Threaded Mode | Linear Mode

Magic Man · 09-16-2010, 01:32 PM

My issue is less with TD and more with Mr. "Full of" Mularkey. He draws up game plans that make no sense. He under-utilizes the weapons at hand, and seems to be committed to the run to a fault. I am all about the "run first, control the clock, win the game" mentality, but when your plan is resulting in a 2.2 average for your star back, the time to change things is nigh.

Knight of God · 09-16-2010, 01:34 PM

I'm thinking that my lack of being clear is a problem.

Okay, so he has Mularkey to deal with. Run heavy guy who likes short passes.

I was in the thinking at the time that you would need two things if you are the man in power and know who you have. You got Turner so now what? You get another top shelf guy to either solidify the D-Line or to back-up Turner. I was thinking either Dorsey or Jonathan Stewart honestly. Dorsey wasn't a sexy pick but made sense. I thought that with Mularkey's scheme you could start Redmon and draft lower for QB. A guy who could develop in the system.

Instead we got Ryan and I went nutty. So then after calming down I said, "WR...please." We got Douglas and I was fine. Year goes by and I see the numbers that Turner posted and I'm thinking RB or LB. We got Jerry...I'm like "Okay, but what about if Turner hobbles?" Nothing.

I just don't think that either Mularkey gets what he has or TD gets who the OC is. It makes me mad at both.

I have heard that TD asks Mike Smith what he see's as a need for the draft and goes and looks at position instead of what we have or gets what he thinks a need is. He takes th offseason from top to bottom, not bottom to top. Its really annoying for me, but I'm not looking at the same thing that a lot of guys are.

Dale4Saul2Red0 · 09-16-2010, 02:53 PM

This TD witch hunt has to stop Knight. It is extremely unjustified.

Knight of God · 09-16-2010, 03:03 PM

(09-16-2010 02:53 PM)Dale4Saul2Red0 Wrote: This TD witch hunt has to stop Knight. It is extremely unjustified.

Then prove me wrong then. Say something that makes sense because when I look at how the team is managed it makes none to me. I have taken the time to show why and how and I'm not liking it.

The players play their butts off for Smitty and have no help. Who is in charge of bringing in said help? Its not a witch hunt. Its the root of the problem. If you have something against what I'm saying then tell me how and why.

Without telling me about "other teams". This is the Falcons and I want to know wbout OUR teamk.

Dale4Saul2Red0 · (This post was last modified: 09-16-2010 03:09 PM by Dale4Saul2Red0.)

2007 ~ 4-12

2008 ~ 11-5

2009 ~ 9-7

If the turnaround doesn't make sense to you, then you will never be pleased as a fan in general. End of story. And 2008 we overachieved, and fans like you set the bar way too high. We're a consistent playoff contender now and still building to becoming a consistent Super Bowl contender. Do I think we can get there this year, yes? But if we don't I'm not going to go all crazy on TD because the guy has done a hell of a job to turn this franchise around and put us in a position to win for years to come.

***Peyton*** · 09-16-2010, 03:07 PM

(09-16-2010 03:03 PM)Knight of God Wrote: Then prove me wrong then. Say something that makes sense because when I look at how the team is managed it makes none to me. I have taken the time to show why and how and I'm not liking it.

The players play their butts off for Smitty and have no help. Who is in charge of bringing in said help? Its not a witch hunt. Its the root of the problem. If you have something against what I'm saying then tell me how and why.

Without telling me about "other teams". This is the Falcons and I want to know wbout OUR teamk.

I haven't read all the way through this thread, but I do have a theory about why the team isn't make strong efforts to shore up a couple of the weak spots. I think it's financial. I think the Falcons are close to that line between profitibility and losing money, and they want to make sure they stay on the right side of that line.

Knight of God · (This post was last modified: 09-16-2010 03:10 PM by Knight of God.)

(09-16-2010 03:07 PM)Dale4Saul2Red0 Wrote: 2007 ~ 4-12

2008 ~ 11-5

2009 ~ 9-7

If the turnaround doesn't make sense to you, then you will never be pleased as a fan in general. End of story.

Think about it man. What did we turn around from? A complete mockery of a season. There was nowhere to go but up.

What about now huh? Why the slow skid south?

EDIT: I can be happy as a fan. I was in '08.

(09-16-2010 03:07 PM)Peyton Wrote: I haven't read all the way through this thread, but I do have a theory about why the team isn't make strong efforts to shore up a couple of the weak spots. I think it's financial. I think the Falcons are close to that line between profitibility and losing money, and they want to make sure they stay on the right side of that line.

There is an idea, but you still lose profits if you lose games. Fans will not pay to see a losing team. Remember the blackouts.

Dale4Saul2Red0 · 09-16-2010, 03:12 PM

(09-16-2010 03:08 PM)Knight of God Wrote: Think about it man. What did we turn around from? A complete mockery of a season. There was nowhere to go but up.

What about now huh? Why the slow skid south?

EDIT: I can be happy as a fan. I was in '08.

Where do you see a slow skid south? Based on an overachieving 2008 and a 9-7 2009??? The pieces are still there and being put into place. The team is being built so they can be a competitive football team for a decade with the chance to win a Super Bowl or two. They aren't being put together to be competitive for a few years.

Just because there is nowhere to go but up doesn't mean you are going to win 11 games next season. Do you know how many teams win 4 games the season before and turn it around and win 11 games the next season??? Very, very, very few!

***Peyton*** · 09-16-2010, 03:17 PM

(09-16-2010 03:08 PM)Knight of God Wrote: Think about it man. What did we turn around from? A complete mockery of a season. There was nowhere to go but up.

What about now huh? Why the slow skid south?

EDIT: I can be happy as a fan. I was in '08.

There is an idea, but you still lose profits if you lose games. Fans will not pay to see a losing team. Remember the blackouts.

Yeah, but I think most people don't really do the math. The ticket sales are not that important. What is the average price of a ticket at the Georgia Dome? Would you say it is $80? So if they are running up 65,000 fans in there, they are making about 5 million per game, 50 mil a year. If attendance were to be down a 20%, it would only mean 10 mil a year less in ticket revenues.

TV money is I believe well more than 200 million per team, so losing some of your ticket sales isn't quite as big a deal as people think.

Look at the Chargers, they are about to have a blackout and ther owner doesn't really care at all.

Knight of God · 09-16-2010, 03:19 PM

(09-16-2010 03:12 PM)Dale4Saul2Red0 Wrote: Where do you see a slow skid south? Based on an overachieving 2008 and a 9-7 2009??? The pieces are still there and being put into place. The team is being built so they can be a competitive football team for a decade with the chance to win a Super Bowl or two. They aren't being put together to be competitive for a few years.

Just because there is nowhere to go but up doesn't mean you are going to win 11 games next season. Do you know how many teams win 4 games the season before and turn it around and win 11 games the next season??? Very, very, very few!

At this rate it won't happen man. You have to do more than what's being done and I've already gone over it at length. You can't start talking about "rebuilding" and "building" in the NFL. Its a myth.

By the time most of the guys develop for the next batch, most of the guys that we have now will have lost many steps, been signed by new teams, or something else.

You build by doing EVERYTHING to win now and build beneath the win.

10-6, 9-7 and if we follow that same pattern 8-8. Thats a skid south man. Not up.