Falcons Look at 2 RB Set

[SuperFan_FutureGrad]

I've been waiting for this to surface, considering the losses at wide receiver, the talent of P.J. as a receiver, and the advantage of having Pope and Lane on the field as much as possible. Not to mention how successful Utah was at running a two back set out of the shotgun!

[1987alum]

A few people have mentioned our losses at WR as a reason for using the 2-back set. I honestly can't believe that even being a part of the equation. I have to believe that is has everything to do with Brandon trying to broaden our options to keep the defenses on their collective toes and little else. I also see this as a vote of confidence for our RBs, because I don't believe Brandon would introduce this formation with the intention of shelving it after Lane & Pope graduate.

[orangeandbrown]

A few people have mentioned our losses at WR as a reason for using the 2-back set. I honestly can't believe that even being a part of the equation.

87, I don't know about our receivers. I really haven't seen enough of Lett and Jones to know for sure. I doubt anyone has seen enough to be sure enough to say they "honestly can't believe that even being a part [a part!] of the equation."

Its possible you are right. IMO, Jones and Lett have a ways to go before they are better than last year's #3 and #4 receivers, who were Steve Sanders and James Hawkins--the best #3 and #4 receivers we've ever had, I would wager.

I'm confident, though, that concerns over depth at WR could play "a part" in us looking to make sure we have other options in the offense.

[Schadenfreude]

I also see this as a vote of confidence for our RBs,

Could it be a vote of confidence in our line?

[SuperFan_FutureGrad]

Orange and Brown said it best. I don't believe anyone is trying to knock our up-and-coming receivers - at least that was not my intention at all. I do, however, doubt that any newcomers could immediately fill the holes of those that left this past year - Magner, Hawkins, or McGrady. Part of what made Sanders and Sharon so great is that teams had to plan against Magner. Sanders especially got big numbers because many teams planned for Sharon as much, or more, as they did Cole.

All I was saying is that with talented backs like Lane and Pope, not to mention Pope's exceptional ability as a receiver out of the backfield or split wide, it seems ridiculous not to have packages with both backs on the field. Add the task of finding new plays and packages to confuse defenses and it seems to make perfect sense. Lastly, losing three of our top five receivers, I am sure, plays at least SOME part in the equation.

I'm not sure if there is any reason to believe faith in the O-line should be given credit to the decision. It would seem to me that if anything, this is a sign of less confidence in the line by adding another potential blocker in the backfield. Same is true for the discussion of the tight-end. I don't doubt the returning talent we have on the O-line, namely Warren and Lichtensteiger, but let's not forget we are losing some talent there as well.