Terrible Calls All Around

When D called me with 2:00 remaining in the 4th quarter of the Falcons game, we shared the same sentiment: worst officiating call since Kent Hrbek. For the ref/ump to rule that Jennings "muffed" the punt and award possession to the Eagles with just over 2:00 left at the 40 yard line was nothing short of a travesty. I immediately compared it to the "Hochuli" call from earlier this season and D agreed. In a situation like that where you are not certain what happened, you award the ball to the recieving team and let the kicking team challenge. Even the Eagles knew that Jennings didn't touch the ball (as you can tell from the gunner pulling up after he corralls the punt). Instead, the officials (who were at least 20 yards away from the play) determined that the ball somehow grazed Jennings and that the punt was "muffed". That was the determining factor of the game and it is amazing me that it is not getting more coverage right now. I've watched at least 6 wrap up shows and no one has actually shown the play itself. They are simply alluding to a "muffed punt by Atlanta" and moving on. Collusion from the NFL for not wanting MORE of their terrible officiating broadcast.

And what is the Falcons recourse? Likely the same as the Chargers. Be pissed off at the officials and get an "I'm sorry" from the NFL? It's pathetic. I've long wondered why the NFL doesn't adopt the collegiate method for review. There is already a review committee in the booth all game anyhow, why not put them to work and have them able to stop play and review things themselves. You still can have a challenge or two to work with at your discretion with the same loss of timeout. It's asinine to penalize a coach for good clock management by removing the ability to dispute an egregious call from backwoods retarded officials. Where is the harm? Hell, if it extends the game 15 minutes it means more revenue dollars from advertising. I'm failing to see the issue. Except that it could potentially point out the unending amateurism that is "professional" officiating.

If there was such a replay system in place here is what would have happened in the Falcons/Eagles game. Call would have been made correctly (overturned by replay) and Ryan would have had the ball at the Falcons 40 with over 2:00 to work with against a pass defense that had seen their best CB and S miss time throughout the game due to injury (Samuel and Dawkins both left the field at different times for injuries). Ryan would likely have worked the Falcons down and gotten in position to score the go ahead TD with minimal time remaining.

Instead: craptastic call and a disheartened defense (who had forced the Eagles off the field with a stellar effort before the punt) gives up an immediate Westbrook icing TD. It's miserable to watch a valiant effort by an inferior but great hearted team go in vain due to errors in judgement by impartial parties.

Then again, this all could have been avoided if Mularkey hadn't decided to throw the fade to Roddy instead of pounding the ball in with Turner from the 2. Any run call would have been better. Of all the things Roddy is good at, jump balls isn't one of them. He's quick, elusive, fast, and has pretty good hands. But he is neither tall nor a good leaper and I'm yet to see him develop the ability to body his way into position and fight for a ball in the air. At the goal line you pound the ball as the pass defense has to defend much less space and the options for a QB are terribly limited and predictable. From inside the 3 you are relegated to fades, slot slants (if the LBs are out of the middle), and slot outs (if you have the TE covered by a LB). The better options are to pound the rock with your big back or FB, spread the formation and run the QB, or try a "flip 90" (RB to the outside). I would have preferred to see the flip to Norwood or Turner running behind Ovie.

Good thing the UGA depantsing of LSU had my spirits high and I'm packing for Florida or I'd have too much time to stew on this crapfest.

To Peavy or Not to Peavy

So what could awaken my interest in baseball after the Braves season that could have been, the Falcons having a winning record, and the Hawks season about the start? No, not the Red Sox losing to the Rays (though that was awesome! How great was it to hear this quote, "And the Boston season rides on pinch-hitter Jed Lowrie"? The guy batted .207 in the playoffs, now allegedly had a hurt wrist, and the Red Sox season rested on his shoulders? Cracked me up.) No, the thing that peaked my interest was off season rumors. Where you have no clue what you're team might end up doing... especially with the Braves and how they keep everything quiet.

So the new and exciting rumor is that we're the leading candidate to trade for Jake Peavy. He's only 27, he's got a Cy Young award, and he grew up a Braves fan in Alabama... what's not to like?

Well several people have answered that question. Some people are worried that Peavy's jerky motion is a recipe for a major arm injury. Also that the Padres willingness to deal their ace, who has a reasonable contract ($11 million in 2009, $15 million in 2010, $16 million in 2011, $17 million in 2012 and a $22 million option ($4 million buyout) for 2013), is a little disconcerting. Additionally, many people don't want to have to give up Tommy Hanson, our top pitching prospect, in the trade. Hanson is a 22 year old fireballer with the mentality of a bulldog... whatever that means, who just won the Arizona Fall League player of the week by winning both his starts while allowing only one hit over 6.2 innings pitched. In his most recent start last Saturday, October 18, Hanson struck out eight of the first nine hitters.

I say go for Peavy. Several of our key players (Chipper, Smoltz, Glavine) are getting old, and won't have too many more productive seasons. Peavy has avoided any major injury so far with his motion, so what's to say that he won't continue that trend. Many people think Sabathia's arms should have fallen off years ago... some people just defy the trends. If we can keep Hanson and still trade for Peavy, great. But I think several teams learned last year that a proven star is much more valuable than a couple of potential stars. The Yankees missed out on Johan Santana because they were unwilling to part with Phil Hughes and Ian Kennedy. Here's their stats for last season respectively: 0-4 6.62 era in 8 starts and 0-4 with a 8.17 era in 9 starts. Boston missed out because they didn't want to trade their prospects, and they certainly could have used another starter in the playoffs.

Now I know that Hanson won't necessarily turn out as a bust, and Hughes and Kennedy might still blossom, but it shows the danger of valuing prospects over a certified ace. But I'm not convinced the Padres will trade Peavy without a deal that blows them away. They can still control him for four seasons with a reasonable salary so they're not just going to give him away. And I don't think the Braves are going to sell the farm for him.

So I think this is just an interesting rumor for bloggers to bat around for a month or so before it dies off and the Braves make some other trade or signing that no one saw coming. It's pretty much their MO at this point. I say Hudson convinces Mulder to sign with the Braves for cheap.

He has Seen the Light

These quotes from an ESPN interview will be a comfort for everyone who saw Arthur Blank as a meddling owner (which is pretty much everyone):

"I'm interested in building a long-term winning organization. There are some teams that have done that in the NFL and had success over time and we've studied those organizations and they have certain characteristics. One is that they keep their coaching staff together over a long period of time and they keep their general manager in place. They have a sense of patience about building their team and they stay the course of their plan."

"My role is to be a cheerleader for them and make sure Mike [Smith] and Thomas [Dimitroff] have the resources they need."

I think I speak for everyone when I say, THANK GOD! The Falcons organization has a chance!

Don't get me wrong, I've always had a soft spot for Blank, especially after the Rankin Smith line of asleep at the wheel owners. But he was getting a little too buddy-buddy with the players. Maybe he was taking the lead from Mora. But I think he's got it now!

Still Urging Patience

Well that prediction was more accurate than I could have ever... well... predicted. And today, due to the dramatic end of the game, the Falcons are getting more national attention than the rest of the season combined. This would be a time where our expectations as Falcons fans could ran away from us, especially with a pretty much guaranteed win over the lifeless "Bye Week." I, however, will continue to extol the virtue of patience.

If you watched the game, you know the Falcons should have blown out the Bears. The end of the game should have come with Matty Ice (a now well-deserved nickname) taking a knee rather than Elam attempting a 48 yd field goal. It's a problem when you look at the box score and see "Elam - 29 yd field goal. Elam - 32 yd field goal." And he missed a 33 yd field goal. We got an 85 yd return from Norwood in the 4th quarter and our drive looked like this: Turner runs for -2 yards, Turner runs for 2 yards, Turner runs for 2 yards, missed field goal. Granted the aforementioned drive happened in the fourth quarter when we were trying to run out the clock, and granted the Bears are still a very good defensive team, but those are red zone (or near enough) opportunities the Falcons cannot afford to squander against good teams. It didn't kill them Sunday against an anemic Bears team, but it will later on.

On the bright side the close score belies the fact that the Falcons dominated a solid Bears team that was hot coming into this game. Ryan proved, for one game at least, that he can burn a team if they continuously stack the box. I love the offensive game that Mularkey called. He put his trust in Ryan by allowing him to throw 30 times against a battered Bears secondary, but he didn't pull a Gruden and go completely pass wacky. He ran the ball 28 times to ensure that the Bears had to continually worry about Turner going off.

But now it's time for the stat that continues to blow my mind, and no one in their right mind would have suggested at the beginning of the season. It's so mind-blowing, I just might make it a reoccurring section at the end of Falcons articles. I'm just going to end on it to give it plenty of room to sink in and let you realize just how much it explains all the success the Falcons are having...

Games: 6
Sacks Allowed: 7

More Falcons Predictions

So I was 1-1 with my last set of predictions. I nailed the Panthers game, but I didn't account for the injuries to the Packers secondary (Harris and Bigby), the injury to Rodgers, and the growth of Matt Ryan for the Packers game. I was actually going to write last week predicting that the Falcons would beat the Packers, but I didn't have time... I swear I was!

This week we are playing the Bears, and our offense will not fare quite as well. The Bears run defense is stouter than the Packers, and our two losses have come against teams that can stop the run. The only way the Falcons can win this game is if Ryan continues to look good in the passing game. Luckily Roddy White getting KO'ed in practice wasn't that serious. Also Mularkey needs to make sure he mixes in some deep routes to stretch the defense. In our two losses, the Bucs and the Panthers were stacking the box, but Ryan was still trying to throw short routes. Ryan has to take several shots down the field, otherwise Turner will be hit behind or at the line of scrimmage every single time.

Defensively I'm not too concerned. Other then Devin Hester, there are no playmakers on the Bears offense. Everything is predicated on not turning the ball over. Forte (Thomas Jones 2.0) is a good, solid back, but he's not going to break any huge runs. He's only averaging 3.6 ypc. Similarly, Orton doesn't have the throws or the receivers to make the big throws as evidenced by his 7.1 ypa average. So as long as we play good special teams, take note of when Hester lines up as a receiver, and force a turnover or two, then the Bears won't score more than 20 points.

Well I was going to predict that the Falcons would lose their first home game, but I just can't bring myself to do it. I'm going with the Falcons winning on a Jason Elam field goal after Matty Ice's first 2 minute drill with the game on the line.

The Fro That Is No Mo

Because (a) Hawks season is around the corner and I am quite ready for basketball season and (b) I’m tired of staring at my horribly errant projection regarding the Crimson "Hang on while we wait for the officials to hand out another 60 yards of terrible penalties" Tide game: It’s time for some Hawks Tawk. Oh yeah, I just did that.

The loss of Josh Childress as he goes on his National Lampoon’s European Vacation tour won’t be as significant as most pundits seem to think. While it is true that Childress was vital as back up PG/SG/SF and even PF at times and was the only strong bench player, his presence on the court also hindered things at times. Here is how the team looked with him on the floor at various positions depending upon whom he was replacing:

At PG: Childress, Joe, Marvin, Josh Smith, Al. While a capable ball-handler, he was never a threat to score and didn’t have the passing ability to be a facilitator. Lacking any real shot, the defense could load up on Joe and clog the passing lanes.
At SG: Bibby, Childress, Marvin, JS, Al. While having a seasoned PG on the court to distribute the ball will help for offensive movement, with no great outside shooters on the court (especially if Bibby was riding a cold-streak), the defense could collapse down low and force low percentage jumpers from Bibby, Marvin, and JS.
At SF: Bibby, Joe, Childress, JS, Al. Probably the best position for him in relation to keeping spacing for the others. He can cut and dive to the basket for easy buckets, but doesn’t really have the strength to finish in traffic. Relies more on angles and with JS and Al down low struggles to find lanes. One option is to pull JS out a little but that would leave JS open for ill-advised jumpers.
At PF: Bibby, Joe, Marvin, Childress, Al. Besides getting abused on the defensive end, Childress doesn’t have the frame to back people down or the height to finish over them. Most of the time, this lineup would push Marvin into the 4 where he wasn’t suited yet.

That isn’t to say that the team won’t miss him. He was our most intelligent player and a great on-ball defender adept at cleaning up errant shots. However, the development of Acie Law (who got a bad rap last year while trying to play injured) and Horford (who will be stronger down low after a season of experience) combined with the maturation of Marvin and JS will create a stronger starting 5 with a more adept backup PG. The additions of Flip Murray to solidify the PG rotation (and Speedy if he actually plays), Mo Evans as a capable bench scorer, and Randolph Morris to give the front lines some beef when ZaZa goes on a fouling spree should create a deeper bench. Personally I’d rather have 2-3 good bench players rather than 1 great one, which is what I think we did. It enables the team more flexibility and gives the roster more places to turn when injuries and tired-ness come along.

I also wouldn’t underestimate ‘Super’ Mario West. He brings the same energy and intelligence that Childress brought and with more playing time could prove to be a very valuable asset off the bench for the Hawks.