PDA

View Full Version : Detroit and Matthew Stafford


GBahDunka
02-24-2009, 11:02 PM
My deepest belief is that if the Lions draft Matt Stafford they are making a huge mistake.

Im not saying I dont believe he will be a good quarterback in the league, it is just that they need to build their team through the draft and building a team i firmly believe should always start with building up the line as well as defense.

Aaron Curry should be the first player taken in this draft. Team him up with Ernie Simms you have the start to a good linebacking corps.

With their pick later in the first round you get oher/smith/beatty someone of that nature pick a left tackle that will protect culpepper to prevent him from getting injured.

Culpepper is the perfect guy to throw to calvin johnson until they find the next gem in a later year. Matt Stafford will be too expensive to pull a carson palmer and not play him.

the Detroit lions cannot afford to throw him in and have him become the next joey harrington or some big bust.

Im by no means a stafford hater, he will be a very good quarterback just not the lions quarterback. This is if the new lions GM is smart

Strawdog
02-24-2009, 11:33 PM
Matt Stafford will be too expensive to pull a carson palmer and not play him.


If you are afraid of drafting a franchise player because you might have to eat some cash while he adjusts to the NFL, let everyone else pick until the chances of finding a franchise player are small enough for you.

Texas Homer
02-25-2009, 12:00 AM
I think they draft Stafford and yes I think it's the right pick.

The Lions need A LOT of help in A LOT of area's, but in my opinion they should start at the top which is a Franchise QB.

Falcon_from_E_Oakland
02-25-2009, 12:06 AM
they should start at the top which is a Franchise QB.
agreed, QB is the most important position on the field....when your in the position to address that problem with a (most believe to be a) franchise QB...you gotta do it.

RaiderNation
02-25-2009, 12:33 AM
I still dont think Stafford is a franchise QB. IDK why I just have a feeling he isnt going to be worth the #1 pick. He will be a decent QB though

Halsey
02-25-2009, 12:44 AM
It's funny to me that some Lions fans feel so safe about the idea of drafting a LB #1 overall. The last 2 times the Lions have spent top 10 picks on 'can't miss' LB's were Chris Claiborne and Ernie Sims. Claiborne was a bust and Sims is good, but couldn't stop the Lions from being a joke on defense last year. Curry will be good, but will never have the kind of impact a franchise QB can.

GBahDunka
02-25-2009, 12:46 AM
who is even going to protect stafford?

in college stafford was at his worse when the pressure got to him

Falcon_from_E_Oakland
02-25-2009, 12:51 AM
stafford was at his worse when the pressure got to him


who isnt? and they have multiple first day picks to address that.

Halsey
02-25-2009, 12:55 AM
who is even going to protect stafford?

in college stafford was at his worse when the pressure got to him

In the NFL teams actually have more than 1 draft pick for filling needs in a given offseason. In fact, The lions have 3 of the first 33 picks. They could do like the Falcons did last year and take both a QB and an OT in the first round if they wanted. The Lions already have 3 OT's that were drafted in the first round and a center that was drafted in the second. Throwing high picks and lots of money at an O-line that protects substandard QB's is a waste of time.

StorminNorman
02-25-2009, 12:55 AM
who is even going to protect stafford?

in college stafford was at his worse when the pressure got to him

Actually Stafford had his best year behind his most least talented offensive line.

I think B.J. Raji is the only other player Detroit could validate the first pick on. You don't draft a weakside outside linebacker number one and if you draft him to play inside then you are drafting a player number one and asking him to play a position he hasn't played. Raji looks like a beast and if Schwartz sees Albert Haynesworth junior in him, I think Detroit should take a serious look at him.

d34ng3l021
02-25-2009, 12:56 AM
A franchise QB can solve a lot of woes for a team in turmoil like the Detroit Lions. The QB can elevate the play of everyone on offense with his pocket presence, accuracy, and leadership abilities. Now, there are 2 questions the Detroit Lions must ask themselves about this situation. Is Matthew Stafford a franchise QB and will the surrounding pieces hinder his development?

I think Matthew Stafford has the tools to become a top QB in the league, and will do so no matter where he ends up. After starting for 3 years, beginning as a true freshmen if I remember correctly, in the tough SEC, he has put up numbers similar to Peyton Manning and Eli Manning, while improving every year he was there. He had some bad games against some top defenses, but every QB does that. I like his toughness and ability to make some spectacular throws that not many QBs can make. He is still a bit raw in terms of decision making, but he is only 20 years old and can improve. I definitely like his demeanor and he seems, to me, like a carbon copy of Jay Cutler.

What seems to worry people more is how will Detroit's supporting cast affect his growth as a QB? Will he become just another David Carr? Of course there is that possibility, but I am very against starting a rookie QB in his first season. There are some that do well (ryan, flacco), but those are definitely the exception. With a capable starter (in relative terms for detroit of course) in Daunte Culpepper, Detroit is able to afford sitting Matthew Stafford on the bench for at least half a season, preferably a whole season barring injury to Culpepper. Maybe even bring in him like Oakland did with JaMarcus Russell (i liked that). The offense that Detroit has is not all that terrible to be honest. Calvin Johnson is absolutely ridiculous. The rookie Kevin Smith almost ran for 1000 (granted, 1000 yards is not what it used to be) yards on that terrible Lions team. They have a 1st round pick invested in the right tackle spot. With a franchise QB and a some other additions through the draft and free agency within the next couple of years, things can be very different. The key is drafting well and investing in the right guys. That is all up to the front office, and I am sure it can't get much worse than what Matt Millen did.

EDIT: I love Aaron Curry and I feel as if he will be the RotY and will have multiple Pro Bowl and All Star selections under his belt by the time his career is done, but honestly, what is adding another talented linebacker going to do for a terrible defense and team? If you want to draft someone other than a QB, at least make it at a position which impacts the game much more, like LT, DE, or DT. Good linebackers are a dime in a dozen and can be much better with a good defensive line ahead of them.

GBahDunka
02-25-2009, 02:27 AM
the bar was set so high this year with matt ryan that if he comes in he would be pressured to start. Everybody praises Flacco so much because he was "such a great rookie quarterback" when the fact of the matter is he wasnt all that productive all he did was not lose the games and let his defense take over.

Theres two scenarios.

A. Baltimore had a great defense that kept flacco from having to win a shootout he would have not been able to win

B. Michael Turner was an absoulute beast this past year and the defense didnt hurt; it was mediocre but good enough to keep them in ball games although matt ryan was brilliant at times.

Halsey you say that they have three first day picks they can use to protect stafford, well thats putting all of the eggs in the basket by a DEFENSIVE minded coach. say the lions went with something like Oher/britton/smith with their second first round pick and went with duke robinson? with their second round pick. This puts their atrocious defense in an even bigger hole than they were in last year.

If you remember 08' the lions averaged about 17 points a game which isnt all that bad considering they had orlovsky in there for a bunch of the season.

If the lions draft stafford will he automatically be better than daunte culpepper? im not so sure about that. Opponents averaged almost 33 points a game against the lions last year and their defensive mold is small and fast when jim schwartz usually builds his defense around size.

Drafting to protect a guy like stafford would really hurt the lions in my eyes.

Gosder Cherilus will be a decent right tackle but is Jeff Backus consistent enough to protect a rookie's blindside?

If i were detroit i would give byron leftwich a long hard look if they are not totally sure about culpepper. If stafford were a bust it would probably postpone the rebuilding of the lions for atleast 4 years. This is something a michigan team CANNOT afford. They are better off going with the safest pick in the draft with curry.

Even if they are iffy on the linebacker position i feel that it might be okay to reach for a defensive end like orakpo. As crazy as it sounds i find orakpo to be the real deal and a future all pro defnesive end/3-4 OLB.

If the lions do end up going with Stafford lets hope for their sake that they hit the FA market hard before the draft. A signing of a guy like Hanesworth would change a lot although shaun Rogers wasnt able to do too much for this terrible lions team.

The thing that made atlanta and miami turn around so fast was the key FA moves. Miami had no quarterback and went with the sure pick in a LT. As long as the lions think they have a serviceable quarterback in culpepper i think they may need to lean that direction.

Halsey
02-25-2009, 03:12 AM
There's always fans who want to take all credit away from QB's and say they only win because of the running game or the defense or the WR's or whatever. You can believe that all you want, but the fact remains that good organizations spend high picks and/or big money when they need a QB. The last 4 Super Bowl winners start first round QB's. 2 of those QB's were #1 overall picks. 9 of the 12 teams in the playoffs this past season started QB's who were picked in the first round and 1 of the teams that didn't start a first round(Arizona) drafted one a few years ago in the first. The Lions have not been coimpetitive for 50 years and the one thing that has remained constant over those 50 years is they haven't had a franchise QB. If you want the Lions to keep being the same ole Lions, root for them to take someone other than a QB with the #1 overall pick.

WMD
02-25-2009, 03:17 AM
I think most Lions fans that don't want Stafford have that mindset because they expect him to start immediately. I don't expect him to start right away and I don't want him to..

This draft for the Lions can't be about the quick fix. No matter who we pick, we're (barring a miracle) going to be terrible next season. So, why not take the big QB, get him on the team, and let him get a year (or as much as possible) of learning under his belt?

wicket
02-25-2009, 03:19 AM
to be honoust i think stafford is the only right pick. they should go OT with their pick at 20 or trade up a bit to make sure they grab one of those top tackles. then go defense all the draft except maybe an offensive guard somewhere. they have enough picks to add some vital parts to that defense (or at least improve it drastically) and with two new guys on the oline stafford (who is already used to playing behind a bad line) will be more than able to survive. As long as they dont play stafford to early he is the right choice (remember he is just 20) .
I also want to add that the franchise also needs a face and a character and stafford deep to CJ would be just that. Just like the NE slant to welker who works it for that extra couple of yards, the miami wildcat, ray lewis breaking someone and tony romo throwing deep to TO and either getting a td or and int.

WMD
02-25-2009, 03:25 AM
Also.. I'm not sure how bad Calvin Johnson would want to stick around Detroit if we passed on the franchise QB. He's had Jon Kitna, Dan Orlovsky, Daunte Culpepper, Drew Stanton and Drew Henson as QB's in his pro career.. At some point, he's going to get tired of the QB carousel and would probably do all he can to make sure he doesn't stay here much longer.

Calvin is the most talented player we've had in a decade, we need to do everything we can to keep him happy.

San Diego Chicken
02-25-2009, 03:55 AM
I don't think Stafford is the greatest fit for Detroit's situation, but they're running out of options here quite frankly. Nobody stepped up and blew anyone away in the combine. Curry did well, but I would be shocked if he went #1.

A tackle is a thought, but the depth of the class sort of takes away the value of drafting one at #1. Other teams aren't going to want to deal up, and the Lions shopping the pick would be signal cold feet and other teams would use the leverage to lowball them.

It's a weak draft. The combine really didn't help anyone at all - the guys that did well just solidified their previous positions, and a ton of guys hurt themselves. Stafford might not be a top 10 prospect in a good draft, but there just isn't a good plan B, unless someone else really wants Stafford.

Iamcanadian
02-25-2009, 04:31 AM
Well, I was all for Detroit drafting a QB at #1 overall but right now at least, Stafford isn't carrying a top 5 grade and neither is Sanchez. They still have their pro days to move up but it looks dim at this point.
This is a very weak draft class as the combine clearly demonstrated and the top 5 group looks pretty shaky to me.
Jones and Monroe LT's - They will be solid players in this league for a long time but they are not elite prospects.
Curry - is an elite prospect but to draft and pay a LBer 1st overall money is absurd. The position just doesn't warrant that kind of money and will screw up Detroit's salary cap structure beyond belief.
Orakpo is another decent prospect who is simply not elite.
Raji is basically a very decent NT prospect but not the type of player you take #1 overall.
IMO, the 2 guys who had a real shot to challenge Curry for being called elite were Crabtree and Andre Smith and the jury is still out on them. If they finally get that type of ranking then I think Andre Smith is the likely guy with all his warts unless Stafford and/or Sanchez blow scouts away at their private workouts. Why Smith, it's simply, he a massive man with very decent feet and 35 and a half inch arms. His ceiling leaves Jason Smith and Monroe far behind but there is still the question of whether he will ever reach that ceiling.
Detroit simply picked a rotten year to hold the 1st overall pick. IMO, the #15 pick could easily turnout to be the best player in this year's draft because the top end is rather weak.

GBahDunka
02-25-2009, 10:38 AM
im not even sure if detroit needs to draft a tackle. They have cherilus and the other guy they spent 40 million on in 06'

they need guards but guards you can get at any point in the draft usually.

They did spend a 2nd round pick on stanton and if they take stafford they will never take a chance on their second round pick.

im not at all a lions fan but for their sake i hope they sure up that defense a bit.

Im willing to bet they are are really worried that they wont be able to trade out of the number one spot.

jnew76
02-25-2009, 10:50 AM
Personally, for the next 6-10 years I would prefer the combination of

(#1)Monroe/Smith and (#20) Matt Cassel and (#33) BPA

Over

(#1) Stafford and (#20) Beatty/Britton/BPA (#33) BPA

nepg
02-25-2009, 11:06 AM
They should draft an LT and make the trade for Cassel. There will be good demand for their other early pick, and they should probably trade back to stockpile picks to use on defense.

I've never been a fan of Stafford, and although he's grown on me a little bit, I still don't think he's close to the best way to go with that pick. I love Aaron Curry, but I hate the pick for the Lions...
________
condo Pattaya sale (http://pattayaluxurycondos.com)

I KNOW IT ALL
02-25-2009, 11:31 AM
Personally, for the next 6-10 years I would prefer the combination of

(#1)Monroe/Smith and (#20) Matt Cassel and (#33) BPA

Over

(#1) Stafford and (#20) Beatty/Britton/BPA (#33) BPA

And they're going to get Cassel for free?

JFLO
02-25-2009, 11:41 AM
I really don't think it is a big deal on who they take with the #1 overall pick because they need so much help that any player that is worthy of the first pick will satisfy.

However, If I'm the Lions, then I'm taking either Eugene Monroe or Aaron Curry.

GBahDunka
02-25-2009, 11:44 AM
And they're going to get Cassel for free?

he noted the number 20 pick for cassel.

i wouldnt go out and get a guy like cassel, i take the gamble with culpepper and bring leftwitch in (two big arm guys that have the ability to stretch the field to the superfreak)

take smith/monroe first overall pass rusher at 20 and at 33 take freeman if hes there to develop and let sit for a year. if hes not there go with defense maybe clay matthews can be found there

benjamink15
02-25-2009, 12:02 PM
And they're going to get Cassel for free?

(#20) Matt Cassel ... i.e. They're trading their 20th pick for Matt Cassel in the first scenario ...

Bigburt63
02-25-2009, 12:06 PM
I think most Lions fans that don't want Stafford have that mindset because they expect him to start immediately. I don't expect him to start right away and I don't want him to..

This draft for the Lions can't be about the quick fix. No matter who we pick, we're (barring a miracle) going to be terrible next season. So, why not take the big QB, get him on the team, and let him get a year (or as much as possible) of learning under his belt?

Also using that logic, it would make sense for the Lions to build up a defense and an OL before bringing in the QB. I agree, barring some sort of miracle, the Lions are destined for another top 10 pick next year. Drafting a LT and going best defense play available at 20 would make sense to build a team from the ground up. I know that a LB (Curry) won't make or break a team, but they aren't realistically looking to be SB contenders next year. If Stafford was the "can't miss" prospect at QB, then definitely take him, but I don't think he is so IMO there is room for debate (although I think he will ultimately be the pick).

I KNOW IT ALL
02-25-2009, 12:09 PM
Also using that logic, it would make sense for the Lions to build up a defense and an OL before bringing in the QB. I agree, barring some sort of miracle, the Lions are destined for another top 10 pick next year. Drafting a LT and going best defense play available at 20 would make sense to build a team from the ground up. I know that a LB (Curry) won't make or break a team, but they aren't realistically looking to be SB contenders next year. If Stafford was the "can't miss" prospect at QB, then definitely take him, but I don't think he is so IMO there is room for debate (although I think he will ultimately be the pick).

Has there ever been a "can't miss" prospect at QB? I don't think so.

Halsey
02-25-2009, 12:11 PM
Also using that logic, it would make sense for the Lions to build up a defense and an OL before bringing in the QB. I agree, barring some sort of miracle, the Lions are destined for another top 10 pick next year. Drafting a LT and going best defense play available at 20 would make sense to build a team from the ground up. I know that a LB (Curry) won't make or break a team, but they aren't realistically looking to be SB contenders next year. If Stafford was the "can't miss" prospect at QB, then definitely take him, but I don't think he is so IMO there is room for debate (although I think he will ultimately be the pick).

There is no such thing as a can't miss prospect. The Lions of all organizations know that. They drafted supposed can't miss prospects like Charles Rodgers and Chris Claiborne. The Lions have been building their team for years. They need to find the one piece they haven't had for 50 years: A franchise QB. Waiting for the perfect time to add a QB will never come about.

BNad
02-25-2009, 12:11 PM
I used to be firmly on the side of of the original poster, but Matt Ryan has changed my mind (possibly for good). If you view him as a franchise caliber QB and you don't have one (clearly the Lions don't) I think you take him.

The way things are playing out.. they could end up getting Andre Smith with the second of the 1st rounders. Like the reverse of the Browns (choosing between Joe Thomas and Brady Quinn... then getting both).

bored of education
02-25-2009, 12:13 PM
Thread number 23 concerning Stafford and Dretroit.

THANKS!

Bigburt63
02-25-2009, 12:25 PM
Has there ever been a "can't miss" prospect at QB? I don't think so.

There is no such thing as a can't miss prospect. The Lions of all organizations know that. They drafted supposed can't miss prospects like Charles Rodgers and Chris Claiborne. The Lions have been building their team for years. They need to find the one piece they haven't had for 50 years: A franchise QB. Waiting for the perfect time to add a QB will never come about.

I'm aware there is no such thing, but some prospects (i.e. Calvin Johnson) are held in such high regard that they are deemed to have almost no chance of failing. I'm not saying taking a potential franchise QB is the wrong choice for the lions, just that I don't think Stafford is necessarily that guy. It would make sense to me for them to build a defense and a decent OL through the draft before throwing a rookie QB into the fire. That being said, it also makes sense to have Stafford sit a full year before he gets his shot (see: Carson Palmer). It all comes down to how you see Stafford...I see too much of a bust potential to bank the future on him personally, but I can see why they would draft him (if that makes any sense).

d34ng3l021
02-25-2009, 12:28 PM
Thread number 23 concerning Stafford and Dretroit.

THANKS!

You're just jealous cause no one cares who KC picks ;)

P-L
02-25-2009, 12:30 PM
If the Lions pass on Stafford I will then become a fan of whichever team drafts him.

d34ng3l021
02-25-2009, 12:34 PM
If the Lions pass on Stafford I will then become a fan of whichever team drafts him.

You really want him, huh?

I am going to be a little bit of a fan to whichever team Stafford goes to. I really like him as a prospect. Last year I wanted us to draft Glenn Dorsey or Jake Long and then Stafford this year. Phew.

P-L
02-25-2009, 12:35 PM
You really want him, huh?

I am going to be a little bit of a fan to whichever team Stafford goes to. I really like him as a prospect. Last year I wanted us to draft Glenn Dorsey or Jake Long and then Stafford this year. Phew.
He's my favorite prospect ever.

d34ng3l021
02-25-2009, 12:39 PM
He's my favorite prospect ever.

Wow nice. Favorite prospect + possible savior to your favorite franchise. Good stuff.

I think my favorite prospect (i have only followed the draft for 4-5 years) was LaRon Landry. Every mock had him going to the Falcons until draft day the Redskins decided to get him. ******* A.

bored of education
02-25-2009, 12:56 PM
He's my favorite prospect ever.

Change your username to P-C then ;)

georgiafan
02-25-2009, 01:12 PM
Some of the other "can't prospects" in recent years at non QB positons haven't faired so well either. People far like Mcfadden, AJ Hawk, Robert Gallery are solid players, but so far haven't been worth a top 5 pick.

Maybe Next Year Millen2
02-25-2009, 01:16 PM
You have to ask yourself is Stafford better than next years QB crop. The answer IMO is yes. I just don't like spread QBs. Harrington was a spread QB who couldn't adjust to the NFL. We made that mistaked in 2002. 2010 second year Stafford is better than rookie Bradford,Tebow,McCoy etc IMO.

This is not a one year fix for the Lions. They have to think about 2-3 years down the line and beyond. The franchise QB is the only answer when you look at that because they take the most time to develop. Nobody is asking Stafford to save the franchise in 2009 or even 2010. We take a LT we still need a LG,blocking tight end and QB with a quicker release, we take a LB, Curry may be out of position at Mike and with terrible DTs in front of him, his impact will be minmal. Every position QB,LT or LB we have to build around to maximize their success not just Stafford. QB is so important in this league. So important that if you don't have one, you have 50 years of losing football the majority of the time. We stumble onto a franchise QB, it evens things up with Minni and Chicago who are still looking for QBs but have a better team.

GBahDunka
02-25-2009, 01:16 PM
my main point wasnt that i didnt think stafford would be a good quarterback it was that i dont think detroit is ready to take him personnel wise

georgiafan
02-25-2009, 01:23 PM
my main point wasnt that i didnt think stafford would be a good quarterback it was that i dont think detroit is ready to take him personnel wise

Agian then let him sit for a year and so you have this offseason and next to build up the talent around him. If you take a QB then all your offense is lacking is a few OL and a another weapon to team with CJ at WR/TE. Two offseasons is more the enough to fix those issues.

Maybe Next Year Millen2
02-25-2009, 01:24 PM
my main point wasnt that i didnt think stafford would be a good quarterback it was that i dont think detroit is ready to take him personnel wise

We are not ready for a LT or LB either. No good LG,blocking tight end or QB with a quick release on our roster. Jason Smiths or Eugene Monroes blocking skills will go to waste in 2009 and Curry will have to swtich positions and has no DTs in front him. We're not ready for these players either.

LBs can found all the time outside of the top 5. More so than QBs especially. LT its the best bet to get a top 5 LT, but they can develop quicker compared to a QB, especially if you have a good QB. 2010 would be a good time for a LT or Defensive player.

bored of education
02-25-2009, 01:27 PM
You also cannot bank on a top Qb prospect worthy of a top 10 pick being available next year. If you think Stafford is worthy of the pick you make it without looking at next years class.

JFLO
02-25-2009, 01:28 PM
You have to ask yourself is Stafford better than next years QB crop. The answer IMO is yes. I just don't like spread QBs. Harrington was a spread QB who couldn't adjust to the NFL. We made that mistaked in 2002. 2010 second year Stafford is better than rookie Bradford,Tebow,McCoy etc IMO.

This is not a one year fix for the Lions. They have to think about 2-3 years down the line and beyond. The franchise QB is the only answer when you look at that because they take the most time to develop. Nobody is asking Stafford to save the franchise in 2009 or even 2010. We take a LT we still need a LG,blocking tight end and QB with a quicker release, we take a LB, Curry may be out of position at Mike and with terrible DTs in front of him, his impact will be minmal. Every position QB,LT or LB we have to build around to maximize their success not just Stafford. QB is so important in this league. So important that if you don't have one, you have 50 years of losing football the majority of the time. We stumble onto a franchise QB, it evens things up with Minni and Chicago who are still looking for QBs but have a better team.

Good post...

I have to ask though, do you think a second year Bradford or McCoy would be better than a second year Stafford? If they are willing to take 3-4 years to rebuild, why not just wait for the better quarterback to roll along next year. Granted, they may not be in the position to do so, but that is a risk you have to be willing to take when it comes to these situations. So would you rather take Stafford this year and rebuild or would you rather take Curry, Monroe, Smith this year, Bradford next year?

It comes down to how the Lions feel about it, but that it just my personal opinion.

I personally think that the Lions are in a need of a player that they know can be reliable five years down the road. Basically, they need the safest player out of the bunch and IMO, that player is Aaron Curry.

JFLO
02-25-2009, 01:32 PM
You also cannot bank on a top Qb prospect worthy of a top 10 pick being available next year. If you think Stafford is worthy of the pick you make it without looking at next years class.

I think a reality that comes with the NFL Draft is that there will always be a quarterback publicized enough that will be available in the Top 10. Look at the past 15 drafts or so? There are obviously going to be more drafts with quarterbacks being in the Top ten, then those without.

Typically, the majority of the teams in the Top 10 could use some help at QB, whether it is due to inconsistent play or just not a QB there at all or any situation.

Sam Bradford or Colt McCoy will be drafted in the Top 10 next year because a team will need one of them and they will be publicized enough for that to happen.

Stafford, IMO, isn't worth a Top 10 pick, but the Lions, Rams, Chiefs, Seahawks, Jaguars and the 49ers would all, without a doubt consider it if he was there.

georgiafan
02-25-2009, 01:33 PM
There is to many questions involved if your plan to go the "safe" route and get your QB next year. If they pass on Stafford you have to think they will draft for a QB somewhere in the mid rounds. If you go the safe route and get guys that can produce right away you will likely take yourself out of the Bradford race for next year. Because in the NFC north there is no way you shouldn't atleast win 3 or 4 games.

JFLO
02-25-2009, 01:34 PM
There is to many questions involved if your plan to go the "safe" route and get your QB next year. If they pass on Stafford you have to think they will draft for a QB somewhere in the mid rounds. If you go the safe route and get guys that can produce right away you will likely take yourself out of the Bradford race for next year. Because in the NFC north there is no way you shouldn't atleast win 3 or 4 games.

The Lions didn't win one game this year...

I understand what your saying, but the NFC North will not be that much different next season than it was this past year.

GBahDunka
02-25-2009, 01:45 PM
its pretty rediculous to spend 30 million or whatever it is on a signing bonus for him to sit for the first year and take a carson palmer role.

one of the quarterbacks will be there next year like

bradford, colt, snead, and maybe jimmy clausen will even emerge.

bored of education
02-25-2009, 01:50 PM
I think a reality that comes with the NFL Draft is that there will always be a quarterback publicized enough that will be available in the Top 10. Look at the past 15 drafts or so? There are obviously going to be more drafts with quarterbacks being in the Top ten, then those without.

Typically, the majority of the teams in the Top 10 could use some help at QB, whether it is due to inconsistent play or just not a QB there at all or any situation.

Sam Bradford or Colt McCoy will be drafted in the Top 10 next year because a team will need one of them and they will be publicized enough for that to happen.

Stafford, IMO, isn't worth a Top 10 pick, but the Lions, Rams, Chiefs, Seahawks, Jaguars and the 49ers would all, without a doubt consider it if he was there.


Teams cannot go into the draft thinking hmmmm lets wait to get our QB next year and build the line or defense. If you need the Qb and the tem wfeels Stafford is worthy of that pick..make that pick. I dont'care if you think Stafford is worthy of that pick or not.

Bigburt63
02-25-2009, 01:54 PM
Teams cannot go into the draft thinking hmmmm lets wait to get our QB next year and build the line or defense. If you need the Qb and the tem wfeels Stafford is worthy of that pick..make that pick. I dont'care if you think Stafford is worthy of that pick or not.

I think its a balance of how they feel about Stafford with how they feel about the other prospects (smith, monroe) that they could take instead. In other words, do they feel that a year with Culpepper (or whoever) with one of those LT's is better than taking Stafford and keeping Backus at LT. I can see both sides of the debate, and I feel that Stafford will be the pick, even though I might have my reservations about the pick.

georgiafan
02-25-2009, 01:54 PM
its pretty rediculous to spend 30 million or whatever it is on a signing bonus for him to sit for the first year and take a carson palmer role.

one of the quarterbacks will be there next year like

bradford, colt, snead, and maybe jimmy clausen will even emerge.

It's even more rediculous to spend the money on him and start him before he is ready. This isn't a sprint it's a marathon. All of those guys will have more questions then Stafford does. You can not count on any of those to be able to start as rookie since all are either juniors or spread QB's.

What happens if Bradford gets hurt? What happens if they decide to come back for a senior year? What happens if your not in position to draft a top QB next year?

bored of education
02-25-2009, 01:54 PM
its pretty rediculous to spend 30 million or whatever it is on a signing bonus for him to sit for the first year and take a carson palmer role.

one of the quarterbacks will be there next year like

bradford, colt, snead, and maybe jimmy clausen will even emerge.

you cannot bank on that dude. that is like getting a pocket 10's heads up for the WSOP finals and folding and saying my next hand ill get pocket Aces

Maybe Next Year Millen2
02-25-2009, 01:55 PM
Good post...

I have to ask though, do you think a second year Bradford or McCoy would be better than a second year Stafford? If they are willing to take 3-4 years to rebuild, why not just wait for the better quarterback to roll along next year. Granted, they may not be in the position to do so, but that is a risk you have to be willing to take when it comes to these situations. So would you rather take Stafford this year and rebuild or would you rather take Curry, Monroe, Smith this year, Bradford next year?

It comes down to how the Lions feel about it, but that it just my personal opinion.

I personally think that the Lions are in a need of a player that they know can be reliable five years down the road. Basically, they need the safest player out of the bunch and IMO, that player is Aaron Curry.

I think Stafford will be better than Bradford for Detroit at least. Mainly because of the canon arm and pro style offense. Decision making will either come to each of them or not, depending on how hard they work at it and the coaching they get. NFL decision making is a lot different than college. I think Stafford fits Calvin Johnson better too. Bradford will be a first year starter in 2011 and Stafford could be a 2nd year starter(3rd year in the league). Stafford will always have 1 more year of precious experience which is huge for a QB.

It's more of a risk to not take Stafford and then not be able to get the QB we want next year than the risk of Stafford busting compared to Curry IMO.
I realize we didn't win a game, but 5 of the 6 NFC North games came down to the 4th Quarter and were our closest games. Throw in the NFC West, Cincy and Cleveland and the Lions may miss that QB by getting 5 wins somehow in 2009. Especially if Monroe or Curry or whoever they take is as advertised, plus free agency/better coaching, and 2 other early picks pick 20 and 33.

I could see the Lions fluking their way out of QB contention. Heck 2007, we picked 15th and the only thing that changed was Shaun Rogers and a Mike Martz offense compared to Colletto.

Malaka
02-25-2009, 02:00 PM
I think a reality that comes with the NFL Draft is that there will always be a quarterback publicized enough that will be available in the Top 10. Look at the past 15 drafts or so? There are obviously going to be more drafts with quarterbacks being in the Top ten, then those without.

Typically, the majority of the teams in the Top 10 could use some help at QB, whether it is due to inconsistent play or just not a QB there at all or any situation.

Sam Bradford or Colt McCoy will be drafted in the Top 10 next year because a team will need one of them and they will be publicized enough for that to happen.

Stafford, IMO, isn't worth a Top 10 pick, but the Lions, Rams, Chiefs, Seahawks, Jaguars and the 49ers would all, without a doubt consider it if he was there.

Other than the Colt McCoy (size, arm strength, throwing motion) part you are actually right. People say you can't pass on a QB, well in the past 8 years there has been one taken in the top 10 every single year, the last year without one was 2000 and there was still a first round QB in Chad Pennington at #18. I honestly do not like Stafford all too much, honestly, I do not consider him a great leader, and he does have a great arm, I do question his accuracy. Just because he has been decent with a bad O-line means nothing David Carr developed all kinds of bad habits because of that, not saying Stafford will end up like Carr, because I cannot forsee the future but the Lions' O-line it is a possibility

Babylon
02-25-2009, 02:00 PM
He's my favorite prospect ever.


Seriously? I think the surest things i've ever seen at QB were John Elway, Dan Marino and Peyton Manning. FWIW he's one of my favs ever too. Just wish i had the chance to watch him play every sunday here in Seattle.

georgiafan
02-25-2009, 02:05 PM
Other than the Colt McCoy (size, arm strength, throwing motion) part you are actually right. People say you can't pass on a QB, well in the past 8 years there has been one taken in the top 10 every single year, the last year without one was 2000 and there was still a first round QB in Chad Pennington at #18. I honestly do not like Stafford all too much, honestly, I do not consider him a great leader, and he does have a great arm, I do question his accuracy. Just because he has been decent with a bad O-line means nothing David Carr developed all kinds of bad habits because of that, not saying Stafford will end up like Carr, because I cannot forsee the future but the Lions' O-line it is a possibility

Nobody on this board knows how good of a leader he is thats just crazy. Just because he isn't waving towels around and clapping on the sidelines like doesn't mean he isn't a great leader. I could see where you could question his accuraccy, but his #1 goal this offseason was to improve that and thats what he did. His comp. % has improved every year and thats with throwing a lot of deep passes and garbage at TE (easy completions).

Malaka
02-25-2009, 02:29 PM
Nobody on this board knows how good of a leader he is thats just crazy. Just because he isn't waving towels around and clapping on the sidelines like doesn't mean he isn't a great leader. I could see where you could question his accuraccy, but his #1 goal this offseason was to improve that and thats what he did. His comp. % has improved every year and thats with throwing a lot of deep passes and garbage at TE (easy completions).

I have no proof on the leadership thing fine, but all those pictures of him and basically just how he looks just screams doush to me... but yeah you can't judge a book by its cover.

His accuracy was still merely mediocre at best.

I know he played in the big bad SEC in a pro style offense, with a poor o-line, but it sounds way to much like a bunch of excuses from the Stafford supporters.

Here is a list of other well known SEC QB Stats
Tim Tebow YDS 2746 CMP 64% YPA 9.22 TD 30 INT 4 ATT 298
Jevan Snead YDS 2762 CMP 56% YPA 8.45 TD 26 INT 13 ATT 327

Heres Matt Stafford's
YDS 3459 CMP 61% YPA 9.03 TD 25 INT 10 ATT 383

His numbers are quite comparable to Snead's, and Tebow's blow his out of the water (system fine I give you that).

My last quarrel with Stafford is the fact that he doesn't seem to show up in big games, sure he's undefeated in bowl games, but he has looked pedestrian in all those games, and he looked horrendous against an SEC rival in the Gators, and he didn't look too good against Alabama either.

georgiafan
02-25-2009, 02:35 PM
My last quarrel with Stafford is the fact that he doesn't seem to show up in big games, sure he's undefeated in bowl games, but he has looked pedestrian in all those games, and he looked horrendous against an SEC rival in the Gators, and he didn't look too good against Alabama either.

I'll repost what someone else said a few days ago about Stafford in big games



Also, I didn't know only Stafford's junior season games counted? Maybe that's why scouts are not worried about Sanchez only starting one season.:rolleyes: It's very convenient to pick and chose "big" games to support your theory. How about also mentioning the other big games that he started in. Stafford went 11-4 as a starter against ranked teams. Two of the losses were against the eventual national champion. The other two were against an #8 ranked Alabama that almost won the SEC and against GT in which he threw for over 400 yards and 5 TDs.

Here are some of his other big games.
2006
#5 Auburn - 14 of 20 219 70.0% CMP 10.95 YPA 1 TD rushed for 83 yards and a TD
#16 GT - Led a late in the 4th qt comeback and threw the game-winning TD with a minute left.
#14 VT - Rallied the Bulldogs from an 18-point deficit in the fourth qt. Bowl game MVP.
2007 (played behind an O-line with three freshmen in it)
#16 Alabama - Threw the game-winning TD in OT.
#9 Florida - 11 18 217 61.1% CMP 12.06 YPA 3 TD 1 INT
#18 Auburn - 11 19 237 57.9% CMP 12.47 YPA 2 TD 1 INT. AU had the #1 ranked D in the SEC.
2008 (O-line consisted of freshmen and sophomores)
#13 LSU - 17 26 249 65.4% CMP 9.58 YPA 2 TD (in Baton Rouge)
Kentucky - 17 27 376 63.0% CMP 13.93 YPA 3 TD (Threw the game-winning TD with one minute left)
#22 GT - 24 39 407 61.5% CMP 10.44 YPA 5 TD 1 INT
#18 MSU - 20 31 250 64.5%CMP 8.07 YPA 3 1 Bowl game MVP.

Malaka
02-25-2009, 02:46 PM
I'll repost what someone else said a few days ago about Stafford in big games

I am assuming none of those are from 08?

If so he must have really tanked in other games, as he finished 06 53% and 07 with 55% and in those games you are showing me he looks like a precision passer.

P-L
02-25-2009, 02:58 PM
Seriously? I think the surest things i've ever seen at QB were John Elway, Dan Marino and Peyton Manning. FWIW he's one of my favs ever too. Just wish i had the chance to watch him play every sunday here in Seattle.
I didn't say my #1 prospect ever or my "surest" quarterback prospect. Just my favorite.

Babylon
02-25-2009, 03:04 PM
I have no proof on the leadership thing fine, but all those pictures of him and basically just how he looks just screams doush to me... but yeah you can't judge a book by its cover.

His accuracy was still merely mediocre at best.

I know he played in the big bad SEC in a pro style offense, with a poor o-line, but it sounds way to much like a bunch of excuses from the Stafford supporters.

Here is a list of other well known SEC QB Stats
Tim Tebow YDS 2746 CMP 64% YPA 9.22 TD 30 INT 4 ATT 298
Jevan Snead YDS 2762 CMP 56% YPA 8.45 TD 26 INT 13 ATT 327

Heres Matt Stafford's
YDS 3459 CMP 61% YPA 9.03 TD 25 INT 10 ATT 383

His numbers are quite comparable to Snead's, and Tebow's blow his out of the water (system fine I give you that).

My last quarrel with Stafford is the fact that he doesn't seem to show up in big games, sure he's undefeated in bowl games, but he has looked pedestrian in all those games, and he looked horrendous against an SEC rival in the Gators, and he didn't look too good against Alabama either.

Someone else referred to Cushing and Brady Quinn with that same description, must be the hair.

Maybe Next Year Millen2
02-25-2009, 03:05 PM
I am assuming none of those are from 08?

If so he must have really tanked in other games, as he finished 06 53% and 07 with 55% and in those games you are showing me he looks like a precision passer.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/player/profile?playerId=183518
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/player/gamelog?playerId=183518&year=2007
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/player/gamelog?playerId=183518&year=2006

He gets better every year. I'll allow a 53 % as a true freshman in 2006.

Big 12 they don't play defense and spread QBs don't translate to the pros so I'll take Stafford with more one more year NFL experience over Bradford and McCoy, who we may or may not be able to select.

Tebow is a flat out winner, but his skillset doesn't translate as a pure NFL QB.
I don't recall Snead being dominant in every big game either and will he only be a junior?
Stafford beat Florida once at Florida, never lost to Auburn, went undefeated in the Bowls and got better every year in a tough SEC. 11-4 vs ranked teams is enough for me with a canon arm for Calvin. We'll see what Mayhew decides.

GBahDunka
02-25-2009, 03:16 PM
I grew up about 5 minutes away from stafford and he's a year above me.

I've met him once or twice and Ive watched him play live 5 times during his high school career.

He did rally highland park to a very memorable season and a state championship. I do know that he was a god here in highland park and if he was pulled over for drinking and driving the cop would just let him go. I dont question his character or leadership ability because he is very very well liked by many. 210 highland park students have applied to georgia since he committed to georgia.

I have no doubt he has great leadership and he is filled with poise. He has potential to be great. If Detroit gets him they need to build around him which will be tough to do in the first year because their pressing needs on defense.

The unfortunate part of the situation is the way the league is run now with longevity of coaches. Coaches are put in situations where they are expected to win instantly when they cannot do this automatically and sometimes result in being fired.

on the topic of "screaming douche" he was just brought up in that type of neighborhood and he's not a douche, hes just been a god his entire life

georgiafan
02-25-2009, 03:16 PM
I am assuming none of those are from 08?

If so he must have really tanked in other games, as he finished 06 53% and 07 with 55% and in those games you are showing me he looks like a precision passer.

Yeah, in 07 espically the games agianst bad teams he didn't do so great in. While his better games came agianst the top teams. Everyone just looks at the boxscore from UF and AL and forgets about his first 2 years. The games that should have been games to pad his stats in his first 2 years he didn't to much in.

Malaka
02-25-2009, 03:18 PM
Well we have to agree to disagree I have my opinions on Stafford you have yours.

Btw, Snead was a sophomore so yes he will be a junior this upcoming season hes actually a QB I am really interested in heading in the next NFL draft.

bored of education
02-25-2009, 03:31 PM
Seriously, if you use the wait to draft a QB next year you are nuts unless you think 100% that Stafford shouldn't be the pick. It should not be that ohh Stafford is best Qb avail and best player available lets wait and address another need then draft a QB in 2012. Any Qb you draft will need time more than likely.

iof you think Curry is higher, Monroe, Smith whoever that is fine. But dont not draft a guy and address another need jsut to draft a QB in the future. ughhhhhh pisses me offfff

Malaka
02-25-2009, 03:35 PM
Really IMO, he is not much higher than Sanchez and is easily behind Curry, maybe even Jason Smith/Monroe as an overall player, but thats obviously my opinion.

GBahDunka
02-25-2009, 03:37 PM
Seriously, if you use the wait to draft a QB next year you are nuts unless you think 100% that Stafford shouldn't be the pick. It should not be that ohh Stafford is best Qb avail and best player available lets wait and address another need then draft a QB in 2012. Any Qb you draft will need time more than likely.

the thing is that QB is, while its the god position in the NFL, is not the most pressing need for detroit.

They need to bring another veteran in, let him, culpepper, and stanton compete.

Maybe next year they can look at the likes of

Dan LeFevour
Colt McCoy
Ryan Perrilloux
Sam Bradford
Jerrod Johnson
Jevan Snead
Tim Tebow

i mean its too early to look to next season though the lions have many more needs other than quarterback.

bored of education
02-25-2009, 03:39 PM
the thing is that QB is, while its the god position in the NFL, is not the most pressing need for detroit.

They need to bring another veteran in, let him, culpepper, and stanton compete.

Maybe next year they can look at the likes of

Dan LeFevour
Colt McCoy
Ryan Perrilloux
Sam Bradford
Jerrod Johnson
Jevan Snead
Tim Tebow

i mean its too early to look to next season though the lions have many more needs other than quarterback.


sure thats fine. but stick to your board, thats what GMs and teams do since we are here posting we will never be in their chairs. they stick to their boards..if they think he is the guy then he is the guy to take not because of what could be a better class next year. if he is not the guy they better pickwho they think because they dont think stafford is the guy. NOTHING TO DO WITH FUUTRE QB CLASSES!

GBahDunka
02-25-2009, 03:47 PM
sure thats fine. but stick to your board, thats what GMs and teams do since we are here posting we will never be in their chairs. they stick to their boards..if they think he is the guy then he is the guy to take not because of what could be a better class next year. if he is not the guy they better pickwho they think because they dont think stafford is the guy. NOTHING TO DO WITH FUUTRE QB CLASSES!

you are misinterpreting what I am saying. I am not saying they should just say dont draft stafford we can get a guy next year. Im saying that the quarterback position is not their biggest hole on their team. Its not even their 3rd biggest hole. Fill the most pressing needs, sure up that defense whether it be via FA or Draft.

If Detroits GM thinks stafford is a future HOF qb then fine, take him so you are not kicking yourself in 5 years when hes beating you on a yearly basis.

If detroit feels like they can begin the rebuilding process without a stafford then i think thats the best route for them to take

d34ng3l021
02-25-2009, 03:48 PM
the thing is that QB is, while its the god position in the NFL, is not the most pressing need for detroit.

They need to bring another veteran in, let him, culpepper, and stanton compete.

Maybe next year they can look at the likes of

Dan LeFevour
Colt McCoy
Ryan Perrilloux
Sam Bradford
Jerrod Johnson
Jevan Snead
Tim Tebow

i mean its too early to look to next season though the lions have many more needs other than quarterback.

QB is by far their biggest need in my opinion. They had a guy who ran into the back of his own endzone last year. They haven't had a pro bowl QB since forever. They have the most talented WR in the history of the league just waiting for a capable QB (for once in his life) to dominate (though he can do so without one). They NEED Stafford.

P-L
02-25-2009, 03:50 PM
The Lions have had good receivers in the past, good running backs, and good offensive linemen. It's been 52 years since we've had a good quarterback. Draft the franchise quarterback and if the front office does a good job, the rest will fall into place.

By the way, I don't liking looking ahead to next year BUT right now offensive tackle looks more promising than quarterback.

bored of education
02-25-2009, 03:53 PM
you are misinterpreting what I am saying. I am not saying they should just say fuckit dont draft stafford we can get a guy next year. Im saying that the quarterback position is not their biggest hole on their team. Its not even their 3rd biggest hole. Fill the most pressing needs, sure up that defense whether it be via FA or Draft.

If Detroits GM thinks stafford is a future HOF qb then fine, take him so you are not kicking yourself in 5 years when hes beating you on a yearly basis.

If detroit feels like they can begin the rebuilding process without a stafford then i think thats the best route for them to take

team needs is a whole different ball game. you may feel that it is not the most pressing need. i may disagree..right or wrong the front office may think it is not the most pressing need yet make the move for Stafford.

GBahDunka
02-25-2009, 03:57 PM
http://espnradio.espn.go.com/espnradio/podcast/index

listen to the 2/24 first draft argument between mcshay and mel, it is pretty intense and i completely agree with mcshay about the lions draft

WMD
02-25-2009, 04:13 PM
The Lions have had good receivers in the past, good running backs, and good offensive linemen. It's been 52 years since we've had a good quarterback. Draft the franchise quarterback and if the front office does a good job, the rest will fall into place.

By the way, I don't liking looking ahead to next year BUT right now offensive tackle looks more promising than quarterback.
Nah, next year we're going DE. Carlos Dunlap! OT in Round 2, 2010. :eek:

Maybe Next Year Millen2
02-25-2009, 04:19 PM
QB is a huge need for Detroit. Moreso than Left Tackle IMO because Backus has 100 starts in a row for some reason and we just took a Tackle last year. And yes we need a LB, but without a DT, just like many claim without a LT, the pick of Stafford/Curry will not matter. You do not spend that much money on a LB. Especially one that switches positions. You can get a LB at pick 20 or pick 33. We have to build the Dline before LBs can be taken by the waiting game logic.

Orlovsky was our best QB last year, which isn't saying much and he's a free agent who isn't resigning with us.

Culpepper has been terrible for 3 years in a row. We restructured his deal to delay a decision on him because of Linehan, but he's not a capable starter in this league anymore. He's a backup and a stopgap at best with only 1 year left on his deal so he's not the future. He's a good candidate with Linehan to take the brunt of the punishment this season if we don't address left guard. Kitna is about to be cut and Stanton has been a huge disappointment and is very injury prone with accuracy and deep ball issues. QB is a huge need, not to mention they take the longest to develop(so it's logical to take one as soon as possible) and they are the most important position. Free agency flat out stinks for QBs, Grossman,Losman and no one is going to hand us Pennington/Warner. Those are incredibly lucky situations. We have to make our own luck with Stafford.

Babylon
02-25-2009, 04:20 PM
Nah, next year we're going DE. Carlos Dunlap! OT in Round 2, 2010. :eek:

Carlos Dunlap is going to be the #1 pick in 2010?:)

GBahDunka
02-25-2009, 04:35 PM
Carlos Dunlap is going to be the #1 pick in 2010?:)

I would be more inclined to the likes of stafford being picked as long as detroit makes a good splash via Free agency.

Boy if they had Shaun Rogers still that curry pick would be looking really good.

Say they get Albert Hanesworth and Bart Scott via FA, i believe that move would automatically improve their defense MAJORLY and give them room to pick a guy like stafford.

Some reports have even said that detroit may like the intangibles of sanchez more. the aura he presents is apparently a great one.

http://video.google.com/videosearch?hl=en&q=mark%20sanchez%20&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wv#q=mark+sanchez+mic&hl=en&emb=0

in this video you can just see the leadership he brings to the table and how much his teammates like him

Halsey
02-25-2009, 05:24 PM
I'm not big on making comparisons that don't really have anything to do with how someone will perform on the field, but I can't help be reminded of someone when I hear all this talk of how Sanchez is such a nice guy who lights up a room with his smile and really gets along with people:

http://i.a.cnn.net/si/2006/players/02/07/gifts0213/t1_harrington.jpg

Joey Harrington has a million dollar smile and is a great guy. I'm just sayin.

JFLO
02-25-2009, 05:41 PM
Teams cannot go into the draft thinking hmmmm lets wait to get our QB next year and build the line or defense. If you need the Qb and the tem wfeels Stafford is worthy of that pick..make that pick. I dont'care if you think Stafford is worthy of that pick or not.


Are you serious? So when Miami drafted Ted Ginn Jr. a couple of years ago, they told themselves the following:

"Man, we need a quarterback more than a receiver but with Brady Quinn on the board, we should probably go with Ted Ginn Jr."

What did they do? They drafted Chad Henne the next year. That's only one example, because teams pass on quarterbacks all the time.

I'm just assuming your a believer in the theory that if you don't have a quarterback, then you need to take one when the opportunity arrives and that's fine, but not every team in the NFL is like that.

WMD
02-25-2009, 05:44 PM
Are you serious? So when Miami drafted Ted Ginn Jr. a couple of years ago, they told themselves the following:

"Man, we need a quarterback more than a receiver but with Brady Quinn on the board, we should probably go with Ted Ginn Jr."

What did they do? They drafted Chad Henne the next year. That's only one example, because teams pass on quarterbacks all the time.
They took John Beck in Round 2 that same year.

JFLO
02-25-2009, 05:47 PM
They took John Beck in Round 2 that same year.

Proves my point even more...


Danke!

bored of education
02-25-2009, 05:50 PM
Are you serious? So when Miami drafted Ted Ginn Jr. a couple of years ago, they told themselves the following:

"Man, we need a quarterback more than a receiver but with Brady Quinn on the board, we should probably go with Ted Ginn Jr

What did they do? They drafted Chad Henne the next year. That's only one example, because teams pass on quarterbacks all the time.

I'm just assuming your a believer in the theory that if you don't have a quarterback, then you need to take one when the opportunity arrives and that's fine, but not every team in the NFL is like that.

no no no you are way off dude. i am saying that people are saying that they should pas on Stafford just because of the class next year. if they think he is the guy then go for it if they really think he is the number one overall player and addresses a need. but dont pass on him just because of next years class alone.

and the last sentence in my post was referring to i dont care if people think he is worthy of the pick. becasue i dont. you cant think that but obviously the front office may feel different.

georgiafan
02-25-2009, 05:53 PM
Are you serious? So when Miami drafted Ted Ginn Jr. a couple of years ago, they told themselves the following:

"Man, we need a quarterback more than a receiver but with Brady Quinn on the board, we should probably go with Ted Ginn Jr."

What did they do? They drafted Chad Henne the next year. That's only one example, because teams pass on quarterbacks all the time.

I'm just assuming your a believer in the theory that if you don't have a quarterback, then you need to take one when the opportunity arrives and that's fine, but not every team in the NFL is like that.

They spent a 2nd round pick that year on Beck and like you said another 2nd round pick the following year on Henne. Now they have Pennington starting for atleast 1 more year. They still have major questions at the QB position for the future and have invested two very high draft picks. But they could have had Beck rated higher then Quinn for all we know.

Maybe Next Year Millen2
02-25-2009, 05:53 PM
Are you serious? So when Miami drafted Ted Ginn Jr. a couple of years ago, they told themselves the following:

"Man, we need a quarterback more than a receiver but with Brady Quinn on the board, we should probably go with Ted Ginn Jr."

What did they do? They drafted Chad Henne the next year. That's only one example, because teams pass on quarterbacks all the time.

I'm just assuming your a believer in the theory that if you don't have a quarterback, then you need to take one when the opportunity arrives and that's fine, but not every team in the NFL is like that.

That Miami GM who passed went 1-15 and was fired. Parcells came in and took Henne yes but got incredibly ***** lucky with Chad Pennington ala Favre. If they go into this past year with Josh McCown, no miracles in Miami.

And the Lions have been passing on QBs. 2006 passed on Leinart and Cutler becasue we went the veteran route with Kitna and McCown(and also passed on Brees in free agency), 2007 passed on Quinn for Calvin obviously so thats ok and then took Stanton(who hasn't been working out as most non 1st rounders play early and couldn't beat out Orlovsky), and 2008 passed on Flacco/Henne because of Kitna/Stanton. This year the barrel is bone dry in Detroit with Kitna finally done and Stanton not earning the right to do anything.

2001 we took the tackle first with Backus and had to settle for a spread QB in 2002. Sounds eerily familiar to this situation. We passed on Drew Brees to do that in 2001. Hope we don't make that mistake again. 04 we passed on Big Ben because of Joey. We've already passed on enough good QBs for second rate free agent QBs(Kitna/McCown) and spread QBs(Joey). Get me a pro style QB with a canon and see what happens. This franchise needs a face for the future.

JFLO
02-25-2009, 05:56 PM
no no no you are way off dude. i am saying that people are saying that they should pas on Stafford just because of the class next year. if they think he is the guy then go for it and think that is the number one need. but dont pass on him just because of next years class alone.

No, I understand what you are saying, but I'm saying that I'm sure some teams do go with this procedure.

Lets say that the Lions are on the clock and they decide to go with an offensive tackle over Stafford because they are in a rebuilding stage. They decide that taking an offensive lineman to develop will be a benefit for a possible rookie QB they draft the following year.

Or they go with Aaron Curry over Stafford because they want to develop the defense with a stud linebacker instead of relying on a rookie quarterback throughout the season, because it was rare that Matt Ryan did well, let alone Matt Ryan and Joe Flacco.

I understand what your saying, but what I'm saying is, is that teams will pass on quarterbacks until the following year, even if they might see "it' in the quarterback.

bored of education
02-25-2009, 05:59 PM
No, I understand what you are saying, but I'm saying that I'm sure some teams do go with this procedure.

Lets say that the Lions are on the clock and they decide to go with an offensive tackle over Stafford because they are in a rebuilding stage. They decide that taking an offensive lineman to develop will be a benefit for a possible rookie QB they draft the following year.

Or they go with Aaron Curry over Stafford because they want to develop the defense with a stud linebacker instead of relying on a rookie quarterback throughout the season, because it was rare that Matt Ryan did well, let alone Matt Ryan and Joe Flacco.

I understand what your saying, but what I'm saying is, is that teams will pass on quarterbacks until the following year, even if they might see "it' in the quarterback.


ohh yes now i hear you. i agree. so when people are hating on stafford for no reason they should be making posts saying they should rebuild the line/defense..we have a stop gap QB for now which is fine. as long as they understand the rebuilding process doesnt happen overnight. but dont pass ona franchise qb just to wait for a 'better qb'. it really depends on front office philosophy and other needs of course.

GBahDunka
02-25-2009, 07:09 PM
I want it known that i am not hating on stafford at all. As a sophomore in high school i thought that he would eventually go number 1 overall in the draft just because i was exposed to him and saw all of the talent he had. Just for the lions sake, are they going to go the miami route and pass on stafford like miami did with matt ryan/joe flacco/brady quinn? It ended up working well with miami but you have to remember that miami made a huge splash via free agency signing maybe not the big name players but key players to their success (furgeson, fasano, trading for adoyle)

30 hours from now is the start of what the lions future will be.

Halsey
02-25-2009, 07:40 PM
A fact that fans who think teams need to choose between having a great D or having a franchise QB don't like to acknowledge: Every one of the top 5 defenses in the NFL started 1st round QB's last year.

Funny how so called 'defensive minded' teams like Pittsburgh, Baltimore and Philadelphia spend big money and high picks on their QB position. But you'll still have less knowledgeable fans who will tell you that a team should pass on a potential franchise QB so they can build a defense. :D

San Diego Chicken
02-25-2009, 07:42 PM
http://espnradio.espn.go.com/espnradio/podcast/index

listen to the 2/24 first draft argument between mcshay and mel, it is pretty intense and i completely agree with mcshay about the lions draft

Really interesting. I agree with McShay - Detroit is really in between a rock and a hard place and like a few other teams in the recent past, they are almost forced to take a QB. They can't just take Jason Smith because that will not go over well with the fans. Also, they can't neccessarily take Stafford and just stash him away, because if the team is 1-7 come midseason, the pressure is going to be on the coaching staff and Lions brass to hand him the keys. Kiper was trying to bring Carson Palmer into the argument but that's different -- during Palmer's rookie year they had Jon Kitna who played very well, and the team was actually in playoff contention all year. If the Bengals had been losing, Palmer would have taken over in his rookie year.

And then the really difficult part is the money situation. Matt Ryan signed for 6 years, 72 million, with close to 35 million in guarantees. Stafford is going to go #1, and his representatives are going to be wanting as much as 80 million, with half of that guaranteed. It's obviously a mammoth number and negociations will be difficult. The risk is colossal.

But that being said, Detroit really has no alternative. Taking Jason Smith or Eugene Monroe won't sell tickets, and taking Aaron Curry would be difficult to justify; he would end up signing for more money than Ray Lewis will. Their only hope really is that someone else loves Stafford and needs him badly enough to trade up.

GBahDunka
02-25-2009, 08:43 PM
Really interesting. I agree with McShay - Detroit is really in between a rock and a hard place and like a few other teams in the recent past, they are almost forced to take a QB. They can't just take Jason Smith because that will not go over well with the fans. Also, they can't neccessarily take Stafford and just stash him away, because if the team is 1-7 come midseason, the pressure is going to be on the coaching staff and Lions brass to hand him the keys. Kiper was trying to bring Carson Palmer into the argument but that's different -- during Palmer's rookie year they had Jon Kitna who played very well, and the team was actually in playoff contention all year. If the Bengals had been losing, Palmer would have taken over in his rookie year.

And then the really difficult part is the money situation. Matt Ryan signed for 6 years, 72 million, with close to 35 million in guarantees. Stafford is going to go #1, and his representatives are going to be wanting as much as 80 million, with half of that guaranteed. It's obviously a mammoth number and negociations will be difficult. The risk is colossal.

But that being said, Detroit really has no alternative. Taking Jason Smith or Eugene Monroe won't sell tickets, and taking Aaron Curry would be difficult to justify; he would end up signing for more money than Ray Lewis will. Their only hope really is that someone else loves Stafford and needs him badly enough to trade up.

I 100% agree with what you're saying. This draft class doesnt have a Mario Williams, patrick willis, Joe Thomas, Gaines Adams, chris long, jake long. I dont see curry as a dominant force in the league; I see him more as a role player that will be a solid linebacker for the next 12 years. Patrick Willis had the potential to just take over games, same thing with Mario Williams. Joe Thomas and Jake Long will be mentioned as some of the best left tackles in the league and get multiple All-Pro honors which yeah Jason Smith and Monroe will be good left tackles but just wont have the same impact as long and thomas.

The lions picked a bad year to have the number 1 overall pick in the stance of making a dominant selection. Stafford has the ability to be great and if the lions play their card right they will have a gem. Stafford is the census pick for the lions just because there is nobody else to take. Too bad they cant trade out and go just a little lower to grab sanchez. I say all of this with no bias because i look at the league as a fan of a game not just of one team. I claim the boys' as my team growing up in dallas.

at quarterback in FA the lions have their choices of

Byron Leftwich, maybe give kyle boller another chance, grossmans probably a bad fit though he has the big arm the lions need, jp losman could compete but he would have to settle with a small contract most likely. Chris Simms could be interesting. It all depends what the lions GM thinks about these qbs, if they are not high on any of them then Stafford makes the most sense unless they traded out of the pick or settled with freeman or nate davis later as more developmental. They are in an interesting spot in the second round. The same spot that miami was when they took henne to develop.

They have a need for a tightend which they could get in chris baker, bubba franks, lj smith. This draft class has a lot of pretty good tight end prospects but they may not want to use one of their picks on a position thats pretty decent in free agency.

Tank Johnson/Albert Hanesworth would be a good addition to keep blockers off of ernie simms. maybe bringing in a guy like chris canty for that end position wouldnt be bad either.

at linebacker they would be in good shape of they brought in bart scott or ray lewis but i dont see ray lewis wanting to sign with a team like detrot at the end of his career. Kevin Burnett or Donnie Edwards would be a good addition at linebacker as well. I could definitely see Cato June in the lions future.

at corner it might not be bad to send pacman to the lions, he knows jim but it just depends if they have a good relationship.

Geason Noceur
02-25-2009, 09:35 PM
I am assuming none of those are from 08?

If so he must have really tanked in other games, as he finished 06 53% and 07 with 55% and in those games you are showing me he looks like a precision passer.



Also, I didn't know only Stafford's junior season games counted? Maybe that's why scouts are not worried about Sanchez only starting one season.:rolleyes: It's very convenient to pick and chose "big" games to support your theory. How about also mentioning the other big games that he started in. Stafford went 11-4 as a starter against ranked teams. Two of the losses were against the eventual national champion. The other two were against an #8 ranked Alabama that almost won the SEC and against GT in which he threw for over 400 yards and 5 TDs.

Here are some of his other big games.
2006
#5 Auburn - 14 of 20 219 70.0% CMP 10.95 YPA 1 TD rushed for 83 yards and a TD
#16 GT - Led a late in the 4th qt comeback and threw the game-winning TD with a minute left.
#14 VT - Rallied the Bulldogs from an 18-point deficit in the fourth qt. Bowl game MVP.
2007 (played behind an O-line with three freshmen in it)
#16 Alabama - Threw the game-winning TD in OT.
#9 Florida - 11 18 217 61.1% CMP 12.06 YPA 3 TD 1 INT
#18 Auburn - 11 19 237 57.9% CMP 12.47 YPA 2 TD 1 INT. AU had the #1 ranked D in the SEC.
2008 (O-line consisted of freshmen and sophomores)
#13 LSU - 17 26 249 65.4% CMP 9.58 YPA 2 TD (in Baton Rouge)
Kentucky - 17 27 376 63.0% CMP 13.93 YPA 3 TD (Threw the game-winning TD with one minute left)
#22 GT - 24 39 407 61.5% CMP 10.44 YPA 5 TD 1 INT
#18 MSU - 20 31 250 64.5%CMP 8.07 YPA 3 1 Bowl game MVP.


I think you missed these.

PuppyPuncher
02-28-2009, 06:30 AM
It's simple, QBs have the most positional value. The Lions need to address the core of their team in this draft and strong-side linebacker is definitely not part of that. I guarantee you that if they take Tyrone McKenzie in the second or third round, people won't be able to distinguish his career from Curry's five years from now.

If there are any doubts about the SLB position, two of the best 4-3 SLBs, Julian Peterson and Thomas Howard are on teams that are picking in the top 8.

Matt Stafford as a prospect is a lot like Troy Aikman. Both guys always wore the same facial expression that seemed to turn people off to them.

StorminNorman
02-28-2009, 01:19 PM
Bottom line is that Matthew Stafford, IMO, is the best QB prospect since Peyton Manning. I would take him in a heart beat and if Detroit passes on them I think it will haunt the franchise until they find a QB of that caliber.

635
02-28-2009, 01:27 PM
What is also a foregone thought is the financial mess that the city of Detroit is in.
The marketing and financial possibilities that a Stafford-Johnson connection could bring them would be immense, and would help jump start that franchise in a city that is in economic ruin.

With that said, they can still address their OT and defensive needs as they have what is essentially two first round picks after their #1 overall pick. This draft could be the turning point for that franchise.

Little Known Fact:The very first pick of the second round pick, generally has a low bust ratio, as it is usually the spot for talented players who have a lot to prove as they were kept out of first round play, or had disappointing during the draft process.

TT Gator
03-01-2009, 01:55 AM
Oh man this again? Even Matt Millen knows(well maybe not but everyone else does) you need more than an elite OLB to help a 0-16 team. They need a total overhaul that means changes at the impact positions. Culpepper has been inconsistent (some would say horrible) since 2004,constantly battling injuries, and is 32 years old. If the Lions want to get better they need a young franchise QB and most of us agree that Stafford is the best QB in this draft. How is Curry a safer pick? I like Curry alot and think he's a Top 5 pick but he's no more a safe pick than Stafford IMO. Their both the best at their position. Both guys started every year in college so they both have experiance. Remember the 2006 draft? They picked a LB in the 1st round when they could of picked up a QB how did that work out for them? Oh yea 2 losing seasons one of them not winning a game. That's not a diss to Sims who's talented it's just to prove LBs don't have the same effect on a team as a good or bad QB. In the last 3 drafts they could of picked Matt Leinart, Jay Cutler, Brady Quinn, or Joe Flacco but didn't. The point is the Lions need to lay the blueprint for their team in this draft. Millen is gone, they got a new head coach, and they've got 3 early picks. LB is a position that can wait till later in the draft or next years draft. But a franchise QB doesn't fall into your lap everday. They've let the Joey Harrington bust get in their way of drafting a 1st round QB for 7 years and all it's done is made them worse its past time for them to get over it.

WMD
03-01-2009, 03:00 AM
Bottom line is that Matthew Stafford, IMO, is the best QB prospect since Peyton Manning. I would take him in a heart beat and if Detroit passes on them I think it will haunt the franchise until they find a QB of that caliber.
I like Matt Stafford.. But how is he a better prospect than Eli Manning, Ben Roethlisberger, or Carson Palmer?

GBahDunka
03-01-2009, 03:52 AM
Physically he has the best entangibles next to carson palmer. Hes a better prospect than jamarcus russell which everyone was wow'd over his ability.

Hes got a crazy strong arm and a good head on his shoulders.

Theres reasons Roethlisberger wasn't the first quarterback taken in the draft. Eli was eli because of the name IMO. Rivers was a better prospect.

Stafford physically other than the height is prototypical. Everyone just doesnt know about what leadership qualities he can bring to a team to elevate a franchise.

Paranoidmoonduck
03-01-2009, 04:16 AM
I like Matt Stafford.. But how is he a better prospect than Eli Manning, Ben Roethlisberger, or Carson Palmer?

He's a better prospect than Ben Roethlisberger. There little doubt about that in my mind.

I'd say he's probably on par with Eli Manning in my mind, if maybe a tiny bit behind. Stafford isn't always the most collected or smartest thrower, but, like Eli Manning, when he's on he's terribly impressive.

In my opinion, since 2003...

1. Carson Palmer
2. JaMarcus Russell
3. Eli Manning
4. Matt Ryan
5. Matthew Stafford
6. Phillip Rivers
7. Jay Cutler
8. Ben Roethlisberger
9. Aaron Rodgers
10. Vince Young

initial_flo
03-01-2009, 04:27 AM
I think it is pretty obvious, they AT LEAST need to come out with a QB in the first round that is the only way.

You either target Stafford right off the bat, or get one of the other 2 using that 20th (moving up if you needed)

Is there really any other way? Coming out with something like Curry and like Beanie Wells or something would be killer.

Find a QB and someone to protect his ass, pretty simple.

jbphburg
03-01-2009, 08:16 AM
I think that defense is a way bigger concern for Detroit, and none of the QBs this year are really turning heads, fix the D first.

635
03-01-2009, 09:38 AM
I think that defense is a way bigger concern for Detroit, and none of the QBs this year are really turning heads, fix the D first.

They have basically three first round picks, they can pick up a Defensive tackle at 20 or 33, but their most urgent need is at The QB and Left tackle positions.

635
03-01-2009, 07:14 PM
Detroit shoud take Monroe or Jason Smith. Take a QB like Nate David later on.

You mean NAte Davis?

Nate Davis is a bum, and won't be anything in the NFL. Why would Detroit take another QB In the second round who is not franchise QB material, when they already have stanton filling that role.

635
03-01-2009, 07:20 PM
Drew Stanton is not an NFL QB, he is a bum. What does it say when they hardly played him last season. Nate Davis can come in and be special. He has a strong arm, is mobile, and is a Rhoad Scholar candidate.

OF course Drew Stanton is a bum..

Nate Davis is not a Rhodes Scholar candidate..He's far from it.He actually has a learning disability and struggled to digest the playbook at Ball State.