NFL (2024 Season)

[Max Rockatansky]

FWIW that 0-16 team was way better than the current iteration of the Lions.

I do believe that team went 4-0 in the preseason.

Correct, the 2017 Browns did go 4-0 in preseason. How ironic! 

I had a Detroit Lions pre-season champions shirt from that year.  It was a niche custom item that someone was making back in those days.

[JayhawkCO]

Vikings have lost twice to the other teams FGs and once to our own curse against kickers.  I don't feel bad.  They made a dumb hire (Campbell) and a dumb trade (Goff).  They reap what they sow.

You don't have to feel bad for them about this season in particular - if Lions fans are anything like most of the other 31 fanbases, a lot of them are probably actively rooting to lose to secure the #1 overall pick. But in the context of the past 30 years, it's got to be a depressing, almost zombie-esque experience to be a Lions fan. They just can't have anything nice, ever. A few good wins in the Stafford era, but never anything in the playoffs, and none of those truly great moments that make being a fan worthwhile.

And today was so bad it was almost comical. They were all set up to get their first win if they could just somehow keep the Bears from scoring with 8:30 remaining. And it wasn't just that the Bears scored... it was the way they scored, bleeding clock and stumbling into a last second FG almost haphazardly because the Lions just could not get out of their own way. Alps already mentioned the killer... Bears had 3rd and 9 at the Lions 16 and it would have been an easy stop, they kick the FG, you get the ball back down 2. But instead the Lions take an illegal timeout, making it 3rd and 4 and the Bears convert for an easy first down, bleed clock, and kick the game winner. I mean HOW!? It is a comically bad coaching error and that's how you end up with an 0-10-1 record with a team has been competitive in many of their games. It's the type of loss that leaves fans with no hope that they'll ever get it together.

Sometimes I wonder though if it'd be better than being a Vikings fan.  We lose games in torturous ways, and, while unlike the Lions we've won playoff games, we haven't been to the Super Bowl in ~50 years and lost the four we have been in.

Detroit's never been to a Super Bowl, period–one of four franchises that have never been (as the NFL defines franchises, of course, given the Cleveland/Baltimore situation).

But the Lions do have four NFL Championships.  The Vikings have nada.

[Max Rockatansky]

Vikings have lost twice to the other teams FGs and once to our own curse against kickers.  I don't feel bad.  They made a dumb hire (Campbell) and a dumb trade (Goff).  They reap what they sow.

You don't have to feel bad for them about this season in particular - if Lions fans are anything like most of the other 31 fanbases, a lot of them are probably actively rooting to lose to secure the #1 overall pick. But in the context of the past 30 years, it's got to be a depressing, almost zombie-esque experience to be a Lions fan. They just can't have anything nice, ever. A few good wins in the Stafford era, but never anything in the playoffs, and none of those truly great moments that make being a fan worthwhile.

And today was so bad it was almost comical. They were all set up to get their first win if they could just somehow keep the Bears from scoring with 8:30 remaining. And it wasn't just that the Bears scored... it was the way they scored, bleeding clock and stumbling into a last second FG almost haphazardly because the Lions just could not get out of their own way. Alps already mentioned the killer... Bears had 3rd and 9 at the Lions 16 and it would have been an easy stop, they kick the FG, you get the ball back down 2. But instead the Lions take an illegal timeout, making it 3rd and 4 and the Bears convert for an easy first down, bleed clock, and kick the game winner. I mean HOW!? It is a comically bad coaching error and that's how you end up with an 0-10-1 record with a team has been competitive in many of their games. It's the type of loss that leaves fans with no hope that they'll ever get it together.

Sometimes I wonder though if it'd be better than being a Vikings fan.  We lose games in torturous ways, and, while unlike the Lions we've won playoff games, we haven't been to the Super Bowl in ~50 years and lost the four we have been in.

Detroit's never been to a Super Bowl, period–one of four franchises that have never been (as the NFL defines franchises, of course, given the Cleveland/Baltimore situation).

But the Lions do have four NFL Championships.  The Vikings have nada.

The Browns have quite a few NFL Championships in the pre-Super Bowl era.  A championship still is better than not having any. 

[webny99]

Maybe I am in the minority on this, but IMO anything pre-Super Bowl era doesn't really count. I mean, no one under retirement age would even be able to remember it at this point.

[Alps]

Fun stat presented during lions game: Goff has played for 4 coaches and has only won games for one of them

[1995hoo]

Vikings have lost twice to the other teams FGs and once to our own curse against kickers.  I don't feel bad.  They made a dumb hire (Campbell) and a dumb trade (Goff).  They reap what they sow.

You don't have to feel bad for them about this season in particular - if Lions fans are anything like most of the other 31 fanbases, a lot of them are probably actively rooting to lose to secure the #1 overall pick. But in the context of the past 30 years, it's got to be a depressing, almost zombie-esque experience to be a Lions fan. They just can't have anything nice, ever. A few good wins in the Stafford era, but never anything in the playoffs, and none of those truly great moments that make being a fan worthwhile.

And today was so bad it was almost comical. They were all set up to get their first win if they could just somehow keep the Bears from scoring with 8:30 remaining. And it wasn't just that the Bears scored... it was the way they scored, bleeding clock and stumbling into a last second FG almost haphazardly because the Lions just could not get out of their own way. Alps already mentioned the killer... Bears had 3rd and 9 at the Lions 16 and it would have been an easy stop, they kick the FG, you get the ball back down 2. But instead the Lions take an illegal timeout, making it 3rd and 4 and the Bears convert for an easy first down, bleed clock, and kick the game winner. I mean HOW!? It is a comically bad coaching error and that's how you end up with an 0-10-1 record with a team has been competitive in many of their games. It's the type of loss that leaves fans with no hope that they'll ever get it together.

Sometimes I wonder though if it'd be better than being a Vikings fan.  We lose games in torturous ways, and, while unlike the Lions we've won playoff games, we haven't been to the Super Bowl in ~50 years and lost the four we have been in.

Detroit's never been to a Super Bowl, period–one of four franchises that have never been (as the NFL defines franchises, of course, given the Cleveland/Baltimore situation).

But the Lions do have four NFL Championships.  The Vikings have nada.

That's a fair point. I had focused on Super Bowls not because I don't count pre—Super Bowl championships but rather because of your reference to the Minnesota Football Team not having been to a Super Bowl in around 50 years (coming up on 45 years, actually–Super Bowl XI was Minnesota's most recent one, in January 1977; they lost to Oakland 32—14).

Maybe I am in the minority on this, but IMO anything pre-Super Bowl era doesn't really count. I mean, no one under retirement age would even be able to remember it at this point.

OTOH, the Redskins' loss to the Bears in the 1940 NFL Championship Game remains infamous.

[jeffandnicole]

Maybe I am in the minority on this, but IMO anything pre-Super Bowl era doesn't really count. I mean, no one under retirement age would even be able to remember it at this point.

So, old people don't matter?

[Max Rockatansky]

My Grandpa sure thought it mattered when the Baltimore Colts were winning NFL Championships.

[webny99]

Maybe I am in the minority on this, but IMO anything pre-Super Bowl era doesn't really count. I mean, no one under retirement age would even be able to remember it at this point.

So, old people don't matter?

They matter, but the success that a team had when they were young doesn't matter anymore.

[1995hoo]

Maybe I am in the minority on this, but IMO anything pre-Super Bowl era doesn't really count. I mean, no one under retirement age would even be able to remember it at this point.

So, old people don't matter?

They matter, but the success that a team had when they were young doesn't matter anymore.

But why limit that to the pre—Super Bowl era? To use an obvious example, the Redskins were outstanding when I was growing up, playing in four Super Bowls in ten years and winning three of them. But the last of those (XXVI) was 30 years ago this coming January. Under your theory, that doesn't really matter anymore, right? (To be clear, I'm far less of a fan than I used to be. The more I watch hockey, the less I watch football.)

[Max Rockatansky]

Maybe I am in the minority on this, but IMO anything pre-Super Bowl era doesn't really count. I mean, no one under retirement age would even be able to remember it at this point.

So, old people don't matter?

They matter, but the success that a team had when they were young doesn't matter anymore.

But why limit that to the pre—Super Bowl era? To use an obvious example, the Redskins were outstanding when I was growing up, playing in four Super Bowls in ten years and winning three of them. But the last of those (XXVI) was 30 years ago this coming January. Under your theory, that doesn't really matter anymore, right? (To be clear, I'm far less of a fan than I used to be. The more I watch hockey, the less I watch football.)

I don't think he's caught onto the fact that Joe Namath is still in a lot of commercials.

[webny99]

Maybe I am in the minority on this, but IMO anything pre-Super Bowl era doesn't really count. I mean, no one under retirement age would even be able to remember it at this point.

So, old people don't matter?

They matter, but the success that a team had when they were young doesn't matter anymore.

But why limit that to the pre—Super Bowl era? To use an obvious example, the Redskins were outstanding when I was growing up, playing in four Super Bowls in ten years and winning three of them. But the last of those (XXVI) was 30 years ago this coming January. Under your theory, that doesn't really matter anymore, right? (To be clear, I'm far less of a fan than I used to be. The more I watch hockey, the less I watch football.)

In this case, I used the term "Super Bowl era" to mean "about 50 years", since that's what it happens to coincide with. Basically what I'm saying is anything more than 50 years ago doesn't really matter to anyone anymore. In your case, the Super Bowls 30+ years ago are still relevant historical context, since there is still at least one generation of fans that remembers that success. But in another 25 years (50+ years total), there will be very few people that were old enough to clearly remember that success, and that's the point at which it goes from barely relevant to not relevant at all.

[jlam]

The Lions are the next team to be 0-16-1 if they DON'T win the next six games! 
And they will be like the 1960 Cowboys, 1976 Bucs, 1982 Colts (Now Ravens; shortened season due to strike  ), 2008 Lions, and the 2017 Browns.
This will be the second time a winless season has happened to the Lions. 
Well done Lions, you guys deserve a winless season /s 

The Baltimore Colts are not the same team as the Baltimore Ravens. The Baltimore Colts moved to Indianapolis in 1984. Twelve years later, the first Cleveland Browns moved to Baltimore and became the Ravens, in tribute to Edgar Allen Poe.

[thspfc]

Tua completes 27 of 31 passes today. Sure, 230 yards isn't a ton, but that's still very good efficiency, and it clearly worked well, as the Dolphins totally dominated the Panthers. Over the last two games, he's a combined 54 of 64. That's ridiculous. Not hard to see why the Dolphins are slowly but surely climbing back into the playoff hunt.

[thspfc]

Another Jets touchdown would have been nice, but then again it's the Jets. I'm still doing well with Texans games over the last two weeks.

Eagles, Steelers, and Chargers on the other hand . . .

[Alps]

Another Jets touchdown would have been nice, but then again it's the Jets. I'm still doing well with Texans games over the last two weeks.

Eagles, Steelers, and Chargers on the other hand . . .

I wish the Jets would lose for draft position, but they manage to screw even that up.

[jp the roadgeek]

The Lions are the next team to be 0-16-1 if they DON'T win the next six games! 
And they will be like the 1960 Cowboys, 1976 Bucs, 1982 Colts (Now Ravens; shortened season due to strike  ), 2008 Lions, and the 2017 Browns.
This will be the second time a winless season has happened to the Lions. 
Well done Lions, you guys deserve a winless season /s 

The Baltimore Colts are not the same team as the Baltimore Ravens. The Baltimore Colts moved to Indianapolis in 1984. Twelve years later, the first Cleveland Browns moved to Baltimore and became the Ravens, in tribute to Edgar Allen Poe.

You're right about the Colts/Ravens not being the same franchise.  However, the Ravens are technically an expansion franchise, despite retaining the ownership and players from the 95 Browns.  The Browns records remained in Cleveland, and the Browns franchise is considered to have been dormant from 1996-1998. 

[webny99]

-That's 3 straight wins for the Bengals over the Steelers, and each one has been more impressive. The Steelers needed that win bad and got blown out of the building. That's probably the Steelers' season... I don't see a single win left on their schedule, much less enough of them to make a playoff push. 8-8-1 still very much in play (which would keep the darn "Tomlin's never had a losing record" thing alive in unbelievable fashion), but so is 5-11-1.

-Falcons are probably the worst 5-6 team in NFL history. They're sort of like the anti-Bills... the Bills either win blowouts or lose close games, while the Falcons either win close games or lose blowouts. The Falcons have been boat-raced 4 times this season (Weeks 1, 2, 10, and 11), but their remaining games have all been one-score games and they're 5-2 in those games. This is not a good team, but it's also a franchise known for choking, so if they can learn to consistently close out games and maybe even get to 8 or 9 wins with a first-year head coach, I think you have to consider it a successful season.

-What are the Chargers this season? They're in every game, but they've been maddeningly inconsistent at times. They've started to shed their reputation for blowing games at the end, and yet they've still had several head-scratchers this season. They needed to beat the Broncos to be viewed seriously as a contender. Now they're right there with the Raiders and Broncos at 6-5 in an improved but muddled AFC West.

[thspfc]

NFL fans are really quick to trash on teams that they were anointing as possible Super Bowl champions a few weeks earlier. The Cowboys lose to the team that should be Super Bowl favorites, and then lose by a field goal overtime while missing their top two WRs and two of their top three pass rushers, and all of a sudden everyone thinks they're average. The Rams have a stretch of frequent costly turnovers and failing to convert in the red zone, leading to three losses, and now nobody thinks they're relevant.

Don't freak out. The Rams and Cowboys are still title contenders.

Also, that was a bluntly bad call on the David Njoku touchdown that just happened.

[jlam]

The Rams are 0-3 with Von Miller, and the Broncos have gone 1-1 without him. The Broncos could be 2-0 over the past few weeks if the final few minutes in the Philadelphia game had gone their way.

[webny99]

The Rams are 0-3 with Von Miller, and the Broncos have gone 1-1 without him. The Broncos could be 2-0 over the past few weeks if the final few minutes in the Philadelphia game had gone their way.

Broncos are actually 2-1, correct? I believe Broncos-Cowboys was after the trade.

[jlam]

The Rams are 0-3 with Von Miller, and the Broncos have gone 1-1 without him. The Broncos could be 2-0 over the past few weeks if the final few minutes in the Philadelphia game had gone their way.

Broncos are actually 2-1, correct? I believe Broncos-Cowboys was after the trade.

Yes, I forgot about that  game.

[webny99]

Wow, what a wild ending to the Seahawks-Washington game. Why on earth didn't Washington kick a field goal to go up 11 points at the Seattle 3 yard line with under 3 minutes remaining? Created a lot of unnecessary drama leaving it a one-score game, and of course Seattle goes down the field and gets a late TD... only to miss the 2pt conversion... only to recover the onside kick... only to have the onside kick called back because of an illegal formation.

Obviously, it was a must-win game for Seattle, now at 3-8 their playoff odds are down to 1%. They'd have to win out and get a lot of help to make it. Even worse... their 3-8 record is the same as the Jets, and the Jets also have Seattle's first-round pick next year. Yikes.

[JayhawkCO]

Wow, what a wild ending to the Seahawks-Washington game. Why on earth didn't Washington kick a field goal to go up 11 points at the Seattle 3 yard line with under 3 minutes remaining?

Their kicker hurt his hamstring.

[Roadgeekteen]

Russ can't cook anymore