Jump to content

A Case For Why The Atlanta Falcons Absolutely Shouldn’T Pay Julio


chazbykr
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 248
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

by Micheal Jaycox

Let me start off by saying this: I LOVE Julio Jones. I really, really do. He, in my eyes, is the most naturally gifted wideout in the NFL, and he has a chance to go down as the greatest wide receiver in NFL history.

That said, I’m now going to tell you why the Atlanta Falcons shouldn’t sign him to a long-term contract now or ever.

Sadly, it’s pretty simple; wide receivers just aren’t that important. And, yes, I know that sounds idiotic — even I feel that way saying it — but look at this:


Do you notice anything unusual?

Since Jerry Rice in 1997, no team has won a Super Bowl with a receiver taking up more than seven percent of their cap space other than the 2013 Seahawks, and that was with Sidney Rice, who had absolutely no role in Seattle’s title run.

Now, check out this:

Did you notice how many teams had a wideout whose cap hit was over that seven percent mark?

Eight, and only one of them (the Lions) made the playoffs.

And just look at the top receivers on each of those Super Bowl winning teams. In the last decade, the only wideout that can even be compared to Julio Jones is Marvin Harrison, and even he was on a relatively reasonable contract.

If Julio Jones ends up getting the same exact contract that Demaryius Thomas got yesterday — and, trust me, he’s likely to get one even larger — he’ll count as 8.80 percent against the cap in his first year and then 10.61 percent against the cap in his second year. In the last two decades, no team has won a Super Bowl with a wide receiver taking up that much of the organization’s cap space, and it’s not a small sample size, either.

So is Julio Jones worth it? Of course he is. And someone will end up paying him that much or more, and it’ll almost definitely end up being the Falcons.

I’ll be honest when I say that I want the Falcons to sign Julio Jones — I really do — but that doesn’t mean it’s the right decision.

History would definitely be against the Falcons, but let’s just hope Atlanta can buck the trend.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Point made but we all know of huge contracts to wr's to keep fans excited but the teams aren't big winners.

Only one team wins every year and not many of them have anything in common. Super bowls have been won in all sorts of ways. You could draw pretty much any conclusion you wanted as to why teams don't win the super bowl. That is because its hard to do.

There are usually only 4 to 5 highly paid receivers at a time. That means there's a 16% chance of a highly paid receiver winning a super bowl before a single snap is played

Edited by FalconFanSince1969
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Only one team wins every year and not many of them have anything in common. Super bowls have been won in all sorts of ways. You could draw pretty much any conclusion you wanted as to why teams don't win the super bowl. That is because its hard to do.

Agreed but the birds have weighed much heavier toward the O than the D and where has that gotten us? We definitely need to score and control the ball with time of possesion but we need to spend and give the D more attn. and with Quinn I see that becoming more of a priority. AS I stated I like JJ but his health is a big concern. If he fails healthwise those same peeps that screamed about Baker will "rise up"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest facelessman07

The exit is only a click away.

It's not really directed at you my friend, rather the posters who seem to have an alarm go off every time the name "Julio" is said, or in this case typed

The article has a lot of valid points and a good post. I don't think he should make more than what Dez or Demaryius got, but that's just my opinion.

It's just funny because we have a group of posters that conglomerate to these threads. As is the case with the Ryan vs Facco thread. And yes, I purposefully misspelled Joe's last name for the sake of the integrity of the aforementioned thread

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not really directed at you my friend, rather the posters who seem to have an alarm go off every time the name "Julio" is said, or in this case typed

The article has a lot of valid points and a good post. I don't think he should make more than what Dez or Demaryius got, but that's just my opinion.

It's just funny because we have a group of posters that conglomerate to these threads. As is the case with the Ryan vs Facco thread. And yes, I purposefully misspelled Joe's last name for the sake of the integrity of the aforementioned thread

Yeah I get it and for sure I love to see JJ at his best. But it concerns me placing so much cap on him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This article talks about not paying a WR over 7%.

1. A few of those contacts are not their highest year of where most the cap hit took place...... Just saying, something to think about.

2. What do you think 7% of the cap hit is for this current year? It is over 10 million dollars. Next year of course it will rise. And keep going up.

3. These contacts will be ranging from, 7-9%.... That's right, you heard me right...... Majority of cap hits happen at the end. They'll make Julio probably 11 this year, 11 next and then start slowly going up. But when it goes up, you can bet the cap hit goes up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be fair, there is an argument for saying that WR isn't a premier position and that it is better to invest your big $ elsewhere. However, there is also an argument for saying that you don't get value for money paying top money for any position, apart from QB.

What are the alternatives? We can't jettison Julio and use the $15m to pick up an equivalent talent at a more valuable position. Generally speaking, Teams keep hold of their best players, they don't let them reach free agency, so very few elite players are avaialble each year. in additions to that, there in no guarantee that an expensive FA player would work out. Most of the huge name defenisve FA's of the last decade failed to live up to their bloated contracts.

So where does that leave us? Adding a pair of 7.5m a year FA's, or three £5m guys aside? That will make us better as an overall team, IF we can find the best value players, but that's far from certain. Will 3 Tyson Jackson level FA, make us a better overall team than 1 Julio Jones?

I have always been of the view that you build through free agency rather than the draft, and the best teams use their money to keep their best players unless their contract demands are simply too high. With you own players, you know exactly what you are getting, their talents, character, work ethic and how they fit with your coaching staff and locker room. When chasing other teams' free agents there are a lot more unknowns. I also think it sends the wrong message to players, if you aren't prepared to reward your best guys.

Our problem over the years, is that we have invested way too many draft picks in the WR position, and not enough on the OL especially, but that's a separate matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now list how many teams didn't pay a wr top dollar, have cap space for other positions, and still dont win the super bowl....or even go to the playoffs. The numbers are similar. If you draft stars, you have to pay them at some point to keep them. If you draft poorly, well nothing is gonna happen anyway

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not WRs, it's highest paid players at any position.

So, lets check OTC's list of highest paid players at each position last year:

Top paid QBs - none of the top 10 made it

RBs- none of the top 40

WR none of the top 24

TE- Gronk was number 9, he was only 4% of the cap.

OL-none of the top 50

DL- none of the top 17

LB- none of the top 11

DB- none of the top 17

So the only top 10 paid player at any position to win a ring last year was Gronk. If you break it down to LT, RG, etc, may change it some- NE had the 8th highest paid LG,but doubt anybody thinks Connolly was responsible for the win.

OTC only goes back to 2013, where Seattle spent a ton of money on WR[#3], TE[#1], OL[#6], think 2014 is much more typical, don't have a way to correlate all the data easily.

QB-6 of the top 14 [in 2015] have won super bowls, although 4 of them got their big money after they won. That'll be 7 & 5 after Wilson gets paid.

Outside of QB, don't think there's any connection between salary and winning the super bowl for any position. Edit- top 14 biggest contracts overall.

Take the QBs out, look at OTCs list of biggest contracts in 2015, only 12 of the top 100 have won a SB, and several of that 12, like Richard Sherman, got paid after winning and/or cashing in on FA dollars.

That was a quick glance at the list, might have missed a few players, but when 90% of the top paid players [non QB] in the league haven't won a super bowl in their careers, means it's not just WRs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This argument is such a strawman. Just because they're paying a WR, is not the reason teams with them failed. To pick out a high-paid wideout and then point to that as the reason they didn't win a SB (and using that as a line of thinking to not pay Julio) is nothing more than cherry picking. And to say those teams would have won without said contract is nothing more than an unproven, hypothetical fallacy.

Correlation does not equal causation.

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/false-cause

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...