You are currently viewing the old forums. We have upgraded to a new NFL Forum. This old forum is being left as a read-only archive. Please update your bookmarks to our new forum at forums.footballsfuture.com.

[MurfDLions]

If we didn't have Shaun Hill, I'd say Stafford. But since we do, Calvin.

[WE-R-Lions]

[CutParisLenon]

Everyone's sentiment sort of echoes this, but I'll say it again.

Calvin is better.

But a great quarterback, which Stafford has the potential to be and almost is, is much more important and very difficult to find.

I also hear the argument that Stafford's success is dependent on having Calvin around. No doubt that Stafford has benefited enormously from Calvin's presence, but I think if he had two solid WRs on the outside rather than one elite WR like Calvin, he'd be able to put up similar numbers if given the time to develop a rapport.

[Nnivolcm]

With our roster it's currently Calvin.

If we had a better receiver core that could step up if Calvin went down OR if we didn't have such a capable back up in Hill then Stafford would be the more important of the two.
_________________

[FootballPhreak]

Until recently, I would have said Stafford. But after seeing our offense without CJ earlier this year it seems clearly to be CJ. He does more for Stafford, Bush, Durham, Pettigrew than Stafford does.
_________________

[TL-TwoWinsAway]

[RyanFuller003]

[X_Factor_40]

I think people undervalue Stafford quite a bit. It's obvious how much of a difference Calvin makes to the team, but without Stafford, Calvin's impact isn't as signifiant. They have a very symbiotic relationship, and the Lions would suffer greatly without either of them. But, the franchise would fall into a black hole without Stafford.
_________________

[TimeForChange]

Surprising amount of confidence in a 33 yr old QB who has thrown 16 passes in 3 years.

[fortdetroit]

Daniel Jeremiah (former NFL scout) on the Dave Dameshek podcast yesterday -

Someone asked who he would take as his QB between Romo and Stafford:

Jeremiah: "I would take Matthew Stafford over Tony Romo. If I had to go win a game at the park tomorrow I would take Matthew Stafford over Tony Romo. He's got more arm talent, he's got a freaky arm. He does not take sacks...look up his sacks he didn't get sacked again last week. He gets the ball out of his hands so quick. Everybody likes to say (in a mocking voice) "Oh, he just throws it up in the air to Calvin Johnson"....I don't know I think it's a little bit more than that. I think he does a good job directing that offense, gets the ball out of his hands and he's explosive."

Someone else: "I think he's got some swagger too."

Jeremiah: "Ohhh, look at that comeback win they had against Tony Romo where he throws that corner route 50 yards across the field. That's a rare throw."

[FootballPhreak]

I sure hope we hold Stafford to a higher standard than "Tony Romo". And I think we do, otherwise this thread would have no debate whatsoever. The answer would clearly be CJ.

If that is the standard we are holding him to, I want a new team to root for.
_________________

[nic_diggler]

As awesome as CJ has been, Stafford has never seen 0-16. Stafford would have won a handful of games that year. I cant guarantee that, but the difference in Stafford and Kitna is laughable. And Stafford is our franchise QB. I dont think this is a hard question to answer. But this is a great question because we are very lucky to have a WR elite enough to have this debate.

[TL-TwoWinsAway]

[Rockcity]

[FootballPhreak]