frozen joe flacco fan

1 hour ago, usmccharles said:

Right.....playoffs every year.  One win in the playoffs each year, a superbowl.  Pretty pathetic

I believe he's talking about our mediocre record since we won the Super Bowl. If you like mediocrity, then you should be very happy 'cause that's where we are. Its hard to say whether the team got better or not, given the injuries we had last year. You ought to know that there's no such thing as the status quo. You're either getting better or getting worse. Again, its kinda hard to say at this point whether we're getting better or worse. Our team has numerous holes to fill at various positions and the coaching seems to have declined IMO.

32 minutes ago, usmccharles said:

Its a rare day around the world for people to actually use paragraphs as well. 

Good point! But other than that, how did you like the play, Mr. Lincoln?

If U don't get it, U don't get it. Harbaugh should be looking for another job as a Special Teams Coach. What is his regular season record since we won the Super Bowl? Its mediocre. If we could not even beat a Cincinnati team without its primary playmakers, Green, Bernard, Hill and Burffict, that's pathetic game-planning and game-coaching. It was evident Cincy laid down against the Steelers in the 2nd half of their game against the Steelers but then took their wrath out on us. Harbaugh should go. It was obvious Cincy wanted the game more than we did. Our team did not play for Harbaugh in a game which decided whether or not we would have a winning season. AND, what about the great playcall again toward the end of the half with us trailing at the time 17-3? We call a pass on 1st and goal with 2:28 to play. It was like deja vu from the Eagles game. It was Einstein who said, "Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again but expecting different results." Well, Harbaugh is obviously not Einstein, is he? That was Forrest Gump football at its finest, i.e., stupid is as stupid does. That was a flat out embarrassing display of coaching ineptitude. Its time to go, John! Your message has gotten stale and its time for a change. The organization needs a new culture and a new philosophy. Its time to bring in someone with a good grasp of the game instead of someone who it takes three years to find an adequate punt returner.     

6 hours ago, rmcjacket23 said:

1. Harbs didn't say anything remotely close to that in his EOY PC. He said Joe needs to play better and the organization needs to find ways to help Joe out. Nothing mentioned about "below average" or "making elite money" or "handcuffing an organization". Those are your opinions, not John's, and there was nothing he said that implied that at all.

2. If you're referencing passer rating or "rankings", you already don't understand what teams look for in a QB or care about, and it certainly has no bearing on financial compensation. Its been a useless statistic since it was created. If I asked you to explain to me what it was, you couldn't, or you'd have to google it. Its why you almost never hear a coach or a team reference it as meaningful, because they don't care.

In terms of "market value", that's simply a product of supply and demand. Oftentimes, the ability to throw for a bunch of yardage or a bunch of TDs is just a small sliver of how NFL teams assign a value to a QB. 

And organizations don't just pay a ton of money for QBs to "take a chance on them". That's how organization personnel get fired, because guys you pay a ton of money to who are relatively unproven almost universally don't pan out. Organizations pay for players that have at least a small sample size of quality play, coupled with a lack of better alternatives at the position, which is the biggest driver of market value. The reason why QB prices have skyrocketed in recent years has as much to do with the unbelievably small supply of even competent QBs that are available to NFL teams in the present as it does how well they produce or how important the position is.

Case in point... there's 32 NFL teams. There isn't anywhere close to 32 competent NFL QBs in the league right now. So if a team finds one that they even think is competent, they're willing to pay for him, even if they are wrong.

The other obvious measurement of why NFL teams don't do what fans do and sit there and compare QB contracts against their peers using useless statistics like Passer Rating is because you almost never hear of a team coming to a competent QB asking for a paycut, which happens at just about every other position. They don't sit there and say "well gee Joe, you only ranked 20th in QB play this year, how about we pay you like the 20th best QB". Doesn't work that way in the real world, and it certainly doesn't work that way in the NFL, especially at a position like QB where the players have a lot more of the power than the organization does.

Its a rare day in Baltimore when I agree with you but I think today's the day! In the above novel, I think you just acknowledged that Joe's competent. That's a step up from most of the intellectual giants who have posted less complimentary things about Joe on this forum. Most of them wouldn't know the difference between competent and elite if Joe's career or personal life depended on it. I'm not sure what your definition of either is but you have intimated that there are less than 32 competent QBs in the NFL. If that is true, your list of elite QBs must really be small. I would suggest Joe's in the 2nd tier of QBs in the league in terms of his overall performance right now. I would also suggest that he's both competent and elite for a variety of reasons, which I do not care to expound upon. Of course, there must be a basis to make such a preposterous claim as this. So, please indulge me. It is simply this. In the NFL, there are only a handful of QBs who I would consider "Triple A" QBs. The shortlist would include those QBs with Athleticism, Arm strength and Accuracy. AND, if there were a fourth A, it would be Attitude. No matter how you rate him in the four "A" categories, Joe is competent and elite. Unfortunately, he's playing on a team that is neither competent nor elite in many ways, not the least of which is the coaching. If Coach Harbaugh learned anything from an earlier game in which we called a pass on 1st and goal to go, it didn't show up in the Cincy game, did it? At a point in the game when the score was 17-3, he opted to throw the ball to Pitta in the endzone again instead of running the ball. It was extremely poor coaching, playcalling and clock management, not to mention a poor read by Joe. Dixon was open in the flat for a certain TD and could have walked into the endzone but that's beside the point. If Joe is ever gonna play at a higher level, the coaching philosophy of this team and its culture must undergo some immediate changes. It was Einstein who once said "the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." He also said "You have to learn the rules of the game. And then you have to play better than anybody else." Its becoming patently obvious that our Head Coach is no Einstein and its also apparent that you don't have to be a football player to be a good coach. Golly, I suppose an aeronautical engineer from Renssalear Polytechnical Institute could even learn how to be a pretty good football coach, huh?        

1 hour ago, Glen1024 said:

Everyone getting on Ozzie like he all of sudden stop knowing how to select talent...man name one draft pick you can say these coaches have made better??? Player development is a big part of coaching and an area harbaugh is weak at. This team has talent on it, but if coaches continue to not use it properly...for instance we have Wallace and periman with tremendous speed on the outside but we never developed a vertical attack this year....it's no coincidence that we use the running game and the offense looked good but how many games this year have we committed to the run....blown leads in the 4th is dean pees calling card,  I remind folks we almost blew a 3 td lead in the superbowl and that was with our hof players playing, the guy needs to go. This team wins with talent alone it's just not a well coached group...is it any wonder that soon as any marquee guy goes down the whole unit falters, the talent level drops and coaches have no answers. Compare that to new england who loses gronk and amendola and brady still puts up 400 yards, the let revis and browner walk after winning the superbowl and the defense is still one of the best in points allowed

Your points are well-taken but Oz shares the responsibility for putting playmakers on the 53 man roster. There have been some recent successes in the draft and some failures. If you are not part of the solution, then you are part of the problem. Oz has not solved our secondary problem IMHO nor has he solved our pass-rush problem via the draft. Who do you look to to do that if not him? Of course the coaching has to be better. Many have acknowledged that but it appears the game may have passed him by. Have Wallace and Perriman been consistently getting separation from their defenders or have I been missing something? I haven't seen the blinding speed to which you're referring. Nor have I seen the dependable hands by Perriman when he needs to make a clutch, move-the-chains catch. We need more playmakers on both sides of the ball and coaches who can coach them up. As you state so eloquently, when one marquee player is hurt, it shouldn't put us into a tailspin but it does seem to have that affect.  

2 hours ago, Militant X 1 said:

Friends of mine who are fans of other NFL teams kept saying to me; "Now that Ray Lewis and Ed Reed are gone; Flacco will never lead the Ravens to another Super Bowl and ya'll probably won't make the playoffs for years to come!"  By no means am I laying this loss tonight in Flacco's lap because he did what he could.  He played pretty well and had no INT's.  He even marched us down the field and got us the go ahead touchdown by Juice for the potential win.  However, the offense still couldn't score TD's in a few red zone trips, receivers dropping key passes, special teams bobbling a FG attempt snap for the first time and then the defense once again folded like a cheap suit in the 4th quarter.  Suggs/Doom had NO PASS RUSH whatsoever.  Big Ben remained upright and was able to scramble out a few times.  This team is shot!  There needs to be a major overhaul of some kind to take place from the coaches, the offense and the defense in order to right the ship.  Cause the reality is that it is sinking fast in this post Lewis/Reed era.

Tell your friends Joe Flacco put his team in a position to win the game with 78 seconds left in a road game against a good defensive team in a hostile environment and in a game we had to win to remain alive in the playoff hunt. We lost because ........ our defense could not protect a 10 point lead going into the final quarter and surrendered 3 TDs. We spotted the Steelers 7, our offense posted 27 points and left another 11 points on the field and our highly vaunted defense folded when it counted. It speaks volumes that The Baltimore Ravens sent 4 players to the Pro Bowl but only 1 was a defensive player - C.J.. No, its time the Wizard of Oz follows the yellow brick road out of town and takes some of the coaches with him. If its true that the players of today are bigger, stronger and faster than the players of yesteryear as some of our fans insist, then we should start drafting some of these speedy behemoths. I agree with your rationale but I do not agree with your friends' assessment of Joe's performance as a starting QB. He rose to the occasion like I hoped he would and did a phenomenal job. I only wish he could snap on FGs and catch his own throws in the end zone. 

3 hours ago, ALPHA said:

Convince me, make a better argument.

I'm not here to convict, convert or convince anybody. Besides it takes one fool to start an argument; it takes two fools to turn it into a conversation.You're entitled to your opinion jest as I'm entitled to mine. So, my argument is as follows: Kamar Aiken is not Julio Jones, Breshad Perriman is not Odell Beckham, Jr., Waller is not Jimmy Graham, Dennis Pitta is not Rob Gronkowski and, in all candor, Joe Flacco is not Tom Brady but what Joe did in Pittsburgh tonight was to put his team in a position to win with 78 seconds left in a game we had to win on the road against a good team in a hostile environment to stay alive in the playoff hunt. If that's not elite, it was most definitely electrifying and exciting to watch. Our offense scored 27 points and arguably should have scored at least 11 more points. Prior to the game, I had predicted a final score of 23-20, so our offensive production exceeded my expectations. Unfortunately, Joe seldom gets the credit he deserves from some of his undeserving "fans" and trolls like Virginia 55. Quite frankly, I attribute some of it to their sheer jealousy that he makes so much money. I don't think he begged Steve Bisciotti for his contract. Its your prerogative to label him whatever you want. I choose to call him elite because I measure his performance and value as a QB by more than the obvious tangibles. For instance, I'm more impressed by winning percentage than by total passing yardage and other statistics. Some of his intangibles include a tremendous will to compete and his unflappable demeanor under stressful situations. I've stated my case about Joe's elite play before and I do not want to go there again 'cause there's too many elitist critics of Joe out there who need to get over it and get used to his eliteness. Its been said, "If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem." Well, Joe ain't the problem!

14 minutes ago, sflegend89 said:

Our head coach is a former special teams coach with a high profile last name. Not to say he hasn't done a decent job but he I see a higher ceiling and more major changes strategically with McDaniels or Patricia. 

Both have been essentially mentored by the most succesful coach in NFL history and both are much more hands-on football strategy oriented coaches. The only pro I see for keeping Harbs is continuity. But at what point do you have to demand more from that head coach position, especially in regards to strategy and philosophy.

I agree with most of what you have said. There's another pro for keeping Harbaugh, which is, its hard to argue with success. However, I believe its time for a change and here's why. A highly regarded management guru, named Peter Druecker, once said, "Culture eats strategy for breakfast." To me, that is what needs to change, i.e., the culture of the organization. The culture of an organization is your reason to  exist. Our goal this year was never high enough. It was to return to the playoffs. It should have been to get back to the SB. With a relatively strong nucleus of returning veterans and a pretty good group of younger players, we had a group of under-achievers. Our management team, led by Coach Harbaugh failed even to return to the playoffs.  

I think the premise of the OP is "Is Harbaugh on the HotSeat?" If it wasn't hot before, it is now. That collapse in Pittsburgh was pathetic. Did you ever once see him on the sideline imploring his defense to leave nothing on the field? Goodbye, Coach! Thanks to some really great players, you had a pretty good run at it!

26 minutes ago, ALPHA said:

Our defense kept our season alive but it took him too long to get heated up. Flacco says he's elite and is paid like he's elite, but he isn't elite.

Joe's elite but your post is not. The Ravens sent one defensive player to the Pro Bowl. End of story. 

I'd like to see them hire one of the young Turks like McDaniels, Patricia or Shanahan. All three of these guys have a high football IQ. John Harbaugh would make somebody an excellent Special Teams coach. So long, Coach! You had a team of underachievers this yea and couldn't get the job done. We sent 1 defensive player to the Pro Bowl. BTW, Oz, its time for you to ride off into the sunset too. The game has passed you by. Its like all the negative Nancys (except me) on this blog site have been sayin. The players in the league are bigger, stronger and faster than they used to be. We need to draft some of 'em. 

42 minutes ago, Ravenseconbeast said:

You wont win with passing 1 TD vs. Steelers.   And you can't win having Steeler score 31 pts.   

Not having Jimmy hurt us keeping Powers as #2 and Tavon as #1.   

SSS who is our best receiver is gone.  With Flacco being the worst efficient 3rd down passer in the league, not having Steve is going to hurt next year.   

We need to get back to our roots and get back to 'right player right price'   Clean up the gunk, and that starts with Flacco shaving his massive contract.  B/C he is a dud QB.  We could also shave off ton off ineffective DBs that hasn't done squat(kendrick lewis/arrington) as well as Watson.  

Create a room to bring in playmakers into this team.  We need major TALENT in the team.   Not 'good boys' but PLAYMAKERS.    We'll see what happens next year.

I know that had to be a typo when you said Joe was a dud QB. You meant dude, right? If I understand your warped logic, you think it is all Flacco's fault again. Let's see. Dennis dropped a TD pass in the end zone. Waller dropped a TD pass in the end zone. Perriman dropped another key pass in the clutch. AND, Aiken, well, Aiken belongs on a volleyball team or some other non-contact sport. If it weren't for old school SSS, we would have been in bigger trouble. Steve and Joe are ballers. BUT, I'll give you credit where credit's due. You are consistent. You never have a nice thing to say about Joe. You just lack objectivity. I just wish they would let Joe tape the plays to his wrist so he could remember what to call like your idol Big Ben does.

If U think that us not having Jimmy was the biggest issue on D, then think again. Not only did we not sack Ben got very little, if any, pressure on him. Blame Coach Pees for that if you want but he's between a rock and a hard place. B/c of our sorry CBs, he has limited options. If he blitzes, we get burned. If he doesn't blitz, the opposing QBs pick us apart.

Otherwise, your post was right on target, just like Joe Flacco was all night long. We need playmakers. Tonight, I was proud of the way the offense fought. I was most disappointed in the play of Terrell Suggs, Elvis Doomerville and Mike Wallace. In the final analysis, it speaks volumes that the Baltimore Ravens sent 4 players to this year's Pro Bowl but only one is from our defense. That's why we lost tonight!  

On ‎12‎/‎23‎/‎2016 at 8:50 AM, The Raven said:

You're right tbh.

But... Suggs has always taken plays off. If we're talking about this year though, Suggs took off the whole Patriots game. He's got eight sacks on the year which is ballin', but he only made one tackle against New England and he didn't record a single statistic against Pittsburgh... Where's he been when it's mattered? He didn't record a state against Miami either, and that was a blowout. He's on the decline big time, and if you can't see he's taking more plays off than ever before, well... smh.

And he ain't never been the "general" of anything. Generals lead. Suggs just talks loud.

If you ask me, Weddle looks like the general right now, which is sad since he's a transplant. People flock to him. They respect him. He made a big mistake against New England but doesn't take plays off. He grinds and he leads.

And Suggs? He's just too busy crawling on all fours wagging his tongue like some kind of man child pretending to be a dog (that actually happened, by the way). He's always liked the attention more than anything.

Well, the tongue wagging scene was not a good look. I agree. But then again, Ray Lewis always exhorted his teammates and encouraged them to bark and play like dogs, remember? When T-Sizzle went down last year with his 2nd Achilles injury, few realized how much he meant to the team until the season was over. Granted, we had several other injuries to key players but T-Sizzle's injury was IMO the most significant. When "The General" went down, General Confusion took over the defense. Even Steve Bisciotti admitted he didn't realize how much Suggs' injury affected the team chemistry. I've seen him take plays off. I've also seen him take heads off. I've seen him do more of the latter than the former. Go Man-child! Play like a one arm dog tomorrow!!

2 hours ago, Desert said:

I knew I wasn't the only one who felt this way. Please understand I appreciate everything Suggs has accomplished in the past. But we still need more consistent play from that position. IMO and that of many others, its time to move on.

I still have not forgotten Suggs showing up to training camp 30 lbs over weight, and out of shape. then using all of preseason and the first half of the season to get in shape. What king of "Veteren Leader" does that BS? Huh?

Torn Achilles injuries are very rarely something players come back from at 100%.

Oh and by the way, to "frozen joe flacco fan" the number of post on this forum has Nothing to do with  comments made here.

Desert

Veteran is spelled V-E-T-E-R-A-N, Desert!

2 hours ago, BmoreRavens732 said:

I dont post on here often. I'm more of a lurker. But I absolutely love getting on here and reading ridiculous posts made by guys like that, especially wizard lol. I'm a die hard ravens fan and I'm a what I guess guys like them would call a "flacco apologist". I've been critical of flacco a few times this season as needed for mostly his mechanics, but sometimes bone headed decisions just like the one he made vs Philly last Sunday. Now my point is I've been trying to figure out all season what's been going wrong on offense for them to flutter so frequently. I've came up with a number of things. Flacco coming off injury trying to get over the mental part of it clearly affected his mechanics. The offensive line being inconsistent. The run game not being utilized correctly or at all. Not enough shots down field with guys like Wallace perriman and Moore on the roster. Its a number of things obviously, but I do realize sometimes these things happen. We've had so much success under harbs and flacco since they've been here, that we as a fan base became spoiled. Nothing wrong with that! Success is to be expected when you've grown accustomed to it. But guys like wizard and Virginia 55 are never satisfied. Period!!! Its funny flaccos won multiple playoff games, was Superbowl mvp, had a historical post season and still had guys crying that he's not throwing over 4,000 yards. But now he's most likely going to pass for 4,000 or more and has a good chance to miss the post season! Which would those guys rather have? He could bring another 3 superbowls back to Baltimore before he retires and guys like that would STILL have something to complain about! Sorry for the rambling bro, its late (or early) and I've had no sleep lol.

Well said. Its obvious part of the problem has been Joe trying to get over the psychological side of his knee injury. I saw the same thing with Tom Brady when he came back from the same injury. Tom played tentatively and protected his knee for several games upon his return. I hope Joe has put that behind him.  

1 hour ago, baroquenspirit said:

Wow! Dear Santa, please let the Ravens listen to this guy for Christmas. 

No way, Jose! The Wizard and I have agreed on many things but he has crossed the line this time like James Patterson, the author . There's no way Big Ben and his merry men will score 34 points in the first half. They won't even score 34 points in the game. If that were to happen, I suspect Harbaugh and Newsome would be on the last train to Clarksville. If that happens, they should be run out of town on a rail. I have said all along that this team is a bunch of underachievers. They have enough talent to beat the Squeelers if they are coached properly. The high powered Steelers offense that the Wizard raves about has scored 341 points in 14 games while our offense has scored 306 points. By my 'rithmetic, that's less than 3 points a game more. Whoopie! The Wizard is right about one thing though. He predicted we would win 6 games and we have! If this goes as it should, we will win 6 + 4 = 10 games. See! There's more than one Wizard in this town, Mr. Broken Spirit. I predicted the final score long before the Wizard did and I said our beloved Ravens would win the game on a Justin Tucker field goal by a score of 23-20. Nothing has changed. Unlike the Cincy Bungles who laid down in the 2nd half against the Squeelers, the Ravens will lay the wood to Big Ben and his band of men. All the terrible towels in the world and Mike Tomlin trying to trip our receivers will not intimidate the unflappable Joe Flacco and the twin Grinches, named Wallace and Smith, who will steal Christmas from the Steelers on Christmas Day in Spittsburgh, PA. By game's end, your team's colors will change from black and yellow to black and blue and your terrible towels can be used for crying towels. Elvis (Doomerville, that is) will be singing his rendition of Blue Christmas to your fans. The General will have his way with Big Ben. Son, this is gonna be fun!!!   

10 hours ago, rmcjacket23 said:

All subjective and dependent on how you arbitrarily define things.

For example... what does "have a run game" actually mean? I mean no team literally runs it zero times, so does that mean that every team technically has a "run game"?

So what constitutes as "having a run game"? Is it volume? Are there a certain number of carries that you cross and then you're considered to "have a running game"? Is it effectiveness at running the ball? Do you have to be in the top half of the league in rushing, or can you just not be dead last? All depends on where you finally put the goal posts.

All depends on how you arbitrarily define these things. If you're saying that you can't be in say the bottom 10 in the league in rushing effectiveness in order to win, then we don't have to look back very far at all to see how this isn't true. 

There must be some truth in the old adage that "If you can't dazzle them with your brilliance, then baffle them with (fill in the blank)." That's all you've done here. The stats you love to quote prove nothing. You may say there is no correlation between Rushing TDs and an effective running game but I respectfully disagree. Here's why. I'm sure you'd agree that Adrian Petersen, Emmit Smith, Barry Sanders, Earl Campbell, Gale Sayers and Jim Brown all played on teams that had effective running games. Granted, some of their teams were highly successful; some weren't. BUT, what did all of them have in common? The answer is: They all led the league in TDs their 1st three years in the NFL. So, there can be a direct correlation between rushing TDs and "having a running game". Some of those teams would have been more successful if they had had better passing games but, again, that's why a balanced attack is generally so important.

At the risk of seeing more statistics, it would be interesting to speculate on whose running game has been more effective and why --- NE's or Baltimore's. I would suggest that NE's has been more effective w/o analyzing a lot of stats. BTW, Adrian Petersen didn't play in the 70s, 80, or 90s. Yep, football has evolved but if your theory about the unimportance of establishing a running game was correct, it would seem to follow logically that the team that leads the league in passing each year would win the Super Bowl every year. We know that is not what always happens. IMO the 2015 Denver Broncos were a good example of a team without a great passing game.

For me, the biggest surprise is the return of Dennis Pitta to the starting lineup. Next to that, I'd say the play of Tavon Young is a pleasant surprise.

13 hours ago, TMC said:

As a fan of a rival, Suggs is the guy I hate to see step on the field against my team but I think I'll hate hearing that he is retiring even more.  If he were on my team, he would probably be my favorite player.  Since he isn't, he is a guy I like to dislike.  I have a ton of respect for the guy and football fans from every team should tip the cap to him when he hangs it up.  He plays hard...all the damn time.  I have a ton of respect for him and the idea that he is nearing the end is sad.

For me, there are certain players you just hate to see leave the game, like Polamalu, Reed, Bettis, Calvin Johnson, and the like....and when Suggs hangs them up, he falls in that group.  

How crazy is it that Suggs and DeMarcus Ware could both hang them up in the next year or so?

When Ray Lewis retired, I had to decide whose jersey to buy. There was some talk back then that T-Sizzle might not be back the next year. I bought a white Suggs Jersey with a Super Bowl patch on it. I'm really glad I did. He really is The Baller or The Brawler from Ball So Hard U. You can bet Ben Rothlisberger knows who "The General" is on our team.

6 hours ago, rmcjacket23 said:

1. Nothing you said in the first paragraph has literally anything to do with rushing TDs. I mean its great and cute and all to reference football play from the 60s, but this ain't the 60s anymore. Or the 70s, or the 80s, or the 90s. Life has evolved, football has evolved, and most importantly, the understanding of how football works as evolved. 

You can probably literally pick any RB in the league right now and do this same comparison, but since you referenced Jim Brown, I'll use him, because he too fits my point perfectly...

Lets look at some of the seasonal stats in Jim Brown's career...

1958: 257 carries, 1,527 yards, 17 TDs, 5.9 YPC. Very impressive stats.

1960: 215 carries, 1,257 yards, 9 TDs, 5.8 YPC

So one would look at 1958 and say "wow, that's a lot better season". But in reality, that's not really the case. Why? Because the only real difference is volume, i.e. how many times they gave him the ball. That has nothing to do with effectiveness as a runner... it has to do with the way the offense as a unit is running and how many times he got his name called in the huddle. In the modern NFL, we would blame this on coaching, not on the player. 

But wait... if he's as effective as a runner, shouldn't his TD numbers be at least somewhat similar? Why with just 42 less carries does he have 8 less TDs? Why was he scoring a TD every 15 carries in 1958, and now only scoring one every 24 carries in 1960? The answer... because TDs aren't in individual statistic, and they are too dependent on a ton of factors that have nothing to do with the individual itself.

Maybe you're still trying to convince yourself that its because of volume. OK, cool.

1963: 291 carries (more carries than in 1958), 1,863 yards (more yards than in 1958), 6.4 YPC (higher than in 1958), but 12 TDs? So he has more carries, more yardage and a better YPC average, yet he scores 5 less TDs? How can that be?

You can literally play this game with just about anybody. RBs, WRs, etc. Pick Ravens players if you want. Go look at Torrey's Smith's numbers here. Best season here by far was the year he only caught 4 TDs... had over 1100 yards on 65 catches. The year after he was highly less efficient, caught less passes for a lot less yardage, yet had 11 TDs. What's the explanation for that?

The moment fans start judging skill position players based on TDs, you'll fail as a talent evaluator. Look at how many fools Marlon Brown made on these forums, when fans saw him catch 7 TDs on like 50 catches (an unsustainable number) and projected him to score like 10+ the next year. Hasn't caught a single one since.

2. I'm not arguing we shouldn't run the ball more, but it does us no good if we aren't going to be consistently effective at it. The numbers of "rushers" the Pats sent doesn't impact whether we should run the ball or not necessarily, because they were also playing a tight zone, so they still had 5-6 guys in the box nearly every play.

3. No. The Patriots beat us because they spread us out in the 2nd half and threw it all over us. The officiating was fine and the under inflated footballs were in the Colts game, not our game (not to mention the fact that under inflated footballs is a pathetic excuse to justify losing).

I didn't expect anything less from you. Trying to insult someone who disagrees with you doesn't make that person a fool nor does it make you win an argument. Obviously, the game of football has changed since the 60s, 70s, 80s and 90s. I don't think anyone is disputing that. Its obviously a more pass-oriented league now. Its patently obvious that you have a bias toward passing and that's fine but there have been numerous examples of successful teams who were run-oriented. The Ravens teams that featured Jamaal Lewis were built that way out of necessity. You love to cite  statistics so you obviously know that Jim Brown lost the rushing title only once during his illustrious career to another pretty good runner on another run-oriented team. I assume the stats you have issued on Jim Brown are accurate as you probably just googled them like any of us "fools" could do. The amazing thing about the stats is that you seem to lack comprehension as to what they really mean. When Jim Brown played, he achieved the rushing yardage in less games than the cupcakes of today play each year. Yes, that's right, I called them cupcakes. The myth that the NFL tries to project that the players are bigger and stronger now than they used to be is ludicrous. You probably never saw Bubba Smith play and I'm sure you've never heard of Big Daddy Lipscomb but that's OK. BTW, you sound a lot like a Bill Belichik surrogate. You become very defensive about your beloved Patriots, when they are criticized by some of us. The officiating stunk in that game like when one of our players reported as a tackle-eligible and we were penalized for it. But that's OK. I know you have a short memory. Here's another cute thing for you: "Computers just tell you the answer." - Pablo Picasso  Is it time for your next computer football game yet? Just as rushing stats do not correlate with winning, passing stats don't either. An effective balance of the two is what ultimately separates the sheep from the goats. Thanks for the discourse and enjoy the game on Sunday!

12 hours ago, ellicottraven said:

Hmm. We just need to play like it. When was it that we performed well on the road for all 4 quarters? It's been a while now and hence the concern. The Steelers have won 5 straight and the Bengals put up a really good fight against the Steelers too and have been playing better than how they started. And we don't have a great track record of winning recently in Cincy either.

You call the way Cincy played in the 2nd half of that game a really good fight? I call it laying down with or without "Perfect" Burfict. That was disgraceful. I think they led at halftime 20-6 and failed to score in the 2nd half. They lost 27-20, right? It was downright pitiful! 

7 hours ago, rmcjacket23 said:

1. Well, for starters, rushing TDs aren't a reflection of a successful running game. They're inconsistent and vary year over year, and are a lot more dependent on field position than most. 

Blount is a perfect example of this. He's got more TDs this year than his last 2 years combined, yet he's actually not nearly as efficient of a runner as he was the last couple years. His YPC has dipped every year for for years now, and he's getting about a half yard per carry less than he was getting just two years ago. 

2. If you look at a team as a whole, in theory, teams need to ATTEMPT to run the ball. The thing is... they don't actually have to be good at it. Attempting to run the ball doesn't keep a defense honest. As the Ravens have learned multiple times this season, if you're attempting to run the ball and can't do it successfully, the other teams defense doesn't gain any more honesty by you running it more. They gain less honesty. They now know they can stop you from running it with a 5-6 man box, which means they can play better coverage knowing they need less people to stop the run.

3. I also asked Tom Brady and Bill Belichick about it. They pointed me in the now infamous direction of the 2014 playoff game against the Baltimore Ravens.

That was the game where the Patriots ran 28 offensive plays in the 2nd half with ZERO designed running plays. They scored 21 points in that half and overcame a 7 point deficit to win.

So what did we learn from that? That on a game-by-game basis, you don't need to run the ball at all. You can stand back there and pick apart a bad secondary for an entire half, put up 21 points, and go on to win a SB. 

 

How do you spell M-a-l-a-r-k-e-y 'cause that's what this is - malarkey (and I don't mean Mike).

Re #1, The Green Bay teams of yesteryear would disagree vehemently with your assertion that rushing TDs aren't a reflection of a successful running game. Their Green Bay sweep culminated in lots of rushing TDs and Bart Starr was quite successful even though he didn't throw a lot at Alabama or Green Bay. I suspect Jim Brown and Leroy Kelley might disagree with you too. I could cite numerous other teams that imposed their will on the opposition by using the pass to set up the run but let's move on;

Re #2, I agree that a team does not NEED to run the ball effectively to win any given game but a balanced attack certainly helps winning on a sustained basis. Our ratio of running plays to passing plays is about 35% run plays and 65% pass plays, right? That is grossly unbalanced and leads to a one-dimensional offense. Whether a team is efficient when they run or not is another question. Ezekial Elliott flared out to his left against TB and took a linebacker with him. The play was not even to Elliott but the threat of a pitch or flare pass to him affected the play of the defense. In several games this season, the Ravens abandoned the run game prematurely even when they had success with it. Its as if there aren't any half-time adjustments being made. Against us, the Patriots this year rushed three defenders most of the time. They were daring us to run but we didn't run enough.  

Re #3, wasn't that 2014 playoff game the one in which we blew two 14 point leads? It really doesn't matter what Tom and Bill told you about their 2nd half game plan. If my memory serves me correctly, we lost the game due to some rather shady officiating and a trick pass play from Edelman to Ammendola in the 4th quarter 'cause the Pats couldn't beat us by playing straight-up, not to mention some under-inflated footballs. Seriously though, the lop-sided 0% run /100% pass ratio in the 2nd half was also dictated by the flow of the game even though I'll admit it was also due in part to our makeshift secondary. In any case, I do not think one isolated game gives credence to your argument about the need to establish a running game. Given their druthers, I'm sure Aaron Rodgers, Tom Brady or Joe Flacco would love to be handing the ball off to Ezekial Elliott, the real MVP of the Dallas Cowboys and perhaps the next Super Bowl MVP as well. Don't get me wrong. Dak Prescott is very good but Ezekial and the Dallas O-line are the difference makers for the Cowboys this year. Without Ezekial, Dak is just another rookie QB IMHO. I'm sure you and Tony Romo will both agree winning in the NFL is not as easy as Dak is making it look.  

17 minutes ago, hn68wb4 said:

Honestly, I really just don't want another recycled former head coach, take a chance on a new young mind working his way up the football ranks. We've been using recycled HCs since Flacco has been here and Kubiak is the only one that's really worked out, Caldwell was good for the playoff run but 2013 was bad, granted we lost a ton of players going into that season, I don't even need to go over Cameron, Trestman, and Morhinweg (for the most part) you guys are well aware of their struggles. I realize it's somewhat more of a gamble going with a mostly unproven guy but the guys we've been hiring just aren't working and getting a one year loan on a Kubiak doesn't help much either as far as continuity is concerned.

Amen.

On ‎12‎/‎19‎/‎2016 at 7:50 AM, BmoreBird22 said:

I actually felt really impressed today that Marty totally recognized that Joe was generally off his game and turned to the backs more than he had previously in the season. I think the run to pass was 23:30 or something around there. That doesn't even include the swing passes to the backs that are similar to a run play for me.

But yeah, it took nine games to finally really utilize the backs after Joe and Harbaugh had been calling for it for so long. That doesn't sit well with me. And I feel like running the ball more was dictated by the rain more than the actual desire to run based on history, but I will still feel happy with yesterday.

And maybe it's just the need to have a full offseason to get some more of "his guys" in here, but I can't really buy the whole idea that he's working with someone else's playbook or the idea that he hasn't learned the personnel. Every playbook will include similar or the exact same plays and route concepts. He had a full offseason to see the players in camp. 

Here's to hoping that if he does say, he encourages the Ravens to sign some good interior offensive lineman and gets the running game back on track.

If that were the case, why did he call a pass play on 1st down with six minutes to play. If Joe audibled to a pass play, that would explain it but that's not what happened. If Marty recognized that Joe was generally off his game, wouldn't he let Dixon and West try to run the ball and eat up some clock? Remember, two of the O-linemen who have just been selected to play in the Pro Bowl are Yanda and Osemele. Let's face it. Our current O-line is not as good on run-blocking or pass-blocking as the O-line Kubiak had to work with. Assuming your first statement is true, then I have no recourse than to agree with Coach Harbaugh that it was the "All-time Worst Call" and I can't see Marty returning next year for an encore performance unless we go deep into the playoffs. I happen to think the play call made by Pete Carroll's offensive staff was the worst ever but this one rates right up there. Finally, it speaks volumes that Joe Flacco is willing to stand up and take the pressure from his diva wide receivers and call for more running plays. Or do you think he's sayin that jest because he lacks confidence in himself? Sorry but I don't think that's the case. Stay tuned 'cause I think the saga of the revolving door for OCs is about to continue for another cycle. While his detractors are quick to complain about Joe's performance after 9 years, how many OCs have we had during that span of time?

19 hours ago, rmcjacket23 said:

Flacco needs a running game... no question there.

The other two guys... not so much.

2011 Packers that won the SB:

27th in the league in rushing yards, 26th in rushing attempts, 26th in YPA (3.9).

2014 Patriots that won the SB:

18th in rushing yards, 22nd in YPA (3.9)

The difference for those two guys primarily is how good their defense is. When they have strong defenses, they're usually SB contenders. 

C'mon man! Don't you follow the games? I think LeGarrette Blount just set a Patriots record for rushing TDs with 15. What are you talking about when you say they don't need a running game? Whether you're ranked first in rushing or 32nd, you still need to run the ball to keep the defense honest and to make the passing game click. If you don't believe it, ask Dak Prescott. He went 32 for 36 the other night against Tampa Bay but I have a feeling Ezekial Elliott had a lot to do with it. The very threat of a run by Ezekial makes the linebackers play differently. Get real!