Jump to content

Dan Quinn Says The Falcons “Nailed It” In Free Agency


JG2008
 Share

Recommended Posts

Dan Quinn says the Falcons nailed it in free agency

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/04/12/dan-quinn-says-the-falcons-nailed-it-in-free-agency/

The Falcons opened free agency with two quick signings of linebackers, Brooks Reed and Justin Durant. In more than a month since then, Atlanta has done little else, signing only low-cost players from the bargain bin.

But Falcons coach Dan Quinn says that the depth the Falcons have added in free agency players including tackle Michael Person, tight end Jacob Tamme, defensive end Adrian Clayborn and linebacker OBrien Schofield is exactly what the team needed.

The free agency part is an important to continue to add overall guys to our team, Quinn said, via the Atlanta Journal-Constitution. It was collectively guys we could add to the club. . . . What we were really trying to say is can we add speed. Can we add toughness in terms of adding to the team that we already had. That was the real factor going into it. How many more guys can we add and it was our job as coaches, how would these guys fit on our team? I thought in that way, we nailed it.

The Falcons had enough cap space that they could have made a big splash with a big-name signing, but they chose to go in another direction. That approach doesnt generate a lot of headlines, but its a strategic approach that the Falcons think will pay off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 89
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

We still are in need of...

Starting Talent

- LG

- FS

- ILB

- RB

- TE

- LEO

Depth

- WR

- CB

- OT

- OG

RB can be had in the draft, or on our own roster...and people keep bringing up safety like we have to have all stars at the position...we have Ish, Moore, Godfrey, Southward, and Sean Baker who are all solid or shown flashes.

I agree with Leo, TE, ILB, LG though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

well no ****, u want him to say we missed out on a bunch of guys? We definitely didn't get a safety we wanted, we lost at least 2 to other teams for starters.

I can't stand this response...the "what else is he supposed to say"

People that are good with words know how to address likes and dislikes without being fake.

If he didn't like free agency he could have easily said

"I'm happy with the guys that we got in free agency but we still have more work to do and we look towards the draft and beyond to finish the player addition of the offseason period."

He doesn't have to say we nailed it to actually like it. I would think if he used a powerful phrase of success like "nailed it" then he actually means it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can't make firm monetary offers to players, only to lose out on them, and then claim to have 'nailed it'. Obviously, that isn't the case, or those players would be on the team. I appreciate the enthusiasm, but factually, it isn't true.

"Factually?"

What insider info do you have to understand what the team wanted and didn't want out of free agency?

Making an offer to a player and not getting that player doesn't mean you failed your offseason when you don't know the conditions of a failed or successful free agency.

If it's failed in YOUR eyes, then that makes sense. But until you can tell me what Quinn and the rest was thinking, then we can probably avoid using the word "factual."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Factually?"

What insider info do you have to understand what the team wanted and didn't want out of free agency?

Making an offer to a player and not getting that player doesn't mean you failed your offseason when you don't know the conditions of a failed or successful free agency.

If it's failed in YOUR eyes, then that makes sense. But until you can tell me what Quinn and the rest was thinking, then we can probably avoid using the word "factual."

It's common knowledge the team made offers to players they didn't secure. Are you suggesting they offered millions to guys they didn't want?

Secondly, if you're going to talk facts, the fact is, I never used the term failure in my post.

My suggestion: Improve you reading comprehension skills, and worry less about trying to take shots at people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Factually?"

What insider info do you have to understand what the team wanted and didn't want out of free agency?

Making an offer to a player and not getting that player doesn't mean you failed your offseason when you don't know the conditions of a failed or successful free agency.

If it's failed in YOUR eyes, then that makes sense. But until you can tell me what Quinn and the rest was thinking, then we can probably avoid using the word "factual."

I mean, you could make the argument we still got Schofield so losing out on Morgan wasn't a big deal (don't buy that), but we made an offer to Ron Parker and didn't get him either. So we went out wanting a safety and didn't get one period. That means, factually, we didn't meet a need we set out to fill. I don't think he phrased it wrongly at all. We need a great draft and offseason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's common knowledge the team made offers to players they didn't secure. Are you suggesting they offered millions to guys they didn't want?

Secondly, if you're going to talk facts, the fact is, I never used the term failure in my post.

My suggestion: Improve you reading comprehension skills, and worry less about trying to take shots at people.

Let's talk about reading comprehension.

I used the word "If" meaning possible, not surety. So it doesn't matter if you used the word failure or not.

In the other statement a general understanding of the opposite of success is failure. Once again this is a general understanding and I used a general statement.

Not at any point did I say you called the offseason a failure. Read it again if you like.

At any rate, once again making offers and not getting that player is not contigent on a "nailed" free agency. I also never said that it didn't mean that they didn't want them, just that it wasn't contigent on having a "nailed" free agency.

To Quinn a "nailed" free agency could have been getting 2 of the 6 or 7 players we got in free agency.

The simple fact that you nor I understand what his definition of nailed is would lead to your statement not being factual but opinionated.

The funny thing is I agree with "you" (that's a shot, not my initial post) OPINION that the offseason wasn't nailed but in my eyes.

I would and could never call him essentially a liar based on his personal idea of a "nailed" free agency.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I mean, you could make the argument we still got Schofield so losing out on Morgan wasn't a big deal (don't buy that), but we made an offer to Ron Parker and didn't get him either. So we went out wanting a safety and didn't get one period. That means, factually, we didn't meet a need we set out to fill. I don't think he phrased it wrongly at all. We need a great draft and offseason.

What is a nailed free agency to Quinn?

There's not many on this board, if any, who can answer that question.

Nailed to Quinn could mean Durant and Reed. Anything else above them two is bonus. So getting Parker could have been considered a bonus, not a necessity based on Quinn's idea of nailed.

Mine, yours, or thanat0s could or will be different.

Losing out on players doesn't constitute an "un-nailed" free agency, especially when I don't know the idea of nailed to Quinn.

Edited by ATLFalcons11
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I mean, you could make the argument we still got Schofield so losing out on Morgan wasn't a big deal (don't buy that), but we made an offer to Ron Parker and didn't get him either. So we went out wanting a safety and didn't get one period. That means, factually, we didn't meet a need we set out to fill. I don't think he phrased it wrongly at all. We need a great draft and offseason.

We could have wanted Parker for CB. He plays both.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We still are in need of...

Starting Talent

- LG-Brandon Schreff,AJ Cann,Cedric Ogbehui,Ali Marpet

- FS-We're good

- ILB-I Wouldnt worry to much about ILB. I think Worrilow,Bartu,and Durant can get the job done. I wouldn't oppose to selecting a guy like Shaq Thompson in the 2nd who is a hybrid LB/S

- RB-We're good I think Freeman is our guy but at least pick up 1 mid rounder. Like Jones from UF

- TE-We're good got 2 valuable stop gap players and 1 youngster

- LEO-Definitely gotta address whether it be in the 1st with Beasley or Dupree or possibly in other rounds with Iggy,Golden,Harold,etc.

Depth

- WR-Deinitely need to get someone to groom behind RW

- CB-Need to get a CB that fits Quinn's scheme doesn't gotta be our 1st or 2nd rounder just gotta get some solid depth

- OT-Meh we don't desperately need it, but a combo G/T like Ogbehui/Mason wouldn't hurt

- OG- read above

Just my take on it^

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't stand this response...the "what else is he supposed to say"

People that are good with words know how to address likes and dislikes without being fake.

If he didn't like free agency he could have easily said

"I'm happy with the guys that we got in free agency but we still have more work to do and we look towards the draft and beyond to finish the player addition of the offseason period."

He doesn't have to say we nailed it to actually like it. I would think if he used a powerful phrase of success like "nailed it" then he actually means it.

Quinn may be perfectly happy with his pick-ups and think he nailed it but I don't think it is unreasonable to see a little hyperbole given that we courted some guys we didn't get (or keep). Maybe his definition is that he filled the positions he wanted to address and was not necessarily speaking to whether we have a winning cast.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quinn may be perfectly happy with his pick-ups and think he nailed it but I don't think it is unreasonable to see a little hyperbole given that we courted some guys we didn't get (or keep). Maybe his definition is that he filled the positions he wanted to address and was not necessarily speaking to whether we have a winning cast.

I absolutely agree with you 100%. I am very long winded so I say things longer when it could be shorter.

I don't personally see the offseason as nailed. Some of that is missing on players and some is not ever going after some players as well (from what I know).

But Quinn's idea of nailed is absolutely different from mine so saying this isn't factually true would be false.

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...