Rome wasn't built in a day. It took a bit longer than that.Rebuilding the Lions will take a bit longer still.
They've been in rebuilding mode since Bobby Lane left. I just thought that if they were going to go out and sign ANY free agents, they would've at least been at positions of need. RB and WR are about the ONLY positions on the team (maybe besides K) that they didn't need to worry as much about. When you're getting backups and depth, you can wait until later in free agency (or later rounds of the draft) to get it. Defensive starters are much harder to come by. The whole problem with Millen was he spent too much effort trying to get a #2 WR, looks like his protege learned well in that regard (except Washington doesn't seem to be that good.)I'll be surprised if they don't draft Stafford. Why? Because that would be about the worst move they could make - which is exactly why I expect it.
Why would drafting Matt Stafford be a bad move? Is it because recent top 10 QB draft picks JaMarcus Russell, Vince Young, Alex Smith, Bryon Leftwich, David Carr, Joey Harrington, Tim Couch, Akili Smith, and Ryan Leif have either been disappointments so far or were busts? The lack of success of those quarterbacks have nothing to do with whether or not Matt Stafford will be successful in the NFL. Most of those quarterbacks either did not play in Pro style systems in college or never had a season where they completed 60% or more of their passes. Stafford played in a Pro style system in college and completed 61% of his passes this season. That doesn't mean he won't bust, but he certainly has the tools to become a top 5 QB in this league. If the Lions feel he can be a top 10 QB in this league, they need to draft him, especially since Calvin Johnson could become the top receiver in the league if he had a legit QB throwing him the ball. The worst thing the Lions could possibly do with the #1 pick is draft Aaron Curry. I don't care if he becomes the next Ray Lewis, linebackers simply don't have the impact on an NFL franchise that an elite QB or LT does.
The reason that drafting Stafford is a bad idea is that if the Lions draft him, he has absolutely no chance of succeeding. The Lions have NEVER invested properly in their offensive line, and because of that, they've never been good. There isn't a QB in the world that could make that team good - including any that are already in the league. Here are a few stats - since 1997, the Lions have had EIGHT top 10 picks, and they've used ZERO on either the offensive or defensive lines (4 WRs, 2 LBs, 1 QB, and 1CB). Most people realize that you win by building up the lines, and the Lions are great proof of that. There's a reason why they keep getting these top 10 picks, and that is because they don't use them wisely. WR is an icing position, the Lions don't have any cake. They shouldn't have been drafting all of them with high picks. There's nothing to do about that now, but they shouldn't be wasting their time in free agency trying to add WRs. They should be spending that money and effort signing CBs, LBs, safeties, etc. Here's another factor why I think drafting Stafford is a bad move - since 1977, the Lions have drafted 14 QBs, including a Heisman winner and three Heisman finalists. Of those 14 QBs drafted, Eric Hipple has won the most games as a Lions starter at 28. The guy with the best winning percentage? That would be Andre Ware with a whopping .500 (3-3) as a starter for the Lions. They never have a good line (nor a good veteran on the roster to groom the QBs they draft, they just throw them out in the fire, then bench them because they're not ready. And they always end up the same - shell-shocked and lacking confidence.As a franchise, they've never been committed to building a tough-in-the-trenches team, in other words, they've never been committed to winning. There is no way for them to address all of their needs this off-season, either through the draft or free agency. But I would like to see them at least start moving in the right direction, and I haven't yet. Maurice Morris? Bryant Johnson? Guys like that are always available after the draft, and for less money.The way I see it, they're going to be drafting in the top 5 again next year, there's just no way around it. If they draft well this year, they should be able to get a solid nucleus of young players - guys that should ALL be playing this year. Next year, take the QB then, and he'll have a better group of young guys around him, making it much easier on him. Plus there's a possible added benefit of a rookie salary structure, which would make a QB less expensive next year. (No guarantee, but I believe the league will have to do this.) Drafting a LT #1 will be less expensive than a QB, and will have more of an immediate impact.I would much prefer them drafting a LT first, but I'd rather they draft Curry than Stafford.
Other then I would add that you need some veterans to help your young core of players develop and begin a new culture in Detroit.
People like to rip the Lions for drafting WR in the first round, but they forget that the Lions also drafted OL in the first round for 3 years in a row ('99-01): Gibson, McDougal, and Backus. And they all sucked. What the Lions need to do is stop drafting players that suck and get the best talent at each spot. It's really that simple. Getting rid of Millen was a good start, but I hope they overhauled the scouting department too.
You'd probably show up at the first day of demolition of an old house and piss and moan about not seeing the Taj Mahal.
