chronob

Who gives a crap about the dates? Dude doesn't score enough touchdowns! End of story. Deep balls, targets, blah blah blah. I don't know how many touchdowns Ryan has thrown since Julio got here, but I think it is the numerical equivalent of a $hitload. I'd trade half the yards he's ever racked up for twice as many touchdowns.

Honestly, there are good reasons to consider this. Julio is one of the greats, but he's already going to rip up his current contract and want a max deal next year. Can't tie up that money in Julio, and I'm sure a receiver that is half as good but will score twice as many touchdowns can be found. Freeman, despite being a very good running back, was vastly overpaid. Trufant is another very good but not great player, and he's not impossible to replace. I don't blame the FO for not making any trade deals for these guys when we thought we could contend this year. But now that it is obvious we won't contend, and our lack of depth at multiple positions is exposed, I think you could argue it's irresponsible not to trade one or all of these guys if the right deals can be had. I don't want to see any of them play for another team, but you simply have to get value for players when you can if you want to remain viable in the long term.

If Dimitroff has the stones for it, he'd be making calls right now to trade Julio and/or Freeman (or insist to Blank that they should). He traded the farm to get Julio, we made the most we could out of him, now trade him to get the farm back. There has to be a contending team right now that would kill to get Julio, and give up multiple picks in the process. Don't get me wrong, Julio is one of the greatest receivers of all time, and I'd hate to see him go (partially because I'm sure he'd torch us every time he plays us). But we clearly need more depth on this team if we're going to make the most out of the rest of Ryan's career.. And no, you don't trade a franchise quarterback that can still play at a high level. You get him better protection so that he can make the most of his playmakers.

It's not just the Falcons, its this town/state. The idea that Atlanta would break the streak of teams that don't make it to the Super Bowl the year they host was always laughable. This is the team that lost the Super Bowl twice in embarrassing fashion, who's star quarterback cared more about fighting dogs than playing football, and had two coaches that preferred toiling for college losers than being an NFL coach. And this is the town that lost two hockey teams. Who's baseball team won 1 championship in 14 straight postseason trips. Georgia and Richt being one catch away from a National Championship game where they could have beat a weak Notre Dame, and Kirby's guys going down to the wire in the Championship to get beat by a last minute change to a rookie quarterback. What the Falcons and other teams around here don't realize is there are no teams of destiny here. They're fighting destiny to make it all the way.

The only reason we're talking about this is because Beasley isn't getting it done. Regardless of contracts, if you swapped them out, is there any expectation Irvin can do things Beasley can't or isn't doing?

I'd rather he acknowledge reality.

You know as well as I do they'll give him more money. He said he wants it, and they won't let him walk or trade him. Can't pay Eric Reid or Earl Thomas if we're giving Julio another new contract.

This decision is essentially writing off the season, or, at the very least, writing off this season's defense. I don't blame them, though. Both of those guys will want real money, and we have to save up for Julio. Plus, they know as well as anyone their chances of appearing in the SB the year they host it is virtually nil (especially now).

Truth

This was good advice even before the season started. We host the Super Bowl this year (something I was not happy about when it was announced). The idea that Atlanta would break the streak of teams that don't make it the year they host was always laughable. This is the town that lost two hockey teams. Who's baseball team won 1 championship in 14 straight postseason trips. This is the team that lost the Super Bowl twice in embarrassing fashion, who's star quarterback cared more about fighting dogs than playing football, and had two coaches that preferred toiling for college losers than being an NFL coach. That's why I wrote off this season before it started, and resolved to simply enjoy each game on its own. I feel awful for the injured players, but as far as the fate of the season goes it's not nearly as much as a let down for me as it could have been.

Disagree. They'd look like this today:

Really, some simple changes would vastly improve our uniforms. No more white jerseys with white pants. Black pants, please. I'd be very happy if they finally went back to red helmets. And as much as I miss (and would be totally happy with a return to) these: It's hard to argue that this isn't the best combo we've every had: The helmets start you with red and the stripes tie straight into the jersey. The black jerseys with red piping around the lettering and logos look great. And the thick red stripe down the side of the pants keeps the red moving top to bottom without being too much. It's easily one of the best designed football uniforms I've seen. Clean, simple, powerful, and it all just ties together. Make these the regular uniform with the red-red-silver ones above as alternates and we'd be good to go.

If preseason isn't worthwhile for starters or is too dangerous, why practice either? Just have them do gym work to stay in shape, study the playbook and video in a classroom, and then drive them onto the field at start time. OF COURSE starters could benefit from more preseason playing time. It's not as if Sark didn't need more work on his playcalling in real game situations. These guys could get hit by a truck or slip in the shower, and be out for a season. This whole "save them for games that count" thing is bull plop. It boggles my mind that in a 4 game preseason the starters don't play a single full game.

If you have to ask the question, then you're not good.

If you're going to run it in at the goal line it comes down to the O-line (including fullback and/or tight ends) pushing their man back and opening a hole for a runner that can move a pile. Is it really more complicated than that? We don't have the guys for that, which is primarily because of our system. You need lighter/nimbler linemen for zone blocking. It is what it is, and it isn't changing. That's why without the right play calls and some misdirection we become the Matt Bryant show in the red zone. Goal line TDs will never be our strong suit. We need to break playmakers free 5-10 yards back, or it ain't happening. It's unfortunate that we can't structure the O-Line like the D-Line, where you have big uglies to stuff the run, and then rotate in lighter/faster players as necessary.