Falcons: Coaching Staff Ratings: Mike Mularkey

[RnB]

They are paid to tell you what you want to hear to keep you interested. They are paid to NOT tell you how majorly an offensive change like this can affect a team.

If they had said, "We drafted JJ and gave up nearly an entire draft worth of picks to change our offense into something more exciting for the fans and the media. However, we will most likely not have the personnel to run such a scheme and could see a dramatic drop off in production until we get things settled"; would you feel better about our 1-2 record right now?

Going from a ball control offense with a heavy running game and short passes to an offense that requires outstanding protection up front and athleticism on the back end; how could people not understand that we would look different this year and it would not be a smooth transition?

If what you are saying, Phocis, is that our FO and Coaches were ignorant enough to not understand that we were missing MORE than just a WR to create a new offensive scheme, we might as well grade our entire organization as "Unacceptable". If someone like me can understand the ramifications of switching up what we did really well last season into something we are unproven at as a team, how in the fuck can our FO and Coaches not understand it?

The bottom line is, I blame dissatisfied fans with unrealistic expectations, and ridiculous media coverage of our team, for the MM hate. I know it might sting your pride to say you bought into the hype and now you are pissed, but admitting it is the first step to accepting it.

[Paulitik]

(09-30-2011 10:32 PM)RnB Wrote:  They are paid to tell you what you want to hear to keep you interested. They are paid to NOT tell you how majorly an offensive change like this can affect a team.

If they had said, "We drafted JJ and gave up nearly an entire draft worth of picks to change our offense into something more exciting for the fans and the media. However, we will most likely not have the personnel to run such a scheme and could see a dramatic drop off in production until we get things settled"; would you feel better about our 1-2 record right now?

Going from a ball control offense with a heavy running game and short passes to an offense that requires outstanding protection up front and athleticism on the back end; how could people not understand that we would look different this year and it would not be a smooth transition?

If what you are saying, Phocis, is that our FO and Coaches were ignorant enough to not understand that we were missing MORE than just a WR to create a new offensive scheme, we might as well grade our entire organization as "Unacceptable". If someone like me can understand the ramifications of switching up what we did really well last season into something we are unproven at as a team, how in the fuck can our FO and Coaches not understand it?

The bottom line is, I blame dissatisfied fans with unrealistic expectations, and ridiculous media coverage of our team, for the MM hate. I know it might sting your pride to say you bought into the hype and now you are pissed, but admitting it is the first step to accepting it.

I don't think anyone expected us to become the Packers or the 07 Pats overnight. No one is a bigger supporter of TD or Smith than I, but they made this bed with their talk. There are a ton of things to blame on the media, but no one expected or should have thought in anyway we'd come out and look as bad as we did, not even them. We could have done nothing, and expected to look better than this.

[nobkowski]

`lI voted

[illmusic]

(09-30-2011 03:16 PM)Beef Wrote:  How will Matt get killed if he's backpeddling away from the rush as he drops the ball over them and never stops?

Come on. It's not like I'm saying stuff that isn't done by other teams and QB's all the time and the QB's get touched even less because they're moving away.

And screens use the same tactic. It's easy to let a screen set up if your QB is backpeddling away from the rush. It's actually required so you draw them further away from the RB for goodness sakes.

And draws are set up just like anything else. If the defense is bullrushing the center, fine, you run some sweeps and screens. If they're stacking the box, great you throw some passes. If they dropping into zone, fine, you bulldoze Turner up the middle. The point is, if you're unpredictable and come at them from multiple angles all game long, you use other plays to set up other plays. It's not just using the pass to set up the run or the run to set up the pass. Certain runs and certain passes move defenders all over the place and when you see a tendancy of an alignment, you've essentially set up your counter.

This is what I do not see us doing. Teams stack the box on us and bullrush 6, 7, 8, and we don't run plays that are great at countering it and we don't set up our next play. When you play the Falcons, you know what's comming.

if our own staff is saying they can't do this stuff, then who are you to say they can? and teams aren't stacking the box on us. Chicago painted the blueprint to stop us. Rush four, cover with the remaining defensive players. we ran a screen and Snelling got murdered on it. you know why? because our line did exactly as you said, just let people run right through. you know what that does? it lets at least one of the defensive players know something isn't up, and they usually make a play on something like that...the rookie Price made the play, btw.

truly good screens don't just let people run right past them, or you tip your hand to what you're trying to do. a play-action screen with people like Peppers, Freeney, and other speed rushers running past Baker untouched? and you don't think Ryan is going to get killed on the legal hit they give him? you don't think the DTs aren't going to have their hands up, which will make Ryan have to float it over them?

all these little scenarios you are putting up is what teams with below average lines do. we've played with a terrible line so far this year. when you have a terrible line, it gets hard to even run these screens because, the team knows they don't need to bring the house to take your QB down. look at what happened to Brady in the SB when the Giants were getting serious pressure with their front four. even the greatest offense to ever take the field, arguably, couldn't handle that.

this isn't an excuse for Mularkey, and he wasn't the guy on TV and in news reports saying explosion...this is just a fact of the matter. any OC you say we go get, we're still middle of the pack this year offensively because, as it stands right now, our line is trash. if you want someone to fall on a sword, throw TD on their for drafting Baker and keeping that scrub on this team for years with no viable option to push him out that starting spot.

[RnB]

(10-01-2011 01:30 PM)illmusic Wrote:  if our own staff is saying they can't do this stuff, then who are you to say they can? and teams aren't stacking the box on us. Chicago painted the blueprint to stop us. Rush four, cover with the remaining defensive players. we ran a screen and Snelling got murdered on it. you know why? because our line did exactly as you said, just let people run right through. you know what that does? it lets at least one of the defensive players know something isn't up, and they usually make a play on something like that...the rookie Price made the play, btw.

truly good screens don't just let people run right past them, or you tip your hand to what you're trying to do. a play-action screen with people like Peppers, Freeney, and other speed rushers running past Baker untouched? and you don't think Ryan is going to get killed on the legal hit they give him? you don't think the DTs aren't going to have their hands up, which will make Ryan have to float it over them?

all these little scenarios you are putting up is what teams with below average lines do. we've played with a terrible line so far this year. when you have a terrible line, it gets hard to even run these screens because, the team knows they don't need to bring the house to take your QB down. look at what happened to Brady in the SB when the Giants were getting serious pressure with their front four. even the greatest offense to ever take the field, arguably, couldn't handle that.

this isn't an excuse for Mularkey, and he wasn't the guy on TV and in news reports saying explosion...this is just a fact of the matter. any OC you say we go get, we're still middle of the pack this year offensively because, as it stands right now, our line is trash. if you want someone to fall on a sword, throw TD on their for drafting Baker and keeping that scrub on this team for years with no viable option to push him out that starting spot.

Not too sold on throwing TD under the bus, otherwise, +1 good sir. Thank you for making a sensible post on this matter.

[Beef]

(10-01-2011 01:30 PM)illmusic Wrote:  if our own staff is saying they can't do this stuff, then who are you to say they can? and teams aren't stacking the box on us. Chicago painted the blueprint to stop us. Rush four, cover with the remaining defensive players. we ran a screen and Snelling got murdered on it. you know why? because our line did exactly as you said, just let people run right through. you know what that does? it lets at least one of the defensive players know something isn't up, and they usually make a play on something like that...the rookie Price made the play, btw.

truly good screens don't just let people run right past them, or you tip your hand to what you're trying to do. a play-action screen with people like Peppers, Freeney, and other speed rushers running past Baker untouched? and you don't think Ryan is going to get killed on the legal hit they give him? you don't think the DTs aren't going to have their hands up, which will make Ryan have to float it over them?

all these little scenarios you are putting up is what teams with below average lines do. we've played with a terrible line so far this year. when you have a terrible line, it gets hard to even run these screens because, the team knows they don't need to bring the house to take your QB down. look at what happened to Brady in the SB when the Giants were getting serious pressure with their front four. even the greatest offense to ever take the field, arguably, couldn't handle that.

this isn't an excuse for Mularkey, and he wasn't the guy on TV and in news reports saying explosion...this is just a fact of the matter. any OC you say we go get, we're still middle of the pack this year offensively because, as it stands right now, our line is trash. if you want someone to fall on a sword, throw TD on their for drafting Baker and keeping that scrub on this team for years with no viable option to push him out that starting spot.

Nonsense. Have we won a game yet because our play calling was better than their play calling? No, we have not.

And Chicago has a super shitty OL and yet they run screens, draws, sweeps, and dumps to Forte and he makes DL's pay the price for over-rushing and puting themselves out of position all the time. He's currently a top 5 RB in the league and a top 3 receiving RB. He has a worse OL and QB than we do, yet some how we can't manage to run these types of plays? Bullshit.

And again, we ran two plays last week that were wildly successful and do exactly what I'm talking about, making DL's pay for bull-rushing, and those were the first and last times in 3 games we've done them. One was a seam dump to Turner and the other was an immediate lateral pass to Julio.

We can do plays that hurt defenses who bull-rush 100% of the time. We've done it a few times. We just need to do it more.

Like I said, when you can point out that we're winning games because our play calling is beating their play calling and not just because our players are making ridiculously incredible catches in double and triple coverage, THEN you can take the blame off of play calling (MM).

And until shitty OL's and worse QB's than ours stop being able to run these types of plays, I'm going to continue to say we should be able to also. Our FO drafted Quizz to be a change-of-pace RB. These plays are CoP plays by definition. Yet we're not doing them.

[RnB]

(10-01-2011 09:53 PM)Beef Wrote:  Nonsense. Have we won a game yet because our play calling was better than their play calling? No, we have not.

And Chicago has a super shitty OL and yet they run screens, draws, sweeps, and dumps to Forte and he makes DL's pay the price for over-rushing and puting themselves out of position all the time. He's currently a top 5 RB in the league and a top 3 receiving RB. He has a worse OL and QB than we do, yet some how we can't manage to run these types of plays? Bullshit.

And again, we ran two plays last week that were wildly successful and do exactly what I'm talking about, making DL's pay for bull-rushing, and those were the first and last times in 3 games we've done them. One was a seam dump to Turner and the other was an immediate lateral pass to Julio.

We can do plays that hurt defenses who bull-rush 100% of the time. We've done it a few times. We just need to do it more.

Like I said, when you can point out that we're winning games because our play calling is beating their play calling and not just because our players are making ridiculously incredible catches in double and triple coverage, THEN you can take the blame off of play calling (MM).

And until shitty OL's and worse QB's than ours stop being able to run these types of plays, I'm going to continue to say we should be able to also. Our FO drafted Quizz to be a change-of-pace RB. These plays are CoP plays by definition. Yet we're not doing them.

What I fail to understand is why you compare our team to Chicago in the first place? We are not the Bears. We are the Falcons. Our team has an identity and running screens, RB dump offs, or splitting RBs out wide is NOT what we do.

If you are saying we did not win ANY games (out of 13) last season due to our playcalling, you are simply lying.

Our coaching staff are doing the best they can with what they have. We have guys on this team trying their hardest to perform on a level that is required to implement our systems. However, the talent level it takes to be an elite NFL player, let alone an elite NFL team, is extraordinary.

We do NOT have many extraordinary offensive linemen which is why our new offensive philosophy is not working. Last season we dominated, period. This season we are changing our offense and need better execution along the offensive line for the system to work. How hard is that to understand?

Firing an OC is never an easy thing in the NFL. Its easy for people to call for a Coach's job but very difficult to find the caliber of Coach that can take teams to championships. You do the math. We have PROVEN success with what we have NOW. What is the point of rebuilding after a 13-3 season?

Changing the offense is all the change I want to see and even that was too much, in my opinion. Moving away from our proven, winning formula in one offseason has been more than we could handle. The further we change the team, the further we get away from multiple winning seasons, NFC South titles, and playoff trips.

TL;DR The Grass is Always Greener on the Other Side of the Fence!

[illmusic]

(10-01-2011 09:53 PM)Beef Wrote:  Nonsense. Have we won a game yet because our play calling was better than their play calling? No, we have not.

And Chicago has a super shitty OL and yet they run screens, draws, sweeps, and dumps to Forte and he makes DL's pay the price for over-rushing and puting themselves out of position all the time. He's currently a top 5 RB in the league and a top 3 receiving RB. He has a worse OL and QB than we do, yet some how we can't manage to run these types of plays? Bullshit.

And again, we ran two plays last week that were wildly successful and do exactly what I'm talking about, making DL's pay for bull-rushing, and those were the first and last times in 3 games we've done them. One was a seam dump to Turner and the other was an immediate lateral pass to Julio.

We can do plays that hurt defenses who bull-rush 100% of the time. We've done it a few times. We just need to do it more.

Like I said, when you can point out that we're winning games because our play calling is beating their play calling and not just because our players are making ridiculously incredible catches in double and triple coverage, THEN you can take the blame off of play calling (MM).

And until shitty OL's and worse QB's than ours stop being able to run these types of plays, I'm going to continue to say we should be able to also. Our FO drafted Quizz to be a change-of-pace RB. These plays are CoP plays by definition. Yet we're not doing them.

you're talking about the Chicago offense that has killed Cutler? you want that offense? the one that's ranked lower than us? and who on our team is as good an all-around threat as Forte? you gonna pass that torch to Quizz already?

and we ran an end-around to Julio that got shut down behind the line of scrimmage, and I think we've ran 2 screen plays that have looked embarrassingly bad so far this year. and we've had 2 quick throws to the outside other than the one you're talking about...both were stopped at the LOS...actually, I think one was stopped behind the LOS because it was batted backwards and Julio caught it. our coaching staff has said we don't have the personnel on the line to throw them in space(apparently), why would we continue to do something that isn't successful. it's funny, I remember in 09 people were calling for Mularkey's head when his end arounds weren't working.

and I'm honestly not getting what you're saying when you say, "call plays where the play-calling was better than the other team". the Packers murdered our secondary, but every other game, Rodgers was fitting the ball in places he shouldn't have been able to fit it. this isn't college football, the coach isn't going to call a 56-0 rout...the competition is more even, you need players to step up in the big moments to make big plays. like when Ryan checked the ball down to Quizz instead of hitting Tony, for what would've probably been a TD. that's a situation where Mularkey drew up a pretty good play to get someone open, but the execution wasn't there. this year, there have been plenty of plays like that...how about we give him one year with a true #2 receiver, instead of Jenkins and Finneran being our 1st day starters.

[Beef]

I'm not calling for Mularkey's head and I'm not comparing the Falcons to the Bears. Since you two completely fail at simple reading comprehension and have resorted to just making shit up, you can go fuck yourselves.

I can't keep saying the same thing and try to have a conversation with people who would probably fuck up a wet dream if they had one.

[illmusic]

lol you're saying run those screens to take the pressure off Matt...then you bring up a team that runs those screens and gives up more pressures and sacks than us, with a worse offense, as a comparison. but whatever, as usual, you run to petty name-calling when it's not that serious lol.