FalcFans Forums

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20 ... ight-ends/

The NFL is the ultimate copycat league. And for a team that went 2-14 last season, it’s important to find a successful franchise to emulate.

Colts coach Chuck Pagano, who while coordinating the defense in Baltimore witnessed first hand the challenges of dealing with the two top-end tight ends on the Patriots roster, hopes to put together a similar attack in Indianapolis.

“It is a match-up nightmare,” Pagano said Saturday, via comments circulated by the team. “Coming off of the AFC Championship game, nobody knew better than the Ravens going into that game with the two guys [Rob Gronkowski and Aaron Hernandez] that [the Patriots] have. It is across the league. You can see it more and more every year.

“You can choose to put a defensive back on them, and they will be undersized, they will get outmuscled and they will get ‘big-boyed’ for the ball. Then you can put a safety or a linebacker on them and they can’t run with them. So we feel like the two guys that we added, and Dominique [Jones] is a physical presence, that guy is 260 pounds and moving around really well. It is a match-up nightmare for any defense.”

The two guys the Colts added are Coby Fleener and Dwayne Allen, taken in the second-round and third-round, respectively, of last weekend’s draft.

Quarterback Andrew Luck took it an extra step. “With three tight ends, do you put an extra safety in [the box] and try to stop the run or do you leave your regular defense in?” Luck said. “How do you do it? How do you match-up with those guys? Do you put a linebacker on them to cover them when they split out wide? So I think it creates mismatches.”

That would be a nice change for the Colts, given that they typically were on the wrong side of the mismatches in 2011.


...............................

The sooner the Falcons embrace this (particularly since it's an offense that works with immobile non rocket armed QBs), the better. It's the way to be a valid run team that still keeps tons of passing threats on the field.

People talk about hte Colts as if they are devoid of talent, but I think they've had a nice off-season to surround Luck with players. They are not a perfect team, but offensively, it's a team that I think people are going to be surprised by how many points they can score. I think their main issue is going to be their secondary on defense that will struggle to stop explosive passing teams because their corners are atrocious (like 2009 Falcons bad if not worse).

Everybody is predicting Andrew Luck to struggle as a rookie for wins. But given recent history, and how much we've seen players like Ryan, Dalton, Roethlisberger, etc. immediately infuse teams with winning capability, if Luck is everything that people think he is, then he should definitely add 3 or 4 wins to that team at the least.

ANd I look at their schedule, and they have at least 5 wins with home games against Miami, Minnesota, Cleveland, and two against Jacksonville. If you figure they can split with Tennessee or Houston, and steal a win from a team like Buffalo, Detroit, NY Jets, Chicago, or KC, it's not crazy to think the Colts could win 8 games this year.

AS for the 2-TE set applying to the Falcons, it's a disappointing development for the Falcons. I don't think they need to have 2 dynamic TEs in their style of offense. Instead, what they need more than anything is that someone at the #2 spot can be an impact run blocker if they really want to be a power-run oriented offense.

Agree on the Colts. Think they're a 6-9 win team if Luck is what is claimed, and if their OL doesn't disintegrate. They won't be good, but won't be horrible.

On the TE aspect, I'm certainly not advocating 2TEs who are glorified WRs, but I think one very versatile TE (good blocker who can catch 30) and one more receiving oriented (more Jimmy Graham) would work well with the run. Even TE's who aren't great blockers are far better than WRs. So a 2 TE set with adequate blockers lets you seal the DE or seal the OLBs pretty well. And if teams go to nickel, which they often would, these TEs should be able to drive down on that safety or CB covering them.

If you're saying that 2 TE needs to be an impact blocker who can also catch 30 balls, I agree. If you're saying we need what is essentially a 6th lineman out there, I don't. I think Gronk type guys who may not be elite blockers can end up being pretty good, because the guys they are blocking aren't OL. They have the same advantage they do in the passing game...they're not as agile as receivers, but they're more agile than the people who cover them. Similarly, they're not a strong blockers as OL, but they're stronger than who they'll have to be blocking.

Plus, that kind of offense works great for a Ryan kind of QB (in addition to no huddle) so I've been surprised for 3 years that that hasn't been the direction. Just liked seeing a top defensive coach commenting on how difficult it is to defend.

You're not wrong, but I think you're barking up the wrong tree. We'll see what Koetter brings to the offense, but it's becoming abundantly clear at least to me, that the prospect of the Falcons maximizing their offenses productivity through the passing game is a pipe dream. Instead, if they aren't going to do that, then they should them maximize their productivity on the ground. And adding a Jimmy Kleinsasser-type of No. 2 TE will add much more than a No. 2 TE like you advocate.

Sure, a Jeremy Shockey-type of addition would help this team quite a bit, but only with the caveat of being used correctly. Which I have zero confidence would be the case. But a Brandon Manumaleuna-type is nearly impossible to screw up because he only does one thing. So they will be able to effectively use him.

The Falcons are investing $7M in Michael Turner, so better get the most out of their investment.

Barking up the wrong tree may be accurate. I've finally (mostly) accepted they're not transitioning to a stress the defense passing attack, I still have trouble understanding why they wouldn't run a 2TE who can catch set if they're wanting to be a running team, but have mostly accepted that. I just think there's a TE class that's more blocking oriented than Vernon Davis, TG, etc., but a better pass catcher than your avg lineman. That seems like who should be the 2nd TE.

If they go toward running 2 TE sets with a blocking TE, 1 WR, Mugs and Turner, I'm just not going to understand what they're doing at all. I'll root for them, but I'll definitely be confused, as compared to a powerful runner like MJD, in the backfield alone, with 3WRs and 1 TE or 2WRs and 2TE. The latter one seems power and pass. The former one (the just power one) hasn't led to any playoff success for any team that doesn't have an absolutely top notch defense in a decade. I'm hoping they're not so inept that they don't at least realize that. But, I'm not sure.

Why keep bashing Turner for what he's getting paid? If we cut him we still have a cap of 5 million for him; so is he worth 2
million in cap money to keep around? Everybody thinks they know exactly how Turner will be used?? To me he's 2 million against the cap since the other 5 million would be paid anyway.... I think Turner is worth 2 million against our cap!!

It's not that simple. Without Turner, you don't keep Ovie. Also, you can designate Turner a June 1 hit, and he'd save more against the cap.

I don't have the exact numbers, but just getting rid of Ovie and doing the June 1 designation, it should be over 7M.

Simple, value. It's out of wack. According to this source: http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/atlanta-falcons/cap-hit/, Turner is the 4th highest paid player on the team this year. But one could make the argument that he's not even among the Top 10 most important players on the roster in terms of the value they bring in terms of winning football games. Sure, the Falcons perceive that Michael Turner dramatically increases their chances of success, but the truth is an effective running game increases their chances of success, and Michael Turner no longer has a monopoly on that.

If you're wondering who the other 10 are, I could/would argue Ryan, Jones, White, Gonzalez, Clabo, Blalock, Abraham, Babineaux, Weatherspoon, Samuel, Grimes, Moore, all "matter more" than Turner does. That's 12 guys I named, so even if you were going to cross 3 or 4 names off the list, the point still is that Turner is no longer an impact guy and thus should be making a lot less money than he is.

If he was making $3-4M, you'd hear very little complaints out of me. And the Falcons should have approached him at the beginning of the off-season and asked him to take such a paycut or else. While the savings against the cap would have been meager as you point out Cyril, it still would have freed a huge weight around this team's neck. They could have replaced Turner with any number of free agents (Hillis, Ryan Grant, BenJarvus Green-Ellis, Michael Bush, Joseph Addai, etc.) paid them their appropriate value $2-4M, and had a committee of backs and centered this offense around Matt Ryan, Julio Jones, and Roddy White, which is what they should have done from Day 1 when they made the move up to get Julio Jones.

To me, any potential loss in production in 2012 in the ground game would have been easily made up for with the growth of the offense in 2013 and beyond. And I would again argue that there would have been minimal if not zero loss in production in 2012 assuming Dirk Koetter can competently handle a ground game. Had a team opted to give Ryan Grant 301 carries last year he would have put up comparable production to Turner once you factor in the "Buccaneer Boosting Effect." The difference is that the Packers and the rest of the league had/have the good sense to realize that Ryan Grant doesn't deserve 301 carries, and thus why he is still unsigned. The Falcons have yet to come to the same realization with Michael Turner.

As for continuing to complain about it, I'll slack off. I guess I've given that dead horse enough lashings so that people definitively know how I feel on the topic. But I reserve the right to come back and elbow drop the darn thing for good measure every now and then in the future...

Look you must not understand----we owe Turner 10 million dollars from his bonus. Its 5 million this year and 5 million next year; we pay him that if he's on the team or not!! So this year I think he's a 2 million dollar player; and who says we must keep Ovie to keep Turner....... In fact i suggested a month ago I still didn't think Turner is on this team come the first day....

I've reviewed that and he probably will be BUT NO MATTER WHEN we cut Turner we owe him 5 million this year and 5 million
next year..... He received a 15 million dollar signing bonus and he's only taken 5 of it!!

He's only owed 5 M total. 2.5 this year, and 2.5 next.

If they cut him, they get 5M back in cap savings. I don't think it's happening. But just wanted to clarify. I've never heard of a contract with 70% of the guarantees coming in years 5 and 6. That's insane.

Turner has base salaries of $5 million this year, and $5.5 million in 2013. Due to his original signing bonus, he is also prorated $2.5 million in bonus money in each of the years making his cap hits $7.5 million 2012, and $8 million in 2013.

If he's cut today, then that $5 million ($2.5M x 2) will be accelerated to this year's cap, meaning that the Falcons would not save but $2.5M in this year's cap. But they would save $8M against next year's cap, because that money will be wiped off the books.

If the Falcons wait until after June 1, then only the $2.5M counts as dead money towards this year's cap, and the remaining $2.5M will linger in 2013, meaning that the team will save the equivalent of his base salaries ($5M in 2012 and $5.5M in 2013) against the caps of those years.

Although I'm not 100% certain that the "June 1 Distinction" is included in the new CBA. I want to say that under the previous CBA, you could designate 1 or 2 people to be cut before June 2 that would function as post-June 1 cuts. I'm not sure if that was held over or not...

Look we all might be a little off on the contract, but I read it was 5 million this year and 5 million next year guaranteed!!
Now his contract for this year and next year are both more than 5 million; I'm just saying that's what's he going to receive regardless!!

I missed my main point!! I think its a great move by the player....... Ovie 's not 25 now and not likely to go squander 10 million dollars!! I think it shows great maturity on his part!!