Detroit Lions FA Thread

[boogerlovejoy]

If we draft more offense its clear sign they think stafford cant get the job done to the point they need to keep adding more and more around him in order to be productive. Watkins is an elite piece that the second we draft him makes me hate the tate signing even more cause he'd be lucky to get 500 yards lol. sooo you have tp think do i want a rd 1 2 and 4 player to help my defense/depth. Or do i want 1 guy that will ensure my offense is elite, ill roll with no depth and below average defense, ill downgrade my prize fa signing to a 3 wr at best, and then after all that i have to pray stafford gets his head out of his ass. Trading up for watkins is a huge risk. Id almost rather them trade up for clowney cause it covers a more important need imo.

N.O. must think Brees is fucking terrible then.....with all the talent at WR and RB they've had the last few years.

Washington must be just about to cut RGIII......adding DJax clearly shows how bad they think he is.

Or...............it's always a good idea to add a talented player when given the chance. You're just too fuckin dumb to know that!

 

[mhughes0021]

N.O. must think Brees is fucking terrible then.....with all the talent at WR and RB they've had the last few years.

Washington must be just about to cut RGIII......adding DJax clearly shows how bad they think he is.

Or...............it's always a good idea to add a talented player when given the chance. You're just too fuckin dumb to know that!

Yup rg3 has a ton of pieces around him. A 6th rd rb and who else....santana moss? Is he retired yet? Wash has one of the worst receiving corps in the NFL. Just goes to show how fucking dumb you are. Thanks for posting....my day is always a little brighter when I get to flick a booger in the morning. Fucking retarded lol...cause trading half your draft can even compare to picking up djax on the open market lol. My god ur dumb....

 

[inkfreq]

This argument is no different than saying "IF they draft a CB, it shows they don't think Suh can get the job done at the line"....

It makes ZERO sense. Sorry bro, but this is the weakest argument I think you have ever made on this board.

Some teams draft to their weakness. Some draft to their strength. Some draft best player available.

.. and then you have Oakland and Cleveland. I have no idea what they are trying to do.

 

[LKP]

Yup rg3 has a ton of pieces around him. A 6th rd rb and who else....santana moss? Is he retired yet? Wash has one of the worst receiving corps in the NFL. Just goes to show how fucking dumb you are. Thanks for posting....my day is always a little brighter when I get to flick a booger in the morning. Fucking retarded lol...cause trading half your draft can even compare to picking up djax on the open market lol. My god ur dumb....

Pierre Garcon and Jordan Reed

 

[boogerlovejoy]

Yup rg3 has a ton of pieces around him. A 6th rd rb and who else....santana moss? Is he retired yet? Wash has one of the worst receiving corps in the NFL. Just goes to show how fucking dumb you are. Thanks for posting....my day is always a little brighter when I get to flick a booger in the morning. Fucking retarded lol...cause trading half your draft can even compare to picking up djax on the open market lol. My god ur dumb....

Lol.....Pierre Gar?on? Ever heard of him? Pretty decent year.

Morris is one of the best backs in the NFL.....why does it matter where he was drafted?? Oh yeah, it doesn't.

You have very little football knowledge. Adding weapons doesn't mean you don't believe in your QB. The fact you actually believe that is hilarious.

 

[tomdalton22]

N.O. must think Brees is fucking terrible then.....with all the talent at WR and RB they've had the last few years.

Washington must be just about to cut RGIII......adding DJax clearly shows how bad they think he is.

Or...............it's always a good idea to add a talented player when given the chance. You're just too fuckin dumb to know that!

actually, if you look at the talent around Brees it isn't that great. Jimmy Grahm is a great TE but Colston is a shell of his old self and the rest of the WR are nothing special. The difference is Brees is a great QB and Stafford is slightly above average (for a starter)

 

[inkfreq]

actually, if you look at the talent around Brees it isn't that great. Jimmy Grahm is a great TE but Colston is a shell of his old self and the rest of the WR are nothing special. The difference is Brees is a great QB and Stafford is slightly above average (for a starter)

But the argument that drafting a WR in the first is a sign they don't believe in Stafford is still akin to saying Denver signing Wes Welker was an indication they didn't believe in Peyton.

Teams want to build by acquiring talent. If they feel Watkins is the most talented impact player in this draft, then taking him at #10 is an intelligent move, not a sign you don't believe in your QB.

A lot of people would argue that Marino should have one a SuperBowl, but he never hard receivers, or when he had receivers, he had no running game. But this logic indicates that if they gave him weapons, they didn't believe in him.

I would say that if they draft a WR in the first, they don't believe in the receivers behind Calvin and Golden... and they have no reason to. But the bigger reason is they feel Watkins is the best talent in the draft.

 

[tomdalton22]

But the argument that drafting a WR in the first is a sign they don't believe in Stafford is still akin to saying Denver signing Wes Welker was an indication they didn't believe in Peyton.

Teams want to build by acquiring talent. If they feel Watkins is the most talented impact player in this draft, then taking him at #10 is an intelligent move, not a sign you don't believe in your QB.

A lot of people would argue that Marino should have one a SuperBowl, but he never hard receivers, or when he had receivers, he had no running game. But this logic indicates that if they gave him weapons, they didn't believe in him.

I would say that if they draft a WR in the first, they don't believe in the receivers behind Calvin and Golden... and they have no reason to. But the bigger reason is they feel Watkins is the best talent in the draft.

I agree with a lot of what you say here. First, if Watkins is there at 10 the Lions would be dancing in the streets. I'm not sure I would take him there without looking at what would be offered via trade. However, that is not going to happen as he will be gone before 10.

Personally, I feel that Tate can be a suitable #2 and the Lions have more pressing needs on defense. If Stafford can't succeed with CJ, Tate, Bush & Bell along with a few other average guys then I think the Lions have an issue at QB.

 

[boogerlovejoy]

I agree with a lot of what you say here. First, if Watkins is there at 10 the Lions would be dancing in the streets. I'm not sure I would take him there without looking at what would be offered via trade. However, that is not going to happen as he will be gone before 10.

Personally, I feel that Tate can be a suitable #2 and the Lions have more pressing needs on defense. If Stafford can't succeed with CJ, Tate, Bush & Bell along with a few other average guys then I think the Lions have an issue at QB.

To me, the Watkins debate all comes down to what they'd have to give up to get him. You can't sacrifice the entire top of your draft to get one guy when there are clearly other holes to fill.

Now, if you can move up and not have to give up too much.....he is an instant game changer to this offense and would give or WR corps great depth.....something it hasn't had since the Moore/Perriman/Morton days. AND.....if they do move up to get him, it better mean that they are aggressive in the post draft FA period. They would need to grab a few quality veterans that get cut... to fill the voids they had to give up... to get Watkins.

 

[mhughes0021]

But the argument that drafting a WR in the first is a sign they don't believe in Stafford is still akin to saying Denver signing Wes Welker was an indication they didn't believe in Peyton.

Teams want to build by acquiring talent. If they feel Watkins is the most talented impact player in this draft, then taking him at #10 is an intelligent move, not a sign you don't believe in your QB.

A lot of people would argue that Marino should have one a SuperBowl, but he never hard receivers, or when he had receivers, he had no running game. But this logic indicates that if they gave him weapons, they didn't believe in him.

I would say that if they draft a WR in the first, they don't believe in the receivers behind Calvin and Golden... and they have no reason to. But the bigger reason is they feel Watkins is the best talent in the draft.

I have no problem drafting watkins in the first. The problem is giving up half ur draft to get him. Youre right.....JUST adding pieces doesn't necessarily mean you have no faith in your qb. But when EVERYTHING you do is to help him, then it becomes a problem. We picked a coach cause of him, an oc to help him, tate to help him (which has been extensively argued was at the expense of helping the defense). If were making all these decisions and continues to fail we HAVE to move on so we can focus on putting a team together instead of what's in the best interest of stafford. If you trade half ur draft away for yet another stafford weapon....its getting slightly ridiculous how much help this guy needs in order to be successful.

 

[LKP]

I have no problem drafting watkins in the first. The problem is giving up half ur draft to get him. Youre right.....JUST adding pieces doesn't necessarily mean you have no faith in your qb. But when EVERYTHING you do is to help him, then it becomes a problem. We picked a coach cause of him, an oc to help him, tate to help him (which has been extensively argued was at the expense of helping the defense). If were making all these decisions and continues to fail we HAVE to move on so we can focus on putting a team together instead of what's in the best interest of stafford. If you trade half ur draft away for yet another stafford weapon....its getting slightly ridiculous how much help this guy needs in order to be successful.

Continue to Fail? It's April. Going mostly offense may be the correct call. We'll see.

 

[mhughes0021]

actually, if you look at the talent around Brees it isn't that great. Jimmy Grahm is a great TE but Colston is a shell of his old self and the rest of the WR are nothing special. The difference is Brees is a great QB and Stafford is slightly above average (for a starter)

Not to mention they have no issue shedding weapons when its not in the best interest of the TEAM. Sproles and Moore gone because they know they're replaceable cause brees can overcome the losses and make the guys around him better. Stafford has never made anyone better....its been one failed attempt after another.

 

[LKP]

Not to mention they have no issue shedding weapons when its not in the best interest of the TEAM. Sproles and Moore gone because they know they're replaceable cause breed can overcome the losses and make the guys around him better. Stafford has never made anyone better....its been one failed attempt after another.

Unknown with life without Sproles and Moore right now. Stay tuned.

 

[boogerlovejoy]

I have no problem drafting watkins in the first. The problem is giving up half ur draft to get him. Youre right.....JUST adding pieces doesn't necessarily mean you have no faith in your qb. But when EVERYTHING you do is to help him, then it becomes a problem. We picked a coach cause of him, an oc to help him, tate to help him (which has been extensively argued was at the expense of helping the defense). If were making all these decisions and continues to fail we HAVE to move on so we can focus on putting a team together instead of what's in the best interest of stafford. If you trade half ur draft away for yet another stafford weapon....its getting slightly ridiculous how much help this guy needs in order to be successful.

We hired an OC that can help our QB?

Well fuck, we're probably the only team in history to do that!!!

Great point, Einstein!!!!

 

[mhughes0021]

Continue to Fail? It's April. Going mostly offense may be the correct call. We'll see.

Helping the offense at the expense of the defense has resulted in 4 wins and 7 wins...thats failure. See the broyles pick as an example. Spending money on tate/pettigrew is another which I understand I feel more strongly about than some of you...but regardless its spending on O instead of D.

 

[mhughes0021]

We hired an OC that can help our QB?

Well fuck, we're probably the only team in history to do that!!!

Great point, Einstein!!!!

But does every other team invite their qb to have input on the hire?

 

[LKP]

Helping the offense at the expense of the defense has resulted in 4 wins and 7 wins...thats failure. See the broyles pick as an example. Spending money on tate/pettigrew is another which I understand I feel more strongly about than some of you...but regardless its spending on O instead of D.

We've gone Defense Round 1 the 3 of the last 4 years. And Reiff is a LT. Shhhhh hughes. Shhhhhhhhhhhhh

The offense got hurt, had turnovers and it hurt the defense.

 

[LKP]

On top of Round 1 D

Defense Round 2 and 4 2013
Defense Round 3 and 4 2012, plus re-sign of Tulloch,Avril,Levy,Sammie Lee Hill to various contracts
2011 sign Tulloch,Durant,Houston,Wright, then Fairley Round 1
2010 Suh Round 1, Spievey Round 3. KVB contract

Plenty of fire power used on defense.

 

[mhughes0021]

We've gone Defense Round 1 the 3 of the last 4 years. And Reiff is a LT. Shhhhh hughes. Shhhhhhhhhhhhh

The offense got hurt, had turnovers and it hurt the defense.

Yup....all staffords fault houston couldn't cover last year.

 

[LKP]

Yup....all staffords fault houston couldn't cover last year.

That would be injuries for some (Underwood, Jones). Good double move by Green though (wasn't on tape before). Don't know how he missed on Brown. He had a down year. He can reboudn to 2011/2012 level. Easily