+- 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 - Radical - 09-17-2011 04:39 PM
(09-17-2011 03:39 PM)takeitdown Wrote: 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.
Even in Pittsburgh, he worked with sub-optimal QBs his whole time there. It wasn't like he could fall back on an elite Pittsburgh defense either. The first time Maddox started playing though, we saw two 1,300 yard WRs, and the 4th best YPA in the league.
With the Bills and the Dolphins, I have to give him a pass. The Bills have been such a clusterfuck of failure for years now. No talent across the board. They had an ancient Eric Moulds, Willis McGahee, and... no one(including at QB). Even then, they went on a 6 game streak of 30+ points a game, with two games of over 40 points. Their GM at the time, even after Mularkey split with them(he wasn't fired), said that Mularkey's offensive system was good.
With Miami, they again had no offensive talent. Daunte Culpepper was supposed to be the savior, but he lasted a whole 4 games, just to be replaced with the single weakest dink and dunk QB to ever step onto the field, Joey Harrington. Oh yeah, they had Cleo Lemon too. Ronnie Brown spent most of the year hurt. What can I say though, Marty Booker was the star WR on that team... Yeah, fuck that noise.
So I'm just not seeing the validity of the complaints. Lack of versatility and a good QB in Pittsburgh, a mess with the Bills(but an impressive streak of offense during the season), a clusterfuck of fail with the Dolphins, and just one good year with some balanced offensive talent with the Falcons and 08. In 2010, we weren't explosive, but ruthlessly efficient and still a Top 5 scoring offense.
RE: Interesting Article on Musgrave's "Predictable" offense in Minnesota - Radical - 09-17-2011 04:47 PM
(09-17-2011 04:05 PM)takeitdown Wrote: 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.
Which again, goes back to my "slow receivers" bit. We no longer had receiving options that were explosive(outside of White), and we couldn't stretch the field laterally. We've yet to have a deep threat(outside of Roddy, but even he isn't a burner), so we've had to rely on YAC to get our explosion. Douglas did it with his slot exploits and reverse plays, and Norwood did it with his outside runs, screen plays, and dump-offs that he exploded with. Once we lacked that, you got what you saw in 2010. Efficient, but not balanced or explosive.
As for your last bit, I can't say I agree at all with that line. Matt dropped off quite a bit in the last two games, but he had +9 YPA in 3 out of his last 5 games, and +7.5 in all but one. His completion percentage and overall success did drop off quickly in those last two games though. I think those are more outliers though, but I honestly cannot recall in detail enough about those games to provide much insight.
RE: Interesting Article on Musgrave's "Predictable" offense in Minnesota - Radical - 09-17-2011 04:49 PM
(09-17-2011 04:37 PM)takeitdown Wrote: 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.
I agree with this. Unless our line continues to play like it did against Chicago, then there's no reason our offense shouldn't open up. We lack a back that had the type of explosion Norwood did, but Quizz is hardly someone to discount.
RE: Interesting Article on Musgrave's "Predictable" offense in Minnesota - phocis850 - 09-17-2011 05:23 PM
(09-17-2011 10:24 AM)Radical Wrote: 2002, the last time he had a team that has even decent amounts of talent on offense, was a year his QB had a Top 5 YPA and two 1,300 yard WRs.
I'm gouging my eyes out...
Tell Unkie Mike at Thanksgiving dinner that we all don't like him.
RE: Interesting Article on Musgrave's "Predictable" offense in Minnesota - takeitdown - 09-17-2011 08:41 PM
Radical,
This
http://www.philadelphiaeagles.com/multimedia/videos/Film-Room-Attacking-The-Falcons-D/0d0d9745-a970-4d48-8a40-900ff2086b50
is what I'm speaking about. It's a good example of how route design can get guys open (which we unfortunately saw last week) and it's using guys who aren't fast (Earl Bennet, Roy Williams) and one fast guy.
I don't see us doing this type of thing well...attacking a matchup. This has been my issue w Mularkey for awhile, and he doesn't have to be a top top guy at it, but we need to see more of it.
RE: Interesting Article on Musgrave's "Predictable" offense in Minnesota - Anomaly - 09-17-2011 09:00 PM
(09-17-2011 08:41 PM)takeitdown Wrote: Radical,Very good video. I agree with you, I can't recall seeing our receivers ever doing that.
This
http://www.philadelphiaeagles.com/multimedia/videos/Film-Room-Attacking-The-Falcons-D/0d0d9745-a970-4d48-8a40-900ff2086b50
is what I'm speaking about. It's a good example of how route design can get guys open (which we unfortunately saw last week) and it's using guys who aren't fast (Earl Bennet, Roy Williams) and one fast guy.
I don't see us doing this type of thing well...attacking a matchup. This has been my issue w Mularkey for awhile, and he doesn't have to be a top top guy at it, but we need to see more of it.
RE: Interesting Article on Musgrave's "Predictable" offense in Minnesota - Radical - 09-17-2011 10:06 PM
I can think of numerous examples of using match-ups and route combinations to get someone open. Post pattern to Roddy White for a TD against the 49ers in 2009, where they used Gonzalez to pull down the SS while Roddy went deep across the formation. In 2010 against the Bengals, we got a big YAC play where they sent Roddy in motion across the formation and he ran a drag while the rest of the receivers pulled the defenders in the opposite direction. Against the Cardinals, we used Tony Gonzalez to clear out the coverage in the middle of the field for White to come in almost uncovered for a TD.
The examples are there, and those are just a few of the "highlight reel" ones. I'm sure there's numerous other examples in almost every game, some successful and some not, of using route combinations and overloading coverage in order to beat the defense.
RE: Interesting Article on Musgrave's "Predictable" offense in Minnesota - illmusic - 09-17-2011 11:18 PM
yeah the Tony Gonzo example is the main one that I thought when I was about to reply...we used that a lot in the redzone...I'm not seeing how ya don't notice the route combos we use out there...the commentators will even talk about it when we use it.
RE: Interesting Article on Musgrave's "Predictable" offense in Minnesota - RnB - 09-18-2011 01:09 AM
Radical and takeitdown have turned a sub-par attack article on our former QB coach (and by extension, our OC) into an awesome thread. Sending some rep your way gentlemen.
I agree with Radical here, especially considering the amount of attention "explosive plays" have been given this offseason. While it is fairly evident that the FO and Coaches are feeling some pressure to produce a more explosive offense, I think it will take more than a superstar receiver opposite Roddy to get that done.
Firing MM? Firing Mike Smith? Firing TD? How far, exactly, are you willing to see our team change to get more "explosive" plays, consistently?
Personally, I like what we did in 2010. I enjoy watching that style of football. It is effective. I cant say I am ready to see our team rebuild to get more 20+ yard plays. We have a fresh season ahead of us and I am excited that the season has finally started. If we cant duplicate our success from last season (barring injury) while trying to be more explosive, I might be ready to see a regime change. It is just way too early to be thinking about it now. Especially after playing a tough away game, versus a serious defense, in our season opener.
RE: Interesting Article on Musgrave's "Predictable" offense in Minnesota - Beef - 09-18-2011 02:07 AM
I don't think it's as much about our route combo's as it is about our in-game adjustments when referring to MM's aptitude.
I feel that we have the plays and the combo's in the playbook and we've practiced them, but I don't think MM can read defenses and call proper counters to set defenses. It almost seems like he has specific plays lined up in order and he wants to run them in that order no matter what the opposing defense is doing. And when a mistake happens or we don't execute, he panics and can't figure out what to call next so he just goes vanilla and digs himself into a hole. And especially if there's a sack, throw-away, or near turnover. It's like he immediately places a choke-collar on Matt for the next series or two and limits the plays to very intermediate or even extremely basic levels which ultimately are predictible and a lot easier to defend.
As I've said here many times before, when my 11 year old daughter who's sitting next to me watching the game goes, "Daddy, we're going to run Turner up the middle left on this play." or "Daddy, he's rolling out again, going to throw the ball out of bounds." and she's correct about 90% of the time, then there's a problem with the play calling scheme.
And the only thing I can attribute that to, is that MM can't figure out what complex or technical play would work best against the defense that's setting themselves so instead he just plays the percentage game and hopes they guess pass when we run and run when we pass. The problem there is, when you call yourself a run-first ball-control offense and you run on 1st down about 90% of the time, you're handicapping yourself and giving away downs right off the bat because the defense is playing the percentage game too and the odds are drastically in their favor.
Screens, play-action, sweeps, H-back dumps, and quick slants to the slot need to be done on 1st and 2nd downs as much or even more than Turner up the gut. But for some reason, it's about a 9:1 ratio in favor of Turner off-tackle. All those plays can help a struggling O-line get some relief from the bull-rush. You keep DL's guessing at that point and it's easier to keep the pocket clean for longer so those deep routes can open up. But that's just not what MM does. He makes it easy for defenses and our OL gets worn down and it's a snowball effect.