Matt Stafford is the suckiest suck to ever suck

[Topweasel]

Chip Kelly destroyed the team. Are you dense?

That's my point. Are you too dense to pick up on that?

[dwt1]

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?

Dude, The OWNER stated he fired Kelly for failing to make the playoffs, the OWNER made the decision to fire him. Topw was trying to make the claim that Kelly was fired for cutting a player. The OWNER said otherwise. I know it's difficult for you , but please try to not confuse analysis with a STATED REASON.

[dwt1]

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.

Actually he DID get another coaching job right away, he went right to an assistant job in New York.

So let me get this straight, he got fire in 1996 because he benched Kosar in 1992 because of his 2-5 record? BTW after Kosar's benching Kosar went on to post a 6-10 record and was never a starter again.

You truly are making shit up.

If Quinn doesn't move Stafford, he will lose his job for not winning playoff games

[Topweasel]

Dude, The OWNER stated he fired Kelly for failing to make the playoffs, the OWNER made the decision to fire him. Topw was trying to make the claim that Kelly was fired for cutting a player. The OWNER said otherwise. I know it's difficult for you , but please try to not confuse analysis with a STATED REASON.

Yeah he traded a QB that he had gotten to the playoffs with. Lost a bunch of games and got fired. That's my point lack of success even if you really believe it's best for the team will get you fired. That was what I said from the beginning. We are a borderline team if Quinn is any good we should have the pieces to get to the playoffs this year. If he got rid of Stafford without a good replacement and we went 3-13 his job would be in jeopardy.

[Topweasel]

Actually he DID get another coaching job right away, he went right to an assistant job in New York.

So let me get this straight, he got fire in 1996 because he benched Kosar in 1992 because of his 2-5 record? BTW after Kosar's benching Kosar went on to post a 6-10 record and was never a starter again.

You truly are making shit up.

If Quinn doesn't move Stafford, he will lose his job for not winning playoff games

He got an assistant job not a HC coaching job.

He benched Kosar in 94. In 95 the team got to the playoffs with Vinny T. But he played worse than Manning did last season and was given a bunch of crap for benching Kosar. In 96 the defense couldn't keep up and they came crashing down to earth. Then he got fired.

I never suggested that purely firing the QB will get you fired. If you think I have I recommend rereading my posts since this chain started. You focus on Stafford because you recognize that QB affects the game more than anyone else. If you get rid of a QB and don't have a better one available your team is going to struggle. If your team struggles you get fired. You have challenged that 3-13 is as good if not better than 7-9 because at least you are trying new QBs instead of continuing with Stafford since you know what Stafford is.

So the point is if you can't find an actual performance upgrade to Stafford, and still move him anyways. It is highly likely the team will struggle and you would be fired. So who should the Lions have gotten that is demonstratively better than Stafford. If you can't find one. Than would the move be so important than it would be worth losing your job over.

[Malto Marko]

I am not convinced Stafford is incapable of winning a playoff game.

Has he won one? No

Has he been to one? Two

Is he responsible for the two losses? No more than any of the other 53 guys on the roster. Not one of them made a play to win a game. Does he get the blame because he handles the ball more than anyone else and therefor has more of a chance to be the hero? No, not really. For him to be successful, every other person on the field has to do their jobs successfully otherwise he has no chance.

I put more blame on his lack of wins in the Playoffs on the Coaching staffs than I do the position. Neither coaching staff did a good job in adapting the game plan to allow for what the D was giving them. They both tried to force it because this is the way we game planned it. This created the ability to predict the plays at every given situation and made it easy to prevent it from being successful.

I have confidence Stafford has the ability not only to win one game, but become very efficient in Playoff games. He still has the handicap of a blind General leading the troops, though.

[Coop]

What Maltus said!

And DWT - don't dump the baby out with the bathwater. There's not a free agent QB nor a draftee of his talent out there right now that replaces him. I can think of probably 10 teams at least that would be one the phone with Stafford the minute he would be announced available.

[chemiclord]

What Maltus said!

And DWT - don't dump the baby out with the bathwater. There's not a free agent QB nor a draftee of his talent out there right now that replaces him. I can think of probably 10 teams at least that would be one the phone with Stafford the minute he would be announced available.

Denver, for one, would be on the phone with his agent in about seven seconds.

[chemiclord]

Actually, let's see... what teams WOULD jump all over Stafford's release?

Cleveland
Houston
Buffalo
Miami
N.Y. Jets
Denver (would immediately be the frontrunner)
Tampa Bay
Washington
San Francisco

I count nine for sure... Philadelphia, Los Angeles, Dallas, New Orleans, San Diego, Kansas City, Chicago... players with old, young, or unreliable QBs might query but wouldn't get in a bidding war.

[Topweasel]

Actually, let's see... what teams WOULD jump all over Stafford's release?

Cleveland
Houston
Buffalo
Miami
N.Y. Jets
Denver (would immediately be the frontrunner)
Tampa Bay
Washington
San Francisco

I count nine for sure... Philadelphia, Los Angeles, Dallas, New Orleans, San Diego, Kansas City, Chicago... players with old, young, or unreliable QBs might query but wouldn't get in a bidding war.

I was drawing out a list myself but decided not to. Yours is very similar. I traded Tampa and Chicago though.

Dark horse in Dallas though, good old Texas kid on the block and the amount of time Romo has lost, while they probably shouldn't be in consideration it would be a very Jones move.

[Panoptes]

Houston
*Cle
Mia
Den
Was

Absolutely would not inquire.

And Chicago is not even a thought because you wouldn't trade your qb within your division. Basic common NFL sense lost on some, somehow.

*Had a lot of draft picks and bypassed all of the top options.

Pands

And KC, hah, no fn way would they be interested. They are grooming young QBOTF to save cap dollars at the end of the AS tenure which could be after 2017.

[Masspartan]

Houston would be interested, but they already wasted a shit ton of money on Osweiler ... if they could turn back the clock they would.

Cleveland would in a heartbeat despite the fact they passed on the rookie QB's this year. They'll regret not having grabbed Cook early in the 4th with one of their plethora of picks. They drafted as if they've got a minor league system in which to stash picks and let them mature. They had what ... 13 picks this year? Used 4 of them on WR's. Will they all make the team?

I don't see KC making a play for Stafford ... not worth the upcharge since Alex Smith fits their system and is the cheaper play. Not sure who their 'young' up and comer is unless it's Tyler Bray (a guy I wanted a few years back)

The no brainers are: Buffalo, NYJets, Dallas,

I could see San Francisco making a big push, Rivers has been getting the shit kicked out of him so I could see the Chargers considering it for 2017.

Not quite as many team as you might think early on, but that's mainly because Stafford will not come cheap. You are going to have to spend considerable cap space on him.

Not sure why you would include Tampa on that list and not Tennessee Chemi ... Winston looks to be the better pro in my opinion that Mariotta.

[dwt1]

Yeah he traded a QB that he had gotten to the playoffs with. Lost a bunch of games and got fired. That's my point lack of success even if you really believe it's best for the team will get you fired. That was what I said from the beginning. We are a borderline team if Quinn is any good we should have the pieces to get to the playoffs this year. If he got rid of Stafford without a good replacement and we went 3-13 his job would be in jeopardy.

Dude, I lived in Ohio during that period - you're full of shit. He got rid of a QB, who over a three period had a combined record of 11-25; Browns fans were done with Bernie Kosar.

The Lions are not a borderline team, to be borderline you need a QB that has demonstrated he can win games against teams with winning records.

[dwt1]

I am not convinced Stafford is incapable of winning a playoff game.

Has he won one? No

Has he been to one? Two

Is he responsible for the two losses? No more than any of the other 53 guys on the roster. Not one of them made a play to win a game. Does he get the blame because he handles the ball more than anyone else and therefor has more of a chance to be the hero? No, not really. For him to be successful, every other person on the field has to do their jobs successfully otherwise he has no chance.

I put more blame on his lack of wins in the Playoffs on the Coaching staffs than I do the position. Neither coaching staff did a good job in adapting the game plan to allow for what the D was giving them. They both tried to force it because this is the way we game planned it. This created the ability to predict the plays at every given situation and made it easy to prevent it from being successful.

I have confidence Stafford has the ability not only to win one game, but become very efficient in Playoff games. He still has the handicap of a blind General leading the troops, though.

Dude, with a chance to win a playoff game, Stafford didn't recognize the blitz and fumbled the ball away - That's not coaching.

[Topweasel]

Dude, I lived in Ohio during that period - you're full of shit. He got rid of a QB, who over a three period had a combined record of 11-25; Browns fans were done with Bernie Kosar.

The Lions are not a borderline team, to be borderline you need a QB that has demonstrated he can win games against teams with winning records.

A borderline is a team one or two games from the playoffs. Your opinion on the potential success of the team based solely on the performance of a single player. So instead of nitpicking debatable points of decades old transactions. We can all agree that a lack of success will get a GM fired. Are you so convicted that Stafford is the problem, that you would be willing to lose your job for it?

You know what you aren't actually going to answer it. The answer is no. No you wouldn't. No one would. Even if Quinn doesn't like Stafford he isn't going to cut or trade Stafford with out at least a temporary side grade option. To ask him to do something you or none else would do is disingenuous.