View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently August 23rd, 2014, 3:52 pm



Reply to topic  [ 71 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
 Declared Underclassmen 
Author Message
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: October 20th, 2004, 4:16 pm
Posts: 9848
Location: Where ever I'm at now
Post 
The Lions need a QB. However, I don't feel there is any QB worth the first overall pick. Stafford is inconsistent, and Bradford doesn't have the intangibles, I think. If the Lions had just one position that they needed to fill, that would be one thing...but we all know that is not the case.

Many of you argue that we should improve the offensive line, and as such take an OT before getting a QB. That argument is flawed because it typically takes years to develop that QB, but not so with an OT.

Still more of you argue that our defense was terrible and ignored over the past few years, and we should address that side of the ball with the first pick. I understand your reasons and agree that side has been ignored. There may be some players (Curry, Jenkins, Orakpo) that could be worth that top pick, and likely would make an immediate impact.

All of you have good reasons, and all of you want to address a glaring need. Leaving it in the hands of the Lions staff is frightening, to say the least.

I would argue that the right thing to do is to take the best player available, that fills a need, and has a good chance to make an impact either now or a year from now. Quite frankly, I don't see that with either QB. I think Oher, Orakpo, Curry, Jenkins, Mays and Crabtree are the only players the Lions should be considering.

Crabtree-not a position of need, but an impact player to be in the NFL
Mays-safety doesn't typically go tops overall, but he could be better than Sean Taylor was. I think he would have been worth the first overall if the Redskins had to do that over again.

Orakpo-fills a huge need, but is he an everydown player?

Oher-the most polished OT available, but off field issues create questions.

Jenkins-With Brian Kelly gone, and hopefully Travis Fisher, who starts opposite Leigh Bodden? Worse yet, what if Bodden decides to leave, or the Lions don't want to pay his $8.6M bonus?

Curry-Great all around player, but is a MLB worth a first overall pick?

Until the Combines are over and the Pro Days are done, I think Curry needs to be the consensus selection. He would help both aspects of the defense, and fills a bigger void than any other player. Unless the Lions can be assured of getting Brandon Spikes at number 20, take this guy. He is a better LB than Jerod Mayo was, and I think NE would agree 10th overall wasn't too high for him.


January 14th, 2009, 4:59 pm
Profile
Millen Draft Pick - Epic Bust

Joined: December 27th, 2006, 4:53 pm
Posts: 693
Post 
m2karateman wrote:
The Lions need a QB. However, I don't feel there is any QB worth the first overall pick. Stafford is inconsistent, and Bradford doesn't have the intangibles, I think. If the Lions had just one position that they needed to fill, that would be one thing...but we all know that is not the case.

Many of you argue that we should improve the offensive line, and as such take an OT before getting a QB. That argument is flawed because it typically takes years to develop that QB, but not so with an OT.

Still more of you argue that our defense was terrible and ignored over the past few years, and we should address that side of the ball with the first pick. I understand your reasons and agree that side has been ignored. There may be some players (Curry, Jenkins, Orakpo) that could be worth that top pick, and likely would make an immediate impact.

All of you have good reasons, and all of you want to address a glaring need. Leaving it in the hands of the Lions staff is frightening, to say the least.

I would argue that the right thing to do is to take the best player available, that fills a need, and has a good chance to make an impact either now or a year from now. Quite frankly, I don't see that with either QB. I think Oher, Orakpo, Curry, Jenkins, Mays and Crabtree are the only players the Lions should be considering.

Crabtree-not a position of need, but an impact player to be in the NFL
Mays-safety doesn't typically go tops overall, but he could be better than Sean Taylor was. I think he would have been worth the first overall if the Redskins had to do that over again.

Orakpo-fills a huge need, but is he an everydown player?

Oher-the most polished OT available, but off field issues create questions.

Jenkins-With Brian Kelly gone, and hopefully Travis Fisher, who starts opposite Leigh Bodden? Worse yet, what if Bodden decides to leave, or the Lions don't want to pay his $8.6M bonus?

Curry-Great all around player, but is a MLB worth a first overall pick?

Until the Combines are over and the Pro Days are done, I think Curry needs to be the consensus selection. He would help both aspects of the defense, and fills a bigger void than any other player. Unless the Lions can be assured of getting Brandon Spikes at number 20, take this guy. He is a better LB than Jerod Mayo was, and I think NE would agree 10th overall wasn't too high for him.


Taylor Mays is staying at USC. What off the field issues does Michael Oher have? Wheres Andre Smith? And the flawed reasoning is that " We could win too many games in 2009 which would stop us from getting our franchise QB in 2010". That is seriously the worst reasoning i could read. How often is the best QB in a draft not the first one taken? Pretty frequently. Recent first round successes like Roethlisberger and Cutler were the 3rd QBs selected.


January 14th, 2009, 5:10 pm
Profile
Heisman Winner

Joined: February 10th, 2005, 6:52 pm
Posts: 801
Location: Linden, MI
Post 
dh86 wrote:
Blueskies wrote:
Quote:
I love how blueskies spouts out some meaningless info... lol.


I love how you attack my information in the "Lions season in review" topic as "wrong". Then when I ask you to prove me wrong, you ignore it and stop posting. LOL

Quote:
How about not trying to twist facts to try and make a point that you clearly are losing with.


Well thank you for telling me that I am "clearly losing". I wasn't aware.

Quote:
The fact of the matter is you can get a franchise qb out of the top 5, GET OVER IT!!!


Hey guess what? You can find a franchise RB out of the top five. You can find a franchise LT out of the top five. You can find a franchise WR out of the top five. A franchise DE, G, TE...

You get my point?

I'm not for taking a QB at #1 at all costs. I'm against people who want to follow stupid mantras like "LT at all costs". Or "a QB can't succeed until he gets a good offensive line so you shouldn't draft one until then..."

There are no hard and fast rules in the NFL draft. You have to go on a case by case basis, play with the hand your dealt and take all the other teams' moves into account.


LT at all costs isnt a mantra. "Pound the Rock" is a mantra. LT at all costs is a fact based analysis of the Lions football team as currently built and the talent available in the 2009 NFL Draft. I dont post theory, I dont post hypotheticals. I post things that have actually happened. For instance, 2005. The 49ers had the #1 pick in the NFL draft. There were 2 QBs considered first round worthy in Alex Smith and Aaron Rodgers. Neither were really considered top level prospects. The only thing really keeping them high on draft boards were the fact that they were Quarterbacks. San Francisco tried valiantly to trade down to take Alex at a more reasonable draft position. No one bit. The 49ers panicked and bought into the "franchise QB" bs and took Alex. 19 TDs and 31 ints later, hes hanging on by a thread in the NFL. I dont believe Matt Stafford is a top 20 draft prospect. My views on young QBs aside. Mark Sanchez is barely a top 10 prospect who needs another year of school badly as he has only been a starter 1 season. Taking a quarterback at #1 in this draft is not an option. Take a player at #1 with a chance to be tops at their position in the NFL.


If we assume your evaluation of Stafford is correct, you are on the right path. That is a pretty important assumption at this stage, however.

_________________
OK. Schwartz is fired, the fans are happy, now what?


January 14th, 2009, 7:04 pm
Profile
NFL Veteran
User avatar

Joined: September 15th, 2004, 6:02 am
Posts: 1355
Location: Honolulu, Hawaii
Post 
Yzermanx3 wrote:
Honolulu_Blue wrote:
This is a unique year for QB's.

It's vogue again to bring in franchise rookie QB's. Look at the success that Baltimore has had with Flacco and the falcons with Matt Ryan. Part of that is scouts and teams have a better idea of what translates to a more successful NFL QB.

Generally Accuracy is the greatest statistical indicator. Experience in a Pro Style offense helps. And continuity and reps is a big deal in how fast that turn around happens. One-hit-wonders never play well as rookies. Usually seniors who've started at least a couple of years and produced or shown steady progress, do better as first year QB's.

That said, there's no senior QB's worth taking in the first round. This is causing an unusual demand for underclassmen QB's. Their could be a serious over-rating of QB's. If the market recognizes that taking QB's early would be foolishness then we could have something like when Brady Quinn free fell to the latter half of the First round. If they do indeed over-rate them, we could have something like when SF drafted Alex Smith, or when a few years ago their was a fire sale of QB's in the second round.

If the Lions are smart they ought to pick them where they're worth. I advocate waiting to see if Stafford or Bradford fall to the 20th pick. If neither is available, I'd say screw drafting a franchise QB this year. If both are available, I'd wait to see if one fell to the us in the second round. If only one is available, I'd take him with the 20th pick.



While I agree Matt Ryan is the main reason the falcons turned things around. Joe Flacco has aurguably the 1st or 2nd best defense in the league. Not saying he's had nothing to do with the success.

Plus both the Falcons and Ravens have superior rushing teams to aleviate the pass rush. I really like Kevin Smith but who do we have that backs him up? Sure isnt a Jerius Norwood or Laroy McClain.

Anyway I really agree with blue in saying we should wait to see if one of the QB's fall to 20. It's happened before. The Sooner would look better in blue and silver than the Bulldog in my eyes. :wink:


Since Bradford is officially out. That makes Stafford the only first round QB in my opinion. With that, demand should seriously outweigh the scarce supply.

Therefore, if I were the Lions, I would be sending smokescreens like crazy that Stafford is the guy.

Obviously I don't think he's worth first overall. But I do think they should make it out that way so we can fleece someone for a trade down.


January 14th, 2009, 7:26 pm
Profile WWW
QB Coach

Joined: January 13th, 2006, 4:18 am
Posts: 3173
Location: Maryland
Post 
I agree. We need to make it look like we want Stafford and try to move down with a team that wants him (Chiefs at #3 maybe) and get a few picks outta it. At #3 we should still be able to land a high quality player, perhaps even the guy I want at #1 Michael Oher.

Also, Mark Sanchez from USC is coming out according to Chris Mortensen. I don't want to hear any talk about taking him at #1.


January 14th, 2009, 8:23 pm
Profile
Walk On

Joined: November 2nd, 2008, 1:29 am
Posts: 427
Post 
I don't think anyone half legitimate even mentions Sanchez #1. Or even first round.

Quote:
Heisman winner Sam Bradford stunned much of the football world by announcing his decision to return to Oklahoma next season.

Coupled with the return of Florida QB Tim Tebow and Texas QB Colt McCoy, both of whom previously announced their intent to put off the NFL, 2009 will mark the first time in history that the top-three Heisman vote-getters all return to the collegiate gridiron the following season.


I just post this to point out the irony. This is said to be one of the deepest drafts with tons of underclassmen declaring, yet we make history with none of the top vote getters declaring.

-ILMP


January 14th, 2009, 10:59 pm
Profile
Millen Draft Pick - Epic Bust

Joined: December 27th, 2006, 4:53 pm
Posts: 693
Post 
Honolulu_Blue wrote:
Yzermanx3 wrote:
Honolulu_Blue wrote:
This is a unique year for QB's.

It's vogue again to bring in franchise rookie QB's. Look at the success that Baltimore has had with Flacco and the falcons with Matt Ryan. Part of that is scouts and teams have a better idea of what translates to a more successful NFL QB.

Generally Accuracy is the greatest statistical indicator. Experience in a Pro Style offense helps. And continuity and reps is a big deal in how fast that turn around happens. One-hit-wonders never play well as rookies. Usually seniors who've started at least a couple of years and produced or shown steady progress, do better as first year QB's.

That said, there's no senior QB's worth taking in the first round. This is causing an unusual demand for underclassmen QB's. Their could be a serious over-rating of QB's. If the market recognizes that taking QB's early would be foolishness then we could have something like when Brady Quinn free fell to the latter half of the First round. If they do indeed over-rate them, we could have something like when SF drafted Alex Smith, or when a few years ago their was a fire sale of QB's in the second round.

If the Lions are smart they ought to pick them where they're worth. I advocate waiting to see if Stafford or Bradford fall to the 20th pick. If neither is available, I'd say screw drafting a franchise QB this year. If both are available, I'd wait to see if one fell to the us in the second round. If only one is available, I'd take him with the 20th pick.



While I agree Matt Ryan is the main reason the falcons turned things around. Joe Flacco has aurguably the 1st or 2nd best defense in the league. Not saying he's had nothing to do with the success.

Plus both the Falcons and Ravens have superior rushing teams to aleviate the pass rush. I really like Kevin Smith but who do we have that backs him up? Sure isnt a Jerius Norwood or Laroy McClain.

Anyway I really agree with blue in saying we should wait to see if one of the QB's fall to 20. It's happened before. The Sooner would look better in blue and silver than the Bulldog in my eyes. :wink:


Since Bradford is officially out. That makes Stafford the only first round QB in my opinion. With that, demand should seriously outweigh the scarce supply.

Therefore, if I were the Lions, I would be sending smokescreens like crazy that Stafford is the guy.

Obviously I don't think he's worth first overall. But I do think they should make it out that way so we can fleece someone for a trade down.


Whos going to trade up to #1 for Matt Stafford? Teams know he is not a top prospect and will dare the Lions to screw up by drafting him.


January 14th, 2009, 11:07 pm
Profile
Walk On

Joined: November 2nd, 2008, 1:29 am
Posts: 427
Post 
Quote:
Teams know he is not a top prospect and will dare the Lions to screw up by drafting him.


Do they though? I've seen plenty of people around here pretty crazy about him. And plenty of people in the media are hyping him as a #1.

It's hardly a stretch. I wouldn't expect to do anything like a 'fleecing' of another team. I welcome it, but the hype is not THAT big. As one of the prime franchises to want a QB, any circumstance that makes Staffords trade value rise, also makes us trading less likely.

-ILMP


January 14th, 2009, 11:21 pm
Profile
QB Coach

Joined: January 13th, 2006, 4:18 am
Posts: 3173
Location: Maryland
Post 
InterimLionsMasterPimp wrote:
I don't think anyone half legitimate even mentions Sanchez #1. Or even first round.
-ILMP


On the ESPN Scout's INC. Top 32 they have him as the 10th overall prospect one slot ahead of Stafford. And I'll bet most sources will rank him as a first round QB. I was saying what I said to prevent any of that talk from the members of this board. Do not take him.


January 14th, 2009, 11:29 pm
Profile
Walk On

Joined: November 2nd, 2008, 1:29 am
Posts: 427
Post 
Really?? I have seen several mocks with no mention of him. Everything I've seen suggests he is an average QB/product of system.

Maybe he's not in mocks because he wasn't expected to come out? I don't know, just guessing.

He may benefit from being the next QB to come out of USC.


January 14th, 2009, 11:41 pm
Profile
QB Coach

Joined: January 13th, 2006, 4:18 am
Posts: 3173
Location: Maryland
Post 
Yea most mocks I've seen don't even have him anywhere. I think most expected him to stay in school. So in the next few days now that they know he is coming out he will start to show up. I've heard guys over at ESPN compare him with Stafford to see who will be the top QB. Just goes to show how weak the top of this QB class is.

I'll be one of the first to say Bradford in 2010!


January 15th, 2009, 12:12 am
Profile
3rd Round Selection

Joined: October 19th, 2005, 1:24 pm
Posts: 1136
Location: Nottingham, England
Post 
inheritedlionsfan wrote:
InterimLionsMasterPimp wrote:
I don't think anyone half legitimate even mentions Sanchez #1. Or even first round.
-ILMP


On the ESPN Scout's INC. Top 32 they have him as the 10th overall prospect one slot ahead of Stafford. And I'll bet most sources will rank him as a first round QB. I was saying what I said to prevent any of that talk from the members of this board. Do not take him.


Based on the 2 bowl games I saw, I'd definitely rate Sanchez ahead of Stafford. Stafford looked poor to me.

Obviously, though, I've only seen a very small sample of these guys' play. Interested to hear observations on why Stafford might be a number 1 pick but Sanchez definitely isn't (to my mind, neither are).


January 15th, 2009, 7:20 am
Profile
QB Coach

Joined: January 13th, 2006, 4:18 am
Posts: 3173
Location: Maryland
Post 
UK Lion wrote:
inheritedlionsfan wrote:
InterimLionsMasterPimp wrote:
I don't think anyone half legitimate even mentions Sanchez #1. Or even first round.
-ILMP


On the ESPN Scout's INC. Top 32 they have him as the 10th overall prospect one slot ahead of Stafford. And I'll bet most sources will rank him as a first round QB. I was saying what I said to prevent any of that talk from the members of this board. Do not take him.


Based on the 2 bowl games I saw, I'd definitely rate Sanchez ahead of Stafford. Stafford looked poor to me.

Obviously, though, I've only seen a very small sample of these guys' play. Interested to hear observations on why Stafford might be a number 1 pick but Sanchez definitely isn't (to my mind, neither are).


IMO neither guy is a #1 overall pick. I've seen Stafford play several times and I just don't like what I see. Sanchez has only one year under his belt and he played for the USC offense that was loaded with talent. He is just a big ? to me. Probably more like a John David Booty than a Carson Palmer.


January 15th, 2009, 3:54 pm
Profile
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: June 26th, 2006, 1:03 pm
Posts: 13429
Post 
Not sure if it was posted yet, Donald Washington from tOSU declared today. Not sure why, he had some off the field problems and got in Tressel's doghouse so he didn't start much this year. He potentially would have had a standout year this next year had he not declared. I think it was a mistake, but it possibly could be a great opportunity for a team to pick up a potential very solid player in the draft late round.

I think Donald could have worked himself to a first or second rounder had he stayed in school.

_________________
regularjoe12 - "You are crackin me up! really! HILARIOUS um let me quote some intellgent people in this coneversation: Steensn:"


January 15th, 2009, 5:49 pm
Profile
Veteran General Manager
User avatar

Joined: May 7th, 2005, 3:25 pm
Posts: 7284
Location: Earth/Sagittarius Dwarf Galaxy
Post 
InterimLionsMasterPimp wrote:
I don't think anyone half legitimate even mentions Sanchez #1. Or even first round.

Quote:
Heisman winner Sam Bradford stunned much of the football world by announcing his decision to return to Oklahoma next season.

Coupled with the return of Florida QB Tim Tebow and Texas QB Colt McCoy, both of whom previously announced their intent to put off the NFL, 2009 will mark the first time in history that the top-three Heisman vote-getters all return to the collegiate gridiron the following season.


I just post this to point out the irony. This is said to be one of the deepest drafts with tons of underclassmen declaring, yet we make history with none of the top vote getters declaring.

-ILMP


We'll never know for sure, but, I think it has more to do with the fact that they were afraid they would end up on 0-16 Detroit Lions.


January 16th, 2009, 1:46 am
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 71 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware.