FLOWERY BRANCH, Ga. — I still remember the game when my awareness of the Atlanta Falcons' unique and bitter rivalry with the New Orleans Saints first took hold. Red and black blurs reflected off my eyes as I sat mesmerized inches away from a chunky television. I watched Michael Vick lead the Falcons to an incredible 37-35 victory against the 6-1 Saints in New Orleans on Oct. 27, 2002.

Atlanta won on a 47-yard field goal by Jay Feely as time expired, and at nine years old I was completely convinced I had just witnessed the greatest sporting event in history. Now that I'm older I can appreciate all the finer aspects of what was truly a special (and fun) game in this rivalry's history, but it still stands out as the first time I heard the Falcons and Saints described as teams experiencing shared success after decades of meeting with little on the line. Fortunately, I'd hear that description many more times.

But in those years, New Orleans and Atlanta learned to play for something more lasting and important: bragging rights. The thrill of rubbing victory in the face of your sworn enemy is what sports is all about, and this rivalry embodies that better than maybe any other. It's a college rivalry inside a professional sports league.

I'm not surprised the first true Falcons-Saints game I can remember was a crazy thriller. I've become very familiar with them in a series that is one Falcons' win away from being deadlocked through 110 regular season games. There are several reasons why getting a win on Sunday is important for the Falcons — and I expect them to play like it — but we all know there's only one reason needed: Because it's the Saints.

Let's get to some questions.

Jeff S. from Roswell, Ga.

What do we have to do to improve the screen pass to the flat? We seem to lose yardage every time we do it with a few exceptions. It seems other teams do it to us with great success.

Will: Thanks for the question, Jeff. It prompted me to do a little bit of research on TruMedia that I thought you'd find interesting.

The Falcons have thrown the ball to the flat 11 times — second-most of any type of route, per TruMedia — and completed nine of those passes for 59 yards and two first downs. Their average of 5.4 yards per attempt on such plays ranks 16th in the league. Atlanta has also thrown the ball eight times to a player running a screen, completing seven passes for 35 yards and three first downs.

I went back to take a look at those screens, specifically, and there were only two occasions where the offense lost yardage. However, Atlanta tried to get the ball to Darnell Mooney in the flat with space three times against the Chiefs, and those attempts gained 2 yards, minus-2 yards, and minus-2 yards, respectively. I have to believe there was something about that matchup the Falcons thought they could attack through those screens to the flat, but Kansas City did a good job shutting it down and it may have left a bad taste in your mouth. I'd chalk some of that up to the offense still figuring itself out to a degree but also a good Chiefs defense.

Let's end on a positive, though. Atlanta is getting some good looks on its screens, overall. Think back to the third-and-13 play on the Falcons' opening drive of the season against Pittsburgh and how Bijan Robinson was just a few fingers away from taking a screen into the end zone for six. Better yet, just watch the clip of Drake London's touchdown against Kansas City below and play close attention to how he gets wide open. Chef's kiss.

Gerald H. from Lithonia, Ga.

The Falcons traded their 2025 third-round pick for Matthew Judon. Judon was brought here to solve the lack of pass rush. Jimmy Lake has Judon in coverage more than rushing the passer.

Will: Hey Gerald, this is a good one to bring up on the verge of a game where the defensive line, in my opinion, could really shine. So, let's talk about one of the key players in the group. To start, though, I want to address your premise a little bit.

I think we all know what you mean when you say he was brought here to solve the lack of pass rush, but that's not quite accurate. For starters, it's never on one single player to fix something as complex and wide-ranging as a pass rush, and the Falcons' approach to pressuring the quarterback is a collaborative one that involves all three levels of the field. Secondly, when Judon was acquired, Raheem Morris spoke much more about his high football IQ and versatility — both of which are vital in a multiple look defense like Atlanta's — as well as his dog mentality in setting the edge. Not so much about him being the Falcons' pass-rush savior.

His role so far backs up those comments. Judon has played over 40% of the first-down snaps, 32.6% of the second-down snaps and 24% of third-down snaps. He is a solid edge defender against the run, and a versatile early-down pass rusher who can also be dangerous on third downs. But the Falcons have a deep defensive line rotation, and they like to keep guys fresh.

As for the final point you made about Judon being in coverage more than rushing the passer, that's simply not true.

Judon has played 129 snaps for Atlanta's defense this season. He's dropped back into coverage on six of them. Judon has rushed the passer on 55 snaps and been involved on 90% of the team's pass-rush snaps, per TruMedia. He was in run defense for the other 68 plays. Judon and Jarrett lead the team with 1.5 sacks each. Atlanta would undoubtedly like to see its sack total rise, though, and that should happen if the team can start winning on early downs and building leads late in games.

Ray K. from Asheville, N.C.

Hi Tori, I read Cameron's post to you and I strongly support what he said. I, too, agree that we should've kicked the field goal. It is hindsight but we must learn from it. Mike Tomlin has been the head coach at Pittsburgh for a long time and there's good reason for it. We lost to his Steelers who didn't score a touchdown but had six field goals. You can win games by kicking field goals. I suppose my question is, how much weight do head coaches in the NFL put on analytics when, for instance, they go 'for it' instead of kicking a field goal? Rise Up and let's beat those Saints!

Will: This is still clearly a big topic of conversation, and there were several questions about it, so I chose Ray's as a representation of all of them. If you'd like to read Tori's response in Tuesday's Mailbox, you can do so here.

Her main point was that the "what if" game can always apply to a situation, and that is a dangerous world to live in. Leaders have to have conviction, and there's a reason these decisions get made ahead of time before the heat of the moment, it's so they can be thought out from every angle without the situational pressure. This was Atlanta's plan of attack, it involved multiple options and the team will live with it and move on.

But as humanity first learned in the true story of time-traveling pioneer Marty McFly, actions have a future ripple effect. We can't say that everything would have remained exactly the same if Atlanta had kicked a field goal with just over four minutes remaining, which would have given the ball back to Kansas City, likely with better field position than its own 6-yard line. The Chiefs would have new information to work with and would make different decisions as a result. (All of this Tori pointed out Tuesday, too).

Besides, hasn't the other storyline this week been about opponents dominating time of possession? Should the team really have expected to get the ball back again at that point? Would it change your answer to learn that the Chiefs' average possession at that point in the game lasted about four minutes?

It's easy to reverse-engineer an outcome once the dust has settled. Honestly, though, when it was happening in the moment, I never felt that it was the right call to bring the field goal unit out. The result isn't what Falcons fans wanted, but I still agree with the thought process. When Patrick Mahomes is on the other sideline, you want to control your own destiny as much as you can.

David H. from Marshalltown, Iowa

I have a question about being placed on injured reserve, since we have two starters now receiving that designation. It seems like being placed on IR means they are out for the season. However, we see players coming back from IR during the regular season from time to time. What are the "rules" for being placed on IR?

Will: Ya know, David, even working for an NFL team, I find myself needing a refresher on these rules several times throughout the year. They can get confusing, especially when changes are introduced. Now is a great time to run through a quick refresher, especially in light of Drew Dalman going on IR earlier this week.

Players who go on the reserve/injured list must miss at least four games. After that four-game period, a player can be "designated to return," which begins a 21-day period during which the player can begin attending practices again while not on the active roster. During this period, a team must add the player to its active roster or the player in question will remain on IR for the rest of the season.

Teams may designate up to eight players for return from IR during the regular season. In a new change to the rule this year, playoff teams will get an additional two designations for the postseason.

Currently, the Falcons have safety DeMarcco Hellams as their only player designated for return from IR later this season. The second-year safety injured his ankle in the Falcons' first preseason game against Miami and was given the designation after roster cutdowns. In addition to Dalman, linebacker Nate Landman is the other notable Falcons player currently on IR who could be activated later this year.

Thank you all for today's submissions! If you'd like to ask a question for a future edition of The Mailbox, which will run Tuesdays and Fridays throughout the season, you may do so here.