Early Vegas Line: Lions favored by 2

[scowan]

It is hard to predict the wins and the losses this year for the Skins, but after 7 Weeks, some things are getting clearer. At 4-3 I have been trying to figure out how the Skins can get to 10-6, which I think is good enough to get into the playoffs. Is that good enough to win the division? I don't know, but being 4-1 in the conference helps with tiebreakers. With that said, the Skins have 9 games to go. I think they can beat the Lions, Vikings, Bucs and Cowboys and Jags, on paper if they play the way they are suppose to. I think they lose their rematch to the Eagles, both Giants games and the Titans game on the road. That would put them at 9-7. Somewhere in there if they can get another win, especially against the Eagles or one of the Giants game they would get to 4-2 in the division and 10-6 over all and winning the division outright could be a real possibility.

[Chico23231]

^ACE any thoughts for Scowan?

[BleedBurgundy]

I have no idea who will win this game. If Stafford is playing, you have to give the edge to the Lions. Between Stafford, Best and Megatron... that's a loaded offense. I think McNabb has played so poorly... he's due for a breakout game. This could definitely be it. So yeah, I have no idea who's going to win.

[MTK]

I actually feel better with Stafford in there vs. Shaun Hill. Stafford is bound to be rusty coming back from injury. Hill is also more mobile and was a scrambling threat.

[SkinzWin]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

I actually feel better with Stafford in there vs. Shaun Hill. Stafford is bound to be rusty coming back from injury. Hill is also more mobile and was a scrambling threat.

That is exactly what I was going to say Matty. After doing some investigatory journalism:

Originally Posted by Mattyk

I actually feel better with Stafford in there vs. Shaun Hill. Stafford is bound to be rusty coming back from injury. Hill is also more mobile and was a scrambling threat.

That is exactly what I was going to say Matty. After doing some investigatory journalism:

Matthew Stafford
Year-09 Team-SF GMS-10 TD-13 INT-20 Fumbles-4 QB Rating-61.0

Shaun Hill
Year-07 Team-SF GMS-3 TD-5 INT-1 Fumbles-2 QB Rating-101.3
Year-08 Team-SF GMS-9 TD-13 INT-8 Fumbles-4 QB Rating-87.5
Year-09 Team-SF GMS-6 TD-5 INT-2 Fumbles-3 QB Rating-79.6
Year-10 Team-DET GMS-6 TD-9 INT-7 Fumbles-1 QB Rating-79.6


Number can lie but only so much. Seems like Hill might be a better option right now for the Lionesses. However, I am not saying Stafford will not be better in the future, just not right now. He is essentially a rookie coming off of a 6 week injured stint so I see him as being very rusty and I think this can be played to our advantage. Yes he does have a cannon for an arm, but I like our chances. The who Hill/Stafford debate is a moot point anyway as Shaun Hill has a broken forearm and is not going to be able to suit up.

[calia]

By the way, not all talking heads think the Lions will win this one: NFL.com Blogs » Blog Archive Playbook picks: Could Bills get first win? «

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by SkinzWin

That is exactly what I was going to say Matty. After doing some investigatory journalism:



That is exactly what I was going to say Matty. After doing some investigatory journalism:

Matthew Stafford
Year-09 Team-SF GMS-10 TD-13 INT-20 Fumbles-4 QB Rating-61.0

Shaun Hill
Year-07 Team-SF GMS-3 TD-5 INT-1 Fumbles-2 QB Rating-101.3
Year-08 Team-SF GMS-9 TD-13 INT-8 Fumbles-4 QB Rating-87.5
Year-09 Team-SF GMS-6 TD-5 INT-2 Fumbles-3 QB Rating-79.6
Year-10 Team-DET GMS-6 TD-9 INT-7 Fumbles-1 QB Rating-79.6


Number can lie but only so much. Seems like Hill might be a better option right now for the Lionesses. However, I am not saying Stafford will not be better in the future, just not right now. He is essentially a rookie coming off of a 6 week injured stint so I see him as being very rusty and I think this can be played to our advantage. Yes he does have a cannon for an arm, but I like our chances. The who Hill/Stafford debate is a moot point anyway as Shaun Hill has a broken forearm and is not going to be able to suit up.

I'd say that grabbing Stafford's rookie stats aren't going to do very much to tell you what Stafford is going to play like. It'd be much safer and smarter to take Shaun Hill's 2010 line, the QB rating of 79.6, and plug that in for Stafford.

We don't really know what Stafford can accomplish in excess of that, perhaps nothing, but that would be the level of expectation for Stafford's play over the second half of the year, given that Hill was no. 2 on the depth chart there in camp.

[SkinzWin]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

I'd say that grabbing Stafford's rookie stats aren't going to do very much to tell you what Stafford is going to play like. It'd be much safer and smarter to take Shaun Hill's 2010 line, the QB rating of 79.6, and plug that in for Stafford.

We don't really know what Stafford can accomplish in excess of that, perhaps nothing, but that would be the level of expectation for Stafford's play over the second half of the year, given that Hill was no. 2 on the depth chart there in camp.

Just because Hill was playing at a higher level this year compared with Stafford's rookie numbers from last year in no way means as soon as you plug Stafford back in that those numbers will remain constant IMO. Stafford hasn't played for a full season and has been out since week one of this season. There are bound to be a lot of nerves and rust to come off.

Why would he automatically get better this season, just because he is not a rookie anymore? I don't think he has had the chance to develop as he was oft injured last season and only played in one game so far this year. He doesn't have a lot of experience to fall back on either. I just think that until he proves he can play better than he did last year I would rather have him than have Hill starting and playing the way he has been playing. That's all I am saying...

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by SkinzWin

Just because Hill was playing at a higher level this year compared with Stafford's rookie numbers from last year in no way means as soon as you plug Stafford back in that those numbers will remain constant IMO. Stafford hasn't played for a full season and has been out since week one of this season. There are bound to be a lot of nerves and rust to come off.

Why would he automatically get better this season, just because he is not a rookie anymore? I don't think he has had the chance to develop as he was oft injured last season and only played in one game so far this year. He doesn't have a lot of experience to fall back on either. I just think that until he proves he can play better than he did last year I would rather have him than have Hill starting and playing the way he has been playing. That's all I am saying...

Well, my question is: what was he expected to prove to you over the last six weeks? Other than the fact that maybe, he gets hurt a little easier than you'd like from a first overall pick, the absence of the opportunity to show that he's better than he was as a rookie hardly means we should not expect Stafford to play better than he did as a rookie.

If he's going to be the Lions franchise quarterback, then yeah, that burden of proof is on him to justify his draft value. As far as performing as well or better than the middling numbers of a guy who was signed specifically to be Stafford's backup, that has to be the expectation here. Hill simply proved that a guy who failed elsewhere could perform at expectation in the Lions offense. So if Stafford is an out and out disaster in the next nine games -- you blame Matt Stafford for it. Not his coaching or his offense. But if Stafford's not a disaster, then he will play as well as Hill because we know what Hill is and what kind of help he has in Detroit: some.

[Longtimefan]

Not surprising. After not having beat the Redskins in a long time, last years win up there has probably given them a little confidence that they can beat this team.

It may not be wise to wait around for this team to self distruct. The Lions, even though they haven't won much lately, have traditionally played well at home. This game will present the perfect opportunity for us to put together a solid performance and a convincing win.

[scowan]

Originally Posted by Longtimefan

Not surprising. After not having beat the Redskins in a long time, last years win up there has probably given them a little confidence that they can beat this team.

This is the kind of game where the Skins players that played these Lions last year should have a little bit of an attitude towards. I mean they let this team that had no business even being in the game, beat them for their first win in 19 games or something like that. This is a game the Skins should win by double digits if you ask me. McNabb needs to put it all together this week or I have serious doubts about him long term. He is really struggling right now. 5 TDs in 7 games? I know everyone says they are still working out things, but to quote ESPN "Come on Man!"

[saden1]

Opening lines are not based on bets placed (there are no bets!) but analysis by bookmakers. Previous bets placed on team are probably taken into a factor.

[skinsfan69]

Originally Posted by saden1

Opening lines are not based on bets placed (there are no bets!) but analysis by bookmakers. Previous bets placed on team are probably taken into a factor.

Exactly. And the reason why we're getting the 2 against a 1-5 team is cause the oddsmakers consider the Skins a weak 4-3 team.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by skinsfan69

Exactly. And the reason why we're getting the 2 against a 1-5 team is cause the oddsmakers consider the Skins a weak 4-3 team.

I would say it has more to do with the fact the Redskins have been in close games all season. 4 games have been decided by 3 points. 2 others 6 or less.

Something else to note: Skins are 5-2 ATS this year.

[Gmanc711]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

I would say it has more to do with the fact the Redskins have been in close games all season. 4 games have been decided by 3 points. 2 others 6 or less.

Something else to note: Skins are 5-2 ATS this year.

Which was the other game we lost? I know we were favored vs St. Louis so thats obviously one. Then losses against Houston & Indianapolis, who I thought we were dogs too in both circumstances... and I thought we were dogs in all the other games too.... making us 6-1? Maybe the Texans game? Were we favored?