Jump to content

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, FalconsIn2012 said:

Not me.....unless you offer max protect, he is a liability

Let's see him in another offensive scheme before passing any final judgments. Everybody dogs the DK scheme, but then folks single out bad performances. It very well could be the square peg thing with him to some degree. 

I'm willing to ride that train another year if I have Sewell, Matthews a promising Hennessey, and the rock solid Lindstrom along the line. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 74
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

They run the risk of losing any credibility they have built up by posting fantasy land BS like this

Definitely Sewell if it played out like this.

The biggest problem about this is it encourages bad decisions.  The thinking is you "have to" get your QB this season because next season the QB class is "bad."  There are multiple ways to get QBs.  T

29 minutes ago, thanat0s said:

Honestly, if Sewell is there at 4, you won't get any argument from me if we take him. Slide Matthews inside to LG and suddenly our line is looking like one of the best in the NFL, assuming he's all they say. 

He probably beats out McGary at RT and McGary becomes depth/trade fodder

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Run 'n' Shoot said:

He probably beats out McGary at RT and McGary becomes depth/trade fodder

Matthews is much better suited to the left side stance, and like I said before, let’s see him in the new system before making final judgements. 
 

People can’t complain about all things Dirk, and then say the only position that he did great with was RT and assume McGary is the problem. 
 

Dirk’s entire scheme was a dumpster fire, and terrible for any offensive lineman to be good in, especially tackles. He deserves the benefit of the doubt if we are giving it to everybody else. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Zach Wilson probly gets taken 3rd right before us and goes on to be a HOFer

I say this only because we are the Falcons, and a FG bouncing off the uprights (and still going in) is what solidified us being 4 instead of potentially 3. And since we are the Falcons, we must pay for this unlucky event in the maximum way possible 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Dirtybird56 said:

Zach Wilson probly gets taken 3rd right before us and goes on to be a HOFer

I say this only because we are the Falcons, and a FG bouncing off the uprights (and still going in) is what solidified us being 4 instead of potentially 3. And since we are the Falcons, we must pay for this unlucky event in the maximum way possible 

It would only be classic Falcons if we trade with SF who takes Wilson and wins multiple titles en route to aHOF career...and Surtain comes to ATL and busts 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, thanat0s said:

Matthews is much better suited to the left side stance, and like I said before, let’s see him in the new system before making final judgements. 
 

People can’t complain about all things Dirk, and then say the only position that he did great with was RT and assume McGary is the problem. 
 

Dirk’s entire scheme was a dumpster fire, and terrible for any offensive lineman to be good in, especially tackles. He deserves the benefit of the doubt if we are giving it to everybody else. 

Yeah, I think if we take Sewell Matthews is gone.  A post June 1 cut frees up $13 million in cap space over $7 million-ish in dead money.  Pre June 1 is still over a million in cap savings over $18 million in dead money.  The numbers appear to be the same for a trade.  I imagine they'd do the second of those and free up a bunch of space.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, ike barn87987 said:

Just wanted to post this, but I don’t wanna draft a QB this draft.

1 year is an eternity in college football. To think any NFL executive would make a decision based upon this is absurd.  You make long-term decisions based upon your football team not what you think may be available over a year from now.  

Edited by autigerfan
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, FalconsIn2012 said:

It would only be classic Falcons if we trade with SF who takes Wilson and wins multiple titles en route to aHOF career...and Surtain comes to ATL and busts 

Eh. 

The 49ers better start winning some games if Shanny is gonna be their coach.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Summerhill said:

I really don't like the thought of Chase, but if you consider Julio is about to turn 32, had about half as many receiving yards as he usually does, and if Chase is really that good and a potential Hall of Famer, I can get on board. 

This is my thought as well, it would ensure we have 2 dominant outside receivers for the foreseeable future. Obviously arguments can be made that isn't necessary, but it does pose a problem for opposing defenses. You can't really double cover them both, and with a good OC, that will be an even bigger problem.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, JDaveG said:

The biggest problem about this is it encourages bad decisions.  The thinking is you "have to" get your QB this season because next season the QB class is "bad."  There are multiple ways to get QBs.  There are always FAs.  There is always another draft.  You can get a later QB in this draft and groom him.  

But teams want to reach for perceived need instead of drafting talent.

That's not to mention the later QBs could end up being better in this draft, and the early ones better in 2022.  Nobody really knows until they suit up and play.

To further this point, the Niners traded back from 2-3 and let the Bears take Trubisky, while they went d-line.  They also left Mahomes on the board with that number 3 pick.  2018 they could have had Rosen or Lamar Jackson, but they went with an OT.  2019 they took Bosa over Josh Allen.  2020 they traded up from 31 to get a WR.  Why from 31?  Because they were the Super Bowl runner up in 2019.

Now, they did trade a 2nd rounder for Garoppolo, and so they did go out and get a QB.  But they did not believe they needed to spend top 5 draft capital on a QB, even though they had it, and even though the QBs were there to be had.  That isn't to say they shouldn't draft one this year, or even that they might have won the Super Bowl had they drafted one in previous years.  Obviously, they'd rather have Mahomes over Solomon Thomas in 20/20 hindsight.  It is to say they still took a WR after a trade up from 31 in 2020 because they had just gone to the Super Bowl the previous year.  You don't have to burn top 5 draft capital to win in the NFL.  Sometimes it helps.  More often it doesn't.  And I think if pressed to the wall, most of us would assume the 2 Super Bowl teams this year will have a 9th overall pick and a 24th overall pick slinging the rock (and if not, Lady Luck being always against us, maybe a number 32 overall pick in Brees). 

Of the teams left in the playoffs, who expects either of the two remaining top 5 QB picks (Mayfield or Goff) to be playing in the Super Bowl?  Who expects both of them to?  Maybe they will, but I think most of us expect Green Bay to beat the Rams and Kansas City to beat Cleveland.  That means we're looking at 7th overall (Josh Allen) at best.  Mahomes is the next highest taken at 9.

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Pacific_Falcon said:

This is my thought as well, it would ensure we have 2 dominant outside receivers for the foreseeable future. Obviously arguments can be made that isn't necessary, but it does pose a problem for opposing defenses. You can't really double cover them both, and with a good OC, that will be an even bigger problem.

You can get into the schematic benefits like this, but for me it comes down to if you have a top 5 pick, you need to pick a Hall of Famer. You don't get to choose which position has a Hall of Fame player. You just have to choose him, as long as he's not a running back. If Chase is a Hall of Famer and other players aren't, Chase is an attractive pick. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Summerhill said:

You can get into the schematic benefits like this, but for me it comes down to if you have a top 5 pick, you need to pick a Hall of Famer. You don't get to choose which position has a Hall of Fame player. You just have to choose him, as long as he's not a running back. If Chase is a Hall of Famer and other players aren't, Chase is an attractive pick. 

My thoughts exactly. If Young were in this class we could take a heavy need but he’s not. Chase, Sewell, and Parsons are those guys this year. Smith might be joining them and of course others could as well during the evaluation process. My preference is Sewell and when the draft hype train picks up I think that will be the consensus non QB pick on this board. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Akod2017 said:

My thoughts exactly. If Young were in this class we could take a heavy need but he’s not. Chase, Sewell, and Parsons are those guys this year. Smith might be joining them and of course others could as well during the evaluation process. My preference is Sewell and when the draft hype train picks up I think that will be the consensus non QB pick on this board. 

Think everybody is sleeping on slater a bit. He's a better fit for what we are and he can play literally every position on the line. Sewell is a better fit in a power scheme. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JDaveG said:

To further this point, the Niners traded back from 2-3 and let the Bears take Trubisky, while they went d-line.  They also left Mahomes on the board with that number 3 pick.  2018 they could have had Rosen or Lamar Jackson, but they went with an OT.  2019 they took Bosa over Josh Allen.  2020 they traded up from 31 to get a WR.  Why from 31?  Because they were the Super Bowl runner up in 2019.

Now, they did trade a 2nd rounder for Garoppolo, and so they did go out and get a QB.  But they did not believe they needed to spend top 5 draft capital on a QB, even though they had it, and even though the QBs were there to be had.  That isn't to say they shouldn't draft one this year, or even that they might have won the Super Bowl had they drafted one in previous years.  Obviously, they'd rather have Mahomes over Solomon Thomas in 20/20 hindsight.  It is to say they still took a WR after a trade up from 31 in 2020 because they had just gone to the Super Bowl the previous year.  You don't have to burn top 5 draft capital to win in the NFL.  Sometimes it helps.  More often it doesn't.  And I think if pressed to the wall, most of us would assume the 2 Super Bowl teams this year will have a 9th overall pick and a 24th overall pick slinging the rock (and if not, Lady Luck being always against us, maybe a number 32 overall pick in Brees). 

Of the teams left in the playoffs, who expects either of the two remaining top 5 QB picks (Mayfield or Goff) to be playing in the Super Bowl?  Who expects both of them to?  Maybe they will, but I think most of us expect Green Bay to beat the Rams and Kansas City to beat Cleveland.  That means we're looking at 7th overall (Josh Allen) at best.  Mahomes is the next highest taken at 9.

Hindsight is always 20/20 right?  
Lady Luck helps out sometimes in the draft.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JDaveG said:

To further this point, the Niners traded back from 2-3 and let the Bears take Trubisky, while they went d-line.  They also left Mahomes on the board with that number 3 pick.  2018 they could have had Rosen or Lamar Jackson, but they went with an OT.  2019 they took Bosa over Josh Allen.  2020 they traded up from 31 to get a WR.  Why from 31?  Because they were the Super Bowl runner up in 2019.

Now, they did trade a 2nd rounder for Garoppolo, and so they did go out and get a QB.  But they did not believe they needed to spend top 5 draft capital on a QB, even though they had it, and even though the QBs were there to be had.  That isn't to say they shouldn't draft one this year, or even that they might have won the Super Bowl had they drafted one in previous years.  Obviously, they'd rather have Mahomes over Solomon Thomas in 20/20 hindsight.  It is to say they still took a WR after a trade up from 31 in 2020 because they had just gone to the Super Bowl the previous year.  You don't have to burn top 5 draft capital to win in the NFL.  Sometimes it helps.  More often it doesn't.  And I think if pressed to the wall, most of us would assume the 2 Super Bowl teams this year will have a 9th overall pick and a 24th overall pick slinging the rock (and if not, Lady Luck being always against us, maybe a number 32 overall pick in Brees). 

Of the teams left in the playoffs, who expects either of the two remaining top 5 QB picks (Mayfield or Goff) to be playing in the Super Bowl?  Who expects both of them to?  Maybe they will, but I think most of us expect Green Bay to beat the Rams and Kansas City to beat Cleveland.  That means we're looking at 7th overall (Josh Allen) at best.  Mahomes is the next highest taken at 9.

I’ll also add that we must take note of just how crucial HC’s are to success around the NFL as well. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

These teams aren't trading with us we will have to stay put and take whoever isn't a qb, ok fine but the point is if teams want to trade up Miami and jets are open for shop, they are going to offer too much to turn down especially if they already have a qb.  Maybe miami goes sewell but I'm sure they'll be offered kinds random to get out of that pick. We really needed that 3. Texans almost won that game too

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by DMT11
Link to post
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.


×
×
  • Create New...