If true, then, yeah, I am 95% out on him. That is Kookoo for Cocoa Puffs.
His coordinator hires have cost this team dearly. He was great at the culture change part but you wonder if heâs holding us back now.
Look at where we are stat wise on Offense
And who is the only QB in the history of the game to have 16 TDs and zero ints?
Saying our offense is inconsistent and thus a bad offense makes no sense
1 Like
Youâre going up against an offense that your defense canât stop. Including a two-pointer.
You have an offense that their defense canât stop. Including a two-pointer.
In this scenario, it doesnât matter if youâre up 7 with two minutes to go â if you donât have the ball, you will lose, because the other team will score 8 while running out the clock. Likewise, it doesnât matter if youâre down 7 with two minutes ago â you have the ball, and you will score 8 while running out the clock.
Whoever has the ball last wins.
Why are you basing your expectations for the 2026 Lions on the 2025 Lions?
Sounds vibe-ish.
Yes. As of now they are in the playoffs. Ergo as of now they are playing like a playoff team.
How could I know that? I donât even know the matchup yet.
1 Like
Way too many assumptions for me there.
To that point in the game, they had forced 2 punts, a missed FG and had a pick. So, 3 scoring drives, 4 non scoring drives.
Plus, back me up here, Natty, We Had Foxy. Good chance they start at or inside their 35 (net 45 punt from the 24).
With a kicker they Do Not Trust. With our D playing a good but not great game. They need 40 yards just to feel like they have a good chance.
What would be really interesting woukd be polling another fan base with A/B options of this scenarioâŚ.punt and hold for 40 yards or go 4th and almost 2 at your 24, score tied, 4 min left.
Reeeeallllly interesting.
So, I went back and looked at their drives.
The previous drive to Danâs call, the Pack chewed up 6:34 off the clock, driving 61 yards and making a field goal. From Danâs perspective, if he punted and they did that again, the Pack would win the game. And it was not unlikely that thatâs exactly what would have happened.
They had 3 other drives that chewed up 4:37, 6:02, and 5:02 off the clock. They also had a TD drive that went 42 yards after our second fumble, but took only 2 minutes off the clock. In our favor, we forced two 3-and-outs, and had the Branch interception. Yes, one of their long drives resulted in a missed FG, but that was their mistake, not us making a play.
Itâs not unreasonable to believe that the Pack was more than capable of driving 50-some yards, eating up all the clock, and knocking down a field goal â their previous drive did exactly that! I certainly wouldnât trust our defense to make that stand. Indeed, as we saw on GBâs final drive, after Danâs call, that Barnes couldnât cover Jones, and we escaped with the (blocked) FG attempt only because Jones dropped the ball.
5 out of 8 drives prior to the call, GB was having their way with us, even though they werenât effective in the red zone. The odds were in their favor if we punted right there. They would have had enough field to work with to eat up the clock again. The only short field theyâd had, they scored quickly, but they werenât particularly effective in the red zone. So the way the game had gone, it sure looked like a shorter field would concede a field goal but give us the ball back with enough time to have the final drive of the game, versus giving them a long field and a FG attempt as time expired.
His call wasnât just an expression of faith in his offense. It showed he didnât trust our defense to force a timely stop.
1 Like
No matter what the D had done to that point, I donât see why itâs such a bad thing to want our fate in the hands of our best unit. I canât remember a time when the âyou left them too much timeâ defense actually held out.
I guess Minnesota, barely, against Chicago. After Caleb got hurt. After Chicago drove all the way down the field and caught a TD that was JUST out of bounds. And they needed a TD, not a FG.
2 Likes
On the poker side of your response, there is so much not being accounted for in your hypothetical scenario. A 3-bet following a button raise alone does indicate strength necessarily. So no Iâm not folding here probably ever in your scenarioâŚbut I am also rarely shipping it in pre flop With QQ. If itâs early in a tournament, we are probably very deep. No reason to play for stacks as only AK or better is likely to call. So at best you are a small favorite. Now deep, in the money scenarioâŚagain need more information like stack sizes, play aggression/current info on said player, etcâŚbut again I am not a fan of getting my money in preflop if I can avoid it without Aces or Kings. I regularly made deep runs because I was very good at pot control and getting it in goodâŚpreferably after the river.
I was a pretty tough freeze out tournament player. Tournament poker changed in the last 7-8 years away from freeze out and more to unlimited entry. It doesnât matter how good you are anymore when you are only firing 1 bullet to the degenerates 7-8. As a consequence to this movement in tournament poker, Iâm willing to bet 20% of the 5% successful tournament players have remained highly profitable. I donât care how good you are, if you are averaging 5+ buy-ins per tournament you are not getting back to the black with out regularly wins or top 3s.
Example. Play 5 tournaments with 1k buy-ins entering 5x each. This is what I played regularly and from experience you have to finish top 6-8 to make 25k. Even if you cash 3/5 tournaments you play in, if you arenât making final tables on the reg you are a losing player. Cash 3/5 tournaments with a field of ~1200 finishing 14th-56th-100th you probably cashed for somewhere between 14-16k. Still a massive loser. But tournament tracking doesnât account for buy-ins. So that player when you look him up looks like a beast registering for 5, 1k tournaments cashing for ~15k. Nobody knows heâs actually in the negative ~10k. I am loose friends with probably 10-12 poker âprosâ and half of those have debts they will never come out of because of backing they canât catch up with. Another 3/4 come out with so little profit itâs not worth itâŚbut they still appear elite on paper.
unlimited entry has ruined tournament play and has significantly hurt the entire poker community. Almost nobody is making money anymore. Those who are, are at risk of going broke constantly. It was a miserable existence when I was successful. I canât imagine still trying to live that life.
As far as the Football side of this hahaâŚI think we basically view it the same. So no reason to go on a long rant in this regard 
1 Like
It has and I now play less tournaments because of this. Typically I play in some mid range freeze outs down in Tunica, MS. $200-$350 buy-ins. You can make some money doing that but I basically do it now because I enjoy playing poker. Most of my games are all cash games now, much easier to make money at the right tables doing this, but being an outsider (not a regular at the poker rooms) I am pretty cautious as to which tables I will stay at. I have seen too many regulars collude on an outsider that sits down.
1 Like
Yea I get that, I was trying to make it simple but agree, who is the player on the button, what has he done in the past hands (range), how many BBâs do I have, etcâŚ
1 Like
Didnât understand why theyâd go for it there⌠And since itâs been explained to me, it makes perfect sense. Thatâs why Danâs the HC and Iâm not. I have more respect for his decision making now, I assumed it was emotion based, but it was great strategy.
1 Like
2025 is important because the same pattern of inconsistency hasnât changed from last year right up through the first six games of this year. The core players are the same. Many of the coaches are the same except for a new OC. The offense that has a lot of money tied up in it still canât decide to start fast or finish slow and goes cold when it needs to be warm or hot. Guys getting paid money drop balls and make dumb penalties when they shouldnât. They had a whole offseason and training camp to correct those things and maybe learn something from last year. But the inconsistencies and actual results are still the same. You can be objective about that. I think? There is not much vibe about that is there?
Hell DC agrees. He uses the word efficient vs my use of consistent. Semantics but we agree. He understands that the offense is not efficient and needs to be much better. Heâs being objective and so am I. Because weâre saying the same thing.
The truth is the offense hasnât been efficient regardless of the stats for a long time now and until that changes and or the defense starts playing much better and more consistently, then the offense has little margin for error if you wanna get to the playoffs and go deep in them. All the skill players and then some have been playing together for a long time now. How much time do they need to be efficient / consistent?
Is there any vibes in that? What part of that specifically is untrue for you?
In their current incarnation the Lions lack the same urgency they had that miracle year they were 2 quarters from a SB. That was 4 years ago. They need to be more consistent or theyâll hover where theyâve been. It can change with the rest of the season. Best we can do is wait and see.
Iâll give you that theyâd be in the playoffs as of now based on some bracket! You win! But I wouldnât qualify this as playoff caliber football based on what Iâve watched. I think you understand very well what Iâm saying. If you wanna disagree. You are allowed to.
The other guy (not you) who literally starts the whole vibes ridiculousness which is why I comment in the first place literally goes on to tell me how the lions would win 1 or 2 playoff games (read it up above) at the end of the year which is months away. Based on what? He doesnât realize his prediction is 100% vibes and based on nothing but hope 
When the season really ends, everybody including yourself will have a feeling about whether theyâre going to win or not. You are basing that on their past performance and that is all Iâm doing here. No more or less. Which is why I use the âif the playoffs were nowâ scenario. Right now they have a ton to cleanup. Barely beat a team that looked like a mash unit.
Sure it might help if you know who they are playing. But if you play consistently inconsistent ball and are sloppy, I personally feel like it doesnât matter who you play or not. Because your long-term success is unlikely. If you can only eek out a playoff win because the other team you play sucks, who cares? Itâs a moral victory.
How about we watch and see how it plays out? Theyâre either going to start playing better or stay the same yeah? They got a couple months to work out the vibes so that theyâre vibinâ deep into January. I hope they can do that.
Itâs not the skill players that create consistency, itâs the line.
Dropping passes and fumbling balls and making dumb untimely penalties and making stupid coaching calls do not have to do with the line. Hiring an OC that is a dud but your personal choice so that you have to replace him half way through a season has nothing to do with the OL. The entire offense as a unit has been inconsistent. Itâs never any one thing. And as far as the OL goes itâs ranked number 1 by PFF since the beginning of the year. Anything else youâd like to add?
Iâm starting to think a large majority of posters here only watch the Lions and not the rest of the NFL.
I have to believe this because itâs the only way some of these posts make any sense.
Just means the individual talent is there. To be consistent, they have to hit on all cylinders as a unit.
Gibbs getting hit in the backfield so often is a function of inconsistent line play. Thatâs what gets the offense off schedule and leads to the higher ratio of short drives. Missed assignments ainât something PFF can track; they arenât privy to that information.
None of the linemen are playing next to guys they played next to last year. And now we just switched centers. Gonna take a few more weeks to gel.