Falconer89

Why Wasn't Taylor Gabriel Re-Signed?

54 posts in this topic

49 minutes ago, Yo_Lover said:

The better question would be why didn't the Falcons get some DL, LB, OL, S any of that is way more pressing

Before the season started, we looked solid as LB and S.  DL was a little light, and the Falcons never seem to do anything about the OL until it's too late.  They're not exactly proactive with signing OL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, robertap said:

Before the season started, we looked solid as LB and S.  DL was a little light, and the Falcons never seem to do anything about the OL until it's too late.  They're not exactly proactive with signing OL.

Lb was not ok before the year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Falconer89 said:

Just as the title asks. He played an important role in our SB year. We could always use depth. Could we not afford him?

That's why we got Ridley

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Calvin Ridley was drafted to replace Taylor Gabriel if you've been paying attention the last several months. Not reading any comments or replies on here. This is a 2+2 thread. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Falconsfan567 said:

Not by a longshot. LB was always 1 injury away from being in trouble.

Yep... no depth is not "ok" at LB.

1 injury and you're playing rookies or very little experience at the position which is essentially the QB of the defense.

Falconsfan567 likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/31/2018 at 0:30 AM, Falcanuck said:

He has a cap hit of 8.5mil this year and the Falcons didn't need him, especially since drafting the best WR in the class lol

There you go making sense again! :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, robertap said:

Before the season started, we looked solid as LB and S.  DL was a little light, and the Falcons never seem to do anything about the OL until it's too late.  They're not exactly proactive with signing OL.

Yeah, you know right? Not like they have signed three OLs over the last two weeks or anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When looking at the flaws on this team, wide receiver is NOT an area of emphasis in terms of need. Now, both sides of the line along with the secondary, well, that's another issue.

Just saying...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Ezekiel 25:17 said:

Yeah, you know right? Not like they have signed three OLs over the last two weeks or anything.

You mean, three guys that no one else in the NFL wanted?  Yeah, that's not what I'd call, "proactive."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, robertap said:

You mean, three guys that no one else in the NFL wanted?  Yeah, that's not what I'd call, "proactive."

So who else would you suggest we bring in, ‘ole wish one???

And you said be proactive, which this proves they have been.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/31/2018 at 6:36 AM, falcndave said:

Go back and look a the first 3 games of last year. Sark tried to use him 100% the way he is using Ridley this year. Gabriel didn't fit that role, he is more of a vertical threat. The Falcons use Julio and "fast guy off the bench" in that role this year. By drafting Ridley we get a refined route runner playing the role of "refined route runner," and much less salary tied up in the role of "secondary vertical threat." 

Ridley is proving to be one of the steals of the draft!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Ezekiel 25:17 said:

So who else would you suggest we bring in, ‘ole wish one???

And you said be proactive, which this proves they have been.

Ok, so I feel like I have to define proactive...  Here we go.

"Creating or controlling a situation by causing something to happen rather than responding to it after it has happened."

Grabbing cast-offs from other NFL teams after several of your players have gotten hurt is not being, "proactive."  Being proactive would be to draft for the position before the position becomes a position of need.  We have done this at just about every position on the roster but OL.

In the last four drafts (cherry picking) we have used a 4th round, a 6th round, and a 7th round pick to address the 5 positions on the OL.  By comparison, we have spent a 1st, a 4th, a 6th, and a 7th to address two spots at WR.  We have spent a 3rd and a 5th on TE's.  A 3rd, 4th, and 5th at RB.  (typically only one on the field at any given time)  Two 1st, a 3rd, and a 5th on the DL.  Two 2nd's, a 5th, and a 7th on CB.   A 1st and a 6th on Safety.  A 2nd, 3rd, and 4th on LB.

To summarize, the OL represents 23% of the starters on the football team.  We have used 3 of our last 25 picks (12%) on OL.  And again, those three picks were a 4th, a 6th, and a 7th.

Given the dictionary definition of proactive, the Falcons fall incredibly short, as it pertains to the talent on the OL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, robertap said:

Ok, so I feel like I have to define proactive...  Here we go.

"Creating or controlling a situation by causing something to happen rather than responding to it after it has happened."

Grabbing cast-offs from other NFL teams after several of your players have gotten hurt is not being, "proactive."  Being proactive would be to draft for the position before the position becomes a position of need.  We have done this at just about every position on the roster but OL.

In the last four drafts (cherry picking) we have used a 4th round, a 6th round, and a 7th round pick to address the 5 positions on the OL.  By comparison, we have spent a 1st, a 4th, a 6th, and a 7th to address two spots at WR.  We have spent a 3rd and a 5th on TE's.  A 3rd, 4th, and 5th at RB.  (typically only one on the field at any given time)  Two 1st, a 3rd, and a 5th on the DL.  Two 2nd's, a 5th, and a 7th on CB.   A 1st and a 6th on Safety.  A 2nd, 3rd, and 4th on LB.

To summarize, the OL represents 23% of the starters on the football team.  We have used 3 of our last 25 picks (12%) on OL.  And again, those three picks were a 4th, a 6th, and a 7th.

Given the dictionary definition of proactive, the Falcons fall incredibly short, as it pertains to the talent on the OL.

Falcons have also spent big money to bring in Alex Mack and Brandon Fusco on the OL. And it's convenient that you went back to only the last 4 drafts since had you gone back 5 drafts you would have found 1st round pick Jake Matthews.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, robertap said:

Ok, so I feel like I have to define proactive...  Here we go.

"Creating or controlling a situation by causing something to happen rather than responding to it after it has happened."

Grabbing cast-offs from other NFL teams after several of your players have gotten hurt is not being, "proactive."  Being proactive would be to draft for the position before the position becomes a position of need.  We have done this at just about every position on the roster but OL.

In the last four drafts (cherry picking) we have used a 4th round, a 6th round, and a 7th round pick to address the 5 positions on the OL.  By comparison, we have spent a 1st, a 4th, a 6th, and a 7th to address two spots at WR.  We have spent a 3rd and a 5th on TE's.  A 3rd, 4th, and 5th at RB.  (typically only one on the field at any given time)  Two 1st, a 3rd, and a 5th on the DL.  Two 2nd's, a 5th, and a 7th on CB.   A 1st and a 6th on Safety.  A 2nd, 3rd, and 4th on LB.

To summarize, the OL represents 23% of the starters on the football team.  We have used 3 of our last 25 picks (12%) on OL.  And again, those three picks were a 4th, a 6th, and a 7th.

Given the dictionary definition of proactive, the Falcons fall incredibly short, as it pertains to the talent on the OL.

And after all of that, you still haven’t named anyone who we “should have” picked up or drafted, instead of the guys we did bring in.

Meaning, you don’t know. 

Got it!  B)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now