It is currently Mon Nov 24, 2014 2:15 am

All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]





Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 5 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: What Have you learned about Winning in the Playoffs?
PostPosted: Tue Jan 24, 2006 2:25 am 
Offline
Moderator
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 7:02 pm
Posts: 6599
Location: Indianapolis IN
I would be interested in other views or opinions about this years playoffs.I think we can learn alot by just simply watching the game and seeing what the winners do to mopve on and what the losers do to be eliminated. Here are some of my thoughts.

1.You don't need a super star QB to advance in the playoffs.Hasselbeck and Rothesberger are this years super bowl Qbs.all we here about from the media is Brady,manning,vick,mcnabb but the reality is give me a QB that doesn't turn the ball over in a big game and can pass the ball.Will vick ever get there to be known as a passing QB?
2.You don't need a star running back to advance in the playoffs.Granted Alexander is one of the best but his offensive line most running backs could run through those holes.Look at Pittsburgh they have a combination of runners and they produce but they are not the best in the league.
3.Games won in the trenches - both pitt and seattle have a pass rush and there off lines can open up holes and pass block.
4.The ability to score everytime throwing long passes is important,sustained drives also.
5.If you had your choice between a star offensive player vs a quality defense I would pick the defense.
6.Turnovers are critical,tackling is critical.We better hope the falcon's learn to wrap up on there tackles in the future.
7.Pittsburgh and Seattle have spent high draft choices on there off line..Hutchinson,Jones, Faneca and I believe a few others on the pitt side (sorry to lazy to look up at this time).
8.Playing a more physical style of football seems to have advantages over the finesse type of football.

This up coming draft and free agency it will be interesting to see what Mckay does for the Falcon's. Do we get second rate cast offs that are just bench warmers and smoke and mirrors or does he get some legit players that can hep this team. Also the draft,are the falcon's going to change there philopshy of finally draft some linemen in the upper rounds and def backs.Last 14 years they have drafted 2 off linemen in the 1-3 rounds.Pitiful!

_________________
Sometimes running the Mularkey offense makes me feel like I'm in a prison.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: What Have you learned about Winning in the Playoffs?
PostPosted: Tue Jan 24, 2006 5:51 am 
Offline
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2005 9:12 pm
Posts: 110
thescout wrote:
I would be interested in other views or opinions about this years playoffs.I think we can learn alot by just simply watching the game and seeing what the winners do to mopve on and what the losers do to be eliminated. Here are some of my thoughts.

1.You don't need a super star QB to advance in the playoffs.Hasselbeck and Rothesberger are this years super bowl Qbs.all we here about from the media is Brady,manning,vick,mcnabb but the reality is give me a QB that doesn't turn the ball over in a big game and can pass the ball.Will vick ever get there to be known as a passing QB?
2.You don't need a star running back to advance in the playoffs.Granted Alexander is one of the best but his offensive line most running backs could run through those holes.Look at Pittsburgh they have a combination of runners and they produce but they are not the best in the league.
3.Games won in the trenches - both pitt and seattle have a pass rush and there off lines can open up holes and pass block.
4.The ability to score everytime throwing long passes is important,sustained drives also.
5.If you had your choice between a star offensive player vs a quality defense I would pick the defense.
6.Turnovers are critical,tackling is critical.We better hope the falcon's learn to wrap up on there tackles in the future.
7.Pittsburgh and Seattle have spent high draft choices on there off line..Hutchinson,Jones, Faneca and I believe a few others on the pitt side (sorry to lazy to look up at this time).
8.Playing a more physical style of football seems to have advantages over the finesse type of football.

This up coming draft and free agency it will be interesting to see what Mckay does for the Falcon's. Do we get second rate cast offs that are just bench warmers and smoke and mirrors or does he get some legit players that can hep this team. Also the draft,are the falcon's going to change there philopshy of finally draft some linemen in the upper rounds and def backs.Last 14 years they have drafted 2 off linemen in the 1-3 rounds.Pitiful!


1 - Agreed. Vick will never have the accuracy of many pure pocket passers imo but I've seen him pass well enough given protection and an open receiver.
2 - Somewhat agreed. Your back has to fit your system and be a solid runner. Your line has to be able to open some holes too.
3 -Totally agreed. Nor can a team have major weaknesses and even make the playoffs. Our secondary for example.
4 - Disagree somewhat. Balance is needed imo. You need to be able to go vertical but you also need to hit those quick outs and slants.
5 - Agreed. Defense wins championships!
6 - Agreed. This will require some replacements on defense, especially the safties.
7 - Well the best talent almost always goes first. The problem I see is we can't fix the defense and the O-Line in one season. Just my opinion of course.
8 - I could not possibly agree more!!!! We are too soft in too many areas.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jan 24, 2006 2:37 pm 
Offline
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 3:03 pm
Posts: 26069
Location: North Carolina
Well I think you may be a bit premature in not calling Roethlisberger a Superstar QB. He's done everything and more you could ever ask from a player in his first 2 years of being in the league. If the Steelers win this game and Big Ben has a good game, I will guarantee you that he is going to be mentioned in the same breaths as Brady & Manning. After all, most of America (excluding the media of course) didn't really jump on the Tom Brady bandwagon until 2 years ago.

Yes, both teams have high draft picks on their front 5:

4 of the 5 Steelers starters were drafted by them on the first day of the draft. The last one: Hartings, was a 1st round pick by the Lions in 1996 before joining Pittsburgh in free agency.

3 of the 5 Seahawks starters are 1st day draft picks, and with Chris Spencer (another 1st rounder) set to take over for Tobeck (undrafted) in a year or two and Womack (4th rounder) for Chris Gray (5th) in the same time span, you'll have a pretty high talent OL.

I do agree that this team needs to look at earlier draft picks up front. It's hard to get a player that is a good fit in this blockign scheme/style in Round 1, but usually there are quality guys in Round 3 and 4. This team needs to use more picks there on the OL. But then again, McKay has done a pretty good job NOT addressing the OL in those rounds since being here, since I'm not at all disappointed in either of his 3rd round picks (Beck & Schaub) or 4th rounders (Demo & Chauncey Davis).

But I think you should make a hard distinction between McKay's drafts and that of Reeves. Fact is, Reeves had no ability to draft high OL. McKay has been here for 2 years, and has drafted only 1: Omi in the 5th round. Of course, I agree that needs to change. But I don't want to see you lumping McKay in with Reeves. Reeves showed propensity to use picks on OL with exception to Claridge and the possibility of drafting Kenyatta Walker in 2001 if not for the trade up for Vick. McKay in his tenure in TB was a little better, but he too is a guy that seems to prefer going OL on Day 2. But most of his picks were done between Rounds 3 and 5. And I think that can work with this scheme, because usually the top guys that fit in this style are overlooked prior to that because most NFL teams/scouts think they are too small or not strong enough.

Well I wouldn't call the Seahawks a physical football team. They are finesse too. Not saying they can't be physical (just like I think we can be very physical...see Eagles game), but I wouldn't say on either defense or offense that they are very physical. The Steelers are a physical football across the board. They've tried finesse in the past, and they really struggled with it losing their identity. It would be hard to make an argument for a team that has a physical style when they run the WCO on offense, and the average size of their LB is 6' 236, and their DL is considered undersized excluding Marcus Tubbs. In fact, the only real difference in their front 7 and ours, two that are built for speed are that they have Tubbs.

If I had to look at anything to learn from the playoffs, it shows that you don't need to have the most talent, but simply play the best, and win when it matters.

You look at our 8 losses, this year, 5 of them came by 1 score or less, and in all 5 of them we had an opportunity to win that football game. The ball didn't bounce our way. It did in 2004, but not this year. I'm not saying that we should have been 13-3, but I think when you look at our 2 losses to TB, 1 to NE, and 1 to SEA, you could say that we played our guts out, but because someone dropped a pass, the defense couldn't make an opportune stop, or whatever, we wound up losing those games. Despite our record against winning teams, those are 3 playoff teams that we went toe to toe with and almost won. But a loss is a loss, and coulda shoulda woulda.

There are a lot of factors involved that could have turned those Ls into Ws. One of them is better coaching. Another is better play from both the OL and DL. Another is more consistency throwing the ball and the WRs catching the ball. Another is playing better in the secondary. And another probably is getting more help from ST than we did in 2005.

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


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jan 24, 2006 9:41 pm 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar

Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 5:31 pm
Posts: 3189
Quote:
1.You don't need a super star QB to advance in the playoffs.Hasselbeck and Rothesberger are this years super bowl Qbs.all we here about from the media is Brady,manning,vick,mcnabb but the reality is give me a QB that doesn't turn the ball over in a big game and can pass the ball.Will vick ever get there to be known as a passing QB?


Hasselbeck is better than most of us know. He just plays in Seattle where he gets zero press. Hasselbeck TD-Int ratio this year? 24 - 9 with a 98.3 rating. And the only reason Big Ben is not a superstar is because it's only his second year in the league. And by the way, all he does is win. Just like Brady and to a certain extent our very own Michael Vick. You answered your own question above when you mentioned media. If they don't promote 'em, we don't know 'em.


Quote:
2.You don't need a star running back to advance in the playoffs.Granted Alexander is one of the best but his offensive line most running backs could run through those holes.Look at Pittsburgh they have a combination of runners and they produce but they are not the best in the league.


Alexander was league MVP and set an NFL record for touchdowns in a season and you say he isn't a star running back? They do have a good line, but Alexander does have talent. Pittsburgh ranked 5th in the NFL yards in rushing without a true superstar, but they have a good system. Hell, the Falcons ranked first without a superstar RB as well. So the answer is no you don't need a star, but you do have to be able to run the ball.



Quote:
5.If you had your choice between a star offensive player vs a quality defense I would pick the defense


Agree, defense wins Championships. Period. And until the Falcons improve in thios area personell or scheme wise, the Lombardi Trophy is still a dream to the Falcon faithful.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: OK My turn!
PostPosted: Tue Jan 24, 2006 10:38 pm 
Offline
Moderator
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 7:02 pm
Posts: 6599
Location: Indianapolis IN
When I mentioned that hasselbeck and rothesberger are not superstars its true.Until you win the big one or put up phenominal pass stats(manning) why would the media want to cover you? Hasselbeck is having a great year but is this the norm or the exception? Remember Trent Dilfer had a great year when the ravens won the super bowl,still no one consdered him a super star.Rothesberger I think gets penalized alot by being in the steeler system of always wanting to run the ball which gives him lesser pass stats.I do think if he wins the super bowl he will go up a level and the media will cover him as we see manning ,brady,mcnabb.Mike Vick is a super star because he is electrifying and the media has blown him up to be this one man team.

Alexander a superstar? Yes of course he is but you don't need a superstar to win a super bowl.You do need to be above average.

As far as the falcon's losing so many close games when there season could have been much better of course you could look at those losses and say it would have been different if we would have done this,done that,got a break.The margin for victory is slim for most teams either you get it done or you don'.Teams that win alot seemingly get the breaks but when is some one going to be accountable for the missed tackling,the penalities,the bad plays and not executing.Sooner or later it comes back to the players and coaches and there failure or success in there job.The Falcon's were 11-5 last year so was that a year they could have gone 14-2 with a few more breaks or played over there heads and with less breaks been 8-8?

Mckay has only 2 drafts with the falcon's so you really can't judge him and his record against the rest of the falcon's GMs. I was making a genralization about the entire organization just like we haven't had consecutive winning seasons in what 38 yrs.Should I blame mora for this? no but he is part of the falcon's future and history so he is part of the 38 year old streak.

_________________
Sometimes running the Mularkey offense makes me feel like I'm in a prison.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 5 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [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: