RedRamage

To me, right now (I reserve the right to change my mind later of course), it feels like the Golden Tate non-touchdown against the Falcons... it was the right call, probably, but it's a stupid rule.

I mean... that wasn't a very hard record to break, but yeah he does. It's be more impressive sounding (to non-Lions fans at least) to say he as twice as many playoff wins in the SB era compared to all other Lions QBs combine!

After a bit more looking, I found that there have been at least TWO previous version. The version I have is this one: https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/32036/monopoly-grand-rapids-edition/images I feel like this did a pretty good job of being Iconic Grand Rapids. Then there's this version: I can only find a eBay listing with more details (https://www.ebay.com/itm/205447113823). This is obviously not a Hasbro licensed version but a knock off. It feels like it was made by someone who googled things about Grand Rapids, but at least they did a better job of putting like-things together from what I can tell.

So apparently a new "Grand Rapids Monopoly" just came out. I know there has been at least one previous version, but that version is a bit dated so I was curious to see what the new one would be like. Short version: HORRIBLE. Properties are: Brown: Fish Ladder Park and Provin Trails. Okay, I can kinda see Fish Ladder. That's not super iconic, but it is definitely part of Grand Rapids and relatively well known. I've never even heard of Provin Trails before looking up. Looks interesting... un-improved trails. However, it certainly isn't iconic Grand Rapids. In fact, it's a Kent County Park that's outside of Grand Rapids city limits. Seems a very odd choice. Lt. Blue: GR Public Museum, John Ball Zoo, (okay, liking where this is going) and Steelhead Trout. Um, what? A museum, a zoo, and... a fish? How are those grouped together? Pink: Medical Mile, Lantern Festival, Wealthy Street. Huh? For non-Grand Rapidians, Medial Mile is a stretch where there's a bunch of hospitals and medical research and education things. It's well known, so yeah I like that. Wealthy street is okay... it's historic in terms of how long it's been in GR I guess and starting to be built back up, so okay, I can understand that. But then Lantern Festival? Again, the grouping makes no sense and Lantern Festival is really not an iconic Grand Rapids thing at all. Orange: Schuler Books, Bridge Street Market, and Meijer. Eh... I mean, I guess? Schuler Books isn't like a major business or anything, but it is Grand Rapids in origin. Bridge Street Market is okay, and I understand Meijer, which is definitely GR based. Red: Mr. Burger, Grand Rapids Popcorn, and Chili Dog. Eh... maybe? I mean I won't really consider Mr. Burger or GR Popcorn to be iconic businesses, but I suppose?? But then we tack on a food item? Again... what? I get the feeling that maybe they wanted this to be Yesterdog or something but Yesterdog didn't want to pay out?? Yellow: Downtown Grand Rapids, Amway Grand Plaza, Ford Airport. Again two of these make sense to me. Amway Grand Plaza is very iconic GR. It's the first real tall building that was built in GR. And of course the airport is a major thing. But "Downtown"? You have two notable building, and then a ill-defined area? Green: Gun Lake Casino Resort, Art Prize, Cherry Street. -Facepalm- Okay so Gun Lake is well known, but... it's more than 20 minutes outside of Grand Rapids. Art Prize is very iconic GR, so that's okay. Cherry Street is like Wealthy Street. But again what heck is up with this grouping? A business well outside of GR limits, an event, and a semi-historic street? Dk Blue: Grand River and the Blue Bridge. At least these are iconic GR. The city is named after the rapids that used to be here on the Grand River and the Blue Pedestrian Bridge is pretty well known. These seem odd choices to the most expensive properties and the grouping (one natural, one man made) is a little odd. Utilities: Reeds Lake and Riverwalk Promenade. Reeds Lake is better known as part of East Grand Rapids (wealthy suburb of GR) but it's close enough that I'm okay with it. The Riverwalk Promenade is an okay inclusion... but again, odd pairing. Railroads: (oh boy... hang on folks) Mountain Biking, Paddleboarding, The Rapid, and Fishing. What? Biking and Fishing... sure, that happens a lot in GR. So, outdoor activities is the theme? Paddleboarding... eh... I certainly haven't noticed much of that in GR, but... maybe I'm just missing it?? But then The Rapid... which is the name of our city bus service. How does that fit... like at all? As a (nearly) life long Grand Rapidian this just feels like SUCH a miss! The old Grand Rapids Monopoly is, as I said, a bit dated now, but still SOOOO much more iconic Grand Rapids.

See, when I hear 5th/3rd, and especially when I see it written like that, I always think of it as a fraction: And of course that simplifies to 0.2/0.33333.... which equals 0.6. So a Fifth-Third is actually only 60% effort.

Just like anything, it wouldn't be impossible to hack given you throw enough money and talent at the problem, but I suspect it would be quite difficult. Then you also have to hope that your efforts don't get discovered. And honestly if you're going to hire someone who unethical enough to take lots of money to do this, that same person may see that he could earn a extra chunk of money selling you out to MLB or media. Plus hacking the pitchcom is only half the battle. Next you have to find a way to reliably, secretly, get that pitch data to the player. This could be done with a sound or a light, but I don't think it would take too long for someone to start catching on to this. And you have the danger of your own teammates. This was how the Astro's sign steal scandal broke. Your pitchers might be loyal to the team and not talk about it, but once a pitcher moves to a new team, you think he's going to remain loyal to the old squad? You think he's going to want to face his old squad knowing that they hacked ptichcom and his pitches are going to be known? So, in short: Yes, it probably can be hacked, but the cost and effort would be high, and the risk of getting caught would also be very high.* (*Now the players may not care... I mean look at how none of the players in in Houston Scandal got even a slap on the wrist. They might go along with it for temporary glory. Honestly, not even the front office or manager suffered extensively.)

I dread the day when they start selling naming rights to parts of the stadium: "Welcome back to Sam Bernstein Field inside 5/3 Bank Ballpark where Will Vest has just come out of the BelleTire Bullpen and finished his warmup tosses on Little Ceaser's Mound. As he prepares to pitch Rodriguez steps into the Wallside Windows Batters Box and the 9th inning, brought to you be Meijer, is underway!"

While I think most of us would prefer to go back to yester year and just name it Tiger Stadium or Tiger Park or something like that, those days are long gone. So, purely for the discussion, what brands/companies would you find acceptable? The "rules" for the discussion are these: 1. The company has to be big enough to reasonably be able to afford naming rights. We're not gonna have Bob's Tow Truck Stadium. 2. The company has to be one that might reasonably be considered by Tiger's ownership. So we're not going to have *orn*ub Park (or Papa John's Stadium for that matter either). So, given those rules what options do you have? Meijer Park? GM Stadium?

Wasn't trying to say you did have a problem with it at all, just saying that I have zero problem with it.

I have ZERO problem with the Mariners trying to steal signals. It's part of the game, always has been, always will be.

What we need is for Ford to talk over the name rights. But obviously they wouldn't use the Ford name as Ford Field already exists. So instead they'd use their luxury brand, and so it'd become: Lincoln Park

Meh... as I've said way too many times already: Football is the most team sport there is of the major sports. EPA per Dropback, from what I can tell, basically judges if the QB added or lost "points" (not sure how points are defined for this stat) for each dropback to pass. But... how do you judge how much of that is the QBs fault vs. the OL or Receivers or what? I mean the one play where Manu totally whiffed his block and Goff was sacked nearly instantly. Goff I'm sure got a negative EPA on that play when it clearly wasn't his fault. And "Create Rate" seems to judge how well a QB can make something happen if the called play failed. Obviously more mobile QBs are gonna be higher here on average, but this is just one aspect of judging a QB. What if your QB is really good at reading the defense and checks out of plays that he suspects will fail? Should not this be counted? He created an advantage before the play even started. I have no problem with using more stats to try to figure out a players value. The most we have the more we can try to cut through the "Was it him or was it the team?" question. I DO have a problem with looking at two stats, graphing them, then declaring that those QBs who are good in these two areas are MVP worthy.

Yeah, if you're gonna pick one to win and one to lose, pick the Philly game to win. Of course it doesn't work that way but we can dream right?

Well, the talking heads seem to agree with you and not me. This of course means that I'm right because talking heads are always wrong, but... USA Today ESPN NFL Bleacher Report Even Packers Fan Tom Grossi They all have the Lions at #1. So far the only site I've found that agrees with me is SI... and given that SI is nothing but AI and clickbait these days, that's probably not an ally I want on my side.

Oh it's not even that Schwartz wasn't at the point Campbell is... Schwartz didn't care about the fundamentals in that way at all. He at least gave off the impression that penalties, to a certain extent, didn't matter. He was okay with some offsides penalties, for example, if it meant his rushers were being super aggressive.

I don't think Schwartz is a "rah-rah" guy at all. He was supposed to be pretty football smart if I recall correctly. He is a bit hot headed imho, which doesn't strike me as Campbell's style really, but I think the comment was more about Schwartz with a talented roster may have done much better than with the roster he got... just like I think Campbell's success is in-part because of the roster he has. The truth of the matter is that football is perhaps the most team sport of any of the big popular sports. A great DL makes secondaries look better, and a fantastic secondary makes the DL look better. An wonderful OL makes even run of the mill RBs successful. A great decision maker and accurate passer elevates WRs and amazing WR make QB's jobs easier. And coaching is no different. A great coach gets more out of his/her team and players... an awesome roster makes coach easier. Which is why all the talk of "is player x just a product of system y" somewhat silly... and more so as soon as Goff player x has show he can excel in system y, z, and w.

Just out of curiosity, how were the opposing fans to you?

Should have googled first... Found this article: https://www.prideofdetroit.com/detroit-lions-analysis/144650/detroit-lions-bizarre-safety-kick-penatly-cincinnati-bengals The short version: For a onside kick the ball needs to go AT LEAST 10 yards, but under the new rules it also can't go (untouched) BEYOND the setup zone. There's a minimum distance AND a maximum distance. The kick went to the 46, which is just beyond the max distance. This makes sense as the kickoff rules "lock" most of the receiving team's players into a certain area so it wouldn't be as fair to allow the kicking team to just boot it as far as possible and try to out run the other team.

Did any one see or hear what the unsportsmanlike conduct penalty on the kicker after the safety was for? The announcers made it seem like it might have something to due with where the kick landed and that it was "outside the setup zone," but I don't think those rules apply on a free kick after a safety. It was very confusing to me and I didn't hear any real explanation for it yet.

And so it continues...

If you want to play that game: The Lions lost to a team that lost to the Browns! If beating a team that beat the Packers is a good sign, then losing to a team that lost to the Browns must be a bad sign, right? Opponents records: Eagles: 14-9-1 Lions: 9-14-1 This is imperfect of course, but if you look at that it certainly seems like the Eagles have faced stronger opposition. Add in that they are the previous seasons SB champs and that seems to me that it's fair to say the Eagles appear to be the better team right now. On the flip side: The Lions, on offense, have more passing yards, a higher completion %, higher yards per pass attempt, rushing yards, and yards per carry. However the Eagles and allowed fewer passing yards and ypa passing but the Lions have few rushing yards allowed and fewer yards per attempt... so the stats seem to favor the Lions. But then you and look back at the opposition faced and question if the Lions better stats are just because they've played lesser teams so can run the score up more? All in all it's hard to judge when they haven't gone head-to-head... even worse that they're no common opponent and that they have identical records. Right here, right now at this moment... yes, I'd say the Eagles are the team to beat.

Looking at the stats from the game on NFL.com and 13 Bengals are credited with at least one solo tackle. 34 total solo tackles are given out. Ja'Marr Chase accounts for 8.8% of the solo tackles.

I'll add in that we played some sloppy ball against some of those teams too. I think we were mostly solid against the Bears and Ravens, but definitely did not play our best ball against the Browns and Bengals. If we play solid against the Chiefs I think we can win because they aren't quite playing top notch either, but if we play sloppy the Chiefs will make us pay.