+- 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: Falcons: ESPN: With weapons, Koetter can succeed (/Thread-Falcons-ESPN-With-weapons-Koetter-can-succeed)
RE: ESPN: With weapons, Koetter can succeed - Aftermath - 01-15-2012 11:23 PM
(01-15-2012 11:12 PM)RnB Wrote: Thanks for the article.that might be the longest and most detailed non-reply I have ever seen, kudos to you sir. How do I +1?
As for this other nonsense: negative, pessimistic douchebaggery. I am not even going to honor this negative bullshit with a reply. Its so transparent that anyone with sense can see right through it.
RE: ESPN: With weapons, Koetter can succeed - Paulitik - 01-16-2012 01:53 AM
(01-15-2012 10:25 PM)cooperbh Wrote: That Jags team was 7th in total offense and 6th in scoring for the season. You can't just cherry pick stats from one game. Why not acknowledge that the Jags' offense still hung 24 points on the Steelers' defense, which was #1 in the league that year?
It was a good offense the year before. It was #10. Then it collapsed under Koettner's watch after his first year.
I wasn't cherry picking, the offense didn't show up in the big game. I was demonstrating his offensive numbers in literally the only important NFL game of this guys career that he was able to win.
This is about playoff success, hiring Koetter doesn't tell me that's what we want.
RE: ESPN: With weapons, Koetter can succeed - Aftermath - 01-16-2012 02:32 AM
(01-15-2012 11:16 PM)cooperbh Wrote: I must have missed that 3-5 year window slamming shut on the Packers, Steelers, Ravens, Eagles and Colts over the last decade. So the Saints are in rebuilding mode next year, I take it? This last season was already Payton's sixth year.
really? Packers just started to be a good team. Ravens didn't do much of anything from 2001-2007. Eagles had a few years with McNabb then blew up their roster and had an influx of talent. Steelers were up and down with Cower until 2005 until BB and a great D took them all the way, now that D is aging and needs more talent. Colts had 8 years where they were competitive in the post season, In rebuilding mode now. Saints started their run with Drew Brees and are now realizing that they need more talent on D to be successful in the post season. Saints aren't in complete rebuilding mode, and in truth they probably wont be able to do much at all with all of the money they will have invested in the offense in 2012. It takes a lot to get everything together at the right time (coaching, talent, staff, GM etc...) to make a run, sometimes its luck and sometimes it is skill, maybe we need a bit of both.
For every team you mentioned there are another 3 teams that have kept true to the 3-5 year wondow
Panthers: 2002-2005
Buccaneers: 1997-2002
Falcons: 2002-2005
Cardinals: 2007-2007
Rams: 1999-2004
Eagles: 200-2004
Seahawks: 2003-2007
Bears: 2005-2007
Jets: 2009-2011 (potentially)
Vikings 1997-2000
Titans: 1999-2003
Steelers: 1993-1997
Chargers: 2006-2009
Colts: 2004-2009
Cowboys: 2005-2009
And there are plenty more, obviously what you dont see in that list are the dynasty teams (Pats, 49ers(80s,90s), Cowboys(90s), Colts, possibly Saints and Pakcers) that were good for a long time but honestly I don't put us in the same league as them. What each team had was a HOF QB to build around, Ryan is good, but not that good. The rest of the teams in the league without a HOF QB have to hope that they can make everything come together all at the right time to be relevant. We are entering year 4, we shall see how it goes.
I'm not saying that we cant put two good teams together back to back like the eagles have done over the last decade, I hope that we can. Just that the best shot for us to win it all is now, it wont last forever, for all we know we could have already missed it with this group of players/coaches. Lets hope not, SB in 2012!
RE: ESPN: With weapons, Koetter can succeed - cooperbh - 01-16-2012 02:41 AM
(01-16-2012 02:32 AM)Aftermath Wrote: really? Packers just started to be a good team.
13 playoff appearances against only two losing seasons in the last 20 years is "just started to be a good team?" Sorry, I'm not going to attempt a football conversation with someone who clearly just started watching the sport a year or so ago.
RE: ESPN: With weapons, Koetter can succeed - Aftermath - 01-16-2012 03:00 AM
(01-16-2012 02:41 AM)cooperbh Wrote: 13 playoff appearances against only two losing seasons in the last 20 years is "just started to be a good team?"Oh, I get it, this Packers team is the same one that played throughout the 1990's and the first half of the 2000's. My bad, didn't know I was having a discussion with a mental zero. My mistake, I should have highlighted the difference between the entire history of a team and the team as it exists in its current state. My fault chief.
(01-16-2012 02:41 AM)cooperbh Wrote: Sorry, I'm not going to attempt a football conversationYeah, that is probably for the best, don't want you to hurt yourself.
RE: ESPN: With weapons, Koetter can succeed - cooperbh - 01-16-2012 03:17 AM
(01-16-2012 03:00 AM)Aftermath Wrote: Oh, I get it, this Packers team is the same one that played throughout the 1990's and the first half of the 2000's.
Of course not. The point is that they have been perrenial contenders through multiple coaching/player changes over those two decades and not subject to your little "window" theory. Just like the other teams I listed.
RE: ESPN: With weapons, Koetter can succeed - Aftermath - 01-16-2012 03:30 AM
(01-16-2012 03:17 AM)cooperbh Wrote: Of course not. The point is that they have been perrenial contenders through multiple coaching/player changes over those two decades and not subject to your little "window" theory. Just like the other teams I listed.
I addressed that point , which you chose to ignore, in the previous posts. perennial contenders, or dynasties, are typically built around a HOF QB or a HOF coach, perhaps even both, I don't think that the Falcons have either. Ryan cant carry this team in down years when we have a lack of talent. At best we can hope for two consecutive teams built around different QBs, like the Eagles. But Mike Smith is no Andy Reid.
The Packers were built around Favre for 15 years and he made them perrenial contenders, often times with not much talent. Ryan is no Bret Favre. Everything about the Falcons points to a 3-5 year window of potential success and not towards perennial contender/dynasty built to last.
RE: ESPN: With weapons, Koetter can succeed - FullMetalFalcon23 - 01-16-2012 02:14 PM
(01-16-2012 03:30 AM)Aftermath Wrote: I addressed that point , which you chose to ignore, in the previous posts. perennial contenders, or dynasties, are typically built around a HOF QB or a HOF coach, perhaps even both, I don't think that the Falcons have either. Ryan cant carry this team in down years when we have a lack of talent. At best we can hope for two consecutive teams built around different QBs, like the Eagles. But Mike Smith is no Andy Reid.
The Packers were built around Favre for 15 years and he made them perrenial contenders, often times with not much talent. Ryan is no Bret Favre. Everything about the Falcons points to a 3-5 year window of potential success and not towards perennial contender/dynasty built to last.
Dude you realise Favre had to become that guy. It didn't just happen. We traded him away because of numerous factors but Brett was no innocent lamb sent to slaughter. He was a problem the team didn't want in the sense that they felt he truly was that bad. It's one of Atlanta's mistakes in the past. He is to us what Brees is to San Diego.
We won't make the same mistake with Matt. I do often wonder if Smith is that Franchise Dynasty HC. But I have no queries regarding Matt being a dynasty type QB so long as we can put it around him properly. Brett didn't start making those around him great until he was older. Much like most great QBsit takes time it takes being humbled to become a true of leader of men who can inspire with his play. Some have instant success others it comes later. Atlanta as long as we can maintain organisational continuity for a long time and have a healthy Matt and Julio are gonna have a very long window of opportunity. Julio's selection was a long term plan with instant benefits. The next thing is getting the Franchise left tackle and tail back over the next few years. Turner is a good fix but in terms of long term those guys always come from the draft.
RE: ESPN: With weapons, Koetter can succeed - Radical - 01-16-2012 06:59 PM
Packers just started to be a good team?
Packers
2007 - 13-3, NFC Championship
2008 - 6-10
2009 - 11-5
2010 - 10-6, Superbowl Win
2011- 15-1
Eagles
2000 - 11-5, Divisional Game
2001 - 11-5, Conference Championship
2002 - 12-4, Divisional Game
2003 - 12-4, Conference Championship
2004 - 13-3, Superbowl Loss
2005 - 6-10
2006 - 10-6, Divisional Game
2007 - 8-8
2008 - 9-6-1, Conference Game
2009 - 11-5, Wildcard
2010 - 10-6, Wildcard
Steelers
2001 - 13-3, Conference Championship
2002 - 10-5-1, Divisional Game
2003 - 6-10
2004 - 15-1, Conference Championship
2005 - 11-5, Superbowl Win
2006 - 8-8
2007 - 10-6, Wildcard
2008 - 12-4, Superbowl Win
2009 - 9-7
2010 - 12-4, Superbowl Loss
2011 - 12-4, Wildcard
Colts
1999 - 13-3, Divisional Game
2000 - 10-6, Wildcard
2001 - 6-10
2002 - 10-6, Wildcard
2003 - 12-4, Conference Championship
2004 - 12-4, Divisional Game
2005 - 14-2, Divisional Game
2006 - 12-4, Superbowl Win
2007 - 13-3, Divisional Game
2008 - 12-4, Wildcard
2009 - 14-2, Superbowl Loss
2010 - 10-6, Wildcard
2011 - 2-14, No Peyton Manning
RE: ESPN: With weapons, Koetter can succeed - FullMetalFalcon23 - 01-16-2012 07:06 PM
(01-16-2012 06:59 PM)Radical Wrote: Packers just started to be a good team?
Packers
2007 - 13-3, NFC Championship
2008 - 6-10
2009 - 11-5
2010 - 10-6, Superbowl Win
2011- 15-1
Eagles
2000 - 11-5, Divisional Game
2001 - 11-5, Conference Championship
2002 - 12-4, Divisional Game
2003 - 12-4, Conference Championship
2004 - 13-3, Superbowl Loss
2005 - 6-10
2006 - 10-6, Divisional Game
2007 - 8-8
2008 - 9-6-1, Conference Game
2009 - 11-5, Wildcard
2010 - 10-6, Wildcard
Steelers
2001 - 13-3, Conference Championship
2002 - 10-5-1, Divisional Game
2003 - 6-10
2004 - 15-1, Conference Championship
2005 - 11-5, Superbowl Win
2006 - 8-8
2007 - 10-6, Wildcard
2008 - 12-4, Superbowl Win
2009 - 9-7
2010 - 12-4, Superbowl Loss
2011 - 12-4, Wildcard
Colts
1999 - 13-3, Divisional Game
2000 - 10-6, Wildcard
2001 - 6-10
2002 - 10-6, Wildcard
2003 - 12-4, Conference Championship
2004 - 12-4, Divisional Game
2005 - 14-2, Divisional Game
2006 - 12-4, Superbowl Win
2007 - 13-3, Divisional Game
2008 - 12-4, Wildcard
2009 - 14-2, Superbowl Loss
2010 - 10-6, Wildcard
2011 - 2-14, No Peyton Manning
Sorry Rad, I missed what you are getting at here. Are you trying to say the Packers haven't been as good as they are made out to be yet. As though, they could end up that way but are currently being over heralded? Or are you saying that they are already good.