Maryland

Steve Smith being out is a pretty big possible loss. Outside of maybe Pitta, Steve is the only other player I trust to make a clutch catch on this team. On 3rd down, it seems as if the only thing opposing defenses have to do is double cover or put a decent corner on Pitta (Revis was on him last time we played on some snaps) and force a throw to someone else.

Kubiak and Kyle Shanahan are both students of Mike Shanahan. Since Kyle Shanahan will almost certainly be offered a HC position with someone next season, you can rule him out completely unless Steve does something very unexpected regarding Harbaugh lol. I actually saw it suggested that our FO should look into hiring Mike Shanahan himself, which I don't automatically hate, since his struggles at the Redskins really wasn't his fault--the GM and especially the owner made it a very toxic environment for him, always undermining his authority at HC and tampering with the roster. I'd sooner give him a shot than hire Norv, in all honesty, since I like Shanahan's offense a lot more than the Air Coryell, which brings back frustrating memories of Cam Cameron. ---- The thing with Norv and the Vikings is this: to begin the season, Pat Shurmer was calling the plays because of his familiarity working with with Sam Bradford. Then, after Bradford got acclimated to the offense, they gave Norv playcalling duties again, but after an anemic few weeks thereafter, they wanted to go back to Shurmer and relinquished playcalling duties from Norv. Although Norv's departure ended with a heated argument with Mike Zimmer, I'm sure their parting was mutual, since it was kind of forced by the FO/HC once they stripped Norv of his playcalling duties--at that point, what function does he even serve? As I see it, Norv was setup to fail in Minnesota. Teddy Bridgewater is/was an awful QB for them to draft to fit Norv's Air Coryell offense (I know hindsight is 20/20, but even at the time I thought Carr would have been perfect for him and found Bridgewater a puzzling choice with Carr on the board). This year, their OL became easily one of the worst in the league after injuries took its toll (but it was pretty bad to begin with anyway), which meant that they didn't have time to run deep passes--a huge part of running the Air Coryell; their WR corps didn't really have a good deep threat; AD went down to start the season, which exacerbated the problems with their OL being unable to run-block, which then meant that they couldn't run play-action and take deep shots downfield. (is all of this sounding eerily familiar? lol) However, even with all of those excuses, it seemed as if Norv wasn't doing anything creative with his offense, and he wasn't doing anything different to compensate for the personnel he had to work with. Like, if your pass protection isn't allowing your QB time to take a 5-step drop, and your OL isn't opening up holes up the middle, then maybe do something different on offense. I have to question if Norv is getting stale and uncreative in his old age. It's hard to tell how much of the Vikings' struggles were related to a weak roster and how much was related to poor playcalling--probably a little of both, same as Trestman. I will say, Norv does seem like the typical Ravens hire lately, being a failed HC/OC retread with no aspirations of usurping Harbaugh's role as HC, so he's got that going for him. Plus, if they want to hire someone similar to Cam to run an offense that takes advantage of Joe's big arm, he's the guy. I would much rather look for young blood at the OC position, however, but that's something to look at during the off-season.

Vinny Cerrato I think. Pretty sure he is well-connected with Trestman after their days at San Fran, so perhaps that was Trestman's impression of Flacco spoken through Cerrato.

The thing with Kaufusi was his measurables were pretty nice for a 5-tech, but he really played kind of soft for a man of his size from what I saw--didn't get a lot of push on his bull-rush, got pushed too much vs the run. I hope he proves me wrong, however, and becomes an every-down DE, since we've been lacking depth at DE for years now. Hopefully his injury doesn't sap his speed like it did with Urban, since that's how Kaufusi seemed to win in college. The criticism with Ngakoue was that he was all speed, and he couldn't convert speed to power. He was essentially projected as a DPR. Now we're seeing he's more than that in the NFL, but hindsight is 20/20. But comparing Ngakoue with Kaufusi is like comparing apples and oranges--one's a DE, the other a rush-LB (in a 3-4). We needed both positions at the time, however.

I have a feeling Diggs' penchant for picking up unusual yet major injuries (Broken leg, lacerated kidney) knocked him down our board and other teams' boards. Plus he is a bit skinny for the position. Still, as anyone who has ever watched him play at MD knew, he was an exciting, dangerous runner with the ball in his massive hands, and he certainly had the quickness and route-running to get separation easily. Shame they overlooked him, especially considering we needed receivers, but what can you do.

Mike Tomlin is one of the worst at playing down to the opponent's level, and we play them next, so... I guess maybe we'll each play down to each other's levels? I guess that's why our games are always so close lol.

He is looking pretty good vs this dreadful Vikings OL lol, but I think we made the right decision not re-signing him to the figure Chicago offered. Fact is, our FO/medical staff knew too much about his knee problems to ever entertain a big contract.

lol, they could bring him out of retirement for 2 games a year every season and get their money's worth. I hope Suggs can stop getting freak injuries and play with his longevity

I have a feeling the players hate the early-morning game, coupled with the long flight to London. Seems like those London games can be pretty unpredictable because of all that. Maybe it'd give us an advantage though, since we prepare better than most teams, I think. ...Though London is probably becoming a home away from home, since most of the Jags players have probably done it several times already lol.

In an article I read on RSR, the author talked about drafting a developmental backup QB to push Flacco to work harder, though I really don't see how this would possibly work unless you happen to hit on a Dak Prescott or Russell Wilson, or spend a high pick on someone to develop like what GB did with Aaron Rodgers, all of which seem unlikely. A developmental backup isn't going to motivate/threaten Flacco anymore than Mallett, Schaub, Tyrod, Bulger, etc. However, having said all of that, I think that our FO should be drafting and developing a backup QB, since developing a backup QB gives you a chance of developing decent trade bait (like any Eagles QB in recent history), or at the very least a chance of developing a cheap, competent backup QB on a rookie deal (like Mike Glennon). Plus, you never know, you could hit on a gem who ends up being better than Flacco, kind of like what SD found with Brees while they had Rivers, or what the Redskins found with Cousins despite drafting Griffin III.

I'll believe it when it's gameday and he's not dressed to play lol. As we saw last year, being dressed and not starting doesn't mean he won't play and then put up 379 and 3 TDs (as he did vs the Browns once Landry Jones "started" for a drive and then sat down). I know I'm not really responding to the message of your quote, but this stat always kind of irked me. I look at offensive TDs scored as a team stat. If the QB is getting the team down to the 1-yard line and then the RB plunges in for a TD, it seems to me the QB should get as much credit as the RB and the rest of the offense--the TD is the result of the entire drive, something all of the offensive players likely played a part in. Terrance West scored 2 TDs at the Giants on the goal line, but it could possibly have been two passing TDs had they attempted a pass there instead. It's a gimmicky stat.

I feel like our organization would not welcome Richardson due to his off-season shenanigans. Pretty sure Steve gets genuinely embarrassed when players do dumb things like that. I mean, it's possible, but I think we would value him less than other teams because of his issues, whereas a team like NE, Cincinnati, Oakland, etc. probably wouldn't care in the slightest. Haden really has been kind of overrated lately. Lots of injuries, and he's just not the shut-down corner people believe him to be.

Oakland has had a horseshoe up their butt all season. A botched kick by SD that would have forced overtime, a dropped pass by the Ravens that would have setup a game-winning field goal, a missed PAT by the Bucs that might have obviated the need for overtime. They get outgained by yards and TOP in most games, but the other team just messes up somehow. They're the opposite of us lol.

Myles Garrett should be the first player taken in the draft as long as teams refrain from overdrafting a QB from this mediocre class of QBs.

Not really related to Harbaugh directly, but I am noticing how beneficial it is to have a HC who has a background in being an OC, building offenses, and calling plays. For example, Mike McCarthy was the Packers' play-caller for a long time, Kubiak called the plays in Houston, Jason Garrett used to call the plays in Dallas. Even if these head coaches don't call the plays in-game anymore, they design their respective offenses, which provides consistency from year to year, regardless of any departures relating to coordinators or assistant coaches going to other teams. Same goes for a coach with a background as a DC--there's a level of consistency there with the defense because he designs it. Pete Carroll is a prime example of this: he's lost 3 DCs since coaching the Seahawks, but he keeps the defense stable because its his defense. When your HC doesn't excel at building offenses or defenses (Harbs is a special teams guy), there seems to be less stability. For example, if Harbaugh had a background in running offenses, we wouldn't be needing to install a new offense every couple seasons due to our OCs either leaving to become a HC or being fired for incompetence, since the HC would provide stability for how the offense is designed. If we rotated our DCs as often as we do our OCs, no doubt our defense would suffer similar problems due to instability at the coordinator position. I guess one of the repercussions with having a coach who doesn't particularly excel on either side of the ball is that the hiring process when looking for a new coordinator becomes extremely important to get right. We hired Mark Trestman and basically wasted 2 years implementing a bad offense. We promoted Greg Mattison and wasted a season in which we could have had a good defense. There is no forgiveness if you get one of these hires wrong. Another repercussion might be that it limits who you want to hire to be your coordinator. You don't want to hire a young up-and-comer who may be too successful like Kyle Shanahan or Adam Gase, since they'll just leave a year or two later, leaving the team right back to square one after they leave, looking for a new coordinator and having to install a new offense. That might be why we keep hiring failed head coaches and re-treads. I guess all of this gives fuel to the "fire Harbaugh" argument, but I still like Harbaugh as a motivator--the players seem to respect him and try to win for him. I just wish we had a HC who excels as an offensive mind to provide stability on offense. Maybe we'll find a good OC with no head-coaching aspirations, someone similar to the Steelers' Todd Haley.

I guess the lesson here is that it's up to preference and specific scenarios. Each of us could probably generate historical examples of both sides of the argument succeeding or failing lol. What matters most in the end is that whoever you draft not be a complete bust like some of our recent picks.

I just got a funny thought. What if Flacco maintained the same predictable cadence ("180, hike" or whatever) throughout the beginning of the season so that he can use this against the Steelers? Like, with the Steelers expecting Flacco's usual, easily-timed hike cadence, the offense starts using this against the opponent. It's kind of like how Pees tries to get by with uncreative blitzes most of the season so that he can save all of his best plays for Pittsburgh.

OL gets healthy, run game improves, they can run more play-action, offense smooths-out, they start generating two-possession leads at the end of games so they don't have to rely on Pees' defense to hold a lead when it counts. One can hope. /oh, and of course the improved OL cures Flacco of his jitters so he stops throwing off his back foot so dang much

Need more trick plays. Try running a Tucker fake-FG, only this time put Tucker under center and run a read-option with Koch. Opposing special teams unit will be in complete disarray. You'll have them respecting the Tucker-Koch read-option the rest of the game, making them play it safe with their kick-block unit.

The first part of your argument gets down to specifics imo. (plus the first round is kind of a special case where everything is magnified--most of our problems come in later rounds, which is where most picks take place). The scenario as you described it seems unfair when you say "I would rather take a high-quality player at a low value position rather than a mediocre player at a high value position." Barnett doesn't seem like a mediocre prospect to me--he seems like an every-down 3-4 rush LB who needs to develop some pass-rush moves, but who already has the speed and strength for the pros. If we're sitting there with a choice of those two, it's not like you're reaching by taking Barnett just because he requires some development. Vic Beasley over Danny Shelton might be a good example--a really good NT who isn't going to rush the passer vs a rush-LB who might be too light to be an every-down LB. I'd take Beasley because rush LB is so much more impactful than a safe NT prospect. With all that said, I'd like to put this scenario another way, one that I feel is more applicable because it deals with the mid-rounds, where we make most of our picks. The scenario: we're sitting there in the middle of round 4. From a pure talent/risk perspective, the highest-quality player is a good blocking TE who will excel on Special Teams, but who will never be anything more than an average pass-catcher. The other choice is a Rush-LB who is not as good right now, he is not going to contribute on special teams, but he has developmental upside as a pass-rusher. In this scenario, would you draft the TE because he's the higher-quality player at a low-value position that we already have filled? Or would you draft the rush-LB because he plays a higher-value position despite not being as good of a player? It seems to me that our FO has been going with the safer pick at the low-impact position these past few years. My suggestion is that our FO should start valuing high-impact positions more than they have in the past, especially in the mid rounds--you might find more Matt Judons that way. For the second part, building a starting OL is really important, so I wouldn't put that on the same lower tier as non-rush LB, interior DL, or depth TEs. Cowboys did very well to build their OL by spending multiple first rounders on their starters, and it's clearly paying off. I would be happy if the Ravens drafted a LG and/or Center high in this coming draft, since those are both important positions and considerable needs. I would not want them to draft a strong-side LB like Upshaw in the second round if there is a G or C of margianally lesser quality available, since those positions matter more and we need them more. BPA is a good principle to abide by, but if going BPA results in 4 depth TEs being drafted over the span of 2 drafts, then you might need to start doing some maneuvering either up or down to make it so that BPA matches up with need a little better.

That's a pretty good projection. I think they had Ziggy Hood starting vs us lol. -Plus B.Will would probably like it since he doesn't have to move far.

Why on earth would we want anything the Jags have on their coaching staff lol. I guess if we want to earn some top draft picks we'll bring 'em in. (Jaguars have had a top-10 pick every year since 2009; they've had a top-5 pick every year since 2012)

The only thing we can really hope with Davis is that getting IR'd sends a message that he's as good as gone next year if he doesn't start trying. Shame that a guy with that physical skillset lets it all go to waste by not trying. ----- I think that, in general, Ozzie and co. draft too heavily at lower-impact positions while under-drafting at higher-impact positions. Yes, interior DL and non-rush LBs are important positions, but they are not as impactful as edge-rushers, WRs, DBs, or RBs. We've not drafted enough of those first 3 positions imo, and the 4th one, RB, we've drafted seemingly one per year since Rice and missed every time (hopefully Dixon changes that). Even TE could be seen as a lower-impact position, considering we almost exclusively use our TEs for blocking outside of Pitta, yet we've drafted more at that position (4) in 2014 and 2015 than any other position. We always hear Ozzie say "you can never have enough pass-rushers," but you wouldn't know it from only drafting Z.Smith, Brent Urban, and John Simon from 2012-2015 (4 drafts), all of them being day 3 picks. From that same period, Terrance Brooks and Matt Elam are the only DBs they've drafted before the 3rd day of the draft--both safeties, no corners. From that same period, Perriman is the only WR they've drafted before the 6th round. They are ignoring the most impactful positions on the field, and missing when they do address those positions. Bring some competition into the mix. Like others have said, take a page from the Bengals and Vikings and attack the draft to restock one of your weakest positions. Stop over-drafting at low-impact positions and get some edge rushers, DBs, and WRs. Imagine if we had attacked edge-rush with the same tenacity we did the TE position--we might be stacked at the position. And stop cutting good prospects because they aren't excellent on special teams... /end rant

I'm honestly amazed Darian Stewart became such a good player at Denver. Granted, some of that is due to scheme, some of that is due to having a great defense around him (especially a great pass-rush), but it still surprises me, since he just looked so slow here.

I'm pretty sure he was one of those players who blew-up the combine. I'm almost certain he broke the combine record for the long-jump and had a huge vertical. I think part of the question was whether he'd be a safety or a corner in the pros. He seems to be doing well as a safety.