Jump to content

Good Article About Matchup From Espn


Atlbirdawg
 Share

Recommended Posts

Double Coverage: Seahawks at Falcons

January, 8, 2013

Jan 8

12:00

PM ET

By Mike Sando and Pat Yasinskas | ESPN.com

nfl_u_ryanpanel_gb1_576.jpgUSA TODAY SportsIf Matt Ryan and the Falcons come out throwing, Seattle CB Richard Sherman stands ready.Northwest meets Southeast when the Seattle Seahawks visit the Atlanta Falcons in an NFC divisional playoff game Sunday.

Seattle is fresh off its first road playoff victory since 1983, having won 24-14 at Washington in the wild-card round. The Seahawks are now 2-1 in postseason play during Pete Carroll's first three seasons as head coach.

As for the Falcons, well, you know the story. They're the No. 1 seed in the NFC and they'll be playing at home. But as NFC South blogger Pat Yasinskas can attest, they haven't accomplished anything yet.

That's where we pick up the conversation.

Yasinskas: The world knows the Falcons have yet to win a playoff game in the Mike Smith-Matt Ryan era. That places enormous pressure on the Falcons, and the Seahawks look a little reminiscent of Atlanta's past two playoff opponents -- the Packers and Giants, who each went on to win the Super Bowl. The Seahawks won their last five regular-season games and seven of their past eight. Throw in their playoff victory against Washington on Sunday and you've got a team that's red hot. Atlanta has the better record and home-field advantage, but the playoff drought brings tremendous pressure. If the Falcons don't win this time around, the patience of owner Arthur Blank will become very thin.

Sando: The Falcons' past struggles in playoff games have invited skepticism from a lot of us. I've taken heat from some Falcons fans this season for allegedly underrating Atlanta in the power rankings. How good is this team right now and how much confidence should Falcons fans have in this team against Seattle?

Yasinskas: Yes, Atlanta fans have shared their opinions with me about where you ranked the Falcons on your ballot. But you might not have been that far off. The Falcons were a bit of an enigma much of the season. They were winning a lot of games, but weren't winning them impressively. They did come on late in the season, aside from a meaningless loss to Tampa Bay in the season finale. This is a team with a tremendous amount of individual talent, and the Falcons are very good at home. But they can't afford to revert back to their early-season ways of playing just well enough to win, because that might get them beat.

Sando: The Seahawks are playing without the burden of expectations. They are very good at quarterback, running back and in the secondary. The read option has added an unconventional element to their offense. Still, winning a 10 a.m. PT game on the road against a very good offensive team will be tough. The Seahawks have started slowly in their past two games. I think they'll have a harder time if that happens again. Along those lines, have the Falcons been able to jump on teams early at home and finish them off? One memory I have is watching Arizona pick off Ryan five times.

Yasinskas: The Arizona game was the only time in Ryan's life (including college, high school and youth league) that he's thrown five interceptions in a game. That was a fluke. Some of those balls were tipped. Ryan generally is very efficient. And starting fast is one of the trademarks of Ryan and the Falcons. Since Ryan entered the league in 2008, the Falcons have scored more points on their first offensive drives than any team in the NFL. They pride themselves on starting fast, and they're particularly good at that in the Georgia Dome.

Sando: The Seahawks fell behind St. Louis and Washington early. They have shown an ability to come back. They were down by 13 to New England and won. They trailed Washington by 14 points and won. They're not slow starters by rule. Seattle was tied with Atlanta for seventh in first-quarter touchdown drives (11) during the regular season. It has been in only the past couple weeks that teams have thrown off the Seahawks early with their blitzes. Seattle came out passing against the Redskins. We'll see heavier early doses of Marshawn Lynch on Sunday.

Yasinskas: I'm certain we will see heavier doses of Lynch. Stopping the run is not Atlanta's strength. The Falcons ranked 21st against the run in the regular season and they've been known to have problems with power runners. That's why it's crucial for the Falcons to get an early lead and force the Seahawks to pass. The other thing I think you'll see is a lot of middle linebacker Akeem Dent. The Falcons used a lot of the nickel package in the regular season, and that kept Dent on the sidelines. But against the Seahawks, I think it's more important for the Falcons to focus on stopping the run, and they'll want Dent on the field for that.

Sando: Interesting. Seattle could counter by shifting into its three-receiver offense and then going with its read-option package. Lynch scored the winning 27-yard touchdown against the Redskins on an option run from three-receiver personnel against Washington's nickel defense. The option has become a reliable tactic for Seattle. Opponents have a tough time determining whether Lynch or Russell Wilson is going to run with the ball. They also must respect the play-action passing game. The Seahawks had 11 rushes for 110 yards on option runs Sunday. They had 224 yards rushing overall. I noticed Cam Newton had 202 yards rushing in two games against the Falcons this season. What was the nature of those rushes and do you see anything Seattle can cull from that?

Yasinskas: Newton did have success against Atlanta, but the Falcons still were able to split with the Panthers. They also held Robert Griffin III to one carry for 7 yards in an early victory at Washington. They won against another mobile quarterback in Michael Vick. So the Falcons have some experience in facing mobile quarterbacks and the read option. I'm sure they used the bye week to prepare to see it again because they knew there was a good chance they'd be facing Wilson or Griffin. Outside linebacker Sean Weatherspoon is the key player against the read option. He's the leader of the defense and probably the best player on the unit.

Sando: The Panthers had 21 carries for 120 yards and a touchdown using the option against Atlanta in Week 4. There will be other keys to this game. Wilson's ability to deal with the Falcons' blitzes could be one of them. Wilson had seven touchdowns, no picks, three sacks and the NFL's third-best Total QBR score (87.2) against five-plus pass-rushers from Week 8 through Week 16. That included going 6-of-6 for 91 yards and a score with a perfect 100.0 QBR against the 49ers' blitzes during a 42-13 victory in Week 16. Wilson wasn't quite as good in this regard against the Rams in Week 17, taking three sacks against their pressure. The Redskins held Wilson to a season-low 9.7 QBR against the blitz. Wilson has taken eight sacks against the blitz over the past two games after taking eight total over the previous 15 games.

Yasinskas: Wilson is incredibly poised. But he still is a rookie coming into a tough venue in a playoff game, so I'm pretty sure defensive coordinator Mike Nolan will try every way possible to pressure him. Drew Brees and Matthew Stafford were the only quarterbacks all season to have much success against Atlanta's blitzes. Nolan likes to mix things up. The Atlanta pass rush starts with defensive end John Abraham, but Nolan has found ways to complement him. Nolan's not afraid to drop defensive end Kroy Biermann into pass coverage and let a linebacker or a defensive back blitz. The Falcons often talk about "disguising" their pass rush, and I'm sure they'll try to do lots of that against a rookie quarterback.

Sando: Wilson has generally improved as the season has progressed, but he has been hit-and-miss all season against DB pressure. Wilson has three touchdowns, two picks, four sacks and a 17.9 QBR score when opponents rush a member of the secondary. He did make Minnesota, Miami and San Francisco (twice) pay for the tactic, however.

There's so much to consider in this matchup, Pat, that we haven't even gotten to one of the most crucial ones. Seattle's 6-foot-4 Brandon Browner and 6-3 Richard Sherman can be dominant cornerbacks. They disrupt receivers' timing and generally get under their skin. You might recall Carolina's Steve Smith just about losing it against Sherman earlier this season. Even the Redskins' left tackle went after him Sunday. If the Falcons win this game, Ryan is going to be the reason, I think. Should the Falcons' receivers like their chances? Or could we see Ryan becoming a bit tentative against big, physical, ball-hawking corners?

Yasinskas: I think the Falcons have to come out and be very aggressive with their passing game. It's the strength of their offense. This is a different team than in the past. Michael Turner is at the end of his career and this is not a running team any longer. Roddy White and Julio Jones are big, physical receivers, so I say let's see strength on strength with Seattle's corners. I think White and Jones can get open against anyone, so the Falcons need to take their chances. Plus, this passing game is about more than just Jones and White. They command so much attention that tight end Tony Gonzalez and slot receiver Harry Douglas could be forgotten about. I think Douglas and/or Gonzalez could end up being key players in this game.

Sando: Seattle has been very good against tight ends for the most part. I'd be surprised if Gonzalez factored in a big way. Seattle has allowed three touchdown passes to tight ends this season, tied for second fewest in the NFL. The Seahawks have allowed 10 scoring passes to wide receivers, the fifth fewest in the league. Sherman had eight picks and three forced fumbles this season, joining Ed Reed, Charles Woodson and Walt Harris as the only players to reach those totals in a season over the past decade. The Seahawks are not as strong at nickel corner, however. And with leading sacker Chris Clemons likely out with a knee injury, life could get tougher for Seattle in the secondary.

Yasinskas: Mike, like just about everyone in the media, I'm skeptical of the Falcons because of their recent playoff losses. But I think this is the year they finally get a victory in the postseason. This is a different team than past years. I think the Falcons will put the game in Ryan's hands and I think they'll win 28-20.

Sando: I think the Falcons are finally ready to break through and win in the postseason. I'm just not sure they've drawn the right opponent to make that happen. Seattle is the more physical team. The Seahawks have beaten seven teams that finished the regular season with a winning record (the number is two for Atlanta). While Seattle was posting the NFL's best strength-of-victory percentage, the Falcons were fattening up on the NFL's easiest schedule. Atlanta is at once the No. 1 seed and the team stepping up in class. Ryan's going to need a great game to prove wrong my 27-20 prediction for another Seahawks victory.

Edited by Atlbirdawg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"...and the Seahawks look a little reminiscent of Atlanta's past two playoff opponents -- the Packers and Giants, who each went on to win the Super Bowl. The Seahawks won their last five regular-season games and seven of their past eight."

I am so sick of hearing this. Seattle is not coming in like the Giants or the Packers. Neither of those teams came in on a hot streak going into the Playoffs. Those teams went on a hot streak IN the playoffs. They both looked mediocre and beatable throughout the end of the regular season.

The Giants were 3-5 in their last 8 in 2011. Yes, that's right. 3-5. They won their last 2 games. That is hardly going in as the hottest team in the league.

The Packers were 5-3 in their last 8 in 2010. That sounds pretty good, but they were 2-2 in their last 4 regular season games when they were fighting for a Playoff spot. They did carry the same 2 win streak as the Giants before the Playoffs. But again, nobody would consider that going in as the hottest team in the league.

Seattle has a lot more in common with the 2011 Broncos. They went 5-3 over their last 8, barely squeaking into the Playoffs. They went on the road and beat one of the gimpy Division winners (Pittsburgh without Mendenhall, gimpy Big Ben, and beat up all across the board). Then they got smaked in the mouth in the Divisional round when they had to face a well-rested juggernaut in New England.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The following exchange makes no sense to me:

Yasinskas: ...The Falcons used a lot of the nickel package in the regular season, and that kept Dent on the sidelines. But against the Seahawks, I think it's more important for the Falcons to focus on stopping the run, and they'll want Dent on the field for that.

Sando: Interesting. Seattle could counter by shifting into its three-receiver offense and then going with its read-option package. Lynch scored the winning 27-yard touchdown against the Redskins on an option run from three-receiver personnel against Washington's nickel defense.

Yasinkas says ATL will use LESS nickel to deal with the read-option, and Sando responds by asserting Seattle's 3 WR set will be the counter, then cites an example of SEA scoring a TD employing read-option AGAINST A NICKEL DEFENSE???

It's hard to take people who get paid to study the game seriously when they can't even make coherent arguments in a structured dialogue setting.

Edited by Kaptain Krazy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yasinskas:

Yes, Atlanta fans have shared their opinions with me about where you ranked the Falcons on your ballot. But you might not have been that far off. The Falcons were a bit of an enigma much of the season. They were winning a lot of games, but weren't winning them impressively. They did come on late in the season, aside from a meaningless loss to Tampa Bay in the season finale. This is a team with a tremendous amount of individual talent, and the Falcons are very good at home. But they can't afford to revert back to their early-season ways of playing just well enough to win, because that might get them beat.

At what year, date, time, and cataclysmic evident did winning impressive become an imperative? I will never understand this mentality when

talking about the NFL...impressive victories is for a league w/o p/o(NCAAF). Why is power rankings even a topic of interest? You are what

your record says you are...Bill Parcels. Saying the Falcons are 0-3 in the p/o is one thing...criticizing "so-called unimpressive wins" seems

outright foolish.

Edited by Mid-Nite-Toker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The following exchange makes no sense to me:

Yasinskas: ...The Falcons used a lot of the nickel package in the regular season, and that kept Dent on the sidelines. But against the Seahawks, I think it's more important for the Falcons to focus on stopping the run, and they'll want Dent on the field for that.

Sando: Interesting. Seattle could counter by shifting into its three-receiver offense and then going with its read-option package. Lynch scored the winning 27-yard touchdown against the Redskins on an option run from three-receiver personnel against Washington's nickel defense.

Yasinkas says ATL will use LESS nickel to deal with the read-option, and Sando responds by asserting Seattle's 3 WR set will be the counter, then cites an example of SEA scoring a TD employing read-option AGAINST A NICKEL DEFENSE???

It's hard to take people who get paid to study the game seriously when they can't even make coherent arguments in a structured dialogue setting.

It really depends on how you take it, the example makes sense to me because if they are going to run a three receiver set we will more than likely have to switch to nickel as opposed to stay in based D. He is comparing traditional personnel match ups, more times than not teams play nickel vs 3 receiver sets, so they are countering by running a 3-WR set (as opposed to 2) and forcing the Falcons into nickel.

The falcons could also counter by staying in base D and seeing if they can shutdown Seattle's passing game while they are in a 3-WR set, but it seems like Sando doesn't think our team is capable of that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The following exchange makes no sense to me:

Yasinskas: ...The Falcons used a lot of the nickel package in the regular season, and that kept Dent on the sidelines. But against the Seahawks, I think it's more important for the Falcons to focus on stopping the run, and they'll want Dent on the field for that.

Sando: Interesting. Seattle could counter by shifting into its three-receiver offense and then going with its read-option package. Lynch scored the winning 27-yard touchdown against the Redskins on an option run from three-receiver personnel against Washington's nickel defense.

Yasinkas says ATL will use LESS nickel to deal with the read-option, and Sando responds by asserting Seattle's 3 WR set will be the counter, then cites an example of SEA scoring a TD employing read-option AGAINST A NICKEL DEFENSE???

It's hard to take people who get paid to study the game seriously when they can't even make coherent arguments in a structured dialogue setting.

Exactly, I don't think a guy like Nolan or any other DC will run Base 4-3 Defense with 3 WR set. I could imagine a something like a big Nickel (extra safety) with 2 WR+2TE+2RB formations. I don't think they had any clue on what they were talking.

Edited by falcons007
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It really depends on how you take it, the example makes sense to me because if they are going to run a three receiver set we will more than likely have to switch to nickel as opposed to stay in based D. He is comparing traditional personnel match ups, more times than not teams play nickel vs 3 receiver sets, so they are countering by running a 3-WR set (as opposed to 2) and forcing the Falcons into nickel.

The falcons could also counter by staying in base D and seeing if they can shutdown Seattle's passing game while they are in a 3-WR set, but it seems like Sando doesn't think our team is capable of that.

If any DC does that for may be more than a snap or two/game, I can guarantee he will be out of the job with in a year in NFL.

Edited by falcons007
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If any DC does that for may be more than a snap or two/game, I can guarantee he will be out of the job with in a year in NFL.

It's worked pretty well for San Fran the last two years...they play tons of base D vs. 3 and even some 4 WR sets. It really comes down to personnel and Willis and Bowman hold up in coverage pretty well vs tightends while one of their safeties brackets the slot receiver with a different LB underneath.

We don't play nearly as much man as they do so it's not nearly as viable for us but it is a look we could give.

Edit: in no way was I saying we should come out in base D all game vs 3-WR sets. Down and distance as well as personnel will dictate smart decisions.

Edited by IA Falcon07
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's worked pretty well for San Fran the last two years...they play tons of base D vs. 3 and even some 4 WR sets. It really comes down to personnel and Willis and Bowman hold up in coverage pretty well vs tightends while one of their safeties brackets the slot receiver with a different LB underneath.

We don't play nearly as much man as they do so it's not nearly as viable for us but it is a look we could give.

San Francisco has some pretty fast linebackers
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yasinskas:

Yes, Atlanta fans have shared their opinions with me about where you ranked the Falcons on your ballot. But you might not have been that far off. The Falcons were a bit of an enigma much of the season. They were winning a lot of games, but weren't winning them impressively. They did come on late in the season, aside from a meaningless loss to Tampa Bay in the season finale. This is a team with a tremendous amount of individual talent, and the Falcons are very good at home. But they can't afford to revert back to their early-season ways of playing just well enough to win, because that might get them beat.

At what year, date, time, and cataclysmic evident did winning impressive become an imperative? I will never understand this mentality when

talking about the NFL...impressive victories is for a league w/o p/o(NCAAF). Why is power rankings even a topic of interest? You are what

your record says you are...Bill Parcels. Saying the Falcons are 0-3 in the p/o is one thing...criticizing "so-called unimpressive wins" seems

outright foolish.

Totally lost in the article is the fact the Falcons won more games than Seattle did.

I guess the Seahawks losses were more impressive than Falcon wins? :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thats actually a decent conversation.

I found them to be totally ignoring some really basic and important info. Its like they had an agenda to build up Seattle while ignoring what got Atlanta here in the first place.

At least Pat had the sense to predict a Falcons win, though he even mitigated that somewhat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The point about Seattle not giving up scores being relevant(TE TDs section)? Of course you won't give up a ton of scores by winning TOP and limiting drives/possessions to the other team, and getting forced INTs along the outside.

Falcons pass offense > Seahawks pass D.

It's not as 'straight up' a matchup as people seem to believe. Browner isn't very good.

Seattle wins by trying to play physical. Period.

They can't sit back or they get beat/picked apart.

Atlanta has played many teams this year trying this tactic; which has worked in slowing the offense at times.

However, I strongly doubt the Falcons wait to pull out all the stops, despite winning in such games in the regular season.

An entire season to build upon from all sorts of games they could play in AND Atlanta has the poise to win any sort of game. Can't say the same for an un-tested team; despite wins vs. quality opponents.

Their 2 wins against their best pass offense opponents were in THEIR place. By a combined score of 3 points.

That is the only way Seattle beats Atlanta; or Atlanta beats themselves. A squeaker or they will lose.

Falcons know what to expect. Seattle is much more predictable than Atlanta. The Falcons actually have innovative, creative, dynamic systems on both sides of the ball which was SORELY lacking in previous years.

^That alone should make this point easier to accept: Atlanta controls it's destiny in this game.

Seattle most assuredly will force pressure outside on the receivers and on the QB up the gut on Atlanta's OL, the FALCONS will try to counter with screen passing/tosses to the outside and early runs to set up play-action deep shots.

The Seahawks will try to run, get their option between Wilson/Lynch going before taking a shot early in the game.

It's an easy script to follow in this one. Question is do their play-makers on D do more than Atlanta's offensive weapons?

With Ryan, more of an actual MVP candidate this year than Wilson(ROY sure, but MVP?) throwing the ball to Atlanta's big 3 plus the other weapons in a creative system? No way Seattle wins this game by shutting down the Falcons offense.

The only way they win is by controlling the ground game, TOP, and limiting the number of possessions Atlanta gets, ala Carolina Panthers game in Carolina.

Good thing Atlanta is well tested vs. running QBs. 3-1 this year against such; beat Cam/Vick/RG3(before dropping him out of the game on a 'clean' hit late in the game after he lead his team to 3 points all game).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All depends on which Falcon team shows up.

Some times the Falcons are super focused and can beat anybody other times they look like a bunch of zombies playing football and can barely beat a bad team. We just don't know what team is going to show up.

The one thing I know for sure if the media would have been showing the Falcons a lot of love this week the team full of zombies would show up to the game

Edited by Brehus
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...