August 29th, 2017 at 6:17 PM ^
Well good thing you didn't sign him then
August 29th, 2017 at 11:22 AM ^
That was in an era of 12 game seasons.
August 29th, 2017 at 7:12 PM ^
August 28th, 2017 at 11:34 PM ^
August 28th, 2017 at 11:34 PM ^
Agent that is.
August 28th, 2017 at 11:36 PM ^
No human being is worth that much money for throwing a ball. At least taxpayers can keep paying for the owner's stadiums though.
August 28th, 2017 at 11:57 PM ^
come on man, it's a market economy. It doesn't work that way. I'd argue Stafford isn't worth that much to the team, but the money is there, somebody has to get it
August 29th, 2017 at 12:21 AM ^
It is a market economy, and he was signed to a contract in a league where salaries are flat-out insane when compared to those in the real world. Those salaries may not be as high if the league didn't operate as a nonprofit & owners actually paid for their own stadiums, but it is what it is in this country. They won't be getting any of my money for their mediocrity though.
August 29th, 2017 at 12:27 AM ^
Why are you comparing them to real world salaries? Are you going to argue that movie stars make too much money too? When the NFL starts losing money, then you can make a credible argument that they are getting paid too much.
August 29th, 2017 at 1:08 AM ^
August 29th, 2017 at 7:45 AM ^
The city of Detroit is not paying any of the athletes. The fans of the Lions, the fans of other NFL teams and the people who purchase any of the items ever advertised at a football game are paying his salary.
August 29th, 2017 at 8:01 AM ^
it's the TV money and sponsorships that are paying Stafford's money, not the fans who purchased tickets and merchandise.
August 29th, 2017 at 2:08 AM ^
Movie stars do make an obscene amount of money, but it's not like the movie producers go whining to local governments every couple of decades for a billion dollar handout.
August 29th, 2017 at 3:59 AM ^
August 29th, 2017 at 7:12 AM ^
August 29th, 2017 at 8:15 AM ^
August 29th, 2017 at 1:47 AM ^
August 28th, 2017 at 11:36 PM ^
August 28th, 2017 at 11:37 PM ^
I wish the lions started a public campaign to put pressure on Stafford to sign for <25 in order to allow the Lions to sign more players under the cap. This is not a bad signing, but it is not exactly great either. Have to sign him and hope he improves from top 15 QB to top 5.
August 28th, 2017 at 11:40 PM ^
August 29th, 2017 at 12:01 AM ^
TSN recently ranked all the starting QBs and Stafford was 13, so pretty close.
August 29th, 2017 at 12:04 AM ^
How many of those guys are 29 years old?
August 29th, 2017 at 12:10 AM ^
August 29th, 2017 at 1:32 AM ^
are right there on his heels and much younger. Even Kirk Cousins is in that middle tier. Agree with you about who is definitively better and might argue that he's better than Rivers.
August 29th, 2017 at 8:20 AM ^
August 29th, 2017 at 3:13 PM ^
yes, but not for next season. Brees is better than him right now.
August 29th, 2017 at 12:45 PM ^
You listed the "better" QB's in the league RIGHT NOW. This is a business decision, not for just today, but for the next 6 years (1 year remaining this year plus the 5 year extension). I would debate the merit of Rivers AND Newton over Stafford, but for this point lets just go with your list. Here are the ages of the 8 QB's you listed above Stafford.....
Brady - 40
Big Ben - 35
Rogers - 33
Ryan - 32
Brees - 38
Wilson - 28 (10 months younger than Stafford)
Rivers - 35
Newton - 28 (15 month younger)
And of the 3 other QB, Luck is 27 (he'll turn 28 in 2 weeks), and Carr is 26. My point being that Stafford is in the group of Mid 20's QB (Wilson, Newton, Luck, and Carr) where I would only say that Wilson is better (not by much but better). Even if you add Cousins, he is 29 (6 months younger) and I would not want Cousins over Stafford.
So, at minimum 4-5 of these QBs will not even make it another 6 years and the 6th will be on the very tail end of his career while Stafford will have another 3-5 left.....
Finally, the Washington Post just put out an article stating very cleary that.....
A) This is a good signing for the Lions because they locked in a quality QB, BECAUSE....
B) Within 12 months, Cousins, Brees, Ryan, and Rogers will all be up for negotiations either because they contracts end soon (Cousins and Brees) or are close and the team will do what the Lions did and negotiate extensions (Ryan and Rogers).
So to all the short sighted people pissing and moaning about the how inept the Lions Front Office is (with plenty of data as support), need to look at this from Bob Quinn's perspecitve a more long range picture. This is a solid extension....... He has locked in a quality QB for the next 6 years (and I would be willing to bet that at least 1-2 times, Stafford will give some of it back to help the team over the next 6 years, as he has done in the past) to a good contract and now he can plan accordingly moving forward....
Jake will be traded this off season once Brad Kaaya demonstates that he has a handle of teh offense for a 3rd or 4th round pick (kudos if he can get a 2nd rounder but not expected) and Quinn can then select another talented player with a solid 3-4 rounder....
Yeah, today this contract does not equate (Stafford = Highest paid), but this is for the next 6 years and I can enure you by the time year 3 or 4 come aournd, he will be no where near the top 5 or maybe even top 10 in QB contracts.....
August 28th, 2017 at 11:47 PM ^
August 28th, 2017 at 11:39 PM ^
August 28th, 2017 at 11:39 PM ^
August 28th, 2017 at 11:40 PM ^
August 29th, 2017 at 12:46 AM ^
70
75
80
85
90
95
00
05
10
15
August 29th, 2017 at 7:52 AM ^
Ya, because QB was totally their problem.
August 28th, 2017 at 11:50 PM ^
Relax...all this proves is that there aren't enough good or better QBs in the NFL.
If the Lions don't pay him this, you think the Jaguars wouldn't. As a Lions fan...would you rather have Blake Bortles on a cheap contract? Of course not.
This is just the way the league is set up...and because the player's don't have as much control as the NBA...and because you have to take the guaranteed longterm deal when it's offered, you don't get the best players with the best deals.
LeBron keeps signing 1 year deals with a 1 year player option and he can always make sure he gets paid what he wants to get paid. In the NFL he's signing a max longterm deal and in 5-6 years, he's not going to be the highest paid player unless he holds out and the owner/GM gives.
It's just a different world. Let Rodgers go on the free market and see what he gets.
Maybe the player's get more control in the future, but I don't see it with the current way the league is structured and the nature of the sport.
But back to my orginal point...if there were more decent QBs in the league, this wouldn't happen as much and so drastically. But there are no other options...if you have a top 15 QB in the league, which the Lions do, you have to do everything to hold onto him. Otherwise you're overpaying for Mike effing Glennon or Brock Osweiler.
August 28th, 2017 at 11:43 PM ^
The biggest Stafford guy out there.
But the Lions really did not have many other options. The quality of college QBs continues to decrease, and you won't find anyone that could push this franchise ahead in awhile.
Sadly, this is what happens when you hitch your wagon to an overall top pick and he does just enough.
This is also how the NFL is trending. Someone will pass him next season, and so on and so forth.
August 28th, 2017 at 11:48 PM ^
Exactly, unless you hit on a rookie, you basically have to have a top 7 QB.
This is why I don't understand NFL teams. They're so rigged and arrogant with whats an "NFL QB."
If you don't have one of these top guys, why not draft a guy and play to his strengths by running a good bit of his college offense in the NFL? You may have to draft a few QBs because of the playing style, but so what? There should be plenty available because they're getting passed over for not being prototypical NFL QBs.
I'd just love to see a team like Jacksonville say fuck it...we're just going to go all in with a college style team and see what we can do. Screw trying to be "NFL"...
August 29th, 2017 at 12:07 AM ^
You will lose every game. Major injuries. You will lose every game with a running QB who can't throw ie. J.T. Barrett. Major injuries. You will lose every game. Do you get the theme and reason why you don't run spread option shit in the NFL. You will lose every game.
August 29th, 2017 at 12:50 AM ^
No we won't...teams run spread all the time in the NFL. Chill with that noise.
Who said anything about JT Barrett? He can't throw the damn football.
Major injuries? We're not talking about a college team playing an NFL team, lol. We're talking about an NFL team playing a NFL team. Why all of a sudden are their a ton of injuries?
Do the Patriots have a ton of injuries I don't know about? They run a ton of spread...but with NFL players.
There's a huge difference between spread and spread-option. But even if you are running the QB more, have 3 guys on your roster that are better fits for your system. Deshaun Watson, Baker Mayfield, and say Trevone Boykin all on the same team running a Clemson or Oklahoma style offense.
That's different than JT Barrett, Denard Robinson, and Kenny Hill all on the same team trying to run the option every other down from the QB position.
August 29th, 2017 at 7:36 AM ^
August 29th, 2017 at 9:11 AM ^
Chip Kelly's issue wasn't that his system didn't work in the NFL, it's that he was sufficiently arrogant to believe that his system was athlete-independent and that he could just plug anyone anywhere and it'd work like magic. The Eagles were 3rd in offensive DVOA in 2013 with Kelly at the helm, but he consistently eroded the talent on that team through his time there.
Dude would be a fine OC for an NFL team if anyone would let him have control of the offense, but you can't give him control of personnel, too.
August 29th, 2017 at 2:07 PM ^
I had also read/heard that because of Chip's uptempo style of play, the Eagles were running something like 10-20% more offensive snaps per game than the other teams in the league. This increase was not unnoticed by the players and their agents who it is alleged wanted to be compensated for the additional risk that these extra snaps created. I suspect it is part of why free agents would want no part of an offense led by Chip.
I have no idea if that number of snaps estimate is real, nor do I know if the increase in number of snaps also would lead to an increased injury risk so grain of salt obviously.
I would doubt that Chip works in the NFL again.
August 29th, 2017 at 12:16 AM ^
August 29th, 2017 at 12:43 AM ^
Again, I said spread...never mentioned the option.
Unless you have Cam Newton, I really don't recommend trying that as long as James Harrison and friends are in the league.
August 29th, 2017 at 7:17 AM ^
You said a college offense. Most NFL teams play spread offenses as it is. So what are people supposed to think you meant?
August 29th, 2017 at 11:43 PM ^
A college style system...that doesn't mean spread option. WAY more teams spread people out and throw the ball versus run a spread option.
So if you were going to make an assumption, I'd think it would follow the majority versus a minority. Otherwise, assume I'm talking about Georgia Tech and Navy next time, those are college teams.
August 29th, 2017 at 12:20 AM ^
Is there a college QB that you think is successful but may not be given a fair opportunity at the pros because he isn't "prototypical"?
I can think of lots of good college QBs who are on teams that either run vanilla offenses or simply out-athlete their opponents. But I can't think of one that otherwise wouldn't be drafted who could alter the landscape of the NFL by playing his "college offense." It seems like opposing teams would isolate whatever the QB is good at and force him to do things they aren't very good at (which is probably throwing the ball further than 15 yeards).
August 29th, 2017 at 12:54 AM ^
Kaepernick looked a hell of a lot better under Harbaugh running the Pistol and using his legs every now and again.
I never thought Tebow was great, but I think he could've been better if these shit teams would've stopped trying to turn him into a pocket passing QB. That's 2 guys right there.
But those are guys who can run...on the flip side, guys like Bryce Petty who come from a Baylor, Texas Tech, ECU, old Oklahoma, Wazzou, Cal style AIr Raid offense...if your team is doo doo, why not go get 3 of these guys and run that style of offense? I mean have the Jaguars shown something that it's not worth a shot? Do we need more Bortles?
If I'm them, I'd give it a whirl...give me the best 3 of those air raid guys who are being forced to take snaps under center and be a "pocket passer." Hire a Lincoln Riley (before Stoops retired) as my OC (or TCU's co-OCs or Kendall Briles)...and let's see what we can do slinging the ball around in this NFL.
Give me Case Keenum, Bryce Petty and this Luke Falk kid and I'd be interested to see if in an Air Raid offense, with a real NFL OL, RB, and WRs...they'd have some success. Versus having 1 of those guys on your roster and trying to work him under center and develop him as an NFL pocker passing QB.
We still may be bad, but I think it'd be worth a shot if every year you're terrible. I don't think you'd ever win a Super Bowl with it, but I could see a team having some success in today's NFL.
August 29th, 2017 at 1:00 AM ^
Denver used Tebow just like they did at Florida. Rely on running game, use his legs (especially on short yardage sitaution) and used Urban Meyer's playbook. Tebow isn't a good QB because he struggles to process and is inaccurate.
August 29th, 2017 at 4:17 AM ^
End of that argument!