ATLballer Posted September 10, 2010 Share Posted September 10, 2010 The Falcons have had problems in the past with mobile QB's....Should a spy be put on Dixon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RI Falcon Posted September 10, 2010 Share Posted September 10, 2010 peterson if anyone. i want weatherspoon in coverage and i want five oh covering the middle of the field and focusing on the run. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papachaz Posted September 10, 2010 Share Posted September 10, 2010 The Falcons have had problems in the past with mobile QB's....Should a spy be put on DixonI've wondered myself if they would put a 'spy' on dixon. I would guess if they do, would it be spoon or whoever plays nickel? i'd say spoon i guess...we'll see sunday! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RI Falcon Posted September 10, 2010 Share Posted September 10, 2010 in better words, the only one im willing to give up focusing on other duties to focus on dixon would be peterson. weatherspoon and lofton are too important with other aspects of our defense Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackredfellow Posted September 10, 2010 Share Posted September 10, 2010 Isn't the MLB typically the spy in a 4-3? If so, Dixon might want to stay in the pocket. Here is what 5-0 thinks of Dennis Dixon... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattIceRyanMVP2 Posted September 10, 2010 Share Posted September 10, 2010 Lofton...Keep him spying and Dixon will wet his pants when he sees 5-0 running after him, He's lucky his pants are yellow as it is... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Falcons 'til Death Posted September 10, 2010 Share Posted September 10, 2010 If our front 4 can get in their backfield a lot this game we won't have to put a spy on him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lokifalcon55 Posted September 10, 2010 Share Posted September 10, 2010 There has been alot of talk on Sirius NFL Radio about the Falcons front 4 running a mush rush. Where the DE's do not overshoot deep as a typical speed rush, but stop short to form a pocket with the DT's in order to contain Dixon so he does not have an open lane to run. If done effectively it would cut down on the need for spying. But in a situation where they would like more pressure they may opt for a spy. The spy could be any LB or DB but it will probably be Lofton or Spoon. I would like to see a package with extra DB, put in Moore and have him slide up and spy, then chase him down and when Moore and Lofton hit him simultaneously, well, I'll just say that I hope he recovers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kiwifalcon Posted September 10, 2010 Share Posted September 10, 2010 No I think if we can contain him within the tackles I think we play him straight up.I'm pretty sure MS will have a plan to keep Dixon within the Tackles,its the running game we have to stop if we can contain Mendinhall and co this will force Dixon to beat us with his arm thats the key in my view and if we do that I'm thinking this will go along way for us to beat the a good Steelers team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karst41 Posted September 10, 2010 Share Posted September 10, 2010 No I think if we can contain him within the tackles I think we play him straight up.I'm pretty sure MS will have a plan to keep Dixon within the Tackles,its the running game we have to stop if we can contain Mendinhall and co this will force Dixon to beat us with his arm thats the key in my view and if we do that I'm thinking this will go along way for us to beat the a good Steelers team.Great Answer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.