Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Falcons Fan MVP

What do you think Dan Quinn could do differently with the players he has to get the defense balling?

51 posts in this topic

4 hours ago, PeytonMannings Forehead said:

 

Exactly. Two of those Mariota touchdowns were against blitzes. All the blitz did was take a man out of coverage and make his read that much easier.

 

We need to put more hands in the dirt and stop trying to be cute with these 3-4 looks. Takk looked like a completely different player agains the run on that 4th down stop. Pad level was incredible. He got underneath the offensive lineman and slashed right by him.

Abandon all those 3-4 looks and get Vic off the field in base. He’s a liability in space.

Did I mention abandon all those 3-4 looks with those exotic pressure where guys like Vic stand and move around and Grady is the only linemen... it hasn’t fooled anyone yet.

And he needs to mix the coverages better. Mariota is a one read quarterback. Every time his first read was covered he panicked and looked to take off. I can’t believe we actually had problems covering Tennessee’s mediocre receivers in man, but they are us up. We had success playing zone yesterday. The week before it was just the opposite.

DQ seems to be having a problem seeing what’s going on from field level. Might be time to hand the play sheet off to someone else.

At least put someone in the box to tell him what's going on.

Harry Douglas was just on 92.9.  He said something that jumped off the page at me.  He said when he was in Atlanta under Koetter, they beat Seattle 3/4 times.  He said the reason is they knew what they were running and they knew what to run in order to beat it.

Harry wasn't dogging on Quinn, which is why it struck me.  He actually said the players have to fix it, they're not doing their jobs, etc.  But that part just jumped out at me, because it seemed so on point, and yet it wasn't really what Harry was trying to say.  

I don't know at this point.  Maybe it's one of those schemes where you have to have all the right pieces to make it work.  Koetter did light it up pretty good in 2012, before Quinn got there as DC (he was there previously as defensive line coach and assistant head coach, but in 2012 he was the DC at Florida).  With any defense, we win that game running away.  I don't really remember the others.  But Harry's take was pretty simple -- we knew what they were going to run and how to beat it.  And he said expressly they need to mix up the coverage looks, run more cover 2, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Lord Sarcomere said:
  1. Scrap the 3-4 front.
  2. Stop putting Vic and Takk in space

That would be a great start.

I haven't paid much attention to the fronts this season, so I've seen that we're running a lot of 3-4 looks, but I haven't paid much attention to situations.  

Are they doing this from base, or are they extending it to nickel looks too (sort of a 5-2 type thing)?

If they're dropping Takk and Vic on obvious passing downs, that's silly.  If they're dropping one of them in base from a true 3-4 and the other team is taking advantage, that's a correction, but it at least makes sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO we need to simplify the defense playbook. It’s clear they are not comfortable in stressful situations with their assignments. I believe you can reintroduce the 5-2 looks later but right now they are not comfortable enough to perform with the added responsibilities. As the offense makes plays their confidence tanks more and more and instead of reacting now they are over thinking . The beauty of the Carroll defense was the simplicity and in excitement to show what we can do or showcase the defense we lost that simplicity.  We cannot play man coverage with the corners we have, it’s just not their strength right now. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, SPITFIRE said:

IMO we need to simplify the defense playbook. It’s clear they are not comfortable in stressful situations with their assignments. I believe you can reintroduce the 5-2 looks later but right now they are not comfortable enough to perform with the added responsibilities. As the offense makes plays their confidence tanks more and more and instead of reacting now they are over thinking . The beauty of the Carroll defense was the simplicity and in excitement to show what we can do or showcase the defense we lost that simplicity.  We cannot play man coverage with the corners we have, it’s just not their strength right now. 

Simplify it to what?  I mean, they aren't exactly splitting the atom out there as it is.

I'm not seeing the added responsibilities.  That strikes me as more guys not doing their jobs.  If anything, I wish they'd mix it up a lot more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cover 3 and Cover 1, which is most of what we run, is about as simple a shell as it gets.  We run some twists and stunts up front, and we mix in some blitzes, but we aren't doing anything exotic with this defense.  If the guys we have can't understand what we're doing now, they don't need to be playing in the NFL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Falcons Fan MVP said:

What do you think Dan Quinn should do with the defensive players he has that could turn the defense around this season? What should he scheme different? 

The very first thing I would do is put Kazee back at the position where he had 7 INTs. Pure stupidity moving a guy who was that successful.

The 2nd thing I'd do is bench Beasley to prove a point. He's an average (at best) DE. I'd use a combination of Clayborn, Comiskee, and others in that spot.

The third thing I'd do is get out of the soft coverage and pressure the QB consistently. You need 4, bring 4. Need 5 bring 5. Need 6 bring 6. But the QB will NOT be comfortable.

Falcons Fan MVP likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, since68andcounting said:

The very first thing I would do is put Kazee back at the position where he had 7 INTs. Pure stupidity moving a guy who was that successful.

The 2nd thing I'd do is bench Beasley to prove a point. He's an average (at best) DE. I'd use a combination of Clayborn, Comiskee, and others in that spot.

The third thing I'd do is get out of the soft coverage and pressure the QB consistently. You need 4, bring 4. Need 5 bring 5. Need 6 bring 6. But the QB will NOT be comfortable.

Benching fools, and Beasley has outperformed my expectations this season, but he's as good a candidate as any, is a good way to get started for sure.

I'd have Trufant's *** on the bench after that last game.  I'd tell him what Norm Van Brocklin told all the starters he cut when he came here -- "I can lose without you."  Let him earn his way back by taking his job seriously.

At this point, it's for their own good.  Too many dudes know they will keep getting paid and keep getting to start no matter how bad they play.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, JDaveG said:

Benching fools, and Beasley has outperformed my expectations this season, but he's as good a candidate as any, is a good way to get started for sure.

I'd have Trufant's *** on the bench after that last game.  I'd tell him what Norm Van Brocklin told all the starters he cut when he came here -- "I can lose without you."  Let him earn his way back by taking his job seriously.

At this point, it's for their own good.  Too many dudes know they will keep getting paid and keep getting to start no matter how bad they play.

I really thought we cut the wrong corner. Tru never seems to show until he is called out as under-achieving. Very Beasleyish, actually.

Takk is internally motivated. The guy is just a little crazy, tbh. We need more crazy like Takk. Like Kazee. Like Debo who is just plain out good. We need self motivated guys like Jarrett.

I think the roster has some issues. But there is STILL A LOT we could do with the guys we have.

Sheffield at Nickel. Kazee at FS. Allen at SS. That's a start.

GeorgiaBoyz and JDaveG like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, JDaveG said:

Cover 3 and Cover 1, which is most of what we run, is about as simple a shell as it gets.  We run some twists and stunts up front, and we mix in some blitzes, but we aren't doing anything exotic with this defense.  If the guys we have can't understand what we're doing now, they don't need to be playing in the NFL.

You're right, this defense is very simplified as it is. And we don't do a very good job of disguising it either. It reads like a book, but it totally relies on awareness and playmakers which we're definitely coming up short with.

JDaveG likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JDaveG said:

At least put someone in the box to tell him what's going on.

Harry Douglas was just on 92.9.  He said something that jumped off the page at me.  He said when he was in Atlanta under Koetter, they beat Seattle 3/4 times.  He said the reason is they knew what they were running and they knew what to run in order to beat it.

Harry wasn't dogging on Quinn, which is why it struck me.  He actually said the players have to fix it, they're not doing their jobs, etc.  But that part just jumped out at me, because it seemed so on point, and yet it wasn't really what Harry was trying to say.  

I don't know at this point.  Maybe it's one of those schemes where you have to have all the right pieces to make it work.  Koetter did light it up pretty good in 2012, before Quinn got there as DC (he was there previously as defensive line coach and assistant head coach, but in 2012 he was the DC at Florida).  With any defense, we win that game running away.  I don't really remember the others.  But Harry's take was pretty simple -- we knew what they were going to run and how to beat it.  And he said expressly they need to mix up the coverage looks, run more cover 2, etc.

Okay, I'm not sure what Harry is talking about because Koetter got here in 2012, and we beat Seattle once in that playoff game.  Then got smoked in 2013, 33-10 in the regular season.

We didn't just beat them in 2012 because we knew what they were running.  They had a similar problem that we had that season -- they couldn't rush the passer with anyone not named Chris Clemons.  We couldn't pressure the quarterback with anyone but John Abraham.  You can beat any scheme when your QB, especially one the level of Matt Ryan has time to spread the ball around to Julio, Roddy and Tony.  

And I keep hearing the refrain that you need the right pieces to run this scheme, as if that is revelatory.  There isn't a scheme out there that doesn't require specific parts to run it effectively.  We're nowhere near the level of talent that the Seahawks were at their peak, but we aren't talent deficient either.  There isn't anything that jumps out on our roster that is stopping us from being effective in this defense.  

It really does come down to as Harry said, players doing their job.  DQ has to mix his coverages better and not hanging guys out to dry on the perimeter.  Our passing game coordinator/DB coach needs to do a better job of coaching up our techniques in zone.  But as far as the scheme itself, it's all based on fundamentals.  There isn't anything fancy.  And if we played to those fundamentals we wouldn't be surrendering 20+ points a half to mediocre offenses.

I feel what Harry is saying on the coverage front.  We actually have been playing some cover-2 the past two weeks, but even if we mixed in more, the same problems persist.  Our fundamentals are lacking and Dan Quinn is a step slow with the play calling. It feels the same way it did last year where we'd be in zone when we should have been in man, where we'd blitz where we should have played back, etc.  

falcons007 and WhenFalconsWin like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, PeytonMannings Forehead said:

Okay, I'm not sure what Harry is talking about because Koetter got here in 2012, and we beat Seattle once in that playoff game.  Then got smoked in 2013, 33-10 in the regular season.

We didn't just beat them in 2012 because we knew what they were running.  They had a similar problem that we had that season -- they couldn't rush the passer with anyone not named Chris Clemons.  We couldn't pressure the quarterback with anyone but John Abraham.  You can beat any scheme when your QB, especially one the level of Matt Ryan has time to spread the ball around to Julio, Roddy and Tony.  

And I keep hearing the refrain that you need the right pieces to run this scheme, as if that is revelatory.  There isn't a scheme out there that doesn't require specific parts to run it effectively.  We're nowhere near the level of talent that the Seahawks were at their peak, but we aren't talent deficient either.  There isn't anything that jumps out on our roster that is stopping us from being effective in this defense.  

It really does come down to as Harry said, players doing their job.  DQ has to mix his coverages better and not hanging guys out to dry on the perimeter.  Our passing game coordinator/DB coach needs to do a better job of coaching up our techniques in zone.  But as far as the scheme itself, it's all based on fundamentals.  There isn't anything fancy.  And if we played to those fundamentals we wouldn't be surrendering 20+ points a half to mediocre offenses.

I feel what Harry is saying on the coverage front.  We actually have been playing some cover-2 the past two weeks, but even if we mixed in more, the same problems persist.  Our fundamentals are lacking and Dan Quinn is a step slow with the play calling. It feels the same way it did last year where we'd be in zone when we should have been in man, where we'd blitz where we should have played back, etc.  

Yeah, I didn't check his work on it.  Maybe he just sort of threw that out there.  Who knows?

In any event, the one bright side is I see some of the leverage problems getting corrected schematically.  They did a better job overall protecting the edge the last couple of games, at least from my easy chair view.  That Trufant non-tackle where he washed Rico out of the play was the only one I recall (I'm sure there were others) where they just completely crapped the bed from an execution standpoint.  I mean, they couldn't have had those guys in any better position and Tru ran right by the play and kept Rico out as well.  It left Deion Jones in trail coverage basically, which is not a winning strategy.  The safety is back there for a reason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JDaveG said:

I haven't paid much attention to the fronts this season, so I've seen that we're running a lot of 3-4 looks, but I haven't paid much attention to situations.  

Are they doing this from base, or are they extending it to nickel looks too (sort of a 5-2 type thing)?

If they're dropping Takk and Vic on obvious passing downs, that's silly.  If they're dropping one of them in base from a true 3-4 and the other team is taking advantage, that's a correction, but it at least makes sense.

YES!  This is what needs to be simplified.  Both Vic and Takk have dropped in passing downs in base and nickel.  We aren't just running more 3-4 looks, we are out and out mixing in straight 3-4 principles.  I've seen up in old fashioned 3-4 okie fronts with a nose and two, two-gapping ends played head up on the tackles.  The pressure looks and the mixing and matching who rushes and who drops is all reminiscent of 3-4 -ish schemes.

Bob Sutton has come in and put his hands all in the mix.  You rarely see 4 hands in the dirt anymore unless Takk and Beasley are off the field and it's Cominsky and Claborn at the ends.  Yesterday I saw Takk put his hands in the grass for the first time I can remember this season.

Neither Vic of Takk need to be dropping back ever at this point.

JDaveG, falconsd56 and Godzilla1985 like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It takes BALLERS to run the scheme that Quinn runs.  The Falcons talent on defense is overrated...  Them monsters he had at Seattle made him look good...

Edited by slickgadawg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, JDaveG said:

Yeah, I didn't check his work on it.  Maybe he just sort of threw that out there.  Who knows?

In any event, the one bright side is I see some of the leverage problems getting corrected schematically.  They did a better job overall protecting the edge the last couple of games, at least from my easy chair view.  That Trufant non-tackle where he washed Rico out of the play was the only one I recall (I'm sure there were others) where they just completely crapped the bed from an execution standpoint.  I mean, they couldn't have had those guys in any better position and Tru ran right by the play and kept Rico out as well.  It left Deion Jones in trail coverage basically, which is not a winning strategy.  The safety is back there for a reason.

We've been playing the edges a lot better, and yesterday we stopped that naked boot to the TE that killed us vs. the Colts.  That's about all the positives I can take away.  But it's something.  Does show we're capable of some kind of improvement.

Lord, don't even get me started on that play.

JDaveG likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, PeytonMannings Forehead said:

YES!  This is what needs to be simplified.  Both Vic and Takk have dropped in passing downs in base and nickel.  We aren't just running more 3-4 looks, we are out and out mixing in straight 3-4 principles.  I've seen up in old fashioned 3-4 okie fronts with a nose and two, two-gapping ends played head up on the tackles.  The pressure looks and the mixing and matching who rushes and who drops is all reminiscent of 3-4 -ish schemes.

Bob Sutton has come in and put his hands all in the mix.  You rarely see 4 hands in the dirt anymore unless Takk and Beasley are off the field and it's Cominsky and Claborn at the ends.  Yesterday I saw Takk put his hands in the grass for the first time I can remember this season.

Neither Vic of Takk need to be dropping back ever at this point.

I understand that every coordinator zone blitzes at times.  But the amount of times I see passes completed over Beasley's head is getting my head to spin.  I was afraid that's what they were doing.

Are they sending pressure from elsewhere and it just isn't getting there?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, JDaveG said:

I understand that every coordinator zone blitzes at times.  But the amount of times I see passes completed over Beasley's head is getting my head to spin.  I was afraid that's what they were doing.

Are they sending pressure from elsewhere and it just isn't getting there?

Yes.  I've seen DQ try just about everything.  Sometimes he'll bring 5 and Beasely will be one of them.  Other times, he'll drop Vic and Takk back and a corner will come from one edge and Campbell, out covering the slot, will come from the other.  Then other times Takk will rush, Vic will drop, and corner from Vic's side will come of the slot.  Other than Philly, non of it has been particularly effective.

And he does it at the oddest times when we actually have been pretty effective getting pressure with 4.  It's all just getting too cute for my taste.

JDaveG and falcons007 like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, PeytonMannings Forehead said:

Yes.  I've seen DQ try just about everything.  Sometimes he'll bring 5 and Beasely will be one of them.  Other times, he'll drop Vic and Takk back and a corner will come from one edge and Campbell, out covering the slot, will come from the other.  Then other times Takk will rush, Vic will drop, and corner from Vic's side will come of the slot.  Other than Philly, non of it has been particularly effective.

And he does it at the oddest times when we actually have been pretty effective getting pressure with 4.  It's all just getting too cute for my taste.

I don't know. Go with the same look too many times and offenses will exploit it. Changing it up is not bad per se. The biggest problem is the players down on the field, they are playing like garbage. I don't think Dan Quinn's play-calling has been the biggest problem. All play calls look bad if the defensive players don't execute it. Not saying Quinn is doing a good job coaching, but the play calling specifically I don't think is the biggest problem. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, prolikewhoa said:

Probably just start blitzing like crazy. F it, at this point. Time to play this "aggressive" football he keeps preaching. 

Couldn’t be any worse than this “we’ll play this horrible zone and hope the Offense makes a mistake” D that we run.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, octoslash said:

Bad scheme and/or playing soft doesn't explain to me why nobody on the defense seems to be able to tackle like NFL players.  

Right, agreed.

It also doesn't explain sleepwalking for entire quarters or halves (or games).

There's some kind of psychological problem. Either Quinn has lost the locker room, or the players are (somehow still) over-confident, or we're too soft in our preparation each week, or something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, PeytonMannings Forehead said:

Okay, I'm not sure what Harry is talking about because Koetter got here in 2012, and we beat Seattle once in that playoff game.  Then got smoked in 2013, 33-10 in the regular season.

We didn't just beat them in 2012 because we knew what they were running.  They had a similar problem that we had that season -- they couldn't rush the passer with anyone not named Chris Clemons.  We couldn't pressure the quarterback with anyone but John Abraham.  You can beat any scheme when your QB, especially one the level of Matt Ryan has time to spread the ball around to Julio, Roddy and Tony.  

And I keep hearing the refrain that you need the right pieces to run this scheme, as if that is revelatory.  There isn't a scheme out there that doesn't require specific parts to run it effectively.  We're nowhere near the level of talent that the Seahawks were at their peak, but we aren't talent deficient either.  There isn't anything that jumps out on our roster that is stopping us from being effective in this defense.  

It really does come down to as Harry said, players doing their job.  DQ has to mix his coverages better and not hanging guys out to dry on the perimeter.  Our passing game coordinator/DB coach needs to do a better job of coaching up our techniques in zone.  But as far as the scheme itself, it's all based on fundamentals.  There isn't anything fancy.  And if we played to those fundamentals we wouldn't be surrendering 20+ points a half to mediocre offenses.

I feel what Harry is saying on the coverage front.  We actually have been playing some cover-2 the past two weeks, but even if we mixed in more, the same problems persist.  Our fundamentals are lacking and Dan Quinn is a step slow with the play calling. It feels the same way it did last year where we'd be in zone when we should have been in man, where we'd blitz where we should have played back, etc.  

He probably meant under MS going against Pete Carol.  Falcons did beat them few times till 2013.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0