PDA

View Full Version : If Stafford falls past Detroit...


StorminNorman
02-25-2009, 11:24 PM
Honestly after listening to that interview, I don't think it would be very sinful of the Lions to pick him over Stafford.

The only two players that should be on Detroit's radar are Stafford or J. Smith. Only at QB or LT can you really justify the contract that comes with the first pick.

That being said, if we take a look at where Stafford could fall - this draft gets VERY interesting.

Lets look at a situation like this:

1. Detroit - Not Stafford
2. Rams - Can't justify Stafford here at all.
3. Chiefs - With the success of Thigpen, Brady and Cassel there is no way in hell the Chiefs take a QB in the first round.

Once Stafford falls past 3, all bets are off. 95% of all mock drafts are out the window and ESPN has a great drama unfolding.

4-7: Teams that have no interest in a first round QB, and probably too high for a team to try to move up.

8. Jacksonville - I could see Jacksonville taking a QB at 1-8, but the whispers indicate that they do not have Stafford as the top QB in this draft. They are one of the great minority of NFL teams that have Sanchez number one. Stafford will not go here.

9. Green Bay - Here is where I think Stafford could be picked. Not by Green Bay, of course, but I think this is the draft position that a trade makes the most sense - for several reasons:

1. Green Bay doesn't have a must have guy, IMO. They would love to add a linebacker here to fit their new 3-4 defense, but at this point Cleveland and Kansas City will have picked, so there is a good chance that the two best 34 players are gone.

2. San Fransisco is sitting at 10 and they lack a franchise QB so this is the last chance to jump in front of Singletary. I don't think San Fransisco is going to trade away players to get Stafford, but I think they very well could pick him should he be thrown in their lap.

3. Ted Thompson: He is one of the best General Managers in Professional Football, so here is a guy that knows how to work a trade. I think he is smart enough to accept a good trade.

Now of course - who would trade up?

There is really only two teams that I think have a big enough a need at QB that would trade up: the New York Jets and the Minnesota Vikings. What makes this even more interesting is the fact the Vikings should be better prepared to trade up, but will Green Bay listen?

Why Matt Stafford will be a Viking:
Minnesota is a team with far less holes, so they have the draft space to trade up.

If you look at Minnesota's needs, they have three needs outside of QB to address:

They need a Right Tackle, a Center and a young CB to play nickle.

These are positions that they won't fill in the first round - these are all positions you draft in day 2, ESPECIALLY in this draft.

Not only that, but Minnesota is a team that has proven in the past they are not afraid of trading draft picks to get a player they want. Last year they looked at their team, saw a huge need for a pass rusher and they went out and trade several picks to get Jared Allen. Its obvious they will look at their team and see a need to address QB - unless they see Sage Rosenfil as the real answer for this team, and not simply a replacement for Gus, I think they would kill for a chance at Stafford.

Why Stafford will NOT be a Viking:
The conflict is this...would Green Bay give Minnesota a franchise QB?

This of course brings us to the New York Jets...

Why Stafford will be a Jet:

The Jets would love Matt Stafford, and its easy to see Stafford fitting in New York. This is a player that has always been in the lime light, he was THE Texas QB (off topic: watch Friday Night Lights), he went to one of the best programs in the country for college and he is enjoying the spot light as QB-1 in this draft. Personality wise, its a great fit (this guy's no Chad Pennington).

The Jets also have more ammo in the draft to trade than Minnesota - besides being 5 spots higher than the Vikings at 17, the Vikings traded away their fourth round pick (on a QB no less) and while the Jets traded their third round pick to Green Bay for Brett Favre they get New Orleans third round thanks to Jon Vilma. Plus New York has an extra fourth round pick they got from Washington last year.

Its also worth mentioning that while Mangenius is gone from New York, the front office from last year is still there as is Green Bay's, so these two sides know each other well from the Brett Favre trade.

Why Mathew Stafford will not be a Jet:

The Jets have cap issues and to date only have 4 million in cap space. They have made several big free agent pick ups the last few years and that does come back in play here. If New York actively moves up to secure Matt Stafford, that's going to cost New York when it comes to negotiate a contract.

The Jets also have far bigger needs than Minnesota. Thomas Jones is over 30, they need some help at corner and could really use a top defensive end.

I really enjoy this sort of speculation in the draft, and this will not be the last time I address this.

d34ng3l021
02-25-2009, 11:34 PM
I can see him going to the Rams or the Chiefs.

TACKLE
02-25-2009, 11:35 PM
You bring up a valid point. Now if Detroit takes Aaron Curry #1, he won't fall past the Chiefs. But, if Detroit takes and OT, he could be in for a free fall come draft day. The Chiefs would probably lean Curry over Stafford. Personally, my opinion is that Brady Quinn > Matt Stafford so it isn't impossible that Stafford could be sitting a while in the green room. But like you mentioned, if a team was really sold on him, they might trade up. But teams may feel like if the difference between Stafford and Sanchez isn't significant enough to move up, they may just stay put and hope Sanchez falls into their laps. Unprobable, but nonetheless, a potentially intriguing scenario.

kmartin575
02-25-2009, 11:41 PM
The idea that "with the success of Thigpen no way in hell the Chiefs take a quarterback in the 1st round" is complete bullcrap. Exactly what Success did Thigpen have? Going 1-10 as a starter? Having a 56% completion percentage (give or take a few tenths)? Only look decent when the team switched the entire offense to one that over the long run does not work in the NFL?

What exactly leads people to believe he is anything special? His horrible accuracy? His below average size for a quarterback? His weak arm?

BeerBaron
02-25-2009, 11:42 PM
He won't fall past KC. The only way I see it is if both Curry and Stafford are there, and I just don't see that happening.

Between the Lions and Rams, one of Curry and Stafford will be gone, possibly both.

KC's big board should look like this:

1.) Curry
2.) Stafford
3.) Kill self.

LonghornsLegend
02-25-2009, 11:46 PM
3. Chiefs - With the success of Thigpen, Brady and Cassel there is no way in hell the Chiefs take a QB in the first round.

"No way in hell" is way too strong of a comment for a team that has no franchise QB at all right now, and it's not like Thigpen did anything to stop a team from taking a perennial franchise QB.


Stafford at #3 would be a great pick.

GBahDunka
02-25-2009, 11:48 PM
you have to wonder what will happen in free agency though. theres a possibility that the chiefs trade for cassel, maybe detroit does. who knows

Halsey
02-25-2009, 11:48 PM
Threads like this make it clear how many fans underestimate how good a QB prospect Stafford is, how valuable QB's are and how much of dropoff there is after Sanchez and Stafford. Stafford or maybe Sanchez are the only picks the Lions can justify. The Lions already have 3 first round OT's on their roster. They have no business adding one with a #1 pick contract. Stafford is going to be the #1 pick and if he somehow wasn't, there's no way he falls past the Chiefs. People can talk about Brady and Cassel all they want. The Chiefs don't have Bill Belichik coaching for them. Tyler Thigpen in no way justifies passing on Stafford. If it were to turn out that both Thigpen and Stafford were quality starting QB's, the Chiefs could just trade one of them down the line. Having more than one quality QB is a good problem to have.

BeerBaron
02-25-2009, 11:48 PM
"No way in hell" is way too strong of a comment for a team that has no franchise QB at all right now, and it's not like Thigpen did anything to stop a team from taking a perennial franchise QB.

Stafford at #3 would be a great pick.

Yah. Agreed fully.

Thigpen played well enough to keep them from reaching for the draft's #2 QB...Stafford is head and shoulders ahead of Sanchez if you ask me and the Chiefs should take him in a heartbeat if there.

The only person I would even consider otherwise is Curry simply because he would impact that defense so greatly....

StorminNorman
02-26-2009, 12:47 AM
The idea that "with the success of Thigpen no way in hell the Chiefs take a quarterback in the 1st round" is complete bullcrap. Exactly what Success did Thigpen have? Going 1-10 as a starter? Having a 56% completion percentage (give or take a few tenths)? Only look decent when the team switched the entire offense to one that over the long run does not work in the NFL?

What exactly leads people to believe he is anything special? His horrible accuracy? His below average size for a quarterback? His weak arm?

"No way in hell" is way too strong of a comment for a team that has no franchise QB at all right now, and it's not like Thigpen did anything to stop a team from taking a perennial franchise QB.


Stafford at #3 would be a great pick.

Thigpen showed enough to I think allow the team the spend this pick building a defense. I am sure the Chiefs would probably look at a QB in draft as well, and they may even want to look at Graham Harrel if he falls into the free agency.

Threads like this make it clear how many fans underestimate how good a QB prospect Stafford is, how valuable QB's are and how much of dropoff there is after Sanchez and Stafford. Stafford or maybe Sanchez are the only picks the Lions can justify. The Lions already have 3 first round OT's on their roster. They have no business adding one with a #1 pick contract. Stafford is going to be the #1 pick and if he somehow wasn't, there's no way he falls past the Chiefs. People can talk about Brady and Cassel all they want. The Chiefs don't have Bill Belichik coaching for them. Tyler Thigpen in no way justifies passing on Stafford. If it were to turn out that both Thigpen and Stafford were quality starting QB's, the Chiefs could just trade one of them down the line. Having more than one quality QB is a good problem to have.

I think Detroit SHOULD draft Matt Stafford - this is speculation on what happens if they pass.

I just don't see the Chiefs taking Matt Stafford, especially if Curry is on the board.

Solomon
02-26-2009, 12:59 AM
http://www.nfl.com/combine/story?id=09000d5d80eea152&template=with-video-with-comments&confirm=true

This Pat Kirwan mock I read has Stafford falling all the way to the Jaguars!

gramage
02-26-2009, 01:01 AM
I have a hard time seeing the Chiefs passing on Stafford at 3 exactly because they have Thigpen, a pretty good quarterback although not someone who strikes me as a guy who can put a team over the top: Exactly who you want starting while you spend 1-2 years developing an incredibly talented but not ready for prime time prospect. This is exactly what Stafford needs if he is going to reach his potential, and it's a pretty good situation for Thigpen knowing that he'll be the starter earning his payday that he'll just have to get on another team.

I don't like Stafford much, but in this environment he could be a hit.

d34ng3l021
02-26-2009, 01:01 AM
He won't fall past KC. The only way I see it is if both Curry and Stafford are there, and I just don't see that happening.

Between the Lions and Rams, one of Curry and Stafford will be gone, possibly both.

KC's big board should look like this:

1.) Curry
2.) Stafford
3.) Kill self.

I think Orakpo would fit well in KC.

gramage
02-26-2009, 01:04 AM
He won't fall past KC. The only way I see it is if both Curry and Stafford are there, and I just don't see that happening.

Between the Lions and Rams, one of Curry and Stafford will be gone, possibly both.

KC's big board should look like this:

1.) Curry
2.) Stafford
3.) Kill self.

If this happened I like Crabtree here to give Thigpen the talent to run the spread he's best in.

BeerBaron
02-26-2009, 01:05 AM
http://www.nfl.com/combine/story?id=09000d5d80eea152&template=with-video-with-comments&confirm=true

This Pat Kirwan mock I read has Stafford falling all the way to the Jaguars!

I still just disagree with the idea of Detroit not taking a QB. They aren't just some team who had a down year and could get by taking an OT and going with some stop-gaps at QB for a year. They are one of the worst franchises in sports history coming off an epically bad, winless year...And I don't think any of the LT's available are Orlando Pace caliber studs. Andre Smith was the only person with a shot at that level and he'ls gone and blown it badly. Jason Smith or Eugene Monroe would be upgrades for sure, but I think you need to take the QB who can be the face of your franchise.

If I were them, I'd trade a 4-12 year with Culpepper/Orlovsky at QB and a good young LT for a 2-14 year with the potential future franchise QB getting some valuable experience in Stafford.

Cushing at 9 is also just silly, heh....I'd like it as a Bears fan though.

I do love his Bears pick.

BeerBaron
02-26-2009, 01:09 AM
I think Orakpo would fit well in KC.

I don't think at #3 overall...maybe if they were sticking with the 4-3 but it's hard to tell how he's going to do with the transition. If you look at some of the better 3-4 OLBs like Ware and Merrimen, they went a little further back in the first because theres always that question of whether they will be able to transition or not.

I know its too early to call Gholston a bust but I bet the Jets are wishing just a little bit they had gone in another direction...Gholston struggling if he were picked 10 picks later wouldn't have looked nearly as bad.

If this happened I like Crabtree here to give Thigpen the talent to run the spread he's best in.

I just have trouble buying that at #3 overall anymore. He measures in short, is shown to have a bad foot that will knock him out of 10 weeks of offseason activities, and there are still those questions on his speed that may not be answered.

HawkeyeFan
02-26-2009, 01:15 AM
All I have to say is...he better not fall past Detroit, Detroit better take him, and then the Rams take Curry.


k deal?

Crickett
02-26-2009, 01:18 AM
The only two players that should be on Detroit's radar are Stafford or J. Smith. Only at QB or LT can you really justify the contract that comes with the first pick.

No Aaron Curry?


3. Chiefs - With the success of Thigpen, Brady and Cassel there is no way in hell the Chiefs take a QB in the first round.

2. San Fransisco is sitting at 10 and they lack a franchise QB so this is the last chance to jump in front of Singletary. I don't think San Fransisco is going to trade away players to get Stafford, but I think they very well could pick him should he be thrown in their lap.

Sooooooooo Kansas City wouldn't take Stafford because they have Tyler Thigpen but San Francisco would when they have Shaun Hill? :confused:



Why Mathew Stafford will not be a Jet:

The Jets have cap issues and to date only have 4 million in cap space. They have made several big free agent pick ups the last few years and that does come back in play here. If New York actively moves up to secure Matt Stafford, that's going to cost New York when it comes to negotiate a contract.

The Jets also have far bigger needs than Minnesota. Thomas Jones is over 30, they need some help at corner and could really use a top defensive end.

This information is fairly out of date. Between players who are free agents and those who were cut, the Jets have a LOT more than 4 million in cap space (try 24 million+) and a bunch of needs bigger than DE and RB. Like ILB where the Jets have let go of three of their top four ILB's and WR now that Laveranues Coles and the Jets have parted ways. If there is a reason the Jets wouldn't trade up for Stafford, its not due to a lack of cap room, its that unlike the Vikings, they simply have too many other needs to address. Now its pretty clear they will address some in free agency, but not even the Jets have enough cap room to address everything and trading up all of the way into the top ten would probably prevent the Jets from addressing any other major needs in the draft besides day 2 depth.

BuddyCHRIST
02-26-2009, 05:11 AM
Will not happen, even if Detroit passes (which they won't) I wouldn't be totally shocked to see the Rams take him (though unlikely) as Bulger is aging and injury prone. But if both those teams pass on him, the Chiefs will not. While Pioli has had success with guys drafted later, this guy knows his football and knows he was able to let those guys sit and learn because of franchise QB's in front. I think more than anything he understands how important a great QB is.

Also a thing to keep in mind is the two major times a highly rated QB prospect has fell recently (Quinn and Rodgers) it was because someone else was drafted in front of them. While some people are split I think the vast majority of people have Stafford above Sanchez.

It's already been discussed but I think Sanchez definitely has the ability to fall. If he makes it past the 49'ers at 10 (which I think would be a mistake, but not surprising) the Jets would be a slam dunk to take him at 17. Also the possibility of someone trying to trade in front of that pick.

But its so hard to speculate because every scenario has played about before where teams with perfect fits of need and value pass up guys. And teams are becoming less and less unwilling to give up picks to trade up.

DeathbyStat
02-26-2009, 06:18 AM
I doubt he falls past Detroit so this whole thing is kinda moot.

But i could see the rams taking him

Sveen
02-26-2009, 06:28 AM
I highly doubt Stafford falling out of the top 3, but stranger things has happened. Who would have pictured Brady Quinn falling out of the top 10-15?

Bengalsrocket
02-26-2009, 06:36 AM
http://www.nfl.com/combine/story?id=09000d5d80eea152&template=with-video-with-comments&confirm=true

This Pat Kirwan mock I read has Stafford falling all the way to the Jaguars!

Pat Kirwan is an idiot:

The Bengals have lots of needs, and they tend to ignore defense early in drafts. A wide receiver would work here, and if Crabtree slid they might do it. But they need help on defense. Orakpo is versatile and helps with a pass rush that has to improve.

Really Pat? Bengals ignore defense early in the draft? is it 2001 again?

2008 NFL Draft:
Round 1 - Keith Rivers (9)
Round 3 - Pat Sims (77)
2007 NFL Draft:
Round 1 - Leon Hall (18)
Round 4 - Marvin White (114)
2006 NFL Draft:
Round 1 - Jonathon Joseph (24)
Round 3 - Frostee Ruckers (91)
2005 NFL Draft:
Round 1 - David Pollack (17)
Round 2 - Odell Thurman (48)
2004 NFL Draft:
Round 2 - Keiwan Ratliff (49)
Round 2- Madieu Williams (56)

for the last 5 years we've been pretty good about working on the defense early on. The problem is that we're making bad picks / having bad luck, not that we're ignoring.

Starting with 2004, both Ratliff and Williams left as soon as they hit free agency (they both play pretty big parts for their teams, the colts and the vikings respectively).

in 2005 Thurman got owned by the commissioner, which most people will back me up when I say that punishment wasn't exactly fair. Meanwhile Pollack had a freak career ending injury.

From 2006 on we've kept those six players, all of which are a part of our 12th ranked defense.

Anyways, enough nerd raging over some sports writer - my point is that he's not very good at his job.

bitonti
02-26-2009, 06:44 AM
The Jets have cap issues and to date only have 4 million in cap space.

the Jets are 40 mil under the cap right now

if Stafford gets past 1 he's basically free falling until someone trades up... or until the middle of the round.

wouldn't it be a kick if DET passed on him at 1, and he or sanchez was still there at 20? it could happen

by the way the biggest problem with Matt Stafford is his height. no one wants to pay 60 mil to a 6'2" QB. the top of the draft is about ideal measurables, neither staff nor sanchez have em.

bitonti
02-26-2009, 06:45 AM
I know its too early to call Gholston a bust but I bet the Jets are wishing just a little bit they had gone in another direction...Gholston struggling if he were picked 10 picks later wouldn't have looked nearly as bad.



any suggestions for what that direction should have been?

I have heard alot of people talk about the Gholston pick, I haven't heard 1 other possibility that makes sense. If the Jets pass on VG, they are reaching for someone. Pats take VG at 7, everyone laughs at the Jets. They literally had no other choices worth the selection. you never ever pass up the last blue chip player for a red chip player.

Bengalsrocket
02-26-2009, 06:51 AM
any suggestions for what that direction should have been?

I have heard alot of people talk about the Gholston pick, I haven't heard 1 other possibility that makes sense. If the Jets pass on VG, they are reaching for someone. Pats take VG at 7, everyone laughs at the Jets. They literally had no other choices worth the selection. you never ever pass up the last blue chip player for a red chip player.

VG wasn't really a blue chip player though. Most blue chip players are "can't miss" prospects that are ready to help a team from day 1. VG has a high chance of "missing" and he already missed the part about helping his team from day 1.

Yah, if the pats take VG right after the Jets pass on him, and he turns out to be crazy good, then the jets might look stupid. But everyone would know why he was passed on.

georgiafan
02-26-2009, 07:19 AM
A team that nobody talked about is Seattle and why I don't think they will take a QB stranger things have happened. Hasselbeck is 33 and is coming off a year where he was hurt. Two of his last 3 years he hasn't done much and I belive has a contract coming up soon. The seahawks are rarely picking in the top 10 and if they have a high grade on Stafford they might go ahead and pull the trigger on there QB of the future. 90% of mocks have them taking a WR, but they could get scared away from Crabtree or sign a FA. I'm not saying it's going to happen, but I don't think you can say 100% that they won't take him.

bitonti
02-26-2009, 07:52 AM
A team that nobody talked about is Seattle and why I don't think they will take a QB stranger things have happened. Hasselbeck is 33 and is coming off a year where he was hurt. Two of his last 3 years he hasn't done much and I belive has a contract coming up soon. The seahawks are rarely picking in the top 10 and if they have a high grade on Stafford they might go ahead and pull the trigger on there QB of the future. 90% of mocks have them taking a WR, but they could get scared away from Crabtree or sign a FA. I'm not saying it's going to happen, but I don't think you can say 100% that they won't take him.

if seattle takes stafford, hasselbeck's confidence takes a jake plummer style nose dive. 33 isn't old for a QB. they pass on him.

bitonti
02-26-2009, 07:53 AM
VG wasn't really a blue chip player though. Most blue chip players are "can't miss" prospects that are ready to help a team from day 1. VG has a high chance of "missing" and he already missed the part about helping his team from day 1.

Yah, if the pats take VG right after the Jets pass on him, and he turns out to be crazy good, then the jets might look stupid. But everyone would know why he was passed on.

VG embarassed the #1 overall pick on national TV. that's as blue chip as you can be. if he was less risky he goes higher, maybe even at 1. i still don't have a name that makes sense for the Jets at 6.

MarioPalmer
02-26-2009, 08:21 AM
any suggestions for what that direction should have been?

I have heard alot of people talk about the Gholston pick, I haven't heard 1 other possibility that makes sense. If the Jets pass on VG, they are reaching for someone. Pats take VG at 7, everyone laughs at the Jets. They literally had no other choices worth the selection. you never ever pass up the last blue chip player for a red chip player.

Umm, Gholston or Mayo? The Pats would do it all over again in a heart beat. Gholston is still learnign a position and has major questions to answer, while Mayo along with Rivers was the most well rounded LBs in the 2008 Draft. Not very hard for the Pats to pick.

And who thinks that the Pats automatically pick Gholston? Mayo was their guy from day one.

Crickett
02-26-2009, 08:25 AM
if seattle takes stafford, hasselbeck's confidence takes a jake plummer style nose dive. 33 isn't old for a QB. they pass on him.

Matt Stafford will be 34 this year and yes, thats pretty old, even for a QB.

lionsfan81
02-26-2009, 08:44 AM
Matt Stafford will be 34 this year and yes, thats pretty old, even for a QB.

that must be the oldest QB in the nfl draft ever. Older than even Chris Weinke lol

Crickett
02-26-2009, 08:46 AM
that must be the oldest QB in the nfl draft ever. Older than even Chris Weinke lol

I failed. I meant Matt Hasselbeck

Mr.Regular
02-26-2009, 08:49 AM
I think he is a top 4 lock, and we're talking worst case scenario here.
Detroit should and probably will take him. #2 could be a perfect spot for someone to jump ahead of KC is he drops somehow, plus the Rams COULD take him. If he's at #3 I think the Chiefs would almost be a lock for him, and even if he somehow falls past that Seattle would have to draft him.

BeerBaron
02-26-2009, 09:13 AM
any suggestions for what that direction should have been?

I have heard alot of people talk about the Gholston pick, I haven't heard 1 other possibility that makes sense. If the Jets pass on VG, they are reaching for someone. Pats take VG at 7, everyone laughs at the Jets. They literally had no other choices worth the selection. you never ever pass up the last blue chip player for a red chip player.

How about the eventual DRotY Jerod Mayo? Jets are in need of inside LB help now this year, he would have been a real nice addition. And a guy taken 3 picks later really wouldn't have been a terrible reach...

Crickett
02-26-2009, 09:23 AM
How about the eventual DRotY Jerod Mayo? Jets are in need of inside LB help now this year, he would have been a real nice addition. And a guy taken 3 picks later really wouldn't have been a terrible reach...

At the time, a pass rush was considered to be the biggest need the Jets had. Bryan Thomas had come off of a career worst year and Calvin Pace was not signed, but was not considered by any means a Shawn Merriman or DeMarcus Ware or Terrell Suggs level pass rusher. I would have liked a DRC selection, but #6 is a bit high to draft a #2 corner and at the time is would have been considered a pretty big reach. Look for any 2008 mocks where the Jets drafted a middle linebacker in the first three rounds. I don't think you'll find many.

bored of education
02-26-2009, 09:32 AM
He won't fall past KC. The only way I see it is if both Curry and Stafford are there, and I just don't see that happening.

Between the Lions and Rams, one of Curry and Stafford will be gone, possibly both.

KC's big board should look like this:

1.) Curry
2.) Stafford
3.) Kill self.

that is my exact big board :D

BeerBaron
02-26-2009, 09:33 AM
At the time, a pass rush was considered to be the biggest need the Jets had. Bryan Thomas had come off of a career worst year and Calvin Pace was not signed, but was not considered by any means a Shawn Merriman or DeMarcus Ware or Terrell Suggs level pass rusher. I would have liked a DRC selection, but #6 is a bit high to draft a #2 corner and at the time is would have been considered a pretty big reach. Look for any 2008 mocks where the Jets drafted a middle linebacker in the first three rounds. I don't think you'll find many.

http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2008/03/jets_add_damien_woody_calvin_p.html

Pace was signed by at least March 3rd.

http://www.nfl.com/players/profile?id=00-0021081

And while Thomas was coming off of only 2.5 sacks in 07, he was only 1 year removed from an 8.5 sack season and between he and Pace, I could have seen it justified that they pass on Gholston.

bored of education
02-26-2009, 09:34 AM
I think Orakpo would fit well in KC.

I think its a reach at 3 for Orakpo. The one trick muscle pony doesn't have the technique and pass rush repetoire (sp.) to be a top 5 pick. But thats just how I feel.

GBahDunka
02-26-2009, 09:41 AM
there are about 8 threads dealing with detroit and stafford. Maybe we are all getting draft hungry and giving everything a little bit of a case of over analyzing the whole situation with detroit

Sniper
02-26-2009, 09:42 AM
VG embarassed the #1 overall pick on national TV. that's as blue chip as you can be. if he was less risky he goes higher, maybe even at 1. i still don't have a name that makes sense for the Jets at 6.

I must have missed this "embarrassment". Long gave up one sack to Gholston.

bitonti
02-26-2009, 10:36 AM
Umm, Gholston or Mayo? The Pats would do it all over again in a heart beat. Gholston is still learnign a position and has major questions to answer, while Mayo along with Rivers was the most well rounded LBs in the 2008 Draft. Not very hard for the Pats to pick.

And who thinks that the Pats automatically pick Gholston? Mayo was their guy from day one.


if Mayo was worth the 6 pick the Pats wouldn't have traded down to 10 before they took him.

Sniper
02-26-2009, 10:41 AM
if Mayo was worth the 6 pick the Pats wouldn't have traded down to 10 before they took him.

Not necessarily. Maybe the Pats deemed him worthy of the #6 pick but knew that the teams in front of them had other dire needs. It makes a hell of a lot of sense to trade back, get more ammo, pay less money to the player picked and take the same player you would have taken at the 6 spot.

Crickett
02-26-2009, 10:44 AM
And while Thomas was coming off of only 2.5 sacks in 07, he was only 1 year removed from an 8.5 sack season and between he and Pace, I could have seen it justified that they pass on Gholston.

As I said before, they signed Pace, but Pace while a decent signing really wasn't and still isn't in the category of elite 3-4 OLB's like James Harrison, Shawn Merriman, DeMarcus Ware etc etc, and Thomas played like a starting outside 3-4 linebacker with 2.5 sacks in 2007. No, there really wasn't much justification passing on Gholston with Darren McFadden off of the board. #2 cornerback was a fair need, but how good of an idea is it to address a need like that sixth overall?

To say that the Jets were better of drafting a middle linebacker when they had the middle linebackers they did is 100% pure hindsight. They need one now because three out of the top four ILB's that were on the Jets roster are free agents/cut.

Babylon
02-26-2009, 11:08 AM
Seattle seems to have locked up their LBs and are talking a FA WR coming in. I would be ecstatic if they took Stafford at #4 (he wont be there). Get me one of those #7 jerseys in XL thank you.

eazyb81
02-26-2009, 11:18 AM
He won't fall past KC. The only way I see it is if both Curry and Stafford are there, and I just don't see that happening.

Between the Lions and Rams, one of Curry and Stafford will be gone, possibly both.

KC's big board should look like this:

1.) Curry
2.) Stafford
3.) Kill self.

Um, no.

Why would KC rank a probably 3-4 inside linebacker above not just one, but two potential franchise QBs that could be available when they pick?

The real ranking:

1. Stafford
2. Sanchez
3. Curry or Everette Brown

KC will transition to the 3-4 this year or next year, and they need an edge rusher, so Brown may fit the bill.

Solomon
02-26-2009, 12:30 PM
At the time, a pass rush was considered to be the biggest need the Jets had. Bryan Thomas had come off of a career worst year and Calvin Pace was not signed, but was not considered by any means a Shawn Merriman or DeMarcus Ware or Terrell Suggs level pass rusher. I would have liked a DRC selection, but #6 is a bit high to draft a #2 corner and at the time is would have been considered a pretty big reach. Look for any 2008 mocks where the Jets drafted a middle linebacker in the first three rounds. I don't think you'll find many.

I agree with you completely. With hindsight, sure the Jets should have gone with Mayo. But I guarentee if they had taken him 6th overall last year people on this board would have ripped them for it.

I can see it now:
"You don't take a 3-4 ILB 6th overall!!"
"Wow, the Jets passed on the number one pass rusher in the draft? No wonder they're such a joke"
"Mayo is a workout warriorzzz who only had one good year in college"
"Mayo over Keith Rivers? What are the Jets thinking?" etc.

Gholston was the right pick at the time.

BeerBaron
02-26-2009, 12:37 PM
Um, no.

Why would KC rank a probably 3-4 inside linebacker above not just one, but two potential franchise QBs that could be available when they pick?

The real ranking:

1. Stafford
2. Sanchez
3. Curry or Everette Brown

KC will transition to the 3-4 this year or next year, and they need an edge rusher, so Brown may fit the bill.

I've esentially polled two Chiefs fans on the board already to get their opinions on the Chiefs pick in a big mock I have coming up and BOTH have been in favor of Curry.

When will people get it through their skulls. Mark Sanchez is not a top 3 pick, and he is head and shoulders behind Matt Stafford. The Chiefs taking him at #3 overall, especially with a linebacker capable of being a game changer even if it's inside in Curry, would be a huge and total mistake.

I would listen to an argument of Stafford over Curry, but thats it.

And on the outside LB front, thats just silly. You don't see college DE's who are converting to 3-4 OLB go that high. Gholston last year at 7 was the highest I can even think of right now. Even the current great ones like Merriman and Ware went outside the top 10.

If they Chiefs were staying a 4-3, then maybe. But they won't take a guy who needs to transition that high.

Vikes99ej
02-26-2009, 12:43 PM
Did anyone see McShay and Kiper arguing today on Sportscenter over Stafford? It was pretty intense.

bored of education
02-26-2009, 12:44 PM
I agree with you completely. With hindsight, sure the Jets should have gone with Mayo. But I guarentee if they had taken him 6th overall last year people on this board would have ripped them for it.

I can see it now:
"You don't take a 3-4 ILB 6th overall!!"
"Wow, the Jets passed on the number one pass rusher in the draft? No wonder they're such a joke"
"Mayo is a workout warriorzzz who only had one good year in college"
"Mayo over Keith Rivers? What are the Jets thinking?" etc.

Gholston was the right pick at the time.

Sometimes I would rather be blind than have hindsight. NO ONE PEGGED Mayo that high. I had him going to NE because I knew NE loved him. But it is easy to say now OHH THEY SHOULD HAVE DRAFTED SO AND SO!

nice post thanks sir!

bored of education
02-26-2009, 12:44 PM
Did anyone see McShay and Kiper arguing today on Sportscenter over Stafford? It was pretty intense.

NOOOO WHAT HAPPENED!

TELL ME
!!!!

superman
02-26-2009, 12:50 PM
the top 3 teams could use a qb. i don't see him falling past alllll of them. just one or two would be weird enough.

Vikes99ej
02-26-2009, 01:03 PM
NOOOO WHAT HAPPENED!

TELL ME
!!!!

Basically, Kiper was calling out McShay for saying that Stafford shouldn't be taken by the Lions. Kiper found it interesting that McShay believed he was a top 10 pick, but the Lions shouldn't take him. Kiper feels that if a QB is projected to be a top 10 pick, he can be a franchise QB and taking him with the #1 pick shouldn't be out of the realm of possibility. Good stuff.

vidae
02-26-2009, 01:34 PM
If the draft happened today and both Curry and Stafford were on the board I'd have a hard time deciding who I want more, but if I ABSOLUTELY had to pick I'd lean Stafford. Thigpen showed he was solid but I'm not sure that he'll ever be more than that, just solid, and we need that QB who can take us to the top.

Curry is a very intriguing prospect though, I'm just not sure he's worth more than Stafford to a team like ours.

Vikes99ej
02-26-2009, 02:16 PM
What's the point of having a great linebacker if you have a worthless defensive line? Raji would make more sense than Curry.

bored of education
02-26-2009, 02:18 PM
What's the point of having a great linebacker if you have a worthless defensive line? Raji would make more sense than Curry.

I disagree. Tank has made strides and Dorsey played well in the 2nd half of last year and was put in a psotion where he should not have been. envermidnthe40-50 mil guaranteed you'd have tied up between 2 DTs. Plus, I would not have Raji value as a top 3 player. He is in the top 12 but not top 3.

eazyb81
02-26-2009, 02:19 PM
I've esentially polled two Chiefs fans on the board already to get their opinions on the Chiefs pick in a big mock I have coming up and BOTH have been in favor of Curry.

When will people get it through their skulls. Mark Sanchez is not a top 3 pick, and he is head and shoulders behind Matt Stafford. The Chiefs taking him at #3 overall, especially with a linebacker capable of being a game changer even if it's inside in Curry, would be a huge and total mistake.

I would listen to an argument of Stafford over Curry, but thats it.

And on the outside LB front, thats just silly. You don't see college DE's who are converting to 3-4 OLB go that high. Gholston last year at 7 was the highest I can even think of right now. Even the current great ones like Merriman and Ware went outside the top 10.

If they Chiefs were staying a 4-3, then maybe. But they won't take a guy who needs to transition that high.

A 4-3 linebacker is not a "gamechanger". They tackle in space and defend the 4th or 5th receiving option.

Don't get me wrong, Curry is a great player, but no 4-3 LB is leading a team to a Super Bowl. As Scott has pointed out many times on here, Seattle had a great trio of LBs last year and they sucked ass. Guess why? Because they didn't have a QB.

And I love your argument that 3-4 LBs shouldn't go that high - guess what sherlock, 4-3 LBs don't go that high either. AJ Hawk was the last one - think the Packers might be regretting that pick just a bit? Has Hawk been a "gamechanger" in his role?

You can say all day that you don't think Sanchez is great but most analysts don't agree with you, just like they don't agree with your lame opinions on Maclin.

Who knows, maybe Pioli doesn't like Stafford or Sanchez - no one on here knows. But I do know that Tyler Thigpen is no one's idea of a potential franchise QB, and his presence should not be enough to avoid picking a QB early.

eazyb81
02-26-2009, 02:22 PM
What's the point of having a great linebacker if you have a worthless defensive line? Raji would make more sense than Curry.

A pass rusher would make the most sense, but sadly it doesn't look like there's a dominant one out there.

With Dorsey and Tank, it's hard for me to think Raji should be our 1st rounder, especially if he's just going to occupy blockers in a 3-4.

GBahDunka
02-26-2009, 02:26 PM
maybe they should go out try to sign tank johnson, bring shaun rogers back, or get albert hanesworth.

They get one of them then they can get curry and have him more effective.

build your team with whats available to bring in in free agency

bored of education
02-26-2009, 02:27 PM
maybe they should go out try to sign tank johnson, bring shaun rogers back, or get albert hanesworth.

They get one of them then they can get curry and have him more effective.

build your team with whats available to bring in in free agency

Christ. Dorsey and Haynesworth would be amazing. Alot of money but amazing. Draft Curry and draft the best DE in the 2nd could mean a solid defense . lol

Babylon
02-26-2009, 02:28 PM
Did anyone see McShay and Kiper arguing today on Sportscenter over Stafford? It was pretty intense.

Thankfully no.

Crickett
02-26-2009, 02:39 PM
And I love your argument that 3-4 LBs shouldn't go that high - guess what sherlock, 4-3 LBs don't go that high either. AJ Hawk was the last one - think the Packers might be regretting that pick just a bit? Has Hawk been a "gamechanger" in his role?

Do the Packers regret taking A.J. Hawk?

Here were the next half dozen people taken after A.J. Hawk

Vernon Davis
Michael Huff
Donte Whitner
Ernie Sims
Matt Leinart
Jay Cutler.

Do the Packers regret taking A.J. Hawk? I wouldn't. In fact, even looking in hindsight, the only pick the Packers could have made from the people taken in the top 15 that would have been better was Haloti Ngata IMO.

vidae
02-26-2009, 03:13 PM
I disagree. Tank has made strides and Dorsey played well in the 2nd half of last year and was put in a psotion where he should not have been. envermidnthe40-50 mil guaranteed you'd have tied up between 2 DTs. Plus, I would not have Raji value as a top 3 player. He is in the top 12 but not top 3.

This. If Dorsey is used correctly he will be better than he was last year and Tank actually looked like he was progressing nicely.

Basileus777
02-26-2009, 03:13 PM
If the draft happened today and both Curry and Stafford were on the board I'd have a hard time deciding who I want more, but if I ABSOLUTELY had to pick I'd lean Stafford. Thigpen showed he was solid but I'm not sure that he'll ever be more than that, just solid, and we need that QB who can take us to the top.

Curry is a very intriguing prospect though, I'm just not sure he's worth more than Stafford to a team like ours.

We'd be ******* crazy to pick Curry over Stafford. I like Curry, but he's still a non pass rushing OLB, a position that isn't really worth a top 5 pick to begin with.

bitonti
02-26-2009, 03:29 PM
in this economy, with everyone losing their shirts, stafford could take a serious fall. He's just not that reliable of a bet in this environment.

If this were a few years ago and his competition was Alex Smith and Aaron Rodgers i'd say hey sure why not? or if he were 6'5" and a senior sure that's plausable

but let's get real people, Ford Motor company probably isn't going to spend 70 million dollars on a 6'2 Junior who plays like garbage in big games. And the rest of the top 5 owners probably will think the same... and then the fall begins.

Saints-Tigers
02-26-2009, 03:37 PM
Sanchez is a "potential franchise QB" because he plays for USC. He wouldn't even be mentioned in the top 10, or in Stafford's ball park if he didn't play for SC.

KaneMarko
02-26-2009, 03:37 PM
The idea that "with the success of Thigpen no way in hell the Chiefs take a quarterback in the 1st round" is complete bullcrap. Exactly what Success did Thigpen have? Going 1-10 as a starter? Having a 56% completion percentage (give or take a few tenths)? Only look decent when the team switched the entire offense to one that over the long run does not work in the NFL?

What exactly leads people to believe he is anything special? His horrible accuracy? His below average size for a quarterback? His weak arm?

Totally agree. There is nothing that Thigpen did last year that should deter the Chiefs from taking Stafford at 3 if he's somehow available. Thigpen is a nice story. But so far he's shown only to be a very limited quarterback. And the Chiefs would be VERY un-wise to go into next season with him as their best option.

BeerBaron
02-26-2009, 03:51 PM
We'd be ******* crazy to pick Curry over Stafford. I like Curry, but he's still a non pass rushing OLB, a position that isn't really worth a top 5 pick to begin with.

He'd move inside in the 3-4...and he's a player of enough impact and ability that I think he would make sense going top 3. And I really don't think Stafford will be available, so don't worry about that...

...unless the Lions are still really, really dumb. Hmmm......

Geason Noceur
02-26-2009, 08:45 PM
I believe that once teams see him throw during Georgia's Pro Day that all this talk about freefalling down the draft will dissipate. In my opinion, there's no QB in the country that looks better Stafford in a camp-like setting like that. When Carson Palmer saw him throw next to Sanchez last summer, he said that Stafford was going to be the No. 1 pick whenever he was drafted. An Elite 11 coach, who has coached Sanchez since he was in 8th grade, said that he prefer Stafford. Folks at the Manning Passing Academy raved about his arm when he threw next to Peyton and Eli. I suspect that some GMs will leave Georgia's Pro Day smitten. If Detroit passes on him, I wouldn't be surprised to see some teams pushing and shoving to get to the front of the line to try and get him.

d34ng3l021
02-26-2009, 11:51 PM
Yeah. Matthew Stafford is going to absolutely wow scouts in his Pro Day it seems.

Crickett
02-26-2009, 11:54 PM
Sanchez is a "potential franchise QB" because he plays for USC. He wouldn't even be mentioned in the top 10, or in Stafford's ball park if he didn't play for SC.

You mean like this guy?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/51/091507-USCNeb-JohnDavidBooty.jpg/200px-091507-USCNeb-JohnDavidBooty.jpg

Saints-Tigers
02-27-2009, 12:38 AM
I said he's not a franchise QB or a top 10 type talent, I didn't say he blows monkey balls.

OSUraider
02-27-2009, 11:56 AM
Anyone see the thoughts of SportingNews.com.

1. Detroit Lions
Mark Sanchez, QB, Southern Cal

10. San Francisco 49ers
Matthew Stafford, QB, Georgia

link- http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_ylt=Av0pLr28xY0PAQMWjcrEPl.R2bYF?slug=mockdr aftsanchezontopsta&prov=tsn&type=lgns

or go to SportingNews website, I dont like much of their mock at all.

abaddon41_80
02-27-2009, 12:00 PM
Sanchez is a "potential franchise QB" because he plays for USC. He wouldn't even be mentioned in the top 10, or in Stafford's ball park if he didn't play for SC.

I agree 100%.

Babylon
02-27-2009, 01:30 PM
in this economy, with everyone losing their shirts, stafford could take a serious fall. He's just not that reliable of a bet in this environment.

If this were a few years ago and his competition was Alex Smith and Aaron Rodgers i'd say hey sure why not? or if he were 6'5" and a senior sure that's plausable

but let's get real people, Ford Motor company probably isn't going to spend 70 million dollars on a 6'2 Junior who plays like garbage in big games. And the rest of the top 5 owners probably will think the same... and then the fall begins.


FWIW Ford has been losing it's shorts for quite some time now. You cant equate every day economy to sports teams.

If i were Stafford i would have the Ford family give me 10 million shares of stock as a signing bonus (about a 20 million dollar investment) when it goes to 10 you'd have 100 million dollars.

bitonti
02-27-2009, 02:50 PM
FWIW Ford has been losing it's shorts for quite some time now. You cant equate every day economy to sports teams.

If i were Stafford i would have the Ford family give me 10 million shares of stock as a signing bonus (about a 20 million dollar investment) when it goes to 10 you'd have 100 million dollars.

even if a great economy Stafford is a gamble. Most draft fans don't see that but the Detroit fans do.