Jeez Pudge if we've been poorly run at the top over the last few years; then what's been up the last 15 years??
You yourself say that Rich McKay was a terrible GM. And I'm trying to find what Thomas Dimitroff has done over the past 2 or 3 off-seasons that was better than anything Rich McKay did...
I think last year Thomas D. had his controversial trade, and his rotten pick-up of Edwards; but picking up James Sanders I thought was
a good move (he's not yet 30) and Kevin Hayden was pretty good too, (also not 30) Franks & even Owens had good moments late in the
And you make these statements as if he's the first GM that has ever found some decent role players. Ever heard of Ed Jasper, Brian Finneran, Chris Draft, Keion Carpenter, Gerald McBurrows, Kevin Mathis, Aaron Beasley, Paul Carrington, Fred McCrary?
I mean it feels like you won't say Corey Peters is good; you think Jerry was a bust when he was still limping his second year, and
no one will say what's wrong.....
It depends on what your definition of "good" is. Is Peters good in the regards that he's better than a lot of DTs in the league? Yes. Is he good in the sense that the majority of NFL teams would open their arms wide to have him start for them? No. I got into a twitter debate with someone a few weeks about Peters. That person stated that if the 2010 draft was held over again, Peters would be a 1st round pick. And I vehemently disagreed. That person based his conclusion off the idea that Peters was one of the 4 or 5 best DTs drafted that year. And I countered that would be true if players like Dan Williams, Linval Joseph, Jared Odrick, Tyson Alualu, and Earl Mitchell didn't exist. Just like Peters, all 5 of those players are solid to good starters like Peters, in addition to players like Suh, Geno Atkins, Mt. Cody, and Gerald McCoy that this person conceded were better.
As for calling Jerry a bust in his 2nd year, I never did such a thing. I only started calling Jerry a bust at the end of this season when he proved that even with a supposedly healthy knee he was no more effective a role player than he was in 2010 when he supposedly still had a bum knee.
You beat on Lofton all the time, and make him sound like he alone is killing our defense
I beat on Lofton because I think he's a good player, but the way some people talk about him is like he's on the verge of being the next Ray Lewis or Jessie Tuggle, and that's just not true. His first 4 years in a Falcon uniform are no better than Keith Brooking's, yet Brooking is vilified by many as one of the most overrated Falcon players in history, and Lofton is lauded as if he's the key ingredient to one of the league's best defenses.
I'm in favor of bringing Lofton back, but not if the team isn't going to use him as a 3-down linebacker. I've only heard of one team in recent history making it work with their MLB as a 2-down defender. That was the Tennessee Titans with Stephen Tulloch in the middle, and Keith Bulluck and David Thornton at OLB. On nickel situations, Tulloch came off the field and Bulluck who was one of the best coverage LBs in recent memory, and Thornton who was pretty good in his prime were their nickel LBs. And that worked for a time, until Thornton's play dropped. But the Titans did that for several years with Pete Sirmon, Ryan Fowler, and then Tulloch as their starting MLB. Because in that way, the MLB was not nearly as important as the two OLBs, and thusly Thornton & Bulluck were paid an amount appropriate to their value, and the MLB was interchangeable and a revolving door.
So if the Falcons plan on employing Lofton in a similar role, then they should pay him accordingly, with money that pays him significantly below his market value. Instead, that money should be spent to find a player like Bulluck/Thornton that can be a good everydown defender.
If this coaching staff sees Lofton as only a 2-down defender, then they should not bend over backwards to re-sign him. Now, I don't know the accuracy of this report. On one hand, they say that they see him as only a 2-down guy, but on the other hand, its a priority to re-sign him. And in my mind, those two statements are incongruous and don't fit together. If he's a priority to re-sign, then he should be viewed as a 3-down defender. If he's only a 2-down defender, then he should not be any more of a FA priority to keep than most feel Thomas DeCoud is.
And if this team winds up giving Lofton a $7-9M/yr. contract, and he's only a 2-down defender, he'll be one of the highest paid role players in the league. His value to the team will be no higher than what Stephen Nicholas, but he'll be paid twice as much.
That's my point about this front office. The mistakes the Falcons front office has made in recent years is completely misevaluating the value of players. They overpay average starters, overdraft role players, etc. And if you make too many of these mistakes, they accumulate and are what keep you from ascending to that next level as a team.