Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Scott Fitterer - the athletic


mrcompletely11
 Share

Recommended Posts

It is amazing at just how bad Fitterer has been. The scary part is he is still the GM. The unknown is if Tepper is forcing the decisions but even so Fitterer is still quilty for not pushing back. This guy makes a lot of money to build a team and each year the team has gotten worse. Tepper can keep hiring and firing coaches but if the team lacks talent that is on the GM and scouts. 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, top dawg said:

I didn't mind taking a flyer on him, but the trade compensation alone was bad. Then it turned to horrible when we bit down on that hook.

taking a flyer on him means not picking up his 5th year option and more importantly.....it means he isn't your only plan at the position.  He should of been a rehab project/depth.  That would have made sense.  And you probably take that flyer on him when he got cut.  Not traded for him.  I can stomach the trade though.  I couldn't stomach how they just slotted a busted QB as THE guy. 

  • Pie 2
  • Beer 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, MrBubba said:

Also let Reddick and Gilmore walk.  I know you can't keep everyone.  But you cannot let talent walk without trying to keep them

We didn't need them, the plan was to trade for Deshaun Watson and we had to sign sure fire Hall of Famer Ian Thomas to an extension. Priorities!

 

Ok, I can't pretend to have that typed that with a straight face.

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Miller being less raw and more pro ready makes sense of why they picked him. With us having a capable starter in Walker the lower floor higher ceiling player makes sense for us as well. I agree with that. 
    • I'm from Michigan and have had this discussion with my Lions friends, and they all agree with me, they were never going to take Freeling over Miller.  As, yes, you are correct, they could have left Sewell at RT and taken Freeling, but they are in a SB contention window right now. An OL with Freeling at LT and Sewell at RT is not as strong as Sewell at LT and Miller at RT would be for this upcoming season and likely at least next year as well. 5 years it could be looked back upon as a long term "mistake" to take Miller over Freeling, but for a franchise like the Lions, you can't worry about the long term when you have current SB aspirations.  It's all about maximizing their current SB window over the next 1-3 years. And it's not about style, it's about day 1 readiness, and a lot of "experts" aren't even sure if Freeling is ready to play Week 1 yet at the position he's used to, let alone switching to a side he hasn't played before, but a career starting RT is going to be more than ready to fill that role for them Week 1. I'm 100% convinced that if our draft positioning was swapped, we'd have still taken Freeling, they'd have still taken Miller, and both teams would have got the OT that they preferred due to what each team needs right now and what their current realistic aspirations are for the 2026 season. We're in a position where we can let our drafted OT sit and learn for a bit, they needed a week 1 starter, for me that's where this discussion becomes very easy to understand why each team took the player they did.
×
×
  • Create New...