fun gus wrote:
. And it goes back to the beef I have with the whole "Super Bowls are magic" mystique on a number of different topics. All of those games were winnable, if the Falcons had showed up and played their A game. But the fact that in 3 playoff games, we've gotten B or C-level execution and/or effort from this team, doesn't rest mostly on the shoulders of the QB like some on this forum would like to imply/portray.
and this, I believe, is the crux of our disagreements.
IMO, the Arizona game we saw the 'A 'game. WE also saw the 'A' game of Warner, who didnt turn the ball over three times, and had Fitzgerald to throw to. We got beat by a better team. A better QB/WR/TE combo. But for a rookie, and considering the flaming bag of crap waiting for Ryan, he gave it his all.
We didn't make the next postseason, injuries.
In the Packers playoff, we saw the 'B' game.
In the Giants Fiasco we got the 'C'-'D' game. Saved from a total 'F' game by the 28% the defense showed up.
Sense a trend here? Other QB's dont quit.
Tim Tebow knew damn well he was not going to beat Brady, but dammit if he didn't keep trying.
Alex Smith does not quit. Matt Ryan has quit. He did not quit in the Packers loss, but he did in New Jersey. He quit
To say that 'the coaching made Matt Ryan quit' or played scared, or whatever, smacks of defensiveness to me. Matt Ryan is a grown a$$ man, is going to be a 5 year vet who going to get a pantload of $$.
But where the disagreement lies is that you believe Matt Ryan acts independent of coaching. What you say about Matt Ryan isn't untrue per se, about him quitting against the Giants, but you say it as if he was the only one that did so. But unlike you, what I saw against the Giants was an entire team that quit, so again I can't heap most if not all of the blame at the feet of Matt Ryan. If it was just Ryan and a handful of other players that played like pussies against the Giants, then I'd be more in-tune with your viewpoint, but when I see Matt Ryan played like he did, the O-line get punked, Roddy White drop a ton of open throws, Tony Gonzalez being a no-show either by his own lack of effort or poor play-calling, the defensive line doing next to nothing outside John Abraham playing at a high level for 1 quarter, the secondary didn't do a good job in coverage/run support.
And again, I think what's happening here is that you're looking at a small portion of the game and extrapolating it for the entire game, rather than looking at the entire game in its entirety and drawing conclusions from that. In this particular instance the latter part of the game where the Falcons couldn't even score in the garbage minutes, and you're blaming Matt Ryan for that, and then that is overshadowing everything else that went wrong with this team.
The Falcons got beat in SEVERAL phases of the football game, and that to me is an indicator of poor coaching. That's not meant to be a reflection/indicator of what Mike Smith has done for 4 years, nor does it mean he needs to be fired. It's just a reflection that for the most important game of the year, Mike Smith along with a number of other players did not show up.
And that's a trickle-down effect. I cannot expect Matt Ryan to man up and carry this team when Mike Smith can't and/or doesn't give him the tools to do so (i.e. by building a gameplan around him).
fun gus wrote:
To get back to the original intent of this thread, is the addition of 2 new coordinators going to 'turn this ship around'? I dont believe it will. Because my belief is that in order to get Matt Ryan back to where he was, we need a coach that is going to change the philosophy. To make a dramatic change ( and that is what we need now: when your franchise QB 'quits', it's drama time) we need to part ways with Turner, we need to quit these tight formations, we need to allow Ryan to use what skills he has to his best advantage.
They aren't going to do that. Instead, because they cant move Turner, he will stay. Koetter's 'bubble screens' are not going to work with Turner. This is only going to further set Ryan back. Even if Nolan can sh*t fumbles and int's, it aint gonna matter squadoo if you cant SCORE. So to me, I need to see some amazing things to convince me that Mike Smith and TD are even aware of the situation were in.
Now most of those statements I am close to 100% agreement on. Thus my criticisms/beefs with Smitty and TD. I believe they are complacent. They believe that this team's formula for success in 2010 was on the money. That all they needed were 1 or 2 more playmakers, and it would get over the hump (see Ray Edwards & Julio Jones). And now it may be that they believe that changing coaches, but continuing to do what they've done but with some moderate tweaks are going to change their fortunes. And I don't believe it will.
I think the Falcons look back at 2010, and the Packers loss as uncharacteristic. A fly in the ointment, but something that you can just pick out with your fingers and flick away. I think they truly believe this team is a 13-3 team "on the cusp" of doing great things. But I don't agree with them, I think this team is a lot further away than many of my fellow fans, and the powers that be in Atlanta seem to think.
I think that's evidenced by their moves to get players like Julio Jones, their impending decision to stick with Turner along with Gonzo. I think they are desperately hoping that Koetter & Nolan recapture that 2010 "magic" when I think it is virtually uncapturable. This team needs to move on from that year, and instead of trying to travel back to the past needs to plan for the future.
And my being "defensive" towards Matt Ryan, is that these are systemic
issues that I think the Falcons have to fix and have nothing to do with Matt Ryan. So this notion that the Falcons can change the QB will change these issues with the team is at best naivete, and at worst stupidity.