It is currently Sun Apr 20, 2014 11:16 pm

All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]





Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 17 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: vick vs schaub
PostPosted: Mon Oct 10, 2005 12:18 am 
Offline
All-Pro
All-Pro

Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2005 1:20 pm
Posts: 557
Location: ubiquitous
there is no controversy to speak of but it's funny. schaub actually gave the falcons a relatively balanced scoring attack. 285 passing, 116 rushing.
granted they probably should have run more mixing it up a with dunn & ducket , but it was really nice to see a consistent passing game for the first time in a long time. But the ironic thing is i think the falcons probably win with vick. i still think the defense plays better when vick is in there for some reason. i don't have any stats but it's their demeanor when vick's in there. maybe that will change as they get more belief in schaub, the d did play well for almost 2 quarters. also if vick was in there they would have run more, wearing down the pats d and the clock. i used to have doubts about vick and i wondered what would happen if schaub got playing time and was the actual starter, would it be better for the falcs? i loved seeing that passing attack and the balanced offense yet i still think the falcons win with vick. it's like some cognitive dissonance. is it pure quarterback mojo or what?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: vick vs schaub
PostPosted: Mon Oct 10, 2005 1:20 am 
Offline
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: Thu Sep 15, 2005 10:59 am
Posts: 136
buddyboy wrote:
there is no controversy to speak of but it's funny. schaub actually gave the falcons a relatively balanced scoring attack. 285 passing, 116 rushing.
granted they probably should have run more mixing it up a with dunn & ducket , but it was really nice to see a consistent passing game for the first time in a long time. But the ironic thing is i think the falcons probably win with vick. i still think the defense plays better when vick is in there for some reason. i don't have any stats but it's their demeanor when vick's in there. maybe that will change as they get more belief in schaub, the d did play well for almost 2 quarters. also if vick was in there they would have run more, wearing down the pats d and the clock. i used to have doubts about vick and i wondered what would happen if schaub got playing time and was the actual starter, would it be better for the falcs? i loved seeing that passing attack and the balanced offense yet i still think the falcons win with vick. it's like some cognitive dissonance. is it pure quarterback mojo or what?



This is not even worth discussing. Schaub played reasonably well for us today, but Vick is our starting QB...No question about it. If Vick started today, we would have won by 14.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Oct 10, 2005 2:39 pm 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar

Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 5:31 pm
Posts: 3008
Quote:
If Vick started today, we would have won by 14


Huh? If Vick started we may have lost by 30. Schaub played well, give him some credit. He didn't lose the game....


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Wonders
PostPosted: Mon Oct 10, 2005 2:44 pm 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 4:54 pm
Posts: 1791
Location: Los Angeles California
Will wonders never end, I agree with Angry again. Vick doesn't score 28 points often, either started would have come up with a loss IMO. Could Vick have thrown that many yards or TDs without an INT, doubt it. Our running game was shut down for the most part and Vick would have helped that, but not 28 points worth and cetainly not enough to swing the game to a 14 victory for us.

MF1

_________________
"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: vick vs schaub
PostPosted: Mon Oct 10, 2005 2:52 pm 
Offline
All-Pro
All-Pro

Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2005 1:20 pm
Posts: 557
Location: ubiquitous
ether3917 wrote:
buddyboy wrote:
there is no controversy to speak of but it's funny. schaub actually gave the falcons a relatively balanced scoring attack. 285 passing, 116 rushing.
granted they probably should have run more mixing it up a with dunn & ducket , but it was really nice to see a consistent passing game for the first time in a long time. But the ironic thing is i think the falcons probably win with vick. i still think the defense plays better when vick is in there for some reason. i don't have any stats but it's their demeanor when vick's in there. maybe that will change as they get more belief in schaub, the d did play well for almost 2 quarters. also if vick was in there they would have run more, wearing down the pats d and the clock. i used to have doubts about vick and i wondered what would happen if schaub got playing time and was the actual starter, would it be better for the falcs? i loved seeing that passing attack and the balanced offense yet i still think the falcons win with vick. it's like some cognitive dissonance. is it pure quarterback mojo or what?



This is not even worth discussing. Schaub played reasonably well for us today, but Vick is our starting QB...No question about it. If Vick started today, we would have won by 14.


"there is no controversy to speak of "
"i think the falcons probably win with vick"
ether, you just repeated what i said already. i was just noting the irony of how schaub brought a balanced passing and rushing attack and still lost. and how it was cool to see a consistent passing attack.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Oct 10, 2005 3:27 pm 
Offline
Moderator
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2005 3:11 pm
Posts: 4377
Location: Vancouver, WA
If the defense would have shown up then either Vick or Schuab would have won that game. But the defense didn't show up and neither Vick or Schuab could have won that game plain and simple.

This is the second time this season that the defense has been a liablility and we were suppose to be improved. Now we lost our replacement for Mathis and our big ticket MLB. Lord help us.

I do think these two injuries will haunt us all season long.

_________________
Fear the BEARD!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Oct 10, 2005 3:45 pm 
Offline
All-Pro
All-Pro

Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 12:06 pm
Posts: 715
Location: Augusta, GA
well what i can't seem to get across to the knuckleheads on the Espn board is that i'd rather have the 75 yds rushing we would have had in this game if Vick was in there vs the 100 yds extra passing we got out of Schaub.
and no, i'm not assuming Vick would have ran for that. i am assuming however that Mora wouldn't have tried to chuck it all over the field with Vick in there like he did yesterday. Dunn had a few 1 or 2 yd runs but he had a few 7 plus yarders also. we got away from running the ball IMO.
i haven't checked the stats and i was at the game so it all kind of runs together but it seemed to me like we passed the ball alot more than we normally do.
our ball control offense masks our defeciencies in the secondary to the 10th degree. brady doesn't pass for 350 if Vick is playing IMO.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Oct 10, 2005 3:51 pm 
Offline
All-Pro
All-Pro

Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 12:06 pm
Posts: 715
Location: Augusta, GA
rushing attempts in 3 wins
40, 36, 41

rushing attempts in 2 losses
28, 26 yesterday.



and it's not like we were playing from big deficits all game. we created some of those deficits by not playing our game.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Oct 10, 2005 3:55 pm 
Offline
Moderator
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2005 3:11 pm
Posts: 4377
Location: Vancouver, WA
That was my thing yesterday. Just because we have a guy that is a pocket passer in there doesn't mean we stop running the ball. Our run game gets going because we run it 40 times a game. Only 28 times doesn't allow us to get into a grove. With our 28 carries will still had 116 yards. Had we rushed for 40 times we'd be pushing 200 and would have kept the ball out of Brady's hands.

_________________
Fear the BEARD!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Ball control
PostPosted: Mon Oct 10, 2005 8:51 pm 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 4:54 pm
Posts: 1791
Location: Los Angeles California
Yep, we are a ball control and clock team. We are not going to win any shootouts even if Schaub is in there and throws for 298 yards and 3 TDs. Our run wasn't working early but by the 4th TJ should have been breaking that Pats D down and we could have killed a clock with an 8 minute drive, however, going down 14-0 will cause you to throw (ala Rams) and that is what we did. Be happy with our passing game, at least we tied it at 28 and that is something.

MF1

_________________
"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:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 11, 2005 11:21 am 
Offline
Moderator
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2005 3:11 pm
Posts: 4377
Location: Vancouver, WA
Atleast we weren't pushing 70 pass attempts :)

_________________
Fear the BEARD!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 11, 2005 2:15 pm 
Offline
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 3:03 pm
Posts: 25555
Location: North Carolina
Yeah, we got away from our running game because for half of the game we were down by 2 scores.

I'm not going to say we would have won this game with Vick at the helm, as dirtybirdnw said, our defense didn't show up.

It's nice to think that on a few of those missed 3rd down conversions, Vick's scrambling ability would have made a difference, but its blatant speculation.

Schaub's accuracy was inconsistent throughout the game, but he impressed with his ability to throw down the field. I had told my dad prior to the game that with Schaub starting, it would be doubtful we took any shots downfield because like previous backup QBs (Doug Johnson/Kittner), it seemed Schaub lacked the confidence to really make strikes down the field. But I was proven wrong. Judging by this game against Vick's previous 4 outings, Schaub definitely throws a better deep ball than Vick. Besides the bomb to Jenkins in Week 1, Vick has been really off on the rest of his deep throws. A few of Schaub's passes this past week were really pretty.

I'm not going to say that there is a QB controversy brewing in ATL, but I think the Vick skeptics have a bit more fuel for their arguments. And I also think with Schaub's performance, Mora now has the option of at least resting Vick a bit longer if he wishes.

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


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 11, 2005 2:54 pm 
Offline
Moderator
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2005 3:11 pm
Posts: 4377
Location: Vancouver, WA
Pudge wrote:
I had told my dad prior to the game that with Schaub starting, it would be doubtful we took any shots downfield because like previous backup QBs (Doug Johnson/Kittner), it seemed Schaub lacked the confidence to really make strikes down the field. But I was proven wrong. Judging by this game against Vick's previous 4 outings, Schaub definitely throws a better deep ball than Vick.


Mora Jr. and Knapp weren't around for the Johnson/Kittner fiasco so they aren't going to be affected by it. The biggest difference between Vick and Schuab besides speed is accuracy deep. Vick can throw the ball further but Schuab can put it on his receiver or lead him enough to get it past a defender.

_________________
Fear the BEARD!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Schaub
PostPosted: Tue Oct 11, 2005 3:06 pm 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 4:54 pm
Posts: 1791
Location: Los Angeles California
Well, I haven't really seen anything to prove Schaub has a better deep touch than Vick. His deep balls were short or misthrown in that game for the most part. Maybe he needs more reps with the WRs and he would be better than Vick, but as of now he is pretty much the same. His passing is simply better mid and short range than Vick with good reads and the ability to throw a 'touch' pass.

MF1

_________________
"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: Schaub
PostPosted: Tue Oct 11, 2005 7:19 pm 
Offline
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2005 9:33 am
Posts: 234
Location: Hiram, Ga
MarylandFalcon1 wrote:
Well, I haven't really seen anything to prove Schaub has a better deep touch than Vick. His deep balls were short or misthrown in that game for the most part. Maybe he needs more reps with the WRs and he would be better than Vick, but as of now he is pretty much the same. His passing is simply better mid and short range than Vick with good reads and the ability to throw a 'touch' pass.

MF1


Especially since the receivers were either a: not looking for the pass and just competing in a foot race with the defenders, or b: make a lackluster attempt to beat the defenders to the ball.

Several times Schaub did try to force the issue and was lucky it was thrown with enough speed to go past everyone. But, i have to fault 'off the shoulder' Jenkins and 'for gods sake look over your shoulder' White to share in the lack of deep passing catches.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Schaub
PostPosted: Tue Oct 11, 2005 7:36 pm 
Offline
Moderator
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2005 3:11 pm
Posts: 4377
Location: Vancouver, WA
MadBirdMike wrote:
Several times Schaub did try to force the issue and was lucky it was thrown with enough speed to go past everyone. But, i have to fault 'off the shoulder' Jenkins and 'for gods sake look over your shoulder' White to share in the lack of deep passing catches.


Finneran is now known as Clutchy Butterfingers... Jenkins should be known as just Butterfingers.

_________________
Fear the BEARD!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 11, 2005 8:17 pm 
Offline
All-Pro
All-Pro

Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2005 1:20 pm
Posts: 557
Location: ubiquitous
what about ike 'backdoor man' reese. the man's never seen a back he hasn't liked to push. just kidding, but he made some real bad penalities when they weren't even necessary. that last run back by rossum to the pat 20 and then taken back really hurt. i'd hate to be in front of him in the grocery line! u'd get pushed right over into ur cart!


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 17 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 3 guests


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