You are currently viewing the old forums. We have upgraded to a new NFL Forum.
This old forum is being left as a read-only archive.
Please update your bookmarks to our new forum at forums.footballsfuture.com.


 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

Debate Over! CB Miliner is the guy
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next
 
This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Detroit Lions
View previous topic :: View next topic  

Who would you take at 5?
CB DeMarcus Milliner
51%
 51%  [ 18 ]
Someone else
48%
 48%  [ 17 ]
Total Votes : 35

Author Message
bigc421


Joined: 12 Feb 2008
Posts: 2963
PostPosted: Wed Feb 27, 2013 11:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Wow nice work freak...i stand corrected. I was going off something i saw on nfl net the other day, they must have been using a cut off point.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
IDOG_det


Moderator
Joined: 02 Mar 2009
Posts: 36892
PostPosted: Wed Feb 27, 2013 11:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

How many of those guys were successful? I know Matthews is an all time great, but I honestly have no clue how well the others played because they are way before my time Laughing.
_________________

"Strength is meaningless in o-line play if there is no explosive, or speed-strength, quality to the strength."
- LeCharles Bentley

R.I.P. Stylish
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
FootballPhreak


Joined: 09 Oct 2007
Posts: 36589
Location: Clio, MI
PostPosted: Wed Feb 27, 2013 11:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

IDOG_det wrote:
How many of those guys were successful? I know Matthews is an all time great, but I honestly have no clue how well the others played because they are way before my time Laughing.

Most had varying degrees of success, but yeah Hannah and Matthews were bestest of the best.

http://www.drafthistory.com/index.php/positions/g

Internet is a wonderful thing. There is a ton more, but I tried to stick to modern era.
_________________
Draft_FanAddict wrote:
If that doesn't concern you, I don't know what would...a missing head?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
IDOG_det


Moderator
Joined: 02 Mar 2009
Posts: 36892
PostPosted: Wed Feb 27, 2013 12:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

FootballPhreak wrote:
IDOG_det wrote:
How many of those guys were successful? I know Matthews is an all time great, but I honestly have no clue how well the others played because they are way before my time Laughing.

Most had varying degrees of success, but yeah Hannah and Matthews were bestest of the best.

http://www.drafthistory.com/index.php/positions/g

Internet is a wonderful thing. There is a ton more, but I tried to stick to modern era.
That link is actually interesting. It kind of shows that if you want the best chance to get a good OG, that the 15-90 range is where you want to pick, moreso in the 15-50 range. But, there is also a decent chance to get a guy in the 5th or later rounds.
_________________

"Strength is meaningless in o-line play if there is no explosive, or speed-strength, quality to the strength."
- LeCharles Bentley

R.I.P. Stylish
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
LionsFTW


Joined: 25 Jan 2010
Posts: 20853
Location: Old forum.
PostPosted: Wed Feb 27, 2013 12:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The rookie contacts is only half the story. The evolution of the game is also a reason. Passing league. The running game has vanished in terms of importance compared to how it used to be. Sure it's still important, but not important enough to build a line around run blocking. Stylish made a mock and he was so giddy about how good the run blocking would be. Sorry, but thats not going to win us games. Thats not us getting our moneys worth for Staff and Calvin. We need to fix our run game to just take pressure off the passing game. Not completely turn our offense around.
_________________
thelawoffices wrote:
theuntouchable wrote:
What's a matter TLO? Cat got your tongue?


I have mono you [inappropriate/removed]
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
FootballPhreak


Joined: 09 Oct 2007
Posts: 36589
Location: Clio, MI
PostPosted: Wed Feb 27, 2013 12:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

IDOG_det wrote:
FootballPhreak wrote:
IDOG_det wrote:
How many of those guys were successful? I know Matthews is an all time great, but I honestly have no clue how well the others played because they are way before my time Laughing.

Most had varying degrees of success, but yeah Hannah and Matthews were bestest of the best.

http://www.drafthistory.com/index.php/positions/g

Internet is a wonderful thing. There is a ton more, but I tried to stick to modern era.
That link is actually interesting. It kind of shows that if you want the best chance to get a good OG, that the 15-90 range is where you want to pick, moreso in the 15-50 range. But, there is also a decent chance to get a guy in the 5th or later rounds.

Well, I have a whole big thing I did a couple years ago around here I posted. It was on my old computer. Anyhow, if you can find it, it broke down the entire league and what round/pick each starting OG was taken as well as average draft position ect.

IMO, it don't matter though. We are not talking about average starting guard here. We are talking about what appears to be a difference maker. Quite possibly the only blue chip guy in the entire draft could be available to us because of positional value. That to me makes him very attractive at #5.
_________________
Draft_FanAddict wrote:
If that doesn't concern you, I don't know what would...a missing head?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
IDOG_det


Moderator
Joined: 02 Mar 2009
Posts: 36892
PostPosted: Wed Feb 27, 2013 12:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

FootballPhreak wrote:
IDOG_det wrote:
FootballPhreak wrote:
IDOG_det wrote:
How many of those guys were successful? I know Matthews is an all time great, but I honestly have no clue how well the others played because they are way before my time Laughing.

Most had varying degrees of success, but yeah Hannah and Matthews were bestest of the best.

http://www.drafthistory.com/index.php/positions/g

Internet is a wonderful thing. There is a ton more, but I tried to stick to modern era.
That link is actually interesting. It kind of shows that if you want the best chance to get a good OG, that the 15-90 range is where you want to pick, moreso in the 15-50 range. But, there is also a decent chance to get a guy in the 5th or later rounds.

Well, I have a whole big thing I did a couple years ago around here I posted. It was on my old computer. Anyhow, if you can find it, it broke down the entire league and what round/pick each starting OG was taken as well as average draft position ect.

IMO, it don't matter though. We are not talking about average starting guard here. We are talking about what appears to be a difference maker. Quite possibly the only blue chip guy in the entire draft could be available to us because of positional value. That to me makes him very attractive at #5.
Yeah, that link shows that the best of the best were taken really high.

But, would we prefer Warmack at #5 and a trade up for a DE, or let's say, Ansah at #5 and trade up for Cooper?
_________________

"Strength is meaningless in o-line play if there is no explosive, or speed-strength, quality to the strength."
- LeCharles Bentley

R.I.P. Stylish
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
FootballPhreak


Joined: 09 Oct 2007
Posts: 36589
Location: Clio, MI
PostPosted: Wed Feb 27, 2013 12:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

LionsFTW wrote:
The rookie contacts is only half the story. The evolution of the game is also a reason. Passing league. The running game has vanished in terms of importance compared to how it used to be. Sure it's still important, but not important enough to build a line around run blocking. Stylish made a mock and he was so giddy about how good the run blocking would be. Sorry, but thats not going to win us games. Thats not us getting our moneys worth for Staff and Calvin. We need to fix our run game to just take pressure off the passing game. Not completely turn our offense around.

Sorry, but Stafford passed for ~5k 2 years in a row and our pass blocking was more than sufficient. I think he was around 10th in the league for pressures/dropback. We need run blocking to do SOMETHING. Our passing game is NOT the issue. Not being able to kill a clock with a lead or keep our defense off the field is a huge one.
_________________
Draft_FanAddict wrote:
If that doesn't concern you, I don't know what would...a missing head?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mikatron!


Joined: 16 Oct 2011
Posts: 135
Location: Somewhere In SoCal
PostPosted: Wed Feb 27, 2013 12:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

LionsFTW wrote:
The rookie contacts is only half the story. The evolution of the game is also a reason. Passing league. The running game has vanished in terms of importance compared to how it used to be. Sure it's still important, but not important enough to build a line around run blocking. Stylish made a mock and he was so giddy about how good the run blocking would be. Sorry, but thats not going to win us games. Thats not us getting our moneys worth for Staff and Calvin. We need to fix our run game to just take pressure off the passing game. Not completely turn our offense around.


Not to be an a hole or anything, but I do believe (regardless of the thread title), he did indicate that his goal was to improve the run game in order to take pressure off the passing game. Obviously could be wrong here, no time to fully investigate.

I guess ultimately, the Lions need to take the player which will make the biggest impact and take pressure off the other players on their respective side of the ball... is that Warmack? Maybe. Milliner? Maybe. The great thing is, the draft is still two months away so there is plenty of time for this to shake out.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
FootballPhreak


Joined: 09 Oct 2007
Posts: 36589
Location: Clio, MI
PostPosted: Wed Feb 27, 2013 12:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

And let us not forget Warmack would help pass pro as well. How much better has Backus looked with a competent OG next to him?
_________________
Draft_FanAddict wrote:
If that doesn't concern you, I don't know what would...a missing head?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Rockcity


Joined: 06 Jan 2013
Posts: 2155
PostPosted: Wed Feb 27, 2013 12:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

LionsFTW wrote:
The rookie contacts is only half the story. The evolution of the game is also a reason. Passing league. The running game has vanished in terms of importance compared to how it used to be. Sure it's still important, but not important enough to build a line around run blocking. Stylish made a mock and he was so giddy about how good the run blocking would be. Sorry, but thats not going to win us games. Thats not us getting our moneys worth for Staff and Calvin. We need to fix our run game to just take pressure off the passing game. Not completely turn our offense around.
soo we have to be a passing team because thats what the league has become..imo balance is the key..game management is a bigger key. if you wanna continue to ignore drafting or signing defence,youd think you';d atleast give them more then a few minutes rest before you go 3 and out..you are just wrong about this whole passing league bs. And why is it you want flucker so bad? you think he will be a good pass protector?

running game has vanished but a rb won mvp.... this is silly talk.

you wanna stack the line with a bunch of doms..
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Rockcity


Joined: 06 Jan 2013
Posts: 2155
PostPosted: Wed Feb 27, 2013 12:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

FootballPhreak wrote:
And let us not forget Warmack would help pass pro as well. How much better has Backus looked with a competent OG next to him?
plus the scheme they run. the more short passing attack..i mean we could stack the line with nothing but run blockers and i dont see it effecting the passing game much. one trick ponys dont get talked about in the top 5 especially guards..
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
LionsFTW


Joined: 25 Jan 2010
Posts: 20853
Location: Old forum.
PostPosted: Wed Feb 27, 2013 12:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Rockcity wrote:
LionsFTW wrote:
The rookie contacts is only half the story. The evolution of the game is also a reason. Passing league. The running game has vanished in terms of importance compared to how it used to be. Sure it's still important, but not important enough to build a line around run blocking. Stylish made a mock and he was so giddy about how good the run blocking would be. Sorry, but thats not going to win us games. Thats not us getting our moneys worth for Staff and Calvin. We need to fix our run game to just take pressure off the passing game. Not completely turn our offense around.
soo we have to be a passing team because thats what the league has become..imo balance is the key..game management is a bigger key. if you wanna continue to ignore drafting or signing defence,youd think you';d atleast give them more then a few minutes rest before you go 3 and out..you are just wrong about this whole passing league bs. And why is it you want flucker so bad? you think he will be a good pass protector?

running game has vanished but a rb won mvp.... this is silly talk.

you wanna stack the line with a bunch of doms..


I want Fluker in the 2nd. Far different than top 5. And yeah, a rb won mvp but whens the last time that happened? And do you honestly think Minny had any chance going to a Super Bowl, let alone winning it?

And when I think balance, I think 50/50. Thats not key, imo. Running the ball adequately enough to make defenses respect it is key.
_________________
thelawoffices wrote:
theuntouchable wrote:
What's a matter TLO? Cat got your tongue?


I have mono you [inappropriate/removed]
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
YlionsY


Joined: 28 Apr 2008
Posts: 14656
PostPosted: Wed Feb 27, 2013 1:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I guess the debates not over.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
RyanFuller003


Joined: 07 Jan 2007
Posts: 20262
PostPosted: Wed Feb 27, 2013 1:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Rockcity wrote:
LionsFTW wrote:
The rookie contacts is only half the story. The evolution of the game is also a reason. Passing league. The running game has vanished in terms of importance compared to how it used to be. Sure it's still important, but not important enough to build a line around run blocking. Stylish made a mock and he was so giddy about how good the run blocking would be. Sorry, but thats not going to win us games. Thats not us getting our moneys worth for Staff and Calvin. We need to fix our run game to just take pressure off the passing game. Not completely turn our offense around.
soo we have to be a passing team because thats what the league has become..imo balance is the key..game management is a bigger key. if you wanna continue to ignore drafting or signing defence,youd think you';d atleast give them more then a few minutes rest before you go 3 and out..you are just wrong about this whole passing league bs. And why is it you want flucker so bad? you think he will be a good pass protector?

running game has vanished but a rb won mvp.... this is silly talk.

you wanna stack the line with a bunch of doms..

Well the MVP's team happened to lose in the first round of the playoffs because the Vikings don't have a real quarterback.

I think it's pretty simple. You have to run to strike some kind of balance, but you don't build an offense around the running game anymore. You pass to build a lead early, then run late to chew clock and win the game. And if you happen to fall behind at some point? You pass to overcome that deficit, too. I'm not going to pretend the Lions' lack of success in the last two hasn't been due largely to the fact that we haven't had a real running back since Sanders retired, but moreover, it has to do with the fact that we've had a revolving door of jokers at the quarterback position until Stafford established himself in 2011.

I do think a big reason behind Stafford's regression last year is that we didn't have Jahvid Best and that Leshoure wasn't enough to scare anyone into playing the run honestly (we faced <7 man fronts more often than any other team in the league last year and still couldn't manage a reasonable running game). Yeah, a lot of that has to do with the line, and that's where guys like Warmack and Fluker are getting a lot of supporters. But the Lions are never going to be a team that runs the ball 50+% of the time like San Francisco or Houston because we aren't working with Colin Kaepernick or Matt Schaub here. We have a quarterback with elite tools and the best receiver in the league. We have a coach and an OC that want to pass. They're building themselves in the mode of the 2000's Colts or the modern-day Patriots. They could run, but they didn't *want* to run, because they were better at passing. That's us, too. I mean those teams had Edgerrin James and now Ridley/Woodhead/Vereen (which isn't a bad trio by any means; at least it's the best RB depth chart the Pats have had since Dillon retired).

Obviously the Lions can't continue to sit here and break the passing attempts record every single year, nor is a 70-30 pass-run ratio a good idea, but they want the ball in the hands of Stafford and Johnson moreso than they want it in the hands of Leshoure or Bell or whoever else they put back there.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Detroit Lions All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next
Page 4 of 9

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group