Aaron Curry says will take less money to be a Lion
by Jettero2112 on Apr 22, 2009 7:25 AM EDT
71 comments
Aaron Curry had an interview on Sirrius radio yesterday and says he'd take less money than last years #1 pick, Jake Long, to be a Detroit Lion.
This would be a freaking coup. Best player in the draft and they don't have to spend $40 mil to get him. I've been on the Curry bandwagon since day one. The Lions need to get this deal done before the Draft. I just hope it's not posturing to get Stafford to take less money.
This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of Pride of Detroit's main writer, Sean, or the site in general. FanPosts are valued expressions of opinion by passionate and knowledgeable fans.
0 recs |
71 comments
Email
Print
Comments
Tell you what, I'll take less than Aaron Curry.
What is this? Midnight Madness days at the Mall?
I hope the decision here will be what is in the best long term interests of the Lions. If it comes down to who they can get for the cheapest…….well, that does not leave me with a lot of confidence in the new Lions management.
I understand that they want a guy signed before the draft to avoid a disruptive hold out, but nickel and diming the #1 pick is beyond stupid.
I am starting to get a bad feeling about this.
by NorthLeft12 on Apr 22, 2009 7:55 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Consider yourself signed
I need a MLB to play for me. Kind of like that Office LB commercial from a couple years back. You get $34.98 a week plus all the snack room food you can scrounge.
by ATL Lion on Apr 22, 2009 8:27 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I have the physique to be a Millen MLB pick.
But I am ninja quick. I am sure I can get out of the way before being cleated.
Does body armour come with the uni?
by NorthLeft12 on Apr 22, 2009 9:22 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
lol
They are worried about cap space obviously NL. I am quite sure they realize that nickle and diming Stafford would be ignorant on their part. They are looking to the future, with it being likely to be a capless year next season. If they can sign a HUGE need this year for less than typical #1 money, you can bet the farm that they will try to do just that. This game is a business, not just a game. If they looked at every pick based solely upon the long term needs of the team, they would be bankrupt in no time flat. The fact is, they have to consider what it will take to pay this guy. They already have the burden of picking #1, and all of the guaranteed money issues that come with that pick. If they feel that they can get by at QB and LT with what they have, and they can sign a guy who is likely the best player in the draft, at the same time filling a gaping hole on their defense, for less money, I say it’s a done deal. Sign the papers and call the press.
by KDawg on Apr 22, 2009 12:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Best player in the draft
for less money than last years #1?! That’s fantastic. I’d think they’re not looking at it as getting him on the cheap but as not overpaying for a non-QB or OT.
Great deal if they pull it off.
"A child of five would understand this. Send someone to fetch a child of five." ~Groucho Marx
by Jettero2112 on Apr 22, 2009 8:05 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
That is the reason why he should be picked #1
I just read this on Detroit NEws website. Showing this amount of unselfishness before even entering the league. How can Mayhew NOT draft him?
When angry, count four; when very angry, swear. ~Mark Twain, Pudd'nhead Wilson, 1894
by Leapin Lion on Apr 22, 2009 8:10 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I don't really agree that Curry is saying anything special.
I’d be happy with Curry as the pick, but really, he’s not saying anything special by acknowledging that Left Tackles make more money that Linebackers so why should it be different for rookies?
Curry could make way less than Jake Long and still be overpaid for a linebacker.
That said, I still want Curry or Jason Smith. Whoever we draft, he’s going to be overpaid regardless, so let’s get the guy who comes out the furthest ahead on the risk/reward/upside/downside analysis. If that turns out to be Stafford, I’ll muster up some benefit-of-the-doubt and hope for the best too.
by n4ry4 on Apr 22, 2009 11:12 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I want Stafford...
But I cannot argue with that, sign him and make him a lion
by thePROD1GY on Apr 22, 2009 8:37 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I hear that the other day on Sirius NFL....
and I thought to my self…. “DO IT”… DO IT…
IF Mayhew and Lewand REALLY want to change the culture here in Detroit, they need to end the search for the holy grail labeled ‘franchise QB’. For the last 50 years, this franchise has been focused on one thing, and one thing only… finding a franchise quarterback. The best years of this franchise (’90s), since the Layne Days, has been when we were all distracted from the QB by the great Barry Sanders.
The ‘Draft Stafford’ crowd is THE reason a curse exists…
“oh, if we just get a Franchise QB that we can build around”….The Lions have been trying that for 50 years. Guess what, it hasn’t worked. Time to change strategies… time to build a team where you don’t need a franchise QB to succeed, time to build a team that is in the running every year because the foundation is there… time to get away from the old way of the Lions…
One player does not equal a foundation. Learn from the history of this franchise and Draft a solid foundation to build on…. DO NOT draft a distraction.
Focus, Mayhew, focus.
by CLF on Apr 22, 2009 8:39 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Now curry needs to walk on water, right Northleft12?
Bet your hating this, now Curry has given the fans More of a reason to chant his name. Wonder how he could follow up bringing a cancer survivor to the draft? Come out and say he will take less money to play for THE Detroit Lions! Woot!
When angry, count four; when very angry, swear. ~Mark Twain, Pudd'nhead Wilson, 1894
by Leapin Lion on Apr 22, 2009 8:42 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
You know what, I like Curry. He seems like a really good guy.
But come on guys, you want to pick him because of who he brings to the draft? Because he will undercut the QB or LT ahead of him? Because he is a beast and he looks ripped?
Curry and his agent [yes he has an agent too!] know that his position is less valuable and that to become the #1 pick they have to sell him more aggressively. Even with the discount they are offering the Lions, he will make a ton more money with the Lions than if he is picked lower [down to tenth?!?] in this draft. So don’t make out that he is doing all this for selfless reasons.
I want the Lions management to pick the player who is the best long term value for the Lions. Sure, money and signability are a part of it, as are his image and popularity. But the number one reason they should base the pick on is their belief in his potential to help the Lions become a playoff [Super Bowl] team.
If the Lions management say Curry is the man, I will be happy to support them. They have had a lot more time to spend on evaluating these guys than any [or all] of us so we just have to trust their judgement.
by NorthLeft12 on Apr 22, 2009 9:08 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I explained the stafford pick 2 posts up...
Why don’t you explain which position Stafford will play if he isn’t “all that and a bag of chips”?
Curry will play special teams and any LB position…. Hell… maybe even alittle goal line TE, eh? anyone like that?
by CLF on Apr 22, 2009 9:19 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You are kidding right?
You want your #1 pick to be a special teamer?
Your explanation is based on what mistakes were made in the past by different people. And you believe in a curse on the QB position.
I believe we had bad football people making bad football decisions. I hope that the scout(s) that looked at and provided feedback on the QBs we have drafted has been ‘retired’ out the door. You know what? Their judgement regarding linebackers has been pretty bad too.
Stafford is the QB. If he flops as a QB he is worthless. Curry though will be a special teams demon! That will help to remind everyone in the NFL how awesome we are to have the #1 pick in the draft chasing after punt and kick returners.
by NorthLeft12 on Apr 22, 2009 9:34 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
In Defense of CLF
I believe the point he was trying to make was that if Stafford busts we just get made fun of until the next team takes a bad QB at #1. I mean, the 49’ers are chomping at the bit for us to take a QB, to let them off the hook.
But if Curry isnt the next Ray Lewis, atleast he can still contribute.
When angry, count four; when very angry, swear. ~Mark Twain, Pudd'nhead Wilson, 1894
by Leapin Lion on Apr 22, 2009 9:48 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You're kidding right?
If you had read the context in which I wrote, The curse exists because of the close mindedness, hallway thinking, no arguing approach that a FRANCHISE QB is THE way and only way to properly build a franchise.
Excuse me for not agree that Stafford is the holy grail of franchise QBs, that he will save this franchise from the cellar, that he IS the messiah of QBs…. I just don’t agree… not with the current state fo the team.
History repeats itself… unless you can learn from history.
by CLF on Apr 22, 2009 9:50 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nobody is saying he is the messiah.
The Stafford at #1 supporters are just saying that he is the best value for this pick.
Of course he can’t win it on his own. I never thought that you were saying that Curry could.
I actually like your idea of changing the overall direction of this franchise from offence to defence. I consider myself a defence oriented fan. I do not like to watch shoot outs. That is one of the main reasons I don’t watch very much college football. Touchdowns come too cheaply.
But at #1, this year, Matt Stafford is the best long term value for the Lions. In my opinion.
This franchise will not be righted in a year or two. I am willing to give these guys a chance to turn it around. Even if I don’t agree with some of their moves, I will judge them on the overall results. I will still criticize and praise when it is deserved, but I won’t call the draft a failure if they don’t take Stafford or an LT or trade down or take McKillop or any other of the crack pot brainstorms that I have had over the last month or two.
by NorthLeft12 on Apr 22, 2009 10:11 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Long Term Answer?
You get more shelf life (sorry NFL players, you are not objects to me) out of a LB that a QB. Especially in this day and age. You get at most 8 years out of a running back, QB even less. Farve is the exception. Name a QB who is starting now that has lead his team for the past 8-10 years and I can give you 4-5 times that number in Line BAckers.
When angry, count four; when very angry, swear. ~Mark Twain, Pudd'nhead Wilson, 1894
by Leapin Lion on Apr 22, 2009 10:16 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Leapin' , There are three times [at least] the number of LBs in the league
Tell you what, if you have the time, look at the starting MLBs versus starting QBs and check their age and experience. You might be surprised.
by NorthLeft12 on Apr 22, 2009 10:44 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thats not the point
The point is, IF Stafford busts you get nothing. But if Curry busts at least you get a solid NFL player that is still serviceable.
When angry, count four; when very angry, swear. ~Mark Twain, Pudd'nhead Wilson, 1894
by Leapin Lion on Apr 22, 2009 11:08 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wehn I mean Busts
I mean, not in the Ray Lewis mold.
When angry, count four; when very angry, swear. ~Mark Twain, Pudd'nhead Wilson, 1894
by Leapin Lion on Apr 22, 2009 11:08 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'd like to change your Defence...
to defense… but it looks as though we can’t agree on that either.
by CLF on Apr 22, 2009 10:28 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
"the best value for the pick..."
still doesn’t make sense to me. The best value for the first overall pick in the draft is the best player in the draft not the 7th or 8th.
Why is everyone (and this is changing the subject just a little) who is so worried about paying the best player in the draft (Curry) alot of money, not worried about spending even more money on a guy who is considered the 7th or 8th best player on some boards?
biggest need + best player = Aaron Curry
by WBL on Apr 22, 2009 11:20 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Which position has the biggest impact on an NFL game?
What positions do the Lions need to significantly upgrade? MLB, QB, LT, DT, G, DE,CB, TE, S, WR, RB, OLB in roughly that order.
You want to move a natural OLB to MLB with the first pick in the draft.
Stafford is the highest rated QB. He is in the top five [at least] of pretty well every prospect ranking board. And the difference between them in the rankings is very small.
Stafford has more potential to change the course of this franchise than Curry. Stafford has more upside. Stafford does have more risk, no argument there. Any QB does.
And finally, I don’t care if they end up making Curry the highest paid LB before he plays a down. That is the way the system is right now. Deal with it.
by NorthLeft12 on Apr 22, 2009 11:48 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Let's make a fair comparison then...
a QB who holds a clipboard for the first year or an MLB starting from day one? Or are we gonna throw Stafford in? I’m gonna go with the guy on the field.
Curry played in a 5-2. There is no OLB in a 5-2. He has the size and ability to play on the inside.
Stafford isn’t even the top QB on some boards, Sanchez is.
Joey had more potential to change the franchise, Andre had more potential to change the franchise, Chuck had more potential to change the franchise… I’m beginning to see why we haven’t had an elite defensive player on our team since Bubba. We are neglecting the team for a position. And we keep neglecting our team for a position. We need to take the best player. The best player is Curry.
And by the way who had the largest impact on the Ravens over the last 10 years? Their QB or Ray Lewis? or how about the Bears? QB or Urlacher? How about the Bears in the 80s? Singletary or McMahon? or the Steelers in the early 90s O’Donnell or their LBs? or the Steelers now? their D, Polamalu, their LBs or Ben? or the Titans? Young/ Collins or Bulluck? They all have one thing in common. They keep winning without a QB (except for the Steelers but Ben’s job is to not screw up not to win it for them so my point still holds).
Now let’s look at the Colts. Manning has done a great job, but they still can’t seem to get past the Conference Finals because they can’t stop anyone (except the one year when they finally did). Hell, they almost lost to the Lions last year because they couldn’t even stop them. Or how about the Broncos. Pro Bowl QB… can’t make the playoffs. Why? Because their D sucked almost as bad as the Lions did. Or how about the Saints? Great QB, great offense, no D, no winning in the playoffs.
What was the Lions biggest problem last year? Defense. Until we start addressing our biggest needs with the best players available, things won’t change and we won’t win.
In the end, it boils down to one thing. Defense wins games. Until we act like stopping the other team is a priority, we will continue down this road of mediocrity.
One other thing regarding CLF’s argument. If Curry doesn’t turn out to be Ray Lewis or Patrick Willis, he’s still on the field playing and contributing. Making tackles. My guess is still solid at worst. If Stafford can’t contribute, well then we have a verrrry high paid podium (i.e. a clipboard holder), not on the field not contributing. But we’re still paying him. An additional reason why Curry is the best pick.
by WBL on Apr 22, 2009 1:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
And to add...
I’d rather pay someone 30+ mil to play special teams than to have them hold a clipboard.
Too much money for someone to be sitting on the bench.
by CLF on Apr 22, 2009 10:02 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm open to
having Stafford play special teams if he fails at QB. Have him on the return team and we can get the enjoyment of watching him get creamed on every kickoff if he proves he is Harrington Jr. That may be worth the $40 mil.
by ATL Lion on Apr 22, 2009 11:25 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The scouts that were working for the Lions when Bloey Harrington was picked....
are the same scouts that are touting Stafford as the next Jesus Christ in Detroit. They have not left, they have not been fired. The only difference is the director of player personnel. Let’s hang our hats on a guy who would be the 4th or 5th best QB if all of the underclassmen had come out this year. Let’s sign a guy who is hailed, by the same scouts that said that Joey was the next Joe Montana, as our savior and long term answer at “franchise” QB. Let’s do it blindly, without consideration for what we could do next year. Why not…..we were 0-16 last year….what could it hurt? Forget about the fact that we have no defense and a pathetic offensive line. Stafford can come in midseason and win every game from his back…..he is that good. Hell, maybe he can win games from the sideline since he is so awesome. Maybe he can turn the clipboard into an XBOX 360 controller and take the Lions to the Superbowl with Culpepper taking all of the hits…..he is that good, isn’t he?
by KDawg on Apr 22, 2009 1:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
+1
KDawg, you don’t seem to get it, the QB is the only position that can change a franchise from cellar dwellers into 3 and 4 peat champions. There is no other thing in football that can contribute to the success of the team. Shiny’s can mentally make people trip up when rushing them, kinetically guide the football into our defensive backs hands and I’m pretty sure there’s a documentary coming out May 1st about Matt Stafford pre-football hijinks called X-Men Origins Wolverine. That healing factor is gonna come in handy when his ribs get shattered after all the hits he;ll take behind our O-line
by MattyZ on Apr 22, 2009 1:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's the same Scouts for the past 23 years.
Scott McEwen has been with the Lions for 23 years, Barry Sanders was drafted 1989. Do the math. lol joking
When angry, count four; when very angry, swear. ~Mark Twain, Pudd'nhead Wilson, 1894
by Leapin Lion on Apr 22, 2009 1:15 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Stafford will be the new deluxe scape goat, Covering for Joey H
Remember Joey was highly touted coming out of college, for his accuracy, leadership, and good character. Well, he made a SI cover and the cover of NCAA College Football 03 or 02 EA Sports; then the Lions ruined him.
When angry, count four; when very angry, swear. ~Mark Twain, Pudd'nhead Wilson, 1894
by Leapin Lion on Apr 22, 2009 9:42 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
CLF YOU MAY BE AN IDOT
Goal line TE EH…WOW, Stafford will be a starter in this league, I have little doubt but northleft is right, your excited about currys special teams play????
by thePROD1GY on Apr 22, 2009 9:39 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Well
Before you question wether or not someone is stupid, make sure you use the spell check.
When angry, count four; when very angry, swear. ~Mark Twain, Pudd'nhead Wilson, 1894
by Leapin Lion on Apr 22, 2009 9:46 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I thought I've made it clear in the past...
But attack the argument, not the person. Name-calling will not be allowed. Consider this your only warning.
Pride of Detroit, SB Nation's Lions Blog
by Sean Yuille on Apr 22, 2009 9:55 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It was a joke..
OBVIOUSLY NO ONE WATCHES “HOW I MET YOUR MOTHER”
by thePROD1GY on Apr 22, 2009 9:59 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
rofl
When angry, count four; when very angry, swear. ~Mark Twain, Pudd'nhead Wilson, 1894
by Leapin Lion on Apr 22, 2009 10:13 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Even if Curry is going to take less than Jake Long
He’s still going to be making around $30 mill guaranteed, like $29 Million. Plus he’d probably get the same overall dollar amountd.
He’s saying this cuz as the #3 or wherever else he would go he’d get at least $5 Million guaranteed less than what Detroit would offer.
So yea he’s smart, but he also ain’t dumb either by saying he’d take less. It still would make him the highest paid LB in the league.
by FreeBradshaw on Apr 22, 2009 10:18 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I'm not sure anyone is picking up on that FB.
I mentioned this fact in my earlier comment, but it got stampeded in the rush to make Aaron Curry the highest paid Special Team player of all time.
by NorthLeft12 on Apr 22, 2009 10:56 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sorry guys...
The Chuck Long experiment has been tried before.
by CLF on Apr 22, 2009 10:59 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thats not the point
Everyone has said the past 3 months you cant take a LB #1 Because of the guaranteed money, right?! Well, he is saying he will take less. Jake Long is the highest paid OT in the league, by a substantial amount. Id Curry took 25-27 million thats not much more than what Bart Scott got this year from NEw York, and Im not sure is Scott is the highest paid LB in the NFL.
When angry, count four; when very angry, swear. ~Mark Twain, Pudd'nhead Wilson, 1894
by Leapin Lion on Apr 22, 2009 11:06 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Who is this everybody?
I have never used that argument and I think it is a poor reason to base on who you would pick.
I’ll make it simple; Who will help the most to get the Lions back into the playoffs in the long term?
That is the guy you draft.
by NorthLeft12 on Apr 22, 2009 11:54 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Curry, by a long shot.
BOTTOM LINE:
Stafford does not have the Stats, nor experience, to be selected #1.
by CLF on Apr 22, 2009 11:58 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Everyone?
I am reffering to the Mock Draft pundits out there, NFL Network, ESPN, Yahoo! Sports, Walterfootball.com, etc. “They” have made that particular arguement.
When angry, count four; when very angry, swear. ~Mark Twain, Pudd'nhead Wilson, 1894
by Leapin Lion on Apr 22, 2009 12:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It would??
30 mill guaranteed for how many years? Do the math…..even Ray Lewis will still be making more money than Curry at 3 years and 22 mill guaranteed.
by KDawg on Apr 22, 2009 1:07 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Outsiders take
I’m a Patriots fan, so I have no real rooting interest in the first pick, but I must admit, that some of the stories coming out of Detroit are a bit confusing to me.
A couple of weeks ago I read in Peter King’s MMQ that the Lions were torn between Stafford, Smith and Curry for the no. 1 pick, that they would be comfortable with picking all of them, and that signability before the draft would be a an important factor in the final decision. It could be smokescreen, but as it stood, it just didn’t make any sense to me at all. In that situation the Lions should absolutely take Stafford, because there is just nothing comparable to being set at the qb position.
Now, I’m not saying Stafford will be any good. If the coaching staff believes his problems with inaccuracy are unfixable – very possible – they should not draft him. But if all three players are graded equal or close to equal, I believe in the good old drafting mantra: “If you don’t have a franchise qb, don’t pass on one.”
by hythlodaeus on Apr 22, 2009 11:22 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Good point about inaccuracy...
Question: his accuracy was 55% in college. Do people think that he will be more accurate in the NFL where the players are faster, hit harder and he has less time to throw (esp, behind the Lions line)?
Doesn’t sound likely to me.
by WBL on Apr 22, 2009 11:25 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thank you
Exactly right. The game will speed up quite a bit and Stafford will have less time to throw. I see him throwing a lot of picks and a lot of balls away. Of course, that won’t be until 201 because he’ll ride pine until either then or Culpepper gets hurt (or when he sucks, which could be sooner). Take Curry and plug him in the middle.
"A child of five would understand this. Send someone to fetch a child of five." ~Groucho Marx
by Jettero2112 on Apr 22, 2009 11:37 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
To STafford's credit...
I think his career Comp% is like 56.6%….not 55%.
Where as Peyton Manning’s percentage was 62.85%… if you throw out his senior season its even better @ 63.3%
He did not average less than 60% during his 4 years at Tennessee. THAT is a #1 pick, franchise QB.
by CLF on Apr 22, 2009 11:56 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Okay, Lets wait until Peyton Manning Jr. is available.
by NorthLeft12 on Apr 22, 2009 11:59 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I wouldn't go that far...
But Stafford isn’t even close to a Peyton Manning now is he?
by CLF on Apr 22, 2009 12:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Stafford completed 61.4% of his passes as a Junior. Matt Ryan, 59% as a Senior.
He improved every year he was a starter. Why don’t you throw in the number of picks he threw in Pee Wee football?
I don’t mind you using statistics to prove your point, I encourage it, just don’t misrepresent them.
by NorthLeft12 on Apr 22, 2009 11:59 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
For once I agree with North
Staffords completion % has risen in each of his 3 years.
When angry, count four; when very angry, swear. ~Mark Twain, Pudd'nhead Wilson, 1894
by Leapin Lion on Apr 22, 2009 12:06 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Could it be that it
took him 3 years to get used to the speed of the game at the college level? Just a thought. Accuracy is like arm strengh some have it some have don’t. The lucky ones have both, but there are few of those (Manning, Brady).
by WBL on Apr 22, 2009 1:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Don't mean to respond to my own
but didn’t finish my thought.
Does that mean it’ll take Stafford 3 years to get a completion percentage of 60% in the pros too?
by WBL on Apr 22, 2009 1:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Where did I misrepresent?
I corrected another on his proper career percentage.
Talk about Misrepresentation… Matt Ryan’s Comp% was 61.6 as a JR…. and 57.6% as a career(not including his senior season to be fair) He was also not a #1 pick.
You are a little defensive towards Staffords stats…. Seems you don’t like us pointing to the lack of quality behind the player. Sure he improved every year… but it still doesn’t warrant THE #1 pick in the draft.
How bout you take a look at jamarcus russell and tell us how he’s doing…lol… He can make all the NFL throws too…LOL….
by CLF on Apr 22, 2009 12:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Your looking at college stats......
In their senior years…..Aaron Curry had 101 tackles, 2 sacks and 1 int….James Lauranitis had 130 tackles and 4 sacks and 2 INT’s…. each had 1 forced fumble.
Curry ran the 40 time tho….have to give him that. When he has to run 40 yards to catch that RB, he can do it better than Lauranitis….
Who is better? Workout warrior Curry who played in a weak offensive ACC or Lauranitis who played in the down, yet still stronger Big 10?? Lauranitis and Curry both come out last year, then JL would be picked higher…….
Curry will be good, so Will Lauranitis.
You have the chance to grab a MLB later in the draft who is just as productive ON THE FIELD as Aaron Curry, you do NOT have the chance to draft a QB like Stafford at any other point in the draft.
Lauranitis will be a beast, so will Curry. You have th chance to draft a beast at MLB and a potential franchise QB in Stafford and Lauranitis
Or you can draft Curry and get a beast of a LB and then with pick #20 you can get the next flame out DT like Peria Jerry………………………..
by FreeBradshaw on Apr 22, 2009 12:30 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
BTW if you are obsessed with Jason Smith
I can’t see how he is worthy of the #1 overall.
YOu say Matt Ryan is better than Stafford yet was #3 overall. Joe Thomas was #3 overall and is a light years better prospect than Jason Smith.
You can find LT’s, starting LT’s, and other lineman too, later in the draft. Just like you can find Lauranitis at #20. He may be your version of demeco Ryans….
1-Stafford
1-20 Lauranitis.
2-1 best available LINEMAN. doesn’t even have to be a LT. can be a G like Duke Robinson.
There are other LT’s in the draft later on that can be starters in the league.
by FreeBradshaw on Apr 22, 2009 12:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree with you about Smith
Smith wasn’t even in consideration until all the others started dropping off. The only LT that has been consistently rated as a top prospect is Monroe. Why? Because he has a proven track record and still performed well at the combine and pro day. Smith became popular at the combine and when everyone else faded.
by WBL on Apr 22, 2009 1:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The current knock on Laurinaitis.....
Is the fact that he is not the most solid tackler. Plus he played in a go after the QB defense, and only had 4 sacks? Curry played in a contain the QB defense, one that did not emphasize rushing the QB. Different teams, different worlds. Versatility is the key difference between Curry and James L. I also like James L…..and if they pass on Curry, I would be more than happy with him at pick 20.
by KDawg on Apr 22, 2009 1:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
James Lauranitis
is a MLB, why do you want versatility when that is your supposed greatest need???
And he isn’t the most solid tackler?? What NFL player is??? They all aren’t the greatest tackler. Lauranitis can tackle tho, the guy wouldn’t be playing if he couldn’t tackle, especialyl as a MLB.
by FreeBradshaw on Apr 22, 2009 2:30 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Actually....
He threw for 60.4% completions last year. I do agree, however, that he will not be as accurate in the NFL.
by KDawg on Apr 22, 2009 1:08 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
