rmcjacket23

  4 hours ago, Bruce_Almty said:

We play 8 games vs teams Vegas ranks a higher probability of reaching the super bowl than the Ravens. Home vs away record (Flacco struggles) is likely 5-3 & 3-5. Splits with the Steelers and Bengals; Raven team composition at this time tells me the Ravens are an 8-8 team (plus or minus 1). At the moment, the Ravens as a team give no indication of being a 10, 11 or 12 win team. The draft could change that.

"IF" Browns would take Flacco &our 16th for their 1st&33rd we could FIX defense and sign Kapernick or even Cutler as stopgap REBUILD decent team. Flacco & our 16th,74th for 1st&12th would be DREAM scenario.

Actually we couldn't afford to sign either of them or anybody. You'd have to cut most of our good players to be able to even afford to trade Joe.

I strongly recommend you do some research on the salary cap and the impact of trades like the one you're proposing, because you sound very ignorant right now.

I would have preferred the bye in week 4 or a non-divisional game rather than playing the Steelers at home. That means it will be a short week for the Ravens, tons of travel, AND a home game against the Steelers which could decide who gets the division crown because we can't afford to lose either game to a division rival, home or away. Since it is obvious the away game would be tougher to win than the home game, even the away game would have been preferable to being beat down before one of the most important games of the season at home. I guess that was the NFL's way of saying if you want input into the schedule then we are going to get you one way or the other. If not starting the season with 5 away games, or getting a ridiculous bye, the NFL has had it out for the Ravens with the schedule since game 1 in Baltimore. Year after year, season after season, the NFL sticks it to the Ravens. I'm sure there is a story just writing about how many times the NFL shafted us with the schedule.

And the same story is written about every franchise every year.

If the biggest knock on our schedule this year is that we have to play the Steelers AT HOME after a London game, you're pretty much acknowledging that our schedule is favorable.

And obviously we CAN afford to lose a game to a division rival. We do it every year, including years where we won the SB and were SB contenders. The idea of any team in our division going 6-0 frankly seems kind of silly at this point, and I would expect fans to know better by now. 5-1 is even a stretch in the last decade or so.

With the obvious caveat being that nobody has any clue who is going to be good at this point...

Hensley's analysis isn't terrible, though I don't see us losing at Home to Indy. That's not a team I see much reason to be threatened by at this point... think they could easily be the worst team in their division this year.

Something tells me the main reason he picked them to lose that game is because he doesn't see us going 8-0 at home, which I agree is a stretch.

See no reason we can't win at least 5-6 home games though. Think Pittsburgh, Detroit and Houston will be the biggest tests there.

Probably need to find a way to win 4-5 road games. Jags game is neutral site, so that helps. Cleveland obviously feels like a winnable game, but the rest of the road games are very tough based on what I see.

55 minutes ago, RayRayRaven said:

maybe u doan but havent bought a jersay in 5 yrs stil got my ed and bolden jersays lik I sayed this yr says it all it calld watchful waitin biscoitti is not only one doin it

Who cares. Most fans don't buy a new jersey every year. I haven't bought a new jersey in like 10 years.

If you watch games on TV, you're a revenue source for the NFL and for the Ravens. Whether you know it or not, you're sending money to the Baltimore Ravens every time you watch them play.

If you think that not spending $100 every five years (of which the Ravens only actual get a piece of that in actual revenue and profit) on some jersey is somehow holding the Ravens accountable for anything, then not only are you incredibly naive and hypocritical, but you also have zero clue what "accountable" means.

16 minutes ago, RayRayRaven said:

yah they accountible tickets and mercandice doan even know whos jersay to buy on the team. betta get  playoffs this yr fur sur

LOL, fans are still buying tickets and merchandise.

Do you really think they're having a tough time selling tickets? (Hint: an empty seat doesn't mean the ticket wasn't sold).

Fans just talk about outrage. They rarely actually do anything about it.

8 hours ago, OLD SCHOOL SMASH BALL said:

So i am guessing once the boards close, there will be no one left to hold the team accountable to the fans that support them. Its just business right? Why give a beep?

Do you really think fans are holding the team accountable now? 

I guess the other side of that coin is... who's holding the fans accountable for anything?

16 minutes ago, Sherly_Tebow said:

Week 6: Bears at Ravens

Week 11: Ravens at Packers

No idea if these are true. Just rumors I saw.

Source?

1 minute ago, trevorsteadman said:

I wonder if they will make the Ravens and Steelers again Christmas Sunday this year.

I'm actually not sure what the NFL is doing on Christmas this year. Christmas Eve is Sunday, so I assume most teams will just play that day, with maybe one night game.

The last week of the season is on the 31st (NYE), so not sure if they'll even play a MNF game for week 16, which would be on Christmas Day. They may just make the last MNF in week 15 on the 18th.

Well early leaks have the Giants hosting the Cowboys on SNF in week 1, so we won't be in that slot.

Looks like Giants @ Redskins is also the primetime game on Thanksgiving this year, so we won't be playing on Thanksgiving either.

9 hours ago, Maryland said:

Honestly, of all the quality posters on this forum, I think I might miss Wizard1 most of all after this forum closes. I honestly enjoyed his shtick where he pretended to be a pessimistic fan, lamenting over the innovative new ways that we were going to lose each week. His was non-confrontational divisional trolling at its finest.

He was also a coward who made a bet not to post anymore if we won a game, and then didn't follow through on his end of the deal.

"IF POSSIBLE" can Ozzie trade Flacco,our 16th pick for Brown's #1! picks,then sign Kapernick or even Cutler as stopgap till next year's QB rich draft? #1 PASS RUSHER,CB at 33?

Good news is that its NOT possible.

I'm sure you'll continue to bring it up though. Seems like a great use of time to constantly troll post about things that quite literally are impossible.

I also would like to get rid of Flacco, but we can't. They could redo his contract to help his CAP HIT and let us get a few more free agents, like a WR.
I've never been a Mel Kiper fan and doubt his mock draft choices.

The do RAVEN'S need a lot of offensive help. With all the TE's we have signed who can play a solid game?? That's why I preach TE Howard from Ala. The guy can be a beast anywhere on the field. He will pull a LB away from the line and help our poor O line to open holes.

At RB, who cares who we have. When it's 4th and one we have to pass the ball, that's just sad.
The O line help is a must. After Howard with the first pick, a LB/Edge with the second, use the third or fourth for a O lineman and a RB. I think we can get more LB's, WR's and/or CB's in the later rounds.

But what we all think is nothing. It's all up to Ozzie and his staff.

Actually, there's pretty much nothing redoing his contract would accomplish either.

If you really think the team needs the money that badly, then donate your salary for the year to them.

That's more justifiable than asking Joe to take a paycut from $6M.

Wake up.

We cannot think going into this year that Permian is going to make it a whole season. I hope Moore has learned how to catch this offseason. Besides Wallace the rest of the core is ??????? This position has been a whole ever since the Ravens have arrived in Baltimore.

My second thought is I keep hearing we need to trade back this year to get more picks. I translate that in to good maybe solid players but not impact players. Our drafts have been on the decline and i Look at the draft that set the tone. The year Dalles jumped right infant of us and took Dez Bryant was the year we missed it big. That was a perfect wideout for this team and we should have traded up to get him. We new Dalles was going to trade up because Jerry Jones said publicly how he missed on Randy Moss. I get trading back if you have STARS on the team and we just need a few pieces. The way we got our Stars was to trade up Suggs, Nhagta, Peter B, and other greats. Who are the playmakers on this team now. Williams is coming and Mosley are on there way but not there yet.

We have drafted a lot of what if guys now its time to draft game changers.

Well Perriman made it a whole season last year, so obviously quite reasonable to think he will play a whole season this year.

Certainly not at any more risk of injury then any of the other guys who play for us this year.

25 minutes ago, letitgosometimes said:

Average = Average; until the owner makes changes at the top, it will be the same ole same ole.

And again, I can spit out example after example on an annual basis of why your statement is completely false.

You can keep digging a bigger and bigger hole with these ridiculous, baseless premises if you want to, but it only makes you look less and less like you know what you're talking about.

If that's what you're going for, then you're succeeding.

Comes off as just a failed trolling attempt though, which I suspect is what you're really going for.

3 hours ago, theduug said:

yep agree that goes without saying. of course we need offensive line to be better.

but i would rather ineffectively run the ball then roll out whatever offense that was last year again. would rather run crappily 40 times then have joe drop back 40 times. gives him more of a chance to get injured too.

LOL, I certainly wouldn't rather run it 40 times if we're not good at it. Pretty much no scenario I see where that yields more points on the scoreboard. And at that point, you're not concerned about keeping Joe healthy, because we're not scoring which means we're not winning.

And lets be clear... Joe's going to throw it 35+ a game in whatever offense we run, and that includes a more effective one at running the ball. Even in Kubiak's offense, he was throwing it 35 times a game. 40 might be a stretch, but there's no scenario where we go back to an offense where he's throwing it 25-30 times a game.

Heck if Joe averages 5-6 yards per attempt, which is pathetic for a QB, he'd still be moving the ball better than a crappy running game will.

All the optimism in the world is no substitute for a great OL. If the season started today we would be in big trouble.

Also an irrelevant comment, since it doesn't start today and the bulk of teams offseason acquisitions haven't even been addressed yet.

Most teams in the league, including some of last years really good one's, would fit into this same category. Certainly applies to everybody in our division.

Harbaugh put the 2017 season squarely on his shoulders when he decided to retain Marty. Bisciotti will not tolerate missing the playoffs 3 years in a row, and 4 out of the last 5 years. Whether it is the right move or not, that is what is going to happen if we miss the playoffs and Joe/the offense doesn't take a major step forward this year.

The Ravens biggest problem has been the draft. We've missed on way too many first/second round picks lately: Perriman, Correa, Maxx, Elam, Arthur Brown, Kindle, Cody to name a recent few. We are not able to reap the benefit of having an impact player playing on a cheap, rookie contract (ex: Dak and Zeke). This forces us to look to FA to fill the rest of our holes. But due to Joe's large cap # and some other older dead money, we've been pretty limited. Hence the dumpster diving on CBs, only signing 30+ WRs, etc. Our later round picks have been good, but take 4 years to develop, and then we can't afford to retain them. Other picks have been good to mediocre: Jimmy Smith only plays 50% of the time, we traded Jernigan a 24 yr old 2nd round pick because he quits half way through a season, Upshaw (we used our first pick in the draft on an edge setter??? Cmon.)

The offensive coaching has probably been one of the worst I've ever seen, and really makes no sense to me. How can Joe Flacco throwing 50 times a game and averaging 4 yards a throw? That is literally insane, he is not Drew Brees. Run the freaking ball 30 times a game and then rely on deep play action for your big chunk, splash plays. He's obviously not accurate enough to be doing other wise (this is why I don't want to draft John Ross FYI). We have a QB with a cannon, two super fast deep threats, a potential pro bowl LT, and the best guard in the game. Figure out how to run the [profanity deleted]ing ball and have a play action offense.

Defense has been solid but can't close out games because we haven't had a pass rush in like 5 years. I don't care who your corners are; if you're giving Ben and Brady 15 seconds to sit and chill in the pocket, you are going to lose.

Last year's draft was probably our best since 2008 and we got 3-4 potential starters out of it in Stanley, Lewis, Young, and Dixon. Now we need to add an explosive playmaker, who makes an immediate impact, to help us close the gap vs. the steelers and pats.

1. If you're running the ball 30 times a game just for the sake of doing it, you're making your offense worse, not better.

Newsflash: the running game wasn't effective when it did run the ball. The solution to that problem doesn't involve running it more. Teams can be incredibly effective running the ball 20-25 times a game. We weren't, and so we didn't run it more. I'm not knocking the coaching staff for that, because I wouldn't continue to trot out a running game that was ineffective.

2. Because the running game isn't effective, and teams know they can stop our running game with a base formation, play action is irrelevant. It achieves nothing. The entire concept is to get defenders to come towards the line of scrimmage to open up the field. When they don't do that because they don't have to, then you're not opening up anything. All you're doing is drawing up a play that takes longer to develop, behind an inconsistent offensive line (perhaps the biggest issue).

Running it 40 or 50 times won't change that.

If you want to fix the offense, you get better up front on the offensive line and especially in run blocking, where we struggled big time. That will open up plenty of things.

The secondary fix is getting WRs who can actually run routes and get open in man coverage.

  4 hours ago, The Mom Gene said:

  23 hours ago, 20306cab said:

Just part of the reason he's pathetic.

I really wish sometimes our fans actually knew what having a pathetic QB was.  Then I remember Grbac and Boller....  how quickly some forget.

You can focus on that, while I focus on the hopes of betterment.

And one of these days, fans will actually establish hope that is actually realistic and supported with rare things like knowledge, intelligence, and understanding of what they're watching.

That's what I hope for. I'll keep the hope for more victories for a later date when fans actually deserve it.

This article is misleading. It's insinuating that since the team has stripped away most of the starting players we had during our 2015 season, that somehow it will equate to us having a shot at a championship this season, and that pundits are wrong for overlooking us this season.. Seriously Mink?

We are overlooked right now for GOOD REASON. Nobody deserves to get credit unless credit is due. This team has been consistently going downhill since our 2012 SB season. You can rearrange, shuffle, cut & resign players all day, that does nothing but mess up a locker room. Years ago, when we cut, traded or released a player it was either because he was not valuable, or THERE WAS A CLEAR BACK UP GUY that was READY TO PERFORM. Hence, Jarret Johnson, Bart Scott, Osemele, etc. Under harbaugh, this team cuts starting players with NO CLUE of who can fill the shoes.

You clearly don't recall the history of the Ravens that well...

John your point is well stated, but an "8 and 8" record is a collar around the Ravens' neck going into this fall 2017 season. How will the Ravens break their pattern of 8-8 level of football? The answer starts at the top with wholesale changes. If you coach the same, you get the same results on the field, no matter who is on the field.

Yeah this isn't even remotely true.

5 hours ago, Maryland said:

It sounds like you're suggesting that Perriman has potential, which I agree with, but he's not yet a player that I can comfortably slot as a future starter for years to come. To put what I am suggesting another way, there is nothing about the existence of Perriman or Moore that would preclude me as a GM from drafting multiple WRs. Even if Perriman turns out to be a solid starter, we still need more receivers for the future. 

Well we could certainly draft multiple receivers, but I see no scenario where they are both high picks that would play over Perriman this season. IF we did that, it would likely be one WR drafted in the first 2-3 rounds, with another drafted very late. The very late guy, obviously, is highly unlikely to even see the field at all or possibly not even make the team, since players in those rounds rarely pan out.

Regardless of what happens on draft day, Perriman is going to play a lot this season (barring injury) and adding even a first round WR isn't going to change that. Plus, given what the team has already told us about the type of receiver they are looking for, they'll likely be targeting a bigger receiver who can work the middle of the field, which wouldn't change what Perriman does that much.

And when you factor in that Mike Wallace is in the last year of his deal, it makes far more sense to invest more in Perriman than it does Wallace.

  8 hours ago, usmccharles said:

  9 hours ago, law215 said:

IMO, trading back works when you already have a good team and need additional picks for depth and future. A team that missed the playoffs and have not won the divison should play the percentages and take the BPA

I completely disagree.  A team with numerous holes is a team that should try to get....numerous picks. 

  9 hours ago, law215 said:

Why in such a deep draft would someone give up picks to us?
Wouldn't they use their picks to obtain many players too?
And if they did, who is this great player they are willing part with picks to secure ?

A team that values a different player than us because they have different needs.  Perfect example Is the Raiders, a team that is a legit contender and some consider the only team that can challenge the Pats.  They need help in the secondary so if a DB is available that they think will put them over the edge, they will want to move up and make that push.  Each team is in a different situation.  Its like you are comparing draft needs from the Browns to the Pats, every team has different needs therefore values players differently. 

 

  8 hours ago, BiggMack91 said:

i don't see us trading back and imo we are going after an offensive playmaker (WR) still would like to see us pick up mack RB from florida in the 2nd or third and if pat eflien is there in the second take him i wouldn't even mind moving up for him and get banner in the 3-4 round to play LG our offense would be almost as good as our D

This forum will explode if we trade back with Mwilliams or Corey Davis on the board, i might be one of those guys.  But adding a RB and a LG (rookies) would in no way make our offense on par with our defense. 

You make valid points. It a matter of do you believe the Ravens have 'holes' or lack 'difference makers'

I believe Ravens had 11 picks last year. There are multiple guys currently on the team at just about every position.But they are 'just guys'. Ravens need difference makers not picks to fill holes.

Bengals beat us cause they have difference makers AJ Green, Benard, Boyd, Eifort

Steelers win cause they have difference makers Brown, Bell

We may split games with them, but they will win more games cause they have players that make the difference. I don't see that on the Ravens.

In fact, they lost Smith Sr and Dummervil. If they can't win more than 8 games with them, you need top talent to replace them

Would also point out that all of the players you listed are offensive players. Its great to have sexy playmakers on offense, and I'd love nothing more than to have them.

But our defense is miles ahead of both of those teams at the moment, both in terms of playmakers and in terms of overall production. So there is a difference there.

Its why a team like Pittsburgh, in my eyes, is dead money in the AFC until they increase their defensive talent and production and do it fast. They can have all the playmakers they want on offense, and they're simply not going to beat New England in the playoffs. Adding another offensive just makes a high powered offense a bit better. It doesn't solve the problems they have.

I frankly have zero concerns about Cincinnati right now. That team has major issues in a lot of areas, and they aren't active enough spenders in FA to account for the people they lose. Doesn't really bother me that they beat us in week 17, and I'm well aware of our struggles against them in recent seasons. But that team isn't close to them that was competing for the division 2-3 years ago.

They're weak on the offensive line, they don't have much of a pass rush anymore, their secondary is average, and they've lost a lot of receivers in recent years. And their RBs are vastly overrated for what they bring to the table.

  9 hours ago, nj_ravens said:

  9 hours ago, law215 said:

The 2012 Superbowl Champion Ravens was in large part a team that was 13-3 in 2006 before Harbs and Flacco, close to winning the Division in 2008, won the division in 2011 and 2012. This is not that team.
This is a team that missed 3 out of the last 4 playoffs and have not won the division in 5 years.

What they need are playmakers : Based on chance of availability
1. OJ Howard –BPA if he’s there at 16. I doubt it though
2. Mike Williams – Miss match, will win ball similar to Boldin, Evans, Benjamin, can make Flacco better
3. Barnett – loss Dummervil, Suggs is older
4. McKinley – speed rusher
5. Corey Davis – route runner, size, RAC
6. Peppers – If the above guys are gone, he’s BPA IMO, will always be around football
7. Cook – home run RB, running and catching out of backfield

Trading back is gambling when you are already behind. Yes, the Ravens can play Steelers, Patriots, and a lot of teams close, but moral victories do not win games.

This is a deep draft so the teams already ahead of the Ravens will get better too. Stay put and select BPA. No need to wheel and deal with a team that has been 3rd in the division for years.

OK, and what if all 7 of those players are on the board, and lets say for sake of example, Detroit (I picked them simply for easy math) wants to give us a 3rd rounder to move back 5 slots, as the draft chart says is approximately even.... you say we don't do it? That doesn't make ANY sense, because you can still get choice of 2 of those 7 AND another player in the top 100.

First, It's highly unlikely that ALL 7 will still be on the board. But I'll play along.

It's still gamble that not needed. What if we move back 2 spots? And Mike Williams turns out to be a beast. He goes to Titans who then would be another AFC team competing for a playoff spot with Ravens.

Also, What if the Broncos trade with Skins. Now there are 2 AFC teams picking a player higher than you.

IMO, trading back works when you already have a good team and need additional picks for depth and future. A team that missed the playoffs and have not won the divison should play the percentages and take the BPA

Well trading back works in a lot more scenarios then just having a good team. Obviously it also works for a team that needs a lot of upgrades at a lot of positions.

The Browns are going to take Garrett, who's clearly the best player in the class at the moment. That team will need a lot of luck to win ONE additional game next season, and that's after they get the best player in the draft. And until they get a viable QB, the same thing will happen year after year.

The REAL way to play the percentages is to stick to the draft philosophy you have and trust your player evaluations. That's playing the percentages. If that means your evaluation says trade up, you trade up. If it says trade back, you trade back. If it says stay put, you stay put.

The absolute worst thing any team can do is deviate from a draft philosophy or strategy to select a player they don't think is worthy of that draft slot... regardless of position.

On 4/11/2017 at 8:32 PM, Ravenseconbeast said:

You are asking almost the impossible.  So you get drafted and don't succeed with your first team.  The possibility of anyone giving you a 2nd chance to be groomed like your first team is slim to none.   

I can list you all the WR we drafted since Joe was drafted and you can name me how many of those WRs actually broke 1000 yards.   Fair?

Justin Harper

Marcus Smith

David Reed

Tandon Doss

Torrey Smith

Tommy Streeter

Aaron Mallette

Michael Campanaro

Darren Waller

Breshad Perriman
 

1. Well 8 of the guys on that list were taken in the 4th round or later, including 5 taken in the 6th or 7th rounds. You'll have a very hard time finding quality football players drafted on this team in the 6th or 7th round throughout the history of the franchise, regardless of position.

So you basically have a first rounder still on his rookie deal, and a 2nd rounder who played quite well and got a lucrative contract on his next team.

2. Some of the guys listed here actually did go sign with other teams, so by definition, they were given 2nd chances. If for some reason you thought that they would go to another team with a chance to start, that's an unreasonable expectation on your part only, since there's really no basis for that expectation.

Basically I see a group of mid-to-late round draft picks who didn't play well here, and either were out of the league entirely or went somewhere else and didn't play well there either.

Kind of hard to spin that as a Ravens problem, other than just being a poor draft pick.

3 hours ago, January J said:

Good point but we haven't really seen them even get that many opportunities to know if they do or not...plus the only way to get better is to get those opportunities ( esp in-game opps). I mean I guess that's done in practice..and maybe they've failed to do so well- hence the lack of opportunities.. But honestly I'm not so sure given the large amount of questionable play calling by the OCs and/or bad throwing decisions by Joe.

 

Crock is a guy i do think needs to learn to use his size a little better- He has more in-game experience than those other 2. He has the potential to be a beast if so.

For me, practice/training camp/preseason is where these types of players simply have to display those kinds of things. There isn't a team in the league (except maybe the Browns, who aren't even trying to win) who can put late round draft picks or "project" type players out there in real game situations and make sure that they learn how to play well on the job. The most likely outcome in that scenario is that those players never play well, and the coaches or FO personnel who decided to give them all that playing time get fired for it. As a coach or GM, I'd certainly never take that risk. I'm putting the guys out there who I think are the best players, not based on whether they might be a great player five years from now.

I certainly agree that playing in the preseason or training camp is nothing like playing in a real game. But the reality is that when fans or analysts or media personnel ask for young players to get more snaps or more playing time, they're doing that from a position of absolutely zero risk. If that player doesn't pan out, nothing happens to the people that called for more playing time, more targets, etc. That blame strictly goes to the player and the coaches/decision makers, and they're the one's held accountable.

Ultimately the Ravens should do what every other team in the league does... trust your talent evaluators. Trust your coaches to determine who the best players are, and give them the bulk of the playing time.