RedRamage

I think it would be really fascinating to see a list of first round picks and grade 'em on their career... just to get an idea what percentage end up being stars... what percentage end up being good... or being just okay... or being busts.

Goff has ONE season with a ESPN QBR over 60 on pro-football-reference prior to this season. He has ONE season with a better than 3:1 TD to INT ratio prior to this season. His net-yards per attempt peaked in 2018 and has steadily declined until this year. His yards per game peaking in 2018 and has also declined every since until this year. I'm not saying Goff is trash, but there has been a steady decline in his career. Was that because he was being used wrong? Was that because his team wasn't good around him? Was that because his coach didn't like him? Was it because he peaked early and the league figured him out? Maybe some of all of it... I dunno. But it's not unreasonable to be worried that after four years of steady decline that this is an outliner rather than a new trend. I fully understand that football is a complex game and many factors are involved other than just one player. I believe I've said repeatedly that I'm unsure... not that I'm out on Goff. I've also said that I want him to prove my doubts/concerns wrong. But I think the idea that we shouldn't have any doubt that this is the "real" Goff because he was good 4 years ago (and just ignore that he steadily declined in between then and now) is silly. Last year I think nearly everyone figured he was a bridge QB... just keep the seat warm for whomever we drafted. This year he's convincing a lot of people that he could very well be the QB of the future... I'm just not convinced totally yet.

Those are all valid points and I don't dispute them at all. I hope that Goff proves these splits aren't an accurate way to measure him over the next few weeks.

I don't know that I would say that Goff passed the test against the Giants. I mean I guess he didn't fail the test, but the Giants game was not a great game for him. He threw for the second fewest yards (165) of any game this year. He didn't have any TDs. Only 17 completions (again second fewest) on 26 attempts. Granted, he also didn't have any INTs which was good and the run game was mostly working so we won handily without Goff needing to throw 250+ yards. I dunno... I know I've posted a lot of negative Goff stuff lately. I'm not anti-Goff... I'm honestly very happy with him this season and I don't think we need to draft a replacement this coming draft. But as others have said: I think you look at upgrading every position and I don't think QB should be exempt from this. I'm not convinced (yet) that Goff can sustain this level of play. But we've got three potentially challenging road games to finish out this year. I certain hope that Goff makes me look silly for doubting him.

The Locked On Lions podcast had Eric Eager (formally of PFF) who said that Goff's numbers followed whether or not ARSB played or not.

I was browsing around on the Jets sub reddit and I saw a stat that gave me pause regarding Goff: He has some pretty horrendous home and away splits: Home: 277 yards/game, 2.5 TDs/game, 0.375 INTs/game Away: 227 yards/game, 0.4 TDs/game, 0.8 INTs/game Now, I know there are LOTS of factors that come into play here besides just home vs. away (For example: injuries to receiving, having to play from behind with a poor defense... both things that have improved since the beginning of the season and we played more road games earlier). But the differences seemed rather pronounced. I'm NOT saying a Goff isn't an answer moving forward, but I'm going to be real interested to see how he performs over the next stretch with 3 away games. If the splits continue with Goff dropped off significantly when away from Ford Field, that might change my feeling on how important drafting a QB is.

My prediction: winner of this game scores more points than the other.

I get the feeling that Duce would be on the short list for OC replacement if we lost Johnson. Not sure on defense.

Imho he was trying to swat the defender away as the defender tried to knock the ball loose. I don't think he was trying to "punch" the defender. The open hand seem to me to confirm that. I think it's also telling that the ref is right there and didn't throw a flag. I think that's because he saw the defender grabbing at the ball and just figured Sewell was reacting to that. That said, this is just my opinion and I agree that it could have very easily been seen differently by an official and flagged. We've all seen it a million times where the first guy does something and the second guy reacts and the second guy gets the flag.

Yeah, and that'll be a bummer in my humble opinion. I like my 1:00 Sunday afternoon games. I'm okay with 4:30 games... just hate the night stuff cause then I gotta stay up late and if they lose I go to bed angry and frustrated. If they win I go to bed jacked up (I said up, not off!) and excited.

Was it after his catch? What that what you were talking about? (see the twitter video here about half way down the page: https://www.si.com/nfl/lions/news/what-theyre-saying-lions-beat-vikings) If that's what you're talking about I think was Sewell just reacting and trying to get the Viking defender away from him who was trying to knock out the ball.

https://www.si.com/nfl/vikings/news/vikings-lions-recap-minnesota-abysmal-defense-wastes-great-kirk-cousins-game-34-23-loss I found this article interesting. It's obviously from a Vikings perspective, but the article talks repeatedly about how the Vikings defense was horrible and that the defense wasted a great game by Cousins and Jefferson. It goes on and on about the putrid defense. It doesn't make any mention at all about how the Lions offense is actually pretty darn good. Again it's a Vikings piece so I'm not surprised and I'm not even condemning them for this. Rather I'm pointing out that we has Lions fans have often done the same. We've often talked about how bad this or that aspect of the Lions are without necessarily giving credit the opposition. It's worth remembering when we lambast our team for their issues that sometimes you gotta give a little credit the team lining up on the other side of the ball.

Anyone else notice that there appeared to be a minor scuffle at the end of the game with a player or two? It was pretty brief but it looked like a Lions player was being pulled away/back from one of the Vikings by some coaches. I couldn't make out who it was though.

Yeah, I don't think we can automatically assume that Holmes was/is a guy who's pro-trading away picks. I mean, we also can't say he's anti-trading either. But I do seem to remember hearing one quote that the Rams were willing to trade away top picks because they felt comfortable that Holmes would find diamonds in the later rounds to losing those high picks wouldn't hurt as much.

FWIW, I would be nice to take a QB and NOT need that QB to be the starter that fall. It would be nice to take a QB either round 1 or round 2 and develop him for a year or so. Even if we take a QB with the Rams pick, I'd love to have that person next year because Goff is playing well enough that we're winning.

Yup. I've pretty much given up on him. He's got the physical skills, I just don't think he's got good decision making ability on the field.

Well, dang... not to shabby there Hongbit.

As someone who's never been personally high on Jiménez, I think the Tigers made a good deal too.

I miss the days and our RBs were Double-A and Double-Z...

Yeah, this as all the markings to me of a Lions team coming in and playing really tight because they are looking at this as a chance to prove they below and just not being comfortable or playing well. I hope I'm wrong. I hope that Campbell and Co. are hammering that this is a chance to go and steal one. They're playing a 10-2 team so no one is expecting a win despite what the media says. A 5-7 team shouldn't be expected to beat a 10-2 team. Just go out and play your best and if they steal one... that's fantastic. If they don't... come back with fire next year.

The key will probably be the Broncos/Rams game. If the Rams lose that they obviously move ahead of the Broncos. Assuming they lose all their rest (as Chicago will probably do), then there's a good chance the rams move up to #2. Looking at current standings all Chicago opponents (past and future) have a record of 118/87/2 (I'm assuming games played against division opponents count twice) while LARams opposition record is 103/104.

While Pro-Bowls aren't always a good measure of the skill of a player, I think they are important for a players HOF chances for two reasons: 1. It's an easy stat to point at and understand (ie, Lazy man research). More Pro-Bowls means better player, right? 2. It's a judgement of how the league sees a player. Players who get picked for the Pro-Bowl are viewed as the better player. The stats may not say that, but the feeling (whether correct or not... insert: unmeasurables comment here) is that that player is better. I would very much agree that Pro-Bowls aren't the best measurement of a player. But I do think Pro-Bowls contribute to the chance of a player making the HOF, meaning they should be included in the discussion of whether or not we think a player will make the HOF. (Note this is a different discussion than whether or not a player deserves to make it to the HOF.)

I watched a little clip of the MLB draft lottery and it looked pretty lame... and I think part of the reason for this is that it's all decided a head of time. There's no excitement. And part of the reason they don't do it live is that if you're doing the lottery and the #1 pick is decided first, it seems anti-climatic. So, why don't they do it in reverse? I'm not great with stats some someone might have to correct me here... but couldn't they do things in reverse is the changed out the number of balls for each team? A simplified example: Three teams: A, B, and C. A should have the best chance of getting the #1 so they get three balls in the bucket. B is next and gets two balls. C is last, they only get one ball. Mix up the balls, and draw out one of them. Because A has three, they have a 50% chance of getting the #1 over all. Here's my reversal: Team A gets just one ball, Team B gets two, and Team C gets three. Now we mix up the balls and draw out for the 3rd pick first. Because team C has the most balls they have the highest chance of getting the 3rd pick, A has the least chance of getting that pick. Would that work?

What's Matt Millen doing these days?