Crumpler cut

Matt Moore obviously has good chemistry with him.

 

I'm disappointed. I thought this thread would be 10 pages easy by now.


In any case, Rosario is really more of an H-back than a TE at this point. He needs to add a lot of muscle mass before he can realistically line up on the line every down. For my own part, I don't see Crumpler as a need. King has proven himself to be solid, and while Crumpler would obviously be better, I don't see how spending millions more to go from solid to good makes that much of a difference to our offense. We don't have much money to spend and I don't think Crumpler would be the best way to spend it unless he takes a heavy hometown discount, something that seems pretty unlikely given that most of the NFL is flush with cash.

And if we don't pick up Crumpler, I would like to see us get a blocking tight end for situational duty, even if he has no fingers on either hand.

 

King was OK for what he needed to be - a bargain priced starter at a position and a guy to compete with the other players. It's not his fault the team put a lot of faith and the RFA on Gaines, but he wasn't anything to write home about after the first few games of the year. He wasn't a good blocker, and Fauria had to provide that, so Fauria got a fair amount of snaps later on.

If we can get better, we should consider it. We may not make a big splash at WR, that may be a roleplayer, so getting a good receiving option can't hurt.

 

Crumpler is a playmaker...King is a player.

I know for a fact that teams have played the Falcons knowing that Crumpler is the first guy they have to stop in the passing game, especially when Vick was still the QB. How many teams face the Panthers with stopping Jeff King as one of their priorities?

 

I like how you phrase that as if you had any clue whatsoever what teams were actually thinking. You "know" that teams were most worried about Crumpler the same way we all do, because we assume it since it seems logical. That is in no way a "fact," however, and you don't actually "know" it. I happen to agree with you, but the way you phrased that was absurd.


magnus:
Sure, Crumpler is better than King, but King is in no way bad. To me, it would be like spending $800 on a new video card when the one you already have is perfectly serviceable. If you have no monetary concerns then fine, but if you have a limit on how much money you can spend, you probably ought to spend it on things you need more.

 

Crump's numbers were a tad distorted with Vick, b/c of the whole "scramble and run until I find someone open in the immediate open field" deal.

He wasn't bad, thru pain, last year. But it's a valid point, about the $$$. I'd just as soon sign another vet WR (Bryant Johnson, Donte Stallworth--if available, David Patten).

We need to be focused on RG. Doesn't have to be Larry Allen from 1994, but we need something more there. Otherwise, all of this shit it moot.

 

Good Lord Collin, do you ever get tired of starting arguments over every minute detail? Of course I haven't been in the meeting rooms, film rooms, or game planning sessions with the Falcons opponents. It's just common sense that you would want to stop the other team's leading receiver...you're right.

 

Crumpler doesn't scare me anymore. He had one nice play vs. Carolina last fall, but the only player not blitzing was picked (err...) by the umpire.

He's never scared me in the past, and he won't scare me in the future. He's solid, and worth a look, but I'm not going to lose sleep, shit razorblades, or jump off a bridge if we don't sign him.

 

Considering that you just gave Wp28 crap for talking about cap space, I think you pretending that you "know for a fact" that other teams were primarily concerned with Crumpler was relevant.

 

I just want another receiving threat to keep Steve Smith from getting clubbed