This is not a Stafford issue -- yet
The knee-jerk reaction (or arm-jerk reaction) is to play the I-told-you-so card about Matthew Stafford, about how difficult it would be for him to have any success taking over an 0-16 team. Oops, hold on. This is a different team, as the Lions remind us again and again.
Fair enough. But it's still a bad team, and while Stafford is not the reason the Lions are 0-2, he sure hasn't helped. That said, let's be very clear on this: Stafford should not be replaced by Daunte Culpepper.
I thought Culpepper should start the season, but once he made his decision, Jim Schwartz has to stick with it for a while. Schwartz wisely wouldn't say Stafford is his quarterback "no matter what," because the truth is, if the rookie throws one TD pass and five interceptions every two games, he'll have to be benched.
Not yet. The kid is raw and risk-taking, but he shows some intriguing flashes. It makes no sense to reverse field already.
The problem is, I do think the Lions' losing streak can mess with Stafford. He loves the strength of his own right arm, and he already forces throws to Calvin Johnson. As the pressure mounts to get a victory, Stafford might be tempted to force even more.
Schwartz says he saw improvement in Stafford from the first week to the 27-13 loss to the Vikings. I did too, marginally. But he's still completing only 50.7 percent of his passes (34-for-67), and against Minnesota, offensive coordinator Scott Linehan protected Stafford with conservative play-calling.
That's the tricky balance -- letting the youngster learn by firing away, and not letting him throw away games by firing recklessly.
It's flat-out stupid to judge Stafford on two games. His inaccuracy is a surprise, but his struggle is completely expected.
bob.wojnowski@detnews.com
