Tomlinson for Vick debate gets revisited

It was only a matter of time before some writer would approach the, “Falcons should have drafted LaDainian Tomlinson instead of Michael Vick” subject. What’s surprising, however, is who the first writer to stoke the fires was.

In his “Tuesday Countdown” column for the Atlanta Journal Constitution, Jeff Schultz briefly discusses how LT should be a Falcon:

Soooo … maybe now’s not a good time to re-evaluate that whole Vick-for-LaDainian Tomlinson-Drew Brees-Tim Dwight trade.

1. It wasn’t Vick for Tomlinson-Drew Brees and Tim Dwight. It was the first overall pick in the 2001 NFL Draft, for the No. 4 selection, Dwight and a third round pick in 2002. People like to lump Brees into the equation because he plays the same position as Vick, but the Chargers didn’t use the Falcons second round pick to select him.

2. The Falcons still had Jamal Anderson in the backfield and he was coming off a 16-game, 1,000-yard season after suffering a knee injury the year before. He was only 29 and healthy again, so the Falcons didn’t really need a back.

3. The most damning point regarding this subject: Dan Reeves, the Falcons head coach and GM at the time, admitted shortly after the ’01 draft that he would have selected offensive tackle Kenyatta Walker or Leonard Davis if he wasn’t able to work out a deal for the No. 1 pick.

By all accounts, LT probably wasn’t going to be a Falcon even if they didn’t trade for Vick. You’d think an Atlanta-based writer would know that. In fact, if you’re going to hammer a team for passing on Tomlinson, make it Cleveland, who instead took Gerard Warren at the No. 3 selection even though they could have definitely used a back (Jamel White anyone?).

Follow the Scores Report editors on Twitter @clevelandteams and @bullzeyedotcom.

Related Posts

  • No Related Post

Leave a Reply

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>