Return of the Gaucho

Pure Football
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by Return of the Gaucho

  1. On 5/14/2019 at 7:46 PM, k-train said:

    Thank you.

    The dude was set to get paid $7.5M & speculation is that he wants a new/larger deal... which is exactly why he's available for trade. Because the Vikes know he's not worth more than that, and took Irv Smith in the draft as a much cheaper option who should be able to do everything Rudolph could... thus making Rudolph completely expendable to them.

    I mean, we are talking about a TE who:
    - will be 30 this year
    - has only had 1 season in 8 where he was above 640 yards
    - has never had more than 840 yards in a season
    - has never had double-digit TDs
    - has only had more than 5 TDs in a season 3 times in 8 years
    - has only caught more than 67% of his targets 3 times in 8 years

    He's an ok player, but he's not worth anywhere near what he's set to be paid... and not worth trading for, especially considering he's gonna get cut anyhow in all likelihood.

    Not only that but if he signs for 6-7 mil next year, the Vikes would potentially get a 5th/6th round compensatory pick I believe. Trading him for the same would essentially be giving him away for free and I doubt they would do it for less than a 4th plus something. 

  2. 4 minutes ago, TRUju2111 said:

    Im sorry..18m over 3 years, whatever his cap hit is, jumps next year and its guranteed..

    Do you seriously have this poor of a grasp on NFL contract structure and the cap? 

  3. 3 hours ago, Sidecar Falcon said:

    Not a bad pick. He fills a need and is one of the top athletes in the draft. We’re more than likely going to part ways with Trufant next year, so having a 1st round CB to take his place next season would be a smart move. 

    I think that assumes they think Oliver can't step in. He was a 1st round grade CB last year, so hopefully he steps in and we can continue to shore up the DL with the first pick.

  4. 1 hour ago, FalconFanSince1970 said:

    Hold up hoss. I only do a hand full of mocks each year. I've heard Dimi say they do hundreds. They also get the benefit of the Senior Bowl, tons of tape, combines, pro days, interviews and workouts. By the way that was from my real time mock.

    Dimi doesn't cite his mocks and say "see I called it sort-of."  I'm sure you're a good dude and I'd get along well with a beer with ya, the hindsight stuff gets old though. Then again, you were baited in this thread, so consider my comment withdrawn.  

  5. 12 minutes ago, FalconFanSince1970 said:

    Ugh plus Todd Gurley, Adrian Amos and Zach Zenner.


    • Beasley - $4.6M, 9 starts, 20 tackles, 7 TFLs, 5.0 sacks, 8 QBHits, 0 FFs, 1 FR
    • Gregory - $1.0M, 1 start, 25 tackles, 7 TFLs, 6.0 sacks, 15 QBHits, 2 FFs, 1 FR


    In which of your many mocks?  You must be the strongest man in the world with all the goalpost moving that you do...

    Sidecar Falcon likes this


    Look, I hate to defend the Stains, I really do, but tonight, Brees was the problem more than the Cowboys.  They had 2 sacks and 1 garbage time interception. Their defense played as well as they played all season, but the common thread was the Saint's play-calling and execution, which was horrid.  If you want to look at this game as some referendum on the Falcons personnel strategy, then I present the following Cowboys 1st team front 7:

    Lawrence - Certifiable stud, no explanation needed

    Crawford - 7th year pro, never more than 5 sacks a season

    Woods - 2nd year as a pro (didn't play 2018...) 1.5 sacks total

    Taco - 2nd year pro, 4 sacks total

    Wilson - 4th year pro, .75 sacks a year

    Smith - 2nd year pro (I'm not even going to count the 1st year because of the nerve issues) - 4 sacks this year

    Lee - It's not even fair to discuss QB pressures with him, though in 8 seasons he has 3 sacks.  When healthy he roams the field and makes tackles, but when does that happen consistently?

    *Also, let's include Vender Esch, since he killed it tonight, but general stats are: rookie, 0 sacks, 77 tackles, 0 sacks


    I dare anyone to say that front 7 is better than the Falcons...

  7. 15 hours ago, tactician said:

    Is it Sark's fault Matt is throwing the ball out of the end zone? Not a single one of the passes at the end of the game was catchable.

    Yeah, that was the lasting impression most are going to take away from this game.  Matt came up small when we needed him to come up big.

    Over the course of the game he just seemed off.  He wasn't comfortable in part because of the pressure, but also in part because of something that seemed to exist between his ears. 

    I am not going to make some grand conclusion on Matt Ryan's place in history off of this one game, but the offense as a whole needs to step it up going forward and he is the leader of the offense. 

  8. Might as well call this thread Sack Lives Matter...

    As for the actual point of thread, the team seems to have improved this offseason.  Even if there is some regression in the defense, the offense and special teams improved, so that can be made up. Personally, I don't think the D regresses.

    The Takk and Beasley edge duo with Grady/Crawford/McClain/Senat rotation inside should at the very least maintain the DL production of last year, with a chance to improve if Takk keeps progressing and finishes more of those pressures. The only problem I have is with the LB corps.  If Riley stays healthy, did he improve enough for that to matter? He wasn't lighting it up before his injury, and he wasn't stellar in his return (though who knows if that is being only 4 weeks post-op on a meniscus surgery).  You would hope he would be coached up, but the last thing this D needs is him to falter out of the gate and get Beasley rotating back into the LB corps more than planned.  

    I do think we will see more coverage sacks this year than in years past. I am pretty interested in seeing Alford more in the nickle if that is the plan.  He seems great at reading QB's eyes, and letting him roam a bit more could be dangerous.  

  9. 58 minutes ago, JDaveG said:

    I'm in general not a fan of "stop and frisk" laws.  Having said that, I appreciate you focusing the attention on people who the police have reason to suspect might not be law abiding, and might be armed improperly.

    I'd quibble over the propriety of what amounts to a license to search people without probable cause.  But I appreciate the focus at least being in the right place.

    I mean, we still have the Terry stop for just this type of situation.  The problem is a "group of youths" in a "high crime area" is not sufficient for reasonable suspicion in an of itself, and wherever this is tried leads to disproportionate impact on minorities.

    I just wish the criminal enhancements for using a firearm in a crime weren't a bargaining chip but instead a mandate.  If we are going to go after those who illegally possess firearms, the first step is to ensure that those that you have already caught using them for criminal purposes are hammered to the fullest extent of the law.  Extending accomplice liability for crimes involving firearms would be a nice addition.

    JDaveG likes this