Falcons: Real Talk: Coach Smith

[Statick]

I'd like to ask Coach exactly how bad does the offensive situation have to get before he swallows his pride and admits that what Mike Mularkey is doing for an offensive gameplan is no longer working? And that Sam Baker and Reynolds aren't exactly getting the job done at their prospective positions on the o-line?

I'd also like to ask him why does it take us spotting the opposing team 10 points before we make major decisions, such as going to the no-huddle or Matt calling his own plays?

I know I don't know everything that's going on behind the scenes to make an informed judgment, but one cannot ignore what's been going on for the past year and a half. I figure either Smitty wants to give his coordinators a chance to do better. I just hope it's not an ego thing with him in that he's just going to roll with what he has due to not wanting to admit he was wrong in choosing his personnel.

Exactly what is it going to take? Matt going down with an injury before he finally wakes up and cans Mike Mularkey? Or realizes that Baker peaked last year or that Reynolds (a converted T) isn't a G?

To his credit, BVG has stepped up his game and has done pretty well calling the plays at DC the past two games. Mike Mularkey, unfortunately, hasn't changed a bit. He's still predictable as ever and shows no signs at changing his gameplan, which is the same style that got him fired at Buffalo and Pittsburgh.

Wake up, coach.

[Radical]

(09-26-2011 12:08 PM)Statick Wrote:  which is the same style that got him fired at Buffalo and Pittsburgh.

There is nothing "real" about this line at all. In fact, it's just downright false.

[Statick]

(09-26-2011 12:10 PM)Radical Wrote:  There is nothing "real" about this line at all. In fact, it's just downright false.

Okay, he "resigned" from Buffalo as a HC for so-called "personal reasons".

From 2003 Espn report: "In his second year, Mike Mularkey started strong, receiving a 91 percent approval rating after a Week 1 win over Houston. But by the end of the season, he only managed a 34 percent rating after a Week 16 win over Cincinnati."

[atljbo]

I just feel like as a team we have out grown Mularky's scheme... We have talents thats not being used to the max

[Statick]

I wish I knew where this Steelers fan pulled this from or if they wrote it, but it's a pretty damning tell regarding MM...

"Originally touted as an offensive genius at the beginning of this decade, Mike Mularkey has rightfully lost that moniker and is approaching "bust" status as a coach.

By examining his track record one thing becomes clear. If past events predict future results, the Atlanta Falcons are in trouble offensively.

Mike Mularkey first became offensive coordinator in 2001 for the Pittsburgh Steelers. He was promoted from tights ends coach and replaced Kevin Gilbride and had his best statistical year as a coach. The Pittsburgh Steelers were ranked 3rd offensively in his first year as offensive coordinator and made the playoffs.
They were ranked 18th the previous year.

The following year, 2002, the Steelers were still excellent offensively, but slipped a bit to 5th. In 2003, the Steelers entered a free fall offensively and dropped all the way to 22nd, missing the playoffs. Mularkey began to be characterized as a coach that used predictable formations and was way too quick to abandon the run. He became reliant on the gimmick or trick play as opposed to sound play calling.

Mularkey still had a great deal of buzz and was touted as one of the up and coming new coaches in spite of the Pittsburgh offensive rankings and not making the playoffs in 2003.

He used that buzz to land the head coaching job in Buffalo, with the Bills. He replaced the fired Gregg Williams, after Williams posted back-to-back 5-11 seasons. His first year as coach in 2004, the Bills after an 0-4 start, reeled off six straight wins and finished just out of the playoffs at 9-7 after getting beat by Mularkey’s former team, the Pittsburgh Steelers back ups in week 17.
The offense for the year ended up ranked 25th up from the previous years ranking of 30th. The offensive coordinator the year before Mularkey got there?

Kevin Gilbride.

So, in the two instances in his career where Mularkey raised an offense's ranking statistically, it was done in his first year as coach and he was replacing Gilbride both times.
In 2005, the Bills dropped offensively from 25th to 28th and his handling and development of JP Losman as the quarterback to replace Drew Bledsoe is laughable at best.

Ask any Bills fan about how they feel about the job Mularkey did with Losman, and you will get an answer that will most likely force you to ask small children to leave the room to spare them the obscenity laced tirade.
Mularkey waffled back and forth and sat Losman in favor of journeyman Kelly Holcomb. Citing differences with the direction of the Bills after team President and General Manager, Tom Donahoe was fired, Mularkey quit the Bills before the start of 2006 season.
In 2006, Mularkey landed in Miami as offensive coordinator and the Dolphins promptly dropped from 14th to 20th in offensive rankings. Mularkey did not have the luxury of replacing Kevin Gilbride to inflate his first year numbers. He was then demoted to tight ends coach in 2007 before being fired at the end of the season.

For the 2008 season, Mularkey has been tapped as the offensive coordinator in Atlanta. Entering a team in disarray for the third time in a row, a team in Atlanta that has not enjoyed back to back winning seasons in its history, Mike Mularkey does not bode well for Falcons fans to reverse that trend. His first example of success, in Pittsburgh, can be attributed in large part to the stability of the organization, stability of the coaching staff, and the offensive coordinator he replaced as opposed to his measure of ability to game plan successfully.

In Buffalo, his pattern of success is very similar, a brief one year rise followed by a precipitous fall after replacing Kevin Gilbride.
His time in Miami can be only characterized as a disaster at best. One of the marks of an effective coach is the ability to say yes to the question, “Did you leave the situation in better shape than when you found it?” In each case of his head coaching or offensive coordinator stops Mike Mularkey cannot say "yes" to that question.
Simply put, Mularkey is not the answer for the Falcons.

He has not demonstrated an ability to develop rookie quarterbacks and he has never developed the team around him to be better consistently for more than one season. He has never improved a team offensively from year one to year two. So, Atlanta fans may find themselves doing better this year offensively, and after the debacle of Bobby Petrino it is hard to imagine them worse, only to begin to regress again in 2009. That is, if he doesn’t follow the pattern of his last stop in Miami where the offense got instantly worse. Who was his starting quarterback in Miami?
Joey Harrington, the same quarterback as in Atlanta.

Perhaps Mularkey will learn from his past mistakes and get something out of Joey Harrington and not develop Matt Ryan like he did JP Losman, because right now things are looking eerily similar to his past situations and that does not bode well long-term for Falcons fans.

OUCH.

[Radical]

(09-26-2011 12:19 PM)Statick Wrote:  Okay, he "resigned" from Buffalo as a HC for so-called "personal reasons".

From 2003 Espn report: "In his second year, Mike Mularkey started strong, receiving a 91 percent approval rating after a Week 1 win over Houston. But by the end of the season, he only managed a 34 percent rating after a Week 16 win over Cincinnati."

You mean a coach left the team after taking issues with the management? The Bills, a team that has been a revolving door of dysfunction and instability had a HC resign from them? Shocking.

Regardless of how you want to try to spin it, he was not fired from Pittsburgh or the Bills.

[Statick]

(09-26-2011 12:48 PM)Radical Wrote:  You mean a coach left the team after taking issues with the management? The Bills, a team that has been a revolving door of dysfunction and instability had a HC resign from them? Shocking.

Regardless of how you want to try to spin it, he was not fired from Pittsburgh or the Bills.

So, that's your only issue with what I stated about MM?

Alrighty, then.

[Paprika Neck]

we need del rio as dcoordinator and a young and innovative oc

[Radical]

(09-26-2011 12:53 PM)Statick Wrote:  So, that's your only issue with what I stated about MM?

Alrighty, then.

Your copied article is such a ridiculous spin job that I didn't feel the need to even get into it.

Concerning your general complaint about Mularkey, I'm convinced that some people just want success, and they don't care how, and they don't understand what makes success.

People throw around that we should do this more, or do that more, or wonder why we do this or that, and simply don't understand why it's going on and what happens when we try things differently.

People wanted us to spread the defense out more, send 5 guys out on pass patterns, and not run so much. What happens? Our mediocre offensive line, now hobbled by an aging C coming off injury and a first time starter in Reynolds, is getting by just 3-4 pass rushers almost instantly.

How do you fix that? You run the ball, leave in extra blockers, and run short timing based routes that can be quickly thrown to a spot for an easy completion. Well, now you're not "explosive" and you're "predictable."

People want to scream about Turner not being elusive and being slow... when he's getting hit 2-3 yards behind the LOS. People want to ignorantly rant on about how Matt Ryan needs to start chucking it down the field. Others want to mouth off about how Mularkey needs to use "better routes." Blah blah blah, I've heard it all. The reality is that it all comes back to the offensive line. You give us an above average line instead of the garbage happening on the field right now, we wouldn't be having any problems at all.

There is no scheme, play, playbook, system, philosophy, etc. that can overcome an offensive line that gets beat consistently by the defensive line of the other team. None, nada, and that's all there is to it. Our offensive line shapes up, and you see a Top 5 offense. Our offensive line continues to perform as poorly as it has, then you can change the OC 50 times, and you're still going to see different looking versions of the same results.

[phocis850]

(09-26-2011 12:53 PM)Statick Wrote:  So, that's your only issue with what I stated about MM?

Alrighty, then.

Rad is on an island.