Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'Mularkey'.
https://www.profootb...otebook-week-5/ Green Bay @ Atlanta | 1st Q, 11:13 | 1st & 10 . Outcome: . Julio Jones gains 17 yards to push the Falcons into the Green Bay red zone on their opening scoring drive. . Why it worked: . Well-executed misdirection plays are a sight to behold and when they click they usually lead to big gains, just like this one. End-arounds are designed to get outside and when combined with a fake to the opposite side of the field against an aggressive defense, they are a very powerful tool for an offense. You will often see an end-around work because the backside defender, in this case Erik Walden, crashes hard to the inside opening up the backside of the play. Walden only takes a couple of false steps on this play, but the Falcons are still able to make him pay and get to the edge. . Atlanta runs this play very cleverly, incorporating a fake into the pitch to Jones who runs his end around straight from the trips bunch to the right side of the formation with fullback Ovie Mughelli leading him from the inside of the bunch. Rookie running back Jacquizz Rodgers appears to be headed on a pitch off right end but Jones cuts in front and takes the pitch out to the left instead. With only those two false steps from Walden as he looks to step down and pursue the play right, the left side has opened up and with Roddy White running Tramon Williams off down the field from his left wideout spot, Jones has half the field to himself. From there it’s simply a case of running to space and picking up the yardage that the Packers have surrendered. Much-troubled left tackle Sam Baker doesn’t make a block on Desmond Bishop but his positioning prevents Bishop from taking an angle to have any chance of stopping Jones short of the first down. This play was well-executed and only excellent pursuit in the secondary cut it off from getting in to the endzone. Back in 08 MM offense was full of trick plays like theese. I remember a game vs Tampa, where Ryan faked the handoff to Ovie, faked the pitch to the left to Norwood looked downfield and hit wide open Norwood in the flats (I think for a huge gain)...I was like whooooaaaaa .
This year it's become increasingly clear that we're in danger of being left behind a large portion of the league in terms of offensive production and scheme. A vocal majority of the board has been very clear about their distaste for Mike Mularkey's offense, however most of those comments are of the "Open it up!!!" nature...criticism that doesn't accomplish anything in terms of actual solutions and, instead, sounds like bellyaching for bellyaching's sake. In reality, there are very clear problems with our offense that amount to more than "opening it up." Specifically, those problems relate to how our coaching staff is actually underutilizing the talent gap we have over most teams in the league. The first two weeks of the season have really hammered home what our problem is. We have failed to adapt to the "modern" NFL be adopting a more spread-esque offensive philosophy that would allow our considerable talent advantage to reap rewards. Instead of approaching offense similar to the way that the more explosive, less talented teams are approaching it, we've opted to continue to same old "grind it out" style that makes us easy to defend and, more destructively, easy to predict. Two teams in particular are laying the blue print for how our offense should look on a more consistent basis: the New England Patriots and the Buffalo Bills. In 4 combined games, the Pats and Bills have put up 152 point utilizing a variety of spread principles that have left their opponents incapable of slowing their offense. By utilizing 4 and 5 wide formations, these teams are spreading defenses thin and causing mismatches all over the field. Buffalo specifically, is doing this with a fraction of the talent we have on this team. They are the poster children for the new NFL....a pass happy, high yardage NFL seeking explosive passing plays and keeping defenses on their heels. Why aren't we adopting similar strategies? There is very little downside to doing more of this sort of thing. Instead of giving away crucial first downs with the exact same counter that we run on a majority of our first downs, we aren't we seeking to use slants and drags to pick up 3-5 yards at a clip? Why do we feel like Michael Turner's carries will magically become more efficient once he crosses the 18 carry threshold? I understand the value of wearing defenses down, but other running backs with similar or inferior skill sets are being used in a more efficient manner and keeping their legs fresh. These principles (spreading the field, not giving away downs, increased efficiency) were noticeably present in Matt's no huddle attack on Sunday. Obviously, this is our best shot at beating the better teams in the league and reaching the full potential this year has. Matt is a smart enough decision maker and capable enough QB to eliminate the "take what the defense gives us" approach and, instead, adopt an approach more conducive to dictating terms to the defense. Organisms that fail to adapt to changing environment die off, as their tired attributes render them unsuitable to continually compete with innovative entities. If we do not begin to adopt a more up tempo, spread out offensive strategy, we are going to be left in the dust by the Buffalos, the New Englands and the Detroits. The Packers, the Eagles and the Saints. We need to be aggressive, not passive. We need to adapt.