What If....we Kept Koetter As Oc This Year...what Would Our Record Be?

[Stoic]

Thoughts?

[HASHBROWN3]

At least 9 wins.

[4dabirds]

Normally, I don't like these kinds of topics, and I was not a huge fan of Koetter. However, I do believe the Falcons would have a significantly better record, but who knows...All those bubble screens could have gotten Julio injured by now, not to mention we'd still have no running game so to speak.

Edited December 18, 2015 by 4dabirds

[ltstorm2]

Koetter doesn't throw the screen nearly as much in Tampa because they have somewhat of a run game. We couldn't run the ball at all and that's why we stopped running it early. Those screens were our short yardage run plays. I remember people saying we'd always give up on the run but it was pointless to keep watching Turner, then Jackson always run directly into the back of a linemen at best or get caught in the backfield for a loss. If Koetter was our OC this year with the average defense we have, we'd have won way more than 6 games.

[Godzilla1985]

9-4 minimum. 11-2 if a ball or two had bounced our way.

Edited December 17, 2015 by Godzilla1985

[TSprings]

9-4 Matt on playing like a top 5 QB

[FalconinPA]

I can't believe that only a short time ago most people on here wanted his head on a stick or in a guillotine. Many then also said that Koetter was handcuffing Ryan and the offense as Mularkey was doing before him. Shanahan most be really bad that Koetter keeps being brought up.

[hiawasseefalcon]

I can't believe that only a short time ago most people on here wanted his head on a stick or in a guillotine. Many then also said that Koetter was handcuffing Ryan and the offense as Mularkey was doing before him. Shanahan most be really bad that Koetter keeps being brought up.

He is. Im not saying Ryan is the best, but he is definitely worse under Shannahan. I also believed, (Before the Season), that we should have kept Koetter.

[Atlfanstckndenver]

This is futile, but i think our record would be a few games better. Maybe 3. Then again, another reason this is futile is because we're discussing hypothetical situations. If we had kept koetter we can be pretty sure our run game would not have won us as many games as it has. Or our o line could have wound up looking worse for a few reasons including the previous sentence. The run game not being as strong would mean more pressure on the passing game and pass blocking etcetcetc... who know.

[Atlfanstckndenver]

I can't believe that only a short time ago most people on here wanted his head on a stick or in a guillotine. Many then also said that Koetter was handcuffing Ryan and the offense as Mularkey was doing before him. Shanahan most be really bad that Koetter keeps being brought up.

Koetter was mostly criticized for his lack of run game and leaning on the screen too much. I just don't think he was as criticized as Mularky was. There where far more people that wanted to keep k around compared to M.

[FalconinPA]

Koetter was mostly criticized for his lack of run game and leaning on the screen too much. I just don't think he was as criticized as Mularky was. There where far more people that wanted to keep k around compared to M.

i can definitely agree with the bolded. But there were still quite a few calling for Mularkey's head though

[toadfishtom]

The mere fact that this question is even being considered shows how bad how offense has become.Koetter was not as bad as Shanahan .He knew what Ryan could do and also what he could not do.We have never been this bad on offense in the Ryan era.Frustration has set in among the players and the fans, changes must be made.

[Atlantafan21]

Probably 9-4 or 10-3. Colts, 49ers, Bucs(home game) and Vikings(maybe) would've probably been wins.

[ManInBlack]

9-4

[jlrfalcon]

10-3

The key is that everyone accepted that the offense was great last year and just maybe needed some talent upgrades on OL and a younger RB than Jackson.

THERE WAS NO REASON TO CHANGE THE WAY IT WORKED - especially a whole massive overhaul of the playbook and over 50% turnover of the offensive roster.

The problem last year was our stupid defensive setup under Nolan that had Biermann as the feature player.

Edited December 17, 2015 by jlrfalcon

[Drunken Minotaur Zebra]

10-3. We would've scored enough to win at least 4 of the games that we lost.

Yep. I think we'd still drop the one in NO, the Vikes, and the Panthers... thats it.

[Power I]

Let's see. We're 6-7. He's 6-7. We have the 17th ranked defense to help our offense, he has the 11th ranked defense. I'm going to say...probably no better than 6-7.

[Dem Birds]

I wanted to keep him. He was only predictable because we couldn't protect and run block. He had to rely on screens and underneath stuff to keep Ryan upright and make up for a lack of running game. His rout concepts were far superior to Shananhan's

[THEHEADCOACH]

If we upgraded the oline some, which has been our big problem all along, we would have won almost all the games we lost. You can't use Tampa's record to decide ours, matt knew our offense alot better and ran it better. We just needed a improved defense , a oline and younger backs. The pass and the run start with those guys up front.

Edited December 17, 2015 by THEHEADCOACH

[samueladams]

Not any better, according to him we didn't have enough talent on the team.

[Csdabest]

Defense was the issue imo. Something quinn would of fixed. More upgrades on the oline would of helped as well

[bdog 29]

Maybe I'm missing something but I always liked Koetter and was really disappointed to see him go. His route combinations were some of the best I've seen as a Falcons fan and I think he would have relied more on the running game if we had halfway decent olinemen and runningbacks.

If we'd kept him on the staff, I think we'd be 12-1 right now with our only loss being to the Panthers. His offense would have scored enough points to win in all of our games but that and given how opportunistic our defense is when we're ahead, I don't see teams being able to gash us like they have.

[blizzard_falcon]

I'd say about 10-4.

If we had kept Koetter, we wouldn't have switched to the ZBS. Which means Hawley and Asamoah would still be starting, barring injury (I still find Asamoh being placed on IR to be really shady).

That means that resources we devoted to Chester, Person, Levitre, Gradkowski, Long, and Harris could have been spent elsewhere. Instead of 6 new linemen - 3 starters - we would have only been in the market for a couple of new guys.

We also likely wouldn't have brought in Hankerson or Nick Williams, though no guarantee the WRs we did add would have made a difference.

You can play this game at TE and RB at well. In the end, I think Koetter would have more success here simply because the scheme would have been familiar, and the offensive line would have been better. Free of Steven molasses Jackson, Koetter may have finally been able to have a decent run game.

I never thought he was a rebolutionary, but he was better than Mularkey, and I was really upset to see him stay within the division. I had high hopes for Shanahan, but he has really disappointed me.

He had impressed me here in DC during RG3's rookie season, by molding his offense to fit RG3's skillset. I haven't seen any of that ingenuity or adaptability here. Just forcing his system onto players and ignoring what made this offense - and this QB - tick for so many years.

[madman88]

We def would have scored more points under Dirk..

Ryan didn't have a line with Dirk yet still put up nearly 5000yds and 20+TDs

The spread might have been the best for ryan

[sdogg]

1-2 losses at most.

4. KYLE SHANAHANS TAKE: Offensive coordinator Kyle Shanahan will lay out his full plan onhow he plans to get the offense moving. Quarterback Matt Ryan talked about a jump-start. You only jump-start batteries when they are dead. So, basically Ryan thinks the offense is dead.

Did Ryan ever say the offense was dead under DK or MM?