regardless weather we scored a touchdown or f g we were doomed, if I'm not mistaken, we had first and goal at the 9, then we go 3 and out to kick a FG, i wouldn't go for 4th down and 14 either, because the offense just sucked at that point, but you just know the way the defense was playing, the lions could just walk all over us, and what happened???

It's a mindset and a culture. LeFleurs' words must haunt him because "all gas, no brakes" has never been a thing. Green Bay is conservative in it's approach to both offense and defense and it really doesn't matter who the coaches are or who the players are, it's organizational. No controversial approaches for us. It serves us well with a consistent approach that breeds winning a lot of games, just not a lot of big games. There are times when you need courage to go win the game and not play to 'not lose' the game.
I for one am tired of watching teams march down the field against us when the game is on the line. Did anyone doubt that we lost the game when we had to settle for a field goal at the end? We hoped. We urged the defense to rise up but Bang. In two plays they were already in field goal range. Game, essentially over. How about we try putting 5 pass rushers on the field and swarm the line of scrimmage. If they beat us deep we at least get the ball back. If the Packers want to win another Super Bowl something has to change...

"The screen pass was the Packers kryptonite as Detroit really picked perfect spots and times to attack."

It would have been nice to see it was DETROITS kryptonite but LaFleur seemed to forget just how well it had been working and didn't call any screens. Just 7 days before Jacobs caught 4 passes for 78 yards. Against Detroit? ZERO for ZERO yards. There was the pass to Jacobs for a TD tough but that was wiped out by a BOGUS call on Watson.

No matter who or what our Defense year after years has a bucket with ha hole at each end! Like said above if we don't have ball at end of game and down 3 o less shut TV off you know the outcome! Take some F----- chances and forget the prevent, stops nothing! At least go down swinging!

Fourth and 1, and Fourth and 14 are 2 very different situations. How much criticism would MLF be receiving if he didn't kick the FG to tie and the Packers lost the game anyway? The Packers were playing on the road, tying the game was the correct call at that point. Since the Packers defense was being abused even if they went for the TD on 4th and 14 and put the Lions deep in their own end its unlikely that the defense would have held the Lions and given the Packers another possession.

The Lions OL won the LOS against the Packers front 7. That was the difference in the game. The Lions offense had the ball for 36+ minutes. Even with less than 24 minutes of possession the Packers offense still scored 31 points. It wasn't a matter of courage it was a matter of physicality and the Lions played more physically than the Packers at the LOS. It is a disappointing and frustrating loss but sometimes teams just get beat. Thanks, Since '61

Detroit have a mostly healthy and very effective offense built around a QB who gets the ball out fast and is very accurate if you can’t get to him or in his face very quickly.

Their D is not as good. It wasn’t great to start with but the injuries have been devastating. We expected a high scoring game, or most did. That materialized with one very significant exception: a woeful offensive performance (Jacobs aside) in the first half.

The real reason we lost was that first half. Why did that occur? Because our OL got minced by a bunch of backups and back ups to back ups. Many spend a lot of time telling us our OL is good, but Campbell showed what he thought and bet on his back ups to swamp it. And they did, not just in the running game but in the pass as well.

This has been a problem for years that many flat out refuse to see, despite the 49ers and others trying manfully to show us the error. Campbell, so often derided as a moron, did, bet on it and won. The bubble is burst. It would have been much worse had Jacobs no again put up a staggering yards after contact performance. This is an OL that results from a flawed philosophy that simply doesn’t look for or emphasize the right things and refuses to accept that weak links are in fact weak links. Let’s call it the Myers-Hanson-Newman delusion. Detroit stripped that bare in a way that borders on the middle finger. Stenavich absolutely has to go.

The line was not the only issue on O. We again seemed to be calling long developing route patterns. Jacobs was absent for most of the third quarter, Kraft invisible for most of the first half. There seemed to be no plan to switch to fast release short routes. LaFleur seems to be delusional in his comprehension of the very weaknesses that the Lions preyed on. Even in the second half, Kraft’s use was intermittent, Reed was invisible through out, no quick slot routes of the sort Detroit employed for easy yards. What we did get was Love improvising surprisingly well from broken pockets in traffic and extended plays.

On D, we went into petrified mode. You are playing a team that has one of the fastest releasing QBs yet our DBs were regularly 10 yards back and even when the pass was obvious later, we left in a guy who can’t cover and had put that on film copiously last week. We didn’t try Hopper or Oladapo—sure they could have been as bad, but you can’t give up more than 100% completion. We just let them take 8-10 yards consistently.

Against the Dolphins we used our tall CBs wisely. I hoped that was an epiphany. They played well. This week we had Stokes snd Valentine frequently playing off zone in the middle and, amazingly, it turns out they aren’t the most sudden in terms of short area agility or change of direction. We had Rochell and King, who are, on the benches. Sure they could also have been dreadful, but they might just have had the physical capability to play in the way demanded by Hafley. If you don’t have players physically suited, either replace them or don’t call that D.

Overall what we saw was that the risk aversion and fear of inexperience in personnel even when the known are cratering that has characterized the LaFleur era has spread to Hafley. The result was a Barryesque mess of inappropriate scheme and personnel and playing so deep that avoiding the big play didn’t really save much time or points.

On offense we saw that LaFleur’s level of comprehension of the actual quality of his OL is wildly inadequate. His division rivals punctured that bubble. He simply doesn’t know we’ve been on this path of futility or how obvious it’s become to others. He also showed he had no back up plan. He’d just living in a whiteboard dream divorced from reality. We refuse to address weaknesses because we refuse to accept they exist. Stenavich is a liability at OC, but he’s simply the next Drayton or Barry: the fatal flaw that didn’t exist for LaFleur until it ended our season. In fact, Stenavich probably did that several seasons ago when he wholly revamped the OL that got us to a Championship game, with disastrous results.

LaFleur does not lead, he doesn’t read the competition or inspire. He can’t lift and he permits ongoing flaws to act as lead weights on our potential. Now Campbell essentially called him out on a big one in public. LaFleur doesn’t elevate on field talent, he draws up some nice plays once in a while but more often his scripted plays fail. LaFleur doesn’t elevate, he doesn’t inspire, he doesn’t reward good or bad play and he doesn’t make hard choices. He doesn’t elevate his roster, he rides its coat tails.

We will not win with LaFleur. We will look good at times but, got the reasons stated, the LaFleur era has been a chimera. LaFleur had spent 6 years essentially flattering to deceive. The Lions are simply the latest and most barefaced example of a team calling his bluff, despite the talent on our roster. Like last year, we were better on O in the second half when circumstances pretty much forced the O to improvise. The LaFleur era needs to end. Until it does, expect more of the same when it matters. We are what he is: pretty but ultimately lacking steel or true self awareness.

I am not a big MLF fan. He seems to be a nice guy and a pretty good offensive coordinator, but he has driven me crazy at times with not replacing failing coaches & players quickly, regurgitating plays that have not been working (apparently hoping that the repeated play will some how work next time), not being good with clock management & timeouts, not taking the ball when we win the toss (I believe in all gas & domination if possible), not overriding some of the play calling of his defensive coaches (who apparently love soft & zone coverages), & coming up short in big games (especially in the playoffs). I think we have the talent (when its healthy) to win, but do we have coaching that will take us to the next level?

Would it be courageous to go for it on 4th and 14 while kicking the FG was craven? 14 yards for the TD in the RZ is a very heavy heft...even when your OL is playing well. The Packer OL was getting man handled by 2nd and 3rd stringers all night. I don't like the odds.

And being down 3 late likely would have been the ball game. The Lions ran 75 plays as it was! This game was a stinker by the D made more odiferous after both Williams and Bullard were injured. The D needed to make a play at the end and they couldn't.

Hindsight is perfect vision, but kicking the FG was not craven, it was the correct decision.

I can only imagine Cory's article had Matt gone for the TD and failed, as the lions then drain the clock to end it...or even scored again. Both more likely than making a 4th and 14 to score a TD.

Then the article might have been entitled: Cory's Corner: A Referendum on Stupid.

.

Ben Johnson, the much sought-after Detroit OC said he looks for 2 things in a team:

1. Organizational alignment-particularly betw GM and HC
2. Commitment to recognizing problems and fixing immediately.

Green Bay drags their collective feet when it comes to recognizing and fixing problems. Their first inclination is to deny and they deny for a very long time (underperforming players, coaches), until fans are screaming for a change
Then, there is a glimmer of acknowledgement but no change --'We believe in this player...' Narveson is the latest example...LVN and Walker are recent examples as well.
Examples of denial and foot-dragging-Barry, Butkus, Savage, LVN, Walker, Wyatt, Gary, Alexander, Stokes--and others, DeGuara, Lowry, Campbell, Royce Newman; remember how long it took to deal w/A. Carlson, Amari Rodgers & Narveson? Fans had to get loud and call it to the attention of the Packer 'brain trust' that the aforementioned players were dragging the team.

Winning teams don't carry dead-wood. They recognize it for what it is and fix it or remove it and learn not to make the same mistakes. Sometimes I think GB is more sensitive to the coach's/GM's feelings than focusing on creating a winning team. Matt had a hard time firing his friend, Barry. Gutekunst may not be as objective as he needs to be when his hand-picked players are not performing well.

Dan Campbell, Ben Johnson and Aaron Glen are on the same page and it shows. Too bad 1-2 of them will be poached. But, if the Lion's FO keeps their philosophy intact, they should continue to excel.
It's about team culture and strict adherence to winning. No side-tracking by those with big egos or personal agendas.

Two observations. First, the 2020 championship game against Brady and the Bucs. Why did LaFleur decide to kick the FG? Because Rodgers only had eyes for Davante Adams. He ignored the rest of the WR's, and threw to Adams even though he was heavily covered.
Second, suppose the Packers had not kicked the FG in the Lions game. Cory, you wrote:

"It was fourth-and-goal at the Detroit 14 with 3:38 left. LaFleur opted to kick the 32-yard field goal and tie the game. The problem with that strategy was that the Packers defense was getting abused all night."

So, if the Packers don't get a TD (and they would have had to pass), the Lions pass rush was causing problems for the OL and Love all game. Why would this play be any different? And then the Lions get the ball, still leading, and do what they did after the kickoff- march down the field and either run out the clock, or at a minimum, kick a FG and force the Packers to score a TD to beat them with a minimal amount of time on the clock, and likely one or no timeouts. Does anyone think the Lions couldn't have scored a TD on that final drive? In the final analysis, the Lions were the better team on Thursday. Not by much, but the Packers slow start, lack of pass rush, and injuries in the secondary were far more significant than a decision to kick a FG rather than go for a very unlikely TD.

We really don't have a secondary (even when healthy)

Valentine, Nixon, Ballentine, Stokes are not starting caliber CB's-
Alexander is down to 4-5 games a year.

So, during this referendum on courage, we witnessed grabbing the game by the horns, going for the gusto, playing with fire, walking a high wire, an inflection point, *and* kryptonite was unleashed on the field? What a time to be alive!

Riverboat Dan and the Lions control their own destiny as they ride the wave of Owner-GM-Coach-Coordinators-players synergy to the next level with guns a blazing! They have been playing 4-D chess while the Packers grasped at straws to stumble to a hideous 9-4 record. The Road to the Super Bowl runs through the Motor City as years of shrewd drafting and high-level coaching finally comes to fruition.

Or. maybe next time Riverboat Dan will go to the well one too many times and the dream will end in a nightmare.

You can't fix this defense. The talent is subpar at best!