| 30 August 2009
As I've been battling a balky internet connection since last night, I took the opportunity to take one of the few remaining Sundays free from NFL football by hanging out with my beloved girlfriend. So I'm just now getting around to thinking about the Lions. Grasping for something to write about, I noticed the Freep asked their resident hit man columnist, Drew Sharp, to answer 3 questions about the Lions after their 18-17 victory over the Colts. Thus, this post...
Matthew Stafford had his best game of the exhibition season (13-for-19, 160 yards, one interception). Did he show he's ready to start in Week 1 if need be?
Sharp: The longer Jim Schwartz waits in naming a starter, the more likely it becomes Stafford. It would be a mistake because the Lions' biggest priority is ending this 17-game losing streak as quickly as possible. They have a better chance of winning one of those first six games with a steady veteran quarterback operating behind an apparently improving, more physical offensive line.
The Lions' defense did a good job stopping the run (allowing 50 yards on 19 carries). Does their front seven look improved from last year?
Sharp: It's always risky over-analyzing exhibition games. But if you solely looked at the first quarter when it was starters lining up against starters, the Lions truly controlled the game at the point of attack on both sides of the line of scrimmage. If they can keep Grady Jackson healthy, he might provide the single biggest impact on this team -- a true run stuffer.
Big Al: It would be hard to not be improved from what may have been one of the worst defenses in Detroit history...maybe NFL history. No other Lions defensive front 7 made less of an impact in my lifetime. Couldn't stop the run, couldn't pressure the passer, couldn't do much of anything, save for collecting paychecks. Then why do I read of Rod Marinelli being the next coming in Chicago? The man DESTROYED the Lions defense with his insistence on running his beloved, and utterly ineffective, Tampa Too. The next undersized and slow defensive lineman I see, he'll be playing for Mr. I Believe In The Invisible. But I digress...
I agree with Sharp, Grady Jackson will do nothing but improve the run defense…as long he stays healthy, suddenly doesn't start playing like his age or eat himself out the league. But Jackson's a 1-2 down player, as his mass doesn't work nearly as well when it comes to a pass rush. Something the Lions will still have to depend upon by blitzing linebackers, not from the 4 men on the line.
Overall, of course the defensive front 7 has played better in the 2 of the 3 exhibition games (The Cleveland game was a flashback to ’08, awful isn’t a descriptive enough word for their performance), especially in comparison to last season. But that’s like saying Paris Hilton has improved as an actress in the time between “House of Wax” to “The Hottie and the Nottie.” Suck is still suck, it’s just a matter of degrees.
For most teams, the fourth exhibition game is a throwaway where starters don't play much. For the Lions, with their uncertain QB situation and coming off an 0-16 season, do you think the fourth exhibition game will have more meaning?
Sharp: The fourth game means less than diddly. They return to Buffalo, where they once lost James Stewart for the season with a shoulder injury when he shouldn't have played at all. It was Buffalo where Jeff Garcia broke his leg scrambling, effectively ending his season, even though he attempted a comeback. The only positives that come out of the fourth and final exhibition game is a healthy roster. That's it.
Big Al: The final exhibition game does have meaning, but only to a handful people. Degenerate gamblers, bookies, Lions and Bills fans with no life (WHAT!?), Bills owner Ralph Wilson, who gets to keep the gate receipts, those employed to broadcast the game and a few players on the roster bubble. That's it.
Otherwise, Thursday's game means squat, as Bruce Campbell said in "Army of Darkness," "Alright you Primitive Screwheads, listen up...This is my BOOMSTICK!" Uh...Sorry, boomstick quotes don't fit the situation.
How about this? I suggest you watch Campbell tear it up in "Army of Darkness" instead of watching what is going to be a meaningless, boring, mundane football game being contested by guys who will be looking for a real job in a couple of weeks.
Let the Culpepper vs. Stafford competition play out on the practice field. There's no reason for them to play against Buffalo. Drew Stanton should play the whole damn game. It's likely to be his last time on the playing field this season.
History tends to repeat itself all too often in regard to the Lions. If The Schwartz plays anyone whom he needs to contribute during the regular season more than a series of plays, he should be fired for incompetence immediately.
As Sharp mentioned, all you need to do is remember back to '05, and Steve Mariucci being ultimately responsible for Garcia's injury. Garcia had no business even being in the game. Even more moronic was Mariucci running his starting RB, James Stewart, right on to the IR on the opening drive of the final exhibition game of '03. Stewart tore up his shoulder on what turned out to be his final carry of the season. You can even go all the way back to Gary Danielson, who was slated to be the Lions' starting QB in 1979. Danielson ended up on the IR after getting hurt in the 4TH QUARTER of the final exhibition game.
All the above injuries is why the last exhibition game should be considered a totally unnecessary evil. If the Lions need to pull stiffs off the street to play in place of their starters, I'm all for it.
That's how much meaning I put into Thursday's game.
| Next > |
|---|
