Drew Stanton and Tim Tebow: 2 Sides of A NFL Coin FLIP

In some ways, the NFL is an unflinching meritocracy. With billions of dollars on the line nobody gets a scholarship. The players who can play, play. The coaches who can coach, coach. The executives pair one with the other. Anyone not pulling their weight is gone in a heartbeat.

Yet somehow, people slip through the cracks.

Good players get hurt, or put in the doghouse. Coaches get stuck with players they don’t want. Players land into specific systems that hide their flaws and magnify their strengths—or the other way around. Problems with chemistry and synergy can make working relationships untenable. Success and failure in the NFL are, sometimes literally, a coin flip apart.

Drew Stanton and Tim Tebow are two sides of the same coin. Both moved across thousands of miles in their youth. Both became highly touted high school quarterback prospects. Stanton, a Rivals 4-star prospect, was Rivals’ 6th-best pro-style QB. Tebow was a 5-star, and Rivals’ No. 1 dual-threat QB. Both were multidimensional athletes who had real potential as baseball prospects. Both led their team to a state championship; Stanton in back-to-back years.

“Desire to win is unmatched . . . brings every intangible you want at the QB position.”

– Mel Kiper

Stanton and Tebow attended in-state schools. Both contributed to their teams immediately in unconventional ways (Stanton a special teams gunner, Tebow a situational change-of-pace quarterback).  They were strong, vocal leaders who often willed their team to win. Both gained yards on the ground both by accident and design, and through athleticism and toughness rather than speed.

Clearly, Tebow ascended to greater collegiate heights than Stanton did: with a much better coach and supporting cast, Tebow won a Heisman Trophy, and led his Gators to a BCS National Championship. Stanton cracked several Heisman watchlists throughout his career, but he and his inconstant Spartans simply weren’t at that level. Stanton, however, didn’t leave the record books untouched: he lead the biggest comeback win in NCAA history.

“I still believe the positives outweigh the negatives . . . He possesses all the physical tools to eventually emerge as a starting quarterback in the NFL, including the size, arm strength and athletic ability . . . also shows the toughness and competitiveness necessary to make it at the next level.”

–Todd McShay

Tebow was unquestionably the better college quarterback, but Stanton was unquestionably the better professional prospect. Both quarterbacks went to the Senior Bowl; Stanton completed 8 of 12 passes for 63 yards and a touchdown and was named the North’s Offensive MVP. As McShay said, Tebow’s week in Mobile “could not have gone worse from an on-the-field standpoint.”

Scouts, Inc. graded Stanton as an 87, an “Outstanding Prospect,” a high second-round grade. Tebow got a 78, a third-round grade. Most observers (including myself) pegged Tebow as a third-rounder—whether as a long-term quarterback project, or as an an unholy marriage of Chris Cooley and Kordell Stewart: “fullback/H-back/tight end/linebacker.”

"Has a well-built, natural frame with good arm length, broad shoulders, developed chest, good bubble, thick thighs . . . thick chest muscles, more in the line of a linebacker, with defined calves . . . Shows good athleticism, with nimble feet that defenses must always account for."

–CBS Sports

The Lions traded down to the 43rd overall pick to select Stanton. Per Scouts, Inc. that was right where he should have been drafted (he was their 41st-ranked prospect). But in the draft, as they say, it only takes one team to fall in love—and then-Broncos head coach Josh McDaniels was smitten with Tebow.

The Broncos dealt the 114th, 70th, and 43rd (!) pick in the 2010 draft to move up to #25 overall and take Tebow. That’s right—the Broncos traded away the exact same slot the Lions used to draft Stanton, plus a 3rd- and 4th-rounder, to draft Tebow and make him their quarterback of the future.

"Smart, hard-working and patient with the football. I liked most that I rarely saw him rush things . . . poised in the pocket."

–Matt Miller

Stanton was not beloved by the Lions coaches; offensive coordinator Mike Martz wanted nothing to do with him. McShay said in the wake of the 2010 Senior Bowl that Tim Tebow needed to be completely torn down and rebuilt as a quarterback; Martz tore Stanton down like that but never rebuilt him. The Lions put Stanton on IR to save a roster spot, and he lost a season of mental and physical practice. Stanton’s mechanics were ruined, and he was getting no coaching and no reps in Martz’s complicated offense.

When Martz was fired after the 2007 season, the Lions simplified the playbook and called in a new quarterbacks coach: former Michigan QB coach Scott Loeffler. Loeffler undid what Martz had done, restoring Stanton’s natural throwing motion. Stanton flashed a little of that magic in a preseason game against the Bengals; he threw a 50-yard touchdown and ran for another. I’m embedding this fan-shot video because it is terrible as it is awesome:

Stanton was again injured, and again stashed on IR, and again his progress halted. After one season working with Stanton, Loeffler was hired away from the Lions by the University of Florida—to polish up Tim Tebow.

It’s here where Stanton’s career as a Lion truly begins, with the hiring of Jim Schwartz and Scott Linehan. With every OTA, training camp, and preseason since Stanton has taken a step forward. Last season, Stanton did what everyone had waited for: he started and won a big game for the Detroit Lions. It wasn't always pretty, but he got the W. His contract ended after last season, but Lions GM Martin Mayhew brought Stanton back:

"Scott [Linehan] came in during year three and we saw a dramatic improvement in his ability, his throwing and his accuracy and all those things got better. But still, they weren't quite where you wanted them to be."

"We got into training camp and he had a pretty good camp, he made plays for us in the preseason. And then late in the year, we called on him to play and start and he won some games for us as a starter. I really didn't envision him doing that prior to this season, being able to get that done.”

"I thought he showed a lot of improvement so we plan on having him here this year and seeing if he continues to improve that way."

Tebow went through nearly the opposite path. He was drafted by an organization that believed completely in his ability to be a premier NFL quarterback . . . and then the rug got pulled out from under him. McDaniels was fired, along with anyone who had any investment in Tebow’s success. John Elway and John Fox were brought in to start a new-new era of Broncos Football, and Tebow suddenly had to prove his worth.

Last week, Fox trusted Tebow with the starting job, and Tebow delivered victory. Like Stanton's big win against the Packers, Tebow put some ugly stuff on tape—but he made it happen when it counted.

If you hadn’t guessed, all of the above scouting blockquotes are about Stanton, not Tebow. It’s not a stretch to say that Drew Stanton, as a player, is Tim Tebow’s professional upside. They share weaknesses, only Stanton’s aren’t so weak—and where Tebow’s stronger, like literal strength, it’s less useful in the NFL.

While Tim Tebow's immaculate character borders on caricature, Stanton is quietly one of the best “good guys” around. His relentless charity work has earned Stanton a perennial stranglehold on the Lions’ Robert Porcher Man of the Year award. There will never be a plaque immortalizing a Stanton motivational speech, but Stanton most certainly knows how heavy a football team is when you place one on your back and carry it.

In the infinite possibilities of other dimensions and alternate timelines, there are Drew Stanton who were drafted by a good team that believed in him, and he’s now coming off his first Pro Bowl appearance. In others, Tim Tebows are moonlighting on special teams and goal-line offense packages.

In our corner of the multiverse, Tebow is the starting quarterback for a Denver Broncos organization that could be secretly hoping he fails. As Tebow faces the Lions this Sunday, Stanton will be be watching from the sidelines—possibly in street clothes, inactive as the Lions’ third quarterback.

Will either have a long, successful NFL career? Eh, flip a coin.

Read more...

Three Cups Deep: Preseason Week 2, Lions at Browns

Let’s review my Great Lakes Classic preview:

How the Lions’ front seven looks against Joe Thomas & Co. will be telling; the Browns completely neutralized the Packers’ pass rush.

As I said in the Fireside Chat, the difference between the Bengals’ and Browns’ offensive lines was breathtaking. Instead of relentless dominance, the Lions’ starters were merely effective, and Colt McCoy had time to make good decisions and get rid of the ball. Sometimes, only by a split-second—but that can be the difference between a sack and a six-yard completion for a first down.

If Stephen Peterman, Dom Raiola, and Rob Sims can’t open up any space for Jahvid Best tonight, that will also spell trouble.

“Trouble” with a capital T. Browns were getting into the backfield on nearly every running play, and Raiola’s second-level blocking was uncharacteristically bad. It doesn’t matter how quickly you get to the second level if the a linebacker can blow you up once you get there. Best was swarmed until they knocked him out of the game with an apparent concussion.

I’m hoping to see another two-great-drives-and-out performance from Matthew Stafford, then big doses of Drew Stanton and Zac Robinson.

Yes, this happened. Not quite as “great” as last week from Stafford, but no negatives and bountiful positives. It looks as though Stafford’s for real. Stanton, in my mind, clearly separated himself from Robinson (if he hadn’t by, you know, starting and winning real games for the Lions). He made some flat-out NFL throws Friday night, and looked dominant against the Browns’ threes—the clear mark of someone who belongs on the roster. We’ve yet to see any of those awful misfires he’s always had hidden in his ammunition, either; in my mind he’s making a solid bid for the long-term backup gig.

I want to see Jahvid Best run well inside and out, and then I’d like to see either Aaron Brown or Jerome Harrison make a resounding statement.

Eeeerrrgh. Best had no room inside, made a few nice plays in space, and went out with what looked like a mild concussion; the leopard has not changed his spots. Until he has holes to hit and hits them, this will remain a concern. Brown, Harrison, and Bell had a little more daylight to work with once it was two vs. twos or threes vs. threes, but still none look to challenge Maurice Morris for a backup spot. I’d like to see them replace Bell with someone else’s training camp cut.

The Lions can’t completely sell out contain on the running lanes to get to the passer.

Oops. 

I’ll be more concerned about the halftime score than the final tally. Word is the Browns will play their starters for most of, if not all of, the first half, and I want to see the Lions’ twos hold their own.

They didn’t. Now, it wasn’t awful and—as I said on the podcast—there were simply too many sloppy penalties, sloppy turnovers, and minor injuries to major players to get much worthwhile evaluation out of this game. For the most part, the stuff we knew was working (the quarterbacks, Burleson, the D-line) was working and the questions we had (run O, run D, pass coverage) remain questions.

The game was a mixed bag, with a mixed result. Going into an always-serious third preseason game against the Patriots . . . I’ve got mixed feelings.

Read more...

2011 Great Lakes Classic Preview: Lions at Browns

Tonight’s Great Lakes Classic—the winner of whom will take home the lovely Edmund Fitzgerald Trophy you see above—will be markedly different from last week’s game. It will be in Cleveland rather than in the welcoming confines of Ford Field. The opponent will be similar—an Ohio-based team with a new quarterback and new offense—but many ways, wholly opposite. How will the results differ from last week’s blowout?

The Bengals are in the last gasp of the Marvin Lewis era. Carson Palmer and Chad Ochocinco and the rest of the crew that made Lewis look smart are gone, replaced with a lot of very young faces learning from first-time coordinators. The Lions’ defense made it clear that the Bengals far behind the eight-ball; this lockout-shortened offseason will have their rookie skill players and greenhorn coordinators playing catch-up all year long. It’s easy to see the Bengals’ yo-yo string breaking this year, and Cincy picking at the top of the draft in 2012—almost regardless of on-paper talent.

Yet, if the Bengals are like the 2008 Lions, primed for a breathtaking fall to Earth, the Browns more like the 2010 edition. They’re clearly moving in the right direction under a first-time head coach, Pat Shurmur. Under center will be a talented second-year quarterback in his first full season as the starter, Colt McCoy. Unlike the Bengals, the Browns (and especially McCoy) looked great in their first preseason game, beating the reigning World Champion Packers 27-17.

Curiously, the Browns and Bengals have opposite strengths. The Bengals’ defensive line looked like a scary matchup for what might be the Lions’ weakest unit right now. The Browns’ D-line isn’t nearly so scary, but their offensive line might be one of the best in the business. How the Lions’ front seven looks against Joe Thomas & Co. will be telling; the Browns completely neutralized the Packers’ pass rush. Likewise, if Stephen Peterman, Dom Raiola, and Rob Sims can’t open up any space for Jahvid Best tonight, that will also spell trouble. Leonard Davis just might get called in . . . .

At corner, Aaron Berry figures to get significant work; it’ll be a great chance for him to make his case for the nickel spot. Meanwhile, every Lion quarterback has to be drooling. The Packers’ Aaron Rodgers and Matt Flynn combined to go 17-of-26 for 200 yards, 2 TDs, and no picks. I’m hoping to see another two-great-drives-and-out performance from Matthew Stafford, then big doses of Drew Stanton and Zac Robinson. If Killer’s rumblings are on-target about Robinson pushing Stanton, the Lions should showcase both and trade one while the trading’s good.

The two biggest questions marks are the Lions’ rushing offense and rushing defense. I want to see Jahvid Best run well inside and out, and then I’d like to see either Aaron Brown or Jerome Harrison make a resounding statement. On defense, the Lions can’t completely sell out contain on the running lanes to get to the passer—especially if Peyton Hillis and/or Montario Hardesty are ready to play (either might or might not be). Meanwhile, a linebacker other than Justin Durant has to get through the trash and get to the hole a lot more quickly.

I’ll be more concerned about the halftime score than the final tally. Word is the Browns will play their starters for most of, if not all of, the first half, and I want to see the Lions’ twos hold their own. That having been said, I’d be just fine with the Edmund Fitzgerald’s bronze effigy sailing back to Detroit, too. Most of all though: I want to see no injuries.

Technorati Tags: nfl,nfl preseason,detroit lions,cleveland browns,great lakes classic

Read more...

2011 Preseason Week 1: Lions vs. Bengals

It’s been so long, I’d almost forgotten. Real football been so far removed from my train of thought; the courtroom antics and traded barbs and season review and number crunching and shopping lists and salary cap numbers almost made me forget about real football. I almost forgot how close it was, how little time there’d be between the figurative kickoff of the league year, and the literal first kickoff.

Two days from now, the Lions will play the Bengals, and all these players, these search keywords, these post tags, these names—mere labels for collected notions of “size” and “instincts” and “experience”—coalesce into people. Men. Players will don pads and jerseys, taped fingers will lace up cleats. Underneath the laundry cynics say we root for, sweat will bead and stomachs will flutter. From the inside the foundation of the old Hudson’s warehouse, they’ll emerge to smoke, music, fireworks, and crowd of thousands of screaming, cheering Lions fans. Then, they’ll go to work.

The Bengals are an interesting opponent. Looking to break in rookie quarterback Andy Dalton and rookie superwideout A.J. Green, we may see their starting offensive line and receivers a little more than usual. Fittingly, they’ll be stress testing the Lions’ weakest unit, the back seven, while providing opportunities for the Lions’ second-strongest unit, the defensive line. Zac at SideLion Report had a nice Q&A with Bengals blog Stripe Hype, if you’re looking for more.

The Lions’ strongest unit is quarterback; while I hope we’ll see at least two series from Matthew Stafford, I’d also like to see Drew Stanton in the whole second half. I doubt Shaun Hill will be interested in re-upping as a long-term backup, so the Lions have to find out if Drew Stanton is capable of taking his place. Elsewhere offensively, I’m hoping to get a long, long look at Johnny Culbreath at LT, and Derrick Williams at WR. Don’t think I won’t be watching the tailback situation with interest, too; I expect Harrison to get a lot of work.

On the defensive side, I hope to see very little Ndamukong Suh. I want Sammie Hill, Andre Fluellen, and Quinn Pitcock in and causing havoc. I want a BIG dose of The Great Willie Young. I hope to see the starting linebacker trio in for as many snaps as possible. I hope to see a lot of Aaron Berry working against A.J. Green. I want Amari Spievey in there as much as possible, too; I’m convinced that more reps will help him develop quickly into a force.

Really, though? I just want to see who beats who in a fight between lions and tigers.

Read more...

Watchtower Review: Lions vs. Packers

Let’s start with all the totally wrong things I said in last week’s Watchtower:

It seems unlikely that the Lions’ defense does that well against an offense that good twice in a row, though, so I’m going to project the Packers to slightly underperform scoring expectations: gaining 23-26 points. I expect the Lions to be more successful defending the pass with zone coverage, allowing 8.0-8.5 YpA, at the expense of fewer interceptions. The Lions will likely cede the run to the Packers again, allowing 4.25-4.5 YpC. I have high confidence in this projection.

3 points, 3.30 YpC, 6.02 YpA.  Tremendous performance by the defense.

As I said, in Week 4, the Lions managed to hold the Packers’ offense to as few points as can be expected, given how effective they were on a per-play basis. If the same offense shows up this week, I don’t see the Lions being so fortunate.

It can be argued that the same offense didn't show up—but the defense far outstripped their Week 4 effort, even with several key starters lost.  I’m still stunned at how well this defense performed on Sunday.

I don’t expect the Lions to put up 454 yards against the Packers this time around, but I do project them to be more productive with their yards: scoring 17-23 points, gaining 4.50-5.00 YpC, and throwing for 5.75-6.00 YpA.

Yeah not so much.  The yards projections were fairly close—4.63  YpC and 5.32 YpA—but they spun that effectiveness into a single measly touchdown.  Two interceptions and a missed field goal didn’t help.

The Lions gave the Packers their best shot in Week 4, and lost the game mostly by shooting themselves in the foot. Between a truly massive amount of penalties (13 for 102 yards), and the now-obligatory Charles Woodson pick-six, the Lions let the Packers off the hook. As I said above, it’s hard to believe that the Lions could play that well against a team as talented as Green Bay twice in once season—and yet, it’s there. It’s there for them, again. They lost by two on the road before, they can win this one at home. They can . . . but they won’t.

They could . . . and they did.

CTRL-C, CTRL-V, folks. This will be an extremely painful 17-24 defeat.

Or, an incredibly improbable 7-3 victory!  I haven’t ever been more wildly wrong in a score projection, and I couldn’t be happier about it.  I will take that over, and over, and over, and over.  Okay, I’ve got an idea: let’s talk about everything I said that was right.

Look for the Lions to drop eight men into coverage on a regular basis, essentially the same game plan we saw against the Patriots on Thanksgiving. The idea is to get enough rush from the front four to slow down the Pack’s offense just long enough for the Lions’ offense to outscore them.

The Lions did blitz the Packers more than they blitzed the Pats—but they certainly got most of their production from the front four.  It also took a looooooooooooooong time, but they slowed down that Pack offense just long enough for the Lions’ offense to outscore them.  Barely.

Greg Jennings will be the key to this game for the Packers’ offense.  If the Lions can stop him with double- and triple-teams, I don’t think Donald Driver and Donald Lee will be enough to score more than the 23-26 I project, if enough to score that much at all.

Greg Jennings: 4 catches, 52 yards, one bobbled pass that was ultimately intercepted.  They didn’t score the 23-26 I projected, either.

Last year, I thought I’d identified a systemic advantage for Scott Linehan against Dom Capers (and most 3-4 defenses), where the running game was disproportionately effective, and scoring was therefore disproportionately higher.

They didn’t score much, but the Lions ran very well against the Packers—the #1 defense in the NFL—and it was the difference in the game.

However, the Packers are allowing 4.49 YpC on the ground, 7th-worst in the NFL—so clearly, my notion that the Packers are generally struggling against the run was true.  Further, the Lions will be starting Drew Stanton, whose running ability is well-known, and whom the Lions have never hesitated to call designed running plays for.  I expect to see at least one rushing touchdown, or 20-plus-yard scramble, from Drew Stanton on Sunday.

Drew ran 4 times for 44 yards.  He didn’t score, and his long was only 17 yards (not 20).  However, on his other three carries he averaged 9 yards per; he was asked to make plays with his feet and he did—along with the six other Lions who toted the rock on Sunday.

First, this presumes that Drew Stanton plays like he did last week: an efficient, effective, conservative backup quarterback.  If Stanton has a regression to his “2009 49ers game” form, this will be an ugly blowout.  However, there’s an X factor here named Jahvid Best. We saw a return to form last week, and if he still has that burst, that bounce, he could do an awful lot of damage against a Green Bay defense that’s lost three of its top five linebackers for the year.

Unfortunately, Drew did regress to 2009 form against the Packers’ defense—at least for the first three quarters—and boy, was it ever ugly.  However, the running of Best, Maurice Morris, Stefan Logan, and Stanton himself bailed the offense out.

Finally, in the first matchup, Brandon Pettigrew made a lot more headlines for the two or three crucial passes he dropped, than the eight he caught for 91 yards. Likely being matched up against A.J. Hawk, as 49ers TE Vernon Davis was last week (4 catches, 126 yards, 1 TD) could result in a field day for Jumbotron.

Okay, this one was pretty much entirely wrong; Pettigrew was held to just 2 catches for 14 yards.  However, it’s worth noting that the game-winning touchdown came on a tight end screen to Will Heller—who was spelling Pettigrew.  Further, Heller ran right through A.J. Hawk on his way to paydirt.

Technorati Tags: nfl,detroit lions,green bay packers,drew stanton,greg jennings

Read more...

The Watchtower: Lions vs. Packers

The Packers are sitting at 8-4, one game behind the Bears in the race to the top of the NFC North.  The Lions are sitting at 2-10, three games ahead of the Vikings in the race to the bottom of the NFC North.  By the Simple Ranking System, both teams are much, much better than their record implies: the Packers’s value is 10.0; #2 in the NFL.  Meanwhile, the Lions are valued at 0.0, and ranked 16th.  Statistically speaking, the Lions are the median team: right smack dab in the middle of the NFL, in terms of relative strength.  But is that enough to compete with the mighty Pack, even before a sold-out Ford Field?

Mike McCarthy vs. Gunther Cunningham

McC	Ornk	PgG	YpA	YpC	Gun	Drnk	PpG	DYpA	DYpC	PTS	PTSΔ	YpA	YpAΔ	YpC	YpCΔ
NOS	14	21.2	6.43	4.46	TEN	29th	27.2	8.05	4.62	12	-43%	8.04	25%	1.53	-66%
NOS	14	21.8	6.62	3.96	KCC	16th	20.3	6.58	4.10	27	24%	9.59	45%	5.83	47%
GBP	3rd	28.8	7.56	4.30	DET	32nd	30.9	5.42	4.42	26	-10%	9.68	28%	3.57	-17%
GBP	3rd	28.8	7.56	4.30	DET	32nd	30.9	5.42	4.42	34	18%	8.92	18%	2.96	-31%
GBP	7th	25.2	7.68	3.99	DET	25th	25.5	7.18	4.58	21	-17%	10.65	39%	4.28	7%
GBP	7th	25.2	7.68	3.99	DET	25th	25.5	7.18	4.58

In the last Watchtowering of the Packers, I discussed the very strong statistical trend we’ve seen when Mike McCarthy faces Gunther Cunningham:

Given equal or greater talent, Gunther Cunningham’s aggressive 4-3 disproportionately disrupts Mike McCarthy’s downfield flavor of the Bill Walsh offense. Given lesser talent, Gunther’s 4-3 will cap offensive production with sacks and turnovers, even while allowing better-than-average offensive effectiveness between the 20s.

In the last two meetings, however, the Packers’ offense has underperformed even this.  In both cases, the Packers scored the amount of points I projected—but with the help of a defensive touchdown, meaning the offense was a full TD below what expectations project.  Last time, I projected the Packers to do the following:

With the Lions possessing a systemic advantage against the Packers’ already injury-weakened running game, and in depressing the Packers’ scoring, I project the Pack will fall just short of their season average, scoring 24-27 points. I have very high confidence in this projection.

Given the depth and specificity of the data we’ve got, and the special circumstances surrounding the matchup, I’ll take the opportunity to get a little more specific: I cite my Whack-A-Mole principle, and project that the Lions will concede the run to the Packers, allowing 3.75-4.0 YpC, in order to focus primarily on the pass, which should yield 7.5-8.25 YpA. Further, I predict the Lions will sack the Packers four to six times.

The Pack did bomb it down the field, picking up 10.65 YpA—but with only 17 attempts, and two of those picked off, that only amounted to 181 yards.  The Lions did cede the run to the Pack in the process: 4.28 YpC.  The Lions sacked the Packers twice (on only 19 dropbacks), though, and recovered two fumbles in addition to those two INTs.  The disruption in scoring is obvious: the Packers are the 7th-best scoring offense in football this year, averaging 25.2 PpG, and the Lions—the 25th-ranked defense—held them to just 21 offensive points.  Keep in mind, the Lions have been allowing 25.5 points per game on the average; to hold the 7th-best offense to less than what you’ve been allowing on average all year is an impressive feat.

So.  The Lions are allowing 25.5 points per game, the Packers are scoring 25.2 points per game.  The Lions have since put their #1 DE, Kyle Vanden Bosch, and #2 corner, Alphonso Smith, on Injured Reserve.  However, the Packers have since lost #1 RB Ryan Grant, and #1 TE Jermichael Finley to injuries, as well.  The last game was at Lambeau, but this game will be a a Packer-fan-filled Ford Field.  As I said last week, rarely do two meetings between two teams in the same season end up with the same result, but all the factors seem to cancel each other out.

It seems unlikely that the Lions’ defense does that well against an offense that good twice in a row, though, so I’m going to project the Packers to slightly underperform scoring expectations: gaining 23-26 points.  I expect the Lions to be more successful defending the pass with zone coverage, allowing 8.0-8.5 YpA, at the expense of fewer interceptions.  The Lions will likely cede the run to the Packers again, allowing 4.25-4.5 YpC.  I have high confidence in this projection.

Mitigating/Aggravating Factors:

Again, with such a consistent trend, and a prior game this season, everything above is a mitigating or aggravating factor—we’re just looking to see what will modify what happened before.  As I said, in Week 4, the Lions managed to hold the Packers’ offense to as few points as can be expected, given how effective they were on a per-play basis.  If the same offense shows up this week, I don’t see the Lions being so fortunate.  On the other hand . . .

This week, ESPN NFC North blogger Kevin Seifert pointed out that Greg Jennings has put the team on his back, much like the (uproariously NSFW-audio-laden) Madden clip we all know and love:

Ahem.

Look for the Lions to drop eight men into coverage on a regular basis, essentially the same game plan we saw against the Patriots on Thanksgiving.  The idea is to get enough rush from the front four to slow down the Pack’s offense just long enough for the Lions’ offense to outscore them.  Greg Jennings will be the key to this game for the Packers’ offense.  If the Lions can stop him with double- and triple-teams, I don’t think Donald Driver and Donald Lee will be enough to score more than the 23-26 I project, if enough to score that much at all.

Scott Linehan vs. Dom Capers

Lin	Ornk	PgG	YpA	YpC	Dom	Drnk	PpG	DYpA	DYpC	PTS	PTSΔ	YpA	YpAΔ	YpC	YpCΔ
MIN	6th	25.3	7.16	4.71	HOU	21st	19.3	6.89	3.92	34	34%	7.92	11%	4.69	0%
STL	30th	14.5	5.67	3.95	MIA	21st	21.6	6.61	2.35	12	-17%	4.26	-25%	4.30	9%
DET	24th	18.1	5.60	3.91	GBP	12th	20.3	6.17	4.46	0	-100%	4.20	-25%	4.33	11%
DET	27th	16.4	7.80	4.42	GBP	7th	18.6	5.96	3.59	12	-27%	4.95	-37%	3.17	-28%
DET	13th	23.2	5.92	3.72	GBP	1st	15.7	6.02	4.49	26	12%	6.13	4%	5.86	58%
DET	13th	23.2	5.92	3.72	GBP	1st	15.7	6.02	4.49

Last year, I thought I’d identified a systemic advantage for Scott Linehan against Dom Capers (and most 3-4 defenses), where the running game was disproportionately effective, and scoring was therefore disproportionately higher.  Then, Daunte Culpepper went out and Daunte Culpeppered the Lions to a big stinky shutout in their first matchup against the Pack, seemingly blowing my theory out of the water.   However, this season has shown that my initial conclusion has legs.

This year, the Packers have the #1 scoring defense in the NFL.  Yes, that’s right, let me say that again: this year, the Packers have the #1 scoring defense in the NFL.  You wouldn’t know it from how little attention this fact has received, but it’s true.  Nevertheless, Shaun Hill led the Lions to a 26-point day against these Packers on the road, and his 40-yard scramble led the Lions’ rushing attack to an impressive 5.86 YpC.

In the comments on the last Watchtower, commenter Matt pointed out that a lot of the Packers’ rushing yards allowed to that point were gained by Michael Vick—and sure enough, the Packers allowed the Lions some significant scramble yardage, as well.  I replied in the Watchtower Review:

My notion that Green Bay is generally struggling against the run this year was false. However, we may have stumbled upon something interesting: are Green Bay’s nickel packages especially susceptible to quarterback runs? With a three-man front attempting to rush the passer, and one or more linebackers blitzing, it would make sense that there’s a giant gaping hole in the middle of the field. I’ll be keeping an eye on this throughout the season . . . and for the next Watchtower.

Well, I can’t find an quick answer for how many yards the Packers have been surrendering to rushing quarterbacks, or if that total’s unusually high.  However, the Packers are allowing 4.49 YpC on the ground, 7th-worst in the NFL—so clearly, my notion that the Packers are generally struggling against the run was true.  Further, the Lions will be starting Drew Stanton, whose running ability is well-known, and whom the Lions have never hesitated to call designed running plays for.  I expect to see at least one rushing touchdown, or 20-plus-yard scramble, from Drew Stanton on Sunday.

Typically, the Lions are outgained by their opponents, but keep games close with red-zone defense, sacks, and turnovers.  However,  against the Packers, the Lions actually far outgained the Pack, outrushing them 123 to 91, and outpassing them 331 to 181.  It was only a slew of costly penalties that kept the Lions from scoring thirty or more the last time around.  I don’t expect the Lions to put up 454 yards against the Packers this time around, but I do project them to be more productive with their yards: scoring 17-23 points, gaining 4.50-5.00 YpC, and throwing for 5.75-6.00 YpA.

Mitigating/Augmenting Factors:

First, this presumes that Drew Stanton plays like he did last week: an efficient, effective, conservative backup quarterback.  If Stanton has a regression to his “2009 49ers game” form, this will be an ugly blowout.  However, there’s an X factor here named Jahvid Best. We saw a return to form last week, and if he still has that burst, that bounce, he could do an awful lot of damage against a Green Bay defense that’s lost three of its top five linebackers for the year.  Finally, in the first matchup, Brandon Pettigrew made a lot more headlines for the two or three crucial passes he dropped, than the eight he caught for 91 yards.  Likely being matched up against A.J. Hawk, as 49ers TE Vernon Davis was last week (4 catches, 126 yards, 1 TD) could result in a field day for Jumbotron.

Conclusion

The Lions gave the Packers their best shot in Week 4, and lost the game mostly by shooting themselves in the foot.  Between a truly massive amount of penalties (13 for 102 yards), and the now-obligatory Charles Woodson pick-six, the Lions let the Packers off the hook.  As I said above, it’s hard to believe that the Lions could play that well against a team as talented as Green Bay twice in once season—and yet, it’s there.  It’s there for them, again.  They lost by two on the road before, they can win this one at home.  They can . . . but they won’t.  Here’s what I said at the end of the last Watchtower:

I'd love to say that this Packer team, struggling so mightily to run and stop the run, is primed for an upset. But the talent gap between these teams is still too large, especially when considering the almost-two-decade-long streak of Lambeau futility the Lions are riding. I project another tantalizingly close game, with an outstanding day by the defensive line—marred by the back seven yielding to one of the best passing attacks in the game. This will be an extremely painful 17-24 defeat.

CTRL-C, CTRL-V, folks.  This will be an extremely painful 17-24 defeat.

Technorati Tags: nfl,detroit lions,green bay packers,mike mccarthy,jim schwartz,scott linehan,gunther cunningham,dom capers,drew stanton,aaron rodgers,greg jennings

Read more...

Watchtower Review: Lions vs. Bears

Okay, last thing first:

The one thing I’ve learned over the past two years of doing this preview, is that when the same teams play twice in a season, the results are rarely the same. But the data points to a repeat—and the injury problems for the Lions should be offset by the difference between a season-opening road game, and a midseason sellout. This is a statement game in many respects, and turnovers will likely make the difference. Last time, there were five fumbles (three lost), two picks, and 6 sacks for –42 yards. I see a similarly messy game this time around; how those turnovers and sacks are distributed will be the difference in the outcome. I am tempted to call this a draw, but at this point in the season, I’ll go out on a limb one more time—despite having a limb hacked out from underneath me three times already this season. I hesitantly project a 21-20 Lions victory, if for no other reason than the Lions need it much more than the Bears want it.

Right.  At this point, I’m not even going to slap myself on the wrist—the numbers said this game was a push, and that’s pretty much what played out.  The one thing I was most confident, about though, was wrong: the Lions played a nearly clean game and lost.  Stanton was sacked only twice, for a loss of 20 yards.  He threw no interceptions, and the Lions lost no fumbles.  Meanwhile, the Lions sacked the Bears 4 times for a loss of 37 yards, and one of those was a sack-fumble inside the Bears' 10 that the Lions recovered.  Clearly, the distribution of sacks and turnovers wasn't the difference in the game, as I said it would be.

Here’s where I tip my cap to Mike Martz.  The offensive gameplan we saw in Week 1 was Mike Martz football: four wide, spread it out, throw throw throw, lots of yards, lots of picks, a tailback doing more damage through the air than on the ground.  Here’s what I projected based on the numbers the Bears have put up all year:

It looks as though the only statistical trend for these two coaches, when facing off against one another, is that both units will play to their means: the 20.2-ppg Bears scored 19 against the 22.4-ppg Lions. Note, however, that that included about thirty minutes of shutout play in between Matt Forte receiving touchdowns. Given the data at hand, I’m inclined to project a repeat performance: 17-21 points, 7.50-8.00 YpA, and 4.0-4.25 YpC. I have medium confidence in this projection.

Here's what actually happened: the Bears scored 24 points, completed 21 of 26 for 9.00 YpA, and carried 28 times for 4.07 YpC.  That's not Martz football, that's Bears football.  The game plan went like this: run, screen, draw, slant, run, run, draw, screen, slant, run, draw, screen, slant, run, run.  They partially neutralized the Lions’ blitzing, and put Cutler in great situations that minimized his opportunity to make mistakes. 

Chester Taylor, a misfit toy who’s been paid a lot of money to not really do anything this season, had his coming-out party: 9 carries for 33 yards and a score, plus five catches for 31 yards.  Forte, though not as devastating with the long receptions this time, was equally effective: 13 carries for 64 yards and a score, plus two catches for 36 yards.  The Bears ruthlessly attacked the Lions’ outside linebackers, who were rendered helpless by Earl Bennett’s speed up the seam, and overmatched on screen by the Bears’ tight ends.  Again, Mike Martz has found out how to make the Bears’ talent go, and had a perfect gameplan to attack the Lions’ defense.

This isn’t to say that Gunther didn’t do his job, too.  Despite the steady diet of screens and draws, the Lions’ pass rush got to Cutler over and over again; both with well-timed blitzes and great front-four performances.  The Bears’ gameplan was to minimize Cutler’s exposure and they still brought him down four times; that is impressive indeed.  What we’re left with is what we knew all along: the Lions’ back seven cannot cover anybody

Everyone wants to know why the Lions can’t close out games; look at the opponent’s quarterbacks completing pass after pass after pass in the fourth quarter and you’ll see why. Eventually, the front four can no longer hold back the flood; the dam bursts.  This is purely due to lack of talent, and cannot be fixed until the offseason.

Offensively, here’s what I projected:

Given a mild yard-producing advantage for Scott Linehan balanced offenses against Lovie Smith aggressive Tampa 2 defenses, I project the Lions to roughly meet expectations: 17-21 points, 5.50-6.0 YpA, and 3.50-3.75 YpC. I have medium-to-high confidence in this projection.

What the Lions did was move the ball better than they have all year.

They rushed for 4.96 yards per carry.  They completed 16 of 24 passes, for 7.42 yards per attempt.  On a per-play basis, this was the most balanced, most efficient offensive game the Lions played all year—and they failed to commit a single turnover.  Let me tip my hat to Scott Linehan as well; he did a similarly masterful job in tailoring his offense to his quarterback’s strengths.  Unfortunately, it only resulted in 20 points.  Both teams were taking long, slow, controlled trips across the field—the Lions’ opening drive burned four minutes off the clock and only went 26 yards—so the Lions’ offense only had nine possessions.  Part of it is simply missed opportunities; when you get a sack-fumble inside your opponents’ ten-yard-line, you have to score.

What’s funny is, every seasoned Lions observer threw up their hands when the Lions had to settle for a field goal there.  The Lions’ radio play-by-play man, Dan Miller, fought to keep the frustration out of his voice as he talked about the importance of getting a touchdown in that situation.  Sure enough, it was the difference in the game.  This is why I don’t put a lot of stock in the “learning how to win” thing.  The Lions don’t need to go to “put the boot on the throat” school, it’s the sum total of made mistakes and unmade plays throughout the game putting them on the wrong side of the ledger at the end.

This team's talent and execution is right there.  I fully believe the Lions have made the jump into the Great Middle of the NFL; they can play and compete with anyone.  However, their youth, inexperience, and lack of depth push them to the edge of their margin for error.  If anything—anything—fluky goes wrong, they simply can’t make up for it.  This is why the keep coming close, but can’t hang on.  This is why they keep being right there, except for . . .  This is why they’re 2-10, and not 6-6.  

Technorati Tags: nfl,detroit lions,chicago bears,jim schwartz,mike martz,scott linehan,drew stanton,gunther cunningham,lovie smith,rod marinelli

Read more...

Three Cups Deep: Lions vs. Bears

A couple of years ago, I had what might be called a quarterlife crisis.  I’d just bought a minivan—relegating my newish five-door Pontiac Vibe to pointlessly capacious commuter duty.  In a move designed to both lower my car payment and raise my self-esteem, I decided to trade it in for an older two-seat convertible.  After months of looking for just the right car, negotiating with the dealer, dealing with the bank, navigating my way through the credit crunch, and getting the stamp of approval from Mrs. Inwinter, I finally got everything arranged.  All the pieces were in place, all the numbers were crunched—and though the deal went right down to the absolute bottom dollar, I knew I had finally gotten what I wanted.

I called the dealer to arrange pickup.  When I asked what I needed to bring with me, he said “Your proof of insurance, title, and payoff statement.”  With fresh memories of the test drive whizzing through my head, I asked my bank to fax over a copy of the payoff statement.  They did so.  It was a thousand dollars higher than I thought it’d be.

To this day I don’t know how I screwed this up, but I thought I’d owed exactly one thousand dollars less than I really did.  There was nothing to be done; I’d already spent a week going back and forth to make it happen.  I’d negotiated so hard that at one point, I was in a room with the salesman, the sales manager, the service manager, and the general manager, bending them all to my will.  To suddenly be a thousand dollars apart meant it was over.

I halfheartedly kept searching for another car, another deal, but it wasn’t meant to be.  I was, I thought, thirty minutes away from swapping keys and driving a real, live sports car home . . . instead, I was back in the wagon.  I was crushed, and for a long time felt fated—doomed, even—to drive this car into the ground.  Sadly, I consigned myself to waiting for my midlife crisis.

In the meantime, though, it’s become easy to remember why I bought this Vibe to begin with: it’s big inside without being big outside, it gets great mileage, and—with a stick—is surprisingly fun to drive, even with five doors and a sewing machine engine.  It’s far from what I wanted, and even farther from what I imagine I’ll be in the market for come Model Year 2031.  But even though it doesn’t put the “permagrin” on my face, I’ve spent a few years wringing enjoyment from this ride; I know how to be happy with it.  I know exactly how hard I can push it around every corner on my commute.  I know that with a well-timed downshift, I can coax just enough “zing” from it to gleefully thumb my nose at an oblivious cell-phone-jabbering Saturn Vue owner as I pass them with authority.

In some ways, it’s pathetic; I’m psyching myself into getting my he-man car-guy rocks off within the context of posted speed limits.  But in other ways, it’s simply acknowledging reality: I’m a happily committed family man, working hard to give my kids every opportunity that I can.  I’m not going to eat my cake unless my family can have it, too—and that day just isn’t here yet.  So, I’m making do with what I’ve got—and frankly, I’m more blessed than many around these parts these days.

Being happy while following this Lions team is much the same.  It isn’t what I want—and God knows That Glorious Day has seemed right around the corner so many times.  But . . . this is what I’ve got.  I’m a Lions fan.  If I tried to drape myself in the colors of a winner, it would be a hollow lie.  Until the day comes when the Lions win games consistently, I’m going to revel in the glory of Calvin Johnson stiff-arming half the Bears’ defense en route to the end zone.  I’m going to go crazy about Cliff Avril picking up the slack for an injured KVB with a three-sack masterpiece of a breakdout performance.  And, yes, I’m going to queue up YouTube and watch Drew Stanton run for paydirt and do something vaguely resembling “the Dougie.”

I’m not going to let this team’s limitations, inexperience, and bad luck ruin my Sundays; I’m just going to watch and cheer and hope, and cherish the good stuff that happens while the snows roll in.  It’s going to be a long, long winter when this season’s said and done . . . maybe the longest winter yet.  With an NFL lockout looming on the horizon, it’s possible that there might not even be Lions football in 2011.  So, please, don’t tune out.  Don’t unplug.  Don’t let Packers fans take over our stadium next week.  Don’t miss out on the really cool moments this team is generating, even without some of their best players.    Make do with what you’ve got, and be thankful you’ve got something to make do with at all.

Technorati Tags: nfl,detroit lions,chicago bears,drew stanton,jim schwartz,cliff avril

Read more...

The Watchtower: LIONS vs. BEARS

The Bears were the first team I Watchtowered this season. They were also the first team to be Watchtowered in both the 2009 and 2010 seasons.  Now, they’re the first team to be Watchtowered twice this season.  The situation this time around is much different than in Week 1.  The Lions, at the time, seemed poised  for a breakthrough season; they had a clear vision and direction, and were primed with the talent to achieve it.  The Bears, meanwhile, were all over the place: loads of flashy talent, lots of money spent—but two new coordinators, and a sense that Death was lurking over the shoulder of Lovie Smith’s coaching tenure.

Of course, we know what happened: the referees insanely ruled that Calvin Johnson’s touchdown was not a touchdown, the Lions lost, and the Bears have been winning games ever since.  At times they’ve looked wobbly—even farcically inept—but eight times out of eleven, the Bears have beaten their opponent.

   . . . well, at least seven times out of eleven.

Scott Linehan vs. Lovie Smith

Lin		Ornk		PgG		YpA		YpC		Lovie		Drnk		PpG		DYpA		DYpC		PTS		PTSΔ		YpA		YpAΔ		YpC		YpCΔ
MIN		6th		26.0		7.60		4.75		STL		22nd		21.6		5.87		4.15		17		-35%		6.88		-9%		7.27		53%
MIN		6th		25.3		7.16		4.71		CHI		13th		20.7		6.49		4.13		27		7%		11.61		62%		4.04		-14%
MIN		6th		19.9		5.94		3.69		CHI		13th		20.7		6.49		4.13		14		-30%		8.45		42%		6.64		80%
STL		10th		22.9		6.69		4.26		CHI		3rd		15.9		5.36		3.96		27		18%		6.47		-3%		4.59		8%
STL		30th		14.5		5.67		3.95		CHI		16th		21.9		6.2		3.42		3		-79%		6.56		16%		0.74		-81%
DET		27th		16.4		7.80		4.42		CHI		21st		23.4		6.36		4.33		24		46%		7.45		-4%		2.46		-44%
DET		27th		25.2		5.95		3.63		CHI		21st		23.4		6.36		4.33		23		-9%		7.70		29%		4.00		10%
DET		12th		23.5		5.86		3.59		CHI		2nd		15.6		5.77		3.58		14		-40%		5.03		-14%		0.95		-74%
DET		12th		23.5		5.86		3.59		CHI		2nd		15.6		5.77		3.58

Last year, I thought I’d identified a strong trend when Linehan offenses meet Lovie Smith defenses, and then the Bears spent last year proving me wrong.  In the first Watchtower of this year, I modified my theory slightly:

Given greater or equal talent, Lovie Smith's relatively aggressive Tampa 2 will surrender a disproportionate amount of yards to Linehan's balanced offense, but also generate high numbers of sacks and turnovers, disproportionately disrupting scoring. Given mediocre or poor talent, Lovie Smith’s Tampa 2 surrenders disproportionately high yardage and points, respective to the Linehan offense’s talent level.

. . . I’ll say that based on extremely weak data, the most likely outcome of the game is a close Lions loss, with lots of sacks and turnovers for both sides, and a final score of 24-30.

The Lions only scored 14 points in the official reckoning—but of course, we know they actually scored at least 20, and would likely have gone for 2.  Even assuming they don’t convert the two, scoring 20 points slides the average/actual delta from -40% to -15%.  The Lions scoring 15% below their mean is not unexpected for the 12th-ranked offense going up against the 2nd-ranked defense.  The “sacks and turnovers” certainly were present, though: the Lions were sacked twice for –32 yards, fumbled three times (and lost two), and threw an interception, to boot.  Still, though, the Lions produced points when they absolutely needed to.  Here was my reaction in the Watchtower Review:

If the Lions were the beneficiary of a systemic advantage that allowed them to move the ball better than usual, either the Lions have an epically bad offense this season, or the Bears are much, much better than commonly thought.

It’s the latter.  The addition of Julius Peppers, and the return of Brian Urlacher to form, has this Bears defense playing like Bears defenses of old.  Allowing only 15.6 points per game on the average, and equally stiff against the run and pass, the Bears’ defense has been keeping the erratic offense in games.  In fact, only the Seahawks and Eagles have topped the Lions’ “20-point” performance against these 2010 Bears.  But, can the Lions repeat the feat?

Of course, the big difference between these two games is that Matthew Stafford and Jahvid Best started the first game, and Drew Stanton and Maurice Morris will be starting this one.  However, Stafford famously didn’t finish that game—and Best mustered only 20 yards on 14 carries.  So, then, the Lions shouldn’t be too far off their typical pace, unless Stanton completely implodes.  Also, note that the Lions’ mean YpA- and YpC-gained figured nearly match the Bears’ means allowed (5.86/5.77 YpA, 3.59/3.58 YpC).  Therefore, given a mild yard-producing advantage for Scott Linehan balanced offenses against Lovie Smith aggressive Tampa 2 defenses, I project the Lions to roughly meet expectations: 17-21 points, 5.50-6.0 YpA, and 3.50-3.75 YpC.  I have medium-to-high confidence in this projection.

Mitigating/Aggravating Factors:

Besides injuries (the Lions are missing their top two quarterbacks, and functionally missing their top two running backs), the main factor is the swing from a season-opening road game to a somewhat-meaningless home game.  This is a classic trap game, and it’s already a sellout.  If Drew Stanton (and the offensive line) can play like he did (and they did) against the Giants, the Lions could do at least this well, and possibly better.  If Drew implodes with turnovers, as he did in his only previous start . . . disaster.

Mike Martz vs. Gunther Cunningham:

MM	Ornk	PgG	YpA	YpC	Gun	Drnk	PpG	DYpA	DYpC	PTS	PTS?	YpA	YpA?	YpC	YpC?
STL	1st	33.8	8.91	4.81	KCC	19th	22.1	6.32	3.83	34	1%	8.48	-5%	3.30	-31%
CHI	22nd	20.2	8.32	3.84	DET	23rd	22.4	7.13	4.79	19	-6%	10.63	28%	3.26	-15%
CHI	22nd	20.2	8.32	3.84	DET	23rd	22.4	7.13	4.79

Here’s what I said in the previous Watchtower:

When the two teams faced one another, it was a study in averages: Martz’s offense produced exactly to its season mean in points, and very nearly so in YpA. Now, the Chiefs did manage to bottle up the run game, allowing only 3.3 YpC—and they also snared three interceptions, and garnered four sacks. Then again, Martz’s offense was notorious for surrendering both picks and sacks in the name of scoring. So, we only have one data point, and it points toward neither side having a systemic advantage or disadvantage. The two teams should play to their (relatively unknown) talent and execution levels.

Given that the Lions allowed 30.9 points last season, and given that they’re presumably improved, I’ll presume that they’re presumably good enough to allow the Bears to reach their season averages for 2010—which, of course, is a total guess anyway, since the one thing Martz does everywhere he goes is inflate scoring over the prior year. Let’s just call it thirty points. This is a guess and not a prediction, and I have extremely low confidence in it.

. . . and in the review:

On defense, Cutler and the Bears moved the ball with incredible ease; 10.62 YpA show that yards were coming in chunks through the air. Despite averaging only 3.25 YpC, the Bears continued to feed the ground game, too: 31 carries at that rate is good for 101 yards. Fortunately, the Lions managed to snare an interception, recover three fumbles, and sack Jay Cutler four times—and the timeliness of said turnovers kept points off the board. Even better was the tremendous four-down goal line stand. It was a signature performance by the defensive line, and it kept the game in the Lions’ control—for a little while, at least.

Going forward, the defense will probably be less spectacularly vulnerable; the Martz offense specifically attacks the Lions' defense's greatest weaknesses. Then again, the defense may well be less spectacular; the Martz offense’s greatest weaknesses played to the Lions’ defense’s strength. Even given the way the back seven was—for the most part—traumatized by the Bears, the Lions’ D played with enough heart, and enough pass rush, to make me think there’s hope for this team despite the painful loss.

That’s proved to be prescient: the Lions have played with a lot of heart, and a lot of pass rush, to this point—but there’s also been an awful lot of trauma in the back seven.  Hope?  Well, sure, there’s been that, but more for the 2011 harvest than the 2010 vintage.  The only important cogs missing for either unit will be Bears’ OLB Pina Tinoisamoa, and Lions’ DE Kyle Vanden Bosch—who put up one of the most amazing individual performances I’ve seen in the first game.  With luck, a finally-healthy-ish Cliff Avril, Lawrence Jackson, and Turk McBride will keep up the intensity.  Oh, and the Lions will play with DeAndre Levy, who wasn’t available for the first matchup.

It looks as though the only statistical trend for these two coaches, when facing off against one another, is that both units will play to their means: the 20.2-ppg Bears scored 19 against the 22.4-ppg Lions.  Note, however, that that included about thirty minutes of shutout play in between Matt Forte receiving touchdowns.   Given the data at hand, I’m inclined to project a repeat performance: 17-21 points, 7.50-8.00 YpA, and 4.0-4.25 YpC.  I have medium confidence in this projection.

Mitigating/Aggravating Factors:

Not many.  The Bears have been slowly evolving from a high variance, pitch-it-around scheme to a more safe and predictable spread-then-run approach.  Cutler’s cut down on some of the wildness, and the offensive line’s been bailed out with shorter routes and drops.  What they’ve done is take some of the teeth out of the offense, in exchange for committing fewer mistakes—the end result, though, is mostly unchanged: the defense is winning games for the Bears.  The major difference is, they’ve realized it and are playing to that strength.  Unless Martz releases the hounds, and the Bears go full-out track meet against the Lions’ secondary, I see a similar, if less wild, final result.

Conclusion

The one thing I’ve learned over the past two years of doing this preview, is that when the same teams play twice in a season, the results are rarely the same.  But the data points to a repeat—and the injury problems for the Lions should be offset by the difference between a season-opening road game, and a midseason sellout.  This is a statement game in many respects, and turnovers will likely make the difference.  Last time, there were five fumbles (three lost), two picks, and 6 sacks for –42 yards.  I see a similarly messy game this time around; how those turnovers and sacks are distributed will be the difference in the outcome.  I am tempted to call this a draw, but at this point in the season, I’ll go out on a limb one more time—despite having a limb hacked out from underneath me three times already this season.  I hesitantly project a 21-20 Lions victory, if for no other reason than the Lions need it much more than the Bears want it.

Technorati Tags: nfl,detroit lions,chicago bears,drew stanton,jim schwartz,scott linehan,gunther cunningham,mike martz,lovie smith

Read more...

Drew Stanton: Detroit Lions Starting Quarterback

By now, you’ve certainly heard the news: Drew Stanton will be starting for the Lions as they face the Bears this Sunday.  This kicked off a cavalcade of reactions:

• Sean Yuille at Pride of Detroit:

  “Apparently Schwartz said that the offense won't change with Stanton at the helm. All I can say is I'll believe it when I see it.”

• Neil at Armchair Linebacker:

  "Hell had to find a way to ferret out the tiny pockets of hope that were still left in the fanbase and then crush their fragile spirits, and what better way to do that than to parade down the streets with a clueless Drew Stanton waving and smiling and throwing Grit at horrified onlookers while the devil rides an evil sleigh made from the bones of Matthew Stafford and Shaun Hill?"

• Big Al at The Wayne Fontes Experience just screamed, senselessly.

I come from a different school of thought entirely.  Way back in March of aught-nine, in this blog’s third month, I penned a little piece I called “On Quarterbacks,” which was much more about Drew Stanton in particular than quarterbacks in general:

Stanton is a player I have an extra soft spot for, because my then-toddler daughter was introduced to football through him. One of the games we'd play with her would be to point out Drew Stanton every time teh camera closed in on him. In fact, one of the first times she recognized a number was during a Spartan football game, and she started shouting, "Green Number Five!" It took us a little while to realize that she was seeing Stanton and calling out his jersey number: a green five. When got a little older, my mother taught her to say "Drew Stanton, what a babe!" (gee, thanks, Mom). Ultimately, DS was kind enough to do an autograph session at the Mall, and my little girl actually got to meet the man in person.

Anyway, when Stanton was drafted by the Lions, it was a dream come true, of course. A second-round pick, at just the right time to draft and groom a QB, and a very Millen kind of QB, a tough-nosed, smart, gritty, vocal leader. The kind of player who legitimately hates opponents and wants to beat them--not for glory, not for stats, not for money, but for the sake of victory. The kind of player who can't stand losing, and will give every last ounce he's got to come out on top. That is exactly the kind of quarterback that most Lions fans have been screaming for for years, yet have not ever seen.

I was both thrilled and scared to tell my daughter about Drew Stanton What A Babe becoming a Lion, because deep down I feared that what happened to Chuck would happen to Drew. That the dark presence that hangs over this organization would roll down upon Ford Field and smite him, and DS would never lead the Lions to anything. Sure enough, it's been two whole seasons now; thanks to injuries, blackouts, and the ineffable Will of Rod, my now-twice-as-old-as-she-was-then daughter has still never seen Drew Stanton play for the Lions.  She roots for the Buccaneers now.

If the Millen/Martz/Marinelli three-headed monster, and multiple untimely injuries, hadn’t snuffed out Drew Stanton’s hopes of ever becoming The Lions’ Quarterback (instead of a Lions quarterback), the selection of Matthew Stafford did.  As soon as the ink was dry on Stafford’s massive contract, the forecast for Drew Stanton’s Lions career read “Cloudy with a slight chance of Charlie Batch in Pittsburgh.”  From that point, Hometown Boy Career Backup was the best Detroit Lion he could hope to be.

Unfortunately, Drew hasn’t made enough of his few chances to get even there.  His first—and until Sunday, his only—NFL start didn’t go so hot: 11 of 21 for 130 yards, no scores, and 3 INTs.  Combined with his various relief and mop-up appearances, he’s completed 55 of 104 attempts for 611 yards, two TDs, and seven interceptions.  That’s a career passer rating of 49.0.

His limitations as a passer are undeniable.  At his best, Drew’s passes are in the right place at the right time, but lack zip, especially on deep routes.  At his worst, his throws are wildly inaccurate and easily intercepted.  As Neil is so fond of pointing out, though, Drew’s stock in trade is Grit: with heart and effort and general athletic ability, he goes out and makes plays and does his best to win, no matter the odds.  In college, it worked—sometimes spectacularly.  Drew did engineer the biggest comeback in NCAA D-I history, after all.

Unfortunately, the same hasn’t been true so far in the pros.  In preseason, we’ve seen Stanton scramble for scores and throw 50-yard bombs—but when the bullets have been live, he’s been a dud.  Some of it’s because his team’s been terrible.  Some of it’s because he gets almost zero practice reps outside of training camp, so never practices with the starters and barely practices at all.  Some of it’s because his best chance to make it in the pros was with slow, steady, careful grooming to build good habits and iron out bad ones.  Some of it’s because . . . well, his limitations as a passer are undeniable.

Even so, this season we saw some real progress out of Drew. When he came in cold against the Giants, he turned in a performance that was a little shaky—but, yes, gritty.  He made plays when he had to, and nearly shocked the Giants at Your Company Name Here Stadium.  He impressed everyone, even Giants head coach Tom Coughlin:

"The third quarterback came in and, geez, he played very, very well,'' Giants coach Tom Coughlin said.

And Dominic Raiola--part of a Lions offensive line that worked incredibly hard to give Drew time against one of the better pass rushes in the NFL--voiced his support of Drew, too:

"Drew is mentally tough. You're not going to tell him he can't play and then he'll go in the tank. The guys are behind him -- he got better and he did a good job for us,'' Lions center Dominic Raiola said. "Drew's come a long way. He's so improved. People who think he's not an NFL quarterback ... he looked like one out there to me. He did a great job of preparing and he gave us a chance."

. . . and Stephen Peterman, too:

"I thought he did great,'' guard Stephen Peterman said. "He came in and stepped in and played a helluva game. He made checks and looks that you wouldn't expect from a guy who hasn't been in there. He did a great job."

In the wake of the Bills loss, I angrily blamed Jim Schwartz for starting a severely hampered Shaun Hill (who was too hurt to practice the whole playbook that week), instead of giving Drew a solid week of preparation with the starters.  Surely, I said during the Fireside Chat, if you knew that that was all Shaun Hill could give you, you have to start Drew.  If you can’t count on your third quarterback to play when your second-stringer is too hurt to take snaps under center, then what is he doing on the roster?  Schwartz answered that very question this week:

"There's a reason we've kept him around, and you only keep a guy around if you have confidence to put him in a game," Schwartz said. "His role has been third quarterback, and now it's time for him to be able to answer that and be able to go."

Obviously, actions speak louder than words: if Shaun Hill, playing at about 52% of his usual ability, gets the nod over a healthy Drew Stanton, then in fact you don’t have confidence to put him in a game.  Then again, actions speak louder than words—Schwartz and Mayhew have had plenty of opportunities to cut Drew loose and bring in someone else.  The Lions have not been shy about churning the roster; there’ve been no sacred cows.  Even beloved, respected, hometown boy, brought-in-by-this-regime Jon Jansen was sent packing when the Lions thought his roster spot would be better served on someone younger.  In fact, they have brought in several other quarterbacks: Brooks Bollinger, Kevin O’Connell, Zac Robinson—and they just worked out Josh McCown and J.T. O’Sullivan earlier this week.  If any of those guys offered a floor, or ceiling, higher than Stanton, Drew’d be gone.

I realize, at this point, that I sound like a fool.  I realize, at this point, that everyone else long ago boarded the Drew Stanton Sucks So Bad it’s Funny train, even though the reality of his situation hasn’t changed: he’s still a 2007 second-round draft pick, and he’s still only getting his second real shot at playing quarterback for this team.  He’s getting a full week of practice reps with the ones, a full week of preparing as the starter, a sellout home crowd, and a team eager to play for him—and get the victory over the Bears that was taken from them.

Go get ‘em, Drew.

Technorati Tags: nfl,detroit lions,drew stanton,shaun hill,jim schwartz,chicago bears

Read more...