Top offences don’t play sloppy? Did you watch the #1 offence in the NFL last night?
They scored a whopping 3 points!
2 Likes
Yes and no. I’m not sure those pesky and infuriating 2006 Cardinals are a viable comparison because I think there’s more variance in baseball.
In NFL history there is only one team with single digit wins to win a Super Bowl in the 16 or 17 game era, not counting the strike year. That year the team that one was nine four and one who’s winning percentage matches up with the team that would be an 11 or 12 win team in a full schedule.
Very few low seeds have advanced even to the Super Bowl so the whole chip in a chair mentality that makes sense in baseball and in hockey I don’t think that makes much sense in the NFL.
I hate to be the reminder of this but HolmBell has only made the playoffs two years, and missed them 3. Of course they get a pass for year number one. To their credit it’s for straight winning seasons which we’ve seen I think Almost Never but this is my point.
This season may tell us whether we are going to keep riding with Sparky Anderson or Jim Leyland, or start to think about that we may be at the Rick Carlisle for Larry Brown moment coming up after 2027
Since the 4-division era in the NFL, 3 out every 8 Super Bowls have been won by seeds 3-6. So the odds aren’t insignificant, even though being a 1 or 2 seed is still obviously preferable. Just making the playoffs is still significant.
Now, I’m counting the Holmes and Campbell era as properly beginning in the '23 season – they reasonably needed the first two seasons to right the ship. So, 2 of 3 seasons of making the playoffs… and not just making the playoffs, but winning the division and getting a home game to start the playoffs. Including a #1 seed. That’s massive success.
In these same 3 years, the team has been derailed by massively bad injury luck. If I’m an owner, I don’t count that against the regime. They know how to build a roster, and how to use that roster. You would need to see multiple years of failing to make an impact while having average or better injury luck before you could say that maybe there might be a better combination out there.
There’s actually more variance in the NFL, because of so few games to play, and how much injury luck matters. And in the playoffs, all it takes is one bad game to destroy the entire season – in the other sports, you get opportunities to recover and adapt.
Make the playoffs, and you can make a run.
The fact you don’t think going for it was a good decision is mind-blowing to me. Its clear that you think we had a good chance of stopping the Packers from driving down the field.
you are wrong about the should’ve lost category. For as long as i can remember, the Lions couldn’t close games. Now they are winning the games that can go either way and all of a sudden its lucky and they should’ve lost? I can’t get on board with that line of thinking.
4 Likes
It’s a line of thinking rooted in the notion that any game not won by multiple scores is a failure.
Because the game wasn’t a display of utter dominance.
Because the game was stressful to watch.
Because you can’t imagine easily winning it all.
It’s a line of thinking rooted in trauma.
4 Likes
Winning is all that matters you are right. Coincidentally this team has the 2nd most wins behind the Buffalo Bills since 2023. This is just off memory/top of my head but i think but we are 40-17 to the Bills 41-16. I think we are not just winning culturally but most importantly, in the W column.
Can point to the postseason if you want to “win” the argument. But i think its pretty obvious that this team has been MASSIVELY unfortunate come playoff time when it counts with the mass injuries. You wouldn’t be wrong that postseason is what matters, but i tend to have some understanding as to why the results may be what they are.
I am not factoring in playoffs for the reasons you mentioned. However like you said, winning is what validates culture. There is a reason why people were ready to pitch Dan overboard halfway into 2022. The team chemistry was great, but the W’s weren’t there. Then when the W’s started coming, and the rest was history.
What I will say is this. The decision making that happened yesterday, is the same decision making that 1) Got you a 24-7 lead in the NFC Championship game and 2) Cost you the NFC Championship game.
Dan (very rightly so) said “This may be our only shot”. I absolutely agree with that statement, and know what he meant. You make decisions to get your team into the best chance to win. That same hair on fire, balls out style also kept us out of the Super Bowl. We lived by the sword, and died by the sword. However, if you keep making decisions like that, you won’t have to worry about them killing you in the Super Bowl, or the NFCCG. You won’t win enough games to even make it that far again, just like Dan warned.
I get it. But imo the decisions arent the same. I was #1 in being critical in Dan’s decision making in that championship game. Stand by that he lost us that game. The physical player errors happen. They are out of everyones control.
I truly believe going for it yesterday with 5 to go gave this team the best shot to win. As ive stated here and other threads…it ensured us getting another possession. Punting does not. In fact, if they do get into FG range, we probably don’t touch the ball again. I don’t see the decisions as the same in terms of giving this team the best chance at victory. Scoring more points when up 24-7 in the championship game is a no brainer and Dan’s biggest fail as Lions HC.
I am not a results oriented person. I believe the correct decision is made before the outcome 100%. It may sound like a hindsight take due to the results of both…but its not. I have been very loud about my dislike for Dan’s go for it style over the years. At least 25% of the time we’ve gone for it in the past i have hated the decision. And a lot of those times, it “worked.”
This is not how probability and statistics work.
I can’t believe the “correct” decisions in sports is dictated by probability. Sooo many more factors need to be taken into account rather than statistical data that doesnt take opponent or gameflow into consideration.
IMO, pointing to probability as the determining factor for decision making is really stupid and makes little sense to me…
1 Like
Or you could be at the Marty Schottenheimer for Norv Turner point. That worked out great. Remember when the Bills fired Bill Polian because he just couldn’t get them over the hump? That was smart. There are far more cases where that doesn’t work.
I love that our coach has the balls to make unpopular decisions, especially when the raw numbers back him up
7 Likes
This team has been inconsistent for a season and a half right up to and including yesterday’s game. By week six last year if you were honest with what you were watching on Sunday, you knew the Lions were cooked. They wound up in last place last year in their own division.
Everyone will tell you how great the offense is and that “if only we had a defense”. Well the defense kept GB to 17 points yesterday and once again our offense has troubles. People just refuse to see how inconsistent our offense has been regardless of the stats. They refuse to see that if you spend all your money on skill players on offense then they need to play up to their salary grade expectations.
Lions fans run a lot on faith, hope and beer! Truth is not a prerequisite. 
What I wrote above is in line with this. People will move the goal posts and say a win is a win. It’s NOT NOT true. But it’s NOT true either right? I mean GB was depleted. And we need a blocked FG to win. We just play sloppy and inconsistent football and that really has not changed since the beginning of last year has it if you’re being honest.
Now it might change with the rest of the season but we kind of have had the same players out there on offense for years now. Not many teams can boast the amount of pro bowl level players we have on offense and yet they just never quite reach that potential.
When the Lions were trying to find their identity and trying to get some wins, being a 4th down gambler was worth it because when you got nothing to lose you got nothing to lose right. I think it initially worked and gave the team a spark. But now a couple of years in it is just kind of a risky identity for the sake of being risky. Going for it on 4th down all the time might also just mean that you’re not good or smart enough to get the job down on 2nd and 3rd down.
In 2026, biting knee caps is a little bit old-fashioned and nobody is being caught off guard by the Lions anymore. So at some point you need to adjust and grow with the times.
Still love Dan as a dude. But the truth is that lions still need to be consistently consistent. And until they do they’re just going to waffle around.
Disagree. It’s for the sake of giving the Lions the best chance to win. That’s all Dan cares about.
4 Likes
The best models will include opponent and gameflow. If they’re not in the analytical models, as a head coach you incorporate those intangibles into the model in your head.
And then you base your decision off of the revised probabilities.
In truth, there’s no guarantee that any particular decision will pay off in the moment. That’s also the nature of probability (and statistics).
So to me, I can’t believe the “correct” decision isn’t dictated by (revised) probability.
The risks worked because Dan had to offset a talent gap by taking chances, and many teams weren’t prepared that we would actually do it. Teams now know that and prepare in advance. It’s also why GB actually covered Sewell. They figured if he is out there, there is a good chance he is getting the ball, because it was an anomoly.
You have to make decisions on giving yourself the best chance to win, while also not giving your opponent the best chance to win. We helped Green Bay with our decision making yesterday more than we helped ourselves. The fact we got away with it, doesn’t mean it was the right call.
Here’s a good question for people. Remember how Sheppard said he made all the right blitz calls in the Carolina game, and we all criticized him for it? Was he actually right?
Except that the numbers don’t support that. The Lions finished last in their division last year. They haven’t won a playoff game in 2 years. They blew a 17 point lead a half away from a SB appearance. This year remains to be seen. But they still can’t consistently turn a boat load of high paid talent into deep playoff success.
Yeah, and honestly I think we should all tack 5-10% on the “go for it side” simply because of Dan’s faith in the offense.
1 Like
If you were honest, you knew we were cooked after Game 1, when it became apparent that the loss of Rags was going to kill us. And you knew even more when GG went down, along with the entire starting secondary, that all was lost. Yet we still had a winning record.
People refuse to see that great skill players can’t overcome a mediocre OL. Neither can great play callers. None of them along the line know what any of it is worth.
1 Like