re: Matt Stafford Agrees to 5 year contract with Lions

quote:

---

There's a good chance that GM that lets him go is long gone before he has a shot at getting that next QB.

---

That's a guarantee, so I get it.

Still doesn't mean I think it's the correct decision for the best interest of the franchise.

The goal is Super Bowl. Seems pretty obvious that the odds of DET doing that is super slim compared to many other teams, so when you say decreased odds, you're correct. But you're already at a really low starting point. So the point is, why keep on keeping on from that position of weakness? The overwhelming odds are DET won't even sniff a Super Bowl in the next 5 years, so why not start that rebuild now instead of most likely "wasting" 5 years before doing the same exact thing?

quote:

---

I don't know that a Super Bowl is the goal for all owners.

---

That's actually true as well, good point.

Fans only think about winning, but owners think about the financial side of it as well.

That would certainly be a good argument for keeping Stafford around.

Stafford turns 30, 3 days after the Super Bowl.

This signing is the Lions saying 'We are okay with being the Indiana Pacers of the NFL-- we accept a 9-7 ceiling, because it comes with a 6-10 floor'.

Terrible decision for a mid-level QB. Its how the Lions of the world remain the Detroit Lions of the world.

quote:

---

ETA: And just to keep the NBA comparison going, if the Lions were to let Stafford walk away and try to find a better QB in FA or through the draft, which NBA team would they be?

---

For NFL, the Denver Broncos, who won a SB after letting Cutler go to Chicago, who did not win a SB with Cutler there.

We know what Stafford is, the article made great points. He's not the problem in DET, but he's certainly not the solution either(stole that take, I heard it somewhere, it fits nicely)

5-46 for his career against winning teams, I think it's 1-25 vs winning teams on the road. What are the odds that Stafford and the Lions have playoff success of any kind over the next 5 years? When you guys are arguing that you get worse with Stafford, I just feel like you're telling me you go from 1% of a chance to .5%, so it's worth giving him $92mil, the % is made up on the fly but you get the point, that's how I process that.

quote:

---

why not start that rebuild now

---

They don't have to tank their team to rebuild, that thought process is flawed.

Even if you believe their "ceiling" is 8-8...they saved 5.5MM in '17 and had more projected 2018 cap space than anyone in the league. They still have plenty of money to throw around in 2018 FA even after this contract. They don't have to take a step back to move forward.

Lions made the right move. He won't be the highest paid QB this time next year and certainly not in year 4 of the contract. He's liked in Detroit and he likes Detroit. If you're the Lions you have to sign him. This is a team that saw Sanders and Johnson walk in the prime of their careers and yet they still sell out their stadium regularly. I give credit to the Ford family for wanting to have the best team possible with the best players possible for their fans. There are a lot of a-hole owners out there who would only think of the bottom line and let him walk for nothing.

quote:

---

Dalton higher QB rating, higher yards per attempt, higher TD %, higher overall rating---Stafford, better PR team

---

LINK

quote:

---

but he's remarkably lousy against good teams. Something like 5-50 in his career against teams that finished over .500.

---

Knowing you'll have to beat 3 or 4 good teams, including a couple of the best, why iwould you then HAVE to do whatever it takes to keep him?

quote:

---

Byron Bojangles III

---

quote:

---

Because they're the Lions, they don't get to have nice things very often.

---

This logic feels like a good way to remain the Lions.