FalcFans Forums

With us drafting a FB bye bye Ovie!

I don't know what the Falcons plan to do, but they should keep Ovie, and give Ewing the year he needs in a weight room.

My hope is this means bye bye Antone Smith.

http://atlanta.sbnation.com/atlanta-fal ... e-mughelli

It's Go Time J.R. !

I am a bit surprised by this move. Either Ovie was more hurt than he (or they) were letting on, or the Falcons are moving away from the power run scheme. I just can't see going from the best FB in the league to a 5th rounder and expecting to still be a premier power run team.

I can give you three million reasons why they let him go.

Snelling can fill in if the rookie isn't ready to go.

This was a cost cutting measure you could see coming a mile away.

Ovie was a class act, on and off the field. This isn't about his citizenship, but about the price of dealing with a salary cap.

D-

Gotta believe they asked him to restructure and he declined.

I'm a bit disappointed in you guys. I do understand Ovie why was cut but show the guy some respect. He was an awesome Falcon and was one of the best blockers in the league. He was incredible as a Falcon and will be missed. He's a class act player and I hope he goes to great AFC team.

Wrong.




Wrong.



Keep trying to come up with excuses for poor management. You guys have become experts at doing so over the past two years.

In all fairness, we don't know what the details of the restructuring were. Without that, it's a bit early to speculate. If I were Ovie, I'd probably take a shot at getting a 2-3 year deal done else where. ATL was clearly only going to keep him one more year as Ewing developed.

Question Pudge:

Is a player able to reduce his salary? Often teams will cut a player and then bring them back at a reduced number to save cap money. That seems a weird way to do it if the player had the ability to just cut his salary.

I know they could have extended Ovie for a year, but that would have increased total cap outlay, it just would have reduced it this year. Whereas having him cut his salary (or cutting him and signing back) would actually reduce it. Didn't know if the new CBA allowed for an outright reduction.



Regardless, this seems to clarify that they REALLY should have cut Mughelli AND Turner in the offseason and gone Gaither/Grubbs. This move seems to make it that much clearer that that would have been a more tenable position.

Ok, here's why I said what I said before... If the Falcons were going to cut him, why not do it at the beginning of free agency when they could have used the extra cap space to bring in more talent? Why wait till now, after FA and after the draft, to dump him? I try to give our management the benefit of the doubt, but what is the deal here? Did they wait till now so that it would be harder for Mughelli to find a suitor? If they might re-sign him, why not restructure?

The issue here is timing... Why now? If they were going to cut him, only to re-sign him, why not work that out before cutting him?

Sometimes I get the feeling that manatees are running this team.

He could have gotten that had he been cut in March. Right now after the draft, the best he can probably do is a veteran minimum deal.


Let's assume that on the table was the simple restructuring I outlined before, where the Falcons reduce Ovie's base salary from $3 million to the veteran minimum at $825,000, and turning the difference into a signing bonus prorated over the course of this season and next year (that would be a year added to his deal).

That would have meant, Ovie had a cap hit of $825,000 (base salary) + $733,333 (previously prorated bonus) + $1.0875 million (new bonus split in half) to total $2,645,833.

If the Falcons cut Ovie, then his $733,333 prorated bonus accelerates to this year. Then you re-sign him to a one-year veteran minimum deal with no signing bonus, which only counts $540,000 against the cap while Ovie receives $825,000 in actual money. That means Ovie's potential cap hit if the Falcons re-sign him is $1,273,333.

That means that cutting Ovie vs. a simple restructuring nets $1,372,500 in additional cap savings. THat's a nice move, but only if you pull it off. If you had approached Ovie with this plan back in February or March, it would be a lot easier to pull off. But if you read the AJC article/interview on Ovie's release, you can definitely tell he was blindsided with this move.

So this idea that there were negotiations ongoing behind closed doors is very unlikely to be the case. Sure we don't know this for a fact, and you can give the front office the benefit of the doubt by ignoring the context clues. But those context clues suggest that the decision to cut Ovie was a decision that has only been recently decided, or if it was proposed earlier, it was something that they've been holding in their back pocket for weeks/months.

Because they wanted to see who was available in the draft? A guy came up who was better, they took him. If not, they keep Ovie and restructre him, or cut him later and hope the gallery could do his job.

Makes perfect sense to me.

In 2011, Mughelli saw action in seven games and hauled in four receptions for 25 yards with two touchdowns before suffering a season-ending knee injury against the Detroit Lions on Oct. 23.

He was viewed as expendable in the new offense under coordinator Dirk Koetter, which will mostly utilize three receivers. A fullback will be utilized about 20 percent of the time.

I think they predict Ewing has better 'hands' for that 20%. I saw the handwriting on the wall the minute they drafted him.

Ovie wont be back. It's not a bad thing.

The question I have then fun gus if that's the case, and that's a viable solution. Why not then just restructure Ovie from the jump, so you don't have to wait to see what's available in the draft. If Ewing is there, then you can draft him and keep Ovie all the same. If not, then you're fine at FB.

And I don't get why it's crazy to keep a player for $3.7 million that is only going to play 20% of snaps, but it's OK to draft someone in the 5th round for the same role? Why is Ovie expendable, but Ewing is an integral part of this team's plans.

Ewing will be solid this year, a lot like Mike Cox was last year. But he won't be good, at least not this year.

I understand your restructuring Pudge, but wasn't in favor of it because he counts 1.5 or so against the cap next year. A flat reduced salary this year doesn't affect next year. However, I fully agree it doesn't seem like this was done with great clarity to Ovie, and I don't think that makes a lot of sense.

However, if the FB is only going to play 20%, the Falcons need to go get a Braylon Edwards or someone who can be real depth at the 4WR and spell guys. If 3 WR are starters, then we have zero depth at a critical position. I'd like them to get a legit vet for WR anyway, but if they're running 3's most of the time, it is essential.

It also brings Turner back into question, because he's not a good single back set RB, because he doesn't have lateral agility (and thus depends more on FB) and doesn't catch well.

Frigging weird. It seems like they were all for going toward a more pass based attack, but not wanting to get rid of Turner has just left them in this mismatched limbo. Seems the exact opposite of "scheme" fit.

Get a 4th WR. Get him now. Let him split snaps with HD. Then we have a shot.

They aren't going to a pass-based offense. They are still going to be the same offense that they were going to be with Ovie. The only difference is now they have a lesser fullback.

I'm betting the whole 20% thing isn't accurate (D-Led reported it, so that should tell you everything ). You know how many games Greg Jones played 20% of less snaps over the past four years? A grand total of three. His actually PT has hovered just under or just above 40% in each of the past four years, which is in fact more reps than Ovie had over the same span in comparison, who appeared in between 35-38% of snaps most years.

So if in fact the Falcons do play Ewing/Cox only 20% of the times, then Ewing was a wasted draft pick. And if cutting the fullback's reps in half has been the plan from the start with Koetter installing his offense, then the Falcons have no excuses for not cutting/restructuring Ovie from the get-go because if that was the case, then they could have never justified having Ovie on the roster for anything but a veteran minimum price.

So if it's true and it does come to fruition that Ewing is only playing that low amount, short of him becoming this team's ST captain like Corey McIntyre back in the day, he'll be a misused draft pick.

But that's just me complaining again because I prefer my favorite football team makes logical decisions.

I agree they should have cut him earlier/restructured then. It's never cool to blindside a guy.

The 20% number probably is wrong. I was hoping it's right, because it would point toward maybe they wanted to go toward a passing attack, but felt Turner was just too good to get rid of. That's just wishful thinking on my part (and in that case I still would have thought their opinion on the irreplaceability of Turner was insane)

Good GRIEF; they cut him after he was medically cleared to play!! I don't call that blindsided, its not even the middle of may.

If Ewing has better hands, and TurdCutter ( tm) uses FB to catch more, then were not getting a 'lesser' fullback. That's your opinion.

For chrissakes, quit acting like Mugs was Larry Centers. He was always a bulldozer, not a reception king.

For 3+ Million Dollars, do you think Ovie was going to play special teams? And, even if he agreed, is that such a great idea, considering he's not exactly a 'spring chicken' and coming off knee surgery?

Ewing costs 1/3rd of the $$, can do the job AND be a Teams player..AND he probably has better hands then Ovie. They probably waited because they wanted a cleared med report and to see how he was moving around. Ewing dropped in the draft: they looked at both situations and chose the new guy.

Suppose next year we actually DO make a move away from a Turner based offense...Now you've got a guy, cheap, young and with a year under his belt who can still contribute on Teams or in a different role. We keep Overpriced Ovie THIS year ( hoping he doesnt go down AGAIN ) and pass on Ewing?.. were going to be looking for a guy like him next year.

This is the classic 'Belichik' model at work( although this year he went balls deep) . Do a good job of evaluating the up and comers, and cut the Vet's with the fattened one year left on thier contract. .

Time to let this one go, Sir Pudge. I'll damn the FO all day long, but this wasn't a bad move, IMO..

Now you're the one acting like Ewing is Larry Centers. Ovie is a good receiver. He caught 21 passes the year before he signed with the Falcons for the Ravens. His lack of usage in the passing game was more a reflection of Mularkey's offense than it was of Ovie's inability to contribute there.

Trust me, the Fullback's primary job is still going to be run blocking. So this idea that because Ewing has better hands means he's better for the offense is inaccurate.


You mean the guy that has 26 special teams tackles over the past 5 years? Including 9 in 2010, which IINM was 3rd best on the team behind Weems and Owens?


Did I say we should have passed on Ewing? No, you could have kept both. And don't spew that we couldn't afford it BS, because as I've said numerous times this off-season, if the Falcons wanted to clear space under this year's cap, they could have easily done so. But as I said earlier, their mismanagement of their money was going to cost them because they would now have to operate like a team that had zero money, instead of a team that had plenty of wriggle room. That's the bed they made, and now they must lie in it. And unfortunately, the most important part of their offense (i.e. the running game) is now going to suffer for it.


If you think this is the Belichick model, then you my friend don't know Bill. The BB model isn't to cut declining veterans, in fact, his team does a better job of hording those types of guys than almost any other team. And then he uses the veteran presence to develop the young guy so that when it's time to move on, he can plug in the young guy with little to no drop-off.

Maybe you should actually take a gander at the Patriots current and past rosters and see how many "Ovie-type" players. I'm betting you would be shocked. The BB model would have been to keep Ovie, but find some way to re-negotiate his deal so that it was much more palatable, commiserate with their role/value to the team.

Ovie still had value. If the Falcons thought he was overpriced, they had THREE FRIGGIN MONTHS to make his deal more palatable. Did they attempt to this? All the signs suggest that they did not even make an attempt to do so.

Unlike the Patriots, the Falcons don't build a culture of competition. The Falcons head coach talks a big game, but anytime they get a new rookie they almost always do away with the competition. Julio Jones? Goodbye MIchael Jenkins. Cliff Matthews? Sayonara Chauncey Davis. Bradie Ewing? Peace out, Ovie. Garrett Reynolds/Mike Johnson? Good riddance, Harvey. Matt Bosher? Bye Koenen, it was nice knowing you. The list goes on and on. That's not how the Patriots do business. And this "Falcon way" directly contributes to why the back-end of the roster is so full of marginal talent. Because at any point when the Falcons can build depth, they do their best to avoid it by moving on from proven veterans, and thus having to replace them with late round picks, undrafted guys, or journeymen off the street. And the players they plug into replace these veterans, do they ever develop into the caliber of contributor/player that they are replacing? The answer is almost always no. Now that Ovie is off the roster, that means that Antone Smith, Dimitri Nance, Robbie Frey, and Mike Cox have a chance to make the Falcons roster as the 5th running back. And are any of them ever going to be anywhere a player in the class of Ovie? Nope. Are any of these guys going to contribute to the Falcons as much over the next 3 years as Ovie could have? Nope.

If Ewing and Ovie had both came to camp, and Ovie was still nursing his injury and was limited and then got cut, that's fine. If they had competed for the job, and it was a tie, then I have no problem with the tie going to young guy. But they couldn't do that, because the Falcons measure their drafting success on games started, not whether or not guys actually become good players. Ewing couldn't start as long as Ovie was on the team, and therefore the Falcons brass couldn't jerk themselves over how great a drafting team they are to all of their sycophants because they couldn't score 6-10 starts for Ewing this year.

Six months ago if you polled people and asked who is the best lead blocker in the league. 60% of people would have probably said Vonta Leach. The other 40% would have said Ovie Mughelli. This is just six months ago. And all because of an MCL tear, everybody just now assumes he's lost it.

Ummm, hate to break this to you, but he was only 'medically cleared' to even get on the field 4 days before he was cut.

So they did not have 'three friggin months' to rework his deal. Until he is medically cleared to play, you dont enter into restructure talks.

Like I said: they waited to see what the Dr's thought, and by then they had a guy fall to them they felt they could not pass on. Sorry, Ovie.

It's not like when they cut Grady: that was stupid. Trey Lewis, indeed

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uCBN5Fr-Ums

Wrong. The Falcons doctors have been monitoring Ovie's injury, rehab, and progress for months now. They know exactly what is going on. Don't you find it interesting that the Falcons offseason program starts on April 23, and Ovie is cleared to go full go in practice on May 4?

Do you honestly believe that when Ovie had his year-end physical back and January or February, that the team doctors, trainers, etc. didn't know he would be back by around this time? These medical and athletic professionals with decades of experience are unable to give a prognosis on when Ovie could be ready to go, and thus allow the football decision makers a good time-table and idea of how to move forward?

Do you think if the Minnesota Vikings approached Adrian Peterson about restructuring the $96 million deal he signed back in September, they could not because he's not medically cleared to play?

http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikin ... 01185.html

You mean because they don't have an exact time-table for his return to the field, and their September target is just a rough estimate, in the meantime if Zygi Wilf/Rick Spielman wanted to shave $5 million off their cap for this year, they could not because Peterson is not medically cleared to play and therefore his deal is untouchable?

You mean to tell me the same team that negotiated a six-year $30 million deal with Ray Edwards last summer, when he wasn't medically cleared to play, forcing him to sit out essentially 15 days of practice last summer, can't do a similar thing with Ovie? Is it somehow different because Edwards was only going to be held out for a few weeks, rather than a few months? They can negotiate a six-year deal that guarantees an injured player $11 million over the course of 72 hours, but they can't negotiate a deal that shaves $2-3 million off an injured players' deal over 72 days?

The Falcons couldn't have approached Ovie back in February and tried to re-do a deal and then to tell him upfront that if they cannot solve the issue by March 13, they would cut him. They would want to bring him back for a 1-yr. veteran minimum deal like Todd McClure. He would be allowed to shop himself around to see if he can get a better deal like McClure was.

If not, the Falcons would welcome him back with open arms on the cheap. But otherwise they would move on. If the team was worried about other teams thinking they might draft a FB, then all they had to do was mention publicly their plan to move Jason Snelling to fullback full-time and have him compete with Mike Cox, who they really like a lot, and all of a sudden no other teams really think you're interested in a fullback because why would you be when you just shelled out a three-year deal with Snelling.

If Ewing is there in the draft in that scenario, you take advantage of your little ruse and draft him. If not, and if no team signed Ovie in the intervening 8 weeks because as you say he wasn't medically cleared to play (therefore it's foolish/crazy to negotiate a deal with him), then you can easily sign him back for a 1-yr. veteran minimum deal after the draft right around the team he would be cleared medically. That would have been the best strategy on how to handle the situation. The Falcons get what they want: a younger FB, and they don't dick over Ovie Mughelli from testing the market.

That's exactly how your boy Belichick would have handled the situation, which is basically what they did with their RB position by letting the overpriced Law Firm walk and then go behind and sign Addai after the draft.

Will the presence of Ovie on or off the roster dramatically impact the Falcons 2012 season? Probably not. Maybe the running game is just 5 or 10% less effective. But what is interesting to me is that in the past two off-seasons, for a team that prides itself on running the football and being physical, has cut bait with their two most physical and impact run blockers: First Harvey Dahl, then Ovie Mughelli. Why? Not because they were making themselves into a better team, but basically because they are being cheap and/or lazy. $38 million undeservedly goes to Justin Blalock last summer, but the team can't find it within themselves to pay $16 million to the better football player in Harvey Dahl for whatever reason. And now with Ovie Mughelli because the team refused to try and make it work financially with him. Don't say they didn't have a choice because they definitely did. This team chose to re-work only two deals this entire off-season: Dunta Robinson and Justin Blalock. They could have signed Matt Ryan and Brent Grimes long-term, re-worked Turner, Baker, Jerry, Babineaux, among others. But they chose not to.

And people wonder why I complain so much, and why I "hate" so much. Because it's these little moves like this that add up which is what prevents a team like us from getting over the hump. This is why I say this team doesn't self-evaluate well and thus far why this front office/coaching staff is incapable of building a championship-caliber team. It thinks it's a better football team with Antone Smith/Dimitri Nance/Mike Cox than Ovie Mughelli on the roster? It think it's a better football team with Kerry Meier on the roster rather than Michael Jenkins? This team thinks Justin Blalock is worth $12 million more than Harvey Dahl?

And they think this is the best team that they can possibly field? Keep dreaming, Thomas.

yes, that's what I honestly believe. And, I think it was wise because of the nature of OM's injury and age.

Mugs did not get 'dicked'. The writing was on the wall when they signed Cox to a 2 year friendly contract...And dont compare Edwards and Ovie: apples and oranges. Two completely different skillsets.

Look, unless Ovie gets snapped up by the Rams or the Texans, chances are he will be back. But I'm not buying the 'Turner needs Mugs' BS or that somehow the FO set out to 'screw over' Ovie, or were being 'lazy'.

From what I've gleaned, TurdCutter ( tm ) was brought in to incorporate screens. His fav is the bubble screen. Ovie has been with this team 5 years, there is easily 5 years of tape on how much of a threat Mugs is receiving..But there's nothing on Ewing.

Now, I get and conceed your point that it would have been 'better' to keep Ovie with restructuring. And, that option is not 'off the table'. But: after not being able to score a damn TD in the playoffs last year, I would certainly HOPE that during Arthur Blanks annual Draft Weekend Carnival Party, that the new and improved coordinator is in there, giving HIS input. TurdCutter is no stranger to Mugs.
Suppose he recommended getting Ewing if he was available, because in his offense, he see's a skillset that Ewing has that Ovie does not, or maybe they have info from thier 'vaunted medical staff with decades of NFL experience' (:roll:) that maybe OM isn't worth restructuring.

Those seem like logical conclusions.
Your milage may vary