Ravens Still A Top Tier Nfl Team

[Chi_Town_Raven]

[quote name='hammer' date='11 November 2009 - 02:57 PM' timestamp='1257969466' post='280255']
Keep in mind guy, that there is ABSOLUTELY NOTHING WRONG with disagreeing with Hammer. I have been wrong enough times in my life to know that I am not always right.

Actually, I was [b]proven wrong [/b]one time last year. It was a case where I thought I was wrong, but it turned out that I was right. See? I hope you get a laugh out of this.... I did. Here's to you dude!
[/quote]
Keep in mind guy, that there is ABSOLUTELY NOTHING WRONG with talking in first person.

[mhead66]

[quote name='Jamal' date='11 November 2009 - 04:26 PM' timestamp='1257974777' post='280309']
I was never a big stats person. Just look at 2000. [b]We had one of the best defenses of all time, yet we weren't even number 1 that year[/b].
Who still talks about that Titans defense? Exactly.
[/quote]
Excellent point.

Some famous quotes on statistics:

1. Torture numbers, and they'll confess to anything.

2. He uses statistics as a drunken man uses lampposts - for support rather than for illumination.

3. Say you were standing with one foot in the oven and one foot in an ice bucket. According to statistics, you should be perfectly comfortable.

4. Then there is the man who drowned crossing a stream with an average depth of six inches.

5. Statistically, the average human has one breast and one testicle.

[mhead66]

Statistically, the Ravens are in the top 10 in:

Points Scored/game
Offensive Yards/game
Passing Yards/game
First Downs/game

Points Allowed/game
Rushing Yards Allowed/game

Cincinnati is not in the top 10 in [b]Points Scored/game[/b]
Minnesota, Cincinnati and Denver are not in the top 10 in [b]Offensive Yards/game[/b]
Minnesota and Cincinnati are not in the top 10 in [b]Passing Yards/game[/b]
Denver is not in the top 10 in [b]First Downs/game[/b]

Minnesota and New Orleans are not in the top 10 in [b]Points Allowed/game[/b]
New Orleans, Indy, Dallas and Denver are not in the top 10 in [b]Rushing Yds Allowed/game[/b]

The difference is...

Cincinnati, Minnesota, Denver, New Orleans, Indy and Dallas are all 6-2 or better.

[hammer]

[quote name='Ed_Reed_Pick_Six' date='11 November 2009 - 05:07 PM' timestamp='1257973657' post='280294']
Hammer, to say wins and losses reflect the 'outer boundary' of what matters is a little non-sensical. [u]We live and die on all the big plays because they affect whether we win or lose the game[/u]. As the original poster said, I couldn't care less about statistics if we find a way to win.

Because, as has been said, that is all that matters at the end of the day. [b]A win is a win, and speaks for itself[/b]. A loss can be justified or downplayed via statistics to console fans etc., but let's face it - does that make us feel any better about losing the game? No. Sure, it might make people feel optimistic about what can be achieved in future games - but unless glamourous statistics are translated into a W, they might as well not have been accumulated.
[/quote]

Yup, I agree, a win is a win. I'll take that EVERY TIME. With that being said, I can put that to rest. Now, lets talk about what the thread is about. And that is "The Ravens Are Still One of The Top Tier NFL Teams."

You are saying the won-loss record should be the beginning-to-end-all marker to determine the top teams. But on many occasions, people who make a living betting on these games don't pick the team with the best won-loss record to win. Why?

Because strength of team can not be determined by won-loss record alone. Stats don't provide you with an all-inclusive, absolute answer either. The data I presented is illuminated by:

1. The backdrop of excessive fan criticism of the teams effort this year.

2. The Ravens standing among team statistical leaders on both offense and defense.

3. The fact that the Ravens could very easily be 6-2, rather than 4-4 (one missed
field goal and one dropped pass).

4. The Ravens 4 losses amount to a total of 21 points.

5. The AFC North is now similar in strength to the AL East in MLB.

[b][b]How many NFL teams are clearly better that the Ravens at this point of the 2009 year? Not many. Let's take a look.[/b][/b]

1. [b]Colts/Yes [/b]- 8-0 record, leads NFL (1st) in fewest points allowed per game, 8th in NFL in fewest yards allowed per game, 4th in NFL in yards gained per game, 8th in NFL in takeaways per game.

2. [b]Saints/Yes [/b]- 8-0 record, 1st in NFL in PPG, 1st in NFL YPG, 1st in NFL in Takeaways Per Game.

3. [b]Bengals/Yes[/b] - 6-2 record, 5th in NFL scoring defense, 9th in NFL rushing offense, 2nd in NFL rushing defense, More Physical Than Ravens in 2 wins.

[b]Other than those teams mentioned above, there are no other CLEARLY dominant teams compared to the Ravens. Heres why:[/b]

1. [b]New England/No [/b]- 6-2 record, Ravens are capable of beating them and SHOULD have beat them in Foxboro.

2. [b]Vikings/No [/b]- 7-1 record, Ravens are capable of beating them and SHOULD have beat them in Minneapolis.

3. [b]Steelers/Not Yet [/b]- 6-2 record, Ravens have not played them yet, but they don't have the same type of team as in the past. Similar to the Ravens with heavy passing and inconsistent running. Ravens are capable of beating the Steelers in at least one of the upcoming matchups.

4. Broncos/No - 6-2 record, no comment.

[b]So please don't "parrot" won-loss records [/b]to me as a show of proof as to how good a team is. You have to factor in other insights as well. Stats are a good starting point. You can then digress from there.

[Chi_Town_Raven]

Doesn't matter if they are "clearly" better, many teams [i]are[/i] better.

[hammer]

[quote name='Chi_Town_Raven' date='11 November 2009 - 07:48 PM' timestamp='1257983283' post='280418']
Keep in mind guy, that there is ABSOLUTELY NOTHING WRONG with talking in first person.
[/quote]

Agreed, but you should note that "hammer" is NOT A FIRST PERSON EITHER. I have not forgotten that my first identity is NOT MY SCREEN NAME.

I would have to digress to (-) "neg repper-ville" to reach that low point in my life. You know, down there below a crack addict or something. Hey, drinks on me!

[mhead66]

[quote name='hammer' date='11 November 2009 - 08:49 PM' timestamp='1257990563' post='280450']
Yup, I agree, a win is a win. I'll take that EVERY TIME. With that being said, I can put that to rest. Now, lets talk about what the thread is about. And that is "The Ravens Are Still One of The Top Tier NFL Teams."

You are saying the won-loss record should be the beginning-to-end-all marker to determine the top teams. But on many occasions, people who make a living betting on these games don't pick the team with the best won-loss record to win. Why?

Because strength of team can not be determined by won-loss record alone. Stats don't provide you with an all-inclusive, absolute answer either. The data I presented is illuminated by:

1. The backdrop of excessive fan criticism of the teams effort this year.

2. The Ravens standing among team statistical leaders on both offense and defense.

3. The fact that the Ravens could very easily be 6-2, rather than 4-4 (one missed
field goal and one dropped pass).

4. The Ravens 4 losses amount to a total of 21 points.

5. The AFC North is now similar in strength to the AL East in MLB.

[b][b]How many NFL teams are clearly better that the Ravens at this point of the 2009 year? Not many. Let's take a look.[/b][/b]

1. [b]Colts/Yes [/b]- 8-0 record, leads NFL (1st) in fewest points allowed per game, 8th in NFL in fewest yards allowed per game, 4th in NFL in yards gained per game, 8th in NFL in takeaways per game.

2. [b]Saints/Yes [/b]- 8-0 record, 1st in NFL in PPG, 1st in NFL YPG, 1st in NFL in Takeaways Per Game.

3. [b]Bengals/Yes[/b] - 6-2 record, 5th in NFL scoring defense, 9th in NFL rushing offense, 2nd in NFL rushing defense, More Physical Than Ravens in 2 wins.

[b]Other than those teams mentioned above, there are no other CLEARLY dominant teams compared to the Ravens. Heres why:[/b]

1. [b]New England/No [/b]- 6-2 record, [u][b]Ravens are capable of beating them and SHOULD have beat them in Foxboro.[/b][/u]
2. [b]Vikings/No [/b]- 7-1 record, Ravens are capable of beating them and SHOULD have beat them in Minneapolis.

3. [b]Steelers/Not Yet [/b]- 6-2 record, Ravens have not played them yet, but they don't have the same type of team as in the past. Similar to the Ravens with heavy passing and inconsistent running. [u][b]Ravens are capable of beating the Steelers in at least one of the upcoming matchups[/b].[/u]

4. Broncos/No - 6-2 record, no comment.

[b]So please don't "parrot" won-loss records [/b]to me as a show of proof as to how good a team is. You have to factor in other insights as well. Stats are a good starting point. You can then digress from there.
[/quote]
Hey Hammer!

You said, in an earlier thread, that "The stats bear out the TRUTH that they rank in the top third teams in the league." You say that stats are the starting point for ranking a team's "strength", and that - despite a 4-4 record (placing the Ravens in a tie for 15th, record-wise), they're statistically better than 68.75% of NFL teams.

However, (above) you seemingly dismiss the Steelers and Patriots, saying the Ravens are capable (and hinting that) the Ravens should beat them - at least the Steelers once.

But, here, you abandon the stats, and I wonder why?

The stats:

Off. PPG: NE 3rd, Balt 9th, Pitt 13th.
Off YPG: NE 2nd, Pitt 5th, Balt 10th
Def PPG: NE 2nd, Pitt 6th, Balt 9th.
Def YPG: Pitt 5th, NE 7th, Balt 12th

How come you rate the Ravens ahead/comparable with the Pats/Steelers, when they both statistically and record-wise exceed the Ravens?

[hammer]

[quote name='mhead66' date='11 November 2009 - 10:09 PM' timestamp='1257991765' post='280460']
Hey Hammer!

You said, in an earlier thread, that "The stats bear out the TRUTH that they rank in the top third teams in the league." You say that stats are the starting point for ranking a team's "strength", and that - despite a 4-4 record (placing the Ravens in a tie for 15th, record-wise), they're statistically better than 68.75% of NFL teams.

However, (above) you seemingly dismiss the Steelers and Patriots, saying the Ravens are capable (and hinting that) the Ravens should beat them - at least the Steelers once.

But, here, you abandon the stats, and I wonder why?

The stats:

Off. PPG: NE 3rd, Balt 9th, Pitt 13th.
Off YPG: NE 2nd, Pitt 5th, Balt 10th
Def PPG: NE 2nd, Pitt 6th, Balt 9th.
Def YPG: Pitt 5th, NE 7th, Balt 12th

How come you rate the Ravens ahead/comparable with the Pats/Steelers, when they both statistically and record-wise exceed the Ravens?
[/quote]

That's a reasonable observation.

The Ravens proved to be a more "physical" team in a head-to-head matchup with the Patriots. That's not a tangible stat, but it shows up only in a head-to-head matchup.

As for the Steelers, I stated that we have them on our schedule twice. We know who they are and we are familiar with them. So my analysis as to is Pittsburg clearly a better team than the Ravens. I stated,,,,Not Yet, because we have to play them first to see.

I know what the stats are for the Steeler, but the intangible evidence is that we have ALWAYS matched up well with them, so the jury is still out on that one.

Now, there are some other teams that probably have statistical better numbers and records than us too, such as the Eagles or the Falcons. But since they are not on our schedule. I can't declare dominance either way.

The point is that there are not a lot of teams that we can clearly say are better than the Ravens, but our fans are calling for the coaches to be "be-headed."

I think we are spoiled by past greatness of our defense and we won't accept anything less that. That's not fairness to the franchise or the players.

[hammer]

[quote name='Chi_Town_Raven' date='11 November 2009 - 09:52 PM' timestamp='1257990736' post='280453']
Doesn't matter if they are "clearly" better, many teams [i]are[/i] better.
[/quote]

Ok, then here's what we do..... "YOU TELL ME" which NFL teams are better than the Ravens, if the word "clearly" can so easily be dismissed as irrelevant. Also PROVE IT with whatever evidence you can muster.

[CorvusCorax]

[quote name='hammer' date='11 November 2009 - 09:35 PM' timestamp='1257993303' post='280467']
Ok, then here's what we do..... "YOU TELL ME" which NFL teams are better than the Ravens, if the word "clearly" can so easily be dismissed as irrelevant. Also PROVE IT with whatever evidence you can muster.
[/quote]

That can be easy. Any team that's better than 4-4.

I get what you are saying however, I think you are taking it to the extreme. When you see people posting about coaching, certain players, etc., chances are they are frustrated with their performance (lack there of). They have every right to be upset.

I'm not asking for Hauschka's head. Nor am I going to whine about Stover not being here. What's the point?

I'm not asking for Mattison's head, I'm asking him to [b]fix it[/b].

I'm not asking for Carr's head, I'm asking for Webb to take his place and for Carr to know his role [and shut his mouth LOL] and perform better.

I'm not asking for the receivers' heads, I'm asking for them to get open and catch the freaking ball.

This is not Detroit because we expect a high level of performance and have every right to demand it. We are [b]proud[/b] of how our team performs and want those players to perform to their highest. When you expect and demand that level of performance, you get a top tier NFL team.

When you stop demanding and expecting that level of intensity, you become a basement dweller.

Stats are just stats and in the end it's the win that counts. Right now, we are looking rather average. Why? Because there is a lack of intensity from [b]all of the players[/b]. When that happens it averages out to being just that, [b]Average[/b]. That's the Stat you're going to have to face.

I don't want the Ravens to be 8-8. I want them to be better than that. I demand it. All of the coaches, staff and players should too.

[hammer]

[quote name='CorvusCorax' date='11 November 2009 - 11:13 PM' timestamp='1257995597' post='280475']
That can be easy. Any team that's better than 4-4.

I get what you are saying however, I think you are taking it to the extreme. When you see people posting about coaching, certain players, etc., chances are they are frustrated with their performance (lack there of). They have every right to be upset.

I'm not asking for Hauschka's head. Nor am I going to whine about Stover not being here. What's the point?

I'm not asking for Mattison's head, I'm asking him to [b]fix it[/b].

I'm not asking for Carr's head, I'm asking for Webb to take his place and for Carr to know his role [and shut his mouth LOL] and perform better.

I'm not asking for the receivers' heads, I'm asking for them to get open and catch the freaking ball.

This is not Detroit because we expect a high level of performance and have every right to demand it. We are [b]proud[/b] of how our team performs and want those players to perform to their highest. When you expect and demand that level of performance, you get a top tier NFL team.

When you stop demanding and expecting that level of intensity, you become a basement dweller.

Stats are just stats and in the end it's the win that counts. Right now, we are looking rather average. Why? Because there is a lack of intensity from [b]all of the players[/b]. When that happens it averages out to being just that, [b]Average[/b]. That's the Stat you're going to have to face.

I don't want the Ravens to be 8-8. I want them to be better than that. I demand it. All of the coaches, staff and players should too.
[/quote]

Now THAT was a very impressive post (seriously). It was reasonable, unemotional, and clearly presented. I don't have any comment or rebuttal to what was said, because non is needed.

I just wish we could use these words as a petition and get all fans on the board to sign on as a statement of disappointment, but strong faith and support for our boys.

We are at the mid-way point of a war and this is no time for the players to look inthe stands and see "white flags." Yes, they have made some BIG mistakes to this point and it's fair for fans to point it out.

However, it is disheartening to hear gross exagerations of an already disappointing performance. We have at least five very winable games remaining on the schedule. We need to STEAL ONE MORE to make the playoffs.

From now forward, lets use monday and tuesday for criticism, but from wednesday forward, lets look to make corrections and find encouragement.

That's fair....right?..........right? Aww, just forget it.

[CorvusCorax]

[quote name='hammer' date='11 November 2009 - 11:16 PM' timestamp='1257999410' post='280501']


From now forward, lets use monday and tuesday for criticism, but from wednesday forward, lets look to make corrections and find encouragement.

That's fair....right?..........right? Aww, just forget it.
[/quote]

That's what you typically see on these boards anyhow. If we win a game, you'll see praises for the next few days. Then on Wednesday the focus changes to the next game. If we lose it's a whine and gripe fest here (and sometimes rightfully so) and criticism is typically done until about Wednesday or so.

[hammer]

[quote name='CorvusCorax' date='12 November 2009 - 01:03 AM' timestamp='1258002200' post='280521']
That's what you typically see on these boards anyhow. If we win a game, you'll see praises for the next few days. Then on Wednesday the focus changes to the next game. If we lose it's a whine and gripe fest here (and sometimes rightfully so) and criticism is typically done until about Wednesday or so.
[/quote]

So why can't we ever accept that the other team just "kicked our asses" on some occasions. This is what actually happened in both Bengals games.

But instead, our fan base, at least on these boards, start growing "hairs on their teeth," and "white milky liquid substances" start oozing from their ears, and they become mean and exagerated, and "finger-pointy."

Each person has a right to their own opinion. That's fair. But when you totally disregard the effort of the team and start pouring "salt into the bleeding wounds of a beaten warrior," then something is wrong.

I just want to be fair to the players who are out there busting there butts to varying degrees of success. That's all.

[hammer]

[quote name='CorvusCorax' date='12 November 2009 - 01:03 AM' timestamp='1258002200' post='280521']
That's what you typically see on these boards anyhow. If we win a game, you'll see praises for the next few days. Then on Wednesday the focus changes to the next game. If we lose it's a whine and gripe fest here (and sometimes rightfully so) and criticism is typically done until about Wednesday or so.
[/quote]


With all due respect, it is now Thursday morning and the "venemous" merged-criticism threads are in full throttle. So, the above statement is OBVIOUSLY not true. People such as yourself are the exception, not the rule.

[Ravens549]

Overall, our defense is ranked 12th in the league. Personally I don't find top 60% to be top tier.
We should jump up a bit from the Browns game.
Lets see where we rank after the Colts and Steelers game.

[darklight1216]

We are a .500 team; that is the definition of average. We're not "better than our record indicates" we're mediocre just like the record shows.

[northsider]

Let's see, the Ravens are third in the AFC North, share the 8th best record in the conference with Jacksonville and the Jets, and are a full two games every division leader except the Arizona Cardinals. If the Ravens swapped divisions with the Redskins, they would be in sole possession of last place in the NFC East.

12th in total defense, 9th in scoring defense, 7th in rushing defense, 19th in passing defense, 18th in sacks, 22nd in yards per play allowed on defense, 11th in touchdowns allowed and 7th in third down conversions allowed.

10th in total offense, 9th in scoring offense, 12th in yards per play, 10th in passing offense, 13th in rushing offense, 12th in sacks allowed, third in touchdowns and 7th in third down conversions.

Maybe my definition of top tier is different. To me, top tier means a team capable of winning a division and fighting for a first round bye in the playoffs. I don't see that here. I see a team that, despite playing well in certain situations (they do score touchdowns and play well on third down), right now is looking at tiebreakers with the Bears, Packers, Jaguars and Jets for draft position.

[darklight1216]

Here's a not so fun stat: The Ravens are one of three teams with more negative runs (22) than 10+ yard runs (21). The others: Detroit and Buffalo. That's not good company.

[Ed_Reed20]

[quote name='darklight1216' date='12 November 2009 - 01:54 PM' timestamp='1258052057' post='280707']
Here's a not so fun stat: The Ravens are one of three teams with more negative runs (22) than 10+ yard runs (21). The others: Detroit and Buffalo. That's not good company.
[/quote]

Wow. Not to pile on but the offense hasn't scored a TD in the first half of a game since the NE game. I still can't believe that. For all the heat the defense has taken, people need to start questioning Cam's gameplans.

[ravensfolife]

I don't think you can blame cam's playcalling. The first couple of games we looked to go downfield on offense, because Cam figured even if we make mistakes the defense would bail them out. Six games later we all see the defense is below average, so Cam goes back to last years ball control offense. So would you rather we take more chances downfield and let the defense bail them out, or try to keep the opposing team off the field? All I know is I hope Mattison leaves his pride and playbook at home this week.

[Ravnet]

Clutch PPG

#1 Bengals
#32 Ravens

[Ed_Reed20]

[quote name='ravensfolife' date='12 November 2009 - 03:17 PM' timestamp='1258057069' post='280737']
I don't think you can blame cam's playcalling. The first couple of games we looked to go downfield on offense, because Cam figured even if we make mistakes the defense would bail them out. Six games later we all see the defense is below average, [b]so Cam goes back to last years ball control offense.[/b] So would you rather we take more chances downfield and let the defense bail them out, or try to keep the opposing team off the field? All I know is I hope Mattison leaves his pride and playbook at home this week.
[/quote]

You control the clock by running the ball. The team hasn't done for the past few weeks. I give Cam a pass against the Vikings because the team was backed up on almost every drive in the first half. However, there is no excuse for how little the offense has done in the first half of the past few games and how little time they've controlled the clock. I'm not one of these fans clamoring to see Cam pound the rock more because the reality is, Lorenzo Neal is no longer here. However, there have too many times this year where Cam hasn't stuck with the run long enough.

[ravensfolife]

[quote name='Ed_Reed20' date='12 November 2009 - 03:34 PM' timestamp='1258058063' post='280747']
You control the clock by running the ball. The team hasn't done for the past few weeks. I give Cam a pass against the Vikings because the team was backed up on almost every drive in the first half. However, there is no excuse for how little the offense has done in the first half of the past few games and how little time they've controlled the clock. I'm not one of these fans clamoring to see Cam pound the rock more because the reality is, Lorenzo Neal is no longer here. However, there have too many times this year where Cam hasn't stuck with the run long enough.
[/quote]
Not always... We seem to use short passes and screens in place of the run. Its still ball control, kinda like the eagles run/pass game

[Jamal]

[quote name='Ravnet' date='12 November 2009 - 03:20 PM' timestamp='1258057226' post='280741']
Clutch PPG

#1 Bengals
#32 Ravens
[/quote]
*End of debate*

[Ravens549]

[quote name='Ed_Reed20' date='12 November 2009 - 03:34 PM' timestamp='1258058063' post='280747']
However, there have too many times this year where Cam hasn't stuck with the run long enough.
[/quote]
I hear a lot of people saying this and I just don't get it.

So, we run the ball and then decide mid way through the fourth quarter down by say 21 points instead of 7 to start passing then?
I cannot tolerate coaching that says we WILL run the ball or else...or else we lose, eh?

[Steelerkillers]

[quote name='hammer' date='11 November 2009 - 01:01 PM' timestamp='1257962505' post='280200']
The FACTS are that the Ravens rank in the top 10 of all important offensive and defensive stats. There are 32 teams in the league. If you average 10th place out of 32 teams, you are not THEORETICALLY one of the top team, but FACTUALLY.

For those mathmeticians out there, they would know that means the Ravens are statistically better that [b]68.75%[/b] of NFL teams right now.

Many of our fans are inclined to factor in things like dropped passes and missed tackles, and falling down DB's and stuff like that. But they don't realize that this stuff happens in ALL NFL GAMES. Being that they don't actually see ALL NFL GAMES, they inappropriately assign DE-MERITS for the games they do see (ie. Ravens Games) to justify their thinking that the Ravns are not a good team. That's an illogical fallacy.

Remember, that old cliche? [b]"We Always Tend To Hurt The Ones We Love"?[/b] I think we are "figuratively:[b] LOVING OUR RAVENS.... TO DEATH!
[/quote][/b] What i have highlighted in your post is exactly what we're doin these days. Even though they suck right now....we still love them!! Thats Real Support!

[ravens_4life]

i still think its our defense. our offense is fine. on defense it seems like there is something missing. if we can go back to the defense that beat the denver we will be fine. as long as mattison is d-coord then we wont see much difference. i am not saying mattison is a bad coach all i am saying go back to the defense from last year and quit trying to change things.

[hammer]

[quote name='Ravens549' date='15 November 2009 - 10:58 AM' timestamp='1258297097' post='281749']
I hear a lot of people saying this and I just don't get it.

So, we run the ball and then decide mid way through the fourth quarter down by say 21 points instead of 7 to start passing then?
I cannot tolerate coaching that says we WILL run the ball or else...or else we lose, eh?
[/quote]

Tht's OK 549 because I don't think they ACTUALLY get it either. I think they are just saying it without actually thinking about it for one minute.