Jump to content

Message to everyone on board..read with open mind


Guest atl.falcon4ever
 Share

Recommended Posts

Guest atl.falcon4ever

I posted this at the end of my last post. "Instead of giving Turner aid, replace him Replace Turner with an every down back"

WOW...I make a post just to explore the possibilities of this happening and it turns into a pissing contest with no real valuable input. Nothing I asked was really addressed. I like Michael Turner and is one of my favorite players currently on the team. But I am a Falcons fan, not a Turner fan. So to me anyone is dispensable if it makes us a better team. My goal is for us to have a team that can win the Super Bowl. To me that means nothing is un debatable are too taboo for discussion. So no I do not hate Turner. No I am not sold on getting rid of Turner. Thats were you guys come in and make a good argument on why we should keep him, or why we should not.

We are all Falcon fans. Yet we rip each other to shreds for trying force our opinion rather than have an intelligent debate.

My reasons for bringing this debate and questions many of you still do not address in my original post. I fear Michael Turner is on Shauwn Alexander's pace of us sucking his tank dry. Before that happens get something out of him if thats the case. If I am wrong them explain to me why I am as an adult. Turner is so good at what he does, he makes us rely on him too much, making us one dimensional. Whether he is used up or not, we are making sure he will be used up sooner than later. If Turners goes from rushing title like Shauwn Alexander did to nothing in one season, you will wonder why, just like Seattle did with Alexander. The only way to change history is to learn from it. If you do not you will repeat it. And I am not saying lets debate Michael Turner v/s Alexander or anyone else? Just stating you can go from top to bottom in the matter of a few games in this league.

No way we should get rid of Matt Ryan. But if someone wants to debate that, it o.k. I can get my point across without getting into a pissing contest. The offense needs to stop relying on Turner so much and open up there passing game. What is the point of having a great quarterback, and not do this? Anyone can hand off the ball, and make a short pass here and there. We do not need Matt Ryan to do that. But I think Matt Ryan is capable of more. If we replaced Turner and got high compensation, we could go get a good back in the draft along with a good scat back in the draft and still address the other needs in the draft. We could also acquire a scat back in the trade with picks for Turner and go for a power back or keep Snelling and see what he can do with someone helping him carry the load. Turner is not the same back he once was. Every year from here he will continue to wear out until nothing is left for him to give. So do we ride the horse to the end, or go get another couple horses that together can do the same thing and help open up the passing game?

Some say wait until the next to last year on his contract and then get something for him. Guess what, Turner will not last that long, and if he does we will never get anything worth much for him when the time comes. Teams get ahead and stay ahead by looking at the future as well as the now. Kinda like a good pool player is always thinking 3 or more shots ahead. You have to set yourself up for longevity. And sometimes that means parting with players before they expire rather than after they expire.

Michael Turner is getting older. And every year he gets older, his injury risk increases. Not to mention the load he has to carry. We have abused Turner like a crackhead on crack. He is almost broken. Trade him and maybe we get good compensation and are better in the long run.

We need two versatile backs. Both have to be equally a threat in the passing game and running game. That way no matter what package you run the defense is guessing at best. Having Michael Turner is like a crutch the offense uses. Its time to let the crutch go and see what Matt Ryan and company can really do. We need to evolve the running and passing philosophy of our offense are we will not succeed. You either change with the times are you are left out in the cold.

And then again I could be totally wrong. But if I am wrong it is not because I hate anyone on this board or team. But I am wrong for trying to think of every possible way to make this team better so we can win a Super Bowl. And thats one thing we all have in common.

Please read with an open mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that we need another RB. I'd love to get a 2nd rounder. RBs fall off hard when they fall. Turner is a back that has had the most carries two year in the past three. Its a real possibility.

I don't want to have Turner fall off the cliff and us not have another answer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd like to know why you think his tank is running dry.

That is just nonsense. It would not be a great move on our part to get rid of the foundation of our team.

I'd like to know why so many people are so misinformed that we have this stellar passing attack, because if you take Michael Turner out of the equation, I will assure you that passing numbers will most likely go down.

I hate seeing topics like this, they never make any sense. I'm glad our front office is smart enough to know what a huge mistake it would be to get rid of Michael Turner.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Falcons fans please raise your hand if you've seen 5 screens "succeed" since '08? Even with Snelling and his great hands he's, just usually the safety valve on most passing plays.

I'd love to have another dynamic back but if Mularkey doesn't call plays that are made for the RB to make plays in space, it doesn't really matter.

Mularkey would run our speedster Norwood up between the tackles when he should have been used on screens way more than he was.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest atl.falcon4ever

I'd like to know why you think his tank is running dry.

That is just nonsense. It would not be a great move on our part to get rid of the foundation of our team.

I'd like to know why so many people are so misinformed that we have this stellar passing attack, because if you take Michael Turner out of the equation, I will assure you that passing numbers will most likely go down.

I hate seeing topics like this, they never make any sense. I'm glad our front office is smart enough to know what a huge mistake it would be to get rid of Michael Turner.

Thats one of the main problems with the team. Turner should not be the foundation are part of the team or offense, foundation wise. Running backs have short shelf lives due to the position. And we are burning Turner faster than he can recover. Just like Seattle did to Alexander.

Matt Ryan is the foundation. Then you put the pieces around him and give him an opportunity to become great. That includes putting a defense that compliments how he runs the offense. Matt Ryan is the foundation, as every starting Q.B. for a team should be. Everyone else is just a pone to help him excel and take us to a Super Bowl victory. Look at most successful teams and you will be able to see this.

You hate seeing topics like this, why? I love topics, whether they are wrong or right to open my mind up to other possibilities. So I do not think so much one way (single minded). Sorry but I do not get what you want in a message board. Perhaps a fairy tale were everyone see's it your way and your post are the best. ANd you are the only one right.

I may be wrong, never said I was right. I am just simply exploring the idea of if we went that route what events would take place. If you read my post more carefully you would understand and appreciate that.

No topic is off limits are too taboo. We should all feel like this and if we have an idea, whether its stupid or not, it may lay the doorway to someone having a great idea. Debates can be helpful if you utilize them that way.

Are debates can be harmful if you do not have an open mind.

If I am just so far off in Wonderland, debate me with some decent reasoning and be done with it. All you can do is share your 2 cents and hope you got your point across. Never will everyone agree on anything completely, all the way down to the front office. They all have there ideas. They listen to each other then the owner or G.M. has to sort out all their points and decide which ones are good and bad and go from there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exploder, speculation runs rampant that Turners tank is running dry because he is being severely overworked. This is his second season out of 3 where he has had 300+ carries. He didn't reach the 300 carry plateau last year because of injury. However, I invite you to look at the league leaders in rushing here: http://www.nfl.com/stats/player?seasonId=2010&seasonType=REG&Submit=Go

The top 5 rushers in the league in this order are: Arian Foster, Jamaal Charles, Michael Turner, Chris Johnson, and Maurice Jones-Drew. The biggest difference in these 4 backs and Michael Turner are not yards per carry, or yards total. They are actually the one thing everyone wants in a running back here: receptions. Michael Turner had only 12 receptions on the year. These same runningbacks had more receptions THIS YEAR ALONE than Turner has had his entire time here in Atlanta.

The lack of Turner being a receiving threat severely cripples this team. Everyone knows that Turner cannot catch the ball out of the backfield and make plays and this does two things that hurt our offense:

1.) Turner isn't a receiving options so this frees up a defender who would normally be assigned to the RB, to provide double coverage on Tony or Roddy. If we had a back who could potentially be a game changer in the receiving game, Roddy or Tony could not possibly be double covered at all times.

2.) With Turner being a run only threat, secondaries are able to play closer to the LOS. When all 11 guys are within 10 yards of the LOS, it allows them to stop the run easier, or in most cases, blitz Ryan and force him into short throws to his #1 and #2 reads (Roddy/Tony). The Falcons, I believe were the heaviest blitzed team this year. If we had a RB capable of slipping past the blitz and catching a screen pass, defenses could no longer play so close to the LOS in fear of giving up a huge play. This would spread the field as a defender would have to account for the runningback. It would open the slot across the middle, it would allow us to even call some running plays out of single back formations because they wouldn't know if we were running or passing.

-----------------------------------------

Now I said all of that, to give my input on this whole subject of Trading Turner. I do not believe it benefits us because nobody wants a run only RB in the league anymore. Almost every single starting RB has the ability to catch passes out of the backfield and make plays. Even Steven Jackson had 46 receptions this year. Our ONLY shot at getting a dual threat running back will be through the draft. I do not want a Noel Devine, or a Locke. I want a runningback who is big enough to be able to handle the load of an every down back. I think our best shot at that would be Murray. He's of the same mold as Darren McFadden, just not AS fast. He is quick, he's 6'1", and he can receive out of the backfield. Unfortunately, I don't think he will be there when we pick at #27, so we will have to trade up to get him. I just don't know this team has the pieces that another team would want and that we are willing to part with to make that jump.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not a huge Michael Turner fan. He might average 4.1 yards a carry but he has an awful lot of 1 or 2 yard gains before he rips off a big one sometime in the 4th quarter. I'd love to see a little more consistency earlier in the game from the RB position. I'd love to have a RB that is dangerous in the passing game as well in the run game. And omg I would love to see us run a few successful screen plays.

Our offense is lacking by not having a RB who can accomplish a dual purpose. Now I don't hate Turner at all. Heck I have a signed picture and helmet from him in my Falcons room. But I think he make our offense more predictable which is not a good thing. Having more options out of the backfield just makes us that much more dangerous.

Solution is to either sign/draft a scat back or trade him and pick up a different feature back. I think the Falcons go the scat back route though. Bottom line is Turner did put up 1300 yards and you aren't going to get that everyday.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I specifically said that I hate seeing topics like this, because they never make any sense.

I'm sure everybody wants Matt Ryan to hurry up and become the next Peyton Manning or Tom Brady and be the focal point of this team's offense, but that's not going to happen right now.

I understand the desire to want a RB that is capable of producing more highlight footage, but just because Michael Turner doesn't do that, it doesn't mean his tank is running dry.

Michael Turner is about to be 29 years old, which is old for a RB; however, he's only got 3 starting seasons under his belt and he hasn't showed anybody outside of this message board that he is "slowing down".

I'm all for grabbing a nice RB to diversify our team, but it's gonna' be tough to replace Michael Turner in our offense... Good RB's are not that easy to find, despite what most people think.

Edited by Master Exploder
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I specifically said that I hate seeing topics like this, because they never make any sense.

I'm sure everybody wants Matt Ryan to hurry up and become the next Peyton Manning or Tom Brady and be the focal point of this team's offense, but that's not going to happen right now.

I understand the desire to want a RB that is capable of producing more highlight footage, but just because Michael Turner doesn't do that, it doesn't mean his tank is running dry.

Michael Turner is about to be 29 years old, which is old for a RB; however, he's only got 3 starting seasons under his belt and he hasn't showed anybody outside of this message board that he is "slowing down".

I'm all for grabbing a nice RB to diversify our team, but it's gonna' be tough to replace Michael Turner in our offense... Good RB's are not that easy to find, despite what most people think.

Well, let's flip the script then. In your opinion, what would this team need to address on the offensive side of the ball to get to the next level?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest atl.falcon4ever

I'm not a huge Michael Turner fan. He might average 4.1 yards a carry but he has an awful lot of 1 or 2 yard gains before he rips off a big one sometime in the 4th quarter. I'd love to see a little more consistency earlier in the game from the RB position. I'd love to have a RB that is dangerous in the passing game as well in the run game. And omg I would love to see us run a few successful screen plays.

Our offense is lacking by not having a RB who can accomplish a dual purpose. Now I don't hate Turner at all. Heck I have a signed picture and helmet from him in my Falcons room. But I think he make our offense more predictable which is not a good thing. Having more options out of the backfield just makes us that much more dangerous.

Solution is to either sign/draft a scat back or trade him and pick up a different feature back. I think the Falcons go the scat back route though. Bottom line is Turner did put up 1300 yards and you aren't going to get that everyday.

Good point......Turner is good for us in so many ways we try not to see why he is bad for us. He is like McDonald's, it taste good and serves its purpose of filling us up and making us content. But at the same time he is crippling us and hurting us in the long run from the toxins and all the bad stuff that he turns us into, being one dimensional, more predictable.

You have to take the good of having him with the bad and see were your options are best suited.

Anyone who can not see that any human being except Superman or Jesus who is used as much as Turner will sooner than later just burn out. Are we that bad of a team that we have to give him the ball that much on all other fronts of the offense? We have to have guys who can do all. The running back position is evolving and we are stuck, and not evolving at this position with the rest of the N.F.L. We either evolve are get left out in the cold, simple as that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest atl.falcon4ever

Our first flaw is being a run first offense. Why would you tell everyone you are a run first or pass first offense. We should learn to use both the run and pass equally as good. Saying you are a run first or past first offense just makes you that much more predictable.

Just like being a 4-3 defense. We should try to be a hybrid 4-3 and 3-4 defense. Mike Smith is an excellent 4-3 defensive coordinator. He needs an 3-4 coordinator to put his ideas with.

I mean just think about it. Saying you are any kind of team are labeling your team, offense or defense one way or another makes you predictable at best. But being good at it all makes you impossible to plan for. If one way is not working, we should be able to differ from game plan and be just as successful at doing more than just one thing good on offense or defense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, let's flip the script then. In your opinion, what would this team need to address on the offensive side of the ball to get to the next level?

Wide Receiver. Hands down, we need another guy across from Roddy White. We don't need a completely new RB. Despite what some are saying, I am a firm believer that Michael Turner still has gas left in the tank and the only thing that I would consider would be possibly adding a young gun to spell Turner and Snelling a few times a game.

Our first flaw is being a run first offense. Why would you tell everyone you are a run first or pass first offense. We should learn to use both the run and pass equally as good. Saying you are a run first or past first offense just makes you that much more predictable.

Just like being a 4-3 defense. We should try to be a hybrid 4-3 and 3-4 defense. Mike Smith is an excellent 4-3 defensive coordinator. He needs an 3-4 coordinator to put his ideas with.

I mean just think about it. Saying you are any kind of team are labeling your team, offense or defense one way or another makes you predictable at best. But being good at it all makes you impossible to plan for. If one way is not working, we should be able to differ from game plan and be just as successful at doing more than just one thing good on offense or defense.

Why should we try to be a hybrid 4-3/3-4 defense? I understand the versatility, but then we are going to have to add specific personnel to our defense just to do that. Why not spend our resources in bringing in personnel that already fit our scheme?

And we can certainly become more versatile WITHOUT losing Michael Turner. Like I said to USAF Hart, I believe our biggest need on offense is the lack of another receiver to put pressure onto defenses. We can spend our resources on a good receiver to align up opposite of Roddy White and still have an effective running game with Michael Turner. There is no reason we should compromise the talent that he brings to our offense, because the odds are we're all going to be complaining about the lack of a run game in 2 years if we were to ditch him now.

Just as I said earlier, good RB's are not easy to find in this league. I don't understand any suggestion of abandoning ours when they have not shown any signs of slowing down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest atl.falcon4ever

I agree that we need another RB. I'd love to get a 2nd rounder. RBs fall off hard when they fall. Turner is a back that has had the most carries two year in the past three. Its a real possibility.

I don't want to have Turner fall off the cliff and us not have another answer.

I watched the video. Really a great video. At times I felt so young in the video. And at times I felt so old to have actually remembered some of these events rather than just hearing about them. Nothing is for certain in life. Do we keep or trade a player Who knows, you just have to make the best judgement you can with what your heart and life brings your way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wide Receiver. Hands down, we need another guy across from Roddy White. We don't need a completely new RB. Despite what some are saying, I am a firm believer that Michael Turner still has gas left in the tank and the only thing that I would consider would be possibly adding a young gun to spell Turner and Snelling a few times a game.

Alright, I can agree that having another receiver weapon would be good to have. However, I go back to one of my previous points in my long post. If teams are housing all 11 defenders within 10 yards of the LOS and blitzing, it is still only going to give Matt Ryan an incredibly small window of time to get a pass off. This means he will only have time to look to his first/second options and those are Roddy and Tony. This is why I feel that getting a RB who can catch out of the backfield and make plays out of the backfield so paramount. wouldn't you agree?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alright, I can agree that having another receiver weapon would be good to have. However, I go back to one of my previous points in my long post. If teams are housing all 11 defenders within 10 yards of the LOS and blitzing, it is still only going to give Matt Ryan an incredibly small window of time to get a pass off. This means he will only have time to look to his first/second options and those are Roddy and Tony. This is why I feel that getting a RB who can catch out of the backfield and make plays out of the backfield so paramount. wouldn't you agree?

But we don't have to abandon Michael Turner to obtain a receiving threat out of the backfield.

Heck, if we added another receiver that would take more pressure off of Roddy and Tony that we wouldn't need to look at dumping it off to a RB as much.

Regardless though, there is no reason why we would have to replace Michael Turner to achieve any type of versatility with our offense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd like to know why you think his tank is running dry.

That is just nonsense. It would not be a great move on our part to get rid of the foundation of our team.

I'd like to know why so many people are so misinformed that we have this stellar passing attack, because if you take Michael Turner out of the equation, I will assure you that passing numbers will most likely go down.

I hate seeing topics like this, they never make any sense. I'm glad our front office is smart enough to know what a huge mistake it would be to get rid of Michael Turner.

1. If you watch Turner, do you see the quick burst from him that we saw in 08? I'm not seeing it. He's struggled with weight issues since 08 as well, not a good sign there either. Can he still play? Sure, but for how much longer is the question. If he has 2 good/decent years left in him, then he has some trade value and maybe take advantage of that right now.

2. The passing game would struggle without Turner. Not sure I would agree there either. It all depends on how we replace him. Do we get a big time receiver and another slot guy and transition to a Colts or Mike Martz type offense with a back who can both run & catch? Or do we replace him with another back who can pound and make defenses respect the run (maybe a Mikel Leshoure).

Not saying we should or should not make the move, but it's definitely a topic worthy of debate at this point of the offseason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd like to know why you think his tank is running dry.

That is just nonsense. It would not be a great move on our part to get rid of the foundation of our team.

I'd like to know why so many people are so misinformed that we have this stellar passing attack, because if you take Michael Turner out of the equation, I will assure you that passing numbers will most likely go down.

I hate seeing topics like this, they never make any sense. I'm glad our front office is smart enough to know what a huge mistake it would be to get rid of Michael Turner.

Why doesn't it make any sense? Because you don't agree with it? Dude don't bash people just because you don't agree with their point! Do you remember anything Edgerrin James did of note after leaving Indy?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just a couple thoughts. Everyone likes our workhorse Turner. He's a helluva ballplayer. Nobody can dispute the value he brings to our offense. Just like nobody can dispute that his lack of hands hinders our playcalling and production.

The point is not whether or not you like turner. The problem lies in how teams defend our offense. With a dual-threat back, a defense cannot assume you will not realease a RB into a route or a screen pass. With Atlanta, one can make that assumption on all but 12 occassions this year. And even when we did throw to Turner, it normally did not sting the opposing team too much.

Before you take the above statement and run with it, listen to this as well. By grabbing a scat back to use like we used Norwood, you can still make the same sort of argument. The simple fact that a scat back enters the game eliminates your element of surprise. The fact that your scat back has entered a game suggests to the defense that a pass to that RB is a distinct possibility. This compounds itself when its 3rd down.

Clearly, a dual-threat RB with good speed and size has clear advantages on all downs. He can catch and run and block with equal consistency. It also opens things up for a no huddle approach w/out interruptions of subbing RBs in and out for certain play packages.

I am not married to anyone on the team. However, the QB position is one that you cannot gamble with once you have been fortunate enough to find a smart, talented one.

I am not suggesting we go one way or the other here. Just thinking things through gentlemen. Now go ahead and get back to the battle of the boards...wink.gif

Edited by HASHBROWN3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest atl.falcon4ever

Just a couple thoughts. Everyone likes our workhorse Turner. He's a helluva ballplayer. Nobody can dispute the value he brings to our offense. Just like nobody can dispute that his lack of hands hinders our playcalling and production.

The point is not whether or not you like turner. The problem lies in how teams defend our offense. With a dual-threat back, a defense cannot assume you will not realease a RB into a route or a screen pass. With Atlanta, one can make that assumption on all but 12 occassions this year. And even when we did throw to Turner, it normally did not sting the opposing team too much.

Before you take the above statement and run with it, listen to this as well. By grabbing a scat back to use like we used Norwood, you can still make the same sort of argument. The simple fact that a scat back enters the game eliminates your element of surprise. The fact that your scat back has entered a game suggests to the defense that a pass to that RB is a distinct possibility. This compounds itself when its 3rd down.

Clearly, a dual-threat RB with good speed and size has clear advantages on all downs. He can catch and run and block with equal consistency. It also opens things up for a no huddle approach w/out interruptions of subbing RBs in and out for certain play packages.

I am not married to anyone on the team. However, the QB position is one that you cannot gamble with once you have been fortunate enough to find a smart, talented one.

I am not suggesting we go one way or the other here. Just thinking things through gentlemen. Now go ahead and get back to the battle of the boards...wink.gif

Could not have said it any better. great post B)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest atl.falcon4ever

Are you not proud of your 5-pager? :mellow:

"Instead of giving Turner aid, replace him Replace Turner with an every down back"

Yes I am proud of it. I got good feed back on it and got to look at the pros and cons of Turners future and the team, with or without him. That was the purpose of my post so yes I am proud. :D

But you must not be so proud :(

Well then no one forced you to read it are comment on it. It must have got your attention either way for you to comment on it. So either way I will take that as a compliment :P

I am here to make no enemies but express my thoughts and hopes for the Atlanta Falcons. With that thanks for reading, posting, etc.

Just wish you could contribute something positive but thats your choice not mine. B)

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...