It is currently Wed Jul 23, 2014 3:20 pm

All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]





Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 39 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Falcons are fifth oldest team after the cuts to 53
PostPosted: Sun Sep 04, 2011 8:51 pm 
Offline
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: Sun Aug 13, 2006 4:58 pm
Posts: 232
Falcons are the fifth oldest team now that the cuts to the 53 man roster have occurred, according to analysis by ESPN:

http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcwest/post/_/ ... 3-man-cuts

Note that the Bucs are the youngest and the Packers are the second youngest. The Packers have really built their team wisely, very young and the defending champs. At least the Falcons are right in the middle (#16) on defense, where youth and athletic ability may trump experience. But they are the second oldest team on offense.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Falcons are fifth oldest team after the cuts to 53
PostPosted: Sun Sep 04, 2011 11:44 pm 
Offline
Hall of Famer
Hall of Famer
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2005 7:12 pm
Posts: 6147
Location: Planet Claire
Surprising. I guess with a coupel of vets liek Tony G, Abe and Peterson your avg. age can get driven up but as I look across the roster few others strike you as old. Not what you would prefer. The 98 SB team was an old team. But I think our core players on both sides of the ball are pretty young. Maybe the depth players?

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Falcons are fifth oldest team after the cuts to 53
PostPosted: Sun Sep 04, 2011 11:46 pm 
Offline
Playmaker
Playmaker
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2010 4:26 pm
Posts: 463
Location: The Kingdom
And this matters because...? :doh:

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Falcons are fifth oldest team after the cuts to 53
PostPosted: Mon Sep 05, 2011 12:24 am 
Online
Superstar
Superstar

Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2005 8:57 pm
Posts: 4474
Don't forget our kicker is 35; we added Reggie Kelly who is 33 and McClure is also 33......IMO it only matters
with starters we don't have replacements for; or would have trouble replacing.....

_________________
"Everything Counts"
Cyril


Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Falcons are fifth oldest team after the cuts to 53
PostPosted: Mon Sep 05, 2011 12:37 am 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar

Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 3:15 pm
Posts: 4190
We have quite a few older players...
Abraham, Bryant, Peterson, McClure, Gonzales, and Mughelli are all over 30. We have a bunch of guys who are 29. I believe this is why Pudge and I are most concerned about giving away a bunch of draft picks for JJ. I look forward to what JJ can do, but we are going to be two years behind in terms of youth from here on out. We can hope that some of the lower round guys pay big dividends for us, but as it stands currently, JJ is the only starter from this year's draft class. Honestly, do you see any of the other guys developing into starters in our system? I would like to believe that Rodgers could start for us, but I'm thinking that if Turner goes down, Snelling will be the starter, not because he is better, but because he is better suited to our system.

Next year, there's a good possibility that we'll have to replace Abraham, McClure, and Gonzales. Hawley might be able to replace McClure, we'll have to see... But we don't have anyone on the roster who is going to replace Abraham or Gonzales. It is unlikely that we're going to be able to afford to replace Abraham in free agency. We have to fork over big money for Grimes and Ryan next year.

Again, I look forward to seeing what our offense can do with JJ, a healthy Douglas, and hopefully Rodgers getting a bunch of touches. I am not looking forward to having to fill some big holes with not a lot of ammo next year. We're going to be stuck drafting for DIRE NEEDS rather than grabbing the best players available.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Falcons are fifth oldest team after the cuts to 53
PostPosted: Mon Sep 05, 2011 1:08 am 
Online
Superstar
Superstar

Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2005 8:57 pm
Posts: 4474
Robert,
I don't understand why you always tell us something that has just been said?? BnB &myself just named 90% of the old players; and
the fact is; Gonzo won't be that hard to fill at his standard of play today(his name will; but his play has become so slow )

Abe is already replaced with Edwards; and Sidbury was kept I
believe?? So was Mathews..... The defensive ends are usually interchangeable....We'll find out if Hawley can replace McClure in the next two weeks.....

29 or 30 is not old for any lineman on offense or defense. Roddy at 29 is our old receiver and fullbacks are a dime a dozen......This admin
didn't pay Mughelli !!

I APPRECIATE you enjoy Pudge's thoughts because he is football savvy; but acting like you & him think alike is a joke; which seems like what you always imply...... I bet he doesn't think we're paying to lose games!!

I know this comes across rude; but you opinion is appreciated, or at least we know its yours!!

_________________
"Everything Counts"
Cyril


Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Falcons are fifth oldest team after the cuts to 53
PostPosted: Mon Sep 05, 2011 12:34 pm 
Offline
Hall of Famer
Hall of Famer
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2005 7:12 pm
Posts: 6147
Location: Planet Claire
Try decaf, Cyril, Robt. and Pudge disagree plenty of times . The line between young and old is a short and thin one in the league which makes the signing of folks like Jerry--an older player who here in his third year is almost viewed with untested "rookie" considerations--a bit of a risk. Rosters are so fluid though. It is scary that the Pack are young and so loaded with talent. While you cannot help but love Julio's talent and potential, I, too, question the wisdom of the move. It says, "The future is now!" And when you look at TG and Turner you can see that logic somewhat. I personally believe Turner's best days are behin him though he will be above servicable this year, at the least. But the teams that stay on top generally seem to be loaded with picks and are the ones jettisoning players a year early rather than trying to milk one more year from them.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Falcons are fifth oldest team after the cuts to 53
PostPosted: Mon Sep 05, 2011 2:32 pm 
Online
Superstar
Superstar

Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2005 8:57 pm
Posts: 4474
I just call it like I see it!! JJ is nowhere in my text, I have no idea if its a good move or not...... Thomas D. hasn't let us down yet; and perhaps this is what we needed to do to become the best team moving forward......; perhaps not; but my thought is JJ was worth it; and picking up Edwards is a big move he's (26) as is the two veterans important moves too. Thomas D. always seems to have enough prospects for someone extra to show up...

Maybe we'll be screwed when we can't replace the old ones next year (as if Thomas D. is going to let that happen)!!

However I'm sure this is your opinion!! I may still stick with regular when I feel my post are honest & mine.

_________________
"Everything Counts"
Cyril


Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Falcons are fifth oldest team after the cuts to 53
PostPosted: Mon Sep 05, 2011 2:46 pm 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar

Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 3:15 pm
Posts: 4190
Gonzo's play, at least in preseason, appears to be significantly diminished. As of now, he may even be a liability on the field. That said, we probably should have drafted a replacement for him this year, if not last year. I believe that having a solid receiving TE helps a QB quite a bit, especially in a system where we want to have balance on offense.

Edwards can not replace Abraham. Biermann can not replace Abraham. All they can do is succeed him. Matthews may have some potential, but do you really believe that he, or anyone else on this staff, is going to step in and deliver double digit sacks?

30 is when WRs start slowing down. Good ones can continue to play at a high level for a while, but most WR's start dropping off considerably after 30.

With regards to Mughelli, you may recall that I would prefer to let him go and keep 5 guys on the field that can do something with the ball. But if the Falcons want to continue being a team that pounds the ball, they will need to start looking for a replacement for Mughelli.

As far as linemen go, yes, they can last a long time in the NFL barring injury. McClure, however, is on his way out.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Falcons are fifth oldest team after the cuts to 53
PostPosted: Mon Sep 05, 2011 3:46 pm 
Offline
Hall of Famer
Hall of Famer
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2005 7:12 pm
Posts: 6147
Location: Planet Claire
Cyril wrote:
I just call it like I see it!! JJ is nowhere in my text, I have no idea if its a good move or not...... Thomas D. hasn't let us down yet; and perhaps this is what we needed to do to become the best team moving forward......; perhaps not; but my thought is JJ was worth it; and picking up Edwards is a big move he's (26) as is the two veterans important moves too. Thomas D. always seems to have enough prospects for someone extra to show up...

Maybe we'll be screwed when we can't replace the old ones next year (as if Thomas D. is going to let that happen)!!

However I'm sure this is your opinion!! I may still stick with regular when I feel my post are honest & mine.

I didn't say JJ was in your text but any discussion about the age of our roster has to acknowledge the opportunity cost of investing so many picks on one player as, obviously, picks are your young blood. The stated intention of the org was to remain competitve year after year and I think they have done that, clearly, in the first three years of the Dimitrof/Smith era. The teams that seem to remain competitve year after year decade after decade seem to value youth and draft picks. TD has had some whiffs just like any other GM does but, for the most part, you would be hard pressed to find Falcon fans unhappy with him. The JJ move was high risk/high reward. If he can stay healthy he's going to make Roddy's ascension to elite look like it took place in a jar of molasses.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Falcons are fifth oldest team after the cuts to 53
PostPosted: Mon Sep 05, 2011 5:20 pm 
Offline
All-Pro
All-Pro

Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2007 2:01 pm
Posts: 952
Just replacing TG and Peterson with rookie/2nd year type players would make a big difference on age, and I don't think we'd see much dropoff.

The only aging guy we'll have a lot of trouble replacing is Abe. Edwards is a complementary piece, definitely not a replacement for Abe. Starting RB may also soon be an issue.

Had we taken a TE already, I'd have little issue with this, as we could take OL, RB, DE in the first few rounds next year and likely be able to replace most spots. We really need a couple of extra picks, though, and we are going to have to "hit" on RB, and TE very soon (not too hard) as well as RDE (quite hard).

So, that is all to say...we're only old at a couple of positions we have to replace (TE, RB, DE) but we still may lack the picks to effectively replace them, and we need to be doing more than "replacing." We need to be able to be upgrading our 4 and 5 receivers, and upgrading positions before they become major needs.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Falcons are fifth oldest team after the cuts to 53
PostPosted: Mon Sep 05, 2011 8:41 pm 
Offline
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 3:03 pm
Posts: 25760
Location: North Carolina
RobertAP wrote:
30 is when WRs start slowing down. Good ones can continue to play at a high level for a while, but most WR's start dropping off considerably after 30.

Actually, that's not true at all, or at least isn't true depending on your definition of "slow down." While WRs do tend to have their peak years between 26 and 30, and technically there is dropoff after that point. Most No. 1/elite/upper-echelon WRs are able to "coast" (much like QBs after 30) for several more seasons as productive starters.

The Hines Wards, Terrell Owens, Randy Mosses, Derrick Masons, can still have 1000-yard seasons well into their 30s, usually with all of them starting to really slow down between 33-35 rather than around 30. Now injuries can sap guys earlier than expected (see Steve Smith & Deion Branch), and those rules don't apply to what are normally considered No. 2 WRs, who do tend to lose it around 30.

But if we're talking about Roddy White, then there is really no reason besides injuries to expect that Roddy won't be a productive starter for another 3-5 years. Will that production be on par with what we've seen the past 3-5 years? Probably not. But it's still probably going to be on a level where he's considered to be one of the Top 15-20 WRs in the league and put up 1000-yard seasons. And by the time he starts to get to the point where guys like Derrick Mason or Hines Ward are at today and he cannot, Julio Jones will be around 26, and entering his prime.

While I do agree with others that Gonzo is replaceable, that is based on an assumption that the market for TEs in the next year or so will be comparable to what it has been in the past few years. And I don't think that's a safe assumption.

We had a stellar TE draft class in 2010, and we had the '07 draft class hit free agency this past summer, which was another strong draft class. Who knows what the 2012 and 2013 draft classes will be, but we do know that it will be primarily the '08 and '09 draft classes that will be hitting the FA market in the coming years, and those were the 2 weakest of the past 5 draft classes. Sure, you can do a lot worse than signing Martellus Bennett, Fred Davis, or John Carlson, but the dropoff from even a decrepid Gonzo to those guys is significant. We may discover that the Falcons missed their window. :ninja:

The point is don't want to replace players, you want to upgrade players. And that's the problem the Falcons face, they have very few young options waiting in the wings that are potentially better alternatives.

You can tell this by the simple fact that when the Falcons do opt to part ways with one of their vested veterans in the past few years (e.g. Michael Jenkins, Erik Coleman, Chauncey Davis, Brian Finneran, Michael Boley, Keith Brooking, etc.), it's rarely met with universal approval, because it always seems that the Falcons are replacing him with a 3rd or 5th round pick or similar or lesser talent rather than that 1st or 2nd rounder of greater talent.

The Falcons have struggled to develop young talent on during this regime.

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


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Falcons are fifth oldest team after the cuts to 53
PostPosted: Mon Sep 05, 2011 8:43 pm 
Online
Superstar
Superstar

Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2005 8:57 pm
Posts: 4474
Quote:
"BnB Said" If I agreed with you then we'd both be wrong.


Well I won't argue with that (:

_________________
"Everything Counts"
Cyril


Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Falcons are fifth oldest team after the cuts to 53
PostPosted: Mon Sep 05, 2011 9:20 pm 
Online
Superstar
Superstar

Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2005 8:57 pm
Posts: 4474
Quote:
"Pudge Wrote"
The Falcons have struggled to develop young talent on during this regime.


OH NO PUDGE!! Jeez very few teams have the most important position on the field "Qb" improve like Ryan has.....
I mean we all expected it but the odds are always against it!! This out weighs everybody!!

Then I think of Peters, Weatherspoon, (yes even Lofton), and William Moore, and I think many have labled Baker a poor tackle too early.....

Then I think of how Grimes was doing and how Weems was doing when Coach Smith got here; and although you didn't mention it;
we've done rather well with our big free agents with Turner and Robinson..... So even throwing out the free agents I'd rethink what we've done in 3 short years and how long of a chance will you give them to get better??

_________________
"Everything Counts"
Cyril


Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Falcons are fifth oldest team after the cuts to 53
PostPosted: Mon Sep 05, 2011 9:57 pm 
Offline
Playmaker
Playmaker
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2008 9:46 am
Posts: 467
Location: Vacaville, CA
Take into consideration how little was here when TD started.

He's only had 4 first-round picks to develop so far, and they replaced:

Vick, Weiner, Mr. WHO? at DT, Boley, and now Jones replaces Jenkins. That's quite a few places we needed someone, and they were filled with #1s. Brooking went, and was replaced with a 2nd rounder. Considering Jerry's knee injury, it's still a little too early to call him a bust (getting very close, tho), and Spoon still has a few years to show his stuff. Baker is pretty bad, but we needed someone, and with the run on LTs, they had to move up to get him.

Other than not being a super-genius, I cannot see criticizing Dimitroff that much for the development over the past few years. I'm just not sold that the extra 1,2 and 2 4s really would make that much of a difference.

The window with Turner. Roddy, Abe and Gonzo is closing. Going for a kill-shot this year and next is understandable, and getting a blue-chip in Jones instead of two more Bakers/Jerrys and a Sidbury or two is understandable.

From the start of the TD regime, 4 OL, the QB, 2 WR, 3 DL, 2 LB, and 3 DBs have been developed. That's not counting the FA pickups that have worked out.

GB got hot at the end of the year. If TB beat the Lions, or if CHI scored 7 more points in one regular season game last year, or if Matt Dodge kicked one punt out of bounds, we aren't talking about how brilliant GB is for drafting because they didn't even make the playoffs.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Falcons are fifth oldest team after the cuts to 53
PostPosted: Mon Sep 05, 2011 11:57 pm 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar

Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 3:15 pm
Posts: 4190
Actually Samedi, we very well could be. Green Bay was destroyed by injuries during the regular season last year. They had a few guys get healthy at the end of the year and the rest is history. If they had not made the playoffs, they would still be very highly regarded this year, and people would be drooling over how young and ready to explode they are. Instead, people are drooling over us with JJ for some reason. The thing is, I don't think that a healthy Atlanta Falcons team is going to beat a healthy Green Bay Packers team. I guess we'll find out on October 9th. I believe both teams will come into that game at 4-0.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Falcons are fifth oldest team after the cuts to 53
PostPosted: Tue Sep 06, 2011 12:42 am 
Offline
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 3:03 pm
Posts: 25760
Location: North Carolina
Cyril, naming 1st and 2nd round picks as your primary examples of the players we've developed is exactly part of my point. The vast majority of the talent in the NFL is from players taken in those rounds. If you were to name the Top 10-15 players at all 22 positions, you would find that anywhere between 60-80% of those players were former 1st or 2nd round picks.

Kudos to TD for gettign guys like Matt Ryan, William Moore, Sean Weatherspoon, Curtis Lofton, and Sam Baker. But it's not quite the great accomplishment that many want to paint it as.

79 players were on the Falcons roster, practice squad, or reserve list throughout the course of the '08 season. ONly 20 of those players remain on the team. That means that in the past 2 seasons, heading into a third, there has been 75% roster turnover.

And of the 20 players still with the team, 12 of them were inherited by Dimotroff & Co.

Of the 41 players currently on the team that were not with us in '08, how many of them do you feel have bright futures here in Atlanta? How many people actually think/expect Kerry Meier to develop into the next Kevin Walter/Jordy Nelson? Joe Hawley? Mike JOhnson? Garrett Reynolds? Are these guys going to be upper level blockers at their respective positions? Are they going to be as respected as Dahl, Clabo, or McClure? Is Corey Peters, Peria Jerry, Vance Walker going to be "really good DTs" that when they hit the open market in a few short years will command big money? Are Matthews and Sidbury on the verge of being productive starters that can get 6-8 sacks on a yearly basis? Are Spencer Adkins and Akeem Dent going to anchor this defense at any point in the next 5 years? Are Chris Owens, Dominique Franks, or Darrin Walls going to make the Falcons think twice about giving Brent Grimes a long-term extension? Is Shann Schillinger poised to step into DeCoud's vacated starting spot next year if need be? Would he be if you gave him 3 more years to develop?

They do a solid job on their high picks. Not a great job, but solid. Not a lot to complain about other than reaching for Baker and Jerry. But after Round 2, what have they done really? Kroy Biermann, Thomas DeCoud, Harry Douglas, etc. look to be solid picks as well, but I bet many of you aren't even completely convinced that those guys will be Falcons in 2012 after hitting the market.

When I say their names, are you sitting here thinking, "Oh we have to re-sign Kroy/DeCoud/HD/etc. after the year because they are going to be a building block/foundation player for the next 5 years! It's a major priority, and they are so good/valuable that losing them would be huge!" ?

Probably not. But if you are, it probably has less to do with your assessment of their ability/value and more a knock against what we have behind them.

There aren't many Brent Grimes, Tyson Clabos, or Harvey Dahls currently on this roster waiting in the wings. Those three guys that many like to attribute to Dimitroff & Co., but were in fact acquired by the previous regime. Weems, Finneran, these types of guys that spend a year on the practice squad, and then a year or two later are becoming key contributors on the regular roster...where are they with the current regime?

What happened to Willie Evans, Glenn Sharpe, Nate Bennett, Darius Vinnett, Brandon Miller, Chandler Williams, Blake Schlueter, Andy Strickland, J'Vonne Parker, Eric Brock, Maurice Lucas? Thomas Brown? Keith Zinger? Wilrey Fontenot? Will Middleton? Robert James?

The Falcons have had to rely on a wealth of veterans to fill key depth roles because of their struggles to develop these types of players I listed above. Remember Verron Haynes? Marty Booker? Justin Peelle? Aaron Stecker? Charlie Peprah? Thomas Johnson? Tony Gilbert? Jamaal Fudge? Kindal Moorehead? Alex Stepanovich? Domonique Foxworth?

I'm not saying TD has done a poor job, just that the picture isn't as rosy as some people claim it is.

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


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Falcons are fifth oldest team after the cuts to 53
PostPosted: Tue Sep 06, 2011 2:26 am 
Offline
Playmaker
Playmaker
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2008 9:46 am
Posts: 467
Location: Vacaville, CA
Here's GB's draft history. I completely fail to see how they've been that amazing. They drafted well on D 2 years ago. Other than that, meh.

Aaron Rodgers is very, very good (and 3 years ahead of Ryan).

Dom Capers is also quite good.

They have several receivers who do a good job of running after the catch, and Rodgers does a very good job in throwing to enable that.

Seriously, though. Look at their team and tell me the depth is that much better than ATL's. In 2 years we may come back to this if Jerry never recovers from that knee injury and if DeCoud doesn't begin to take better angles. Spoon should be fine w/o the injuries. Baker's horrible, but he's better than Brohm "developed."

To say that ATL is failing to develop their players as well as they should when compared to GB needs some evidence of who GB is developing so well. PIT, I'd give you, but PIT is ahead of everyone right now. GB has Rodgers in his prime.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Falcons are fifth oldest team after the cuts to 53
PostPosted: Tue Sep 06, 2011 5:59 am 
Online
Superstar
Superstar

Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2005 8:57 pm
Posts: 4474
Quote:
"Pudge Wrote Cyril, naming 1st and 2nd round picks as your primary examples of the players we've developed is exactly part of my point. The vast majority of the talent in the NFL is from players taken in those rounds. If you were to name the Top 10-15 players at all 22 positions, you would find that anywhere between 60-80% of those players were former 1st or 2nd round picks."


Yea but before that we couldn't do s*** even with those first two rounds.....

2002- Tj Duckett & Will Overstreet
2003-Peerless Price & Bryon Scout
2004-DeAngelo Hall & Michal Jenkinns
2005-Roddy White & Jonathan Babineau
2006-Jimmy Williams & Jeriouis Norwood
2007-Jamal Anderson & Justin Blalock

Yes the Weems & Grimes were already here; but these are the guys you wanted to see developed who weren't doing anything; that should include Snelling too.....Doesn't Smith get some credit for coaching them up???

Free agents have also been vastly improved; I guess you have to see where we were and where we are now to really decide!!
Many answers will come in the following weeks.

_________________
"Everything Counts"
Cyril


Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Falcons are fifth oldest team after the cuts to 53
PostPosted: Tue Sep 06, 2011 12:46 pm 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar

Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 3:15 pm
Posts: 4190
Is TD doing a decent job of acquiring talent? yes he is.

Could he be doing better? probably.

Did we hurt our chances of finding starters this year and next by trading for JJ? most definately.

Do you disagree with any of the answers to the above questions?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Falcons are fifth oldest team after the cuts to 53
PostPosted: Tue Sep 06, 2011 1:06 pm 
Offline
Playmaker
Playmaker
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 23, 2007 6:07 pm
Posts: 496
Quote:
Is TD doing a decent job of acquiring talent? yes he is. - agreed

Could he be doing better? probably. Would change to maybe

Did we hurt our chances of finding starters this year and next by trading for JJ? most definately.


The last question is the most interesting. Without going in the long, detailed answer, I think while we hurt our chances to get 2 to 4 good quality starters for the next two years, it was worth getting one potential stud star this year. I think the overall thought process was we've built the past three drafts, lets spend a bit and get a stud this one and let our drafted talent develop.

_________________
~Yulin


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Falcons are fifth oldest team after the cuts to 53
PostPosted: Tue Sep 06, 2011 1:22 pm 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar

Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 5:31 pm
Posts: 3091
Quote:
I'm not saying TD has done a poor job, just that the picture isn't as rosy as some people claim it is.



Are you serious? This franchise has been one of the most poorly run from top to bottom in NFL history, and TD & Co. have turned it completely around in 3 short years. If all things continue on this trend, you are witnessing what will be one of the greatest turnarounds of a franchise in all of sport.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Falcons are fifth oldest team after the cuts to 53
PostPosted: Tue Sep 06, 2011 1:41 pm 
Offline
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 3:03 pm
Posts: 25760
Location: North Carolina
Cyril wrote:
Yes the Weems & Grimes were already here; but these are the guys you wanted to see developed who weren't doing anything; that should include Snelling too.....Doesn't Smith get some credit for coaching them up???

Yes, and I'm not saying that the Falcons have done a poor job. THey took guys like Weems, Dahl, and Grimes who did nothing besides sit on the p-squad with previous regimes and now they are/were key contributors with our team. They deserve plenty of credit for getting those players to become better players, but where is the next generation of these players? That's what concerns me.

Michael Palmer? Andrew Jackson? John Parker Wilson? Jose Valdez? Maybe. We will see, but I'm not as hopeful given our recent history with developing those guys.
samedi wrote:
Here's GB's draft history. I completely fail to see how they've been that amazing. They drafted well on D 2 years ago. Other than that, meh.

A big part of the reason for the Packers success is because their first and second round picks in recent years have been homeruns. While the Falcons have hit one with Matt Ryan, they have yet to hit one with any of their other top picks. That's not to say that Moore, Spoon, Lofton, are bums by any means, just that none of them are Top 10 players at their respective positions like some of the Packers picks: Aaron Rodgers, Nick Collins, Greg Jennings, Clay Matthews, etc.

But let's throw 1st & 2nd round picks out the window...

Since 2005, that's when Ted Thompson returned to the Packers after 5 years in Seattle. Let's look at their 3rd thru 7th round picks...

3rd/2008 - TE Jermichael Finley - Considered by many a Top 5 TE.
4th/2008 - OG Josh Sitton - Considered a Top 10 guard.
3rd/2007 - WR James Jones - Certainly was a major contributor, producing on a level comparable to a solid No. 2 last year.
6th/2007 - LB Desmond Bishop - So good last year that they parted ways with Nick Barnett, as many felt he was even better.
3rd/2006 - OG Jason Spitz - A decent starter for a few years that is now in Jacksonville.
6th/2006 - DT Johnny Jolly - An effective starter before off-field issues pushed him aside. But certainly better player for them than Peters has been to date for us.
4th/2005 - LB Brady Poppinga - A decent starter on par with say a Stephen Nicholas for us.

Let's go back further, because part of it is not just what they've done in the past few years but it dates back well into the Ron Wolf regime as well...

7th/2004 - OC Scott Wells - Basically their Todd McClure
5th/2002 - DE Aaron Kampman - Do I need to explain this one?
6th/2001 - TE David Martin - Contributed as a No. 2 TE for many years, comparable to what Peelle did the past 3 years
4th/2000 - LB Na'il Diggs - A good starter for them for a number of years.
5th/2000 - DE Kabeer Gbaja-Biamila - Do I need to explain this one?
7th/2000 - OT Mark Tauscher - For a big chunk of his career was considered a Top 5 RT.
3rd/1999 - CB Mike McKenzie - Most remember him with the Saints but forget he gave GB 5 or so good years as a starter
7th/1999 - WR Donald Driver - Do I need to explain this one?

Still not convinced? SHould I bring up the undrafted talent that the Packers have mined over the years?

Vonta Leach, Colin Cole, and Paris Lenon are all undrafted FAs that the Packers originally picked up and are now starters elsewhere in the league.

Which doesn't include the guys they've managed to hold onto like Cullen Jenkins, Tramon Williams, Sam Shields, Ryan Grant, John Kuhn, and Atari Bigby.

3 of those guys are considered Top 10-15 at their respective positions, making up that 20% that I mentioned earlier that aren't 1st/2nd round picks.

I want to see the Falcons do better with their 1st/2nd round picks, do better with their 3rd thru 7th round picks, and do a better job mining the talent of the undrafted market to stumble upon these guys that go onto have starting careers.

I don't expect miracles to happen or perfection. Even a team like the Packers who have done a really good job still have their share of misses. And I realize that relatively speaking we are early in TD's tenure. I went back a decade in the Packers draft history, and that's only being compared to 3-4 years from TD.

In the future, we may draft/develop on that level that the Packers have done recently.

AngryJohnny51 wrote:
Are you serious? This franchise has been one of the most poorly run from top to bottom in NFL history, and TD & Co. have turned it completely around in 3 short years. If all things continue on this trend, you are witnessing what will be one of the greatest turnarounds of a franchise in all of sport.

I think the 90s Bucs and 00 Colts would have something to say about that. A lot of teams go through bad times. Did the Steelers turnaround in the Cowher era less of an accomplishment simply because they won in the 70s? They were just as bad a team as we were in the 80s for the most part.

So are you suggesting that because the Falcons drafted Aundray Bruce 20 years ago, it makes TD's selections better?


People like to pretend that TD started from scratch in '08. He did not. The cupboard definitely wasn't full, but let's not act like it was completely bare either. Many of the players that are considered to be our best today, he never had to add. Roddy White, Jonathan Babineaux, John Abraham were already on the team. So was Brent Grimes, Tyson Clabo, etc. He's added some key pieces (e.g. Matt Ryan), but the majority of them have been FAs like Turner, Gonzo, Robinson, and Ray Edwards, rather than via the draft. NOw, it's early and we're not sure what Spoon, Moore, Jerry, Jones, Dent, Mike Johnson, etc. are going to become. It's certainly possible if not probable in a few cases that in a few years we'll be talking about them in the same light as some of those Packers picks.

I still think Dimitroff is a very good GM, probably one of the 5-10 best in the league today. But unless he hits homeruns with those 2nd and 3rd round picks next year, he's going to be very hard-pressed to upgrade the talent level of this roster in the next 2 years. And once more, he's going to probably continue to rely heavily on free agency. Free Agency does not build sustainable long-term success because the vast majority of FAs will only give you 2-3 good years. Because their contracts tend to go up over time, but their play tends to go down over that same time because for the most part you're signing 27-29 year olds. This is epitomized by Michael Turner. Now Turner is still a productive starter for this team, but unless he puts up numbers comparable to what he was at in '08 or '09, then he's not going to be worth the $$$ we pay him going forward. We may be able to find 80% the player he is going forward for 10-20% of the price.

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


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Falcons are fifth oldest team after the cuts to 53
PostPosted: Tue Sep 06, 2011 4:49 pm 
Offline
All-Pro
All-Pro

Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2007 2:01 pm
Posts: 952
Pudge wrote:
They deserve plenty of credit for getting those players to become better players, but where is the next generation of these players? That's what concerns me.

... ...




I want to see the Falcons do better with their 1st/2nd round picks, do better with their 3rd thru 7th round picks, and do a better job mining the talent of the undrafted market to stumble upon these guys that go onto have starting careers.



We definitely need to hit better on 1st and 2nd (and I'd say 3rd) rounders as impact guys. That can predominantly be helped by not having glaring needs that make you take inferior players (Baker, Dent, etc.) On the 4th-7th rounders, TD needs to start going for higher ceiling guys. It was great to get the lunch pail guys from East Pawtucket Technical College in the late rounds at the beginning, for culture. But now, we need guys with the physical skills that if they develop, they'll be legit players in the NFL (more like a Walls) Even Spencer Adkins would fit the high ceiling requirement...he didn't work out, but if he did, you have a guy with legit NFL tools. The "safe" 5th rounder isn't going to do a lot for an already good team.

Oddly, the easiest way to remedy both of those issues is to be more willing to plug in a midtier FA (not way late, but early, as the plan) instead of an early draft choice, and then free up your draft. This means you don't have to take the "safe" (read, very low ceiling) 4th-7th rounders as depth, because you have an inexpensive proven commodity and can go for the playmaker...and it also means you won't need to reach as much for your 1st through 3rd rounders. You still probably go safe there, but you don't have as dire a need. Your 1st round board then would have 7 or 8 "needs", none pressing, and you could get a very solid foundational player.

I feel like a bit of a transition to this direction has to happen, because it sets up the draft so much better, so the hopefully superior scouting the Falcons do can really show.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Falcons are fifth oldest team after the cuts to 53
PostPosted: Tue Sep 06, 2011 6:27 pm 
Offline
Playmaker
Playmaker

Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2006 1:51 pm
Posts: 378
Location: Estepona, Spain
Useless statistic. Just 2 years ago I think we were one of the youngest teams in the NFL.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 39 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Cyril, Google [Bot] and 4 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: