PDA

View Full Version : 2007 Lions Schedule


Lions-Slappy
04-11-2007, 12:25 PM
Ouch no favors for the Lions and there 3-13 record last year, looks like they will have one of the toughest schedules in the league. finishing with Dallas, at San Diego, Kansas City and at Green Bay.



2007 Schedule

Sep 9 @Oakland 4:15pm
Sep 16 Minnesota 4:05pm
Sep 23 @Philadelphia 1:00pm
Sep 30 Chicago 1:00pm
Oct 7 @Washington 1:00pm
Week 6 BYE
Oct 21 Tampa Bay 1:00pm
Oct 28 @Chicago 1:00pm
Nov 4 Denver 1:00pm
Nov 11 @Arizona 4:15pm
Nov 18 N.Y. Giants 4:15pm
Nov 22 Green Bay 12:30pm
Dec 2 @Minnesota 1:00pm
Dec 9 Dallas 1:00pm
Dec 16 @San Diego 4:15pm
Dec 23 Kansas City 1:00pm
Dec 30 @Green Bay 1:00pm

Another top 5 pick in the 2008 Draft? best hope 5-11 record.

Bootland27
04-11-2007, 12:46 PM
What does the toughest schedule in the NFC equate to?????

0-16: I believe :rolleyes:

Maybe Next Year Millen2
04-11-2007, 12:49 PM
At least we will know right away if we have no chance. If we lost to Oaklanad and Minnesota we will know its gonna be a long season. Could be Week 1 against a rookie QB in Russell. Week 2 Travaris Jackson another essential rookie.

WMD
04-11-2007, 01:16 PM
I won't underrate Oakland, their defense was pretty good last year. They can definately take us in Game 1 of the year.. I looked over the schedule and can only see 2 Wins.. Home Opener against Minnesota, and Thanksgiving against the Packers...

DeMonikk1
04-11-2007, 01:28 PM
Yeah, 4-12 is a distinct possibility....I am disappointed..

Xiomera
04-11-2007, 01:34 PM
I'm happy to see a more traditional opponant on Thanksgiving. It should always be against the Packers, Bears, or Vikings, IMO.

Thomas7399
04-11-2007, 01:38 PM
That settles it.......draft defensive in first round this year.....draft brohm in first round next year

DeMonikk1
04-11-2007, 01:39 PM
That settles it.......draft defensive in first round this year.....draft brohm in first round next year

Exactly what I hope for..

lionsfan81
04-11-2007, 01:41 PM
i see a 13-3 season baby!! :)

Jagonsucker
04-11-2007, 01:44 PM
lol wow 1-15 here we come!

WMD
04-11-2007, 01:50 PM
That settles it.......draft defensive in first round this year.....draft brohm in first round next year

Defense this year AND Defense next year!

Gaines Adams, or trade down for Patrick Willis this year.. Next year, take Kenny Phillips or Calais Campbell.. That is full of Me-Happiness.

Addict
04-11-2007, 02:03 PM
lol wow 1-15 here we come!

Wow, you're one negative dude. It's a tough schedule I agree, but 1-15's overreacting.

C'mon, there are a few very winnable games in this schedule

@Oakland - tougher than it looks, but they have either a rookie QB or... well nobody at QB, so definately one we can win. 1-0
Minnesota - beatable team, if we show up, we can win this one 2-0
@Philadelphia - tough, very tough, McNabb should still be around by week 4, so... let's say it's a loss. 2-1
Chicago - super bowl losers don't do well the next year. We should be able to win, toughie though, but it's a 10-man offense vs. 12 guys on D (Grossman ;)) 3-1
@ Washington - ehm... nah we lose this one 3-2
BYE - it's a cat in the bag, this team never shows up, shame it don't count
Tampa Bay - home against tampa. Nuff said. 4-2
@Chicago - I cheated earlier, so... yeah we lose. Just pray Urlacher doens't eat one of our players 4-3
Denver - could go either way, but since I have been overly positive... 4-4
@Arizona - This one we should be able to win... 5-4
N.Y. Giants - Eli Manning, no Tiki. 6-4
Green Bay - We should be able to get them, we're at home 7-4
@Minnesota - we got one, we ain't gettin' two 7-5
Dallas - depends on how romo plays next year, since he wasn't playing brilliant football near the end last year but... 7-6 (8-5 if Romo handels the kick-placements)
@San Diego - ehm... I'm not even gonna try to give us this one 7-7
Kansas City - don't you just hate the way we collapse near the end? 7-8
@Green Bay - Packers are gonna be like 16-year old drama queens and win this one, just because we beat them earlier this season 7-9

So! Another losing record, again, no playoffs. But if it goes down like that... I'd be happy. Well I'd probably be really upset since we'd lose 5 in a row near the end, but... 7-9 is decent.

Maybe Next Year Millen2
04-11-2007, 02:51 PM
Wow, you're one negative dude. It's a tough schedule I agree, but 1-15's overreacting.

C'mon, there are a few very winnable games in this schedule

@Oakland - tougher than it looks, but they have either a rookie QB or... well nobody at QB, so definately one we can win. 1-0
Minnesota - beatable team, if we show up, we can win this one 2-0
@Philadelphia - tough, very tough, McNabb should still be around by week 4, so... let's say it's a loss. 2-1
Chicago - super bowl losers don't do well the next year. We should be able to win, toughie though, but it's a 10-man offense vs. 12 guys on D (Grossman ;)) 3-1
@ Washington - ehm... nah we lose this one 3-2
BYE - it's a cat in the bag, this team never shows up, shame it don't count
Tampa Bay - home against tampa. Nuff said. 4-2
@Chicago - I cheated earlier, so... yeah we lose. Just pray Urlacher doens't eat one of our players 4-3
Denver - could go either way, but since I have been overly positive... 4-4
@Arizona - This one we should be able to win... 5-4
N.Y. Giants - Eli Manning, no Tiki. 6-4
Green Bay - We should be able to get them, we're at home 7-4
@Minnesota - we got one, we ain't gettin' two 7-5
Dallas - depends on how romo plays next year, since he wasn't playing brilliant football near the end last year but... 7-6 (8-5 if Romo handels the kick-placements)
@San Diego - ehm... I'm not even gonna try to give us this one 7-7
Kansas City - don't you just hate the way we collapse near the end? 7-8
@Green Bay - Packers are gonna be like 16-year old drama queens and win this one, just because we beat them earlier this season 7-9

So! Another losing record, again, no playoffs. But if it goes down like that... I'd be happy. Well I'd probably be really upset since we'd lose 5 in a row near the end, but... 7-9 is decent.

I agree with most of that except switch the home game vs Bears W to a L and the Washington game to a winnable game. Min game Week 2 is against another essential rookie in Travaris Jackson too. That last game could be Brett Favres last game. Win for the Packers, no doubt about it. We haven't won in Lambeau since before Favre. Lambeau in December again too for the Lions, we never go there in September. 7-9 is my optimistic opinion as well. That is sad 7-9 is optimistic but we are the Lions.

Mythos
04-11-2007, 03:06 PM
Why all the suprise? We knew we had the AFC West and NFC East. We just didn't know the other two (tampa, ARz) or the actual dates.

I think the first two games are going to be very telling. If we start 0-2 it could get very ugly. I like Minny & Tampa as our best chances for wins.

Chucky
04-11-2007, 03:08 PM
whats the best way to get single game seats for the Lions( specifically for the bucs game) mad rep will be given

P-L
04-11-2007, 03:18 PM
Wow. I only see 7 winnable games on the schedule. And the chances of us winning all of them are slim to none. *Sigh* Here comes another 5-11 season.

TacticaLion
04-11-2007, 03:23 PM
Any team can win any game any day. Teams improve and digress every year.

That being said, that schedule is incredible. We COULD hit 7 (as P-L said)... but 5 seems like a possibility.

Anything can happen, though...

Addict
04-11-2007, 03:26 PM
I agree with most of that except switch the home game vs Bears W to a L and the Washington game to a winnable game. Min game Week 2 is against another essential rookie in Travaris Jackson too. That last game could be Brett Favres last game. Win for the Packers, no doubt about it. We haven't won in Lambeau since before Favre. Lambeau in December again too for the Lions, we never go there in September. 7-9 is my optimistic opinion as well. That is sad 7-9 is optimistic but we are the Lions.

Well, I was kinda cheating with the bears game, and I really wasn't sure about Washington, but since we would be 4-1 otherwise, which would've been way too optimistic (momentum coming into play and all that). So point taken, but I refuse to predict us going 0-2 against the Bears next year. 1-1 just sounds better.

Tarvaris Jackson... well there's a few issues with that point:
1- he's won't technically be a rookie
2- by no means a sure starter, they could go QB round 1, so I just settled for not bringing the QB situation up and calling it a W.

And... I don't see your last point... Green Bay beats us in game 16, the WHY really isn't improtant. You say emotional victory since Favre is calling it quits (probably), I say because they're 16-year old girly drama queens who want to avenge their away loss. Same difference.

Scotty D
04-11-2007, 04:56 PM
Like P-L I see about 8 games that we have a shot at. We always tend to steal 1 or 2 games that we shouldn't be in.

bearsfan_51
04-11-2007, 05:02 PM
Didn't you guys know who you were playing? I don't see how this is a shocker. Everyone knew the NFC North would be a tough run playing the NFC East and AFC West. If you think you have a tough schedule you should check out the Bears.

TheMadLionsFan
04-11-2007, 05:03 PM
4 - 12

.............................

woodnick
04-11-2007, 05:25 PM
Didn't you guys know who you were playing? I don't see how this is a shocker. Everyone knew the NFC North would be a tough run playing the NFC East and AFC West. If you think you have a tough schedule you should check out the Bears.

Yeah, the second easiest schedule in the league. Pretty brutal!

" The Super Bowl loser lament was broken when the Seahawks won the NFC West last year, ending a six-year streak in which the Super Bowl loser didn't make the playoffs. Thanks to the league's second-easiest schedule, the Bears shouldn't have much of a dropoff from their 13-3 season. Though their .465 schedule (119-137) is substantially tougher than the league easiest schedule of 2006, they have six games to play with in the NFC North. The Bears might not win 13, but they still should win 11 and maybe 12 games this season despite a possible holdout by linebacker Lance Briggs. "
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=clayton_john&id=2833485

TacticaLion
04-11-2007, 05:32 PM
Didn't you guys know who you were playing? I don't see how this is a shocker. Everyone knew the NFC North would be a tough run playing the NFC East and AFC West. If you think you have a tough schedule you should check out the Bears.
Holy jesus. You've gotta sit on the Lions forum and remind them that *gasp* the Bears are still in the NFL. Great. We get it. Go away.

"Hey guys! If you think YOU have it tough, come check us out!". "Hey guys! Millen is HORRIBLE! What about Mike Williams now?!". "HAHA! Without McCown, maybe Mike Williams can make the roster! HAHRAHRHARHAR!".

There's a place where Bears fans can go and make friends... and it's called the "Chicago Bears Team Forum". Go there and make the stupid comments... not here.

detroit4life
04-11-2007, 05:40 PM
i see 4-12 as worst case and 7-9 as best case for us this year either way i say we take Kenny Phillips next year hes amazing

Scotty D
04-11-2007, 05:48 PM
i see 4-12 as worst case and 7-9 as best case for us this year either way i say we take Kenny Phillips next year hes amazing

Lets atleast get one of the guys from Miami. Phillips or Calais Campbell. That would make me happy.

detroit4life
04-11-2007, 05:51 PM
Lets atleast get one of the guys from Miami. Phillips or Calais Campbell. That would make me happy.


yeah but somthign about those miami safetys makes me want phillips they seem to allways be good and i'd be surprised if we didnt take a DE this year but safety is going to be a big need next year since jennedy is going to exposed a lot this year IMO

bearsfan_51
04-11-2007, 07:07 PM
Yeah, the second easiest schedule in the league. Pretty brutal!

" The Super Bowl loser lament was broken when the Seahawks won the NFC West last year, ending a six-year streak in which the Super Bowl loser didn't make the playoffs. Thanks to the league's second-easiest schedule, the Bears shouldn't have much of a dropoff from their 13-3 season. Though their .465 schedule (119-137) is substantially tougher than the league easiest schedule of 2006, they have six games to play with in the NFC North. The Bears might not win 13, but they still should win 11 and maybe 12 games this season despite a possible holdout by linebacker Lance Briggs. "
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=clayton_john&id=2833485
We play all the same teams you do, except we play the Saints-Seahawks, and you play the Bucs-Cardinals. I would say ours is harder. Not to mention that it's not just who you play, but when and where. We've got many more primetime games on the road and more west coast road trips I believe. Anybody that even remotely follows the NFL should have known who they were playing as soon as the season ended last year. The only reason why we have a lower % is because we get to play each other twice.

So unless you're going to concede that playing the Bears twice is that brutal, I don't see how the Lions schedule is harder.

bearsfan_51
04-11-2007, 07:09 PM
Holy jesus. You've gotta sit on the Lions forum and remind them that *gasp* the Bears are still in the NFL. Great. We get it. Go away.

"Hey guys! If you think YOU have it tough, come check us out!". "Hey guys! Millen is HORRIBLE! What about Mike Williams now?!". "HAHA! Without McCown, maybe Mike Williams can make the roster! HAHRAHRHARHAR!".

There's a place where Bears fans can go and make friends... and it's called the "Chicago Bears Team Forum". Go there and make the stupid comments... not here.

Actually ever other comment you just listed wasn't on the Lions forum, or stupid for that matter. Sorry for providing perspective, I know it hurts your brain.

And I do post on the Bears board, and lots of other ones too.

Xiomera
04-11-2007, 07:38 PM
Nah, we will go 2-14 . . . mark it down. Millen is going for a bell shaped curve in victories . . .

2-14
3-13
5-11
6-10
5-11
3-13
2-14

TacticaLion
04-11-2007, 08:36 PM
Actually ever other comment you just listed wasn't on the Lions forum, or stupid for that matter. Sorry for providing perspective, I know it hurts your brain.

And I do post on the Bears board, and lots of other ones too.
Haha... providing prospective. You're comparing our schedules as if our teams are equal... both 13-3 the previous season and both made it into the playoffs.

Playing you (for us) should be a hard game... while you playing us should be an easy game for you. As stated, you have the second easiest schedule in the NFL.

You seem to want to talk about the Bears... but in the Lions forum. Stay over there.

dreadedluck
04-11-2007, 09:31 PM
A few weeks ago all you clowns talked about was 10-6. Now back tracking comments, loser attitudes and even more hyprocitical lapses. Goes to show you the fans in Detroit are also in denial. Big ups to all you floppers out there keep twisted it up!!! It seems only Canadians make sense in this chatroom!!

TacticaLion
04-11-2007, 11:20 PM
A few weeks ago all you clowns talked about was 10-6. Now back tracking comments, loser attitudes and even more hyprocitical lapses. Goes to show you the fans in Detroit are also in denial. Big ups to all you floppers out there keep twisted it up!!! It seems only Canadians make sense in this chatroom!!I have no clue what that meant.

Denial? Umm... if we thought we'd go 15-1 next year, we'd be in denial. We have a HARD schedule next year... and, as it is possible that we can win 10 games next year, it's unlikely (as I said above).

A lot of rage in that post, though... keep up the good work.

woodnick
04-12-2007, 12:14 AM
We play all the same teams you do, except we play the Saints-Seahawks, and you play the Bucs-Cardinals. I would say ours is harder. Not to mention that it's not just who you play, but when and where. We've got many more primetime games on the road and more west coast road trips I believe. Anybody that even remotely follows the NFL should have known who they were playing as soon as the season ended last year. The only reason why we have a lower % is because we get to play each other twice.

So unless you're going to concede that playing the Bears twice is that brutal, I don't see how the Lions schedule is harder.

Not trying to be a fair-weather fan, but the last time I checked it's more difficult to play the superbowl runner-up twice than the division's last place team.

woodnick
04-12-2007, 12:38 AM
IMO our record will completely depend on who we draft.

Scenarion 1) If we draft Quinn rd 1 than we win get no more than 3-4 wins.

Scenario 2) If we can trade down and get Thomas or Adams + additional 2nd and more with defense heavy draft, we end up with around 5-7 wins.

Scenario 3) If we do the very very improbable and trade down twice then trade up and end up w/ Adams or Landry and Willis in the 1st then Spencer or Merriweather in 2nd and Hughes in 3rd then we end up with 8-9 wins.

Scenario 3 will not happen, but I see it as the very best case scenario and then I still find it hard to believe 10 wins is achievable.

In my mind, the over under for a successful season is 6 wins. 7 wins and I'm almost content for the year, 5 and I'm still using Matt Millen toilet paper.

Mythos
04-12-2007, 01:08 AM
yeah but somthign about those miami safetys makes me want phillips they seem to allways be good and i'd be surprised if we didnt take a DE this year but safety is going to be a big need next year since jennedy is going to exposed a lot this year IMO

I see us reaching for Adams, not addressing safety, and picking high in '08. Phillips should definitely be the man under those circumstances. I could see, however, a new coach/GM blowing everything up and starting w/ the QB.

Iamcanadian
04-12-2007, 02:51 AM
IMO our record will completely depend on who we draft.

Scenarion 1) If we draft Quinn rd 1 than we win get no more than 3-4 wins.

Scenario 2) If we can trade down and get Thomas or Adams + additional 2nd and more with defense heavy draft, we end up with around 5-7 wins.

Scenario 3) If we do the very very improbable and trade down twice then trade up and end up w/ Adams or Landry and Willis in the 1st then Spencer or Merriweather in 2nd and Hughes in 3rd then we end up with 8-9 wins.

Scenario 3 will not happen, but I see it as the very best case scenario and then I still find it hard to believe 10 wins is achievable.

In my mind, the over under for a successful season is 6 wins. 7 wins and I'm almost content for the year, 5 and I'm still using Matt Millen toilet paper.

Did you know that only 20-26% of rookies even start the season as starters. Rookies outside of RB's rarely ever impact the success of a team in their 1st season. We should win between 4 and 6 games depending on how good Martz's offense performs. If he cannot get Kitna to significantly cut down on his interceptions, we could even win less than 4 games but I feel Martz will manage the offense better in his second season and 6 wins is possible. Even if we draft Adams and find a MLB in the draft, our defense won't show a lot of improvement until next year after they get some seasoning. The defense is still going to be a major problem which really worries me because Marinelli is suppose to be a defensive coach and great defensive HC's get their teams to play defense even with mediocre talent. Marinelli has yet to show he can do that.
What is truly sad is that you, a Detroit fan, accept 6 wins as a decent season and 7 wins as your content level. Please order a lot more Millen toilet paper and just maybe if we get rid of him, we can actually contemplate the playoffs.

Iamcanadian
04-12-2007, 02:52 AM
I could see, however, a new coach/GM blowing everything up and starting w/ the QB.

May it come to pass !!!

Maybe Next Year Millen2
04-12-2007, 09:01 AM
We play all the same teams you do, except we play the Saints-Seahawks, and you play the Bucs-Cardinals. I would say ours is harder. Not to mention that it's not just who you play, but when and where. We've got many more primetime games on the road and more west coast road trips I believe. Anybody that even remotely follows the NFL should have known who they were playing as soon as the season ended last year. The only reason why we have a lower % is because we get to play each other twice.

So unless you're going to concede that playing the Bears twice is that brutal, I don't see how the Lions schedule is harder.

I agree we all knew the schedule way beforehand. I wasn't suprised with the teams we play, the only thing brutal about the schedule for the Lions is a really tough last 6 weeks.

It is the same exact schedule (even in terms of who we play home and away) except for the two games as you said. Tampa and Arizona are improved teams even though the Saints and Seahawks are still good. We don't know who will be better right now. Maybe the Saints could be ravaged by injury when you play them or overachieved last year. You play the Saints Week 17, you or the Saints may have already clinched something by then and be playing backups. We both have one short week with a Thursday. Tampa won't have Gradkowski starting at QB this year also. In terms of west coast games you are wrong. We both have 3 each. Both at San Diego and at Oakland for both teams. You go to Seattle, we travel to Arizona. Point is you can't really tell yet who has the harder schedule. All I can say is the entire NFC North has a brutal schedule because we are playing two very strong divisions in the NFC East and AFC West.

woodnick
04-12-2007, 11:23 AM
Did you know that only 20-26% of rookies even start the season as starters. Rookies outside of RB's rarely ever impact the success of a team in their 1st season. We should win between 4 and 6 games depending on how good Martz's offense performs. If he cannot get Kitna to significantly cut down on his interceptions, we could even win less than 4 games but I feel Martz will manage the offense better in his second season and 6 wins is possible. Even if we draft Adams and find a MLB in the draft, our defense won't show a lot of improvement until next year after they get some seasoning. The defense is still going to be a major problem which really worries me because Marinelli is suppose to be a defensive coach and great defensive HC's get their teams to play defense even with mediocre talent. Marinelli has yet to show he can do that.
What is truly sad is that you, a Detroit fan, accept 6 wins as a decent season and 7 wins as your content level. Please order a lot more Millen toilet paper and just maybe if we get rid of him, we can actually contemplate the playoffs.

I said that "7 wins and I'm almost content for the year" meaning that 7 wins, IMO, is an indication that we are on the right path. Granted I should have said " the over under on a successful rebuilding season is 6 wins," but I just felt like that was implied given the current state of our franchise. If you want to be a realist/pesimist/downer or whatever you consider yourself that's fine, just please don't misquote me to try to prove that you aren't happy with the Lions.

And yes, I understand that rookies hardly ever make an impact on the field, however you forgot to mention LB's as a position that make an impact. If we can get Willis and he can make an impact like Ryans/Vilma/Sims did than IMO our defense can take a big step forward. In scenarios 2 and 3 I had the Lions drafting players in the first that would be able to contribute right away, and the more holes a team has that is filled during the draft, the more rookies contribute. If you draft for depth and/or future then the rookies sit and don't contribute.

JPLUFF
04-12-2007, 11:32 AM
Best case scenario this team wins 5 games. I think they can beat Minnesota at home, Oakland in week one, Tampa Bay at home, Arizona at Arizona, and Green Bay thanksgiving day. I think they'll end up being 3-13, but right now there are 5 winnable games on that schedule.

Aard
04-12-2007, 11:40 AM
Nah, we will go 2-14 . . . mark it down. Millen is going for a bell shaped curve in victories . . .

2-14
3-13
5-11
6-10
5-11
3-13
2-14

Heh. "Ask not for whom the bell tolls..."

Addict
04-12-2007, 05:00 PM
Nah, we will go 2-14 . . . mark it down. Millen is going for a bell shaped curve in victories . . .

2-14
3-13
5-11
6-10
5-11
3-13
2-14

Well at least if we do end up 2-14 we could always argue that it was for reasons of symmetry.