178 replies to this topic

[dirtybirdz10984]

but but why didnt Andy Reid take him? what did he do in college?

[Robb4242]

niels petersen, on 13 April 2012 - 04:53 AM, said:

I understand the concern about Koetter, and I do understand why some are cautious about buying into him being the right choice.

But the highlighted part, I simply cannot agree with.. Yes, their OL was good at opening holes for MJD, but good in pass protection, not by a long shot! I know Gabbert had some fault as well, as he hung on to the ball for way too long. But Jax OL had just as many problems in pass protection as we did. The only difference was, that Ryan is better at getting rid of the ball than Gabbert, which means more sacks on Gabbert but more hits on Ryan.

You point to the OL as an important factor to play the 4 verts, and that is true. But you also have to have some talent at the WR position. Koetter didn't have the shadow of talent in Jax, but he will have that here. He will also have a QB that knows when to get rid of the ball, so all of those things play in his favor. Yes, the OL is still a concern and must be fixed for us to really take off, but to say that Koetter isn't the right choice because we don't have the OL in place to go deep all the time, is a bit of a stretch IMO.

Koetter seems to be a lot more versatile than MM, but will also continue some of the things we did well under MM, so I don't buy the argument that Koetter won't have success because of our OL. I think he has more to offer than the 4 verts, and that he knows how to adjust as the game goes along. If he implements some routes for more yac, and put players in position to make a play after the catch, that will be an upgrade over MM instantly. Just because Koetter will bring the 4 verts, it doesn't mean we will keep doing it even if it isn't working. I think he knows better than that, and that he brings more to the table than that.

Just my 2 cents.

I could be wrong about the OL issue, but I do agree we've got the skill position talent to take advantage of the offense that Koetter supposedly wants to bring here, much more than Jacksonville did.  However, I've almost given up all hope that we will ever address our OL issues.  We've had serious issues along the OL since before Dimitroff was hired, but for some reason we cannot address that issue with a high draft pick or starting quality free agents.  If the ownership (and yes I think it's Mr. Blank having a big say in this) refuses to allow us to spend money to improve our OL, then bringing in an OC who wants to feature a vertical passing game just doesn't fit.  I think if I had seen some emphasis on improving the OL this offseason, like at least attempting to bring in one of the big FA's this year, then I would feel better about the Koetter hire because it would show the front office knows what we need to fix to take advantage of Koetter's schemes.  Koetter may in fact be a great OC, but I'm just not sure he will work here until ownership buys into bringing in fans with consistent winning teams rather than just flashy skill position players.

[Big Rob 64]

Robb4242, on 13 April 2012 - 02:01 PM, said:

1) ---I do agree we've got the skill position talent to take advantage of the offense that Koetter supposedly wants to bring here, much more than Jacksonville did.  

2) ---I've almost given up all hope that we will ever address our OL issues.

Agreed on both counts.

[niels petersen]

Robb4242, on 13 April 2012 - 02:01 PM, said:

I could be wrong about the OL issue, but I do agree we've got the skill position talent to take advantage of the offense that Koetter supposedly wants to bring here, much more than Jacksonville did.  However, I've almost given up all hope that we will ever address our OL issues.  We've had serious issues along the OL since before Dimitroff was hired, but for some reason we cannot address that issue with a high draft pick or starting quality free agents.  If the ownership (and yes I think it's Mr. Blank having a big say in this) refuses to allow us to spend money to improve our OL, then bringing in an OC who wants to feature a vertical passing game just doesn't fit.  I think if I had seen some emphasis on improving the OL this offseason, like at least attempting to bring in one of the big FA's this year, then I would feel better about the Koetter hire because it would show the front office knows what we need to fix to take advantage of Koetter's schemes.  Koetter may in fact be a great OC, but I'm just not sure he will work here until ownership buys into bringing in fans with consistent winning teams rather than just flashy skill position players.

I definitely want us to improve the OL as well, because that is our biggest problem on offense. I understand your point about Koetter possibly not being that successful with his deep passing game here because of the OL. But i think that Koetter was brought in to expand our offense, not change it dramatically. I think he was hired because he is capable of building on top of the things we have established with MM, while also being knowledgeable in the deep passing game and the screen game. That gives us a lot of different strings to play, and that alone will help us offensively IMO.

If we'd still have MM as our OC, I don't think the deep passing game would have improved either. Probably even regressed. So I think it is worth a shot giving Koetter an opportunity to improve our deep passing game. Even if the deep passing game he brings with him isn't as successful as it could be with a great OL, I really believe he will be a well balanced upgrade over MM, because Koetter will build on what we do well and add to our offense with screens and deep passes.

I agree with you that it is frustrating that we haven't been trying to upgrade the OL through FA or high draft picks. I think the answer is combination of two things. First, that we haven't really had any high 1st round draft picks these last few years, which is really where the most impact OL are drafted. Second, I believe that TD feels that it is generally possible to find good OL players throughout the entire draft, and history has also shown a lot of examples of that. OF course, this kind of approach results in investing in OL players through the draft is a somewhat slow process, as the OL selected in the middle rounds of the draft have to be developed first.

I think TD has his way to do things with the OL, and this team is going to try to fix the problem that way. And to be fair, it really took up to this season for it to become clear that we have serious problems on the OL. During our previous 4 years, we have had a good run blocking OL, and statistically haven't given up a lot of sacks. But that said, I completely agree with you - I'd wish we would make more of an effort to improve on the OL.

Edited by niels petersen, 15 April 2012 - 09:23 AM.

[PokerSteve]

The Falcons brass wasn't looking for a super-star offensive coordinator, they were looking for somebody that would be a good fit for Smith and his run-oriented, conservative, clock-control offensive philosophy. I think the Falcon brass believes if Mike Nolan can ramp this defense up to becoming a top-five defense this season, Koetter's offense will be good enough to get this team at least one play-off win. And of course the fact he was from Jax was the real clincher. If the defense isn't way better, doubt the Falcons are going to overcome that with a dramatic increase in offensive output with Koetter at the helm. I don't see the team scoring average increasing dramatically this season just because the game plan will include two or three more screen passes per game or a couple more go-route passes.

Edited by PokerSteve, 15 April 2012 - 02:17 PM.

[Stryka]

PokerSteve, on 15 April 2012 - 02:17 PM, said:

The Falcons brass wasn't looking for a super-star offensive coordinator, they were looking for somebody that would be a good fit for Smith and his run-oriented, conservative, clock-control offensive philosophy. I think the Falcon brass believes if Mike Nolan can ramp this defense up to becoming a top-five defense this season, Koetter's offense will be good enough to get this team at least one play-off win. And of course the fact he was from Jax was the real clincher. If the defense isn't way better, doubt the Falcons are going to overcome that with a dramatic increase in offensive output with Koetter at the helm. I don't see the team scoring average increasing dramatically this season just because the game plan will include two or three more screen passes per game or a couple more go-route passes.

I think that we dont necessarily want to be a run oriented conservative clock control offense but we want to be a more balanced offense with more big play ability.  Easy points in the NFL make you a dangerous team.  We arent dangerous because we can go up big and let teams back in as well as when we get down big, we are usually out of the game.  We need to be able to run effectively but we also need to be able to score quick.

People here are trying to minimize the impact of a good screen game.  Teams that run screens often keep defenses off balance.  Aggressive front 7s have to take another second to diagnose a play when you have a good screen game.  DEs that get up field wont be as anxious to just explode off the line.  Its also a great way to get yards when you are down in a game and the defense is trying to get to the QB.  Great offenses use the screen game to get big plays and cheap yards.  Remember we lost to the Bears and the best and most critical plays they scored on were the Screen to Hester and the screen to Forte.

[Big Rob 64]

Stryka, on 15 April 2012 - 02:26 PM, said:

I think that we dont necessarily want to be a run oriented conservative clock control offense but we want to be a more balanced offense with more big play ability.  Easy points in the NFL make you a dangerous team.  We arent dangerous because we can go up big and let teams back in as well as when we get down big, we are usually out of the game.  We need to be able to run effectively but we also need to be able to score quick.

People here are trying to minimize the impact of a good screen game.  Teams that run screens often keep defenses off balance.  Aggressive front 7s have to take another second to diagnose a play when you have a good screen game.  DEs that get up field wont be as anxious to just explode off the line.  Its also a great way to get yards when you are down in a game and the defense is trying to get to the QB.  Great offenses use the screen game to get big plays and cheap yards.  Remember we lost to the Bears and the best and most critical plays they scored on were the Screen to Hester and the screen to Forte.

Who is trying to minimize the impact of screens? But screens are not a magical cure-all. Causing a moment's hesitation in the defense will just mean Baker gets blown up a moment later.

[Falconsfan567™]

Big Rob 64, on 15 April 2012 - 10:49 PM, said:

Who is trying to minimize the impact of screens? But screens are not a magical cure-all. Causing a moment's hesitation in the defense will just mean Baker gets blown up a moment later.

I like how you completely ignored the stats I posted about the Jaguars gaining more offense yards than the Falcons in 2010. And how the Jaguars gained more yards per play than the Falcons.

[niels petersen]

Big Rob 64, on 15 April 2012 - 10:49 PM, said:

Who is trying to minimize the impact of screens? But screens are not a magical cure-all. Causing a moment's hesitation in the defense will just mean Baker gets blown up a moment later.

Split seconds of hesitation by the defense is what makes many plays work in the NFL. No, screens aren't the magic cure, but it adds another dimension to our offense that defenses must account for, and it can help the OL out if it is having problems pass protecting. Our offense last year was so predictable and that was a real problem - it cannot be a bad thing to expand our offensive qualities, and add more dimensions into the offense to become less predictable.

[cooperbh]

Big Rob 64, on 12 April 2012 - 11:10 AM, said:

I was right about why MM and BVG were bad even during our 13-3 season in 2010. In mid-season I predicted a swift and ignominious post-season exit. I pointed out specifically why they were incompetent, and those were the specific reasons they were either ushered out the door, or at least not missed.


I was proven to be right then.

I will be proven right this time as well.


And we will have wasted yet another season. The window of opportunity for a championship will close a bit. All our hopes and dreams of a championship will be put on hold for another year. And another. And then a few more.

Big Rob 64, on 12 April 2012 - 08:16 PM, said:

I hope you're right. If you are, feel free to bump this. I'll eat my words gladly.

Would you like fries with that, Miss Cleo?

Koetter's offense is currently 3rd in the league in points scored through the first quarter of the season. Top 10 in YPP. I'd say "Raider Ball" is working out pretty well in Atlanta.

[freebird310]

Yea, another epic brain fart from the Bigdooshboy .....

[metatron360]

Dang!

[Wjcorner]

To be fair, he clearly said this needs to translate into playoff success

[Da Bird is Da Word]

Y'all don't forget anything huh?

[Atlsport]

I knew from just looking at the title that this was an oldie.  lol

[falconfreak1]

the panthers d last night reminded me of the giants d from last year in the playoffs. In fact i believe the panthers got more pressure on Ryan than the giants did. Did anyone else notice a difference in the offensive performances from those two games. It appears that Koetter has atleast given Matt alot more confidence in himself. My point is who cares what his resume says he is qualified for we are winning and Ryan is the top passer in the league and i dont think that we are 4-0 with M.M. running the show and no way in **** is Matt the number passer with M.M. still running the offense. QUIT COMPLAINING

[Magic Man]

Big Rob, from what I hear, Crow goes really well with:

[Bring It]

Compared to the the pathetically BORING..........VANILLA Mularkey, Dirk Koetter is Bill Walsh, Vince Lombardi, and Joe Gibbs all rolled into one.

[Dr Long Shot]

Bring It, on 01 October 2012 - 09:27 AM, said:

Compared to the the pathetically BORING..........VANILLA Mularkey, Dirk Koetter is Bill Walsh, Vince Lombardi, and Joe Gibbs all rolled into one.

He has been far from perfect, but right you are sir. One thing that I love about both our coordinators is that they treat are veterans with respect enough to hear what they have to say and implement their ideas to the gameplan.