It is currently Fri Nov 28, 2014 10:24 am

All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]





Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 11 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Explaining The Collapse Of The Falcons
PostPosted: Mon Jan 21, 2013 1:34 pm 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2007 3:51 pm
Posts: 4916
Location: New York
if you are tired of hearing Mike Smith getting ripped on by Rob, check out this article explaining how a piss poor pass rush and a bad running game makes it hard to keep a lead. Also the future of a few players, including a much needed decision to be made on either keeping Grimes or Robinson.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1494 ... ta-falcons

_________________
Image

I'm a Devin Hester guy.


Last edited by Emmitt on Mon Jan 21, 2013 4:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Explaining The Collapse Of The Falcons
PostPosted: Mon Jan 21, 2013 1:39 pm 
Offline
Moderator
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2005 3:11 pm
Posts: 4526
Location: Vancouver, WA
I pretty much have made that point in all of Rob's posts. Lack of a consistent running attack and pass rush has killed this team in both games.

As much as I want Quizz to be a superstar it is rather clear that he is better suited as a change of pace back getting 10 or so touches a game. He is an impressive pass blocker considering his size though.

_________________
Fear the BEARD!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Explaining The Collapse Of The Falcons
PostPosted: Mon Jan 21, 2013 2:45 pm 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar

Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2005 8:57 pm
Posts: 4713
Most don't need to read an article. Last year Rob sincerely accused the coaches or players of throwing a game. He could have started 50 years ago and said none of our coaches could win a Super Bowl and that's the way it has turned out.

I guess Bill B. should be fired too. Its obvious the teams with the hottest Qbs and best defenses usually win.

Look A. SAMULES who has two rings was telling the team all week this game is just another game and to look at it as more is just distracting. After our final loss Rob's emotions just takes over his mind!!

We had the ball in the first quarter about as much as Frisco had it it the third quarter, and our two turnovers killed us. The turnovers is usually the difference in playoff games.

We've never had a coach that could win like Coach Smith. Its not 100% about players;
but about 95% about players. Coaches don't cause turnovers..... Case closed!! Game over!!

_________________
"Everything Counts"
Cyril


Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Explaining The Collapse Of The Falcons
PostPosted: Mon Jan 21, 2013 3:01 pm 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar

Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 3:15 pm
Posts: 4346
I was right about Mularkey and Van Gorder sucking last year. I'm right about Smith this year. You might consider it whining and over-reaction to losing, but it's not. I've been saying for a while that Mike Smith is making poor decisions. I have waited until now to completely throw him under the bus for it. We blew two HUGE leads in the playoffs. How can you possibly say that coaching isn't a large part of that?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Explaining The Collapse Of The Falcons
PostPosted: Mon Jan 21, 2013 3:17 pm 
Offline
All-Pro
All-Pro

Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2007 2:01 pm
Posts: 952
What article?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Explaining The Collapse Of The Falcons
PostPosted: Mon Jan 21, 2013 3:32 pm 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar

Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2005 8:57 pm
Posts: 4713
Mularkey was great for Ryan his first three years; didn't let him get killed and kept his confidence. Then as Ryan matured as a Qb he was ready for another Offensive Assistant. (have you seen what happens to a Qb when as a rookie they let him take a beating??)

Look if you think Van Gorder sucked then you shouldn't love Nolan. Our fundamentals sucked in tackling and blown coverages; not to mention a lack of pass rush (which isn't on Nolan).

I can say its not coaching because both teams are good..... We don't get any credit for
getting ahead?? Its unfortunately because of turnovers. Ryan has not thrown more Tds
than interceptions in his playoff career but I still like him.

Your desire to be right is amusing. Were you a Falcon fan when our seasons were consistently over by October?? Do you want to change coaches every 3 years like in the past?? So in Ryan's 5th year we went to the Championship game!! I'm sorry we lost too; HOWEVER THEY KEPT ME ENTERTAINED THROUGH JANUARY, and that's what sports is entertainment; the odds of you ever seeing a Super Bowl win is very slim; hate to break it to you but its been this way for almost 50 years.... We've only had one better season in our franchise existence... I don't think the world is going to end today---bet I'm right!! As Pudge said you can act bitchy just like last year. Last year it was we were paid off wasn't it??

_________________
"Everything Counts"
Cyril


Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Explaining The Collapse Of The Falcons
PostPosted: Mon Jan 21, 2013 3:56 pm 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar

Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 3:15 pm
Posts: 4346
You seem to be confusing two separate statements Cyril. I said that it was possible that we threw a game late in the season to improve our playoff chances. (I believe it was the Saints game, but I'm not going back to verify that, though you are welcome to) I said that Mularkey didn't have an answer for the Giants, so he didn't even try. Our offense put up a goose egg against the Giants.

Mularkey was a horrible OC. Mularkey was fine for Ryan in year 1. In year 2, Mularkey did exactly the opposite of what he should have done. Instead of challenging Ryan and continuing to help him grow, Mularkey took things off of his plate and tried to turn him into a game manager. He kept Ryan in that game manager role for as long as he was here. Under Koetter, Ryan has been allowed to blossom into the QB that he always could have been. The team has been his team this year, and he has shown that he is a top 5 QB in this league.

I'm sorry that you can't admit that I was right about Mularkey, but I was. I'm also right about Smith. If you are content with being bridesmaids for the next 10 years, then keep Smith around. I'm telling you that Smith's game day decision making is hurting our chances of winning it all.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Explaining The Collapse Of The Falcons
PostPosted: Mon Jan 21, 2013 4:41 pm 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2007 3:51 pm
Posts: 4916
Location: New York
Wow totally forgot to put it up. My bad guys here’s the link. This is my entire take of it.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1494 ... ta-falcons

_________________
Image

I'm a Devin Hester guy.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Explaining The Collapse Of The Falcons
PostPosted: Mon Jan 21, 2013 11:39 pm 
Offline
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 3:03 pm
Posts: 26076
Location: North Carolina
It's funny because Mularkey is "horrible" and Koetter comes in and makes the offense what 5%, 10% better? and he's a genius. Ryan blossomed under Koetter right? Yeah, for about 9 weeks. From the Arizona game onward, Ryan was basically the same QB he was in 2011 under Mularkey.

What you were right about Robert was that Mularkey was incapable of leading a pass-happy attack. But you weren't alone in that opinion. You weren't right that Mularkey is a horrible OC. Because if Mularkey was a horrible OC, then how come he helmed a Top 10 offense? Does that mean that the other 22 OCs in the league are even more horrible.

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


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Explaining The Collapse Of The Falcons
PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2013 2:14 am 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar

Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 3:15 pm
Posts: 4346
Mularkey was able to skate by with the talent that we had. (who couldn't?) How did he fare in Jacksonville? Oh yeah, they fired his butt already.

Seriously, you guys must really think that our roster is full of bums, and that without the coaches that we've had, we would be completely horrible. I'm sorry, but I think the opposite is true. I think that our offense is absolutely loaded with talent. Our talent on offense is an offensive coordinator's wet dream. You could hand the clipboard to anyone on this forum and they would be able to get production out of our offense.

That said, Mularkey did not get the kind of production out of the offense that the offense was capable of. As such, it was in our best interests to find someone who could. Koetter did a pretty darn good job considering this was his first year. The run game could have been better, but Turner is obviously in decline, and we ran the ball 75 fewer times this year than we did last year.

I sincerely believe that this team could have been the greatest show on turf 2.0 had the coaching staff been less conservative. We scored 40 points in our first game, and never repeated that, "mistake." God forbid we beat teams decisively.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Explaining The Collapse Of The Falcons
PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2013 2:28 am 
Offline
Hall of Famer
Hall of Famer
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2005 7:12 pm
Posts: 6247
Location: Planet Claire
You are circumventing a lot of things, Robt. First off, yes, we did score 40 point s in our first game....against one of the worst teams in the league...or were the very worst? Mularkey di dpoorly in JAX. Guess what? Koetter did not exactly set the woods on fire there either. So, anyone on the forum could light it up with the O talent we have but not Mularkey?

I don't think anyone doubts that we are loaded with talent--at receiver anyway. Our RBs are about standard issue at this point as is our line. Probably slightly better. We flung the ball around pretty good this year and had some funky screens, end arounds, shuttle passes, etc. We did not have the recieving backs to even begin to be GSOT part 2. Uh, recall a guy named Marshall Faulk? Michael Turner he wasn't.

Our offense was inconsistent pretty much all year and I don't see that as scheme. Very Jekyll and Hyde and the playoffs were a micro-cosm of this. All those come from behind wins in relatively low scoring games were not because Smitty stubbornly ran the ball. They were because we kicked too many FGs and at times sputtered on O...just like Sunday night. All the big money is on the offensive side of the line. Do you think Smitty--a D guy--is entirely comfortable with that?

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 11 posts ] 

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