FLOWERY BRANCH, Ga. — OK y'all. I owe you guys an apology for missing Tuesday's Mailbox edition.
That's on me, and the less than three hours of sleep I was working off of that day. But fear not, I wasn't going to go an entire week without a Mailbox post.
So, here we go, let's dive into your questions as the Falcons get set to host the Kansas City Chiefs at home this Sunday night.
Michael C. from Brewster, Massachusetts
Kyle Pitts hasn't been too involved in the offense the last few weeks. Why aren't we giving him the ball more?
Tori: I don't think it is for a lack of trying. He was targeted four times Monday night and three times against the Steelers in Week 1. He has caught six of those seven targets for a total of 46 receiving yards. But I realize from looking at the numbers that this is different from the other receiving weapons on the team. Here's how things stack up for the Falcons across the board:
- Drake London: Eight catches on 10 targets for 69 yards
- Darnell Mooney: Five catches on 10 targets for 103 yards
- Ray-Ray McCloud: Nine catches on 10 targets for 94 yards
- Bijan Robinson: Nine catches on 10 targets for 68 yards
So, 10s across the board and seven targets for Pitts. It's not like he's super far off. I will also note a lot of Robinson's catches are designed screens and/or check downs, which are fundamentally easier throws for a quarterback to make. But still, I know none of this answers your questions as to why the Falcons "aren't giving (Pitts) the ball more."
But here's the thing with that question: I actually do think the Falcons are spreading the ball out a bit better from Week 1 to Week 2. I am not concerned with Pitts having seven targets through two games when everyone else has 10. You're talking about a couple throws here or there that are going to London or Mooney or McCloud. That's OK with me because those guys have proven reliable, too, and deserve their targets as well.
Also, I do believe defenses have a say for who you can target when, for better or worse. And honestly, if you're looking at this specific matchup against the Chiefs this Sunday, it could bode well for Pitts, specifically. Through their first two games this season, the Chiefs have given up 25 receptions for 276 yards to tight ends. Averaged out, that's 12.5 receptions and 138 yards per game.
This note was pointed out in a recent article I found from a Kansas City Chiefs blog. In the blog, the writer noted out, too, that "it hasn't exactly been Hall of Fame caliber tight ends that have hurt KC so far." It's been Baltimore's No. 2 tight end Isaiah Likely (nine catches for 111 yards vs. the Chiefs) and Cincinnati's journeyman Mike Gesicki (seven catches for 91 yards vs. Kansas City). Nothing against those guys at all, but they do not scream elite-pass-catchers the way Pitts does, even with the lack of overall production from Pitts in 2022 (due to injury) and 2023 (due to quarterback issues). So, yes, you're right that Pitts' targets are less than others in this offense, but I think it's important to have perspective in this.
Those targets are not far off from everyone else, and we're only two games into 2024. One big game against a team that has struggled to contain tight ends could change everyone's perspective.
Camereon W. from Snellville, Georgia
WHAT A GAME!!! Who would have thought the Falcons would have such a season-defining game so early? Regardless, there was much improvement from the offense. I thought Kirk Cousins in particular really changed the perception of him from last week to this week. As good as he was, there is still room for growth (something he stated himself after the game).
I think one of those growth areas includes routes that break to the outside. Kirk still seems a tick off with out routes and almost threw an interception. What other areas do you think he needs to improve to move this team to the next level?
Tori: Third-and-medium-plus situations have been a thorn in the Falcons' side so far in 2024. And while this isn't necessarily a Cousins-only problem as your question presents, it is one that has lingered through two games.
Against the Steelers, the Falcons were 2-for-9 on third down. Their two conversions came on third-and-medium. Of their nine third downs total, six were of distances 10 yards and beyond.
Against the Eagles, the Falcons were — again — 2-for-9 on third down. This time, they did limit how many third-and-long situations they were in, with only three of the nine coming at a distance of nine yards or more. However, it was the third-and-medium distances that hurt the Falcons Monday night. They had third-and-4, specifically, four times and could not notch a first-down conversion. The Falcons threw the ball out of shotgun on all four of those downs. Cousins targeted Bijan Robinson, Drake London and Kyle Pitts in those situations and all three passes fell incomplete. He was sacked on the final third-and-four play.
If the Falcons as a unit — not just Cousins — can get closer to a 50% conversion rate on third down, it changes this offense. Right now, they are sitting at a conversion rate of 22% on third down.
Barry W. from Rex, Georgia
Before the season started the Falcons were expected to have the defensive rookie class play a vital role. On Monday night, two of the draft class were listed as inactive. I imagine the free agent signings that happened late in the preseason might have changed the plans on rushing the rookies into playing a major role. Do you think this will continue to be the case?
Tori: I think Raheem Morris said it best this week when he was asked about Ruke Orhorhoro being inactive in the first two games of the 2024 season: If you keep Orhorhoro active, who are you keeping inactive out of the group of defensive linemen the Falcons have right now?
You get six defensive linemen you're putting out on the field right now, per Morris. In the first two games that has been Grady Jarrett, David Onyemata, Eddie Goldman, Zach Harrison, Ta'Quon Graham and Kentavius Street. There's a lot of veteran reps in that grouping. And you know what? The coaches have liked what they've seen from them.
"(Ruke) just happens to be surrounded by a bunch of vets right now that are actually really intently doing a good job for us," Morris said.
As I noted in the last two inactives reports, this is a good problem to have. And its very different from the situation the Falcons have found themselves in throughout the last few years. Because the team was fighting its way out of salary cap hell, you can't pay big-time play makers big-time money. So, the Falcons pieced their roster together with rookies and mid-level free agents on short-term deals. You know what that causes? More opportunities for your rookie class. The Falcons relied on the draft classes of 2021, 2022 and even 2023 to play and play immediately. They had to because of the nature of the roster.
That is no longer the situation at hand in 2024, especially on this defense.
I don't think this means we won't ever see Orhorhoro or Brandon Dorlus active this season. I just think it means the Falcons don't have to rush them along. They don't have to go through a trial by fire the way other Falcons rookies have in the last few years. That's OK. That's good, in fact, because it means the Falcons have health and depth and playmakers ahead of them. That is not a bad thing and something the Falcons — particularly the defensive line — has been needing for years.
