View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently October 26th, 2014, 12:07 am



Reply to topic  [ 31 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
 Stephen Hill G-Tech a Lion. 
Author Message
Walk On
User avatar

Joined: January 11th, 2006, 4:04 pm
Posts: 430
Post Re: Stephen Hill G-Tech a Lion.
m2karateman wrote:
Mufasa wrote:
wjb21ndtown wrote:
Wayne Fontes wrote:
I don't know why there is this "get rid of Nate" campaign going on. He had a career high in receptions this year. He also appears to be the vocal leader on that offense and the team as a whole. I'd much rather keep him around for another year or two, and address WR in the back end of the draft or next year even. You could then slide TY into a "#2 role" with the new blood from a deep WR class as the #3/slot guy when Nate is gone.


Nate is garbage. He doesn't get any separation, and he drops too many balls. He doesn't take heat off of CJ like he's supposed to, and he's a big reason why our offense sputters at times.



I saw this man get flagged 3 times in the N.O. game for offensive pass interference. Now I know some of those calls were within question in the N.O. game, but 3 times.



That's unheard of, 1 in a game is rare and he cost us a big play with one of those calls. So separation is a glaring issue for him and that means he's no threat and takes absolute no pressure off C.J.



Believe me, I know how bad the Ref's were in that game, I almost got into a fight with a Saints fan at the bar. But you really believe not once, Nate wasn't guilty of Offensive P.I. out of 3. Then those Ref's were boulder than I thought. This game should have been called "Penalty Gate" and each one of those Ref's should be brought in front of a board and punished severely. Because to call 3 blatant penalties against Nate and action not to be taken, tells me the entire NFL was in on the outcome of this game.



First off, Nate isn't the reason our offense sputters at times. Yes, he has his shortcomings, and I wouldn't mind finding an upgrade, particularly given Nate's salary. It's too high. But there are certainly worse second receivers in the NFL. If the Lions were to want to upgrade, I'd be all for it. But NOT in the first round. That would just flat out piss me off.

And bringing up the Saints game as an example is just a poor, poor choice. His getting flagged was a mockery of the referees, not Nate. Not one of those calls, NOT ONE, was worthy of the flag being thrown. Saints receivers were doing the same, and worse, and not getting calls. Our defensive line was getting flagged for personal fouls, but in the meantime the referee just sat there and watched Carl Nicks throw Ndamukong Suh down by his helmet...yes, his FREAKIN' HELMET!! No call.

Of all the examples that might be possible to prove your point, that certainly is not one that will earn you support here.

_________________
The REAL "Lion King" and father to Simba


April 13th, 2012, 3:38 pm
Profile
ST Coordinator – Danny Crossman
User avatar

Joined: March 30th, 2006, 12:48 am
Posts: 3827
Location: Davison Mi
Post Re: Stephen Hill G-Tech a Lion.
Mufasa wrote:
regularjoe12 wrote:
wait...you are talking about the game where the refs callled over 15 penalties on the Lions...and like 3 on the head hunters?

tell me you dont REALLY think the refs were being fair and unbiased in that game?

even the commentators were talking about the rediculous calls and non calls in that game. Chris Collinsowrth was flat out upset at least twice in that game about the refs.

3 offensive P.I. calls on the same guy on pretty close to the same drive. Thats not bad play...thats bad calls by the ref.


What part of I quote "Some calls were within questioned" did u miss before u get your panties in a bunch. Second, those P.I.'s didn't happen within the same drive. Third, 1 offensive P.I. is too much and I'm sure he had 1 legit call out of 3 even if the Ref's were pretty bad that game. An I've seen him get those calls in past games.



so you want to hate on a guy for getting bad calls in a game you admit had poor officiating.....oooohhkaaay

if you want to hate on nate at least be accurate...the guy had a case of the dropsies last year. other than that the guy has met expectations.

And for the record..I dont wear panties....im a comando man! :lol: :lol:

_________________
2013 Lionbacker Fantasy Football Champion


April 13th, 2012, 3:40 pm
Profile
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: October 20th, 2004, 4:16 pm
Posts: 9891
Location: Where ever I'm at now
Post Re: Stephen Hill G-Tech a Lion.
Mufasa wrote:
m2karateman wrote:
Mufasa wrote:
wjb21ndtown wrote:
Wayne Fontes wrote:
I don't know why there is this "get rid of Nate" campaign going on. He had a career high in receptions this year. He also appears to be the vocal leader on that offense and the team as a whole. I'd much rather keep him around for another year or two, and address WR in the back end of the draft or next year even. You could then slide TY into a "#2 role" with the new blood from a deep WR class as the #3/slot guy when Nate is gone.


Nate is garbage. He doesn't get any separation, and he drops too many balls. He doesn't take heat off of CJ like he's supposed to, and he's a big reason why our offense sputters at times.



I saw this man get flagged 3 times in the N.O. game for offensive pass interference. Now I know some of those calls were within question in the N.O. game, but 3 times.



That's unheard of, 1 in a game is rare and he cost us a big play with one of those calls. So separation is a glaring issue for him and that means he's no threat and takes absolute no pressure off C.J.



Believe me, I know how bad the Ref's were in that game, I almost got into a fight with a Saints fan at the bar. But you really believe not once, Nate wasn't guilty of Offensive P.I. out of 3. Then those Ref's were boulder than I thought. This game should have been called "Penalty Gate" and each one of those Ref's should be brought in front of a board and punished severely. Because to call 3 blatant penalties against Nate and action not to be taken, tells me the entire NFL was in on the outcome of this game.



First off, Nate isn't the reason our offense sputters at times. Yes, he has his shortcomings, and I wouldn't mind finding an upgrade, particularly given Nate's salary. It's too high. But there are certainly worse second receivers in the NFL. If the Lions were to want to upgrade, I'd be all for it. But NOT in the first round. That would just flat out piss me off.

And bringing up the Saints game as an example is just a poor, poor choice. His getting flagged was a mockery of the referees, not Nate. Not one of those calls, NOT ONE, was worthy of the flag being thrown. Saints receivers were doing the same, and worse, and not getting calls. Our defensive line was getting flagged for personal fouls, but in the meantime the referee just sat there and watched Carl Nicks throw Ndamukong Suh down by his helmet...yes, his FREAKIN' HELMET!! No call.

Of all the examples that might be possible to prove your point, that certainly is not one that will earn you support here.


Could they have been flagged as PI? Sure. WERE they PI? No. Not if they weren't flagging the Saints for the same damn thing. That's my point. I see receivers pushing off all the time. Even Calvin will push off from time to time. But to nail Burleson three times was utterly ridiculous and BLATANT favoritism towards the Saints. Once, I could have understood. But three times was a travesty, and the refs should have been thrown off the top of the Superdome for doing it. If the League weren't so hell bent on protecting the referees, they would have fired them mid-week after that game. It was like I was watching a game with officials from the WWE.

_________________
Driver of the 'we need a coaching change' bandwagon. Climb aboard.


April 13th, 2012, 3:45 pm
Profile
Walk On
User avatar

Joined: January 11th, 2006, 4:04 pm
Posts: 430
Post Re: Stephen Hill G-Tech a Lion.
regularjoe12 wrote:
Mufasa wrote:
regularjoe12 wrote:
wait...you are talking about the game where the refs callled over 15 penalties on the Lions...and like 3 on the head hunters?

tell me you dont REALLY think the refs were being fair and unbiased in that game?

even the commentators were talking about the rediculous calls and non calls in that game. Chris Collinsowrth was flat out upset at least twice in that game about the refs.

3 offensive P.I. calls on the same guy on pretty close to the same drive. Thats not bad play...thats bad calls by the ref.


What part of I quote "Some calls were within questioned" did u miss before u get your panties in a bunch. Second, those P.I.'s didn't happen within the same drive. Third, 1 offensive P.I. is too much and I'm sure he had 1 legit call out of 3 even if the Ref's were pretty bad that game. An I've seen him get those calls in past games.



so you want to hate on a guy for getting bad calls in a game you admit had poor officiating.....oooohhkaaay

if you want to hate on nate at least be accurate...the guy had a case of the dropsies last year. other than that the guy has met expectations.

And for the record..I dont wear panties....im a comando man! :lol: :lol:



I don't think I really hate Nate Burelson, I originally created this thread because it would be fun to see two 6'5 Wr's with 4.3 speed out running the NFC North. Unfortunately our third starting WR Titus Young was a recent draft pick which would make Burelson the odd man out due to contract, age, and drops, separation issues. I pointed out that Burelson does have separation issues, which was previously pointed out by another poster. Getting offensive p.i. usually comes from wr's trying to separate from db's. In his case in New Orleans, they're were some bad calls in that game but I used that as an example because it was more glaring than pulling out some rare, obscure game most wouldn't remember, unfortunately it was a bad play calling game, but I do believe 1 out 3 P.I.'s calls happen (Even if most of our emotions was vested in the Ref's bad play calls and didn't want to see the obvious in some cases. I'm Guilty of it) it supports my support of Nate having separation issues amongst other times, face it he's getting older it happens. I think Nate is serviceable, but if we made a move for Stephen Hill which I doubt but we've seen crazier things happen check our draft history other than the Locker Room influence we would have to move on and it would be fun to see hill in the line up across from Megatron.

_________________
The REAL "Lion King" and father to Simba


Last edited by Mufasa on April 13th, 2012, 5:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.



April 13th, 2012, 4:46 pm
Profile
ST Coordinator – Danny Crossman
User avatar

Joined: March 30th, 2006, 12:48 am
Posts: 3827
Location: Davison Mi
Post Re: Stephen Hill G-Tech a Lion.
don't get me wrong, I see where you are comming from. I had moments of hate for Nate myself, due to his drops. But I just don't see it happening. The extra things he brings to the table are just invaluable. He is pricey though....I'll give you that.

I just don't recall him having anything near what I'd call excessive penalties is my point. Everyone gets a penalty called on em every now and then, and at least to my recollection Nate is right in the middle of the pack IMO.

_________________
2013 Lionbacker Fantasy Football Champion


April 13th, 2012, 4:59 pm
Profile
Walk On
User avatar

Joined: January 11th, 2006, 4:04 pm
Posts: 430
Post Re: Stephen Hill G-Tech a Lion.
regularjoe12 wrote:
don't get me wrong, I see where you are comming from. I had moments of hate for Nate myself, due to his drops. But I just don't see it happening. The extra things he brings to the table are just invaluable. He is pricey though....I'll give you that.

I just don't recall him having anything near what I'd call excessive penalties is my point. Everyone gets a penalty called on em every now and then, and at least to my recollection Nate is right in the middle of the pack IMO.


It wasn't so much a penalty issue, I was looking at. Just pointing out something that probably has gone un-notice all season, but it took the N.O. game to take notice (because the Ref's were so Ticky Tack), that he don't separate well from DB's which in some cases leads to penalties (DB separation) that's huge. That was the starting decline of Marvin Harrison, Some would say in Randy Moss most recently, and T.O. An when that happens, he have no place on the field. Your just riding out that hefty contract hoping no one notice.

_________________
The REAL "Lion King" and father to Simba


April 13th, 2012, 5:19 pm
Profile
Heisman Winner

Joined: February 10th, 2005, 6:52 pm
Posts: 809
Location: Linden, MI
Post Re: Stephen Hill G-Tech a Lion.
wjb21ndtown wrote:
Wayne Fontes wrote:
It wouldn't happen at 23 as there is probably no way that Stephen Hill would be the BPA at that spot. If he were available at 54, then maybe.



I wouldn't hate it. WRs generally get drafted earlier than their "projection." Hill has already been working out with CJ, which shows me maturity and work ethic, two things essential for a good football player. If we did select him I'd like to see us get something for, and dump Nate, but I could see the FO keeping Nate for another year while this kid gets some experience. I really like Hill, a LOT.

Everyone else would cry, but if we went WR, OL first and second round I would be happy.


I'm not sure about this scenario. Maybe if he were the far and away best on the board. I guess I think someone of similar grade that makes sense is likely to be on the board at the same time. Really you're talking about a guy who is probably 4th off the bench, and for my money I'd rather take someone who could compete in the secondary or even a RB rather than another backup WR with a rd 1 pick.

_________________
OK. Schwartz is fired, the fans are happy, now what?


April 13th, 2012, 10:32 pm
Profile
Team MVP
User avatar

Joined: February 20th, 2007, 10:51 pm
Posts: 3363
Location: Saginaw, MI
Post Re: Stephen Hill G-Tech a Lion.
I think with Mayhews strategy of BPA with the "exception of QB, TE..etc" ...I think WR needs to be added to that list for the 1st Rd.

_________________
April 22nd, 2010 @ 7:44p.m. "The Detroit Lions select...Ndamukong Suh". Those are some beautiful words.


Lionbacker2 Fantasy Champion 2011


Last edited by kdsberman on April 18th, 2012, 9:06 am, edited 1 time in total.



April 13th, 2012, 10:54 pm
Profile
Post Re: Stephen Hill G-Tech a Lion.
LionFan57 wrote:
wjb21ndtown wrote:
Wayne Fontes wrote:
I don't know why there is this "get rid of Nate" campaign going on. He had a career high in receptions this year. He also appears to be the vocal leader on that offense and the team as a whole. I'd much rather keep him around for another year or two, and address WR in the back end of the draft or next year even. You could then slide TY into a "#2 role" with the new blood from a deep WR class as the #3/slot guy when Nate is gone.


Nate is garbage. He doesn't get any separation, and he drops too many balls. He doesn't take heat off of CJ like he's supposed to, and he's a big reason why our offense sputters at times.


I'm sorry, I disagree with that entirely.

Our offense sputters because of our OL!! Because of the OL we have no running game and our QB doesn't get nearly as much time as he should. You can't lay the blame of a sputtering offense at the feet of Burleson alone. That's crazy!

I agree w/ Wayne Fontes. Burleson is nowhere near as bad as some people say and his locker room presence is a valued commodity! We have much bigger issues to deal with early in the draft before we go for a WR. Including a RB that just might help our sputtering, 5000+ yard offense.


Every time Nate drops a pass on 3rd and long he makes the offense "sputter," and its frequent. He is no #2 WR, yet he's being paid like one. Titus is a much better #2 WR right now. Nate has zero ability to take pressure off of CJ, zero ability to go deep, and he doesn't get good possession. I don't know what people see in him. He's definitely not worth $6.5 million dollars. I agree that our OL needs a lot of help, but as has been mentioned, you can get quality OLman in the 2nd, 3rd and 4th rounds of the draft.

If we drafted Hill we could have our WR corps set for the next 5 years.


jrd66 wrote:
wjb21ndtown wrote:
Wayne Fontes wrote:
It wouldn't happen at 23 as there is probably no way that Stephen Hill would be the BPA at that spot. If he were available at 54, then maybe.



I wouldn't hate it. WRs generally get drafted earlier than their "projection." Hill has already been working out with CJ, which shows me maturity and work ethic, two things essential for a good football player. If we did select him I'd like to see us get something for, and dump Nate, but I could see the FO keeping Nate for another year while this kid gets some experience. I really like Hill, a LOT.

Everyone else would cry, but if we went WR, OL first and second round I would be happy.


I'm not sure about this scenario. Maybe if he were the far and away best on the board. I guess I think someone of similar grade that makes sense is likely to be on the board at the same time. Really you're talking about a guy who is probably 4th off the bench, and for my money I'd rather take someone who could compete in the secondary or even a RB rather than another backup WR with a rd 1 pick.


I'd like Hill to play 3rd WR, with the intent of making him our #2, and moving Titus back to #3 after he plays this season, or most of this season as our #2. Right now we have no #2 WR, period. Nate is a possession slot receiver that is being paid like a #2 and not filling the bill. He drops too many balls to be called a possession guy, and he can't go deep or take pressure off of CJ. He's simply not a threat, at all, and that needs to be rectified for this offense to really click.


April 14th, 2012, 3:42 pm
Hall of Fame Player
User avatar

Joined: April 5th, 2005, 7:03 am
Posts: 7411
Location: Ford Field - 35 yard line / Row 32
Post Re: Stephen Hill G-Tech a Lion.
wjb21ndtown wrote:
LionFan57 wrote:
wjb21ndtown wrote:
Wayne Fontes wrote:
I don't know why there is this "get rid of Nate" campaign going on. He had a career high in receptions this year. He also appears to be the vocal leader on that offense and the team as a whole. I'd much rather keep him around for another year or two, and address WR in the back end of the draft or next year even. You could then slide TY into a "#2 role" with the new blood from a deep WR class as the #3/slot guy when Nate is gone.


Nate is garbage. He doesn't get any separation, and he drops too many balls. He doesn't take heat off of CJ like he's supposed to, and he's a big reason why our offense sputters at times.


I'm sorry, I disagree with that entirely.

Our offense sputters because of our OL!! Because of the OL we have no running game and our QB doesn't get nearly as much time as he should. You can't lay the blame of a sputtering offense at the feet of Burleson alone. That's crazy!

I agree w/ Wayne Fontes. Burleson is nowhere near as bad as some people say and his locker room presence is a valued commodity! We have much bigger issues to deal with early in the draft before we go for a WR. Including a RB that just might help our sputtering, 5000+ yard offense.


Every time Nate drops a pass on 3rd and long he makes the offense "sputter," and its frequent. He is no #2 WR, yet he's being paid like one. Titus is a much better #2 WR right now. Nate has zero ability to take pressure off of CJ, zero ability to go deep, and he doesn't get good possession. I don't know what people see in him. He's definitely not worth $6.5 million dollars. I agree that our OL needs a lot of help, but as has been mentioned, you can get quality OLman in the 2nd, 3rd and 4th rounds of the draft.

If we drafted Hill we could have our WR corps set for the next 5 years. ...



I agree that Nate is overpaid relative to his production and obviously any dropped pass makes the offense sputter. However, I'm not interested in spending our 1st round pick on another WR when we have desperate needs a OL & DB. Nate fits into the exact same category as Backus & Raiola have for years. They're not good enough - but they're not bad enough to fix now vs other, more pressing needs.

But prove me wrong about Nate. You (or someone) produce the numbers. (I have no clue where to go to find them). Show me the stats for Calvin Johnson; Nate Burleson; Titus Young & Brandon Pettigrew. Let's see the following categories:

1) Number of targeted throws
2) Catches
3) % catches
4) At fault drops (if it's available)

njroar wrote in another thread...
njroar wrote:
... He did have more drops last year, but still caught a higher % (67) when targeted than CJ (63). CJ's made catches were just in more productive areas. I'm not saying in any shape or form that Nate was better than CJ, but its not like he slacked off. He's still the most productive #2 we've had in a very long time.


Find the data and lets discuss it.

You're saying Nate causes the offense to 'sputter' frequently - I'll bet he wasn't even targeted more that twice per game on 3rd down! I'll bet that 3rd down OL penalties caused the offence to sputter more that Nates drops. I'll bet the OL's failure to get a push and a corresponding 1st down on 3rd / 4th & short caused the offense to sputter more than Nates drops.

I contend that an improved OL benefits the entire offense more than the improvement in production that a slightly better, lesser paid, rookie WR brings. A better OL allows us:

1) To run more often than we did.
2) Get more positive average yardage on each run attempt (regardless of the RB). And therefore...
3) More 1st downs.
4) Buys extra time for Stafford to find open targets & launch the ball, and...
5) Buys time for all the WR's & TE's to get more separation on the DB's & LB's (or get fouled).

Stafford can't connect to ANY reciever if he's running for his life, on his back, or, hurt & sitting on the bench. So when it comes to spending this years 1st rd pick on a offensive lineman vs another WR - I'm going with OL and implementing Wayne Fontes' strategy posted above.


And BTW, this comment about Burleson from another thread...

wjb21ndtown wrote:
WarEr4Christ wrote:
This is why Nate needs to stay on the team!!!! He consistently provides this leadership and builds up those around him. He may not be flashy in his own right, but he does get the job done and leads those around him. Nate definitely needs to stay!

We don't need the S. Rogers fiasco of 5 years ago.


If Nate wants to "lead" he should do it by catching the balls that are thrown his way. Sorry, but I see this as a worthless spotlight grab, and judging by his prior behavior I would be willing to bet that Nate smokes too...


...was totally unfair to the guy.

_________________
Image


April 15th, 2012, 3:28 pm
Profile WWW
All State
User avatar

Joined: December 12th, 2008, 1:42 am
Posts: 354
Location: Michiana
Post Re: Stephen Hill G-Tech a Lion.
I also think Nate is overpaid, but he's not totally lacking redeeming value. If Titus continues to grow this year he'll be the true No. 2 by the end of next season and Burleson may be on the way out. Regardless of Burleson not living up to his contract or his role, between CJ, Burleson, Young, Pettigrew, and Scheffler this is one of the best Lion's Receiver groups in a LONG TIME.

_________________
Same Old Lions, just a different year....


April 18th, 2012, 12:22 am
Profile
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: October 20th, 2004, 4:16 pm
Posts: 9891
Location: Where ever I'm at now
Post Re: Stephen Hill G-Tech a Lion.
Getting back on topic.....

A player I wouldn't mind the Lions taking a VERY close look at in the middle rounds is Ryan Broyles. Very sure handed, runs disciplined routes and ran a 4.57, even though he isn't completely healed from his injury. I think if his knee is coming along well and the prognosis is a complete recovery, he could be a great addition to the receiving corps and give us a very dangerous group to defend against. Imagine having CJ, Nate, Titus and Broyles lined up, along with Scheffler at TE. Talk about having some weapons.....

_________________
Driver of the 'we need a coaching change' bandwagon. Climb aboard.


April 18th, 2012, 11:07 am
Profile
Post Re: Stephen Hill G-Tech a Lion.
What does anyone think of adding Junior (Hemmingway) in the 5th or later? I would love to land any of the MSU WRs or Junior, but Junior has been a great leader and a great example at UofM. He's versatile, he has great hands, and he's super clutch. He has returned punts, kicks, and at 225lbs he has even rushed the ball (I don't think he'd get any sort of rushing role in the NFL though, too slow for an end around, too tall, and not beefy enough, just pointing out his versatility and willingness to do whatever it takes to win).


April 18th, 2012, 11:15 am
Varsity Captain

Joined: September 28th, 2011, 5:57 pm
Posts: 304
Post Re: Stephen Hill G-Tech a Lion.
I know that I'm starting this crap up again, I've been away for awhile and wanted to get my 2 cents in.
Nate is not a bad reciever, not worth his pay but still worth being on the field.
As for using the N.O. game as an example of his ridiculous penalties, most of us know that they were not all Nate's fault.
The refs were calling everything that had the slightest look of a penalty. Not for the Saints or against the Lions. Most fans and people in the league were calling the Lions dirty. Hell even Suh called the commish to apoligize. The refs were in abit of a quandry. Let the boys play ball or call everything that resembles a violation. The refs can be fined and suspended for not doing their jobs properly just like the players. If you think it looks close from the dirtiest team in the league you better throw the flag.
Nowhere did anyone say that all these penalties were all in the same drive!
Yes Nate is coming to the end of his career but he caught more than 70 passes last year. Take that away and Matty does not throw for 5k.

Finally, I've noticed that some veteran posters have left this board. Weither it was immature name calling or stupid comments or needless arguements, it needs to stop. We are hear to talk, share info and even have a great arguement about the Lions. There is no reason to take it to a personal level on this board! You want to go there, send an IM.
I've been a member here for somewhere around 5 years and could always find quiet a few folks that have been here longer then I have and have knowledge about the Lions and the league that I have only been able to find here. I know that sometimes we all can get carried away when talking sports, politics or religion. There is no reason to make it personal.
It may not be my place to say but if all your looking for is a fight, to degrade someone or just be an rectum, please find somewhere else to go or IM me and I'll give you my exwives contac info.

Have a great holiday! Shake a veteran's hand!
Joe


May 27th, 2012, 5:58 pm
Profile
Team MVP
User avatar

Joined: February 20th, 2007, 10:51 pm
Posts: 3363
Location: Saginaw, MI
Post Re: Stephen Hill G-Tech a Lion.
Well said Boz.

_________________
April 22nd, 2010 @ 7:44p.m. "The Detroit Lions select...Ndamukong Suh". Those are some beautiful words.


Lionbacker2 Fantasy Champion 2011


May 28th, 2012, 5:03 am
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 31 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Exabot [Bot] and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware.