View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently October 23rd, 2014, 1:23 pm



Reply to topic  [ 159 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11  Next
 I can't believe this. I have changed my mind about #1. 
Author Message
National Champion
User avatar

Joined: December 16th, 2008, 8:44 am
Posts: 843
Post 
Leo wrote:
Let’s see Alex Smith completion percentage 67.5%. So what’s the point?

The biggest knock now against Stafford is completion percentage? After starting as true freshman Stafford increased his completion percentage each year and last year got over 'magical' 60% at 61.4%. Which is higher than Peyton Manning senior season at 60.4%. Again what's the point?

I still think the Lions should draft Stafford if for no other reason I still have yet to hear a compelling arguement out there to draft anybody else.


We were the worst at running and the worst at stopping the run, simulataneously. There is your reason.


February 14th, 2009, 7:05 am
Profile
5th Round Pick - Traded
User avatar

Joined: January 11th, 2005, 11:35 pm
Posts: 1079
Post 
Quote:
We were the worst at running and the worst at stopping the run, simulataneously. There is your reason.


Great thanks for stating the obvious. But the Lions need everything including a QB. I just don’t see a player worthy of that #1 pick.

When you’re spending 60+ on a player he just can’t be good he needs to be able to live up to that contract or else he’s a bust. Robert Gallery has turned out to be a pretty good guard for the Raiders. But he’s still considered a complete bust because the Raiders are paying him to be their franchise left tackle.

I keep hearing anything but Stafford or anything but a QB but I haven’t heard a better option. From what I can tell the Lions feel they are set on Backus and Cherlius at tackle. So don’t see them drafting a O-line from a group of Monroe, ASmtih, JSmith or Oher when non of them seem to be able to separate themselves from the pack.

The defensive crop is so unimpressive that Aaron Curry who’s greatest asset is ‘versatility’ is considered the top defender. BJ Raji who wasn’t even considered a top 10 pick until the senior bowl has leapfrogged everybody and might the only realistic option for the Lions outside of Stafford.

_________________
The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.


February 14th, 2009, 2:27 pm
Profile
Color Commentator - John Madden
User avatar

Joined: January 19th, 2007, 3:21 am
Posts: 1919
Location: A2
Post 
I agree with Leo. I can't see a player outside of Stafford being a better option. Of course if the Lions had the #1 last year they would've been able to pick any of the top 5 players and been justified in doing so. This year they need so much help that anyone they take will be an improvement. That being said I think that until the combine and pro days I still see Stafford as the best option at #1 even though he might not be a world beater. If one of the LT's shows that he's a MAN at the combine then maybe they'll get consideration at #1 but for now we're stuck in this conundrum.

_________________
Forward down the field!


February 14th, 2009, 3:21 pm
Profile
NFL Veteran
User avatar

Joined: September 15th, 2004, 6:02 am
Posts: 1355
Location: Honolulu, Hawaii
Post 
Oh please. Where's Staffords compelling argument?

Curry is the highest graded LB in years.
Raji fills a position that can make the biggest impact immediately.
The offensive linemen can have a stabilizing effect, like Jake Long.

Stafford isn't any more worthy of the number 1 pick, in fact he may be less so. To put him their by default simply because he's the no. 1 at the QB position is lazy. He's clearly not the best individual prospect when you don't let the position he plays blind you.

_________________
Image
Lion http://www.suh93.com


February 14th, 2009, 5:23 pm
Profile WWW
Heisman Winner

Joined: February 10th, 2005, 6:52 pm
Posts: 809
Location: Linden, MI
Post 
Honolulu_Blue wrote:
Oh please. Where's Staffords compelling argument?

Curry is the highest graded LB in years.
Raji fills a position that can make the biggest impact immediately.
The offensive linemen can have a stabilizing effect, like Jake Long.

Stafford isn't any more worthy of the number 1 pick, in fact he may be less so. To put him their by default simply because he's the no. 1 at the QB position is lazy. He's clearly not the best individual prospect when you don't let the position he plays blind you.


HB-

Stafford may be more so. Who says he's clearly not the best prospect? Me, you, M2K?

Some people say Stafford is the best QB prospect to come out in many years. The Lions need to look at him and discern what they believe themselves. Either validate or shoot holes in that theory based on their own criteria. IF he is the best QB to come out in years, they sure need to think about taking him. If he's that good in their minds, there had better be someone REALLY special sitting next to him to get them to pass. Who do you suppose that might be?

For my money, that the first question they must answer in this draft. IS Stafford the real thing? If not, move on and look elsewhere at #1. If so, take him and don't look back.

As far as the lazy arguments go, many here are saying : No, he's a QB and can't play in 2009 so don't do it. For me, that's the lazy argument. QBs are pivotal, WR are not, OG are not, TE are not, and so on. LT can be, RB can be, DE can be...

I would love to say the Lions are all set a QB so they don't need to think about rolling the dice on one in this draft. They're not, and if they are, no one knows it including them. They must consider the QB at #1 overall at the very least.

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


February 14th, 2009, 6:52 pm
Profile
NFL Veteran
User avatar

Joined: September 15th, 2004, 6:02 am
Posts: 1355
Location: Honolulu, Hawaii
Post 
Look at the scouting services. Mel Kiper has him at 4. Scouts Inc. has him at 5. NFL Draft Scout has him at 8.

It stands to reason, that if Stafford were the no. 1 overall prospect, then wouldn't their be near unanimous consent that he were that can't miss QB? There are just as much skepticism for him as their are those who love him. And that unsurety is enough for me to avoid annointing him the pick immediately.

I am not advocating just ruling him out. But the body of work that he must be judged on is already done. It is what he showed on the field, and that polarizing reaction he gets from that body of work is enough to do due dillegence in examining the other prospects.

I'm not disagreeing with any of your points. But it's those who are too lazy not to search high and low for a better alternative upon seeing what a crapshoot it'll be to go with Stafford. Never did I say he would bust, never did I say he would be elite. I did argue that I wish he went back to school so I could be more sure about what we're getting. But that's the point. It's lazy not to see what a gamble going with the QB is, and just spewing lazy BS like, "I have yet to see a compelling argument for somebody else." Look for one! They are out there, and their not that hard to figure out.

Please don't infer that I make a lazy argument with QB generalizations, because I do my research. I've looked every which way trying to rationalize Stafford as a pick. This draft hobby is something I invest my time and money in, as I have subscriptions to certain pay sites. And in my research I keep coming back to how much a coin flip it is to go with Stafford. He simply has not shown enough. He, by his own admission, needs to work on consistency. He has holes in his game that, with his amount starts, should've been worked out by now.

_________________
Image
Lion http://www.suh93.com


February 14th, 2009, 7:47 pm
Profile WWW
Heisman Winner

Joined: February 10th, 2005, 6:52 pm
Posts: 809
Location: Linden, MI
Post 
HB-

I read a lot of draft stuff as well. Its a silly interest, but I do it anyway. I find the evaluations of Stafford to be very positive myself. Almost all of them start out with something along the lines of '...everything an NFL team can want in a QB...' The qualifiers that are common are not killers in my mind. Mostly they center around consistency and trusting his arm too much. Sometimes its 'should have been better at Georgia...' It seems to me that the primary argument on this board is 'he's clearly not that good' and I wonder where that comes from. I think its pretty likely that he is good enough, but like any other NFL QB, you'll need to see once he joins a team.

I'm not inisting that they draft him, just that they do the homework. If he grades out, I want the guy. If not, pass; don't reach. The Lions have never had a guy like that on the team. The best QB prospect they've drafted was Chuck Long, and I can't tell you why he busted out. He seemed to have it all. Looked better than Leinart in his day. I think he did get hurt early, and in the 80's guys didn't come back the same as they do now.

Raji is quite intriguing, and might be the pick if Stafford doesn't grade out. It seems high for him at #1, but they're going to pick someone.

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


February 14th, 2009, 8:31 pm
Profile
Team MVP
User avatar

Joined: February 20th, 2007, 10:51 pm
Posts: 3362
Location: Saginaw, MI
Post 
I dont want Stafford because for 1, he aint gonna do crap behind our horrible line, and 2, Kitna is plenty good enough for RIGHT NOW, until we fix our defense and o-line. Stafford would be pointless right now. Thats all im saying. Whether hes good or not, a quarterback needs a line to protect him. And as bad as our defense is, Stafford wouldnt ever be on the field anyway considering our defense wont stop the opposing offense anyway.

_________________
April 22nd, 2010 @ 7:44p.m. "The Detroit Lions select...Ndamukong Suh". Those are some beautiful words.


Lionbacker2 Fantasy Champion 2011


February 15th, 2009, 10:28 am
Profile
National Champion
User avatar

Joined: December 16th, 2008, 8:44 am
Posts: 843
Post 
The only way I take Stafford is if I am comfortable sitting him at 12 million a year for at least a year or two... and I'm not comfortable doing that :p especially when there isn't a shortage of qb's to come out in the near future.


I also picked this up from an espn article and thought it was relevant to the Stafford debate...

"Stafford was directly preceded at Georgia by the recently retired David Greene; both spent their entire college careers under head coach Mark Richt in similar offensive systems. Stafford's college numbers are actually worse than Greene's, with the latter completing 59 percent of his passes and averaging 8.01 yards per attempt to Stafford's 7.83. If Stafford was really a star in the making, wouldn't he have put up better numbers, in the same system, than a guy who washed out of the NFL without taking a professional snap? If it was our $25 million guaranteed, the answer would need to be yes."


February 15th, 2009, 11:36 am
Profile
Modmin Dude
User avatar

Joined: December 31st, 2004, 9:55 am
Posts: 12141
Post 
MLive wrote:
Lions expected to hold private workout, interview with quarterback Matt Stafford
by Tom Kowalski
Monday February 16, 2009, 9:00 AM

The recent news that Georgia quarterback Matt Stafford would not participate in the drills at the upcoming NFL Scouting Combine was not disturbing to the Detroit Lions' scouting department.

It's not unusual for top-rated quarterbacks to skip the combine workout (Atlanta's Matt Ryan, who was the NFL's Offensive Rookie of the Year, didn't throw at last year's combine).

Besides, the Lions are going to get a good, up-close-and-personal look at Stafford over the next couple of months. And that goes for Mark Sanchez and Josh Freeman, too.

Not only will the Lions be in attendance when Stafford holds his pro day workout at Georgia, but Stafford also will be asked to perform a private workout just for the Lions.

In addition, the Lions will also hold an extended interview session with Stafford -- above and beyond what is covered at the combine.

The Lions plan on doing extensive research on Stafford, not only covering all the bases but combing the infield and outfield grass as well.

That due diligence will extend to USC's Sanchez, another possibility with the first overall pick, and Kansas State's Freeman, who might be an option with Detroit's 20th overall choice in the draft.

http://www.mlive.com/lions/index.ssf/20 ... d_pri.html


February 16th, 2009, 2:38 pm
Profile
Walk On

Joined: November 2nd, 2008, 1:29 am
Posts: 427
Post 
I'm going to ask a question here, and I don't know the answer. Is it typical for a team picking at the top or near the top to bring in the top 3 QB prospects for private workouts, even if they don't end up taking a QB? Or does this move indicate a strong likelihood of a QB draft, and it's simply an exercise of picking the right one?

The article says it's 'due diligence', but somehow I'm doubting the top 5 or 10 teams are working out all 3 privately as part of their own 'due diligence'. I could be wrong, and that is why I'm asking.

If the Lions are considering taking a Curry, Raji, Smith, Monroe, Oher, etc..., then why no mention of private workouts for any of them? I'm wondering how much to read into this. Is the writing on the wall?

-ILMP


February 16th, 2009, 5:38 pm
Profile
QB Coach
User avatar

Joined: August 21st, 2005, 3:36 am
Posts: 3139
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Post 
InterimLionsMasterPimp wrote:
I'm going to ask a question here, and I don't know the answer. Is it typical for a team picking at the top or near the top to bring in the top 3 QB prospects for private workouts, even if they don't end up taking a QB? Or does this move indicate a strong likelihood of a QB draft, and it's simply an exercise of picking the right one?

The article says it's 'due diligence', but somehow I'm doubting the top 5 or 10 teams are working out all 3 privately as part of their own 'due diligence'. I could be wrong, and that is why I'm asking.

If the Lions are considering taking a Curry, Raji, Smith, Monroe, Oher, etc..., then why no mention of private workouts for any of them? I'm wondering how much to read into this. Is the writing on the wall?

-ILMP

It is very typical to work out a whole bunch of players. Most will be to get a first hand view of the player. It doesn't necessarily mean anything. The reason there is no mention of private workouts for the other players is that it is very early. Teams are just now starting to set up private workouts. There will be many other players brought it. Plus, the QB is the highest profile position, so they get the most attention.

There is really nothing to read into here. It's just the team doing its due diligence. Nothing to worry about.

_________________
"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence." - John Adams

“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” - Neil deGrasse Tyson


February 16th, 2009, 5:52 pm
Profile
Mr. Irrelevant

Joined: April 16th, 2005, 3:23 pm
Posts: 941
Location: Hollywood, FL
Post 
faulkn22 wrote:
The only way I take Stafford is if I am comfortable sitting him at 12 million a year for at least a year or two... and I'm not comfortable doing that :p especially when there isn't a shortage of qb's to come out in the near future.


I also picked this up from an espn article and thought it was relevant to the Stafford debate...

"Stafford was directly preceded at Georgia by the recently retired David Greene; both spent their entire college careers under head coach Mark Richt in similar offensive systems. Stafford's college numbers are actually worse than Greene's, with the latter completing 59 percent of his passes and averaging 8.01 yards per attempt to Stafford's 7.83. If Stafford was really a star in the making, wouldn't he have put up better numbers, in the same system, than a guy who washed out of the NFL without taking a professional snap? If it was our $25 million guaranteed, the answer would need to be yes."


This is getting ridiculous...

This is the problem with being the front runner for a #1 pick... People are always looking for a way to pick your game apart...

Stafford set the UGA record this year for TD passes and is 2nd in yards behind Eric Ziere on a single season basis...

Greene started as a red shirt freshman (versus a true freshman like Stafford) and played a full year more than Stafford... Greene is a product of playing in a lot of games that is why he has career records... He doesn't own 1 single season record that I know of...

Greene threw just 13 TDs and 11 INTs as a junior... The next year, Richt changed the offense because of Greene's liabilities... Greene never completed more than 60 % of his passes... Stafford finished his junior year with a 61 % completion rate while owning the record for single season TDs...

Stafford is 3100 yds and 25 TDs short of breaking Greene's career records... Had Stafford played another year, one could reasonably assume he would improve on his previous stats, breaking Greene's records and likely ending up with higher overall completion percentage...

Stafford played 2 years after Greene... In that article it says that Greene directly preceded him... That isn't even half true...

That article was ridiculous...

Seriously, the kid completed 61 % of his passes, threw 25 TDs vs 10 INTs in the best defensive conference in the NCAA with a less than average offensive line as a TRUE Junior... He is accurate, mobile, smart, a good leader, sees the field well, anticipates his throws well, has an excellent build for a qb, a nice release and an absolute cannon for an arm... What else do you want from the kid? In what way is this not worthy of the #1 overall pick?

Can he improve on some things? Sure... Name 1 prospect in the history of the draft that couldn't...


February 17th, 2009, 3:23 am
Profile
Mr. Irrelevant

Joined: April 16th, 2005, 3:23 pm
Posts: 941
Location: Hollywood, FL
Post 
InterimLionsMasterPimp wrote:
I'm going to ask a question here, and I don't know the answer. Is it typical for a team picking at the top or near the top to bring in the top 3 QB prospects for private workouts, even if they don't end up taking a QB? Or does this move indicate a strong likelihood of a QB draft, and it's simply an exercise of picking the right one?

The article says it's 'due diligence', but somehow I'm doubting the top 5 or 10 teams are working out all 3 privately as part of their own 'due diligence'. I could be wrong, and that is why I'm asking.

If the Lions are considering taking a Curry, Raji, Smith, Monroe, Oher, etc..., then why no mention of private workouts for any of them? I'm wondering how much to read into this. Is the writing on the wall?

-ILMP


Drew Sharp wrote an article praising the Lions (weird right?) for what they are doing with their first pick... He said they are intentionally mentioning QB every chance they get in an effort to drive the value of the #1 pick up... "Optimizing the value of their asset" was how he put it I believe... Who knows if they can possibly create Eli type buzz they may be able to move that pick for a ton of value... I doubt they'll pull it off, but I agree with Sharp that they are going about it the right way...


February 17th, 2009, 3:34 am
Profile
National Champion
User avatar

Joined: December 16th, 2008, 8:44 am
Posts: 843
Post 
Murtyle wrote:
faulkn22 wrote:
The only way I take Stafford is if I am comfortable sitting him at 12 million a year for at least a year or two... and I'm not comfortable doing that :p especially when there isn't a shortage of qb's to come out in the near future.


I also picked this up from an espn article and thought it was relevant to the Stafford debate...

"Stafford was directly preceded at Georgia by the recently retired David Greene; both spent their entire college careers under head coach Mark Richt in similar offensive systems. Stafford's college numbers are actually worse than Greene's, with the latter completing 59 percent of his passes and averaging 8.01 yards per attempt to Stafford's 7.83. If Stafford was really a star in the making, wouldn't he have put up better numbers, in the same system, than a guy who washed out of the NFL without taking a professional snap? If it was our $25 million guaranteed, the answer would need to be yes."


This is getting ridiculous...

This is the problem with being the front runner for a #1 pick... People are always looking for a way to pick your game apart...

Stafford set the UGA record this year for TD passes and is 2nd in yards behind Eric Ziere on a single season basis...

Greene started as a red shirt freshman (versus a true freshman like Stafford) and played a full year more than Stafford... Greene is a product of playing in a lot of games that is why he has career records... He doesn't own 1 single season record that I know of...

Greene threw just 13 TDs and 11 INTs as a junior... The next year, Richt changed the offense because of Greene's liabilities... Greene never completed more than 60 % of his passes... Stafford finished his junior year with a 61 % completion rate while owning the record for single season TDs...

Stafford is 3100 yds and 25 TDs short of breaking Greene's career records... Had Stafford played another year, one could reasonably assume he would improve on his previous stats, breaking Greene's records and likely ending up with higher overall completion percentage...

Stafford played 2 years after Greene... In that article it says that Greene directly preceded him... That isn't even half true...

That article was ridiculous...

Seriously, the kid completed 61 % of his passes, threw 25 TDs vs 10 INTs in the best defensive conference in the NCAA with a less than average offensive line as a TRUE Junior... He is accurate, mobile, smart, a good leader, sees the field well, anticipates his throws well, has an excellent build for a qb, a nice release and an absolute cannon for an arm... What else do you want from the kid? In what way is this not worthy of the #1 overall pick?

Can he improve on some things? Sure... Name 1 prospect in the history of the draft that couldn't...


I have read this same thing from other sources as well, so if you want to make it look as if you are right and they are all wrong, by all means. Hey, maybe you know Mark Richt, or you lock yourself in a room and watch tape all day (scary without being paid, but I guess you could), but stats are stats and the fact is a washed up qb put up better numbers than him. You can use excuses if you'd like to prop up your choice, thats cool.
My point is, you'd think hecould outperform a kid that never threw a pass in the league. It doesn't matter if he played "directly" behind him, it was the same system. They haven't changed schemes. In fact, the only thing that has changed there are the people surrounding Stafford. They are all better than what they've had in the past.

Fact of the matter is, this kid wouldn't break the first round in other qb classes. There is no doubt about that. You seem to be in love with his arm. You ask what could he do better? How about show up to play against a sorry defense like MSU. He played well for about 10 minutes that game, which is pathetic. That was the nail in the coffin for him from me, if you can't torch that defense, you think you are going to go through Baltimores? Get real.

Moral of the story... You can bash an article (for not being accurate that they played back to back) but don't take it so far as to think you are going to overshadow the stats and facts with your rhetoric. If you were that damn smart, you'd be writing in that mans place, would you not?


February 17th, 2009, 5:58 am
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 159 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] 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.