Matt Stafford: 27.5 million signing bonus

[Mr. Scot]

Not a big deal. Really. Unless you know the whole picture, it is easy to see what you want. Happens all the time. Fans that don't watch other teams a whole lot have their own notions of what that teams is. I know most folks don't watch the Lions. So I don't usually bring them up. It was just nice that this deal finally got done.

Lions fans may be long suffering. But they are a knowledgeable lot.

It is a matter of trying to do too much. Coupled with a lack of talent, and no running game. It is a dangerous mixture. The future holds the truth. Because folks will use the past to judge and predict what they want to believe.

 

I'm not one to just watch Panther games.  Tend to watch at least three games a week, sometimes four, and catch highlights of the rest.  Helps give me better perspective.

 

Mind you, I'm not saying Stafford sucks.  I think he's good.  Just not that good.

[panthers55]

Said like a football fan that doesn't watch the team.

Not going to get into it. Just want you to know that you sound just like every other talking head that uses stats, and not actually knowledge, to judge a player. Almost like folks treat Cam.

But hellz. This is the interwebz.

I have watched Stafford play but surely not as much as you have as I am not a huge Detroit fan. Still I have watched enough to know that he has not been elite outside of 2011 by any standard. Stats don't always tell the whole story but other than your observations which are  much more subjective than any stat, what do you have to show the stats don't tell the tale??

 

Maybe the fact he threw multiple touchdown in only 5 games and had 0 TDs in 4 games.  Or that he only had 4 games where he didn't throw a Int. Instead of Cam  who improved and went 5-1 in  his last 6 games, Detroit finished the year losing the last 8.  During that streak he was very inconsistent playing very well against Minnesota and later on abysmal against a patsy in Arizona. 

Dont get me wrong, it wasn't all his fault and he started off great coming from behind to beat the Rams and a few weeks later scoring big 4th quarter points and an overtime field goal against Seattle.

 

In the losing streak the Lions gave up a number of 4th quarter leads to lose late. They  also failed to score points in the second half. Against Greenbay in  both games  they scored 10 points in the second half. Against Houston it was again 10 points and in 5 overtime possessions they managed one field goal attempt which hit the upright.  Then against Indy they once against scored 10 points. There seems to be a theme here.  In a number of close losses the defense might have given up big leads but the offense was also enemic.  Certainly not what you would expect of an elite quarterback.

 

Newton had better numbers and was supposedly in a slump. What does that make Stafford in? A slide,

[iamhubby1]

I'm not one to just watch Panther games.  Tend to watch at least three games a week, sometimes four, and catch highlights of the rest.  Helps give me better perspective.

 

Mind you, I'm not saying Stafford sucks.  I think he's good.  Just not that good.

Hellz, even I have a hard time watching the Lions. But as bad as things have been, it would have been much worse without Mathew. He gives that team a chance. Which is something that has been lacking in Detroit for a lot of years.

I only know what I can see. And I see the makings of a very good to great QB. And he is still a kid.

It's late. So I will leave you with this. The Lions have no star power other than Suh and Mathew. Farley is coming on, so that would make a whopping 3 stars. It is tough to win in this league with a good team. Try winning with an average team.

I would take Cam 10 out of 10 times. But I am extremely happy to have Mathew at the helm for the Lions.

[JawnyBlaze]

It's late. So I will leave you with this. The Lions have no star power other than Suh and Mathew.

Heh you kinda left out the biggest star on the team - Calvin. Guess that can be attributed to it being late though :)

[CelibatePimp]

Going by stats - like passing yards, for example - would tell you that last year, Tony Romo and Matt Ryan were better quarterbacks than Peyton Manning, Eli Manning, Aaron Rodgers and (significantly) Cam Newton.  In fact, stats put Romo in the Brady/Brees range.  You wanna defend those ideas?

 

Or how about this?  Remember when we signed David Carr?  At that time, Carr had the best completion percentage in the league and pretty good yardage stats.  Why?  Because he played in a West Coast offense.  WCO attacks inflate passing stats.  That's why I'm automatically suspicious of QBs out of WCO systems (ask the Cardinals how that works).

 

Stats can be misleading.  The true "slippery slope" is thinking they tell the whole story. 

 

That is why the only stats available are not just passing yards! There are more stats to determine good QBs than just passing yards. Even if you "watch" a player play well, what at the end of the day are you looking at? The number of TDs? Number of INT? Are those all not stats?

 

It is up to you to know what stat you are looking for and how to analyze those in context.

[CelibatePimp]

Stats alone are an awful way to judge a player because the NFL, by and large, is not a sport where a player can go out and be a world beater on their own merits alone.  Stats can be artificially inflated / deflated by the abilities of the other units / players on the field with the player you're measuring.

 

If you watch someone play and have an objective bone in your body you'll be able to form a much better picture of what they're really like than you'd be able to by looking at box scores.  In this I'm with Mr Scot.  I would prefer to judge a player based on what I can see as a long time football fan with some knowledge of the game than by a series of numbers that don't tell you even a portion of the whole story.

 

If you watch someone play in order to rate them, what are you looking out for? Number of INT? Number of TD? Number of completions? Are those not stats?

[Creep59]

Fair question though.

Do we assume that Gettleman will pay the kind of contract Newton's agent is going to be seeking?

I'm not dead sold on that notion.

 

 

But you have to keep in mind.  Cam isnt just a quarterback.  Hes also an entertainer and icon so it is a 3 for 1 deal.

[panthers55]

It is funny how stats are suddenly a bad way of evaluating talent. I can hear it now as players go up to Gettleman looking for a big extension using that logic. You know Dave that numbers and stats are not as good as my own personal observations.

[Rules&Regulations]

Wearing a Detroit Tigers hat at his press conference, that's how you support the city that supports you. Kaeperstupid should be taking notes.

[frash.exe]

I would hazard a guess that there are far more Panther fans that had a team before the Panthers, than there are of those only knowing the Panthers. So you are making a broad sweeping derogatory statement that insults almost every adult Panther fan.

But hey, at least you're consistent.

many of them were redskins defectors

while I don't care much for that franchise's heritage, abysmal is not a word I'd use to describe their history. I usually reserve that word for garbage franchises, such as the Lions.

[top dawg]

Everybody's pretty happy right now with the notion that we have a GM who will play hardball on contract negotiations.

Will they still be happy if the guy he's playing hardball with is Cam, or Luke, or Star?

 

There is playing hardball, and there is playing hardball.  Even G-man ain't  crazy enough to alienate one of the top up and coming franchise QBs in the league---one with generational potential, I might add---by low balling him on the money.  Hopefully all parties involved will bring reasonable expectations within the context of the market and what is fitting in order to make this team a perennial championship contender (like other historically good franchises). 

 

If I could tell all the parties involved one thing before the negotiations begin, it would be that "Compromise leads to championships!"

[top dawg]

TBH, the main question is whether we should try and lock up Cam early like the Lions did with Stafford.

 

[hepcat]

Stafford lead the Lions to the playoffs in 2011, for the first time in 12 years.  His stats look nice on paper.  Naturally Detroit will pay whatever it takes to keep him around.

 

Cam on the other hand has a lot to prove.  While his stats also look good on paper, he hasn't lead his team to the playoffs.  How he performs in 2013 will go a long way towards his next contract.

[TheRumGone]

for some reason i still think Cam will take less than what people expect to make this team better overall. He wants to win.