So those 3 wins at the end of last year? Great momentum huh?

[JeffAtl 547]

4 minutes ago, WhenFalconsWin said:

Take a meaningless game and curb stomp the ever loving she-it out if a team. I want easy wins and some good feel on Sundays. Maybe create a winning culture around here. 

This team acts like it doesn't know how to win, how it should feel. 

The team won those 3 games at the end of last season.  Why do they not know how to win and how it should feel?

Could it be that winning meaningless games against disinterested opponents isn't the elixir that many here think it is.

Seriously, these players are adults and professionals.  They see through meaningless wins.  

[vel 32,351]

This is why I laughed at the whole "momentum" argument. It's just not a real thing. Winning in January 2019 has no impact on what this team is doing now. Rosters turnover too much to try and make a momentum argument. Those three wins didn't matter in the grand scheme of things. It honestly provided a false sense of hope that this team wasn't that bad and that they "found their footing" yet you fired every coordinator on the team. So whatever "momentum" you had you kicked out the door. 

[runshoot 1,431]

Never for tanking. Never for trying to lose.

But those people who think momentum carries over from a previous year beating 3 bad teams, clearly live on another planet.

[vel 32,351]

39 minutes ago, Falcanuck said:

Had the Falcons lost those last 3 games, they would've picked top 5 and likely got Josh Allen, Devin Bush or Devin White....

Could have drafted Brian Burns and not needed to tank...

[WhenFalconsWin 28,033]

1 minute ago, JeffAtl said:

The team won those 3 games at the end of last season.  Why do they not know how to win and how it should feel?

Could it be that winning meaningless games against disinterested opponents isn't the elixir that many here think it is.

Seriously, these players are adults and professionals.  They see through meaningless wins.  

I want to win on Sundays, meaningless or otherwise. Tanking for a projected pick is like playing the lottery. No player is assured greatness. 

The Browns have been accused for tanking a longtime now, where has that got them. 

How about we build an organization with a winning system and draft players that fit that system instead of hoping/praying for one or two magic bullet players to "fix" this franchise....cause that won't work.

[Flying Falcon 9,264]

4 minutes ago, WhenFalconsWin said:

I want to win on Sundays, meaningless or otherwise. Tanking for a projected pick is like playing the lottery. No player is assured greatness. 

The Browns have been accused for tanking a longtime now, where has that got them. 

How about we build an organization with a winning system and draft players that fit that system instead of hoping/praying for one or two magic bullet players to "fix" this franchise....cause that won't work.

Hey hey!!! Stay off my Browns nah. They all I have this season.

[Mescalito 2,017]

3 minutes ago, WhenFalconsWin said:

I want to win on Sundays, meaningless or otherwise. Tanking for a projected pick is like playing the lottery. No player is assured greatness. 

The Browns have been accused for tanking a longtime now, where has that got them. 

How about we build an organization with a winning system and draft players that fit that system instead of hoping/praying for one or two magic bullet players to "fix" this franchise....cause that won't work.

The Browns obviously don't know how to draft.  Just about any good quarterback drafted in the past 10 years, maybe longer I don't know, the Browns more than likely could have had.  They are not really a good example to use honestly.  They just sucks as an organization top to bottom.

[WhenFalconsWin 28,033]

2 minutes ago, Flying Falcon said:

Hey hey!!! Stay off my Browns nah. They all I have this season.

That is not saying much, but they have doubled the Falcons win total 

[Flying Falcon 9,264]

Just now, WhenFalconsWin said:

That is not saying much, but they have doubled the Falcons win total 

 Well, atleast we have 2 wins. I'll go for that right now with the Falcons.

[JeffAtl 547]

3 minutes ago, Mescalito said:

The Browns obviously don't know how to draft.  Just about any good quarterback drafted in the past 10 years, maybe longer I don't know, the Browns more than likely could have had.  They are not really a good example to use honestly.  They just sucks as an organization top to bottom.

You hit on the key point.

The Browns went into this endless rut not by tanking but by trying too hard to draft a franchise QB.

The Browns would have been much better off trading down and parlaying those high picks into many picks.  They could have found a QB through the trade or FA market.

Edited October 14, 2019 by JeffAtl

[Falcons_Frenzy 3,971]

Yes, maybe the Falcons can lose all the time like the know it all fans want. No sense arguing about how a team should or shouldn't lose. The Falcons have perfected losing so we should probably get used to it.

[MAD597 7,497]

1 hour ago, JeffAtl said:

Quinn would have lost the locker room without those three wins.  

Yep I wonder what this year would have looked like if that had happened? Maybe 1-5

[MAD597 7,497]

44 minutes ago, JeffAtl said:

Or they could have drafted the exact same players they did, but still have lots of draft capital left over.

The draft capital lost with those 3 wins roughly equated to an additional 2nd round pick.

Yep could have gone to a big hoss at DT which we obviously are in need of

[MAD597 7,497]

22 minutes ago, vel said:

This is why I laughed at the whole "momentum" argument. It's just not a real thing. Winning in January 2019 has no impact on what this team is doing now. Rosters turnover too much to try and make a momentum argument. Those three wins didn't matter in the grand scheme of things. It honestly provided a false sense of hope that this team wasn't that bad and that they "found their footing" yet you fired every coordinator on the team. So whatever "momentum" you had you kicked out the door. 

Hey but we went from a top 5 draft pick to middle of the pack, so that is "winning" right?

[Falcanuck 10,601]

50 minutes ago, falcons007 said:

You don’t add good players like Allen. That’s the context. There are many second and 3rd round DE who outplayed top picks in recent years. 

Again, never even said that. Your rebuttal was adding good players to this D wouldn't help. Which was stupid. Was never even in reference to the draft. You are legit getting microdosed, check your coffee.

[vel 32,351]

6 minutes ago, MAD597 said:

Hey but we went from a top 5 draft pick to middle of the pack, so that is "winning" right?

I get your argument. I thought winning those games were pointless as well in the draft position race. But at this point, they had already begun to make their bed. I don't think that higher pick would have changed anything. Hitching their wagon to Vic essentially boxed them into the corner they are in now. 

Now.... I hope they lose out and get a high pick to attract a good GM who would see this roster and the potential of two picks in the top 40 as potential to turn this thing around quick. I don't think they have much choice of losing out at this point though. I don't think they'll be favored in any game going forward. 

[Falcanuck 10,601]

46 minutes ago, Flying Falcon said:

Listen.....kid. I don't believe that this team would take advantage of his "blue chip" status, cause even the worst teams and worst coaches can make a "blue chipper" look like isht with their crappy schemes. And that is exactly what Allen would look like here with this coaching squad.

 

And.........kid, losing seems to affect even the better players psyche regardless of their "blue chip" status or not. Kid.

This isn't an argument. I don't understand how you can't formulate this in your brain. "don't pick elite players because this team wouldn't use them properly".... so what? Pick bad players? Wtf are you both on? I want some. 

Allen is factually better than Lindstrom and plays DE (a position of greater need). If any team in the NFL is given the option they'd take Allen. 

[Flying Falcon 9,264]

Just now, Falcanuck said:

This isn't an argument. I don't understand how you can't formulate this in your brain. "don't pick elite players because this team wouldn't use them properly".... so what? Pick bad players? Wtf are you both on? I want some. 

Allen is factually better than Lindstrom and plays DE (a position of greater need). If any team in the NFL is given the option they'd take Allen. 

That's not the arguement. We're discussing whether that talent would be any benefit here with this coaching staff. 

[Falcanuck 10,601]

Just now, Flying Falcon said:

That's not the arguement. We're discussing whether that talent would be any benefit here with this coaching staff. 

Talent is always a benefit. Like what????? My word.

[MAD597 7,497]

5 minutes ago, Flying Falcon said:

That's not the arguement. We're discussing whether that talent would be any benefit here with this coaching staff. 

This coaching staff is on borrowed time. Talent drafted this year will be around longer.

[Jerz 7,182]

5 minutes ago, Flying Falcon said:

That's not the arguement. We're discussing whether that talent would be any benefit here with this coaching staff. 

The coaching staff wouldn't be here as long as the talent we acquired if they suck that bad. You never pass up on talented players because of a bad coaching staff.

[ChickenBiscuit 6,149]

1 minute ago, Jerz #Quinning said:

The coaching staff wouldn't be here as long as the talent we acquired if they suck that bad. You never pass up on talented players because of a bad coaching staff.

Lindstrom and McGary picks could still pay off depending on how both of them develop. I actually don't mind the move of double dipping in the 1st round on OL or DL. 

[JeffAtl 547]

2 minutes ago, ChickenBiscuit said:

Lindstrom and McGary picks could still pay off depending on how both of them develop. I actually don't mind the move of double dipping in the 1st round on OL or DL. 

I thought it was a good move as well.  First round prospects tend to have about a 60% hit rate, so we should get at least 1 strong starter.

 

[ChickenBiscuit 6,149]

1 minute ago, JeffAtl said:

I thought it was a good move as well.  First round prospects tend to have about a 60% hit rate, so we should get at least 1 strong starter.

 

McGary and Lindstrom have to be priorities going forward, though. Our OL coach is almost just as important as our OC or DC. They're the X factor next season, even if we grab a RB in the 3rd or something. It's on them next season.

[Jerz 7,182]

Just now, ChickenBiscuit said:

Lindstrom and McGary picks could still pay off depending on how both of them develop. I actually don't mind the move of double dipping in the 1st round on OL or DL. 

I like those guys if we weren't strapped with a QB that needs all the help he can get while ignoring the defense in the first round 2 straight seasons while banking on overrated players(Beasley, Campbell,Tru). I like the vision with those two guys its just the timing of it is off imo.