Jump to content

- - - - -

Falcons were worse off after 2007

This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
52 replies to this topic

#46 pstall


    Gazebo Effect

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 23,654
  • Reputation: 3,061

Posted 22 November 2010 - 10:54 AM

having a good draft can apply to any team for any year. no crap it helps.
I think Marty has done a good job but where he messed up was his slowness on pulling the trigger on various scouts who proved they know as much about football as Russell Brand knows about ping pong.

But I think the big issue I have now is how this team didn't prep itself enough to grab some extra picks. this would have been the ideal year if you are going to cut your salary down to at least do what the Pats did.
Hmm. Pats will go to the playoffs AND have multiple early picks yet again.
Has Marty EVER gotten multiple early rounds(1-3) in a draft?

#47 Mr. Scot

Mr. Scot

    Football Historian

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • posts: 47,305
  • Reputation: 15,079

Posted 22 November 2010 - 12:08 PM

Umm, because he's the GM? Just because the ball didn't bounce in our favor on every decision doesn't mean he's above criticism. Again, being 1-15 with one of the most anemic offenses in league history falls at the feet of the GM at some point in the conversation of "how did we end up here?"

It was pretty well known within the organization, at least amongst the players, before training camp started that we were going to be Otah-less for most of the season. I understand it's not easy to go out and plug in a quality RT/LT overnight, but what we have now is pretty bad.

Our DEs are average at best. Johnson is rotational, and Brown, though he looks more promising than he did this time last year, is always going to be compared to the 1st round pick Hurney gave up to get him here. Neither would start for most other teams in the league, and they both look like career situational ends at this point in their careers. And couple that with an atrocious secondary and the personnel looks even worse. At the very least, they're not above being replaced.

Obviously a lack of a legitimate QB is the most glaring miss, a concern for about 80% of the teams in this league, but we're going on two seasons now of having the worst QB corp in the country. His steadfast love for Delhomme ruined us last year, and his inability to find his replacement ruined us this year. I'm still okay with the Clausen pick there at 48, but I'm not okay with not having a viable veteran QB on the roster to start the season. That's our biggest weakness currently, and that is distinctively a result of Hurney's moves as a GM.

If we pass on Luck this spring, barring a trade for anything other than a lion's share of picks to move down, God help us all. This is now, more than ever, a QB-driven league, and what we've been subjected to behind center these past few years has been some of the worst quarterback play I've seen in nearly 18 years of watching football.

Again, I'm not saying Hurney is to blame for all of our woes, nor am I saying he's a terrible GM. I'm just saying he seems to be getting by pretty well for the long-time GM of the worst team in the league. If he was retained next season, I wouldn't be angry. If he was let go, I wouldn't be angry either.

2008 - Built a good enough team to go to the playoffs, probably good enough to have made it to and maybe even won the Super Bowl had Jake not picked a bad day to have a bad day

2009 - Delhomme meltdown continues; Fox's refusal to bench him pretty much dooms the season

2010 - Youth movement

#48 Cyberjag


    Senior Member

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 3,866
  • Reputation: 664

Posted 22 November 2010 - 12:39 PM

Just curious, was Hurney operating in a vacuum when he kept Fox without offering him an extension? That's kind of unusual, isn't it? And hasn't that been recognized as part of the problem this year?

And was Hurney acting alone when he cut everyone over 30 but Steve Smith, and didn't sign a free agent WR? Yes, it worked out on Defense, but on offense we found out that we really missed Vincent and Moore wasn't what we thought he was. In other years, we would also have had a Josh McCown around, but this year we had to go with two rookies. Did Hurney do that by himself?

Did Hurney's decision to extend Jake help the team or hurt the team? Face it, his extension money is a drop in Jerry's financial bucket, and doesn't count against this year's nonexistent cap. But if he hadn't done it, think we would have been able to sign Hollis Thomas last year? Or anyone, for that matter?

If you want to bash him, go find something that he has autonomous authority over (like which players to draft, or how to manage the cap), and pick apart his decisions there. You can go after Eric Shelton and Dwayne Jarrett, he hired the scouts that said they were worth drafting, for what it's worth. But don't come down on him for stuff that's been going on by directive.

And to the original point in this thread, we've got way more talent than the 2007 Falcons. Four of our offensive linemen have proven that they can play at a high level (granted, one's been injured all year). We have not two, but three very good running backs. We have Smitty, who may be a touch slower but still effective in the slot, and we have two young receivers who are showing flashes of being able to play well in this league.

On defense, we have a very good secondary, one of the best linebacking units in the NFL, and some decent talent on the edges of the line.

Get a coach who can light a fire under the players, get them all on the same page, and call a game in a way that makes sense, and see what happens. Even if we didn't get Andrew Luck, we're poised to make a dramatic improvement next year. There's nothing like a little experience and leadership, it's what we lack right now but we're building it.

This year sucks. But it's nothing like 2001, because any rational person can see a light at the end of the tunnel. Back then we were thrilled at the prospect of seven wins in 2002. Now all of us should expect that next year. Big difference.

#49 Fiz



  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 11,063
  • Reputation: 878

Posted 22 November 2010 - 03:25 PM

Hmm. Pats will go to the playoffs AND have multiple early picks yet again.
Has Marty EVER gotten multiple early rounds(1-3) in a draft?

check here

#50 frash.exe


    Freddy Frashbear

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 15,092
  • Reputation: 5,690

Posted 22 November 2010 - 04:47 PM

Sorry, but a "genius GM" would never have a 1-15 team under his watch this far into his tenure. I'm not sure why we as fans keep bending over backwards to defend a guy whose team has never strung together two straight winning seasons.

i don't know if it's right to have a problem with Hurney's moves during his early tenure here. Fox should be pinned more on the "no back to back winning seasons" thing

Hurney did bring a lot of good guys in the mix at that point and he was doing a much better job than he has the last few years.

#51 Baschski


    Senior Member

  • Joined: 04-January 09
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 1,837
  • Reputation: 0

Posted 22 November 2010 - 08:49 PM

I really hate when we get awesome value out of our late round picks.

#52 House


    Fly Navy

  • Joined: 29-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 2,481
  • Reputation: 0

Posted 22 November 2010 - 09:57 PM

This thread has proven that a lot of people have no idea how the HC/GM dynamic works and what the difference between the two jobs is. Much less who should get praise/blame for what.

#53 Carolina Husker

Carolina Husker

    I hate football

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 10,538
  • Reputation: 394

Posted 22 November 2010 - 10:27 PM

I agree.