The Lions' Poor Position Renders 2009 Draft Unwatchable

Rumors abound now that Matthew Stafford will be the first pick of the draft for my beloved and soon-to-be-estranged Detroit Lions. It's not because he's the best player on the board or because he feels an immediate need. It's because the best player on the board doesn't play a position that justifies the contract that the Lions must give to the first pick.

And this, quite frankly, sucks.

I've opined before that putting an underclassmen quarterback, regardless of his talent level, on a bad team will almost always kill his career.

Sure, there have been a couple of exceptions. Troy Aikman and Peyton Manning come to mind. But these quarterbacks had unique mental make-ups and much more experience in big time competition prior to getting draft. And both were seniors. I think Aikman was even a redshirt senior because of his transfer from Oklahoma.

Now, when talking about Stafford, you have to compare him to Aikman and Manning and not Flacco and Ryan from last year. As good as they were, they both went to good, competent, playoff calibre, talented teams. Aikman and Manning did not. 

If you compare Stafford to Manning or Aikman physically, his arm is probably stronger, but the two others are much bigger. Manning is a skinny 6'6", 230 and Aikman a stout 6'4", 220.

Height does matter a bit in the NFL and, at 6'2", Stafford doesn't have much of it. Also, while Stafford's arm is strong, Manning or Aikman were both far more accurate at this point. The decision-making skills of Manning and Aikman were also much more acclaimed. Manning and Aikman had both played in more games and thrown more passes, which made them safer picks.  

So, in my opinion, Stafford doesn't stack up to the prototypical franchise QBs. He does stack up to Brett Favre as a prospect, but Brett Favre sat for a year to develop and has a unique mental make-up. It's impossible to tell if Stafford has these qualities.

Now, I'm not trashing Stafford. I think he can start in the NFL and make plays.

But, not on a bad team—not if he starts out on a bad team. The Lions are a bad team. The Lions, as of yet, can't protect the quarterback, run the ball, catch the ball with consistency, stop the run, rush the passer, or cover. Developing a quarterback in that situation is like deliberately trying to kill his career, even if he sits for a year behind a competent veteran like Culpepper.

I don't want a team with an exciting quarterback. I want a team that is the product of a good program, a good philosophy. I want a team that is consistent in its drafting, its use of free agency, and coaching.

Such a team is built inside-out, like the Steelers. The Steelers get guards, centers, nose tackles, and linebackers—then they'll get a wideout, or a corner. For as long as I can remember, the only first round pick that the Steelers had spent on a QB was when they drafted Rothlisberger. Kordell Stewart was a third rounder. Neil O' Donnell was a free agent. Miller was a free agent.

If you look at the top QBs in the league right now, how many were a No. 1, overall? Just one—Manning. In the last 15 years, how many No. 1 QBs have won Super Bowls? Just two—Aikman and Manning. How many started a Super Bowl? Three—Manning, Aikman, and Bledsoe.

So, you see, it isn't a farce that you need a great quarterback to be an elite team, but it is a farce to say that you can only get one by drafting that QB early.  

And that is why the draft sucks for me. The Lions are forced to pay an obscene amount of money to a prospect that is most likely going to fail simply because his position historically commands that obscene amount of money.

Did I mention that he has never played in the NFL? They can't trade the pick. They're precluded from taking the best player on the board.

Yeah, the NFL Draft sucks.