Post Reply 
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Falcons Mularkey is getting called out now
01-10-2012, 04:00 PM (This post was last modified: 01-10-2012 04:07 PM by Anomaly.)
Post: #51
RE: Mularkey is getting called out now
(01-10-2012 03:55 PM)cooperbh Wrote:  It's just comical at this point. Trying so hard not to use the "A" word...

AGENDA AGENDA AGENDA AGENDA AGENDA AGENDA AGENDA AGENDA AGENDA AGENDA AGENDA AGENDA AGENDA AGENDA AGENDA AGENDA AGENDA AGENDA

There I said it for you.


But for 4th down you only have three options. Run, pass, or punt/field goal. As we've seen on multiple occasions any type of run or sneak we've tried has failed. If Mike Smith was dead set on going for it then at least try something else and the only other option is to pass it.

[Image: Julio150High.png]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
01-10-2012, 04:32 PM
Post: #52
RE: Mularkey is getting called out now
(01-10-2012 03:30 PM)cooperbh Wrote:  OK, so we determined in November that, on 4th and inches, running Turner up the middle is absolutely the wrong call. Now, in January, we learn that the QB sneak everyone was calling for in November is actually the wrong call in that situation.

So, what is the right call on 4th and inches? Just so we can let our new OC know.

i've been thinking that for a minute, mostly because I was one of the people calling for a QB sneak...i can't remember if Beef or anybody else was though, so it might've just been me...for the record, I haven't disagreed with the play call in the situation, I'm just astonished that our line couldn't push forward for a fucking inch. more an indictment of our line than the playcall, imo
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
01-10-2012, 04:36 PM (This post was last modified: 01-10-2012 04:38 PM by juraitwaluzka.)
Post: #53
Mularkey is getting called out now
It was pretty clear to me that running turner up the middle didn't work so why would a QB sneak be much different. How about a pass, or something to the outside. Anything but right up the middle against a defensive front that was obviously stacking the inside. They knew it was coming, I knew it was coming, apparently the staff thought they were fooling someone or were just too stubborn to admit that their short yard package blows.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
01-10-2012, 04:40 PM
Post: #54
RE: Mularkey is getting called out now
How about we learn how to run a screen play? Like the other 31 teams in the NFL do.

[Image: katyperrysnlgif.gif][Image: wtf-girl-photo-booty-rub1.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
01-10-2012, 05:23 PM (This post was last modified: 01-10-2012 05:24 PM by Beef.)
Post: #55
RE: Mularkey is getting called out now
(01-10-2012 03:30 PM)cooperbh Wrote:  OK, so we determined in November that, on 4th and inches, running Turner up the middle is absolutely the wrong call. Now, in January, we learn that the QB sneak everyone was calling for in November is actually the wrong call in that situation.

So, what is the right call on 4th and inches? Just so we can let our new OC know.

It wasn't just that it was a QB sneak, it was the design of it that irks me. Your QB under center with nobody in the backfield? Seriously think about it for a second and you'll realize it's the dumbest set/play ever conceived.

Like I said earlier, Matt would have had a better chance running a keeper from shotgun than that asinine sneak. There's nothing "sneak" about it, which is the irony. At least on the first 4th and inches they had the appearance of options other than a sneak. And I have no problem with that call. It simply failed because our OL is unthinkably worse than faith perceived.

[Image: sexy-hot-girl-dancing-3-o.gif] [Image: images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSupbgNd4tN3Uxraa9Dz1h...mp;amp;t=1]
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
01-10-2012, 08:36 PM
Post: #56
RE: Mularkey is getting called out now
(01-10-2012 05:23 PM)Beef Wrote:  It wasn't just that it was a QB sneak, it was the design of it that irks me. Your QB under center with nobody in the backfield? Seriously think about it for a second and you'll realize it's the dumbest set/play ever conceived.

Like I said earlier, Matt would have had a better chance running a keeper from shotgun than that asinine sneak. There's nothing "sneak" about it, which is the irony. At least on the first 4th and inches they had the appearance of options other than a sneak. And I have no problem with that call. It simply failed because our OL is unthinkably worse than faith perceived.

I agree that second call was completely retarded from a matchup standpoint. It seemed, though, you were criticizing both calls in your earlier post. If that's not the case, then forget I brought it up.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
01-10-2012, 11:32 PM
Post: #57
RE: Mularkey is getting called out now
(01-10-2012 08:36 PM)cooperbh Wrote:  I agree that second call was completely retarded from a matchup standpoint. It seemed, though, you were criticizing both calls in your earlier post. If that's not the case, then forget I brought it up.

If your opponent is stacking six in the box and everyone on the field, in the stadium, in the known universe can see the sneak coming, try and force the offsides then call the time out and kick the damn 3pts. Make it 10-5 and give your defense some momentum.

I'm no coordinator but geez I can see this.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
01-10-2012, 11:59 PM (This post was last modified: 01-11-2012 12:16 AM by juraitwaluzka.)
Post: #58
RE: Mularkey is getting called out now
(01-10-2012 11:32 PM)Jesus Wrote:  If your opponent is stacking six in the box and everyone on the field, in the stadium, in the known universe can see the sneak coming, try and force the offsides then call the time out and kick the damn 3pts. Make it 10-5 and give your defense some momentum.

I'm no coordinator but geez I can see this.

That's what I was praying would happen when all the motion started. Generally I never have a problem with going for it on 4th and short. Call a play, line up and if you've got a good matchup go otherwise revert to the above. Like you said it was clear to anyone who was looking that they had very little chance of making that. It would've had a better chance if we came out 4 wide to at least spread them out a bit. Instead we continue to ME FALCON RUN THRU WALL

This could've been a signature moment, a time to show your genius, saving up that one play, fool the defense knowing that they have watched the film and you know what they expect you to do so you do something different. Instead we know they know what we're going to run but just try it anyway. Maybe I could even give you the first one. The second one, inexcusable and points to the core of the problem that I hope is now gone.

This is what I want to see in our next OC, I want to be surprised. What I hope happens is that through the interviewing process Smitty will get blown away by someone and at that moment truly see the light. I don't think he's ever coached before where they had a great offense. I know they are analytical. Our needs now are not at all the same as the needs we had 4 years ago.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
01-11-2012, 12:14 AM
Post: #59
RE: Mularkey is getting called out now
(01-10-2012 11:32 PM)Jesus Wrote:  If your opponent is stacking six in the box and everyone on the field, in the stadium, in the known universe can see the sneak coming, try and force the offsides then call the time out and kick the damn 3pts. Make it 10-5 and give your defense some momentum.

I'm no coordinator but geez I can see this.

Same here. That's why in the very statement you quoted, I referred to the play as "completely retarded."

Or maybe you were agreeing with me and just expanding on that? I couldn't tell.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
01-11-2012, 12:30 AM
Post: #60
RE: Mularkey is getting called out now
(01-11-2012 12:14 AM)cooperbh Wrote:  Same here. That's why in the very statement you quoted, I referred to the play as "completely retarded."

Or maybe you were agreeing with me and just expanding on that? I couldn't tell.

Yea both.

It was heartbreaking to watch. still so to think about.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply