Do The Ravens Have Enough Offense?

[RavenousBG]

I heard Steve Young last night on audibles say that he didn't think the Ravens had enough offense. Really, he was disappointed, he thinks all the pieces are in place but that the Ravens don't get enough production out of the offense. Then I spoke to some friends at work today and they didn't think that the Ravens scored enough points. I live amongst a bunch of NY Giants, NE Patriots, and NY Jets fans in NY.

My contention is that the Ravens have the most balanced team in the NFL right now. The offense can do a little of everything and they can score a moderate amount of points. On Defense they don't give up a lot of points or yards on average. That makes them more balanced than every team in the AFC. Pittsburgh is close but they don't run the ball as effectively when needed. See the Browns goal line stand. I would say the Texans but with a Rookie QB I would say the pass game has some holes in it now.

I think the Ravens have enough offense and the right defense to knock off high powered teams.

I know Steve Young sees the 49ers of his days when he looks at the Packers and I think he thinks the Ravens are underachieving with all the weapons they have at their disposal. I can understand when you rattle off the names of the skill players but the scheme is different and the play caller is Cam Cameron. But the Ravens can score and especially against the weaker defenses.

What's your take?

[Ravenslifer]

[quote name='RavenousBG' timestamp='1323479743' post='901381']
I heard Steve Young last night on audibles say that [b]he didn't think the Ravens had enough offense[/b]. Really, he was disappointed, he thinks all the pieces are in place but that the Ravens don't get enough production out of the offense. Then I spoke to some friends at work today and they didn't think that the Ravens scored enough points. I live amongst a bunch of NY Giants, NE Patriots, and NY Jets fans in NY.

My contention is that the Ravens have the most balanced team in the NFL right now. The offense can do a little of everything and they can score a moderate amount of points. On Defense they don't give up a lot of points or yards on average. That makes them more balanced than every team in the AFC. Pittsburgh is close but they don't run the ball as effectively when needed. See the Browns goal line stand. I would say the Texans but with a Rookie QB I would say the pass game has some holes in it now.

I think the Ravens have enough offense and the right defense to knock off high powered teams.

I know Steve Young sees the 49ers of his days when he looks at the Packers and I think he thinks the Ravens are underachieving with all the weapons they have at their disposal. I can understand when you rattle off the names of the skill players but the scheme is different and the play caller is Cam Cameron. But the Ravens can score and especially against the weaker defenses.

What's your take?
[/quote]

I would agree with Young to an extent. We do have all the pieces, but it's one thing to have all the pieces to a Porshe-911, and another thing altogether to know how first to assemble them correctly and then how to drive the car to achieve maximum performance (I love car analogies). We, for the most part, have everything we need for a championship team, except, IMO, a solid o-line - but even the line has come together in the last few weeks. But, for instance, the only receiver we have over 6 feet tall, besides the tight ends, is Doss, and he doesn't see the field. We have a bunch of smaller, shiftier receivers that don't make consistent deep threats, IMO, because they can't always shield out defenders like say, VJ or Malcolm Floyd; also, Boldin isn't fast. We have a stud running back and a capable back up, but they weren't being used effectively earlier in the season, like in Jacksonville or Seattle. Doss just might have the best hands on the team or possibly tied with Q, but we don't know because he doesn't play. I feel like I keep bringing up the same point over and over again, but I think all the pieces [i]are[/i] in place to utilize more of a West Coast style of offense. No matter their speed, the one thing all of our receivers excel at is making yards after the catch, and that's what West Coast is all about. It's also about keeping a QBs completion percentage high and maximizing TOP, which is what we really need given the excellence of our defense. I'd rather be a team that scores 20 points a game but gets something like a 65-35 split of the TOP battle, than a team that can score 30 points a game but is prone to lots of turnovers and three-and-outs because the deep passing game is naturally harder to pull off and results in more incompletions.

Regardless of the style of offense, it's apparent that we are an absolutely horrible red zone team. Why, because our offensive coordinator has zero imagination. Once we get inside 15 yards, all he does is run the ball. Even last year when Flacco put up 25 TDs, only 1 was from within 10 yards of the endzone, 12 were 10-20 yards out, and the other 12 were from greater than 20 yards away. Contrast that with guys like Manning, Brady, Brees, Rodgers, Rayn - all of these guys have double digit touchdown passes from at or inside the opponent's 10 yard line. When Cam gets down close, all he does is try to run the ball, and everyone knows it, which is why half the time we get stuffed and have to settle for field goals instead of touchdowns. So Cam has the parts to build and drive a 911, but either doesn't have the plans or doesn't care about the plans and wants to do it his way.

[Wallace17_OutRunMe]

The Ravens inconsistent ability on offense and like you just mentioned above their inability to score points on a consistent basis in the red zone is the one thing that will absolutely kill the Ravens if they end up playing the Packers in the Super Bowl...

[OUravensfan]

Agree about redzone inefficiency, but we are ranked 6th in the league in points scored with 24.7. That's not that bad.

Also have one of the best Net Point totals at 104.

[tsizzle95]

our offense is not going to be putting up packers like numbers. we are though very balanced with the run and the pass which makes it incredibly hard for defenses to prepare for us. But the thing that gives us the edge is our dominant defense. i have confidence that if make the sb and play say green bay or new orleans, our d will hold them to around 15-20 points which will be easy for our offense to outscore.

i do have to agree with the red zone efficiency though. if we can really become effective in the red zone, we will be a very serious contender for the lombardi

[gabefergy]

I dont think we have to have a high-powered offense as long as we can control TOP and make defensive stops. That said our offense isnt that bad, we are still averaging almost 25 points per game which is the 6th best scoring average in the league. I know its a far cry from GB, NO, NE offenses, but none of those teams have nearly the D we do. I think the Ravens are the most balanced team in the league in terms of both a strong defense and offense plus the ability to run or pass the ball effectively.

[Crabcakes&Football]

Steve Young is right in one thing. We should be getting more our of our offense with the talent there.

[Tank 92]

Young is right, but fails to mention that things are now on the upswing. If he had watched every game, he would see that we are steadily progressing towards becoming a complete Team.

I think our offense has the ability to score enough points to win any game. Yes, we have had all of the pieces, but they are just now coming together. Our O is basically a whole new squad this year and they are now starting to learn each other's tendencies and talents. Rice and Leach, Leach and the O line, Joe and the new receivers and tight ends; All new relationships that are coming together.

I like the direction we are headed on offense and think we'll be very tough for any opponent to handle the rest of the way.

[Ravenslifer]

I am rather long winded, I know, but my overall point is that, for whatever reason, we are not going to be a team that puts up 30+ points consistently. And that's okay. Rodgers may put up 35 points a game, but he HAS to because his defense gives up almost as many. Our defense is one of the best. What they need is an offense that can maintain TOP and avoid turnovers. My problem with the Air Coryell system that Cam Cameron runs is that it's designed to score [b]lots[/b] of points very quickly, and by definition does NOT emphasize TOP and is very prone to turnovers and 3-and-outs. So it bothers me that we aren't consistently scoring upwards of 30 points a game, because that means the offense is not working properly. I think that's what Steve Young is alluding to; that, and that we are abysmal in the red zone.

Or here's another car analogy: IMO, what our offense is a Honda Civic. A nice, reliable car that has little flash but lots of substance, that is never going to win a race but can travel long distances on one tank, won't break down, and most importantly, gets the job done for whatever you need - groceries, hauling the kids around, work, school, whatever. Cam Cameron, however, is behind the wheel, and somehow he's decided that he's Mario Andretti and he's driving a Bugatti Veyron (fastest commercially available car in the world, for those who don't know).

[Natty Boh]

You could make an argument that no team in the AFC has enough offense to compete with the Packers. The Patriots would probably be the closest thing in the AFC but with the worst defense...it wouldn't matter. The only other team in the NFL that has an offense comprable to the Packers is the Saints but we all know you can't have 2 NFC teams in the Super Bowl.

The Ravens have as good a chance as any other top AFC team if not better against the Packers or Saints given their defense.

[Ravenslifer]

The key to beating a team like the Packers is the same thing the Giants did to the Patriots in the 2008 Superbowl - except that I'm pretty sure that Patriots' defense was better than either this year's Patriots defense or this year's Packers defense. Maintain TOP and keep the quarterback, whether it's Rodgers or Brady, off the field. The Ravens are built to do that, and at the same time we have the passing game to score points to keep up with them, especially since we really haven't seen what this offense can do against a bottom 20 passing defense, like they both are.

[ravens rule]

I watched it last night and he was right on we have a lot of talent and should get more out of our offense. He also said Q should be dominating. In my opinion if we get the Ray Rice and the running game going in the playoffs we should be fine only weakness is redzone.

[Wallace17_OutRunMe]

[quote name='Natty Boh' timestamp='1323483287' post='901424']
You could make an argument that no team in the AFC has enough offense to compete with the Packers. The Patriots would probably be the closest thing in the AFC but with the worst defense...it wouldn't matter. The only other team in the NFL that has an offense comprable to the Packers is the Saints but we all know you can't have 2 NFC teams in the Super Bowl.

The Ravens have as good a chance as any other top AFC team if not better against the Packers or Saints given their defense.
[/quote]
The Steelers have a better offense then the Patriots. The Patriots have no outside threats and have no ability to stretch the field. Everything they throw is inside and dink and dunk. Playing like that against the Packers just wont get it done. The Steelers on the other hand have young,fast wide receivers in Wallace,Brown,and Sanders that have speed and can stretch the field play after play and can score at any moment. Plus, they have veteran receivers like Ward and Cotchery who are playmakers as well and an excellent receiving tight end in Heath Miller who is very dangerous as well. And they have a QB in Ben Roethlisberger who can get them the ball. The Steelers have a much better chance to knock off the Packers if they meet them in the Super Bowl then the Patriots do just for the reasons I mentioned above...

[Natty Boh]

[quote name='Wallace17_OutRunMe' timestamp='1323483702' post='901432']
The Steelers have a better offense then the Patriots. The Patriots have no outside threats and have no ability to stretch the field. Everything they throw is inside and dink and dunk. Playing like that against the Packers just wont get it done. The Steelers on the other hand have young,fast wide receivers in Wallace,Brown,and Sanders that have speed and can stretch the field play after play and can score at any moment. Plus, they have veteran receivers like Ward and Cotchery who are playmakers as well and an excellent receiving tight end in Heath Miller who is very dangerous as well. And they have a QB in Ben Roethlisberger who can get them the ball. The Steelers have a much better chance to knock off the Packers if they meet them in the Super Bowl then the Patriots do just for the reasons I mentioned above...
[/quote]
I don't know if that gives them a better chance but I'll agree they would have a chance. I also don't agree with the Steelers having a better offense than the Patriots. If you look at the Patriots...they are usually scoring in the 30's. They have scored over 30 points in 9 out of their 12 games this season. The Steelers have been in the 30 point range in only 3 of their now 13 games this season. It's a rough way to look at it but points are points.

[Mick0311]

The thing is this; if it comes down to a shootout with any of the high-powered offenses in the league, we can compete. We can put up a moderate amount of points, but our defense is better than all the defenses of the elite offensive teams like GB, NO, NE... We don't need to match their offensive output, since it will theoretically be lower when they play us. That is the plan of a balanced team We will have to grind out wins against those teams, so it's not going to be a blowout. When we play well, we are a tough matchup for every team in the league.

[Tank 92]

[quote name='Wallace17_OutRunMe' timestamp='1323483702' post='901432']
The Steelers have a better offense then the Patriots. The Patriots have no outside threats and have no ability to stretch the field. Everything they throw is inside and dink and dunk. Playing like that against the Packers just wont get it done. The Steelers on the other hand have young,fast wide receivers in Wallace,Brown,and Sanders that have speed and can stretch the field play after play and can score at any moment. Plus, they have veteran receivers like Ward and Cotchery who are playmakers as well and an excellent receiving tight end in Heath Miller who is very dangerous as well. And they have a QB in Ben Roethlisberger who can get them the ball. The Steelers have a much better chance to knock off the Packers if they meet them in the Super Bowl then the Patriots do just for the reasons I mentioned above...
[/quote]


Not to be unsociable, but who cares? I know I don't come here to read about the squealers.

[Tank 92]

[quote name='ravens rule' timestamp='1323483690' post='901431']
I watched it last night and he was right on we have a lot of talent and should get more out of our offense. He also said Q should be dominating.[u][i][b] In my opinion if we get the Ray Rice and the running game going in the playoffs we should be fine only weakness is redzone.[/b][/i][/u]
[/quote]


If the running game continues on the path it is on, red zone efficiency will no longer be a problem.

[Ravenslifer]

[quote name='Wallace17_OutRunMe' timestamp='1323483702' post='901432']
The Steelers have a better offense then the Patriots. The Patriots have no outside threats and have no ability to stretch the field. Everything they throw is inside and dink and dunk. Playing like that against the Packers just wont get it done. The Steelers on the other hand have young,fast wide receivers in Wallace,Brown,and Sanders that have speed and can stretch the field play after play and can score at any moment. Plus, they have veteran receivers like Ward and Cotchery who are playmakers as well and an excellent receiving tight end in Heath Miller who is very dangerous as well. And they have a QB in Ben Roethlisberger who can get them the ball. The Steelers have a much better chance to knock off the Packers if they meet them in the Super Bowl then the Patriots do just for the reasons I mentioned above...
[/quote]

Well it's all on how you define better. The Patriots are far superior to either the Ravens or the Steelers in scoring, or PPG, where the Patriots average 30 a game, the Ravens 25, and the Steelers 22. But just like you can play offensive defense, you can play defensive offense, and that's where both the Ravens and Steelers have the edge over the Patriots. Both teams are better at running the football than the Patriots, and New England allows over 100 yards rushing a game (so does Green Bay). If a team with a great defense can establish the run and keep Tom Brady or Aaron Rodgers on the bench, then yes they can win. But if you get into a shootout with either of those teams, I think the matchup favors them.

[PeRK82]

[quote name='RavenousBG' timestamp='1323479743' post='901381']
I heard Steve Young last night on audibles say that he didn't think the Ravens had enough offense. Really, he was disappointed, he thinks all the pieces are in place but that the Ravens don't get enough production out of the offense. Then I spoke to some friends at work today and they didn't think that the Ravens scored enough points. I live amongst a bunch of NY Giants, NE Patriots, and NY Jets fans in NY.

My contention is that the Ravens have the most balanced team in the NFL right now. The offense can do a little of everything and they can score a moderate amount of points. On Defense they don't give up a lot of points or yards on average. That makes them more balanced than every team in the AFC. Pittsburgh is close but they don't run the ball as effectively when needed. See the Browns goal line stand. I would say the Texans but with a Rookie QB I would say the pass game has some holes in it now.

I think the Ravens have enough offense and the right defense to knock off high powered teams.

I know Steve Young sees the 49ers of his days when he looks at the Packers and I think he thinks the Ravens are underachieving with all the weapons they have at their disposal. I can understand when you rattle off the names of the skill players but the scheme is different and the play caller is Cam Cameron. But the Ravens can score and especially against the weaker defenses.

What's your take?
[/quote]

I think we have plenty and are deep in players depth, the only problem is we arent using them. I personally think we should be passing more on these sorry teams to get used to throwing it when it comes down in the play off and we more than likely are going to have to throw it. If we get a 3 td lead against the Colts, i dont think we need to run the clock out, i say throw it and keep throwing it. Then if we are scoring on them and the game is away with say a whole 4th quarter, i say bring in T.Taylor for some exp. Because if Flacco goes down, i trust Taylor but the guy needs some more Exp.

[Wallace17_OutRunMe]

[quote name='PeRK82' timestamp='1323484601' post='901451']

I think we have plenty and are deep in players depth, the only problem is we arent using them. I personally think we should be passing more on these sorry teams to get used to throwing it when it comes down in the play off and we more than likely are going to have to throw it. If we get a 3 td lead against the Colts, i dont think we need to run the clock out, i say throw it and keep throwing it. Then if we are scoring on them and the game is away with say a whole 4th quarter, i say bring in T.Taylor for some exp. Because if Flacco goes down, i trust Taylor but the guy needs some more Exp.
[/quote]
What has Tyrod Taylor shown you and proven to you thus far in order for you to trust him if Flacco goes down?? The guy has never even played a snap I believe until last week when he came in against the Browns am I correct?? Just wondering

[Ravenslifer]

[quote name='awholelottahaloti' timestamp='1323484388' post='901446']


If the running game continues on the path it is on, red zone efficiency will no longer be a problem.
[/quote]

Well see that's my issue with Cam Cameron's offense - all he wants to do in the red zone is run, and that will kill us in the end, because teams will just load up and stop us. If he'd just let Flacco throw 2 or 3 short TD passes, then defense would have to respect both the running and passing games in the redzone. It's like what happened in the Seattle game. Rice sat on the bench, everyone in Seattle saw it, and so they didn't bother loading the box to stop the run, they just dropped back into coverage because they knew Ricky Williams wasn't going to beat them. It made life miserable for the offense until we finally got some cracks at them, but we still lost. One big run by Rice would have forced the Seahawks to honor the run and made it easier to score. Now, teams know that in the red zone we NEVER pass, we ALWAYS run. So they just load the box, which is why we get stuffed so many times. Flacco has 1 pass TD of 10 yards or less. Other quarterbacks all over the league have double-digit passing TDs from that range. I'm not saying start passing like crazy, but what I am saying is letting Flacco throw some touchdowns from short distance will force defenses to honor both the run and the pass in the red zone. Right now they KNOW we won't pass, so they just stuff the run.

[Ravenslifer]

[quote name='Wallace17_OutRunMe' timestamp='1323484937' post='901455']
What has Tyrod Taylor shown you and proven to you thus far in order for you to trust him if Flacco goes down?? The guy has never even played a snap I believe until last week when he came in against the Browns am I correct?? Just wondering
[/quote]

You know, there have been "Start Tyrod Taylor" threads since week 2, and I can't figure out for the life of me what they expect him to do that Flacco can't except run around some more.

[PeRK82]

[quote name='OUravensfan' timestamp='1323481786' post='901396']
Agree about redzone inefficiency, but we ar[b]e ranked 6th in the league in points scored with 24.7[/b]. That's not that bad.

Also have one of the best Net Point totals at 104.
[/quote]

Is that ranked 6th in TD points or FieldGoals included, because we have a ton of Fieldgoals because like everyone else myself included is saying. All we do is run the ball, how bout we try some quick screens atleast. And if we actually start throwing TD in the red zone, it will open up the running TD, thats a given.

[Ravenslifer]

I'm pretty sure that 25 PPG stat ALSO includes all of the defensive scoring that's been done.

[PeRK82]

[quote name='Wallace17_OutRunMe' timestamp='1323484937' post='901455']
What has Tyrod Taylor shown you and proven to you thus far in order for you to trust him if Flacco goes down?? The guy has never even played a snap I believe until last week when he came in against the Browns am I correct?? Just wondering
[/quote]


I know you are a Stealers fan, so i know you might be a bit slow. But i have seen enough of him in the preseason to see that the guy has skill. I said i trust him but i said he needs some EXP. He has great pocket awareness and is very mobile. Also he is pretty accurate, atleast compared to most of the starting QBs that are playing now.

[hawkprey]

[quote name='Ravenslifer' timestamp='1323485168' post='901463']
I'm pretty sure that 25 PPG stat ALSO includes all of the defensive scoring that's been done.
[/quote]
Defensive scoring counts. The Packers scored just as many TDs on defense/STs as we have.

[PeRK82]

[quote name='Ravenslifer' timestamp='1323485028' post='901458']

You know, there have been "Start Tyrod Taylor" threads since week 2, and I can't figure out for the life of me what they expect him to do that Flacco can't except run around some more.
[/quote]


No one is saying to Start Taylor, look at my post. Heck, im a Flacco Fan and think he can take us all the way to the SB and win. I said if we run up the score on the Colts then i think it would be a good idea for Taylor to come in to get some EXP because god for bid if Flacco goes down, we might be in the same boat as the TEXANS.

[Ravenslifer]

[quote name='PeRK82' timestamp='1323485447' post='901470']


No one is saying to Start Taylor, look at my post. Heck, im a Flacco Fan and think he can take us all the way to the SB and win. I said if we run up the score on the Colts then i think it would be a good idea for Taylor to come in to get some EXP because god for bid if Flacco goes down, we might be in the same boat as the TEXANS.
[/quote]

I'm not referring to you specifically. I'm just saying that in certain games, like after Jacksonville, people get on the board, blame Flacco for losing, and then say they KNOW Tyrod Taylor would have done better. I agree he does need some real game experience. But I also know is he doesn't have nearly the talent of Flacco. I watched the guy in college and I have to say that for a player with as much hype as he had in the ACC and with as much talent on offense as he had around him (especially compared to Flacco, who didn't play with a single guy that got drafted in ANY NFL draft), his numbers and accuracy didn't look too good to me. I certainly don't think he's ever going to be a starting caliber NFL quarterback, but that's my opinion based on what I watched from him. By all means, we should give Tyrod chances to see if I am wrong and he actually can play, but people keep bringing up the pre-season, and he really wasn't that impressive - he threw something like 3 picks in 3 quarters of football. I don't want to be in any kind of situation where Flacco goes down and we NEED Tyrod to play, because I think he'd fail at this point. But you're right, if we get up big early on a team, Tyrod should be put in, as should guys like LaQuan and Tandon, because we should see what they can do and maybe what they can offer us in the playoffs if we need them to go.

[Tank 92]

[quote name='Ravenslifer' timestamp='1323484971' post='901457']

Well see that's my issue with Cam Cameron's offense - all he wants to do in the red zone is run, and that will kill us in the end, because teams will just load up and stop us. If he'd just let Flacco throw 2 or 3 short TD passes, then defense would have to respect both the running and passing games in the redzone. It's like what happened in the Seattle game. Rice sat on the bench, everyone in Seattle saw it, and so they didn't bother loading the box to stop the run, they just dropped back into coverage because they knew Ricky Williams wasn't going to beat them. It made life miserable for the offense until we finally got some cracks at them, but we still lost. One big run by Rice would have forced the Seahawks to honor the run and made it easier to score. Now, teams know that in the red zone we NEVER pass, we ALWAYS run. So they just load the box, which is why we get stuffed so many times. Flacco has 1 pass TD of 10 yards or less. Other quarterbacks all over the league have double-digit passing TDs from that range. I'm not saying start passing like crazy, but what I am saying is letting Flacco throw some touchdowns from short distance will force defenses to honor both the run and the pass in the red zone. Right now they KNOW we won't pass, so they just stuff the run.
[/quote]


Yeah, I agree. And most of those red zone passes by other QBs are play action and I just think with a more dependable running attack, those passes will open up for us as well. And I'm with you on Cam, but am trying to stay positive and wish for some fairy dust to drop on his head and grant him imagination!

[hawkprey]

This is stupid. Analysts these days care WAY too much about offense. But who represented each conference in the Super Bowl last year? two good DEFENSIVE teams who could both get after the QB. Two of the top 5 defenses made the big game, not two of the top 5 offenses. So we need to stop this whole "The only teams that can beat Green Bay are the ones who can keep up with them on offense" charade. No one can keep up with the Pack on offense. You need a team with the defense that can stop them. Then you can ask the question of "Can Green Bay's defense do enough to keep up with [whoever's] defense?"