Jump to content

Smith Knows Failure Starts With Him, Not Coordinators (Jeff Schultz, Ajc)


Supes™

Recommended Posts

Jeff Schultz

Mike Smith knows failure starts with him, not coordinators (updated)

10:48 am January 11, 2012, by Jeff Schultz

Falcons+Giants+Football.JPE.JPG

Things didn't go Mike Smith's way for the third straight postseason. (AP photo)

(UPDATED: 2:20 p.m.)

Once you get past the problems on the offensive line and the secondary, the quarterback’s accuracy problems, the breakdown of the offensive line and players just generally looking at times like they would rather be somewhere else, this is what the current chapter of Falcons’ tumult comes down to: Mike Smith is on the clock.

When an NFL team blows out a coaching staff, it basically is eliminating scapegoats. Think of it as a restaurant owner changing chefs because the tables in his dining room are always empty.

Falcons owner Arthur Blank isn’t happy because he hasn’t a won a playoff game in seven years, and it’s not for lack of his willingness to spend money. General manager Thomas Dimitroff isn’t happy because the moves he has made to turn the Falcons into winners have nonetheless had limitations. Somebody had to take the hit. For now that’s Smith’s assistant coaches.

Regardless of the fact that Mike Mularkey left for a head coaching job (Jacksonville Jaguars) and Brian VanGorder left for a return to college (Auburn defensive coordinator) — and his career tendency to get restless after a few years — the backdrop of a third straight playoff loss screamed that one or both were going to get fired, anyway. Other staff changes also may follow.

The Falcons underachieved this season. They know that. Forget the regular season drop from 13-3 to 10-6. The last two postseason belly-flops to Green Bay and New York were embarrassing. Dimitroff had already decided, to use his words Wednesday, that there was not “going to be a minor tweak, [like] changing the color of socks.”

When there’s failure in any business, it generally starts from the top down. Blank has done little wrong since making his ill-fated decision in 2007 to bring in Bobby Petrino. Dimitroff has had some high-profile personnel moves that have fizzled (Dunta Robinson, Ray Edwards and Sam Baker, being prime examples). But he largely has reshaped the organization and given order and respectability to the front office. (Critics of the Julio Jones trade remain. But Jones has proven to be a great player, a potential difference-maker. I thought it was the right move then and I still do.)

After owner and general manager, the next move down the ladder is head coach. Smith’s 43-21 (.672) regular-season record is impressive. But this organization is way past that now. The 0-3 playoff record is the massive mole on his resume’s forehead.

This is sports. The appropriate question isn’t: How many games did they win? The appropriate question is: Should they have done better?

The obvious answer is yes. That’s on Smith.

There were too many games this season where the Falcons didn’t seem focused. They were inconsistent. They were soft mentally and physically. They lacked an edge. Those maladies aren’t exposed against losing teams, against whom the Falcons won most of their games. They show up against premier opponents, and on the road, and in the postseason.

“I understand what my job is,” Smith said. “It’s to get people to perform. When guys don’t block, when guys miss tackles, ultimately one guy is responsible for that, and that’s me. I put more pressure on myself than anybody can possibly put on me.”

It’s commendable that Smith never has had a team go into a slide. Losses were followed by wins. But it shouldn’t take a loss to get everybody’s attention.

For now, everybody is blaming the coordinators. That’s fine. Mularkey never figured out a way to fully utilize the weapons on the team, and he became indignant any time somebody suggested his play-calling was flawed. The Falcons don’t need to be a bombs-away offense — just far less predictable.

Dimitroff on the offense: “In this league, as you know, match-ups are very important and there’s the Sun Tzu approach of the art of surprise, the art of deception. That’s very important. Looking forward with a new coordinator, how we utilize our talent is going to be very important.”

VanGorder was viewed by some as too rah-rah and college-like for the NFL. Sorry, I’m not buying it. The guy knows defense. Maybe some of his players just don’t take direction well.

Regardless, it often seemed Smith wasn’t on the same page as his coordinators. For as much heat as Mularkey took, Smith is the one more likely to order vanilla in an ice cream shop. VanGorder’s defensive resume is all about attacking and blitzing. But the Falcons were conservative.

Coordinators call plays but the head coach sets the agenda. If Mularkey and VanGorder failed, it’s at least partly because Smith failed. Going into next season, this much is certain: There will be nobody else to blame.

''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''

Underlined segments of the article are links to more of Jeff's articles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 61
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Main reason for the failures on his team. At least according to that article.

Well I think what Jeff is trying to say is that it would be wrong to absolve Smitty of any failures and I think Smitty would agree. He did agree, basically, in the presser today. Nobody is arguing that he is the most successful coach we've ever had.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Smith is as much to blame as any coordinator that was on this staff. If he and Dimitroff have a 'shared vision' it failed miserably when we took shortcuts to build this team and left our offensive line in the hands of second year players that were unproven at this level.

We need to become aggressive on both sides of the ball. Mike Smith needs to be the one to set that tone for our future coordinators instead of doing the exact opposite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's hard to blame Smitty for BVG and MM's failures, but he still deserves some. Tomlin doesn't get credit for the Steelers defense and he plays the same role as Smitty in PIT. He doesn't get blamed when Big Ben has a poor game.

Where I fault Smitty is the lack of preparation of this team and lack of fight/dog/heart/whatever you want to call it. They were a soft bunch of nice guys. Schultz points this out as well. What ever Smitty does to get the guys focused after a loss should be the same every week. Demand excellence or leave.

As for TD, I am fine with him. He can only get the pieces. It's the DC/OC's job to utilize them. Like he said:

Dimitroff on the offense: “In this league, as you know, match-ups are very important and there’s the

Sun Tzu

approach of the art of surprise, the art of deception. That’s very important. Looking forward with a new coordinator, how we utilize our talent is going to be very important.”

He got MM some shiny toys in Julio and Quizz, and MM just tossed them to the side and stuck with his old toys. Guys like those two and HD should be utilized just as much as Julio, Roddy, Tony, and Turner. This offense is a gold mine with talent and week in and week out, we knew the 4 players who would get the ball. Shut down 1 and the other 3 won't even touch it any more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jeff Schultz

Mike Smith knows failure starts with him, not coordinators (updated)

10:48 am January 11, 2012, by Jeff Schultz

Falcons+Giants+Football.JPE.JPG

Things didn't go Mike Smith's way for the third straight postseason. (AP photo)

(UPDATED: 2:20 p.m.)

Once you get past the problems on the offensive line and the secondary, the quarterback’s accuracy problems, the breakdown of the offensive line and players just generally looking at times like they would rather be somewhere else, this is what the current chapter of Falcons’ tumult comes down to: Mike Smith is on the clock.

When an NFL team blows out a coaching staff, it basically is eliminating scapegoats. Think of it as a restaurant owner changing chefs because the tables in his dining room are always empty.

Falcons owner Arthur Blank isn’t happy because he hasn’t a won a playoff game in seven years, and it’s not for lack of his willingness to spend money. General manager Thomas Dimitroff isn’t happy because the moves he has made to turn the Falcons into winners have nonetheless had limitations. Somebody had to take the hit. For now that’s Smith’s assistant coaches.

Regardless of the fact that Mike Mularkey left for a head coaching job (Jacksonville Jaguars) and Brian VanGorder left for a return to college (Auburn defensive coordinator) — and his career tendency to get restless after a few years — the backdrop of a third straight playoff loss screamed that one or both were going to get fired, anyway. Other staff changes also may follow.

The Falcons underachieved this season. They know that. Forget the regular season drop from 13-3 to 10-6. The last two postseason belly-flops to Green Bay and New York were embarrassing. Dimitroff had already decided, to use his words Wednesday, that there was not “going to be a minor tweak, [like] changing the color of socks.”

When there’s failure in any business, it generally starts from the top down. Blank has done little wrong since making his ill-fated decision in 2007 to bring in Bobby Petrino. Dimitroff has had some high-profile personnel moves that have fizzled (Dunta Robinson, Ray Edwards and Sam Baker, being prime examples). But he largely has reshaped the organization and given order and respectability to the front office. (Critics of the Julio Jones trade remain. But Jones has proven to be a great player, a potential difference-maker. I thought it was the right move then and I still do.)

After owner and general manager, the next move down the ladder is head coach. Smith’s 43-21 (.672) regular-season record is impressive. But this organization is way past that now. The 0-3 playoff record is the massive mole on his resume’s forehead.

This is sports. The appropriate question isn’t: How many games did they win? The appropriate question is: Should they have done better?

The obvious answer is yes. That’s on Smith.

There were too many games this season where the Falcons didn’t seem focused. They were inconsistent. They were soft mentally and physically. They lacked an edge. Those maladies aren’t exposed against losing teams, against whom the Falcons won most of their games. They show up against premier opponents, and on the road, and in the postseason.

“I understand what my job is,” Smith said. “It’s to get people to perform. When guys don’t block, when guys miss tackles, ultimately one guy is responsible for that, and that’s me. I put more pressure on myself than anybody can possibly put on me.”

It’s commendable that Smith never has had a team go into a slide. Losses were followed by wins. But it shouldn’t take a loss to get everybody’s attention.

For now, everybody is blaming the coordinators. That’s fine. Mularkey never figured out a way to fully utilize the weapons on the team, and he became indignant any time somebody suggested his play-calling was flawed. The Falcons don’t need to be a bombs-away offense — just far less predictable.

Dimitroff on the offense: “In this league, as you know, match-ups are very important and there’s the Sun Tzu approach of the art of surprise, the art of deception. That’s very important. Looking forward with a new coordinator, how we utilize our talent is going to be very important.”

VanGorder was viewed by some as too rah-rah and college-like for the NFL. Sorry, I’m not buying it. The guy knows defense. Maybe some of his players just don’t take direction well.

Regardless, it often seemed Smith wasn’t on the same page as his coordinators. For as much heat as Mularkey took, Smith is the one more likely to order vanilla in an ice cream shop. VanGorder’s defensive resume is all about attacking and blitzing. But the Falcons were conservative.

Coordinators call plays but the head coach sets the agenda. If Mularkey and VanGorder failed, it’s at least partly because Smith failed. Going into next season, this much is certain: There will be nobody else to blame.

WOW, and I thought it was the fans fault 1st then the potential of a strike

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't know how to take that, you want me to leave or you're taking time off as well?ph34r.png

Haha! Me take some time off as well is what I meant!

You guys aren't going anywhere. This board is a train wreck that you can't look away from.

I agree it's a train wreck, but me thinks me needs some time away. Train wrecks are too addictive to look at some times, lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This article is 100 percent dead on about smitty. This change of coordinators clearly gives smith an out to make some tweaks to his philosophies and schemes. Personally i think he deserves a lot of the blame here too. Maybe mularky did suck. Scratch the maybe. He did suck, but its smiths job to see that and do something about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who ordered all the ill-fated fourth-and-short attempts?

ahem...*cough* smitty *cough*

and when the play-calls came down from MM on those attempts, Smitty heard that through his headset and made no attempt to stop or change the calls. QB sneak with an empty backfield? WTF!?!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This article is 100 percent dead on about smitty. This change of coordinators clearly gives smith an out to make some tweaks to his philosophies and schemes. Personally i think he deserves a lot of the blame here too. Maybe mularky did suck. Scratch the maybe. He did suck, but its smiths job to see that and do something about it.

How come people say that MM and BVG were poor coordinators after a game the foulcons lost throughtout the year but after they won a game they would say the foulcons were going to win the super bowl. I get confused reading these boards sometimes. Same thing was said last year. Eiters the foulcons are good or they are not. I pick the latter because of history of there actions

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How come people say that MM and BVG were poor coordinators after a game the foulcons lost throughtout the year but after they won a game they would say the foulcons were going to win the super bowl. I get confused reading these boards sometimes. Same thing was said last year. Eiters the foulcons are good or they are not. I pick the latter because of history of there actions

Why even bother? Believe me, if you didn't this board would be better off.

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.


×
×
  • Create New...