Yes, of course Detroit is more well-rounded and their D is likely the best they've ever had.
And I say to that, look at the season they had and the spot they are in and what is on the other side of the field.
Where are the wins of note?
Giants? In the worst spot of the year for them? A team that lost 7 in a row, including a gift-wrapped game to the atrocious jags.
The Jets. Need I say more?
Atl/New Orleans. And on and on and on.
They had exactly ONE impressive win...over Green Bay. And then when they played them for all the marbles Green Bay in Week 3 took their lunch money and left them in the gutter.
Make no mistake, they deserve to be here Melos. I just can't see them beating a Dallas team that is legit. They roll the bad teams and have had one of, if not the most impressive win of the year in Seattle.
So I don't have them winning. That makes the number the only thing of note. It's big. You don't give 7 out in the playoffs like candy. But these final few weeks to end the season, I see a Lions team that has lost its mojo enough for me to lay the TD.
And your Kings analogy is understood. But this Detroit team is on the road against the cream of the crop of Wild Card teams. They are on the road. It's Stafford who can turn the ball over at a moment's notice.
Dallas hasn't come this far and worked this hard to lose to a team that hasn't won a playoff game since George Bush was president.
And not Bush/Cheney. I'm talking Bush/Quayle! And many here have no idea who Quayle even is! It was that long ago.
Accept he practically called the Jets Fins game from opening kick to finish.
Go find a thread where a guy types:
Det +7 and doesn't even spell the entire word all without a mustard seed of analysis and go trust his pick instead. He's quite the capper!
Excuse me.
Now you've not only admitted I didn't say Lacy was Murray but now you further insinuate something I didn't say either.
In the biggest game of the year for the NFC North title, Detroit was run on. That was a big function of the Packers success. It says something to all the people lauding the Lions Run D like it's unstoppable who clearly want to forget this.
This game is bigger, is the third road game for Det in a row, with a running back who is clearly better. It's an observation. You draw your own conclusions (which will likely be erroneous once again).
Yup. I wrote two pages JUST about that.
Boy, they come in all shapes, sizes and levels of stupidity, don't they.
BB I have it straight up and teased it with multiple bowl games. Glad to see you are on the same side.
It's a tough number, but I'm not going to take it because the Lions won't win. Therefore, you are trying to middle a loss with 7. That is tough to do when you can't win. If the Lions had a shot to win this game, I wouldn't lay this kind of number.
Good point. I'll concede that.
2. Tony Romo has a MUCH better o-line than Matthew Stafford and his offense was at complete strength during the whole season when I remember right. He - probably - had the best running game of all teams taking pressure off him. Nevertheless, he posted an interception rate (interceptions/attempts) of 0.1% worse than Matthew Stafford. With the interception rate of 2.0%, Matthew Stafford is #6 in the league.
Ok, but come on now. If we microanalyze any player in that regard we can find flaws, possibly severe ones. It's a bit much to say that about Romo given the season he just had.
3. You mentioned that Stafford came down from his INTs but had fumbled the ball more often. Well that's most likely a product of having a mediocre o-line and how much pressure you get from the opposite d-line. When talking about fumbles, we have to focus on the whole offense, and look there: The Detroit Lions have an offensive fumble percentage of 1.9%, just 0.1% better than the Cowboys. Want a comparison between both QBs ? Tony Romo fumbled the football six times this season, compared to Stafford's eight, while playing one game less and having 167 pass attempts less to face pressure by the d-line.
Ok, conceded again. But that O-Line as a whole, being so poor will plague Stafford at the worst possible time.
As always Jules
ANYONE can start a thread with 9 halftime bets and go 5-4 or 4-5 or 6-3 or 3-6 etc. without a hint of analysis.
I'd rather LOSE going down with analysis and a pick I researched than pick this half, that half, win lose win lose Central Michigan hail Mary lateral covers yadda yadda yadda.
You're here today and you'll be gone soon enough.
I'll still be here.
And Dallas will show up. They have fought too hard to get here. They have a history, unlike Detroit. It's games like this you can trust them. Now it's just about the number.
Warped, I've been 'hitting games' for years. I don't care to start threads with 50 picks in them so my one pick is magnified like I have my entire bankroll on it. I don't of course. It is one pick. It is win or lose and I don't chase.
You'll be gone like a fart in the wind tomorrow. Seeya.
Scal. Good writeup. You may have persuaded me from the Suh camp. As a longtime Vikes fan, I must agree the Lions are reliable, steady losers.
Exactly. If you've watched the Vikings al these years, you know what this Detroit team is, especially in a meaningful spot.
Established in 1995,
Hot Forum Topics
