Jump to content

Dan Quinn: Falcons Still Talking To Joe Barksdale


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 136
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Wasting money on minimal 1 yr contracts... Lol wut??

Every bit counts.

But who knows how much competition is enough? Or if our veterans are truly healthy?

Well yeah, health is always a factor. I guess I'm operating on the assumption everybody will be ready to go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fwiw, I tend to agree with you. I'm just glad we are trying to address the issue.

I'm not complaining about our activity, no doubt. I guess I just don't see OT as a position dire enough to warrant throwing all these bodies at the wall. Lots of other positions we could be doing this with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah but there's a line between getting more competition and then just wasting money. We already have a ton of OT's on the roster, is Barksdale that good to actually make a difference?

Here's the thing and let's just be honest. We have a LOT of suck players on this team right now. They may have been poorly coached, but after a while of that, its hard to coach suck out of a player. When you have a team full of suck, you have to sometimes balance that by getting guys to compete with them. Just to see if something happens or if you see something else. Some guys may even have sucked in one position and can be moved to another. How can you know for sure if you don't have anyone to put at that previous position?

Baker is hurt. By all accounts Matthews is hurt. The rest? Suck and don't have back-ups. This isn't the old regime where we have enough cross trained guys and think its a good idea to put Levine there in the case of emergency. We are getting players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's the thing and let's just be honest. We have a LOT of suck players on this team right now. They may have been poorly coached, but after a while of that, its hard to coach suck out of a player. When you have a team full of suck, you have to sometimes balance that by getting guys to compete with them. Just to see if something happens or if you see something else. Some guys may even have sucked in one position and can be moved to another. How can you know for sure if you don't have anyone to put at that previous position?

Baker is hurt. By all accounts Matthews is hurt. The rest? Suck and don't have back-ups. This isn't the old regime where we have enough cross trained guys and think its a good idea to put Levine there in the case of emergency. We are getting players.

Asamoah doesn't suck, but your point is well taken anyway. Thinking of o-linemen I like -- Hawley is hurt, Stone is an UFDA in his 2nd season, Matthews is hurt. Baker is meh when he's not hurt, so I wouldn't say he sucks. Holmes has flashed but for the most part has sucked. Konz has sucked. The rest just aren't anything to write home about at all.

Perhaps competition will help. Really, that's a good enough reason (thread jumping here) to get Irvin. At least if the line sucks, it will be immediately apparent in OTAs. They already have their work cut out for them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The coaches saw Holmes and Schraeder in practice, drafted an OT, signed one, and want to bring another in.

That should tell you everything you need to know about how the coaches feel about Holmes and Schraeder.

i know for a fact that coaches don't decide anything on DL and OL in no pads. So no the helmets and shorts practices had nothing to do with how they feel about the oline
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The coaches saw Holmes and Schraeder in practice, drafted an OT, signed one, and want to bring another in.

That should tell you everything you need to know about how the coaches feel about Holmes and Schraeder.

Lol, Person is barely depth and Rodgers was a 7th round pick. That tells me they weren't worried about it at all, just our depth. Schraeder is great. He came in an incredibly raw UDFA, had a decent if unspectacular rookie year, and made huge strides his 2nd year. He's mean, he's quick, he's big. He's ideal for a fast paced offense and I seriously don't get the people knocking him. Based on performance, he was our best lineman not named Asamoah last year. Matthews played hurt too much, Hawley got injured, Stone was decent at best, Konz is a dumpster fire, I don't trust Baker at all. Holmes either, maybe he improved last year but I'm not sold. Schraeder is solid with the ability to be great.

All my opinion obviously, but I think people forget he didn't play HS football at all and only played 3 years of college football. The dude is a freak.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They watched film too.

The Holmes apologists are ridiculous. "OMG why are we signing more OTs? My beloved player who has gotten Matt Ryan killed the last 2 years is in danger!"

now they could feel like our OTs suck cause of the film they saw. But you don't evaluate line of scrimmage players in helmets and shorts. That's just silly to be honest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

now they could feel like our OTs suck cause of the film they saw. But you don't evaluate line of scrimmage players in helmets and shorts. That's just stupid to be honest

In the same vein you don't make up your mind on your players as an HC based just on film either though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am sort of flabbergasted for lack of a better word that people are actually having a problem with the guys in charge wanting to bring in as much competition as possible. I mean it doesn't even register in my brain as to what is going through a persons head when they think like that. Even more so after all this talk and bravado around here about Seattle and the way they brought in records amount of people in their tryouts and camp. The more the merrier as far as competition is concerned folks. Can't believe I just had to say that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am sort of flabbergasted for lack of a better word that people are actually having a problem with the guys in charge wanting to bring in as much competition as possible. I mean it doesn't even register in my brain as to what is going through a persons head when they think like that. Even more so after all this talk and bravado around here about Seattle and the way they brought in records amount of people in their tryouts and camp. The more the merrier as far as competition is concerned folks. Can't believe I just had to say that.

competition either makes you better or breaks you. I say bring em in
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am sort of flabbergasted for lack of a better word that people are actually having a problem with the guys in charge wanting to bring in as much competition as possible. I mean it doesn't even register in my brain as to what is going through a persons head when they think like that. Even more so after all this talk and bravado around here about Seattle and the way they brought in records amount of people in their tryouts and camp. The more the merrier as far as competition is concerned folks. Can't believe I just had to say that.

Nothing against competition, just think we could use competition at other positions more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Uhh, there are 90 spots. 15-20 of those spots are camp bodies. Keep washing out the obvious washouts and bring in more, rinse repeat.

Exactly... so why replace the washouts with more washouts? Get a player at a greater position of need and maybe they'll stick. We have OT's coming out our ears. People are making it out like I'm more against this than I am, I don't care that much, it just seems like we could have found a better position to look at, that's all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exactly... so why replace the washouts with more washouts? Get a player at a greater position of need and maybe they'll stick. We have OT's coming out our ears. People are making it out like I'm more against this than I am, I don't care that much, it just seems like we could have found a better position to look at, that's all.

You replace obvious camp bodies who never had a chance to make the squad with people that actually have a possibility of cracking the 53.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exactly... so why replace the washouts with more washouts? Get a player at a greater position of need and maybe they'll stick. We have OT's coming out our ears. People are making it out like I'm more against this than I am, I don't care that much, it just seems like we could have found a better position to look at, that's all.

how do you know the players we bring in are washouts
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am sort of flabbergasted for lack of a better word that people are actually having a problem with the guys in charge wanting to bring in as much competition as possible. I mean it doesn't even register in my brain as to what is going through a persons head when they think like that. Even more so after all this talk and bravado around here about Seattle and the way they brought in records amount of people in their tryouts and camp. The more the merrier as far as competition is concerned folks. Can't believe I just had to say that.

I agree competition is critical so the shift in philosophy is welcomed. It does contradict statements like " we nailed free agency". I would prefer less hype and more straight shooting. At least these actions indicate they are doing everything possible to upgrade and make the roster as competitive possible.

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...