View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently September 1st, 2014, 9:52 am



Reply to topic  [ 31 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next
 Stephen Hill G-Tech a Lion. 
Author Message
Walk On
User avatar

Joined: January 11th, 2006, 4:04 pm
Posts: 430
Post Stephen Hill G-Tech a Lion.
Would anyone be mad, if Detroit went out and shocked the world by drafting Stephen Hill #23. I know WR isn't a need, but nor was DT when we took Fairley. Imagine, lining him up with Megatron on the otherside with our second year WR in the slot, Pettigrew @ TE. 3 6'5 threats on the field and 3 WR's running in the 4.3 to 4.4 range do you know what kind of match up problems this would cause and make Matt Stafford a yards beast. Dumping Nate Burelson or trading him during the draft.

_________________
The REAL "Lion King" and father to Simba


April 11th, 2012, 5:40 pm
Profile
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: August 6th, 2004, 9:21 am
Posts: 9400
Location: Dallas
Post Re: Stephen Hill G-Tech a Lion.
Mufasa wrote:
Would anyone be mad


I think a lot of people would be mad.

_________________
Image
LB Tweet


April 11th, 2012, 5:52 pm
Profile WWW
ST Coordinator – Danny Crossman
User avatar

Joined: March 30th, 2006, 12:48 am
Posts: 3755
Location: Davison Mi
Post Re: Stephen Hill G-Tech a Lion.
In Mayhew I trust. I can't say I'd like it, but so far the guy has a good eye for tallent and anything that can make the team better for a longer period is good IMO. so long as he doesn't nerglect areas that are getting desperate for help (cough cough SECONDARY cough cough)

_________________
2013 Lionbacker Fantasy Football Champion


April 11th, 2012, 5:56 pm
Profile
Team MVP
User avatar

Joined: February 20th, 2007, 10:51 pm
Posts: 3333
Location: Saginaw, MI
Post Re: Stephen Hill G-Tech a Lion.
Pablo wrote:
Mufasa wrote:
Would anyone be mad


I think a lot of people would be mad.

I would be one of them.

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


Lionbacker2 Fantasy Champion 2011


April 11th, 2012, 9:28 pm
Profile
Hall of Fame Player
User avatar

Joined: April 5th, 2005, 7:03 am
Posts: 7411
Location: Ford Field - 35 yard line / Row 32
Post Re: Stephen Hill G-Tech a Lion.
kdsberman wrote:
Pablo wrote:
Mufasa wrote:
Would anyone be mad


I think a lot of people would be mad.

I would be one of them.


So would I.

I'm even upset that this thread isn't in the draft section. :|

_________________
Image


April 11th, 2012, 9:58 pm
Profile WWW
Color Commentator - John Madden
User avatar

Joined: January 19th, 2007, 3:21 am
Posts: 1919
Location: A2
Post Re: Stephen Hill G-Tech a Lion.
It wouldn't happen at 23 as there is probably no way that Stephen Hill would be the BPA at that spot. If he were available at 54, then maybe.

_________________
Forward down the field!


April 13th, 2012, 11:09 am
Profile
Post Re: Stephen Hill G-Tech a Lion.
Wayne Fontes wrote:
It wouldn't happen at 23 as there is probably no way that Stephen Hill would be the BPA at that spot. If he were available at 54, then maybe.



I wouldn't hate it. WRs generally get drafted earlier than their "projection." Hill has already been working out with CJ, which shows me maturity and work ethic, two things essential for a good football player. If we did select him I'd like to see us get something for, and dump Nate, but I could see the FO keeping Nate for another year while this kid gets some experience. I really like Hill, a LOT.

Everyone else would cry, but if we went WR, OL first and second round I would be happy.


April 13th, 2012, 11:16 am
Color Commentator - John Madden
User avatar

Joined: January 19th, 2007, 3:21 am
Posts: 1919
Location: A2
Post Re: Stephen Hill G-Tech a Lion.
I don't know why there is this "get rid of Nate" campaign going on. He had a career high in receptions this year. He also appears to be the vocal leader on that offense and the team as a whole. I'd much rather keep him around for another year or two, and address WR in the back end of the draft or next year even. You could then slide TY into a "#2 role" with the new blood from a deep WR class as the #3/slot guy when Nate is gone.

_________________
Forward down the field!


April 13th, 2012, 11:22 am
Profile
Post Re: Stephen Hill G-Tech a Lion.
Wayne Fontes wrote:
I don't know why there is this "get rid of Nate" campaign going on. He had a career high in receptions this year. He also appears to be the vocal leader on that offense and the team as a whole. I'd much rather keep him around for another year or two, and address WR in the back end of the draft or next year even. You could then slide TY into a "#2 role" with the new blood from a deep WR class as the #3/slot guy when Nate is gone.


Nate is garbage. He doesn't get any separation, and he drops too many balls. He doesn't take heat off of CJ like he's supposed to, and he's a big reason why our offense sputters at times.


April 13th, 2012, 11:26 am
Hall of Fame Player
User avatar

Joined: April 5th, 2005, 7:03 am
Posts: 7411
Location: Ford Field - 35 yard line / Row 32
Post Re: Stephen Hill G-Tech a Lion.
wjb21ndtown wrote:
Wayne Fontes wrote:
I don't know why there is this "get rid of Nate" campaign going on. He had a career high in receptions this year. He also appears to be the vocal leader on that offense and the team as a whole. I'd much rather keep him around for another year or two, and address WR in the back end of the draft or next year even. You could then slide TY into a "#2 role" with the new blood from a deep WR class as the #3/slot guy when Nate is gone.


Nate is garbage. He doesn't get any separation, and he drops too many balls. He doesn't take heat off of CJ like he's supposed to, and he's a big reason why our offense sputters at times.


I'm sorry, I disagree with that entirely.

Our offense sputters because of our OL!! Because of the OL we have no running game and our QB doesn't get nearly as much time as he should. You can't lay the blame of a sputtering offense at the feet of Burleson alone. That's crazy!

I agree w/ Wayne Fontes. Burleson is nowhere near as bad as some people say and his locker room presence is a valued commodity! We have much bigger issues to deal with early in the draft before we go for a WR. Including a RB that just might help our sputtering, 5000+ yard offense.

_________________
Image


April 13th, 2012, 11:46 am
Profile WWW
Team MVP
User avatar

Joined: February 20th, 2007, 10:51 pm
Posts: 3333
Location: Saginaw, MI
Post Re: Stephen Hill G-Tech a Lion.
wjb21ndtown wrote:
Wayne Fontes wrote:
I don't know why there is this "get rid of Nate" campaign going on. He had a career high in receptions this year. He also appears to be the vocal leader on that offense and the team as a whole. I'd much rather keep him around for another year or two, and address WR in the back end of the draft or next year even. You could then slide TY into a "#2 role" with the new blood from a deep WR class as the #3/slot guy when Nate is gone.


Nate is garbage. He doesn't get any separation, and he drops too many balls. He doesn't take heat off of CJ like he's supposed to, and he's a big reason why our offense sputters at times.


Thats why we got Titus, who had a pretty good rookie year in my opinion. Should only be better this year.

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


Lionbacker2 Fantasy Champion 2011


April 13th, 2012, 11:47 am
Profile
Walk On
User avatar

Joined: January 11th, 2006, 4:04 pm
Posts: 430
Post Re: Stephen Hill G-Tech a Lion.
wjb21ndtown wrote:
Wayne Fontes wrote:
I don't know why there is this "get rid of Nate" campaign going on. He had a career high in receptions this year. He also appears to be the vocal leader on that offense and the team as a whole. I'd much rather keep him around for another year or two, and address WR in the back end of the draft or next year even. You could then slide TY into a "#2 role" with the new blood from a deep WR class as the #3/slot guy when Nate is gone.


Nate is garbage. He doesn't get any separation, and he drops too many balls. He doesn't take heat off of CJ like he's supposed to, and he's a big reason why our offense sputters at times.



I saw this man get flagged 3 times in the N.O. game for offensive pass interference. Now I know some of those calls were within question in the N.O. game, but 3 times. That's unheard of, 1 in a game is rare and he cost us a big play with one of those calls. So separation is a glaring issue for him and that means he's no threat and takes absolute no pressure off C.J.

_________________
The REAL "Lion King" and father to Simba


April 13th, 2012, 1:47 pm
Profile
ST Coordinator – Danny Crossman
User avatar

Joined: March 30th, 2006, 12:48 am
Posts: 3755
Location: Davison Mi
Post Re: Stephen Hill G-Tech a Lion.
wait...you are talking about the game where the refs callled over 15 penalties on the Lions...and like 3 on the head hunters?

tell me you dont REALLY think the refs were being fair and unbiased in that game?

even the commentators were talking about the rediculous calls and non calls in that game. Chris Collinsowrth was flat out upset at least twice in that game about the refs.

3 offensive P.I. calls on the same guy on pretty close to the same drive. Thats not bad play...thats bad calls by the ref.

_________________
2013 Lionbacker Fantasy Football Champion


April 13th, 2012, 2:41 pm
Profile
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: October 20th, 2004, 4:16 pm
Posts: 9850
Location: Where ever I'm at now
Post Re: Stephen Hill G-Tech a Lion.
Mufasa wrote:
wjb21ndtown wrote:
Wayne Fontes wrote:
I don't know why there is this "get rid of Nate" campaign going on. He had a career high in receptions this year. He also appears to be the vocal leader on that offense and the team as a whole. I'd much rather keep him around for another year or two, and address WR in the back end of the draft or next year even. You could then slide TY into a "#2 role" with the new blood from a deep WR class as the #3/slot guy when Nate is gone.


Nate is garbage. He doesn't get any separation, and he drops too many balls. He doesn't take heat off of CJ like he's supposed to, and he's a big reason why our offense sputters at times.



I saw this man get flagged 3 times in the N.O. game for offensive pass interference. Now I know some of those calls were within question in the N.O. game, but 3 times. That's unheard of, 1 in a game is rare and he cost us a big play with one of those calls. So separation is a glaring issue for him and that means he's no threat and takes absolute no pressure off C.J.


First off, Nate isn't the reason our offense sputters at times. Yes, he has his shortcomings, and I wouldn't mind finding an upgrade, particularly given Nate's salary. It's too high. But there are certainly worse second receivers in the NFL. If the Lions were to want to upgrade, I'd be all for it. But NOT in the first round. That would just flat out piss me off.

And bringing up the Saints game as an example is just a poor, poor choice. His getting flagged was a mockery of the referees, not Nate. Not one of those calls, NOT ONE, was worthy of the flag being thrown. Saints receivers were doing the same, and worse, and not getting calls. Our defensive line was getting flagged for personal fouls, but in the meantime the referee just sat there and watched Carl Nicks throw Ndamukong Suh down by his helmet...yes, his FREAKIN' HELMET!! No call.

Of all the examples that might be possible to prove your point, that certainly is not one that will earn you support here.

_________________
Driver of the 'we need a coaching change' bandwagon. Climb aboard.


April 13th, 2012, 3:13 pm
Profile
Walk On
User avatar

Joined: January 11th, 2006, 4:04 pm
Posts: 430
Post Re: Stephen Hill G-Tech a Lion.
regularjoe12 wrote:
wait...you are talking about the game where the refs callled over 15 penalties on the Lions...and like 3 on the head hunters?

tell me you dont REALLY think the refs were being fair and unbiased in that game?

even the commentators were talking about the rediculous calls and non calls in that game. Chris Collinsowrth was flat out upset at least twice in that game about the refs.

3 offensive P.I. calls on the same guy on pretty close to the same drive. Thats not bad play...thats bad calls by the ref.


What part of I quote "Some calls were within questioned" did u miss before u get your panties in a bunch. Second, those P.I.'s didn't happen within the same drive. Third, 1 offensive P.I. is too much and I'm sure he had 1 legit call out of 3 even if the Ref's were pretty bad that game. An I've seen him get those calls in past games.

_________________
The REAL "Lion King" and father to Simba


April 13th, 2012, 3:27 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 31 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 2 guests


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.