The Detroit Lions are going to need a quarterback sooner or later. As I write this, they are 0-5 and staring a number one pick in next April's draft right in the face. Jon Kitna's placement on Injured Reserve for the remainder of the season means that he will not be of much help. Their inability to trade Kitna (it is rumored that the 49ers had some interest) before the deadline means that it is likely he will simply be let go when the time comes. Mayhew maintains that Kitna is under contract next season, so he will be dealt with when the time comes. Regardless, the Lions plans obviously do not involve him.

If not Kitna, then who? The NFL draft should not be used to find a quarterback, at least not  the upcoming draft. In the organization's first draft without Millen, they should focus on fixing a horrible defense, or patching up an offensive line that allowed the second most sacks in 2007 with 54, behind the Chiefs and the 49ers who tied for the most. Maybe select a QB in the late rounds, but Stanton serves as their drafted quarterback for now.

So, where does that leave them? The current roster slots are filled with three unproven QBs. Dan Orlovsky is the starter, backed up by Drew Stanton and Drew Henson. Despite the seeming lack of promise, all three of these players should be looked at closely.

Orlovsky is in his fourth NFL season. He was taken by the Lions in the 5th round of the 2005 draft out of the University of Connecticut, and saw his first real action when he started in place of the injured Jon Kitna last week in a 12-10 loss to the Minnesota Vikings. Orlovsky was 12 of 21 with 150 yards and a touchdown. Not a bad stat line for his first career start. Then again, the Youtube video of the play on which Orlovsky dropped back into his own end zone to pass and rolled right out of the back of it (resulting in a safety) currently has 84,890 views and is titled "Dumbest QB Ever!!"

And then we've got Drew Stanton. Taken in round 2 of the 2007 draft from Michigan State University, Stanton has been injured for most of his career, and one has to hope that he will not be derailed by injuries, as was a once promising Charles Rogers who was drafted a few years ahead of Stanton, also out of Michigan State.  I use this comparison only based on injuries. Rogers' immaturity was evident during his few years in the NFL with his failed drug tests. Drew Stanton on the other hand has done and said all of the right things so far, and appears to be working hard to improve and set himself up for an opportunity to be the starter.

It does not appear as though Dan Orlovsky is a long-term solution. Stanton, however, was taken in the 2nd round and should be given an opportunity to be the Lions quarterback of the future. This season is already a lost cause for the hopeless Lions, so they should see exactly what it is they've got in him. That's not to say that they should throw him immediately into the fire. This could ruin his confidence, and is not necessary. Stanton and Orlovsky should split playing time the rest of the season, and be re-evaluated at the end of it to see what their future in the organization might hold.

The Lions also have a wild card in Drew Henson. "Drew Number Two" has not had a successful football career since his days of splitting playing time with Tom Brady at the University of Michigan, and becoming the starter once Brady graduated. Henson had the opportunity to be a Heisman Trophy contender his senior year, but instead chose to pursue baseball. He signed a contract with the New York Yankees--switching back to football after only nine at bats and one hit in part of two seasons with New York. After signing with the Dallas Cowboys and being pulled during his first start, Henson's career has gone nowhere fast. He is now riding the Lions bench. Many would argue that Henson does not even belong there as a third-stringer. However, he did come from the University of Michigan, a school who has turned out solid quarterbacks in the past, as a quarterback that could have been in contention to win a Heisman. Give him some playing time this season too. Who knows, maybe Tom Brady rubbed off on him while they were splitting time.

Regardless of whether or not any of the three current quarterbacks pan out, the Lions should bring in an outsider next season. Detroit has not been kind to its quarterbacks in recent years. One can only hope that with the end of Matt Millen's reign, things will start to turn around, and the position will at least become playable. If this is indeed the case, the Lions would be wise to look to Baltimore as a source for their new guy. Out for the season with a torn labrum, Kyle Boller's days in Baltimore appear numbered. Joe Flacco has been named the Ravens' starter for the rest of the year, and while he is not exactly exceeding expectations (he has thrown one touchdown versus seven interceptions this season), it is clear that the Ravens have decided to move on from Boller, a once promising first round pick out of California, the second QB taken in the draft behind only Carson Palmer. Boller has shown flashes throughout his NFL career of what he is capable of. With 45 career touchdowns  and 44 interceptions, Boller is not  in position to be an offensive savior. Still, I am not convinced that he would be the second-coming of John Kitna. Kitna is a career back-up who for some reason has been given opportunities to start football games. Boller is a once-promising first round pick who is still capable of producing at the top level in the NFL, but his time in Baltimore has not yet revealed what he can be.

One final thing that the Lions would still be missing, though Boller would be a step in the right direction. Orlovsky and Stanton, with Kitna gone, have no veteran presence on which to rely. The perfect candidate for the job? Stick with me on this one: Mark Brunell. Ok, so he's not (and should not) going to start another game in the NFL. But, he's got 15 seasons under his belt, and is a three-time Pro Bowler. He knows what it takes to compete, and his presence could go a long way (with an inexpensive price tag) with Orlovsky and Stanton. Large gain outweighs the relatively little cost here.