakland. 

Jay Cutler...well, Jay Cutler sucked.

Stafford will have a better cast around him, but even more importantly, he'll be working with his first competent coaching staff. 

[SemperFeist]

32 minutes ago, wcblack34 said:

but even more importantly, he'll be working with his first competent coaching staff. 

Second. Jim Caldwell knew what he was doing  

But certainly his first competent FO/ownership. 

Edited April 28, 2021 by SemperFeist

[swede700]

I also don't think anyone ever made the declaration that Stafford was "the hero of the organization."  I only said he kept them from being 4-12 every year.  I think he's a pretty good QB...yes, he has had a lot of garbage yards and he's had his fair share of mistakes, but a lot of times, that's to compensate for a lack of running game (which he's never had his entire career) and a lack of defense. 

It's not a coincidence that the best defense they had, they went 11-5.  He's always hovered right around that 9th-11th best QB in the league his entire career.  That's not a bad place to be in. 

We'll have to see the running game he has in LA, but the defense has to be better than the mediocre at best he's had to deal with most of his career.      

[babababa]

2 hours ago, wcblack34 said:

Who ever said that Stafford was going to the Hall of Fame? I don't think anyone sees Stafford as a Hall of Famer. I think the point VD was making is that there have been many very good QBs that just played on terrible teams. 

Steve Young looked like a bust in Tampa and became a Hall of Famer in San Francisco.

Jim Plunkett looked like a bust in New England and won Super Bowls in Oakland. 

Jay Cutler...well, Jay Cutler sucked.

Stafford will have a better cast around him, but even more importantly, he'll be working with his first competent coaching staff. 

Well the comparison was to a HOF QB. When someone posts cryptically -- and it's hard to read sarcasm on the internet -- I interpret what I will. A does not equal B to put it bluntly. He could have put any number of other non-HOF QBs like Vinny Testaverde to compare with. Even then, at least Testaverde won some playoff games despite his abysmal 42.3% win rate. I just don't know how some of the QBs lasted as long as they did. In the case of Archie Manning it's amazing to me that he's a HOF'er just looking at his stats and losses. 

[wcblack34]

28 minutes ago, babababa said:

Well the comparison was to a HOF QB. When someone posts cryptically -- and it's hard to read sarcasm on the internet -- I interpret what I will. A does not equal B to put it bluntly. He could have put any number of other non-HOF QBs like Vinny Testaverde to compare with. Even then, at least Testaverde won some playoff games despite his abysmal 42.3% win rate. I just don't know how some of the QBs lasted as long as they did. In the case of Archie Manning it's amazing to me that he's a HOF'er just looking at his stats and losses. 

Sure. But Archie played in a time when there was no salary cap and NO free agency. He was forced to play for the Saints, and they were an abysmal organization at that time. He still went to a couple of Pro Bowls (when that was an actual honor). I think most realized that he was a stellar quarterback for a s****y organization. 

Edited April 28, 2021 by wcblack34

[babababa]

2 hours ago, swede700 said:

I also don't think anyone ever made the declaration that Stafford was "the hero of the organization."  I only said he kept them from being 4-12 every year.  I think he's a pretty good QB...yes, he has had a lot of garbage yards and he's had his fair share of mistakes, but a lot of times, that's to compensate for a lack of running game (which he's never had his entire career) and a lack of defense. 

It's not a coincidence that the best defense they had, they went 11-5.  He's always hovered right around that 9th-11th best QB in the league his entire career.  That's not a bad place to be in. 

We'll have to see the running game he has in LA, but the defense has to be better than the mediocre at best he's had to deal with most of his career.      

There's no objective measure to argue with "he kept them from being 4-12 every year". Nor is there a way to argue with Virginia Viking's feelings about Stafford keeping the Lions from drafting 1st overall every season. 

Setting a player up to elevate an organization out of the abyss such as you have is conjecture -- and seeing through the veil -- makes him out to be a hero. You don't have to literally say he's a hero.

I started out all of this criticizing Stafford's record. I'm not the only one to do it. Just think if the Vikings fans on this board would have been so generous to Cousins last season. 

[Guest]

19 minutes ago, babababa said:

Well the comparison was to a HOF QB. When someone posts cryptically -- and it's hard to read sarcasm on the internet -- I interpret what I will. A does not equal B to put it bluntly. He could have put any number of other non-HOF QBs like Vinny Testaverde to compare with. Even then, at least Testaverde won some playoff games despite his abysmal 42.3% win rate. I just don't know how some of the QBs lasted as long as they did. In the case of Archie Manning it's amazing to me that he's a HOF'er just looking at his stats and losses. 

Did you ever see Archie play?  He was one of the most exciting players of his era.  He was the Mahomes of his era without the support of players and coaching that Mahomes has enjoyed.  He never held anything back trying to win, and the only thing he got in return was the snot beat out of him be defenses.  There are a lot of players who deserve to be considered for HOF.  Manning was one of them...and deserves to be there.  Do I think that Stafford deserves consideration?  Not at this point.  However, he may turn into YA Tittle after he had been traded from the 49'er's to the Giants.  In fact, Stafford right now compares statistically to Tittle before going to the Giants.  I just wish that Manning had the opportunity to play on a championship quality team.

[wcblack34]

Archie is actually just in the College Football Hall of Fame, by the way.