4-3 V.s. 3-4

[rastaman831226]

[quote name='Ravensfan23' date='05 April 2010 - 11:26 AM' timestamp='1270481189' post='386746']
Imo, its just unfair to base an opinion on Mattison's abilities based on what happened against the Colts.

Peyton Manning is the best QB in the game and he rans that offense like a well oiled machine.

The best defense for the Colts is a good offense, which the Ravens didn't have in that playoff game.

The Ravens defense was dominate in the first quarter and a half, they played as well as anyone could expect against the Colts. Then the Colts scored twice in like the last 2 minutes.

However, when your offense isn't helping you out on the back end, it's hard to keep pace with the Colts. We only scored 3 points and couldn't move the ball at all.

How can any defense hold the Colts to 3 points or less, when they are constantly on the field and playing on a short field at that.

If you ever hold the Colts to 20 points or less it should be enough to beat them.

Mattison was not and is not a problem for us. If you really want to point the finger at anyone, point it at Cam Cameron(not saying Cam is a Problem). Regardless if the defense finished a hard or soft number 3(still don't understand how that makes sense) they still finished at the top of the league and got the job done. It was Cam's offense that couldn't come through when needed.

So I guess if the defense finished a soft #3, then the offense was in marsh mellow form towards the end of the season?
[/quote]

Whoa, still stuck on the Colts, eh? You'd be better served dissecting the Minnesota game, the Green Bay game, the Cincinatti games 2x or both Pittsburgh games where, in one, a QB with 2 passes in his NFL career made Mattison's idea of defensive scheming look like it was drawn up by a high school JV coach. After coaching college ball for 37 years and having but one year coaching LB's in the NFL, Mattison proved last year that he's too old, too conservative and in over his head as a Ravens DC.

[beasy2487]

[Ravensfan23]

[quote name='rastaman831226' date='05 April 2010 - 03:11 PM' timestamp='1270498263' post='386886']
Whoa, still stuck on the Colts, eh? You'd be better served dissecting the Minnesota game, the Green Bay game, the Cincinatti games 2x or both Pittsburgh games where, in one, a QB with 2 passes in his NFL career made Mattison's idea of defensive scheming look like it was drawn up by a high school JV coach. After coaching college ball for 37 years and having but one year coaching LB's in the NFL, Mattison proved last year that he's too old, too conservative and in over his head as a Ravens DC.
[/quote]

Do you actually think about what you wanna say before you say it? Really, because correct me if I'm wrong but weren't u the one who just said his lastings impression of Mattison was the Clots game? But I'm the one stuck on the Colts.

Ok, yes the Ravens didn't play well in the games you mentioned. However, at work point do players need to be held accountable. Mattison didn't instruct Reed to go for a pick and cut off Washington allowing Rice to run for 50 yards after a slant.

Mattison wasn't the one that was covering Chris Henry when he caught a 70 yard pass(Plamer would have only passed for about 160 yards without that play). That was just a one on one play.

Your hate for Mattison won't change. Hell you've already given yourself an out, if the Ravens defense does dominate in '10, by saying hopefully the other coaches will help Mattison out this season.

Mattison is and will continue to be the Ravens DC, if you don't like it, write a letter or something. I'm sure the Ravens would love to read it.

[BMOREHAWAII]

If Barnes and Kruger bulk up, and get some play time in pre-season we can see their potential and i think it would be an awesome change of events because we can keep JJ in the backfield for coverage, or for stopping the run..

[rastaman831226]

[quote name='Ravensfan23' date='05 April 2010 - 05:19 PM' timestamp='1270502352' post='386916']
Do you actually think about what you wanna say before you say it? Really, because correct me if I'm wrong but weren't u the one who just said his lastings impression of Mattison was the Clots game? But I'm the one stuck on the Colts.

Ok, yes the Ravens didn't play well in the games you mentioned. However, at work point do players need to be held accountable. Mattison didn't instruct Reed to go for a pick and cut off Washington allowing Rice to run for 50 yards after a slant.

Mattison wasn't the one that was covering Chris Henry when he caught a 70 yard pass(Plamer would have only passed for about 160 yards without that play). That was just a one on one play.

Your hate for Mattison won't change. Hell you've already given yourself an out, if the Ravens defense does dominate in '10, by saying hopefully the other coaches will help Mattison out this season.

Mattison is and will continue to be the Ravens DC, if you don't like it, write a letter or something. I'm sure the Ravens would love to read it.
[/quote]

It's called NFL and if an aged and all too conservative Gregg Mattison cannot keep up with today's professional football, he will have his job Not For Long. A far more experienced NFL/AFC former N.E. DC with a SB ring and a healthy knowledge of the 3/4, Dan Pees, was brought in for a reason. And it it is not just to be Ravens' LB coach. In closing, I'd just like to stress that if the difference between the hard nosed 2008 defense and the jellied 2009 defense proved anything, It proved that it ain't the players- it's the scheme.

[Bltravens]

[quote name='rastaman831226' date='05 April 2010 - 02:11 PM' timestamp='1270498263' post='386886']
Whoa, still stuck on the Colts, eh? You'd be better served dissecting the Minnesota game, the Green Bay game, the Cincinatti games 2x or both Pittsburgh games where, in one, a QB with 2 passes in his NFL career made Mattison's idea of defensive scheming look like it was drawn up by a high school JV coach. After coaching college ball for 37 years and having but one year coaching LB's in the NFL, Mattison proved last year that he's too old, too conservative and in over his head as a Ravens DC.
[/quote]
Really, cuz Dixon's rush TD came on a Rex Ryan all out cover 0 over load blitz. The normal Mattison calls allowed 10 points. Both Cincy games, he allowed 17 how is that anything but solid. In 2006 Rex let F'in Jake Delhomme throw for almost 400 yards. Minnesota and GB were two of the highest scoring offenses in football this year, did Mattison struggle against Minnesota without a doubt. However I refuse to pin the GB game on him soley, the defense forced 3 turnovers and the offense could barely get past half after the first drive.

Who do you want to be the DC, because no matter who he is, he wont be Rex, cant be Rex, and wont be able to run Rex's system as effectively as Rex. This was proven in Philly this year already.

Edit- Also Dean Pees is the guy you want running the defense...the guy who allowed us to rush for 200+ yards on him at home in the playoffs...

[berad]

[quote name='rastaman831226' date='05 April 2010 - 11:11 AM' timestamp='1270480316' post='386742']
Your bad attempt at sarcasm was duly noted. And to even hint that Rex Ryan, Marvin Lewis, or Mike Nolan ( well, Nolan not so much ) were not great DC's by NFL and Raven standards is ludicrous. Suffice to say you misspoke. As to " ..strong improvement towards the latter part of the season.", good performances against the flea bags of the NFL ( Det.,Chi.,and Oak. ) sprinkled in among bad showings against over 500. teams ( GB., Pitts. ) does not make for " .. a strong improvement towards the latter part of the season." It makes for a subpar overall performance. Again, the best and most immediate hope for the Ravens is having Dan Pees. former N.E. DC and now Ravens LB coach play a major role in defining the 3/4 defense this coming season
[/quote]

I never said they weren't great! It's becoming increasingly difficult to have any sort of constructive dialogue with you when you are hung up on the thought that I disrespected the memory of Rex Ryan or something.

The Ravens allowed only [b]13.1 points per game[/b] over their last 10 games. That is a [i]significant[/i] improvement and whether you choose to recognize that fact is up to you. Forgetting the fact that we held the Broncos to 7, the Colts to 17, and the Bengals to 17 (both times) does not mean it didn't happen.

Mattison did well enough in his first season so that there should be no doubts about his role, here, in Baltimore.

[J-man]

[quote name='BMOREHAWAII' date='05 April 2010 - 05:55 PM' timestamp='1270504537' post='386930']
If Barnes and Kruger bulk up, and get some play time in pre-season we can see their potential and i think it would be an awesome change of events because we can keep JJ in the backfield for coverage, or for stopping the run..
[/quote]

If Barnes could balk up, and if he grew like 2 inches, he could be as good as Suggs off the edge, maybe....but that's scary.

[flynismo]

[quote name='rastaman831226' date='05 April 2010 - 05:55 PM' timestamp='1270508154' post='386963']
It's called NFL and if an aged and all too conservative Gregg Mattison cannot keep up with today's professional football, he will have his job Not For Long.[/quote]


What am I missing here? Did we not already establish that Mattison led this defense to a top three ranking last season? What will it take for him to be worthy in your eyes? #2? #1?

[Ed_Reed20]

The fact that people are questioning Mattison as the DC is really puzzling.

One of the best players on D was overweight, several key players are over 30 and injuries decimated the secondary. Despite that, the D played well most of the season and held opposing teams to 20 points or less in the two play-off games. With the rules of game favoring offenses, that is an achievement that can't be overlooked.

With another year of familiarity, some upgrades through the draft and barring any major injuries, I don't see how the D can't improve regardless of what system it runs.

[rastaman831226]

[quote name='Bltravens' date='05 April 2010 - 07:06 PM' timestamp='1270508796' post='386968']
Really, cuz Dixon's rush TD came on a Rex Ryan all out cover 0 over load blitz. The normal Mattison calls allowed 10 points. Both Cincy games, he allowed 17 how is that anything but solid. In 2006 Rex let F'in Jake Delhomme throw for almost 400 yards. Minnesota and GB were two of the highest scoring offenses in football this year, did Mattison struggle against Minnesota without a doubt. However I refuse to pin the GB game on him soley, the defense forced 3 turnovers and the offense could barely get past half after the first drive.

Who do you want to be the DC, because no matter who he is, he wont be Rex, cant be Rex, and wont be able to run Rex's system as effectively as Rex. This was proven in Philly this year already.

Edit- Also Dean Pees is the guy you want running the defense...the guy who allowed us to rush for 200+ yards on him at home in the playoffs...
[/quote]


Whoever is the next DC certainly can't be a Gregg Mattison and maybe Dan Pees can help prevent the 300+ yard passing games and the 500 yd totals Mattison's schemes got dialed up for. I give Mattison till the end of this coming season before he retires or gets royally dumped on his can. Ravens need elite coaching to play with the big boys in the NFL and Gregg Mattison with his poor choices and lack of good judgement has proven he's no elite coach.

[Ed_Reed20]

[quote name='rastaman831226' date='05 April 2010 - 10:30 PM' timestamp='1270521024' post='387047']
Whoever is the next DC certainly can't be a Gregg Mattison and maybe Dan Pees can help prevent the 300+ yard passing games and the 500 yd totals Mattison's schemes got dialed up for. I give Mattison till the end of this coming season before he retires or gets royally dumped on his can. Ravens need elite coaching to play with the big boys in the NFL and Gregg Mattison with his poor choices and lack of good judgement has proven he's no elite coach.
[/quote]

LOL! How many times did the D give up 300+ yards passing or 500 yards of total offense? I can't remember too many. And in those games the the D got lit up, the offense either failed to score or waited too late do so.

To your statement about Mattison retiring or being fired, don't hold your breath because I higly doubt Mattison will retire or be canned unless the D gives 50 points every week.

You say he isn't an elite coach. Name one coach who was considered "elite" after one season.

If you want to complain about a few poor outings from the D fine but don't bring up the previous DC like he was a genius who never saw his units get set on fire.

Every D has a bad day. In case you didn't realize, there are people paid to put up points too and some of them are VERY good at what they do.

[Bltravens]

[quote name='rastaman831226' date='05 April 2010 - 08:30 PM' timestamp='1270521024' post='387047']
Whoever is the next DC certainly can't be a Gregg Mattison and maybe Dan Pees can help prevent the 300+ yard passing games and the 500 yd totals Mattison's schemes got dialed up for. I give Mattison till the end of this coming season before he retires or gets royally dumped on his can. Ravens need elite coaching to play with the big boys in the NFL and Gregg Mattison with his poor choices and lack of good judgement has proven he's no elite coach.
[/quote]
Your grasping for straws now man. The only reason we were in the playoffs was the defensive play the last 8, 9 weeks, and the only reason we were in the playoff games themselves. Pees never won a Super Bowl as the Pats DC either, and was a rookie LB coach when they won in 04, hardly an architect of any part of the Pats schemes, or game day coaching.

[berad]

[quote name='rastaman831226' date='05 April 2010 - 10:30 PM' timestamp='1270521024' post='387047']
Whoever is the next DC certainly can't be a Gregg Mattison and maybe Dan Pees can help prevent the 300+ yard passing games and the 500 yd totals Mattison's schemes got dialed up for. I give Mattison till the end of this coming season before he retires or gets royally dumped on his can. Ravens need elite coaching to play with the big boys in the NFL and Gregg Mattison with his poor choices and lack of good judgement has proven he's no elite coach.
[/quote]

The 2009 Ravens [b]never[/b] gave up 500 yards of total offense in any game!

The [b]only [/b]300+ yard passing game was by Phillip Rivers in an infamous [i]win[/i] against the San Diego Chargers; even though the Ravens faced great QBs like Favre, Manning, Brady, Rodgers, Palmer (twice), Roethlisberger, and Cutler [i](well, maybe not so much him..)[/i]

I suggest you look back on the season to find out what actually happened.

[XxSizzleXx]

let`s just put this guy in a sleeping bag and knock some sense into him.

[rastaman831226]

[quote name='Bltravens' date='06 April 2010 - 12:18 AM' timestamp='1270527498' post='387092']
Your grasping for straws now man. The only reason we were in the playoffs was the defensive play the last 8, 9 weeks, and the only reason we were in the playoff games themselves. Pees never won a Super Bowl as the Pats DC either, and was a rookie LB coach when they won in 04, hardly an architect of any part of the Pats schemes, or game day coaching.
[/quote]


The reason we had a bad #6 wild card slot was pizz poor game plans against Cinncy twice, Minnesota, and Green Bay. Teams that dominated the clock and the games because the defense could not keep them off the field. And read to learn, learn to read- never said Pees got the SB ring as DC, however Pees was/is LB coach with a ring and was DC during N.E. 16-0 season. And yes, Pees knows 3/4.

[rastaman831226]

[quote name='berad' date='06 April 2010 - 12:20 AM' timestamp='1270527630' post='387095']
The 2009 Ravens [b]never[/b] gave up 500 yards of total offense in any game!

The [b]only [/b]300+ yard passing game was by Phillip Rivers in an infamous [i]win[/i] against the San Diego Chargers; even though the Ravens faced great QBs like Favre, Manning, Brady, Rodgers, Palmer (twice), Roethlisberger, and Cutler [i](well, maybe not so much him..)[/i]

I suggest you look back on the season to find out what actually happened.
[/quote]

As reads: San Diego 474 yds, Minnesota 426 yds, Cincinnati 403 yds, Colts 375 yds, Cincinnati again 369 yds. and Green Bay 350 yds.- all in one season leading up to a total of 4808 total yards allowed in 2009 and a far cry from the IR'ed riddled 2008 team that allowed 4177 total yds. that year. Gregg Mattison is an old and very bad bad coach.

[Bltravens]

[quote name='rastaman831226' date='06 April 2010 - 11:28 PM' timestamp='1270618128' post='387694']
The reason we had a bad #6 wild card slot was pizz poor game plans against Cinncy twice, Minnesota, and Green Bay. Teams that dominated the clock and the games because the defense could not keep them off the field. And read to learn, learn to read- never said Pees got the SB ring as DC, however Pees was/is LB coach with a ring and was DC during N.E. 16-0 season. And yes, Pees knows 3/4.
[/quote]
Your unreal, you throw out Pees' Super Bowl ring when he was a first year LB coach like it holds serious weight with what his responsibilities were in terms of coaching and to you that means hes a far better DC than Mattison. Pees was also basically squeezed out of NE this year as the DC after one of NE's worst defensive seasons in recent memory. Mattison's gameplans against Cincy that both surrendered 17 points, that for some reason you still refuse to acknowledge is beyond good enough to win games, are not bad gameplans. Minnesota and GB, yes the defense had below standards days thats not in question...but 2 games in a season, shoot Rex was good for 2 or 3 a season when he got blown up. Also, if your going to count Pees 16-0 season with the Pats as solid credentials that hes a legit DC then your going to have to acknowledge Mattison because Pees finished in the top 3 in points allowed that year, just like Mattison. The BIG difference, Pees had a record setting offense that actually stayed on the field and forced other teams offenses to be 1 dimensional, Mattison had one that crapped itself the last 6-7 weeks of the season and Mattison had to carry them. And I hope nobody is reading your posts to "read to learn".

[rastaman831226]

[quote name='Bltravens' date='07 April 2010 - 02:20 AM' timestamp='1270621220' post='387702']
Your unreal, you throw out Pees' Super Bowl ring when he was a first year LB coach like it holds serious weight with what his responsibilities were in terms of coaching and to you that means hes a far better DC than Mattison. Pees was also basically squeezed out of NE this year as the DC after one of NE's worst defensive seasons in recent memory. Mattison's gameplans against Cincy that both surrendered 17 points, that for some reason you still refuse to acknowledge is beyond good enough to win games, are not bad gameplans. Minnesota and GB, yes the defense had below standards days thats not in question...but 2 games in a season, shoot Rex was good for 2 or 3 a season when he got blown up. Also, if your going to count Pees 16-0 season with the Pats as solid credentials that hes a legit DC then your going to have to acknowledge Mattison because Pees finished in the top 3 in points allowed that year, just like Mattison. The BIG difference, Pees had a record setting offense that actually stayed on the field and forced other teams offenses to be 1 dimensional, Mattison had one that crapped itself the last 6-7 weeks of the season and Mattison had to carry them. And I hope nobody is reading your posts to "read to learn".
[/quote]

This is real and you're still grasping for excuses. Pee's 3 years as DC of an elite team, his SB ring, DC of a 16-0 club, and healthy experience with the 3/4 easily trumps Gregg Mattison's resume. If you don't realize this, you're just pointlessly flapping gums. As to Mattison's grand gameplans- Cincinnati dominated TOP and the game 34:19 minutes to our 25:41- a huge disparity. Mattison had no clue as to how to keep Carson Palmer off the field. To make matters worse, with plenty of time to watch film and make adjustments to Cincinnati, Mattison allowed the Bengals to hog the ball and the game to a TOP tune of 40:00 minutes to our woeful 20:00 minutes. That's called not getting the job done. Under Mattison, we've gone from a dominate scoring defense that could turn the tide in critical games to a defense that can't hold the opposition nor get them off the field. Gregg Mattison is an old, all too conservative coach and a bad, bad match for this highly aggressive and versatile Ravens' defense. I'd go so far as to say even YOU would make a better DC.

[Ed_Reed20]

[quote name='rastaman831226' date='07 April 2010 - 03:52 AM' timestamp='1270626760' post='387710']
This is real and you're still grasping for excuses. Pee's 3 years as DC of an elite team, his SB ring, DC of a 16-0 club, and healthy experience with the 3/4 easily trumps Gregg Mattison's resume. If you don't realize this, you're just pointlessly flapping gums. [b]As to Mattison's grand gameplans- Cincinnati dominated TOP and the game 34:19 minutes to our 25:41- a huge disparity. Mattison had no clue as to how to keep Carson Palmer off the field. To make matters worse, with plenty of time to watch film and make adjustments to Cincinnati, Mattison allowed the Bengals to hog the ball and the game to a TOP tune of 40:00 minutes to our woeful 20:00 minutes.[/b] That's called not getting the job done. Under Mattison, we've gone from a dominate scoring defense that could turn the tide in critical games to a defense that can't hold the opposition nor get them off the field. Gregg Mattison is an old, all too conservative coach and a bad, bad match for this highly aggressive and versatile Ravens' defense. I'd go so far as to say even YOU would make a better DC.
[/quote]

LOL! Back to this foolish argument? Did you watch those games? The Ravens did very little offensively in both those games and turned the ball over a number of times too. If you want to put a premium on TOP fine but at least try to understand a team doesn't only concede TOP defensively. An offense's inability to stay on the field hurts just as much as a defense giving up long drives.

Really, this argument is pointless. Rather than look at what Mattison did objectively, you've convinced yourself he is a terrible DC after only one season. You've chosen any of the strong and pretended like age, a new scheme and a rash of injuries all contributed to some poor performances. What matters is, the team doesn't see things your way and a strong draft or two should get the D back to where it once was.

[berad]

[quote name='rastaman831226' date='07 April 2010 - 01:45 AM' timestamp='1270619116' post='387697']
As reads: San Diego 474 yds, Minnesota 426 yds, Cincinnati 403 yds, Colts 375 yds, Cincinnati again 369 yds. and Green Bay 350 yds.- all in one season leading up to a total of 4808 total yards allowed in 2009 and a far cry from the IR'ed riddled 2008 team that allowed 4177 total yds. that year. Gregg Mattison is an old and very bad bad coach.
[/quote]

Yeah, read what you just wrote! Understand that [b]none[/b] of those totals eclipse 500 yards! No one ever said the 2009 Defense performed better than it's 2008 counterpart; pushing that argument does not serve you any purpose.

2008 Ravens : 40 games missed by starters.

2009 Ravens : 49 games missed by starters.

The statistics contradict nearly every claim you're making. Mattison should be given more time to show what he's got before you form an end-all-be-all opinion on him.

[beasy2487]

[quote name='rastaman831226' date='07 April 2010 - 01:45 AM' timestamp='1270619116' post='387697']
As reads: San Diego 474 yds, Minnesota 426 yds, Cincinnati 403 yds, Colts 375 yds, Cincinnati again 369 yds. and Green Bay 350 yds.- all in one season leading up to a total of 4808 total yards allowed in 2009 and a far cry from the IR'ed riddled 2008 team that allowed 4177 total yds. that year. Gregg Mattison is an old and very bad bad coach.
[/quote]

Man this guy's head is thick... wait... is that... Kyle Boller?

Hm. It makes perfect sense: Completely unaware of what's going on around him, dumb as nails, desperate, mysterious desire to trash the Ravens...

Alright, now that I've gotten that cleared up, I can see why you hate Gregg Mattison. In his first year he succeeded where you failed. Mattison was better than Ryan in his first year, and LIGHT YEARS better than Pees will ever be seeing as the Pats defense was suspect the entire year the Pats went 16-0.. and what do you know, it was poor discipline and coverage that ended up losing them the super bowl... Kyle kyle kyle, your arguments are falling apart. Let's not even talk about how horrible you were in your first year, that goes without saying.

Kyle, I must say rastaman831226 is a fitting name, seeing as you were clearly baked out of your mind while you were our quarterback... but you'd think that would make you the chill kind of stupid, not the foolhardy hate-spewing kind that you are... it's quite sad.

Kyle, are you upset that it's your fault Rex couldn't get a ring during his good years because of you? Maybe you just don't want to see Mattison achieve what you and Rex couldn't? It's OK Kyle! You can be happy for the team you helped create(correction: weren't able to destroy).

Kyle Boller, haunting us to this day under the guise of rastaman831226. Terrible.

[Markus92]

IMO Barnes is our second best pass rusher opposite of a healthy Suggs. If you watch on third downs he brought alot of pressure

[flynismo]

[quote name='berad' date='07 April 2010 - 10:00 AM' timestamp='1270648833' post='387751']
Yeah, read what you just wrote! Understand that [b]none[/b] of those totals eclipse 500 yards! No one ever said the 2009 Defense performed better than it's 2008 counterpart; pushing that argument does not serve you any purpose.

2008 Ravens : 40 games missed by starters.

2009 Ravens : 49 games missed by starters.

The statistics contradict nearly every claim you're making. Mattison should be given more time to show what he's got before you form an end-all-be-all opinion on him.
[/quote]


In addition to that, let's not forget the significant personnel losses we suffered- Cmac, Scott, Leohnard, and also Rolle to injury. Not like Mattison had the weapons that Ryan did.

[Ed_Reed20]

[quote name='Markus92' date='07 April 2010 - 11:09 AM' timestamp='1270652974' post='387796']
IMO Barnes is our second best pass rusher opposite of a healthy Suggs. If you watch on third downs he brought alot of pressure
[/quote]

Barnes got after the QB quite a bit last season but I think Pryce is still the better pass rusher.

Barnes offers speed off the edge but once a tackle hooks him, its a wrap. Pryce has the power and hand usage to get past tackles even if they stop his initial surge.

[rastaman831226]

[quote name='berad' date='07 April 2010 - 10:00 AM' timestamp='1270648833' post='387751']
Yeah, read what you just wrote! Understand that [b]none[/b] of those totals eclipse 500 yards! No one ever said the 2009 Defense performed better than it's 2008 counterpart; pushing that argument does not serve you any purpose.

2008 Ravens : 40 games missed by starters.

2009 Ravens : 49 games missed by starters.

The statistics contradict nearly every claim you're making. Mattison should be given more time to show what he's got before you form an end-all-be-all opinion on him.
[/quote]

Thank you for finally admitting that the 2008 team with 19 players on IR performed better than the comparatively healthy 2009 version and that the 2008 defense outperformed the 2009 defense in every important statistical category. Getting the truth out of you is like pulling teeth. I accept your apology. As to another one of your bad manipulations of fact, you'd be more credible if you'd tried to explain how many players were actually IR'ed and how many players were not in games via coaches decision. Try again.

[-Truth-]

[quote name='rastaman831226' date='07 April 2010 - 10:54 AM' timestamp='1270655656' post='387815']
Thank you for finally admitting that the 2008 team with 19 players on IR performed better than the comparatively healthy 2009 version and that the 2008 defense outperformed the 2009 defense in every important statistical category. Getting the truth out of you is like pulling teeth. I accept your apology. As to another one of your bad manipulations of fact, you'd be more credible if you'd tried to explain how many players were actually IR'ed and how many players were not in games via coaches decision. Try again.
[/quote]
Well did you try reading again? His statistic said 40 games were missed by starters in 2008 and 9 more than that were missed in 2009. There were 16 players on IR. The 3 players on the practice squad were injured, but not placed on Reserve List. This is compared to the 15 players that were on IR last Season. Not exactly comparatively healthy. And to touch on the games against Cincinnati, Joe Flacco threw for a combined 381 Passing Yards, with 1 TD and 4 INTs in 2 combined contests. Why blame the Defense for the difference in TOP?

[berad]

[quote name='rastaman831226' date='07 April 2010 - 11:54 AM' timestamp='1270655656' post='387815']
Thank you for finally admitting that the 2008 team with 19 players on IR performed better than the comparatively healthy 2009 version and that the 2008 defense outperformed the 2009 defense in every important statistical category. Getting the truth out of you is like pulling teeth. I accept your apology. As to another one of your bad manipulations of fact, you'd be more credible if you'd tried to explain how many players were actually IR'ed and how many players were not in games via coaches decision. Try again.
[/quote]

Read all of my postings, I never said once that the 2009 defense was better, overall, than it's 2008 counterpart. I've said numerous times that the 2009 defense was not up to par and Mattison needs to improve the unit come 2010.

Did you just read what I wrote?! The 2008 defense was, comparably, [b]HEALTHIER[/b]! And it was a [i]'coaches decision'[/i] to sit McAlister for 10 games, should I deduct that from the 40 total games missed by starters?

I'm not apologizing for anything I wrote or anything I think. Everything I claim is grounded in fact, not delusion.

[beasy2487]

[quote name='berad' date='07 April 2010 - 03:23 PM' timestamp='1270668229' post='387920']
Read all of my postings, I never said once that the 2009 defense was better, overall, than it's 2008 counterpart. I've said numerous times that the 2009 defense was not up to par and Mattison needs to improve the unit come 2010.

Did you just read what I wrote?! The 2008 defense was, comparably, [b]HEALTHIER[/b]! And it was a [i]'coaches decision'[/i] to sit McAlister for 10 games, should I deduct that from the 40 total games missed by starters?

I'm not apologizing for anything I wrote or anything I think. Everything I claim is grounded in fact, not delusion.
[/quote]

Don't let Kyle rile you up... he's a feisty troll.

[Bltravens]

[quote name='rastaman831226' date='07 April 2010 - 01:52 AM' timestamp='1270626760' post='387710']
This is real and you're still grasping for excuses. Pee's 3 years as DC of an elite team, his SB ring, DC of a 16-0 club, and healthy experience with the 3/4 easily trumps Gregg Mattison's resume. If you don't realize this, you're just pointlessly flapping gums. As to Mattison's grand gameplans- Cincinnati dominated TOP and the game 34:19 minutes to our 25:41- a huge disparity. Mattison had no clue as to how to keep Carson Palmer off the field. To make matters worse, with plenty of time to watch film and make adjustments to Cincinnati, Mattison allowed the Bengals to hog the ball and the game to a TOP tune of 40:00 minutes to our woeful 20:00 minutes. That's called not getting the job done. Under Mattison, we've gone from a dominate scoring defense that could turn the tide in critical games to a defense that can't hold the opposition nor get them off the field. Gregg Mattison is an old, all too conservative coach and a bad, bad match for this highly aggressive and versatile Ravens' defense. I'd go so far as to say even YOU would make a better DC.
[/quote]
While I appreciate the comment, your TOP argument is a fallacy as it directly correlates to both sides of the ball not just one. Not only did Mattison hold Cincy to 17 points, but in one of the games the defense actually scored half the points for the Ravens in the game. Mattison does have a different approach, but Rex was vastly different than Marvin, and his blitz philosophy vastly different than Nolans. Also this defense I would argue cant be as aggressive as it has been in the past because of its lack of experience and high quality ability in the secondary. Mattison was forced to give the corners help over the top, and forced to do it even more when Walker and Carr were playing 40 snaps a game. If we had C-Mac and Rolle when they could still play, then yes I would agree Mattison needs to let it air out more often. He's playing with the personnel he's got, the defenses quality players isnt close to what its been in the past. Last year we had what 2 playmakers (Ray, Reed- you cant even count Suggs last year) some would argue Ray isnt the playmaker he was. Look at the guys Rex had playing for him from 06-08 as playmakers (Scott, AD, Suggs, Lewis, Reed, C-Mac, Rolle, Reed, Pryce had 13 something sacks in 06). Now to directly compare 08 and 09. Scott, Suggs, Lewis, Reed, Rolle(compare his play to our DB play this year is night and day). I still dont even know who you want running this defense, nobody is aggressive as Rex is, and your not going to find another DC that sells out as much as him on the blitz.

Im really trying to let you have your say with this, but wanting Mattison gone is foolish at this point. He has his own opinions and schemes on coaching a defense and game planning than Rex and although not flashy, the defense was effective last season. And as you state, last year was his first year running a 3-4 defense, considering that and he finished 3rd in the league, and with another year to get to understand it better, the defense can only get stouter(unless key injuries, *knock on wood*)