Lions’ 2010 Offseason: Offense or Defense?

A hot topic of debate these days is whether the Lions should “go offense” or “go defense” in the draft.  Many say the Lions have had the worst defense in the NFL for the past two seasons, and they won’t be competitive until it’s addressed.  Others have argued that the Lions should “complete” the offense—if one unit is very good, the Lions may be more competitive than if both units were merely less bad.

I say it’s all missing the point.

This is the way the typical fan would approach an offseason, were they given the reigns to their team.  Keep the starters who played well last year, and any first- and second-year players.  Declare the remaining, unfilled starting positions “holes”, and add those positions to the “shopping list”. Then, rank the positions on the shopping list in your perceived order of need.

In free agency, go after the names you best recognize who play positions at the top of your shopping list.  As free agents are acquired, scratch their positions off the list.  Then, in each round, note your highest-ranked remaining need, and take the best player available at that position.  If, at the end of the draft, all of the “holes” have been “filled”, your team had a "good offseason".

Unfortunately, that’s not how you build a team.

Last year, the Lions churned the roster like crazy, trying to cycle in any amount of talent they could.  They used and abused their #1 waiver priority, bringing recent cuts from all over the league in for tryouts.  They also added some quality “name” veterans, guys like Larry Foote, Grady Jackson, Philip Buchanon . . . at the time, we called these guys “stopgaps”, players who could play at a decent level for a year or two while the Lions rebuilt the talent base of the team.

The funny thing is, it's now a year later; many of these one- or two-year players now only have one (or no) years left here in Detroit.  We as fans have to get over the idea that when Larry Foote was signed last year to a one-year deal, that the Lions were “set” at middle linebacker.  They were never any such thing; they aren’t now, either.

Unfortunately, it’s going to take at least this draft, and the next one, before Lions fans can look at the “starters” the way normal NFL teams do: as solid pieces that will be in place for several years.  Outside of Calvin Johnson, and most of the players from the 2009 draft class, every single position on the roster is a “hole”.

The Lions simply can’t afford to shackle themselves to perceived need, be it immediate or medium-term.  Practically every position on the field is still in play for practically every round in the draft; about the only thing that the Lions couldn’t use is a quarterback or tight end in the top few rounds.  The Lions can—and should—take the best player on the board, regardless of what position, or side of the field, they play on. 

Read more...

Sunset in the Tundra

"Sunset in the Tundra" - Kahnjan Metha

This morning, I was rooting through my drawers for an appropriate shirt.  Being Friday—and, therefore, Casual—I often don the colors or gear of one of my chosen sports teams.  During football season, I’m consistently sporting Lions gear to close out the work week.  This morning, it clicked.

It’s over.

The Lions are not going to play any more football until next autumn.

As we age, years seem to get shorter and shorter.  Seasons change as fast as we can get used to them, months are over before we know it, weeks melt away like ice in a fire . . . and days are interminable.  Yet, this annual cycle of football/no football stays the same.

In-season, it feels like the game always has, and always will, be there—week after week after week, football has a lovely rhythm.  We watch the game, have our Sunday outbursts, our slept-on-it Monday reactions, and our Tuesday and Wednesday reflections.  Then, three days of hype about, breakdowns of, and buildup to the next contest.

But now, we step foot onto the seemingly-infinite ice sheet between us and more Lions.  Oh, sure, there’s the playoffs, Super Bowl, college all-star games, etc.; we’ll get our football fixes.  But as of right now, we no longer live in the real: we return to our annual festival of speculation, argument, infighting, name-calling, prognosticating, and pronouncement-making that DF1979 over at Roar of the Lions aptly calls the “Ifseason”.

The Ifseason has always been a double-edged sword.  On one hand, “optimists” such as myself now have a an infinite canvas of snow upon which we can paint scenes of future Lions glory.  On the other, every internet discussion about the current and future Lions will be like NFL front office LARP: imaginary battles fought with foam swords and pretend spells.  Lions fans will argue vociferously over what is and is not real, what will and will not be, and what would and would not happen in various scenarios.

As exasperating—and pointless—as it is, it’s really all we have.  Despite what can only be described as massive upheaval last offseason—new President, GM, Head Coach, coaching staff, logo, uniform, and half of the roster—the improvement was difficult to quantify: from immeasurably bad, to merely awful.  Is 0-16 to 2-14 significant?  Are the Lions on the right track?  Did Mayhew, Harris, Schwartz, Cunningham, and Linehan overcome all odds to get this team back on the board, or did they fail spectacularly?

Obnoxiously, we won't be able to know—for real—until next autumn.

Read more...

be my valentine?

From Dave Birkett's blog, a quote Martin Mayhew on the hiring of Shack Harris as the oft-mentioned "personnel man":

"Mayhew was asked if he'd be OK if Harris voiced strong opposition to his decisions as they related to, say, the No. 1 overall pick. 'There were any number of yes men available, and we didn't pick any of those guys,' he said."

I gotta say folks, I know I have to be all "WTF why didn't they CLEAN HOUSE!!!?!?!?!?!?" in public . . . but I have a secret man-crush on Martin Mayhew.  Sometimes, even the blind old rich dude finds the acorn.

Read more...