Fire Millen

[b.j. booker 0]

Needed to be said. Have to keep up the quota.

[akamarvalous 0]

lol.......that statement says alot

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

http://nflimpact.com

[Guest sweatness_34]

You wish you had Ortin. Best QB in da game, count on it! Dog.

[Savage Beast 1]

You wish you had Ortin.

 

Cowboy Bob or his son Randy?

[Portis26 0]

Cowboy Bob or his son Randy?

 

Once again Savage Beast -- you make me laugh

[MahSoonerz 0]

Thank you for this important public service.

 

Fire Millen!

[Let Da Big Dog Eat 40]

Thank you for this important public service.

 

Fire Millen!

 

Yep, needs to be said on a daily basis. Anyone notice that Swamp has not been in here to defend him? Oh, that's right, I forgot, there is no defense for Millen having his job outside of Ford and old timers desease.

[Raider 84 29]

Cowboy Bob or his son Randy?

Thats comedy!

 

[toofunny 0]

Yep, needs to be said on a daily basis. Anyone notice that Swamp has not been in here to defend him? Oh, that's right, I forgot, there is no defense for Millen having his job outside of Ford and old timers desease.

 

Yeah how this guy has his job is a mircale. One of the worst run NFL teams in the league.

 

Everyone laughed when I said the Lions should have taken Brown last year. Funny how if the Lions would offer up Mike Williams for Brown they'd laugh in their face.

 

Franchise tackle... or overrated Trojan. Hmmmmmmmmmmm....

[swamp dog 0]

Yeah how this guy has his job is a mircale. One of the worst run NFL teams in the league.

 

Everyone laughed when I said the Lions should have taken Brown last year. Funny how if the Lions would offer up Mike Williams for Brown they'd laugh in their face.

 

Franchise tackle... or overrated Trojan. Hmmmmmmmmmmm....

 

glad to see last year's draft already has a final grade. you're pretty darn good, there. start stalking the fords. they just may give you a job yet. or a restraining order. but maybe a job, too.

[Savage Beast 1]

Once again Savage Beast -- you make me laugh

 

I can't believe you did not "fix" my post this time?

[harken34 0]

Lions will never win until they do fire his sorry butt for a GM.

[Raider 84 29]

Have they fired him yet?

[Grigs Allmoon 0]

Have they fired him yet?

 

I don't tihnk so. They must be keeping him around as part of a publicity stunt...

 

 

Stay tuned to see how long Millen has a job!

[Brad GLuckman 519]

I hope they never fire Millen. Last year was too entertaining. Watching Lions fans chanting fire Millen at every sporting event helped me momentarily forget how bad the Packers were...

 

Millen =

[Raider 84 29]

Millen = for NFL fans.

[swamp dog 0]

I hope they never fire Millen. Last year was too entertaining. Watching Lions fans chanting fire Millen at every sporting event helped me momentarily forget how bad the Packers were...

 

Millen =

 

the key word there being "momentarily"

[Savage Beast 1]

Millen is good for the NFL. It makes me at every NFL draft to watch him draft a WR with his 1st pick. No other GM in the league has the balls to do this, or the lack of brains. Which WR will Millen draft with his 1st rounder this year? I can't wait to watch the draft and find out.

[jiujitsugod71 0]

Not until he drafts Chad Jackson in the first round, then they can fire him. That way, if the Ford's don't already think he's a tard, they would for sure then.

[ShaneFalco 0]

Not defending Millen, as I think he has made numerous horrible moves and has done enough to warrant his firing, but I don't get the "let's dump all of the Lion's troubles on Millen. Once he's gone the Lions will win. If he stays the Lions will lose" attitude. No, the Lion's probably shouldn't have drafted Mike Williams last year. Dumb mistake. But Millen isn't the only reason the Lions suck. Add in the Fords, the old coaching staff, some of the players, and you begin to realize that the Lion's problems go deeper than just Millen.

[swamp dog 0]

Not defending Millen, as I think he has made numerous horrible moves and has done enough to warrant his firing, but I don't get the "let's dump all of the Lion's troubles on Millen. Once he's gone the Lions will win. If he stays the Lions will lose" attitude. No, the Lion's probably shouldn't have drafted Mike Williams last year. Dumb mistake. But Millen isn't the only reason the Lions suck. Add in the Fords, the old coaching staff, some of the players, and you begin to realize that the Lion's problems go deeper than just Millen.

 

i find it humorous fans of teams like the bears and packers grill millen over his round 1 picks. millen has had just as good--if not better--round 1 drafts in his tenure than have the bears and packers in the same time period.

 

just because the bears and packers spread out their bust picks over the different positions doesn't make it any less laughable.

 

enough said.

[Brad GLuckman 519]

the key word there being "momentarily"

 

Yeah...that's why I included that "key word"

[Walter34 3]

i find it humorous fans of teams like the bears and packers grill millen over his round 1 picks. millen has had just as good--if not better--round 1 drafts in his tenure than have the bears and packers in the same time period.

 

just because the bears and packers spread out their bust picks over the different positions doesn't make it any less laughable.

 

enough said.

 

Maybe because the Bears and Packers havent blown top 10 picks year after year like the Lions have? Since Millen's start:

 

1.18 Backus (Decent)

1.3 harrington (Bust)

1.2 Rogers (Bust)

1.7 Roy (Stud)

1.10 MW (?)

 

For elite top picks, he has only hit once in 4 years so far with MW still being questionable.

 

During this span, Terrell and benson have been the only top 10 picks for Chi. 0-1 with a questionable.

 

Green Bay has only had 1 top 10 pick - Jamal reynolds, so they are 0-1.

 

Millen has earned the derision and besides all of that, its a running joke for all fans, not just division rivals. Learn to laugh at yourself or your team and you will be much happier.

[swamp dog 0]

ANY round 1 pick is a premium pick, walter.

 

2001: (8) david terrell (bust)

2002: (29) colombo (bust)

2003: (14) haynes (bust--rumored to be cut this summer before tank got hurt)

2004: (14) harris (decent--but no shaun rogers)

2004: (4) benson (?)

 

and let's not go back and get into the curtis enis, mcnown, etc etc etc blown premium picks.

 

i suggest YOU start laughing at your own bears instead of continually thinking their shiat don't stink.

 

free tip.

 

so far i haven't seen any snl skits on matt millen

[Sho Nuff 720]

ANY round 1 pick is a premium pick, walter.

 

2001: (8) david terrell (bust)

2002: (29) colombo (bust)

2003: (14) haynes (bust--rumored to be cut this summer before tank got hurt)

2004: (14) harris (decent--but no shaun rogers)

2004: (4) benson (?)

 

and let's not go back and get into the curtis enis, mcnown, etc etc etc blown premium picks.

 

i suggest YOU start laughing at your own bears instead of continually thinking their shiat don't stink.

 

free tip.

 

so far i haven't seen any snl skits on matt millen

 

Every first rounder is a premium...but comparing where the Lions have picked vs. a team like the Packers? Would you not agree the amount of it being a crapshoot goes up significantly once you get past the first 10-15 picks or so?

 

As for SNL...how old is that skit?

And nobody makes one about Millen and the Lions...because nobody really cares about Millen and the Lions enough to write a skit. Plus....they are a joke enough on their own without anyone having to point it out. Kind of like you.

[swamp dog 0]

Every first rounder is a premium...but comparing where the Lions have picked vs. a team like the Packers? Would you not agree the amount of it being a crapshoot goes up significantly once you get past the first 10-15 picks or so?

 

As for SNL...how old is that skit?

And nobody makes one about Millen and the Lions...because nobody really cares about Millen and the Lions enough to write a skit. Plus....they are a joke enough on their own without anyone having to point it out. Kind of like you.

 

fullwood (1.3) mandarich (1.2--before barry sanders) buckley (1.5)

 

the packers first-round busts haven't been because they've picked later in round 1.

 

there is no statistical data that shows picks 1-10 in drafts have been consistently better than picks 11-20--or beyond--in round 1. in other words, all drafts and all things averaged, there is no more guarantee of getting a stud/blue-chip prospect picking in the upper half of round 1 as there is picking in the middle/bottom of the round. in some odd years there might be 1 or 2 'super blue chip' players like a peyton manning, but that is even rare.

 

case in point: the 2002 draft. case on point: 2003 draft. case in point: 2004 draft.

 

http://www.nfl.com/draft/history/years/2002

 

a premium pick=a round 1 pick.

 

and i'll refrain from the personal attacks, although i get a kick of out making your life so miserable by simply pointing out facts

[Walter34 3]

there is no statistical data that shows picks 1-10 in drafts have been consistently better than picks 11-20--or beyond--in round 1.

 

I challenge this.

 

At work now so I wont have time until later, but I'm pretty sure that top 10 picks are substantially more successful historically than 11-20, 21-30 etc.

[swamp dog 0]

I challenge this.

 

At work now so I wont have time until later, but I'm pretty sure that top 10 picks are substantially more successful historically than 11-20, 21-30 etc.

 

walt, take a look at the link i've provided. that has the league's entire draft history. knock yourself out.

[Sho Nuff 720]

fullwood (1.3) mandarich (1.2--before barry sanders) buckley (1.5)

 

the packers first-round busts haven't been because they've picked later in round 1.

 

there is no statistical data that shows picks 1-10 in drafts have been consistently better than picks 11-20--or beyond--in round 1. in other words, all drafts and all things averaged, there is no more guarantee of getting a stud/blue-chip prospect picking in the upper half of round 1 as there is picking in the middle/bottom of the round. in some odd years there might be 1 or 2 'super blue chip' players like a peyton manning, but that is even rare.

 

case in point: the 2002 draft. case on point: 2003 draft. case in point: 2004 draft.

 

http://www.nfl.com/draft/history/years/2002

 

a premium pick=a round 1 pick.

 

and i'll refrain from the personal attacks, although i get a kick of out making your life so miserable by simply pointing out facts

 

Wow...going that far back that had nothing to do with anyone remotely associated with the team any more. Great data there.

 

Making my life miserable by pointing out useless data from 20 years ago?

 

Yes...there is a difference between the #1 pick...and the 26th pick.

[mozzy84 0]

I hope they keep Millen around forever. The guy was terrible on t.v and he's even worse at running a football team.

[swamp dog 0]

Wow...going that far back that had nothing to do with anyone remotely associated with the team any more. Great data there.

 

Making my life miserable by pointing out useless data from 20 years ago?

 

Yes...there is a difference between the #1 pick...and the 26th pick.

 

hey, let me try throwing something out there: the sky is green. wow, that felt good.

 

i've provided data, you simply have provided a blind claim.

 

going into any given draft, yes, there is a difference in value of the picks (what they're worth) in comparison to the rest of the first round. but you're just as likely to get a good player, most years, in the middle or end of the first round as you are at the top of the round.

 

as i've told walter: check the draft histories and knock yourself out.

[Sho Nuff 720]

hey, let me try throwing something out there: the sky is green. wow, that felt good.

 

i've provided data, you simply have provided a blind claim.

 

What data did you provide? 20 year old 1st round picks that are quite irrelevant to the discussion.

 

And a link to the 2002 draft that does not really prove your point?

 

Yeah...you provided data.

 

Look...you are of the opinion for some reason that screwing up a top 10 pick is no worse than screwing up a much later pick. That is fine....does not mean your opinion has any real validity.

[Brad GLuckman 519]

Is Swamp Dog serious?

Sometimes it's hard to tell.

[swamp dog 0]

What data did you provide? 20 year old 1st round picks that are quite irrelevant to the discussion.

 

And a link to the 2002 draft that does not really prove your point?

 

Yeah...you provided data.

 

Look...you are of the opinion for some reason that screwing up a top 10 pick is no worse than screwing up a much later pick. That is fine....does not mean your opinion has any real validity.

 

actually, from that link you can access links for all drafts in the history of the nfl.

 

i'm simply saying check it all out. get back to me with your findings. simple as that.

 

Is Swamp Dog serious?

Sometimes it's hard to tell.

 

 

see my post above. check out the data and draw your own conclusion.

[Sho Nuff 720]

actually, from that link you can access links for all drafts in the history of the nfl.

 

Linking to a draft is not data that supports your conclusion...or any other conclusion for that matter.

 

That is like saying X restaraunt has good food....want data....here is the menu.

[Walter34 3]

You want proof ... there's the INTER-NET! Knock yourself out!

[swamp dog 0]

Linking to a draft is not data that supports your conclusion...or any other conclusion for that matter.

 

That is like saying X restaraunt has good food....want data....here is the menu.

 

it's pretty simple: look at drafts that are least three years old. look at all the players drafted in the first round. look at where those players are today, what kind of players they are today. if you did that for each year going back to ???? you will find, easily seen, easily provable--with minor exceptions--that being picked in the top-10 doesn't guarantee a player a successful nfl career anymore than being picked 11-?

 

how is that not easily shown? you scoff at my data--and it is data out there for the entire world to see--but off zero data for your claim: that i'm wrong that the top of the draft is magically filled with better players on a consistent basis than is the middle/late part of round 1.

 

same goes for you, walt. put up or zip it.

[Brad GLuckman 519]

I don't think people are saying that a top 10 pick is guaranteed to be better than an 11-20 pick...I think people are just saying it's more likely. You know, because there is a reason they were picked higher...because they were supposed to be better...so more likely than not...they do end up better....notice I didn't say always....just more often.

[swamp dog 0]

I don't think people are saying that a top 10 pick is guaranteed to be better than an 11-20 pick...I think people are just saying it's more likely. You know, because there is a reason they were picked higher...because they were supposed to be better...so more likely than not...they do end up better....notice I didn't say always....just more often.

 

the data still does not support that claim of "they end up being better more often."

 

please, someone, anyone: look at the data! i'm not interested in bickering back and forth with people just throwing their opinions out there. analyze draft history.

 

there's a difference between there being a pre-draft consensus on who the top players are and how these players actually perform after the draft. and there is no support for walter's (or anyone's) contention that the lions have had more top-10 picks therefore they should have drafted better than the bears who had a couple of top-10 picks but also a couple of picks in the teens. that's just plain lazy rhetoric.

 

yeah, okay: millen's obviously an idiot for drafting harrington. tell me: where was harrington projected to go in the draft? where did he go? what were the scouting reports on him and where did they indicate he should go. both kiper and jimmy johnson GUSHED over that pick by the lions.

[Walter34 3]

the data still does not support that claim of "they end up being better more often."

 

please, someone, anyone: look at the data! i'm not interested in bickering back and forth with people just throwing their opinions out there. analyze draft history.

 

there's a difference between there being a pre-draft consensus on who the top players are and how these players actually perform after the draft. and there is no support for walter's (or anyone's) contention that the lions have had more top-10 picks therefore they should have drafted better than the bears who had a couple of top-10 picks but also a couple of picks in the teens. that's just plain lazy rhetoric.

 

yeah, okay: millen's obviously an idiot for drafting harrington. tell me: where was harrington projected to go in the draft? where did he go? what were the scouting reports on him and where did they indicate he should go. both kiper and jimmy johnson GUSHED over that pick by the lions.

 

ok lapdog, here is the data that you are hanging your hat on:

 

From 99 to 03

 

Picks 1-10 - 26 probowlers

Picks 11-20 - 15 probowlers

Picks 21-32 - 10 probowlers

 

Wow, what a shock