RedRamage

Then don't come at me with close losses. You listed the Lions "almost" wins are prove that they were a good team even when they lost... proof that they were almost there. I merely listed times the lions "almost" losses as proof that you can find negative details if you look for them. Look, I feel like we're arguing over something that's really not that important to argue over. One person has the Seahawks ranked ahead of the Lions right now. That's really no big deal. We don't know how much time this person went into looking at all the details of the teams, what they did last year and again who and with what players... all the off season moves, evaluation of the draft, etc. etc. etc. It's an off season power ranking before all the off season moves have been done (ie, June 1st cuts). It's a minor thing that we really shouldn't be putting this much effort into. I don't find it unrealistic that the Seahawks are ranked ahead of the Lions. You do think it's unrealistic. We each have our opinion on it with our own reasons. Let's not waste more time nitpicking something that's such a minor and unimportant take. I certainly don't think any less of you as a person or a fan because you feel that the Lions should be ranked ahead of the Seahawks in everyone's power rankings. I hope you don't feel less of me because I'm not upset by it.

Because Pete Carroll and John Schneider have a proven track record that included multiple playoff victories two SB appearances and one SB victory. We also saw Geno Smith appear to play much better under Carroll while Wilson regressed significant after leaving Seattle raising the question of how good Carroll might be as a QB whisperer. Compare this to Holmes and Campbell who have a 12-21-1 record in two years. You bring up a whole lot of valid detail points which could be used to bump up the Lions stock. But this is a team that has sucked for years and now has a rookie HC and a rookie GM. And there are plenty of details that you could use to knock down the Lions too. They were close to losing against GB, in Chicago, and in NYJ (without their better QB). I don't think it's out of line at all to want to see a young team with rookie leadership prove it on the field. It's worth noting too that the ranking is that the Lions are trash. They're in the top 3rd of the NFC according to this person. That's good.

Yeah, but the Lions had one good half of a season. I think it's very easy, especially from the national perspective, to wonder if this was a fluke or a real turn around. I think I'd probably rank them ahead of the Seahawks personally, but I'm not going to be too up in arms about someone saying: "Prove it to me the last half of 2023 wasn't the fluke and that the first half was."

Wow... that is... very bad. Just super messed up. I'm surprised the players even put up with it. I'd never heard of the NAL previous so I just looked it up and according to wikipedia, players get around $200 per week. I mean I suppose there's always the hope that you shine enough that one of the bigger leagues picks you up, but man... $200 per week playing a game that could any play could spell the end of your career on the slight outside chance that maybe a scout of a developmental arena league sees you and thinks you can transition to the big time? And then have an owner who hasn't paid you for 2+ weeks?

I will yeet myself into an actual lions exhibit...

Obviously impossible to say unless Holmes is presented with the hypothetical and answers (and we assume he answers honestly), but I tend to think not. I don't think they were targeting a QB. Again we don't know if they had a much higher grade on Richardson but the fact that they didn't draft Hooker until the 3rd... even trading out of their third 2nd round pick... it doesn't feel like they were thinking: "We need/want a QB." I think it was as much of a "Oh, he's still available here? Sure we'll take him then!"

I kinda felt that way too... in might be explained, in part, because of the nature of this draft. Everyone seems to be saying something to the effect that outside the top QBs and one or two other guys, the rest of the "top" talent was just all sort clumped together. If that's truly the way most teams were seeing it, then there isn't as much of a market for another team to move up. If Arizonia is targeting Paris Johnson but would be nearly as happy with Wright and pretty okay with Skoronski... they're not going to offer a ton to make sure they get their top of the line OT.

Do we know that the union didn't also warn the players? The union might simply be looking at this and thinking: Player aren't going to pay attention to us... or at least they won't pay enough attention to just us, but their agents are a more serious source. I work in the higher ed field and I'm acutely aware students don't always read emails sent to them. Some of it is because they don't care, some is because their stressed out and don't really ingest what's said to them, and some of it is communication fatigue: "That's just one more email from the university/college... they send me crap like every other day and most of it's totally unimportant." I can tell you that we'd love to be able to send information to mom and dad at times (along with sending it to the students) because mom and dad will be more likely to read it and if they do they will harp on the students to make sure the message comes through. This could simply be the union understanding the players will listen to the agent but not necessarily to them. On a side note: If agents get a percentage of the players contract... if players get suspended and lose a paycheck, do agents then lose that money too? If so, that's another reason to get the agents involved.

@Longgone Not sure if there were more, but this is the one I remember, and I remember a bit wrong. Apparently it was a national writer speculating that a beat writer quoted.

There was chatter from some beat writer(s) who heard that if Witherspoon was there the Lions were going to stay at 6 and draft him, but because he wasn't they traded out. Obviously this depends on believing the source(s) that the writer(s) referenced.

I agree that this is probably the weakest area on the team, and given Holmes past drafting track record I'm a little surprised that no DT were taking earlier. My only thought is maybe the Lions are getting good medical reports on Onwuzurike and expect him to actually be a contributor this season. That seems questionable to me, but obviously I'm not in the Lions front office. I supposed it's also possible that Paschal steps up in his 2nd year.

In a perfect world, sure... no one talks about how good a draft is or isn't until 3-5 years down the line. The reality is everyone is gonna have "hot takes" ... and fans are largely expecting hot takes so if you don't have one posted they're gonna wonder why. And the "experts" will grade based on their "expert" opinion. If they thought Gibbs, for example, was 2nd round talent they'll grade the Lions poorly for drafting him in mid-1st. That's not shocking, that's what they thought. They shouldn't suddenly change their opinion on a guy just because he was drafted somewhere they didn't expect it to happen. Again, that's not shocking. It doesn't make it right, just what their opinion is.

He's probably related to Dan, so it's just homerism.

Funny thing is that most of the league would've said that same thing if the Lions had drafted him just 1.5 years ago.

Panthers have been slow starters this season, but my goodness.. this is ridiculous. 21-3 already. Ugh... not good.

And the Panthers just got burned by a mobile QB. That feels familiar.

Michigan with a FG on their first drive in Ford Field. Pretty surprised with the crowd size. I mean, it's not huge, but it's fair good... especially compared to some other games I've seen.

Yeah, he's electric at times, but only at times. He just never seems consistently produce well. Every once in a while you see flashes... like that one TD where he had to adjust to the catch, was on the ground, got up and dodged like 4 defenders to make the endzone. But then two plays later you see he dance around trying to make a HR and get tackled for a loss instead of plunging ahead and get 3-4 yards.

No one is saying that. People are wondering if perhaps there is a flaw in the scouting staff/FO evaluation process. Obviously we won't know for the next few years and I hear just about everyone saying something to the effect of: "I'll give Holmes the benefit of the doubt right now." Don't make strawman arguments out of people expressing their doubts.

That right there is why the Lions drafted him.

He wore his socks high I'm pretty sure.

That's a semi-valid rebuttal. I think it is worth noting this. The counter might be that the available best available CB was better than the best available RB, but then you also have to consider if what other CBs or RBs there were along with how much the team needed one vs. the other and well... now the waters are pretty muddy and who's to say right now what the right decision was... let's check back in 2027 and see.

I honestly don't know if Dan Campbell could act that well.

Best was totally a health bust. in 2011 he was averaging well over 100 yard combined before the injury. If we get 1700 all purpose yards out of Gibbs I'd consider that a major success.