reed20fence

Some coaches never change. Others evolve in their outlook and knowledge. Kubiak was a pariah in his last year in Houston for being an extremely risk-averse playcaller and very unimaginative after Arian Foster went down. In fact, in O'Brien's intro presser the Texans' GM said they were happy to finally have a "smart, imaginative, original thinker." Unfortunately for the rest of the league, Kubiak was listening. He evolved and added more quirks to his zone run schemes with us and then in Denver adapted the offense to fit around Peyton's dying arm. Trestman didn't evolve. His playcalling was bland, unimaginative, and frustratingly unaware of situational needs during large patches of the game. We telegraphed runs in the shotgun and then wondered why the run game wasn't producing. We threw the ball 50+ times routinely out of the gun to where simply man coverage were sufficient to stifle us for quarters on end. Hopefully Morningwheg has observed.

Could we maybe use the 8 million in space now to acquire, oh I don't know, a left guard that won't get Joe or our RBs landed or IR?

Nobody knows what the heck is going on in truth. It's a fun time killer to prognosticate. Even the coaches don't truly know for 100% certainty how to fix the anemic offense. It's not for lack of willingness to take shots on chunk plays. We've got the talent and will. Sometimes the plays just click and other times they don't. That's life. People don't like to acknowledge that any endeavor involving human error can have widely random outcomes. Recall how Ray Lewis remembered that Denver game in 2012 where we got blown out and then next week every play was made against the Giants. He said "one game all the mistakes happen, the next week every tackle was made, every pass was caught, every play made - that's just sports, you move on that quickly."

It's just a feeling... but my impression is that we play offense terrified - petrified really, of failure. We don't attack. It's like, 1st down - pass play. 2nd down - didn't complete the pass, 99.9% chance we run the ball so we don't get caught in 3rd and long. 3rd down - say your Hail Mary's and pray for the best. I agree, it is just a really anemic and pedestrian offense. No killer instinct. Just risk mitigation for 60 minutes.

We don't run the ball well because we don't honestly care about running the ball well. If the majority of your run plays are out of the shotgun and a basic run behind the guard or a sweep where every single defender is standing there watching the entire play develop, you really think it's that hard to stop? They've been defending basic runs like that since their peewee days. Comparing our commitment to the run game (and I don't blame Trestman, it's a philosophical choice by the team) during Kubiak and after Kubiak is a joke. Kubiak's offense by its very design produces 1,000 yard rushers, and works the passing game out of run plays. Right now the only function we envision for running the ball, as a franchise, is to: (1) keep a defense balanced and (2) run the clock if we're winning at the end of the game. That is all. And we're 3-0 despite a non-existent run game.

We'll take the W, no matter how ugly. We really don't have any committment to running the football well. This is fine, because you clearly don't need to run well to win games. I think we envision running the ball as more of a tool to keep a defense balanced and honest, and if necessary, run the clock near the end of the game. However, I don't think the "keeping them honest" idea is working when the vast majority of our run plays are out of the shotgun where every member of the defense can watch the handoff and the front 4 themselves can stuff us for 2 or 3 yards.

The Raven way is to just get on the field and force the other team to account for your talent. Just keep sprinting go routes down the field and force the secondary to respect the deep game. The moment a corner and safety are forced to play over the top of Perriman, he's done his duty to the offense. Forcing a safety out of the box widens the gaps that defenders have to cover. It expands the underneath coverage zones the rest of the defense has to account for. The more defender Perriman can force to account for his speed deep, the easier the job gets for the rest of the offense. Can't wait!

We can win 16. That's the team's mentality but It's my mentality as a fan as well. And yeah, I know, "be realistic" and what not. But I seriously don't see a team in this league that we can't beat. What was it - 14 out 16 games last season decided by less than 1 score? 9 out of 11 of our losses by less than 1 score? All that with a decimated team? I mean hell, just add Sizzle back to the equation alone and the whole tenor of those games changes. What then of getting a whole slew of playmakers like Joe, Forsett, SSS, Perriman, Wallace, Weddle and Hester? "Experts" are unimaginative lemmings most of the time. They don't realize how stacked this team is until it starts winning.

First TD dance should be waving the smoke off his feet after he burns a secondary.

We've had 3 consecutive years of secondaries that have gotten shredded, years by the way in which, on aggregate, we have a losing record. In those years we've had no serious 2nd starting calibre CB and have stuck an undersized coverted safety with 2 torn acls as our 2nd corner in Webby. I wouldn't consider this "nailing everything so far." We haven't drafted this high in over a decade and what's the first inkling? Draft a LT and trade back twice to stockpile mediocre players.

"These two guys are going to run to the ball 100 miles per hour every single play,” Head Coach John Harbaugh added. “That’s really important on this defense.” OK, that is a great mentality to look for, but no one more exemplifies that in this draft class or in quite a few draft classes, than Scooby Wright. He is the textbook definition of a Raven. http://youtu.be/5l4OVGoZayE

I've used the same argument for years but we've had some of the league's worst secondaries since the Super Bowl. Intel arguments and insider knowledge and blah blah blah are all fine and defensible if you're wiwinni, but ultimately the proof is in the pudding, and our pudding has been terrible. winning*

I've used the same argument for years but we've had some of the league's worst secondaries since the Super Bowl. Intel arguments and insider knowledge and blah blah blah are all fine and defensible if you're wiwinni, but ultimately the proof is in the pudding, and our pudding has been terrible.

They have watched hundreds hours of tape. They know what value they are getting. Youve watched a 2 minute youtube video and listened to Mel "overraction" Kiper. Ill trust ozzie who has 2 Rings. Monday morning GMs. SMH No, we watched 3 seasons worth of bad secondaries toppoed of by a 5-11 team just last year. we did have 20 players go on ir How many starters in the secondary were on IR last year?

Scoobie Wright is the next hope.