Chat with Pat Yasinskas: thinks Smitty might turn into John Fox

[theProf]

Chat with Pat Yasinskas

Tyler (Georgia)
Pat, How much longer can we expect Tony Gonzalez to play before retiring?

Pat Yasinskas (12:56 PM)
I listened to him after the game Saturday night. He didn't sound like a guy who's ready to retire.


Rock Knuteney (Slidell, LA)
Many times teams that over achieve one year, come back to earth the next. What do you see for Atlanta and Tampa Bay next year? Both teams won some games they should not have, and like the turnovers the Saints got in 2009, those wins may not come in 2011. I see Atlanta at 10-6 and TB at 8-8.

Pat Yasinskas (1:00 PM)
I see Tampa Bay and Atlanta being good for a long time to come. Both have good young QBs. If Tampa Bay can get some DEs, re-tool their o-line and get a speed back to go with Blount, Bucs could be real dangerous.


Kyle (Washington DC (displaced Saints fan))
Why are the ATL coaches and players so resistant to crediting the other team when they lose? Mike Smith, Roddy White, ... they didn't credit the Saints or Packers.... Sean Payton always starts with crediting the other team, win or lose. I think Smith's poor sportsmanship hurts the Atlanta team.

Pat Yasinskas (1:07 PM)
Are you serious? Smith is probably the most humble coach in the NFC South. He always gives praise to the other teams -- and he actually means it.


Greg (Albuquerque)
Pat, I understand the idea that the Falcons need to "stay the course" on D, meaning no D-coordinator change. But as a longtime Georgia resident, I watched MANY Bulldog games when BVG was DC, and they NEVER "won" a second half with defensive changes. I felt like last Saturday I was re-living that mediocrity in coaching. Is there any sense from Flowery Branch that Smitty et al recognize this? I'd have taken McDermott's aggressive 4-3 approach in a heartbeat, personally...Thanks!

Pat Yasinskas (1:30 PM)
Keep in mind, Smith comes from a defensive background and is very involved on that side of the ball. I don't think you can put it all on BVG.


Sharell (NCFalconFan)
I love our coach and waiting for his contract extension but with that said, will FALCON FANS still be talking about the lack of explosive plays on offense this time next year? I like our style but we can't seem to make the adjustment when it comes to playing offensive teams such as aints, philly and green bay, who are all on our sked next year. How stubborn is Smith?

Pat Yasinskas (1:35 PM)
Pretty stubborn. He might want to learn to adjust or else he'll turn into John Fox.


Greg (Albuquerque)
Pat, thanks for the answer on BVG/Smith...so does this mean the Falcons are doomed to fail against superior QBs in all playoff matchups? I mean, crossing ones fingers for "perfect execution" of a minimally complex gameplan borders on insanity.

Pat Yasinskas (1:53 PM)
Again, I think that's why Smith has to learn to adjust a bit. It's nice to have the basic concept of a system like Fox did with "run the ball on offense and stop the run on defense". That's a good start, but you have to be flexible, at least a little, depending on what you have that particular year and who you are playing.


Sharell (NCFalconFan)
I agree with Greg. I think Smith thinks so much of his philosphy that did get him 13 wins this year, not sure if we will see a lot of adjustments. Knowing what you know about Dimtroff, what do you think his conversation with Mike Smith is going this offseason.

Pat Yasinskas (2:02 PM)
Good question (as always). They work well together and I think both realize or will realize they need more explosive plays on offense and defense. Some of that involves adding personnel and some of it includes putting personnel in position to make those plays. They don't need to tear things down and start over. Just need a few tweaks.


Karl (Valdosta)
I wonder if Mike Smith and Mike Mularkey will get together to open up the offense more, but to also make Matt the focal point of the offense. your thoughts...

Pat Yasinskas (1:45 PM)
I hope they do. I think they need to do that.


joshie (tampa)
have you seen Matt Ryan improve over the past few years, i dunno he still looks like he did when he was a rookie to me. he seems like he doesn't get much better then when he was a rookie.

Pat Yasinskas (1:47 PM)
I think there has been definite improvement. But, like I just said, I'd like to see Falcons open things up for him a bit. Use more no-huddle and use the slot receiver more.


Ryan (College Park )
Pat, what do you think of the Falcons signing Charles Johnson to solidify their pass rush?

Pat Yasinskas (1:49 PM)
Well, let's wait and see if he actually makes it to free agency. I'm sure Panthers will try to keep him.


http://espn.go.com/s...h-pat-yasinskas


Around the NFC South
January, 22, 2011 1:00PM Comments By Pat Yasinskas

"Atlanta tight end Tony Gonzalez sounded like he wanted to play another season after last week’s playoff loss, but he said he would take a little time to ponder his future. Apparently, time is up and Gonzalez definitely is planning to return."

http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcsouth

[SeaMill]

Love coach, but dont want him to turn into Bobby Cox. Not being a hater but you know....Great regular season and fizzle out in the playoffs. With that said, I have faith in him.

[cooperbh]

The nice thing about Smitty is that he does seem to learn from his mistakes, even though he has a tendency to overcompensate at times. Hopefully, he will find that balance when making course corrections as he gains more experience.

One thing I am absolutely certain of is that Smitty will never again allow himself to be talked into running just one more play - which everyone in the building knows has to go to the sideline - when he is already in field goal range with only 10 seconds left to go in a half.

[Beef]

The negativity & illogical assumptions from these Q's & A's are ridiculous. 3 years ago this team was in complete shambles. Since this FO has come here, we've had 3 winning seasons & year two people seem to forget we were overwhelmingly plagued with injuries to key personel all season, yet still won.

To be where we are in just 3 years is spectacular. We still have huge holes in key positions on both sides of the ball & yet we won the division & beat some pretty damn great teams in the process. It's WAY too early to be criticising & making ignorant assumptions about if, how, & when the FO will make incredible sweeping changes to adjust entire game philosphies when you're missing key players & have been extremely limited in what can be done as a result.

You can't spread defenses out with only 1 big-play receiver, 1 possession receiver, a slow 8 yards catching over the middle only TE, a no-show slot receiver, a predictible as hell bowling-ball between the tackles only run game, no screen game, absolutely no around the edge sideline to sideline game, virtually no YAC threat, & no deep threat receiving game. In that scenerio, it's obvious you're completely limited to exactly what the Falcons did, which is dink-n-dunk 10 yards at a time clock control. Now if the weapons are there to incorporate those other dimensions, then of course the plays can be run. But that just wasn't the case for us. It doesn't mean Smitty & MM don't have those plays in the book & have to completely change their philosophy & style. They just need the personel & then they can open it up.

I believe they fully intend to do this. And I completely understand that they haven't had time to collect the proper personel to do all this in just 3 years. The instant-gratification crowd clearly doesn't get this & thinks that the FO sucks because we didn't win a SB already this year with this lot of players.

Now should our defense have been better considering the personel we have? I believe so, but there's still several holes there as well which certainly did limit the extent of the play calling, so it's kind of a catch-22. The difference, IMO, is that there's clear evidence that BVG's style of soft zone cushion coverage IS quite flawed & we are playing below expectations as a result on defense. This is why I think we concentrate FA signings mostly on plugging those holes & then I pray there is a style change at that point since the proper personel will be there to make it possible. Much tighter & physical coverage, a ton more man-to-man, & a hell of a lot more blitzing has to be better than what we've been running. And we should easily be able to transition to that if we go for it & spend the money on the right FA's.

[theProf]

(01-22-2011 05:31 PM)Beef Wrote:  The negativity & illogical assumptions from these Q's & A's are ridiculous. 3 years ago this team was in complete shambles. Since this FO has come here, we've had 3 winning seasons & year two people seem to forget we were overwhelmingly plagued with injuries to key personel all season, yet still won.

To be where we are in just 3 years is spectacular. We still have huge holes in key positions on both sides of the ball & yet we won the division & beat some pretty damn great teams in the process. It's WAY too early to be criticising & making ignorant assumptions about if, how, & when the FO will make incredible sweeping changes to adjust entire game philosphies when you're missing key players & have been extremely limited in what can be done as a result.

You can't spread defenses out with only 1 big-play receiver, 1 possession receiver, a slow 8 yards catching over the middle only TE, a no-show slot receiver, a predictible as hell bowling-ball between the tackles only run game, no screen game, absolutely no around the edge sideline to sideline game, virtually no YAC threat, & no deep threat receiving game. In that scenerio, it's obvious you're completely limited to exactly what the Falcons did, which is dink-n-dunk 10 yards at a time clock control. Now if the weapons are there to incorporate those other dimensions, then of course the plays can be run. But that just wasn't the case for us. It doesn't mean Smitty & MM don't have those plays in the book & have to completely change their philosophy & style. They just need the personel & then they can open it up.

I believe they fully intend to do this. And I completely understand that they haven't had time to collect the proper personel to do all this in just 3 years. The instant-gratification crowd clearly doesn't get this & thinks that the FO sucks because we didn't win a SB already this year with this lot of players.

Now should our defense have been better considering the personel we have? I believe so, but there's still several holes there as well which certainly did limit the extent of the play calling, so it's kind of a catch-22. The difference, IMO, is that there's clear evidence that BVG's style of soft zone cushion coverage IS quite flawed & we are playing below expectations as a result on defense. This is why I think we concentrate FA signings mostly on plugging those holes & then I pray there is a style change at that point since the proper personel will be there to make it possible. Much tighter & physical coverage, a ton more man-to-man, & a hell of a lot more blitzing has to be better than what we've been running. And we should easily be able to transition to that if we go for it & spend the money on the right FA's.

Thanks for your thoughts and comments. I agree with almost everything you said. Still I think Atlanta had enough weapons on offense to be a little more creative and explosive than they actually were. I would have liked to see Atlanta use the no-huddle offense much more than they did. I'd prefer Ryan doing most all of the actual play-calling during the game, rather than Mularkey. I wonder if the soft defensive scheme, which I don't like either, is primarily BVG's or Smitty's.

[JDaveG]

(01-22-2011 06:15 PM)theProf Wrote:  Thanks for your thoughts and comments. I agree with almost everything you said. Still I think Atlanta had enough weapons on offense to be a little more creative and explosive than they actually were. I would have liked to see Atlanta use the no-huddle offense much more than they did. I'd prefer Ryan doing most all of the actual play-calling during the game, rather than Mularkey. I wonder if the soft defensive scheme, which I don't like either, is primarily BVG's or Smitty's.

I don't know what Van Gorder ran at Georgia, but Smitty is a cover-2 guy, so my guess is it's his base system. If he's going to run it he needs to run more man under and shake out of the base to let the corners press more. We give WAY too much cushion, especially on 3rd and short.

[papachaz]

i actually was in this chat, submitted a few questions but they weren't chosen. i did however love the way Pat shushed one of the pantie fans about Beason, the fan upset that beason wasn't named the nfcs defensive mvp over vilma, pat telling him the saints d actually stopped their opponents and got off the field occasionally, LMAO too funny....

i've tried to find it but i can't. don't always like hearing what he has to say, but he does seem to call it as he sees it. gotta appreciate pat for that

[Slamee101]

(01-22-2011 04:38 PM)SeaMill Wrote:  Love coach, but dont want him to turn into Bobby Cox. Not being a hater but you know....Great regular season and fizzle out in the playoffs. With that said, I have faith in him.

Lets all hope and pray that doesn't happen brother! I don't think it will though.

[theProf]

(01-22-2011 06:25 PM)chazmataz Wrote:  i actually was in this chat, submitted a few questions but they weren't chosen. i did however love the way Pat shushed one of the pantie fans about Beason, the fan upset that beason wasn't named the nfcs defensive mvp over vilma, pat telling him the saints d actually stopped their opponents and got off the field occasionally, LMAO too funny....

i've tried to find it but i can't. don't always like hearing what he has to say, but he does seem to call it as he sees it. gotta appreciate pat for that

Occurred at the 1:25 mark as follows:

"Sam (Tampa)
PAT HE HAD 16 MORE TACKLES AND MORE PASS DEFLECTIONS SWITCHING POSITIONS BACK AND FORTH THIS YEAR, SO IF BEASON DIDN'T "LIGHT IT UP" THAN VILMA SURE AS HELL DIDN'T. PLEASE, COME UP WITH SOME LOGIC TO YOUR REASONING.

Pat Yasinskas (1:25 PM)
He might have spent a little more time on the field than Vilma. Saints sometimes stopped other teams."

[papachaz]

(01-22-2011 06:34 PM)theProf Wrote:  Occurred at the 1:25 mark as follows:

"Sam (Tampa)
PAT HE HAD 16 MORE TACKLES AND MORE PASS DEFLECTIONS SWITCHING POSITIONS BACK AND FORTH THIS YEAR, SO IF BEASON DIDN'T "LIGHT IT UP" THAN VILMA SURE AS HELL DIDN'T. PLEASE, COME UP WITH SOME LOGIC TO YOUR REASONING.

Pat Yasinskas (1:25 PM)
He might have spent a little more time on the field than Vilma. Saints sometimes stopped other teams."

yeah he and that guy went back and forth for a few minutes before that, kinda shut the guy up after that one, LMAO i laughed out loud at that