PDA

View Full Version : 2009 NFC North Champions


Manic Depressant
05-06-2009, 02:00 PM
Who do you think is going to win the 2009 NFC North?

Vote and also post with how you think the teams will finish from 1 to 4. Explanations are encouraged.

Hopefully we can get some good discussion on what to expect in the upcoming season!

jsang74
05-06-2009, 02:15 PM
1. Vikings
Best defense, best running game.
2. Packers
Best offense in the division on paper, defense may struggle but scoring points can win games.
3. Bears
Solid defense but Cutler doesn't have Brandon Marshall or Eddie Royal to throw to and two new starters at tackle make me question if the offense will be much better.
4. Lions
Terrible defense + terrible offense = terrible team. At least they can't be worse than last year.

The Dynasty
05-06-2009, 02:35 PM
I mainly chose the Vikings because of the Defense will only get better because of the time spent through the team. I am not worried about the 4 game suspension that Kevin and Pat Williams might have to go through. If it was the first four games we play the Browns, Lions, Niners, and Packers. I think we can win 3 and maybe 4 games if we are lucky. Im also going on the assumption that if the Vikings sign Brett Favre. I feel having a stable QB for just a year will make the vikings offense a lot better than has been put on the field in the past years. Adrian Peterson is the best running back in the league. We have 2 capable home run threats in Wide Receivers. I just like our chances if we sign Favre. It doesnt hurt to have the 2nd easiest scheldue in the league.

I didnt choose the Packers because of the Defense. Switching to the 34 can become a little problem in the beginning. Players might occasionally get out of place but If they show up for the first 3-4 games and the Offense is the same as last year then they could easily win the division.

Bears the main problem is the Wide Receiver spot. Devin Hester is a burner and could take it to the house every play but after that they are hoping on rookies and players who are 3rd WR's at best. They also have to hope for the defense to come back to regular form. They were 16th in Defense last year.

Lions I think they could become a surprise this upcoming season. I think there Defense is looking very good especially the LB core with Foote, Sims and Peterson. Some questions still remain on the defense though and same with the offense. Culpepper is down to his rookie weight and will push stafford to make sure that right man wins the job. The offense could become very explosive with Calvin Johnson and Kevin Smith. But I still feel they end up in the bottom of the division but a bigger improvement from last year.

Yatta!
05-06-2009, 08:02 PM
I really think that every team in this division has improved over the offseason. I voted for the Vikings just, if they get improved quarterback play then they will be in the Superbowl hunt - in any case they got below average performances from Frerotte & Jackson last year and still came out on top. That and the transition to the 3-4 worries me for us, even if we have brought the right players and coaches in. It's impossible to tell how guys will react to positional changes etc. Still I think that the Vikings, Packers and Bears will all be in the playoff hunt and could all be candidates for 10 wins or more.

thenewfeature06
05-06-2009, 08:07 PM
1. Vikings
Best defense, best running game.
2. Packers
Best offense in the division on paper, defense may struggle but scoring points can win games.
3. Bears
Solid defense but Cutler doesn't have Brandon Marshall or Eddie Royal to throw to and two new starters at tackle make me question if the offense will be much better.
4. Lions
Terrible defense + terrible offense = terrible team. At least they can't be worse than last year.

that was last year i look for this year to be completely different on the defense side now with matthews and raji, they have the pieces to be a top 5 D

familyguy555
05-06-2009, 08:18 PM
Watch out everyone. Just kidding of course but I think we could get 3rd.

BGB
05-06-2009, 11:15 PM
Watch out everyone. Just kidding of course but I think we could get 3rd.

I really do think you guys could win 6 games this year. That will give you the most improved award.

hagy34
05-07-2009, 12:23 AM
The Vikings are the best team in this division. The pack will be much improved but not there yet. The Bears defense is really going to drop off and Cutler cannot win games by himself. The Lions are the Lions.

marshallb
05-07-2009, 07:01 PM
I went with the Vikings. I think they have the best defense in the division and their offense would be #2. Especially if they get Favre. I'd go with Green Bay to finish 2nd. I think their defense is even with Chicago's and their offense is better and has better chemistry. Then I'd go with Chicago. They failed to address their #1 need, which was the pass rush. Chicago got no pass rush last year and the only move they made to address that was bring in a new coach. Detroit is obviously last, but I think they could surprise and win a few games, but they are no where near ready to compete.

GB12
05-07-2009, 09:53 PM
Watch out everyone. Just kidding of course but I think we could get 3rd.
Over who? The Lions aren't even close to any of the other 3 teams in the division.

The Dynasty
05-07-2009, 10:00 PM
Over who? The Lions aren't even close to any of the other 3 teams in the division.

Yeah I cant see them going over someone and becoming the 3rd team in the division barring a serious injury to a critical player on either the Packers, Bears or Vikings. Although I have liked what the Lions have done in this off season. A potential Franchise QB and TE in the draft. They already have a potential all pro for a wide receiver. The defense has been improved in the off season give it time and the NFC North could be come very competitive.

hagy34
05-07-2009, 10:07 PM
Yeah I cant see them going over someone and becoming the 3rd team in the division barring a serious injury to a critical player on either the Packers, Bears or Vikings. Although I have liked what the Lions have done in this off season. A potential Franchise QB and TE in the draft. They already have a potential all pro for a wide receiver. The defense has been improved in the off season give it time and the NFC North could be come very competitive.

Still boggles my mind how they pass on a franchise OT (Oher) for a TE (Pettigrew). I mean Stafford and Oher would've been a haul in the first round!!!

Boston
05-07-2009, 10:24 PM
Watch out everyone. Just kidding of course but I think we could get 3rd.

Yeah, there is no way the Lions leave the cozy confines of that cellar they've become so accustomed to.

Right now I think it's a toss up between the Vikings and Packers. If the Vikings sign Favre I think they could be very, very good this year, provided he's healed enough to be effective. They've got the best running game in the league, several deep threats to stretch the defense when they start creeping up, and a defense that has been pretty good. If the Packers make a successful transition to the 3-4, though, I think they take it. Rodgers is only going to get better, our O-line is solidifying, and Grant might not completely suck for the first half of the season again.

TitleTown088
05-08-2009, 01:06 AM
I voted for the Packers because I like the Packers.

There, I spared you guys reading some feel-good BS about I honestly feel( not just my homerism) the Packers are will win and why things are looking up for them next season.

Cerni88
05-08-2009, 04:25 AM
What it all comes down to:

Vikings: 3 back up Qb's

Packers: 3 - 4 defense switch. NT a rookie and no one else played there

Lions: Well, they have a QB can work in the system, but they went 0 - 16. Playoffs is exceeding expectations.

Bears: HELLO DEFENSE????

PACKmanN
05-08-2009, 09:15 AM
What it all comes down to:

Vikings: 3 back up Qb's

Packers: 3 - 4 defense switch. NT a rookie and no one else played there

Lions: Well, they have a QB can work in the system, but they went 0 - 16. Playoffs is exceeding expectations.

Bears: HELLO DEFENSE???? and wideouts

i fixed it for you, Raji will play DE and NT, but i would rather have him at NT and Harrell at DE.

StorminNorman
05-10-2009, 07:48 PM
People overstate how far behind the Lions are.

Minnesota is my favorite for the Division.

Manic Depressant
05-10-2009, 07:57 PM
People overstate how far behind the Lions are.

Minnesota is my favorite for the Division.

The Lions went 0-16 last season and were the worst team in NFL history. I don't really know how you can overstate how far behind they are.

StorminNorman
05-10-2009, 10:55 PM
The Lions went 0-16 last season and were the worst team in NFL history. I don't really know how you can overstate how far behind they are.

Please, thats the lazy illogical response. The Dolphins went 1-15 the year before, they won their division the next year. The Falcons made a similar jump. What happened in 2008 is irrelevant to 2009.

The Lions were not the least talented team last year, they simply had terrible management and terrible coaching. Rob Marinelli was not meant to be a Head Coach. Neither was Cam Cameron. Both are great coaches - just not head coaches.

Plus, the Lions that take the field in 2009 are not the same Lions that took the field in 2008. Their defense will feature five new starters in the back seven (Foote, Peterson, Henry, Buchanan and Delmas). Ernie Sims, arguably the most talented defender on Detroit's roster, will benefit from a system that plays on his strengths.

The Lions offense looks solid. Pettigrew is a major acquisition that will help both running and passing. Kevin Smith had a very strong end to the season and will have the bulk of the carries from Day 1. Calvin Johnson is still Calvin Johnson and Bryant Johnson is an upgrade over anyone who tried to replace Roy Williams.

I think Schwartz has the makings to be a fantastic NFL Head Coach. Gunther Cunningham is a highly respected defensive coordinator and Scott Linehan had terrific success as an offensive coordinator. The upgrade in coaching alone makes the Lions a significantly better team.

Manic Depressant
05-10-2009, 11:16 PM
Please, thats the lazy illogical response. The Dolphins went 1-15 the year before, they won their division the next year. The Falcons made a similar jump. What happened in 2008 is irrelevant to 2009.

The Lions were not the least talented team last year, they simply had terrible management and terrible coaching. Rob Marinelli was not meant to be a Head Coach. Neither was Cam Cameron. Both are great coaches - just not head coaches.

Plus, the Lions that take the field in 2009 are not the same Lions that took the field in 2008. Their defense will feature five new starters in the back seven (Foote, Peterson, Henry, Buchanan and Delmas). Ernie Sims, arguably the most talented defender on Detroit's roster, will benefit from a system that plays on his strengths.

The Lions offense looks solid. Pettigrew is a major acquisition that will help both running and passing. Kevin Smith had a very strong end to the season and will have the bulk of the carries from Day 1. Calvin Johnson is still Calvin Johnson and Bryant Johnson is an upgrade over anyone who tried to replace Roy Williams.

I think Schwartz has the makings to be a fantastic NFL Head Coach. Gunther Cunningham is a highly respected defensive coordinator and Scott Linehan had terrific success as an offensive coordinator. The upgrade in coaching alone makes the Lions a significantly better team.

So the Lions are probably a bit better. And so are the Packers, Vikings, and Bears. Every team in the division improved, not just the Lions.

StorminNorman
05-10-2009, 11:54 PM
So the Lions are probably a bit better. And so are the Packers, Vikings, and Bears. Every team in the division improved, not just the Lions.

Did I say no other team improved? Absolutely not.

No team in the division improved MORE than Detroit did, however. Of course no team had more room to improve in than Detroit.

Gay Ork Wang
05-11-2009, 01:31 AM
Did I say no other team improved? Absolutely not.

No team in the division improved MORE than Detroit did, however. Of course no team had more room to improve in than Detroit.
thats because when u jump from 0 to 10 u improved more than teams that improve from 20 to 22. Still makes u a lot inferior. seriously how where the lions supposed to get worse? lose all Preseason games?

i cant believe that there is a Lions fan out there saying people underestimate the lions after a winless season

tjsunstein
05-11-2009, 01:49 AM
I think this thread should be titled 2010 NFC North Champions because Week 17 ends January 3rd. When I saw the title I thought it was solely about Minnesota.

This might be me being a homer but I think the Packers win it with the Bears, Vikings, and Lions following in that order.

I also doubt that Green Bay loses all but one game (7/8 last year, the only one being week 1) decided by 5 points or less.

Yatta!
05-11-2009, 09:23 AM
Peter King just rated Chicago as the 4th best team in football. Wow.

Gay Ork Wang
05-11-2009, 09:24 AM
Peter King just rated Chicago as the 4th best team in football. Wow.
we are that awesome! Another 8-8 season coming!

StorminNorman
05-11-2009, 11:23 AM
thats because when u jump from 0 to 10 u improved more than teams that improve from 20 to 22. Still makes u a lot inferior. seriously how where the lions supposed to get worse? lose all Preseason games?

i cant believe that there is a Lions fan out there saying people underestimate the lions after a winless season

That's funny...

I thought we were talking about 2009...

You know...not 2008. :confused:

Gay Ork Wang
05-11-2009, 11:26 AM
That's funny...

I thought we were talking about 2009...

You know...not 2008. :confused:
we are. but u gotta realize u know, u didnt get a new team

StorminNorman
05-11-2009, 12:05 PM
we are. but u gotta realize u know, u didnt get a new team

Yes we did. Our offensive philosophy is different. Our defensive philosophy is completely different. Our starting day roster will be loaded with new faces.

In what way isn't this a new team?

If you take the Pittsburgh Steelers roster and you force their defensive to play a Tampa 2 and you force their offense to play in a spread - that team is different.

Maybe Next Year Millen2
05-11-2009, 12:33 PM
we are. but u gotta realize u know, u didnt get a new team

The 0-16 team was pretty much gutted. I would call 11 new starters(CB1,CB2,FS,MLB,SLB,NT,UT,LG,TE,FB,WR2) plus a new nickel corner, a new slot WR, a new KR/PR with a new coaching staff is pretty much a new team. Well its a half of a new team keeping the other half of Detroit that is worth keeping in Calvin,Gosder in year 2,Kevin Smith in year 2 ,Ernie Sims with tremendous help around him,Cliff Avril(in year 2),DeWayne White(decent DE),Daniel Bullocks(decent SS with hopefully help around him). Backus and Raiola are more than serviceable for one year at least. Backus especially was not the problem last year with the Oline when you re-watch the games.

I didn't even count Matthew Stafford because Daunte is the guy for 2009 rightfully so with Linehan here. Its more of a unknown leaning towards bad than a guranteed historically bad team like last year. Due to a ton of changeover, expecting more than 5 wins shouldn't be done but we do play the NFC North close no matter what. Its the non NFC North games were the Lions get demolished, the worst of the year always being on Thanksgiving making the public perception of non Lions fans even worse.

The roster is in much better shape after one offseason without Millen and thats not even counting on Stafford to be a franchise QB. If he is, then the Lions are even better shape but we won't find that out until 2010,2011. The Bears,Vikings,Packers have all improved as well, but the games were already close with 2008 Lions roster. Cutler is the biggest drastic change but he's not invincible to Lions losses, see 2007.

Addict
05-11-2009, 12:36 PM
Peter King just rated Chicago as the 4th best team in football. Wow.

are the Lions top 20?

Gay Ork Wang
05-11-2009, 12:40 PM
thats still maybe 50%. i dont see how the Lions are going to take 3rd in the division over the other 3.

Addict
05-11-2009, 12:43 PM
thats still maybe 50%. i dont see how the Lions are going to take 3rd in the division over the other 3.

I can't see that either. Then again, I couldn't see a team go 0-16...

The_Dude
05-11-2009, 02:15 PM
1. Vikings ~ Best Def, AD, and i'm a homer

2. Bears ~ Cutler will have a solid impact on the offense, Forte is a stud, and they still have a decent def

3. Packers ~ Rodgers is great, but a suspect def b/c of the switch to the 3-4

4. Lions ~ well, they are the Lions... 'nuff said!

Maybe Next Year Millen2
05-11-2009, 02:21 PM
thats still maybe 50%. i dont see how the Lions are going to take 3rd in the division over the other 3.

What do you mean maybe 50%. It is exatly 50% of the starting roster or more when you count big role players such as nickel,slot,KR/PR. 50% of the starting roster is a huge turnover rate so yes I would consider that a new team. Heck the Bears getting Culter/Pace alone makes it a new team to game plan for Chicago. 2 guys impact which will be great versus 11 or more new guys(maybe Stafford too) impacts for Detroit.

The other half remaining of Detroits 0-16 roster are good football players for the most part whom I listed before. Its not like we kept the Dwight Smiths Ryan Neces and Paris Lenons from our 0-16 team we kept the players that actually produced like Calvin,Ernie,Kevin Smith,Gosder and the young players with potential Avril,Fluellen,Bullocks. So an unknown on Detroit 50% with seemingly better talent and 50% of the Lions roster that deserves to stay means improvement for the Lions. The entire Detroit roster in 2008 wasn't junk contrary to popular belief. Some players actually did produce it just wasn't enough to carry the terrible players. White/Avril were the only ones to pressure the QB so they stayed and Bullocks/Sims were our best tackers by far. I'd say half or more were terrible, so we replaced half or more. There is nobody remaining on the roster that I absolutely hate like Lenon,Dwight Smith,Nece,Darby(not starting and at nose),McDonald/Furrey without Martz et.

I agree I wouldn't expect anyone to see 3rd right now from Detroit especially from division rivals eyes. 6-7 wins is enough to get third though, but you're telling me the Packers coming off a 6-10 season can't go 6-10 again?

I'd actually prefer it if you write off the Lions because of 0-16 and Millen,both of which have nothing to do with the Lions 2009 roster. Vikings and Bears are much tougher to leap frog since they are the frontrunners and both very talented. However, 10 and 9 wins from prior year doesn't mean you get or more wins automatically again. Pittsburgh,Baltimore,Green Bay twice,each other twice,Seattle(best offseason?),Arizona,an NFC East opponent and NFC South opponent. 10 tough games for the 3 frontrunner North teams means you have to earn it. Then don't slip up against an overhauled Detroit who usually play you close,and the rest of your weaker opponents(who Detroit plays too St Louis,Cleveland,Cincy,San Fran(SF isn't that weak actually).

Boston
05-11-2009, 02:56 PM
Yes we did. Our offensive philosophy is different. Our defensive philosophy is completely different. Our starting day roster will be loaded with new faces.

In what way isn't this a new team?

If you take the Pittsburgh Steelers roster and you force their defensive to play a Tampa 2 and you force their offense to play in a spread - that team is different.

Great. After all this is done you are still the Lions, and you still have a majority of the same faces returning this year. Different isn't always better, might want to get ahold of that concept before the season starts.

Maybe Next Year Millen2
05-11-2009, 03:33 PM
Great. After all this is done you are still the Lions, and you still have a majority of the same faces returning this year. Different isn't always better, might want to get ahold of that concept before the season starts.

You are incorrect. Over the majority is new plus the coaching. The faces on the Lions roster are not the same at all and the ones you do recognize, you like seeing their face on the team. And the ones returning are returning for a reason, they don't suck,we like them or they are young with potential. I love how everyone assumes nobody played well for the Lions last year. That is utterly false. The good players weren't mistake free but for the most part produced on a weekly basis. Ernie Sims,Calvin Johnson,Kevin Smith,Jeff Backus,Gosder Cherilus,Cliff Avril,DeWayne White had the least to do with going 0-16 and were the reasons were competive in games instead losing 100 to nothing every game.

7 new starters of 11 on D which was the main problem last year. Usually change doesn't mean better, but when you are historically bad on defense(record breaking bad), change does mean better especially massive overhauling change. Especially, Julian Peterson over Ryan Nece, Larry Foote over Paris Lenon, Louis Delmas over Dwight Smith(and yes Delmas is a rookie but Dwight Smith is the worst FS ever in the history of the league with the way he tackles compared to how Delmas tackles),Grady Jackson over Chuck Darby(due to 60 more lbs of gearth to block with our LB core behind him), decent DEs in Avril(led rookies in sacks) and White who is a decent DE but has health issues in second half of seasons. Back end at corner is probably still the weak link for sure but Bodden and Brian Kelly couldn't do anything, Henry and Buchanon can't be worse than torched every week especially on 3rd down and only 1 int. Especially with LB coverage help and safety help coming in 2009 and a new nickle corner too in Eric King from the Titans. Just a better run defense(even at 20th say,not record breaking 32) will aid Detroit immensly which I think we did address that area greatly.


Offense 4 new starters plus a future potential franchise QB on Offense. Calvin was the offense last year amongst QB turmoil, so just think if he actually has decent QB play. That QB turmoil is addressed with Daunte/Linehan and Stafford for the future. Giving Calvin a little bit of help would be nice. Bryant Johnson,Ronald Curry,Pettgrew, and Derrick Williams certainly is a good start. Furrey and McDonald were worthless without Martz and they both got hurt.

Blocking issues. New Left Guard from a team with a great Oline coach,new blocking tight end, who is supposedly a monster blocker and will aid this Oline, Gosder making the jump from year 1 to year 2, Backus more than serviceable and then problems at center although Raiola has played better and RG IMO. Kevin Smith in year 2, Maurice Morris as a better 3rd down back than Rudi if needed, a new FB, a QB that knows the system as opposed to looking at his wrist band to figure out the play and hopefully not being down 21-0 in the first quarter should all aid our Oline problems.

Saying it's the same old Lions would be true if it were the majority of the same faces and Millen/Marinelli were still in charge. However, its a ton of new faces and the good/decent players remaining with a new coahing staff. The biggest offseason move was done in October with the firing of Millen. We're going to claw our way out and the North will be very even more competitive, 90s competive.

Gay Ork Wang
05-11-2009, 04:27 PM
Lions for NFC North Champions?

Maybe Next Year Millen2
05-11-2009, 06:13 PM
Yes Lions for NFC North Champions. That is what I have been saying. End Sarcasm and hopefully dumbass people saying same old Lions. Not much is the same, heck we even changed our uniforms.

The Millen purge has begun. No more free wins, ever.

Gay Ork Wang
05-11-2009, 06:27 PM
nobody said its the same team. but to assume they are going to make a Dolphinesque/Falconesque leap is really like a 0.01% chance

marshallb
05-11-2009, 09:38 PM
One thing to note with the Lions is chemistry. You say they have all those new players, how are those players going to gel and everything. Plus, who is the veteran leader in the locker room, that will keep the team together after a tough loss or two in a row.

You also have to remember that very few of those players(if any) that they added were stars or anything close to it. As far as the guys they added that will play this year, I'd say that only a couple of them will be stars or play anything like it this year. Stafford isn't likely to play and shouldn't, Pettigrew is good, but how big of a difference will a rookie TE make, Delmas should be a real good player in the secondary, but will he be right away, note the big jump in competition level, and Peterson should make a big impact. Those would be about the only guys that Detroit added that I'd come close to labeling stars(unless I'm forgetting someone), and 3 of them are rookies and one isn't likely to play.

That being said, I could see the Lions winning 4-5 games if the transition goes as smoothly as possible.

StorminNorman
05-12-2009, 03:53 PM
are the Lions top 20?

I would rather have Peter King claim we will go 0-32 than have him call us a top 20 team. The guy is about as accurate as an indoor sun dial.

Great. After all this is done you are still the Lions, and you still have a majority of the same faces returning this year.

Are you sure?

QB: Stafford is new and, unless Culpepper performs beautifully, is likely to start by week 8 at the latest. If Culpepper performs well, then it is likely due to the fact he is basically a different man, having lost 30 lbs and playing for a coordinator he had his best years under.

RB: Kevin Smith will own the position from day one. Also we have added a Spell Back in Maurice Morris and just signed Antoine Smith from FSU after an impressive camp. We also added Andre Brown who will help with Kick Returns. Terrell Smith was added at FB.

WR: Calvin Johnson is the most talented WR in the league. Everyone behind him is new.

TE: Brandon Pettigrew is new.

OL: Added two new guards.

DL: Added Gandy and Sammie Lee which will add massive bulk. We still may add a Kevin Carter-like DE.

LB: Added two starting LB's in Foote and Peterson. Added two more rookies.

DB: Almost entirely new. Added three new CB's and a promising young safety.

So we have new players at QB, FB, WR, TE, LG, RG on offense (6 of 11) and at NG, OLB, MLB, RCB, LCB, FS (6 of 11), and this not including players that will get significant playing time (like back up RB, third and fourth WR's, nickle backs, etc).

So of 22 standard starting positions, we have new starters at 12.

The majority of our starters our new.

Different isn't always better, might want to get ahold of that concept before the season starts.

But different is also not always insignificant. Might want to get a hold of that concept before the season starts.

Yes Lions for NFC North Champions. That is what I have been saying. End Sarcasm and hopefully dumbass people saying same old Lions. Not much is the same, heck we even changed our uniforms.

The Millen purge has begun. No more free wins, ever.

They won't learn. They would rather go the easy route "Lions suxor!"

StorminNorman
05-12-2009, 04:00 PM
nobody said its the same team. but to assume they are going to make a Dolphinesque/Falconesque leap is really like a 0.01% chance

Why?

What makes us different than the Dolphins or Falcons in 2008?

What makes us different than the Browns (went 4-12 in 06, 10-6 in 07) or the Bucs (went 4-12 in 06, playoffs in 07) in 2007?

What makes us different than the Saints (3-13 in 05, playoffs in 06) or the Jets (went 4-12 in 05, playoffs in 06) in 2006?

Gay Ork Wang
05-12-2009, 04:09 PM
Why?

What makes us different than the Dolphins or Falcons in 2008?

What makes us different than the Browns (went 4-12 in 06, 10-6 in 07) or the Bucs (went 4-12 in 06, playoffs in 07) in 2007?

What makes us different than the Saints (3-13 in 05, playoffs in 06) or the Jets (went 4-12 in 05, playoffs in 06) in 2006?
u are the lions :/ too lazy to list most of it

Manic Depressant
05-12-2009, 04:18 PM
Why?

What makes us different than the Dolphins or Falcons in 2008?

What makes us different than the Browns (went 4-12 in 06, 10-6 in 07) or the Bucs (went 4-12 in 06, playoffs in 07) in 2007?

What makes us different than the Saints (3-13 in 05, playoffs in 06) or the Jets (went 4-12 in 05, playoffs in 06) in 2006?

What makes you different than the Rams who went from 3-13 to 2-14?

What makes you different than the Chiefs who went from 4-12 to 2-14?

What makes you different than any other team that got worse from one season to the next?

P-L
05-13-2009, 09:08 AM
What makes you different than the Rams who went from 3-13 to 2-14?

What makes you different than the Chiefs who went from 4-12 to 2-14?

What makes you different than any other team that got worse from one season to the next?
Maybe because it is impossible to be worse than 0-16. Simple logic tells you that you can't win less than zero games or lose more than 16 games in an NFL season.

Gay Ork Wang
05-13-2009, 09:12 AM
Maybe because it is impossible to be worse than 0-16. Simple logic tells you that you can't win less than zero games or lose more than 16 games in an NFL season.
does that make you a playoff contender?

Addict
05-13-2009, 09:23 AM
does that make you a playoff contender?

he was replying to the hypothetical situation created by MD that we are no different from teams that got worse after a bad season. Nobody's saying we're playoff contenders (well, nobody sane anyway)

Manic Depressant
05-13-2009, 10:02 AM
Maybe because it is impossible to be worse than 0-16. Simple logic tells you that you can't win less than zero games or lose more than 16 games in an NFL season.

I know you're not this dense...

Gay Ork Wang
05-13-2009, 10:45 AM
he was replying to the hypothetical situation created by MD that we are no different from teams that got worse after a bad season. Nobody's saying we're playoff contenders (well, nobody sane anyway)
well

Why?

What makes us different than the Dolphins or Falcons in 2008?

What makes us different than the Browns (went 4-12 in 06, 10-6 in 07) or the Bucs (went 4-12 in 06, playoffs in 07) in 2007?

What makes us different than the Saints (3-13 in 05, playoffs in 06) or the Jets (went 4-12 in 05, playoffs in 06) in 2006?

thats what i was referring to

regoob2
05-13-2009, 03:03 PM
Why?

What makes us different than the Dolphins or Falcons in 2008?

What makes us different than the Browns (went 4-12 in 06, 10-6 in 07) or the Bucs (went 4-12 in 06, playoffs in 07) in 2007?

What makes us different than the Saints (3-13 in 05, playoffs in 06) or the Jets (went 4-12 in 05, playoffs in 06) in 2006?The difference is those teams actually won a game. You guys are coming off the worst season in NFL history. The worst ever. You guys suck. Its going to take more than 2 vet LBs to make anyone even consider you guys a mediocre team. Your terrible.

StorminNorman
05-13-2009, 04:52 PM
u are the lions :/ too lazy to list most of it

Of COURSE! I forgot how important the logo of a team was to its success on the field! I also forgot how much history impacts the present! Coach Wisenhunt must also have overlooked that - after all, he just led the Cardinals, a team whose history is just as woeful and pathetic as the Lions, to the Super Bowl.

What makes you different than the Rams who went from 3-13 to 2-14?

What makes you different than the Chiefs who went from 4-12 to 2-14?

What makes you different than any other team that got worse from one season to the next?

That's a good question, and if I was going around saying there is no way we can have a bad year - it would be a relevant question. My response was not a prediction of the playoffs, it wasn't a prediction of so many wins - it was simply refuting the idiotic notion that the Lions have no chance of success in 2009.

StorminNorman
05-13-2009, 04:55 PM
The difference is those teams actually won a game. You guys are coming off the worst season in NFL history.

Miami was one play away from going 0-16. So that's really not a difference.

The worst ever.

If you are going to do something, might as well be the best.

You guys suck.

Clearly I am talking to a gentleman and a scholar.

Its going to take more than 2 vet LBs to make anyone even consider you guys a mediocre team.

See, this is what's so great about the NFL. Speculation is irrelevant because it will be proven on the field. We will get to see just how mediocre the Lions really are.

Your terrible.

It's spelled you're.

The Dynasty
05-13-2009, 05:05 PM
See, this is what's so great about the NFL. Speculation is irrelevant because it will be proven on the field. We will get to see just how mediocre the Lions really are.

The Detroit Lions have always been Mediocre for the most part. The Lions total win percentage since they have been made is .462. The Lions havent had a winning season since 2000 and you are trying to tell us because of what Miami and Falcons did last year is going to the lions? You have to be joking. The Falcons had a great Off season before last year and The Dolphins did have a shocking year but it doesn't hurt when they got excellent QB play from Pennington.

That said the Lions are headed in the right direction but they still have lots of holes that still need to be fixed and filled. They will not make the playoffs. They might win at most 6 games and that's being very generous.

I like that you are an optimistic but this is taking it a little bit too far. Enjoy the rebuilding process but I wouldn't expect much from the Lions this year..Maybe in years to come they will become good.

Manic Depressant
05-14-2009, 11:58 AM
That's a good question, and if I was going around saying there is no way we can have a bad year - it would be a relevant question. My response was not a prediction of the playoffs, it wasn't a prediction of so many wins - it was simply refuting the idiotic notion that the Lions have no chance of success in 2009.

The whole point of this thread is predicting the future. We're dealing in probabilities. The reality is the Lions have far and away the highest probability to finish last in the NFC North.

Each of the Vikings, Bears, and Packers can be considered serious playoff contenders. The Lions cannot.

StorminNorman
05-14-2009, 03:47 PM
The Detroit Lions have always been Mediocre for the most part.

Same could be said for the Cardinals before 2009. Same could be said before Saints, especially before this decade. If the Lions simply went through a coaching change, your worries would be more warranted - but the Lions also cleaned up the front office. Martin Mayhew has started his tenure wonderfully.

The Lions total win percentage since they have been made is .462. The Lions havent had a winning season since 2000 and you are trying to tell us because of what Miami and Falcons did last year is going to the lions? You have to be joking.

I just don't understand how what a team did in 2003 has any impact on what the team will look like in 2009.

The Falcons had a great Off season before last year and The Dolphins did have a shocking year but it doesn't hurt when they got excellent QB play from Pennington.

The Lions have had a great off season and Detroit may have very solid QB play from either Culpepper or Stafford.


The whole point of this thread is predicting the future. We're dealing in probabilities. The reality is the Lions have far and away the highest probability to finish last in the NFC North.

Each of the Vikings, Bears, and Packers can be considered serious playoff contenders. The Lions cannot.

And all I am saying is that dismissing possibilities simply because they are not PROBABLE is ridiculous in the NFL as the improbable so frequently happens.

The Dynasty
05-14-2009, 07:27 PM
Same could be said for the Cardinals before 2009. Same could be said before Saints, especially before this decade. If the Lions simply went through a coaching change, your worries would be more warranted - but the Lions also cleaned up the front office. Martin Mayhew has started his tenure wonderfully.

Cardinals had a Superbowl MVP for a QB last year. The Saints had Drew Brees, one of the best Quarterbacks in the league. The Lions have a rookie QB and have Culpepper, who was terrible after moss left. Given it was only a couple games he played but they were god awful.

I have said this before, I like where the Lions are headed but expecting a change from 0-16 to considering them winning the NFC North is outrageous.

StorminNorman
05-14-2009, 08:02 PM
Cardinals had a Superbowl MVP for a QB last year. The Saints had Drew Brees, one of the best Quarterbacks in the league. The Lions have a rookie QB and have Culpepper, who was terrible after moss left. Given it was only a couple games he played but they were god awful.

Culpepper once was an NFL MVP candidate (if he had that year any other than Peyton's brecord setting year, he would have the award). While Culpepper didn't show any indication that player any more, neither did Warner for several years.

I have huge faith in Stafford, but I also think Culpepper could have a decent year this year. I don't think you can look at 2008 in predicting how Culpepper can do this year, nor can you really look at any point in his career. The philosophy now suits him very well, if Culpepper has any gas at all left - he should play well. If Culpepper is as done as he looked next year, Stafford will start early if not day 1. I do not expect Culpepper to perform in 2008 as well as Warner did, but he certainly has the ability to.

I have said this before, I like where the Lions are headed but expecting a change from 0-16 to considering them winning the NFC North is outrageous.

I never stated I expect the Lions to win the NFC North. I just don't think they are light years away from the other teams in the division.

GB12
05-14-2009, 09:29 PM
http://www.draftcountdown.com/forum/showthread.php?t=24187

Part 2?

StorminNorman
05-15-2009, 09:35 AM
So because a fan was wrong a year ago, the Lions can never be good?

Gay Ork Wang
05-15-2009, 10:05 AM
So because a fan was wrong a year ago, the Lions can never be good?
yes exactly!

Manic Depressant
05-15-2009, 11:09 AM
So because a fan was wrong a year ago, the Lions can never be good?

If we go by your logic, we can never denounce any team, ever. The Lions are basically the definition of a franchise that will likely struggle next season and be the worst team in their division. If we can't say that about the Lions, we can't say it about anybody.

Maybe Next Year Millen2
05-15-2009, 11:40 AM
What makes you different than the Rams who went from 3-13 to 2-14?

What makes you different than the Chiefs who went from 4-12 to 2-14?

What makes you different than any other team that got worse from one season to the next?

Because the Rams/Chiefs and others didn't change 11 or more starters between those two years. They kept their GM between 2007 and 2008, they kept their coaches and they kept the majoirty of their players. We changed a butt load of things. Sometimes it only takes a couple changes like Matt Ryan/coaching and Jake Long/Pennington. So with 11 changes, to say we have .01 % is just ignorant garbage. We have as good a chance of any losing team.

Saying the Lions are the Lions is just lazy and annoying. That statement indicates the Lions will never turn it around. With Millen, I'd probably agree with you, but he's gone.

Yes it will take Lions some time to gel. 5-6 wins is possible though and is much improved. Its not like the North rolls to wins against us any way. The games are usually close.

The Lions will have some big impact players. IMO you only need a couple of them if they are surrounded by a bunch of solid players. I think this is what the Lions have done, added a solid core of players. When people around you are better, you play better. With better coaching, you play better. I think we need one more on the Dline to trully be a competive team. Shaun Rogers and Mike Martz scheme for Colletto was the only difference between 7-9(3-3 in division) and 0-16. Think about that and you'll see why the Lions have the ability to turn it around every year no matter what.

Gay Ork Wang
05-15-2009, 11:43 AM
why are we talking about football anyways

Maybe Next Year Millen2
05-15-2009, 11:56 AM
The Detroit Lions have always been Mediocre for the most part. The Lions total win percentage since they have been made is .462. The Lions havent had a winning season since 2000 and you are trying to tell us because of what Miami and Falcons did last year is going to the lions? You have to be joking. The Falcons had a great Off season before last year and The Dolphins did have a shocking year but it doesn't hurt when they got excellent QB play from Pennington.

That said the Lions are headed in the right direction but they still have lots of holes that still need to be fixed and filled. They will not make the playoffs. They might win at most 6 games and that's being very generous.

I like that you are an optimistic but this is taking it a little bit too far. Enjoy the rebuilding process but I wouldn't expect much from the Lions this year..Maybe in years to come they will become good.

Yes 8 losing years. 8 years of Millen. Coincidence I think not. And those 8 years of losing have really very little to do with the Lions 2009 roster and coaches. Even the 2008 roster is almost completely different than the 2009 roster. The Lions made the playoffs 6 times out of 10 in the 90s in the free agency era. 9-7 in 2000.They can be a competive playoff team which is what we are talking about here. Without Millen, we can be a competive team I truly believe that. 2009 5-6 wins is probably the max because it all starts with the QB so Daunte has to improve or Stafford has to be good as a rookie, but with so many changes who knows. I've seen 1-2 changes with coaching drastically change things in this league. Hell Bears went to be seen as mediocre to deep playoff team because of one guy,Dolphins/Falcons last year. So with well over half a new roster/new coaches and GM(who appears to be intelligent overhauling his roster,hiring Schwartz, smart trades(Roy,trade back in 3rd),drafting a potential franchise QB) plus keeping the good players, well things could be drastically changed too in Detroit.

StorminNorman
05-15-2009, 02:27 PM
If we go by your logic, we can never denounce any team, ever. The Lions are basically the definition of a franchise that will likely struggle next season and be the worst team in their division. If we can't say that about the Lions, we can't say it about anybody.

Exactly! And that's the beauty of the NFL! You can never dismiss ANY team in the preseason.

Manic Depressant
05-15-2009, 03:07 PM
Exactly! And that's the beauty of the NFL! You can never dismiss ANY team in the preseason.

I guess you missed the point of this thread then...

Crazy_Chris
05-15-2009, 03:53 PM
http://www.draftcountdown.com/forum/...ad.php?t=24187

Part 2?

Ha that is a very funny thread to look back on great read now that we know what happened. There are a few simularities between some of the lions fans arguements from than and now.

Exactly! And that's the beauty of the NFL! You can never dismiss ANY team in the preseason.

Of course you can dismiss exteremly bad teams before the season starts. That is the true beauty of the NFL because inevitably 1 or 2 of the dismissed teams will surprise you. But you can't just go around using those surprises to justify giving every ****** team some respect. It is called a surprise for a reason because the majority of people aren't expecting it.


From what I have read in this thread you seem to just want the other NFC north fans to give the lions some respect. People overstate how far behind the Lions are.

Minnesota is my favorite for the Division.Just to say that the lions aren't that far away from the rest of the pack. But why should they what have the Lions done to earn this? . . .

Yes, anything can happen in the NFL we all know that, but just because it CAN happen doesn't mean it will or that opposing fans should give some respect to a ****** team just because there is a small possibility they could be good.

Sure they made a lot of changes, but every bad team in the NFL made changes in their roster and/or coaching staff this year. Just because the Lions were the worst and thus made the most changes doesn't mean they should get a good amount more respect this year.

It's not like they went out and added a bunch of excellent players that will all definatly make big impacts this season. The only real good player added this year is Julian Peterson. Other than him it's just a bunch of mediocre-solid vets and some rookies. Re-read the thread GB12 posted in there they have a similar arguement about the change in the coaching staff and, all the new players they added last year and how they were going to improve the team. Did they improve them? Nope, that doesn't mean this year they won't improve because undoubtly you will win more than 0 games. But just because you add a bunch of different players not mean they have made a huge improvement.

The Lions are a better team than last year but they have not done anything that should make any one consider them as significantly closing the gap on the rest of the division. The Bears, Packers, and the Vikings all have pretty good chances at competing for a playoff spot this season. While I agree the difference may be a bit overstated, it's not by much. The Lions while improved are still at this point a good ways from the other 3 teams.

Addict
05-15-2009, 03:56 PM
Exactly! And that's the beauty of the NFL! You can never dismiss ANY team in the preseason.

You would have loved TacticaLion... loved.

Maybe Next Year Millen2
05-15-2009, 05:20 PM
Ha that is a very funny thread to look back on great read now that we know what happened. There are a few simularities between some of the lions fans arguements from than and now.



Of course you can dismiss exteremly bad teams before the season starts. That is the true beauty of the NFL because inevitably 1 or 2 of the dismissed teams will surprise you. But you can't just go around using those surprises to justify giving every ****** team some respect. It is called a surprise for a reason because the majority of people aren't expecting it.


From what I have read in this thread you seem to just want the other NFC north fans to give the lions some respect. Just to say that the lions aren't that far away from the rest of the pack. But why should they what have the Lions done to earn this? . . .

Yes, anything can happen in the NFL we all know that, but just because it CAN happen doesn't mean it will or that opposing fans should give some respect to a ****** team just because there is a small possibility they could be good.

Sure they made a lot of changes, but every bad team in the NFL made changes in their roster and/or coaching staff this year. Just because the Lions were the worst and thus made the most changes doesn't mean they should get a good amount more respect this year.

It's not like they went out and added a bunch of excellent players that will all definatly make big impacts this season. The only real good player added this year is Julian Peterson. Other than him it's just a bunch of mediocre-solid vets and some rookies. Re-read the thread GB12 posted in there they have a similar arguement about the change in the coaching staff and, all the new players they added last year and how they were going to improve the team. Did they improve them? Nope, that doesn't mean this year they won't improve because undoubtly you will win more than 0 games. But just because you add a bunch of different players not mean they have made a huge improvement.

The Lions are a better team than last year but they have not done anything that should make any one consider them as significantly closing the gap on the rest of the division. The Bears, Packers, and the Vikings all have pretty good chances at competing for a playoff spot this season. While I agree the difference may be a bit overstated, it's not by much. The Lions while improved are still at this point a good ways from the other 3 teams.

You know what I agree. Who cares about respect at this point, its May. Plus its fans of the other North teams, they shouldn't give respect anyway. We should all hate each others teams no matter what. I think everyone has agreed that the Lions have improved, some only slightly,some a good/decent amount(Lions fans) and then nobody in their right mind thinks its significant enough improvement to be a definite playoff team(not even Lions fans except for Tactica probably lol). How much improvement is to be determined with the season. Just because players failed(Millen/Marinelli players) doesn't mean that our over 11 new starters will fail this year from Mayhew/Scwartz. They have just as good a chance of any other LOSING team to suprise. But as you said its a suprise. Over 11 starters is a massive massive change in the NFL so a suprise is not out of the question and if it happens we'll know the reason why. The many new players won't necessarily gurantee to significantly improve the team either but its a start in the right direction.

However, I will say these free agents have a better track record than the free agents last year by far. Which is why people(non Lions fans) think the Lions improved even slightly whereas last year nobody thought we improved which we didn't losing Shaun Rogers/Martz(except for most Lions fans,myself included). Peterson is a stud SAM especially when compared to Nece, Foote is a very solid player cut for cap reasons especially when compared to Paris Lenon, Grady Jackson will cause problems due to his size(especially when compared to undersized nose Chuck Darby), Buchanon and Henry are far from great but solid so we are about the same at corner, just new names. Secondary will be an issue IMO. Rookies are rookies but they can have a big impact if they play and live up to the hype so Pettigrew and Delmas are just as impactful as any other player like Harvin/Raji/Matthews. Throw that on top of other solid players the Lions kept(some not all), and the improvment builds on itself making a suprise an option.

With it being May, everyone is optimistic. Bears fans are optimistic with Cutler but he hasn't proven anything either in a Bears uni and new Ron Turner offense. Especially with a lack of weapons. Green Bay was 6-10 and are switiching to the 3-4 that they may or may not fit. They haven't proven anything either. Vikings are the team to beat with only QB issues/suspension issues setting them back. Sage/TJ have a lot on their shoulders because clearly you can't win playoff games in this league without a QB or historic defense. Playoffs isn't a suprise for those teams, but each of these teams have to prove they can go deep in the playoffs just like the Lions have to prove they have significantly improved with this roster/coaching/GM overhaul. The Lions can compete head to head because North games are usually close. The rest of the schedule its up to your team to prove their worth.

Gay Ork Wang
05-15-2009, 07:26 PM
bears weapons are underrated. they lack weapons in form of WRs, its not like they lack weapons at all

JFLO
05-17-2009, 07:39 AM
I mainly picked Minnesota because of defense and the fact that Jay Cutler is going to have to do A LOT of work in Chi Town. Like previously mentioned, he's going to be seeing sometime on the turf and will have less valued wide receivers to throw to.

sweetness34
05-18-2009, 02:54 PM
Olsen, Hester, and Forte are weapons on offense, and good ones at that. It's not like Jay will have dog **** around him. If anything our offense is going to be better, we didn't change much will our skill positions and we added a Pro Bowl QB. The question we all have is about the defense.

marshallb
05-18-2009, 04:00 PM
Olsen, Hester, and Forte are weapons on offense, and good ones at that. It's not like Jay will have dog **** around him. If anything our offense is going to be better, we didn't change much will our skill positions and we added a Pro Bowl QB. The question we all have is about the defense.

I agree, IMO the Bears biggest weakness last year was the pass defense. They did nothing to address the pass rush and very little to address the secondary. I think the only addition to the secondary was in the draft and none of those will likely make a big impact.

Maybe Next Year Millen2
05-18-2009, 06:30 PM
Yes no weapons is an exaggeration for the Bears. Lack of number 1 receiver by far should be the statement. I think Hester can be a Eddie Royal type and get 800-900 yards and a half dozen tds. Same type of receiver. Olsen is a good TE weapon/redzone guy and Forte is good but has to work on that YPC. Cutler definitley helps the focus on Forte. Bears won't be top 5 or anything in O like Cutler was last year, but they'll be improved for sure borderline top 10 range. And with that defense way better than the Broncos, that might be all they need if Cutler can limit the ints.

Gay Ork Wang
05-24-2009, 01:25 PM
http://draftcountdown.com/forum/showthread.php?p=1155271&#post1155271

for the guy that said Shaun Rogers alone made them win 7 wins

Maybe Next Year Millen2
05-24-2009, 06:00 PM
Its pretty obvious it was Shaun Rogers if you watched our run D and pass rush last year compared to 2007(which was much better), missing Shaun Rogers for Chuck Darby was huge because of the double team on Rogers instead of Redding. Withthout Shaun Rogers, the D was historically bad and we couldn't hide our terrible Mike LB in Lenon on top of poor tackling safeties other than Bullocks. With Shaun Rogers playing at his highest level as a Lion, we win 7 games, did a good job in the first half stopping the run and force turnovers with a worse secondary, the D holds early and we sweep the Bears/beat the Vikings. Its a snowball effect without that double team. Just like poor QB play has a huge effect on the offense.

I fell into the Marinelli trap last year. His guys failed miserably. We had a bunch of undersized Rudis(the ****** Notre Dame guy) running around. Good idea, but alot like Millen all talk. We'll see what happens with bigger DTs and much much better LBs and better tackling safeties, nobody is saying they are competing for the division anyway. Hate away.

bearsfan_51
06-06-2009, 10:41 AM
http://www.draftcountdown.com/forum/showthread.php?t=24187

Part 2?
I own that thread. I should put it in my resume.

Addict
06-06-2009, 10:54 AM
I own that thread. I should put it in my resume.

it's tactica's thread, BF

bearsfan_51
06-06-2009, 10:58 AM
I want stormin normin to admit he's tactica. It won't happen, of course, because he's a coward.

Addict
06-07-2009, 07:08 AM
I want stormin normin to admit he's tactica. It won't happen, of course, because he's a coward.

IMO jury's still out. Even Tactica would realize that the lions have little to no chance of winning anything more than 4 games at this point.