Mr.TaterSalad

From scouting and analyst reports I've read, McCoy seems like he would be the best CB in the draft were it not for his injury. I've read he has elite-level ball and tracking skills and it seems the dude creates turnovers and interceptions, which we need more of on defense. He has the speed (4.40 40 time), size, and athleticism to keep up with most any WR. He won't get out matched or mowed over in man coverage either, which the Lions like to play. The one knock I read on him was from Draft Buzz who said "Run support engagement runs hot and cold, takes conservative angles at times." We know that the ability to play the run and willingness to engage is one of the more important traits this coaching staff is looking for. I don't think he's bad against the run though or unwilling to come up and make a tackle.

I've had a feeling if they take a DE/Edge it will be Faulk. Hopefully I am waaaaaaay off base and he's not Josh Paschal 2.0. NFL.com's scouting report compares Faulk to Carlos Dunlap. That would be great if he ended up being that type of player.

It's just going to be a partisan race. Most people will vote straight ticket Dem or Republican. If it is a bad year for Republicans, like we think it could and should be, people will plunk for the Democratic ticket, which will include UofM, MSU, and Wayne State boards.

A little backstory here. I was there at the Michigan Democratic Party convention yesterday at Cobo/Huntington Place. At the convention, Democrats had the chance to vote on their parties nominees for the offices of Attorney General, Secretary of State, State Board of Education, and Boards of Regents. The more progressive candidate's won and beat out candidates pushed by the Labor Caucus in some instances and other instances, who the Labor Caucus wanted was the same person that most progressives wanted to win. There were two instances where the progressive choice beat the Labor Caucus choice. One was when Washtenaw County Prosecutor Eli Savit beat out Oakland County Prosecutor Karen McDonald for the Democratic nomination for Michigan Attorney General. Savit is your typical Ann Arbor liberal and has been a reformed-minded prosecutor. The other instance was in the UofM Regents race where, as you mentioned Amir Maklid, beat out the Labor Caucus Choice. In other instances, like the Michigan Secretary of State's race, the choices progressives and labor wanted were aligned, with Garlin Gilchrist winning the SOS nomination. For years, the Michigan Democratic Party convention process was controlled by labor unions, more specifically labor union leadership of the major unions in the state (UAW, LiUNA, Building Trades Council, Carpenters, MEA, and AFT). More specifically than that, it was controlled by the leadership at the Michigan AFL-CIO (of which many unions belong to like the UAW) and it's President Ron Beiber. Ron Beiber doesn't like progressives. Ron Beiber loves Ron Beiber more than anyone else in the world. He also loves playing kingmaker. And for years the Michigan AFL-CIO, Labor Caucus, and Ron were the kingmakers. If you go back to pre-2016 conventions, there would be 3,000, maybe 3,500 people at most that participated in the convention nominating process. That allowed for Ron, union leadership, and the Labor Caucus more broadly to bring 1,500 or so people to a state party convention and control the nomination process and who wins these races. Now that more people, from all walks of life are showing up to the convention, they don't have the votes to run the show like they used to. This upsets Ron very much. Yesterday, there were people from all across the state who came. People from local community Democratic Clubs and Congressional District Clubs, and College Democrats chapters. As well, there were people from activist organizations like local Indivisible Chapters, The People's Coalition, Michigan United, Detroit Action, Ranked Choice Voting Michigan, Mop Up Michigan, DSA, etc. With more local Democrats attending and more people from these types of organizations, they aren't going to follow and do what Labor Caucus says to do. Furthermore, when you nominate uninspiring candidates like Karen McDonald, not everyone in Labor Caucus is going to stick with their team. Some of those people voted for people like Eli Savit as well. So the days of labor controlling the party with a handful of voters is over it appears.

Why did the official Lions Twitter post this? I know former Lions players Tracy Scroggins and Chris Payton-Jones sadly passed away. But this seems like an odd thing for a professional football team's Twitter handle to post without context. Was this a Dan Campbell quote at sometime in the past? Was this a Wayne Fontes quote after he got caught with cocaine?

I would personally be underwhelmed, but not upset, if they picked a safety in the first round. I think safety is a very real option for them. It wouldn't surprise me at all if they had any or all of Caleb Downs, Dillon Thieneman, and Emmanuel McNeil-Warren rated high on their draft boards. Drafting a safety would allow them to play a lot of 5-6 defensive back sets and put more guys in the box. They would utilize a safety as opposed to putting a third linebacker on the field. So essentially, the safety they could draft would be Anzalone's replacement. They could also moonlight their safety as a slot corner, depending on who they pick as well. Thieneman specifically played the box safety role at Oregon and played as a lot corner at time. He's got the speed and athleticism they like. He also offers good range in coverage across the middle of the field and can step down low more often to play against the run. We know the Lions love guys against the run. With the injury uncertainties they have and letting Anzalone go, safety could be a real option for them at #17.

Assuming the Lions don't trade up or down from pick #17 next week, I think this would be my list of guys I would want the Lions to draft. The second list are guys I still like, but would be underwhelmed, but not upset, if they took them. The third list are the guys I wouldn't be interested in drafting at all. I tried to keep my want list realistic, so as not to include someone like a David Bailey, Francis Magnoia, or Arvell Reese. Want: Spencer Fano, OT/Utah Monroe Freeling, OT/Georgia Rueben Bain Jr., DE/Miami Blake Miller, OT/Clemson Akheem Mesidor, DE/Miami Vegea Ioane, G/Penn State Jermod McCoy, CB/Tennessee Mansoor Delane, CB/LSU Cashius Howell, DE/Texas A&M Like, but underwhelmed: Dillon Thieneman, S/Oregon Emmanuel McNeil-Warren, S/Toledo Avieon Terrell, CB/Clemson Max Iheanachor, OT/Arizona State Caleb Banks, DT/Florida Don't Want: Kenyon Sadiq, TE/Oregon Kaydn Proctor, OT, Alabama Keldric Faulk, DE/Auburn

This might be true. But I think the intent of using Hasan is two-fold. One, he's popular with younger, college-aged voters. Young men in particular. So I think Abdul is trying to attract those people into his coalition for the primary election in particular and keep them around for the general election. Two, Abdul, like Mallory, is going to be more reliant on small dollar donations to his campaign. So he's using Piker to broaden his reach and help promote his campaign to get more small dollar, individual donations. The more Piker talks about Abdul on his show, the more engagement and donations he gets from around the country.

As much as people want to clutch their pearls, it won't be decided by Hasan Piker either. I only brought up the Cheneys to counter act the claim of Piker being a horrible human being and how it's unacceptable to campaign with horrible human beings.

I compare the conversation around OT in this year's draft to the conversation around drafting a DE/Edge in last years draft. Many in the fanbase and media were certain that somewhere, early on in the draft, the Lions were drafting a DE/Edge. There was certainty that Marcus Davenport would not be their starting edge opposite Aiden. Then the draft happened and they didn't draft a DE/edge early on and when the season started Marcus Davenport was indeed their starting edge. I think of Larry Borom in a similar sense. They very well could draft a starting OT in the first or second round. Again, I very much hope they do. But they just as well could not and view that Borom is their starter, as they did with Davenport at DE/edge. They clearly like Borom and think he has the capabilities to be a starter for them if needed or if they choose to go that route. I don't think they feel pigeonholed based on immediate need into taking a OT early on and knowing Brad's history, won't allow themselves to feel that way. It's the same way they didn't allow it last year with DE/edge because in their eyes they had Davenport on the roster and able to start.

Cheney endorsed Harris, as did his daughter. His daughter, while of course not directly responsible for his war crimes, campaigned with her. Harris embraced Cheney's endorsement and said she was honored to have it. By accepting the endorsement you are allowing it to be one more step in the process to rehabilitating the image of a war criminal. No, she didn't go out on the campaign trail with Cheney. That's very good that she didn't. Yes, accepting his support is bad because **** Cheney is a bad person.

I don't agree with everything Hasan Piker has said. But spare me the outrage. Where was your outrage when Kamala wanted her name and reputation associated with someone who was a war criminal and should have died in the Hauge in Richard Cheney? I certainly didn't like her accepting Cheney's endorsement and no Democrat should feel comfortable with it. Harris said she was honored to have the endorsement of a person who authorized the use of torture on human beings and committed war crimes. Building the case for war off lies, going into war for no-bid oil contracts, slaughtering civilians in Iraq, and using chemical weapons in Iraq when the Bush Administration allowed white phosphorus bombs to be dropped on people is all far worse than anything Piker said. So spare me please.

What is the justification for Kenyon Sadiq when they have a very good TE in LaPorta already on the roster? Unless the back injury is career threatening, I don't see the justification. Another offensive weapon isn't what they need.

Two simple questions about the draft. Who do you want their first round pick to be? Who do you think it will be? Want: Monroe Freeling, OT/Georgia Think: Blake Miller, OT/Clemson For all my belief that Larry Borom could be their starting RT next year (and I very much think he could be), I think they will end up making the wise decision of drafting a starting OT in the end.

I wouldn't want my name or reputation at all associated with what this administration is doing. They're doing bad, immoral, unlawful things daily, especially Noem and her department. That's one major reason to cast a vote against. Getting to have the clear, moral clarity that you opposed this lawlessness and inhumanity at every turn means something imo.

I just don't want to end up with another capitulating Senator who will vote for Trump's nominees. We already have one Michigan Senator who capitulated to Trump in Elissa Slotkin. We don't need another one. Slotkin voted for 9 Trump cabinet, executive, and/or judicial nominees. Imagine voting for the nomination of someone like a Joseph Goebbels, Herman Goring, or Heinrich Himmler in the 1930s. Insanity. She thought these people like Kristi Neom and Scott Bessent were qualified enough for the job. Haley Stevens would almost assuredly vote in line with Slotkin in my view. Voting in another candidate who votes for confirming that many Trump nominees is not more of what I want. I want someone who will fiercely oppose future nominees and Trump in general. I do feel Mallory McMorrow would be good on opposing Trump's nominees and his agenda more broadly. I think she would be in line with Abdul there and above Haley Stevens. I would feel far more comfortable with McMorrow than Stevens.

Missed an entire season with a blown ACL, so it makes sense we'd be interested in him.

Barack Obama won the White House with the name Barack Obama. The Republican Party did a full on assault on the poor guy over his association with his pastor Jeremiah Wright and it did not work on the whole. Obama still won in spite of the linty of attacks about it. Furthermore, Trump won't be on the ballot, so any bump Mike Rogers got last time around from Trump being on the ballot likely won't carryover into this election cycle. People didn't vote for Mike Rogers because he was this charismatic figure whom they adored, they were voting for Trump and happened to check the box for the other GOP Senate candidate. We've seen in 2018 and 2022 that when Trump isn't on the ballot and/or the midterm elections are a referendum on him, that Republicans perform poorly or underperform. Rogers will loose a solid chunk of his non-college educated, white working class voters due to Trump not being on the ballot and being wildly unpopular. To me, whether Trump will or will not weaponize ICE in Dearborn, Dearborn Heights, Canton, Farmington Hills, Novi, Rochester, or any community that has a high immigrant community voting populace (be it Arab-American like Dearborn/Heights or South Asian/Indian-American like a Canton/Novi Rochester) is not a deciding factor for or against Abdul. What is more of a deciding factor to me are the Arab-American, Muslim-American, and South Asian-American voters that Abdul can help us win over. I feel the block of voters he can help bring back into the fold is more than the amount of voters the Trump Administration would be able to suppress. We can bury our heads in the sand and say we don't need Arab or Muslim voters, but I simply think that is a mistake. We should be building a broad coalition, with as many voters as we can get. You can talk about voters in the middle that Abdul might turn off, but Haley Stevens is going to turnoff just as many Arab-American and Muslim-American voters with her unrepentant allegiance to AIPAC and the pro-Israel lobby. Also, if you're a voter in the middle and you're angry about inflation, gas prices, the war raging on, or just mad at Trump and the party in power in general, do we really think all of that is going to be thrown out the window just because Abdul is who he is? I get that there will be a lot of bigotry and discrimination, just as there was against Harris in 2024. But when people are concerned or angry about their economic standing and voting based off of it, generally the party in power pays a political price for it. Maybe Abdul will be the exception of the rule because he's Arab-American and Muslim. The other thing to note is gut feelings and vibes. Often times, people don't vote based on policy and specific stances a candidate takes on issues. Rather, they vote on vibes and what their gut tells them. When a candidate has the right vibe and goes against the grain as an outsider, as Trump fooled people into believing twice, people cast their ballots for them. In a Democratic Party that is seen as weak, feckless, and uncool, Abdul is the opposite. Elissa Slotkin herself was just on Bill Maher's program the other week talking about the energy and vibe of Democrats and how we need more alpha energy in the party. Who gives that off more than a workout bro and doctor like Abdul? Sure, one could make the argument if they wanted that Abdul would give a bunch of racists "terrorist" and "un-American" vibes. But those bigoted people, who first and foremost judge a person by their race, religion, or identity, likely weren't voting for Haley Stevens or Mallory McMorrow either because they probably hate woman in leadership near or equally as much.

So you believe that Bill Clinton allegedly raping woman is ok?

Yes, it matters. Well, I guess it selectively matters. Because if they are a white, alleged rapist, it's ok. But if they are someone like Hasan it is not. Furthermore, Elissa Slotkin has gone on Bill Maher's show numerous times and I don't see her getting a bunch of **** for going on the Democratic version of Tucker Carlson.

I don't want to put words in your mouth and make a bad faith argument here. So rather than assume I'll ask, what is it about Abdul in your eyes that makes him unelectable? I've met the guy a dozen times and he is one of the most affable, jovial, likable, personable human beings you will ever meet. The dude radiates charisma and is full of charm. He's a really strong public speaker and does a great job relating to the room he's in and explaining his positions on issues.

I'm sorry for voting based on policy positions and stances on issues. Next time I'll make sure to vote based on who does and doesn't like Hasan Piker and who is acceptable to Chuck Schumer. I'll also make sure to do no research into the candidates on the issues. For the record, when he ran for Governor in 2018, I actually voted for Gretchen Whitmer in the primary over him.

Definitely voting and supporting Abdul because he gets it on policy more than the others. Haley Stevens would be another corporate shill who thinks that pathway forward to a successful future is giving subsidies to corporations and making only marginal improvements on the edges for things. She's a supporter of the failed trickle-down economic theory as well. Mallory is better than Haley and supports, at least at some level, more substantive changes than Stevens does. McMorrow is also a big advocate for trickle-down economics. During her time in the State Senate, she voted in support of over $2 billion in corporate subsidies while our public schools continued to be underfunded and our roads continued to crumble. Governor Whitmer's SOAR corporate welfare slush fund has been an unmitigated disaster for Michigan. We spent billions of dollars to create a paltry amount of jobs. McMorrow never once voted against the Governor's SOAR corporate welfare slush fund. Giving direct payments to corporations in exchange for "creating jobs" is such a 1980s/1990s outdated theory of economic growth. Corporations rarely ever deliver on the promised amount of jobs after receiving the taxpayer subsidy payment. If you want to improve an economy you need to invest in the people, not the company. Improving education systems, job training programs, skilled-trade training, regional transit, affordable housing, affordable college. These are the things that over the longterm create more job growth and keep people from moving out of the area. A great example of our failure to do so is when Michigan tried to attract Amazon to build one of their regional HQs here in Metro Detroit. Amazon essentially laughed at us and said no way. They cited, among other things, a lack of amenities that younger workers want like no regional transit in the area, as a reason for not choosing Southeast Michigan for an HQ. It's too bad McMorrow seems to think the opposite is true and that direct cash payments to corporations in exchange for jobs is the way to go. Also, Abdul endorsed and campaigned for Kamala.

I hope his BPA is an OT. I think it very well could be. But that's been the broader point I am trying to make this whole time, "could be". I've seen people running around with great certainty as if it is a lock on being an OT and discussing other positions as options isn't worth it. I'm just not that strident in my belief that it will be given Brad's history of drafting and the comments made about Borom. Here's to hoping they draft an OT though and get back to having an elite Oline.

I think if we had Connor Bedard to build around instead of Dylan Larkin most internet fans would be elated. I know I would be. I think you'll always find a group of fans that bitch for the sake of it and wouldn't be happy even if we won the damn cup. But if we had Bedard to build around, I suspect this fan base would feel better and be more forgiving of the GM.