<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1"?>
<BODY.CONTENT>
<UID>
9002130737
</UID>
<PUBLICATION>
DETROIT FREE PRESS
</PUBLICATION>
<DATE>
901119
</DATE>
<TDATE>
Monday, November 19, 1990
</TDATE>
<EDITION>
METRO FINAL
</EDITION>
<SECTION>
SPT
</SECTION>
<PAGE>
1E
</PAGE>
<ILLUSTRATION>

</ILLUSTRATION>
<CAPTION>

</CAPTION>
<BYLINE>
MITCH ALBOM
</BYLINE>
<AFFILIATION>

</AFFILIATION>
<MEMO>

</MEMO>
<COPYRIGHT>
Copyright (c) 1990, Detroit Free Press
</COPYRIGHT>
<HEADLINE>
TRUTH ABOUT LIONS IS TOO, WELL, DEPRESSING
</HEADLINE>
<SUBHEAD>

</SUBHEAD>
<CORRECTION>

</CORRECTION>
<BODY>
EAST RUTHERFORD, N.J. --  Every now and then, someone asks how I come up
with an angle for this column. And I tell them: Some days are harder than
others.

  Take Sunday, at the Meadowlands. The  Lions lose again. They get shut out
by the Giants, 20-0. This is hardly big news.  The Giants are an awesome team.
And the Lions? Well, you could say the Lions are in a different league than
the Giants.

  How's that for being polite?
  Which brings us to the original question: What's the angle? What slant can
you take on a game in which the Lions 1) score no points, 2) make no sacks, 3)
have no excuses?
  Let's see. I could write about Barry Sanders, and his dwindling patience
with the run 'n' shoot offense. I could write about how, after the loss,
Sanders said he might eventually go to his coaches  and "demand that some
changes be made."
  Some people think this is news -- "BARRY COMPLAINS!" -- but the truth is,
Barry has been saying this for weeks. All you had to do was ask. He might be
quiet.  He is not dumb. He knows the run 'n' shoot is not designed to feature
him, which makes it the biggest waste of talent since Marlon Brando appeared
in "Superman."
  So while Barry's frustration -- he  says he's not yet at the breaking point
-- is interesting news, it's also old news. Not to mention sad news. Which
could depress you. And who wants to be depressed on a Monday morning?
  How about  the quarterback angle? I could write about that. But what's new
there? Sunday once again showed that 1) Bob Gagliano is only as good as his
arm and his receivers, both of which have their limitations,  2) Andre Ware
has plenty of promise, but thinks more of his progress than his coaches do,
and 3) Rodney Peete looks nice in street clothes. Unfortunately, he can't win
many games in them.
  So writing  about the quarterbacks is also old news, and could depress you.
And who needs that on a Monday morning?
If you can't write something nice . . .  
  The defense. I could write about the defense. Unfortunately, anything I say
would be bad or a lie.
  I could write about the third-down problem, and how the Lions' defense acts
as if third down is the one that comes before first.
  Or I could write about the  lack of a pass rush, and how the Lions on
Sunday couldn't get close enough to ask Phil Simms directions. But even Wayne
Fontes said after the game: "Pass rush has been a problem since I've been
here."
  He didn't say why, then, he traded Eric Williams early in the season. But
the answer would just depress you.
  Same goes for Jim Arnold, our Pro Bowl punter, who actually kicked a punt
nine yards  Sunday -- and it wasn't blocked, and it wasn't affected by wind.
Arnold, who botched several others, was so upset after the game he said, "I
wouldn't be surprised if they asked me for my playbook tomorrow."
  I guess I could criticize him, but I figure Arnold has earned the
occasional off day -- considering how many Jerry Ball keeps taking.
  Wait. How about Fontes? I could write about his postgame press
conferences, and how they all sound alike -- "We got beat by a better football
team. . . . We need to improve. . . . We're getting there. . . . " But let's
be honest. You're sick of that song and dance  by now.
  Which leaves the receivers (too many drops, depressing), the tackling (too
many misses, depressing), or the remaining schedule (too many tough opponents,
the Bears twice, the Raiders, the  Broncos, depressing.)
  I mean, let's face it. By the time I'm done writing, you'll be hiding under
the bed.
Singing a different tune 
  So, in search of a kinder, gentler angle, I left the steamy confines of the
Lions' locker room and wandered over to where the Giants were getting dressed.
The tenor there was much different. So was the alto, and the bass.
  Simms was talking about going undefeated  this season. "It's exciting.
But we got to go one step at a time."
  Everson Walls was laughing about the Giants' shutout defense. "When we had
to stay out there for six plays today, we got tired.  We said, why are we out
here this long?"
  Coach Bill Parcells was talking about his 10-0 record and his playoff-bound
team. "We're really coming together as a unit. I like our guys."
  It's been  a long time since I've heard this kind of optimism in a Sunday
locker room. And I realize how lousy losing must be for the Lions players.
After all, they all come out of college as success stories --  or else they
wouldn't be drafted -- and they all think they'll be the ones to make a
difference in Detroit. Chuck Long thought it. Lomas Brown thought it.  Peete
thought it. Ware thinks it.
  And the  same old story seems to swallow them up. Mediocrity. You go
looking for an angle, and you find there is only one angle, the same old
angle: The Lions are good enough to win a few, and bad enough to lose  the
rest.
  As I was leaving the stadium, Dave Anderson, a  Pulitzer prize-winning
writer for the New York Times, tapped me on the shoulder and pointed in the
Lions' direction. "It must be a thrill  watching this team every week," he
said.
  You don't know the half of it, Dave.
</BODY>
<DISCLAIMER>

</DISCLAIMER>
<KEYWORDS>

</KEYWORDS>
</BODY.CONTENT>
