Calvin Ridley has been suspended for the 2022 season, at a minimum; he'll be eligible to apply for reinstatement a year from now, but as we've seen in the past, professional sports tend to come down hard on gambling offenses. Nobody can say with any confidence when and where Ridley might play again.
Most can understand why leagues are so averse to players and coaches (Pete Rose) gambling on their teams or sports. It's the "integrity of the game" concern, since they're in position to affect outcomes of games, or -- in the case of Ridley specifically -- have inside information which can affect outcomes. He'd left the Falcons, but it's certainly possible he could have been privy to info the general public isn't, as a for instance. Plenty of scenarios where an active player, with the team or not, could influence and/or benefit from an outcome.
But there's plenty of sympathy for Ridley, which I can also understand. The NFL has partnerships with FanDuel and DraftKings. They want us to gamble; they're promoting it on a regular basis. In the past it was more subtle, a casual, tacit acknowledgment, which has been around since forever (Jimmy the Greek, anyone?). It's definitely hypocritical to actively, aggressively encourage gambling to everyone following the sport, while throwing the (sports)book at those in it. I understand why players can't and shouldn't gamble. But the NFL needs to recognize that they're putting out mixed messages here.
Whatever. Ironically, it could be said that this suspension actually increases the chances of Ridley playing for the Falcons again (someday). I say this because the entire offseason storyline involving Ridley over the past two months has focused on him being traded, with the Patriots one of the teams commonly mentioned. Absolutely no one has been talking about Ridley as Atlanta's No. 1 wideout next season. So Atlanta's loss here is in the draft pick compensation they have got for a talented wideout, not much from the 2022 on-field product (barring that pick or picks being immediate contributors). It always looked like Atlanta would have a gaping hole at No. 1 wideout. Since Ridley now won't be traded in the next month, perhaps he suits up for the team in 2023.
As for 2022, the Falcons will be looking at free agency and the NFL draft (they have the 8th overall pick) for wide receivers, since they're comically undermanned at the moment -- they barely have enough under contract to even approach the definition of "meeting." Last year's No. 1 Russell Gage is an unrestricted free agent. So is running back/wide receiver hybrid Cordarrelle Patterson. Olamide Zaccheaus, the team's only other wideout to reach 300 receiving yards a year ago, is a restricted free agent. He'll doubtless be back, and currently slots in as their No. 1, hilarious though that sounds. Last year's No. 3, Tajae Sharpe, is also unrestricted. Next man up: special teamer Frank Darby, a former sixth-round pick who caught 1 pass in 10 games a year ago.
If there's any positive that can be taken out of this, it's that tight end Kyle Pitts looks like a lock to be a target monster next season. He has to be. Pitts was generally considered a disappointment last year, scoring just 1 TD, but he's also the first rookie tight end to go over 1,000 receiving yards since Mike Ditka did it 60 years ago. Every rookie tight end should be so disappointing.
So Pitts, and perhaps Gage (if he re-signs) and whatever other wideout steps into Atlanta's starting lineup look extra intriguing with Ridley gone. But there's far more negative.
Especially for Matt Ryan. The Falcons are stuck with the 37-year-old (in May) for one more season, thanks to a contract restructure that makes him virtually impossible to get off the books until 2023. He won't have Ridley, so he'll be working with Pitts and probably a new or lesser wideout or three, so a bounce-back is unlikely. His splits last year -- with Ridley, and without him -- are pretty alarming.
First table below shows Ryan's numbers last year in the five games he had Ridley in the lineup. From a fantasy perspective, not bad: the Week 1 dud against the Eagles, but all others, and his 5-game averages, pretty solid.
| RYAN W/RIDLEY, 2021 | ||
|---|---|---|
| Opp | Yards | TD |
| Phil. | 164 | 0 |
| at T.B. | 300 | 2 |
| at NYG | 243 | 2 |
| Was. | 283 | 4 |
| at Mia. | 336 | 2 |
| Average | 265 | 2 |
Then there are the 12 games Ryan didn't have Ridley in the lineup last year. Those weren't so good. Most notably, Ryan threw multiple touchdowns in four of five with his No. 1, but just two of 12 without him. He threw for even 240 yards in just three of those non-Ridley games.
| RYAN W/OUT RIDLEY, 2021 | ||
|---|---|---|
| Opp | Yards | TD |
| NYJ | 342 | 2 |
| Car. | 146 | 1 |
| at N.O. | 343 | 2 |
| at Dal. | 117 | 0 |
| N.E. | 153 | 0 |
| at Jac. | 190 | 1 |
| T.B. | 297 | 0 |
| at Car. | 190 | 1 |
| at S.F. | 236 | 1 |
| Det. | 215 | 1 |
| at Buf. | 197 | 0 |
| N.O. | 216 | 1 |
| Average | 220 | 0.8 |
To sum: the Falcons are in trouble. No Ridley in 2022, which isn't a huge surprise, but also no draft pick compensation that could be used to help replace him. As for Ridley himself, I hope he comes back in 2023. While his offense may be terrible for the all-important integrity of the game, it's hardly the worst a player can do or has done and returned to the NFL. Meanwhile, the NFL might need to think about some of its partnership choices. Promoting and discouraging gambling at the same time is a tricky path to navigate.
--Andy Richardson