Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

raysnill1

Chip Kelly Gets It, Hopefully Coach Smith Will Too Lol

122 posts in this topic

Taking a ride a the Vickamotive.

Not at all. I'm a falcons fan all day. It is what it is. The man's record is still a winning record. I kiss no man's @ss and I ride no coat tails but I will be a proponent for truth above my like/dislike of a human being. Wether I like that person or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How's that? The only big issue was the dog fighting. Everybody was ready to see what Vick would do in petrino's system. Say what you will but he was a winner in Atl when healthy and still has a winning record. #Fact!! #MenLie #WomenLie #NumbersDont

We sure wanted to see what he would do under petrino...problem is Vick didnt, he had other issues to deal with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not at all. I'm a falcons fan all day. It is what it is. The man's record is still a winning record. I kiss no man's @ss and I ride no coat tails but I will be a proponent for truth above my like/dislike of a human being. Wether I like that person or not.

Agree...the truth is Vick didnt give a *amn about this team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We sure wanted to see what he would do under petrino...problem is Vick didnt, he had other issues to deal with.

Truth. And that's his cross to bare. BUT...Still doesn't erase what he did in Atl and that he has talent or a winning record. That's all I'm saying bro. I love #2 as my qb and I look at it as a thank you to #7. Without his poor decision making we don't have the current regime leading this team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those same if's apply to every qb. His are just magnified by falcons fans. It didn't take 12 years either. He's been a winner in this league and still has a winning record. I could understand if he sucked his whole career but he's never really sucked. Maybe as an individual but football no. He's just been injury proned and carries the ball like a loaf of bread but if Matty ice ran as much as he did he'd fumble a lot too. Qb's aren't the best protectors of the ball when they run.

I still enjoy watching the guy play, but the injuries and turnovers aren't just a one season anomaly, Vick's is the best chance they got at QB, but he will have to have to reverse some trends to keep Kelly from blowing a gasket in my opinion. I do like watching new coaches though,but the transition isn't easy from the NCAA. Saban Spurrier Pigtrino its a different game and a different player they are dealing with every day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have mixed feelings about TOP. if you're up by 2 or 3 TDs I'm all for running the clock down but I'm also for getting points. say for instance we're ahead and a team knows we're gonna run so they slack off HD. I'm all about taking a shot to HD to get points rather than a quick out or slant to get another 1st down.

Do long as he doesn't trip over the yardage marker!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is not college. Maybe it works(IMHO it won't), but you are talking about 40 players on Sunday versus 70, 80 players on Saturday. The "OLD BALL COACH" was a world beater in the preseason when he coached the 'Skins. How did that work out? I do agree we need more TD's vs FG's but not at the expense of leaving our defense on the field for 35-45 minutes a game

Exactly, there is not anything more frustrating to watch then the Falcons driving 80 yards, use eight minutes of the clock and then settle for a field goal, but you are right about the time on the field for the defense. If you keep an NFL defense out there that long, they will be dragging at the end of the season.

I do not like hiring college coaches without NFL experience anyways. I would rather hire an NFL special teams coach, and so, naturally, I hated the Petrino hire as soon as I heard it. Jimmy Johnson being the exception to the rule, college coaches have a very high failure rate. It is a different ballgame in the NFL. Coaches go from kids they could boss around to players with big paychecks and even bigger egos. Knowoing how to handle pro players is probably the main thing the college coach lacks. The overbearing, shouting coach is not effective at this level, because players just do not respond to that anymore. The friendly push over coach does not work well either. We saw that with Mora and Jones(Jones also would not let go of the run and shoot). A coach has to be able to put some foot on a$$ when it is necessary. The balance is in between, and that has to be learned with experience in the NFL.

He must adapt to other things like speed of game, increased level of competition, basic ins and outs, and the lost in translation of unique or "the latest thing" offenses, successful in college, usually will not work in the pros. The list is long of coaches hired straight from college without NFL experience falling flat. Why the NFL keeps repeating that mistake is beyond me? I do not expect Chip Kelly to be there more than three seasons. His lack NFL experience is obvious when he talks like this. He is going to exhaust his defense, so while there may be exceptions, as a whole, I do not like this type of hire.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Playing for fewer possessions increases the "variance" allowing inferior teams a better chance of winning. With Atlanta's potentially awesome offense, the Falcons should switch to a mode of increasing the number of possessions as that will increase their chances of winning. Early in Smith's tenor playing for fewer posessions made sense, but that is no longer the case. He needs to wake up and realize that.

Also I hope he has learned that going for 2 when you have just scored a TD to go up by 19 makes sense. I sure hope someone showed Smitty the Grantland article.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't think that I'm implying for an instant that I would rather have Kelly over Smith. I love Mike Smith and what he's done for this team. I only was saying what I did because I hate when people act like because he hasn't done something before the opportunity arises that it's a valid argument. It's not. Saying 'How many times has Chip Kelly done this in the NFL?' Is a stupid thing to say when he hasn't even coached an NFL game yet. That's like saying Desmond Trufant should be released because he's never picked off an NFL QB before.

Invalid point. Logic would be to look at the OP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you feel as if offense is a strength of your team then it is a good tactic to try and run as many plays as possible. New England has already been implementing this tactic and it has worked for them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The falcons' ability to hold onto leads once they get them suggest mike smith knows what controlling the clock means and TOP mean. Further, is your goal to score 100 points a game or win? Ill settle for 30 points and waaaay less opportunities for injury as well as a defense that stays a but more rested.

The Falcons lost the lead in 10 out of the 18 games played last year!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know how this turned into a Mike Smith vs Chip Kelly resume comparison but I think all Kelly was trying to say was if your offense is more efficient then you might not win the time of possession battle and that's o.k. Futhermore, a more effecient offense will trump an inefficient offense everytime. And under those cercumstances, time of possession can be misleading. Driving down the field for 8 minutes to end in a missed field goal attempt or an interception does not help your team win but a long completion for a touchdown does even if it takes 30 seconds.

Joremarid likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't even imagine how good we'd be if we played something like New England's offense. Dear lord.....

Julio and Roddy capable of pushing the defense deep but also great in space on option routes? A RB or two that can catch out of the backfield? A surehanded redzone TE?

If we played a more up tempo offense like NE or even New Orleans/GB, we'd be a significantly stronger team. Our defense would be seen as "good enough"

yixt.jpg Hmm...New England also has Tom Brady.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think this holds true in college, especially in the Pac 10 where you don't have physical AND fast defenses, and can simply outscore everyone in a track meet.

He might find it a little different in the NFL. There's no doubt that the game has opened up and is more pass oriented. You HAVE to be able to put up some points. But every time I start to think the ball control running game doesn't matter, I'm proven wrong again. The teams that went to the Super Bowl last year ran the ball effectively WHEN THEY HAD TO. They controlled the clock on a long scoring drive and wore out the opponent's defense. Likewise, even in college, Alabama won that game in the 3rd quarter when they ran it down Georgia's throat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't even imagine how good we'd be if we played something like New England's offense. Dear lord.....

Julio and Roddy capable of pushing the defense deep but also great in space on option routes? A RB or two that can catch out of the backfield? A surehanded redzone TE?

If we played a more up tempo offense like NE or even New Orleans/GB, we'd be a significantly stronger team. Our defense would be seen as "good enough"

That's been my whole beef with Smith since he arrived. Now it's time to take off the friggin' training wheels, take it out of low gear, pop the clutch and blow the soot out of this offense, Mr. Coach. Grind-it-out football may not be dead, but it's boring as h3ll and I don't see that style ever winning many play-off games, much less a Super Bowl in this high-scoring era of football.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I disagree with that. That offense will be explosive with all that speed. It's catered for Vicks style. All he needs is protection. Because Atl fans hate him doesn't mean he's still not a threat from the qb position. He's still a dangerous qb.

Been hearing that crap since 2001...give up he ain't that big of a deal or threat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I maintain that balance is the key.... if your O is only using 20-25 minutes per game and scoring 31 pts then that's good, but if your D is dragging their tongues on the grass from going hard for 35-40 minutes a game and you're up by less than 14 pts starting the 4th Qtr... you dang well better score a TD every time you get the ball because the opponent is going to steamroll your D for most of the 15 minutes left!!!

Note to Coach Kelly:

in the NFL... all the teams are good, all the players are good, some of great. You ain't playing in the Pac12 anymore where a real defense is hard to find.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I maintain that balance is the key.... if your O is only using 20-25 minutes per game and scoring 31 pts then that's good, but if your D is dragging their tongues on the grass from going hard for 35-40 minutes a game and you're up by less than 14 pts starting the 4th Qtr... you dang well better score a TD every time you get the ball because the opponent is going to steamroll your D for most of the 15 minutes left!!!

The above statement makes very little sense. What I see is a lot of wasted downs on the part of the Falcons i.e. running against a 9 man front for the sake of running the football. My interpretation of what Kelly is saying is why run against a 9 man front when there are better plays in your play book to run against that particular defensive front. Meaning you should take what the defense gives you instead of stubbornly saying that we should run the clock out because we have a 7 point lead in the 3rd quarter. You'll see plenty of defesive fronts that favors running the ball during the course of a game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's the main thing to me. When you're in the 4th quarter, and the other team's defense is completely out of gas because they've been on the field most of the game, that basically puts your offense in complete control to finish them off.

I don't know..we do a good job with TOP and 4th quarter is usually when teams come back on us.

That's really been our teams glaring issue. Not putting teams away. So that doesn't seem to hold true for our falcons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites