And I Thought Some of You Guys Were Bad...

[Kreton]

You can say it has no bearing, which I actually agree with, when you talk about 5, 10, 15, 20 years ago. The team still has only won a single playoff game in 50 years. That is why you hear many fans say -- SOL. Until the team shows they can get over the hump -- you will see many people thinking along the same lines.

Is your point that people are idiots who are too stupid to understand sports and historical significance? If so. I agree. If not, go ahead and assume I'm talking about you.

 

[TwoCents22]

I think the negativity comes from HOW were winning. If we were this same record, and our offense and Stafford were lighting the scoreboard up, yet our defense was sucking, things would be a lot more positive.

Of course there's always going to be a few "SECONDARY SUCKS" type people, but this is what the league is today. Have a top 5 QB you are a consistent contender. Top 5 defense is nice to have but the production is a lot less consistent.

Just look at last year. At 6-3 we had a lot of people predicting Superbowl. A lot less negativity than this year at this point in the season.

 

[broncosmitty]

If the Lions had impressed radio listeners, radio listeners would most likely be less pessimistic.

Not everyone try's to sell themselves a bag of magic beans on a daily basis.

Like with Stafford. Obviously some Lions fans have decided Caldwell and Lombardi have cut down on his turnovers. Not sure why, wishful thinking possibly. When in reality, the informed fan knows he has thrown MORE INTs this season, than at the same point last season. Some people accept, some people deny, it is what it is.

 

[Thruthefog]

I think the perception that he has fewer turnovers is born of the fact that last year they were coming at the most critical time of the games (games that were lost). Therefore they weren't forgotten as easily as the turnovers he's had this year. A win will make people more forgiving and more forgetful.

I know I was one who believed this (fewer turnovers) to be true. I only check stats for fantasy football. Otherwise, I go completely on memory and perception, which fail me at times.

The same goes with penalties. It's not so much how many turnovers and penalties, but when they occur.

 

[tpaulus_2]

I think the perception that he has fewer turnovers is born of the fact that last year they were coming at the most critical time of the games (games that were lost). Therefore they weren't forgotten as easily as the turnovers he's had this year. A win will make people more forgiving and more forgetful.

I know I was one who believed this (fewer turnovers) to be true. I only check stats for fantasy football. Otherwise, I go completely on memory and perception, which fail me at times.

The same goes with penalties. It's not so much how many turnovers and penalties, but when they occur.

It's no perception, Tex, Stafford is on pace for considerably less turnovers. Last season he had 19 INTs and lost four fumbles. This year he's on pace for 14 INTs and two lost fumbles. That's a 30% decrease.

Unfortunately his TDs are way down, too, so not all is as it should be there, but I just wanted to clear that up as there seems to be some misinformation floating around the board on this particular topic...

 

[lionstop1]

Every QB in the league has turnovers.

 

[tpaulus_2]

Every QB in the league has turnovers.

That's not even close to true. There's still dozens of back-up QBs and 3rd stringers who haven't thrown a pick or fumbled. Dumbass.

 

[broncosmitty]

It's no perception, Tex, Stafford is on pace for considerably less turnovers. Last season he had 19 INTs and lost four fumbles. This year he's on pace for 14 INTs and two lost fumbles. That's a 30% decrease.

Unfortunately his TDs are way down, too, so not all is as it should be there, but I just wanted to clear that up as there seems to be some misinformation floating around the board on this particular topic...

Even when shown facts, you refuse to listen. Absolutely fucking amazing.

 

[gandydancer]

Even when shown facts, you refuse to listen. Absolutely fucking amazing.

I was one who thought he was doing much better. As Fog said, not many costly TO's. After the concrete numbers you displayed. My perception was corrected and I can't find them beans anywhere.

 

[Microwahevo]

If we're talking strictly turnovers, then Stafford, through 10 games both this year and last year, has the same amount of turnovers, 10. Interceptions, he's thrown one more this year than last. But I'm not following exactly what everyone's talking about. Just putting total turnover stats out there.

 

[LPinSLC]

So then, he hasn't cut down on TO's. He had a bad 2nd half of the season last year. Early in the year(around this same point last year) there was a thread discussing Stafford being on the brink of elite. His 2nd half collapse better not be repeated. This idea to limit Stafford through 3 1/2 quarters and then unleash the gunslinger isn't likely going to help his overall TO's. Being in a position to have to score = forcing things. They better get this playcalling in order or we're destined for a repeat of last season.

 

[TrustMeIamRight]

So is it only alright to use what happened last year when it supports your opinion? What happened to how they fared in 2013, 1984, 1492 or whatever has no bearing on what happens this year?

It's no perception, Tex, Stafford is on pace for considerably less turnovers. Last season he had 19 INTs and lost four fumbles. This year he's on pace for 14 INTs and two lost fumbles. That's a 30% decrease.

Also, how we finished last year, the year before, 1996, 1985, or 1968 has no bearing on how we'll finish this year, so anyone who lets that influence their opinion on the Lions, imo, isn't interested in assessing this year's team, but would rather just take the easy road and bitch about the past. If results from recent seasons plays such a large role in the ultimate destiny of a team each season, then why do we very rarely get repeat Super Bowl champions?

 

[tpaulus_2]

If we're talking strictly turnovers, then Stafford, through 10 games both this year and last year, has the same amount of turnovers, 10. Interceptions, he's thrown one more this year than last. But I'm not following exactly what everyone's talking about. Just putting total turnover stats out there.

Yep. Last year he had a horrible finish and was a turnover machine down the stretch.

I projected out his INTs and Fumbles lost per game this year and he's on pace to finish with about 30% less turnovers this year, provided he maintains his current pace.

I think that's pretty straight-forward.

I also don't have a bias against the guy, so I'm not trying to convince myself that he's going to do the exact same thing this year and finish with a ton of turnovers in the last 6-7 weeks, simply because that's what he did last year...

 

[tpaulus_2]

So is it only alright to use what happened last year when it supports your opinion? What happened to how they fared in 2013, 1984, 1492 or whatever has no bearing on what happens this year?

We're directly comparing his numbers last year to this year. I get the feeling you're smart enough to understand the difference between comparing a players stats year to year vs. using team success in prior years as a barometer for current success.

I'd explain that this is an apples/oranges situation, but I think it's pretty obvious you're just being a jackass for the sake of being a jackass. Since you can't seem to handle not starting arguments for more than a week or so at a time, I'll just say I'm not surprised...

 

[tpaulus_2]

So then, he hasn't cut down on TO's. He had a bad 2nd half of the season last year. Early in the year(around this same point last year) there was a thread discussing Stafford being on the brink of elite. His 2nd half collapse better not be repeated. This idea to limit Stafford through 3 1/2 quarters and then unleash the gunslinger isn't likely going to help his overall TO's. Being in a position to have to score = forcing things. They better get this playcalling in order or we're destined for a repeat of last season.

I guess it's all about how you want to look at it. On a turnover-per-game basis, he's down from last year. In 2013 he turned it over 1.437 times per game, this year he's at exactly 1.00 turnovers per game.

Obviously we won't know for sure until the season is done and over with, but so far, this year, his turnover-per-game rate is down, which is good...

 

[Thruthefog]

I know Micro's pretty bad. A couple year's ago at the tailgate, he threw up behind the dumpster, which, in itself wasn't bad, but that's where we were smoking our weed.

 

[LPinSLC]

I guess it's all about how you want to look at it. On a turnover-per-game basis, he's down from last year. In 2013 he turned it over 1.437 times per game, this year he's at exactly 1.00 turnovers per game.

Obviously we won't know for sure until the season is done and over with, but so far, this year, his turnover-per-game rate is down, which is good...

The statement was, "at the same point last year." I get that on a per game average, he would finish the year lower than last. If at this same point last year, we could have projected 1 per game, then his average wouldn't have ballooned to 1 and 1/2 per. Didn't quite turn out that way.

Like 68 said, the turnovers haven't directly resulted in losses. That's huge. His pick 6's last year were bad too. I hate how much they seem to be limiting the kid. Unless he isn't being limited. Maybe he just doesn't have the time to allow routes to develop. Either way, I'm still sporting my Stafford jersey and got one in the mail for the anti-Stafford(Smitty)

 

[broncosmitty]

Im anti-Something but it aint Stafford.

Actually think this could be Stafford's best season. Could. Might. Hope it fuckin is. He can throw all the picks he wants on third and long. His pick was a punt last week. None of that first down forcing stuff though.

I just hope we don't have a game like Philly last year. Season went to shit after that.

 

[TrustMeIamRight]

We're directly comparing his numbers last year to this year. I get the feeling you're smart enough to understand the difference between comparing a players stats year to year vs. using team success in prior years as a barometer for current success.

I'd explain that this is an apples/oranges situation, but I think it's pretty obvious you're just being a jackass for the sake of being a jackass. Since you can't seem to HANDLE not starting arguments for more than a week or so at a time, I'll just say I'm not surprised...

How is this an apples/oranges situation? Are you not using what happened last year to come up with your statements regarding Stafford this year? That is basically what you are hearing from Lions fans who don't think the Lions can close out a season. That caller you talked about who said Detroit would win 9 games -- He is saying Detroit would win 2 more this year. 2013 -- they won 0 in their last 7. 2014 -- they won 1 in their 7 games. So he actually thinks they will win twice as many games over the last 7 weeks than what we have the last 2 years combined.

I don't agree with him, but it is most definitely possible. I think they win 3 games and finish with 10 wins. How many do you see the Lions winning down the stretch?

 

[Thruthefog]

This is 2015? I must be in the express lane to Alzheimersville.