It is currently Thu Apr 24, 2014 3:05 pm

All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]





Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 25 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Offensive line... weak`
PostPosted: Sun Sep 08, 2013 5:15 pm 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar

Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 3:15 pm
Posts: 4087
I'm sure that we could find a lot of reasons that we lost to the Saints, but I'm heaping the blame on the offensive line. We suck in pass protection. Hopefully, they will get better.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Offensive line... weak`
PostPosted: Sun Sep 08, 2013 6:02 pm 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2007 5:41 pm
Posts: 2298
Location: Albany NY
Agreed line played terrible, especially Baker :x He was getting pushed back every other play.... also Tony isn't much of a help at this point when he stays in. :doh:

_________________
When life gives you lemons, find some salt and tequila then invite me!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Offensive line... weak`
PostPosted: Sun Sep 08, 2013 6:41 pm 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 8:16 pm
Posts: 1336
Location: Macon, GA
RobertAP wrote:
I'm sure that we could find a lot of reasons that we lost to the Saints, but I'm heaping the blame on the offensive line. We suck in pass protection. Hopefully, they will get better.


Of course it would be so easy to heap critism on the OL but today's game bears out the true weakness of the 2013 Falcons. Against good teams they can not stand up to a rush and on crucial downs our RBs will be stuffed or the QB hurried or sacked. As Dave points out in the next post, Baker is again terrible as a Vet. Holmbs has a weak excuse in that he is new and han't played but Baker has no excuse. He is definitely not one of the top LTs in the league.

TD had made a big mistake and it will cost us the playoffs if not corrected very soon. Not sure what he can do but he's not earning his salary if he can't fix the OL quickly.

_________________
John O'


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Offensive line... weak`
PostPosted: Sun Sep 08, 2013 6:56 pm 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar

Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 3:15 pm
Posts: 4087
If TD wants to fix the OL, he's going to have to trade the future to save the present. That might be a good idea considering the circumstances.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Offensive line... weak`
PostPosted: Sun Sep 08, 2013 10:16 pm 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2007 6:59 pm
Posts: 1108
Location: San Diego, CA
The protection was brutal and the rest of the offense was just not able to carry them. The defense picked the offense up as much as anyone could hope for.

_________________
The Young Gunner


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Offensive line... weak`
PostPosted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 1:32 am 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar

Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2005 8:57 pm
Posts: 4349
Look we were 3 of 11 on third down conversions, The Saints had the ball for 10 more minutes than we did. If our line was the reason Ryan was always needing to rush his passes; and Steven Jackson was hit and then gained 4 yards on his own, their's nothing we can do now.(Nothing worthwhile)

We basically played the game without Roddy, but the worst part is the Saints didn't look like a playoff team either.

I'd say we looked about like we did in preseason, I like whoever was the new guy at right guard!!

_________________
"Everything Counts"
Cyril


Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Offensive line... weak`
PostPosted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 2:16 am 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar

Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 3:15 pm
Posts: 4087
From what I saw, we didn't break down at all in the middle of our line. It was the tackles that really blew it. Both Baker and Holmes looked crappy in pass protection. The Falcons either should not have given up Clabo, or they should have gone after a tackle in the off-season. I would have been happy if they had gone after a real left tackle and had moved Baker over to RT, though I am a bit unsure if Baker would be any better off on the right side at this point.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Offensive line... weak`
PostPosted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 2:27 am 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar

Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 3:15 pm
Posts: 4087
Quote:
Holmes: “We kept Matt pretty clean for the most part.”
Smith: “We’ve got to protect the quarterback better than we did today.”
Holmes: “By the time he was getting hit, the ball was gone.”
Smith: “He was hit entirely too many times."


Holmes is delusional. It's one thing to have a short term memory... It's another to not man up and own your mistakes. Jackson owned his mistake. Holmes needs to own his. If he's not owning his mistakes, how can he correct them?

TD, go get us a real OT.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Offensive line... weak`
PostPosted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 7:09 am 
Offline
Draught Guru
Draught Guru
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2007 7:32 am
Posts: 4824
BY JEFF SCHULTZ - THE ATLANTA JOURNAL-CONSTITUTION

NEW ORLEANS —

Once you get past the what-ifs — that a potential game-winning drive ended on the other team’s 3-yard line, that the new running back looked great until dropping a touchdown pass with 49 seconds left — the Falcons’ 23-17 loss to New Orleans really comes down to one things: This isn’t a team built to score only 17 points.

Not in Game 1. Not in Game 16. Not against any team, let alone New Orleans, which allowed the second-most points in the NFL last season (454). Not against any defense, let alone one that shattered the league record for yards allowed in 2012 (7,042).

Coach Mike Smith defend the Saints, saying, “That’s not the 2012 defense.” OK. Let’s go with that. Let’s assume New Orleans defense will be improved in 2013. But this was still a unit that already had four starters standing in street clothes because of injuries and lost two other regulars early in the game. And no, this defense won’t send a truckload of players to the Pro Bowl at season’s end, with our without bounties.

Seventeen points. That’s what this high-wattage, bright Hollywood marquee of an offense produced in 11 possessions on Sunday. Seventeen points, including one scoring drive in the last eight possessions.

“If we score 17 points, I’m just saying: That’s terrible. You know? I’m just telling the truth,” said wide receiver Roddy White, who nonetheless admitted he was limited by a high ankle sprain. “All of the guys that we have, we should be able to score a lot more points than that. But we [shot] ourselves in the foot on a lot of drives. We had penalties, we had things called back, drives stalled. We got off to such a good start but then we kept doing things wrong. “We on offense, with the players we have, have to win this game.”

The defense, a young unit missing veteran cornerback Asante Samuel, limited Drew Brees and the Saints to two touchdowns and 23 points. That should have been good enough to win this game.

It’s only one loss. But the question about the Falcons is whether by season’s end, we will look back on this team as a beautifully decorated house with a faulty foundation. They can’t block. The reconstructed offensive line, a concern through the offseason, training camp and four exhibition losses — which we can now confirm were not completely meaningless — struggled in several areas but mostly pass protection. Quarterback Matt Ryan was sacked three times. The Saints were credited with six other quarterback hits.

That total seems conservative. Ryan was belted often and was constantly under pressure. It’s a wonder he escaped with all of his organs intact. “There was pressure on the right side, left side, up the middle,” Smith said. Sometimes, even coaches don’t have to wait to look at the film to analyze a problem.

This offense has a great quarterback, a tight end waiting on the top step in Canton, (Tony Gonzalez), the best trio of wide receivers in the NFL (White, Julio Jones, Harry Douglas) and a standout running back (Steven Jackson). None of it will matter if the beef up front keeps getting spun in circles or knocked on their rumps.

It is true that the Falcons almost pulled out a win in the end: Ryan drove the offense down the field in the final three minutes, faced a third-and-goal from the Saints’ 3-yard line. He then had a high but catchable pass dropped by Jackson at the goal line. (On fourth down, Ryan was under pressure and tried to hit a triple-covered Gonzalez in the middle of the end zone but the pass was intercepted by safety Roman Harper.) But even at 1-0, the Falcons’ biggest problem would’ve been evident.
“I would be less than honest if I said there were no issues,” guard Justin Blalock said. “That’s always going to be the case. Even if we go down and score on the last play, the issues are not going to disappear just because we win a game.”

Center Peter Konz echoed the sentiment. He said the line didn’t adjust well when the Saints changed their fronts in the second half, using “more radar” type plays, in which “they just kind of stand up and walk around” and pick pass-rushing lanes.
The most scrutinized of the linemen remains tackle Lamar Holmes. He needs more than just significant improvement. He needs a reality check.

Consider this sample of quotes from Holmes and Smith:

Holmes: “We kept Matt pretty clean for the most part.”
Smith: “We’ve got to protect the quarterback better than we did today.”
Holmes: “By the time he was getting hit, the ball was gone.”
Smith: “He was hit entirely too many times.”

Was Holmes watching the same game as everybody else?

A familiar refrain: This was Smith’s and general manager Thomas Dimitroff’s biggest gamble. They cut right tackle Tyson Clabo for salary cap purposes because they believed that Holmes would not be a significant step down. But in combination with two other position changes — Konz sliding over from right guard to replace the retiring center Todd McClure and Garrett Reynolds starting at right guard — the results have been disastrous.

They have 15 more games to try to get it right. But the opener didn’t live up to the billing.

_________________
"what if there were no hypothetical situations?"


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Offensive line... weak`
PostPosted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 12:57 pm 
Offline
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 3:03 pm
Posts: 25575
Location: North Carolina
John O wrote:
today's game bears out the true weakness of the 2013 Falcons.

Don't you mean the 2011 and 2012 Falcons as well?

RobertAP wrote:
If TD wants to fix the OL, he's going to have to trade the future to save the present. That might be a good idea considering the circumstances.

Unless the Falcons are trading for a bonafide All-Pro in the prime of his career, that's a terrible idea.

_________________
"Vincere scis, Hannibal, victoria uti nescis" -- Maharbal, 216 B.C.E.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Offensive line... weak`
PostPosted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 1:06 pm 
Offline
Draught Guru
Draught Guru
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2007 7:32 am
Posts: 4824
Pudge wrote:
John O wrote:
today's game bears out the true weakness of the 2013 Falcons.

Don't you mean the 2011 and 2012 Falcons as well?

RobertAP wrote:
If TD wants to fix the OL, he's going to have to trade the future to save the present. That might be a good idea considering the circumstances.

Unless the Falcons are trading for a bonafide All-Pro in the prime of his career, that's a terrible idea.



Pudge: looking at it objectively, does our OL look better or worse then 11/12? Im not saying the OL hasn't been an issue the whole time: It just looks to me like they are definitely 'worse' this year.

The other thing is: do you think trading for something other then a "bonafide All-Pro in the prime of his career' is terrible because whoever we get will not be able to step right in and do the job( because this move should have been made about 8 weeks ago) ? :ninja:

_________________
"what if there were no hypothetical situations?"


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Offensive line... weak`
PostPosted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 1:20 pm 
Offline
Playmaker
Playmaker

Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2006 1:51 pm
Posts: 376
Location: Estepona, Spain
Pudge wrote:
John O wrote:
today's game bears out the true weakness of the 2013 Falcons.

Don't you mean the 2011 and 2012 Falcons as well?

RobertAP wrote:
If TD wants to fix the OL, he's going to have to trade the future to save the present. That might be a good idea considering the circumstances.

Unless the Falcons are trading for a bonafide All-Pro in the prime of his career, that's a terrible idea.


Eugene Monroe. The Jags are not going anywhere this year, and just drafted their future stud tackle. I would be willing to believe that Monroe could be had for the right price.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Offensive line... weak`
PostPosted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 2:10 pm 
Offline
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 3:03 pm
Posts: 25575
Location: North Carolina
Nuccah wrote:
Eugene Monroe. The Jags are not going anywhere this year, and just drafted their future stud tackle. I would be willing to believe that Monroe could be had for the right price.

Okay, put yourself in the Jaguars situation. What would you ask the Falcons for?

Knowing that you have all the leverage in the situation, and you are weak at nearly every position. Monroe will be 27 next April, meaning that if you were J-ville and opted to pay him market value next spring, you could presume that you could potentially get another 5-6 years out him because he should be able to play until he's 32. Clabo is currently 32, Jordan Gross is 33, and Jeff Backus just retired at 35.

So are just going to be content with a mid-to-late 1st round pick from Atlanta for a player that would be a Top 10 pick in any draft that has 5+ years of value left?

_________________
"Vincere scis, Hannibal, victoria uti nescis" -- Maharbal, 216 B.C.E.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Offensive line... weak`
PostPosted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 2:16 pm 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2007 5:41 pm
Posts: 2298
Location: Albany NY
Offer a 3rd and a 7th to them, maybe they bite. Both of our tackles played terrible all preseason and yesterday, if we can get decent on one side we can double the other, and make due. Sucking on both sides is really crippling our offense at the moment.

_________________
When life gives you lemons, find some salt and tequila then invite me!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Offensive line... weak`
PostPosted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 2:26 pm 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar

Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2005 8:57 pm
Posts: 4349
We just guaranteed Baker 18 million on a longer 7 million a year contract.

I agree with Gus this line looked like the worst one we've had.

_________________
"Everything Counts"
Cyril


Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Offensive line... weak`
PostPosted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 3:10 pm 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar

Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 3:15 pm
Posts: 4087
PFF gave Holmes and Baker -4.1. (edit) Konz was -1.5. Blalock was a solid 2.0 and Reynolds was a surprising 2.5 with positive numbers in all aspects of his game.

Between Holmes and Baker, they gave up a combined 2 sacks, 5 hits, and 7 hurries. No one else on the line gave up a hit or a sack. Gonzo was responsible for the other sack.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Offensive line... weak`
PostPosted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 8:03 pm 
Offline
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 3:03 pm
Posts: 25575
Location: North Carolina
fun gus wrote:
Pudge: looking at it objectively, does our OL look better or worse then 11/12? Im not saying the OL hasn't been an issue the whole time: It just looks to me like they are definitely 'worse' this year.

Hard to judge. It's only been 1 game. If I arbitrarily picked 1 game from last year and compared it to this one game, then the odds would be good that I would yes. But there were plenty of games last year (and the year before) where the line looked/performed worse.

I've said it a thousand times before, but don't make 1 game into an entire season or career. In the past it was in relation to 1 bad game from Matt Ryan, became a referendum on his entire career. Now it's 1 bad game from the OL now means that the season is doomed, or there won't be brighter days ahead.

Maybe there won't, but maybe there will be. We won't know until those days actually arrive. But NFL seasons have their ups and downs. But the human brain is a nature defragmenter, it takes out all the stuff it doesn't need or think it needs. So when you look back at a previous season you write a new narrative that summarizes it. And it leaves out a lot of details. It's why people think music of today is always worse than that of their youth. Because their brains only remember the good stuff, and forget about all the crappy music that oversaturated the airwaves in their time too just like it does today. The reason why people always high school went by so fast, is because you don't remember all 180 days you spent during your sophomore year, most of them bored as hell in class every day. You don't remember all the tedious projects and homework assignments you had to complete that year. You just remember the 10 awesome things you did that year, so in your brain, your sophomore year consisted of less than 2 weeks time period.

You don't remember how crappy the Falcons played against the Raiders, Cardinals, or Panthers because it doesn't fit your postscript for how the season went, which was a Falcons team that went to the NFC Championship and was one of the 3 or 4 best teams in the league by year's end.

People don't remember how dour things were following the Falcons season-opening road losses in 2010 to the Steelers and 2011 to the Bears. Why? Because the rest of the season went along and the Falcons made the playoffs.

Remember this

_________________
"Vincere scis, Hannibal, victoria uti nescis" -- Maharbal, 216 B.C.E.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Offensive line... weak`
PostPosted: Mon Sep 09, 2013 9:54 pm 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2007 5:41 pm
Posts: 2298
Location: Albany NY
RobertAP wrote:
PFF gave Holmes and Baker -4.1. (edit) Konz was -1.5. Blalock was a solid 2.0 and Reynolds was a surprising 2.5 with positive numbers in all aspects of his game.

Between Holmes and Baker, they gave up a combined 2 sacks, 5 hits, and 7 hurries. No one else on the line gave up a hit or a sack. Gonzo was responsible for the other sack.


If I recall week 3 of the preseason, everyone gave up pressures and or sacks except for Reynolds who gave up nothing that game as well. Is Reynolds our best guy? :rofl: What the hell is going on here lol.

Pudge, while I put little stock in preseaon, they were terrible in preseason as well, thus the concern level being so high. Also, this wasn't a great defense that they struggled to block, it was the Saints :shock:

_________________
When life gives you lemons, find some salt and tequila then invite me!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Offensive line... weak`
PostPosted: Tue Sep 10, 2013 5:35 am 
Offline
Playmaker
Playmaker

Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2006 1:51 pm
Posts: 376
Location: Estepona, Spain
Pudge wrote:
Nuccah wrote:
Eugene Monroe. The Jags are not going anywhere this year, and just drafted their future stud tackle. I would be willing to believe that Monroe could be had for the right price.

Okay, put yourself in the Jaguars situation. What would you ask the Falcons for?

Knowing that you have all the leverage in the situation, and you are weak at nearly every position. Monroe will be 27 next April, meaning that if you were J-ville and opted to pay him market value next spring, you could presume that you could potentially get another 5-6 years out him because he should be able to play until he's 32. Clabo is currently 32, Jordan Gross is 33, and Jeff Backus just retired at 35.

So are just going to be content with a mid-to-late 1st round pick from Atlanta for a player that would be a Top 10 pick in any draft that has 5+ years of value left?

You are assuming they are planning on keeping him. They didn't draft a tackle so highly to stick him at RT for the next 5-6 years.

All I'm saying is give it a shot. If the Jags don't have him in their future plans, why not get a high pick in exchange?

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Offensive line... weak`
PostPosted: Tue Sep 10, 2013 8:16 am 
Offline
Draught Guru
Draught Guru
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2007 7:32 am
Posts: 4824
Pudge wrote:
fun gus wrote:
Pudge: looking at it objectively, does our OL look better or worse then 11/12? Im not saying the OL hasn't been an issue the whole time: It just looks to me like they are definitely 'worse' this year.

Hard to judge. It's only been 1 game. If I arbitrarily picked 1 game from last year and compared it to this one game, then the odds would be good that I would yes. But there were plenty of games last year (and the year before) where the line looked/performed worse.

I've said it a thousand times before, but don't make 1 game into an entire season or career. In the past it was in relation to 1 bad game from Matt Ryan, became a referendum on his entire career. Now it's 1 bad game from the OL now means that the season is doomed, or there won't be brighter days ahead.

Maybe there won't, but maybe there will be. We won't know until those days actually arrive.



well, riddle me this Batman....I dont have the ALL-22, so maybe I missed something..When Ryan got that sack where he was thrown to the ground, where was the 'pissed off Dahl/Clabo type' getting in someones face? Or for that matter when Vacarro took that cheap shot when Ryan scrambled out of the pocket?

We used to have a dirty,mean OLine that other teams feared. Now we have a RT that doesn't even know how bad he sucks, who gets winded in preseason in a half, who thinks it's okay for the QB to take a hit because he 'gets the ball out of there' fast?

I can tell you wight now without a shadow of a doubt, this OL is NOT as good as last year, and I plainly do not 'need' to see 6 more games to figure that out.

Your milage may vary :ninja:

_________________
"what if there were no hypothetical situations?"


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Offensive line... weak`
PostPosted: Tue Sep 10, 2013 9:34 am 
Offline
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 3:03 pm
Posts: 25575
Location: North Carolina
Nuccah wrote:
You are assuming they are planning on keeping him. They didn't draft a tackle so highly to stick him at RT for the next 5-6 years.

All I'm saying is give it a shot. If the Jags don't have him in their future plans, why not get a high pick in exchange?

Yeah, I don't know if they are going to keep Monroe. But because of the new CBA, there's nothing stopping them from doing so. Remember Joeckel is only going to make $21M over the next 4 years. That is about the amount in guaranteed money paid to a top RT nowadays.

They won't have to pay him until 4 years from now. In the meantime, they can give Monroe a 5 or 6 yr deal worth $9 or $10M/yr., and by the time he's too old and too overpaid, Joeckel's contract will be expiring, and they can cut Monroe and pay Joeckel.

And if the Jags do manage to go forward with Blaine Gabbert at QB (which is doubtful), they better keep both guys. Not to mention they have almost no big $$$ players on their team, so they can definitely afford to pay Monroe. Teams in their division have used #1 picks on DEs in the past 3 years (Derrick Morgan, Whitney Mercilus, and Bjoern Werner), so there is a clear premium on edge rushers in that division.

At this point, the only reason to let Monroe go is 1) Because they don't think he's worth a big money deal or 2) They just want to play Joeckel at LT for the sake of playing Joeckel at LT

But the Jags O-line stinks, and letting go a Top 10 LT just because they want to put Joeckle in that spot (who has far from proven he's worthy) is kind of foolish.

If I was in the Jaguars shoes, the Falcons would definitely have to sweeten the pot to make me part with him. One #1 pick probably wouldn't be enough, especially if it's in the pick No. 20-25 range.

_________________
"Vincere scis, Hannibal, victoria uti nescis" -- Maharbal, 216 B.C.E.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Offensive line... weak`
PostPosted: Tue Sep 10, 2013 2:48 pm 
Offline
Playmaker
Playmaker

Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2006 1:51 pm
Posts: 376
Location: Estepona, Spain
Pudge wrote:
Nuccah wrote:
At this point, the only reason to let Monroe go is 1) Because they don't think he's worth a big money deal or 2) They just want to play Joeckel at LT for the sake of playing Joeckel at LT

But the Jags O-line stinks, and letting go a Top 10 LT just because they want to put Joeckle in that spot (who has far from proven he's worthy) is kind of foolish.

If I was in the Jaguars shoes, the Falcons would definitely have to sweeten the pot to make me part with him. One #1 pick probably wouldn't be enough, especially if it's in the pick No. 20-25 range.


Wouldn't be the first team to have done it, and the Jags haven't exactly made the greatest personnel decisions in recent years :wink:

In the Falcons shoes, with Monroe available, what would you be prepared to offer/accept?

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Offensive line... weak`
PostPosted: Tue Sep 10, 2013 5:26 pm 
Offline
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 3:03 pm
Posts: 25575
Location: North Carolina
On principle, I don't believe in parting with #1 picks unless I'm getting a elite/near-elite player in the prime of his career (meaning he should have at least 5 more years of high level production).

So basically unless the Jags were willing to part with him for a #2 pick, that's about the only way I'd pull the trigger. Because you figure if they let him walk next year, they'll get a #3 in 2015 if not more as a compensatory pick. So it only makes sense to deal him for a #1 or #2. I personally would be surprised if they dealt him for just a #2.

But the issue here is Baker's contract. They are locked into it for 3 if not 4 years. And while many think you could trade for a player like Monroe, and then just move Baker to RT, I'm not so sure. I don't think Baker would be any better at RT than he is at LT really. And if he continues to have subpar performances, you're locked into having this overpaid and underachieving RT for several years.

This is why I was so critical of the Baker contract. If it was a deal that the Falcons could get out of after 2 years, it would have been ideal. Because it meant you could potentially cut bait and not be saddled with an overpaid underachiever for years and years.

_________________
"Vincere scis, Hannibal, victoria uti nescis" -- Maharbal, 216 B.C.E.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Offensive line... weak`
PostPosted: Tue Sep 10, 2013 11:43 pm 
Offline
Cap Guru
Cap Guru
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2005 12:28 am
Posts: 2071
Location: Macon, GA
RobertAP wrote:
I'm sure that we could find a lot of reasons that we lost to the Saints, but I'm heaping the blame on the offensive line. We suck in pass protection. Hopefully, they will get better.


Not sure I'm going to agree with this one just yet, we'll see Thursday... :shock:

_________________
Follow me on Twitter @MidGaGator72


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Offensive line... weak`
PostPosted: Wed Sep 11, 2013 9:23 am 
Offline
Draught Guru
Draught Guru
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2007 7:32 am
Posts: 4824
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/wire?sec ... id=9655786

Falcons line still huge question mark after loss
Updated: September 9, 2013, 6:58 PM ET
Associated Press

FLOWERY BRANCH, Ga. -- The Atlanta Falcons have some of the most dynamic offensive players in the league.

Matt Ryan. Julio Jones. Roddy White. Tony Gonzalez. Steven Jackson.

It may not matter if they don't get better blocking up front.

Already a giant question mark coming into the season, the offensive linemen did nothing to alleviate those concerns in a 23-17 loss to the New Orleans Saints in Week 1.

Coach Mike Smith tried to downplay the line's performance on Monday, saying it falls on the entire offense to make sure Ryan has enough time to throw.

"It wasn't just the offensive line," Smith insisted.

But the guys in the trenches looked horribly overmatched against a Saint defense that, while revamped and playing a different scheme, still has many of the same players who produced some of the worst numbers in NFL history a year ago.

Ryan was sacked three times, hit six other times and had everything from an intentional grounding penalty to a throw-away on third-and-goal.

This might be dismissed as an anomaly if not for the Falcons having only two starters in the same positions they played a year ago.

Lamar Holmes, a third-round pick in 2012, has been forced into a starting role at right tackle after Tyson Clabo was cut in a salary-cap move, and projected replacement Mike Johnson went down in training camp with season-ending injury. Garrett Reynolds, who has started only 14 games in five seasons, is the new right guard. Peter Konz, who started at guard last season, shifted to center after the retirement of Todd McClure.

Left tackle Sam Baker and left guard Justin Blalock are the lone holdovers from last season's starting unit. Baker is the only first-round pick in the bunch.

"We don't want Matt to be under any pressure," Konz said. "We don't want anyone touching Matt, much less sacking him."

Ryan completed 25 of 38 passes for 304 yards and a pair of touchdowns, but there were far too many times when he had to throw with defenders in his face or couldn't throw at all. The Falcons were so desperate to give Ryan better protection, they actually sent in backup lineman Joe Hawley as an extra blocker on a few plays -- a formation normally used in short-yardage running situations, not when they're planning to throw.

On Atlanta's final drive, when the team faced fourth-and goal at the Saints 3 with less than a minute remaining, Ryan had to throw quicker than he wanted and was picked off by Roman Harper in the end zone. New Orleans brought the pressure with only three rushers, dropping the other eight players into coverage.

"I want our offensive line to be so good they're confident we can block who we need to block, so we have a chance to use all our weapons," Konz said.

The Falcons will face an even tougher test Sunday when they host St. Louis in the home opener. Last season, the Rams had 52 sacks, tied for the NFL lead with Denver. They're off to another hot start, recording four sacks in a 27-24 win over Arizona. Robert Quinn had three of those takedowns and is surely licking his chops at the chance to go against Atlanta's shaky line.

While Smith acknowledged there's always competition for the starting spots -- and he's held open auditions in the past -- the Falcons don't have a whole lot of options.

Jeremy Trueblood is the most prominent name among the backups, but he signed with the Falcons just a week ago and has had only a couple of full practices with his new team. He wasn't even active against the Saints. The only other linemen to play in New Orleans were Hawley, a fourth-year player who hasn't been able to hold a starting job, and undrafted rookie Ryan Schraeder from Division II Valdosta State.

"I'm absolutely confident we've got right guys," Smith insisted. "I think we will see a large improvement from Week 1 to Week 2 in terms of not only the offensive line, but the entire football team. The biggest jump you have during the season in always from Week 1 to Week 2. We're playing a lot of younger guys who have not played much. This was a great learning experience for them. Unfortunately, we didn't get the outcome in the ballgame that we wanted."

_________________
"what if there were no hypothetical situations?"


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 25 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: AngryJohnny51 and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to: