FalcFans Forums

The Bucs are gonna cut K2 because of salary, because he worked out on his own, and his bad knees. I know there's no chance the Falcons will sign Winslow, but if you can get him for a few million $$$ to be the No. 2, why wouldn't it make sense to make that move? Depth at TE is arguably the worst on the roster.

The sad thing about this, is that the Falcons will probably sign a much lesser TE at the end of August/beginning of September...

Yeah I saw this today, either he or Dallas Clark would make a nice #2 and further bridge the gap until we actually draft one (since we obviously have no interest in letting an heir groom from the greatest in history).

All it would have taken to get K2 was a 6th round pick. I doubt the Bucs would have dealt him in the division for such a bargain.

A "few million" for a thirty year old "back up" with bad knees and a worse attitude? No thanks. We need to get a young buck in here to learn the ropes from a future hall of famer.

Like I said earlier this off-season when discussing Winslow, he doesn't have a bad attitude. Most of the stigma against him are things he said/did when he was an immature 21 year old, not anything he's done over the past 5-7 years he's been a pro playing at a high level.

And you're right, it's better for us to have a young stud TE that we can grow in the future. But that player is not on this roster, nor will he be between now and the end of the 2012 season, so why then would picking up Winslow deter us from that?

Gonzo is signed through 2012. Winslow is signed through 2014. If we were to acquire that young stud TE next off-season, then you could employ him and Winslow together for 2013 and 2014, giving you two good TEs and you don't have to have the stud come in right away and be a force. Then after 2014, you probably let Winslow walk, since he'd be about 31, the same age as Alge was when we let him go.

Well, we can agree to disagree there. Reports are he wasn't the best or hardest working teammate in Tampa. So says Josh Freeman anyways.



You are right. We do not have that player on the roster. I am hoping that as players are cut and rosters reduced, some young talent at the TE positi0on maybe available. Not likely, but I'll hold out a little hope.



I don't think the two could coexist for the season. Both are starters and both want the ball. I would assume that Gonzo would get the lions share and that would basically leave us with a 3M a year back up TE. An unhappy one at that. Then when Gonzo hangs them up after the season, we'd still be in the same boat we are now. An aging TE on the downside of his career with no young talent to displace him.

I must say this line of reasoning is sound. The downside is greater then the 'upside'. Risk/Reward.

Maybe Marcus Rucker will get cut by the Chiefs and we can find a hidden gem, but Im not holding out hope

You raise fair points AJ51.


Which I would argue is better than having nobody at the position and still needing a young talent to displace him. I guess the point for me was if Gonzo at age 36 is worth committing $7 million for one year, then why would committing $12 million over the next three years to a 28-year old Winslow be a bad move. I mean we committed $14 million to the final three years of Gonzo's contract when we got him in '09, and he was 33 at the time.

Obviously, it's all moot now since the Seahawks got him. But for a late round pick, even if you assumed the Falcons would have had to commit a higher premium (conditional 5th?) than what the Seahawks gave up for him, I think that woudl have been worth it.

I want this team to get a young stud TE next year, and I don't think the acquisition of Winslow should deter them from doing so. I've been saying for 3 straight off-seasons that this team needed to add/sign a good No. 2 TE. They have ignored the position, and I think that has put them into the position now where they are really weak at the position as far as depth goes. If Gonzo misses a game or two, they basically will have nothing at the position other than a poor man's Justin Peelle in Michael Palmer. I'm not going to get into the benefits it would mean for the offense, I think most people can fairly easily figure that out.

And for the record, I don't think Winslow is as bad an egg as people think he is. IMHO, he's that Corey Dillon-type of player that has a rep of being a malcontent, but put into a winning and stable environment like he would have in Atlanta, you would see a lot different player. As for what he did last year, I certainly can buy that he was disruptive in the locker room, because the Bucs didn't have a good coach that could control that locker room. Let's not forget that team absolutely quit on Raheem Morris last year. To me it's really no different than if someone was disruptive in the locker room during the reigns of Petrino or Mora. After all, Alge Crumpler could have been described as a malcontent after Petrino, and had he been 28 with bad knees instead of 31 with bad knees, you can sure bet that Dimitroff would have kept him on in 2008.

I think Winslow & Gonzo would have gotten along a lot better than people thought. Just like Jeremy Shockey didn't poison the Panthers locker room when the team went out and got Greg Olsen. IMHO, the majority of the "big personalities" that are known in the NFL are so because they want to win, and won't bite their tongue when it comes to exposing why their team is not. Smitty is a good enough coach that most people like that would quickly be able to buy in and get on board in the Falcons locker room. I think most rational people would come to Atlanta and understand that playing alongside Gonzo, White, and Julio means that you're not going to get as many balls as you may like. Unlike say a T.O., K2 doesn't strike me as a guy that is irrational.

Tell it. And don't forget the 4th WR and versatile feature back. My new plan is, I'm just going to keep saying this very reasonable thing, so often it becomes like a subliminal message.

People won't know why they do, but they'll be putting that the Falcons really need that 4th WR, 2nd TE, versatile RB in their blogs, and it will be picked up by Wyche and Ledbetter and Yasinskas. And it will become a common question at press conferences (So, Coach Smith, do you think that lack of a 2nd TE is what prevented you from beating the cover 2 today?). And then it will be in the heads of the FO.

It's my new "Field of dreams" method to developing the team.

The problem takeitdown, which I'm sure I, you, and others have said many times before now is that for these things to happen, it's goign to take a complete philosophical overhaul within the Falcons organization. And it's something that I've only recently embraced in the past few years because I used to be one of those people that said, we didn't need to dump Michael Jenkins or replace him because we were good enough. That was myself, and this organization embracing mediocrity.

The question is: Is Smitty too conservative for his own good?

There is nothing wrong with being conservative. But there is a threshold you can cross where IMO your conservatism can actually hurt you. And as I've said numerous times before, I think that factor is what kept teams coached by Bill Cowher, Tony Dungy, John Fox, Jeff Fisher, and Marty Schottenheimer from being able to reach their full potential on a yearly basis. And by that, I mean being able to compete for a championship on an annual basis.

And by this team's actions, inactions, etc. over the past two years, it's becoming increasingly apparent to me that Smitty may fall into that category. It doesn't stop them from winning games during the regular season, but it makes it harder for them to win in the postseason. Which is very frustrating because the Falcons are quickly becoming the San Diego Chargers of the NFC.

Yeah, I actually think it's a big problem. It makes it harder for me to get excited about the team. A lot of people are big into the "well we won didn't we" philosophy in the regular season. I never have been. I'd rather lose with 2 fluke interceptions, but with 6 yards per carry, and 9 yards per attempt, and a grand defensive performance, than win on the other side of that battle. And that's because if I see all of that dominance, I know the flukes won't keep happening, and that's a team that can be modified just a touch to contend in the postseason. It's why I'm not as giddy over ugly wins as some...I'm always looking at what does how you played say about who you are as a team right now?

I think Smitty has been content to stay on schedule, keep it close, and rely on the other team to mess up. Which will, as we've discussed, make you a solid 8-8 to 12-4 team depending on schedule, but will leave you flat against good teams and in the playoffs.

My hope (though not my belief) is that Dimi understands this, and pushes in that direction, and that Smith's 4th down bravado signals that he's not so conservative, and can move in that direction. But, as I said, it's not what I actually think.

My more realistic hope is that they realize they need to be able to stretch a defense more, even though they cling to the run game. That's why I've advocated the 2TE/2WR 1 RB personnel for this offense. I think Smith could feel they're still a power team, but could still stress a defense in the pass game. I prefer 11 personnel myself, but I figure the above is more what Smith might bridge to. And I think that's good enough to make it a really good team.

But I do think now is the time Smith has to declare to himself and the world (through coaches/schemes, not words) that he's not MartyBall deluxe. He needs to show he can adjust to the world as it is in the NFL and roll from there.

But I am concerned he's too conservative, and that (combined with what that seems to do to our personnel shopping) has made it much more difficult to be excited about the Falcons the last 2 years. I love seeing them in the playoffs, but I don't define being a contender as being in the playoffs, but rather being a team who could win it all...and those are two very different things. The Falcons team who looked the most like they could win it all was the one with Ryan as a rookie, when Turner was running like mad, and Ryan was completing deep passes. So I've liked the winning seasons, but I haven't once felt like we were a better than 50% shot to beat a playoff team except for that first year. I want to see the team that makes me think "if we bring our A game, no one's beating us" not the team that makes me think "well, if we play perfectly, and the other team brings their C game, we can win."

I agree. It has me in a position where in the future I might have to temper my expectations for this team. It's like being a Charger fan vs. a Giants fan. As a Charger fan, I know that with Norv Turner as my head coach, it's virtually impossible that we'll win a Super Bowl. At least as a Giant fan, even though my team often underachieves, I know that Coughlin & Co. can pull things together at the right time to make things work and make a SB run possible.

Their conservative strategies in the past (especially 2010) made sense to me because you didn't have the personnel to be a fearsome, explosive passing attack that could put points up. But now you do have that potential, and if you just merely embraced it, you could really start to reap the benefits of that. I really do think offensively, this team's personnel matches up well with the Arizona Cardinals of '08. I think they could be that sort of team today if they embraced it, and then when you factor in where they could be 2 or 3 years from now with that as their foundation, you could really be a scary.

And I believe I've said before, that Smitty's conservative nature leads to a fairly consistent level of play that is very successful in the regular season. But when it comes to the playoffs, and where the level of competition dramatically increases and you need to elevate your level of play, his conservative strategy of playing not to lose doesn't allow a lot of room for that. And it's why the Falcons continue to get exposed by teams that aren't necessarily better than them in January.

And I like you would much rather be 9-7 and scary than 12-4 and solid. And recent history continuously shows us that it's the scary teams that win championships, not the solid teams. You have to be able to play with the big boys, and this team has mostly shown over the past 4 years that is not capable of doing that. And I don't think it has that much to do with their QB or their personnel on either side of the ball. I think that comes from the head coach. And I don't have any hope/faith that TD is going to step in and fix that problem, because I don't believe that's his job or responsibility to do so.

Because of where this franchise has been for most of its existence, coupled with their success over the past 4 years, I think it has lulled the powers that be within this organization to believe the arrow is still pointing up. Which I don't think it is. And I think they like many fans still tend to look back towards 2007 and say "Look how far we've come!" and instead they need to be looking more at 2010, and using that as their basis for comparison and see how much further along they are from there. That to me is a championship mentality. The analogy would be if at the beginning of a semester you got a 57 on your math test, and then on your midterm you got an 89, and you are ectastic with how much improvement you've made. But you then rest on your laurels for the remainder of the semester, and you probably get an 86 on your final or whatever. The true "champion" however will look at the 89 and say it's nice and all, but they're not going to rest until they get a 99 or a 100 on their final. And based off what I've seen over the past few off-seasons, I don't think anybody in this organization possesses that drive/determination.

And that's what I mean by tempering expectations. At some point, you just have to learn to be content with your 86 or 89 if that's all you have within you.