TDW’s 2010 Season Post-Mortem

[Polar Bear Jones]

I agree with most of your analysis. The thing with us still being a ground and pound team is that we were built primarily to be young QB friendly. I think even TD and the staff have been surprised with Matt's progression. We sacrificed explosiveness for steadiness and consistency which being a long time fan I loved. Now we must transition by increasing explosiveness and I think that must be done through the draft. I would not be surprised to see us go for some more boom or bust guys to try and really get a high impact rookie.

[Peyton]

Great Stuff, as always.

When you are winning, as the Falcons were this year, it's easy to overlook glaring deficiencies and even pretend they don't exist.

That is what happened with Falcons fans this year.

The funny thing is.....the glaring deficiencies played a minor role in the playoff loss.

In a way...I am kind of glad the Falcons got destroyed instead of losing a close game.

I think if the Falcons had lost a close game, TD and company might be inclined to do less this offseason.

With the royal ass kicking that the Falcons took, there are a number of different things that will be addressed, and some of them might not have been if not for the ugliness that went down in the Georgia Dome.

[TheDirtyWord]

(01-26-2011 02:37 PM)phocis850 Wrote:  I didn't see anything regarding coaching. What is your take on that TDW?

I think we're for the most part OK in that area.

I can understand those who tire of Mularkey because he is quite conservative. But it's tough to fault turning the ball over 17 times while running 1097 plays from scrimmage while putting up 26 PPG. The first number ranked 2nd in the NFL behind New England...the second number was the best in the NFL.

However, I'd like for our offense to be more about what we do do on offense versus what we don't do (turn the ball over). I think Ryan has been coached to be conservative, but that could be because past White, his collection of WR's is below mediocre. Turner's YPC was his lowest in his 3 seasons in Atlanta, but I do think that some part of that is because defenses could cheat up a step or two knowing the Falcons weren't a big play offense. So I see that being a priority in the off-season to bring that element back to the offense. Do I think Mularkey is capable of doing that...yes. But did his approach frustrate me at times this year? Yes.

As for defense...I think they made real strides. You've got to remember that:

Corey Peters - rookie
Biermann - 1st year starter
Lofton - 3rd year
Weatherspoon - rookie
Nicholas - 2nd year starter
Grimes - 2nd year starter with breakout campaign
DeCoud - 2nd year starter
Moore - 1st year starter

...there is a simply alot of young talent on this defense and it's growing up together, but I just named 8 starters and this unit ranked 16th in the NFL. And in their final 7 regular season games gave up 18 points only once.

Did they get buzzsawed by GB? Yes, but I think that's a case of a top calibre NFL QB playing about as well as he could play. I saw on Playbook that we decided to deploy a spy on Rodgers which certainly in retrospect looks like a tactical blunder. But this is a unit that is growing up nicely and I would hesitate to change direction. That said, with that continuity, experience and cohesiveness, the burden will be on Van Gorder to be more creative with his looks, schemes and blitz packages because his players should be able to handle that type of ratcheting up.

[Swift Is a Die Hard]

I have no clue why so many people are set on Kyle Rudolph, TE ? do these people watch college football week in and out or just go to mock draft sites and check well he is 1 rated TE falling into our slot . Kyle Rudolph is nothing more then a younger Justin Peele ..

Mularkey needs to cut the TE set out completely unless its 2 TE formations and we want to run play action out of it . We can rather sit back and wait to see what happens with a guy like Owen Daniels...(NOT WASTE A 1ST round pick on a TE )
Its just a dumb move.

Id rather go SPREAD.. 4 WR SETS

WR1 Roddy
WR 2 Jenkins
WR3-Malcom Floyd ( FA )
SLOT-Harry Douglas

Draft another play making wr. 3rd round

Draft should look like this ..Whatever TD takes he goes

1) C , RB, WR ....(Im thinking TD makes a real bold move in draft and I would not be surmised if he goes after the local kid in AJ GREEN )

2) C or best RB

3) whatever he didnt get in 2nd

Im also thinking TD brings in a VETERAN PASS RUSHER..

If he drafts a Pass Rusher early he has given up on Bierman and Sidbury
If he brings in a veteran pass rusher he can sell to them there will both see playing time still

[TeamPlayer1]

In sports the best motivation to improve is a good ass whooping!

[TheDirtyWord]

(01-26-2011 03:19 PM)Swift Is a Die Hard Wrote:  I have no clue why so many people are set on Kyle Rudolph, TE ? do these people watch college football week in and out or just go to mock draft sites and check well he is 1 rated TE falling into our slot . Kyle Rudolph is nothing more then a younger Justin Peele ..

Really? Just another version of Peelle? Notre Dame gets alot of TV time...I've seen him play in maybe 4-5 games over his career. I noticed him - he's a good player and he fits a need.

Quote:Mularkey needs to cut the TE set out completely unless its 2 TE formations and we want to run play action out of it . We can rather sit back and wait to see what happens with a guy like Owen Daniels...(NOT WASTE A 1ST round pick on a TE )
Its just a dumb move.


Id rather go SPREAD.. 4 WR SETS

WR1 Roddy
WR 2 Jenkins
WR3-Malcom Floyd ( FA )
SLOT-Harry Douglas

Draft another play making wr. 3rd round

Fact is, we ran 2 TE sets about 50% of the time this season...if not more. That we're not changing. And you don't run 2 TE sets with 4 WR sets. And if you only have 1 TE on the field, then you probably have your All-Pro FB in the game on quite a few of those plays.

So I think 4 WR sets are at best a 10-15% of the time formation. The idea behind Rudolph is that my confidence in Harry Douglas as a viable WR3 is waning and with Floyd on the market, I see some team overpaying him to be a #1 WR after he showed quite well in that role while VJ was out.

I don't necessarily disagree with a WR in the 3rd round even on top of a TE.

[TheDirtyWord]

(01-26-2011 03:09 PM)Peyton Wrote:  Great Stuff, as always.

When you are winning, as the Falcons were this year, it's easy to overlook glaring deficiencies and even pretend they don't exist.

That is what happened with Falcons fans this year.

The funny thing is.....the glaring deficiencies played a minor role in the playoff loss.

In a way...I am kind of glad the Falcons got destroyed instead of losing a close game.

I think if the Falcons had lost a close game, TD and company might be inclined to do less this offseason.

With the royal ass kicking that the Falcons took, there are a number of different things that will be addressed, and some of them might not have been if not for the ugliness that went down in the Georgia Dome.

I agree with this...a 24-21 loss would have seemed like a break here, a break there and we're hosting the Bears and perhaps on our way to Dallas. However, I do not think the Falcons will look at it as in 'their deficiencies', but rather how they can make Matt Ryan, Aaron Rodgers like...

That comes down to weapons. What is scary about the Packers is that next year, they get perhaps one of the top three TE threats back from injury in Jermichael Finley. When a QB has those types of weapons at his disposal and they were in full display on 1/15...it's tough to say to your QB -"well Michael blocks REALLY well!!!".

[caver50]

I would like to see Franks in there also, but this year when Williams went down, all we had was owens which was a complete disaster. Personally I don't want to see Owens in ther this year. So, if Franks is in there and if he or one of the corners goes down,
who do we have??