gehringer_2

I get that logic, but it shouldn't apply to the case of injury. A player at any position is sat down when they are too hurt to be effective. That shouldn't be a source of controversy or jeopardize his locker-room standing.

that assumes they really care if they win. Play a QB so banged up you only throw for 11 yds in a half in today's NFL and persuade me you really care if you win or lose the game as much as some other set of longer term agendas not in public view. FB coaches are some of the greatest pitchmen going. They'll swear away any kind of reality to get to where they are really going.

it a one in thousand shot - it doesn't matter if you throw it all the way the end zone - but the further the better.

true, they never even warmed him up despite Goff being treated on the sidelines through the course of the game. Makes no sense to me, but it's the Lions, you can't expect it to make sense. And why would they care if they did? If not today they obviously can't have any intention of ever using him?!

Maybe not the 'O' players but maybe the 'O' coaching staff.

and you couldn't put the other QB in just to throw the HM?

well, that was just about the silliest FB game I've ever watched.

Nice of the Lions to take the time outs for Pittsburgh to get downfield.

completing the pass to the marker. What a concept.

If there were justice in the Universe, the Steelers, and Lions and this officiating crew would all never be seen again.

U.N.R.E.A.L. But I don't get it the management here. If you are playing for OT because you don't want to throw at the end of the 4th and want the time in OT to run, why do you come out throwing in OT instead of going back to the 4 big body formation?

so far playing for OT looking like a great call......not.

this is one weird game

Football can be oddly entertaining when being badly played.

Steelers can't bury the punt. Another door open for the Lions.

Steelers can't bury the punt. Another door open for the Lions.

So it was Goff in the shot on the bench of the player with his torso wrapped? Wasn't sure

but they didn't and how likely was it they would? Heck the Lions didn't even come out with a full stop front, they were playing prevent against the 1st down.

yeah, that was a head scratcher.

you're assuming that better than Blough would have been "a lot of money". I don't know how true that is. Even Daniel really wasn't that costly at 3/13, but I find it hard to believe you couldn't have paid less and still not done better than Goff (or apparently Blough) could do today. But it goes back to the more basic question of how much they cared about how much the lost this year. I think the answer all along has been not much.

You're assuming they would have had to spend a lot to get someone better than Blough? I don't know how true that is. Even if Daniel was too expensive ( and really, 3/13 is not that much) there had to be guys out there that could do a lot more than Goff is able to do today. But it goes back to a much more basic question of whether they *really* cared how much they might lose this season. I don't think it was/is very much.

I wondered before the season started that the Lions were unwilling to invest anything in their #2 QB. You pays your money, you takes your choice.

dropping like flies on both sides now

Tracey Walker not back? Hope that wasn't too costly a TD save.

two good defensive plays, then the secondary loses a receiver again.