There is a clear disconnect here.
Go back and re-read your initial post in that thread
fun gus wrote:
If Grimes sat out when he could have played vs the Giants because he was unhappy with his contract and did not want to risk injury, in that context if we tagged him and got a 1st round pick I think that is a wise move.
Now you know I love me some Grimes, but really? A 30 yr old munchkin CB coming off knee surgery and with bad blood between him and his agent/wife, the front office? If he sat out when we really needed him on purpose, sorry, I'd rather have that first round pick no matter how much Dunta sucks.
I do think you have a right to be pissed at the management for letting it get to this point. There might be something we dont know about his injury, and maybe that had something to do with TD not getting his extension done....But if he sat himself then buh bye lil man. I 'll miss ya, but dont let the door hit ya where Good Lord split ya.
At this point, your entire premise as I see it is this:
"TD was right from the start
because he did not pay Grimes. He was justified in doing so because Grimes is a quitter and/or has injury concerns."
I'm saying this:
"TD was right in not paying Grimes only in hindsight
. Had he given him market value and he had suffered a Week 1 Achilles tear, then we would have been up s***'s creek. But ecause the Achilles injury is completely random and unforeseeable event, you cannot use that as a reason why in Jan/Feb he was right in not paying Grimes."
Pudge, were just rehashing the same damn argument we had the 2nd week of January. Go back, and reread the entire thread...
""And I'm betting you're saying that because of the sliver of doubt that has been inserted in your brain because of this article that was mentioned in the first post, where you read into it that Brent Grimes lacks heart. Had Dan Parr never written this story, I'd bet that you would be alongside me saying that he was the one free agent that the Falcons must re-sign."
"Not really Pudge, I had come to this conclusion waaaay before Mr Parr's broadside. I was just to timid to voice it because I knew the riot it would create. My mind was made up not to sign Grimetime for anything more then 3 years because I saw Grimes struggle more this season against bigger faster WR's then in the past...It may be completely perception too. Grimes used to own Brees. In the first game, before he was injured, he seemed a step off to me. Again: you'll probably find a cute stat to blow that up. But when he came back on the MNF game, and he wasn't 100% it hurt watching him against 6 foot 6 Graham. It was then I started to think about it. I know it's 'unfair' and it probably speaks to Grimes 'heart' positively, but after that display I started thinking more about Grimes contract.... I began to wonder if we locked him up for a 5-6 year huge deal, if it wouldn't be a Nnamdi Asomugha situation.
I know this will get me flamed, but I cant see spending 60 million 6 yrs with 25 guaranteed for Grimes. I'm sorry, but nobody is worth that, not Dunta Not Grimes, not Brandon Carr, Not Cortland Finnegan, Not Carlos Rodgers, Not Eric Wright, William Gay or Al Harris."http://falcfans.com/forums/viewtopic.ph ... 3&start=25
Now, I said in this thread that had Grimes not been injured, he would have had a deal, fast. No problem. But even then, I was concerned that his size/position and age were a concern going down the road. Im being consitent here.
I was worried if we gave Grimes the $$ we would have a 'Nnamdi situation'. Now you can say that the achilles inury is a 'fluke' injury, that's a fair point. I conceeded that.
But earlier in this thread I said 'for 10 million dollars, I want at least 12 games'. I know it's speculation, but I dont and did not think Grimes was really going to do that this season. I think because of the age/position and style of play ( combined with injuries ) that Grimes was more then likely to get reinjured.Just like Sam Baker is probably more likely to reinjure his back, but that doesn't mean he cant suffer an achillles. right?
As a matter of fact, I think he probably would have blown out his knee again, either this year or next, only this time much worse then his current achilles injury. BUt then, we would be on the hook for the $$.
And I was even scketchy about a 3 year deal, but Grimes wanted more then that. If they could have given hims a three year deal, front loaded with the third year mostly incentive pay, that might have been okay: but even then I was worried he wouldn't see the contract through...But what was being reported is that Grimes wanted waaaay more thena 3 year deal...
The stuff about sitting in the playoffs, or holding out last year,ancillary: but combined
it doesnt make sense for a long tem deal, considering the likelyhood of injury.
I have held the same positon about this since last year: the only difference is in hindsight
you admit you changed your opinion. The fact is TD made a wise decision
. He didnt back up the money truck, but he kept our best CB on a one year deal to see if he could make it through the season, and be productive. Nothing stopping us from signing him next season. As a matter of fact, if you reread the thread I wanted to let Grimes test the market for a 1st round pick. Nobody thought that was a good deal, right? Should that not tell us something? ( Full disclosure: I wanted Dre Kirkpatrick, and guess what: he injured himself in preseason and missed his first NFL game
AFTER getting busted..remember?)
I've been completely consistant all along! Even if we had let Grimes go for a first round CB pick, I still believe in the long run
, we would have been 'better off' then signing Grimes to a long term contract...As a matter of fact, Asante Samuels could have taken this pic and taught hm up to be a contributor by next year, locking up that position for years to come. Now, we HAVE to use a pick to fix this situation.
In the end, I was wrong, you were wrong and TD was right
you can come out of the corner now Pudge;-)