falconidae Posted March 16 Share Posted March 16 34 minutes ago, Duff_Man said: No, but when I saw this topic out there, I knew it would be a back-door way of you putting Ridder over somehow. Again. Thing is, Heinicke is a good signing no matter what they intend to do at QB. If they take a QB at 8, you want a quality vet backing him up. If they do trade for Lamar, definitely need a quality backup. If they trade up for a QB, still need that vet presence in the QB room. I expect them to go with Ridder and the beerman, but won't be stunned if they take some other route at QB. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DownvoteDon Posted March 16 Share Posted March 16 10 minutes ago, falconidae said: Thing is, Heinicke is a good signing no matter what they intend to do at QB. If they take a QB at 8, you want a quality vet backing him up. If they do trade for Lamar, definitely need a quality backup. If they trade up for a QB, still need that vet presence in the QB room. I expect them to go with Ridder and the beerman, but won't be stunned if they take some other route at QB. How does this make sense? You are saying that Ridder will go from the starting QB to gone. If they take a "Quality QB at 8", or "trade up" you keep Heinicke and dump Ridder. If they trade for Lamar (they won't) you don't need a Heinicke because the Falcons have already established that Ridder is AT LEAST a quality back up. The only thing that makes sense is that Heinicke is the vet presence and serviceable back up for Ridder. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chifalc Posted March 16 Share Posted March 16 Just now, DownvoteDon said: How does this make sense? You are saying that Ridder will go from the starting QB to gone. If they take a "Quality QB at 8, or trade up, you keep Heinicke and dump Ridder. If they trade for Lamar (they won't) you don't need a Heinicke because the Falcons have already established that Ridder is AT LEAST a quality back up. The only thing that makes sense is that Heinicke is the vet presence and serviceable back up for Ridder. They have to take the ‘falcons are playing an elaborate game of poker and mean to draft a QB’ dream to the end. DownvoteDon 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Talon28 Posted March 16 Share Posted March 16 54 minutes ago, Duff_Man said: No, but when I saw this topic out there, I knew it would be a back-door way of you putting Ridder over somehow. Again. The op was primarily created to stir the pot seems to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
falconidae Posted March 16 Share Posted March 16 3 minutes ago, DownvoteDon said: How does this make sense? You are saying that Ridder will go from the starting QB to gone. If they take a "Quality QB at 8", or "trade up" you keep Heinicke and dump Ridder. If they trade for Lamar (they won't) you don't need a Heinicke because the Falcons have already established that Ridder is AT LEAST a quality back up. The only thing that makes sense is that Heinicke is the vet presence and serviceable back up for Ridder. I did say that's what I expect to have happen. And, yeah, any of the other possibilities means Ridder becomes the 3rd QB. I don't expect that, but again, whatever they decide to do at QB, Heinicke is a good signing. If they do decide to trade for Jackson, which i do not expect at all, you'd want a solid backup because it's likely Lamar will miss a game or two. You could throw Ridder in as part of the trade. If they trade up to get Stroud, Young or Revis, you still need the vet backup. I don't expect that either. If a QB falls to 8 and the Falcons really like him, which is the most likely scenario, and still not likely, you need the vet backup. 5 minutes ago, chifalc said: They have to take the ‘falcons are playing an elaborate game of poker and mean to draft a QB’ dream to the end. I'm firmly on the Ridder train myself, which is incredibly obvious if you've read any of my other posts. I'm just pointing out that there are indeed other interpretations of the signing. Any way they go at QB, you need a good vet backup. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gazoo Posted March 16 Author Share Posted March 16 3 hours ago, Duff_Man said: No, but when I saw this topic out there, I knew it would be a back-door way of you putting Ridder over somehow. Again. I really appreciate your kind words. But know some are not going to be happy with the analysis because they don’t want Ridder start. This unhappiness could manifest in many ways including distorting my post or playing the message board mind reader where one ascribes false motives to the analysis. When I see someone doing this often without ever offering productive commentary I typically just ignore them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chifalc Posted March 16 Share Posted March 16 2 hours ago, falconidae said: I'm firmly on the Ridder train myself, which is incredibly obvious if you've read any of my other posts. I'm just pointing out that there are indeed other interpretations of the signing. Any way they go at QB, you need a good vet backup. Not reasonable other interpretations. The signing of ‘Mr beer” specifically shows what sort of qb they want. The style is obvious. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
falconidae Posted March 16 Share Posted March 16 21 minutes ago, chifalc said: Not reasonable other interpretations. The signing of ‘Mr beer” specifically shows what sort of qb they want. The style is obvious. That doesn't change my point. Anyway they go with a QB, they need a QB like Heinicke to back him up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.