Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

WK9: Atl @ Carolina
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 12, 13, 14, 15  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Atlanta Falcons
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
GSUeagles14


Joined: 21 Jan 2011
Posts: 6294
PostPosted: Sun Nov 03, 2013 6:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

tech2186 wrote:
GSUeagles14 wrote:
tech2186 wrote:
GSUeagles14 wrote:
tech2186 wrote:
SpoonFed56 wrote:
We DO NOT need to trade back! Keep playing this way and we will be top 5. How often have we picked top 5 since 08 without trading a bunch of picks? Once. And we took Ryan. We need an impact player and don't forget we will be picking high in the 2nd, 3rd etc etc. We will get healthy this offseason and get a solid draft/FA we will be right back in the hunt next year.


We haven't been in this situation in 6 years But this is different. We aren't 1 or 2 players away. We are 5-7 players away from being dominant. We need depth. We need high quality picks which is something we haven't had a lot of in the past 5 years.

Now you are right about one thing, TD hasn't traded back before. Only up. But I hope some sense is knocked into him if we have a Top 5-10 pick. A gamble on one player isn't wise if we have the chance to pick 2 1st rounders. Teams who have 2 1st rounders usually pick in the middle of the first where there is great value.


Is rather get 1 sure things than a couple maybes. And we are not 5-7. Players away. Realistically we need a De and a lt to co tribute immediately. Possibly a guard. As long as we resign our dts than that's basically it.


Yeah, sure thing isn't that easy with TD. I am not willing to gamble with his track record. Also, one player won't help. This team needs to load up on picks for depth purposes. That is what winning culture teams do. This team is 5-7 players away. Three of those players are on our Oline that could stand to be replaced. and we all know that DT, DE and TE are positions of need. That is at least 5 players right there.


His record in the first is solid, his record in the early first is phenomenal. If you read my post, I'm assuming we bring back our dts, and I'm willing to bet anything we will not have three new starters on t he ol that aren't currently on the falcons roster.

You don't draft early in the first for depth, that's where you get impact players.


You draft for depth when you have a competitive team. If this is a fluke of a season, which we all hope, then the 2014 draft would and should be a draft of depth. Yes, they would be impactful depth hopefully, but that is what the theme would be. Jerry and Peters are not true NFL starters. They are rotational players. Jerry may not even be that! DT is a position of need. There may not be 3 new starters on the Oline but that doesnt mean there doesn't need to be competition for those positions. Reynolds, Baker and Konz need to be on notice. Holmes looks to be ok for now but he shouldnt feel to safe.

Having 2 picks in the first two rounds does not help this mediocre staffed team. We need impact players and we need more than one. We need a few. This team lacks explosive players. Why pick one player in the 1st if you can get 2? And the talent drop off won't be that bad if we have a trade back scenario like "devils" proposed.


I refuse to believe that you think drafting in the early 1st is for depth. Just can't do it.

Also, can you define drafting for depthL what does it entail?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
tech2186


Joined: 01 Jan 2008
Posts: 4487
Location: Dawg House
PostPosted: Sun Nov 03, 2013 7:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

GSUeagles14 wrote:
tech2186 wrote:
GSUeagles14 wrote:
tech2186 wrote:
GSUeagles14 wrote:
tech2186 wrote:
SpoonFed56 wrote:
We DO NOT need to trade back! Keep playing this way and we will be top 5. How often have we picked top 5 since 08 without trading a bunch of picks? Once. And we took Ryan. We need an impact player and don't forget we will be picking high in the 2nd, 3rd etc etc. We will get healthy this offseason and get a solid draft/FA we will be right back in the hunt next year.


We haven't been in this situation in 6 years But this is different. We aren't 1 or 2 players away. We are 5-7 players away from being dominant. We need depth. We need high quality picks which is something we haven't had a lot of in the past 5 years.

Now you are right about one thing, TD hasn't traded back before. Only up. But I hope some sense is knocked into him if we have a Top 5-10 pick. A gamble on one player isn't wise if we have the chance to pick 2 1st rounders. Teams who have 2 1st rounders usually pick in the middle of the first where there is great value.


Is rather get 1 sure things than a couple maybes. And we are not 5-7. Players away. Realistically we need a De and a lt to co tribute immediately. Possibly a guard. As long as we resign our dts than that's basically it.


Yeah, sure thing isn't that easy with TD. I am not willing to gamble with his track record. Also, one player won't help. This team needs to load up on picks for depth purposes. That is what winning culture teams do. This team is 5-7 players away. Three of those players are on our Oline that could stand to be replaced. and we all know that DT, DE and TE are positions of need. That is at least 5 players right there.


His record in the first is solid, his record in the early first is phenomenal. If you read my post, I'm assuming we bring back our dts, and I'm willing to bet anything we will not have three new starters on t he ol that aren't currently on the falcons roster.

You don't draft early in the first for depth, that's where you get impact players.


You draft for depth when you have a competitive team. If this is a fluke of a season, which we all hope, then the 2014 draft would and should be a draft of depth. Yes, they would be impactful depth hopefully, but that is what the theme would be. Jerry and Peters are not true NFL starters. They are rotational players. Jerry may not even be that! DT is a position of need. There may not be 3 new starters on the Oline but that doesnt mean there doesn't need to be competition for those positions. Reynolds, Baker and Konz need to be on notice. Holmes looks to be ok for now but he shouldnt feel to safe.

Having 2 picks in the first two rounds does not help this mediocre staffed team. We need impact players and we need more than one. We need a few. This team lacks explosive players. Why pick one player in the 1st if you can get 2? And the talent drop off won't be that bad if we have a trade back scenario like "devils" proposed.


I refuse to believe that you think drafting in the early 1st is for depth. Just can't do it.

Also, can you define drafting for depthL what does it entail?


GSU, this isn't school and I am not Webster. I am not going to define everything for you. It's called reading comprehension. Read the past few posts and you will see what I mean when I say trade back. I basically explained it to you in my last post. The team has too many mediocre to poor starters and that was before the injuries.... Which means.....WE NEED DEPTH
_________________


ROO to all the Nasty Que Dogs!! I love my Omega Psi Phi!!!
University of Georgia Class of 2008
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
BeeperKing


Joined: 10 Feb 2013
Posts: 4362
PostPosted: Sun Nov 03, 2013 8:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

All I got out of that is you don't think Corey Peters is a starter. That means you aren't actually watching him. He's been far and away the best player in the front 7. I literally don't know how you could say that.
_________________


Foster a Falcon '14: Julio Jones
FakingInjuries wrote:

Without those elite targets, [Matt Ryan] is in the same tier as Matt Cassell.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
tech2186


Joined: 01 Jan 2008
Posts: 4487
Location: Dawg House
PostPosted: Sun Nov 03, 2013 8:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

BeeperKing wrote:
All I got out of that is you don't think Corey Peters is a starter. That means you aren't actually watching him. He's been far and away the best player in the front 7. I literally don't know how you could say that.


Peters being the best player on the Falcons D line is not saying a whole lot. That is like being the best cook at Ihop. That doesn't mean you are ready to be the next iron chef. Peter is a really good solid player. But on a Dline that is dominant he would be a rotating DT. That is what I am saying, we don't have a dominant player on the Dline or Oline. Just average to bad players. I am not trying to take a shot at Peters. I like him a lot. And he is a solid DT. But on a really good Dline he would be rotational at best. Of course he would start for us. Who else you gonna start Peria Jerry???
_________________


ROO to all the Nasty Que Dogs!! I love my Omega Psi Phi!!!
University of Georgia Class of 2008
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
BeeperKing


Joined: 10 Feb 2013
Posts: 4362
PostPosted: Sun Nov 03, 2013 8:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

tech2186 wrote:
BeeperKing wrote:
All I got out of that is you don't think Corey Peters is a starter. That means you aren't actually watching him. He's been far and away the best player in the front 7. I literally don't know how you could say that.


Peters being the best player on the Falcons D line is not saying a whole lot. That is like being the best cook at Ihop. That doesn't mean you are ready to be the next iron chef. Peter is a really good solid player. But on a Dline that is dominant he would be a rotating DT. That is what I am saying, we don't have a dominant player on the Dline or Oline. Just average to bad players. I am not trying to take a shot at Peters. I like him a lot. And he is a solid DT. But on a really good Dline he would be rotational at best. Of course he would start for us. Who else you gonna start Peria Jerry???


Peters has been great on all three downs this year. He would be a starter on other teams, probably about 10-15 others. Jerry is a good enough rotational tackle.
_________________


Foster a Falcon '14: Julio Jones
FakingInjuries wrote:

Without those elite targets, [Matt Ryan] is in the same tier as Matt Cassell.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
GSUeagles14


Joined: 21 Jan 2011
Posts: 6294
PostPosted: Sun Nov 03, 2013 8:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

tech2186 wrote:
GSUeagles14 wrote:
tech2186 wrote:
GSUeagles14 wrote:
tech2186 wrote:
GSUeagles14 wrote:
tech2186 wrote:
SpoonFed56 wrote:
We DO NOT need to trade back! Keep playing this way and we will be top 5. How often have we picked top 5 since 08 without trading a bunch of picks? Once. And we took Ryan. We need an impact player and don't forget we will be picking high in the 2nd, 3rd etc etc. We will get healthy this offseason and get a solid draft/FA we will be right back in the hunt next year.


We haven't been in this situation in 6 years But this is different. We aren't 1 or 2 players away. We are 5-7 players away from being dominant. We need depth. We need high quality picks which is something we haven't had a lot of in the past 5 years.

Now you are right about one thing, TD hasn't traded back before. Only up. But I hope some sense is knocked into him if we have a Top 5-10 pick. A gamble on one player isn't wise if we have the chance to pick 2 1st rounders. Teams who have 2 1st rounders usually pick in the middle of the first where there is great value.


Is rather get 1 sure things than a couple maybes. And we are not 5-7. Players away. Realistically we need a De and a lt to co tribute immediately. Possibly a guard. As long as we resign our dts than that's basically it.


Yeah, sure thing isn't that easy with TD. I am not willing to gamble with his track record. Also, one player won't help. This team needs to load up on picks for depth purposes. That is what winning culture teams do. This team is 5-7 players away. Three of those players are on our Oline that could stand to be replaced. and we all know that DT, DE and TE are positions of need. That is at least 5 players right there.


His record in the first is solid, his record in the early first is phenomenal. If you read my post, I'm assuming we bring back our dts, and I'm willing to bet anything we will not have three new starters on t he ol that aren't currently on the falcons roster.

You don't draft early in the first for depth, that's where you get impact players.


You draft for depth when you have a competitive team. If this is a fluke of a season, which we all hope, then the 2014 draft would and should be a draft of depth. Yes, they would be impactful depth hopefully, but that is what the theme would be. Jerry and Peters are not true NFL starters. They are rotational players. Jerry may not even be that! DT is a position of need. There may not be 3 new starters on the Oline but that doesnt mean there doesn't need to be competition for those positions. Reynolds, Baker and Konz need to be on notice. Holmes looks to be ok for now but he shouldnt feel to safe.

Having 2 picks in the first two rounds does not help this mediocre staffed team. We need impact players and we need more than one. We need a few. This team lacks explosive players. Why pick one player in the 1st if you can get 2? And the talent drop off won't be that bad if we have a trade back scenario like "devils" proposed.


I refuse to believe that you think drafting in the early 1st is for depth. Just can't do it.

Also, can you define drafting for depthL what does it entail?


GSU, this isn't school and I am not Webster. I am not going to define everything for you. It's called reading comprehension. Read the past few posts and you will see what I mean when I say trade back. I basically explained it to you in my last post. The team has too many mediocre to poor starters and that was before the injuries.... Which means.....WE NEED DEPTH


If your posts had one oz of logic, they would be easier to understand. And i guess i got confused on it not being school since you just brought up grammar and spelling.

Anyway, depth implies players who are not starting. I dont care if we are picking at 5, 15 or 20, we better be looking for a starting player. Heck, reading back over your posts im not even sure you know what depth means. Again, id rather have one sure thing, which Lewan, Matthews or Clowney are IMO, vs a couple maybe guys.

AND LOL on Corey peters. In one sentence you called him a rotational player and 10 minutes later you say hes a really good solid player. I guess thats rotational in the sense all dlinemen get rotated in and out, but cmon. Its hard to take things seriously.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
tech2186


Joined: 01 Jan 2008
Posts: 4487
Location: Dawg House
PostPosted: Sun Nov 03, 2013 8:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

BeeperKing wrote:
tech2186 wrote:
BeeperKing wrote:
All I got out of that is you don't think Corey Peters is a starter. That means you aren't actually watching him. He's been far and away the best player in the front 7. I literally don't know how you could say that.


Peters being the best player on the Falcons D line is not saying a whole lot. That is like being the best cook at Ihop. That doesn't mean you are ready to be the next iron chef. Peter is a really good solid player. But on a Dline that is dominant he would be a rotating DT. That is what I am saying, we don't have a dominant player on the Dline or Oline. Just average to bad players. I am not trying to take a shot at Peters. I like him a lot. And he is a solid DT. But on a really good Dline he would be rotational at best. Of course he would start for us. Who else you gonna start Peria Jerry???


Peters has been great on all three downs this year. He would be a starter on other teams, probably about 10-15 others. Jerry is a good enough rotational tackle.


Yeh, but on Dominant D lines (KC, Houston, San Fran, Seattle, Carolina..etc) Just to name a few he would not. I'm saying I want this Defense to be as dominant as those guys and if we want that we have to continue to get dominant talent and not settle for average play.
_________________


ROO to all the Nasty Que Dogs!! I love my Omega Psi Phi!!!
University of Georgia Class of 2008
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
GSUeagles14


Joined: 21 Jan 2011
Posts: 6294
PostPosted: Sun Nov 03, 2013 8:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

tech2186 wrote:
BeeperKing wrote:
tech2186 wrote:
BeeperKing wrote:
All I got out of that is you don't think Corey Peters is a starter. That means you aren't actually watching him. He's been far and away the best player in the front 7. I literally don't know how you could say that.


Peters being the best player on the Falcons D line is not saying a whole lot. That is like being the best cook at Ihop. That doesn't mean you are ready to be the next iron chef. Peter is a really good solid player. But on a Dline that is dominant he would be a rotating DT. That is what I am saying, we don't have a dominant player on the Dline or Oline. Just average to bad players. I am not trying to take a shot at Peters. I like him a lot. And he is a solid DT. But on a really good Dline he would be rotational at best. Of course he would start for us. Who else you gonna start Peria Jerry???


Peters has been great on all three downs this year. He would be a starter on other teams, probably about 10-15 others. Jerry is a good enough rotational tackle.


Yeh, but on Dominant D lines (KC, Houston, San Fran, Seattle, Carolina..etc) Just to name a few he would not. I'm saying I want this Defense to be as dominant as those guys and if we want that we have to continue to get dominant talent and not settle for average play.


No way does peters not start over edwards/short. Everything else is basically apples to oranges as the others are all 3-4 teams or a hybrid (Seattle). Try again.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
tech2186


Joined: 01 Jan 2008
Posts: 4487
Location: Dawg House
PostPosted: Sun Nov 03, 2013 9:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

GSUeagles14 wrote:
tech2186 wrote:
GSUeagles14 wrote:
tech2186 wrote:
GSUeagles14 wrote:
tech2186 wrote:
GSUeagles14 wrote:
tech2186 wrote:
SpoonFed56 wrote:
We DO NOT need to trade back! Keep playing this way and we will be top 5. How often have we picked top 5 since 08 without trading a bunch of picks? Once. And we took Ryan. We need an impact player and don't forget we will be picking high in the 2nd, 3rd etc etc. We will get healthy this offseason and get a solid draft/FA we will be right back in the hunt next year.


We haven't been in this situation in 6 years But this is different. We aren't 1 or 2 players away. We are 5-7 players away from being dominant. We need depth. We need high quality picks which is something we haven't had a lot of in the past 5 years.

Now you are right about one thing, TD hasn't traded back before. Only up. But I hope some sense is knocked into him if we have a Top 5-10 pick. A gamble on one player isn't wise if we have the chance to pick 2 1st rounders. Teams who have 2 1st rounders usually pick in the middle of the first where there is great value.


Is rather get 1 sure things than a couple maybes. And we are not 5-7. Players away. Realistically we need a De and a lt to co tribute immediately. Possibly a guard. As long as we resign our dts than that's basically it.


Yeah, sure thing isn't that easy with TD. I am not willing to gamble with his track record. Also, one player won't help. This team needs to load up on picks for depth purposes. That is what winning culture teams do. This team is 5-7 players away. Three of those players are on our Oline that could stand to be replaced. and we all know that DT, DE and TE are positions of need. That is at least 5 players right there.


His record in the first is solid, his record in the early first is phenomenal. If you read my post, I'm assuming we bring back our dts, and I'm willing to bet anything we will not have three new starters on t he ol that aren't currently on the falcons roster.

You don't draft early in the first for depth, that's where you get impact players.


You draft for depth when you have a competitive team. If this is a fluke of a season, which we all hope, then the 2014 draft would and should be a draft of depth. Yes, they would be impactful depth hopefully, but that is what the theme would be. Jerry and Peters are not true NFL starters. They are rotational players. Jerry may not even be that! DT is a position of need. There may not be 3 new starters on the Oline but that doesnt mean there doesn't need to be competition for those positions. Reynolds, Baker and Konz need to be on notice. Holmes looks to be ok for now but he shouldnt feel to safe.

Having 2 picks in the first two rounds does not help this mediocre staffed team. We need impact players and we need more than one. We need a few. This team lacks explosive players. Why pick one player in the 1st if you can get 2? And the talent drop off won't be that bad if we have a trade back scenario like "devils" proposed.


I refuse to believe that you think drafting in the early 1st is for depth. Just can't do it.

Also, can you define drafting for depthL what does it entail?


GSU, this isn't school and I am not Webster. I am not going to define everything for you. It's called reading comprehension. Read the past few posts and you will see what I mean when I say trade back. I basically explained it to you in my last post. The team has too many mediocre to poor starters and that was before the injuries.... Which means.....WE NEED DEPTH


If your posts had one oz of logic, they would be easier to understand. And i guess i got confused on it not being school since you just brought up grammar and spelling.

Anyway, depth implies players who are not starting. I dont care if we are picking at 5, 15 or 20, we better be looking for a starting player. Heck, reading back over your posts im not even sure you know what depth means. Again, id rather have one sure thing, which Lewan, Matthews or Clowney are IMO, vs a couple maybe guys.

AND LOL on Corey peters. In one sentence you called him a rotational player and 10 minutes later you say hes a really good solid player. I guess thats rotational in the sense all dlinemen get rotated in and out, but cmon. Its hard to take things seriously.



You are so pathetic it isn't funny. First you ask questions yet you answer the question yourself?

How does depth imply players who aren't starting? Let me simplify this for you because you need slow instruction. Read slow so you can understand. Ok? Here we go... When you accumulate picks like for example the Pats do, you create instant depth. Even in the first round.

Let's say the Falcons trade back to a desperate team that needs a QB and we end up drafting Nix in the first and then Cyrus Kouandjio with your 2nd first rounder. With that scenerio you have created instant depth. Whereas now you have Holmes and Baker(he hasn't been cut in this scenerio) and now you have Kouandjio to compete with those two for one of the starting positions. If someone gets injured (WHICH IS VERY POSSIBLE) you have 2 established OT's that have playing experience on your roster ready to go instead of some UFA you know nothing about.

And in this scenario you still selected Nix who can start from day one because he has taken PETERS position if Babs is back. (Sorry Peters). But now Peters is that much more dangerous because on limited snaps you know he is going to be good and not miss a beat when Nix is out. That is how Dlines and Olines become dangerously deep and impactful.

Teams have done this before. The NY Giants did the same with JPP. People questioned the pick when they drafted him because they had Osi and Tuck. But they did it to create depth and groom for the future and look at JPP now. Look at how the Giants won another ring. That's how you do it. You build in the draft by building depth. You hope that 1st rounder can come in and start but most good teams don't want to start a rookie. No matter how good a prospect he is. You want that rookie to come in and contribute but you hope you have vets that can start over him. You start a rookie when you have no other choice.

In conclusion: Depth is relative. Depth can be that rookie starter, it can be that vet that isn't playing that well, or it can be a rookie that contributes but doesn't start. Regardless you want enough players that can come in and be as effective as the next. In today's NFL that is more important than ever. As this season can attest. And I believe that is done best by accumulating Picks. This organization has tried this pick one impact player a draft formula. And it has nothing to show for it.
_________________


ROO to all the Nasty Que Dogs!! I love my Omega Psi Phi!!!
University of Georgia Class of 2008


Last edited by tech2186 on Sun Nov 03, 2013 9:14 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
tech2186


Joined: 01 Jan 2008
Posts: 4487
Location: Dawg House
PostPosted: Sun Nov 03, 2013 9:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

GSUeagles14 wrote:
tech2186 wrote:
BeeperKing wrote:
tech2186 wrote:
BeeperKing wrote:
All I got out of that is you don't think Corey Peters is a starter. That means you aren't actually watching him. He's been far and away the best player in the front 7. I literally don't know how you could say that.


Peters being the best player on the Falcons D line is not saying a whole lot. That is like being the best cook at Ihop. That doesn't mean you are ready to be the next iron chef. Peter is a really good solid player. But on a Dline that is dominant he would be a rotating DT. That is what I am saying, we don't have a dominant player on the Dline or Oline. Just average to bad players. I am not trying to take a shot at Peters. I like him a lot. And he is a solid DT. But on a really good Dline he would be rotational at best. Of course he would start for us. Who else you gonna start Peria Jerry???


Peters has been great on all three downs this year. He would be a starter on other teams, probably about 10-15 others. Jerry is a good enough rotational tackle.


Yeh, but on Dominant D lines (KC, Houston, San Fran, Seattle, Carolina..etc) Just to name a few he would not. I'm saying I want this Defense to be as dominant as those guys and if we want that we have to continue to get dominant talent and not settle for average play.


No way does peters not start over edwards/short. Everything else is basically apples to oranges as the others are all 3-4 teams or a hybrid (Seattle). Try again.


Your opinion... Try again (not to mention that most teams in the league run a 3-4, not to mention most of the dominant Dlines in the league are from some 3-4 base. )
_________________


ROO to all the Nasty Que Dogs!! I love my Omega Psi Phi!!!
University of Georgia Class of 2008
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
GSUeagles14


Joined: 21 Jan 2011
Posts: 6294
PostPosted: Sun Nov 03, 2013 9:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

tech2186 wrote:
GSUeagles14 wrote:
tech2186 wrote:
GSUeagles14 wrote:
tech2186 wrote:
GSUeagles14 wrote:
tech2186 wrote:
GSUeagles14 wrote:
tech2186 wrote:
SpoonFed56 wrote:
We DO NOT need to trade back! Keep playing this way and we will be top 5. How often have we picked top 5 since 08 without trading a bunch of picks? Once. And we took Ryan. We need an impact player and don't forget we will be picking high in the 2nd, 3rd etc etc. We will get healthy this offseason and get a solid draft/FA we will be right back in the hunt next year.


We haven't been in this situation in 6 years But this is different. We aren't 1 or 2 players away. We are 5-7 players away from being dominant. We need depth. We need high quality picks which is something we haven't had a lot of in the past 5 years.

Now you are right about one thing, TD hasn't traded back before. Only up. But I hope some sense is knocked into him if we have a Top 5-10 pick. A gamble on one player isn't wise if we have the chance to pick 2 1st rounders. Teams who have 2 1st rounders usually pick in the middle of the first where there is great value.


Is rather get 1 sure things than a couple maybes. And we are not 5-7. Players away. Realistically we need a De and a lt to co tribute immediately. Possibly a guard. As long as we resign our dts than that's basically it.


Yeah, sure thing isn't that easy with TD. I am not willing to gamble with his track record. Also, one player won't help. This team needs to load up on picks for depth purposes. That is what winning culture teams do. This team is 5-7 players away. Three of those players are on our Oline that could stand to be replaced. and we all know that DT, DE and TE are positions of need. That is at least 5 players right there.


His record in the first is solid, his record in the early first is phenomenal. If you read my post, I'm assuming we bring back our dts, and I'm willing to bet anything we will not have three new starters on t he ol that aren't currently on the falcons roster.

You don't draft early in the first for depth, that's where you get impact players.


You draft for depth when you have a competitive team. If this is a fluke of a season, which we all hope, then the 2014 draft would and should be a draft of depth. Yes, they would be impactful depth hopefully, but that is what the theme would be. Jerry and Peters are not true NFL starters. They are rotational players. Jerry may not even be that! DT is a position of need. There may not be 3 new starters on the Oline but that doesnt mean there doesn't need to be competition for those positions. Reynolds, Baker and Konz need to be on notice. Holmes looks to be ok for now but he shouldnt feel to safe.

Having 2 picks in the first two rounds does not help this mediocre staffed team. We need impact players and we need more than one. We need a few. This team lacks explosive players. Why pick one player in the 1st if you can get 2? And the talent drop off won't be that bad if we have a trade back scenario like "devils" proposed.


I refuse to believe that you think drafting in the early 1st is for depth. Just can't do it.

Also, can you define drafting for depthL what does it entail?


GSU, this isn't school and I am not Webster. I am not going to define everything for you. It's called reading comprehension. Read the past few posts and you will see what I mean when I say trade back. I basically explained it to you in my last post. The team has too many mediocre to poor starters and that was before the injuries.... Which means.....WE NEED DEPTH


If your posts had one oz of logic, they would be easier to understand. And i guess i got confused on it not being school since you just brought up grammar and spelling.

Anyway, depth implies players who are not starting. I dont care if we are picking at 5, 15 or 20, we better be looking for a starting player. Heck, reading back over your posts im not even sure you know what depth means. Again, id rather have one sure thing, which Lewan, Matthews or Clowney are IMO, vs a couple maybe guys.

AND LOL on Corey peters. In one sentence you called him a rotational player and 10 minutes later you say hes a really good solid player. I guess thats rotational in the sense all dlinemen get rotated in and out, but cmon. Its hard to take things seriously.



You are so pathetic it isn't funny. First you ask questions yet you answer the question yourself?

How does depth imply players who aren't starting? Let me simplify this for you because you need slow instruction. Read slow so you can understand. Ok? Here we go... When you accumulate picks like for example the Pats do, you create instant depth. Even in the first round.

Let's say the Falcons trade back to a desperate team that needs a QB and we end up drafting Nix in the first and then Cyrus Kouandjio with your 2nd first rounder. With that scenerio you have created instant depth. Whereas now you have Holmes and Baker(he hasn't been cut in this scenerio) and now you have Kouandjio to compete with those two for one of the starting positions. If someone gets injured (WHICH IS VERY POSSIBLE) you have 2 established OT's that have playing experience on your roster ready to go instead of some UFA you know nothing about.

And in this scenario you still selected Nix who can start from day one because he has taken PETERS position id Babs is back. (Sorry Peters). But not Peters is that much more dangerous because on limited snaps you know he is going to be good abd not miss a beat when Nix is out. That is how Dlines and Olines become dangerously deep and impactful.

Teams have done this before. The NY Giants did the same with JPP. People questioned the pick when they drafted him because they had Osi and Tuck. But they did it to create depth and groom for the future and look at JPP now. Look at how the Giants won another ring. That's how you do it. You build in the draft by building depth. You hope that 1st rounder can come in and start but most good teams don't want to start a rookie. No matter how good a prospect he is. You want that rookie to come in and contribute but you hope you have vets that can start over him. You start a rookie when you have no other choice.

In conclusion: Depth is relative. Depth can be that rookie starter, it can be that vet that isn't playing that well, or it can be a rookie that contributes but doesn't start. Regardless you want enough players that can come in and be as effective as the next. In today's NFL that is more important than ever. As this season can attest. And I believe that is done best by accumulating Picks. This organization has tried this pick one impact player a draft formula. And it has nothing to show for it.


EVery free agent signing creates depth, any player added creates depth. You dont draft in the 1st round for depth, you look for impact players. IF TD starters drafting players with the logic of "well, taking x player moves Jackson to the bench and hed be a great back up", he should be immediately fired. We've been over this several times, but look at the rams. Theyve had plenty of picks and they still suck. Look at Cleveland.

And yes, when youre picking early, you want that guy to start. Lastly, the bolded makes absolutely no sense. I feel like im actually getting stupider reading this crap.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
tech2186


Joined: 01 Jan 2008
Posts: 4487
Location: Dawg House
PostPosted: Sun Nov 03, 2013 9:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

GSUeagles14 wrote:
tech2186 wrote:
GSUeagles14 wrote:
tech2186 wrote:
GSUeagles14 wrote:
tech2186 wrote:
GSUeagles14 wrote:
tech2186 wrote:
GSUeagles14 wrote:
tech2186 wrote:
SpoonFed56 wrote:
We DO NOT need to trade back! Keep playing this way and we will be top 5. How often have we picked top 5 since 08 without trading a bunch of picks? Once. And we took Ryan. We need an impact player and don't forget we will be picking high in the 2nd, 3rd etc etc. We will get healthy this offseason and get a solid draft/FA we will be right back in the hunt next year.


We haven't been in this situation in 6 years But this is different. We aren't 1 or 2 players away. We are 5-7 players away from being dominant. We need depth. We need high quality picks which is something we haven't had a lot of in the past 5 years.

Now you are right about one thing, TD hasn't traded back before. Only up. But I hope some sense is knocked into him if we have a Top 5-10 pick. A gamble on one player isn't wise if we have the chance to pick 2 1st rounders. Teams who have 2 1st rounders usually pick in the middle of the first where there is great value.


Is rather get 1 sure things than a couple maybes. And we are not 5-7. Players away. Realistically we need a De and a lt to co tribute immediately. Possibly a guard. As long as we resign our dts than that's basically it.


Yeah, sure thing isn't that easy with TD. I am not willing to gamble with his track record. Also, one player won't help. This team needs to load up on picks for depth purposes. That is what winning culture teams do. This team is 5-7 players away. Three of those players are on our Oline that could stand to be replaced. and we all know that DT, DE and TE are positions of need. That is at least 5 players right there.


His record in the first is solid, his record in the early first is phenomenal. If you read my post, I'm assuming we bring back our dts, and I'm willing to bet anything we will not have three new starters on t he ol that aren't currently on the falcons roster.

You don't draft early in the first for depth, that's where you get impact players.


You draft for depth when you have a competitive team. If this is a fluke of a season, which we all hope, then the 2014 draft would and should be a draft of depth. Yes, they would be impactful depth hopefully, but that is what the theme would be. Jerry and Peters are not true NFL starters. They are rotational players. Jerry may not even be that! DT is a position of need. There may not be 3 new starters on the Oline but that doesnt mean there doesn't need to be competition for those positions. Reynolds, Baker and Konz need to be on notice. Holmes looks to be ok for now but he shouldnt feel to safe.

Having 2 picks in the first two rounds does not help this mediocre staffed team. We need impact players and we need more than one. We need a few. This team lacks explosive players. Why pick one player in the 1st if you can get 2? And the talent drop off won't be that bad if we have a trade back scenario like "devils" proposed.


I refuse to believe that you think drafting in the early 1st is for depth. Just can't do it.

Also, can you define drafting for depthL what does it entail?


GSU, this isn't school and I am not Webster. I am not going to define everything for you. It's called reading comprehension. Read the past few posts and you will see what I mean when I say trade back. I basically explained it to you in my last post. The team has too many mediocre to poor starters and that was before the injuries.... Which means.....WE NEED DEPTH


If your posts had one oz of logic, they would be easier to understand. And i guess i got confused on it not being school since you just brought up grammar and spelling.

Anyway, depth implies players who are not starting. I dont care if we are picking at 5, 15 or 20, we better be looking for a starting player. Heck, reading back over your posts im not even sure you know what depth means. Again, id rather have one sure thing, which Lewan, Matthews or Clowney are IMO, vs a couple maybe guys.

AND LOL on Corey peters. In one sentence you called him a rotational player and 10 minutes later you say hes a really good solid player. I guess thats rotational in the sense all dlinemen get rotated in and out, but cmon. Its hard to take things seriously.



You are so pathetic it isn't funny. First you ask questions yet you answer the question yourself?

How does depth imply players who aren't starting? Let me simplify this for you because you need slow instruction. Read slow so you can understand. Ok? Here we go... When you accumulate picks like for example the Pats do, you create instant depth. Even in the first round.

Let's say the Falcons trade back to a desperate team that needs a QB and we end up drafting Nix in the first and then Cyrus Kouandjio with your 2nd first rounder. With that scenerio you have created instant depth. Whereas now you have Holmes and Baker(he hasn't been cut in this scenerio) and now you have Kouandjio to compete with those two for one of the starting positions. If someone gets injured (WHICH IS VERY POSSIBLE) you have 2 established OT's that have playing experience on your roster ready to go instead of some UFA you know nothing about.

And in this scenario you still selected Nix who can start from day one because he has taken PETERS position id Babs is back. (Sorry Peters). But not Peters is that much more dangerous because on limited snaps you know he is going to be good abd not miss a beat when Nix is out. That is how Dlines and Olines become dangerously deep and impactful.

Teams have done this before. The NY Giants did the same with JPP. People questioned the pick when they drafted him because they had Osi and Tuck. But they did it to create depth and groom for the future and look at JPP now. Look at how the Giants won another ring. That's how you do it. You build in the draft by building depth. You hope that 1st rounder can come in and start but most good teams don't want to start a rookie. No matter how good a prospect he is. You want that rookie to come in and contribute but you hope you have vets that can start over him. You start a rookie when you have no other choice.

In conclusion: Depth is relative. Depth can be that rookie starter, it can be that vet that isn't playing that well, or it can be a rookie that contributes but doesn't start. Regardless you want enough players that can come in and be as effective as the next. In today's NFL that is more important than ever. As this season can attest. And I believe that is done best by accumulating Picks. This organization has tried this pick one impact player a draft formula. And it has nothing to show for it.


EVery free agent signing creates depth, any player added creates depth. You dont draft in the 1st round for depth, you look for impact players. IF TD starters drafting players with the logic of "well, taking x player moves Jackson to the bench and hed be a great back up", he should be immediately fired. We've been over this several times, but look at the rams. Theyve had plenty of picks and they still suck. Look at Cleveland.

And yes, when youre picking early, you want that guy to start. Lastly, the bolded makes absolutely no sense. I feel like im actually getting stupider reading this crap.


Please Please keep showing your ignorance. It is so funny how little you know about Football. The rams you speak of have not been good because of coaching and the QB. Their position player draft picks have been good. Jenkins, Long, Laurenitis, Quinn, Ogletree, etc are all very good picks. Just because a team is bad doesn't mean you can relate it to drafting. Drafting is an art and requires a skilled GM with a skilled staff. You are sitting there typing away giving your "In TD you trust" attitude. Well guess what? I don't trust TD in the draft. I don't at all. He has let this team down with his drafting philosophy so far. That is why I think if you give him more picks the math shows that he will hit on something than he will if he has fewer picks.

And you can't possibly be getting any dumber than you already are. I mean you grammar and spelling is embarrassing. If you need help I am more than happy to give you some assistance. I mean that genuinely.
_________________


ROO to all the Nasty Que Dogs!! I love my Omega Psi Phi!!!
University of Georgia Class of 2008


Last edited by tech2186 on Sun Nov 03, 2013 9:41 pm; edited 2 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
BeeperKing


Joined: 10 Feb 2013
Posts: 4362
PostPosted: Sun Nov 03, 2013 9:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

This whole "won't start on most teams" argument is very, very silly. That's like saying that William Moore won't start on seven other teams because they have better safeties. Peters is a fantastic defensive lineman. He isn't top-10 (yet, at least), but we can't knock him because he isn't there yet.
_________________


Foster a Falcon '14: Julio Jones
FakingInjuries wrote:

Without those elite targets, [Matt Ryan] is in the same tier as Matt Cassell.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
tech2186


Joined: 01 Jan 2008
Posts: 4487
Location: Dawg House
PostPosted: Sun Nov 03, 2013 9:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

BeeperKing wrote:
This whole "won't start on most teams" argument is very, very silly. That's like saying that William Moore won't start on seven other teams because they have better safeties. Peters is a fantastic defensive lineman. He isn't top-10 (yet, at least), but we can't knock him because he isn't there yet.


No it isn't. William Moore is a Pro Bowl caliber safety. That's why he got paid the way he is getting paid. Will see how much teams value Peters when he is up for FA and then you can tell how good the league perceives him to be.
_________________


ROO to all the Nasty Que Dogs!! I love my Omega Psi Phi!!!
University of Georgia Class of 2008
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
GSUeagles14


Joined: 21 Jan 2011
Posts: 6294
PostPosted: Sun Nov 03, 2013 9:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

If TD has failed, why has the team been so successful the last 5 years? History shows he hits on early 1st round picks. Thats an absolute, undeniable fact. In general he usually hits on 1st but thats beside the point. So if you arent being a liar and its truly what you are basing it off of, you should want us to pick as early as possible.

oh, and:

Quote:
Just because a team is bad doesn't mean you can relate it to drafting


Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Atlanta Falcons All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 12, 13, 14, 15  Next
Page 13 of 15

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group