|ESPN.com: NFC South||[Print without images]|
Posted by ESPN.com's Pat Yasinskas
Final stop on the team-by-team mailbag is the Atlanta Falcons.
Wjeri in Augusta writes: How can the falcons enternain trading Vick without a backup quarterback,not only that ,with this new wildcat system Vick would fit perfect in ATLANTA,and he will pack the house and the N.F.L.Even murderers and child molesters are given a chance vick is no better or no less.He has done his time now it's time to be prime.
Pat Yasinskas: Let me start by saying I believe Michael Vick will play in the NFL again ... elsewhere in the NFL. In other words, not Atlanta. That's the last place he'll play. Forget all the legal stuff and just look at reality. What possible sense would it make to have Vick (and his huge contract) as a backup? The Falcons have a ton of money invested in Matt Ryan and, if you didn't notice, he was phenomenal last year. The Falcons don't need to run the Wildcat much, if at all. If they feel the urge, they can snap the ball to Jerious Norwood. Besides, I think defensive coordinators around the league might come up with some ideas to stop, or slow, the Wildcat next season.
David in Pendleton, Oregon writes: I heard the Raiders released Gibril Wilson what do you think the odds are of the Falcons picking him up?
Pat Yasinskas: Like the idea a lot. Gibril Wilson is only 27, and that's eight years younger than Lawyer Milloy, who the Falcons have said they will not re-sign. Wilson was released by the Raiders last week and that makes him a free agent before free agency even starts Friday. I think there are a fair amount of teams that will show interest in Wilson. He didn't have a great season with Oakland last year, but few of the Raiders did. Before that, Wilson was a pretty solid safety for the Giants. The one thing that could get in the way of the Falcons pursuing Wilson is the price tag. If that stops them, I still expect them to pursue some less-expensive free-agent safeties.
Steve in Eugene, OR writes: Pat, I read your article on Brooking with interest. Reports have been that he achieved some trigger in his contract making 2010 a voidable year. On which end is it voidable, Brooking's or the Falcons'? Is he technically not under contract to the Falcons right now, or would have actually have to be cut? As always, thanks for the work you do.
Pat Yasinskas: Steve, this situation appears to be a little hazy. As I understand it, Keith Brooking did trigger something that made 2009 a voidable year -- and it's the Falcons who hold the right to void the year. The assumption is they will void it, if they haven't already. But there are indications Brooking and the Falcons have been talking in recent days. You could see a deal reached where he stays around at a lower salary and with the understanding that he might be a backup.
Pat Yasinskas: Well, that's always a possibility, especially when you consider the up-and-down history of the NFC South. But I like the way Mike Smith and Thomas Dimitroff have built this team. They've got a very good core in place. Sure, there's some touching up to do, but I think the Falcons should be a playoff contender for a long time to come. And the biggest reason I say that is Ryan. I give him an "A" for his rookie season. Yeah, maybe he wore down and wasn't quite as effective at the end of the season. But this kid is very good and he's going to keep getting better.