Maryland

4 minutes ago, RaRaRavens said:

Flacco is the 4th highest paid QB in the league, but he is playing like garbage. Yes, he's O-line sucks bllz, but he's not the only QB who has bad O-line. In fact, he's only tied to 15th most sacked QB thus far. Luck has hands down the worst pass protection in the league and he's been sacked TWO TIMES more than Flacco, but Lucks QBR is 96,2 compared to Flaccos 75,4. But yeah-yeah, I know, Luck is also the highest paid QB. But to throw in couple more QBs who get their butt handed to them every Sunday: Rivers, Dalton and Ryan are all having it worse than Flacco, they all are getting paid less than Flacco, yet their QBRs are 20-40 points higher than Flacco's.  Sure, Bengals have AJ and Falcons have Jones who save their QB from time to time, but Rivers has arguably worse weapons than Flacco, still he's getting it done most Sundays.

Looking at sacks alone is not really useful for understanding how well the OL performs. You should also look at what the OL does in the run-game, as this sets up play-action; time to throw; and total pressures (hurries, hits, sacks). QBs can avoid sacks by throwing the ball away, which may conceal how poorly the OL is pass-protecting if you're only looking at sacks. Conversely, having a QB who takes a lot of unnecessary sacks can amplify this number. 

13 hours ago, Ravens4Real said:

Still no SSS today. Outside of Stanley, he's probably the most important to get back. We have no other guys that will make that tough catch in the middle of the field. Hopefully he can practice a little tomorrow so that he can play some Sunday.

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. 

4 hours ago, Inqui said:

He ran his own type of WCO system. We tried to recreate it with Trestman but, uh, I think we all know how that turned out. Iirc Kyle Shanahan's another one who runs it, though I really don't see him leaving Atlanta for a lateral move - especially with how well they're doing. I feel like there's someone else who's been floating around the league who runs the same system, but their name is eluding me atm. 

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. 

10 hours ago, usmccharles said:

Who has suggested that?

Sadly, we wont get any real answers

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.

22 minutes ago, jazz1988 said:

Bronson was getting first round grades from certain teams according to some reports I seen  which i believe mainly came from rotoworld.com. I know Yannick is younger than Bronson but 26 is still young  and  it's not like the guy is turning 35 or 40. Ideally Bronson has more upside as pass rusher than Yannick it's ashame that he's out this season because he could probably help alot in the pass rush department. The season not over with and both Correa and Judon have plenty of time to grow as pass rushers and hopefully Doom makes complete healthy comeback.

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. 

1 hour ago, K-Dog said:

Okay here is some positive.  ( CNN would be impressed with the spin I am putting on this )

I know the Ravens often "play down" to their opponents.  There is no way on Gods green earth we are the only team that plays down to their opponents.  
I am thinking for the next few weeks at least, there is a good chance our opponents will play down to us.  Making our job just that much easier.

Yeah, I know.
I am sorry.

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.

1 hour ago, Boddiebroadus said:

Wow I'm missing McPhee 

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. 

1 hour ago, ravensnj said:

My biggest question: Can we just block the 38 year old James Harrison? Really??? 

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 

3 hours ago, trevorsteadman said:

As long as it counts as an away game I don't mind either way.

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.

15 hours ago, BmoreBird22 said:

It's looking like Ben WILL NOT play according to Schefter and others.

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). 

14 hours ago, PurpleCity5 said:

Joe Flacco has the most passing attempts in the league and least TD passes. He needs to step up and lit a fire under his play. Joe is honestly playing considerably worse this year than last. Actually, through seven weeks Joe has been playing worse this year, than his 2013 season. How does that figure considering the awful group of receivers and an atrocious offensive line? 

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.

13 hours ago, BmoreBird22 said:

Two names on the market are SHELDON RICHARDSON and JOE HADEN.

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. 

2 hours ago, jboy19 said:

Im not even sure Haden is consistent enough or healthy enough to give up a decent pick. 

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. 

7 hours ago, January J said:

Figures the redskins did everything they could not to win that game against Cincinnati... Atleast cinci didnt  win i suppose. And that Oakland game was infuriating... They just keep continuing to come through week in and week out. Tampa had chance after chance. We just can't catch a damn break for nothing. 

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.

7 hours ago, Somerset Ravens said:

I do agree that we need a pass rusher but I believe Myles Garrett will be gone before we pick. A strong offensive line would give us a solid running game, giving balance to our offense. It also would give Flacco more time in the pocket allowing us to have a vertical passing game instead of a dink and dunk passing attack. This team's weakness is on the offensive side and strengthening the offensive line is best way to improve it.

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. 

5 hours ago, JoeyFlex5 said:

ive personally always been big on taking the higher quality player at a low value position rather than a mediocre player at a high value position. id take jonathan allen over derek barnett in a heartbeat for example, we need edge rush but derek barnett has a lot of legitimate issues but still gets top 10 hype due to him being an edge rusher, jonathan allen is a DT/DE but without question he is the better player, probably the 2nd best player in the entire class, but due to him not bringing as much explosive edge rush he wont be valued the same. 

ive always thought that you can build your team by taking the blue chip players at spots like G, C, DT, LB, TE, and then once that core is in place you begin making moves to get those high impact guys, every now and then youll luck out and get a high value position guy later in the rounds and that can soften the process of building the skill positions. honestly i look at the cowboys, they did it right, they committed to building a line and took BPAs on the line regardless of positional value and suddenly the pieces fall into place with them getting prescott and zeke to carry the team and they lucked out with guys like cole beasley. the vikings too, they steady added pieces to the defense until suddenly theyre one of the best in the league, they put together a "decent enough" OL and got a few elite players like rudolph and harrison smith, then they lucked out with bridgewater and diggs way later than they shouldve went, and now theyre tearing it up with freaking bradford at qb.

if you have a weak roster and draft by BPA, you may  face some hiccups by having glaring holes, but once you build that core and one or 2 pieces fall into place, suddenly youre an elite team. we panicked to replace ray and ed and it set us back quite a bit. our line is in shambles because we have drafted on the line on day 3 every year since 2012.

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.

5 hours ago, JoeyFlex5 said:

I got him going to the redskins. Last I checked they really need a NT to make their front seven work and they'll have the cap space for it depending on how they structure the cousins deal. 

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.

42 minutes ago, Steve0x said:

Breaking News! Jaguars fire offensive coordinator Greg Olson. Can the Ravens hire him? 

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)

3 hours ago, JoeyFlex5 said:

I agree on most of your points but it is reasonably speculated that Carl Davis actually went to the "phantom ir" because he played horrible in the preseason. He was facing guys who will never sniff a regular season snap and was totally invisible. Considering his reputation of laziness and lack of desire to improve its a bad sign that he showed flashes as a rookie and then regressed so badly in year 2 that he did literally nothing against the soon-to-be stockbrokers and insurance salesmen of the preseason 4th quarters.

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

6 minutes ago, kjbmore said:

Maybe because we haven't had the other horses around them to allow them to be successful. When you're sliding into a defense full of pro bowlers, HOF guys and young studs, you just need to do your job and you probably have the luxury to cheat and play a bit more aggressively.

when you're sliding into a unit in flux, don't have the same cushion

case in point darian stewart

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.