I liked your article Tom, and as always, I learned from it. Its obvious that you work hard. The only thing in there that I disagree with is the need for a project Free safety. I have faith in Terrence, even though he hasn't had much of a chance to prove himself.

Thanks for the feedback. By "project", I meant someone that might develop into a starter eventually. Marion, or more likely, Holt, should be the starter this year. The thinking was that if Marion leaves, they would then have someone to back up Holt. I was trying to get around that imprecise term "need" by using more precise categories like "playmaker", starter, back-up, and project. I might have defined the terms, but that could have added length without resolving the confusion.

Everytime you talk I suffer from confusion but you learn me lots. Good article and to the other guy too who did the Twas the draft before article.

'Twas the week before draft day and all through the land, Lions fans grow anxious, voicing demands. ?Draft Derrick Johnson! He?s the next Ray Lewis!? ?No! Erasmus James will bring championships to us!?

I thought that was a great opening Mr. Irvine. As to your argument, I might have been swayed towards it on a general level, but I did not feel it fit the particulars of this draft. I do not see any WR at 10 that would make a quantum difference to our offense, while I do see impact on the other side of the ball.

Thanx.

As my writing may have suggested, I wasn't so sure either, but I would have considered either Edwards or Williams at #10. Based on my limited knowledge of this years draft calss.

However, the signing of Kevin Johnson made the first round pick a bit easier IMO.

The article was intentionally ambiguous. It was meant to stir up the reader. Either in favor of offense or in favor of defense. I just like to write and I try to do different things with my writing to make it interesting. Most of the time, the best stuff is the stuff that gets people to think or to scream. LOL.