Pure Football
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


About JerseyNo12

  • Rank
    Veteran Falcon
  • Birthday 08/11/1990

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

9,951 profile views
  1. What if the Falcons play like they did against the Redskins, which is frankly a better team?
  2. I agree. I have to remind myself that people, especially during and immediately after games, are just frustrated and venting their emotions. I think the mods realize that and generally let it slide as long as people aren't personally attacking or threatening others. Having seen it for so long now, it just makes me laugh because of how melodramatic guys get over this stuff. The only comments that bother me are those that essentially amount to libel--going after someone's character or who they are as a person. Granted, there are some who repeatedly post the same negative nonsense over and over again, and I usually ignore them and hope others do too so that their threads and posts get buried quickly. There should be a standard of conduct, and there are always gonna be those who consistently teeter on that boundary.
  3. I get what you're saying and coaches are also responsible for making sure the proper message gets heard. That being said, those players are grown men and professionals. They should know better than most that there is no such thing as "gimmies" in the NFL.
  4. No need to apologize. I'm 100% with you on this!
  5. That has more to do with discipline. Smitty was conservative to a fault. Those Falcons teams rarely beat themselves. However, those teams just lacked the tenacity we've seen from DQ's teams.
  6. So it seems. If this is true, then the coaching staff, starting with Dan Quinn, has to do some self-evaluation. They shouls be trying to win every game regardless of conference.
  7. I don't care about the fans. Fans will always talk trash. But I'm more irritated that professionals essentially acted like fans. That's unacceptable. I agree that if the Falcons had played with the same energy and focus as the three games prior, they do run away with the game. It shouldn't have been close, given the skill level of the players we have. That's what makes it so frustrating, because as professionals you expect the players and coaches not to underestimate any opponent regardless of record or whatever is going on.
  8. Some of you keep blaming the coaches, but DeVondre unequivocally stated that loss was on the players, and I'll take his word for it. He said adjustments were made, but the players took the Browns for granted (like MANY of you did and continue to do). They "didn't come out with the same energy" as in weeks prior. Ryan, a little more vaguely, essentially echoed those same thoughts. This will hopefully be a learning experience for the whole team not to take anything for granted--health, other supposedly bad teams, etc... I'm confident they will and I wouldn't be surprised if the Falcons win every remaining game in the regular season. They know what they're capable of, they just have to be consistent.
  9. As much as I don't like it, today's loss wasn't really all that surprising. It started off good in 2015 (3-1 against the then lowly AFC South), but then it's been trending downward ever since (2-2 in 2016; 1-3 in 2017). Truth is, the Falcons can afford to lose games against AFC teams. Those losses have a minimal effect on the standings in the NFC race. That being said, given their current record, they can probably only afford to lose one more game (preferably to the Ravens) to keep their playoff hopes alive. Granted, it is the Browns the Falcons just lost to and that alone is enough to send many of you to the ledge. However, if the Falcons are to lose in the remaining half of the season, it's better that it's to the Browns as opposed to, say, Green Bay. Some of you probably believe now that since they just lost to the Browns, the Falcons won't win another game this season. There's no good reason to believe that. DQ's record against the NFC has consistently been stellar, and that will be the key in this half of the season.
  10. "Suck for Luck Colts" lol. Nice assessment OP. Getting Debo back will be a boon for the defense. It seems as though the depth issue that many were complaining about earlier in the season is no longer a problem. Gotta credit DQ for sticking to his guns when everyone was clamoring for him and TD to sign veteran depth, although getting Irvin was a solid and sensible move because Irvin knows DQ's defense from their days in Seattle. That transition should be buttery smooth. Can't wait for the second half of the season. We're basically back at 0-0. Just gotta take it one game at a time. We handle our business and the rest will fall into place. Provided the team remains relatively healthy, there isn't a team left on the schedule we can't beat, and that includes New Orleans.
  11. Jerry Rice's records are gonna stand for a long time.
  12. Yes. I don't know (and this isn't directed specifically at you) how this idea that Sark is running a different system than Shanahan did got to be so widespread, but it's a lie. The whole reason Sark was hired was because Quinn thought he could run Shanahan's offense, of course with his own tweaks and verbiage, but fundamentally it's the same offense Shanahan installed.
  13. It's not offensive. We expect the offense to still be able to succeed without Freeman because the Falcons have other tremendously talented players on the offense. They're still professionals. They've found ways to win despite setbacks because that's ultimately what they're paid to do. Of course, it would be easier or less daunting if all parties were present, but such is the game and life in general. The problem is people are suggesting that the offense is succeeding because Freeman is out as opposed to succeeding despite Freeman being out. Those are fundamentally different viewpoints, and it seems a vocal minority is asserting the former rather than the latter with nothing to substantiate that idea. I don't think you are making the former point (I hope not), but that's the reality. This whole thread was based on the former assertion that the offense is better off without Freeman for no other reason other than that he's injured and the offense has performed well anyway (well, insofar as passing and scoring points), which in this case is purely coincidence. That quite frankly is offensive. There are plenty of teams in years past that have been able to move the ball and score points despite an anemic rushing attack. Heck, that was us in 2012. But it eventually catches up when you can't run the football effectively.
  14. I guess the black shirt and leather jacket with upturned collars says a lot...