RedRamage

Honestly, I'm getting tired of you taking one thing I said and then applying that one piece as if it's a universal rule I'm advocating. I never said we can only draft if we have multiple 1sts. Having multiple 1st rounds this year is ONE reason that the Lions could consider taking a shot IF there's a guy at 6 that they see having a real shot of being a franchise type player.

No, no, and no. Based on what I see... what QBs are in this draft... I wouldn't do it. But I also know that I don't know what Holmes knows. From where I'm sitting everything looks like a change up outside... but I also know that I'm sitting in the nose bleed section. Holmes is in the batters box. He better key his eye out for a fast ball down the middle. IF he see it, he should swing away. The assurances I asked for is essentially saying: Can you guarantee that next pitch will be a ball in the 3-0 count will be a ball? If see, then Holmes shouldn't even think about swinging. If you can't guarantee that it will be a ball... then he better be ready to swing, just in case. No, you didn't. You talked about Goff getting drafted in 2016 and said that the Lions were in a similar situation because in 2016 they came off a 9 win season except Goff was drafted before the 2016 season, not after.

Again, the situation was different then. Worse team, no second 1st round pick. New front office, new coaching staff. Not a situation where you swing for the fences. Disclaimer just to make it super duper abundantly clear... using my other analogy: Right now it's 3-0 count, runner on 3rd, no outs... IF it's a fast ball down the middle, swing away. If it's a slider outside and low, then don't swing away.

Yes, Goff was very good in 2022. No question. Can you assure me that: 1. Goff will be as good (or nearly as good) in 2023? 2. Goff will not ask for a very large extension after 2023? 3. Goff will not have an career ending injury? I'd say probably yes to 1, maybe yes to 2, and probably no to 3. But I can't assure that and I doubt Brad Holmes can either. So it at least makes sense to *think* about the QB position. Yes, the defense was very bad last year, particularly in the secondary... and guess what: They've done a LOT in FA to work on that. So yes, we're in a 3-0 count, no outs, runner on third base. We're in a position where we could swing for the fences if we see what looks like a fast ball coming down the middle. You got a few things wrong there... 2015 Lions season: 7-9 2016, Jan: Quinn hired 2016, April: Goff drafted 2016 Lions season: 9-7 In the 2016 draft Quinn was brand new, so this was his first draft and the Lions were 7-9. Their draft pick was at 16. So, not coming off a great year, not with a GM who had a track record, not with a high draft pick, not with a second draft pick in the first round, not with a feeling that they are front runners for the division BEFORE the draft. So no... going into the 2016 draft the Lions aren't anything like the Lions going into the 2023 draft.

I don't recall too many situations with Stafford in which: 1. We had two first round picks 2. We had a mostly complete team (on paper) 3. We had faith in our GM to make good evaluations of players 4. We had faith in our GM to find diamonds in later rounds 5. We had Stafford on the verge of a his contract running out Show me a year where we had all 5 of those things and I'd probably see some logic in looking at the QB position and evaluating long term solutions. I do seem to remember many times arguing with people that weren't super high on Stafford (not that they hated him, just that they weren't sold that he was the answer) and saying that we have much bigger issues on the team than QB. Let's address those first then we can talk about upgrading QB if need be. That seems kinda like the situation we're in right now.

At the risk of getting labeled a Goff hater... The Lions right now don't have too many obvious, huge holes -- at least on paper. (We'll see if the paper stands up to the 2023 season.) But again, on paper there's not obvious huge holes that NEED to filled in the draft of the team will stink. So... we can, in theory, use a pick on a luxury item. We can "waste" a pick on a player who likely won't be contributing to the team this year without being a joke of a team. That's why we could but why should we? The reasoning for those who want to do it (for the record, I don't!) is two fold: First, we don't know if the 2022 Goff will be the 2023 Goff. Goff has had good season in his career, but he's also had bad season too. He hasn't exactly had a high level of consistent performance year to year to year. (There are many reasons for this and I'm sure others will tell me how I'm wrong to even suggest that Goff's past poor performance is his fault... let's just say that it isn't all his fault.) So if we can't count on Goff for 100% sure, we should be ready for his replacement. Second, if Goff does perform very well he could get very expensive, very soon. Let's say that 2023 Goff takes the Lions to the SB and then starts wanting a big contract extension but the Lions don't want to pay him. Going into the 2024 draft, they'll be picking number 31. Not too many franchise QBs will be available at that spot. However... at position 6 in the 2023 draft... maybe there is a franchise QB there. While we have the luxury of a pretty complete team, why not get that insurance that if Goff makes a huge money demand we aren't over a barrel where we can to pay him or suck with Nate Sudfeld as our starting QB in 2024? Taking a QB at 6 this year doesn't mean we can't have Goff in 2023 or 2024 or even beyond... it just gives us flexibility if Goff gets too expensive or if he regresses. And having a pretty complete team AND a second 1st round pick means we can absorb a pick that doesn't play in 2023.

Agreed... and I hope the Lions don't get into a bidding war... I mean, unless it's the Bears, Packers, or Vikings... then I want them to get into a bidding war then drop out at the last minute making one of those teams over pay.

Dear heavens... I want to see that website! Somewhat in GB's defense... they can't do a whole lot until the Rodgers situation gets resolved. And right now I think the Jets have the better hand. They can probably deal with not having Rodgers better than GB can in having Rodgers. Jets have other options at QB so they could still field a team. They could explain the situation to the fans a bit with: "We tried to trade for Rodgers... we gave a fair offer for an aging QB... but they won't negotiate with us in good faith." Compare that with GB who'll argue: "They didn't give us what we thought we should get so... now we're stuck with a QB who doesn't want to play for us that we're paying a huge amount of money to and who's value is dropping every week of the season." So GB's in a bad situation right now.

No idea if Anderson intended it this way, but I've always taken "40 games" as more of: "Wait until 1/4 of the season if over before any 'Hot Takes'." Which of course I've completely ignored by starting this whole thread.

Well, as I said... I do hope I'm wrong. I'll update this periodically and like I said I'll be extremely pleased if y'all can laugh at me in a few weeks or months for even thinking there is any similarity between the two years.

Here's another: 2003: alt.sports.baseball.detroit-tigers 2023: Motownforums.com

I sincerely hope that this is just yet another slow start for the Tigers. I sincerely hope that in a few weeks y'all will be making fun of me for even thinking that a thread like this tracking the two years was necessary. I really, really hope that... Through 9 games: 2003: 0-9, R = 9, RA = 14, pW/L = 1-8 2023: 2-7, R = 27, RA = 62, pW/L = 0-9 For Pythagorean Theorem, I'm using this formula from Baseball-Reference: W%=[(Runs Scored)^1.81]/[(Runs Scored)^1.81 + (Runs Allowed)^1.81]

That seems like way to little of a return for moving up to #3.

That was a very cool ceremonial opening pitch.

Yeah, I mean there's a million ways to try to over analyze this. Are the Bears a bigger name in Europe vs. the Lions? Is the NFL trying to show case Fields (definitely an electric player... questionable if he will be a long term NFL star, but certain electric and exciting to watch)? Is the NFL hoping to showcase the SB champs and give them an easier chance at a big victory on the international stage? Does the NFL think that the Lions will be an even bigger deal in 2024 so wants to showcase them internationally next year? How many licks does it take to get to the Tootsie Roll center of a Tootsie Pop?

Can't say I blame him. I mean he's got millions (assuming he's saved/invested some) already... probably more money than he needs for the rest of his life, and the NFL is brutal on player's bodies. I think it's also pretty admirable that he's announcing it way in advance (assume he doesn't change his mind) so that the Dolphins can plan appropriately. Now he is saying he'll play out his contract so it's not like if he retired in 2025 after his contact was up that the Dolphins would be left in a lurch, taken by surprise and scrambling to fill a hole, but still I think it's pretty cool to give lots and lots of notice so the Dolphins can play appropriately.

Yeah the mocked picks seem bad, but I liked the trade.

That seems like a lot for Simmons.

This is from: https://www.footballguys.com/article/2023-williams-mock-draft-2 I think I'd do that trade. Get a second 1st and 2nd rounder next year when there isn't a guy that I think is lock pick for the 6th pick right now. I don't love losing pick 81 but we would also get 119. Interestingly they have Carter falling all the way to 26. I don't think I'd mind the Lions taking a shot at Carter at 18 or 23 if it played out this way. FWIW, they have the Lions taking Brian Branch (S) at 18 and Drew Sanders (LB) at 23.

Darn good thing we got Boyd out of there isn't it?

Yeah, I mean I guess... I don't see it working personally. I don't see a GM at the 8-10 range going: "Oh man, he dropped to me and he's supposed to be a clear cut top 10? Well, then I'm grabbing him!" What I do see happening is teams in the 11-15 range going: "He's an undeniable talent, but I'm worried about the red flags. Sure wish I had an opportunity to interview him one on one to try to answer some of those questions. Without that chance I just not sure I'm gonna take a flier on him."

So that's what Carter was doing between the Combine and pro-day...

I know there's a limit on how many players a team can bring in, but there isn't a limit on how many teams a player can visit, is there? I'm trying to understand the move here as I'm sure it's coming from the agent, not from Carter himself. I mean, I suppose it's possible Carter is calling this shot, but I can't see any agent agreeing to that unless s/he thought it was a good idea too. The only thing I can think of is that they're trying to play like Carter's stock isn't dropping or in jeopardy from the various things that have happened. Like: "Yeah, we're so confident that we're going in the top 10, there's no need to even talk to anyone else." Personally this seems like a super stupid move by Carter's agent. This feels like it's coming off as arrogant. I think Carter visiting a bunch of teams and having good interviews with them would be a way to really raise his stock and maybe get a team to trade up for him if he starts to slip a bit. I wonder if the agent is worried that Carter won't interview well?