AJC: Falcons Want Mike Peterson To Return In 2011

by Dave Choate on May 19, 2011 8:01 AM EDT in Falcons News

There may be no country for old men, but there's always a roster spot for an old linebacker.

Mike Peterson could've been on the chopping block this off-season, but the Falcons seem committed to returning to him for at least one more season. I've long been harder on Peterson than most because I'm a big believer in a young, mobile linebacking corps that can help out in pass protection..Call me old-fashioned.

But Peterson has undeniably been an asset for the Falcons, and ironically he was much better in 2010 than 2009. At this point he gives the team a great veteran presence—he's helping to lead up off-season workouts—an above average skill set when it comes to stopping runners and a below average one in the passing game. Unless he drops off a cliff, he's a perfectly solid option to start outside in the short-term.

For the long haul, of course, we're talking about another player. But if Peterson's right in his interview with the Atlanta Journal-Constitution that the Falcons want him back, I'm happy to welcome him back into the fold.

Are you?

Tweet Comment 60 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Hell yeah

He made the most game changing plays and impact plays of all the linebackers this year.

"I'm about rings now"
~Arthur Blank

by CollegePark4Life on May 19, 2011 8:20 AM EDT reply actions

Granted I didn't see every game the past two seasons

But I have a lot more memories of Peterson being in the right place at the right time or jarring the ball loose on a taller than I have of him going Keith Brooking vs. the Cardinals.

But if we want him to come back it’s most likely as a starter. What does that mean for Nicholas?

by FLA_Falcon on May 19, 2011 8:37 AM EDT via mobile reply actions

I think he's comfortable taking a back seat

If the Lions grab Nicholas to further bolster their ridiculous defensive front seven, then he’ll probably start. But it seems like he’s been hinting more recently that he’s aware of his age and role on the team. If the staff is smart he transitions into a Finneran-esque presence on defense — takes a backseat to the younger, faster guys but still in there for high leverage situations and there to mold the newer players.

by kman_722 on May 19, 2011 8:51 AM EDT up reply actions

Well Nicholas is already testing the market when te lockout is lifted

And chances are there’s gonna be a lot more teams willing to pay more for him. So I doubt Nicholas will be back next year

"The only problem with invading America isn't getting past their military, but dealing with the 80 million snipers once you're in."-Joseph Stalin

by dirtybirds233 on May 19, 2011 9:59 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions

He's a real pro!

Can’t have too many really pro players on your team. He leads by example and plays every play full speed. If he knows this could be his last year maybe he will want to go out balls afire!

by Gjmoody on May 19, 2011 8:49 AM EDT via mobile reply actions

I’m a big believer in a young, mobile linebacking corps that can help out in pass protection.

You’re not alone on this one. I thought the Falcons felt the same way. Seriously, isn’t that why Keith Brooking was let go?

"In a dog eat dog world, you must have the mentality of a Pit Bull." -Phil Jackson

by waltbabyluv on May 19, 2011 9:44 AM EDT reply actions 2 recs

rec'd

There’s no denying that he was solid last year, but this feels like that moment when you decide to stay at the craps table one spin too long. To be fair, if he’s cheap, then it’s probably not the worst move possible. Just scares me a little.

by James Rael on May 19, 2011 9:49 AM EDT up reply actions

He's an older vet who would rather stay in Atlanta than test the market - so yeah he's going to be cheap by NFL standards

I think these are the types of Free Agent acquisitions we need to pay more attention to. Peterson brings a reasonable skill set at a reasonable price – which is just what we need as we prepare our younger players to be full-time starters.

As it stands, he can back up all of our LB spots, is familiar with our system, and even start for us until Dent is ready to take over (assuming Nicholas leaves). Nobody is expecting Peterson to have a long-term future with the team, but he does give us short-term flexibility. And did I mention this will likely be the least expensive way to add depth to our LB corps? What’s not to like?

by Leon07 on May 19, 2011 11:50 AM EDT up reply actions

What’s not to like?

Plenty. You act like he’s not 34 (almost 35) years old and 2009 didn’t happen. Don’t get me wrong, I like Mike. I’d just rather they re-sign Nicholas (though I understand that’s probably not possible).

If you re-read what I wrote, you’ll see that we pretty much agree. It’s not the worst move possible, especially if he comes cheap.

As for familiarity with the system, I don’t really buy that argument, though it gets thrown around A LOT. These are professionals. If they’re present for training camp, they’ll grasp the terminology. At this point, with the end of the lockout nowhere in sight, I’m sure the Falcons FO will give him a look. But if FA comes to fruition in the near future, I guarantee you they look at other options.

by James Rael on May 19, 2011 12:36 PM EDT up reply actions

There's nothing wrong with having some proven depth

Would you rather see Peterson or Robert James step in in the 4th quarter of the NFC Championship game if Spoon goes down?

by Mosugo on May 19, 2011 12:07 PM EDT up reply actions

False dichotomy

There will be a free agency sooner or later. He’s not the only option.

by James Rael on May 19, 2011 12:36 PM EDT up reply actions

Plus there’s nowhere in the article that says the Falcons confirmed that they wanted him back. Peterson thinks they want him back and he’s heard they want him back, they never told him they want him back.

"In a dog eat dog world, you must have the mentality of a Pit Bull." -Phil Jackson

by waltbabyluv on May 19, 2011 12:55 PM EDT up reply actions

The FO said so months ago, but things can change

by Fear Me on May 19, 2011 2:22 PM EDT up reply actions

Fair enough he's not the only option

But I’m assuming he is just a backup/special teamer (He had a very good blocked punt in 2009). I don’t see another player available who could combine being cheap, being a great veteran leader and who would be willing to be a backup.

by Mosugo on May 19, 2011 3:54 PM EDT up reply actions

true. By the interview he gave in the AJC

it sounds as if he’s willing to take a backup role

by Fear Me on May 19, 2011 4:10 PM EDT up reply actions

Fair enough

But 2/3 of those factors are TBD and the third (veteran leadership) can come from other places. We won’t know who’s going to be cheap/willing to be a backup for some time.

by James Rael on May 19, 2011 6:12 PM EDT up reply actions

Peterson would be brought back for depth and

leadership. He is also tough against the run. The other driver for bringing him back might be the situation with Nicholas.

by mwalex on May 19, 2011 12:37 PM EDT up reply actions

Mentoring Dent for his eventual transition to strong-side LB

would probably be another

"My parents do a lot of things behind the scenes that go unnoticed"- Cam Newton, Heisman acceptance speech.

by TurnerTheBurner on May 19, 2011 3:11 PM EDT up reply actions

Wouldve been nice to nab Justin Houston though...

Ron Artest = Ron (sm)Artest - He Is The Most Interesting Man In The World

by JoshChildressAfroIsCure4Cancer on May 19, 2011 10:00 AM EDT reply actions

Houston most likely would have been playing DE

by jlanders on May 19, 2011 11:42 AM EDT up reply actions

Houston definitely would have played DE.

by Mosugo on May 19, 2011 12:07 PM EDT up reply actions

I don't know if he could lose 10 - 20 lbs

He would be a beast at the LB

Ron Artest = Ron (sm)Artest - He Is The Most Interesting Man In The World

by JoshChildressAfroIsCure4Cancer on May 19, 2011 10:08 PM EDT up reply actions

His n attribute is rushing the passer

by Mosugo on May 20, 2011 6:59 AM EDT up reply actions

*main

Why waste that at LB?

by Mosugo on May 20, 2011 7:00 AM EDT up reply actions

I want him back

But as a backup. I’d prefer Nicholas starting over him.

I doubt Nicholas stays though, so Peterson is the next best option. It’s not too bad of a drop-off.

by ndnpride8806 on May 19, 2011 10:07 AM EDT reply actions

I think keeping him is a good idea

If we lose him and nic what options do we have in free agency that are noticeably better? Then can we sign two better LB in free agency, since trades are out of the question?

"I'm about rings now"
~Arthur Blank

by CollegePark4Life on May 19, 2011 1:27 PM EDT reply actions

Keep Nicholas And Snelling

Getting a bit frustrated. Losing a starting LB just entering his prime and a high quality running back due to cash, but can spend just a ton else where. Nicholas was 3rd in tackles last year. Your now 3rd WR, Jenkins, probably makes more than what it would take to keep both of them. Note that neither are TD draft choices.

by Whopper Dawg on May 19, 2011 1:40 PM EDT reply actions

Exactly

Rich McKay picked all these great players and never picked any busts. Why was he ever demoted? Seriously, I don’t understand what you want from Dimitroff’s drafts. You seem to be upset that Dimitroff is fallible. It is impossible to bat 100% in the draft. It’s almost impossible to even bat 50% Even in the first round. There will always be busts and bad picks. Look at Belichick’s (the so called king of the draft) recent history high in the draft. I will ignore 2010 as it is too soon. I will also go by your methods of judging a pick-ignore qualitative views and only look at if they have put up good stats. Also anyone who was injured is a bust. :

2009: 4 2nd round picks with which they picked: Patrick Chung, Ron Brace, Sebastien Vollmer and Darius Butler.

Butler has been a healthy scratch several times. He has 3 career starts. Vollmer was a good pick, their current starting right tackle. Ron Brace has 7 career starts but no sacks and only 31 tackles. He has finished both seasons on IR. Patrick Chung has started 14 games and has 4 picks and 2 sacks. Another good pick.

3rd round-Brandon Tate and Tyrone McKenzie

Tate only played 3 games his rookie year. He played in all 16 this year. He has 24 receptions for 432 yards and 3 TDs in his career. However due to his return ability I call him a good pick. Mckenzie was released before ever playing for the team.

So the Patriots were .500 high in the 2009 draft.

2008-1st round-Jerod Mayo
2nd round- Terence Wheatley
3rd round-Shawn Crable and Kevin O’Connell

Mayo was undisputadly a great pick. Wheatley is no longer on the roster. The Pats just drafted another QB in the 3rd round-so they have no faith in O’Connell. Crable was released after spending his rookie year on IR.

So they were .250 high in the 2008 draft.

2007-1st round-Brandon Merriweather

Their only high pick before the first round, he has made 2 pro bowls. But he has also been benched several times for performance reasons and was involved in a shooting this offseason. I’m going to say undecided

2006-Round 1-Laurence Maroney
Round 2-Chad Jackson
Round 3-Dave Thomas

Maroney was traded for a 4th rounder. Jackson was cut after 2 years of doing nothing. Thomas was traded for a 7th rounder in 2009. So the Pats were .000 high in this draft.

So in total the Pats were 4/13 or .307 between 2006 and 2009 with several players not making the roster.

Temper your expectations please, drafting is unpredictable. You cannot be sure of any players, even in the high rounds. And even if you consider Dimitroff’s high picks as busts, which I don’t, he is much better than .307. And all of our high picks are still on the roster. You cannot expect 100% success high in the draft, which it seems like you do sometimes.

by Mosugo on May 19, 2011 4:21 PM EDT up reply actions 3 recs

Wow

I mostly agree with you, but I’ve gotta point out 2 things to make sure we’re sticking to the facts:

1. If you’re considering the first 3 Rounds as “high picks”, we’ve got one that’s already gone from the roster – Chevis Jackson.

2. Thomas Dimitroff was still with the Patriots in 2006 and 2007. I know Belichick has final say, but it doesn’t do much good to trash those 2 draft classes for NE when TD was their Director of Scouting… I feel pretty confident you’d get similar results if you go back 4-5 years with GB, Indy, or Pittsburgh, though.

"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein

by orang3b on May 19, 2011 4:58 PM EDT up reply actions

Completely forgot about Chevis Jackson

I was going to do it for the Packers-and on the surface of it you would look to get similar results with guys like Brian Brohm(2nd), Justin Harrell (1st), Pat Lee(2nd), Abdul Hodge(3rd) and Brandon Jackson (2nd). Also, I didn’t put too much stock into Dimitroff being there during those drafts as he was essentially 3rd in command behind Pioli and Belichick and he has shown to have a very different philosophy from Belichick in his time here.

by Mosugo on May 19, 2011 6:45 PM EDT up reply actions

Wow

Pretty incredible post. There was no comment on TD’s draft expertise and certainly none on New England’s (although your knowledge on the subject is truly impressive). Guess you have bunches of time.

All I was lamenting was

1) We were probably (by all accounts) losing two very good players for the Falcons
2) We have a bunch of money tied up in one position now (and by further explanation) it looks to start hurting resources in other positions
3) They were McKay picks. Often in business and the NFL, if you are not the current regime’s “guy” than you are more prone to elimination (fire, trade, release, not signed, etc) than someone the new regime has brought in. I did not say that was a factor or would be, just noted that it is the case.

How you can take those comments and blow it up into some sort of attack on TD involving New England’s draft history is beyond me.

I believe my comments are accurate, but since I can’t say that on this board anymore, (along with numerous other things) allow me to say the following:

This post and all the preceded it, and will follow it are strictly and entirely speculation on my part and do not represent the views of the Falcons, the NFL, the government and mankind as a whole.

by Whopper Dawg on May 19, 2011 11:44 PM EDT up reply actions

I know you didn't comment on TD's draft history this time

The New England draft knowledge came from a simple google and watching some NFL games over the last 3 years. I was just addressing your usual point that TD’s drafts have ben disappointing.

by Mosugo on May 20, 2011 6:59 AM EDT up reply actions

You didn't comment on TD's draft history this time

Then why bring it up? That would be like me bringing up something you posted on another subject at this time. Why would I do that?

Doesn’t make sense.

by Whopper Dawg on May 20, 2011 2:38 PM EDT up reply actions

LOL - Love the disclaimer.

by FLA_Falcon on May 20, 2011 9:21 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions

Whopper Dawg, point #2

I completely agree with this. It is probably my biggest objection to the trade for Julio. Not just that our likely WR3 will be making $3.5M this year… but that it also basically forces an expensive Free Agent signing at DE, which squeezes the “budget” even further.

The trade (IMO) was very “win-now” and fairly high risk. It seems like a move a team like Indianapolis might want to make… to go all-in while Peyton Manning’s window of opportunity is still open (I didn’t realize he was already 35). But Matt Ryan’s only 25! If this move doesn’t work out, it could cause a fairly big step-back in a few years (not enough cheap-ish high quality Rookies coming in; too many bloated FA contracts – assuming there will be a Salary Cap). I want that “window” open as long as possible. The trade seems like TD was trying to open the window as wide as possible right now. The consequences of it not working scare the crap out of me, but I guess that’s why TD’s the GM – he has big brass balls. After he finalized the trade:

Dimitroff was at peace, taking in six weeks of work and research. All of his nerves were settled and the job done.

"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital." - Aaron Levenstein

by orang3b on May 20, 2011 11:21 AM EDT up reply actions

Actually,

Including the playoffs, Nicholas was 4th in tackles.

by mwalex on May 19, 2011 5:34 PM EDT up reply actions

, Nicholas was 4th in tackles

Still very valuable, eh?

by Whopper Dawg on May 19, 2011 11:46 PM EDT up reply actions

I can't argue that one

by mwalex on May 20, 2011 5:25 AM EDT up reply actions

LB corp should be

Nicholas (SS), Lofton (MLB), and Weatherspoon (WLB) as starters

Peterson, Wire, and Dent as backups.

by Fear Me on May 19, 2011 2:28 PM EDT reply actions

oops Nicholas SLB not strong safety

by Fear Me on May 19, 2011 2:29 PM EDT up reply actions

haveu guys lost it?!?

Nick was marginal, above average, at best. He was 3rd in tackles cause no one else could bring anybody down. I like the guy but if he wants to test the market, then by all means proceed. As for Pete, he has been in Mike Smith’s system for more than his time with the Falcs. He came over with CS from Jax. He is old but he is a locker room presence. This FO cares about the locker room. TD and CS have brought this team a long way, Until they give me reason to doubt I’m on board

by birdwatch on May 19, 2011 3:06 PM EDT via mobile reply actions

I pretty much agree

by saipol on May 19, 2011 4:05 PM EDT up reply actions

If the was 3rd in tackles as a backup where would Nicholas have been if he was starting?

by Fear Me on May 19, 2011 4:12 PM EDT up reply actions

He wasn't a backup

61 of his 72 tackles came as a starter.

by Mosugo on May 19, 2011 4:28 PM EDT up reply actions

Well, it all depends on whom you's rather have starting

Nicholas or Peterson. If you think Nicholas is marginal would you rather have Peterson start? I hope not because he is terrible against the pass and twice the age of Nicholas. Marginal, hmmm, best third starting LB on ATL, that’s for sure.

by mwalex on May 19, 2011 5:37 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs

this

by James Rael on May 19, 2011 6:13 PM EDT up reply actions

Not sure I disagree with your points

but has anyone else noticed how much more love Nicholas is getting now that there’s the possibility he might leave?

I like the guy and all but I’m not sure how much above average he really is. His stats from last year put him just slightly below Micheal Boley (NYG) and their career stats are fairly similar. Honestly I think that’s the kind of player Nicholas is going to be: good but nothing special.

Assuming we can get the same production from Peterson/Dent at a significantly lower price, I wouldn’t be heartbroken to see Nicholas walk.

by Leon07 on May 19, 2011 6:44 PM EDT up reply actions

Exactly

He is a solid NFL starter. The kind of guy you find in the later rounds of every draft. Also I think that too much is being made of the coverage abilities. Whoever our 3rd linebacker is will be coming out on 3rd down. Spoon and Lofton are our nickel linebackers. I know not all passing is done on 3rd down (unless you’re the Falcons), but if the opposition was in a pass heavy formation we would be in nickel anyway regardless of the down.

by Mosugo on May 19, 2011 6:48 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs

Ehhh, I can't agree

I think people are putting too little stock in what is needed at WOLB.

I agree that ATL shouldn’t pay Nicholas huge money, but his 4yr/$1.83MM contract, around $450K per year, is MUCH less than Peterson 2yr/$6.5MM contract, $3.25MM a year. Justin Peele was paid $1.635MM for last year. Nicholas was paid slightly more than Antoine Smith. He was paid less than Coy Wire, $765K.

I’d be all for him getting Peterson money and Peterson getting Nicholas money from last year.

Oh yeah, just for you Leon7, Boley was paid $3.5MM for last year. Almost 9 times more than Nicholas.

by mwalex on May 19, 2011 7:35 PM EDT up reply actions

it's not just

About who u want starting. If Nicholas would play here for 1mil a year, sign and start him. Bye Pete! But since Nicks is going to want more than that, I think it would be a good idea to hold onto a guy who organizes team workouts and has been in the same system for more years than Nicholas has been in the league. And isn’t it funny how when Spoon got hurt people didn’t seem as keen on Nicks starting. Now all of a sudden we should trade MJ12 just to clear salary to keep him?

by birdwatch on May 20, 2011 12:49 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions

Not sure what you mean here about Nicholas

There were plenty of times on this site that fans wanted to see Spoon, Lofton, and Nicholas on the field at the same time

by Fear Me on May 20, 2011 1:59 PM EDT up reply actions

Now let's not worry too much

Even though neither Mo Pete nor Akeem Dent are good in pass coverage, it seems most likely that they’ll share snaps at SLB on 1st and 2nd down, and then bring out the nickel/dime package on 3rd most of the time. My guess is Peterson sees 75% of snaps and Dent gets 25%.

So while their pass coverage skills will be somewhat of a liability, as long as we sign a veteran Nickel CB to shore up our Nickel defense I’ll be happy.

"My parents do a lot of things behind the scenes that go unnoticed"- Cam Newton, Heisman acceptance speech.

by TurnerTheBurner on May 19, 2011 3:09 PM EDT reply actions

You have no idea how Dent will play in pass coverage

People get on here are repeat that with NO basis for it. The played three years under a crappy DC and under a new DC his last year where UGA transitioned from a 4-3 to a 3-4.

I can almost guarantee you he will be better than Peterson in pass coverage.

by mwalex on May 19, 2011 5:41 PM EDT up reply actions

You have no idea how Dent will play in pass coverage

Well, I saw him play for the past two years at UGA in person, and I can tell you for certain that his strength is definitely playing the run. He’s also (most likely) going to be switching from MLB to SLB so you have to take into consideration he might struggle to adjust to pass coveraging playing from the strong side than playing in the middle.

he played three years under a crappy DC

What does Wilie Martinez have anything to do with how well Dent defends the pass?
He ran a 4-3. We run a 4-3. If anything, playing in a 4-3 for 3 years should help him transition to our defense better than playing under Grantham did.