December 24th, 2017 at 9:19 PM ^

Golladay, Agnew, Glasgow, Dahl, Killebrew, Zettel, and Reeves Maybin in the 3rd round or later. All of those guys are pretty solid contributors already. He's done a good job getting younger and restocking the talent in the organization.GM is absolutely a strength, and I no longer have to worry about shitty late round picks.


December 24th, 2017 at 5:13 PM ^

Jehovah and Yahweh are the same dude (notice the similarities in the name?), and Mohammed only talked to he/she/them, falling far short of deity status himself. Jesus is somewhere between Muhammed and Yahweh, on the "is he/she a deity?" chart...


December 24th, 2017 at 7:33 PM ^

I'd stay out of the religion conversation on the board, but considering tomorrow is Christmas: In the Catholic faith, Jesus is considered both God and man. So, He is not in between Mohammed and Yahweh. The latter is God the Father, Jesus is God the Son, and the Holy Spirit completes the Trinity.


December 24th, 2017 at 7:46 PM ^

Dude, this was totally not intended to start a religious debate. But since you did... If Jesus is "both God and man," then he is neither entirely a deity (God) nor entirely a man (Mohammed), and thus, literally by definition, between the two, like I said. And FYI, Christ was almost certainly not born on December 25th. Happy Saturnalia! 


December 24th, 2017 at 8:22 PM ^

Not intending this to be a debate. Whether you agree with the Catholic faith is irrelevant. The belief is the belief. Jesus is not viewed as being "in between", he is viewed as being both. In that faith, he is not lesser to God the Father. Again, I'm not looking to argue here and if it upsets you then you can take it up with the Catholic Church.


December 24th, 2017 at 10:27 PM ^

I am not sure why someone downvoted you as you are 100% correct. The fact that Jesus is of the same substance is of the Father and Holy Spirit is well trodden theological ground and consumed the first 1000 years of Christian history. See Arianism, the Monophysites and many others. Not saying which definition is right but the Catholic, Protestant, and Orthodox faiths are all pretty clear on this point, even if they differ greatly on others. Oh, throw in the Anglican Church too!


December 24th, 2017 at 7:41 PM ^

that my friends would always have in the 90s. Would Bill Walsh have been as great a coach without Joe Montana? How would Belichick have fared without Brady? Would Tomlin still be in Pittsburgh without Roethlisberger? My buddies used to argue it was the system and any quarterback would thrive. I think history shows conclusively that this is not the case and you really need a great QB.

With that said I think the Lions have their QB. Just need a couple pieces including the line and maybe the coach...


December 25th, 2017 at 4:03 PM ^

doesn’t win real games. The Lions missed a huge opportunity to trade him to Dallas last season.
You can’t complain about the Lions not having a good O line or a top RB when they have no cap room because they are paying their “franchise” QB $30 million.


December 29th, 2017 at 1:10 PM ^

Is it really an exception? Pretty much every coach is either a retread that had little success before, or he was a complete shot in the dark hire with no head coaching experience. Pick your poison. You don’t find proven successful head coaches on the open market often, and when you do, the Lions have no shot in hell at getting him.

Blue in Paradise

December 24th, 2017 at 4:26 PM ^

I don't necessarily disagree but he wasn't the one dropping passes or missing blocks.  OTOH - how do you not challenge the Tate catch.

I would say I am 60/40 in favor of firing Caldwell.  He isn't a bad coach but just can't seem to get the guys to the next level.