Baltimore Sun

[Blex64]

So I was reading the Sun's pullout about our awesome win yesterday, and was utterly disgusted.

I'm not sure if their football analysts don't like the Ravens, or if they're just plain stupid, but something's up.

According to the sun, Oher and Webb played terribly and almost cost us the game, Flacco played like a "B+" QB, and the only reason we won is because Big Ben wasn't present.

Is this normal for them? What the heck is going on? You'd think our local paper would at least support our team..

[MsMarvel73]

You'll learn, like the rest of us have, that the Sun writers are a bunch of ijits....Preston the biggest one of all.

[flynismo]

Nice, of course they mention that big ben missed the game but I suppose it slipped their minds that ed reed, foxworth and gaither weren't playing for us?Screw the sun, i am no longer buying that paper, and i'll tell anyone who'll listen to not support the paper that doesn't support us.

[theFRANCHISE]

Though I'm not local and have yet to read the online versions of the print stories you're referring to, I have two instant reactions:

1) If you don't like it, you don't necessarily have to read it.

2) Local papers [i]can[/i] be objective about things; perhaps what they're saying might have a level of validity when you look objectively at the game after a few days? Who knows. As fans, we're inclined to look at everything with blinders, as that is our right. But, at the same time, we also have to recognize that our own opinions are not 100% truth. Yeah, it was a great win for the Ravens and it was a complete team victory, but when we look closer at the game, perhaps there was much more to take away from it than just a sweet victory? Perhaps there were, indeed, some bad performances mixed in with some good ones?

[MagicianCamille]

Of course we would have lost if Big Ben had been playing, we didn't have Ed Reed. I wonder how the game would have gone if we had Gaither and Reed back and the Steelers had Big Ben. Too bad we'll never know. It's really quite pointless to discuss then, isn't it?

It's funny to me how when Polamalu was out for the Steelers every loss they suffered was "so-and-so defeated the Steelers (without Polamalu)", or if they son "Despite not having Polamalu, the Steelers pulled out the victory". However, when we're without the best safety to ever play the game, there's really no mention of it.

[flynismo]

@ Franny

I agree, I'm all about objectivity. Which is why that article is utter crap.

[Ed_Reed20]

I think their analysts were pretty fair and complimentary of the Ravens. They're all somewhat cynical so of course they were going to mention Ben's absence but I thought they graded the Ravens' performance well.

[Moderator 2]

Aaron Wilson of the Carroll County Times is the best Ravens beat writer-the Sun is good for wrapping crab shells

[theFRANCHISE]

To be fair, in regards to any possible mentions of Ben Roethlisberger's absence being used as an excuse (again, I haven't had a chance to read the articles), there is never an NFL team playing at 100%, even in Week 1. The nature of the game makes each week a crapshoot as to the health and status of each team's star players. The Ravens will likely never play the Steelers with all of their best players in for either team, so to use an injury as an excuse is a weak one.

That said, there is also a valid point to be made in the absence of said stars, as they can change the complexion of a game. However, that speaks only to possibilities and never to absolutes, as there is never a guarantee that one or two players can make a difference; note the keyphrase "[i]can[/i] change" rather than "[i]will[/i] change" in the previous statement.

[AsianRice]

I wonder they know much about football or not. Obviously, they know nothing about the Steelers except Ben Roethlisberger and of course are ignorant about the Ravens team.

[flynismo]

[quote name='Moderator 2' timestamp='1286225071' post='498347']<br />Aaron Wilson of the Carroll County Times is the best Ravens beat writer-the Sun is good for wrapping crab shells<br />[/quote]

no, the paper will probably just criticise the crab shell and claim The Roethlis Burger is better.

[flynismo]

Just go ahead and change the company name to the Pittsburgh Sun. They're dead to me.

[flynismo]

[quote name='theFRANCHISE' timestamp='1286225205' post='498355']<br />To be fair, in regards to any possible mentions of Ben Roethlisberger's absence being used as an excuse (again, I haven't had a chance to read the articles), there is never an NFL team playing at 100%, even in Week 1. The nature of the game makes each week a crapshoot as to the health and status of each team's star players. The Ravens will likely never play the Steelers with all of their best players in for either team, so to use an injury as an excuse is a weak one.<br /><br />That said, there is also a valid point to be made in the absence of said stars, as they can change the complexion of a game. However, that speaks only to possibilities and never to absolutes, as there is never a guarantee that one or two players can make a difference; note the keyphrase &quot;<i>can</i> change&quot; rather than &quot;<i>will</i> change&quot; in the previous statement.<br />[/quote]


here's the rub...

I'm sure we've all heard of bill james, but in case not, he is a renowned statitician employed by major league baseball teams. He is the einstien of statistics (sorry steelers prophet haha)

he performed many studies of the game of baseball and the impact that the great players make on the game.
The greats (when i say great, i mean guys like babe ruth and ted williams in their prime) typically were worth 3 extra wins a year.
The obvious conclusion is that individual players, even the great ones, have less of an impact on a teams success than people think.
The other obvious conclusion is how the hell does that translate into football terms? I dont know, I dont have an answer for that.
But i suspect the principle is the same. For example, pittsburgh was THAT close to going undefeated without roethlisberger, which supports james' theory. Another example is that we are 3-1 after facing three of last years top 5 defenses, despite not having reed, foxworth and gaither, which further supports james' theory.

So they can take that 'we woulda lost if roethlisberger played' comment and stick it where the SUN dont shine, cuz the sun gets no play in my house anymore.

[Blex64]

[quote name='theFRANCHISE' timestamp='1286224780' post='498338']
Though I'm not local and have yet to read the online versions of the print stories you're referring to, I have two instant reactions:

1) If you don't like it, you don't necessarily have to read it.

2) Local papers [i]can[/i] be objective about things; perhaps what they're saying might have a level of validity when you look objectively at the game after a few days? Who knows. As fans, we're inclined to look at everything with blinders, as that is our right. But, at the same time, we also have to recognize that our own opinions are not 100% truth. Yeah, it was a great win for the Ravens and it was a complete team victory, but when we look closer at the game, perhaps there was much more to take away from it than just a sweet victory? Perhaps there were, indeed, some bad performances mixed in with some good ones?
[/quote]

I certainly don't have to read it, and I won't be anymore, but that's not the point. They weren't looking at the game objectively, they were looking at the game through Pitt's eyes. Webb and Oher were some of the best players on the team yesterday. Sure, Oher had a couple penalties but he also spent the entire game holding James Harrison in check..

Their analysis wasn't objective, it was poor and clearly biased. Seriously felt like I was reading a Pittsburgh paper.

[theFRANCHISE]

[quote name='Blex64' timestamp='1286226321' post='498391']
I certainly don't have to read it, and I won't be anymore, but that's not the point. They weren't looking at the game objectively, they were looking at the game through Pitt's eyes. Webb and Oher were some of the best players on the team yesterday. Sure, Oher had a couple penalties but he also spent the entire game holding James Harrison in check..

Their analysis wasn't objective, it was poor and clearly biased. Seriously felt like I was reading a Pittsburgh paper.
[/quote]
Just to play devil's advocate and in maintaining my neutral stance on The Sun, what was it about the analysis that made it read as if it was a Pro-Steelers paper? Was it just because it didn't give enough credit to the Ravens in your view? Or was it because it gave too much credit to the Steelers?

In regards to the other comment made about Bill James and his theory, my only issue is that anything applied to baseball does not necessarily carry over into football. Sabermetrics, while an objective analysis, is not something that is easily applied to other sports or mediums beyond baseball. James' theory is not sabermetrics in its intended form, but it [i]does[/i] have a basis within the field.

[Blex64]

[quote name='theFRANCHISE' timestamp='1286226639' post='498400']
Just to play devil's advocate and in maintaining my neutral stance on The Sun, what was it about the analysis that made it read as if it was a Pro-Steelers paper? Was it just because it didn't give enough credit to the Ravens in your view? Or was it because it gave too much credit to the Steelers?

In regards to the other comment made about Bill James and his theory, my only issue is that anything applied to baseball does not necessarily carry over into football. Sabermetrics, while an objective analysis, is not something that is easily applied to other sports or mediums beyond baseball. James' theory is not sabermetrics in its intended form, but it [i]does[/i] have a basis within the field.
[/quote]

Too much credit to the Steelers. Accredited the win to Steeler's mistakes and the lack of Big Ben, not to our superior play. That was kind of biased, but again, their analysis was completely off. Oher and Webb had their way with Harrison and Wallace and were called out as our worse preformers..? And then they went on to gave our O-line an A+ rating. None of it made sense, it just really annoyed me.

[Pitts200]

Don't get me wrong, Im not making an excuse for the Steelers not having Big Ben. But Ben is a top 5 qb when playing and there is a reason why qbs typically are the highest paid player on the field. They have the biggest impact on a game and you can't deny the fact that the Steelers are a different team with Ben on the field.

I don't have the stats in front of me but look at the Ravens record vs the Steelers with Ben playing and when he isn't.

Once again, this isn't an excuse for the Steelers yesterday but just an argument that a QB is pretty much the most important person on the field.

Can anyone here argue that the Colts would be the same team without Manning. (Not putting Ben on this level but just showing how important a qb is.)

Lets use Rodgers then, would the Packers be as good. How about San Diego w/o Rivers?

Now you guys talk about Reed being out and using that comparison as being the same as Ben being out.

But lets take arguably one of the best defensive players in the league (Revis) and take notice that he hasn't played in 2.5 games yet the Jets are winning and that is on a defensive team like the Jets.

It just shows that a QBs play is always going to have the highest effect on a game than at any other position. Now that doesn't guarantee a win or loss if the qb plays great or horribly but it determines the outcome the most out of any other position.

[Bltravens]

[quote name='theFRANCHISE' timestamp='1286226639' post='498400']
Just to play devil's advocate and in maintaining my neutral stance on The Sun, what was it about the analysis that made it read as if it was a Pro-Steelers paper? Was it just because it didn't give enough credit to the Ravens in your view? Or was it because it gave too much credit to the Steelers?

In regards to the other comment made about Bill James and his theory, my only issue is that anything applied to baseball does not necessarily carry over into football. Sabermetrics, while an objective analysis, is not something that is easily applied to other sports or mediums beyond baseball. James' theory is not sabermetrics in its intended form, but it [i]does[/i] have a basis within the field.
[/quote]
The only issue I had was with the secondary grade, giving them a C-...Webb was beat on two plays but his great make up speed and ball skills prevailed, but guess what, every corner gets beat and only good corners can recover from a mistake mid play, Webb did that twice. Washington was soft on 2 coverages, 9 route that he had no clue where the ball was, and a dig route that he took the outside shoulder on. That also could have been a zone coverage though (I re-watched the game but cant remember the coverage that play). Flacco deserved a "B", he was stellar for most of the afternoon but the INT he threw was pretty sloppy as was the stalled drive on the Pittsburgh 3 yard line(also due to play call).

[lowrider]

Just to throw this out there, there were two report cards. One was for the game against the steelers, one was for the first 4 games of the season. They graded Flacco and o line pretty tough for the first 4 games because, well, they deserved to be graded difficult. Flacco was wildly inconsistent the first four games, and the o line struggled to get comfortable (partly because Oher is young, and Yanda and Chester weren't used to playing in those positions).

That being said, the sun gave Flacco a B+ and the o line an A for how they played against the Steelers. Can you disagree? Flacco threw a God awful interception, and had some terrible throws in the red zone before the game winning drive. Partly was because of the play calling but partly was because Flacco throw some bad throws. B+ seemed fair. And the o line got an A so I don't think that is really unfair.

The sun gives credit when credit is due. I love the sun because personally baltimoreravens.com makes me want to vomit from how politically correct it is. The Ravens website talks about how much of a great leader 3rd string qb's and special teamers and how much potential practice stringers have. And thats why so many of these people on this forum fall in love with Troy Smith and other journeymen players. Baltimoresun shoots it straight. Sure sometimes they are too critical. But if there was a grading system on some ravens websites everyone would get an A+ for effort every game which makes me want to stab my eyes out. The sun helps me look at football from an unbiased view.

[ooo sugahhh 52]

[quote name='Pitts200' timestamp='1286235120' post='498565']
Don't get me wrong, Im not making an excuse for the Steelers not having Big Ben. But Ben is a top 5 qb when playing and there is a reason why qbs typically are the highest paid player on the field. They have the biggest impact on a game and you can't deny the fact that the Steelers are a different team with Ben on the field.

I don't have the stats in front of me but look at the Ravens record vs the Steelers with Ben playing and when he isn't.

Once again, this isn't an excuse for the Steelers yesterday but just an argument that a QB is pretty much the most important person on the field.

Can anyone here argue that the Colts would be the same team without Manning. (Not putting Ben on this level but just showing how important a qb is.)

Lets use Rodgers then, would the Packers be as good. How about San Diego w/o Rivers?

Now you guys talk about Reed being out and using that comparison as being the same as Ben being out.

But lets take arguably one of the best defensive players in the league (Revis) and take notice that he hasn't played in 2.5 games yet the Jets are winning and that is on a defensive team like the Jets.

It just shows that a QBs play is always going to have the highest effect on a game than at any other position. Now that doesn't guarantee a win or loss if the qb plays great or horribly but it determines the outcome the most out of any other position.
[/quote]
you make a good point but i dont think the comparison to the colts chargers and packers is accurate. not to say that ben isnt on their level its just that there is more to the steelers than just him. pit has a defense it can rely on to win games whereas if manning or rivers go down, their defenses cannot carry them. the loss of troy last year was worse for you guys in my opinion

[Pitts200]

I think the lose of Troy last year was overplayed. Not saying he isn't a VERY important cog in the Steelers Defense. But just like the Ravens, the Steelers have been an up and down franchise the past 10 years.

Meaning, yes we have 2 superbowl titles but its been back and forth of , Playoffs/no playoffs/playoffs/no playoffs.

That should sound familiar to you Raven fans being that you guys are always competitive like the Steelers but haven't really had back to back playoff seasons like the Steelers these past few seasons.

My point being, we won the Superbowl 2 years ago, it seems to be a habit that after going to the playoffs/winning the superbowl, the Steelers seem to play poorly the next season and that just so happened to coincide with Troys injury.

I truly don't believe last seasons defensive meltdown was just from Troy being out. People need to remember that the offense had NO running game last year and wasn't able to run out the clock at the end of games to keep the other teams offense off the field. Typical Steeler football to end a game isn't with the defense on the field but with the offense taking a final kneel after running the last 6 minutes off the clock with a power running game.

[flynismo]

I honestly dont believe that any one man makes a team, even a quarteback. Tom Brady gets hurt, and some Cassell guy with a total of 22 professional passes under his belt steps in his place and the Pats still go 11-5. Ben Roethlisberger is out the first month, the Steelers still go 3-1 in his absence despite playing some very tough opponents, and were 1:08 away from going undefeated in that stretch. Same with other players. Ed Reed, arguably the best safety to ever play, out for the month and we are 3-1 without him, Christ, our 2008 Ravens team had 18 players on the IR, including four defensive starters if I recall correctly, and that didn't stop us from going to the AFCCG. Could go on and on...

[GoRavensNTerps]

i always liked the carroll county times a lot better than the sun. We haven't had a sun subscription for years now. Such a horrible paper that will fold sooner or later.

[Ravens549]

[quote name='MagicianCamille' timestamp='1286224838' post='498341']
It's funny to me how when Polamalu was out for the Steelers every loss they suffered was "so-and-so defeated the Steelers (without Polamalu)", or if they son "Despite not having Polamalu, the Steelers pulled out the victory". However, when we're without the best safety to ever play the game, there's really no mention of it.
[/quote]
Here-Here!

[Kwothdaraven]

How anyone can say webb played poor is beyond me.

[Ed_Reed20]

I have yet to see a single article on The Sun's website that talks about Webb or Oher playing poorly. OP, can you provide a link.

[BloodRaven]

I'd like to see the link too.

Oher played average IMHO, he gets beat too often.

[1/28/01]

[quote name='BloodRaven' timestamp='1286246006' post='498797']
I'd like to see the link too.

Oher played average IMHO, he gets beat too often.
[/quote]
Considering who he was up against, I would have to disagree.

[Kwothdaraven]

Average? Oher dominated one of the leagues top pass rushers in jerome harrison

[H8R]

Franny leveraging for a spot on that worthless rag.....? : P Call it what it is, CRAP. I have zero problems calling things what they are but they lend far too much opinion and speculation with little to zero quality data in which they try to sell it as fact.