If the Lions were to have a draft like this...http://cdsdraft.com/mocks/member-mocks/index.php?id=6354...I think that their starting lineup would be very solid, and could win them at least 6 games. The guys with a star next to their names are the guys who are from the draft. There will still be a few holes, but most of them can be filled very easily. Check it out...


QB: Matthew Stafford, QB, Georgia*
RB: Kevin Smith
FB: Jerome Felton(Possibly Jon Bradley if he returns well from injury)
WR1: Calvin Johnson
WR2: Bryant Johnson
TE: Michael Gaines(They are looking for a TE and may have to resort to drafting one)
LT: Will Beatty
LG: Stephen Peterman or Jeff Backus(Possibly even Louis Vasquez*)
C: Dominic Raiola(Maybe trade Raiola for more picks and use Edwin Williams*)
RG: Manny Ramirez(if Peterman starts at LG, if not, then its Stephen Peterman)
RT: Gosder Cherilus

DEFENSE
LE: Dewayne White
DT: Cory Redding
DT: Grady Jackson
RE: Cliff Avril
WLB: Ernie Sims
MLB: Jasper Brinkley*
SLB: James Laurinaitis*
CB1: Anthony Henry
CB2: Phillip Buchanon
FS: Daniel Bullocks
SS: Reshard Langford*

I don't know if you should throw Stafford in right away. If Culpepper and CJ can get on the same page, and you bulk up that O and D line I see no problem with you guys possibly even making a run for the NFC North title. That depends ALOT on that Culpepper/Johnson connection though. If they can get something going I wouldn't be shocked to see the Lions in the playoffs....call me crazy...

Well Culcrapper has ZERO accuracy, so there is no way he could help at all. I'm not saying they throw Stafford in right away, but they should start him sometime this season. I think that they could really do well this year, but it will all depend on how other teams in their division do, and not how well or poor they do. Stafford has to get some playing time this year, and I think that if he is drafted, then he must play by the mid point of the season if they are not winning, but if they are, then keep him out the whole year. And I can't call you crazy for thinking the Lions could make the playoffs, because I too think that they could get close, if not in, but like I said, it really isn't in their hands, but rather in the hands of Green Bay and Minnesota, as they have more of a chance. If either of those teams fail to perform, then look for Detroit to be there.

likes like maybe 3 more wins than they had last year.......whoopie

i agree with yerck. culpepper/CJ has some shades of culpepper/moss in that all you have to do is throw it up, and hope he can come down with it. you guys (the lions) aren't going to do much this year, anyway, so why not take curry at 1? best defensive player (and prospect, period, according to many). then, take a QB in '10. you'll have a top 3 pick then, too.

Curry at number one would be great, but I don't really think the Lions are going after him. With Stafford's ties to Bobby Lane, it looks like he may be the pick. The Lions also could get Laurinaitis, or another great LB in the second, while they couldn't get a great QB with the exception of Freeman in the second, and he may need at least 2 years before he could start. And Detroit will NOT have a top 3 pick next year. Things are going to get MUCH better this year. I could see them winning between 6-9 games if they can keep healthy. Kevin Smith and Calvin Johnson really showed what they were made of, and with a little help, they could carry this team to a very respectable record.

if smith and johnson "showed what they were made of," why didn't that propel them to at least one win last season?

by no means am i a lions fan. however, since i live in michigan (albeit on the west side), i have the "privilege" of watching pretty much every lions game every sunday. it's frustrating, to say the least, that that's what i have to watch. that being said, i don't think they'll go winless next season, but i also don't think that taking stafford at 1 will propel them to a 6-9 win season. there are a lot of holes on that team, and i think that you almost should take BPA in this draft to fill some of those holes. bolster the defense. improve your o-line (especially important for a young QB). take a QB in '10.

hell, if you wanted to take laurinaitis in the 2nd, then take OT with the first pick. while i think that stafford is/could be a better prospect than david carr was, the fact that carr spent more time on his back than paris hilton his rookie year probably played a big part in him being a bust. houston had no o-line that year, and look how that treated them.

you don't go 0-16 if you don't have major problems with your team. i would be both extremely surprised, and extremely impressed, if the lions were around .500 this season.

The biggest thing to me is, Stafford is not one of those consensus "can't miss QB's"!!!!!
I absolutely wouldn't take him with the first overall pick.

The lions need to and can afford to take BPA every pick in the draft and thats the way it should be.

Build a team then fill in the QB spot.

Next years QB seems to be better than this one as of right now.

If I were GM of the lions I would take Curry or which ever OT I had highest on my board. (it's Monroe on my board)

I honestley think the lions won't take Stafford and he could fall to San Fran unless someone trades up for him.

I haven't seen anyone on this site or for that matter any expert really praise and love stafford..... so why the h3ll do most people have him going number 1?

Yeah, yeah I know the statistics on Qbs and the first pick, but come on now.

If there was ever a team that needs to pick to fill needs this version of the Detroit Lions is it. There is no good pick to be made at #1, but the hunt for a potential franchise QB is as good a gamble to make at #1 as any.

BTW...I agree that Stafford if NOT the #1 player available, as our Top 100 clearly illustrates.

Alright, since none of you are Lions fans, it is hard for you guys to clearly see what the issues are. Even though Calvin Johnson and Kevin Smith had great years, the problems were on defense, at QB, and on the o-line. This leaves the Lions with one of three picks; o-line, defense, or QB. Now, the Lions have been addressing the defense very well this offseason, and my guess is that they are going to draft mostly defense as well. The area of need they made an attempt at upgrading is QB. This was a failed attempt, but it shows that they want a QB, and since the attempt failed, it looks as if they are going to be drafting one. My guess is that Stafford will be that QB. The area that they have just mildly addressed is the o-line, meaning that they must be planning on drafting an o-lineman in this draft at some point, most likely at pick 20 as they will be looking for a franchise LT moreso than anything. With this class being very deep in OTs, the Lions will most likely go QB number one.

By your logic do you never give your opinion on other teams because you are a Lion fan? I disagree with us not being able to see what the lions need. I don't believe that we all watch the lions on an imaginary tv that shows us one game and lion fans a total different game.

OK so the lions need Def, Oline and QB. Why wouldn't curry, monroe or jason smith be good picks? The 3 of them seem to be rated so high on everyones board and QB is such a high risk position!

Oh well, none of really know whats going to happen. GM's do crazy things on draft day.

it's not hard for me to see the problems. i'm forced to watch their games.

and, with kitna, orlovsky, and (if i'm remembering right) an injured stanton, OF COURSE you would want to try to upgrade your QB position. as soon a culpepper came in, he was better than what the lions had there.

as yerck pointed out before, build the rest of your team before getting the QB. once you have the parts in place, get the signal caller to complete it. no use in spending big money now on a QB when, as i said earlier, he's going to spend a TON of time on his back.

The Lions do not necessarily need to go o-line with the first overall pick just to find a quality starter, they can go QB first, then o-line with the 20th overall pick. Here is my relation to the situation: Why spend $75 million on a security system for a $20 million house??? By this I mean, why spend the money on a LT first, just to draft a QB with the 20th pick, and possibly miss out on the top three prospects. You know the LT will be there with the 20th pick, why not hold off and grab him there?

With not being a fan of the Lions or any team for that matter, it is harder to realize what it is they need. You can watch every game and still be oblivious to their needs.

how so? games are played on the field, aren't they? anybody that follows football even a little bit should be able to watch a game, and see what went wrong during that game that caused a team to lose. now, extrapolate that over a 16 game season, and there's no way that you can watch the games and NOT notice/see things. you almost have to be an idiot to watch every game and be oblivious to team needs.

i know detroit will need a QB. not once did i say they wouldn't. but, you can address so much more in this draft, and you're in a situation where you have a year left with culpepper, allowing you to get a lot of what you need in this draft. again, even though you, for some reason, disagree that the lions will have a top 3 pick......they will. you can get an elite QB prospect in next year's draft, AFTER you address other needs on your team. this won't be fixed overnight.

that's why i would take curry, and team him with ernie sims. gives you two really good linebackers on that defense. still take your LT 20th. maybe take DE in the second. right there, in the first 33 picks, you've upgraded your defense and got your LT. or, take a LT first, DT second (if one is there), and DE third. upgrade the offensive and defensive lines.

i know you love stafford, for reasons i'll never understand. i've never really been impressed with him, personally. and, with a high pick and a (potentially) deeper QB class next season, there's no reason to take a QB this year with the #1.

WOW!!! Everyone please stop giving your opinion on the draft and the NFL. Lionsman11 has declared that you must be a fan of a team to have any possible relevant or intelligent thought on that team. For now on CDS, waltermocks, mel kiper and a few million other draftnik's must only do 1 team mocks! Thats the team they root for.

Games are not only played on the field, but they are also won and lost in the locker room. Without a franchise QB, the Lions will have nothing in the locker room but a washed up veteran that will appear on nutri-system in a few years. The Lions won't be in the top 3 next year, even with the roster they have right now. They have upgraded at many positions and with the new coaching staff alone they will win at least 4 games. Drafting Curry would be amazing, I am a huge fan of the guy myself and I think that overall, he is the best prospect, but the best decision for Detroit may be to draft Stafford. It may not be best for the team on the field, but it will be in the locker room, and in the stands where the fans will have hope.

By the way, I don't love Stafford, I actually had once hated his game and was far from a fan, but looking closer, as well as finding out about his ties to Bobby Lane, he is the guy Detroit will draft.

"The Jason Smith pick is great, but the Jerry pick sucks!"


That was a quote from your opinion on someones mock draft. I am confused completely!!!!

I did not even say that in any way! I said that being a fan allows you to see ALL of the issues on a team, and also what may be best for the team. I am glad that you want to have your input on who the Lions should draft, and please continue, but being a true fan allows you to not only see the best player for the team, but also for everybody withing the organization. And with myself being a TRUE fan, I am able to see that.

they're won and lost on the field. the locker room stuff is something that is overrated, in my opinion. don't get me wrong....you don't want a locker room with a bunch of malcontents. but, you can have a great locker room with a team full of guys who suck. who cares, at first, if the guy is a great locker room influence if he can't play? i could go to detroit right now and be a great locker room guy. however, i'm a 5'10 white guy with no NFL skills whatsoever (i have some football skills (well, ok, HAD), but nothing worthy of NFL stuff. not one). so, does that then mean that i should be drafted because of my locker room influence? NOTE: this question doesn't apply to matt millen. i have no doubt that if he was still running the lions, he might actually draft me.

also, what's to say that curry wouldn't be a great locker room guy?

what gives fans in the stands hope is what you put on the field, not what goes on behind closed doors. we, as fans, don't know what really goes on in the locker room. you're presented with the face they want you to see. not saying guys like tony romo are assholes.....they may not be. but, we only judge them on what they say to the media and, by extension, us. as a TRUE fan, as you claim to be (and which i don't doubt), you should be more concerned with if they win games or not, NOT whether guys are great in the locker room.

also, if detroit wins only 4 games next season, they'll still have a top 3 pick.

last, if you're convinced that stafford is the guy (which he may be, however misguided the pick would be), then maybe you should reevaluate what you want out of this team. if you want to win sooner, you don't take stafford, IMO, with the #1.

I happen to agree with you, and everyone else who is proposing the Lions draft someone, either one of the two OTs, or the LB, other than Stafford. He actually reminds me of a spoiled child, and just ask the Broncos how that works out. He has some potential, but the other 3 also have that potential, and are clearly better reads as to projecting their futures in the NFL, barring injury, of course. Besides, if you want a strong armed QB with potential, Freeman just might have a better arm than Stafford, and he just might be there with their 2nd 1st round pick.

I have heard that some maturity questions are starting to pop up. He isn't neerly the raging a hole that leaf was but he is apparently a little immature and as you say "spoiled" type of kid.

I think he falls to San Fran or further, but I am the only guy wasting his breath saying that.

LM -

If Andre falls due to an unimpressive pro-day would you be opposed to taking him at 20? Assuming Stafford is the pick at 1...

I would be VERY opposed to the Lions taking Andre Smith! The only way that I would want them to take him is if he were going to fall to round 3, which I know he won't.

any proposed lineup with stafford and a bunch of other rooks starting is totally unrealistic - even on a team as bad as det - stafford starting is a disaster in progress period . the catch22 here is that if det passes on a qb with the "hope" of drafting one next year is they may win enough games to screw that up . schwartz doesn't seem interested in the same ol same ol so modest improvement seems a reasonable enough expectation . BTW no one is worthy of the #1 more by virtue of the system not the players

The "system" does come into play...no doubt, when you draft a player. However, we really don't know exactly what "system" Schwartz will employ, although I would think defensively it will be similar to the Titans. That being said, the kid Smith from Texas or the other OT Monroe, along with Curry will likely fit any "system Schwartz decides to use. That can not be said about Stafford. I also question his ability to read a defense. His arm allowed him to get by with that in college, but it won't in the pros...especially on crucial 3rd downs and in the red zone when teams tend to tighten up, and often "set up" the opposing QB with unorthodox looks or schemes. Stafford is a gamble, whereas the other 3 are likely sure things barring injury. Every draft people fall in love with someone's arm, but then are disappointed when the mental talent can't match the physical talent, and there is no consensus on Stafford's long-term projection in the NFL...everyone loves his arm, but people either love him, or hate him as a NFL QB. As far as stating Stafford and a bunch of rookies starting is totally unrealistic, might I remind you Atlanta started, and played most of last year with a rookie QB and OLT starting, so in today's NFL, your statement in regards to that is the only thing unrealistic. My question is this...do you want to put your franchise, which has already suffered for so many years in jeopardy of remaining in the doldrums for about another 5+ years if you blow this pick, or do you take a sure thing, and wait for next year when Bradford and McCoy, among others will be coming out, and you'd likely get a shot at someone with at least as much potential as Stafford, and perhaps much more?

I'd take the sure thing in drafting Curry or Smith before Stafford. Beef up our roster this year and take the franchise guy next year.

Just some food for thought

The 20th and 33rd picks nearly match up perfectly with the ninth pick, which if detroit passed stafford at 1 he would fall to 9 before the 9ers pick at 10. So the lions could trade for the ninth and end up with Jason Smith and Matt S7afford

OR

Just trade the 20th for jay cutler, draft Jason Smith at 1 and then best def player available at 33.

I don't think Denver would take the 33rd for cutler so thats why I din't purpose that option.

Here's where I have a problem. I think Cutler and Stafford are kind of cut from the same cloth, if you get my drift. Both have great arms, but make a bunch of bad decisions. Cutler has put up great numbers, but that was in Shanahan's system. What kind of numbers will he post in a different system. I personally think he had pretty much come to the top of his potential in regards to his recognition of defenses, and teams were starting to figure him out. He's also proved to be very thin skinned, and that's on top of having little if any leadership skills. That's not the kind of grit I want my QB to project. Heck, give me a Billy Kilmer, who couldn't throw the ball half as far as Cutler, and rarely threw a spiral, but had a never say die attitude and was a real leader before giving me Cutler.

Here's a thought. I am a Chargers fan, and I thought the Broncos had something when Cutler first came into the league and had a fine rookie season. With the rest of their team, and a draft or two, I envisioned a year in year out dog fight between them for a few years. Now, I think whether or not he is the QB, the Broncos will be like a dog beat too much when it comes to winning the division for awhile, and mostly it's because of Cutler and his attitude. I won't bash his stats, but, systems can pad those too, and to some extent, that's what's happened with Cutler (Not to mention a heck of a receiver corps that Elway never really had). However, his mouth, lack of leadership, and (if you watched last season's finale against the Chargers you'll know what I mean) his finger pointing to deflect blame towards his teammates when he clearly made a mistake do not bode well for someone some delusional Denver fans like to label a "franchise" QB. If he ever grows up, shuts his mouth, and really puts in the work needed to become a great QB, he has all the tools. However, thus far he's shown to be more myth than legend, even if he is better than John Elway. And, if you look in Jay Cutler's mirror, you see Matthew Stafford...IMO.