Jump to content

falcndave

Pure Football
  • Posts

    7,261
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by falcndave

  1. 1a) As stated many times, he saw his job as trying to go out and find the types of players the coaches were asking for. In hindsight, he probably should have established his own vision for the roster and been more assertive about pursuing it (He would have either had more success or failed quicker. Either way, Falcons would be better for it.). 1b) He didn't establish himself in the eyes of the owner. He'll probably look back on it and feel he was too much of a "yes" man. I don't think bending to Julio's holdouts and such was TD's brain child. Fans put pressure on AB, AB gave TD "Falcon for life" orders. Part of a GM's job is to advise the owner. As with 1a, TD needed to establish his own vision to push back with credibility. 2) Trying to win now on too many occasions (short sided decisions). 3) Too many FO player evaluation misses in the trenches.
  2. I agree. However, if we take it on the chin from an NFC East team for the second time in three weeks, it probably won't help your campaign for sanity!
  3. Confirmation of what we already knew. AS is adaptable and will design game plans for specific opponents. You can know with 100% certainty that the route trees will have a few more vertical branches in week 3 than they did vs. the front seven of the Eagles and Bucs. The Giants are 27th in total defensive DVOA and show equal weakness against both the run and the pass. On the other hand, the Giants offense ranks well above the Falcons (probably due mostly the QB rushes), so in week 3 AS will probably choose to come out on the attack. That is the way it is with adaptable HCs. You can pretty much predict the offensive approach based on the upcoming opponent. That will take some getting used to. Dan Quinn was taken from the Carroll school of coaching. That school says, "We are going to do what we do all the time. We are not going to try to outsmart you. We are going to beat you with talent and execution."
  4. Agreed. Free runners in the A gaps are typically about communication. Seemed like there was an ant trail through the A gaps on Sunday. The Falcons were taking the "See no evil" approach to OL assignments: If I don't look at him, he's your man!
  5. They are also coming up with the occasional big play to derail otherwise promising drives. That is reality in the NFL. Offenses have to win about fifty percent of snaps to sustain drives (if you call plays like AS, about 70%). Defenses can kill a drive with a single negative play.
  6. That is where I was going with the point about AS not using MR's strengths. Ryan is typically in the top 25% of the league in ADOT and yards per completion. I know that is a fundamental scheme difference between AS and DK, but the deep outs and deep crossing patterns were always used by Shanahan. AS seems to fully embrace that the OL is broken and that MR is going to have to channel his inner Joey Harrington by dinking and dunking the ball out of his hand as quickly as possible on every snap. I'll be interested to see if he attacks deeper when we get to a team with an average DL. He very much believes your game plan should account for your opponents strengths and weaknesses. Ryan's arm strength isn't a part of the equation. He never possessed a cannon. He does deliver timing routes with good anticipation and he still has zip in the 20-30 yard range. It is a complete mystery to me when AS doesn't seem to have those throws in his play book.
  7. No argument. My point is despite the deficiencies, they created enough negative plays that they managed to get off the field multiple possessions while trailing in both games. You can easily argue that 21 of the Bucs points this week were given up by the Falcons offense. The defense still gave up over 20. I think our difference is that I think a mixed bag is good enough. To many times we lost big leads last season because the defense couldn't make one play to get off the field for entire quarters. I think that is looking better in 2021.
  8. Thanks. I actually had it as a negative at first. The more I thought about it, they actually do show a lot of emotion on the field after good plays and bad. It is just when they are off the field that they come across as, well, let's just say "more reflective." It take it as a sign they are focused on the x's and o's more than trying to get "up" for the next game. It fits the coach.
  9. These are a sample of my thoughts through week two Readers Digest Version: Detailed thoughts below The Good Ryan grasping AS concepts Pitts participating in running game AS creating opponent specific game plans Defense getting off field in key situations Even keel attitude The Bad Ryan's accuracy (occasional lack thereof) Members of the OL are not on the same page Punter. Any questions? AS is not fully using Ryan's strengths yet Extra travel is not great in a season where the team has two new systems to learn and study Text Wall Version! 1) Objectively Good things: Ryan showed a glimmer of hope that he can do some of the new things AS is asking of him. The two-point conversion and somehow using subtle pocket movement to avoid free runners straight up the A gaps, more than once, are examples. Kyle Pitts showed up much better as a blocker than I had anticipated. He's not dominating anyone, but he shows an understanding of where he needs to be and successfully obstructed desired pursuit angles by defenders on a few occasions. AS showed that he is adaptable and attacks different teams in different ways. That was an assumption, and week two confirmed it for me. It is as simple as looking at the box score from the two weeks. Run/Pass percentage and pass distribution were very different. If you entered the game as an eligible receiver in week two, you probably got targeted. The receiving section of the box score was more Shanahan-esque in week two vs. the Bucs, whereas it was more 2020 Tennessee Titans-esque in week one. The Defense has shown the ability to create negatives plays and to get off the field consistently enough on third down to provide comeback potential in both games. I think the defense, despite the anticipated scheme lapses and lack of natural pure rush talent, is good enough once the offense starts doing its part. 2) Objectively Bad things: Accounting for poor protection at times, Ryan simply was not as consistently accurate as I've come to expect. There were a handful of makeable throws where he simply did not put the ball where it appeared he intended to put it. I'm not worried...yet, but I am not going to pretend I didn't see it. The middle of the OL is not on the same page at times. Getting physically beat is going to happen. Having three guys on three different plans after the snap is a problem. The punter position needs to be addressed. 3) More Subjective Concerns: I think MR is showing adaptability to the new things AS is trying to get him to do, but I'm not sure that AS is truly accommodating Ryan's strengths into his play calling so far. That may be by design. It is natural to work on concepts early and expand the playbook as the season progresses. The thing I think I think Ryan is especially good at is delivering intermediate to deep out routes on-time and on-target. The team is in new systems on both sides of the ball. Meeting room time and film study is extra important. After week 1, the team was in a situation where they had sixteen games left in the season at would be traveling for ten of those sixteen games. Fortunately, most of those games are short trips, but the lost time to travel would be easier to absorb if established systems were in place. 5) More Subjective Good Things: The team is portraying a bit of a Laissez-faire attitude so far. Under Quinn, that would have been objectively bad. Quinn relied on emotion to be the catalyst that fueled on-field results. While "ho hum" attitudes can be distasteful to fans, whether things are going good or bad, I think it is the right approach with a team that is experiencing growing pains with new systems on both sides of the ball. I'll hope to see the overall attitude continue when improved results start to show up. I prefer a team that is based on solid fundamentals and less dependent on real-good-feel-good feelings to get results. I'm sure better results will start to show up. I'm still confident in 7-9 wins. While the result was not competitive in week two, there were long stretches of the game where the team showed the ability to compete. That was encouraging to me.
  10. I agree with is a 7-9 win team. Oddly, that has been my estimate all off season. People can't see the forest for the trees sometimes. If you take a scoreboard/box score view of the world, those are a couple of pretty scruffy looking trees! I always ask: What is the upside potential? This team's upside potential was basically the third quarter of the Bucs game. I think it will be a few more weeks until we get to the point where we can realistically string 4 similar quarters together. So, I think the teams up-side potential is consistently moving the ball on offense, forcing three-and-outs on defense through occasional negative plays...but still making the occasional head scratching error on either side of the ball.
  11. Going forward, personnel groupings and formation possibilities will not have the traditionally accepted correlations most people have come to expect. In other words, you can't assume the Falcons are in a short yardage package just because we run out 3 TEs. When Hurst and Pitts are two of the TEs, and with Davis and Patterson both being good route runners...we can effective run power or stretch you out four wide. Be careful who you sub in lest the Falcons go up-tempo and trap them on the field for a while (see first two drives vs. Eagles).
  12. I can agree that AS is not maximizing the skills of guys on the roster. He has leaned more toward working on new concepts he wants them to develop at this point. I'm working on a post I'm labeling "Objective Homerism." I'll expand on this note there. As far as the current roster, it is what it is. He's the had coach and it is literally his job to make that group competitive. I don't see how throwing them under the by publicly announcing they are not good enough would by helpful toward building a competitive roster. I think it would have quite the opposite impact.
  13. I think the Falcons were competitive in week 2. I think the real gap is between TAFT's expectations and what they actually said. The team is good enough to win in now, but they can't put all the eggs in the 2021 basket. They have to think holistically. So far, what I see is 100% in line with that. I think many in TAFT assigned a meaning to their words that was never intended.
  14. I'm sure Ryan will be benched. He may not even be allowed to practice. That will obviously fix everything.
  15. Basically home field advantage with a slight "ugly score" +.5 adder to get more money on the Falcons. Looks like typical Vegas "we see this as a toss up, but most fans will think the Falcons played more poorly than they really did in Week 2" line.
  16. We will. As Ragone said in his PC, the QB is coached to go where the defense allows you to go (I hate that, but is seems to be the philosophy of the new regime). Last week the Eagles sat back in zone and offered a lot of checkdowns. This week, the Bucs will blitz at a much higher rate than the Eagles. That will naturally leave some open spaces downfield on occasions where the OL does pass block for a few seconds.
  17. It's hard to see it any other way considering the most recent data point. However, a slightly longer term (about 5 regular season games) view shows this offense scoring plenty of points on the Bucs with a similarly deficient OL and an even worse running game. While I think AS will be more run heavy by nature than DK, he can't be any worse at play-calling overall. As long as we don't help the Bucs as well as we helped the Eagles, I think we can score 4 times.
  18. Well, it was a bunch of snaps in a short period of time as AS was trying to wear down the defense. Guess that is a double edged sword.
  19. No need. I generally agree with you that AS is willing to be intentionally deceptive. He has said so himself on a couple of occasions (actually said he's not interested in giving away information). I like my coaches that way. You'll never see Belichick worrying about how many media friends he's making. That said, I can't tell you if Dalman is better or not. Should we get behind, the Tampa front is going to make whoever is standing in that position look like a clown.
  20. You can see the current roster on the website. Since your 100% sure its not Mayfield, list the top three other players you think it might be.
  21. I think it was AS's approach to ONE GAME. One of the reason he was considered a good hire is that he is adaptable and tailors the game plan each week for a specific opponent. Now, don't think I'm reassured by that. He only considered the strength of the opposing D in week one. Every pass was designed to be Joey Harrington stuff; short and quick with immediate check-down to outlets. He designed a game plan that he felt would beat the 14-17 points he expected the Eagles to score. He expected the Eagles to struggle to score points. What he failed to do was include plays that attacked the weakest link of the Eagles, their secondary. When they turned out not to be the same offense they were in 2020, it was too late to adjust. While he's adaptable at drafting a unique game plan for each week, he sticks to them religiously once a game kicks off. See the Titans last two playoff ousters as examples of this. I don't know if this week's game plan will work better without improved OL play, but I am 100% confident it will be more aggressive. He will guess that Tampa is likely to score more point than he planned for the Eagles to score in week 1. He'll plan to keep up.
  22. Okay, so Gallman and Foreman? I think it is probably mostly about the relationship between available options, overall need, and the cost/value ratio. I can't assume there was an available OG that represented an upgrade at appropriate value (you wouldn't want to spend those dollars on a very marginal upgrade...you'd want at least a partial solution). That goes back to my total assumption they would have loved to address OG, but didn't have anyone they were confident enough in to make a move in that direction. Nobody wants to take an inadequate young player with development potential off the field just to trot out an older veteran who is only marginally better. I simply assume if the guy all us as fans want was out there at solid value, they would have brought them in.
  23. Personally, I tagged RB as our biggest offensive need coming out of last year. I think many were on that page, while many also would have put OL as the bigger need. Davis and Patterson are 5m better than Ollison and whoever you pencil in at RB2 out of last year's choices. The fact that they addressed a big need that had been a glaring weakness for as long as the OL keeps me from grading them too harshly.
  24. I'm sure I can't tell you anything you don't already know. But, as long as you ask this quality of question its pretty difficult to reply with an insightful answer. We all know the FO and HC knows there is a weakness at OG. I'm sure we all have less of a true idea of the big picture than we think we do. We're inclined to equate results with intent. I'm sure they would love to address the glaring gap at OG. The obvious follow up questions is: "Why didn't they draft someone earlier?" The answer to that is "opportunity cost." They have to think beyond 2021...as much as I loathe having to admit that. If we draft an OG and he works out perfectly, as I gaze into my crystal ball I can see the first 100 posts on TATF in December of 2023 focused on: "KYLE PITTS WAS RIGHT THERE!!"
  25. Everything you said was spot on. I just want to point out that AS was the ring leader of the whimpering puppy squad. This was the game plan AS gave them. Protect the ball. Don't force it. Get the ball out quick to protect our RG. He was calling draw plays on third and long so often one of them actually worked. Ryan didn't attempt a pass over 20 yards in the air the entire game. That is on him, but it was AS calling the plays. He was scared to death of the Eagles pass rush. No wonder the guys he was supposed to lead were playing like a bunch cowering puppies. He had harped on the Eagles front and staying out of passing situations so hard, he had them cowering while they were still sitting in meeting rooms. Ryan has one of best ADoTs in the league traditionally. If Sunday's game plan is what AS wants to draw up, I have no idea why he thought Matt Ryan was a good fit for that. Shanahan runs a WCO predicated on PA off of outside zone looks. Its a darn similar base offense. When he had Ryan, Shanahan designed plays that both got the ball out quick and challenged the sticks on every freakin' play. You can do both with the skill position players we have. If you want to protect a deficient OL from certain pass situations, don't ask your QB to do his best Joey Harrington impersonation. Instead, attack the first down marker on first down...and second down. Avoid 3rd down.
×
×
  • Create New...