RavensBaltimore

No, that's not what I am implying. What I am saying is that when the offense plays like crap everyone wants to scream and shout how much Joe sucks and NOBODY wants to account for the 9 different offensive line changes he's played, Steve Smith Sr being out for several weeks and piss poor play by the OL and receivers. When the OL plays as well as it did, then that allows Joe to what he does and that allows the receivers to do what they do. Almost every struggling team has a weak OL, without a strong OL your offense will go nowhere!! Look at Oakland, you honestly believe Carr is as good as he is, he and Dak have the two best OL in the league right now. You parroted all the points they brought up on the radio but nice try. Flacco getting healthier, healthier since the week before, really?? Getting in Wallace's face and Marty calling a better game - guess what take all of those ball them up and if the OL plays like crap then none of that even matters!!! Flacco was able to sit in the pocket and get comfortable because the OL played as well as they did. It all starts with the offensive and defensive lines. 1. I do not parrot anything. I don't think that's good English. 2. I grew up in Baltimore but I live in a different market now, and so I do not listen to Baltimore radio nor do I have time to 3. The 5 points I highlighted are what a reasonable person would think. In fact far too often the Oline and the WRs have been scapegoated. The QB is a 9th year veteran. While he played well last Sunday, he however had been very mediocre prior to then. Last Sunday was the best pocket awareness I had seen from him. He even stepped to the side and climbed the pocket. He would usually back up and start running and throw the ball away. Better protection improved his accuracy, but he had been very inaccurate even on snaps when there were no pressure. When the O-line can't pass protect or run block, and the wrs can't get separation and drop far too many passes, especially on clutch drives, they aren't being "scapegoated". People are just making common sense observations. I don't agree that Flacco had been very inaccurate when he had time. His comp ℅ has been pretty good despite a lot of throw aways and drops early in the season. He also fit passes in tight windows, even on deep throws. However, by the time we got to the games in NY, he did look gun shy, and he wasn't stepping into his passes with confidence, but that will happen to anyone who constantly gets hit for several weeks straight.

"veteran defender Terrell Suggs wasn’t interested in coming out of the game early" I was wondering why SSS was still in after Flacco went out.

I think bad weather gives us an advantage because Joe Flacco has the arm to zip passes through heavy winds, and rain doesn't really affect him either. Most teams don't have a qb win an arm like Joe's, and if our opponent has to rely on the run, that plays right into the hands of our defense.

If you're getting that from NFL Mobile, they're wrong. The Bengals beat the Lions, Jets, Dolphins, Browns, and Eagles. They're 5-6-1. Wrong. The Bengals are 4-7-1. They have definitely not beaten the Lions, seeing as how the AFC North does not play the NFC North this year.

You see this type comment invites counter arguments which some people on this website will readily see as "hate on Flacco" You are essentially implying that if the offense isn't playing well to look no further than the Oline and the WRs. That I completely disagree. Flacoo played an excellent game last Sunday, but let's not pretend that he has not been mediocre WRs and Oline not withstanding. What I think is more likely the case is 1. Flacco is getting healthier 2. He was determined to elevate his game and that of others around him - when's the last time you saw Flacco get in anyone's face like he did Wallace yesterday? 3. The Oline is jelling 4. The OC called a better game 5. The whole offense consequently played better I don't think Flacco was mediocre considering everything around him. The run game put him in too many long yardage situations, he had no time to throw, his wrs couldn't get open, and because of the lack of practice time, they weren't on the same page, and there were too many drops. Even when he did have time to throw, he wasn't stepping into his throws with confidence because he was so used to getting hit. I've never seen anyone succeed under those circumstances, although i haven't seen many QBs play in an offense that bad in the first place. Even with all that, Flacco was still making some great throws to help the team. On a few of the deep balls he completed to Wallace and Perriman, he got hit while throwing it and still dropped a perfect dime 40-50 yds down field. Those were a big part of our offense early in the season when we couldn't sustain drives. He also made some perfect throws that were dropped, like Wallace dropping his potential 22nd straight completion and TD, or Perriman dropping a perfect deep ball that may have been a TD. Joe would have won us the game against the Redskins if Perriman would have tapped his foot in bounds, and he made another perfect throw to Wallace on the final play, but he dropped it. There were drops by Moore and Aiken that cost us the game against Oakland. Joe missed an open receiver once in a while, but so does every other QB in the league. Some people brush all of that off as "excuses", but when he gets time to step into his throws, he can dominate a game as well as anyone.

The reality is that everything is gameplan specific, and can change due to whatever is occurring during that game. For example... week 2 at the Browns. First 2 possessions we had 3 runs and 5 passes, so pretty balanced. By our 3rd possession, we were down 20-2. When you're down 18 points, you're going to throw the ball a lot, almost regardless of what time it is in the game. Just depends on game flow and playing to the strengths/weaknesses of the other team. Against a team like the Jets, I'd expect a much higher pass/run ratio. That's definitely true. I've tried to explain to people many times that the run/pass balance is influenced by the flow of the game, and people usually just respond by giving me box score stats, so I referenced a general stat for their benefit. When you look at our blowout wins over the past few years, we have been very pass heavy while building the lead almost every time, but running the ball to milk the clock after we build a big lead skews the stats and creates the ILLUSION that we need to run to win.

To all the people who think the Ravens need to run the ball: look at the tweet above from ESPN stats and info. In weeks 2, 4, and 13, Flacco had more 1st half pass attempts than anyone all year(other than Rodgers in week 7). Weeks 2, 4, and 13 are also 3 of our highest 4 scoring games of the season.

you're overegging it a little bit - brady was not terrible he is just particularly effective with gronk - now i will agree that gronk is maybe the most valuable non-qb on any team in the nfl because of the difference he makes to that offense with him vs without him but brady is unquestionably the best qb in the history of the sport and was amazing long before gronk turned up in the nfl - so the narrative that brady will fall apart without gronk is wrong but i agree there is a significant fall off I never said that Brady will fall apart without Gronk. I said that he's not very good without Gronk, and I posted facts to support that claim. I don't think Brady is remotely close to the goat. He's never put up great numbers without Moss or Gronk, and he wins on a team that can win without him. 11-5 w/Cassell, 3-1 with 2nd and 3rd stringers this year. If you can take away his easy passes, he doesn't have the talent to beat you. As much as I hate the Steelers, Roethlisberger has made some incredible plays to win games that most QBs can't make. Rodgers does that too, and neither of those teams has a great record without them. The Colts went 2-14 when Manning got hurt. Brady takes advantage of playing on a team that can win with any decent qb. In my opinion, he is the most overrated player in the history of professional sports.

While I dislike Brady more than anyone, saying he isn't that good without Gronk is crazy talk. He was great before Gronk got there and he didn't miss a beat while Gronk was out due to injury. Are they better w/Gronk, no doubt. Thinking they're easy to beat w/out Gronk, is fool's gold. That being said, If anyone can beat them in Foxborougn, it's the Ravens. You're making stuff up. Brady's numbers dipped dramatically without Gronk last year. The year before, he was flat out horrible until Gronk got healthy. I saw a stat on TV, and since Gronk has been with NE, Brady's comp % without Gronk is 57.5 and his qb rating goes from well over 100 with him to 84.4 without him. Go to ESPN.com and look at his career stats. In the 8 years without Moss or Gronk, Brady's numbers are solid, but nothing special. The last time we played them without Gronk, we held them to 13 points, Brady threw 2 picks and we shut them out in the 2nd half. That was with a mediocre defense. In eight years without Moss or Gronk, Brady managed to win three super bowls...so what exactly is your point? Brady was a game manager then. The defense shutting down Manning's Colts and Warner's Rams was a bigger factor in those SB wins(they also cheated). Those SBs were also more than a decade ago and not very relevant to Monday's game. If you read the entire post, I think it's pretty easy to see what my point is.

While I dislike Brady more than anyone, saying he isn't that good without Gronk is crazy talk. He was great before Gronk got there and he didn't miss a beat while Gronk was out due to injury. Are they better w/Gronk, no doubt. Thinking they're easy to beat w/out Gronk, is fool's gold. That being said, If anyone can beat them in Foxborougn, it's the Ravens. You're making stuff up. Brady's numbers dipped dramatically without Gronk last year. The year before, he was flat out horrible until Gronk got healthy. I saw a stat on TV, and since Gronk has been with NE, Brady's comp % without Gronk is 57.5 and his qb rating goes from well over 100 with him to 84.4 without him. Go to ESPN.com and look at his career stats. In the 8 years without Moss or Gronk, Brady's numbers are solid, but nothing special. The last time we played them without Gronk, we held them to 13 points, Brady threw 2 picks and we shut them out in the 2nd half. That was with a mediocre defense.

It's funny that people act like Joe suddenly and mysteriously got hot. He is always elite when he gets time to step into his throws, his receivers get at least a little separation, and they open up the offense and play aggressive.

We won a couple shoot outs with Brady in 2012, and had our defense been healthy, we probably would have won another shootout in the 2014 playoffs. Brady isn't very good without Gronk, and with our defense healthy, I like our chances in a shootout in NE.

When the offense was struggling, our o-line was decimated by injuries, SSS was out, and Perriman was still getting his feet wet. The offense was undermanned and searching for an identity. I don't think today was a fluke. Ever since the Browns game, they have been moving the ball more consistently and finding a rhythm. I have no clue why it took so long to go to the no-huddle, but I'm glad it finally happened. Penalties were killing drives and we were settling for too many field goals, but I could tell that progress was being made, and we finally saw it come together today.

I'm sure glad Mornhinweg hates being called conservative. This is how our offense needs to play. No more wasting possessions by trying to establish the run game and setting up play action. That's not the strength of our team. While everyone else has been saying we need to run the ball more, I've been saying we should do exactly what we did today. Keep it going!

Amazing. Even when we score 38, Ravens fans still want to run the ball more. Other then a few drives, running the ball has been holding this offense back and killing drives all year. I said before the game that we need to stop trying to run the ball and put Flacco in a hurry up offense out of the shotgun, and I was obviously right. During the game, the announcer said our offense was among the league's best in the last 2 mins of halves this year. I wonder why? Now that the pass protection has improved and the receivers are healthy, the offense could be very good if they continue being aggressive and avoid getting conservative.

What is it going to take to make people understand that Flacco isn't going to carry the team? Without a run game, we stand no chance of moving the ball. He hasn't got the type of rapport with WRs to reduce the margin of error and this is compounded by his inaccuracy. His best friend is a play action pass. You can't have that without a great run game. Flacco has carried this team to a SB before, and he has carried them in the playoffs several other times. The run game has not helped the offense move the ball very often this year, so it makes no sense to say that we can't move the ball without it. Joe is not inaccurate. He makes up for the lack of separation by the receivers by fitting passes through very small windows. The receivers get a little more separation when we go up tempo and we don't put ourselves in obvious passing situations by getting stuffed on 1st down. Flacco's best friend isn't play action. Play action is useless when your run game is as bad as ours. Flacco's best friend is the no huddle offense.

I'm sick of hearing about our run game. On Sunday, the line had one of its best games of the year, the RBs broke a lot of tackles, and they both still averaged less than 4 yds/carry. Our run game is not taking us anywhere. We need to put Joe in the shotgun, keep a fast tempo, get him in a rhythm, and mix some runs in to keep the defense honest, just like we did in the SB run. Even in the playoff games with Kubiak, Joe came out firing with a fast tempo, and we scored at least 30 in both games. Our offense can be much better if they stay aggressive and stop being conservative.

Well consider this- We have only beaten teams with losing records and bad teams at that. Come playoffs there are not any of those teams left to play. We were on play away from beating the Raiders, Giants, and Redskins, who have great records. We might have beaten Dallas too if it weren't for unnecessary penalties/questionable calls that killed drives. I know that almost doesn't count, but the stupid mistakes that cost us those games are correctable. We have proven we can compete with the best teams in the league, even when we're not playing our best. You can't do anything about the games we already lost, but moving forward, we can beat anyone if we cut down on the unforced errors.

After all those years in a tough division with a tough schedule, the Ravens deserve a shot to play in an easier division for a change. And if you don't think a team can look very bad at points during the regular season and then go on a SB run, then you haven't watched many NFL seasons or you just don't learn very easily.

Did you watch the game? The offense didn't abandon the run until the 4th qtr, and when they put Joe in shotgun and sped up the tempo, he didn't throw off his back foot for minimal gains. He led the team down the field for a TD, just as he did the last time we went with the no huddle. It worked in Cle, it worked in Dal, and it was a key component in our SB run. That's the type of offense we should run. Keeping Joe under center and trying to set up play action only works when the O-line is consistently opening up holes and pass protecting, and our o-line hasn't done that this year. If we run the type of offense we ran in 2012, this team could be a real contender. Otherwise, we are going to be predictable, put ourselves in too many 3rd and longs, and continue struggling to put up 20 points. I know what games I have been watching since 2008. When Joe has twice as many pass attempts as rushing attempts, the Ravens typically lose. And for the record, they only ran the ball twice in the second half. Those stats are like that because the Ravens, like all teams, run when they are ahead and pass when they're behind. Ive never understood why so many people can't understand such a simple concept. Until the final 2 drives, we had 16 runs and 23 passes. Then we had to pass because of the game circumstances, and it worked, but we waited too late to do it. Had we been playing with the lead, we would have mostly run on the final 2 drives, which would have skewed the stats the other way. If you have balance, you tend not to get so far behind that you have to throw on every down. Regardless, the Ravens have chosen to abandon the run over the past 2 years when they were leading or the game was close. When they do so, they usually don't have much time of possession, which puts pressure on our defense and contributes to so many defensive collapses late in games. Bottom line, they can't score (7th worst in the league), can't control a game, have no red-zone efficiency whatsoever, and can't come from behind. If you find this acceptable, and want to see more of it going forward, you must really look forward to watching highlights from the Browns. The Ravens did have balance when we were down 14. That's my point. In a lot of these games where fans say we need to run more, they are balanced until the 4th qtr, but we have to do nothing but pass to try to catch up, which skews the stats. In many of our blowout wins(and you have to go back to 2014 for that) we were very pass heavy while building the lead, but we ran on almost every play in the 4th qtr to milk the clock, which creates the ILLUSION of balance. You can't just look at the box score.

Did you watch the game? The offense didn't abandon the run until the 4th qtr, and when they put Joe in shotgun and sped up the tempo, he didn't throw off his back foot for minimal gains. He led the team down the field for a TD, just as he did the last time we went with the no huddle. It worked in Cle, it worked in Dal, and it was a key component in our SB run. That's the type of offense we should run. Keeping Joe under center and trying to set up play action only works when the O-line is consistently opening up holes and pass protecting, and our o-line hasn't done that this year. If we run the type of offense we ran in 2012, this team could be a real contender. Otherwise, we are going to be predictable, put ourselves in too many 3rd and longs, and continue struggling to put up 20 points. I know what games I have been watching since 2008. When Joe has twice as many pass attempts as rushing attempts, the Ravens typically lose. And for the record, they only ran the ball twice in the second half. Those stats are like that because the Ravens, like all teams, run when they are ahead and pass when they're behind. Ive never understood why so many people can't understand such a simple concept. Until the final 2 drives, we had 16 runs and 23 passes. Then we had to pass because of the game circumstances, and it worked, but we waited too late to do it. Had we been playing with the lead, we would have mostly run on the final 2 drives, which would have skewed the stats the other way.

Did you watch the game? The offense didn't abandon the run until the 4th qtr, and when they put Joe in shotgun and sped up the tempo, he didn't throw off his back foot for minimal gains. He led the team down the field for a TD, just as he did the last time we went with the no huddle. It worked in Cle, it worked in Dal, and it was a key component in our SB run. That's the type of offense we should run. Keeping Joe under center and trying to set up play action only works when the O-line is consistently opening up holes and pass protecting, and our o-line hasn't done that this year. If we run the type of offense we ran in 2012, this team could be a real contender. Otherwise, we are going to be predictable, put ourselves in too many 3rd and longs, and continue struggling to put up 20 points.

I think Ray's comments sum up the feelings of a lot of fans. People get frustrated, so they lash out at the quarterback.

Going back to 2014, when Jimmy Smith got hurt, our secondary took a nosedive. Last year, our secondary was horrible until Smith got back into reasonable football shape, and they were pretty good in the second half of the season. The secondary had been complete garbage in the game and a half without him this year. I guess that says a lot for Jimmy, but it's not good to be so dependant on 1 player.

In the 2nd half, before the final 2 drives, every 1st down pass resulted in a first down, and every 2nd or 3rd down pass was in a long yardage situation, so which one of those passes should have been a run? We ran the ball on 1st down twice in the 2nd half, which resulted in a 2nd and 10 and 2nd and 16,and we ended up punting both times. Those were our only two 2nd half punts. When we stopped running altogether, we scored a TD. So how can you possibly think we needed to run more? I broke down each drive in an earlier post. What we should have done was run the no huddle much earlier.