Matt Stafford is the suckiest suck to ever suck

[Topweasel]

I'd go further and say you don't throw away games at the end of the season for a better draft pick, but that's not in line with the current discussion.

No it's a good point. In fact some teams when they know the best they are going to do 5-11 they'll still push for it in those last few games often trying harder than teams who need those wins to get into the play-offs. No team wants to be considered soft and they seem to relish in being a spoiler. It also unlike just about every other sport. There are so many "expendable players" that even if a GM or Coach wanted to lose they would try hard anyways because they are playing for an interview next season when the team they are on cuts them.

The only time allowing your team to lose is when drafting a top 10 pick at QB and you think its best for their development to play right away even if the veteran backup might be the safer bet for that first season.

[dwt1]

I don't have to prove anything the Lions keeping Stafford prove my point. As for Carolina they performed so badly with the first QB that they were in a lucky position to pick Cam. But I doubt a single player or coach was happy they did so badly they they got to pick Cam. The colts are mostly happy having Luck. But do you really think they were happy to go what was it 2-14 or something? Happy that they pretty much were forced to let go of a HoF QB?

So answer my question. You have a job that only 32 people at any given people can fill at a time. You have a family that you moved across the country. You have a QB that can lead the team to the playoffs, but unlikely to win a playoff game. You know you could do better if given the time. Would you cut that QB, knowing that there is a 90% chance you are fired within 2 year specifically because you cut that QB? Knowing it could be decades before you have a chance at that job again?

If the Lions went 2-14 this year the decision is easy. They would have a top spot to pick another top QB. But you don't pay 100million in salaries to throw away the season to get top pick on purpose.

This is the NFL, if you don't win playoff games you're going to get fired. If you're not winning playoff games, you threw away the season.

BTW - point to one GM who has ever been fired for getting rid of a player

[Passepartout]

It is like this, beyond the playoff games. Super Bowl or bust! To each and every single coach.

[dpatnod]

MS did not lose any game by himself.

It's been a bad team.

For years.

I refer you to the established precident about getting bent, and how you should in the case studies of the people vs. DWT 1 through 5.

[dwt1]

MS did not lose any game by himself.

It's been a bad team.

For years.

I refer you to the established precident about getting bent, and how you should in the case studies of the people vs. DWT 1 through 5.

Uhmm....actually he did - The Lions had the ball with a chance to win the game. Where on first and ten, he threw an incomplete pass, Then on 2nd and 15 he did complete a 8 yard pass, then on 3rd and 7 he threw a 4 yard pass leaving 4th and 3. Then on forth down he failed to recognize the blitz and fumbled the ball away.

But I'll play your game, the measure of a great QB is not that they don't lose games, it's that they WIN games.

[wcfwtf]

He hasn't proven to be a big game player. No evidence so far in 5 complete years of NFL football.

He didn't lead Georgia to any big wins either.

It's unfortunate he started with a bang, but has regressed ever since. Which is a very bad sign.

[dwt1]

He's a victim.

[Topweasel]

This is the NFL, if you don't win playoff games you're going to get fired. If you're not winning playoff games, you threw away the season.

BTW - point to one GM who has ever been fired for getting rid of a player

Chip Kelly I'll give you another Bill Billicheck, now both were Coaches with player personal decision making. Oh at to that same list McDaniels.

But my point wasn't that they would get fired for letting the player go specifically, though it's a catalyst. My point is if you have a semi competitive team, like lets say a 7-9 and you cut, trade, or demote the player at the most important position. If that team then goes 3-13 you will probably be fired. If it's the Fords I would give you two seasons.

The people above made changes to a competitive team at QB. Only one of those moves was probably the right move. But it didn't matter. They sucked after the move and the decision makers fired them. If you are going to decide to cut, demote, trade Stafford if you don't have a QB that's better in the wings you will be fired. Since you have already stated you didn't have any better alternative, just that anything is better than Stafford in the sense he is known quantity of can't win with, you would do worse this year and probably next and will be fired. So again knowing you would be fired from a job you probably would get the chance at again. Would you still get rid of Stafford.

[Topweasel]

He hasn't proven to be a big game player. No evidence so far in 5 complete years of NFL football.

He didn't lead Georgia to any big wins either.

It's unfortunate he started with a bang, but has regressed ever since. Which is a very bad sign.

He had his second best season last year an had an over 90 Passer rating. Not as good as 2011 but not a regression when comparing it to 2012-2014. 2014 wasn't even that bad either it just was stat wise a very productive season.

Not saying he is a big game QB. He hasn't shown that. Just saying that it isn't going through some downward spiral.

[dwt1]

Chip Kelly I'll give you another Bill Billicheck, now both were Coaches with player personal decision making. Oh at to that same list McDaniels.

But my point wasn't that they would get fired for letting the player go specifically, though it's a catalyst. My point is if you have a semi competitive team, like lets say a 7-9 and you cut, trade, or demote the player at the most important position. If that team then goes 3-13 you will probably be fired. If it's the Fords I would give you two seasons.

The people above made changes to a competitive team at QB. Only one of those moves was probably the right move. But it didn't matter. They sucked after the move and the decision makers fired them. If you are going to decide to cut, demote, trade Stafford if you don't have a QB that's better in the wings you will be fired. Since you have already stated you didn't have any better alternative, just that anything is better than Stafford in the sense he is known quantity of can't win with, you would do worse this year and probably next and will be fired. So again knowing you would be fired from a job you probably would get the chance at again. Would you still get rid of Stafford.

So it wasn't Billicheck's record of 36 and 44, but the fact that he got rid a player that led to 36 and 44 record that got him fired?? Got it. If you keep Stafford and don't win a playoff game......YOU WILL GET FIRED, ask mildew how keeping Stafford worked out for him.

Oh and Chip Kelly got fired because he failed to make the playoffs two years in a row.

But, it's funny that both of your examples immediately found HQ jobs.......Did Mildew find another GM job?

[Topweasel]

So it wasn't Billicheck's record of 36 and 44, but the fact that he got rid a player that led to 36 and 44 record that got him fired?? Got it. If you keep Stafford and don't win a playoff game......YOU WILL GET FIRED, ask mildew how keeping Stafford worked out for him.

Oh and Chip Kelly got fired because he failed to make the playoffs two years in a row.

But, it's funny that both of your examples immediately found HQ jobs.......Did Mildew find another GM job?

Well BB didn't get another Coaching job right away. But yeah he went to the playoffs in 94 playing behind a Vinny T. That played worse than Manning did last season on the back of a great defense. So while he had success, he benched Kosar, played Teste, dumped, had a little success and then went on to have his worst season. It helped that it aligned with the Browns moving and a fresh start. But if Kosar whom was well liked was QBing in 1995 there is good chance BB was the Ravens coach in 1996.

Same thing with Chip Kelly. Missing the playoffs is a key but his point going into the season was that he needed to be able to play GM because he wasn't going to succeed with current lineup and it was his GM's fault. He then trades away the only QB he had success with for a QB that hasn't done anything but sit in a tub since college. If Kelly basically push the Eagles into firing their GM so he could clean house of some well like players, he might have had some latitude if the Eagles played well even if they didn't get into the playoffs.

Either way right move or not lack off success means getting fired. I think we can all agree on that. So even allowing some hindsight in. Who was a realistic option for an upgrade at QB (not your own perception but demonstratively better than Stafford). If you can't name one. Then would you be willing to loose your job to move Stafford. That is what you are asking of Quinn, you are asking Quinn to fall on a sword, just so you get your way.

[dpatnod]

So for the Eagles, it was Chip Kelly who failed to make the playoffs for them (not Nick Foles/Bradford/Sanchez).

But for the Lions, it was Stafford who failed to make the playoffs for them.

And Manning got the Broncos to the SB.

Should Drew Brees be let go? Or is that because of Sean Payton?

What is a HQ job? Some kind of home improvement big box store?

[Fraquar]

......
Either way right move or not lack off success means getting fired. I think we can all agree on that........

Not for the Lions organization for the past 50+ odd years. Hopefully lack of success does mean something going forward other than a contract extension.

[AMP]

Chip Kelly destroyed the team. Are you dense?

[dpatnod]

Chip Kelly destroyed the team. Are you dense?

Nope. But that is basically DimWit's proposal to fix the Lions.