Mike Smith admitting the coaches are the problem

[TomBradyMVP12]

How and the heck couldn't he of know this before? It doesn't take a freakin' rocket scientist to notice that our play calling sucks offensively.

[JKH5785]

Radical : all you have stated is the theory behind why he is doing, in case you haven't noticed, it don't work.

The only way you know how to debate something is to keep asking for the same information over and over and more and more. Your obviously watching a different game than me and most other members of this board. We live in a completely different realm of reality, so I see no reason to keep explaining and explaining and explaining and explaining the same things over and over again because you don't understand what an opinion is.

It's not an agenda, they are often not precise and if they are it's still one's personal opinion based on the facts interpreted by oneself. Opinions are not meant to prove one wrong, and as soon as you understand that, the better off you'll be.

here's some help

o·pin·ion   [uh-pin-yuhn]
–noun
1. a belief or judgment that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty.
2. a personal view, attitude, or appraisal.

So all this you must have an agenda because you haven't stated any precise factual knowledge that you keep asking for is bollocks, it's an OPINION

[RnB]

Thanks for bring some more in depth analysis to the table Rad. I have stated my case, regarding Mularkey and why I dont think he is completely to blame, a number of times over the past month; spanning across three forums now. I try to lay out logical reasons why the attitude about Mularkey, while not completely unwarranted, is simply misinformed. I too feel like alot of people against Mularkey have an agenda but I try to keep the personal accusations to a minimum and refute the arguments only.

I do find it a problem responding to most of the Mularkey criticism, as you do, because its generally in the vein of "Our playcalling sucks, we need more big plays, fire Mularkey." Its very hard to make people understand that alot of the time, its not the playcalling that is bad but the execution. There are also times when the defense just steps up and makes good plays. Blaming it all on the playcalling is throwing around criticism with blinders on, something I think people should try to avoid. I have spoken, at length, about why I think we are not making more "big plays", so I wont go into that again. Just see my previous post (or maybe a post over in the Fire Mularkey Poll). Suffice to say, the big plays are there but Matt Ryan is a smart QB who is risk adverse and focuses entirely on high percentage passes.

I enjoy MM's offense and truly think that seeing a ball control offense with a power running game, in action, defines the game of Football. For me, there is nothing better than watching the type of offense we run dominate time of possession and break the will of the opposing team one drive at a time. We have all the pieces in place to do that on a consistent basis but we have yet to see all our players execute up to their ability for long stretches of time. We have seen glimpses of what we can do with this offense, but nothing consistent. As far as who I feel needs to execute better, offensively, to really make this type of offense work: OLine, Matt Ryan, Turner.

[Radical]

(09-15-2010 03:14 PM)JKH5785 Wrote:  Radical : all you have stated is the theory behind why he is doing, in case you haven't noticed, it don't work.

The only way you know how to debate something is to keep asking for the same information over and over and more and more. Your obviously watching a different game than me and most other members of this board. We live in a completely different realm of reality, so I see no reason to keep explaining and explaining and explaining and explaining the same things over and over again because you don't understand what an opinion is.

It's not an agenda, they are often not precise and if they are it's still one's personal opinion based on the facts interpreted by oneself. Opinions are not meant to prove one wrong, and as soon as you understand that, the better off you'll be.

here's some help

o·pin·ion   [uh-pin-yuhn]
–noun
1. a belief or judgment that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty.
2. a personal view, attitude, or appraisal.
3. the formal expression of a professional judgment

So all this you must have an agenda because you haven't stated any precise factual knowledge that you keep asking for is bollocks, it's an OPINION

It "don't" work. Well, it works around the league, they are common concepts that offenses execute on a week to week basis, and have done so for years. So here comes the other half, and the most important part of any offense. Execution. Mularkey can draw up the PERFECT play every time, but he can't make it work by himself.

What you've explained to me so far is that you're criticizing him for the use of widely used and successful offensive concepts. That shows me that while you may have an opinion, it doesn't seem to be a well informed one. Your assertion is that Mularkey is a bad offensive coordinator, I don't believe that he is, and thus begins the debate. Opinions can be argued, and they are argued all the time, every day, all over the world. Heck, there are television shows on major networks about arguing points of view, even classes you can take on it.

I mean, I guess we could discuss the best way to cook a steak, but that is something that is entirely preference. You down? Medium-Rare by the way.

[JKH5785]

(09-15-2010 03:23 PM)Radical Wrote:  It "don't" work. Well, it works around the league, they are common concepts that offenses execute on a week to week basis, and have done so for years. So here comes the other half, and the most important part of any offense. Execution. Mularkey can draw up the PERFECT play every time, but he can't make it work by himself.

What you've explained to me so far is that you're criticizing him for the use of widely used and successful offensive concepts. That shows me that while you may have an opinion, it doesn't seem to be a well informed one. Your assertion is that Mularkey is a bad offensive coordinator, I don't believe that he is, and thus begins the debate. Your assertion is that Mularkey is a bad offensive coordinator, I don't believe that he is, and thus begins the debate. O

Even if some are used around the league, it doesn't make them work for our team. The Wildcat has worked for MIA better than any other team in the league, it has been successful for them.

Does that mean that all the other teams should use it and not be criticized when it doesn't work as well for them as well as it does for Mia, because after all, it is a "successful offensive concept" for them

The fact that you don't realize that it works both ways "shows me that while you may have an opinion, it doesn't seem to be a well informed one."

My opinion is Mularkey is shit, I have give my reasons...
Your opinion is that he isn't, you have given your reasons...

[Radical]

(09-15-2010 03:19 PM)RnB Wrote:  Thanks for bring some more in depth analysis to the table Rad. I have stated my case, regarding Mularkey and why I dont think he is completely to blame, a number of times over the past month; spanning across three forums now. I try to lay out logical reasons why the attitude about Mularkey, while not completely unwarranted, is simply misinformed. I too feel like alot of people against Mularkey have an agenda but I try to keep the personal accusations to a minimum and refute the arguments only.

I do find it a problem responding to most of the Mularkey criticism, as you do, because its generally in the vein of "Our playcalling sucks, we need more big plays, fire Mularkey." Its very hard to make people understand that alot of the time, its not the playcalling that is bad but the execution. There are also times when the defense just steps up and makes good plays. Blaming it all on the playcalling is throwing around criticism with blinders on, something I think people should try to avoid. I have spoken, at length, about why I think we are not making more "big plays", so I wont go into that again. Just see my previous post (or maybe a post over in the Fire Mularkey Poll). Suffice to say, the big plays are there but Matt Ryan is a smart QB who is risk adverse and focuses entirely on high percentage passes.

I enjoy MM's offense and truly think that seeing a ball control offense with a power running game, in action, defines the game of Football. For me, there is nothing better than watching the type of offense we run dominate time of possession and break the will of the opposing team one drive at a time. We have all the pieces in place to do that on a consistent basis but we have yet to see all our players execute up to their ability for long stretches of time. We have seen glimpses of what we can do with this offense, but nothing consistent. As far as who I feel needs to execute better, offensively, to really make this type of offense work: OLine, Matt Ryan, Turner.

Some does understand! At least!

[Peyton]

(09-15-2010 03:23 PM)Radical Wrote:  

(09-15-2010 03:14 PM)JKH5785 Wrote:  Radical : all you have stated is the theory behind why he is doing, in case you haven't noticed, it don't work.

The only way you know how to debate something is to keep asking for the same information over and over and more and more. Your obviously watching a different game than me and most other members of this board. We live in a completely different realm of reality, so I see no reason to keep explaining and explaining and explaining and explaining the same things over and over again because you don't understand what an opinion is.

It's not an agenda, they are often not precise and if they are it's still one's personal opinion based on the facts interpreted by oneself. Opinions are not meant to prove one wrong, and as soon as you understand that, the better off you'll be.

here's some help

o·pin·ion   [uh-pin-yuhn]
–noun
1. a belief or judgment that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty.
2. a personal view, attitude, or appraisal.
3. the formal expression of a professional judgment

So all this you must have an agenda because you haven't stated any precise factual knowledge that you keep asking for is bollocks, it's an OPINION

It "don't" work. Well, it works around the league, they are common concepts that offenses execute on a week to week basis, and have done so for years. So here comes the other half, and the most important part of any offense. Execution. Mularkey can draw up the PERFECT play every time, but he can't make it work by himself.

What you've explained to me so far is that you're criticizing him for the use of widely used and successful offensive concepts. That shows me that while you may have an opinion, it doesn't seem to be a well informed one. Your assertion is that Mularkey is a bad offensive coordinator, I don't believe that he is, and thus begins the debate. Opinions can be argued, and they are argued all the time, every day, all over the world. Heck, there are television shows on major networks about arguing points of view, even classes you can take on it.

I mean, I guess we could discuss the best way to cook a steak, but that is something that is entirely preference. You down? Medium-Rare by the way.

Ok, let me jump in here.

Radical was right to correct JHK on the facts regarding Mularkey, because he wasn't fired from Pittsburgh or Buffalo.

That being said, I would ask that we refrain as much as possible from accusing people of "having an agenda" .

Honestly, I am probably just scarred from being accused of "having an agenda" any time I share an opinion that is remotely negative on the other board. Maybe the "agenda" accusers on the other board have just wore me down, but I just don't like it.

The truth is that all the fans have an agenda - they'd like for the Falcons to do everything they can to win a Super Bowl. We just have different opinions on what that is.

I am making a polite request. Nobody will be banned for saying "I think you have an agenda", but it usually leads to a much less civilized conversation, because people find it really insulting, and that is what we are trying to avoid here.

So that's how I feel about it.

[Radical]

(09-15-2010 03:32 PM)Peyton Wrote:  Ok, let me jump in here.

Radical was right to correct JHK on the facts regarding Mularkey, because he wasn't fired from Pittsburgh or Buffalo.

That being said, I would ask that we refrain as much as possible from accusing people of "having an agenda" .

Honestly, I am probably just scarred from being accused of "having an agenda" any time I share an opinion that is remotely negative on the other board. Maybe the "agenda" accusers on the other board have just wore me down, but I just don't like it.

The truth is that all the fans have an agenda - they'd like for the Falcons to do everything they can to win a Super Bowl. We just have different opinions on what that is.

I am making a polite request. Nobody will be banned for saying "I think you have an agenda", but it usually leads to a much less civilized conversation, because people find it really insulting, and that is what we are trying to avoid here.

So that's how I feel about it.

Copy that, and thanks for following up on that PM quickly. I don't drop the "a" bomb often, and I will refrain from doing so here in the future.

---

(09-15-2010 03:30 PM)JKH5785 Wrote:  Even if some are used around the league, it doesn't make them work for our team. The Wildcat has worked for MIA better than any other team in the league, it has been successful for them.

Does that mean that all the other teams should use it and not be criticized when it doesn't work as well for them as well as it does for Mia, because after all, it is a "successful offensive concept" for them

The fact that you don't realize that it works both ways "shows me that while you may have an opinion, it doesn't seem to be a well informed one."

My opinion is Mularkey is shit, I have give my reasons...
Your opinion is that he isn't, you have given your reasons...

Complimentary routes, overloading one side of the field, and heavy line sets aren't like the Wildcat. The Wildcat is a novelty package that is more about catching the other team off guard rather than a standard part of every offensive scheme in the league. That's like saying that if a team can't run up the middle, then they shouldn't do it at all. If a team can't run up the middle, then that means there is something wrong with the players/execution, no the OC.

The Wildcat is also a question of personnel. You need the line and RBs to run it, which not every team has. If we were to try to switch to a spread offense, then you could look at the coaches. We don't have the depth at WR or the pass blocking ability along the line to do that, nor does it match up with our strongest assets like Turner or Mughelli. We have a team built for a ground pounding offense that work best in a 21 or 22 personnel set. If our offensive line doesn't execute, like they didn't against the Steelers, then naturally we're not going to produce well. Throw that in with some bad penalties and a few miscues by Ryan, against a world class defense, and you have a low scoring game.

[Tandy]

(09-15-2010 01:42 PM)Radical Wrote:  Yet I watched our line get absolutely mauled from start to finish, Ryan getting attacked all day in the pocket, and a running game that couldn't even consistently get passed the LOS. Someone explain to me how we supposed to air it out against the Steelers when Ryan can't even get 3 seconds to make a throw? Is Mularkey supposed to get on the field and open up holes in the run game for Turner? Is he supposed to stop James Harrison and the rest of that defense unit from mauling Ryan in the passing game? Maybe Mularkey should have batted down that pass that was intercepted by Polamalu, assisted Baker against Harrison on that holding penalty in overtime, keep Ryan from overthrowing those passes early in the game, and keep Norwood from dropping that flat pass that would have sent him flying up field?

Boy, you sure touched on a subject I've seen overlooked a lot during the after-game discussion. That line just can not handle a physical 3-4 defense - and especially one that's probably going to be back on their number 1 pedestal now that they have their players back in the line-up - UNLESS they drastically go downhill this season.

I don't know if you saw my breakdown on the other board - but you are right - the average time for Ryan to throw - from snap to leaving his hands was 1.7 seconds. That's insane! In 44 passes - he had 7 passes where the time from snap to throw was over 2 seconds! That's what, 15% of the passes! He was either throwing on the run, with a defender in his face or with the pocket closing in on him. That line was immediately moved back into his drop with him - they never held at the line.

Here are all times over 2 seconds with my notes when I was recording it:

1st Qtr: 4:01 left - 3 seconds - My notes: Ryan had to throw this away to avoid a sack by Polamalu -
2nd Qtr: 9:25 left - 3 seconds - My notes: Shotgun - on the run - hit as released
2nd Qtr: 2:00 left - 4 seconds - My notes: Running for his life - Peele Caught
2nd Qtr: :17 left - 3 seconds - My notes: Shotgum - Defender in his face - Weems Caught
3rd Qtr: 2:47 left - 3.9 seconds - My notes: Almost hit as threw - Line held all around him - coming in on him - Snelling Caught
4th Qtr: 4:15 left - 3.9 seconds - My notes: No one open - Scrambled - Ran Right threw on the run- Roddy Caught
OT: 13:16 left - 3.0 seconds - My notes: Ran to escape sack - hit as threw away - says Roddy - but he really threw it out of bounds

If it's coaching - then they need to figure out what techniques they are not using and start using them. If it's personnel, then they need to beef that line up some and start holding a pocket when they need it. We have had fits from the 3-4 defenses we've played where they have that big physical nose tackle and talent on the defense.

[phocis850]

What is so tough about a 3-4 that we can't execute?