It is currently Thu Oct 23, 2014 2:49 pm

All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]





Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 32 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: 16 sacks Given up to Panthers in thier 2 season games.
PostPosted: Sat Jan 04, 2014 1:09 am 
Offline
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 3:03 pm
Posts: 26018
Location: North Carolina
Cyril wrote:
So you go crazy after an injury, and think we can just steal a good player!! Most teams with the players are trying to win and why give us anything when they know we need it??

Ever heard of Eugene Monroe, Jon Beason, Anquan Boldin, LeGarrette Blount, Darrelle Revis, Carson Palmer, Alex Smith, and Chris Ivory? Maybe Levi Brown, Bryant McKinnie, Isaac Sopoaga, Gabe Carimi, Trent Richardson, and Davone Bess ring a bell?

If you don't know what I'm talking about, then that says a lot. But if you don't know, your ass better call somebody!

But speaking of desperation, you're so desperate to refute the possibility that the Falcons could trade for Josh Gordon, that you're still missing the point. It's not whether the Falcons could have gotten Josh Gordon. It's whether they could have gotten someone better than Brian Robiskie. Someone that actually fit what the team needed: someone that could stretch a defense and offer the faintest glimmer of a chance that we could throw deep on par with any of the other 31 professional football teams. Brian Robsikie is clearly not that player. You'd have to be brain-dead to think that he was that player.

Had they gone with another player they worked out at that time, another ex-Brown Mohamed Massaquoi who has good size and deep speed, instead of Robiskie, we'd be having a very different conversation right now. Maybe Robiskie outworked Massaquoi. In fact, I'm assuming he did (otherwise what's the point). But it's clear that Robiskie wasn't going to give the team what it needed, which was someone that could try to fill Julio's shoes. And if the team had signed Robiskie and then cut him after 2-3 weeks when it was clear he wasn't working out, then we'd be having a different conversation right now. Because all of those things I mentioned are at least attempts. It would show me their trying. Obviously, nobody bats 1.000 on personnel moves, but if you can show me that you can properly diagnose an issue and at least make an attempt to address it, I'll give you points. But when you blatantly ignore a glaring issue or just think you can throw a piece of scotch tape over a gaping wound and that'll stop the bleeding, then you're not going to get any credit from me.

You may disagree with me that the WR situation was the biggest issue that this team faced this year. But what you shouldn't disagree with is that it was indeed a big issue. If not #1 then #2 (I'm trying to be magnanimous here). What hurts a team worse than one with a bad OL is one that also has no threat of the deep pass, which means defenses can just pin their ears back with no fear of consequences. That is describing one of the worst offenses in professional football, which the Falcons were for a large chunk of 2013.

The problems with the OL stem from the team not doing a good job getting/keeping good players. It's simply a matter of drafting better players and spending better in FA, and this team's OL issues will turn around. The problems at WR stem from the team not knowing that it needs good players. Because that can't simply be solved by getting better players, because the team clearly doesn't understand or know that it needs better players. That's a much more glaring problem than the OL when it comes to this organization.

And you can't simply pass the buck and blame Matt Ryan, Thomas Dimitroff, and/or Arthur Blank (as you have so non-subtly done Cyril) for that failing. That's on the coaching staff more than anybody else. Because it's their scheme, and if they don't know or understand that you need to generate big plays in today's NFL, then why are they worthy of coaching at this level?

That has to change. There's no way that this team can think it's gonna win a Super Bowl (at some point) throwing the ball down the field half as muchas the average NFL team. Again, and you can't simply blame the OL for that. Because other teams as I've shown have equally bad OLs and they aren't held back by that belief. The belief that their OL is too s***ty to even try. Arizona's horrific OL didn't stop them from trying. And Jacksonville's horrific OL and bad QB play didn't stop them. Why did it stop the Falcons?

And this thread (and others) has come done to me being upset because the coaches didn't try, and you guys giving them a pass because you believe the OL was soooooo bad that it made any attempt futile. And that simply isn't true, once you look at any of the other 31 NFL teams that play professional football.

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


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: 16 sacks Given up to Panthers in thier 2 season games.
PostPosted: Sat Jan 04, 2014 1:21 am 
Offline
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 3:03 pm
Posts: 26018
Location: North Carolina
And since I know most of your eyes will glaze over reading that last excellent post, here's the short version:

If any of you can explain to me why Jacksonville is capable of throwing the ball deep significantly more than we are, then I'll concede the argument.

But here's a tip, if at any point the name Cecil Shorts comes up in your explanation, you're likely in territory that is making the exact same claim I've been making this entire time (that the WRs matter).

But we all know that you can't make that explanation, because it's a damn-near impossible argument to make and would also require you to get a clue first.

Image
Happy now Bnb?

I'm washing my hands of this.

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


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: 16 sacks Given up to Panthers in thier 2 season games.
PostPosted: Sat Jan 04, 2014 5:03 pm 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar

Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 3:15 pm
Posts: 4303
Pudge wrote:
Image
I'm washing my hands of this.

I think you're doing it wrong.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 16 sacks Given up to Panthers in thier 2 season games.
PostPosted: Sun Jan 05, 2014 3:08 am 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar

Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2005 8:57 pm
Posts: 4639
s***, he doesn't get anything right (:

Maybe he'll do better in 2014!! (:

_________________
"Everything Counts"
Cyril


Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 16 sacks Given up to Panthers in thier 2 season games.
PostPosted: Sun Jan 05, 2014 10:27 am 
Offline
Hall of Famer
Hall of Famer
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2005 7:12 pm
Posts: 6234
Location: Planet Claire
Wouldn't it be more likely than Robiskie was signed to replace the same spot at the bottom of the depth chart that whoever moved up when JJ went down used to hold and that "next man up" was the supposed plan? I do think the O system should take more shots down field and I don't think they are the personel savants that we might prefer but you just don't replace what a JJ brings to a team....certainly in season....and trading away more high draft picks to do so--if indeed it had ever been a possibility--seems counter productive to me. Furthermore, we were losing with JJ so to mortgage anything for a JJ Lite doesn't seem especially smart. Granted, some guys were coming back albeit by the time Jackson or Roddy were back and resembling themselves in their prime the season was nearly over.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 16 sacks Given up to Panthers in thier 2 season games.
PostPosted: Sun Jan 05, 2014 6:40 pm 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2007 5:41 pm
Posts: 2411
Location: Albany NY
My gripe is, we kept Tony G rather than getting draft picks which we desperately need for him, then we don't even try and get a guy to replace Julio when he goes down and Roddy is hurt.

Your either in it to win it, or building for next year, our decision makers seemed confused as to what their goals were and froze up, leaving us with a lousy team and no extra pics.

The same could also be said for last off season when we cut our best players for being too old, then signed old guys from other teams?

Our once always logical leadership seems to be moving without a compass or plan.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 16 sacks Given up to Panthers in thier 2 season games.
PostPosted: Sun Jan 05, 2014 8:23 pm 
Offline
Hall of Famer
Hall of Famer
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2005 7:12 pm
Posts: 6234
Location: Planet Claire
DaveWaz wrote:
My gripe is, we kept Tony G rather than getting draft picks which we desperately need for him, then we don't even try and get a guy to replace Julio when he goes down and Roddy is hurt.

Your either in it to win it, or building for next year, our decision makers seemed confused as to what their goals were and froze up, leaving us with a lousy team and no extra pics.

The same could also be said for last off season when we cut our best players for being too old, then signed old guys from other teams?

Our once always logical leadership seems to be moving without a compass or plan.

Hard to argue. As a rule they have put a lot of stock in their own talent evaluation and acquisition. I think I recall reading articles stating that ATL was near the top of the league in retaining their own draft picks which looks good on paper when the general consensus is that building through the draft is the tried and true path to success. But when the guys you draft don't seem to pan out like this year people ask questions and want you to trade away picks for proven talent. As you say, regarding TG, they seemed to resist this as well. May be a marketing thing which is always very close to the surface with Blank.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 32 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 1 guest


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: