It is currently Thu Oct 23, 2014 12:07 am

All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]





Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 9 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Mora and Co. in denial about Vick?
PostPosted: Fri Nov 04, 2005 12:35 pm 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar

Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 5:31 pm
Posts: 3173
Sounds like they could be in denial and unwilling to tweak the system...

http://www.ajc.com/sports/content/sport ... lcons.html


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Nov 04, 2005 3:45 pm 
Offline
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 3:03 pm
Posts: 26018
Location: North Carolina
This stat made me a bit uneasy:

AJC wrote:
Maybe such suggestions are pointless. In 10 career games in which Vick passed for 200 or more yards, the Falcons are 5-4-1 (including playoffs and a non-start loss at Miami in 2001). Atlanta is 25-12 when he starts and fails to throw for 200 yards.


Under the guidance of Chris Chandler during his final 3 years here (1999-01), the Falcons were much more successful when he did a good job throwing the ball. They were 9-9 in games that Chandler had thrown for 200 or more yards, and 4-17 in games that he did not. But I guess that is the difference between the two offenses.

I don't think the system needs an overhaul, but a tweak here or there. We have good speed at the WR position. We don't have a bunch of burners, but Roddy has deep speed. Jenkins, Dez, and Pathon all can stretch the field as well. We should take more shots downfield, but then again, Vick has been very inaccurate on his deep throws. Is that because he can't throw them as well as believed, or just that it's so infrequent when he does, he has no rhythm?

Vick suggested a week or two ago that the Falcons use the 2-minute offense more often. Others on this board have said the same thing. Vick gets into a better rhythm in the 2-minute offense and is just a plain better passer. The only sign of life from Vick vs. the Saints was in the 2-minute offense and he complete 6 of 7 passes.

But I also believe that if you can't make a 9-yard slant work, then you have no business being a starting NFL QB.

I'm looking at Doug Flutie during his days in Buffalo where he went 21-9 as a starter, averaged 194 yards and 1.2 TDs a game, and a 81.7 passer rating. If Flutie can do it, why can't Vick? Flutie's handlers in Buffalo: Wade Phillips, Joe Pendry (current Texans OL coach) and Turk Schonert (current Saints QB coach).

It seems too easy to heap all the blame on the system or on Vick's shoulders. It would be easy to say that the system was better in 2002 when Vick had a career high 81.6 passer rating. But I believe that Vick is a better QB now, and that the offense employed by Reeves then was a watered-down version. Vick was very new to defenses, and few knew how to handle him. Vick ran anytime he didn't have an open receiver, and that's why his interceptions were so low.

So you might say that Reeves offense was a better fit, but I would add "at that time" to that statement. I don't think Vick is a bad fit in this offense. Donovan McNabb has played his entire career in a WCO. Randall Cunningham had his best year in a WCO. Mobility and a big arm doesn't automatically mean you're a poor fit for the WCO.

I htink Knapp wants totake more shots downfield, as he showed in the Patriots game. But I also think part of his reluctance is an overall lack of confidence in Vick. And I can partly understand. Schaub, in that Patriots game, had more accurate deep throws in that single game than Vick has had this entire season. It's hard to say to yourself "Let's do that more often!" when in the limited times you've done it, it hasn't worked. It's just counter intuitive.

I agree with Mora, tweaking is best. Overhauling it will only hurt the team more than help.

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


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Nov 04, 2005 3:52 pm 
Offline
Moderator
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2005 3:11 pm
Posts: 4526
Location: Vancouver, WA
I have to admit that perhaps everyone was wrong when it came to Dan Reeves offense. We may not have liked Dan Reeves but his offense seems to fit Vick more then what Knapp & Co. have installed.

Vick under Reeves:
Passer: 331/634 (52% Comp.); 4,306 Passing Yards; 22 TD's & 14 INT's, 71.1 Passer Rating (62 Passes over 20 yards, 14 over 40 yards)

Rusher: 184 Carries for 1,321 Yards; 7.5 YPC; 10 TD's; 18 Rushes over 20 yards

Vick under Knapp
Passer: 247/447 (55% Comp); 3,036 Passing Yards; 19 TD's & 18 INT's; 70.5 Passer Rating (43 Passes over 20 yards, 9 over 40 yards)

Rusher: 169 Carries for 1205 Yards; 6 TD's; 15 rushes over 20 yards.

Believe it or not Vick passed more under Reeves then he did under Knapp. Overall Vick was a better passer under Reeves too. I think if you bring in Gibbs with Reeves offense Vick becomes a better overall Quarterback with a rating closer to 80.

Perhaps we should have asked Reeves to stick around as OC because so far this WCO crap hasn't worked. At least we stretched the field a little bit with Reeves. Beyond all that Vick's career year was under Dan.

_________________
Fear the BEARD!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Nov 04, 2005 3:52 pm 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar

Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 5:31 pm
Posts: 3173
The whole thing is a sticky situation IMO. Vick wins and that is the bottom line, but Mora and Company have to take "tomorrow" into consideration as well. I was never a big fan of Dan Reeves, but he handled Vick well.

The Falcons have to take shots down the field regardless who is at QB. If we become one-diminsinal or worse yet...predictable, this team is in trouble.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Nov 04, 2005 7:17 pm 
Offline
All-Pro
All-Pro

Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2005 1:20 pm
Posts: 557
Location: ubiquitous
there's no way they're bringing reeves in as offensive coordinator, though i think i'd prefer him to knapp who i've never been a fan of, but that being said, would it not be concievable to bring him in as a kind of advisor, the same way gibbs is used? granted it could hurt knapps pride, but if he's not too insecure about it, it seems he should welcome input from someone who's had some success in nurturing vicks passing abilities, cuz knapp sure as hell hasn't had any success at that.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Nov 04, 2005 7:48 pm 
Offline
All-Pro
All-Pro
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 9:51 pm
Posts: 869
Vick would probably be more consistent on his deep throws if the Falcons didn't drop the first 2 every game....

I don't care if we have 50 yards passing as long as we win honestly, and it's getting old having the same conversation over & over when people don't take what is said into account & just rehash old, ignorant statements.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Nov 05, 2005 4:34 pm 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar

Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 5:31 pm
Posts: 3173
The_Incomparable wrote:
Vick would probably be more consistent on his deep throws if the Falcons didn't drop the first 2 every game....

I don't care if we have 50 yards passing as long as we win honestly, and it's getting old having the same conversation over & over when people don't take what is said into account & just rehash old, ignorant statements.


Pot, kettle, black?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Nov 05, 2005 6:45 pm 
Offline
All-Pro
All-Pro
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 9:51 pm
Posts: 869
AngryJohnny51 wrote:
The_Incomparable wrote:
Vick would probably be more consistent on his deep throws if the Falcons didn't drop the first 2 every game....

I don't care if we have 50 yards passing as long as we win honestly, and it's getting old having the same conversation over & over when people don't take what is said into account & just rehash old, ignorant statements.


Pot, kettle, black?


Lame, stupid, reply? Without question. I consider what is said & reply based on what was said. People here lately are posting the same stupid s*** I see at ESPN or AFMB, and IIRC, you were one of the people who were a pain in the ass over at ESPN; so you can kindly find your way out of any conversations I am involved in as far as I am concerned.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Nov 06, 2005 12:04 am 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar

Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 5:31 pm
Posts: 3173
The_Incomparable wrote:
AngryJohnny51 wrote:
The_Incomparable wrote:
Vick would probably be more consistent on his deep throws if the Falcons didn't drop the first 2 every game....

I don't care if we have 50 yards passing as long as we win honestly, and it's getting old having the same conversation over & over when people don't take what is said into account & just rehash old, ignorant statements.


Pot, kettle, black?


Lame, stupid, reply? Without question. I consider what is said & reply based on what was said. People here lately are posting the same stupid s*** I see at ESPN or AFMB, and IIRC, you were one of the people who were a pain in the ass over at ESPN; so you can kindly find your way out of any conversations I am involved in as far as I am concerned.


I beg to differ. You seem to be the one who slings the insults around when someone has a different opinion.

And you are wrong about the ESPN boards.... ask anyone who posted there.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 9 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: