falconidae

How is being completely negative about this report any different than being completely positive? Both are completely unrealistic stances. Few points: This is the Falcoholic website, they don't, as far as I know, have real reporter access. Nobody on this thread is overly excited about Davison. Every single reply about the report itself is something like: "Cool, hope he steps up this year" Which is hardly the overreaction you're railing against. This is the dead zone of NFL offseason [this came out Friday, before Jones got traded]. This is the only stuff you're going to get

Even if he does, Falcons still win. They got rid of a malcontent, freed up cap space this year and next, got extra draft capital and established this is TF's and AS's team.

Which is all we get this time of year anyway. Still better than nothing and still better than reports he's doing poorly. If Pees can get the youngsters on the DLine to perform better, this defense can take a huge leap forward.

Appreciate the respect, and feel the same about you. No, we haven't agreed about adding another bye week reduces the total number of games played. That's where the disconnect is. Actually, we just disagree on how important that is. I think any revenues lost are more than made up by increased TV/cable revenues. Teams have a single bye week now, and it doesn't reduce the number of games played by any team, those games are just spread out over 17 weeks instead of 16. Any revenue lost by a team that is on its bye is more than made up for by an additional week of TV/cable revenues. I'm sayi

And my entire post was about a different take than yours.

I said they'd have 18 games.

Same amount of games, just spread out over a longer period. Same as it is with 1 bye week now. And an extra 3-4 weeks of television revenue.

NFL could add 2 more bye weeks, arrange it so all Thursday games came off bye weeks, have 18 games, have an extra 3 weeks of football, generate tons more money, players would be healthier with 3 bye weeks a season. Scheduling would be insane, but that's what quantum computers are for.

Why?

meh

Huge difference between a 13 year track record than a 1 year, 2 year or 3 year track records. If you can't understand that, I'm not going to try to explain it to you. And, if you can't understand how much better a team Brady had compared to Ryan, not going to try to explain that to you either. I'm done, made my point.

Same. Do hope that some of the youngsters, esp. on the DLine, are much better under Pees.

If he teaches Pitts how to block, that alone will make it worthwhile. Assuming, sigh, that Julio is gone, 3TE set with Pitts, Smith, Hurst, Riley and Davis could just be deadly. And take pressure off an Oline needing time to gel. Think of lining up w/ Ryan in the shotgun, with Pitts and Smith as H-backs in front of him, with Davis beside him. Hurst tight to the LOS and Ridley out wide. What does the defense do?

Just as a bit of trivia, that emoji started as a serving of soft serve chocolate ice cream.

This started because you claimed that several QBs are on pace to overtake Ryan, which is just absurd. Ryan has a MVP and a Rookie of the year, and is a much better playoff QB than Rivers. That matters for the HOF. And, Ryan has more yards and TDs than Brady had at the same point in their careers. That, unlike your claim that multiple QBs are going to overtake Ryan, is a fact. It's also a fact that Ryan has never had Belichick or a defense like Brady did. If Ryan maintains his career pace for another 4 years, he'll have 70,000+ yards and 450+ TDs. Those are HOF numbers by