Phillup11

New Members
  • Content count

    90
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Phillup11


  1. IMO, I don't think 2019 Matt Ryan can operate in the ATL 2012 offense with the same efficiency.  I think Matt Ryan has lost some arm strength, not just on the deep ball, but with putting the ball in tight windows.   Koetter playbook requires more tight throws.  (Why do you think Tony G. has so many highlights making congested catches...and now Matt Ryan is caught forcing passes to TEs yet again).
    Shanahans offensive concepts are the best thing for Matt Ryan as he nears retirement.  Having a steady ground game with short passes, and the deep passing game is predicated on PA passes which gives matt ryan time in the pocket to "wind-up" and throw deep.  


  2. When DQ was hired, he had the option to hire Koetter.  He didn't have any OC "friends" to bring along automatically.  He wasn't even close to Shanahan like that, he just reached out to him.  He could have easily kept Koetter in for the familiarity to Ryan over the reason he hired shanahan, which was because of his scheme.  Well now, we settled and hired Koetter again NOW because of his familiarity to Matt Ryan.  

    TBH, we should have kept Sark.  He was slowly getting into his groove and at least he kept the same scheme.  Ryan is starting to get too old and weak arm to be changing schemes repeatedly now.  I feel Shanahans scheme is best for the current version of Matt Ryan.  


  3. One thing to note was that Shanahans "long play calls" worked for the Falcons.  Especially with the shift-to-motion in the plays.  That is something that was slowly reduced with Sark, and now likely all together with Dirk coming in.  It was a tremendous advantage that put us in favorable matchups by moving receivers around.  

    People talk about being unpredictable with the playcalls, but I feel like shortening up the playcalls is a direct correlation to predictability. 


  4. The defense has been trending more man coverage in recent years.  I'm sure DQ loves to play man, BUT it was only feasible when all of our defenders were healthy.  I remember seeing an article months ago mentioning that because we lost many starters on defense, we started playing more zone coverage again.  I also remember an article breaking down the defensive tendencies and it showed more snaps of man coverage in games with all starters healthy by a wide margin than games where 2 or more starters on defense were out.  (Man coverage is also what got us a 20 point lead against NE in the superbowl AND lost us the lead because the defense got tired from it)  


  5.  

    Disadvantage

    Shift to motion preplay - This was a major advantage that Shanahan discovered and when we hired Sark, it was one of the key elements mention that should carry over on offense.  I'm not sure how adept Koetter is at using shifts/motions on offense.  It allowed Matt Ryan to read the field.  I also noticed that there is a coorelation between the creativity of the shift/motion and the length of playcall, which is why Shanahan had super long playcalls, and when they were shortened when sark came in our shifts/motions were less creative.  Koetter likely has even shorter playcalls, considering Matt Ryan could frequently audible at the LOS and the no-huddles. I feel that aspect of our scheme will completely dissapear.

     

    Run to set up the pass - I'm sure Koetter will come in saying "We will run 1st", but every coach says that.  The differences are in the games when the run doesn't work the 1st time and it becomes abandoned.  That's why Koetter has a pass happy offense.  He never comes into a game planning to pass 80%, it just ends that way when the run game fails to start.  As a result, the impact of our play-action will be reduced.

     

    Predictability, becoming less reliant on the run actually makes you unpredictable.  If you understand football, you know that when a team is in a passing situation, it is much easier to predict the play than when they have a chance to run it.  Simply because if the defense is running a blitz, they know the offense will have to get the ball out quick.  Defenses also know what plays to expect in order to beat their coverage.  If your main gripe against Sark was about him being predictable, don't expect much to change this year.

     

    Advantages

    Passing attack.  When we get in offensive passing shootouts, (which is often what happens when we play the saints) Koetter is well suited for those battles.  

     

    Experience - Obviously has years of experience as an OC against NFL defenses.  

     

     


  6. 47 minutes ago, Beast-N-Da-Sheetz said:

    Biggest mistake Quinn made was hiring Sark to run Shannys scheme. That's like getting with a new girl and she asks you to act just like her ex boyfriend who left her. I'm still wondering what a true Sark offense looks like.

    Yes and getting a new OC this year to do the same thing might put us in the same position.  I was worried we would do this when KS left, after seeing his old teams fail to reproduce his offensive magic after he left.  


  7. 1 hour ago, ⚡Slumerican⚡ said:

    Are you thinking we won't find a oc that's better than Sark? I know u liked the guy, but experience wise he was green.. Very green, I honestly believe any OC that we hire with experience is gonna make this team shine.. I may be wrong, and I'll admit it if I am.. But imo Sark wasn't very good at all

    Technically, he has 2 years of OC experience now... With an experienced OC by his side in Gregg Knapp who is capable of providing input to our  game-plan prep and in-game adjustments.  


  8. 28 minutes ago, ⚡Slumerican⚡ said:

    Knapp was a qb coach that had to be brought in just to decipher defensive schemes to sark.. Knapp did his job, Sark didn't.. Quinn obviously sees value in Knapp 

    Knapp is a prior experienced OC working on the staff with Sark.   No reason for coaches to not communicate with each other for the sake of the team.  Either Knapp didn't do his job or isn't as good either.  He should be gone too.  We brought in Scott Pioli to help our GM - Dimitroff - with evaluating talent in the draft and FA.  He is present to help  the acting GM make the most informed decision.  Same for Knapp / Sark. Knapp is the one in the booth analyzing opponents tendencies during the game so Sark can get an idea of what/when to call a play.  Knapp is also involved in practice, it isn't like he is super busy coaching up MVP Matt Ryan.  He is available for game-planning input as well.  In the end, Sark is the guy in charge, but Knapp either didn't help our or didn't have any better ideas.  


  9. 1 hour ago, k-train said:

    IMO it really seemed like the offense finished well overall in spite of Sark, not really because of him.

    He wasn't horrible, but his play calling left a lot to be desired over several large chunks throughout the season & that made his inexperience at this level very obvious.

    When you are given the weapons he had access to, there is basically no room for error, and there really shouldn't be any reason for an offense like that to be so inconsistent.

    A competent OC with some NFL experience should've easily had us in the top 5, but Sark couldn't do that.

    Yes, the o-line was abysmal thanks in part to injuries, but a good coach would figure out a way to adjust in order to make it less on an issue & to mask their deficiencies... but Sark couldn't do that either.

    Pretty sure other NFL teams know who he is... a guy who was out of his element... and I'd be kinda surprised if he gets another shot coaching in the NFL.

    But wouldn't one figure that having Greg Knapp on staff would help Sark with the offense, including the play-calling.  IMO, if Greg Knapp had any better input, he would have been put in charge earlier in the season but that hasn't happened either.  Those kind of details make me think that "average tierr" coordinators might have had the same outcomes, and unless we get an upper tier coordinator this season we will be in the same situation if similar injury circumstances occur in 2019. 


  10. Dirk Koetter is predictable.  Its all passing attack with him.  We won't have a run game and as a result, no PA passes.  That is what had our offense using creativity and being unpredictable with Shanahan.  Folks say Sark isn't creative and is predictable, but if switching to Koetters scheme will have us the that same hole as we will be one-dimensional with a Oline thats not so great.  


  11. 6 hours ago, Falconsin2012 said:

    Sark is a like a rhythm QB.  He is great when on script.  But good defenses force you off script and make you adjust on the fly.  He struggles in that environment

    Isn't that what Gregg Knapp was hired for.  To help Sark make adjustments.  Its worth considering that Gregg Knapp is present during the game and halftime to provide input on suggestions.  He is the one in the booth keeping track of the defenses tendencies and relaying them to Sark.  Makes me wonder how people want to replace Sark with Knapp.  


  12. 7 hours ago, vafalconfan said:

    Tandy there is no doubt that played into it..here is my issue. It's 4th and 1 and we have the ball at midfield. Our O line has been overwhelmed all day by the Ravens defense. Sark calls a running play with Ito Smith into the left side of the line.. we all remember the Raven's linemen waiting in our backfield to crush our undersized running back. That did it for me and I think for some of the Falcon players as well..those guys knew that play call had zero chance! The players are saying all the right things in public, but they know they are not being put in the best position to succeed.

    Hate to break it to ya, but Matt Ryan audibled that play.  


  13. 9 hours ago, E. T. said:

    If I had to nitpick anything from this game, some of the Falcons playcalling/execution on 3rd down wasn't good enough. Cardinals clearly knew Julio was getting the ball with both WRs blocking. Drop obviously doesn't help, but you can't be this predictable and expect to succeed.

     
    8 Stark makes a great point here!
     

    I still cringe when writers associate predictability with play success.  Run plays and screens are the main plays prone to predictability.  Because a QB has multiple options to pass a ball, pass plays can't be predictable.  This is a rub route in man coverage.  Good play call for man coverage.  The CB was pressed and played tight so it was a tough pass.  Normally, in the slot the CB isn't pressed on Julio like that, so considering that the OC isn't calling plays based on psychic abilities and instead on tendencies, this is extremely nitpicky.  


  14. 3 hours ago, jlrfalcon said:

    Sark's biggest problem is his inability to adjust - note how our offense can never come back in games because the offense cannot make adjustments when an opposing defense is beating us a certain way.  Note that it took almost 2/3 season for him to realize that Schraeder was not performing like his prior years and replace him.  Note that our offense played well through week 9 against the Redskins but when opposing defenses learned to play us differently, our offense collapsed until maybe this past week or 2 (way too long to adjust to the new coverage).  Note that it took almost a whole season for Sark to supposedly adjust the playbook from the way Shanahan had it.

    Perhaps we can find an OC who is a quick adapter and that this offense can quickly adapt back to its 2016 levels.

    You would think having a person like Gregg Knapp helping, would point out some adjustments Sark needs to make.  I mean during the 1st half of the season, people were crediting the offense on Knapp rather than Sark.  Some people even want him to be the next OC, but he is on our staff today and is experienced and capable of providing suggestions to Sark.  Just like we have many prior GMs on our staff, we have prior Coordinators too, so it appears NOBODY in the coaching staff has an idea what to do.  


  15. 10 hours ago, Falconsin2012 said:

    Believe me, I admitted to eating Crow on Sark after the Redskins game.  He finally put together a string of excellent games.  I was happy for him.  And all blame should absolutely not fall on him.  Can’t account for injuries...but I don’t think he is good at adjusting in game.  When forced off script we tend to stay on script.  And he is too pass happy.  Even when the run game struggles, keep trying.  It helps a depleted OL.  But we run 34% of the time.

     

    Bottom line, Falcons have not eclipsed 20 points since November 4th.  It’s just not working which is the fault of more than Sark

    If you rewatch the Packers game last week, you'll see we ran the ball often and efficiently that game.  He was not pass happy.  It helped our depleted Oline.  Bonus:  Not a single toss play was called.   Interestingly,  a sizable chunk of fans are upset that he refuses to abandon the run.  Me thinks people just attach themselves to any reason to criticize sark.  

    Schwarzwald likes this

  16. 2 hours ago, k-train said:

    Other than the fact they stayed with the outside zone run game, Kyle & Sark's playbook are very different. Sark absolutely loves tossing the ball for some reason, hardly ever uses a FB & we barely ever use play action with him calling the plays (even when the run game is working). Shanahan was constantly shifting guys around at the line to keep opposing Ds guessing, used play action a ton, and had designed roll outs for Ryan a bunch.

    I know there was a lot of talk when Sark came in about keeping things the same, but an actual look at the two should make it crystal clear that the two offenses have a ton of differences.

    In this AJC article from last year, DQ even says they can't just dust off the old playbook, tell the players "Here ya go" & six months later everything's great.

    “How do you take something that’s really good and try to get it better?” Quinn said. “It’s the same exact challenge that we do the players that are playing and we go, ‘OK, now you go to here.’ It’s not like we just going to play that out, it’s not like we just going to playbook-up and dust it off and six months later, we’re ready to go again. We’re always about what could be better.”

    I also don't think it's likely that is the same verbiage that Shanahan used, which was kinda long & complicated. I actually know they don't because in that same article in the AJC last year they were talking about how Sark immediately changed it to try to simplify things.

    “(Sarkisian) made it a little more friendly, verbiage-wise, to shorten things so we can get to the line and play faster, dictate to the defense,” Schaub said. “… He’s really dove headfirst into it and started fast with knowing what we’re doing.”

    A coordinators tendency to run a specific play doesn't mean the playbooks are different.  Shanahan had toss plays in his playbook too.  I would also like to point out how outdated that reasoning is, Sark ran ZERO toss plays vs Green Bay.  We don't have a FB worth using honestly and if you noticed offenses like the Rams and cheifs, using heavy packages to run the ball is becoming obsolete.  We also don't have a good FB to justify running those packages.  Shanahan did not use PA every game, because each game is different.  Your memories of Shanahan are based on the "perfect" games where the Oline was clicking and run game allowed him to be "unpredictable".  Check out his games where those weren't the cases.  

    Geneaut likes this