Falcons

By Vick Mexico

October 6, 2006 04:22 PM | Link to this

Looking at remainder of schedule, I think the Birds go 9-7 this year. The losses I have are against Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, Baltimore, Washington, Tampa Bay, and Philly, plus the loss already to the Saints. Wins are the three we already have plus against NY, Det, Cleve, NO, Dallas, Carolina.

Talks amongst yourselves…

By Richard

October 6, 2006 04:42 PM | Link to this

Washington and Tampa Bay are you kidding I would believe losses to the Giants and Panthers but not to TB and the Skins. Nothing is a sure thing in the NFL these days but the falcons will win 11 at least if they can get the offense rolling a little. The Falcons whole season rests on the offensive side of the ball barring injury to any of our top defensive guys. I think that if we can get Alge to put some stickem on those hands and Roddy gets motivated by the play of Lelie and Jenkins with the running game already rolling we could be formidable down the stretch. I say 11-5 maybe 12-4.

By lee sunset

October 6, 2006 04:45 PM | Link to this

Unless Tampa Bay turns it around (doubtful) we should beat them (even at T Bay). Plus I’m not sold on Washington yet - and TJ Duckett will not get his revenge (will he even be active?). I think 11-5 is realistic.

By lee sunset

October 6, 2006 04:50 PM | Link to this

Also… obviously it’ll be a tough game but New England showed Cincy is vulnerable against the run (even at home) and Palmer is not mobile.

By TD

October 6, 2006 05:50 PM | Link to this

I see losses against the Ravens and the Skins, it is difficult to win on the road in the nfl. Pittsburgh looks really out of sorts with the Bus retiring and losing Randle El. Plus Hines has a hamstring injury. The defense should be able to sack Manning a bunch and keep the Giants down. I think a 11-5 or 10-6 is definitely within reach.

Did anyone ever say why Hartwell didn’t have his knees “scoped” earlier?

By larry w.

October 6, 2006 06:10 PM | Link to this

Hopefully Forney will make a speedy recovery. He is a very valuable piece to our offense. I was really hoping that with the addition of Musgrave, Knapp would take a more aggressive approach in his game planning and play calling. I thought he did a very good job of putting together a game plan for Tampa, but he is still pretty predictable and conservative overall. I truly believe that his playcalling has directly lead to our red zone woes. Some bloggers have suggested bringing Jackson up from the practice squad just for those red zone situations. I know that in order to do that, we would have to make roster space by demoting someone else to the practice sqaud. I don’t know how practical that would be, but the whole redzone mindset must change. What we have been doing so far is not working. Knapp has got to allow his offensive line an opportunity to show some toughness in those situations.

By kg

October 6, 2006 06:14 PM | Link to this

I think the Birds can go 3-1, 2-2, 2-2 for a 10-6 season. However, that might not be good enough for a division title. It will probably take 11-5 to win the division. There are no locks on the schedule, even the Lions could be tough in 5 weeks as they get their offense in gear under Martz.

By virginia falcon

October 6, 2006 07:50 PM | Link to this

After going 6-2 last year, I thought we were a genuine lock for 11-5 to finish the year and have home field advantage. Then we lost to Green Bay and knew everything had changed. The relative invincibility of teams changes throughout the season……I say we just look at small chunks of the season to have any realistic idea of what will happen.

By Coleman

October 6, 2006 10:03 PM | Link to this

Hey TD,

It’s been reported that Hartwell didn’t realize he had a problem until the end of preseason. His options were to try to play with pain through this season or get the scope immediately and be out a few weeks. Supposedly he had a sit-down with Mora, and Mora said go ahead and get the scope. So the story goes. The whole thing sounds a little sketchy somehow.

Time will yet tell whether Hartwell is the beast he’s described as or the Peerless Price of defense. Assuming he returns healthy soon, and given the fact that Beck seems like a very good backup, and the linebacking corps is doing well without Hartwell, he looks like a very expensive backup.

By Larry

October 6, 2006 10:12 PM | Link to this

Our won/loss record is irrelevant because, should we make it to the playoffs, we will at some point once again face a defense that will play the run and force the worst passing QB in NFL history to throw the ball!

What’s the use? You can’t win a super bowl with a QB who throws a football like a shot-put!

By Tom

October 7, 2006 01:09 AM | Link to this

Good god…I hate you media types.

Instead of complaining about the 1-lineman-a-week policy, here’s a novel idea…

Why not actually TALK to the 1 lineman talking that week?

By Falcons Fan

October 7, 2006 05:13 AM | Link to this

Because that lineman might be a RESERVE guy who didn’t even dress for the game. His comments would be nearly worthless.

By b man

October 7, 2006 07:48 AM | Link to this

I am aware Vick isn’t a QB from the typical pocket passer mold who’ll throw for 250-300 a game but look at last years SB champs for a second. Big Ben’s passing numbers weren’t great but the Steelers had a strong running game & a solid defense…he made timely throws when he needed.

Now, I’m not comparing Pit to Atl but I think the Falcons have a very good chance if they can stay healthy b/c a running game & defense can carry a team.

By Nunna Yo Biznezz

October 7, 2006 07:54 AM | Link to this

To All..Don’t get it twisted..Even though Brooking is playing in Hartwell’s spot,don’t think for a minute he is not needed..Brooking is all hype.Bryan Cox should have stuck to his guns and backed up(instead of backing down)his comment of Brooking being a below average LineBacker..He makes a lot of tackles,yes he does,AFTER THE PLAY IS OVER 10-15 YARDS DOWN THE FIELD..

He is not an impact player.He runs by the ballcarrier alot instead of tackling them.. Im a season ticket holder..I tape falcons game,and i watch them over and over to see (when the camera allows me too)what the players do,and anything i miss when i see the game..He looks lost most of the time..

Beck is a heavy hitter,but don’t think he is the answer to Brooking..Neither can do pass coverage,and if Hartwell plays any similar to the above mentioned,he needs to be gone too..But,because of his injury,and the fact that Beck is just in his 2nd year,but still a rookie to me,i’ll give them both the benefit of the doubt,and a little time to prove themselves..

Brooking,needs to be out of here..

By Vick Mexico

October 7, 2006 09:19 AM | Link to this

Is the inability to develop a passing game because of Vick or is it because of the receivers?

By lee sunset

October 7, 2006 09:44 AM | Link to this

Vick Mexico - I think it’s a combination of things. MV7 still struggles with reads; footwork has improved but still relies on athleticism too much, Finneran’s absence, Roddy’s not stepping up, O-Line is geared for the run. And, yes, dropped passes. The shoulda, coulda, woulda’s are frustrating - add back 10 passes that were dropped and/or intentionally thrown away and MV7’s at the “magical” 60% completion rate. Also, if Crump catches the TD against Saints and Roddy doesn’t get called for questionable block against ‘Zona (in replay he’s pushing the cornerback from the side, not back), MV7 has a few more TD passes. Whatever. 3-1 is fine by me. Just hope the Falcons come out of bye stronger this year than last (they were 6-2 at bye last year and we know what happened after that). Really hope they take it to the Giants and sack/intercept Wonderboy/PeytonLite Eli.

By larry w.

October 7, 2006 10:13 AM | Link to this

Vick Mexico, from what I have observed, the problem is a combination of the passer, the receivers, and the preparation. The reason I point to preparation is because I do not believe that Vick is being allowed to get into any type of passing rhythm because of the infrequency in which the pass is used in our offense. Very rarely will you see two pass plays called back to back. Once, and certainly no more than twice a game we will see the deep pass. There are no slant routes being ran underneath the defense to take advantage of the big pass rushes that defenses like to employ against us. We do not execute screen passes very well, an indication that we do not practice them enough to make them effective. Most quarterbacks come out needing to get into a passing comfort zone. Coaches usually accomplish this by utilizing slant routes and quick outs. Our receivers are running routes 15 and 20 yards downfield. It takes time for those routes to develop, and in obvious passing situations, you are not going to have that kind of time in the NFL. Therefore we see Vick often times trying to wait for the receiver to clear downfield, but he doesn’t have time so he either takes off with ball or often times has to throw the ball before the play has completely developed. I could go on and on about preparation, but hopefully you get the idea.

By Steve T

October 7, 2006 12:27 PM | Link to this

Bottom line: if the WRs step up, the passing game will improve. Jekins is big, strong, and fast. He needs to fight for the ball. Do you guys remember the drop he had in the end zone? Vick placed the ball the only place he could throw it and Jenkins has to make the catch. What is up with Crumpler?

Let us lay off Vick until the WRs step up. Hey OC, here is a bright ideal, why not send some of those fast WRs deep and hit the home run.

By Jay

October 7, 2006 12:42 PM | Link to this

Hartwell and Brooking have had some good games in the past, but the young guys are far exceeding them now. Energy, health and desire to hit have dropped for the two stars. They love the sound of big buck$ more than popping pads and they want the buck$ as long as they can make’em last.

By parks

October 7, 2006 03:14 PM | Link to this

Brooking is just playing for money now?

some people just have no clue

By kg

October 7, 2006 03:56 PM | Link to this

To Larry, you’re the only person that has accused Vick of throwing the ball like a shot put. Most people criticize Vick because he throws too hard, making it hard to catch, or not having good footwork making the passes inaccurate. We’ve had some great throwing Qb’s, Bartkowski, Miller, Jeff George, but it was an old man that took us to the super bowl. There are no style points in the NFL, only wins and losses. Besides, there are lots of great qb’s who never made it to a super bowl, much less win one. Look at Marino and Peyton M., these guys are in the record books as two of the greatest passers ever, but no sb. Besides, things could be worse, we could have drafted Ryan Leaf. Now there was a bad qb and passer.

By ATLien Player

October 7, 2006 05:10 PM | Link to this

The Falcons attempt the least amount of passes in the NFL. “CHECK THE STATS AT NFL.COM” That means they are NOT a passing team!! The Falcons run first and then run some more. So you won’t see big stats from Vick, but that’s ok! Just win baby!!!

By e.b.

October 8, 2006 01:43 AM | Link to this

“Vick Mexico” —-gee, I guess that was your attempt at being funny. Instead, you just seem real stupid.

By E.Hill

October 8, 2006 12:18 PM | Link to this

I’m all over Hartwell. This guy has delievered nothing. Infact, he waited until the end of the preseason to have is knees scoped,scouped,soaked, whatever. Is he or isn’t he going to bring something to the table against the Giants next week? He has been here two years, 26 million in the black,and probably doesnt have five tackles totaled!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

By J Rich

October 8, 2006 01:02 PM | Link to this

This is to Vick Mexico, Lee, and Larry, and some others…you’ve all made some valid points on Vick passing issues…let me through this out there

Vick under Reeves in his second season threw for 2900 plus yards a hair under 3000. He ran for 777. Finneran was one of his receivers, I don’t think Crump was in the fold yet, I can’t remember who the other receivers were. Our running game was no where near what it is today.

Think about this, the two most productive players in the passing game are the TE and a slower WR(by his own admissions.)

How is it that Vick has been able to find Crumpler and Finneran consistantly, but has limited success with other receivers in an offense that is geared to spread the football around vs a Dan Reeves offense that focused on ball controll? And trust me I’m not calling for Dan Reeves

What I do know is Vick is capable of much better. Allegations that he’s the worst passing QB ever are foolish at best.

Offense co-ordinators should be able to design a offense to suit his skill rather than try to make him comform.

By 2dead flies

October 8, 2006 07:45 PM | Link to this

FORNEY HOPE YOU GET BETTER. Management has gave us a line that can do one thing run block. Look at the facts . They build it that way and now we have to live with it. The reciver scheme is a real joke. and this is a fact Greg Knapp does not know how to fix it.Management blamed price. now he is gone now who is the problem? GREG KNAPP. Mora won’t fire him and he is part of the problem.We will not see a passing game till Greg Knapp is gone or to save face and hire some one who can do the job he is gettig paid to do!

By Najeh Davenpoop

October 8, 2006 08:58 PM | Link to this

Looks like the reason my local corner store was out of Haterade this week was because Vick Mexico bought it all. Tampa is one of the worst teams in the NFC, there is no way we lose to them. Cincinnati has a terrible run defense, you combine that with our #1 ranked rushing attack and Deangelo Hall available to shut down Chad Johnson and we probably end up beating them too. Mark Brunell is terrible under pressure, and assuming we have John Abraham healthy against Washington I could actually see us shutting them out. If Pittsburgh, Baltimore, and Philly beat us it wouldn’t surprise me, but we did beat Philly last year when they had T.O. so I don’t see why we can’t beat them without T.O. We could end up losing to Carolina the 2nd time around though, in a division game against a good team anything’s possible. I don’t see us winning less than 11 games this year though, and we have a pretty good chance of making it 12 or 13.

Fire Greg Knapp!

By lee sunset

October 8, 2006 09:24 PM | Link to this

J Rich and Larry W,

Good points. No way Vick is worst passing QB. If he threw it as much as McNabb he’d be able to get in a rhythm more consistently. But we’re trading ball-control run offense (not that’s there anything wrong with that) for a less consistent passing game. If possible, after we’ve made opposing teams cornerbacks hesitate when seeing the option, I want to see Vick run the option where he pulls the ball back from Dunn, steps back (instead of running) and launches a pass down left sideline to Lelie (Texas did this yesterday to perfection). p.s. Redskins were less than impressive today. We can beat them.

By Vick Mexico

October 8, 2006 09:57 PM | Link to this

Not to beat a one-dimensional horse, but the Falcons’ current dominance in the running game is going to become a problem. Maybe not now or through Week 17, but when the playoffs come around, someone is going to solve the option attack that has lit up opponents to the ridiculous tune of 234.2 yards per game. Yes, for the third straight year, the Falcons are leading the league in rushing. And for the third straight year, they are trolling the depths of the league in passing offense (31st overall), after finishing 27th and 30th the last two seasons.

We can celebrate the Falcons’ vaunted defensive aggression all we want. Certainly that and the running game should be enough to vault Atlanta into the playoffs once again. But the single-dimension offense promises to be the franchise’s postseason undoing yet again, just like it was in the 2004 playoffs. It should be remembered that Atlanta destroyed St. Louis en route to the NFC championship game, rolling up 327 rushing yards. Then the Falcons encountered a defense that had one goal: hem in quarterback Michael Vick and the running game, and force the Falcons to throw the ball. The result? Atlanta rushed for 99 yards, and Vick completed 11 of 24 passes with one interception and no touchdowns. Oh, and the Falcons lost 27-10.

And yet, somehow, this postseason might be different? Not likely. Not with two of the league’s best rushing defenses, Chicago and Seattle, expected to stand in the way. And not with the Falcons already showing in the loss to New Orleans that when they fall behind and need to move via a passing attack, the results aren’t pretty. Perhaps the answer is a quarterback rotation with Matt Schaub. It sounds unconventional and far-fetched, but so is winning a Super Bowl while relying on the option attack.

By lee sunset

October 8, 2006 10:05 PM | Link to this

QB rotation would be interesting, even with the possibility of having both Schaub and Vick next to one another in shotgun. Why not? But it’ll never happen…

By D-Man

October 9, 2006 09:36 AM | Link to this

Okay, Forney Get well soon, blazay blazay, hopefully we get Abraham in, and in response to Vick Mexico, a quarterback rotation isn’t a bad idea but hopefully they don’t take an obvious approach like Greg Knapp always do with it. I mean a peanut league knows what Greg Knapp is gonna do before the play is ran. All you have to know is what down is it and how far are they from a first down and you have the Falcons offense summed up!

By lee sunset

October 9, 2006 10:20 AM | Link to this

Exactly, D-Man, regarding QB rotation. Didn’t Reeves rotate Vick and Doug Johnson (alternating series) for a bit during pre-season? And Vick was not a happy camper…

By D-Man

October 9, 2006 10:55 AM | Link to this

Yes Lee Sunset He did rotate Doug and Vick and I think it will work better with Schaub and Vick because they are stronger at there crafts. I hope Greg Knapp understands this or we might have to get a smarter OC here in Atlanta, ohh and AF please please please play Jerious Norwood more he needs at least 20 touches per game, he’s got extremely quick feet and we also can home into split back formations and screen passes more to get short yardage. I mean the redzone could be a breeze if we work on short yardage plays.

By lee sunset

October 9, 2006 11:17 AM | Link to this

I have sneaking suspicion they are focusing very earnestly on red zone O during extra practice time of bye week. At least I hope. Maybe I’ll ask Jim Mora when I see him and players at Warrick Dunn’s “Wash and Wear” event tonight…

By dirtybird54

October 9, 2006 02:15 PM | Link to this

Hey D. Orlando; I like the Falcons idea of having only one lineman talk per week; the whole idea is to keep idiots like you from gleaning too much info from our O line, plus giving other team bulletin-board material. On the subject of wins/losses, I think 11-5 is doable, but 10-4 might be more realistic. I can’t see us beating Ravens, Bengals and all three NFC South foes.If Steve Smith isn’t hurt, will probably lose to Carolina.

By Vick Mexico

October 9, 2006 02:41 PM | Link to this

Man, McNabb is a stud!!! What if Vick were that good? What makes McNabb great is his ability to make those around him better. Who are his receivers anyway? Baskett, Brown, Lewis… It certainly doesn’t hurt that he has great offensive coaches.

Will Vick ever be as good as McNabb?

By D-Man

October 10, 2006 09:13 AM | Link to this

Question is will McNabb be as good as Vick, little Mexico…. These are two different types of QB’s McNabb has one dimension, Vick is a triple threat, now you may not see it due to the fact that our OC coach calls on more running plays than Philly’s OC coach. But Vick can do multiple things, McNabb…..he strong in the one dimension he can do. Pay attention little Mexico.

By 2.5DEAD Flies

October 10, 2006 09:45 AM | Link to this

Has Mcnabb won the super bowl, has manning won the super bowl that’s the prize . Every thing else in for nothing. Vick is in the same class, none of them have won the big one. Talk about what is, not want -a- be’s.