It is currently Thu Oct 30, 2014 10:10 am

All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]





Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 91 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: I'm going back to Matt Ryan = Game Manager
PostPosted: Sun Nov 17, 2013 5:57 pm 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 4:54 pm
Posts: 1821
Location: Los Angeles California
After what Matt has showed us this season I'm going back to his Game Manager tag. He obviously can't carry a team, and the more pressure that is put on him without all his shiny hood ornaments or dominant running attack, he starts throwing INTs and losing games to horrifically bad teams. That doesn't mean I want to be rid of him, as I think he is a great Game Manager if he has tools, but he obviously isn't elite. Welcome to the world of Alex Smith, Atlanta! :dance:

_________________
"I am certainly not afraid to have Brian Finneran on the field. Has he ever not made plays? He just makes plays. He is one of those guys that just makes plays. He is dependable."

J. Mora JR.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: I'm going back to Matt Ryan = Game Manager
PostPosted: Sun Nov 17, 2013 6:19 pm 
Offline
Moderator
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2005 3:11 pm
Posts: 4526
Location: Vancouver, WA
It could be worse...

_________________
Fear the BEARD!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: I'm going back to Matt Ryan = Game Manager
PostPosted: Sun Nov 17, 2013 7:12 pm 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar

Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 3:15 pm
Posts: 4318
MarylandFalcon1 wrote:
After what Matt has showed us this season I'm going back to his Game Manager tag. He obviously can't carry a team, and the more pressure that is put on him without all his shiny hood ornaments or dominant running attack, he starts throwing INTs and losing games to horrifically bad teams. That doesn't mean I want to be rid of him, as I think he is a great Game Manager if he has tools, but he obviously isn't elite. Welcome to the world of Alex Smith, Atlanta! :dance:

Matt hasn't been good in recent weeks, but really, who would be? Drew Davis came in for a series and got knocked out of the game. Matt's taking this beating every week. Manning would be out for the season by now. Rodgers would be on IR. Brady and Brees would probably be doing about as well as Matt.

When you have no run game, no time to throw, and your all-star set of receivers is either on IR, or on the tail end of their career, there's really not much that you're going to be able to do to prove your elite status.

Please show me an example where an, "elite," QB has done more in similar circumstances. (No pass protection, no run game, no defense)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: I'm going back to Matt Ryan = Game Manager
PostPosted: Sun Nov 17, 2013 7:33 pm 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 4:54 pm
Posts: 1821
Location: Los Angeles California
Here is what I'm seeing.

Brees was 2-9 in his second season as a starter in San Diego and was injured with only 11 starts, otherwise he's never won fewer than 7 games, including last season without a head coach and bounty gate taking some players away from the team.

Manning was 3-13 his first season, but never won less than 6 games after that [in 2002, the Playoffs! Playoffs! press conference] no matter what his team looked like.

Brady has never won fewer than 9 games in his entire career, and this season he was throwing to no one with no running back for the first six games.

Rodgers won 6 games his first year and hasn't won less than 10 every year after, and his defense was horrid last season and ALL his receivers were on IR.

Those guys are all elite, which means no matter what crap gets thrown at them they still don't let their team bottom feed and always give their squad a chance to win. I don't see that from Matt, instead I see a dink and dunk 'safe' player who needs a good team around him to collect 10+ wins before falling in the playoffs to superior defenses or QB play which is the perfect definition of a Game Manager.

_________________
"I am certainly not afraid to have Brian Finneran on the field. Has he ever not made plays? He just makes plays. He is one of those guys that just makes plays. He is dependable."

J. Mora JR.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: I'm going back to Matt Ryan = Game Manager
PostPosted: Sun Nov 17, 2013 8:32 pm 
Offline
Hall of Famer
Hall of Famer
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2005 7:12 pm
Posts: 6236
Location: Planet Claire
I think that is fair to say. You could give the same tools to other QBs and they would not be as successful with them as Matt has been. Recall Pudge saying we needed to turn the team over to Matt. Well, today I think we saw the dark side of that. Jackson began the game with two of the best runs UI had seen out of him all season. We could have fed him but we just went pass happy again. We were in TB territory with 2nd and 1 and tried 3 consecutive pass plays and had to turn it over on downs. It is pretty clear to me that MR is not and will never be a top 3 QB but that doesn't mean I want him gone. The word elite is subjective. I would say it means top 3.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: I'm going back to Matt Ryan = Game Manager
PostPosted: Sun Nov 17, 2013 10:28 pm 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2007 3:51 pm
Posts: 4906
Location: New York
You just compared Matt Ryan to Alex Smith. You officially lost all credibility on the site. Ryan is a game manager, yet had no running game to speak of last year and still led the team to the NFC championship game. This is the kind of post that really sickens me and these are the Falcon fans I can't stand.

Get a clue MF1 seriously.

_________________
Image

I'm a Devin Hester guy.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: I'm going back to Matt Ryan = Game Manager
PostPosted: Sun Nov 17, 2013 10:54 pm 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 4:54 pm
Posts: 1821
Location: Los Angeles California
You're right Emmitt, Alex Smith is a much better runner than Ryan, my bad :whistle:

_________________
"I am certainly not afraid to have Brian Finneran on the field. Has he ever not made plays? He just makes plays. He is one of those guys that just makes plays. He is dependable."

J. Mora JR.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: I'm going back to Matt Ryan = Game Manager
PostPosted: Sun Nov 17, 2013 11:24 pm 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar

Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2005 8:57 pm
Posts: 4655
Quote:
After what Matt has showed us this season I'm going back to his Game Manager tag.


Wait, when did being a great game manager become a bad thing?? Most Qbs can't do it and I
think Matt is as good as a game manager as anyone in the NFL........

NOW OBVIOUSLY I wish he could be the best and carry bad teams; but last year is a perfect example of great game day management!! Our team last year wasn't that good; the offensive line not good either; nor the defensive line.

Matt didn't dink and dunk last year!! Ryan's not an average game day manager; he's a great game day manager.

If people would realize years like this come along; that being a great game day manager will keep you in the top ten of Qbs for a career; and accept we have a top ten Qb; that's good enough to win a Super Bowl .......

I'm more worried that Arthur doesn't know it!!

A top ten Qb is a big deal; a great game day manager Qb is a big deal; Guys these are not opinions; their facts!!

_________________
"Everything Counts"
Cyril


Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: I'm going back to Matt Ryan = Game Manager
PostPosted: Mon Nov 18, 2013 12:08 am 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 4:54 pm
Posts: 1821
Location: Los Angeles California
Cyril, I hope that wasn't directed at me, as I said Ryan was a great game manager. I don't have a problem with it. I'd rather have Ryan than 20+ other QBs in the league starting right now. He's damn good at what he does. All I'm saying is he's not going to go win X amount of games for the team while putting it on his back like an elite QB would, this season has proven that.

_________________
"I am certainly not afraid to have Brian Finneran on the field. Has he ever not made plays? He just makes plays. He is one of those guys that just makes plays. He is dependable."

J. Mora JR.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: I'm going back to Matt Ryan = Game Manager
PostPosted: Mon Nov 18, 2013 1:16 am 
Offline
Hall of Famer
Hall of Famer
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2005 7:12 pm
Posts: 6236
Location: Planet Claire
Yep, I don't see what the prob is, Emmitt. He is def not a "play maker" type of QB. He has always been surrounded with a lot of weapons albeit mundane OL and to have the success he has with this hand is pretty good. He has stunk it up for almost a month running now though. He's tough in the pocket though. I'll give him that all day. TB's QB barely got his pants dirty.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: I'm going back to Matt Ryan = Game Manager
PostPosted: Mon Nov 18, 2013 2:05 am 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar

Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 3:15 pm
Posts: 4318
Up until this season, he had more come from behind victories than anyone else in the league for as long as he's been in the league. A, "game manager," is a guy who is able to win games despite not putting up very good numbers. Trent Dilfer comes to mind.

Matt Ryan is perfectly capable of putting up big numbers. He has two things going against him:
1. Our head coach wants a ball control offense. The Falcons are known for their ability to create long drives and eat clock. That's by design.
2. Our offensive line has been getting worse, year after year, and is now at the point that it is probably the worst unit in the NFL.

These two things feed off of each other. We don't stretch the field because the QB doesn't have time, and we let it get that way because we don't really care to stretch the field, we want to have 15 play drives.

One thing that I see constantly said about Ryan is that, "he doesn't buy time." I have to ask, how is he supposed to? He has edge rushers running past our OT's, and DT's and linebackers pushing our linemen back 10 yards or simply running around them. There's no place for Ryan to go. This unit is horrid.

Some have been calling for Davis to play... Well, he made it half a series before he was knocked out of the game. Ryan seems to take these hits on just about every snap.

Who has been able to put up elite numbers in a similar situation? Frankly, I can't remember seeing an offensive line as bad as ours is right now. I'm sure that there have been some, but this line is pretty freaking horrid. Show me a QB who has put up good numbers behind such an offensive line.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: I'm going back to Matt Ryan = Game Manager
PostPosted: Mon Nov 18, 2013 2:11 am 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2007 5:41 pm
Posts: 2413
Location: Albany NY
Another silly thread, today's game was meaningless, and Ryan like the rest of our guys are going through the motions, next year when we have a full team again we will see Matty Ice at his best and will be in the playoffs making a run.

_________________
When life gives you lemons, find some salt and tequila then invite me!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: I'm going back to Matt Ryan = Game Manager
PostPosted: Mon Nov 18, 2013 2:18 am 
Offline
Hall of Famer
Hall of Famer
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2005 7:12 pm
Posts: 6236
Location: Planet Claire
RobertAP wrote:
Up until this season, he had more come from behind victories than anyone else in the league for as long as he's been in the league. A, "game manager," is a guy who is able to win games despite not putting up very good numbers. Trent Dilfer comes to mind.

Matt Ryan is perfectly capable of putting up big numbers. He has two things going against him:
1. Our head coach wants a ball control offense. The Falcons are known for their ability to create long drives and eat clock. That's by design.
2. Our offensive line has been getting worse, year after year, and is now at the point that it is probably the worst unit in the NFL.

These two things feed off of each other. We don't stretch the field because the QB doesn't have time, and we let it get that way because we don't really care to stretch the field, we want to have 15 play drives.

One thing that I see constantly said about Ryan is that, "he doesn't buy time." I have to ask, how is he supposed to? He has edge rushers running past our OT's, and DT's and linebackers pushing our linemen back 10 yards or simply running around them. There's no place for Ryan to go. This unit is horrid.

Some have been calling for Davis to play... Well, he made it half a series before he was knocked out of the game. Ryan seems to take these hits on just about every snap.

Who has been able to put up elite numbers in a similar situation? Frankly, I can't remember seeing an offensive line as bad as ours is right now. I'm sure that there have been some, but this line is pretty freaking horrid. Show me a QB who has put up good numbers behind such an offensive line.

The Packers line was easily as bad as ours last year. I would also bet we had as many explosive pays from scrimmage as anyone last year. One of the reasons our line looks so bad is we are watching it in a game wherein we compare it to the pressure the opponent's QB is getting which is next to none.

BTW, did anybody think to go by Pudge's house and take any hand guns he might have away? He is conspicuous by his absence. Word is he is not taking the losses well. :shock:

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: I'm going back to Matt Ryan = Game Manager
PostPosted: Mon Nov 18, 2013 2:23 am 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar

Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2005 8:57 pm
Posts: 4655
MF1--no it was just my thinking that some Qbs are much better than others at getting the whole team or offense involved; and somehow we've decided that's a bad thing??? I do think
Ryan is a great game day manager; no he's not going to just carry an offense on his own...

Now I'm not pissed if our Qb is not a top 2-4 Qb in the league; I am proud that we have a consistently top 10 Qb.... Obviously this year they're no offense to manage. I never get into is Ryan number 4 or 5, my knowing he's a top 10 is good enough for me!!

No I'll always name someone if its directed at them; its not always a bad thing; I just want to get this notion that a very good game day manager is bad; out of here!! There are a very few
who can carry a team; most Qbs are game day managers but some do it a lot better than others.

I call a great game day manager one that can get all receivers involved; and have running plays without fumbling and getting players who are out of position, back into position. The good ones are also versatile both long and short.....Ryan is not going to be Brady but what he does I think is good enough to win most years......and consistently....... Its hard to win giving up 40 points. I was just trying to say that a very good game day manager is a hard Qb
to find and its a good thing!!

Obviously Ryan won't look good this year without a line or receivers....and under those circumstances you can look pretty bad; an offense should at least have an average offensive line; and one very good receiver..... This year at this point we don't have either!!

I don't think its a silly thread; its folks understanding that getting everyone involved is hard to do and Ryan is as good as anyone at it....I actually think the players are giving 100% its just to bad we don't have any players on the field for Ryan to work with this year!!

As to Pudge I just figured he's shooting anyone who doesn't agree with him (:

_________________
"Everything Counts"
Cyril


Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: I'm going back to Matt Ryan = Game Manager
PostPosted: Mon Nov 18, 2013 2:27 am 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar

Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2005 8:57 pm
Posts: 4655
Robert wrote
Quote:
A, "game manager," is a guy who is able to win games despite not putting up very good numbers. Trent Dilfer comes to mind.


Yes but I'm talking about a great game day manager which I think Ryan is.... He gets everyone involved and is consistently good. I agree no one could look great under center of Today's Atlanta Falcons......

_________________
"Everything Counts"
Cyril


Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: I'm going back to Matt Ryan = Game Manager
PostPosted: Mon Nov 18, 2013 12:07 pm 
Offline
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 3:03 pm
Posts: 26040
Location: North Carolina
Matt Ryan has been playing like Alex Smith this year. Both are at the bottom rung of the year in terms of taking shots downfield. And both have been dinking and dunking this year. The difference is that Smith has a good running game and a great defense backing him up, and the Chiefs are winning that way. The Falcons are losing that way because their running game is the worst in the league and their defense is one of the 3 worst in the league.

The Falcons don't take deep shots because they're not called. And when they are, Ryan checks it down because he and the team don't want to turn the ball over. Blaming the OL for the team's inability to stretch the field is not accurate. The problem is the play-caller and the QB, period. You can blame the OL and the WRs for if/when those plays are attempted, but not executed. But those players aren't being attempted, and that's 100% on the play-caller and the QB.

Yes, Ryan will probably never be a QB on par with Brady, Brees, etc. At least not under this coaching staff. If he gets his very own Sean Payton, then there's that possibility, although it's still unlikely.

The reason for that is because the biggest knock on Ryan is his unwillingness to throw the ball into tight windows down the field. That's the difference between him and the other elite QBs, as well as the other good but not great QBs. Ryan doesn't play with balls. And even though they aren't as smart or good as Ryan is, players like Eli, Stafford, Cutler, and Flacco have balls. And thus when they are on their game, they are better than Ryan.

To compensate for this lack of testicular fortitude, the Falcons need to upgrade their OL and WR play. If they want Ryan to become a better QB than he has been to date, they need to get WRs that are able to stretch the field and make plays downfield, which can force Ryan to take more shots downfield. But you need to give him taller WRs that are able and willing to go get the ball, not dumping him with Harry Douglas-type of short receivers that struggle when asked to run routes beyond 10 yards.

The Falcons need to revamp their offense and personnel around Ryan if they want him to be more than what MF1 accurately calls him, a game manager.

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


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: I'm going back to Matt Ryan = Game Manager
PostPosted: Mon Nov 18, 2013 2:14 pm 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar

Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 3:15 pm
Posts: 4318
backnblack wrote:
BTW, did anybody think to go by Pudge's house and take any hand guns he might have away? He is conspicuous by his absence. Word is he is not taking the losses well. :shock:

I have noticed that Pudge does not post on game day. I leave it to him to explain this if he feels it necessary.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: I'm going back to Matt Ryan = Game Manager
PostPosted: Mon Nov 18, 2013 2:55 pm 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar

Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2005 8:57 pm
Posts: 4655
Pudge wrote ;
Quote:
Blaming the OL for the team's inability to stretch the field is not accurate.



Yes but blaming the O-line for Ryan being under consistent pressure is!!

All I'm trying to say is that normally Ryan is a good Qb, probably consistent top 10, I'm not comparing him to anyone; just saying this Game Manager is done better than others which make some Qbs better than others. I think Ryan is at the top of the list of game managers;
he can get everyone evolved. He's not going to ever be a Brady or P. Manning; and being a very good game manager is not a bad thing as has been implied over the years. Some are just better than others and Ryan IMO has always been a top 10 or better in the last few years...

This year is just a cluster f*** for about everybody; not disagreeing with what your saying;
just clarifying that some Qbs manage the game far greater than others. Until this year we've
really not had anything to bitch about concerning Ryan!!

_________________
"Everything Counts"
Cyril


Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: I'm going back to Matt Ryan = Game Manager
PostPosted: Mon Nov 18, 2013 3:48 pm 
Offline
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 3:03 pm
Posts: 26040
Location: North Carolina
Cyril wrote:
I think Ryan is at the top of the list of game managers;

I agree. From the neck up, the only QB in the league that I would say is better than Ryan is Peyton Manning, but it's not by a huge degree.

The issue here is that people are going to gravitate to 1 of 2 camps: Either putting too much blame on Ryan himself, or Not putting any blame on Ryan himself. The reality like most things it that things really rest somewhere in the middle.

The good thing is that "fixing" Ryan isn't going to be be dramatic or overly complicated. You can fairly simply take him from where he is today which is one of the 10 Worst Starters in the league to back where he was as one of the 10 Best Starters in the League without having to do too much.

But part of it goes back to what we were talking about post-2011, in that the coaching staff hasn't really provided a great support base to maximize Ryan's ability.

What isn't on Ryan is the weapons he has around him. One of the reasons why Brady has been quasi-competent with crap WRs is that he had an entire off-season and summer to work with them. What has proven in hindsight to be a grievous miscalculation is that without that same time to work with Johnson/Davis/etc. Ryan simply doesn't trust his receivers. Part of that is on coaching, largely thanks to the fact that over the course of 3 years here, guys like Cone and Davis really haven't had extended opportunities to integrate themselves in the starting offense. The other part of that is on the front office for not accurately predicting that this would happen. And the other part of that is on Ryan, simply because he's the QB and at the end of the day it's on him to complete passes to the WRs.

The issue again here is similar to what it was post-2011, which is people want to blame one thing for what ails the team, whether it's the head coach, the GM, the QB, the OL, the WRs, the defense, etc. The Falcons are going to have to fix multiple issues to get this team corrected.

I'm getting tired of people trying to whittle down the Falcons problems to 1 or 2 areas as if that's all or most of the problem. It's a team-wide issue. Sure, there are areas that are bigger issues than others. And I would certainly say that the problems on both the OL and DL are the 2 biggest problems this team has. And if the Falcons can go from bad to good in both of those areas, it will certainly mask many of the other issues the team has.

But the mistake that fans make, and to a certain extent this front office makes with their need-based drafting strategy is basically thinking that you can snap your fingers and solve those problems.

You remember the '07 Giants OL, that was considered the best in the league and helped that team go all the way to the Super Bowl, and really was the last run-first team to win a Super Bowl. That didn't happen over night. 4 of those 5 starters were acquired by the Giants in '04 and '05, with the 5th one being on the team since '01 (Seubert). It took the better part of 3 years, which included the Giants dumping a former #1 pick at LT in Luke Petitgout for that to coalesce into that '07 group, not to mention the fact that all 5 starters started all 16 games in '07 to get that cohesion. The Giants maintained that same starting five over the next 2 years, and it never resulted in the right mix to get them another playoff win.

Look at the '12 49ers OL, another dominant unit. That required 3 #1 picks drafted between 2-5 years prior to that, as well as a failed #2 pick (Chilo Rachal) getting replaced by a UDFA (Boone) that they had picked up in 2009. Coupled with a FA pickup in Goodwin at C that was replacing David Baas, a former #2 pick from 7 years prior that they finally gave up on.

The point I'm making is that if people think the Falcons can just use their top 2 picks on a OL and it's going to suddenly make them into a good OL are fooling themselves. Just like I don't think if the Falcons draft Clowney (or someone else) and a quality DT is going to make them into a top defense. But it can potentially form the foundation of one down the road, kinda like when the Panthers drafted Kris Jenkins and Julius Peppers in back to back years in '01 and '02, and formed the core of what was one of the league's best DLs for the next 6+ years. Those guys helped turn Mike Rucker into a double-digit sack guy, and helped extend the career of an aging journeyman like Brentson Buckner.

And the one concern you have to have if/when Blank starts firing folks is that if the pressure is going to be on them to start making short-term moves, rather than the long-term reloading project that this team desperately needs. If I could give Arthur Blank some advice, it would be to build with the attitude of opening the new stadium in 2017 and 2018 with a Super Bowl-caliber team as opposed to trying to win one in the time between. Because frankly, 2016 will be the 9th year for TD, and as I've indicated before Year 9 is the time when you can expect things to pay dividends if you're judging from what Bill Polian, Rich McKay, Bill Parcells, etc. did with losing franchises like what the Falcons were when TD took over.

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


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: I'm going back to Matt Ryan = Game Manager
PostPosted: Mon Nov 18, 2013 5:18 pm 
Offline
Hall of Famer
Hall of Famer
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2005 7:12 pm
Posts: 6236
Location: Planet Claire
Good points, Pudge, and I do think that they have been playing short term a bit here and I feel that AB is much of the reason. He is not getting any younger and has been mentioned by many a writer he sends our memos in red ink which means "Alert!" When smith arrived it was all process and players closest to the ball and then came unexpectedly sudden success. the young QB did not take as much developing as might have been expected. In fact, MR ushered in the era now where rookies are pretty much expected to step right in and start.

For those of us who wanted Dorsey I think that the thinking was you build the lines and then go find your QB, however, this may be fallacious thinking because if you wait three or four years and then wait for the QB to develop the lines you have built are either aged, injured or making bank. It's a tough juggling act. I don't think one off season can fix the team but I did not think one off season could do what it has apparently done to us. And I certainly do no think you can fix i tall through the draft but you have to use that as your foundation. It's such an inexact science. Everyone thought Konz was the center coming out of college and he may end up being OK but right now it is looking like a right headed move that has gone wrong. He's simply getting manhandled.

you and some others called this when the team made the JJ move...that the team would pay down the road. That may or may not be the case and, frankly, it is hard to argue with taking the shot they did last year. they got pretty darn close to pulling it off. Revisionism will say they mortgaged the future and had nothing to show for it but in the game of inches that is sports the black and white view belies what is really sort of gray.

BTW, interesting now that you have taken on Birdy's MR=pussy mantra. We doubters always questioned if the physical weaknesses could be compensated for by the above the neck strengths. He just doesn't have the physical tools to pump balls in the tiny cracks that a Rodgers or Brees can. As with our O heavy roster we have a brain heavy QB. the gamble is whether it can mask the other clear shortcomings. For the record, Matt has won me over. I just hope he does not lose the team.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: I'm going back to Matt Ryan = Game Manager
PostPosted: Mon Nov 18, 2013 6:14 pm 
Offline
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 3:03 pm
Posts: 26040
Location: North Carolina
backnblack wrote:
BTW, interesting now that you have taken on Birdy's MR=pussy mantra. We doubters always questioned if the physical weaknesses could be compensated for by the above the neck strengths. He just doesn't have the physical tools to pump balls in the tiny cracks that a Rodgers or Brees can. As with our O heavy roster we have a brain heavy QB. the gamble is whether it can mask the other clear shortcomings. For the record, Matt has won me over. I just hope he does not lose the team.

Since I started watching the All-22 last year, it has become apparent to me of Ryan's hesitance to "pull the trigger" on tight-window throws downfield. He'll do it on 3rd down if he's throwing to Tony or Julio, but if it's not a do/die situation (e.g. 1st & 10), he'll always take the check down and live to play another down rather than risk the turnover or sack.

And I think this has worked in the past because when the Falcons could be confident that they could keep the game close through 3 quarters with Ryan and the Big 3 moving the ball, and the defense getting a stop here or there with a TO, then Ryan could turn it on in the 4th quarter when his back was against the wall, and that sort of hesitation was thrown out the window.

I've said in the past that this conservative nature of the offense is somewhat coach-driven (Smitty's unwillingness to make mistakes early), but also QB-driven because I think Ryan is a smart QB that knows TOs can dig a hole early that is harder to climb out of. It's the "live to play another down" sort of mentality that really does separate Ryan and other elite QBs from the Stafford/Cutler/Eli type of guys that have no hesitancy of pulling that trigger.

The other issue that plays into that is arm strength. Because Ryan has lived his entire life with his arm, he knows his limitations on what throws he can and can't make better than anyone. He has a built-in "arrestor" on that trigger. And unlike those guys I just mentioned, who have elite or very good arms, they never developed those "inhibitions" and it certainly gets them into trouble quite a bit. The sort of "mental mistakes" that are rare with Ryan.

Of course when you take away the "Big 3" and make it into the "Big 1.5" (since Roddy is far from 100%), things break down. Part of what has happened over the years is because Ryan is smart and wins "pre-snap", he will lock on guys and his 1st read. And thus when he was locking onto Tony, Julio, or Roddy that didn't get him into trouble, because he can generally trust those guys to beat man coverage and reward him for that. Now when you take away 2 of those guys, and teams subsequently bracket Tony Gonzalez, then Ryan gets stuck, which IMO best explains why he's struggled as of late.

Now I won't blame coaching completely but I don't think the Falcons coaching staff has done a great job getting Ryan to stop doing this, and particularly as of late when he has needed the extra help from Koetter & Co.

The reality is that most QBs "lock on" to their first read. Or they then check it down. The idea that a QB will scan a defense on a consistent basis and go through multiple progressions is a myth. Maybe a top QB would do that for about 20-25% at most, but most throws are dictated by pre-snap reads and the alignment of coverage within the first 1.5 seconds of a play while the QB is dropping. It's just inhuman to think a guy is going to be able to consistently read coverages, especially playing behind our OL.

The thing the Flacons must do in order to subvert this "obstacle" of Ryan's, is to significantly upgrade the talent of the WRs, so that you have 4 or 5 guys that are "man beaters" (which they have failed to do) or modify the offense to use more complementary routes to make beating man coverage less necessary (which they have failed to do). They did that with Drew Davis vs. Arizona, which led to his "big" game, but I haven't seen enough of it since then.

IMO, they should do both, but they have to do at least one of them this off-season. Otherwise you're always going to be a sprained ankle or broken toe away from this scenario that we currently found ourselves in.

I'm a pro-Matt Ryan guy, but I'm also very much aware of his limitations and obstacles. Thus unlike most, I appreciate Matt Ryan for exactly what he is, not what he isn't or could be. I've always felt that Ryan's limitations and obstacles are not insurmountable, but I think the front office has taken some of it for granted, and this has formed part of my beef with them over the years.

But I will say that like them, I still expected Ryan to play better than he has as of late.

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


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: I'm going back to Matt Ryan = Game Manager
PostPosted: Mon Nov 18, 2013 9:14 pm 
Offline
Bench Warmer
Bench Warmer
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 03, 2013 10:44 am
Posts: 11
Location: Binghamton, New York
You know what all of those quarterbacks have always had? Competent offensive lines. We have an offensive line this year that I'm not sure a NCAA team wouldn't come in and dominate against. Rarely do we see Matt with a pocket, he's constantly under pressure. He's not the type of guy that will get out of trouble and make moves to buy time. He's a pure pocket passer, you can't do anything from the pocket when there isn't one. The wins we do have this year are solely on the back of Matt.

You can blame his inefficiencies on the pressure he's feeling from receiving his ridiculously large contract, and the fact that Tony Gonzalez is still with the team. He's trying to make way too much happen on his own. Throwing into double coverage isn't an option at this point, but he has to (1 because he hasn't got time to go through progressions, and 2 because our receivers are banged up). It's obvious that Roddy White is either playing hurt still or he is not the same player he was in the past. He's making bone headed drops and he's not running routes efficiently either. Having guys like Tony Gonzalez, Roddy White and Julio has absolutely helped Matt, it would help any quarterback. Gonzalez is being stared down from the snap of the football on majority of plays because Matt knows he hasn't got time to go through his progressions. I'm not sure how much easier it gets to notice that.

As far as Matt Ryan not willing enough to pull the trigger in tight windows? I don't buy it. What's the excuse for 2008 and 2009 seasons when we saw Matt play at a high level as well? He didn't have "the big three" as some of you call it. Sorry, but that's not really an excuse. Tony Gonzalez has done nothing, and I said he would do this when he chose to come back in the off season, but help Matt Ryan regress throwing the football. He trusts him too much, and rightfully so. Matt is a franchise quarterback and he's a guy that can go out and win games. Alex Smith is NOT that type of player, Smith is the guy that goes out and just doesn't LOSE a game.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: I'm going back to Matt Ryan = Game Manager
PostPosted: Tue Nov 19, 2013 12:10 am 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar

Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2005 8:57 pm
Posts: 4655
PUDGE WROTE:
Quote:

I'm getting tired of people trying to whittle down the Falcons problems to 1 or 2 areas as if that's all or most of the problem. It's a team-wide issue. Sure, there are areas that are bigger issues than others. And I would certainly say that the problems on both the OL and DL are the 2 biggest problems this team has


All of the above is the darn truth!!

_________________
"Everything Counts"
Cyril


Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: I'm going back to Matt Ryan = Game Manager
PostPosted: Tue Nov 19, 2013 8:49 am 
Offline
Hall of Famer
Hall of Famer
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2005 7:12 pm
Posts: 6236
Location: Planet Claire
When you call it a "team wide issue" which I think is fair it calls into question leadership which is a real prickly supposition. HC? Team leaders? Ownership? And it is really weird how it can happen. I guess I have been made acutely aware of this by the local college team. Auburn went from NCs to arguably the historically worst team ever fielded at Jordan Hare stadium to where they are now which is--incredibly--not totally unthinkable as NC contenders. They fire a HC who had won the only NC AU had earned since the 50s two years after he won it. So, I guess all of us that say Smitty should stay due to what he has already done can be sobered up by looking at the team here in Auburn and what can happen when the coach loses a locker room. I don't think coaches get stupid or incompetent over night but groups of people can be very fickle and once the sea shifts it is hard to turn around. Clearly something is amiss in FB and it isn't just talent or the lack thereof.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: I'm going back to Matt Ryan = Game Manager
PostPosted: Tue Nov 19, 2013 1:06 pm 
Offline
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 3:03 pm
Posts: 26040
Location: North Carolina
Cyril wrote:
PUDGE WROTE:
Quote:

I'm getting tired of people trying to whittle down the Falcons problems to 1 or 2 areas as if that's all or most of the problem. It's a team-wide issue. Sure, there are areas that are bigger issues than others. And I would certainly say that the problems on both the OL and DL are the 2 biggest problems this team has


All of the above is the darn truth!!

Truth is all I know, Cyril. :lol:
backnblack wrote:
hen you call it a "team wide issue" which I think is fair it calls into question leadership which is a real prickly supposition. HC? Team leaders? Ownership? And it is really weird how it can happen. I guess I have been made acutely aware of this by the local college team. Auburn went from NCs to arguably the historically worst team ever fielded at Jordan Hare stadium to where they are now which is--incredibly--not totally unthinkable as NC contenders. They fire a HC who had won the only NC AU had earned since the 50s two years after he won it. So, I guess all of us that say Smitty should stay due to what he has already done can be sobered up by looking at the team here in Auburn and what can happen when the coach loses a locker room. I don't think coaches get stupid or incompetent over night but groups of people can be very fickle and once the sea shifts it is hard to turn around. Clearly something is amiss in FB and it isn't just talent or the lack thereof.

Well, in the case of Auburn, it's hard to argue that their success wasn't largely due to Cam Newton being Cam Newton, and Nick Fairley being Nick Fairley. I remember at that pro day that year that was televised on ESPN, all the NFL scouts were saying how "devoid" Auburn was of talent and that they would fall off the cliff once those 2 guys left, and I think that was accurately reflected in what happened there. Now, I haven't seen enough of Auburn this year to really judge just how much improvement in talent they have made since then, but by and large success in college football is 90% talent/recruiting, 10% good coaching. Just look at Les Miles and his success at LSU. :wink:

It's a little different in the pros, because you don't have the wide disparities in talent that you can get in college (like say Florida vs. Vanderbilt or USC vs. Colorado), and thus coaching matters a bit more. You can be conservative and old school coach, which really only works in the pros if you have more talent than others. You can do more with less if you have the right coach, particularly if you have a good QB and an innovate play-caller (see Mike McCarthy). Or if you have horses on defenses and an innovative schemer (see Rex Ryan).

FR Chris wrote:
You know what all of those quarterbacks have always had? Competent offensive lines.

Ehh, I'm not sure. Manning has proven that you can basically put any 5 guys in front of him, even marginal NFL players and he's not going to get sacked or hit. Brees is kinda the same way, although he's never really had to play with a mincemeat OL in NO, but there is constant turnover over the past 7 years and it hasn't made a difference. Ryan is in that same boat, in that he can do more with less in comparison to other QBs around the league.

But like most folks, I would really like to see the day that Ryan does have a good OL similar to what Brady has gotten used to playing behind in NE. Because in terms of their pocket abilities, Ryan and Brady are probably the most comparable.

FR Chris wrote:
What's the excuse for 2008 and 2009 seasons when we saw Matt play at a high level as well?

Well, in 2008 and 2009 Ryan was asked even more so to manage the game, more in the sort of "pejorative" sense that we tend to associate with that term. Here are some compelling stats, just look at the Falcons 1st down plays over Ryan's career:

Percentage of Run plays called on 1st down, and Yards Per Carry on those runs:

2008 - 69.9%, 4.41
2009 - 55.2%, 4.07
2010 - 57.3%, 3.89
2011 - 56.3%, 3.63
2012 - 47.4%, 3.33
2013 - 38.6%, 3.10 (overall)
2013 - 38.9%, 2.59 (post-Julio injury)

Ryan's numbers on 1st down (Completion %, Passer Rating, and Yards Per Attempt)

2008 - 61.5%, 97.2 rating, 9.4 YPA
2009 - 53.5%, 67.5, 5.8
2010 - 59.5%, 82.0, 6.3
2011 - 59.5%, 100.2, 8.2
2012 - 70.0%, 101.2, 8.2
2013 - 69.6%, 87.0, 7.1 (overall)
2013 - 64.8%, 70.0, 6.4 (post-Julio Injury)

The question you're probably wondering is why was Ryan so good on 1st down as a rookie in '08 than he was in '09. Well, the answer is rather simple. The Falcons were very effective utilizing play-action in '08 due to the dominance of their rushing attack, and in '09 the drop in production was largely thanks to turnovers and mistakes. He threw 6 picks that year on 1st down. People often forget that in '09, Ryan had those troubles early in the year where he was very turnover prone and the Falcons were forced to dial things back on offense to protect the football.

FR Chris wrote:
Matt is a franchise quarterback and he's a guy that can go out and win games. Alex Smith is NOT that type of player, Smith is the guy that goes out and just doesn't LOSE a game.

I agree with you, but what you're not seeing is that what you call Alex Smith is EXACTLY what Ryan and this Falcons offense has become since Julio has been out. There is no bite to their offense. They run the ball for 2 yards on 1st down, get into 3rd and long and they cannot convert. They don't attempt any big plays or throws down the field until they are behind by 2 or 3 scores in the 2nd half.

Today's reality is that the Falcons offense has basically become one that asks Ryan to not lose the game because they want to dial it back due to his turnovers, but unlike Alex Smith they don't have the league's best defense that can get stops, nor do they have the running game and a Top 5 RB helping their offense that Smith has that allows KC to win that way. Instead, the Falcons have arguably the worst running game in the league, and have one of the worst defenses in the league.

That is a losing formula. We've seen what Alex Smith has done in those situations in past years in SF, but the reality is that even in those years where the 49ers were a losing team under Mike Nolan and Singletary, they were still better in both those areas than the Falcons currently are.

And this is why I have switched from supporting Mike Smith wholeheartedly to trashing him because to me when you are trying to win this way, you have to be a incompetent idiot to think that can be successful.

So I have 1 of 2 conclusions to draw: either Mike Smith is an idiot and thinks you can be uber-conservative with a Top 10 QB and win, or he knows it's not a recipe for success and they are purposefully tanking. Regardless, that guy shouldn't be the head coach of my favorite football team.

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


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 91 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users 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