Detriot Lions defense has injury problems.

[DVontel]

I know, I'm just talking about one who plays 16 games and isn't on the verge of retirement when we acquire him.

Again, I'd be over the moon if we had a Stafford for 10 years, because I could at least go into the season without a huge question mark at the league's most important position.

Just pessimism because we know what to expect with Stafford.

 

[Solar7]

Just pessimism because we know what to expect with Stafford.

Well, it's not pessimism, again, I think he's a better QB than he's being given credit for.

 

[kerouac9]

I know, I'm just talking about one who plays 16 games and isn't on the verge of retirement when we acquire him.

Again, I'd be over the moon if we had a Stafford for 10 years, because I could at least go into the season without a huge question mark at the league's most important position.

I dunno. I'd probably rather have a question mark than suffer through Ryan Tannehill or Andy Dalton. In the right light, Tyrod Taylor looks like one of those guys that can be the answer for a while.

 

[Solar7]

I dunno. I'd probably rather have a question mark than suffer through Ryan Tannehill or Andy Dalton. In the right light, Tyrod Taylor looks like one of those guys that can be the answer for a while.

Well, I think Stafford is leaps and bounds above Tannehill, and much better than Dalton. I still wouldn't sneeze at what Dalton has done for his franchise if we had that here. Despite not winning them, 7 playoff appearances would be nice, but a little disappointing. Certainly better than getting so close to the promised land and then being 4-12 with Kevin Kolb, or the debacle last year.

 

[gimpy]

Where are all the people who wanted us to sign Stafford when they thought he was going to be traded or released here a year or two ago?

 

[daves]

Where are all the people who wanted us to sign Stafford when they thought he was going to be traded or released here a year or two ago?

Stafford would've been an enormous upgrade over the dreck the Cardinals had then. Solar is claiming he'd be the best QB the Cardinals have ever had. He certainly is not except by the contorted definition Solar keeps having to finesse. That has nothing to do with wanting someone better than Skelton, Kolb, Lindley, etc.

...dbs

 

[BigRedRage]

Stafford would've been an enormous upgrade over the dreck the Cardinals had then. Solar is claiming he'd be the best QB the Cardinals have ever had. He certainly is not except by the contorted definition Solar keeps having to finesse. That has nothing to do with wanting someone better than Skelton, Kolb, Lindley, etc.

...dbs

I wanted him all day when he was possibly becoming available. With Arians as his coach, ida taken it all day long.

 

[Crimson Warrior]

Well, I think Stafford is leaps and bounds above Tannehill, and much better than Dalton. I still wouldn't sneeze at what Dalton has done for his franchise if we had that here. Despite not winning them, 7 playoff appearances would be nice, but a little disappointing. Certainly better than getting so close to the promised land and then being 4-12 with Kevin Kolb, or the debacle last year.

Solar7, you right that Stafford is a good QB. But from my uneducated perspective, guys like Matt present a peculiar kind of problem. And again, this is from a guy that doesn't follow the NFL super closely. This is just my opinion.

But guys like Stafford (and I'll throw Jay Cuttler, Dalton and Cousins in this group) are good, but not good enough to lead their team to a championship.

I know, I know, put them on a team with a top flight defense, and they would win a championship. Maybe. But it's never happened for those guys.

What I'm saying is that Stafford plays just good enough to keep his job, but never good enough to lift his team to the next level. If I'm way off, forgive me.

 

[wit3card]

Solar7, you right that Stafford is a good QB. But from my uneducated perspective, guys like Matt present a peculiar kind of problem. And again, this is from a guy that doesn't follow the NFL super closely. This is just my opinion.

But guys like Stafford (and I'll throw Jay Cuttler, Dalton and Cousins in this group) are good, but not good enough to lead their team to a championship.

I know, I know, put them on a team with a top flight defense, and they would win a championship. Maybe. But it's never happened for those guys.

What I'm saying is that Stafford plays just good enough to keep his job, but never good enough to lift his team to the next level. If I'm way off, forgive me.

Joe Flacco would have a word or two with you, but yes. Basically they aren't good enough to get you to the promised land, same probably will be said from Wilson if he continues like this in the next decade.

 

[Krangodnzr]

I know, I'm just talking about one who plays 16 games and isn't on the verge of retirement when we acquire him.

Again, I'd be over the moon if we had a Stafford for 10 years, because I could at least go into the season without a huge question mark at the league's most important position.

10 years of mediocrity at best!?!?

Sign me up!

Stafford is like that pretty girl who sucks in bed.

 

[Ronin]

10 years of mediocrity at best!?!?

Sign me up!

Stafford is like that pretty girl who sucks in bed.

You must be registered for see images attach

 

[Solar7]

Stafford would've been an enormous upgrade over the dreck the Cardinals had then. Solar is claiming he'd be the best QB the Cardinals have ever had. He certainly is not except by the contorted definition Solar keeps having to finesse. That has nothing to do with wanting someone better than Skelton, Kolb, Lindley, etc.

...dbs

There's not much of a way to say that a 10 year starter who throws for over 4,000 yards almost every year isn't better than anything we've had in AZ. Especially given that his talent wasn't better than we had here. I'm not sure why this is a difficult argument. We'd be so lucky to have him. I'm not sure how this is finesse. Thinking he's worse is placing 5 playoff wins over everything else he outranks our QBs in.

Solar7, you right that Stafford is a good QB. But from my uneducated perspective, guys like Matt present a peculiar kind of problem. And again, this is from a guy that doesn't follow the NFL super closely. This is just my opinion.

But guys like Stafford (and I'll throw Jay Cuttler, Dalton and Cousins in this group) are good, but not good enough to lead their team to a championship.

I know, I know, put them on a team with a top flight defense, and they would win a championship. Maybe. But it's never happened for those guys.

What I'm saying is that Stafford plays just good enough to keep his job, but never good enough to lift his team to the next level. If I'm way off, forgive me.

I watch Stafford play a lot year to year. There's no doubt that there's some great QBs out there, like Brady, Wilson and Rodgers, who have a knack for winning games. But just because you're not engineering the perfect drive in the most clutch moment, does it mean you're a bad, or even mediocre QB. Most of those guys have superior coaching, or franchise management.

Stafford plays well enough not only to not lose his job, but not to be replaced. He's legit. Cousins and Dalton? Maybe, but the reality is that there aren't a lot of QBs that are genuinely superior for them to be overtaken by.

 

[Krangodnzr]

There's not much of a way to say that a 10 year starter who throws for over 4,000 yards almost every year isn't better than anything we've had in AZ. Especially given that his talent wasn't better than we had here. I'm not sure why this is a difficult argument. We'd be so lucky to have him. I'm not sure how this is finesse. Thinking he's worse is placing 5 playoff wins over everything else he outranks our QBs in.


I watch Stafford play a lot year to year. There's no doubt that there's some great QBs out there, like Brady, Wilson and Rodgers, who have a knack for winning games. But just because you're not engineering the perfect drive in the most clutch moment, does it mean you're a bad, or even mediocre QB. Most of those guys have superior coaching, or franchise management.

Stafford plays well enough not only to not lose his job, but not to be replaced. He's legit. Cousins and Dalton? Maybe, but the reality is that there aren't a lot of QBs that are genuinely superior for them to be overtaken by.

I actually like Stafford ok. But Palmer and Warner were better. Both elevated their teams at times. Played great in critical situations to win games.

Stafford is the guy who fails in those situations.

 

[Solar7]

10 years of mediocrity at best!?!?

Sign me up!

Stafford is like that pretty girl who sucks in bed.

I really think I need to understand your argument better (along with @DVontel and others). Do you think a "good" quarterback is one who is a generational talent? Peyton Mannning, Drew Brees, Tom Brady? Russel Wilson? Aaron Rodgers? They're all first ballot Hall of Fame guys.

Because I think this is where we're diverging, and I am with anyone else here. A QB that finishes in the top ten of of most statistically relevant categories in most years is "good" to me. A QB that holds his job against all comers for ten years is "good" to me.

I'm getting the vibe that the expectations of what a really good QB are on this board are sky high. Tons of playoff wins, championships, leading the league in touchdowns... we've never had that.

 

[Solar7]

I actually like Stafford ok. But Palmer and Warner were better. Both elevated their teams at times. Played great in critical situations to win games.

Stafford is the guy who fails in those situations.

Overall career. That's what I'm talking about. If you think we can dismiss a healthy Matthew Stafford in game 1, when we have rookies and street free agents playing CB, I'm not sure what to tell you. That's what started this argument.

He's going to put up numbers against our team, and anyone thinking we're going to saunter in there like we're playing Josh Allen and the Bills is sorely mistaken.

 

[Cheesebeef]

Overall career. That's what I'm talking about. If you think we can dismiss a healthy Matthew Stafford in game 1, when we have rookies and street free agents playing CB, I'm not sure what to tell you. That's what started this argument.

He's going to put up numbers against our team, and anyone thinking we're going to saunter in there like we're playing Josh Allen and the Bills is sorely mistaken.

dude... a healthy Stafford came into our house late last year against one of the most atrocious teams I've ever seen and put up a whopping 10 points on offense and threw for 103 yards. That is the game that makes me think this is toss-up. We're not going to be good this year, but I don't think we're close to the all-time Cardinals atrocity from last year and the Lions are still the Lions and on the road.

 

[kerouac9]

I watch Stafford play a lot year to year. There's no doubt that there's some great QBs out there, like Brady, Wilson and Rodgers, who have a knack for winning games. But just because you're not engineering the perfect drive in the most clutch moment, does it mean you're a bad, or even mediocre QB. Most of those guys have superior coaching, or franchise management.

Stafford plays well enough not only to not lose his job, but not to be replaced. He's legit. Cousins and Dalton? Maybe, but the reality is that there aren't a lot of QBs that are genuinely superior for them to be overtaken by.

Well, Stafford's a really good QB compared to, like, me. But when you put him up against his peers among starting NFL quarterbacks, where does he land? Somewhere in the middle third, right? That's mediocrity.

The biggest problem with Stafford (but not for him) was that he was the last of the BIG bonus baby rookie QBs. The Lions have been tight against the cap from the moment he was drafted, and haven't been able to build anything around him unless a bunch of draft picks hit. If the Lions can get a draft class like the Saints did in 2017, they could jump back into contention. But his massive cap number has always hamstrung their ability to put a championship roster around him.

 

[PACardsFan]

Solar7, you right that Stafford is a good QB. But from my uneducated perspective, guys like Matt present a peculiar kind of problem. And again, this is from a guy that doesn't follow the NFL super closely. This is just my opinion.

But guys like Stafford (and I'll throw Jay Cuttler, Dalton and Cousins in this group) are good, but not good enough to lead their team to a championship.

I know, I know, put them on a team with a top flight defense, and they would win a championship. Maybe. But it's never happened for those guys.

What I'm saying is that Stafford plays just good enough to keep his job, but never good enough to lift his team to the next level. If I'm way off, forgive me.

I agree. When the Cardinals signed Palmer, I felt he was a huge upgrade & someone who could get us into the playoffs. But, IMO, we were never going to win a championship with Palmer. Regardless of how many yards he threw for, or TD's he threw, he would always make the bonehead plays that made my jaw hit the ground.

 

[kerouac9]

I really think I need to understand your argument better (along with @DVontel and others). Do you think a "good" quarterback is one who is a generational talent? Peyton Mannning, Drew Brees, Tom Brady? Russel Wilson? Aaron Rodgers? They're all first ballot Hall of Fame guys.

Here are the 12 QBs that I'd take this season over Matt Stafford, without really thinking about it:

Patrick Mahomes
Phil Rivers
Deshaun Watson
Baker Mayfield
Ben Roethlisberger
Tom Brady
Dak Prescott
Carson Wentz
Aaron Rodgers
Drew Brees
Cam Newton
Russell Wilson

There were a bunch of guys like Matt Ryan, Lamar Jackson, and Kirk Cousins that I went back and forth on including. Would you rather have Matt Stafford or Jared Goff?

 

[Solar7]

dude... a healthy Stafford came into our house late last year against one of the most atrocious teams I've ever seen and put up a whopping 10 points on offense and threw for 103 yards. That is the game that makes me think this is toss-up. We're not going to be good this year, but I don't think we're close to the all-time Cardinals atrocity from last year and the Lions are still the Lions and on the road.

That team had some better games on defense than I think we give them credit. I'd still give them credit if we were healthy or not suspended.

Without Patrick Peterson or Robert Alford, this is pretty scary. With nothing on the defensive line, or in Haason Reddick's position, Kerryon Johnson and CJ Anderson are a challenging duo. We're playing a team with a ton of NFL experience, against a rookie coach. I'm not sure how we can say at any point that we're "not close" to last year's atrocity. I really do hope it... but I personally have to hold back against a team full of vets.

Well, Stafford's a really good QB compared to, like, me. But when you put him up against his peers among starting NFL quarterbacks, where does he land? Somewhere in the middle third, right? That's mediocrity.

The biggest problem with Stafford (but not for him) was that he was the last of the BIG bonus baby rookie QBs. The Lions have been tight against the cap from the moment he was drafted, and haven't been able to build anything around him unless a bunch of draft picks hit. If the Lions can get a draft class like the Saints did in 2017, they could jump back into contention. But his massive cap number has always hamstrung their ability to put a championship roster around him.

This is a damn good argument, but statistically, he ends up in the top ten around his peers. I completely agree that the bonus baby thing killed them. But most things he does year-to-year put him in the top ten statistically.

 

[Krangodnzr]

Overall career. That's what I'm talking about. If you think we can dismiss a healthy Matthew Stafford in game 1, when we have rookies and street free agents playing CB, I'm not sure what to tell you. That's what started this argument.

He's going to put up numbers against our team, and anyone thinking we're going to saunter in there like we're playing Josh Allen and the Bills is sorely mistaken.

We'll probably lose, that's for sure.

They have some nice pieces on the d line.

 

[Solar7]

Here are the 12 QBs that I'd take this season over Matt Stafford, without really thinking about it:

Patrick Mahomes
Phil Rivers
Deshaun Watson
Baker Mayfield
Ben Roethlisberger
Tom Brady
Dak Prescott
Carson Wentz
Aaron Rodgers
Drew Brees
Cam Newton
Russell Wilson

There were a bunch of guys like Matt Ryan, Lamar Jackson, and Kirk Cousins that I went back and forth on including. Would you rather have Matt Stafford or Jared Goff?

Well, my argument isn't this season. It's duration of career. Although, I can admit that with that said, I'm kinda skewing the argument, since we're talking about game 1 in this thread.

There's some guys on the list that surprise me a little (Dak, Wentz, Mayfield, maybe even Mahomes or Watson), but my argument has really just been that he's pretty darned good, especially compared to the career usage of any Arizona/Phoenix Cardinals QBs. Throughout the duration of his career, I don't know how to call him bad. I don't know how we could possibly say he's not considered in the top ten of the overall group that has played the position over the years he's been in the NFL, which is a very fluid thing.

 

[Chris_Sanders]

Oof. This take is extremely bad. Stafford is like the Stephon Marbury of the NFL — very good talent that got very rich playing on very bad teams.

For this thread, it’s hard to picture a 6-win season for the Cards that includes a loss to the Lions in a high-variance early season situation.

Also, the Lions are clearly the worst team in their division with maybe the worst coach.

30 career comeback wins. First Cardinals playoff victory. Will take it all day over Stafford

 

[Solar7]

30 career comeback wins. First Cardinals playoff victory. Will take it all day over Stafford

Stafford has 26 comeback wins, all for his original team. Plummer has 20, 5 with the Broncos. So...

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/P/PlumJa00.htm
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/S/StafMa00.htm

 

[Chris_Sanders]

Career versus career obviously.