MileHighMiracle12

  28 minutes ago, The Mom Gene said:

I'm with Law215.  I love this pick. With Jimmy, Tavon, Carr and now Humphrey??? We have a great set of CB's. Add in Weddle, Jefferson, Webby, WOW.  We've got a secondary this year.

PASS RUSH? Suggs is 34 going on 50. NO ELVIS...Can't "cover" all day.

Ozzie does pretty well with his small school scouting. I wouldn't be surprised if we pick up a 3rd/4th round pass rusher from a smaller school that has been overlooked. Possible that OL talent falls in the 2nd round, everyone was talking about how deep the CB pool is, so a 2nd round run on them would push some talent down to us (Possibly Lamp or JuJu? I'd be happy with either, though they probably won't make it to us).

  On 3/25/2017 at 8:43 PM, rossihunter2 said:

before i read this i was sure it would something like: corey davis's dad played backstreet football with joe flacco's cousin's sister's aunt's nephew's mother-in-law's stepson's baseball coach

Technically, Joe's cousin's sister would also be his cousin. The sister's aunt could be Joe's mom, who's nephew could be the original cousin. If you had stopped there, you would've been close.

Its also possible that Tom Flacco coached baseball at some time and that the convolution managed to get us back to him anyway... After all, Mike Flacco was drafted by the Orioles, right? So we know the Flacco's are a multi-sport family.

I wonder - if the ravens don't go out and get a receiver in FA, maybe they would move Pitta to the slot as the #3 WR and keep perriman/wallace on the outside. That way they can keep 4 of the other 5 TEs (I'd prefer the 4 on rookie contracts).

Without Justin Tucker the Ravens would have lost 3-4 more games this year. He is way more valuable than the majority of our team. Only if we had a coach and and QB that understood his value by taking the points when we are in his range instead of going for it on 4th Down, or turning the ball over.

IMO Perriman can become a number 1 WR, but needs to work on making the tough catches in traffic. If you look at his numbers in 2016 he had 66 targets for 499 yards and 3 TDs. Most number 1's are targeted ~140 times. If Perriman had the same production on 140 targets he would have had 1048 yards and 6 TDs. He is going to be a good WR imo.

I feel like having SSS and Mike W. on the team last year really cut into Perriman's playing time, which I think was fine for essentially a rookie receiver getting up to speed on the game. What I could see as being an issue this year is that he has some experience under his belt and needs to be playing as a #1 or #2, not a #3... but if we bring in another vet and keep Wallace, we might be tempted to go with the proven receivers leaving Perriman at #3 and stifling his progression.

So how is Brady and Belichick good for the NFL?

Brady and Belichick are good for the NFL the same way the late 90's Yankees dynasty was good for baseball... Having a 'villain' makes rooting for your team to beat them that much more fun... but that villain needs to win consistently to prove they are an actual threat or else they aren't really a villain at all. If the Browns were caught cheating, or expanding the rules, etc. but still went 1-15, would anyone care?

I am so happy that I didn't once hear the phrase "One for the thumb." I got so sick of that BS when Pitt was going for their 5th ring.

I think I might be rooting for the Patriots this Sunday... I hate to see them win, but something about having the "Big Bad" proving they are still the team to beat makes it that much sweeter when we do take them down.

Plus, I really don't like Matt Ryan, even though I don't have any basis for that feeling.

  19 hours ago, verified said:

Have to blame this season on ozzie, His draft picks have been terrible and it shows. His love affair with small school guys has cost us, Imagine if we had ajay ayih from the dolphins. But noooo ozzie passed on him and drafted dixon out of Louisiana tech, hes to arrogant.

You do realize the entire draft process is a gamble and ozzie IS one if the best at it right? Its rediculous to play the what if game. As far as ajayi and dixon are concerned I wouldnt be surprised if ajayi is a backup in a few years and dixon our starter. Dont get me wrong he had a great half a season but history is full of guys who had one great season before flaming out. Peyton Hillis comes to mind. To me he just has that feel. Dixon could to but to me he feels like a ray rice type guy who will just get better and better every season. Rice had a very quiet rookie season and then exploded the following year. 

Something else to consider - Jay Ajayi was drafted in 2015, Dixon was drafted in 2016...

Hmm, my top 10 for the steelers:

1) Hines Ward

2) James Harrison

3) Big Ben

4) Troy Polamalu

5) Santonio Holmes

6) Mike Tomlin

7) Joey Porter (he's been gone for so long)

8) Bill Cowher

9) Mike Wallace (Love you now, but I hated you then)

10) Any and Every steelers fan

  29 minutes ago, Tdot.to.Bmore said:

i think most ppl here are just confused on how you can argue that the hit was ok because of a technicality. You said you were ok with the no-call??? Thats just crazy lol. Sometimes its ok to be wrong my friend and just accept it.

LOL, I'm not arguing the hit was OK because of a technicality... the people that are arguing that he should have been flagged for it are arguing that based on a technicality. 

I have zero issue with the hit or not calling a penalty on the hit. Why? Quite simple really... I have simply no earthly idea what anybody really thinks Sherman should have or even could have done differently there. He's clear of the holder by the time the whistle is blown. You're committed at that point.

This isn't the Matrix and Sherman isn't Neo. He's not stopping his progression or his body within a second of impact because he hears a whistle. Just not realistic for somebody to expect him to do that. 

Having been around these boards long enough, I can also say for 100% certainty that if Sherman played for the Ravens, it would be unanimous that it shouldn't be a penalty, and if Tucker were the kicker, it would be unanimous that it should be. The only differences here are the jerseys they are wearing.

If you don't want that play to happen, blow the whistle when its time to blow the whistle. Don't wait until he's 3-4 yards into the backfield to try to stop progression of fully grown, highly athletic athletes. Its not happening. 

The first audible whistle on the TV broadcast (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kxiKnrUK_6o) happens well after Sherman hits the kicker.

  17 minutes ago, MileHighMiracle12 said:

Well... they can throw more than one penalty flag on the same play. I can't tell for sure, but it didn't look like he blocked the ball, he just took the kickers legs out after the kick, which would be roughing.

Actually they can't throw a roughing the kicker penalty on a play they blew dead, which is what they ultimately did.

They can call unncessary roughness (as Dean Blandino referenced), but that implies that they think Sherman intentionally dove with the intent of taking the kicker out and not at the ball.

He's clearly going for the block based on his body angle. The problem with calling unncessary roughness is that it implies that Sherman should have just stopped playing because he knew he was offsides.

He's waiting for the whistle to stop play. When the whistle comes too late, this is what happens.

Thanks for the explanation. I think what is confusing is the timing of the whole play.

I've rewatched it several times and the whistles don't blow until after he has already taken out the kicker. It seems strange that they wouldn't be allowed to call roughing the kicker when it happened before the whistles blew the play dead... but I guess the rules don't always make sense.

Tucker can be livid about the rule all he wants, but the enforcement of it was correct.

The burden falls on the officials for not stopping the play dead once Sherman is blatantly offsides. You can't wait for him to clear the holder and dive at the kicker before blowing your whistle.

Well... they can throw more than one penalty flag on the same play. I can't tell for sure, but it didn't look like he blocked the ball, he just took the kickers legs out after the kick, which would be roughing.

  1 hour ago, bostonraven said:

  1 hour ago, bioLarzen said:

The maths problem only requires the use of the Pythagorean theorem (a²+b²=c²) where a is the half of the rope's length (60 yards or 360 feet), b is the height of the man/building that must fit under the slackened rope (6 or 30 feet) and c is half of the slacked rope's length. So, it goes (figures are in feet)

180²+6²=c2

32,400+36=c²

32,436=c²

180.1=c

This is half of the slackened rope's length, which puts the total (slacked) rope length at 2*180.01=360.02; the original rope length is 360 feet (120 yards), so the required slack for a 6-foot man to fit under the rop is 0.02 feet, or abour 0.24 inches.

 

For the 30-feet buliding, using the same principle, gives a slack of 4.96 feet.

 

bioLarzen, your observations and critiques on this site are usually spot-on, and I am a fan. But in this particular case, I gotta say that the decimal places are really important *smiley face*

Agree with all points

What about the width of the 6' tall man's head?