The 2nd in a series reviewing the Detroit Lions
I make no qualms about saying that I was not a fan of drafting Matthew Stafford as the 1st pick overall in the 2009 NFL draft. Now it is time to put that opinion aside and judge him for what I saw and what he did.
Stats = 201 of 377 (53.3%), 2,267 yards, 13 TD, 20 IT, 24 sacks. He also ran the ball 20 times for 108 yards and 2 touchdowns.
Throughout the season most of the fans who liked Stafford kept comparing his numbers to those of Peyton Manning in his rookie season. In taking a close look at this I will admit there are a lot of similarities. If Matthew Stafford's numbers were to be projected to playing a full 16 games as Manning did, they were almost identical in Yards, Completion % and Attempts per game.
Here are a few places where these two quarterbacks do not compare. Stafford would have thrown five less TDs and four more interceptions and he would have taken 16 more sacks. Stafford's QB rating also was a full 10 points lower. Now those stats may not seem like much but that is a TD/IT differential of nine! Another glaring thing Stafford supporters are not considering is this. Manning is only ONE player. There have been many star quarterbacks in the NFL. There have probably been a whole passel of rookie quarterbacks who had similar numbers to Manning's rookie season and never turned out to be anything. To find one star QB whose numbers are similar and say, "See? He is in line to become a great player" is ridiculous. Another simple fact is that it is almost useless to look at statistics alone to judge a rookie quarterback.
There are too many factors to look at in order to judge a quarterback. If a quarterback has a great running game, he will find more open receivers to throw to. What kind of protection does he get from his offensive line? What kind of plays does the coach call for him? How good are his receivers? Are receivers getting open? Is he hitting his open receivers consistently? Is he reading defenses well? How tough is he? How durable is he? So many things to look at. To look at the statistics of one other QB and say he is in line to be a great QB just doesn't cut it.
Here are some other stats he has in common with another QB. This QB was closer to Stafford than Manning was in Completion % and QB Rating, he took 29 less sacks in a 16 game projection and his TD/IT ratio was better than Stafford's by more than six! The rookie QB I am comparing him to? Joey Harrington! Before you scoff at this, also consider one other fact. Look at the team support Stafford has compared to Harrington had. Which receivers would you rather throw to? Calvin Johnson, Bryant Johnson and Dennis Northcutt, or Roy Williams, Mike Williams and Charles Rodgers? Who had the better running game to support them? Who had more time in the pocket to find open receivers? Who would you rather have calling plays? Scott Linehan or Steve Marriucci? At least in my opinion Stafford has a much better supporting cast than Harrington had by a large margin, yet his numbers were not a lot better than Joeys across the board. That shows how little one can compare numbers of two rookie quarterbacks.
Matthew Stafford has a big problem with accuracy. I know many fans of his will look at some of his big plays where he put the ball right on target and call him a very accurate QB. I cannot help but to look at the far more numerous times when he had a receiver running wide open across the field and not having any pressure in the pocket and still throwing over the receivers head or behind him. A couple of great throws in a game does not make one an accurate passer if he misses the wide open short routes twice as often.
Matthew Stafford's big TD pass to save the game against Cleveland won over a lot of fans. The fact that he dislocated his non-throwing shoulder and still came back out to throw a touchdown was great to see. I will give him kudos on the fact he is a tough quarterback. What worries me is that as tough as he is, he still missed games due to a dislocated knee as well as a dislocated shoulder. He ended the season on the IR and had surgery on his knee. He may be tough but his durability looks to have issues.
Another area of concern for Stafford is his struggles to put any touch on his passes. Many of his picks came from throwing the ball on a rope to his receivers when he needed to put a little air underneath them. If you are throwing a short route, you can throw a lot of zip on the pass. When throwing a deeper route, he needs to put more air under them so the linebackers cannot simply reach up and snatch the ball out of the air. Over and over again Stafford threw deeper routes on a rope where any defender between him and his target could grab the ball.
I would even question his decision making just a little. Too often he had Calvin Johnson in a one-on-one match up and was not willing to put the ball up for Megatron to make a play. Yet often enough he threw the ball to Bryant Johnson when he was in double coverage.
Aside from the bad, there were some flashes of brilliance from the rookie quarterback. There were some great deeper passes and there were times he did very well running through his reads before throwing the ball. There were some good times but in my opinion, just not enough of them to believe he is going to be a good quarterback much less a star.
In ten games as the Lions QB, Stafford had two or three where he played decent. The rest he looked pretty bad. I expect some growing pains but from the number one pick overall in the draft, I expect better. If he was not expected to play better, then he should not have been named starter to begin the season. Remember, Schwartz named him starter because he felt he was ready to play. If that was ready, then that was a failing grade.
GRADE = D ... Though I will say that would be a "D" with an expectation it will be much better next year.
Showing posts with label Quarterback 2009. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Quarterback 2009. Show all posts
10/9/09
Should Stafford Play with Injured Knee?
Jim Schwartz will only say that his rookie quarterback, Matthew Stafford is day to day. Stafford will not discuss any details on the injury other than that it is not the same injury he suffered in high school. Nobody is talking and the Lions fans are left to make assumptions. So here is mine....
It does not matter! It is that simple. It simply doesn't matter if his knee is days away or weeks away from being ready to play. It doesn't matter if it is the same injury from high school or not. It does not matter, because Stafford has not practiced and therefore should not play this week.
This has nothing to do with the fact I don't think he should have been starting from week-1. This has everything to do with common sense. He is a rookie and the future of the Detroit Lions. He needs repetitions. If a veteran quarterback misses a week of practice, it is still no easy thing to enter a game and look crisp. For a rookie, who is still learning the scheme and how to read defenses, it is far more difficult. If a rookie quarterback misses a week of practice, you just should not throw him back into the wolves. Especially when the wolves are the Pittsburgh Steelers.
The Lions should play Daunte Culpepper this week and I cannot believe I am saying this but if Stafford practices next week, then you put him back in. The last thing the Lions need is a quarterback controversy. Schwartz should come out and say that Culpepper will start, but it is only for the short term and when Stafford is ready he will resume the role as the Lions starting quarterback. The only possible way this should lead to a controversy is if Stafford misses more than two weeks and Culpepper wins both games against the Steelers and after the bye week against the Rams. In that case you have to question whether to bench a quarterback who is winning. Other than that very slim chance, the Lions quarterback is Stafford and everyone knows he will take the reins again when he is healthy.
The first two weeks of the season, Stafford was far from ready to be playing. In fact, I do believe that if Culpepper had been playing, the Lions would have won the game against Minnesota. I felt the Lions should have sat Stafford for the first season and if not the whole season, until at least after the bye-week. They started him right away and took an extra loss because of that decision. Now however, Stafford has had the extra repetitions and is starting to come along. The injury might set him back a little and now after the bye-week he will be right back to where he would have been if he waited in the first place. Maybe slightly ahead of schedule but that little difference was not worth taking the extra loss.
Extra loss or not though, the job should be Stafford's now so long as he is healthy. But only if he is healthy. If he misses a week of practice, he should not play. Once he is back in practices, then he is put back in. No controversy, just simple common sense.
It does not matter! It is that simple. It simply doesn't matter if his knee is days away or weeks away from being ready to play. It doesn't matter if it is the same injury from high school or not. It does not matter, because Stafford has not practiced and therefore should not play this week.
This has nothing to do with the fact I don't think he should have been starting from week-1. This has everything to do with common sense. He is a rookie and the future of the Detroit Lions. He needs repetitions. If a veteran quarterback misses a week of practice, it is still no easy thing to enter a game and look crisp. For a rookie, who is still learning the scheme and how to read defenses, it is far more difficult. If a rookie quarterback misses a week of practice, you just should not throw him back into the wolves. Especially when the wolves are the Pittsburgh Steelers.
The Lions should play Daunte Culpepper this week and I cannot believe I am saying this but if Stafford practices next week, then you put him back in. The last thing the Lions need is a quarterback controversy. Schwartz should come out and say that Culpepper will start, but it is only for the short term and when Stafford is ready he will resume the role as the Lions starting quarterback. The only possible way this should lead to a controversy is if Stafford misses more than two weeks and Culpepper wins both games against the Steelers and after the bye week against the Rams. In that case you have to question whether to bench a quarterback who is winning. Other than that very slim chance, the Lions quarterback is Stafford and everyone knows he will take the reins again when he is healthy.
The first two weeks of the season, Stafford was far from ready to be playing. In fact, I do believe that if Culpepper had been playing, the Lions would have won the game against Minnesota. I felt the Lions should have sat Stafford for the first season and if not the whole season, until at least after the bye-week. They started him right away and took an extra loss because of that decision. Now however, Stafford has had the extra repetitions and is starting to come along. The injury might set him back a little and now after the bye-week he will be right back to where he would have been if he waited in the first place. Maybe slightly ahead of schedule but that little difference was not worth taking the extra loss.
Extra loss or not though, the job should be Stafford's now so long as he is healthy. But only if he is healthy. If he misses a week of practice, he should not play. Once he is back in practices, then he is put back in. No controversy, just simple common sense.
9/7/09
Stafford Named Starter - Choice Wreaks of William Clay Ford
Look back at other quarterbacks who started in their rookie season. What do they all have in common? None of them had a decent veteran quarterback for the coach to have put in ahead of them.
Look back at the history of rookie quarterbacks who came out of college early. They usually fail.
What do Matt Ryan, Joe Flacco and other rookie quarterbacks who have succeeded have in common? They each had a good running game to keep defenses honest. They each have had good offensive lines to protect them.
Now let us look at Matthew Stafford's situation as the rookie quarterback for the Detroit Lions....
Although the Lions running game has looked good in the preseason, remember, it is just preseason. It has been years since the Lions have shown any real semblance of a running game to make defenses honest. Sure Kevin Smith looked good last year, but he did not put fear into any defense. They do not fear that he has the speed to break the long ones, so they set up to stop the pass more and blitz the quarterback. That is a huge mark against Stafford being successful.
Pass protection... Laughable. For the most part, this same offensive line has given up over 50 sacks for three seasons in a row. In the last game, they broke down completely twice in the first half alone, allowing Stafford to be sacked hard both times. If they do that four times a game, that will be a pace of 64 sacks aloud. Not only is this a huge mark against Stafford being successful, it could ruin him.
Veteran quarterback ahead of him.... Culpepper. In the preseason, Daunte Culpepper completed 22 of 34 passes (64.7%) for 194 yards. He threw 1 touchdown and had no interceptions and was sacked only once. Culpepper has a history of throwing for over 4000 yards when he had a top receiver to throw to and is in great shape this year.
Rookie, Matthew Stafford completed 30 of 55 passes (54.5%) for 389 yards. He threw one touchdown and had three interceptions and was sacked 3 times.
Culpepper's 89.6 QB rating is far better than Stafford's 52.8 rating. The veteran Daunte Culpepper has looked by far the better, more sure, most accurate and game manager of the two quarterbacks.
Back in April, most of the fans wanted either the offensive lineman, Jason Smith or linebacker Aaron Curry. Most all of those fans would have been happy with either of the two over Stafford. They understood that cliches have a lot of truth to them. "Defense wins championships" for one and the other... "The games are won in the trenches". Both cliches are very popular for a reason. They are true. The fans finally understood this and when the Lions ignored a plea from Curry that he would play for less money and instead selected Matthew Stafford again, another cliche came to life. "Ford loves the sexy pick to sell tickets."
All preseason long, the Lions have had a quarterback battle going. Schwartz has said it over and over. He will play the quarterback that gives him the best chance to win. He will play the better of the two. Anyone who watched the games and the stats, could see that Culpepper was the obvious better of the two. He out played Stafford and didn't make mistakes. Culpepper would obviously give the Lions a better chance to win. So can someone please explain why the rookie, Matthew Stafford was selected to start the 2009 season?
The answer is just as obvious. "For loves the sexy pick." Ford does not know a football from the bulging tip of his nose. Ford would not know what a winning NFL game plan was if he found himself wiping with one. What Ford does know however, is business, and that is all the Detroit Lions are to him. A business! He cares not for winning. At least not nearly as much as he does for filling seats, and Ford knows that the exciting quarterback will fill the seats early on. What he does not know is that when that rookie starts losing, those seats wont stay filled. But Ford also knows the fans (not all of them but most of them. Enough anyway) are stupid enough to fall for this long enough that next year he can make another sexy pick and fill the seats again. Just like he did when he selected the high profile offensive player over the great defensive player or offensive lineman for the last decade.
The choice of Stafford over Culpepper simply wreaks of the Ford decision. It is not about winning. It is about selling tickets. It is about filling seats now because the season is only 16 weeks long and the now will last that long. if the Detroit Lions main objective was to erase the putrid scent of the 0-16 season, they would want to win more games. That would call for the veteran to play. That is NOT what William Clay Ford cares about though. He wants to fill seats far more than he wants to win. So the high profile "sexy" choice of the rookie quarterback is chosen in stead.
When will Ford finally learn that a winning product would fill the seats and sell more merchandise than any one rookie ever would?
Look back at the history of rookie quarterbacks who came out of college early. They usually fail.
What do Matt Ryan, Joe Flacco and other rookie quarterbacks who have succeeded have in common? They each had a good running game to keep defenses honest. They each have had good offensive lines to protect them.
Now let us look at Matthew Stafford's situation as the rookie quarterback for the Detroit Lions....
Although the Lions running game has looked good in the preseason, remember, it is just preseason. It has been years since the Lions have shown any real semblance of a running game to make defenses honest. Sure Kevin Smith looked good last year, but he did not put fear into any defense. They do not fear that he has the speed to break the long ones, so they set up to stop the pass more and blitz the quarterback. That is a huge mark against Stafford being successful.
Pass protection... Laughable. For the most part, this same offensive line has given up over 50 sacks for three seasons in a row. In the last game, they broke down completely twice in the first half alone, allowing Stafford to be sacked hard both times. If they do that four times a game, that will be a pace of 64 sacks aloud. Not only is this a huge mark against Stafford being successful, it could ruin him.
Veteran quarterback ahead of him.... Culpepper. In the preseason, Daunte Culpepper completed 22 of 34 passes (64.7%) for 194 yards. He threw 1 touchdown and had no interceptions and was sacked only once. Culpepper has a history of throwing for over 4000 yards when he had a top receiver to throw to and is in great shape this year.
Rookie, Matthew Stafford completed 30 of 55 passes (54.5%) for 389 yards. He threw one touchdown and had three interceptions and was sacked 3 times.
Culpepper's 89.6 QB rating is far better than Stafford's 52.8 rating. The veteran Daunte Culpepper has looked by far the better, more sure, most accurate and game manager of the two quarterbacks.
Back in April, most of the fans wanted either the offensive lineman, Jason Smith or linebacker Aaron Curry. Most all of those fans would have been happy with either of the two over Stafford. They understood that cliches have a lot of truth to them. "Defense wins championships" for one and the other... "The games are won in the trenches". Both cliches are very popular for a reason. They are true. The fans finally understood this and when the Lions ignored a plea from Curry that he would play for less money and instead selected Matthew Stafford again, another cliche came to life. "Ford loves the sexy pick to sell tickets."
All preseason long, the Lions have had a quarterback battle going. Schwartz has said it over and over. He will play the quarterback that gives him the best chance to win. He will play the better of the two. Anyone who watched the games and the stats, could see that Culpepper was the obvious better of the two. He out played Stafford and didn't make mistakes. Culpepper would obviously give the Lions a better chance to win. So can someone please explain why the rookie, Matthew Stafford was selected to start the 2009 season?
The answer is just as obvious. "For loves the sexy pick." Ford does not know a football from the bulging tip of his nose. Ford would not know what a winning NFL game plan was if he found himself wiping with one. What Ford does know however, is business, and that is all the Detroit Lions are to him. A business! He cares not for winning. At least not nearly as much as he does for filling seats, and Ford knows that the exciting quarterback will fill the seats early on. What he does not know is that when that rookie starts losing, those seats wont stay filled. But Ford also knows the fans (not all of them but most of them. Enough anyway) are stupid enough to fall for this long enough that next year he can make another sexy pick and fill the seats again. Just like he did when he selected the high profile offensive player over the great defensive player or offensive lineman for the last decade.
The choice of Stafford over Culpepper simply wreaks of the Ford decision. It is not about winning. It is about selling tickets. It is about filling seats now because the season is only 16 weeks long and the now will last that long. if the Detroit Lions main objective was to erase the putrid scent of the 0-16 season, they would want to win more games. That would call for the veteran to play. That is NOT what William Clay Ford cares about though. He wants to fill seats far more than he wants to win. So the high profile "sexy" choice of the rookie quarterback is chosen in stead.
When will Ford finally learn that a winning product would fill the seats and sell more merchandise than any one rookie ever would?
8/30/09
Stafford vs Culpepper
The Detroit Lions have a real quarterback battle on their hands and every fan has an opinion on it. So do I and I am going to go into detail about it for one reason. I'm right!
Matthew Stafford - The rookie is the future of the Lions and has shown signs of brilliance during the preseason. He has the ability to throw down field and actually hit his receiver in stride. He has a toughness about him that is willing to stand in and take a hit to make a last second throw. His problem is that he is still a rookie and makes rookie mistakes. Stafford is also prone to bouts of inaccuracy, as we saw in his dismal week-2 in the preseason against the Cleveland Browns.
Daunte Culpepper - He is the veteran quarterback who seems capable of not making the mistakes to kill us. If nothing is open down field, Culpepper will check down to make a short completion. Culpepper has also shown he has the elusiveness that makes him very hard to sack.
So who should be the starter? I have read a lot of comments by Lions fans recently. Let us analyze their reasoning.
"The Lions will not win a lot this season anyway. So we should start Stafford and let him take his lumps and learn." --- Taking a few lumps will do good for any rookie quarterback, but that depends on how many lumps. If he takes a few hits, it will introduce him to the NFL is all, but if he is sacked at record paces like previous quarterbacks? That can ruin a rookie quarterback. The rookie QBs who have been successful in their first season have been set up to succeed. They have good offensive lines and good running games to keep defenses honest. Until the Lions prove they can do that in regular season games, I have to believe that Stafford would lose a lot of confidence after his 20th IT or his 50th sack.
"Culpepper does not complete passes down field." --- What I have seen of Culpepper is more a product of what is given to him. Often the Lions coaches call screens for him. Sometimes he will look down field and when he sees nothing there, he checks down and dumps it off for positive yardage. This is a major reason he is not throwing interceptions while Stafford has 3 in 3 games.
"After watching a second time, I took a closer look at Stafford's incompletions. Two were near miss TDs, two drops (Brown, Jennings), one hail Mary miss (int) and one misread with TE route. It did not have rookie mistakes written all over it. Stafford is ready, there is no reason he should sit." --- In the third game, Stafford did indeed look ready. Have we already forgotten how many he over threw in week two? This shows me he is inconsistent, just like most rookies.
My theory - Consider the Lions fans. They are split on Stafford and Culpepper. Which ever QB starts, if he loses a lot, throws interceptions and such, the fans will start booing and screaming for the other quarterback. Now look at the Lions schedule. The first six games will be tough. They could easily start 0-6. If you start Stafford, and he goes 0-6 while learning, throws interceptions and makes rookie mistakes, the fans will boo and scream for Culpepper. At least the fans who want Culpepper to start will. That can ruin a young quarterbacks psyche. Even one as confident as Stafford. What happens if you start Culpepper?
If Culpepper wins a few games, everyone will be happy and nobody will complain about Stafford sitting and learning for a season. If Culpepper starts off at 0-6, the fans will be screaming for Stafford by the bye-week. The Lions could now trot Stafford out their to the delight of the fans and start him against the Rams. A team the Lions might actually beat. You are now starting Stafford when he actually has a better chance to succeed and build his confidence rather than ruin it.
By starting Stafford, the Lions are putting him and themselves in a position where they have to succeed or they could ruin their future quarterback like they have so many times before. If they start Culpepper, they place themselves and Stafford in a win win situation.
Matthew Stafford - The rookie is the future of the Lions and has shown signs of brilliance during the preseason. He has the ability to throw down field and actually hit his receiver in stride. He has a toughness about him that is willing to stand in and take a hit to make a last second throw. His problem is that he is still a rookie and makes rookie mistakes. Stafford is also prone to bouts of inaccuracy, as we saw in his dismal week-2 in the preseason against the Cleveland Browns.
Daunte Culpepper - He is the veteran quarterback who seems capable of not making the mistakes to kill us. If nothing is open down field, Culpepper will check down to make a short completion. Culpepper has also shown he has the elusiveness that makes him very hard to sack.
So who should be the starter? I have read a lot of comments by Lions fans recently. Let us analyze their reasoning.
"The Lions will not win a lot this season anyway. So we should start Stafford and let him take his lumps and learn." --- Taking a few lumps will do good for any rookie quarterback, but that depends on how many lumps. If he takes a few hits, it will introduce him to the NFL is all, but if he is sacked at record paces like previous quarterbacks? That can ruin a rookie quarterback. The rookie QBs who have been successful in their first season have been set up to succeed. They have good offensive lines and good running games to keep defenses honest. Until the Lions prove they can do that in regular season games, I have to believe that Stafford would lose a lot of confidence after his 20th IT or his 50th sack.
"Culpepper does not complete passes down field." --- What I have seen of Culpepper is more a product of what is given to him. Often the Lions coaches call screens for him. Sometimes he will look down field and when he sees nothing there, he checks down and dumps it off for positive yardage. This is a major reason he is not throwing interceptions while Stafford has 3 in 3 games.
"After watching a second time, I took a closer look at Stafford's incompletions. Two were near miss TDs, two drops (Brown, Jennings), one hail Mary miss (int) and one misread with TE route. It did not have rookie mistakes written all over it. Stafford is ready, there is no reason he should sit." --- In the third game, Stafford did indeed look ready. Have we already forgotten how many he over threw in week two? This shows me he is inconsistent, just like most rookies.
My theory - Consider the Lions fans. They are split on Stafford and Culpepper. Which ever QB starts, if he loses a lot, throws interceptions and such, the fans will start booing and screaming for the other quarterback. Now look at the Lions schedule. The first six games will be tough. They could easily start 0-6. If you start Stafford, and he goes 0-6 while learning, throws interceptions and makes rookie mistakes, the fans will boo and scream for Culpepper. At least the fans who want Culpepper to start will. That can ruin a young quarterbacks psyche. Even one as confident as Stafford. What happens if you start Culpepper?
If Culpepper wins a few games, everyone will be happy and nobody will complain about Stafford sitting and learning for a season. If Culpepper starts off at 0-6, the fans will be screaming for Stafford by the bye-week. The Lions could now trot Stafford out their to the delight of the fans and start him against the Rams. A team the Lions might actually beat. You are now starting Stafford when he actually has a better chance to succeed and build his confidence rather than ruin it.
By starting Stafford, the Lions are putting him and themselves in a position where they have to succeed or they could ruin their future quarterback like they have so many times before. If they start Culpepper, they place themselves and Stafford in a win win situation.
8/25/09
Advice to Schwartz: Make Decision Soon!
The San Fransisco 49ers got it right. They named Shaun Hill the starting quarterback for the season opener over Alex Smith. I would not even presume to know if Shaun Hill is a better quarterback, but I do know the 49ers were right in one aspect. They named their starter early. Jim Schwartz and the Detroit Lions need to do the same.
There is an ongoing debate in Detroit about whether it should be the veteran Daunte Culpepper or the 72 million dollar rookie Matthew Stafford. There are plenty of arguments for both sides, but whatever Schwartz is going to decide, he needs to decide soon.
Both Stafford and Culpepper are new to the Lions. Stafford is a rookie and has never played for any NFL team much less the Lions and Culpepper was signed in 2008 and played very little. Two of the three starting receivers for the Lions are new this season. The Lions will likely be playing with a new Tight End as well. The offensive line is now running a power block scheme rather than a zone block. It takes time for all of this to gel together and the quarterback is at the center of that gelling.
The Lions can practice until their faces turn Honolulu Blue, but the practice can only take them so far. Game action is a whole new level. Schwartz has said he might play the starters for a half in the fourth preseason game as well. Very few teams in the NFL if any play their starters much in the fourth preseason game. The Lions however, need that extra work. To keep the quarterback competition going even another week would only harm them. Who ever is going to be the starting quarterback needs time to get used to his receivers and linemen in real game action. One quarter of action each in the last two weeks of the preseason just won't cut it.
Anyone who knows me, knows I think Culpepper should start. If Schwartz comes out and names Stafford the starter, I will be fine with that. Just so long as he names him now and not wait another week before doing it. The quarterback needs more reps with the first team before the season starts, especially if it is Stafford, a rookie.
There is an ongoing debate in Detroit about whether it should be the veteran Daunte Culpepper or the 72 million dollar rookie Matthew Stafford. There are plenty of arguments for both sides, but whatever Schwartz is going to decide, he needs to decide soon.
Both Stafford and Culpepper are new to the Lions. Stafford is a rookie and has never played for any NFL team much less the Lions and Culpepper was signed in 2008 and played very little. Two of the three starting receivers for the Lions are new this season. The Lions will likely be playing with a new Tight End as well. The offensive line is now running a power block scheme rather than a zone block. It takes time for all of this to gel together and the quarterback is at the center of that gelling.
The Lions can practice until their faces turn Honolulu Blue, but the practice can only take them so far. Game action is a whole new level. Schwartz has said he might play the starters for a half in the fourth preseason game as well. Very few teams in the NFL if any play their starters much in the fourth preseason game. The Lions however, need that extra work. To keep the quarterback competition going even another week would only harm them. Who ever is going to be the starting quarterback needs time to get used to his receivers and linemen in real game action. One quarter of action each in the last two weeks of the preseason just won't cut it.
Anyone who knows me, knows I think Culpepper should start. If Schwartz comes out and names Stafford the starter, I will be fine with that. Just so long as he names him now and not wait another week before doing it. The quarterback needs more reps with the first team before the season starts, especially if it is Stafford, a rookie.
8/21/09
Stafford to Start 2nd Preseason Game
Detroit Lions coach, Jim Schwartz has said rookie quarterback, Matthew Stafford will start the second preseason game. Stafford is expected to play into the second quarter then give way to Daunte Culpepper who started the first game.
For now, don't read too much into this news. This decision in no way predicts who will start the first game of the regular season. Schwartz has all along said that he would give his quarterbacks equal chance before making a decision on his starter for the season. With Culpepper starting the first game, it is only right to let Stafford start the second game.
However, it is of utmost importance that Sometime during the next week, Schwartz needs to make his final decision. The third preseason game is usually the dress rehearsal for the starters in the NFL and whoever will be the starting quarterback needs to get more reps in to prepare for the real season. To continue having the two share reps in practice would only hinder the inevitable starter.
A lot of fans are high on Stafford after the first game but it is not rightfully so. Though Stafford did nothing to hurt his chances, he still did not really out play Culpepper. Daunte being the veteran, he should have to be out played by Stafford to lose the starting nod to the rookie. After a record breaking NFL worst season in 2008, Daunte's lack of mistakes would better suit the Lions 2009 season.
If Stafford truly out plays Culpepper in the 2nd game, then he should get the nod, but if Daunte is not out played, he should not be benched. It is as easy as this. If two quarterbacks play evenly, then go with the one who will make less mistakes.
For now, don't read too much into this news. This decision in no way predicts who will start the first game of the regular season. Schwartz has all along said that he would give his quarterbacks equal chance before making a decision on his starter for the season. With Culpepper starting the first game, it is only right to let Stafford start the second game.
However, it is of utmost importance that Sometime during the next week, Schwartz needs to make his final decision. The third preseason game is usually the dress rehearsal for the starters in the NFL and whoever will be the starting quarterback needs to get more reps in to prepare for the real season. To continue having the two share reps in practice would only hinder the inevitable starter.
A lot of fans are high on Stafford after the first game but it is not rightfully so. Though Stafford did nothing to hurt his chances, he still did not really out play Culpepper. Daunte being the veteran, he should have to be out played by Stafford to lose the starting nod to the rookie. After a record breaking NFL worst season in 2008, Daunte's lack of mistakes would better suit the Lions 2009 season.
If Stafford truly out plays Culpepper in the 2nd game, then he should get the nod, but if Daunte is not out played, he should not be benched. It is as easy as this. If two quarterbacks play evenly, then go with the one who will make less mistakes.
6/17/09
How Long before Detroit Lions Fans turn on Stafford?
Matthew Stafford seems to be my big topic right now. That is because there is so much controversy surrounding him as the Detroit Lions new quarterback of the future. For the most part, I understand, that Detroit fans like Matthew Stafford... for now. But let us take a look at history.
Scott Mitchell - The year was 1994 when the Detroit Lions signed the left handed quarterback Scott Mitchell from Miami. For the most part the Lions fans loved the signing. In 1995 when Mitchell set the Lions single season record of 32 touchdown passes, the fans praised him. By 1998 Scott Mitchell lost his job to Charlie Batch and the fans hated Mitchell, complaining he was inaccurate and had no guts.
The fact that the fans never looked at was that the Lions offensive line grew worse with each year Mitchell was the quarterback. In 1997, Mitchell was sacked 41 times. I remember one game, in the play-offs when Scott Mitchell stood up from behind center and pointed at a linebacker who was set to blitz. He shouted to his line as he pointed at the defender. When the ball was snapped, the blitzing line backer came through untouched and drilled Mitchell. That to me, was the single most awful offensive line play I had ever seen.
Joey Harrington - When Harrington was drafted in 2002, the fans were excited. As a rookie, he started 12 games and showed flashes of ability and plenty of toughness as he jumped up after being sacked and patted the defender who had drilled him into the turf on the back of the helmet, congratulating the guy for a good hit. After the 2005 season, Joey opted not to return to the Lions and the fans were excited to see him go. Harrington left the Lions as arguably the most hated player in team history.
The truth was that yet again, Harrington was never given a chance to succeed in Detroit. Roy Williams was the best receiver he ever had to throw to. We all remember how bad Mike Williams was and how bad Charles Rogers was after his injuries. Along with the bad receivers, Joey had the usual horrible offensive line play in front of him and no running game to make defenses honest. The worst thing Joey had going for him though, was the coaching. Steve Marriucci was possibly the most conservative coach and the easiest going coach in Lions history. He never disciplined his players. Rarely did he call for plays deeper than 5 to 7 yards. Rarely did he call for plays where Joey would pass across the middle. If one looks back at Harrington's games, they will find that he had his best games when he used the middle of the field and wasn't hit constantly. Everyone hated Joey for the Chicago debacle where he threw five interceptions. Nobody remembers that he was often throwing the ball as he was being hit. That he never had any open receivers to throw to. Joey never had the luxury of just getting the ball to where the receiver could catch it. His receivers were always covered. He had to thread the needle almost every play. He left the Lions a shell of what he could have been.
Jon Kitna - When Kitna was signed in 2006, most of the fans liked him. When he threw for over 4000 yards, the fans loved him. Nobody cared that he threw 22 interceptions that year. When he threw for over 4000 yards in 2007, nobody cared that he threw another 20 picks. When Kitna was benched/injured after four games in 2008, the fans were glad to see him done.
Again the offensive line was horrible for Kitna. In 2006 he was sacked an amazing 63 times. He ate turf another 51 times in 2007. That is 114 sacks in two seasons. No quarterback is going to look good or get better when he is hit that often. Those hits took their toll on Kitna and in 2008 he was sacked 15 times in just four games.
Matthew Stafford - The fact is, if Tom Brady is sacked 50 to 60 times a season, he does not become a star. If Payton Manning was to be sacked 60 times a season, he would not be considered one of the best quarterbacks in the NFL. When a QB is sacked that often, no matter who it is, they begin to look for it even when it is not coming. Now we expect Matthew Stafford to be a star while playing behind the same line that has allowed 169 sacks in the last three years.
Right now the fans love Stafford. As much as I am adamant about how he should sit this season so they can get him better protection next year, the fact is they will likely play him this year. He will show signs of promise in his first year as Harrington did. He will be hit a lot. If the Lions front office do not get him better protection, then within the next three years the fans will be calling for his head as they did with Harrington. The only thing Stafford has going for him that Harrington did not is Calvin Johnson and possibly a better coach, but that is yet to be seen.
Scott Mitchell - The year was 1994 when the Detroit Lions signed the left handed quarterback Scott Mitchell from Miami. For the most part the Lions fans loved the signing. In 1995 when Mitchell set the Lions single season record of 32 touchdown passes, the fans praised him. By 1998 Scott Mitchell lost his job to Charlie Batch and the fans hated Mitchell, complaining he was inaccurate and had no guts.
The fact that the fans never looked at was that the Lions offensive line grew worse with each year Mitchell was the quarterback. In 1997, Mitchell was sacked 41 times. I remember one game, in the play-offs when Scott Mitchell stood up from behind center and pointed at a linebacker who was set to blitz. He shouted to his line as he pointed at the defender. When the ball was snapped, the blitzing line backer came through untouched and drilled Mitchell. That to me, was the single most awful offensive line play I had ever seen.
Joey Harrington - When Harrington was drafted in 2002, the fans were excited. As a rookie, he started 12 games and showed flashes of ability and plenty of toughness as he jumped up after being sacked and patted the defender who had drilled him into the turf on the back of the helmet, congratulating the guy for a good hit. After the 2005 season, Joey opted not to return to the Lions and the fans were excited to see him go. Harrington left the Lions as arguably the most hated player in team history.
The truth was that yet again, Harrington was never given a chance to succeed in Detroit. Roy Williams was the best receiver he ever had to throw to. We all remember how bad Mike Williams was and how bad Charles Rogers was after his injuries. Along with the bad receivers, Joey had the usual horrible offensive line play in front of him and no running game to make defenses honest. The worst thing Joey had going for him though, was the coaching. Steve Marriucci was possibly the most conservative coach and the easiest going coach in Lions history. He never disciplined his players. Rarely did he call for plays deeper than 5 to 7 yards. Rarely did he call for plays where Joey would pass across the middle. If one looks back at Harrington's games, they will find that he had his best games when he used the middle of the field and wasn't hit constantly. Everyone hated Joey for the Chicago debacle where he threw five interceptions. Nobody remembers that he was often throwing the ball as he was being hit. That he never had any open receivers to throw to. Joey never had the luxury of just getting the ball to where the receiver could catch it. His receivers were always covered. He had to thread the needle almost every play. He left the Lions a shell of what he could have been.
Jon Kitna - When Kitna was signed in 2006, most of the fans liked him. When he threw for over 4000 yards, the fans loved him. Nobody cared that he threw 22 interceptions that year. When he threw for over 4000 yards in 2007, nobody cared that he threw another 20 picks. When Kitna was benched/injured after four games in 2008, the fans were glad to see him done.
Again the offensive line was horrible for Kitna. In 2006 he was sacked an amazing 63 times. He ate turf another 51 times in 2007. That is 114 sacks in two seasons. No quarterback is going to look good or get better when he is hit that often. Those hits took their toll on Kitna and in 2008 he was sacked 15 times in just four games.
Matthew Stafford - The fact is, if Tom Brady is sacked 50 to 60 times a season, he does not become a star. If Payton Manning was to be sacked 60 times a season, he would not be considered one of the best quarterbacks in the NFL. When a QB is sacked that often, no matter who it is, they begin to look for it even when it is not coming. Now we expect Matthew Stafford to be a star while playing behind the same line that has allowed 169 sacks in the last three years.
Right now the fans love Stafford. As much as I am adamant about how he should sit this season so they can get him better protection next year, the fact is they will likely play him this year. He will show signs of promise in his first year as Harrington did. He will be hit a lot. If the Lions front office do not get him better protection, then within the next three years the fans will be calling for his head as they did with Harrington. The only thing Stafford has going for him that Harrington did not is Calvin Johnson and possibly a better coach, but that is yet to be seen.
6/16/09
The Detroit Lions Fans should use Common Sense.
I hear a lot of Detroit Lions fans saying the Lions will win three games at the most in 2009. I have heard others say they will make the play-offs. Among those are Lions running back, Kevin Smith. The truth likely lays somewhere in between.
Let's face one fact right now. The Lions front office did not draft for this year. They have repeatedly said this is a two part draft. They drafted with expectations of putting it all together after next seasons draft. That was why they drafted Quarterback - Matthew Stafford and not OT - Jason Smith. If the Lions were looking to win in 2009, they would have taken Jason Smith in hopes that Culpepper could lead them behind a stronger and improved offensive line. The drafting of Matthew Stafford while not improving the worst offensive line in the NFL, says they want to groom their young quarterback and have him ready for 2010.
The Detroit Lions offensive line has been in the worst three teams for allowing sacks for three straight years. It has been since Barry Sanders retired since the Lions had a running game and let's face it, that was because Barry was great, not because the line was any good. One of the most common cliches in the NFL is... "The game is won in the trenches". The reason that cliche is used so often is because it is true, and until the Lions build their offensive line up, they will not make the play-offs.
Yet it is important for fans not to be too pessimistic. Yes the Detroit Lions were the worst team in NFL history. Yes they still have a horrible offensive line. I understand that they have a choice of playing a rookie quarterback or a veteran who has fumbling issues and has not had a good season since 2005. But there are reasons to be optimistic as well. The Detroit Lions had several games in 2008 which they lost by one touchdown or less. Several times they had the lead only to see their defense lose it in the fourth quarter. As bad as the Lions might be expected to be, I have a hard time believing they are not vastly improved still.
Offensive lineman, Gosder Cherilus was beginning to look like a decent player in the second half of 2008. He will be more experienced and could still improve his game for 2009. The addition of Brandon Pettigrew should help the offense a little as well. Yet the biggest reason to be optimistic is the defense. Of the eleven starters in 2008, the Detroit Lions will go into 2009 with 6 of them replaced. The addition of Julian Peterson and Larry Foote should move the Lions linebacker crew from one of the worst to one of the best in the NFL. If the cornerbacks, both of whom were replaced, play better than last years players, the defense will be far improved. Enough to make a difference in those close games and maybe hold some leads.
There is every reason to believe the Lions will win more than three games in 2009. There is every reason to believe they will not make the play-offs. Very likely the truth lies somewhere in the range of 4 to 6 wins. Of course this is all depending on how much better or worse their opponents are from 2008 as well.
6/7/09
Detroit Lions Quarterbacks
Who will be the Detroit Lions starting quarterback? Will it be Matthew Stafford, the first overall pick in the 2009 NFL draft? Might it be the veteran Daunte Culpepper who is finally healthy after the major reconstructive knee surgery in 2005? Could it be Drew Stanton, the 2nd round pick in the 2007 draft? Okay, we all know it wont be Stanton, but which of the other two will start the season under center?
Matthew Stafford was the first overall pick and is being paid an ungodly amount. If he could handle it, I am sure the Lions would want it to be him. However, what one wants is not always the best thing. Do not confuse Stafford with the 2008 rookies Matt Ryan and Joe Flacco. Many fans seem to believe that since those two quarterbacks had big years as rookies, that Stafford can too. The difference is that both, Ryan and Flacco had good offensive lines to protect them and good running games for defenses to worry about. The Detroit Lions are not considered to have either of those to offer Stafford. Make no qualms about it, opposing defenses will not respect Detroit's running game. They will sell out, blitzing often to pressure a rookie quarterback into making mistakes.
Daunte Culpepper is the early favorite and has a resume of four seasons with 3400 plus yards passing. One of which he threw for 4717 yards and 39 TD's. Yet, one cannot get their hopes up too high with Culpepper as the Detroit Lions starting quarterback. He has not had a good season since 2005 when he went down with the knee injury and he has a reputation of fumbling the football for too often. In his career, he has fumbled the football 94 times, 38 which were covered by the other team. the rumors were always that for being such a big guy, Daunte Culpepper has very small hands.
My early opinion is, barring injury, to expect Daunte Culpepper as the starting quarterback when the season starts. The Lions have retooled their offensive line to a degree, but nobody believes they have really upgraded the line. The Lions will want to sit Stafford the first season if possible, add more strength to their line in the next off-season and draft then start their future star quarterback. I also expect that once Culpepper fumbles a few too many times, takes a few too many sacks and starts playing horrible, the fans will cry for Stafford. By mid-season, the Lions front office will give in and play Stafford. If I am right, then we can only pray that Stafford keeps his poise long enough to finish the season without becoming gun shy.
If the Detroit Lions offensive line is not any better than it was last year, and they play Stafford.... it will be the beginning of Joey Harrington all over again. A first round QB with only average accuracy who shows promise in his rookie season and ends up ruined by the Lions poor offensive line play.
Correction: I orignially had Joe Flacco's name as Joe Stacco. I have no idea where that came from and make no excuses. Sorry.
Matthew Stafford was the first overall pick and is being paid an ungodly amount. If he could handle it, I am sure the Lions would want it to be him. However, what one wants is not always the best thing. Do not confuse Stafford with the 2008 rookies Matt Ryan and Joe Flacco. Many fans seem to believe that since those two quarterbacks had big years as rookies, that Stafford can too. The difference is that both, Ryan and Flacco had good offensive lines to protect them and good running games for defenses to worry about. The Detroit Lions are not considered to have either of those to offer Stafford. Make no qualms about it, opposing defenses will not respect Detroit's running game. They will sell out, blitzing often to pressure a rookie quarterback into making mistakes.
Daunte Culpepper is the early favorite and has a resume of four seasons with 3400 plus yards passing. One of which he threw for 4717 yards and 39 TD's. Yet, one cannot get their hopes up too high with Culpepper as the Detroit Lions starting quarterback. He has not had a good season since 2005 when he went down with the knee injury and he has a reputation of fumbling the football for too often. In his career, he has fumbled the football 94 times, 38 which were covered by the other team. the rumors were always that for being such a big guy, Daunte Culpepper has very small hands.
My early opinion is, barring injury, to expect Daunte Culpepper as the starting quarterback when the season starts. The Lions have retooled their offensive line to a degree, but nobody believes they have really upgraded the line. The Lions will want to sit Stafford the first season if possible, add more strength to their line in the next off-season and draft then start their future star quarterback. I also expect that once Culpepper fumbles a few too many times, takes a few too many sacks and starts playing horrible, the fans will cry for Stafford. By mid-season, the Lions front office will give in and play Stafford. If I am right, then we can only pray that Stafford keeps his poise long enough to finish the season without becoming gun shy.
If the Detroit Lions offensive line is not any better than it was last year, and they play Stafford.... it will be the beginning of Joey Harrington all over again. A first round QB with only average accuracy who shows promise in his rookie season and ends up ruined by the Lions poor offensive line play.
Correction: I orignially had Joe Flacco's name as Joe Stacco. I have no idea where that came from and make no excuses. Sorry.
6/5/09
Matthew Stafford
I will come straight out and get it over with. In my opinion, Matthew Stafford was a horrible pick for the Detroit Lions. He very well may become a great Quarterback in the NFL, but for the Lions, in 2009, he was a horrible pick.
Many times I have heard Stafford supporters say that you need a great quarterback to be a Superbowl contender in the NFL. What they do not consider is the fact that every great quarterback has a decent offensive line in front of him. In 2008, if you were to take the Lions quarterbacks out and put Payton Manning in but keep everything else the same, how many games would they have won? Three? Maybe four tops? Does anyone actually believe Manning would be a star QB today if the Lions had drafted him? If you say yes, you are lying to yourself. The one thing every great QB has in common is that they are given the chance to succeed. That is something the Lions have not given to a quarterback in a long long time.
Go back and look at Manning and Tom Brady. They are two of the best quarterbacks in the NFL and arguably two of the best the NFL has ever had. Yet even they have had some pretty bad games in their careers. If you go back and watch those games, you will find a common denominator. They had a lot of pressure on them in those games. If the offensive line breaks down and the quarterback is forced to pass to soon, his timing with his receivers is thrown off. If you hit a QB enough times in a game, they begin to feel the pressure and will make mistakes. No quarterback in the history of the NFL is immune to that!
Everyone knows it is possible to win a Superbowl with an average QB. Everyone remembers the Baltimore Ravens doing it with Trent Dilfer. I don't know anyone who is willing to say Dilfer was a great quarterback. I also don't know anyone who can point out a team that has won the Superbowl with a bad offensive line. If the offensive line is bad, the receivers do not have enough time to run their routes. The QB does not have enough time to go through his reads and find the open receiver. The Running Back has no openings to gain good yardage.
Matthew Stafford may have the talent to be a great quarterback, but can he pass from on his back? If the blitz comes through as often as it did in 2008, who will Stafford throw the ball to if the receivers have not had time to get open? How many times will he be hit before he catches an acute case of 'Happy Feet'? The Detroit Lions have done little to improve their offensive line from 2008. The worst offensive line in the NFL and it is not much improved if at all. Yes they signed OT-Jansen recently. If this was five years ago, I would be excited. Today? Jansen has bad knees and is at the end of his career.
As a Detroit Lions fan, I hope Matthew Stafford works out and becomes a great quarterback for them. For that to happen, the Lions will need to sit him and let him learn until they can show they can protect him.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
