Jump to content

The Answer To Offensive Production


USAF HART
 Share

Recommended Posts

I don't know how many times I am going to have to say this but EVERY SINGLE ISSUE on offense starts with our running backs. Every single STARTING RB in the league had at least 25+ receptions last year. Every one of them, with the exception of Michael Turner. If we want this team to turn a corner, either we need to start getting Turner to start catching screen passes or we need to bring in a back who will. Because Turner is not a threat to catch the ball, teams are loading up the LOS to stuff the run, even if we aren't dialing up a run play. This puts alot of pressure on our passing game because every defender is within 10 yards of the LOS.

Remember when Tandy posted those amazing stats saying matt Ryan averaged somewhere around 2 seconds before he had to get rid of the ball? Want to know why? Teams are playing us too close because there is no threat unless it's coming up the field via WR's or TE's. The Falcons were the most blitzed team last year, and because Turner wasn't catching passes out of the backfield, we had no answer. Most teams struggled to double Tony and Roddy, but the great teams were able to stop it. WE NEED A DUAL THREAT RUNNINGBACK! If Turner is in the game, there's no point in guarding him because he isn't getting a pass thrown his way. This frees up a defensive body to double Roddy/Tony. If Snelling is in the game, they have to worry about the pass so they can't double both Tony/Roddy.

Why is Jenkins' stats so poor? Because Matt Ryan is only averaging two seconds before releasing the ball. Now you tell me how fast you can look at 3 different targets in 2 seconds and determine who the best available target is. Given what Matt has to work with, I am shocked his INT numbers aren't higher. Most designed plays for the Falcons have either Roddy or Tony as the designated first target. They usually find themselves lined up on the same side of the field, and due to the pressure Matt can't turn his head fast enough to the other side to see if MJ is open or not. I hope this all makes sense. I'm tired, and it's my night time over here. I just got off work and i'm ready to count sheep. Before everyone goes jumping off the deep end, I don't want to trade Turner, and I still think he can contribute to this team. I SIMPLY would like to see him involved more as a dual threat running back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We didn't give Gartrell Johnson a shot at all this year. The problem is Mularkey. Put the kid in and let him show what he can do...:rolleyes:

IMO, I don't believe it's the RBs. We need a playmaker at WR and another OL to improve our pass protection. A scat back would be last on my list simply because Snelling and Mughelli were serviceable out of the backfield this year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Without question the fact that teams don't have to account for Turner as a receiver effects the TEs and WRs in the pass game.

Offensively 3 of our starting OL are FAs but assuming the OL is settled the biggest offensive need is a RB with speed who can catch passes. This RB needs to be able to take carries from Turner who is worn down by seasons end when hes gettting 375 carries

Im going to do a thread on the RBs we will consider

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gartrell Johnson is the sorry. Point blank period.

Excuse me if I read your post incorrectly, but sorry? How would you know? 10 atts for 36 yds for the year... we didn't use him at all and he has the speed and hands to be a solid scat back. All he needed was quality reps to get adjusted to the scheme and overall speed of the game, but the coaches never gave him a shot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Excuse me if I read your post incorrectly, but sorry? How would you know? 10 atts for 36 yds for the year... we didn't use him at all and he has the speed and hands to be a solid scat back. All he needs is quality reps to get adjusted to the scheme and overall speed of the game, but Mularkey never gave him a shot.

He had his shot vs carolina he just didn't do anything with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to add. I don't think he has 2 seconds to unload the ball but if it's true then doesn't that fall on the line. It's not a hidden element that our line is more successful with a run cause it's what they are better at. If we want more pocket time then we have to design the line for it. Turner in the backfield will cause more defenders to cheat up but that isn't a bad thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to add. I don't think he has 2 seconds to unload the ball but if it's true then doesn't that fall on the line. It's not a hidden element that our line is more successful with a run cause it's what they are better at. If we want more pocket time then we have to design the line for it. Turner in the backfield will cause more defenders to cheat up but that isn't a bad thing.

Its suppose to open the defense for the big play down field we just never call it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We didn't give Gartrell Johnson a shot at all this year. The problem is Mularkey. Put the kid in and let him show what he can do...:rolleyes:

IMO, I don't believe it's the RBs. We need a playmaker at WR and another OL to improve our pass protection. A scat back would be last on my list simply because Snelling and Mughelli were serviceable out of the backfield this year.

Adding another playmaker at WR will NOT change the outcome of this offense. Matt Ryan barely has enough time to look at Roddy/Tony,much less MJ12. So if you subtract MJ12, and add Vincent Jackson, it's still not going to matter because Vincent Jackson will be on the opposite side of the field, so Matt will not be able to progress through his reads like we want him to.

Without question the fact that teams don't have to account for Turner as a receiver effects the TEs and WRs in the pass game.

Offensively 3 of our starting OL are FAs but assuming the OL is settled the biggest offensive need is a RB with speed who can catch passes. This RB needs to be able to take carries from Turner who is worn down by seasons end when hes gettting 375 carries

Im going to do a thread on the RBs we will consider

Whatever you do, please do not put Locke from Kentucky or Noel Devine as RB's we may consider. Neither of those RB's will be NFL starting material capable of handling the load if Turner goes down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's all about risk vs reward. Teams can load the box and know that most likely we will run on early downs and if we dont the next option will be a 10 yrd out. The laws of averages say that eventually we wont convert and either settle for a FG or be forced to go for it on 4th dwn. The only reason teams don't blitz on every down is the fear of giving up a big play. Teams know that if you blitz us, prob the worse that will happen is a first down with Roddy or Gonzo making a great catch and we have to do that 5 times to cash in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having Turner be a reliable option outside of the run would be nice. If your statement holds true though that the D stacks the line, then in theory that opens up the pass. A quick hit to a short slant and you already have all those defenders beat.

Of course the defense stacks the line. Why else would Turner keep getting stuffed for 1-2 yard runs? Where else do all these complaints about Turner "losing steam" and "not getting it done anymore" come from? lol. The Falcons were the #1 blitzed team, and because we wanted to maintain our offensive philosophy, we continued to run the ball even if it was detrimental to our running back. A short slant would work if Roddy and Tony were not the first and second reads and were not double covered all the time due to Turner not being a threat to catch a pass. Again, Jenkins is "ineffective" because Matt has no time to give him many looks.

Just to add. I don't think he has 2 seconds to unload the ball but if it's true then doesn't that fall on the line. It's not a hidden element that our line is more successful with a run cause it's what they are better at. If we want more pocket time then we have to design the line for it. Turner in the backfield will cause more defenders to cheat up but that isn't a bad thing.

If Tandy were here, she could confirm the numbers, but I am almost 100% positive it was around the 2-2.5 second range on average that Matt has before he releases. It's hard to blame an offensive line of 5 guys trying to stop a blitz of 6-7 on ALMOST every down. Defenses like the Packers and Saints were overload blitzing us and we just simply didn't either call the right plays or have enough people to block for us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course the defense stacks the line. Why else would Turner keep getting stuffed for 1-2 yard runs? Where else do all these complaints about Turner "losing steam" and "not getting it done anymore" come from? lol. The Falcons were the #1 blitzed team, and because we wanted to maintain our offensive philosophy, we continued to run the ball even if it was detrimental to our running back. A short slant would work if Roddy and Tony were not the first and second reads and were not double covered all the time due to Turner not being a threat to catch a pass. Again, Jenkins is "ineffective" because Matt has no time to give him many looks.

If Tandy were here, she could confirm the numbers, but I am almost 100% positive it was around the 2-2.5 second range on average that Matt has before he releases. It's hard to blame an offensive line of 5 guys trying to stop a blitz of 6-7 on ALMOST every down. Defenses like the Packers and Saints were overload blitzing us and we just simply didn't either call the right plays or have enough people to block for us.

The diff is that GB and NO both have several WRs to go to and they run quick slants or screens to slow the blitz down. Opposing teams know that if you blitz us and cover Roddy and Tony that by the time Ryan gets to his third read that he will be feeling the pressure and wont have the time to make a good throw. If a blitzer has to hesitate and think about the RB he just ran by catching a pass. Then that sec of hesitation could be the diff in converting a big play. We need another playmaker on off. I wish Norwood could be that guy, but he's always getting hurt. It's not the plays Reggie Bush makes, It,s the threat of the play he could make if left unaccounted for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course the defense stacks the line. Why else would Turner keep getting stuffed for 1-2 yard runs? Where else do all these complaints about Turner "losing steam" and "not getting it done anymore" come from? lol. The Falcons were the #1 blitzed team, and because we wanted to maintain our offensive philosophy, we continued to run the ball even if it was detrimental to our running back. A short slant would work if Roddy and Tony were not the first and second reads and were not double covered all the time due to Turner not being a threat to catch a pass. Again, Jenkins is "ineffective" because Matt has no time to give him many looks.

If Tandy were here, she could confirm the numbers, but I am almost 100% positive it was around the 2-2.5 second range on average that Matt has before he releases. It's hard to blame an offensive line of 5 guys trying to stop a blitz of 6-7 on ALMOST every down. Defenses like the Packers and Saints were overload blitzing us and we just simply didn't either call the right plays or have enough people to block for us.

Here are the actual stats.

http://www.nfl.com/players/michaelturner/profile?id=TUR608668

so he averaged 4.1 yards per carry. His average has gone down but it's still above many more in the league. Maybe the answer isn't always replace a player.

As for the passing time allowed. I don't see that being realistic at all. I think I remember the thread on that and it was for one game if my memory serves correct. That time has little to do with blitzing it has to deal with when he decides to release the ball. He has a quick release time is all I'm hearing from that analysis. Rodgers had a quick release against us that doesn't mean we were applying a ton of pressure.

The only thing I can say is that we may have a new OC along with a new QB coach for the next season. Maybe or hopefully things go good and for those who have hated our O will get some satisfaction or it could end up being a bad move. 13-3 isn't reflective of a team that needs to make a ton of changes. Hopefully we are only a few pieces away from being where we want to be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jenkins has shown he can use his size to make catches when Ryan goes to him in the clutch. The problem with him is that he's never taken over a game (no 100 yarders) and he lacks ability to make something happen with the ball in his hands. He's at his best when the D is keying on someone else and he's matched up with a small corner he can use his 6-4 frame against.

With a fast RB that can catch passes and a legit #3 WR/#2 TE Jenkins production would improve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Our offensive problems don't start with our running game, it starts with us only having really 2 receiving options on the field. Or atleast 2 that teams worry about. Teams focus on stopping Roddy and Gonzo. That's it. We don't have any other play makers on the team.

When teams know we don't have any kind of big play threat,(gonzo's not even a big play threat) they can stack the line to stop our best weapon.

I think we should get a change of pace back but keep throwing to Turner every now and then.

We had Norwood, how often was he used as a receiver? Hardly ever. We've spent years on this board begging for Mularkey to use Norwood in the passing game but we didn't.

Why all of a sudden do people think that because we get a pass catching running back we wouldn't be running him up between the tackles like Norwood.

Has anyone seen any of our running backs out in an actual route, and not just a dump off?

I can see how some people would think that if we had a pass catching rb it would make defenses have to be concerned with him.

Get another playmaker at WR, make teams respect our passing game. Matt Ryan is I believe 29 out of 32 QB's with his 6.5 Yards per pass. Only Sam Bradford, Jimmy Clausen and Jimmy Clausen had less.

Now stretching the field would also be out of the Norm for Mularkey but if he does, regardless of RB, it should make our ground game even better.

As often as we do run, we should be able to play action the **** out of teams but we can't because there's no threat deep.

Edited by ltstorm2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is no way that we can blame all our offense woes on Michael Turner. I agree we do need a speed back to help Turner out. But, without Turner we definitely would not have had 3 winning seasons. There are plenty of thing to pick out if you want to find out what is holding our offense back, Turner not being able to catch out of the backfield is only one of many.

Edited by FalconinPA
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I keep seeing all these posts about "our offensive woes," or Jenkins being "ineffective." Ryan and Malarkey sharing the blame... Was I watching a different team than everyone else? Our offense was fantastic this year(including MM, Ryan, and Jenkins).

Every player can get better. Every position can be improved. But from reading this thread you would think that we are a team being held back by a poor offense. That is the farthest thing from the truth.

Turner is a grinder. He isn't as fast as he used to be, and he isn't good catching balls out of the backfield. But he is a great RB. We used Snelling a lot on third downs. Snelling had 44 receptions- some of them in big time situations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My god, it's like people REFUSE to have reading comprehension on this board. In a nutshell, I said Turner needs to get more looks in the passing game, or we need to bring in a back who can shoulder the load of an every down back AND catch the ball while splitting time with Turner. It's not rocket science. There is no underlying hate for Michael Turner. Michael Turner has been probably the most consistent piece we've had on offense in the past 3 years. Not where in any of my original post did I say get rid of Turner. In fact, at the bottom I said this is not a hate on Turner post.

If you do not believe that getting the running back more touches in the passing game is important to the overall success of an offense, then I don't know what to tell you, and you probably should not respond to this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If MM stays and he wants to use Turner in the same fashion then going after Larry has to happen, if that doesnt happen then our Oline has to get better.

Ever think the reason Turner catches so few passes is because he has to stay in and block to help out the o line? And maybe the reason Snelling catches a lot of passes when he's out there is because he cant stand back there to block so Matt has to check down to him.

Either way you look at it , if the o line is better Turner will get his chances to catch passes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...