A Very Falcoholic Discussion: Is The Run Defense Cooked?
On Sunday, we watched the Falcons get shredded by Reggie Bush and Pierre Thomas of the Saints. This was particularly worrisome given that the Falcons will soon face three potent rushing offenses in Tampa Bay (Cadillac Williams, ex-Falcon Warrick Dunn) , Minnesota (Adrian Peterson) and St. Louis (Steven Jackson) and will have to come up with superlative defensive efforts to keep those guys from chewing up yardage.
The question I pose to you fellows before I dispense my own expert well-informed amateurish unique analysis is whether the Falcons can clamp down and put a stop to this wanton running. What is it that put the Falcons in such a bad spot on Sunday, and can we expect to see it again?
Go forth and prosper!
24 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
the Brees effect
I think they determined if the Saints were going to beat them, they were going to have to beat them running. I don’t expect it to happen again.
Good point
These offenses we are going to face pose a very different threat than the Saints. In that game, their ability to run was of secondary concern to getting beat by Brees’ arm. The Vikings really don’t pose that same threat. I would expect the defense to key on the run game much more against them. Stephen Jackson really hasn’t been himself most of this season, and the Rams are struggling all around. I would imagine our defense will be able to dictate the pace of that game.
Naturally, the Bucs concern me most. Their offense is very well rounded and Jeff Garcia has been killing the Falcons for years. Dunn has rejuvenated himself, and Williams, even only at three-quarter speed, is better than nothing. The Tampa game, possibly more than any other this season, is one where our defense must clamp down in the red zone while our offense scores touchdowns, rather than settling for field goals. I know that is obvious for any game, but in a game against a stout defense and a well rounded offense, we can’t afford to leave any points on the field.
Ever heard the expression, "You can't squeeze blood out of a turnip ..." ?
Yup. Our run D is what it is. It ain’t perfect. We know that.
Bottom line: They are playing to their ability. We need to hope their ability is greater than our equal to that of our upcoming opponents.
"He's getting better, but he's not there yet ..."
Actually
I’ve thought our run defense has done a very good job this year, especially against Carolina the second time we faced them.
I just think our D line was outmanned and frankly, outplayed. I don’t think our defense took NO as seriously as they should have Sunday. They didn’t look as fast to the ball, nor did they try to pressure Brees that much. I just don’t think they were giving it their all against the Saints.
Complacency is a boogerbear.
"The nice thing about supporting a bedraggled-cum-decent team? Watching all those analysts eat their words."
Hmmm ...
NFL players usually don’t chose to “not give it their all.” I think they were outmanned and outcoached. If someone “doesn’t give it [his] all,” he won’t have a job for very long.
"He's getting better, but he's not there yet ..."
Case in point:
Adam Jennings. They just looked tired and/or unmotivated to me. I still think they thought they could take NO like they did in October.
"The nice thing about supporting a bedraggled-cum-decent team? Watching all those analysts eat their words."
by Adam Schultz on Dec 9, 2008 12:10 PM EST up reply actions
Jennings
Jennings had limited ability. Like I said, you can’t squeeze blood out of a turnip.
"He's getting better, but he's not there yet ..."
My friend in Minnesota (that'll make the weekend before Christmas interesting)
is petitioning the NFL to send Detroit to the CFL.
"The nice thing about supporting a bedraggled-cum-decent team? Watching all those analysts eat their words."
by Adam Schultz on Dec 9, 2008 12:45 PM EST up reply actions
They wouldn't take 'em
But that’s a worthwhile cause.
"He's getting better, but he's not there yet ..."
A polite word for
Clusterf@#$
"The nice thing about supporting a bedraggled-cum-decent team? Watching all those analysts eat their words."
by Adam Schultz on Dec 9, 2008 12:09 PM EST up reply actions
Tough Loss, But We'll Bounce Back
Sometimes you get outcoached. The Saints had to win that game to stay alive, and they prepped heavily and chose to throw us off guard by running the football. Yes, good teams make adjustments in the game and do not let that happen, but I don’t really see that as a major problem going forward. Smitty and the rest of the staff have demonstrated that they will evaluate and adjust each week, and you can see that they are working hard in doing that because our players are improving as the season goes on.
We came out flat, no doubt about it, but this team bounces back well from losses. Plus the bright side of all this is that we saw how Ryan reacts when he makes a mistake. By going perfect on a drive all the way to the goal line and then, and this might be a bold statement, outdueling Drew Brees yet again. Man this kid is special.
Matt Ryan
will lead this team to greatness in the coming seasons. He’s a monster in the pocket and out. He makes (mostly) right decisions and plays with heart and emotion. He wants to win and you can feel it every time he’s got the ball.
"The nice thing about supporting a bedraggled-cum-decent team? Watching all those analysts eat their words."
the falcon's are steady
They come out with a solid game plan… if the opposing team’s game plan catches them off guard, they don’t normally react well (remember Denver and now New Orleans).
Nothing on our defensive line with the exception of Abraham is truly exceptional, but our defense is very functional as long as the offense remains solid and keeps them off the field for long periods of time.
Look what happened to TB
Teams have bad weeks. It happens. If it starts happening a lot more often, thats a trend. Which is far and away something to get worried about.
" No, I think I'll sit in the balcony " - Abe Lincoln
Exactly
Once (Denver) was a fluke, but twice (NO) makes it seem like there is something to be concerned about here. In both cases (moreso in NO) the D had trouble stopping their offense in late game situations when a stop would have really helped out. Late in the games has been one of our weaknesses this year with really only the Carolina game being one where we put on a good late performance. If we get up on Tampa on Sunday and it gets late in the game we HAVE to be able to finish.
I'm torn here
On one hand, I agree with FrankyWren that the personnel is playing to about the level they can. I think the linebacking corps has underperformed this year, but I’m also not expecting a sudden talent explosion in the next three weeks.
In my mind, the real culprit Sunday was a lack of game planning and preparation. The Falcons knew the Saints would come out throwing the ball and just didn’t seem prepared for a concerted rushing effort between a sturdy, powerful back like Pierre Thomas and a more dynamic runner in Reggie Bush. Drew Brees actually had a pretty ho-hum kind of game, but the Falcons were so deep in the hole because of the run that there was no coming back.
Because we’re facing three average to poor passing attacks in the weeks ahead, I think we’ll come out much better against the run. I just hope we don’t get caught off guard if the Bucs take it to the air.
Thoughts?
Meh,
We’ve benefitted a lot from a relatively easy schedule. The NFC North and AFC West are shadows of their former selves. So has the rest of the South, for that matter.
The reason our Run D hasn’t been exposed as badly before was that we got out to an early start. You can’t grind the ball on the ground all day long when you’re going into the half 24-0. It’s been our “secret” weapon all year long, and I don’t expect it to change. It’s the only constant so far, and it’s the only thing that masks a defense we all knew was pretty bad coming in. I mean, we all wanted a DT in the off-season, and it wasn’t because we just thought Matt Ryan was a stupid-face-doo-doo-head. It was because the D needed/needs some TLC in a major way. It’s not a good defense.
I think Smith knows it, and I think it’s why he’s always pushing for the fast starts and keeping practices up tempo. Maybe that’s just what he does, but I suspect he knows that if another team has a comfortable situation and can pick and choose their playcalling (i.e. they’re not forced into a one-dimensional role) we’ll get shredded.
Fast starts. That’s the key.
We’ve heard that a million monkeys at a million keyboards could produce the complete works of Shakespeare; now, thanks to the Internet, we know that is not true.
Good points
Grinding the ball and playing solid D were Smitty’s goals from the outset. We’ve shown we can accomplish the former …
"He's getting better, but he's not there yet ..."
I agree about the gameplanning ... But can you blame them?
They didn’t plan for Bush or Thomas. But think about it. Reggie has been injured … Thomas is a relatively unproven (until he met our defense), second year back. Where was the threat? Plus Brees is having his best year ever, maybe the best year any QB has ever had. So it makes sense that we planned to defend the pass.
"He's getting better, but he's not there yet ..."

by 



















