...has EARNED more playing time and deserves to be out there earlier and more often. Can Norv not see this? Discuss. Side note: Offense seems to be far too pass happy. Do my eyes deceive me? Yes, I understand they had to throw it vs ATL because of the score.
I agree that Jackie Battle has earned more playing time, if it were up to me he would get most if not all of our goal line carries for the forseeable future. When you quickly fall behind by several scores, it may seem tempting to abandon the running game & simply air it out but to do that plays right into the hands of the opposition, it’s what they are expecting you to do and they will usually be prepared for that tactic. It leads to more 3 & outs and turnovers, and can turn what may have been a close game to a blowout – it happened just that way for us last weekend against Tennessee. If you stay balanced & continue to possess the ball & acquire points, your chances of coming back to win in the end are much higher.
The running game period, deserves more playing time. I'm a broken record at this stage but after Ryan fumbled and Atl went down and scored, Norv went into panic mode and went pass pass pass.That's his MO, if in doubt, pass. We were still in this game, we were running the ball real well with Mathews. Keep at it. Instead look what happens, Atl realise it's pin your ears back time and the weakest point of our team ie. O line is exposed play after play. Mathews, Battle, Brinkley, McClain..... it doesn't matter to me RUN the freakin ball, get the D off balance.
He should be the primary compliment to Mathews with Brinkley operating as a third down back maybe. I still believe that Mathews should get the bulk of the carries but Battle has earned some playing time
How do you beat a prolific passing offense like the Falcons? Keep them on the sideline with a power running game. Football 101. Think we need to send Norv back to school.
Norv didn't go into panic mode after the Atlanta drive following the fumble. He called passes because there was 2:32 on the clock before the half. We weren't going to drive the ball 80 yards running it in 2:32.
Norv tried to keep up with the ATL with the pass when Norv should've been more focusing on tiring out ATLs D.
If I'm not mistaken we had 3 timeouts and the 2 minute warning. In my opinion plenty of time to mix it up. Having Rivers force it results in an INT and instead the Falcons with a short field score. If we were more methodical at that point worst case we would have gone into the half 13-3 down and we get the ball to start the 2nd half. Instead 20-3 meant game over.
And what if Mathews had put the ball on the ground again? Also, where do you get that our WCS is going into the half 13-3? From whence came these magical three points? The worst case scenario is still being down 20-0 at the half, it just becomes less likely if we run the ball three times and then end up punting, although a turnover is still always possible. Having three timeouts and the 2 minute doesn't guarantee that we'd have enough time to drive the ball 80 yds.
The Atlanta game is long gone, nothing can be done about it today. Since it seems to be the consensus in here that the O-line sucks, I think a great heaping dose of Rygina, Battle and McClain early on might soften up a defense. I think it was Conc who might have mentioned going elephant on the opposition with a three tight end set, sounds crazy but would work in the long run.
I am still mad about the Ed Hochuli blown call. Once I get over that I might be able to move on to this game and than after that I plan on getting angry over the Seattle/Packer game. But that wont be for a while.
Dude has 17 carries for 124 yards, 7.3 avg, 2 td's with a long rush of 52. Tell me again why we wait till the 4th to use him?
Dude has 17 carries for 124 yards, 7.3 avg, 2 td's with a long rush of 52, because we waited till the 4th to use him.
While I might agree with you about the Titans game, where we held the ball for 3/4 of the game, in no way were the Falcons Defense worn down in the 4th when Battle broke his huge run.
I didn't say they were tired. They were bored. Zero chance the Chargers score 24 points in 4 minutes. The only threat in their lives at that point is if they're embarrrased by a 60 yard TD bomb over their heads while in uber-prevent defense. Play the run? Seriously? (5 Falcons 7 yards or further from line of scrimmage on Battle's big run) p.s. I really like Battle, and I think he's awesome insurance. But his track record over 5 seasons shows him to be a 3.76 ypc guy. That's a comfort, re. backing up your feature back, but you don't go making wild changes based on a crazy 52 yard ramble when the defense is barely still awake in garbage time.
That's the point... forcing the pass in my opinion meant Rivers gets no time to pass with the O line the way it is. Mixing in the run with the pass at least gets the Atlanta D off balance. My bad on the 3 pts. I shoulda said worst case scenario 13 zip. Yes Mathews could have fumbled again, just like Rivers throws picks now and again. And 3 TOs and the 2 min warning guarantees nothing. My point is... effectively telling the Atlanta coaches and players we're gonna pass every down allows them to dial up all sorts of blitzes etc. Our O line is not equipped to deal with this period.
We needed to get some chunk yardage. A screen pass might've been in order to attempt to slow the rush, but the team needed to pass. Running the ball at that point would have been the tactical equivalent of taking knees. If you want to contend that the Chargers should have anticipated pressure and attempted a screen, I won't argue against that. If you wish to suggest that we were likely to get points from a drive based on running the ball, I think your opinion lacks perspective.
Not saying wild changes. What i'm saying is give him some carries early. Dude has not touched the ball before the 4th quarter. Mix him in earlier. Doesnt seem wild to me. Mathews was running like a truck before the fumble last week. A strong helping of Mathews with a smattering of Battle is what i'm calling for.
Well, if it's a smattering you're clamoring for, well, I can't oppose that. I'm just saying that Battle is a good guy and a known entity...that 52-yarder was crazy atypical and not anything to take too seriously, given the (no run defense) circumstances. Overall, Mathews is simply a better runner, and you just don't take the ball out of the hands of your best playmakers too often...
Yeah I think fearing the fumble too much would be a mistake by Norv, Mathews looked as he was being advertised in pre-season before the fumble. It makes you wonder why he hasn't adopted the LT/Tiki ball on the chest plate running style yet. I'm gonna be dissapointed if Battle gets too many carries this week, he's been good, but he's an ISO back, he doesn't give us any ability to turn the corner. Teams like the Steelers, Ravens, Texans, and even the Raiders with big heavy front 7s will shut us down if we come at them like that.
I hear yah, not clamoring, but when you play a prolific passing offense like the Falcons, a power run game will keep their O on the sideline and eat up playclock. Obviously you have to be able to pull off a power run game but i think with an 80/15/5 Mathews to Battle to McLain split on carries, utilizing McMichael and Rosario in the run game as blockers, and mixing in play action we could have kept Matty on the sidelines more, given our D a breather, and slowed down the blitzing on Philip.
And I rest my case after the KC game. A solid mix of the 2 is much better than either one by themselves. And I think Sunday showed that Battle can expand his game. Loved his post game comment where he said he didn't think he had caught 4 passes in his whole career let alone in 1 game and getting a TD, but that he was ready, willing, and able to do anything they asked of him.
It was an okay game by Battle thanks to the 2 short TDs, but he didn't do anything Mathews couldn't, and rather less at times. I just hope Norv isn't arrogant enough, or stupid enough to think he can keep giving Battle the bulk of the carries without our production taking a hit....not that our offensive production has been impressive anyway. Our defense and Cassel's stupidity won the game this week.
I prefer Battle over Mathews. Battle is stronger a lot like Eddie George where he can pound the ball and tire out the defense. Second half Mathews should see the field as a 'closer' does in baseball. With his fumbling issues, Mathews is still to much of a risk to use him right away. We can't afford to let any team a free turnover.
Could not disagree more, our offense was completely stagnent with Battle in the game from the start of the 2nd to the start 4th quarter. We had some 4 strait 3 and outs plus a short FG off a defensive takeaway, Battle was unproductive. When Mathews came in he was immediately our entire offense, he converted 5 first downs in the 4th quarter (against 8 man fronts) and put Battle in position to catch that screen pass from Rivers on the TD. Mathews needs 20 carries per game, and I'll start bashing him for fumbles when Rivers stops throwing stupid interceptions.
