Jump to content

The Gonzalez Trade is a good thing


whitekb011
 Share

Recommended Posts

First, we have not made a trade offer, nor do I agree with a 2nd rounder this year, maybe next years's 2nd, because we should get that back with Comp pics for our departed FA class this year. Here are my basic reasonings for this.

1. Proven TE that can help Matt Ryan put drives together without having to learn the NFL Game.

2. He is a good route runner, has great hands, and finds the open space for the QB.

3. Leadership, he is a Team Guy and we need that in our locker room with the departed veterans of this year for the team and the TE group we have in place.

4. Our schedule is brutal this year and we need another passing option that gains the respect of the opposing defense. We play the NFC East and AFC East next year with road games at NE, Dallas, NYG, and NYJ. If we don't incorporate our TE in the offense more, it will give the opposition was less thing to worry about.

5. He can help Peele be a good tight end, maybe work up some younger guys that we might draft in the later rounds. Remember, this is a very deep draft in TEs.

Just my thoughts on why he would be good for us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A 2nd rounder is way too much for a guy on the wrong side of 30. Even a 3rd is really a stretch. The help would be good, but I think a 2nd rounder would be more helpful. Maybe a 4th and a 6th or something. He is 33, how many more years is he actually going to be productive?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agree with points 1,2, & 4 but the problem is Mularkey has never really utilized TEs in his offensive schemes while he was either a OC or HC. Only year TEs posted good numbers with him as either was 2006 in Miami and it was Saban calling the offensive plays that year, not Mularkey.

I agree with 3 & 5 but he has a cap hit of 10.25 million over the next 2 years and then we would either have to resign him or find another TE. 10.25 Million is expensive for a "Quick Fix" Leader.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No way I'd offer a second or a third for him. Maybe a 4th and one of our 5ths. Dude is getting old very fast and we'd be lucky to get 2 years out of him. That's not what you want from giving up a second rounder. I am not convinced that TD is really persuing this very hard. I won't believe it until it happens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with 3 & 5 but he has a cap hit of 10.25 million over the next 2 years and then we would either have to resign him or find another TE. 10.25 Million is expensive for a "Quick Fix" Leader.

I think we did this with Milloy before we decided to let him walk so it could be a possibility. I am still not feeling a 2nd rounder when it was rumored other teams were offering 3rds & 4ths.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agree with points 1,2, & 4 but the problem is Mularkey has never really utilized TEs in his offensive schemes while he was either a OC or HC. Only year TEs posted good numbers with him as either was 2006 in Miami and it was Saban calling the offensive plays that year, not Mularkey.

I agree with 3 & 5 but he has a cap hit of 10.25 million over the next 2 years and then we would either have to resign him or find another TE. 10.25 Million is expensive for a "Quick Fix" Leader.

I am curious to know who Mularkey had at TE in all of those years... did he not utilize TE's by choice? or was it a necessity to not utilize them? Having a threat like Gonzo over the middle opens the door for so many more possibilities. Roddy might get more single coverage, Jenkisn could have more production because of this, linebackers might have to stay committed to Gonzo instead of Norwood swinging out to the flats; it really would make our offense so much more dynamic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am curious to know who Mularkey had at TE in all of those years... did he not utilize TE's by choice? or was it a necessity to not utilize them? Having a threat like Gonzo over the middle opens the door for so many more possibilities. Roddy might get more single coverage, Jenkisn could have more production because of this, linebackers might have to stay committed to Gonzo instead of Norwood swinging out to the flats; it really would make our offense so much more dynamic.

That's what I see too. They will not be able to double Roddy all the time and this will provide Douglas more opportunities as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agree with points 1,2, & 4 but the problem is Mularkey has never really utilized TEs in his offensive schemes while he was either a OC or HC. Only year TEs posted good numbers with him as either was 2006 in Miami and it was Saban calling the offensive plays that year, not Mularkey.

I agree with 3 & 5 but he has a cap hit of 10.25 million over the next 2 years and then we would either have to resign him or find another TE. 10.25 Million is expensive for a "Quick Fix" Leader.

Didn't know his cap hit was that high, we would have to restructure his contract with a "Sign and Trade" clause. If we take the cap hit then we also should lower our offeor to a 3rd Next year and a 6th next year. I don't want to get rid of any draft picks this year because this is a very deep defensive draft and we need our 2nd and 3rd this year to shore up some holes on defense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agree with points 1,2, & 4 but the problem is Mularkey has never really utilized TEs in his offensive schemes while he was either a OC or HC. Only year TEs posted good numbers with him as either was 2006 in Miami and it was Saban calling the offensive plays that year, not Mularkey.

I agree with 3 & 5 but he has a cap hit of 10.25 million over the next 2 years and then we would either have to resign him or find another TE. 10.25 Million is expensive for a "Quick Fix" Leader.

Who was it that said we wanted to get Matt a receiving TE to give him another option? Wasn't that Mularkey? :huh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great post and all very good points. Gonzo is also going to open up everything like running game and free up wide receivers. Remember how our offense struggled a little towards the end of the year? That was because defenses game planned us very well, Gonzo makes it hard to do no matter how good of a game plan you have. I think if we got him we would have everything a championship offense needs. I also think there would be more to the trade than just 2 for gonzo

Link to comment
Share on other sites

if we did this then that would mean we are getting a player to get us "over the top" (on offense anyway) i beleive tony only has a handful of years left but he would definitely get us over the top. ohh yea and a lilttle more bulk on OL wouldn't hurt either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

if we did this then that would mean we are getting a player to get us "over the top" (on offense anyway) i beleive tony only has a handful of years left but he would definitely get us over the top. ohh yea and a lilttle more bulk on OL wouldn't hurt either.

I believe he is a supllemental fit that TD referes to with FA and we will darft a TE for the future. We have to have a better passing attack from the TE. If we don't then the teams we will play on the road (Dallas, NE, NYG, and NYJ) will have very good D's and we can't afford to go in their like that. Remember, we played the NFC North and AFC West in 2008. They are no where close to the NFC East and AFC East. Plus we also have San Fran (West coast game) on the road and Chicago again.

Now is he worth a 2nd, doubtfull, but if they want to spend that on him, then I trust TD. Also, WRT Mularkey and the use of a TE, Pittspurgh never had a good tight end until Heap, and he is no Gonzo, not eve comparable. Alge is not close to this guys performance level. Plus his charecter and leadership coupled with his community service would add to the image of the organization.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Correct me if I am wrong... but did we lose the playoff game because of the TE play?

As a matter of fact how many loses did we have last year where the TE was the problem?

I don't recall many.... from my recollection it was the defense that was the problem.

If we make this trade and DON'T significantly upgrade the defense then this trade isn't going to make that much of a difference.

This would be a great idea fantasy football wise....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would be fine with a 3rd rounder. I think he has more left in the tank than people think. He is not a speed guy so the age doesn't concern me in that department. I think he as 3 or 4 years left easily. When he come here he will not be thrown to every down like in KC so his legs will be fresh and maybe he can last even longer. He would complete our offense like many say. And we could be in the SB in 3 years easy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A 2nd rounder is way too much for a guy on the wrong side of 30. Even a 3rd is really a stretch. The help would be good, but I think a 2nd rounder would be more helpful. Maybe a 4th and a 6th or something. He is 33, how many more years is he actually going to be productive?

.....but this guy is a BREAST.... :P

Tony G's Stats....Better than I thought

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Falcons Interested In Trading For Gonzalez

The Atlanta Falcons are “seriously considering” trading for veteran Pro Bowl tight end Tony Gonzalez, according to our own Michael Lombardi of the National Football Post.

Lombardi reports that the Falcons may be willing to give up their second round draft pick (#55 overall) in order to obtain the services of Gonzalez.

The move makes sense as Justin Peelle, the Falcons top tight end target from 2008, caught only 15 passes for 159 yards and 2 touchdowns in 16 games last season.

Meanwhile, Gonzalez is coming off another Pro Bowl season in which he hauled in 96 receptions for 1,058 yards and 10 touchdowns.

More on this story as it develops.

Theirs no doubt that Gonzales would would make the offence more productive in the running game and in the passing game, and if we could get three or four years out of him what more could you want.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Falcons Interested In Trading For Gonzalez

The Atlanta Falcons are “seriously considering” trading for veteran Pro Bowl tight end Tony Gonzalez, according to our own Michael Lombardi of the National Football Post.

Lombardi reports that the Falcons may be willing to give up their second round draft pick (#55 overall) in order to obtain the services of Gonzalez.

The move makes sense as Justin Peelle, the Falcons top tight end target from 2008, caught only 15 passes for 159 yards and 2 touchdowns in 16 games last season.

Meanwhile, Gonzalez is coming off another Pro Bowl season in which he hauled in 96 receptions for 1,058 yards and 10 touchdowns.

More on this story as it develops.

Theirs no doubt that Gonzales would would make the offence more productive in the running game and in the passing game, and if we could get three or four years out of him what more could you want.

The main problem I have is the 10.25 million dollar cap hit over the next 2 years and then Gonzalez does not have a contract and we would either have to resign him or someone else or draft one and start all over again in that positioin. 10.25 million for a 2 year "Quick Fix". Quick Fixes are what got the Falcons in trouble before in the past, the team last year began a long term youth movement which should continue. I am not in it for just tomorrow, but the next week and following weeks as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The main problem I have is the 10.25 million dollar cap hit over the next 2 years and then Gonzalez does not have a contract and we would either have to resign him or someone else or draft one and start all over again in that positioin. 10.25 million for a 2 year "Quick Fix". Quick Fixes are what got the Falcons in trouble before in the past, the team last year began a long term youth movement which should continue. I am not in it for just tomorrow, but the next week and following weeks as well.

Bruce, I didn't know that his cap was 10M till you pointed it out earlier. I would hope it would be a sign and trade. Remember, if we cut Vick this year, his CAP hit will be large too... the good news is we have most of our guys under contract that we want to keep so there is room under the cap. The Rookie pool will be allocated and they are aware of that too. I know 10M is a lot for this guy, but he is a beast and is clutch. It's a tough call and I have faith in TD to do the right thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bruce, I didn't know that his cap was 10M till you pointed it out earlier. I would hope it would be a sign and trade. Remember, if we cut Vick this year, his CAP hit will be large too... the good news is we have most of our guys under contract that we want to keep so there is room under the cap. The Rookie pool will be allocated and they are aware of that too. I know 10M is a lot for this guy, but he is a beast and is clutch. It's a tough call and I have faith in TD to do the right thing.

Despite all the negative "Don't Trade For Gonzalez" posts I actually would be intrigued to see him in Atlanta, but for his cost and how Mularkey uses TEs he wouldn't a good fit here. We could go cheaper and younger in that position and groom him for the long term to fit the system in place. Really I see the "Pros" but I also see the "Cons" in the deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Despite all the negative "Don't Trade For Gonzalez" posts I actually would be intrigued to see him in Atlanta, but for his cost and how Mularkey uses TEs he wouldn't a good fit here. We could go cheaper and younger in that position and groom him for the long term to fit the system in place. Really I see the "Pros" but I also see the "Cons" in the deal.

Im with you on that, I just started the post mainly because of our brutal schedule next year, especially on the road. I think we can agree that we need production, more importantly, a TE that has to be accounted for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...