SmokinwithWilly

I don’t disagree Ryan may play into his 40s. Question is would they rather pay a 39 year old Ryan 30m or Wilson 8m. At some point you have to ask yourself, when does that salary offset performance. Can you add 2 or 3 defensive players that will collectively add more than a drop of to 3500 yards and 22 TDS by a first time starter. I don’t see Ryan in Atlanta after 2 years. Ryan may be playing, but I don’t see it there. Just because it doesn’t make sense to you doesn’t mean there isn’t logic behind it. Playing the long game always makes sense, you just have to weigh value across many different levels to make those decisions. Hurney could never play the long game and we see how that ended up. He got fired from the same job twice because he could never look longer than the current season. If I’m GM, I’m absolutely considering setting the franchise up for the future. Other than Aaron Donald, I can’t think of a defensive player who is as impactful on the field as a QB. Unless I think there is a player of that caliber in this draft, and I don’t, I’m not closing off any options. The NFL is making it much harder for defenses and this becoming more and more offense driven league. Half the league is looking for a QB in the next 2 years. There aren’t going to be that many available in the draft. If you think the most important position of your franchise for the next 10 years might be there at your pick, you better consider it. im not saying they will take a QB. I’m not saying they won’t. But you better believe they are considering it.

It actually does make some sense but you have to think beyond the scope of just Matt Ryan. How long do GMs and coaches have to turn around their team? 3 maybe 4 years. That could realistically leave the Falcons starting year 3 needing to draft a QB to start because they has to dump Ryan's contract. And next year's class is not looking particularly strong. No other position is as important as QB and having a top 4 pick is an opportunity you dont have often. So if you think your future QB is there you take him, sit him for 2 years, dump Ryan and his contract and have a guy with 2 years of NFL camp and experience ready to go year 3 with 3 years of rookie contract remaining. If you're thinking about your future as a coach or GM, you better be considering Ryan is 36 and you may have to start over 3 years into your stint. Question is will you make it to year 4?

Brett Favre is the closest I can think of. 400/5 one week and 200/1/4 the next. Favre was obviously better, but the erratic decisions are the closest I can think of.

It's the only thing I could think of that made any sense at all man.

I thought about Hill too and here's what I came up with. There's no real game tape on him as a QB. He's more familiar with the system than Winston, has actually run plays in games in the offense, but theres no tape. For 3 or 4 games, that was probably going to get it done, similar to Allan here. Any longer, and I think we would have seen Winston.

It all depends on if you think he's the guy. If we want Wilson we may have to try for 2. Still I think the price this year is a bit rich. I'd like to keep our picks and build our line. A trade back IMO would be ideal if the QBs we want are gone. I would actually be interested in bringing in Winston on the cheap. He's proven he can make the throws albeit his decision making has been poor with the amount of interceptions he has thrown. He's an interesting option that could possibly be improved. If so, we could build our line and add another receiver, and take a little time to find the right QB. I know it's not a popular option, but IF and it's a big if, he could work out some of the decision making issues, he would be an upgrade over T2G.

With so many buyers, conventional trade deals may not be in play. Where I live housing availability right now is low and demand is high. Houses are selling for 100k over asking in under 24 hours. Desperation for a commodity skyrockets the price.

Would we be better off as a team getting solid QB play for a 1st and a 5th for the next for years in Stafford or with questionable QB play from a rookie that we are likely going to have to trade 3 1sts to get? How many more games would we have won this year with Stafford instead of T2G? This is the worst year in NFL history to need a QB. Over half the league is looking for a QB in the next 2 years and next years class is weak at the position. So yeah, I would have been happy to give up 8 and have Stafford for the next 4-6 and have time to find a QB to groom.

The desperation was apparent after Teddy said he didnt have time to check out of a TD pass he couldnt make to a run play.

2 late 1st and a 3rs for Mahomes? That's all we have to give up? Get on the phone to the Chiefs right now before every other team in the NFL beats us to it.

We didn't lose that game because of Rhule. We lost that game because of Ron. No coach in his right mind would have kept playing Haskins after halftime or likely have let him suit up to start with after what he had done earlier in the week.

It's almost like having Ron coaching the Hornets.

It's funny you put none of the blame of what happened on Cam. Cam hurt himself with that stupid ass video. If you're a coach coming into the season, how does it look to you having a guy that posts a video on social media telling everyone how he LIED to the coaches, LIED to the trainers, LIED to doctors, LIED to the team owner about the seriousness of his injury and hurt the entire team in the process, and then acted like it was no big deal. That video made it all look like it was some kind of joke. That poo doesn't sit well with people. Everyone knows that guys play hurt. But there's a difference between being hurt and being injured. I know Cam put his body out there and played his style of football using his athleticism and size to try and run over people, but I still think that the reason he was let go had more to do with trust than people want to admit.

Now now. 7 7ths would be fair compensation dont ya think.

That's not just 4 1sts. 1sts dont always work out. That's 2 rookie contracts for high quality starters. Plus 2 1sts plus 2 2nds. Part of the issue with Watson is the size of his contract. You cant give away your impact players on their rookie contracts plus draft picks. Burns and Chinn for Watson because of contracts would make more sense.

Did I say sit him for 2 years? No. 1. And I'm not sure he would sit that long. Goff is terrible. They didnt trade for Goff to be the future. They traded away cap space for 1sts. I mean I guess you could call the Chiefs idiots for sitting Mahomes for a year and then moving on from Alex Smith. They wasted a year of his rookie contract. If you think your QB of the future is there, you take him. Franchise QB is the hardest position to find. No other position matters as much.

T.B. is not a decent backup, just an expensive one.

You do if you think you won't have a shot at the top 2 pick next year or you think it's a weak QB class. Coaches don't have 4 years to wait for something to pan out. If they like Lance, take him at 7, let him sit a year and compete with Goff in 2022. After 2022 Goff is gone and you have a seasoned starter, not a fresh rookie in your 3rd season as HC. And with 2 extra firsts they can afford a luxury QB pick if they think he's the future. It might not make a whole lot of sense in terms of draft capital, but the picture is bigger than that. Year 3 the HC and GM could already be on the hot seat. This is about more than just draft picks. HC and GM have to think about their futures as well.

Goff is not anyone’s answer at QB. Just because they traded for him doesn’t mean he’s the future in Detroit. QB at 7 is definitely still on the table.

Trade agreed to in principle. No paperwork filed officially.

That’s why as much as I don’t want TB here next year, he likely is. We will have to pay to get rid of that contract. We saw what it cost to dump the Osweiller contract. Getting rid of Goff’s was going to cost a 1st at least.

They left off “until Dan Snyder called and fugged up the process.” Well they didn’t leave it off, just said it a little more politically correct.