+- Atlanta Falcons Talk (http://atlantafalconstalk.com)
+-- Forum: Falcons Fans Message Boards (/Forum-Falcons-Fans-Message-Boards)
+--- Forum: Talk About The Falcons & So Much More (/Forum-Talk-About-The-Falcons-So-Much-More)
+--- Thread: NFL: Interesting Article on Musgrave's "Predictable" offense in Minnesota (/Thread-NFL-Interesting-Article-on-Musgrave-s-Predictable-offense-in-Minnesota)
RE: Interesting Article on Musgrave's "Predictable" offense in Minnesota - illmusic - 09-17-2011 12:25 PM
i guess people are really going to compare the talent Mularkey had in Pittsburg to the talent he's had in Atlanta up until this year? how about we give him a 16 game season with more than one deep weapon...how about we give him a 16 game season without an old, knee-less Brian Finneran entering into the starting line-up during any injury...
RE: Interesting Article on Musgrave's "Predictable" offense in Minnesota - Radical - 09-17-2011 01:08 PM
(09-17-2011 11:48 AM)Peyton Wrote: A person can make the "Mularkey isn't the problem" argument, and a person can make the "Ryan isn't the problem" argument, but a person can't make both of those arguments.
The offense is regressing and one of those guys is the reason why.
The difference between 2008 and 2010 is the following.
Todd Weiner vs. Sam Baker
Jerious Norwood vs. no one
Harry Douglas vs. hobbled Harry Douglas
Now, you still have Baker, arguably the worst left tackle in the NFL. You've replaced Norwood with Quizz. While he looks decent so far, he wasn't the ridiculous speedster Norwood was. You have Harry Douglas back in form, but you've replaced a very good RG in Harvey Dahl with first time starter Reynolds and our signal caller on the offensive line with a 2nd year, first time starter Joe Hawley.
Against the Bears, what killed us was getting behind early because our defense crapped the bed, our offensive line failing miserably to protect Ryan against just a four man rush. If you're getting that kind of pressure with just your down linemen, you'll kill any offense in the league easily. Heck, that's what shut down the greatest offense of all time in Superbowl 42.
RE: Interesting Article on Musgrave's "Predictable" offense in Minnesota - takeitdown - 09-17-2011 03:12 PM
(09-17-2011 11:48 AM)Peyton Wrote: A person can make the "Mularkey isn't the problem" argument, and a person can make the "Ryan isn't the problem" argument, but a person can't make both of those arguments.
The offense is regressing and one of those guys is the reason why.
You could technically argue it's the OL and have a point, but I agree with your larger point.
I think it's a bit of both. I think most of the blame falls on Mularkey (for unsophisticated route combos and scheming) but there are probably a few QBs who could carry out Mularkey's offense better.
I think they're just mismatched. Mularkey's offense seems like it would thrive on a good deep ball thrower who can put it up to guys running go routes, as well as drill in the curls. Ryan would excel with a more spread system in which his mind is the most important element, and his demonstrated ability to adjust to a D and get rid of the ball in less than 2 seconds is highlighted...and since the routes are more multiple, it's far more likely one of those guys is running free or open in the 2 seconds.
I don't think either are elite, but I feel I can nearly guarantee neither will become so with each other.
RE: Interesting Article on Musgrave's "Predictable" offense in Minnesota - Radical - 09-17-2011 03:18 PM
(09-17-2011 03:12 PM)takeitdown Wrote: Mularkey (for unsophisticated route combos and scheming)
And this is what I'm talking about. People keep rattling off this general complaint in one thousand different ways, but no one has been able to elaborate on it.
RE: Interesting Article on Musgrave's "Predictable" offense in Minnesota - takeitdown - 09-17-2011 03:33 PM
(09-17-2011 03:18 PM)Radical Wrote: And this is what I'm talking about. People keep rattling off this general complaint in one thousand different ways, but no one has been able to elaborate on it.
How do you want it elaborated? It's mentioned by defenses we play against, analysts, etc. Since I'm not going to have these at hand, we'll go into less hearsay.
Also, and most simply, we very seldom have "free runners" in space. Our QB has to fit it into tight spots on pretty much every play, whereas in most other games (including against us) there are 2 to 5 gimme passes. These don't come about by accident. You have to target a particular player (like the SS) and say you're going to make him make a choice about a route, and you send 2 at him, making him choose.
We run very few clear outs and then drags. We don't do much in the middle of the field at all with our WRs. I'm sure he runs the standard shallow drag with the square in behind it, but, frankly, I've seldom seen it...and it's a basic basic concept.
Part of the problem is the ridiculously short internal clock on our offense due to either OL or conservative nature...but if you don't throw double move routes and slow developing combo routes in there sometimes, you make it too easy on the D and don't give them any reason to second guess themselves.
I could diagnose each route and show why others have more diversity, etc. But the easiest thing is simply to say: Other teams have guys running more open, and then it falls on our WRs or Mularkey's routes. I think our WRs are of a talent level that we know they can get open, so it leaves Mularkey. Said another way, how do you think Sean Payton or McDaniels, or 10 other coordinators would do with Roddy, Julio, HD, and Gonzales? If you think they'd be open a lot and exploiting weaknesses on D, then you agree.
I'm not even as enamored with our pass catching talent as some, as I believe a quick feature RB who's a threat to run and catch, and seam stretching TE are pretty critical in the modern NFL, but I feel our routes make it WAY too easy on the DBs.
RE: Interesting Article on Musgrave's "Predictable" offense in Minnesota - takeitdown - 09-17-2011 03:39 PM
As an add on: When a coordinator has been dinged in 3 or 4 places for not stretching a defense, it's usually not a conspiracy. Mularkey's defense is always "I have a deep route called." I don't dispute that. I don't have coaches tape, so I can't see it, but I'm sure he does have one. But if your deep guys are consistently covered, from year to year and from team to team, it means you have a problem with your deep routes.
It means, likely, your deep routes are generally a 7,8,9 and that's it. It means it's unlikely you have double move routes out there or deep deep ins.
If your guys are never open deep, and you have legit WR talent...whose fault does it become?
And btw, I don't mean 50 yards deep, I just mean 25 yard down there.
RE: Interesting Article on Musgrave's "Predictable" offense in Minnesota - Radical - 09-17-2011 03:57 PM
(09-17-2011 01:08 PM)Radical Wrote: Jerious Norwood vs. no one
Harry Douglas vs. hobbled Harry Douglas
Let me just expand on this.
# of Explosive Plays in 2008
Jerious Norwood
20-39 yards - 7
40+ yards - 4
So 11 explosive plays, not even counting the multiple 10-19 yard plays that he had, some of which going for touchdowns.
Harry Douglas
20-39 yards - 5
40+ yards - 2
7 explosive plays, not including a few end-around plays that went for 10+ yards, including a TD or two.
18 explosive plays, including six 40+ yard gains. You don't think that wouldn't make a huge difference in our offense? Let's just say that the 7 by Douglas, and half of the ones by Jerious were added to Matt Ryan's 20+/40+ stat for 2010. Where would that leave him?
That would give him 44 20+ yard plays. That would be good for 11th in the league, right ahead of Peyton Manning. 40+ yard plays? 10, tied for 5th with guys like Aaron Rodgers and Drew Brees. Throw in a halfway decent LT in Todd Weiner over Sam Baker, an absolutely horrible all around LT, and you have some serious improvement in our offense.
RE: Interesting Article on Musgrave's "Predictable" offense in Minnesota - takeitdown - 09-17-2011 04:05 PM
(09-17-2011 03:57 PM)Radical Wrote: Let me just expand on this.
# of Explosive Plays in 2008
Jerious Norwood
20-39 yards - 7
40+ yards - 4
So 11 explosive plays, not even counting the multiple 10-19 yard plays that he had, some of which going for touchdowns.
Harry Douglas
20-39 yards - 5
40+ yards - 2
7 explosive plays, not including a few end-around plays that went for 10+ yards, including a TD or two.
18 explosive plays, including six 40+ yard gains. You don't think that wouldn't make a huge difference in our offense? Let's just say that the 7 by Douglas, and half of the ones by Jerious were added to Matt Ryan's 20+/40+ stat for 2010. Where would that leave him?
That would give him 44 20+ yard plays. That would be good for 11th in the league, right ahead of Peyton Manning. 40+ yard plays? 10, tied for 5th with guys like Aaron Rodgers and Drew Brees. Throw in a halfway decent LT in Todd Weiner over Sam Baker, an absolutely horrible all around LT, and you have some serious improvement in our offense.
I agree losing those two hurt, and know the reasons you're mentioning. It's also why I think a legit back who's quick and can catch is critical. You give teams something to worry about in the short field so the intermediate opens up.
I don't disagree with you that those guys helped. My question is...without those guys, shouldn't we have seen more deep routes thrown than we did (they dropped by nearly 1/2 in terms of percentage of balls thrown that were deep) and shouldn't we have still been able to get guys open?
I'm a huge proponent of the "more threats you have, the more each will be open" theory, so I know losing two components hurt. But was it enough to make us a bottom 5 to 10 ypa team? Or did teams just adjust to Mularkey and he didn't adjust back? Remember, the last 4 or 5 games of even the first season the passing game started to constrict.
RE: Interesting Article on Musgrave's "Predictable" offense in Minnesota - Radical - 09-17-2011 04:22 PM
(09-17-2011 03:33 PM)takeitdown Wrote: Also, and most simply, we very seldom have "free runners" in space. Our QB has to fit it into tight spots on pretty much every play, whereas in most other games (including against us) there are 2 to 5 gimme passes. These don't come about by accident. You have to target a particular player (like the SS) and say you're going to make him make a choice about a route, and you send 2 at him, making him choose.
We run very few clear outs and then drags. We don't do much in the middle of the field at all with our WRs. I'm sure he runs the standard shallow drag with the square in behind it, but, frankly, I've seldom seen it...and it's a basic basic concept.
Part of the problem is the ridiculously short internal clock on our offense due to either OL or conservative nature...but if you don't throw double move routes and slow developing combo routes in there sometimes, you make it too easy on the D and don't give them any reason to second guess themselves.
I could diagnose each route and show why others have more diversity, etc. But the easiest thing is simply to say: Other teams have guys running more open, and then it falls on our WRs or Mularkey's routes. I think our WRs are of a talent level that we know they can get open, so it leaves Mularkey. Said another way, how do you think Sean Payton or McDaniels, or 10 other coordinators would do with Roddy, Julio, HD, and Gonzales? If you think they'd be open a lot and exploiting weaknesses on D, then you agree.
I'm not even as enamored with our pass catching talent as some, as I believe a quick feature RB who's a threat to run and catch, and seam stretching TE are pretty critical in the modern NFL, but I feel our routes make it WAY too easy on the DBs.
First off, the free runners in space issue. Your first problem is you have to look at who we've had the past few years as receivers. Outside of Roddy White, we haven't had a SINGLE receiving option that ran anything short of a 4.5 40. Michael Jenkins was slow, Finneran is god-awful slow, Gonzalez is very slow, Snelling is very slow, etc. I'm not saying that 40 times makes the player, but the difference in speed is staggering some of the time. Jenkins may have been the 2nd fastest receiving option available, and that's pretty scary really. With Roddy, the guy has routinely had coverage rolled his direction, and even double teamed. Hard to get into space when the back 7/8 is keying in on you all day.
Now, this leads back to two different points. One, our offensive line is poor when it comes to pass blocking. Okay on a good day, but all around it hasn't been great. The worst offender here is Sam Baker, who has been absolutely atrocious as a blind side protector, no matter what metric you use. Come slow receivers with poor pass protection, how do you attack down the field? How do you really attack to begin with? The answer comes in the form of a question? What are the hardest routes to defend in football? The answer is timing routes, especially stop routes; outs, curls, hitches, comebacks, etc.
I can't continue to address each specific instance, but I can point out examples of everything you mentioned that have gone for big plays in this regime. 2010 Arizona, 2009 Tampa Bay 2, Bengals 2010, etc. are a few that contain plays you mention. Concerning our offense with Julio Jones, it's too soon to judge. The good news is that we saw four 20+ yard plays already, more than we saw last year on numerous occasions, including some deeper routes to Tony Gonzalez. This coming against a team that excels in limiting those types of plays. I don't think we'll see the same poor overall results though we saw against Chicago.
RE: Interesting Article on Musgrave's "Predictable" offense in Minnesota - takeitdown - 09-17-2011 04:37 PM
(09-17-2011 04:22 PM)Radical Wrote: First off, the free runners in space issue. Your first problem is you have to look at who we've had the past few years as receivers. Outside of Roddy White, we haven't had a SINGLE receiving option that ran anything short of a 4.5 40. Michael Jenkins was slow, Finneran is god-awful slow, Gonzalez is very slow, Snelling is very slow, etc. I'm not saying that 40 times makes the player, but the difference in speed is staggering some of the time. Jenkins may have been the 2nd fastest receiving option available, and that's pretty scary really. With Roddy, the guy has routinely had coverage rolled his direction, and even double teamed. Hard to get into space when the back 7/8 is keying in on you all day.
Now, this leads back to two different points. One, our offensive line is poor when it comes to pass blocking. Okay on a good day, but all around it hasn't been great. The worst offender here is Sam Baker, who has been absolutely atrocious as a blind side protector, no matter what metric you use. Come slow receivers with poor pass protection, how do you attack down the field? How do you really attack to begin with? The answer comes in the form of a question? What are the hardest routes to defend in football? The answer is timing routes, especially stop routes; outs, curls, hitches, comebacks, etc.
I can't continue to address each specific instance, but I can point out examples of everything you mentioned that have gone for big plays in this regime. 2010 Arizona, 2009 Tampa Bay 2, Bengals 2010, etc. are a few that contain plays you mention. Concerning our offense with Julio Jones, it's too soon to judge. The good news is that we saw four 20+ yard plays already, more than we saw last year on numerous occasions, including some deeper routes to Tony Gonzalez. This coming against a team that excels in limiting those types of plays. I don't think we'll see the same poor overall results though we saw against Chicago.
Just so we're on the same page...I agree we've needed more talent. Jenkins is actually quite fast (4.39) but he's not at all sudden, so his speed really never counted.
I guess you're saying: If Mularkey doesn't get it done this year, with Roddy, Julio, HD, Gonzales and Quizz/Snelling THEN we'll know something.
The problem with any of these arguments is you can always come up with a few counterexamples. I'm speaking of the entire body of work. The other problem is I can say it's the OC, and you say it's the QB, and we're never really going to get to who actually isn't doing what.
What I will say is certain guys are known for complex route combos that get people open (Payton is a good example) and Mularkey simply isn't. We seldom confuse a defense, and defenses say this "we know what they're going to do, and that's what they did." kind of quotes. That's fine, but sometimes you need to confuse that safety.
I also know we don't run a lot of these things because we run routes that eject the ball in 2 seconds, and that prohibits you from doing some of these things. I'm a big believer that even if it's not your absolute strength...you have to take a couple of those chances to keep a D honest.
A good example is basketball. I wasn't great going left (and it turned out being a big weakness.) Even though I wasn't great at going left, I had to 20% of the time or so...just to keep the defense honest when I went right. Technically, I wasn't playing to my strength, but what I was doing was opening up my strength. If you're too focused on your own strengths, you telegraph what you're doing. It sometimes pays to be less efficient on certain plays (do a double move slow developing route even if there's a higher chance of sack) in order to open up the rest of your strengths (DBs can't bite on the first move because they know the second is in there as an option so the intermediate game opens up). I think Mularkey plays too much to strengths...so much so that he decreases them. It's a variation of Nash equilibrium in economics. I've seen it in businesses I consulted for, and I see it on teams. It's easy to think "I'll identify what I do best, and do that" but sometimes you have to do some of what you don't do best, to keep the competitors honest.