PDA

View Full Version : I know its early, but things are looking good...


TacticaLion
09-17-2007, 11:32 PM
Kitna predicted 10 wins... and everyone thought he was crazy. We're 2-0 right now, which means we have to finish 8-6 to hit that mark (yes, I'm good at math). The breakdown:

(Note: Games in red = harder, games in orange = toss-ups and games in green = easier.)

Philadelphia - 3 injuries to their starting secondary (Lito, Dawkins and Considine) bodes well for our offense. If the defense can make a FEW plays, we could take this game.

Chicago - I think we'll win one against Chicago, but I don't think it'll be this one.

Washington - Their passing game isn't that impressive, and, if we can contain Portis/Betts nearly as much as we contained AD, we should do well on defense. Their secondary looked great against Phi, so this should be a close one. Considering the OLine injuries they've had, and the level of our DLine, I think we can pull this one off.

Tampa Bay - Interesting game. Their defense doesn't scare me and their offense played well... against a poor Saints D. I really think we could take this, but it'll be close.

Chicago - We lost the first, and I think we'll win one, so here it is. I do think we've narrowed the gap between us and the Bears, and this win should show that.

Denver - The running game will hurt and, when we get close to containing it, they'll throw with success against our secondary. Their defense is great and has one of the few secondaries that should give us problems. Not good.

Arizona - A young offense and an average defense. I think this one is ours.

New York Giants - It all depends on the injury status for the NYG. If Jacobs is still hurt and Manning hasn't recovered, we could have this one. If they are, we could be in trouble. I think they'll be ready by this game.

Green Bay - You win some, you lose some. Green Bay matches up well against us, and Favre will continue his outstanding (last?) season.

Minnesota - I wasn't impressed with what I saw in game 1. AD was contained and Jackson was scarred. We got quite a bit of pressure and should've been farther ahead with Kitna in the game.

Dallas - Too much O for our D. One of those teams that'll exploit our defensive weaknesses and stop us on a few of our drives. The pressure Dallas can create will be hell for our passing game.

San Diego - Eww. LT? If he hasn't broken out up to this point, this game is his chance. Too many weapons to handle on defense and our offense will receive too much pressure from Merriman and Co. Painful.

Kansas City - I just don't see it. A young QB behind an aging/questionable OLine against our defense... I give us the advantage. Their defense doesn't scare me either... which leads me to believe that this'll be a blowout.

Green Bay -Marinelli has been preaching performance through adversity since he got to Detroit, and this game will showcase that mentality. A scrappy, do-or-die Detroit team should make enough defensive plays to pull this off.

We could always upset a hard team and lose against an easy team, but starting 2-0 (and facing a weakened Eagles team in week 3) puts us in the right direction. If most of the team can stay healthy, 10 wins is definitely achievable.

Just my thoughts. Anything can (and probably will) happen.

P-L
09-17-2007, 11:44 PM
If we are going to get to 10 wins (I'm still VERY skeptical that it's possible) I think we need to win next Sunday. If we lose Sunday with two games left against Chicago, two against Green Bay, San Diego, Dallas, and Denver then I think we have no shot. If our guys have the confidence from being 3-0, then I could see us pulling an upset or two.

bearsfan_51
09-18-2007, 12:23 AM
I doubt you split with Chicago and Green Bay, or win all the games you are "supposed" to. Chalking up wins against teams like the Redskins and the Bucs seems a bit presumptuos to me considering you've beaten nobody of worth yet. You couldn't even put Minnesota away untill overtime, playing them in the dome will be much harder. The Lions still reek much more of a 7 win team, but hell, 7 wins would be quite an improvement.

Xiomera
09-18-2007, 07:08 AM
I am saying we win 8.

Notredameleo
09-18-2007, 08:22 AM
7-9.....thats all

Iamcanadian
09-18-2007, 09:05 AM
Football is definitely a game of momentum and emotion. If we beat Philly, we could even make the playoffs in this pitiful division. However, right now the reality is we beat 2 of the worst teams in the NFL. Minny's game plan against us was from mars because trying to beat us with Jackson passing was absurd.
I saw 2 pretty poor teams last Sunday who both turned the ball over on a regular basis. Even before Kitna got hurt, he turned the ball over twice if I remember correctly. It was a very ugly game which we were extremely lucky to win. Philly will be hungry as their whole season will depend on our game. This isn't Oakland or Minny, and it could be tough on us. A blowout isn't out of the question. Counter balancing that is the fact that Philly played on Monday night and could be shot emotionally so it is not out of the realm of possibility that they can be beaten.
It is a good test against a far better team than we have played so far!

TacticaLion
09-18-2007, 12:19 PM
I doubt you split with Chicago and Green Bay, or win all the games you are "supposed" to. Chalking up wins against teams like the Redskins and the Bucs seems a bit presumptuos to me considering you've beaten nobody of worth yet. You couldn't even put Minnesota away untill overtime, playing them in the dome will be much harder. The Lions still reek much more of a 7 win team, but hell, 7 wins would be quite an improvement.
I think we have a better shot against GB than Chicago, to be honest. Chicago's offense doesn't scare me... at all... and they don't have the secondary that GB has. I certainly don't think it's out of the question to split those series.

Note: Kitna missed half of the Minn game. Before that point, he moved the ball with ease. We need a QB that has a great understanding of Martz's offense to have offensive success, and JTOS just isn't there. Without Kitna, we're looking at a 2-3 win season.

Dallas, San Diego and Denver are on a much different level than Tampa Bay, Washington and Kansas City. I never said we'd positively win those games, but those games are much easier than others on our schedule. And, as I said, we could beat a hard team and lose against an easy team. It happens every year.

P-L
09-18-2007, 09:55 PM
To be fair, despite the numbers, JT O'Sullivan was awful in that game. We were in control almost the entire game, but three turnovers by O'Sullivan let the Vikings into the game. There is no doubt in my mind we would've won by a couple of scores had Kitna played the entire game. One of the fumbles he had, led directly to a Minnesota TD. I think any unbiased Vikings fan would admit that the Lions outplayed them almost the entire game.

TacticaLion
09-18-2007, 10:07 PM
To be fair, despite the numbers, JT O'Sullivan was awful in that game. We were in control almost the entire game, but three turnovers by O'Sullivan let the Vikings into the game. There is no doubt in my mind we would've won by a couple of scores had Kitna played the entire game. One of the fumbles he had, led directly to a Minnesota TD. I think any unbiased Vikings fan would admit that the Lions outplayed them almost the entire game.
Word for word.

We were in control until JTOS came in and tried to play for the Vikings. He tried hard, and the fumble wasn't just his fault, but he doesn't have a feel for the offense and shouldn't be an option. Orlovsky has more time in the system... shouldn't he be a better option?

Kitna came back in, though, and won the game. Such an incredible player.

Addict
09-19-2007, 03:43 AM
Word for word.

We were in control until JTOS came in and tried to play for the Vikings. He tried hard, and the fumble wasn't just his fault, but he doesn't have a feel for the offense and shouldn't be an option. Orlovsky has more time in the system... shouldn't he be a better option?

Kitna came back in, though, and won the game. Such an incredible player.

Let's not forget kitna still needs to be replaced (and I'm not sold on Stanton)

TacticaLion
09-19-2007, 11:37 AM
Let's not forget kitna still needs to be replaced (and I'm not sold on Stanton)

Yes, he does... but, if Martz stays in Detroit, I'll believe in Stanton until he shows me otherwise.

WMD
09-19-2007, 05:14 PM
Bah.. Stanton showed me otherwise in College..

awfullyquiet
09-19-2007, 05:27 PM
6-10.
But hey. ten losses isn't horrible.
you're only 2 under .500. Maybe next year you'll score 500 points next season.

TacticaLion
09-19-2007, 05:31 PM
6-10.
But hey. ten losses isn't horrible.
you're only 2 under .500. Maybe next year you'll score 500 points next season.

You talk a lot... with our remaining schedule, you think we'll actually only win 4 more games?

We'll see. Watch out for that foot.

Bootland27
09-19-2007, 07:48 PM
So far so good.....but I'm just letting this thing play out, week by week. I'm not going to get ahead of myself. Like Marinelli said, when he was asked how it feels to be 2-0? "We're 2-0."

TacticaLion
09-19-2007, 09:06 PM
Bah.. Stanton showed me otherwise in College..

He hardly had a supporting cast. Let him prove himself at this level with a solid group around him.

P-L
09-19-2007, 09:10 PM
My goal for this year is 7-9, which I don't think is too much to ask. I want single digit losses for once. If we do better, then great. However, I'll be very disappointed with less than 7 wins.

TacticaLion
09-19-2007, 09:15 PM
My goal for this year is 7-9, which I don't think is too much to ask. I want single digit losses for once. If we do better, then great. However, I'll be very disappointed with less than 7 wins.
Agree. Another 6-10 season will be a disappointment... but I think we'll land at least 7. The "losing" culture here has changed... and it's noticeable.

awfullyquiet
09-20-2007, 05:50 AM
You talk a lot... with our remaining schedule, you think we'll actually only win 4 more games?

We'll see. Watch out for that foot.

I will.

but lets start here.
I doubt you will take two from chicago. nor do i see you taking the cards.

first, you're assessment that they're 'young' only comes from the fact that matt leinert is a second year quarterback, yet in the same token. jay cutler is too and he'll be throwing to worse recievers, earlier in the season? Q and Fitz are better than any two recievers the broncos have had in years. edge is better than henry. yes, denver has the more competent defense as a whole, but, arizona has all the parts from top to bottom, with berry and dockett, dansby is confident, wilson, and two decent corners... i don't think one is easy and not the other. if anything arizona will be harder. assuming they quit that underachieving of theirs.

i'm sure i could go on green bay for hours, but really, i don't think you give green bay any slack. if you take one and one from them. which is possible.

washington looks tough.
i would expect casualites in that game. and what if kitna goes down again (50 more sacks this year might do it to him)? JTOS won't cure your ails i suppose... I will expect them to blitz, and blitz, and blitz, and every team will blitz five + at you. if anyone the bears will show how its done (really. bob babich has the balls to do it too...) and from then on... everyone will be putting 5 man rushes to disrupt any time. and the hits. oh man. the hits.

sure. it's a what if.
but if the bears do it in week 4 (which i believe they will) and it works to success (which i also believe it will with 54 in coverage and briggs, hillenmeyer and vasher all blitzing in weird times). the lions will get rocked and be subject to kansas city too as a tougher game with a more agressive defense that shows it can create pressure.

if that happens. green bay will clamp down further and faster.

now, oaklands pass rush okay. burgess is pretty good and they have a solid back seven (yes, back seven). minnesotas honestly, actually they're pass rush is totally inadequate to play in an afl game.

give a team team that can pass rush. denver, chicago, gb, sd, dallas, a healthy NYG, KC. martz will kinda look like sitting ducks. like last year.

TacticaLion
09-20-2007, 10:33 AM
give a team team that can pass rush. denver, chicago, gb, sd, dallas, a healthy NYG, KC. martz will kinda look like sitting ducks. like last year.Are you kidding me? A pass rush is the least of my worries. Please, send a few blitzes against a 4 WR set... see how far it gets you. Leave someone open... be my guest. Ask a S to cover Furrey or McDonald (and leave CJ81 or Ol' Roy with single coverage)... humor me. It'll make our job easier.

The only thing that will challenge the offense is a great secondary with a thick pass rush from only the DLine. The moment you take someone away from the defense, Kitna will move the ball at will (until he reaches the red zone).

If the key pieces of our offense stay healthy (Kitna, the OLine, the WRs), the offense will be successful. If Kitna goes down, or the line falls apart, we'll be picking top 5 again.

awfullyquiet
09-20-2007, 02:42 PM
Are you kidding me? A pass rush is the least of my worries. Please, send a few blitzes against a 4 WR set... see how far it gets you. Leave someone open... be my guest. Ask a S to cover Furrey or McDonald (and leave CJ81 or Ol' Roy with single coverage)... humor me. It'll make our job easier.

The only thing that will challenge the offense is a great secondary with a thick pass rush from only the DLine. The moment you take someone away from the defense, Kitna will move the ball at will (until he reaches the red zone).

If the key pieces of our offense stay healthy (Kitna, the OLine, the WRs), the offense will be successful. If Kitna goes down, or the line falls apart, we'll be picking top 5 again.

The line hasn't shown that it won't fall apart. six sacks in two games, two FF's, and Udeze hasn't been a good pass rusher in the past year, and he got one still.

The key to blitzing tactica is timing. Defenses will blitz when the offense is looking for coverage, and go into coverage when it's looing for blitzes. Yes, I know there'll be plenty of 3/4 wide sets. If anything, blitzing will be more effective then than in a 2 wr set as to dislodge timing, it puts more pressure on the o-line which has shown it can be broken up the middle and on the edges.
The thing i don't think you get is that green bay and the bears linebackers (with the exception of poppinga-sort of) excel in coverage too. and i'm certain urlacher could run with any three of the lions wrs. and not lose in a size advantage either to Johnson. AJ Hawk may also be able to run too. He's gotten better since last year. More disciplined.

I don't get your ideal that if you take someone away from the coverage to rush that that spot will be empty or that kitna will have time to find where the open spot is, or the recievers are having issues getting off the LOS. or some aspect of timing is beaten. Hairston and Babich both will take that risk knowing that they have decent corners and cover linebackers and do it. The way you have it, that's just not the way it works. Sure the blitz gets beaten, as does the coverage, the trick is to mix them, and beat the o-line... and if anyone does better at confusing blitz and coverage from the box, it would be the bears. with nine guys at the line who all drop into coverage. tell me, tell me, dear tactica. why would you, as this genius oline coordinator not be scared of someone actually rushing 7 guys who are between 6-2 and 6-6 one play per drive when it is a 4 wide set when you're expecting zone coverage? Leaving the other 4 manned up? It takes balls on both side of the fence to play that. But, i think with the aggressive nature of the bears defense, they will show the way, and give others what is necessary to take.

TacticaLion
09-20-2007, 05:04 PM
The line hasn't shown that it won't fall apart. six sacks in two games, two FF's, and Udeze hasn't been a good pass rusher in the past year, and he got one still.

The key to blitzing tactica is timing. Defenses will blitz when the offense is looking for coverage, and go into coverage when it's looing for blitzes. Yes, I know there'll be plenty of 3/4 wide sets. If anything, blitzing will be more effective then than in a 2 wr set as to dislodge timing, it puts more pressure on the o-line which has shown it can be broken up the middle and on the edges.
The thing i don't think you get is that green bay and the bears linebackers (with the exception of poppinga-sort of) excel in coverage too. and i'm certain urlacher could run with any three of the lions wrs. and not lose in a size advantage either to Johnson. AJ Hawk may also be able to run too. He's gotten better since last year. More disciplined.

I don't get your ideal that if you take someone away from the coverage to rush that that spot will be empty or that kitna will have time to find where the open spot is, or the recievers are having issues getting off the LOS. or some aspect of timing is beaten. Hairston and Babich both will take that risk knowing that they have decent corners and cover linebackers and do it. The way you have it, that's just not the way it works. Sure the blitz gets beaten, as does the coverage, the trick is to mix them, and beat the o-line... and if anyone does better at confusing blitz and coverage from the box, it would be the bears. with nine guys at the line who all drop into coverage. tell me, tell me, dear tactica. why would you, as this genius oline coordinator not be scared of someone actually rushing 7 guys who are between 6-2 and 6-6 one play per drive when it is a 4 wide set when you're expecting zone coverage? Leaving the other 4 manned up? It takes balls on both side of the fence to play that. But, i think with the aggressive nature of the bears defense, they will show the way, and give others what is necessary to take.Yea... that whole "6 sacks in 2 games" comment is a bit irrelevant, considering Kitna has only been sacked three of those times (and played all of game 1). JTOS has no clue how to run the offense, which is why he was sacked the other tree times with many fewer snaps. Martz's offense requires more time for the QB, and other teams know we're looking to pass, so that isn't a bad sack number at all. Kitna has had a fair amount of time in the pocket and has learned to get the ball out quickly.

and i'm certain urlacher could run with any three of the lions wrs.I was going to continue to respond to your post, but this sentience is ridiculous. Urlacher is a great MLB and can play well in coverage, but he cannot run with Ol' Roy or CJ81 (and would struggle with SMD). Let me guess... Urlacher has better hands than Marvin Harrison and could've made BOTH of the FGs for the Raiders, right? Sure...

awfullyquiet
09-21-2007, 03:06 AM
Yea... that whole "6 sacks in 2 games" comment is a bit irrelevant, considering Kitna has only been sacked three of those times (and played all of game 1). JTOS has no clue how to run the offense, which is why he was sacked the other tree times with many fewer snaps. Martz's offense requires more time for the QB, and other teams know we're looking to pass, so that isn't a bad sack number at all. Kitna has had a fair amount of time in the pocket and has learned to get the ball out quickly.

I was going to continue to respond to your post, but this sentience is ridiculous. Urlacher is a great MLB and can play well in coverage, but he cannot run with Ol' Roy or CJ81 (and would struggle with SMD). Let me guess... Urlacher has better hands than Marvin Harrison and could've made BOTH of the FGs for the Raiders, right? Sure...

To be fair, the O-Line allowed five. JTOS really should take the blame for one of them. Fine. I'll agree to that. Kitna has a good release for the offense, also true. He's a great fit, like how garcia was in philly (and that's a complement, really, if you can't see that you're a lost cause). Your o-line isn't that good. Period. Not in run blocking, not in pass protection. I can assure you, if you replaced the lions o-line with the vikings o-line, i would see an actual playoff contender. They pass protect the same, but are better run blockers. That would be scary. But right now. Giving up as many sacks as they do does not help their case. You cannot have a great passing attack with 3-5 sacks a game (which is totally reasonable, considering Kitna had what? 58 last year? 0 sacks is a good sack number. If you pass, you want 0 sacks, any sack can kill a drive at any time, you lose half of your playbook when you're at second and 18 or third and 15. Fair amount of time doesn't allow you to exploit roy, furreys, and cj's potential of being deep threats. Fair amount means five step two reads. Fair amount means kitna gets sacked once ever eight dropbacks. If they're 70-30 pass-run, every ten plays, kitna will be sacked. and to reiterate. taking 3-5 sacks a game is not good. and not to mention the hurries. and the knockdowns. and the defenders with their paws and their big bodies running in. Kitna does fine. If he got sacked once ever twenty drop backs, i'm sure he'd throw for 5k yards this year.

now, as far as urlacher being able to run with wrs... i don't think you quite grasp how much of a freak urlacher is. no. he doesn't have the hands of holt. (he did catch 6 TDs in college. out of nine receptions. as a slot reciever/TE as an aside, saying he does have some hands, hence, the interceptions (unlike donnie edwards)...) He's faster than most safeties in the league (bob sanders, top five defensive player ever included (yes. that's sarcasm, sort of)). Has always been faster than most safeties. In reality, he plays safety seeing as he plays the deep third about what? 35% of the time? Yes. He's also covering wide-outs in the nickel. When he was at the combine in 2000, everyone was saying he was, yes, a safety. He played it at new mexico for two years, and continues to at some extent for the bears currently. He is fast. He is really really fast. A tweener to some extent due to his coverage ability.

I don't think you watch football games.

TacticaLion
09-21-2007, 09:46 PM
To be fair, the O-Line allowed five. JTOS really should take the blame for one of them. Fine. I'll agree to that. Kitna has a good release for the offense, also true. He's a great fit, like how garcia was in philly (and that's a complement, really, if you can't see that you're a lost cause). Your o-line isn't that good. Period. Not in run blocking, not in pass protection. I can assure you, if you replaced the lions o-line with the vikings o-line, i would see an actual playoff contender. They pass protect the same, but are better run blockers. That would be scary. But right now.
Part in bold: huh? I don't think any of this Vikings OLine/Lions OLine paragraph makes sense. Recap:

Your o-line isn't that good. Period. Not in run blocking, not in pass protection.A common thought.

I can assure you, if you replaced the lions o-line with the vikings o-line, i would see an actual playoff contender.Ok... a reasonable perspective.

They pass protect the same, but are better run blockers. That would be scary.What?! The Vikes' OLine pass blocks the same as ours... yet our pass protection is horrible... but, if you replaced our OLine with theirs, we'd be an actual playoff contender? This just in: Martz doesn't necessarily want to run the ball... so our "lack of run blocking" isn't a huge hit against our offense. Passing the ball all over the field will force the defense to adjust... which will open up the running lanes.

So... let me get this straight. Our pass blocking isn't that good. Check. The Vikes' OLine would make us playoff contenders. Check. They pass block the same as us. Question mark.

See the problem with that?

Urlacher.I wont get into an argument with a Bears fan about Urlacher... because it's pointless. I will say this, though: I could care less about Urlacher's ability to outrun "most safeties in the NFL"... because not all safeties are fast players. Answer this one: can he outrun most CBs? That's what our WRs tend to do... outrun CBs. So, if you can tell me that Urlacher is faster than most CBs in the NFL, your argument would make sense... but would also be wrong.

He's a dominant player. I know this. I agree with it. I hate him because of it. But, he isn't faster than most CBs in the NFL and can't run step-by-step with Ol' Roy or CJ81 (and probably even SMD). It's just the way it is.

familyguy555
09-23-2007, 01:17 PM
Back to the drawing board......

Because of one lose. Yeah ok...

neko4
09-23-2007, 01:22 PM
Because of one lose. Yeah ok...
and two wins against Oakland and Minnesota who combined for 8 wins last year

Iamcanadian
09-23-2007, 08:00 PM
You talk a lot... with our remaining schedule, you think we'll actually only win 4 more games?

We'll see. Watch out for that foot.

Please, Tactical Lion, get real. I think it is quite reasonable that we will only win 4 more games.

You have to remember that this is Matt Millen's team. He brought the talent aboard and both in FA and during the draft, he sold Marinelli down the drain and provided Martz with plenty of help.
The man simply hasn't a clue about how to build a football team and as long as he is making the decisions, we are going nowhere. I cannot believe the idiot experts on TV who thought Detroit was an improved team and could compete with ouir defense.
AS LONG AS MATT MILLEN RUNS THIS ORGANIZATION, WE WILL NEVER BE A PLAYOFF TEAM AND WILL CONTINUE TO SET RECORDS FOR LOSES OVER THE TENURE OF HIS STAY IN DETROIT.

Iamcanadian
09-23-2007, 08:07 PM
Agree. Another 6-10 season will be a disappointment... but I think we'll land at least 7. The "losing" culture here has changed... and it's noticeable.

A few more games like today and whole team will pack it in. Winning is the only thing that changes a team's culture, the rest is all mirrors which will only reflect back the state of the team. A few more games like this and there will be another half dozen players Marinelli will have to get rid of for snipping at him and management.

Jagonsucker
09-23-2007, 08:20 PM
the problem starts with the owners..like the dude above me said..our GM and owner dont know how to build a winning football team. Get Millen out of town..put in somebody who knows what the hell theyre doing..I mean come on, there was so many good players in the draft the past couple years and we couldn't capitlize on hardly any of them. This team is a disgrace to the NFL

TacticaLion
10-22-2007, 05:37 PM
So far, it looks like I've been pretty far off. Philly and Wash smoked us, but we won that game against the Bears (which I didn't see).

I can only see 3 likely wins on our schedule... which leaves us at 7-9. We'll have to steal two (either against Chicago, Denver, NYG, Dallas, San Diego and/or Green Bay) to consider the playoffs.

Lets hope this running game continues to improve.

detroit4life
10-22-2007, 07:04 PM
So far, it looks like I've been pretty far off. Philly and Wash smoked us, but we won that game against the Bears (which I didn't see).

I can only see 3 likely wins on our schedule... which leaves us at 7-9. We'll have to steal two (either against Chicago, Denver, NYG, Dallas, San Diego and/or Green Bay) to consider the playoffs.

Lets hope this running game continues to improve.

i think we have a legit chance at beating denver. Chicago depends from what i saw in their game vs. Philly i dont think we can but we did do it once so i think theres hope. I also think we could beat Green Bay at home. Favre has a good chance at tearing us apart but if we pressure him like we did against Tampa its a possibility. The rest i dont see much hope but i think theres a chance every sunday. The lions have been great in pulling out wins so i think theres a chance they make it to 8-8 or 9-7.

GB12
10-22-2007, 07:10 PM
I think they'll get 3 or 4 more wins. With a half decent pass defense you would have a chance at Kitna's prediction.

TacticaLion
10-22-2007, 09:20 PM
I think they'll get 3 or 4 more wins. With a half decent pass defense you would have a chance at Kitna's prediction.

I'm more concerned with our protection for Kitna than our defense. Our defense has performed surprisingly well... it's the offense that has to live up to its hype.

Iamcanadian
10-22-2007, 11:48 PM
I'm more concerned with our protection for Kitna than our defense. Our defense has performed surprisingly well... it's the offense that has to live up to its hype.

I don't think you can blame it all on the OL. Teams are quite aware of Martz's mode of operation and will sell out the ran to attack the passer. They are going to tee off on the OL on practically every play and that puts an extreme amount of pressure on the OL. When you add in the fact that Kitna isn't really very nimble especially at 35 years of age, and I think you begin to see why solid defensive teams that can mount a pass rush are going to be very tough for us to beat. Fortunately, Chicago's offense stinks so we will have a shot at winning especially as it seems like a lot of breaks are falling our way this season.
Our defense is up and down with poor offensive teams getting held in check while average offensive teams like Philly and Washington have beaten up our defense badly. Fortunately Chicago's offense falls into the 1st category giving us a chance at victory.

Scotty D
10-22-2007, 11:53 PM
I don't think you can blame it all on the OL. Teams are quite aware of Martz's mode of operation and will sell out the ran to attack the passer. They are going to tee off on the OL on practically every play and that puts an extreme amount of pressure on the OL. When you add in the fact that Kitna isn't really very nimble especially at 35 years of age, and I think you begin to see why solid defensive teams that can mount a pass rush are going to be very tough for us to beat. Fortunately, Chicago's offense stinks so we will have a shot at winning especially as it seems like a lot of breaks are falling our way this season.
Our defense is up and down with poor offensive teams getting held in check while average offensive teams like Philly and Washington have beaten up our defense badly. Fortunately Chicago's offense falls into the 1st category giving us a chance at victory.

Uhh most of the time teams just rush 4 and get more than enough pressure.

TacticaLion
10-23-2007, 05:49 AM
I don't think you can blame it all on the OL. Teams are quite aware of Martz's mode of operation and will sell out the ran to attack the passer. They are going to tee off on the OL on practically every play and that puts an extreme amount of pressure on the OL. When you add in the fact that Kitna isn't really very nimble especially at 35 years of age, and I think you begin to see why solid defensive teams that can mount a pass rush are going to be very tough for us to beat. Fortunately, Chicago's offense stinks so we will have a shot at winning especially as it seems like a lot of breaks are falling our way this season.
Our defense is up and down with poor offensive teams getting held in check while average offensive teams like Philly and Washington have beaten up our defense badly. Fortunately Chicago's offense falls into the 1st category giving us a chance at victory.
As Scotty said, we've had a hard time blocking 4. It really isn't the blitzes that scare me... but what Martz will tell Kitna to do when the opposing team is bringing pressure. If we drop back and take the short pass, we'll be fine... but, if Martz gets stubborn and tries to throw downfield, Kitna's in trouble.

Oh, and I don't know what games you watch, but Kitna could be the best scrambling QB in the NFL. First, it was Vick. Then, Young. But, now... Kitna.

Iamcanadian
10-23-2007, 10:12 AM
Uhh most of the time teams just rush 4 and get more than enough pressure.

When DLmen are told to forget about the run and just tee off on a pass rush, their job becomes a lot easier and the OLman's job becomes a lot harder. Play action isn't effective and the QB is the only target. Against most teams the DL has to respect the run and cannot completely commit to the pass rush but against the Lions, that is all the DL has to worry about. It is going to make your OL look worse than it probably is.

TacticaLion
10-23-2007, 01:50 PM
I take back what I previously said... the rest of the season is looking promising.

I think we match up well with Chicago... but it's away. After that, we have the Broncos, Packers and Giants at HOME... which is outstanding. Then, we have the Vikes in Minn, but have the Cowboys and the Chiefs back at home.

Wow. If we play anything like how we've played at home this year for those games, we may actually grab a respectable record.

Addict
10-26-2007, 10:45 AM
I think they'll get 3 or 4 more wins. With a half decent pass defense you would have a chance at Kitna's prediction.

this team isn't talented enough for 10 wins, I'd like them too, but they're just not.

ironman4579
10-28-2007, 03:53 PM
Well, my prediction of 6-10/7-9 is looking pretty shaky right now. Could we *gasp* have a .500 or better record this year?

P-L
10-28-2007, 04:35 PM
@ Arizona
@ Minnesota

Those are all games we "should" win. I stress the word "should" because we're still the Lions and I can't call them locks. This is also assuming that Jon Kitna and Kevin Jones stay healthy. That puts us 7 wins right there.

vs Green Bay
vs Kansas City

These are games I think we are fully capable of winning, but am not that confident about. I really like Green Bay, but I think we have just enough talent to steal one of the two games from them. Kansas City has played well, but if our defense plays decent then I think we can put up enough points. If we win those, that's 9 wins.

vs Denver
vs New York (Giants)
vs Dallas
at San Diego
at Green Bay

I can't see us winning these games. I wouldn't completely rule against us pulling a surprising upset, but I'm not counting on it.


All in all, I think we finished between 7-9 and 9-7. I think Kitna's prediction of 10 wins is just out of reach. However, if we could pull off 9 wins then a lot of people will be surprised. I know some Lions fans predicted us to go 2-14 or 3-13 this season. Most predicted 5-11 or 6-10.

Addict
10-28-2007, 05:17 PM
@ Arizona
@ Minnesota

Those are all games we "should" win. I stress the word "should" because we're still the Lions and I can't call them locks. This is also assuming that Jon Kitna and Kevin Jones stay healthy. That puts us 7 wins right there.

vs Green Bay
vs Kansas City

These are games I think we are fully capable of winning, but am not that confident about. I really like Green Bay, but I think we have just enough talent to steal one of the two games from them. Kansas City has played well, but if our defense plays decent then I think we can put up enough points. If we win those, that's 9 wins.

vs Denver
vs New York (Giants)
vs Dallas
at San Diego
at Green Bay

I can't see us winning these games. I wouldn't completely rule against us pulling a surprising upset, but I'm not counting on it.


All in all, I think we finished between 7-9 and 9-7. I think Kitna's prediction of 10 wins is just out of reach. However, if we could pull off 9 wins then a lot of people will be surprised. I know some Lions fans predicted us to go 2-14 or 3-13 this season. Most predicted 5-11 or 6-10.

I know I predicted 8-8 or 9-7 and I still stand by that (although I'm amazed I might be right about it). Say we win both 'could win' games and win one of our two 'should be able to' wins and lose all others except the NY Giants game since i've really not been impressed by them yet and I think that since the game is played @ ford field we may have a shot at it.

.500 or better, here's to hoping Kitna's proved right!

TheMadLionsFan
10-28-2007, 05:18 PM
They can beat Denver.....they're run defense isn't that good and Kevin Jones seems to be getting on track....

TacticaLion
10-28-2007, 05:33 PM
To me, it's all about the home/away games. And, that plays in our favor.

Remaining home games:

Broncos
Giants
Packers
Cowboys
Chiefs

Remaining away games:
Cardinals
Vikings
Chargers
Packers

We need to finish 5-4 to end up with a 10-6 record... 5-4. I think we can beat Minn and Ariz on the road, which leaves us with 5 home games.

We're in great shape.

Addict
10-28-2007, 06:02 PM
so this isn't us?

http://fanart.lionking.org/Artists/Kuya/Kuyalionfat.jpg

detroit4life
10-28-2007, 06:31 PM
I think this team can reach 10 we have some good teams coming up but this team seems to get better every week. Minnesota and Arizone should be wins and i think we can take GB at home denver and the chiefs. That would give us ten.

TacticaLion
10-28-2007, 08:20 PM
I think this team can reach 10 we have some good teams coming up but this team seems to get better every week. Minnesota and Arizone should be wins and i think we can take GB at home denver and the chiefs. That would give us ten.

Yep. We need 5 more wins and have 5 more home games (and a few winnable away games).

If the defense keeps it up, and KJones stays healthy, every game is winnable.

Bootland27
10-28-2007, 09:14 PM
"The Bears are not who we thought they were"

Addict
10-29-2007, 04:14 AM
bears should fire lovie and sign Jim Mora, just for entertainment purposes.

TacticaLion
10-29-2007, 08:20 AM
"The Bears are not who we thought they were"Ha. That made me laugh...

... "and we let them off the hook!"