Welcome to Detroit Sports Forum!

By joining our community, you'll be able to connect with fellow fans that live and breathe Detroit sports just like you!

Get Started
  • If you are no longer able to access your account since our recent switch from vBulletin to XenForo, you may need to reset your password via email. If you no longer have access to the email attached to your account, please fill out our contact form and we will assist you ASAP. Thanks for your continued support of DSF.

What to do with Stafford

Lions had 4 winning seasons with Stafford (they have 0 with a lesser QB)

wow...4 winning seasons out of 12. Holy shit...what a ringing endorsement!

They had winning seasons 33% of the time and 67% of the time had losing seasons. They made the playoffs 25% of the time winning 0 playoff games

In the 18 seasons prior to Matt they had winning seasons 35% of the time and losing seasons 65% of the time (better than Matt with QBs worse than him). They made the playoffs 35% of the time and actually won a playoff game.

The Lions actually had more success with lesser QBs than they have had with Matt.
 
For fucks sake read my whole post

There are other seasons he played well enough for playoffs. If they had Rodgers or Maholmes at QB it is still probably 4 winning seasons in 12. Maybe less.

Based on Staffords play alone, they should have made the playoffs 10 of 12 seasons.
 
Last edited:
For fucks sake read my whole post

There are other seasons he played well enough for playoffs. If they had Rodgers or Maholmes at QB it is still probably 4 winning seasons in 12. Maybe less.

Based on Staffords play alone, they should have made the playoffs 10 of 12 seasons.

the rest of your post is garbage. The same shit you regurgitate every year...excuse after excuse. Teams deal with the same shit that the Lions and Matt deal with. The Lions teams in the past had the same shit happening and yet those "lesser" QBs were able to lead those teams to more success than your boy Matt.

If they had Rodgers or Maholmes at QB it is still probably 4 winning seasons in 12. Maybe less.

Based on Staffords play alone, they should have made the playoffs 10 of 12 seasons.

These are the statements that you make that causes you to lose all credibility.
 
Rodgers and Maholmes do not deal with poor run game, as many weapon caused turnovers and beyond terrible defense. And when they do, they lose too

IT IS A FACT STAFFORD HAS WORST RUN SUPPORT BY FAR OF ANY QB OVER THE 12 YEARS

ALSO ONE OF THE WORST DEFENSIVE SUPPORT

PLUS ALL THE INJURIES

NOBODY OVERCOMES ALL THOSE THINGS. ITS REASONS NOT EXCUSES AND THERE ARE MORE REASONS FOR LOSING THAN OTHER QBS HAVE TO DEAL WITH. YOUR BULLSHIT ALL QBS DEAL WITH IT IS WRONG. NOBODY DEALS WITH IT THE AMOUNT STAFFORD HAS TO
 
Rodgers and Maholmes do not deal with poor run game, as many weapon caused turnovers and beyond terrible defense. And when they do, they lose too

IT IS A FACT STAFFORD HAS WORST RUN SUPPORT BY FAR OF ANY QB OVER THE 12 YEARS

ALSO ONE OF THE WORST DEFENSIVE SUPPORT

PLUS ALL THE INJURIES

NOBODY OVERCOMES ALL THOSE THINGS. ITS REASONS NOT EXCUSES AND THERE ARE MORE REASONS FOR LOSING THAN OTHER QBS HAVE TO DEAL WITH. YOUR BULLSHIT ALL QBS DEAL WITH IT IS WRONG. NOBODY DEALS WITH IT THE AMOUNT STAFFORD HAS TO

finally, you admit that the Lions are total shit. It's about time.
 
finally, you admit that the Lions are total shit. It's about time.

Had good plans and all my predictions were spot on going into seasons as I had plenty of reasoning. Went to shit for various reasons. Injuries a big one, coaching another and good players in past seasons not executing in certain seasons. NFL is tough

New era. Let's see what Campbell/Holmes and a new QB can do. They better build around him WAAAAAAAY better than they did Stafford especially since new QB will probably be WAAAAY worse than Stafford
 
Rodgers and Maholmes do not deal with poor run game, as many weapon caused turnovers and beyond terrible defense. And when they do, they lose too

IT IS A FACT STAFFORD HAS WORST RUN SUPPORT BY FAR OF ANY QB OVER THE 12 YEARS

ALSO ONE OF THE WORST DEFENSIVE SUPPORT

PLUS ALL THE INJURIES

NOBODY OVERCOMES ALL THOSE THINGS. ITS REASONS NOT EXCUSES AND THERE ARE MORE REASONS FOR LOSING THAN OTHER QBS HAVE TO DEAL WITH. YOUR BULLSHIT ALL QBS DEAL WITH IT IS WRONG. NOBODY DEALS WITH IT THE AMOUNT STAFFORD HAS TO

59 yds rushing. 400 yards given up. Mahomes beats the bills in a blowout...because of him. Everything you say is false.
 
59 yds rushing. 400 yards given up. Mahomes beats the bills in a blowout...because of him. Everything you say is false.

LOL garbage yards did you even watch the game. Chiefs D held Bills in check big time. Also Tyreek Hill did all the work.

Also the punt fumble gave Bills a TD. Then it was all stud defense from there. FGs no touchdowns until late

It's like you have never watch a game in your life

https://www.espn.com/nfl/boxscore?gameId=401220401

And Chiefs had 114 yards rushing in that game against the Bills. and two rushing TDs by the Chiefs lol. 4.6 YPC

Allen had an 80 QB rating.

Had late garbage runs by Allen. Bills scored 24 points with 9 of them in garbage time. late TD, onside and FG
 
Last edited:
LOL garbage yards did you even watch the game. Chiefs D held Bills in check big time. Also Tyreek Hill did all the work.

Also the punt fumble gave Bills a TD. Then it was all stud defense from there. FGs no touchdowns until late

It's like you have never watch a game in your life

https://www.espn.com/nfl/boxscore?gameId=401220401

And Chiefs had 114 yards rushing in that game against the Bills. and two rushing TDs by the Chiefs lol. 4.6 YPC

Allen had an 80 QB rating.

Had late garbage runs by Allen. Bills scored 24 points with 9 of them in garbage time. late TD, onside and FG

run game stats were boosted by a trick play to a WR (end around). KC RB, 19 rushes for 59 yards (3.1 YCP)
 
https://www.si.com/nfl/broncos/news...avorite-to-land-qb-matthew-stafford-via-trade

Broncos are Now Odds-On Favorite to Land QB Matthew Stafford via Trade
Are the Broncos in the Matthew Stafford hunt or is it just outside speculation? The oddsmakers are rarely wrong.
NICK KENDELLUPDATED:JAN 27, 2021ORIGINAL:JAN 26, 2021
The 2021 NFL offseason starts now, at least in the hearts and minds of Broncos Country. With the hated division-rival Kansas City Chiefs set to play in their second consecutive Super Bowl led by the inhuman Patrick Mahomes against the Tampa Bay Tom Bradys, a worse outcome could hardly have been imagined to cap off what has been a frustrating calendar year.

For the Denver Broncos, while the Super Bowl won?t kick off until February 7, the offseason is already in full swing.

The Broncos wasted no time in kicking things off with bang. Coming off of a fifth-straight year missing the postseason, the call for continuity was quickly squashed as Broncos legend John Elway stepped down as general manager and George Paton was hired to succeed him.

While Paton has preached that drafting and developing will be the lifeblood of the organization under his watch, he has also stated that with him in charge, the team would be involved in every potential deal.

One potential 'deal' the Broncos are being linked to is the acquisition of quarterback Matthew Stafford. Stafford, who will turn 33 in a week's time, is the former No. 1 overall pick out of Georgia in 2009. While the Detroit Lions have not had much team success during his tenure, he has annually been one of the better statistical quarterbacks, keeping a consistently outmanned Lions team in games where they were outmatched.

Of course, Aaron Rodgers and the Green Bay Packers were the largest roadblock keeping Stafford and the Lions from contending, but also the Lions never seemed to be able to develop that good defense while the Chicago Bears and Minnesota Vikings were able to which allowed them to compete with Rodgers in the NFC North.


It?s become a running joke how the Lions were never able to build a capable running game during Stafford?s tenure in the Motor City.


It can easily be argued the reasons things didn?t completely fall apart in Detroit over the past few years is because of the talent and play of Stafford. Despite his best efforts, the Lions just can?t seem to get out of the way of their own inept reputation. The Lions have reportedly agreed to let Stafford seek a trade and will presumably begin fielding offers. Stafford will be gone.


If Vegas' odds are improving for Stafford to wind up in Denver, people should pay attention. Vegas wasn?t built by losing money. Denver is likely interested in Stafford and they very well may trade for him before the offseason is over and now, according to SportsBetting.com, the Broncos are the odds-on favorite to land him.

What happens next for the Broncos? Don't miss out on any news and analysis! Take a second and sign up for our free newsletter and get breaking Broncos news delivered to your inbox daily!

A Contract Denver can Live With
Even despite Drew Lock finishing the 2020 campaign on a statistical upward trend, there appears to be growing momentum for the Broncos landing Stafford this offseason. Sporting an extremely palatable contract with a $20 million cap hit in 2021 and a $23 million dollar cap hit in 2022, Stafford will be just the seventeenth highest-paid quarterback next season on a short-term deal.



Also while 33 is not 'young', it?s much younger than the quarterbacks that played this past Sunday in the NFC Championship ? Aaron Rodgers at 37 and Tom Brady at 43 (43?! How is that even possible?) can easily serve as the argument for Stafford having 3-to-5 great seasons left, and could play beyond that. For context, Stafford is the same age as Russell Wilson. Is Wilson too old?

Stafford will not completely close the gap between the Broncos and the Chiefs alone. It will take an equal helping of great decisions and luck for Denver to contend with Mahomes for the next decade-plus, but the first step is rostering a quarterback capable of giving you a chance.

Lock Isn't There Yet
Could Lock be that guy? Maybe one day, but he wasn?t in 2020. Furthermore, Lock is at the bottom of enough statistical categories this season that Paton would be remiss to not explore avenues to improve the position.

This is further true when analyzing the roster. The only way this Broncos offense can get substantially better given the amount of talent and resources already invested on that side of the ball is if the quarterback plays better.

Sure, getting Courtland Sutton back will be big, figuring out the right tackle position is going to matter, and everyone growing a year older and better is important, but in the end, the biggest difference this offense can make this offseason is improved play at the quarterback position ? Lock or not.


With Lock, the Broncos go into 2021 with the fourth-best quarterback in the AFC West, but with Stafford, the team would be in the conversation for the second-best. Las Vegas' Derek Carr has had some up-and-down seasons and definitely belongs, but he isn?t obviously better than Stafford and while L.A.'s Justin Herbert had an incredible rookie season, he had some outlier statistics (such as his accuracy under pressure) that tend to fluctuate wildly season-to-season. Herbert has the goods and is likely a franchise quarterback, but it wouldn?t be shocking to see some statistical regression in 2021.

A Base Familiarity
The Stafford-to-Denver connection also gains merit given the Broncos' current regime is littered with staffers that used to work in the NFC North. With Vic Fangio and Ed Donatell?s history with the Bears and Pat Shurmur and Paton?s past with the Vikings, Denver has many higher-ups that would have a pretty good idea of what the Broncos would be getting in trading for Stafford. It's said that the NFL is a 'who you know' league, and connections like this can influence decisions.

Speaking of Fangio, while Paton will be the man who makes the final decision, it would make sense that the Broncos head coach would be very much interested in Stafford. After two more down than up seasons, Fangio is on the hot seat entering the 2021 season.

While it can be argued Fangio may want all the draft capital and cap space possible to find guys he wants for the defense for a make-or-break season, I think it?s even more likely he would prefer to bring in a known quantity and value at the quarterback position so he can worry less about that side of the ball and focus more on what he knows best; coaching defense.



Sidebar: Stafford Wouldn't Necessarily Doom Lock
While many who believe in Lock will believe obtaining Stafford likely means the end for Drew in Denver, that is not necessarily the case. Given the requisite arm talent and athleticism Lock possesses, he could still develop into a good NFL quarterback.

Lock is also incredibly cheap on his rookie contract, costing about $2 million per season against the cap the next two years. As long as he has the maturity to not be a locker room issue following a hypothetical addition of Stafford, I honestly would argue it makes more sense to keep Lock.

Lock has shown he can start in this league and the Broncos likely won?t find an equitable return on him this offseason via trade. He has more value as the backup with youth, tools, and developmental upside than flipping him just to flip him.

Talent Just Waiting to be Capitalized On
One final aspect that likely cannot be overstated in trading for Stafford is his potential effect on the entire Broncos offense. While not likely to the extent of going from Tim Tebow to Peyton Manning, the development of Demariyus Thomas, Eric Decker, and Julius Thomas under the watchful eye and grueling demands of the five-time NFL MVP was a giant difference-maker for the respective careers of those three players (and earnings).

With the 2021 Broncos have so much youth at the pass-catcher positions in Jerry Jeudy, KJ Hamler, Noah Fant, and Albert Okwuegbunam, obtaining a veteran to help grow this cache of young receiving options could have long-term effects on the overall health of the team. Much like Tampa Bay's offense this season, Denver's offense has the pieces in place to have a veteran come in and explode the following season.


Cost to Acquire can be Absorbed
In the end, the Broncos are in the driver's seat on whether or not they want to pursue Stafford. Holding the No. 9 overall pick in April's draft, a high second-, a high third-rounder, and a few tradable receivers, it would be hard for the Indianapolis Colts or San Francisco 49ers to beat Denver in a bid.

The question then comes down to how valuable the Lions believe Stafford is and how much Paton and the Broncos are willing to give up. Is it a first-rounder and multiple Day 2 picks like some have suggested or is it two seconds like Peter King floated? In due time we will find out.

There is no such thing as a perfect roster in the NFL. There will always be holes and positions that are not as strong as they could be. That is the nature of the NFL.

Teams will still try to craft as talented and complete of a depth chart as possible but inevitably some signings will flob, picks will bust, and players will get dinged. The easiest way to compete with that attrition is having an unquestioned franchise quarterback under center.

Bottom Line
Stafford is obtainable, won?t cost that much on the cap, and would give the Broncos a 5-to-8 year window potentially to compete with a quarterback good enough to win a lot of games. If the cost to acquire is palatable, Stafford-to-Denver makes a heck of a lot of sense and no one should be shocked if it does indeed come to fruition.


Stafford would come in on day one and raise the Broncos? floor, open up a window to contend for the playoffs again, and give Denver a shot for the next half-decade with the quarterback position finally having some stability and a proven talent under center.

Stafford would give Fangio a better shot to keep his job, likely leading the Broncos to a better outcome in 2021 than any other likely alternative. Stafford would also give Paton flexibility and time to find an heir at the quarterback position over the next two years of Stafford?s contract (if not beyond).

Adding Stafford may feel like a 'win now' move on the surface, but in reality, it could be Paton fulfilling Elway's philosophy ever since Manning rode off into the sunset and set up the Broncos to 'win now and from now on.'
 
https://www.si.com/nfl/broncos/news...ckage-for-matthew-stafford-includes-drew-lock

Two of the better draft analysts out there are The Draft Network's Kyle Crabbs and Joe Marino. On their The Draft Dudes podcast, Kyle and Joe discussed what a no-brainer it would be for the Denver Broncos to trade for Stafford and instead debated what a fair cost would be to obtain the quarterback. Here's the crux (listen at 32:23-35:01).

"This is a one (first-rounder), and picks, and a player," Crabbs said.

"A one, Drew Lock, DaeSean Hamilton, and a two (second-rounder)?" Marino queried.

"Yeah," Crabbs said. "And the reason being [Stafford's] going to be 33 this season, he's under contract for the next two seasons, you will have an extended runway beyond that. If he continues to play well, extend him and keep him under contract. This is not just a one-year pay-off. Financially, you're paying him $43 million over two years for a guy who's a top-10 physical talent at the position."

What happens next for the Broncos? Don't miss out on any news and analysis! Take a second and sign up for our free newsletter and get breaking Broncos news delivered to your inbox daily!

The Argument for Stafford-to-Denver
The proposed package to acquire Stafford from The Draft Dudes was a bit of a reach, suggesting Denver should trade picks No. 9, 40, a 2022 second-rounder, Drew Lock, and wideout DaeSean Hamilton. Marino and Crabbs went on to compare this projected trade offer for Stafford to what Denver commanded for Jay Cutler in the infamous trade with the Chicago Bears in 2009.


However, the big caveat they missed was that Stafford will be 33, whereas Cutler was just 25 years old when the Broncos dealt him to Chicago. Obviously, Stafford is a more known and proven commodity but the age difference is substantial.

The trade that should be compared to when discussing a Stafford-to-Denver scenario was the Cincinnati-Oakland trade of Carson Palmer which sent a first- and second-rounder to the Bengals back in 2011.
 
However, the big caveat they missed was that Stafford will be 33, whereas Cutler was just 25 years old when the Broncos dealt him to Chicago. Obviously, Stafford is a more known and proven commodity but the age difference is substantial.

The trade that should be compared to when discussing a Stafford-to-Denver scenario was the Cincinnati-Oakland trade of Carson Palmer which sent a first- and second-rounder to the Bengals back in 2011.

the first rounder was #17 overall
 
run game stats were boosted by a trick play to a WR (end around). KC RB, 19 rushes for 59 yards (3.1 YCP)

Talking about run support for Maholmes. Who cares if its WR or RB. They ran well on the day.

you are so missing the point because you guys lost the argument

And there was defense and Hill and Kelce doing a ton of work after the catch too

Stafford got none or very little of these things this year.

Maholmes 0-16 if the QB for the 2020 Lions
 
Last edited:
Talking about run support for Maholmes. Who cares if its WR or RB. They ran well on the day.

you are so missing the point because you guys lost the argument

And there was defense and Hill and Kelce doing a ton of work after the catch too

Stafford got none or very little of these things this year.

Maholmes 0-16 if the QB for the 2020 Lions

youre a moron. RBs had 59 yards and their average was shit. You would use that as an excuse for Stafford every single week of your life. Mahomes doesnt let that shit stop him. You bring up KC's TE support and yet we have a pro bowl TE lmao.

Youve lost your mind.
 
youre a moron. RBs had 59 yards and their average was shit. You would use that as an excuse for Stafford every single week of your life. Mahomes doesnt let that shit stop him. You bring up KC's TE support and yet we have a pro bowl TE lmao.

Youve lost your mind.

They had 129 rushing yards and 4.6 YPC. I take that any game of the year you turd for Stafford. They made life easier for Maholmes. I don't care if its Golladay running the fucking ball for 50 yards or not. It was a huge help to him. 2 rushing TDs too

You are so overwhelmed by how much more I know than you
 
?Of course, a simple phone call to Detroit doesn?t necessarily indicate serious interest in Stafford. It could simply be teams inquiring about the asking price for Stafford, and if it?s out of their price range that could be the end of it.?

Did you read the article past the headline. More than 80% of people don?t.

So many teams need a good QB. And he is one. Interest can mean lots of things but this is showing he is a good QB to get that many at least phone calls.
 
Talking about run support for Maholmes. Who cares if its WR or RB. They ran well on the day.

you are so missing the point because you guys lost the argument

And there was defense and Hill and Kelce doing a ton of work after the catch too

Stafford got none or very little of these things this year.

Maholmes 0-16 if the QB for the 2020 Lions

at this point, I have no idea what you are arguing about. I was just pointing out that the running backs didn't produce. An end around that goes for 50 is included in the rushing numbers, but ask any coach about their running game on any given day, and if their running backs went 19 for 59 they would say it sucked.

Your last statement is why everyone here thinks you are a tool. NOBODY in their right mind believes that Stafford is better than Mahomes. I kind of hope that Matt goes to Denver and finishes behind Mahomes every year for the rest of his career. Never winning the division and never winning a playoff game. That would be great.
 
Talking about run support for Maholmes. Who cares if its WR or RB. They ran well on the day.

you are so missing the point because you guys lost the argument

And there was defense and Hill and Kelce doing a ton of work after the catch too

Stafford got none or very little of these things this year.

Maholmes 0-16 if the QB for the 2020 Lions

You obviously aren't Dumb, but you post some things that really do hurt your credibility. Not sure if you have just blinders on or what the issue is, but your assessment of Stafford is clearly lacking. The absolute great quarterbacks elevate the play of players around them. Stafford did that to a certain extent, but he proved he wasn't a top tier guy. Mahomes is doing that in KC. Mahomes on this team and we were probably a wild card team, even with that shitty defense. Brady on this team and we are probably a wild card team. Arians even said it was Brady who made those guys believe they could win. Some guys just have that "it" factor. Stafford was amazing, but he doesn't compare to those guys. You can say whatever the hell you want, but you are clearly wrong, and nobody, not even the most staunch Stafford supporters, would agree with you.

The fact you said Mahomes would be 0-16 here is laughable.
 
Back
Top