Sports Columnists

By Carl

August 31, 2005 04:43 PM | Link to this

Terence, Whether or not Price is the problem with the offense is inconsequential. The guy ran lazy routes, did not block downfield, and basically gave too little effort for a player of his perceived caliber. That’s not just my opinion, but the front office and coaching staff as well. What kind of message would it send to the players, fans, and the rest of the NFL if Mora and Company allowed this to continue? Price had to go and he only has himself to blame, not the coaching staff, players, fans, or even the AJC! If I don’t perform my job to the best of my abilities I am at risk of losing it, and, evidently, so is Mr. Price.

By Jim Mitchell

August 31, 2005 05:01 PM | Link to this

Terrence:

I am an old U.T. fan, so I cheer for Peerless. However, there was a problem here, just from a receiving perspective. It’s like the flanks of the offense on a basketball court. You have a small forward and a power forward. A small forward doesn’t have a prayer playing strong forward. On the flanks in football, a #2 wide-out is like that small forward. A #1 wide-out is like that power forward. Both wide-outs need a modicum of speed. But the #1 guy needs size and strength as well. Peerless could not fit that mold. Hopefully one of the others can. I’ll be watching this fall to find out. I moved to St. Petersburg, Fl. from Marietta three days ago. I’ve already found a sports bar where I can watch the Falcons games. They’ve promised they will turn one set on the Atlanta games. I won’t miss a one.

Best regards from a recently transplanted fan.

Jim

By Will

August 31, 2005 05:20 PM | Link to this

I live in Rochester and attended many Buffalo Bills games when Peerless Price was on the rooster. I saw some of his best games in 2002. He is a top receiver. The Yards After th Catch were outstanding. Price can break free. I also went to Emory about the same time Price left. I saw his games in Atlanta, as well. Simply, Vick is a terrible passer. He has virtually no touch and uses Alge Crumpler as a safety blanket. He should be a running back. Price was used as a decoy and a blocker and literally, I mean “literally,” had one chance per game to make a play. If you look back to the Denver game, Price exploited Champ Bailey twice for scores. Both sideline receptions, both in traffic. A person with real football knowledge wouldn’t put this on Price. Check the tape. Also, I saw Price continually mess up Sam Madison when he was back in the AFC. So much for that.

By johna

August 31, 2005 05:24 PM | Link to this

Plain and simple Price lacked the desire needed to be a force on the field. How many times did we watch a defender run in front of him and knock the ball down. He rarely would go to the ball, he always waited for it and to me that shows a lack of wanting something bad enough to do what ever it takes to get it done.

By JT

August 31, 2005 05:32 PM | Link to this

Cafaro please post your comments once instead of repeatedly.

Thanks.

By Big Al

August 31, 2005 06:46 PM | Link to this

Vick has a better than 65% winning percentage. Add his rushing yardage and TD’s to his passing stats and see where he ranks with the other “passers”.

As for Price! Seemed he had better concentration and willingness to catch balls over the middle before he got his $10 Million signing bonus. He’s not the only guy to have a career year in his last year of his contract and then to become a diva when they got their big payday. All that happened to him was HIS ARMS GOT SHORTER AND HIS EYES wandering to see who’s gonna hit him

By todd little

August 31, 2005 06:47 PM | Link to this

this is why the sorry ajc keeps him due to this kinda response they know you spend money on the tired rag…. moore should go with worthless

By Marcus

August 31, 2005 06:51 PM | Link to this

Just to clear something up to Will. Peerless wasn’t covered by Champ in the Denver game. He was covered by Herndon go back and watch the film. Price’s best game last season came against someone’s #2 corner. Think about that before you dis our QB!

By Big Al

August 31, 2005 06:57 PM | Link to this

Hey Todd. If we don’t have different perspectives on things we’d be living in a dull world. TM is just presenting his point of view. No need to be rude.

By Harlan

August 31, 2005 07:22 PM | Link to this

It’s amazing how any time there’s a problem, people always seem to want to narrow it down to one factor and one factor alone. Has anyone considered that this situation was the result of some of the “theories” espoused by the ever-so-clever (NOT) Terrence Moore? Especially Mr. Moore himself? Probably not. Here goes:

1) Peerless was certainly a part of the problem. Lack of effort, poor attitude, pick your poison. Call it the “Alvin Harper” syndrome. Funny coincidence, eh? Former UT receivers that played a sterling #2 but bombed when given #1 responsibility and #1 money. Hey, I’m a UT fan, but I call ‘em like I see ‘em.

2) The offensive line is not among the best in the league when it comes to pass protection. No denying it and little has been done to effectively mitigate this problem. In their defense, the unpredictability and scrambling of Vick must make it tough to hold (pass) blocking assignments.

3) Our overall receiving corp has been…err…mediocre. So, even with Price being less than stellar, he was the #1 guy and probably was the focus of defensive secondaries which made his job even tougher (not that he struggled that hard to overcome that hurdle). I don’t watch game film so I’m sure someone can disprove this but it’s a thought.

3) The final factor in this equation, and possibly the most important is one that some people refuse to admit or see: Vick is not a very good passing QB. Yes, he has a cannon for an arm. However, throwing with amazing velocity means nada without accuracy. Look, I’m not saying that Schaub will ever be a starter or will be better than Vick. However, his skills in the passing game (delivery of the ball to a target) SEEM to be slightly better. I couldn’t help but notice that in games where Matt played, he seemed better able to find Peerless. I don’t recall the stats, but I do remember thinking that Peerless caught more passes when Schaub was in. Not saying that Vick alone was the reason Peerless wasn’t productive - just saying that perhaps he and Vick just weren’t the right fit for each other…and by extension that Vick and ANY receiver wouldn’t be terribly productive. Well…any receiver other than a TE named Crumpler. Hmm…maybe it’s just easier to find a big, relatively slower player to throw to.

By Larry

August 31, 2005 07:50 PM | Link to this

For those who think that the issue was Price coupled with Vick’s inexperience in this offense, let me as you a simple question or two.

Did Vick get any better in this offense and vertical passing game as the 2004 season progressed?

Was Vick better in game 16 as a passing QB after 4 preseason and 15 regular season games?

Was Vick better at the passing game in the playoffs?

He better show some—not substantial—improvement this season or we’ll all be leaning toward Mr. Moore’s latter theories. Just improvement, not perfection.

Stay tuned.

By Matthew

August 31, 2005 07:52 PM | Link to this

I’d like to take another moment to challenge the hypocrisy Mr. Moore.

Mr. Moore, you’re always so ready to take a stand for whatever cause you believe in, or whatever slight (real and those in your mind) you perceive to be happening to whomever.

So why not take up to slights that happened to the Irish 100 years ago. Or 200 years ago? Or even 50 or 60 years ago?

Are you trying to say that one kind of discrimination is worse than another kind?

Have you ever heard of “Irish Need Not Apply?” Or replace Irish with Italian, Orientals (now Asian, as Oriental is a racist term), German, or yes, Black, or Indian.

What about the wrong-headed stereotype of a drunk, fighting Irish man. Not only is this demeaning, and wrong, it is blatantly anti-Catholic in a heavily protestant nation. So are you going to fight for the Catholics out there, who a called idolaters and other worse and wrong names by Southern Baptists (who are very hypocritical themselves)? Are you going to fight for Southern Baptists, whom I just called hypocritical?

YOU, MR. MOORE, ARE A HYPOCRITE!

I challenge you to denounce the ugly stereotype of the Fighting Irish.

I challenge you to be a man of principle, as you have so far wrongly claimed to be. Actions speak louder than words.

I am of German-Irish, Italian, and Catholic decent. I also, like most every American, have a small percentage of my genetic make-up that belongs to the Cherokee Tribe on my Grandmother’s side on my dad’s side. Not a great amount, but a tiny bit.

Thing is, Mr. Moore, most of us are just plain mutt.

I have said this to you before, and I’m saying this again. Biologically, there is only one race - The human race. The correct term for the divisions within this race is ethnicity. So all of y’all from the other columns claiming that the Irish who may be offended by “Fighting Irish” don’t count, and their argument isn’t as good as the one by the Indians because the Indians are a race and the Irish aren’t, you’re just plain wrong.

There you have it, Mr. Moore. I am challenging you to take a stand against your beloved Notre Dame for their promotion of terrible stereotype of the Irish. I challenge you to be a man of principle. I challenge you to NOT be the hypocrite that you’ve proven to be time and time again with your actions and your words.

Recant your ridiculous assertion, or call for the end of the Fighting Irish.

Be a man, Mr. Moore. You can either admit your hypocrisy, and be a man and apologize. Or if you really, really believe in what you say, you’ll start a movement, or acknowledge said movement, to end the ridiculous stereotype of the Fighting Irish which the University of Notre Dame profits mightily from.

There is no thing as good and bad discrimination, or high or low levels of discrimination. It either is, or it isn’t. All discrimination, if it truly exists, is bad. Africans, Natives, Irish, Italians, Asians, and many others have been discriminated against in this country at one point in time and some still to this day.

So take a stand, or remain a hypocrite. The choice is yours, Terence.

I’ll be the thorn in your side on this issue forever. This is me taking a stand against YOUR hypocrisy. And I won’t rest, I won’t stop. Every column you write, I’ll reprint this blog, until you acknowledge your hypocrisy or demand the end of the Fighting Irish.

As a disclaimer, personally, I have no problem with Native mascot names (besides the blatantly wrong Redskins or the abhorrently-smiling Chief Wahoo) or the Fighting Irish. I’m just challenging Terence Moore’s rampant hypocrisy, because I’ve had enough of his false logic and in some cases, straight-up fabrications (Like in the Jackie Robinson story from last in which Moore called MLB out for being racists, because of a lack of black-Americans in MLB compared to other sports, ignoring the fact that a vast number of players who come from Latin America are not Caucasian. Meaning, I guess, that MLB are okay with people of color, but only if they don’t come from America. How ridiculous is that?). Mr. Moore has stepped over the boundary one too many times. We would be better off without his flawed and skewed viewpoint.

By mountain jim

August 31, 2005 08:24 PM | Link to this

Who exhibits the most self-importance writing in these blogs? T’ain’t Moore.

I will have to disagree with those here who think that Price was not a problem. His lack of effort and inability to get open much of the time was what I observed last season, with several interceptions and near-interceptions caused by his obvious slacking off and inability to come back for or fight for the ball,things anyone being paid #1 money should do.

I have to support the coaching staff on this call - a developing cancerous attitude out the door is addition by subtraction, and once Roddy and Jenkins show their skills we will clearly see it was not Vick’s passing that was the problem.

mj

By Eddie

August 31, 2005 08:59 PM | Link to this

I think it comes down to Peerless’s lack of effort and leadership between the receivers hurt him.Also I think that Atlanta’s version of the West Coast was not an perfect fit for Peerless.Teams whom runs versions of the West Coast have receivers that have height,upper body strength and speed like Terrell Owens,and Jerry Rice who can not only run after the catch, but be able to break tackles and be productive.Peerless has speed, but lack the height,strength,and effort to be an number 1# receiver in the WC.

By Matthew

August 31, 2005 09:01 PM | Link to this

Not self-importance…

I just feel if Moore can write about whatever he feels, then he should at least be held to some sort of standard of logic and common sense.

By thomas davis

August 31, 2005 09:12 PM | Link to this

Matthew, Get a therapist. Someone whom you can pay to listen to your bile.

By Gumbo

August 31, 2005 09:48 PM | Link to this

Jeez, for once I agree with Matthew.

Just imagine how many articles our beloved columnist would have written if Notre Dame’s mascot was the “Fighting Spearchuckers” instead of the “Fighting Irish”, and their mascot was an African woodsman throwing a spear instead of a leprachaun with his fists in the air.

Guess it’s different if the offended party is white, huh?

Hopefully, one day, our good friend Terence will be able to say, in the words of Doc Holliday in “Tombstone”,

“I’m sorry - my hypocrisy only goes so far.”

Well, a guy can dream, can’t he???

By TJ

August 31, 2005 09:57 PM | Link to this

Mr. Moore,

I must commend you for, while short, giving us a very stimulating read and topic of discussion. I really enjoy reading your articles, they are always poignant. I guess your writing style is so magniloquent some people just don’t get it.

With Peerless Price, I kind of lean to the Alvin Haper syndrome. Buffalo knew that Price wasn’t #1 receiver material so instead of paying him #1 money, they traded to a team who needed a #1 receiver while Price’s stock was high.

Price became a victim of his success. His success in Buffalo got him the big money in Atlanta. The big money brought big expectations. Price was unable to live up to the expectations.

Price’s inability to live up to the lofty expectations brought him into disfavor with the fans. His lack of #1 receiver ability along with a young QB was just too much for him to overcome. The Price era in Atlanta can be compared to a Camelot Marriage with a Chuck Finley/Tawny Kitaen divorce.

While this is why I feel Price was not successful with the Falcons, I do not feel this is the sole reason for the Falcons passing deficiency. I believe that, as pointed out by Mr. Moore, the offensive line has to improve a lot in pass protection.

Maybe a timed passing scheme like what Troy Aikman prospered under in Dallas would be more fitting for Vick’s rifle arm. With a timed scheme though it still comes down to good pass protection from the offensive line though.

Personally I prefer the west coast type offense for Vick. It allows for more improvision and bootlegs to utilize his atheletic ability.

One thing about Vick is that he is a winner. When he plays the whole team has the confidence they can win any game. That is an important intangible which statistics just can’t measure.

Vick is still young so don’t get down on his passing ability yet. This might be officially his 5th year but only his 3rd full year as a starter. Vick is just now starting to enter the beginning of the upside of his prime.

By Clete

August 31, 2005 10:01 PM | Link to this

It’s very simple, if you perform your job the way it’s supposed to be performed you stay, if not, you go. Bye bye Peerless, where ever you end up, you’d better step it up and perform or you won’t stay there long either. Come to think of it Terence, you had better be glad you are working for the AJC, because they obviously don’t expect much performance out of their sport writers.

By Tee

September 1, 2005 01:31 AM | Link to this

Well i do believe that maybe Price was not the problem…But there was a problem. I think by getting rid of Price who had low production for a number one reciever probably getting number one reciever pay, you give the bunch as you call them the chance to play. I disagree to the fact that you dissed that bunch by the way. I feel they are a young talented bunch, and without that added pressure of knowing whether or not you will play or not they will hopefully blossom into something positive for the team.

By Andy

September 1, 2005 06:58 AM | Link to this

I believe Crumpler is Vicks favorite target because he adjust his routes(when Vick is scrambling) and he fights for the ball. The Falcons paid him alot of money and he could not adjust to the needs of Vick to get him the ball more. Schuab did get Price the ball more. Vick can’t—thats not his game.

oh—I can’t help it.

HEY CAFRO——PLEASE POST THE 100 OR SO POSTS ABOUT HOW ANDREW JONES STINKS— SHOULD BE TRADED…BLA BLA—TM’s BEING A HYPOCRITE?—-YOU TALK ABOUT “LOGIC?” (I have just edited the rest of this.)

By ricko

September 1, 2005 09:05 AM | Link to this

I thought this was a discussion on the cutting of Peerless Price and the ability of the Falcon’s passing game to succeed.

Then out of the blue some nut job with an obsessive compulsive disorder tries to turn this into a discussion about race.

This Matthew fellow comes across as one of those ultra-liberal race baiters. No matter the subject a race baiter tries to change the subject to racism so they then can prop themselves up on their soap box and let everyone know how much more righteous they are than the rest of us. This is exactly what this Matthew character is doing.

Matthew, we are here to discuss sports so take your race baiting drivel back over to moveon.org or peta.org to discuss with your buddies. Rumor has it that Al Sharpton is over there wanting his soap box back. He does say you are almost as good at race baiting as him though.

I will give Terrence Moore credit for ignoring Matthew’s trolling, I couldn’t. Terrence you are a better man than I.

You would think that the ajc would have a web master to delete trolling posts and ban trollers if they keep it up. Most sites do.

By TR

September 1, 2005 09:47 AM | Link to this

In response to your comments:

1) The Price theory: Price played well in Buffalo as a #2, but couldn’t cut it anywhere else as the #1 (ended up in Atlanta as a result of an owner set on getting him); he played lazy, didn’t fight for balls, and anticipated getting hit (no matter who was throwing to him); finally, I guarantee Peerless won’t be a #1 receiver whatever team he signs with (he just doesn’t have the size to fight off DBs).

2) The offensive line theory: we have some definite holes on this OL and not a conventional OL like the Colts, Patriots, and Eagles of the world. I say give this Gibbs OL philosphy one more year and if teams are still running through like no one’s there, we have to ditch Gibbs and his philosphy of cut blocking and start over. For those of you that blame Vick for rolling out and not getting rid of the ball quick enough, have you been really watching the games? Vick leaves the pocket when it starts to collapse around him (he’s trying to more pocket oriented); rollout plays are by design and the OL should be rolling with him; and there have been times Vick couldn’t take a one step drop—let alone a three or five— without defenders being in his grill. Our OL may not have the right mix of personnel yet…how come Denver never had these sack problems and ran the same blocking scheme…hmnnn?

3) The other wide receivers theory: bottomline here, Finn is the best receiver we have right now. Dez White hasn’t shown anything other than he’s about a #3 at best, Michael Jenkins still too inconsistent and raw, and Roddy White is an unknown rookie with lots of potential (still waiting to see). I don’t know why the Falcons never went after a veteran receiver like Muhammad, Moss, etc. who you know can get down the field and catch the ball. Jenkins or Roddy has to step up and emerge as the future receiver of this team…if not them both.

4) The offense theory: Vick is just starting his third season of actual play; and the second in the same offensive system. I believe the west coast offense is perfect for Vicks’ skills (a mobile QB who can throw on the run). Once Vick learns to truly read defenses and has time to have his receivers get to where they need to be, I believe he will start to take teams apart.

5) The Vick theory: patience is the key here. Look how long it took the likes of Young, McNabb, and others to pick up the WCO before they began seeing success. This is only Vick’s second year in this offense. It’s funny how some of his critics say he can pass, but he threw the ball in Reeve’s offense with no problem. Our scheme may hurt Vick’s passing as well (run first team), by not throwing enough in games. Vick doesn’t have the passing skills or mechanics of a Manning & Brady because he wasn’t given the training they received in college. So please stop with the comparisons!!! Vick is a raw talent who’s been carrying the Falcons for each of the three seasons he’s played. I believe this will be the first year we get a glimpse of Vick utilizing others around him to win.

By Nookah

September 1, 2005 10:10 AM | Link to this

The stats speak for themselves. Peerless just was not getting it done. He seemed to lack the desire and appeared to be hiding in the shadows. In Buffalo he had Moulds to stand in the front line for him, so he succeeded while under the radar. When he came to Atlanta he had to be the front line guy and some people just can’t act that leading role. It’s a different thing when the pressure is on. If you do not have the personality to accept that responsibility then you won’t perform. Peerless will never be a #1 guy. He is a good supporting receiver at best.
The bottom line is we made a bad investment and like every good business man, let’s not whine about the past but cut our losses and move on. Roddy and Micheal will be great and I have no doubt about Micheal ‘Clarke Kent’Vick. Give him the protection and he will be even more awesome. Is that possible? You bet it is.
Do I hear Super Bowl? Go Falcons!!!

By HB

September 1, 2005 10:55 AM | Link to this

Mr. Moore’s penchant for playing the race card is well documented by long-time AJC readers, so it’s no completely outlandish that the issue comes up once again.

However, the point relates to Vick’s production out of this version of the West Coast (as if all versions are the same). Bottom line is that this offense led the team to the NFC championship game in the first year of a new system. Kind of hard to find fault with Vick’s performance in that context. Let’s see who gets to the Super Bowl first, Manning or Vick. Stats are for fantasy games. Vick’s talent creates inside running lanes for Duckett and Dunn because the outside defenders can’t cheat to the middle for fear Vick will get outside them and take it to the house. Sequentially, with the running success that fear creates (leading rushing offense in the NFL last year) defenses cheat up to stop the run and Crumpler gets behind them and is virtually impossible to defend in single coverage by linebackers and/or safeties. Truth is, when Vick and Crumpler roll out together I’d say it’s one of the toughest plays in football to defend. Come off Crumpler to shut down Vick’s running lane and Vick dumps it over you to Alge. Stay back on Alge and watch Vick pick his lane in the open field and accelerate like no other athlete in the game today. Why don’t we give Vick and this team, and it’s coaches, the benefit of the doubt on how things will progress this year? See what Jenkins can bring in year two. Give Roddy White a year to learn to play in the NFL. Bottom line is that Price wasn’t productive. If Mora and his staff thought he could contribute effectively to this team, he’d still be in uniform. Given last season’s success, I’d say Mora has earned the right to make those types of decisions. Maybe Peerless can move in with Steve Belkin.

By earl

September 1, 2005 12:01 PM | Link to this

i kenw as soon as price was cut moore would have something to say about it , sense he [price] is anafroamerican

By falcon guy

September 1, 2005 12:21 PM | Link to this

It amazes me that someone can say that Vick isn’t a good passer, but in the same breath say that he uses Alge Crumpler as a safety net. Well why is it that Alge has no problem catching balls thrown to him, or getting yards after the catch? Why was it that Finneran had no trouble catching passes from Vick (even while Vick was a first year starter)? Mysteriously the balls thrown from Vick to Crump or Finn are easier to catch. The truth is there’s no mystery. Crumpler is a great receiver with excellent skills. Finneran is a hard worker who knows how to get open. Price was not a good receiver or a hard worker. He was outmatched by #1 cornerbacks and he didn’t buy into the team concept of blocking for his RB’s.

By Falconsfan

September 1, 2005 12:26 PM | Link to this

I am just surprised Terrance Moore did not try to turn this into a racial issue like he does with everything else!

By Carlos

September 1, 2005 12:27 PM | Link to this

Saying Price was the “problem” is too simplistic of an approach. It’s almost as close to making an excuse as you can get. Dont care that he didnt block or was lazy it doesnt matter. If any of the other recievers on the team were better they would have stepped up during his tenure. I think the real bottom line is the Falcons realized that Price just wasnt producing enough to justify his high salary.

Also since when has one man, (not a QB) can be held responsible for a teams passing game failing? The mere thought is ridiculous.

Truth be told the “problems” with the passing game lies in a combination of the theories that Moore presented. All of them have merit.

I dont think Price was the “problem” the truth is Price just wasnt the ANSWER we all hoped and thought he would be.

By JIM

September 1, 2005 01:08 PM | Link to this

There is sympathy for Peerless is this neck of the woods….If you put Jerry Rice in his prime with the worst passer in football he’d have a bad year. another intriguing stat. everybody knows dan reaves was known as a running coach. so how in the world did vick have 100 MORE passing attempts under reaves wake up falcon fans we need to wake to the fact this is another blow to our team, vick is already in his 3rd offensive scheme in 4 yearsThe people, (fans, media, unintelligent fans) want to see Vick succeed so much that they are blind to the fact that he needs alot of work in the passing gameHow many years have we said “Vick is only in the 2nd,3rd, 4th year, or he was hurt the first season so this is really his rookie season.Or the classic � wait till he learns the offense, all i have heard the past 3 yrs is VICK VICK VICK between people that have never played football and the ESPN ANNOUNCERS wacking each other off its makes me laugh every time i hear his name….the same people that says VICK RULES says P.MANNING SUCKS . Give me a break to suceed and win a superbowl leave the PASSING to the running back and the running to the quaterback RIGHT OHHHHH thats right thats what the falcons have tryed to do with VICK and look at the result watching it on the tv again. 2003 and 2004 what is the biggest diffence no its not that vick was hurt no no no …..2003 falcons aveaged 21 points per game with doug johnson!!! 2004 we aveaged almost 15 points per game WIERD that we won alot more games in 2004 how is that possible 2 REASONS defence and special teams not VICK LAST yr Vick had a total of 16 touchdownS combined rushing and passing.AND 28 TURNOVERS JUST HIMSELF INT AND FUMBLES 2 TO 1 turnovers to touchdowns worst in history and ESPN wacking each other off says hes a MVP …. 2003 26TH RANK DEFENCE AND 28TH RANK SPECIAL TEAMS AVG 21 PPG = LOSING RECORD. 2004 2ND RANK IN THE NFL IN DEFENCE AND 2ND RANK SPECIAL TEAMS AVG 15 PPG = ALMOST A SUPERBOWL NOW WHATS THE BIG DIFFERENCE NOT MIKE VICK….NOW TO PEERLESS PRICE �GREAT RECEIVER IN COLLEGE �-GREAT RECEIVER IN BUFFALO��TRADED TO FALCONS AND NOW HE SUCKS OK WHY …. ILL TELL YOU WHILE VICK IS RUNNING AROUND LIKE A CHICKEN WITH HIS HEAD CUT OFF HES RECEIVERS NOT ONLY PRICE IS OPEN AND BY THE TIME HE LOOKS UP ZONE HAS PICKED UP ALL HES RECIVERS AND PRICE IS DOUBLE TEAMED SO WHAT DOES VICK DO …HES RUNS FOR THE SIDELINE OR LOOKS FOR CRUMPLER 5 YRDS OUT OR TRYS TO FORCE THE BALL INTO A COVERED MAN MOST Which are INT OR HOLDING THE BALL ONE HANDED FUMBLES IT….ONE OF THOSE 4 THINGS. gggggggeeeeeezzzz nice offence do you know how many attempts vick tryed to throw to price in the 1st 2 games last yr. ( 4 )Yeah great and we ask why he dont have some good #’s ….. it dont matter if we had T.O. AND RANDY MOSS AND MARVIN HARRISON…. VICK WILL STILL RUN AROUND SCRAMMBLING NOT LOOKING FOR HIS RECEIVER WHILE THEY ARE OPEN AND THEN FORCEING IT WHEN THIER NOT….HE WOULD BE A BETTER RECIEVER ,DROP HIM THE BALL OUTSIDE 5 YRDS OUT ON A DIG AND LET HES SPEED TAKE OVER…..IF NOT WE WILL HAVE SCORES LIKE WE DID LAST YEAR 6-3,12-6, 14-7 WHICH MOST OF THOSE Pointcame from specialTEAMS (ROSSUM)AND DEFENCE ints. And MORA dont get me started the things he does uuuuuuurrrrgggg….. if he knew what hewas doing and really wanted vick to do well he would have him in shotgun everydown to give him time to see the receivers and we wouldnt be releasing people like PRICE.

By JIM

September 1, 2005 01:36 PM | Link to this

MR MOORE I AGREE WITH YOU … THE FALCONS ARE GOING TO PLAY SOME TEAMS THIS YEAR THAT KNOW WHAT THEY ARE DOING … LAST YEAR WE ONLY PLAYED TWO.. KC AND THE EAGLES AND THEY BOTH KILLED US … SO VICK IS GOING GO OUT THERE AND AVERAGE ONE INT ONE FUMBLE AND ONE TD AND LOSE 7-34 BUT HE RUSHED FOR A HUNDRED YARDS WUUUPPPPEEEEEE AND ANOTHER IS THE NFC IS ALOT BETTER THAN LAST YEAR SO THIS YEAR WE WILL SEE WHAT HE IS MADE OF…AND REMEMBER VICK FANS WHEN SOMETHING GOES RIGHT ITS VICK VICK VICK AND IF WE GET KILLED ITS EVERYONE ELSE…. THAT IS THE ADDITUDE I ALWAY HEAR FROM YOU BUT WE WILL SEE ……NO MORE 6-3,14-12,12-6 WINS WE ARE PLAYING THE BIG BOYS NOW…..NO MORE EXCUSES ….PRICE IS GONE NO MORE SCAPGOAT.

By Brian

September 1, 2005 01:36 PM | Link to this

I agree with one of Moores scenarios, the offense will defintely have to be changed. Secondly who gives a flying flip, we were one win away from the Super Bowl and given the talent on the team, we should be close again. Concerning the passing game how about a revamp use Alge, Finneran and one other guy, we don’t need to run a spread offense in order to run the west coast. Maybe an additional blocker will help out the line instead of spreading them thin. the Falcons are a running team, period, Alge made it to the pro-bowl and has great production, why the complaining about a down field threat it didn’t hurt us last year, with the exception of the Philly game. Even then it didn’t matter they were bringing the heat, Vick didn’t have time to throw one deep. Revamp the offense a little and quit complaining we could return to the basement of the NFC.

By Falcon Fan

September 1, 2005 02:00 PM | Link to this

True Price was not a No.1 reciever, the problem is we still don’t have a number one receiver. DOn’t get me wrong Crumpler is the man and he benefits the most in the current scheme. This mistake of signing Peerless just got worst, we don’t have anybody to repalce him, believe it or not The Falcons are in the midst of that three season window to win a Super Bowl, why risk waiting on the younger guys to blossom. We needed/need to go out a get a big name reeiver. How much longer can we expect to have Dunn/Duckett in the backfield. The is short sighted mis-management. We gave up albeit a low 45 catches for what “a hope and a prayer that these new guys catch 20”. I hope they pick someone up soon, and I hope they Birds realize this current team has one ot two more seasons b4 the window of opportunity closes. the Birds are the Number 2 team in the NFC behind Philly how long before the other teams in the NFC get better and the Falcons fall down the ladder, injuries and free agency will take it’s course. ACT NOW Please GO GET A WIDE OUT.

By Big Jimmy

September 1, 2005 02:29 PM | Link to this

Mr. Moore is right. But do people think that Mora and the crew don’t know that too. They will do what they feel like they have to do to win. Jim, I read your posts everyday and you never make any sense. Tis team will win and win big. We will feature the run, but will throw the ball enough to scare people. Give Mora a break, Do you people actually think the coaches are stupid. Terrence Moore propbably thought Doug Johnson should have started a couple of years ago.

By Jason

September 1, 2005 02:38 PM | Link to this

I’ve read a lot of crap from several idiots who obviously don’t know anything about football. I’ve read that Vick was not a good passer and that he should be a running back. No fools he’s in the perfect position for his abilities. The NFL is changing players are stronger and faster and it will be very hard for an immobile quarterback to have success unless your name is Peyton. Vick is a winner in his first two full seasons as starting quarterback he has managed to have winning seasons with the later increasing the number of wins. He also managed to take them pass the first round his first year and to the NFC championship his second. So its safe to think that its Superbowl time in altanta given his track record. It is true that he didn’t get peerless the ball but he couldn’t get himself open. With a quaterback like Micheal Vick and his scrambling ability it gives recievers more time to get open. A corner can only hold you for so long and real recievers like T.O or Randy Moss will burn them everytime. But the key to that is they are #1 recievers peerless is barely #2 he sucks. Sometimes he would watch Vick make plays instead of playing football. I never wanted the Falcons to get peerless I thought they should have went with Lavernious Coles who was faster and had better hands. The last thing I will say is to all of you who feel the young recievers are below average check their attributes such as Roddy White who is 6’4 220 and runs a 4.2 and has solid hands. Sounds like another reciever who under Jerry Rice was considered below average until he got his chance. We all know who that is.

By doc

September 1, 2005 02:39 PM | Link to this

tm didnt clarify or offer anything significant to the mix. that is a simple synopsis of what has transpired and probably not to inspired with journalistic efffort or depth of ananlysis. i want to say so now what is your point, position, opinion, etc.

unfortunately, it is not as simple as that tm. it was a bad decison based on what happened going forward. they hired a thououghbred and decided they wanted or needed a clydesdale which peerless will never be. he got frustrated and unfortunately knew the handwriting was on the wall. these nfl contracts are an absurdity anyway. there was no way they were going to pay the rest of the contract after this season when it really escalated so now was the best time to let him go when they were relatively comfortable with what they had.

By Big Jimmy

September 1, 2005 02:59 PM | Link to this

I agree with Brian, we run the football, and people seem to forget that the eagles were the same way until they got T-HO. They had no passing game either. We will be alright. Run boy run. Thats my advice.

By Mike G

September 1, 2005 03:26 PM | Link to this

I understand and agree with most of the theories presented, but the plain and simple truth is that Vick is not a polished pocket passer. When the protection breaks down, the O line has no idea where the guy (Vick)is, thus resulting in more sacks. This is why pocket passers are more efficient, the blockers know where the QB is at all times, if there’s nothing there, they throw it away or take a sack. This offense just dosen’t fit Peerless, he needs to be in a multiple WR set to be effective. With that, throw in the different offensive schemes “they re-learn every year.” and you have a recipie for mediocrity. The Falcons have historically given the money to one year wonders (I.E. Jamal Anderson!), and went against keeping quality, steady, performing vets. I still can’t believe we let Brett farve and Deion Sanders go, as well as a host of other quality players in the past. The problem is the organizations mode of thinking, or lack thereof. Go EAGLES!

By Big Jimmy

September 1, 2005 04:23 PM | Link to this

Mike G why even respond. You are a c** suckin eagles fan! Everybody knows that Vick is not a pocket passer, and I don’t think he will ever be one. But with the offensive line that he has in front of him I wouldn’t sit in the pocket either. We did what we had to do. Peerless Price was not going to make or break this offense. The guy stunk it up. Yeah, part of it was Vicks fault, but when the ball was thrown his way he didn’t make plays. So, i’m glad they let his sorry a** go. Let the young guys try to step up.

By Scott

September 1, 2005 04:30 PM | Link to this

Jim, check your info and calm down. Atl averaged over 22 points a game last year, and that seven points (compared to your claim of 15) is a huge difference. And who, in their right mind, would say that Peyton sucks. He’s going to have better numbers than Marino when it’s said and done, with or without a ring. I would tell you to stop listening to irrational chatter, but you can’t stop yelling. I can tell you like to hear the sound of your voice, so listen to yourself!

As with Mr. Moore. I usually abhor your articles. However, you make great comments that I agree with. Your tone, however, is what offends people (but I think that’s what you like). I think level headed fans realize that we didn’t punch our ticket to Detroit by releasing Price, but we didn’t hurt ourselves either.

I think that most sane Falcons fans think rationally that there were obviously many problems surrounding the Falcons passing game. Mediocre receivers, average offensive line, and Vick’s grasp of the offense. All are said to be improving (and frankly, I trust the coaching staff’s judgement more than you and the other haters).

Bottom line is that Price didn’t fit the role of the #1 receiver IN THIS PARTICULAR OFFENSE (and I don’t think he would in most offenses). Once he AND VICK struggled, he ended up getting complacent and frustrated. They never acheived a chemistry.

I don’t expect that the team was improved OR hurt by the release. He just needed to try his game elsewhere, where he can run fly routes all day.

In the end, if OUR team keeps progressing like it is, I don’t care what the makeup of our offense is. We’re not the best team in the NFC, but anyone can get to the game if they make the playoffs, and I think you’ll see #7 and our badass defense in the post-season.

By Thom

September 1, 2005 05:07 PM | Link to this

You are right Terrence Price was not THE problem…you are.

By Randy

September 2, 2005 09:02 AM | Link to this

What about the major theory, Mr. Moore:

Vick can’t PASS!

By Randy

September 2, 2005 09:06 AM | Link to this

You forgot the most feasible theory, Mr. Moore. Vick can’t Pass!

By eric

September 4, 2005 10:59 PM | Link to this

Terence Moore is an idiot.