Threaded Mode | Linear Mode

***Peyton*** · 12-29-2010, 11:32 AM

(12-28-2010 11:24 AM)AsylumGuido Wrote: "Being held" to 17 points was simply a by-product of the style of play. The Saints had the ball for 36:35 minutes. They ran 74 plays to Atlanta's 52. The Saints were given the short pass all night long and chose to use a ball possession approach to battle the blitz. Few defenses, if any, can keep up that approach all game long. In the end it turned out that the Falcons couldn't keep it up either, although their effort has to be commended.

Yeah....that's just not true. It was not a by-product of the style of play.

The Saints punted 7 times and threw 2 INTs. Before their game winning TD drive, 4 of their 11 drives were 3 and outs or worse and only 2 of 11 drives lasted more than 6 plays. They scored 1 TD on the first 11 drives and that was on a short field. That's not exactly a dominant offensive performance, or even a good one. Average at best. No...not even average.

The truth is.....before that last game winning drive...it would have been fair to say the Saints had been completely shut down. The only problem was the Falcons offense had been shut down as well and made those two killer mistakes.

The only reason they had so much time of possesion advantage is because of that one long drive in the 4th quarter. Before that, time of possession was basically even.

Jesus · 12-29-2010, 11:38 AM

(12-29-2010 11:32 AM)Peyton Wrote: Yeah....that's just not true. It was not a by-product of the style of play.

The Saints punted 7 times and threw 2 INTs. Before their game winning TD drive, 4 of their 11 drives were 3 and outs or worse and only 2 of 11 drives lasted more than 6 plays. They scored 1 TD on the first 11 drives and that was on a short field. That's not exactly a dominant offensive performance, or even a good one. Average at best. No...not even average.

The truth is.....before that last game winning drive...it would have been fair to say the Saints had been completely shut down. The only problem was the Falcons offense had been shut down as well and made those two killer mistakes.

The only reason they had so much time of possesion advantage is because of that one long drive in the 4th quarter. Before that, time of possession was basically even.

In reality the atlanta offenses ability to move the ball in the second half cost us the game not the defense. If the team had scored and ate some clock after the second Int the game would have been over. The D would have been rested and ready for one last shut down. But that's the thing. If if if...

Hopefully we execute better in the playoffs.

***Peyton*** · 12-29-2010, 11:50 AM

(12-29-2010 11:38 AM)Jesus Wrote: In reality the atlanta offenses ability to move the ball in the second half cost us the game not the defense. If the team had scored and ate some clock after the second Int the game would have been over. The D would have been rested and ready for one last shut down. But that's the thing. If if if...
Hopefully we execute better in the playoffs.

Biggest play of the game was that damn Turner fumble. Mularkey should have called play action on the first play there, would have been an easy TD.

AsylumGuido · 12-29-2010, 11:58 AM

(12-29-2010 11:05 AM)nobkowski Wrote: LOL you got a big "Got Cha" with this one.

Besides, if we gave anyone a blue print, so did yall.

I've been trying to be quiet cause I can't seem to not complain about "stuff" from that game.

I will say this and shut up: Many have been saying we have been winning only by luck. Well, it seems to me that the luck got all equaled out in just this one game.

There's a difference between having blueprint and having the tools and/or resources to apply it. Very few NFL squads have a secondary capable of doubling White and Gonzo and still having enough quality coverage depth to contain the other options.

Jesus · 12-29-2010, 11:59 AM

(12-29-2010 11:50 AM)Peyton Wrote: Biggest play of the game was that damn Turner fumble. Mularkey should have called play action on the first play there, would have been an easy TD.

or run misdirection with Snelling and move it to the outside
or out in the shotgun spread their D out and send Ryan up the middle.

g-dawg · 12-29-2010, 05:50 PM

(12-28-2010 07:22 PM)AsylumGuido Wrote: Most every team has done that and has had very little success. Although, you did hold Brees to 302 yards passing and over 70% completions.

I'm convinced that Brees is always gonna have 300+yds and 70% completions against the Falcons.

Having said that, Falcons got a ton of stops as Peyton pointed out, Guido.....

Falcons defense did play great and pressured Brees. On the flipside, for all the pressure the Falcons got on Brees, they could not get his facial birthmark on the damn ground........Bierrman missed Brees twice and Brian Williams and several others were "grabbing air" when they were supposed to be sacking Drew Brees. Usually, if we whiff on the sack, Brees completes the damn pass - give the man credit......

AsylumGuido · 12-29-2010, 06:09 PM

(12-29-2010 05:50 PM)g-dawg Wrote: I'm convinced that Brees is always gonna have 300+yds and 70% completions against the Falcons.

Having said that, Falcons got a ton of stops as Peyton pointed out, Guido.....

Falcons defense did play great and pressured Brees. On the flipside, for all the pressure the Falcons got on Brees, they could not get his facial birthmark on the damn ground........Bierrman missed Brees twice and Brian Williams and several others were "grabbing air" when they were supposed to be sacking Drew Brees. Usually, if we whiff on the sack, Brees completes the damn pass - give the man credit......

Yup. I have been watching that "grabbing air" since 2006. Brees just has this eerie ability to avoid the sack, usually by stepping up into the pocket at the very last second. Don't feel like your guys failed. They simply joined good company.

**Radical** · 12-30-2010, 12:47 AM

(12-29-2010 11:59 AM)Jesus Wrote: or run misdirection with Snelling and move it to the outside
or out in the shotgun spread their D out and send Ryan up the middle.

or...
or...
or...
or...
or...

Arkansas Falcon · 12-30-2010, 08:09 AM

(12-28-2010 06:49 AM)ggp Wrote: This is the right way to look at this. Sure, we all wanted to give the Saints a good beating, but the loss will serve to sharpen the team's resolve. Who knows, maybe this loss will help us win in the play offs. Shake this off and move on. That's what champions do.

I totally agree as well.

caver50 · 12-30-2010, 12:51 PM

(12-28-2010 01:18 AM)g-dawg Wrote: Falcons will win and be razor sharp next week and will have renewed focus for the playoffs. I think when you win as many in a row as the Falcons have won the tendency is to think you might be better than you really are.

With Packers/Saints as likely wildcards we more than likely will face one of those teams again - damn good teams.

Besides, on the superstitious side, I thought the sound of beating Saints three times in one season was unlikely - I would a lot rather lose this game and beat Saints in the playoffs.......we shall see....

I'am with ya Dawg. Our birds are gonna be ill the next time we see those aints. I gotta tell you that I was out of town in the mountains and didn't get to see the game. Man I hated it, but that would have been a tough loss take (too much stress) That just fired us up and made us a tougher team that could carry us to the big game.
Heads up everybody, were moving foward.