+- Atlanta Falcons Talk (http://atlantafalconstalk.com)
+-- Forum: Falcons Fans Message Boards (/Forum-Falcons-Fans-Message-Boards)
+--- Forum: Talk About The Falcons & So Much More (/Forum-Talk-About-The-Falcons-So-Much-More)
+--- Thread: Falcons: Are Falcons Victims Of Their Own Success? (/Thread-Falcons-Are-Falcons-Victims-Of-Their-Own-Success)
Are Falcons Victims Of Their Own Success? - cooperbh - 01-20-2012 09:41 PM
As I watch the playoffs this year, I can't help but be somewhat envious of all the top tier linemen I see making an impact. Ngata, Suggs, Grubbs, McKinnie, Carter, Mankins, Wilfork, Pouncey, Watt, Brown, Bulaga, Staley, Iupati, Smith (Both Justin and Aldon.) I often find myself asking, "Why don't the Falcons have more studs manning the trenches? Players that can push their opponents backwards, regardless of which side of the line they play on?"
That's when it occurrs to me that all of the above players were drafted in the first round, with the vast majority selected in the top half of that round (Pick 16 or higher.) Impact DTs, DEs, OGs and OTs don't just grow on trees, after all.
I then think back to the Cowboys dynasty of the 90's and recall how it was built on a foundation of stockpiled high-round draft picks. That, in turn, makes me wonder how many other built-from-the-ground-up championship teams were constructed in the same manner.
What follows is a list of Super Bowl champions who started their run as a rebuilding team, along with the total number of high-round draft picks each spent in rounds 1-4 during their first four seasons of rebuilding. (Note that Super Bowl winners such as the Patriots, Redskins and Raiders are not included on the list, since the incoming GMs/coaches of those franchises did not inherit a team with a losing record which was in need of rebuilding. Also note that I have adjusted the baseline for what constitutes a high-round pick based on the total number of teams in the league during the year which the SB winner in question drafted.)
Here are the numbers:
Packers, 2006-2009: 10
Saints, 2006-2009: 8
Colts, 1998-2001: 9
Bucs, 1996-1999: 13
Ravens, 1996-1999: 8
Rams, 1997-2000: 12
Packers, 1992-1995: 5
Cowboys, 1989-1992: 18
Bears, 1982-1985: 9
Giants, 1979-1982: 9
49ers, 1979-1982: 11
Dolphins, 1970-1973: 5
Steelers, 1969-1972: 18
And the number of high-round draft picks the Falcons have spent in rounds 1-4 over the last four years? 4.
I don't want to make excuses, because when it comes down to it, you still have to draft well regardless of the slot you end up in. But there's no getting around the fact that the difference in both player talent and pick value between a high first and a low first is much greater than a low first and a high second. The same applies in every round of the draft, but especially so for rounds one, two, three and four. Hence, having high-round draft picks gives a GM a distinct advantage over one who is drafting at the bottom of each round, in regards to both the talent available and flexibility to manuever.
The '70-'73 Dolphins and the '92-'95 Packers not withstanding, every team on the above list had at least twice as many high-round picks as the Falcons did during their first four years of rebuilding. Again, not making excuses, but teams generally do not go from four wins to a yearly playoff participant starting in season one like the Falcons did. Put another way, it's much easier to assemble a roster consisting of high-round picks like Greene, Bradshaw, Blount, Ham, Harris and Swann when you're posting a losing record every season.
Maybe I'm reaching here, but I can't fault TD too much for taking a chance on a Peria Jerry or a Chris Owen when the B.J. Rajis and Ladarius Webbs are already off the board as the Falcons go on the clock. Nor can I solely blame him for overpaying for BPA in free agency or giving up all those low rounders for that "missing piece" when the expectation from both owner and fans alike is "playoff wins or bust" beginning in year two of the process.
Looking at the initial four year records and number of high-round draft picks of those teams listed above, you could make the argument that you have to lose to win a championship. Fortunately or unfortunately, the Falcons haven't had that luxury.
RE: Are Falcons Victims Of Their Own Success? - Radical - 01-20-2012 10:22 PM
With the new pay scale for rookies, I'm starting to think the ideal thing would be to move up to the top and grab a player you view as a "sure-thing" top tier player for the right place. Obviously, you can't do it often, but hitting on talent of that level can be a huge boost. Before, even if you did hit, you'd be loaded down with a ridiculous rookie contract, now it's not so bad.
RE: Are Falcons Victims Of Their Own Success? - phocis850 - 01-20-2012 10:35 PM
Falcons have pretty much everyone they need except a few pieces. Who's to say that if BVG and MM were more aggressive and less obvious in their play calling that we would be on this list as not the norm. We built this team mainly through FA, and it's paid off.
And yes, the rookie payscale is a huge boost now. However, it kinda makes 1st round picks less valuable to a GM. Now that you don't have to find money to pay them anymore. You know what the cost is gonna be.
RE: Are Falcons Victims Of Their Own Success? - Radical - 01-20-2012 11:01 PM
If anything it makes them more valuable. Now you don't have to worry about paying 40,000,000 to someone just because you picked him in the top 5. More people will be willing to trade up now that you won't have to worry about hedging your franchise against some rookie.
RE: Are Falcons Victims Of Their Own Success? - juraitwaluzka - 01-20-2012 11:07 PM
Good points, I'm thinking if not for the rookie wage scale we probably don't jump up to take Julio. The wage scale is the best thing to come out of the lockout if you ask me.
RE: Are Falcons Victims Of Their Own Success? - ATLBound - 01-20-2012 11:20 PM
(01-20-2012 10:35 PM)phocis850 Wrote: Falcons have pretty much everyone they need except a few pieces. Who's to say that if BVG and MM were more aggressive and less obvious in their play calling that we would be on this list as not the norm. We built this team mainly through FA, and it's paid off.
And yes, the rookie payscale is a huge boost now. However, it kinda makes 1st round picks less valuable to a GM. Now that you don't have to find money to pay them anymore. You know what the cost is gonna be.
Of all the positions that have changed since this regime got here I believe we have more from the draft than we do from FA
RE: Are Falcons Victims Of Their Own Success? - hitwriter - 01-22-2012 01:15 AM
(01-20-2012 11:07 PM)juraitwaluzka Wrote: Good points, I'm thinking if not for the rookie wage scale we probably don't jump up to take Julio. The wage scale is the best thing to come out of the lockout if you ask me.
+1
RE: Are Falcons Victims Of Their Own Success? - The Falcon Jedi - 01-22-2012 02:22 AM
Falcons are victims of over-expectations. Falcons have built a good team, not a great team. Marketing and clever advertising got the Fans hyped for success too soon and too fast. This team has been above average, but with obvious weaknesses. I think the 2008 team, Ryan's rookie season, was our best team in this regime so far.
RE: Are Falcons Victims Of Their Own Success? - Radical - 01-22-2012 04:24 AM
I wish I could provide more of a response for you coop. I haven't felt inspired enough to do a lot of in-depth research, but a lot of the key cogs in successful teams weren't necessarily from high draft picks during a period of losing. In the modern era of Free Agency, you don't see teams needing a bunch of top tier draft picks to get going. Would the Saints be where they are without getting Brees through FA? Would the Packers have done what they did without drafting Rodgers late in 05?
RE: Are Falcons Victims Of Their Own Success? - m2Falcons - 01-22-2012 10:19 AM
(01-20-2012 11:01 PM)Radical Wrote: If anything it makes them more valuable. Now you don't have to worry about paying 40,000,000 to someone just because you picked him in the top 5. More people will be willing to trade up now that you won't have to worry about hedging your franchise against some rookie.TD saw the opportunity last year. I applaud him for it. Julio is gonna' be a 12 year Monster at WR in the NFL and isn't a frigg'n Diva either. Barring injury disaster TD solved one huge hole/need issue for 12 years with a potential future HOFer.