RedRamage

Well, it seems clear from the war room that this is a guy they really wanted.

Yup. Swift will ... swiftly ... be leaving the Lions.

RB and TE? Yeah... that's the Lions needs, sure... EDIT: Uh... okay, I guess I'm wrong.

I'm saying they didn't think the top players were that good. Simplistically... they thought players 6-12 on their board were pretty much equal.

How about TWO TEs?

I'm guessing they are thinking there just isn't that much greatness at the top... well, outside of maybe one or two guys who were gone. They may have figured that whomever they get at 12 is gonna be just as good as who they could have gotten at 6.

Carter to Chicago then?

Yeah, that's perhaps the worst case scenario. And yet a very good case scenario would be that the Bear grab him and he flops.

I think the ideal would be to trade back a few spots. Obviously this requires finding a partner but there seems to be many players that there general conscious is: "Yeah, he's a good player and I'd like him on the team, but... not sure he's quite worth a #6 pick." I mean if we could move back to the 8-12 range, pick up some more picks and still get either Witherspoon, Gonzalez, Wilson, or Skoronski... I wouldn't be opposed to that.

Not thrilled with the pick at 6, but not necessarily horrible. Less happy with the pick at 25. I'd have taken Kancey. Would also need to see what else we got in the trade. One part that's good: Carter going before the Lions pick. This will bail out the Lions here. If Carter is there at 6 and the Lions don't take him and he ends up being a star, or if the Lions take Carter and he ends up being a problem... those will big blunders. Obviously there's also the change that they take him and he's a star or the pass and he's a problem, but if he's not there at 6 then that removes the possibility of the Lions making the wrong choice.

I just had a very insightful thought... at least I think it's insightful... Remember when you were a kid and you hated getting the gifts like clothes or shoes or other practical gifts? Now that you're an adult you may still like the flashy gift, but you understand that the stuff like new pants or shoes or whatever really are the better thing for you and pay dividends much longer than the flashy gift. Have the Lions, perhaps, finally grown up to the point where the unexciting but very practical "gifts" are what's best for the team?

Not sure if you're joking or if you really believe that to be a solution.

You mean after they come back a commercial break?

Where do you have Calijah Kancey going? If he was there at 48 I would have taken him. Also, is the Swift trade straight up a 4th rounder for him or are getting something more? A 4th for Swift seems low, but I might be putting too much value on him.

I was listening to the Locked on Lions podcast yesterday and they had a guest on... can't remember who, but he brought up an interesting point: That the Lions might be suffering a bit by not having a mobile QB on the scout team. The guest mentioned picking up someone like Thompson-Robinson in the draft on the off chance that you could develop him into a star and if not, at least you have someone mobile for the defense to practice against.

Perhaps some credit, sure. But if we attribute much of Brady's success to his development by Belichick, then does it seem reasonable that Belichick should be able to develop other QBs? To be fair for nearly two decades he didn't need to, but for five years wit the Browns he didn't develop a franchise QB. And for three years since Brady has left there are no signs that the next franchise level QB is emerging in New England.

It's also worth considering if we really think this years QBs are bad... would we be helping a divisional rival make a draft mistake? That might be worth something right there.

Remember this is the Lions we're talking about. I'd be thrilled if half of our second round picks amounting to anything!

I very much think Belichick is overrated. That's not to say he's trash, but yeah... without Brady he's been very bad. I think the lack of a good coaching tree could be attributed to just a poor teacher or perhaps someone who's not willing to share his secrets. Both of these things may or may not be considered failings in a HC depending on your perspective, but I'd say it is possible to be a good HC without having a good coaching tree. It certainly doesn't help, but isn't, by itself, proof that you're a bad HC. To me the real damning thing is his record with and without Brady. For the year prior to 2001 and after 2019, plus adding in 2008 the year Brady only played one game, Belichick's record is 77 and 85. Now, if you consider that these were years when Belichick's team did not have a franchise level QB, 77 and 85 really isn't bad... but it's also not good. If you want to make the case that Belichick is the best or one of the best (like, top 5 or even top 10) coaches all time, then this is a guy who should be able to make even "less than" players perform better sub-.500, right?

If the front office looks at Stroud as Goff 2.0, then the only reason to consider taking him is if you feel there's a very good chance you're not resigning Goff and you don't expect to be in a position to get a "Goff level QB" in the next couple of years. However this seems like an unlikely thing given that Holmes and Campbell and praising Goff and Goff seems to like it here. I don't see the FO thinking they'd be unable to sign Goff. However, if the front office looks at Stroud as a significant upgrade over Goff, then there may be a reason to do it. If they think Stroud is very capable of being better than Goff then it might very well be worth drafting him. If Stroud could be the next Rodgers (without the crazy) or Brady... you take him even with Goff on staff. However this also seems unlikely as no one seems to value Stroud quite that highly. (Though, 23 teams didn't think Rodgers was worth it and 32 teams repeatedly didn't think Brady was worth it.) Finally, you might try to play 4D chess here and if Stroud is available and no one will trade with you because no one thinks you'll actually draft him, you might try drafting him and trading him once you have control like what the Chargers did with Eli Manning. However, this seems REALLY risky as you might not be able to moving him as Stroud doesn't seem to have nearly the same level of excitement that Manning did.

You know what's going to happen right? The Lions are finally gonna have their greatest season in the SB era... make it all the way to the SB and face Aaron Rodgers and the Jets, who will knock them off with a Hail Mary because of a bad penalty call.

He's alright for a cheesehead.

That more than I think GB should get for a aging, flaky QB who may retire after next year, but less than I feared that GB might get, so I guess it's not too terrible.

I think you're missing what most of us are saying about this. First, I at least (and I suspect others) fully understand that gambling on games in the league in which play is a very, very bad look and very much damages the integrity of the game. Super bad. In my humble opinion gambling on any sporting event for a player should be banned because it skates so close to gambling on your sport. It's not a question of not understanding the dangers that gamble presents from an image stand point. Second, I fully understand (as do others) that these are the rules and JaMo broke 'em and he has to pay the price. We're not questioning if he's guilty or if he should be punished. So what am I questioning? This: Why is something that a player is allowed to do when "off campus" punished so severely when he is "on campus" but not engaged in active work*? What liability does betting on games AT work create that betting on games when NOT AT work NOT create? That is the ultimate question. According to the NFL one is fine, the other is a 1/3 season suspension. The best answer I've seen is: A headline saying: "players are routinely betting at practice" sounds bad. And I agree, but a headline saying: "players are routinely betting on games, just not at work" doesn't really sound better. *I'm assuming that he wasn't actively engage in a team meeting or working out or practicing. I'm assuming he was on a lunch break or whatever. If he did do this while in a meeting or when he was supposed to be doing something else, that's another situation entirely and then it's a case where the Lions should be punishing him for not doing his job.