clock menu more-arrow no yes

Filed under:

Did the Buccaneers have a better offseason than the Falcons?

New, comments

There’s a case to be made, and ESPN makes it.

NFL: Atlanta Falcons at Tampa Bay Buccaneers Kim Klement-USA TODAY Sports

We all, I think, liked the Falcons’ offseason. The draft class was quality, free agency gave the team one impact defender and a few useful pieces, and they really only lost our dear friend Patrick DiMarco along the way. If they fall short of the playoffs this year, it won’t be because of anything they did in the offseason.

That said, not everyone loved the team’s low-key approach to the offseason, and multiple outlets have insinuated that the Buccaneers should be the toast of the NFC South for their approach. This happens on an annual basis—think of how many times in recent years analysts have picked the Bucs to go to the playoffs—but this time’s a little different because we’re not talking about a season projection. They may even have a point.

The Bucs, perennial also-rans, managed to come away with DeSean Jackson and a strong draft class, potentially vaulting them past the Panthers and Saints in the NFC South. I’d love to trash Tampa Bay the way I always do, but the reality is that they’re not that far away from being one of the more dangerous teams in the entire conference, and those wanting to laud them for their offseason ahead of the Falcons aren’t necessarily wrong to do so. If anyone suggests they’re better than the Falcons...well, forget that.

Was the Bucs’ offseason actually better? Discuss.