It is currently Sun Nov 23, 2014 3:40 pm

All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]





Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 97 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: It should be Dominique Time
PostPosted: Wed Dec 18, 2013 10:18 pm 
Offline
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 3:03 pm
Posts: 26068
Location: North Carolina
Cyril wrote:
All you've wanted is for Ryan to have more longer passes and play wide open. I don't think Ryan wants to and I don't care what people say, nobody can make Ryan throw long!!
He loves the dink and dunk and always has.

One of the benefits of watching the All 22 each week is seeing how rarely the Falcons receivers run routes beyond 15 yards. If its 2nd & 8, more often than not our receivers are running 7-8 yards down field, turning, and waiting for Ryan to throw the ball. Thats purely the product of play design, thus the province of the offensive coordinator.

I agree that Ryan is inherently cautious. He'll NEVER be what we often term a "gunslinger" but I'm not asking him to be. I just would like to see 3-5 plays in the 1st quarter/half that are designed to go down the field. Most weeks its been 1, maybe 2 during the entire 1st half. Deep passing early simply hasn't existed in our offense outside the Bills/Bucs (Week 7) games. Trust me, I've been keeping track since Week 8. Ryan is dead last in the league in terms of 15+ yard pass attempts per AdvancedNFLStats with 12%. Pretty much every other Top 10 QB is throwing between 18-27%.

AngryJohnny51 wrote:
Hard to throw deep when you have receivers who can't get seperation and an O-line that is giving him zero protection. when White and Jones were healthy last year, he seemed to have no problem pulling the trigger. How soon we forget. Can't blame him for loving dinking and dunking when he's getting killed back there. Plus, the short quick pass is an extention to our (lack of) running game.

Again I think people overexaggerate the lacking quality of the OL. Is it bad? Yes, it marks winning hard. Is it terrible? No, in the sense that winning isn't impossible. And the rhetoric I keeping reading/hearing is one that seems to suggest "Well, what can the coaches do with this line?"

And I'm sorry but I just don't buy it. Ryan is getting hit more, but not by a huge degree. This year the "official" tally is 75 QB hits hits thru 14 games (9th most in league). Last year it was 79 in all 16 games, 6th most in league. Last year Ryan was 31st out of 39 QBs in terms of deep (15+ yards) shots at 17.6%. He was 24.7% in the playoffs BTW.

Here are the Top 10 teams this year in terms of how many hits their QB has taken and percentage of deep throws:

1. Browns - 103 hits, 19.9% deep
2. Texans - 90, 17.6%
3. Colts - 87, 22.1%
4. Jaguars - 81, 14.5%
5. Bills - 81, 19.4%
6. Cardinals - 79, 22.3%
7. Jets - 78, 25.5%
8. Redskins - 76, 19.4%
9. Falcons - 75, 12.1%
10. Dolphins - 74, 16.9%

For the record, if Ryan threw 3 more deep throws per game, his number would be around 19.5%. If he threw 4 more deep throws per game,it would be around 22.0%.

If the beating Ryan has taken this year is "too much" but I hate to say it, but he needs to toughen up. League average a year ago was around 65. He's on pace to get hit about 85.7 to es this year over 16 games, slightly more than how much he got hit last year over 18 games (83). Look, I'm not saying I want Ryan to get hit that many times, but its far from excessive.

And I'll again stress the not having WRs that can separate is entirely the fault of the coaching staff for not developing the backups on the roster, or not stressing to their GM that they needed one (I've been saying it for 2 years)

_________________
"Vincere scis, Hannibal, victoria uti nescis" -- Maharbal, 216 B.C.E.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: It should be Dominique Time
PostPosted: Wed Dec 18, 2013 11:01 pm 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar

Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2005 8:57 pm
Posts: 4695
Can't Ryan change any play he wants??

Maybe Ryan isn't a top ten this year because of himself?? If they were the same age I'd rather have ROMO!!

_________________
"Everything Counts"
Cyril


Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: It should be Dominique Time
PostPosted: Thu Dec 19, 2013 1:17 am 
Offline
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 3:03 pm
Posts: 26068
Location: North Carolina
Cyril wrote:
Can't Ryan change any play he wants??

Maybe Ryan isn't a top ten this year because of himself?? If they were the same age I'd rather have ROMO!!

Just like 2 years ago you would've rather had Matt Cassel? viewtopic.php?p=107284#p107284

So now it's on Ryan to be Peyton Manning and be his own coordinator?

Endless excuses... :roll:

_________________
"Vincere scis, Hannibal, victoria uti nescis" -- Maharbal, 216 B.C.E.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: It should be Dominique Time
PostPosted: Thu Dec 19, 2013 5:02 am 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar

Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 3:15 pm
Posts: 4339
I just don't understand how you can turn this on Ryan for not, "calling his own plays." How does our head coach feel about doing improvised stuff? "Never do that again."

Have you noticed that the no-huddle offense has been getting more and more scarce? The coaches want to run the offense from the sidelines, they don't want Ryan to be making the decisions.

So why doesn't Ryan stand up and say, "I'm sick of this. I'm the franchise guy, you coaches can be replaced." How would you feel about that Cyril?

If Ryan were to do that, this team would be toast. People would be fired, Ryan would be labelled a prima donna, and things would go to hell in a hand basket.

So again, I just don't get how you can turn on Ryan for this. Ryan certainly hasn't been playing his best football this year, but a large part of that is that the coaching staff is coaching scared. The players came out a couple of years ago and said that this staff makes it too hard to score points. That's true again this year. It's a staple of a Mike Smith offense. Long, sustained drives, control the clock.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: It should be Dominique Time
PostPosted: Thu Dec 19, 2013 10:27 am 
Offline
Hall of Famer
Hall of Famer
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2005 7:12 pm
Posts: 6240
Location: Planet Claire
Matt is too much of a boy scout type guy to cause ripples like that but i think this year points to some sort of internal problems with the team. I'm not sure what it is but the collapse is more than Xs and Os. A cheap diagnosis would be something like a star system in place where guys like TG skip camp but I can't say that is really it. It just seems like the problems have a deeper root than injuries and personel.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: It should be Dominique Time
PostPosted: Fri Dec 20, 2013 2:43 am 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar

Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2005 8:57 pm
Posts: 4695
Cyril WAS asked how he would like this??
Quote:
So why doesn't Ryan stand up and say, "I'm sick of this. I'm the franchise guy, you coaches can be replaced." How would you feel about that Cyril?


I'd love it!! It would be the first sign of any important emotion ever coming from Ryan.....

I'm not turning this on Ryan. You can't say this from one thread where Pudge is blaming the Coaching staff because he thought we couldn't be held out of the playoffs. He will do & say anything to not take responsibilty for saying even after Roddy was hurt that this team was a playoff caliber team when it wasn't. (I've said this to Pudge)

Robert you know how I post, if I think something's for sure I don't say " Maybe"

I asked a question to Pudge's question " Can't Ryan change any play he wants".....Its a fair question based on what we were discussing.

I spent the first ten weeks saying Ryan or no one could pass well with this Offensive line. Then I spent the next 4 weeks defending that statement with no help from anyone?

So NO my feelings are not that this is on Ryan but a terrible offensive line that has gotten a little better (except the 6 sacks ) but as I ask Pudge; what are the coaches going to change
to get better results?? Pudge wants longer passes; I have no idea what Ryan thinks or the coaches think...... Obviously it eventually comes down to the GM. or Head Coach, but Qbs get
too much praise when their winning too much blame for when their losing.

I predicted 10-6 before the season started and obviously didn't think that was going to be Ryan's fault. I don't think Ryan has had a good season, but I think he's been hit enough to throw him off. Since no one else was giving comments here is where Pudge stands

Quote:

If the beating Ryan has taken this year is "too much" but I hate to say it, but he needs to toughen up. League average a year ago was around 65. He's on pace to get hit about 85.7 to es this year over 16 games, slightly more than how much he got hit last year over 18 games (83). Look, I'm not saying I want Ryan to get hit that many times, but its far from excessive.


So please take my posts over a season....... Pudge and I have had disagreements on "what happened" but I have never liked the team from preseason.....I believe Pudge would agree
that's he's said " this line is not so bad that we're losing this much"

So you might speak up on why we have lost from the beginning of the season after going 0-4 in preseason??

I mean for the people blaming the coaches aren't they really Blaming Ryan some too?? I know you don't like Smith but the 4 playoffs in 6 years; makes Smith rather proven like Ryan.

So I think its a lack of talent & the injuries. Pudge and I have discussed everything from preseason to Pudge claiming we should have given up something to find a deep threat....
What we have given up?? ( I've tried to be accurate on Pudge's statements or you may read them yourself.)

_________________
"Everything Counts"
Cyril


Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: It should be Dominique Time
PostPosted: Fri Dec 20, 2013 4:58 am 
Offline
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 3:03 pm
Posts: 26068
Location: North Carolina
Cyril wrote:
He will do & say anything to not take responsibilty for saying even after Roddy was hurt that this team was a playoff caliber team when it wasn't. (I've said this to Pudge)

Oh you mean the team that went down to the wire with the New Orleans Saints (current #2 seed in the NFC), New England Patriots (current #2 seed in the AFC), Miami Dolphins and New York Jets (two teams vying for wildcard spots)? We went go toe to toe with those teams, but thanks to some breakdowns on defense and poor play in the red zone, we lost those games in the final 2-3 minutes. And we beat a Rams team that just smoked th Saints with their backup QB. So your notion that this team never was playoff-caliber doesn't hold water.

Change a half dozen plays, and this team is 5-0. Yes, I know coulda/woulda/shoulda, but the idea that this team was never good enough to make a serious run this year is just revisionist history.

Even if the team had started 1-4, had they maintained the level of play they should over the first 5 weeks of the season after the bye, I guarantee we would have won at least 3 more games since then and would be 7-7 right now and only been mathematically eliminated within the past week or two from the playoffs at worst.

Part of the reason why I'm so gung-ho about calling out Smitty is because for 9+ months I was pounding the table about how awesome Mike Smith was as a coach, and how he was coaching up a slightly above average football team in terms of talent into a perennial playoff team and that proved he was a really good coach that didn't get the credit he deserved for making lemonade out of lemons.

Well, now we fast-forward to today, and the opposite appears true. Smitty has found a way to turn lemons into dogshit.

We're coming off a game where we averaged 3.9 yards per play against a defense that heading into the week was 5th worst in the NFL and giving up an average of 6.0 yards per play. That was basically the same as our defense, as we were 4th worst in yards allowed per play. And guess what, the Redskins averaged 7.1 yards per play against us, with a green QB that isn't a good vertical passer, but they took plenty of shots down the field and you change the outcome of 1 or 2 plays, the Redskins win, and if you change the outcome of 4 or 5 plays, they probably do so by 20+ points.

That epitomizes the underachieving nature of Mike Smith and the Falcons. Mike Smith has done a worse job coaching this year's Falcon team than anybody I can recall seeing in the past 15 years. Yes, worse than Petrino.

_________________
"Vincere scis, Hannibal, victoria uti nescis" -- Maharbal, 216 B.C.E.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: It should be Dominique Time
PostPosted: Fri Dec 20, 2013 10:53 am 
Offline
Hall of Famer
Hall of Famer
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2005 7:12 pm
Posts: 6240
Location: Planet Claire
CYril, I thought you predicted 6-10 not 10-6. You'd look a lot smarter if you did!

People dis the JJ trade but in my opinion the team went belly up when JJ went down and he is the main reason we almost won the games you mention, Pudge. Recall that the Pats game was oen we got back into after many people had left the building because we were getting owned. If I recall properly, JJ caught a long and improbable catch to get back in it. Maybe I'm confused. Regardless, the long ball went out the door with JJ and without him stretching the field seemingly the fairly intermediate passes.

MR has been hit about as much as any QB in the league this year and I don't care who you are--this will take effect. Maybe it has turned him into a "pussy." But when you have no deep threat and your RBs are ineffective it is going to be hard to get anywhere. Couple this with a horrible defense and you have the 2013 Falcons. Smitty was quoted assaying, "We build this roster and we like it." Pretty much tied his own noose with that comment to me.

I've been pretty supportive of the org and I guess I go whichever way the wind is blowing but that statement and what I have seen on the field this year shakes my faith in them...all of them...from #2 to TD to Smitty. I think there has been hubris on TD's part and the players and that Smitty is perhaps too much of a player's coach (Roddy's streak, TG missing camp, Rodgers getting more snaps than Smith).

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: It should be Dominique Time
PostPosted: Fri Dec 20, 2013 12:33 pm 
Offline
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 3:03 pm
Posts: 26068
Location: North Carolina
backnblack wrote:
CYril, I thought you predicted 6-10 not 10-6. You'd look a lot smarter if you did!

People dis the JJ trade but in my opinion the team went belly up when JJ went down and he is the main reason we almost won the games you mention, Pudge. Recall that the Pats game was oen we got back into after many people had left the building because we were getting owned. If I recall properly, JJ caught a long and improbable catch to get back in it. Maybe I'm confused. Regardless, the long ball went out the door with JJ and without him stretching the field seemingly the fairly intermediate passes.

MR has been hit about as much as any QB in the league this year and I don't care who you are--this will take effect. Maybe it has turned him into a "pussy." But when you have no deep threat and your RBs are ineffective it is going to be hard to get anywhere. Couple this with a horrible defense and you have the 2013 Falcons. Smitty was quoted assaying, "We build this roster and we like it." Pretty much tied his own noose with that comment to me.

I've been pretty supportive of the org and I guess I go whichever way the wind is blowing but that statement and what I have seen on the field this year shakes my faith in them...all of them...from #2 to TD to Smitty. I think there has been hubris on TD's part and the players and that Smitty is perhaps too much of a player's coach (Roddy's streak, TG missing camp, Rodgers getting more snaps than Smith).

BnB, you're 100% right on all your points. Julio was a major reason for our success in the first 5 games. One could say his play and his talent was masking the coaching deficiencies, because for the first 5 games of the year, he was arguably the best WR in the league.

But the long ball wasn't a big part of the offense even then, as Ryan only threw the ball more than 15 times on 12.4% of his throws during the first 5 games, and most of those (roughly 60%) came in the Patriots and Jets games where this team was trailing for most of the game.

We lost Julio and the offense went into the tank, but IMO the offense was ALWAYS underachieving, with Julio and without him. There are stats that suggest this, but I won't bore you with them, but just trust me when I say the link between this team generating big plays and scoring TDs is fairly high. Yet this coaching staff has opted to be more conservative with their offensive game-planning and design.

Not to oversimplify, but that basically tells me that either this coaching is clueless in regards to what it takes to win games, or they are purposefully trying to lose games. And I think we know which one is the more reasonable of those two conclusions to make.

Would having more aggressive play-calling lead to more wins, I believe so because it would lead to more points. Would it mean this team would be the running for the division? No, probably not. We'd probably still be out of the playoffs because as you have said and everybody knows, it's hard to win a lot of games when you have an OL, running game, and defense as bad as we have this year.

But what you can do is coach up one of the few strengths that remain to you and that's your QB. What this Falcon team hasn't lost is their QB. And if you put him in a scenario/environment/situation/scheme that asked him to step up his play, then you have a chance. You can be better than what we'v seen.

But what instead happened? After he threw those picks vs. Arizona and Carolina, they pulled him back. They asked him to be conservative and manage the game vs. Seattle, and the Falcons got blown out. They asked to manage the game vs. TB, and the Falcons didn't take a deep shot until the 2nd half.

I have 2 main beefs with this coaching staff…

1. Brian Robiskie. Back when we realized that opposing teams (NE & NYJ) had figured out how to stop Tony Gonzalez, this team should've known they needed a WR that can help take pressure off him and stretch the defense. They chose to stay part, as I'm not sure adding Brian Robiskie should even qualify as making a move. That is an unforgivable failure, and they should have simply known better. I let it slide initially because I was hopeful that DK had something up his sleeve that would mitigate the need for that sort of player, and of course I was wrong. He had nothing up his sleeve except his elbow.

2. I've been saying throughout this season if you've been reading my reviews of the games on the main site that Matt Ryan has been playing conservative and relying too much on checkdowns. As BnB said, Ryan is a boy scout, and frankly will do what he's told. If he's throwing too much short, then the coaches need to make more concerted efforts to get him to throw long by calling plays that require the receivers to run longer routes. They need to tell him that his 1st read should be the WR running the 15-yard route rather than immediately going to the 5-yard check down because it's the safe play. But they're not doing that because they are too conservative. The only conclusion is that Ryan is doing exactly what they want him to do because they haven't really changed their game plan away from that. Things looked to be improving vs. TB, NO, and BUF in regards to the play-calling and game plan, but then things went right back to being s***ty vs. GB & WAS.

With these coaches unable to figure/fix these two issues, it makes me wonder, why are they qualified to be NFL coaches? I know that's being hyperbolic, but IMO this isn't rocket science. If I can figure this stuff out, then certainly an NFL head coach should be able to. And certainly one that is supposedly a good NFL head coach right?

But you're right, it's a failure of all 3 pillars of this organization: Ryan, TD, & Smitty. But here's the cold reality. Due to the contract they gave him in July, this team is committed to Matt Ryan for at least another 2-3 years. There is no such commitment to TD & Smitty. In fact, all reports indicate that 2014 is the final years of each of their contracts. So there is a lot more pressure on them to start to carry their own weight in the time being...

_________________
"Vincere scis, Hannibal, victoria uti nescis" -- Maharbal, 216 B.C.E.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: It should be Dominique Time
PostPosted: Sat Dec 21, 2013 4:10 am 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar

Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2005 8:57 pm
Posts: 4695
Yes I meant 6-10 but figured Pudge would remember that......

I can only stick to my original statement....... I knew we had 2 rookie corner backs and I thought we had one useful linebacker is Spoon. I knew we had no pass rush like last year;
so that looked bad enough.

Then on offense its been ages since i've seen Baker play good, we had a untested player (Konz)
at center; but he was horrible last year. We had what I thought was absolutely no one at right guard; and Johnson has been on the team 4 years...... He's a number 3 pick who we've tried before; he's never made it so I counted 2 rookie corners; 2 unproven linebackers except the one who's never done that well, and so I counted what I thought was 8 players who was untested; and I figured if we won on 4 of the 8 then that would leave 4 positions wanting....

Its the same logic I used to predict 6-10. So half way through the season Pudgte says I'm crazy
just because he doesn't like my logic...... Yes The rookie corners have done very well for rookies; the free agent linebackers have done great for free agents; but none of the linemen
worked out!! Now for some reason into about game 4 after all our injuries Pudge has totally discounted my logic and is now saying Coach Smith is doing the worst job he's seen in 15 years..... Why should I deal with that crap when I explained myself early.....Holmes was horrible his first 6 games.........


Pudge says the linemen are under ratted, he's throwing up everything to blame the coaching staff only not to realize the injuries really hurt us. Everybody has injuries but we had too many open positions to handle it. As Pudge said we played N.O. tough both times but we lost. Who care if the Cardinals beat N.0. These things happen all the time in the NFL .

Pudge is going to great length to say our line not was never terrible but it was!! Hawley at center has
been an improvment; our right guard has improved and Holmes has really improved.

I've been answering his attacks on my saying the line sucked; and his contention the coaches suck...... I'm SICK OF ANSWERING...... He can make up anything he wants. I explained this in preseason, and one person looked up teams that go 0-4 in preseason have a 17%
chance of making the playoffs.

BnN YOU'VE SEEN THE SEASON'S when everyone says preseason doesn't count but our starters looked like s*** then...... I've kept the conversation going but don't care anymore if I ACCIDENTLY put in 10-6, or 6-10...... It doesn't matter anymore to me; Pudge may say what he wants..... He'll soon be talking to himself!!

Ps. Pudge keeps calling for a long ball receiver when Julio went out but never addresses
what would we have had to give up before the trading deadline?? A #1 OR 2 DRAFT PICK,
did we even have the salary cap to pay for a big receiver?, he's stuck on the Robiskie trade;
when that means nothing. I said from day 1 that letting Toney G. stay home during summer practice was a terrible decision for the team; and Pudge has argued with me on every issue.

Tony G. i think is getting 10-12 million and if nothing else could have helped our other tight ends; I don't know if I've ever heard of a team letting a signed player stay home.... What a terrible decision that Blank & Thomas D. signed off of.

I've watched enough football to know that a good coach can have a bad year; and I think Thomas D. did much worse than Smith; but we don't have winning players on the field....
Matt Ryan although the season is nowhere on him; hasn't played very good either..... I wonder why?? Anybody with common sense would know its the Offensive Line--- They gave up six sacks just 3 or 4 weeks ago, but logic can't win when dealing with Pudge, he's too smart for every one else----YEA RIGHT (:

_________________
"Everything Counts"
Cyril


Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: It should be Dominique Time
PostPosted: Sat Dec 21, 2013 4:50 am 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar

Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2005 8:57 pm
Posts: 4695
from J Post subject: Re: Are the Falcons the team to beat in the NFC?
PostPosted: Mon Jun 03, 2013 4:20

Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2005 6:57 pm
Posts:4238


Quote:
Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2005 6:57 pm
Posts:4238
Really we haven't addressed much....... With the offensive line having a new center, right tackle, and maybe right guard, that leaves our Qb & running backs to perhaps have a hard time.

The same with the Defensive Line, we don't have young studs coming back??

I'd love to hear someone NOT on the Falcons roster say we're the team to beat......

_________________
"Everything Counts"
Cyril


Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: It should be Dominique Time
PostPosted: Sun Dec 22, 2013 1:23 pm 
Offline
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 3:03 pm
Posts: 26068
Location: North Carolina
Yes, Cyril you said ALL those things. And in a vacuum, you would think those things are the reason why this team is 4-10.

But we're not in a vacuum. And I will staunchly contend the reason why the Falcons are 4-10 has little do with rookie corners or linebackers, no pass rush, or a bad OL. It has everything to do with this offense not scoring in the red zone and being too conservative on offense.

You talk about that game that the Falcons gave up 6 sacks. That came against the Bills. And let me remind you that despite giving up all those sacks, hits, and hurries in that game, the Falcons offense scored 34 points (a season-high) and converted 57% of their third downs (a season-high) and had their 2nd best total yardage total of the year, behind only the Patriots game where they were throwing the entire game to come from behind.

So again, I'll continue to stress that despite the OL having its worst game, the offense played its best football. And why was that? Because they took shots down the field and Roddy White made those plays. And again, the common response is, "Well having a relatively healthy Roddy was the key to that. We needed a good WR and we had one that day and in the days since and for the most part the offense has been decent."

And that's why the Robiskie move does matter. Because this team stupidly thought Harry Douglas and Drew Davis and Darius Johnson could carry this offense. And they didn't. And had they made a trade for a WR at the trade deadline, they probably would've only given up a #3. Or they could have signed a legit NFL WR like Laurent Robinson, Steve Breaston, Austin Collie, etc. that actually has the skills to be a decent NFL WR. Would that have given them what they needed at WR? Maybe, maybe not. But it would've definitely given them more than what they got out of Brian Robiskie, which was 6 inactive games.

So I'll keep talking to myself because I'm the one that is right.

I'll continue to stress this season wasn't lost in July/August with Tony Gonzalez getting a break from training camp or the team not having "proven" starters on the OL. This season was lost in October and November when this team became one of the worst-coached teams in the NFL. But of course you're going to disagree with that, because it would cause you to question whether or not Mike Smith is a good coach. And you've already given Smitty a pass, as you just said "good coaches can have bad years." I haven't watched as much football as you, but I don't agree based on all the football I've seen. Yes, a good coach can have a down year. But I've never heard of a good coach morphing into a bad coach for a season. That's what has happened this year in Atlanta.

_________________
"Vincere scis, Hannibal, victoria uti nescis" -- Maharbal, 216 B.C.E.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: It should be Dominique Time
PostPosted: Sun Dec 22, 2013 2:11 pm 
Offline
Hall of Famer
Hall of Famer
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2005 7:12 pm
Posts: 6240
Location: Planet Claire
I think you are pretty wrong there, Pudge. Finding some WR on the league scrap heap and trading yet another draft pick for him was going to save this season? No way. Granted, our RZ woes are an issue but we were not one wR away from being contenders unless that WR was named JJ and I'm not sure at all that that was even the case. Was our lack of depth an issue? No doubt. Your fixation on Robiskie is weird.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: It should be Dominique Time
PostPosted: Sun Dec 22, 2013 4:03 pm 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar

Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 3:15 pm
Posts: 4339
Pudge, you make it sound like the bad coaching was a sudden thing, it wasn't. The bad coaching has been there since the very beginning. Our offense is known for sustaining long, tedious drives. The reason that we're known for it is because that's how we play the game. We don't try, or make many explosive plays. That has ALWAYS been the way that this team has been run under Smith. Before this season, you were all in denial about this fact. However, the deterioration of our offensive line is the catalyst for why this season has been horrible. The line's inability to run block has put us in bad down/distance situations, and their inability to pass block has affected Ryan's ability to make plays on 3rd down.

I have been saying all along that if we wanted to continue to play football the way that we were trying to, that we would need to upgrade our lines. We did the opposite, we let the lines fall into disrepair, and now we're reaping what we've sown.

Here's the biggest issue in my mind, we're going to keep TD and Smith around... They're going to go out and get the linemen that we need this year, and nothing is going to change in the way that we do things. We are still going to be conservative as heck, and we're not going to win the Superbowl because we play scared. Matt Ryan will continue to make them look good by pulling things together in the last few minutes of the game. Imagine what Ryan could be doing under capable leadership.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: It should be Dominique Time
PostPosted: Mon Dec 23, 2013 2:00 am 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar

Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2005 8:57 pm
Posts: 4695
Robert you've at least been consistent. I think perhaps Ryan has shown this year he can not carry a team by himself; but very few can.

Robert wrote:
Quote:
However, the deterioration of our offensive line is the catalyst for why this season has been horrible. The line's inability to run block has put us in bad down/distance situations, and their inability to pass block has affected Ryan's ability to make plays on 3rd down.


Your exactly right Robert.......And plenty of this does fall on Coach Smith this year.....And actually more so Thomas D.

Everybody knows this, except Pudge.

After I had stated 6-10 and given reason's why
Pudge says
Quote:



Yes, Cyril you said ALL those things. And in a vacuum, you would think those things are the reason why this team is 4-10.


I don't even know what talking in a vacuum means...... I thought I wrote them here and you had every chance to respond. No its not why we're 4-10; the extra injuries to an already depleted team did that. Without the injures we might have ended up 7-9..... My main point was forget about a Super Bowl we don't have the players and look terrible in preseason.

I didn't need to change my story half way throw the season!!

_________________
"Everything Counts"
Cyril


Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: It should be Dominique Time
PostPosted: Mon Dec 23, 2013 2:17 am 
Offline
Hall of Famer
Hall of Famer
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2005 7:12 pm
Posts: 6240
Location: Planet Claire
It wasn't so long ago--maybe when Mularkey was OC--that the problem with the O according to many was that they would not put it in Matt's hands and let him carry the team. I think MR is good but he is not a QB who is going to carry a team and this has come out in spades this year. With JJ he still has play makers that other QBs covet. Who does Cam have that is so great outside of S. Smith? Matt is a very good game managing style QB. He needs to be surrounded with talent and if he is he can win but he isn't going to routinely set the woods on fire without help.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: It should be Dominique Time
PostPosted: Mon Dec 23, 2013 12:56 pm 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar

Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 3:15 pm
Posts: 4339
BnB, you're making the assumption that Matt is set up to carry the team. He's not. He's set up to be a game manager. We don't run any long routes, that's why everything is dink and dunk. Ryan has more come from behind wins than anyone for the time that he's been in the league, and he has done that on a team with a super conservative philosophy. He can carry this team if we actually ask him to do so, and we give him the tools necessary to do so.

This team's offense is set up for failure. It's an offense that wants to run the football, but can't run block. It's an offense that wants to control the clock, but it cannot do that. In the past, we asked Matt Ryan to bail the offense out on 3rd down, or late in the game, and in the past, our offensive line was somewhat capable of providing him the time to do so, and now it's not. We give Ryan 3rd and long situations, short and medium routes short of the 1st down marker, and 1.8 seconds to throw the football. No, "elite QB," would be able to, "carry the team," under such circumstances. This season is a testament to just how tough our QB is.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: It should be Dominique Time
PostPosted: Mon Dec 23, 2013 1:34 pm 
Offline
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 3:03 pm
Posts: 26068
Location: North Carolina
RobertAP wrote:
We don't try, or make many explosive plays. That has ALWAYS been the way that this team has been run under Smith. Before this season, you were all in denial about this fact.

No, it wasn't denial. It was understanding that it was a process. That you couldn't just draft Julio JOnes and become an explosive offense. It was assuming that the Falcons were working towards being a more explosive offense, so you give the coaches the benefit of the doubt. Did they progress as quickly as hoped? No. But they didn't need to be explosive in previous years because they won games with their tedious attack. But what was revealed this year in a year where the team needed to be more explosive in order to field a competitive offense, they got more conservative. That's the problem. That's the reason behind the sudden revelation.
RobertAP wrote:
However, the deterioration of our offensive line is the catalyst for why this season has been horrible. The line's inability to run block has put us in bad down/distance situations, and their inability to pass block has affected Ryan's ability to make plays on 3rd down.

How do you figure that? Again, this is people warping the reality to fit their preconceived world view.
You mean the Falcons offense that still ranks 7th in the league in 3rd down conversions? The team converted 42.4% of their 3rd downs WEeks 1-5. They've converted 40.3% since then, which is still above average. Here are some numbers that you guys might find interesting.

Falcons offense on 1st/2nd down in 2012 and 2013:

2012 Rushing: 342 carries, 1315 yards, 3.85 YPC, 9 TDS
2013 Rushing (Weeks 1-5): 92 carries, 370 yards, 4.02 YPC, 3 TDs
2013 Rushing (Weeks 7-15): 164 carries, 597 yards, 3.64 YPC, 5 TDs

2012 Passing: 69.5% completions, 3512 yards, 24 TDs, 8 INTs, 7.8 YPA, 103.0 passer rating
2013 Passing (Weeks 1-5): 74.1% completions, 1236 yards, 7 TDs, 2 INTs, 7.6 YPA, 104.9 passer rating
2013 Passing (Weeks 7-15): 65.2% completions, 1533 yards, 8 TDs, 6 INTs, 6.1 YPA, 82.6 passer rating

It should be noted that the YPC in the early part of 2013 is greatly enhanced by the 50-yard run by Steven Jackson in Week 1. Outside that play, they averaged 3.52 yards per carry.

The point is that the dropoff wasn't significant with the running game from 2012 to 2013 to the point where the Falcons offense has been. The dropoff wasn't significant as far as this team's ability to move the chains.

The dropoff came in the passing game, where this team threw more picks and gained less yards per pass. This offense could sustain itself in 2012 by throwing the ball because they had playmakers at WR and TE that could carry this offense alongside the QB playing his best football.

Then that changed in 2013 when said playmakers were injured, and this offense didn't know how to adjust.

You guys can continue to ignore the evidence, but it's not the OL. If it was, then the fact that the Bills game could occur would be next to impossible. How come our offense played well that week despite the OL having its worst game? Oh, maybe it had somehting to do with the fact that Roddy White played like Roddy White and the Falcons threw the ball downfield more often than they had in the previous 5 games? Neither could the games we played against the Rams and Patriots, where our OL stunk in those games, but they were probably 2 of our next 3 best offensive performances. How come we scored all those points against the Bucs? The evidence shows that it had less to do with our OL having a respectable game and had everything to do with the fact that the Falcons scored because of big plays. Look at the 6 touchdown drives in those 2 Bucs games:

37 yards TD catch by Harry Douglas, 80 yard TD catch by Harry Douglas, 50 yard TD run by Antone Smith. And on the other 3 scoring drives, the Falcons had these plays:

24-yard catch by Drew Davis
26 yard catch by Douglas and 24 yard catch by Tony Gonzalez
38 yard run by Antone Smith

Those plays set up those eventual TDs.

Again, if you want to continue to ignore the link/correlation between this offense generating big plays and scoring TDs, then be my guest, but you're the one that is wallowing in ignorance. Your arguments aren't based off facts. It's commonly believed that the offensive line has improved as the season has progressed, yet how come the offense has gotten worse?

HOw are you guys not getting this? This team had a very good offense in 2012, and that offense was still largely intact in the first 5 weeks, and into the 7th week of the season against the Bucs. Then after that point, they get demonstrably worse, and you guys are stuck on it being the OL as the cause/source of blame?
Image

RobertAP wrote:
They're going to go out and get the linemen that we need this year, and nothing is going to change in the way that we do things. We are still going to be conservative as heck, and we're not going to win the Superbowl because we play scared. Matt Ryan will continue to make them look good by pulling things together in the last few minutes of the game. Imagine what Ryan could be doing under capable leadership.

Now I'm starting to believe this too.

_________________
"Vincere scis, Hannibal, victoria uti nescis" -- Maharbal, 216 B.C.E.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: It should be Dominique Time
PostPosted: Mon Dec 23, 2013 1:59 pm 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar

Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 5:31 pm
Posts: 3189
Quote:
HOw are you guys not getting this? This team had a very good offense in 2012, and that offense was still largely intact in the first 5 weeks


Not necessarily true. 60% new offensive line, minus 50% of your starting receivers (Roddy), and no Steven Jackson (Turners equalivant) is not really the same offense as 2012.


Last edited by AngryJohnny51 on Mon Dec 23, 2013 3:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: It should be Dominique Time
PostPosted: Mon Dec 23, 2013 2:14 pm 
Offline
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 3:03 pm
Posts: 26068
Location: North Carolina
AngryJohnny51 wrote:
Pudge wrote:
HOw are you guys not getting this? This team had a very good offense in 2012, and that offense was still largely intact in the first 5 weeks]


Not necessarily true. 60% new offensive line, minus 50% of your starting receivers (Roddy), and no Steven Jackson (Turners equalivant) is not really the same offense as 2012.

The point being the production on the field wasn't significantly different, at least not during the first 5 weeks of the season. The only difference was the wins and losses, and that was largely due to the team not converting in the red zone in those losses, and giving up too many big plays on defense in those losses. Those 1 or 2 non-red zone conversions and those 1 or 2 big plays that our opponents got in critical situations were the difference in winning a 1-score game and losing one. In previous years, we were the team that always made those plays.

The point is that if the changes up front were really as impactful as some people say they were, then we would have seen a significant dropoff in the offensive production right off the bat. We did not see that dropoff, no matter how much those people try to say we did.

The point is that those people are trying to create a narrative where the offensive line is the central problem with this team. But when you actually look at the "words written on the field" then it is clear that the injury to Julio Jones and/or Roddy White were the real issue that this team couldn't overcome. The evidence clearly shows that, not only statistically, but the eye in the sky also shows this.

_________________
"Vincere scis, Hannibal, victoria uti nescis" -- Maharbal, 216 B.C.E.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: It should be Dominique Time
PostPosted: Mon Dec 23, 2013 3:42 pm 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar

Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 5:31 pm
Posts: 3189
Quote:
The only difference was the wins and losses, and that was largely due to the team not converting in the red zone in those losses, and giving up too many big plays on defense in those losses


This I agree with. I've been saying it for 3 years now, defensively you cannot rely on the timely turnover as part of your gameplan. We lived by the sword for the past few years, this year we are dying by it.

Quote:
The point is that if the changes up front were really as impactful as some people say they were, then we would have seen a significant dropoff in the offensive production right off the bat. We did not see that dropoff, no matter how much those people try to say we did.


But, we kind of did. Numbers wise it's close, but the only reason for that is because Julio Jones was an absolute beast before he got hurt. Our running game wasn't great in 2012 and we are 15 yards+ a game poorer this year. And you are correct, we are a bad red zone team this year....compared to last. But why? No Roddy, zero run threat. Double Julio, double TG and that was the game plan on stopping us. Could the coaching staff have gotten more creative? Maybe. Could the offensive line blocked better to allow us to get more creative? Definitely.

We can argue what went wrong and whose to blame all day. The real question is which direction do the Falcons go in fixing this?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: It should be Dominique Time
PostPosted: Mon Dec 23, 2013 5:07 pm 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar

Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 3:15 pm
Posts: 4339
Pudge, you have to understand that I believe this is a multi-headed beast. You know I'm upset with the offensive play calling. But again, the play calling that we use is consistent with the style of play that Mike Smith wants. He wants to have an offense that can sustain long drives. He is not a fan of explosive plays, for whatever reason. If a team wants to sustain long drives, then they need to win a higher % of their downs. This year, though the stats indicate that we're near where we were last year, it has been obvious over the course of the season that this offensive line (with the receivers and runners that we have) is not capable of winning the number of downs that we need to win in order to sustain drives.

Our QB is a master of getting rid of the ball quickly. I don't know that there's anyone better than him at getting rid of the ball quickly. Even though he's able to get rid of it quickly, he still sees the kind of pressure that you'd expect from someone who stands back there like a statue. If he had more time, he'd be able to accomplish more, and perhaps the coaches would feel more confident drawing up longer routes. As you've seen, the coaches have curled up into a ball. They're not good coaches. The line is not a good line. We have several problems and no easy solutions. However, we have one of the best QBs in the NFL to build around.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: It should be Dominique Time
PostPosted: Mon Dec 23, 2013 5:41 pm 
Offline
Hall of Famer
Hall of Famer
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2005 7:12 pm
Posts: 6240
Location: Planet Claire
Pudge wrote:
AngryJohnny51 wrote:
Pudge wrote:
HOw are you guys not getting this? This team had a very good offense in 2012, and that offense was still largely intact in the first 5 weeks]


Not necessarily true. 60% new offensive line, minus 50% of your starting receivers (Roddy), and no Steven Jackson (Turners equalivant) is not really the same offense as 2012.

The point being the production on the field wasn't significantly different, at least not during the first 5 weeks of the season. The only difference was the wins and losses, and that was largely due to the team not converting in the red zone in those losses, and giving up too many big plays on defense in those losses. Those 1 or 2 non-red zone conversions and those 1 or 2 big plays that our opponents got in critical situations were the difference in winning a 1-score game and losing one. In previous years, we were the team that always made those plays.

The point is that if the changes up front were really as impactful as some people say they were, then we would have seen a significant dropoff in the offensive production right off the bat. We did not see that dropoff, no matter how much those people try to say we did.

The point is that those people are trying to create a narrative where the offensive line is the central problem with this team. But when you actually look at the "words written on the field" then it is clear that the injury to Julio Jones and/or Roddy White were the real issue that this team couldn't overcome. The evidence clearly shows that, not only statistically, but the eye in the sky also shows this.

So we have these three killer receivers and no run game--just like last year--and one of them goes down, therefore, the solution is to get another killer receiver not have a more balanced attack so that you can weather the loss of one of these guys and if they are not hurt they put you into the elite class? The problem with the team is not one thing but steadily losing at the line of scrimmage is like a house built on shifting sand--one brick slips out and the whole thing topples.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: It should be Dominique Time
PostPosted: Mon Dec 23, 2013 6:03 pm 
Offline
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 3:03 pm
Posts: 26068
Location: North Carolina
AngryJohnny51 wrote:
And you are correct, we are a bad red zone team this year....compared to last. But why? No Roddy, zero run threat. Double Julio, double TG and that was the game plan on stopping us. Could the coaching staff have gotten more creative? Maybe.

In a nutshell, look at the difference between how the Detroit Lions use Joseph Fauria and how the Falcons use Levine Toilolo in the red zone, and you have your answer. Coaching is a bigger part of it.

RobertAP wrote:
Pudge, you have to understand that I believe this is a multi-headed beast. You know I'm upset with the offensive play calling. But again, the play calling that we use is consistent with the style of play that Mike Smith wants. He wants to have an offense that can sustain long drives. He is not a fan of explosive plays, for whatever reason. If a team wants to sustain long drives, then they need to win a higher % of their downs.

You're right, and part of my frustration is realizing that for the first time when the Falcons needed to become more explosive, they got even more conservative. And thus it's why I've suddenly pulled a complete 180. I was willing to let it slide that Mike Smith was conservative, even though it wasn't my cup of tea, because the team was winning and I didn't think the team had the talent yet to be more explosive, and thus with DK being in his first year and still having more good moves to make, i was willing to be patient.

But now, the realization is that it's not just a personnel issue, it's a mindset that this team lacks.

RobertAP wrote:
Our QB is a master of getting rid of the ball quickly. I don't know that there's anyone better than him at getting rid of the ball quickly. Even though he's able to get rid of it quickly, he still sees the kind of pressure that you'd expect from someone who stands back there like a statue. If he had more time, he'd be able to accomplish more, and perhaps the coaches would feel more confident drawing up longer routes.

Peyton Mannign is probably better. But Manning over the course of his career hasn't been a great vertical passer. And how come the Colts and now the Broncos get away with that? Because of the way defenses play Manning. They fear him and his intelligence, because despite not being the most vertically-oriented offense out there, the Colts and now Broncos offense attack the defense. It may not be with a 30-yard bomb, but Manning is going to sit there and decipher the scheme and attack a defense's weakness.

The Falcons aren't that team. Once they threw the no-huddle out the window in Week 6, they weren't going to be able to do that. But they could still attack by taking shots down the field. But defenses already knew that the Falcons were already a team that wasn't going to take deep shots, and that became even worse. That's what has made our offense easy to defend. Defenses don't fear the deep ball, and don't fear our WRs that they are willing to stack the box and leave their CBs on islands against our WRs. They know they can bracket Tony Gonzalez with a safety, and it will shut down our offense.

That's the issue. Our coaches needed to try and find a way to make it harder to defend our offense in the post Julio/Roddy games. And they didn't. They didn't try. That's my beef. I'll say it again, it's one thing to try and fail. It's another thing to not try at all. And when you watch tape of the games, you clearly see little to no effort to challenge/attack opposing defenses.

The lack of a quality OL is just a convenient excuse. As I've illustrated in previous posts, other teams have worse lines and manage to still try and attack their opponents by throwing downfield. You're right they curled up into a ball and coached scared. Giving them a better OL isn't going to change that. When they were put into a fight or flight response, they chose flight instead of fight. And I've washed my hands of them.

backnblack wrote:
The problem with the team is not one thing but steadily losing at the line of scrimmage is like a house built on shifting sand--one brick slips out and the whole thing topples.

I agree it's not one thing, but it doesn't start with the OL. It does with this team because the coaches let it. "Oh we don't trust our OL, well I guess there's nothing we can do about that..." And they surrendered.

Image

Other and notably more successful teams compensate/counter by going on the offensive.

_________________
"Vincere scis, Hannibal, victoria uti nescis" -- Maharbal, 216 B.C.E.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: It should be Dominique Time
PostPosted: Mon Dec 23, 2013 7:54 pm 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar

Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2005 8:57 pm
Posts: 4695
Your pictures are so cute, I suppose they're suppose to take away from the issue you can't make!!

Quote:
The lack of a quality OL is just a convenient excuse. As I've illustrated in previous posts, other teams have worse lines and manage to still try and attack their opponents by throwing down field.


It wasn't convenient back in June!! i'M SORRY i MUST DISAGREE with Robert on how good Ryan is. I think he's very good too. but he has some bad habits that the top 5 just don't have.

First his lack of great arm strength keeps him from really firing the ball in when necessary. I agree he has a quick release but I think he's slower than the best at finding those receivers; and a real fault is he also stares down his only option. That lack of arm strength really hurts his longer passes....... I like Ryan a lot and he can take a team to the Super Bowl and he's especially good with a decent line because he knows his weaknesses, and has trained himself not to do more than what he's capable of....That's a strength, but he throws a terrible screen which is a great weapon to slow down the pass rush.

YES great point AG51 --- OUR O-LINE WHICH IS AS GOOD AS SUPPOSEDLY LAST YEAR, IS RUNNING FOR 15 YARDS LESS A GAME.... THAT MUST NOT MEAN ANYTHING!!

_________________
"Everything Counts"
Cyril


Image


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 97 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  


cron