Offensive Line

and how far did the lions go again?

just stop. you're making a fool of yourself (twice as much, being a lions fan)

You got me Tromadz. None of what I said is true. So sorry.

They went just as far as the packers, plus one more win.

so they ended up with nothing but a worse draft pick. ok.

Don't you remeber? they did lousy, lousy enough to win one more game than the Fudgies.

5-11 > 4-12. :wink:

Teams don't play for draft picks, they play to win games. Or maybe the Packers do play for draft picks? It would certainly explain why Favre threw his 29 ints.

WAAAHHH!

That statement is a very common self defense mechanism kicking in for NFL teams that did not do well the season before. Justify it by saying that you got a better draft choice.

to be honest, 4th and 26, i live in chicago, and ive heard that statement "all you ended up with was a worse draft pick" from about 200 bears fans in my years of gloating cuz the packers have destrowned(destroyed+ owned) them for years.

Yes, you are correct tromdaz. I am sure many Bears fans have used that statement for the past 10-15 years. Just like I am sure the Packer fans used it in the late 70's and 80's. etc,etc.

I just hope that GB beats Chi at least once this year. I would hate to have to be witty and make up some word about the Bears win streak against GB.

yeah bears fans dont like to think. ive noticed that.

Lack of depth? Well excuse me for not having adequate FAs.

- RB: Green, fisher, ****** all hurt.

- WR: Ferrgy, Walker, Murphy all hurt.

- TE: Franks, Martin hurt.

Three playmaking positions devestated. Injuries are not an excuse? Maybe if you have all pros. If you loose your start player in week 1, you are in trouble. But I agree, it shouldn't be an excuse. Loose your reserves almost every week after, and you are in some trouble.

Why? Well the FA depth is terrible during the season. Do you really think if a FA was worth a damn, he would still be on the FA market when the season starts? Same thing with with practice squad players. If a PS player could make a difference in a game, would he really be on the PS?

We lost players like flies. We were devestated. That is why the Packers had a problem, because they had the players, and the reserves, but when both the players and the reserves start dropping like flies, that becomes a problem.

You like to think highly of yourself. What would you have done with our injury situation. Lets play a serious game: Your TT. You have about 2 million in salary to work with. You best WR is done. Ditto for best TE. Ditto for best RB. Ditto for your reserves. How do you find players? Go ahead, get me some players worth a damn. Oh damn, you can't trade because no fool would take a injured player in return for anyone worth his own shoes. What do you do? Come on, tell me. Injuries aren't an excuse, so find a way to field a CAPABLE roster mineral....

WR - Get me some depth to give me 3/4 solid options. Also, get me a player who has the ability to produce in the neighbourhood of 1000 yard season.

TE - Get me a player who can be a red zone machine, and block like our Bubba did. while you are at it, find me a field streching TE, since we need one to ease pressure on our WRs.

RB - Get me some depth + a player who has the ability to rush for a 1000 yards.

Lack of depth? BS. What else can you have besides a lack of depth when your best players AND THEIR RESERVES are injured?

OK, so this year should be completely different, then? If you went 4-12 with those guys and they're all scrubs, then this year what should your record be? Give me a number.
And if all your players get hurt, then I suggest you find yourselves some players that don't get hurt all the time. And I think you did just that by going and getting Charles Woo..... nevermind. I forgot that Woodson only played in 6 games last year.
So if/when he gets hurt this year, are you going to blame Woodson or the hack that brought him in? He's been injury-prone since 2002, so keep that in mind. You don't pay a CB 40 million when he's missed 22 games in four years.
Injuries happen. Maybe you got the short end of the stick, but such is life. The Packers just couldn't pull it together. But this thread isn't about making up excuses for last year; it's about making up excuses for THIS year, so hop to it. You're running out of time.

There are too many variables to give you a number. It depends on how fast the players gel, Favre develops trust in our #2 WR, Franks getting back into the swing of things, our LB group building chemistry, our rookies developing. If the line gets settled quickly, and a clear #2 WR is developed and Green is in form, any where from 8-10 wins is possible. If the line takes time to gel, it takes a while to get a clear #2 to emerge, Green can't get going right away, well than we may as well end up with 6 wins or maybe 5.

The problem with this year is that we have a new coach, new O system, new style of doing things. Those things take time to adjust to, but I sure as heck don't expect to see as much sloppy play this year as I did last year.

As for your suggestion to find guys who are less injury prone, Walker/Franks/Green/Fisher/Murphy weren't injury prone. They had been bruised and bang, but nothing too serious like last year. Eventually there is a time when it seems as if things start to catch up, and that was it. Last year WASN'T THE STANDARD, IT WAS AN ANOMALY in terms of injuries. As for Woodson, time will tell. In certain cases, a player needs a change of scenery. Time will tell.

As for excuses for this year?

McCarthy paid more attention to weight watchers instead of the Packers.

Seriously, is it just me or is McCarthy really rubbing off on his assistants in a bad way? I mean the pics I saw of jags in Atlanta showed me he was pretty fit, but now it looks as if he is McCarthy's understudy in a pie eating contest. HE was out of shape by the looks of things at the scrimmage and TC. Damn!

Like I said, I think you guys are headed in the right direction, I just think you should've paid more attention to your line.
The Lions got two quality FAs and the Packers had way more capspace than they did. So I just don't think you were aggressive enough this off-season with the o-line.
But, for the first time, I'll admit that I could be wrong. Those two rookies could turn out to be Pro-Bowlers, but I wouldn't bet anything on it. You have to admit, though, that it looks really bad right now. If they turn out to be anything special, it would be an act of God.

I can see where you are coming from. I have wondered the same thing too. Personally, I think Steve H. was too much to even consider. And the other FAs where either not right for the system, or too old and just a stop gap solution. However, I do think TT should have AT LEAST gotten some veteran G who has a track record of being solid in here to at least attempt to get one of the G spots.

Neither would I.

I'm not sure about an act of God, because I think the Gs will be great with some time. However, time isn't on our side. You are right, it doesn't look all fine and dandy, and I do worry that starting two rookie guards may lead to an even worse situation than last year. One is bad enough for our O-Line, but two really doesn't paint the best picture. However I take comfort in knowing that if anyone could get something out of the two, its Jags. Afterall, he was Gibbs #1 man.

:yawn: wake me when it's over...zzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Uh..........then why are the Lions still in the NFL? :wink:
I can't seem to remember how many Super Bowls they have won in the last 40 years........... :lol:

They've sucked, with the exception of a few decent years.
You know this whole thing is ridiculous, right? The fact that the Lions haven't won a superbowl yet is irrelevant to the future. Why do you refuse to understand that?
Here are a few franchises in professional sports that have sucked for long periods of time to become powerhouses:
Recently - The Detroit Tigers, worst to best in one year.
The Detroit Red Wings - 55 years without a Stanley Cup
The Boston Red Sox - I don't follow baseball much, but didn't they go a good amount of time before they won a championship recently?
The New England Patriots - Nobodys to dynasty.
Tampa Bay Bucs - Again, they were the worst team in the NFC before they've won a superbowl and are a respectable team every year.
New York Rangers - Went a record number of years without a Stanley Cup.

My point is: The past doesn't necessarily dictate the future. Every time you mention the Lions have never won a bowl doesn't mean anything. You guys are pretty hung up on it, though. But honestly, I do believe the Lions will go to the superbowl before the Packers do again.

well, that makes ONE of you!!

Hey, if it was your favorite team, you would too.

saying that your team has gone to the superbowl is a very strong thing stand by. Tradition and being proud of you team should not be knocked. Yeah Mineral you are right with the past does not dictate what is happening for the future. Since it is in the past, there is not a thing we can do about it. The past does dictate where one stands with their team. Every sports fan has fond memories of certain events in sports history. Saying the Pack has gone to to the Superbowl is something that backs GB's tradition. You can say the same thing about teams like the Steelers who have a great football tradition. Even Red Sock Fans had to wait a really long time to see their team make it to the World series. Cubs fans still back their team. Heck the cities area is a great supporter for the Twins. Twins fans are proud of their tradition and have won a couple world series to back it up. All I am saying is it different for Vikes fans just because they have not won the big game. They have some tradtion, but when you look back at things a lot the history is focused on stupity such as giving away team's worth of draft picks for Hershel Walker, the Love Boat, The Wizzinator etc, compared to good things such as THE PURPLE People Eaters, Tarkenton, and you guys owned the 70's.

that's...why i can't help but like ya, buddy!! :wink:

25 years from now, we will all be sitting here, and reading Mineral's quote,.........still.........

"My point is: The past doesn't necessarily dictate the future. Every time you mention the Lions have never won a bowl doesn't mean anything. You guys are pretty hung up on it, though. But honestly, I do believe the Lions will go to the superbowl before the Packers do again."

While we will be counting the 3 or 4 MORE Lombardi trophies the Packers have won since now.

I DO compliment you for your positive outlook on the Lions Mineral! If they were my team, i know i would have the "oh yeah? We'll SEE who wins a Super Bowl first" attitide too. Can't blame you for loving and sticking by your team. Most guys would have jumped ship by now. I stuck by the Pack through the 70's and 80's, and took alot of crap for it.

Then why do you base all your ridiculous predictions for Green Bay on last season? Last season is in the past, much like our three Super Bowl wins. However, out of one side of your mouth you will claim the Pack is going to tank based on last season's record, yet out the other side you claim that the past doesn't matter when we mention Green Bay's thee Super Bowl wins.

Next time think before you open your mouth, hypocrite.

BTW: The Lions inability to bring home a Lombardi is very much a part of the present, and will continue to be until they prove to the world that they are able to actually win one. Personally, I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for it.

GO PACK!!!

Robert C. Hedley

:bow: