BOLDnPurPnBlacK

I guess you are allowed to be unimpressed but no one else is allowed that luxury then.

 

 

 

In the context, it is what I meant. If there is no vertical game, and we are inefficient with screens, not much scoring going on.

 

The original post I responded to is in bold. No, nothing was said about coaching at all. So everyone "assumed" incorrectly.

 

Sorry it came somewhere as a response to your post then. Way to go and cherry pick posts.

Because the sentence he bolded was in direct context with liking to run screens and having no vertical game. It was not saying because it is Trestman we won't score. It was directly responding to a lack of a vertical game and how we have not been exactly efficient with screens. It was taken out of context.

 

I think the point that you're missing that I think we're all assuming is that the original point indicated coaching being a factor in screen inefficiency, i.e. not emphasized by any of our previous coaches. If Trestman bases his offense on it, he'll emphasize it and correct it to be more efficient. He did this in Chicago, thus confidence he could do it here. And if he, with a screen heavy, lite on vertical passing based scheme could near lead the league in scoring 2 years ago with McCown, there is some indication that scoring wont be the issue here.

 

Does everything have to be spelled out?

 

And regardless of context "we wont score at all" is a pretty direct and clear statement. It stands alone and apart from the rest of your post.

he refuted your point though.

Your mad, we get it. But look into it first.

 

Right? I never got this... like somehow pointing out that someone only bold highlighted one sentence of  your post is somehow a defense for having a terrible post.

Here's some info about the Chicago Bears Offense under Trestman. What we see here is a very efficient offense in 2013, and a huge regression in 2014. The concerns about his reluctance to run the ball seem warranted in both years. Does anyone know what could account for the offense's regression in 2014? Looks to me like the offensive line got worse, for one.

 

 

2013

Total YPG – 8th (382/game) PPG – 2^nd (27.8/game)    TOP – 8^th (31:02)

Passing: Attempts – 16^th (36/game) YPG – 5^th (267/game) YPA – 7^th (7.7/attempt)

Rushing: Attempts – 24^th (25/game) YPG – 16^th (114/game) YPA –  7^th (4.5/carry)

Sacks: 4^th (30) QB Hits: 20^th (85)

 

2014

Total YPG – 21^st (327/game) PPG – 23^rd (19/game) TOP – 17^th (30:13)

Passing: Attempts – 7^th (38/game)  YPG – 15^th (237/game) YPA – 29^th (6.6)

Rushing: Attempts – 30^th (22.2/game) YPG – 27^th (90.1) YPA – 16^th (4.1)

Sacks: 19^th (41) QB Hits: 17^th (82)

 

Jay Cutler played a lot more in 2014.

lol at this board whenever anything happens that's different.

 

You'd think it was a browns forum or something....

We wont be pass happy. Ozzie and harbs wouldnt have hired him if that wasnt talked about ad nauseum. and if he shows tendencies harbs will reel it right back in. Hes an amazing HC for that reason. He's hands off until things need pulling back in.

 

The guy took the chicago bears, who routinely were touted as a strong defense and ST with nothing on offense to the 2nd best offense in the league under MCCOWN.

 

You can throw the names out all you want, Bennett, Jeffery, Marshall, Forte. Great. And what happened this year? You cant just throw big names on a field and produce. 

 

Trestman just needs a QB who will listen and be open. Cutler is not. McCown was. Look at what McCown REALLY was 1 year after leaving Trestman. Got beat out by Glennon. So if Trestman can pull 1 year of success out of a guy like that im happy. I mean, this is Baltimore, all we're looking for is 1 year of success right?

I still hope we get Knapp as a QB coach with whoever comes here between Gase or Trestman or Marrone as OC. Trestman really seems like a fan-motivated request over the other two, who have some weight to the rumors considering that they're being reported by the media as options. I'm not sure how I feel about Marrone. Marrone did teach OL & TEs before, so maybe he would come here as a TE coach. That could be an all-star cast if we land Gase as OC, Marrone as TE coach, and Knapp as QB coach. 

 

That would be the best case scenario for sure. That's got my vote - get it done Harbs and Ozzie!

With so many OC positions currently open, I will be shocked if Trestman doesn't land one of them. I can't imagine he'd pass on an OC position anywhere to be QB coach here.

Yea was just going to say the same.

With the high number of oc openings and low number of experienced candidates trestman shouldn't have any trouble getting his pick of the litter once gase is hired.

Gase, trestman, marrone and chud are the only experienced candidates I can think of.

There's a difference. Having had different styled coaches for JV, varsity, and in college, I can tell you that some coaches are indeed soft, and other coaches are tough.

I don't disagree.

But I also don't think that with our culture and history - the DNA of the players we have - that any coach could come in and turn them soft. Yanda and Steve smith aren't gonna all the sudden start tip toeing around and playing patty cake.

Were a smashmouth team and we have to the leadership and culture in place for the players to demand that of themselves. It's the way things are run from the bottom of the top of the organization.

I just don't see any validity to the argument that Trestman shouldn't be considered. Even if he is soft or coaches in a soft manner that it would have any effect on our players.

--

Off topic but something I just thought of. It's a regularly spoken concern that Joe having had 4 coordinators in as many years may stunt his growth and development especially being in his prime.

Playing devils advocate - could it possibly have a benefit that not many qbs get. He's learning many different schemes from some of the brightest offensive minds in the world. That diversity, these different perspectives, and philosophies joe is soaking up and applying to his game.

He's had success and shown growth across the board. I'd like some continuity and to see him settle in with someone, but there's got to be some benefit to knowing so many offenses and having that adaptability. He can take the positives from all of them and how each of them plays well against certain defenses in specific situations.

Once Joe hits the peak of his mental development which I don't think happens for most until 32 or so - he's gonna have such a wealth of offensive knowledge that not even many veteran coaches can boast to have.

He's overcome the detriment. Soon I think we start seeing serious dividends to the coaching carousel.

Yeah I agree. I have no problem with hiring hiim.

But there are plenty of viable questions, such as why the likes of Fox or Del Rio didn't take him with them to their new places. A lot of possible reasons for that, but its still worth pondering as part of the interview process.

Ultimately, gut feeling says we probably hire him in the next day or so.

Fair questions as I'm not sold on Gase either, but it's just as likely that Gase didn't want to go with Fox or Del Rio as it's been reported he was seeking HC opportunities himself. And when those didn't surface fox and del rio likely had filled their positions or maybe Gase is looking to detach himself from them to make a name for himself.

Maybe he they limited him in fully implementing his own system and he's seeking an opportunity to have full control of the offense. And Harbaugh has a reputation of letting coaches do what they do best, plus baltimore in general being a spring board into better opportunities elsewhere.

Just playing devils advocate a bit.

A question I have on Gase - any chance he'd be able to bring Denver's QB coach with him? Didn't he used to work under Kubiak and have familiarity with his offense? That'd be a bonus for sure.

Either way looks like Gase is the front runner. Brought him in right away.

I'd like to see them interview some other candidates, especially Trestman and Marrone. But unfortunately time isn't really on our side. With the number of OC vacancies right now we need to move and move fast.

When Trestman had a QB that wasn't a complete failure his offense was near tops in the league and explosive.

We saw this year what McCown was. Couldn't keep his job over Glennon. His success the previous season in Chicago under Trestman has to be at least partially attributed to trestmans coaching and play-calling.

And if he can do that with a journey man, backup like McCown I'm at least mildly interested in seeing what he could do with someone like Flacco.

The comments about him being "soft" I just don't get. Players are soft, or play soft, you don't coach soft. And we have an established philosophy and style of play, Trestman no doubt would have to agree to cater his offense somewhat to what we do here in baltimore. I'm sure that conversation would take place in any interview, would he be willing to adapt to basing the offense to open the passing game off the run?

We have continuity in personnel. Flacco, the line, at least 2 rbs, FB, rb's coach, and Castillo were all here and learned kubiaks system. That's enough to keep me cautiously optimistic that the success of the run game can carry over. They all contributed to it's success - it's not like Kubiak went out and executed. He taught, they learned and then went out and did it. They hopefully retained enough of it to go out and do it again next year.

I'm more interested in someone who can get our passing game to take off. Someone with a scheme with spacing and timing concepts to get receivers open and our QB in rhythm early. Of Trestman can do that then im all for him.

While I agree that pre-snap some QBs will notice a 1-on-1 matchup and will throw to a certain WR b/c he recognizes a mismatch.  I rarely think when a QB drop backs and has to go through his progressions/options he says, "oh Webb is playing him let me throw his way".  A QB usually has less than 4 seconds to make a pass, that happens so fast, the QB is looking for the receiver that is open regardless of who's defending him. 

 

I read a comment from Flacco yesterday, he basically said he's gonna throw to whoever is open even if that WR/TE is being defended by Reavis.

 

Yea but this was the 1st drive which appeared scripted, and ben got the ball out extremely fast to his 1st read which just happened to be the man Webb was on like 5 pass plays in a row. 

 

Our corners play on a side and dont typically follow receivers around. The Steelers know that, so yes they could dial up plays where the 1st read, or the play is designed to open the receiver webb is going to be on.

But back to Melvin, since getting his shot I would honestly say he's been our best cornerback.

I found it very telling that the Steelers chose to attack Webb early and often instead of testing the largely unproven Melvin. Tells me that the tape shows and supports my belief that he's outplayed

every cb this year not named Jimmy Smith - albeit

with limited time.

He's been a beast in bump and run, plays the ball in the air and for the most part has tackled well on the few receptions he's given up.

If he continues to play at this level lock him up.

I'm the same as you, and I too have also heard a lot of negativity filtering through. He doesn't seem to command respect, or a cohesive playing unit.

Now, that may be different when dealing with the quarterbacks as opposed to an entire locker room, but honestly, the Bears offence still seemed a rabble, even with the weapons they had available.

I don't blame Trestman for that mess. They've consistently underachieved. He had them competing with Seattle last year if memory serves.

That locker room will be a mess regardless of who the coach is as long as Cutler is at QB, and Brandon Marshall just magnifies the issues. Urlacher has been very outspoken on that very issue.

I'll agree that I don't think Trestman has the personality to command a locker room but that wouldn't be an issue here. Harbaugh, the FO and the vets have that on lock.

With the freedom to focus purely on scheme and play calling I think he can succeed. He reminds me of a mangini type who was successful with the organizational strength under belichek but failed miserably when asked to run the show.

I don't think that means either of them are bad football coaches they just need the right environment to be successful. I think the ravens can provide that environment.

8 or 9 DL? We carried 5 for a portion this year. Injuries have us at 8 now but it's typically 6 or 7 when we only run a 3 man front.

We may have gone with 5 for portions of the season but if KLM, Cody and urban all weren't injured I bet all but maybe Cody would have been on the 53 instead of all the safeties.

9 might be high but I don't see any less than 7. With 9 I was including McPhee since he often rotates as a d-lineman but since he a olb I'll admit I overshot.

8's my prediction.

I don't watch a lot of Bears football, but I've heard fans say things like "pass happy," "soft," and "clueless" when describing Trestman.

I also question the guys resume. I mean, how do you go from the NFL, back to college, then to the CFL? He was an OC in the 90s and early 2000s, but his last NFL coaching gig before being the Chicago Bears HC was as an offensive consultant with the Saints in 2007. Sorry, I'm not sold on this guy. There is no consistency in his resume. HE had no longevity. His longest coaching gig lasted five years in the CFL. His longest NFL stint? Three years with the Oakland Raiders as OC and QB coach.

I look at his stats with San Fran. He was with San Fran in 95 and 96 as OC. The offense actually improved in 1997, after he was gone. By the way, he spent 1997 as the Detroit Lions QB coach, a demotion. What does that tell you?

Am I missing something? Is there a reason he just recently resurfaced as an NFL coach? Why has he never lasted long in the NFL? It seems he's been fired a lot. What's so great about this guy?

System wise, it's a decent fit, though he's WAY to pass happy. I just question his ability. I am not sold on this guy.

I think with the principles we have in place and the strong staff and FO plus veteran leadership he would work out well here.

Best case would be to bring him in in kubiaks staff as a QB/passing game consultant though I doubt he'd be interested in that. Though it'd be great for him to learn the principles of kubiaks run based wco and just add some of the passing wrinkles he brings. Kind of groom him to take over if/when Kubes leaves.

Haven't looked into his past too much but sounds like from the teams you've mentioned he's been in bad situations with bad teams/organizations. The bears were a legit Super Bowl contender last year until cutler came back. I believe cutler was the issue not Trestman.

I think within a strong organization that has an identity he would succeed. I just don't think Trestman coming in would all the sudden make Flacco, SSS, Torrey, KO, and yanda "soft." And I'm sure there would be conversations during the hiring process about being able to maintain offensive balance and not be too pass happy otherwise we wouldn't hire him in the 1st place.

Outside of Kubes or dennison staying I just can't think of another candidate for OC that wouldn't require a complete scheme overhaul.

Admittedly I don't have much knowledge of who might be available from the college ranks (though I'd absolutely love chip Kelly's protege from Oregon) so I'm no expert on the available options but I find Trestman to be an intriguing fit

Kyle Shanahan would be another obvious fit but pretty sure Cleveland could block that plus I'm not so sure he'd be interested in lateral movement anyways.

I guess we just pray Kubes stays or were gonna have an interesting offseason looking for a replacement. Maybe dennison would be interested in getting out from underneath kubiaks shadow and proving he can be an actual OC since in Houston Kubes was the play caller and dennison was OC in title only and would likely be the same if he were to follow Kubiak in that hypothetical situation.

You can't say that for sure. There's no telling what will happen. I like both KLM and Urban, but I know better than to simply count on them returning from injuries. We're going to add another DT, whether it's popular or not. I think one of Canty or Ngata are gone, with the possibility for both to be gone.

I am confident one won't be here for cap purposes. Then again, who knows. I won't say definitively because there's no definite either way.

I definitely agree with one being gone but am nearly 100% confident it's Canty. I actually wouldn't be surprised to see him retire after the season.

Ngata will restructure to lower his cap hit.

And like I said, I have nothing to back my notion on KLM and Urban and wouldn't advise anyone to bank on it but I think odds are very good we get a Jernigan-like 1st season from at least one of them

I do also see us either drafting or signing an under the radar vet DT or NT to rotate with Williams as a run stuffer/block eater. We have a ton of undersized, finesse d-lineman who specialize in interior pass rushing so we could use another big body.

I see Ngata, Williams, Jernigan, Urban, KLM, and one of Guy or Tyson as locks to be on the roster next year. I think Cody and Canty are gone for sure. We'll carry 8, probably 9 so I see a mid-round pick and bargain vet signing coming in.

Rather have Brian Pariani (or better yet, Rick Dennison) - keep the system we have.

Trestman can come in as a QBs coach, but I think he'll find work somewhere else in fairly short order.

I'm working under the assumption that if Kubiak leaves so do dennison and pariani though pariani there's a better chance as he may want a shot at being an OC which he won't under Kubiak.

And who knows maybe dennison wants to prove himself away from Kubiak bc when he's been a HC he's still had complete control of the offense and called plays so dennison was OC in title alone. But still thinks it's most likely they'd all go together.

Under that assumption I really like Trestman as the man for the job to sustain the offensive growth we've seen this year or maybe even take it a step further. I'm also intrigued to see what he could do with Joe.

I don't hold cutler against him bc he just seems like a stubborn know-it-all type who probably refused to take his teachings or any constructive criticisms to heart.

Yeah, I agree completely Kubiak staying is the absolute best and preferred scenario and I do honestly think he will stay.

Trestman is already getting interviews for OC positions so there's a chance he gets snatched up before this hypothetical situation would even happen, but if he's still around id try to bring him in in some capacity as an offensive assistant if Kubiak stays or as the OC if he leaves.

I do think if Kubiak leaves dennison isn't an option as he'll go with Kubes wherever.

But let's just hope this is a complete non-issue.

Let me start by saying I want nothing more than for Kubiak to come back and I do think there's a good chance he will.

But if he were to leave what would you think about the possibility of bringing Trestman in as our new OC. Has a lot of success doing wonders for qbs (no one can fix cutler) and had that bears offense playing tops his first year.

I don't think he's a good fit as a HC but could see him having success with less on his plate and bein able to just focus on offense.

Hope we keep kubs be he'd be tops on my list if we lose him.

I really only see a few stud DL and they're Williams, Jernigan and Ngata. Ngata may not even be here. After them, we have the forever injured KLM, Canty who may be cut just like Ngata, a guy with potential in Urban, Tyson who has looked okay in a limited role, and Guy, who's more of a complement albeit an underrated one.

I don't see a plethora of DL prospects here who wouldn't benefit from adding Redding. Two of our DL are coming off injuries, and two could be off the team. Then you have two more who will be in their second and third years respectively next year.

Ngata isn't going anywhere.

And one of either KLM or Urban Is going to be a stud. Nothing to back that up but the eye test but I stand by it.

Anyone else notice that esp early in the game the steelers chose to pick on Webb NOT Melvin. Tells me they saw on tape what some of us are seeing.

He's the best corner on the field wearing black and purple at the moment.

He was a pleasant surprise. Looked comfortable and confident. 1st three plays: great tackle, excellent pursuit and tackle for loss, and then perfect coverage with an interception that was ruled an incompletion.

He made more plays in only 10 snaps than any other corner. Played excellent coverage and only allowed one reception. And he's got perfect size and athleticism.

When he was in the game he was the best cb on the field. He deserves to start until he proves otherwise. May have unearthed a gem

I was born in Baltimore and then lived in Perry Hall until I was 10. Moved all over after that...

 

Lived in:

Phillipsburg, NJ

Ocean City, MD

Clarks Summit, PA

Bloomsburg, PA

Ocean City, MD

Doylestown, PA

East Norriton, PA

and now currently reside in Pipersville, PA

 

My older brother and his wife moved back the Bel Air, MD a few years ago so fortunately I get to visit Ravens country frequently and go to a home game every year. My grandparents and my parents all have houses in Ocean City, MD and have since I was 3 so been able to keep in touch with my Maryland roots pretty well. My moms parents and brother have never left Baltimore. Everyone on both sides of my family was born and raised in Baltimore, but unfortunately most of us have left and dispersed across the country, but it will always be home.

Regardless of the comparison? That was your whole point. A backup is somebody who usually doesn't see the field unless it is in specific situations or as you already mentioned it without realizing, in case somebody (the starter) goes down. The typical starting lineup in the NFL consists of two starting cornerbacks. That's where that term comes from. It doesn't come from who is getting how many snaps. You are confusing these two things. All that is scheme-related. If we play a team that doesn't have a QB who can throw which forces them to run the ball 50 times, I'll put some run stuffers on the field in response to that and they'll get most of the snaps. That doesn't mean they're "starters".

Cody is not a starter just because somebody decides to run the ball a lot on us and we have to keep him out there. I don't know why I'm even pointing these things out, it's so obvious. And you still haven't answered my question why nickel corners are NOT eligible for Pro Bowls, why the NFL will not allow you or anybody to vote a nickel corner in. Nickel corners get a lot of playing time in most teams, nobody is arguing that. But it is situational, no team lines up with 3 corners unless they have to. The typical starting formation consists of 2 receivers and 2 corners, those are the starters. If you line up with 3 receivers the defense will send out their sub package, a nickel formation with pass rushing D-Linemen on the field as well as an additional corner instead of a linebacker to defend the pass. That doesn't mean they're "starters". And I guarantee you that no cornerback who thinks highly enough of himself, who has been a #1 or #2 corner his entire career, will consider a nickel job a starting position. It's a demotion to a backup role. It'd be like us now asking Ngata to only enter the field in obvious running situations. He'll still get plenty of playing time but ask him if that's a starting job. Either way, I'm done with this. This has been going on forever.

Yea that bum of a "backup" Dumervil... Don't know how we got him here with a demotion.

If he gets paid like a starter, plays like a starter, then he's a starter. And I'm sure Flowers would love to get paid the same to play a little less. I think you're way over valuing ego in the equation - money has a way helping players overlook silly designations like "starter" and "backup."

The question isn't if flowers would come here and be ok in a 3 man rotation... The question is whether we'd pony up the coin for a 3rd starter knowing what we've already got invested in our top 2 with Jimmy's pay day not having really come yet. I guarantee Flowers would tattoo "ravens backup" on his forehead and play nickel for $5-6 million.

Oh and by the same logic that Cody's not a starter even if he actually starts (huh????) just because another team decides to run the ball - Flowers then is a starter by talent level or production or whatever designation you're choosing to use regardless because it would just be the ravens making a choice to invest in 3 starters at that position. It's a stupid definition.

Try this on for size... Whichever 11 players actually "start" a game on the field are the "starters" for that game on that unit. You're arguing talent level, production, or effectiveness. "Starter" and "backup" aren't proper designations for the argument you're trying to have.