If we pretty much have the same roster as we have today, who do you think the Lions will take? Not who you want, but who will they take?

There were no trades. No other team wanted the 1OA. We didn't sign any big name OTs, LBs or QB's.

Who is the Lion's choice?

The Draft is 3 weeks from yesterday. The Lions could have their guy inked a week, or so, prior to the draft, so we should know in the next couple of weeks who the pick is.

I feel like they'll take Smith, just because they want to build from the inside, build the running game up, and get the trenches solidified. Smith will help the running game and the passing game and can solidify the line for years to come. They'll likely look to play him at guard in his rookie year, but if he shows that he's ready to be the starting LT then Backus will slide to guard and we'll be able to finally build up a running game with Kevin Smith and protect our QBs blindside. Having that protection plus the threat of a running game will open things up for our QB so that he's got time to actually go through his reads and let receivers get open. Plus, building the running game will help us run the clock and keep our defense off the field, something we could never do last year which lead to them being worn out and playing even worse than usual.

It's either going to be J. Smith or M. Stafford, IMO. Not sure if, if we sign Ephraim Salaam, if that will change our opinion on Smith.

#3 ... Those are all good reasons and I agree. I flip flopped though after Staff private workout. It appears the Lions were impressed with Staff and I think they take him.

They can still do all those things you mentioned, but draft the OT at 20 or 33. There should still be a starter for years to come there.

I wouldn't be surprised if the did go J Smith, I just think they'll take Staff if they see him as a starter.

It's either going to be J. Smith or M. Stafford, IMO. Not sure if, if we sign Ephraim Salaam, if that will change our opinion on Smith.
I have heard nothing about this....

I know DrRay. I saw that Ephram thing. I thought that might be a sign that they were going QB at 1OA. Then if you read some of the opposing teams boards, they say he isnt' that great.

So maybe he's just a Backus backup?

He would probably be a backup or play LT, moving Backus into guard (that is, if we don't draft an LT or LG, etc). Lots of ways that could play out since we have a lot of flexible guys on the o-line now, especially if Salaam is signed.

I thought for sure most peeps would think the Lions would draft Stafford. WTFChris will help me out tomorrow morning with his vote...or not.

Now I can't remember DrRay you wanted Staff in the last poll and you think Staff? I think thats the way you voted. Or were you a Curry guy?

I voted that they pick Stafford but I would like to see them pick Curry with Smith being my #2.

^ It wouldn't be a HUGE mistake taking Staff though, right? Or aren't you sold on him?

I'm not a 100% sold on the guy but the way I see it is that whomever the Lions pick is only one piece of the puzzle and to be honest I not sold on Bradford or McCoy for next year's draft making the Stafford pick even more logical.

I would like Curry, but I don't think that has a chance of happening and my number 2 is Stafford.

^ It wouldn't be a HUGE mistake taking Staff though, right? Or aren't you sold on him?

I think it would be a huge mistake. I hate it when a team drafts a qb early which basically tells the kid it's on your shoulders to save our franchise. For every one qb drafted early that has gone on to succeed, I'll show you twenty that have flamed out.

That being said, I think the Lions will take Stafford.....they do love to punch me in the jejunum.

For every one qb drafted early that has gone on to succeed, I'll show you twenty that have flamed out.


By early, do you mean top five? Hell, even top 10? If you do, go ahead and show me that ratio, I'm calling your bluff.

The Lions are going to draft Jason Smith and play him at LG next to Backus. Then next year when Backus is gone Smith will move to LT and we will find our guard replacement through FA or via the draft.

It's more likely that we take Smith and play him at LT right away, sliding Backus over to guard. If Backus fails here, he gets cut after the season.

And what's the ratio of good QB's taken in the top 10 vs outside the top 10?

not everybody can find Tom Brady.

Peyton, McNabb, Ryan, Big Ben, Cutler, Eli, Rivers, Palmer. All those guys are top 10 picks (or very close to it).

Brees was a 2nd rounder. Rodges was in the 20's. Brady a 6th rounder. How many other good QB's have been taken outside the top 10?

By early, do you mean top five? Hell, even top 10? If you do, go ahead and show me that ratio, I'm calling your bluff.

ha...good call. But I'll just go off the top of my head and give you some guys that were given the keys to the offense too early.

JaMarcus Russell
Vince Young
Matt Leinart
Alex Smith
JP Losman
David Carr
Kyle Boller
Rex Grossman
Patrick Ramsey
Joey Harrington
Ryan Leaf
Akili Smith

I've just always been of the opinion that a QB shouldn't be starting for a couple years...of course there are exceptions, but I don't think Stafford would be one of those

I think they should let the clock expire one or more times.

JaMarcus Russell - don't know
Vince Young - don't know, likely bust
Matt Leinart - don't know, likely bust
Alex Smith - BUST
JP Losman - not top 10
David Carr - agree, terrible talent around him
Kyle Boller - not top 10
Rex Grossman - not top 10
Patrick Ramsey - not top 10
Joey Harrington - BUST
Ryan Leaf - BUST
Akili Smith - BUST

only 5 of those are legit top 5 busts. half your list are not even top 10 picks, so I don't see how they prove your point.

I give you 5 busts, 3 maybe busts. and there have been these successes in that time frame:

Ryan, Rivers, Eli, Big Ben, Cutler, Peyton, McNabb, Culpepper (prior to injury).

I think he conceded the point, but just wanted to show some guys who have started right away and failed.

They may not be top ten picks but they were guys that started before they should have, which is exactly what would happen to Stafford.

and I'll return the favor with your list

Ryan-don't know (hey, if you can do it, so can I)
Rivers-has had LT to take the pressure off
Eli-never asked to win games by himself, always had a great team around him, including defense
Big Ben-see Eli
Cutler-can't wait to see what he does in a place where qbs' go to die, much like Detroit
Peyton, McNabb, and Culpepper-hey if you think Stafford is at these guys level, then by all means, they should be working on the contract now

I agree forcing him to start right away is a bad idea. But we can't say he would definitely do that. I think they are happy playing DC most of the year. I could see Stafford playing with a few games left though.

It's important that we have a running game if he plays right away. Which means drafting another Olineman or 2.

I'd draft him and start him right now. Go play football. Duck and cover.

I think they should let the clock expire one or more times.

Of course, it would never happen because they'd be an even bigger laughing stock than they already are, but what do you think the Rams would do if the Lions let time expire?

They'd take Stafford, I think.

The player that the Lions draft would hold out until paid #1 money.

If he is who they think he is, yes.

I wanted to try a type of a Denny Green schtick

Edit: didn't realize there was a page 3 when I posted. Chris already made my point.

NFL says Lions are allowed to pass on No. 1 pick
by Tom Kowalski
Monday April 06, 2009, 3:56 PM
The Detroit Lions have the first overall pick in the draft and, according to the league, there are no rules prohibiting the Lions from skipping the pick and waiting until they're good and ready to make that selection. The Lions aren't likely to do that, of course, but why wouldn't they at least look at the possibilities?


If the Lions really want to draft Georgia quarterback Matthew Stafford - and want to save some money, too - why not wait until the No. 3 pick to do it? After all, the St. Louis Rams (currently No. 2) and Kansas City Chiefs (No. 3) aren't likely to take a quarterback. As it stands now, Baylor left tackle Jason Smith and Wake Forest linebacker Aaron Curry would probably be the first two players off the board.

And, if the Lions want to take it a step further, they can wait until the seventh overall pick to get a quarterback - USC's Mark Sanchez. Detroit could snap him up right before the Jacksonville Jaguars pick at No. 8. Or the Lions could wait another pick or two and take Boston College defensive tackle B.J. Raji.

The Lions would prefer to trade out of that No. 1 pick but, so far, there aren't any takers and probably won't be.

I had been under the assumption that the league would frown on a team passing its pick - basically thumbing its nose at the draft process - and that penalties might be possible from the Commissioner's office. That's not the case.

"If a club passes during the draft, it gives up its pick at that point and can re-enter at any point to make its selection,'' said NFL spokesman Greg Aiello.

I then wondered if Detroit skipped down to No. 5, whether that pick would be considered the real No. 1 pick (because he was taken by Detroit) or the No. 5 choice.

"To use your example,'' Aiello wrote in an e-mail, "if a player is selected 5th, he is the 5th pick. There is no other way to view it.''

And no potential fines or sanctions coming from Commissioner Roger Goodell?

"It has never been an issue,'' Aiello wrote. "There is no penalty for passing, other than losing a higher pick.''

Back in 2003, the Minnesota Vikings were picking seventh overall and they were trying to trade back, believing they could move back and still get the guy they wanted (DT Kevin Williams). The Vikings ended up missing their turn and also the next one and ended up drafting Williams with the ninth overall choice.

Let's say the Lions move back to seventh and get Sanchez or Raji - or somebody else. If they stay at No. 1, it appears they'd have to pay that player about $32 million in guaranteed money. Last year's seventh overall pick - Sedrick Ellis - got $19.5 million in guaranteed dough. This year's pick will get a little more, of course, but the Lions could still save themselves about $12 million. (Last year's No. 3 pick - quarterback Matt Ryan - got $27.3 million in guaranteed money.)

The Lions are a pretty traditional team and it's not likely that president Tom Lewand or general manager Martin Mayhew will be interested in bucking the system. Then again, to gain a competitive advantage, you never know.

It all boils down to whether the Lions are really happy with who they're going to take at No. 1 - and whether the ability to negotiate a deal before the draft is worth the advantage. Here's the other thing - because the Lions are allowed to negotiate with players before the draft, there's nothing stopping them from negotiating with Stafford as the No. 3 player, not the No. 1. They can't sign him to a deal, but they can find out the ballpark figures for what it's going to take.

If you're thinking that the Seahawks or some other team might leapfrog ahead of the Lions and take their player, it's possible. But the beauty of being 0-16 is that there are a lot of players who can help you immediately. If you get leapfrogged, take Curry instead. Or drop down and take Sanchez or Raji. The possibilities are endless.

Again, the odds of this happening are remote ... then again, aren't the Lions always telling us that they plan to do all of their due diligence to prepare for this draft? Wouldn't a strategic delay in drafting fall into that category?

Well I'll be damned.

If it helps us pay less and the guy they want will fall, then go for it. Everything I read said that it'd still be considered the 1OA. I'm not sure about all of that.

Maybe they'd be happy with Staff, Curry, Smith or Monroe and will step in at 4 and take the last of the bunch and attempt to negotiate from that standpoint.

I really don't see how that would work. If you are Stafford's agent are you going to be happy that they simply waited a few picks to get you to save money? There is no salary slotting, so whoever they picked can still demand #1 money. You'll just create an unhappy draft pick doing that shit.

It would have to be something were they were forced into missing their pick (like how Minny was working on a trade). maybe if they couldn't get the deal worked out or something. that way it's stafford's fault they couldn't get him #1.

^^Exactly. By skipping our turn, the player we pick will hold out for no. 1 money anyways. It's a stupid notion, sorry to those that support it.

I'm not sure that anyone is supporting it.

It certainly doesn't get you off on the right foot with your draft pick.

I don't think anyone here knows enough for sure about it to support or debunk it.

It will basically be up to the league, cuz they set the rookie pool. I think they would have a say in all of it.

The league doesn't have much at all to do with rookie salaries at this point. It is crucial that they implement a rookie salary structure next go 'round.

Well they do set the rookie pool, and if I'm understanding all of that correctly, they would have some say whether its the 1st or the 4th pick.

Well, if we waited til the 4th pick, they can say it's the 4th pick all they want, and it would be the 4th pick, but the player can still hold out.

My point is if the league sets it at 4th, then the Lions have some ammo for calling it a 4th.

The rookie pool will be announced prior to the draft, so I don't know if they'd backtrack or not. But I expect the league will have some input on this...if the Lions were going to try it...which I doubt.

This is assuming the Lions really want Stafford... if it's someone else there's too much risk.
It does beg the question... what's the lowest offer we're willing to accept for moving back to a top 10 pick... another 2nd?

At this point, if I was happy with any of the top 3 or 4, or if the guy I really wanted wasn't considered top 4 (Orakpo, Raji, Sanchez), I'd be willing to trade back a few spots even just for a 5th or 6th rounder. You're still getting the guy you want, you're saving money, and you're getting an extra pick. I'd try to get the best deal I could, but in the end I'd take a later pick because it still works out in my favor.

PFT: Lions current plan is to draft Matthew Stafford
Posted by Philip Zaroo | MLive.com April 08, 2009 12:33PM
Thought they're not citing any sources, ProFootballTalk.com is reporting that the Detroit Lions are closer to taking Georgia quarterback Matthew Stafford with the No. 1 overall pick.

ProFootballTalk.com, April 8: If what we're hearing and how we're hearing it is part of the smokescreen process, then they're doing a fabulous job of it.
Based on the organization's recent history, however, it's more likely that they aren't quite as crafty about spreading misinformation as this specific tactic would require. (For obvious reasons, we can't disclose how we obtained the information.)

It's hard to speak to this with anything other than speculation, but I'm inclined to think the Lions are going to do the opposite of what it appears. That's not just because I think they should take Wake Forest linebacker Aaron Curry, either.

If the Lions are getting closer to taking someone, it's because another day has passed. Whoever the Lions take, ultimately, I think will be decided by who they can sign before the draft. Can you imagine how disastrous it would be for the Lions to take Stafford without a contract, then have him hold out for some or most of training camp?

Get er done

Yeah you can just about count on them doing the opposite of the "leaked" scoop.

"Hello."

"Joe Dumars? Hi there, Martin Mayhew here. I was wondering if you could help me. I have ProFootball Talk all in my ass and I need to feed them misinformation. How do you always do it?"

"Do they have a moron named McCosky writing for them....?"

^LMAO

57.14% of the peeps voting WILL be wrong