// The Lions did have a lot of needs. QB, OL, DL, LB, S...essentially every position on the team save WR. In that respect, people were correct in saying that Detroit could take almost anyone and it would fill a hole. However, good teams--teams that win consistently--start from the trenches. This is as true on the college level as it is in the NFL. There is a reason why Michigan went 40 years without a losing season and why the Lions have gone 50 without winning a title, and generally being uncompetitive throughout most of that span; the disparity in the quality of their lines. UofM always had good lines, while the Lions had poor to merely average.
// The closest the Lions ever came to having a great line that I can remember was with the Eric Andolsek-Mike Utley-Lomas Brown core. When we were kids in the early 90s, that was a promising line. But then Utley was crippled in a game and Andolsek was killed by a semi in his yard. The Lions haven't come close to fielding a good line since. I admit that the comparison is flawed. The differences in competition at the college level can be wide ranging. But there is no doubt what the recipe for success was in Ann Arbor--a strong, powerful run attack based on superior OL play along with a fierce, technically sound and physically punishing defense. Not coincidentally, the Steelers of the 70s won with the same formula. The best teams still win with that formula.
// We were lead to believe, first under Rod Marinelli and now Jim Schwartz, that the Lions were going to "pound the rock". Well, in order to pound the rock you need the road graters to punish the defense. The Lions did nothing to address that. The one OT they took is considered a "finesse" tackle. The Lions had guys within their reach who could have made this team better now. Specifically, Michael Oher at 20. They could have found a quality guard in the third round to pair with the OT and thus solidified their line.
// Despite my feelings on Curry’s future, they could have taken Stafford, drafted Oher, and taken Duke Robinson in the 4th round. They would have been far better off doing that than taking a TE at 20, an OLB who had a 5th-round-grade in the 3rd and who will have to be converted to MLB, as well as a WR in the 3rd. The Lions should have said "we cannot fill all the holes now, so let's follow a proven formula and build our lines." That at least is understandable. We know that it’s not realistic for them to become a solid team in one draft. Alas, what we got was the same nonsensical approach to drafting that we have seen from the Lions for ages.
// With that said, I’ll leave you with some Banks to get ready for a strong Saturday night.
// The closest the Lions ever came to having a great line that I can remember was with the Eric Andolsek-Mike Utley-Lomas Brown core. When we were kids in the early 90s, that was a promising line. But then Utley was crippled in a game and Andolsek was killed by a semi in his yard. The Lions haven't come close to fielding a good line since. I admit that the comparison is flawed. The differences in competition at the college level can be wide ranging. But there is no doubt what the recipe for success was in Ann Arbor--a strong, powerful run attack based on superior OL play along with a fierce, technically sound and physically punishing defense. Not coincidentally, the Steelers of the 70s won with the same formula. The best teams still win with that formula.
// We were lead to believe, first under Rod Marinelli and now Jim Schwartz, that the Lions were going to "pound the rock". Well, in order to pound the rock you need the road graters to punish the defense. The Lions did nothing to address that. The one OT they took is considered a "finesse" tackle. The Lions had guys within their reach who could have made this team better now. Specifically, Michael Oher at 20. They could have found a quality guard in the third round to pair with the OT and thus solidified their line.
// Despite my feelings on Curry’s future, they could have taken Stafford, drafted Oher, and taken Duke Robinson in the 4th round. They would have been far better off doing that than taking a TE at 20, an OLB who had a 5th-round-grade in the 3rd and who will have to be converted to MLB, as well as a WR in the 3rd. The Lions should have said "we cannot fill all the holes now, so let's follow a proven formula and build our lines." That at least is understandable. We know that it’s not realistic for them to become a solid team in one draft. Alas, what we got was the same nonsensical approach to drafting that we have seen from the Lions for ages.
// With that said, I’ll leave you with some Banks to get ready for a strong Saturday night.
