Jim Caldwell / Offense Week 16 Thread

[Militant X 1]

[quote name='Ravensfan23' timestamp='1356364173' post='1277832']
This is what frustrated me about Cam. I really like his offensive mind, but when people say he never took input, this is where i think it showed the most. [u][i][b]There were so many games where lesser DB did great against the Ravens WRs, only because the offense didn't gameplan to beat them.[/b][/i][/u]

It doesn't matter if it's a DB or a LB, [u][i][b]every defense has a weakness, you just have to be good enough to attack it. [/b][/i][/u]Will you always have success? No but it gives you a better chance.

It's like Cam took the approach of, no matter who or what, the offense will work against any defense.

[u][i][b]The Ravens did a great job of attacking Webster and forcing the Giants to adjust. Once they Adjusted, Caldwell did what a good OC needs to do. Make his own adjustments. No matter where Webster lined up, Joe found him. Then when they gave him help, it opened up other areas of the field.[/b][/i][/u]

I believe Cam's downfall was lack of game plan. His play calling suffered, because defenses adjusted and Cam rarely did. Caldwell must continue to be good at this. I think him being in the booth helps even more. It's easier to make quicker adjustments when you can see the entire field.
[/quote]

exactly! i absolutely loved how Caldwell made sure that Joe "attacked" the weak link in the giants defense no matter which receiver he was covering. Webster was clearly....the weak link and the Ravens pissed on him all night long. i love it! lol!

~Mili

[Ravensfan23]

[quote name='Militant X 1' timestamp='1356367720' post='1277913']


exactly! i absolutely loved how Caldwell made sure that Joe "attacked" the weak link in the giants defense no matter which receiver he was covering. Webster was clearly....the weak link and the Ravens pissed on him all night long. i love it! lol!

~Mili
[/quote]

Yea, I think back to the 2nd Browns game and it seemed like every 3rd down throw, was attempted on Joe Haden. I understand Haden was just returning from injury and you don't wanna backdown from anyone, but once Haden showed he was holding up, why keep testing him only to fail?

[Cville-Raven]

I actually saw some 5 wide sets and it was beutiful.

[CalvinSmoke]

Caldwell called a good game last week and a good game this week. He knows that he's doing. I hope the g
Tam can keep rolling. Our defense showed us what they can do when the offense keeps them off the field

[TonyTone1192]

We looked great (offensive line showed played BETTER, still not great though). Joe looked a lot more comfy in the pocket, was A LOT more accurate yesterday than in the previous 3 games. And our receivers/tightends/backs made plays!

Great coaching & excellent execution.

Let's keep it up!!

[Sizzlebshu]

[quote name='Militant X 1' timestamp='1356361985' post='1277781']
i thought it was a brilliant game plan for THIS game. obviously our coaches looked for and found the "weak-link" in the giants defense....Webster! and they attacked and exposed him over and over and over! i would have done the same thing! IF the defense has a problem with defending something....expose it early and often UNTIL they prove that they can stop it. sure, this strategy will vary from team to team but against the giants? it worked to perfection!

~Mili
[/quote]

Like I said I liked the situational strategy it was good, but it makes me question how good the offense really is. I mean was this a sign of things to come or was this just another game like Oakland, ie a bad defense getting abused. If its the latter than this means nothing. If we took advantage of the giants in a variety of ways, I wouldn't have any complaints but since it was almost solely webster it leaves a question mark. Like I said it was good game planning for this game and it worked but, I would have liked to see Caldwell call routes that worked no matter the situation ie give torrey slant that neither hosely or webster can defend or send the tight end up the seam when a receiver is doubled etc... Thats my complaint. I have no complaint about the strategy just what it may mean/imply

[nextgen_RavensFan]

[quote name='The Raven' timestamp='1356319653' post='1277214']
I also want to bring up how well balanced the offense was today. Wasn't too pass heavy. Wasn't too run heavy. Perfect balance, in my opinion.
[/quote]

This was the one game that we did not quit on the run game and it showed. OMG to Pierce, the guy is a beast. It looks like he loves contact and just runs through leg tackles. We might just have the best tandem in the entire NFL. We are so lucky as fans to have Ozzie and company. Pierce was a great pick up and HUGE if Rice and "god forbid" Rice get should hurt i think Pierce can and will be a feature running back somewhere. The guy is as solid as they come and shows zero fear.

[Ravensfan23]

[quote name='Sizzlebshu' timestamp='1356381205' post='1278190']


Like I said I liked the situational strategy it was good, but it makes me question how good the offense really is. I mean was this a sign of things to come or was this just another game like Oakland, ie a bad defense getting abused. If its the latter than this means nothing. If we took advantage of the giants in a variety of ways, I wouldn't have any complaints but since it was almost solely webster it leaves a question mark. Like I said it was good game planning for this game and it worked but, I would have liked to see Caldwell call routes that worked no matter the situation ie give torrey slant that neither hosely or webster can defend or send the tight end up the seam when a receiver is doubled etc... Thats my complaint. I have no complaint about the strategy just what it may mean/imply
[/quote]

If that is your compliant then you have nothing to complian about, because that is exactly what caldwell did. Not only did he do it this game but he did it against the Broncos as well.

Caldwell used Dickson and Pitta down the seam a lot, just because a lot of passes weren't completed to them doesn't mean it wasn't successful. It wasn't a seam route, but there was one play on the 3rd drive when Flacco almost threw the deep Int. Pitta ran a deep square In and it was wide open for a huge gain, but Joe just didn't see it, it liked the deep shot more.

One of the reason the seam routes where open much was the Giants refused to give their DBs help on the outside. The seam routes held coverage in the middle of the field and made it possible to keep their DBs on that island.

There were a good amount of slants as well. However the game plan didn't call for a heavy dose of slants. Why go away from what was working? I kno you say it was a good gameplan for this game, but that's all you can focus on.

You can't say, oh i would have loved to see routes that work on any defense, because every defense is played different. That's why it's called "gameplan". What you suggest is similar to what got the Ravens in trouble with Cam, we should run these certain routes every game regardless of coverage.

I understand what you are saying, every team won't have a weak link like Webster, but each team does have a weak link. Can Caldwell and Joe consistently take advantage of it is the question. This game has no way of saying they will or won't

[Inqui]

[quote name='Sizzlebshu' timestamp='1356381205' post='1278190']
Like I said I liked the situational strategy it was good, but it makes me question how good the offense really is. I mean was this a sign of things to come or was this just another game like Oakland, ie a bad defense getting abused. If its the latter than this means nothing. If we took advantage of the giants in a variety of ways, I wouldn't have any complaints but since it was almost solely webster it leaves a question mark. Like I said it was good game planning for this game and it worked but, I would have liked to see Caldwell call routes that worked no matter the situation ie give torrey slant that neither hosely or webster can defend or send the tight end up the seam when a receiver is doubled etc... Thats my complaint. I have no complaint about the strategy just what it may mean/imply
[/quote]
I agree with this. From the perspective of the game, you can't really expect Caldwell to [b]not[/b] take advantage of (one of) the Giants' big weaknesses. But although it worked, it's not necessarily that much to get excited about either.

"Complaint" may have been a bad choice of words, but I think it's a perfectly fair reason to hold off leaping in the air and proclaiming this team finally becoming the offensive powerhouse we all know it can be.

[Militant X 1]

[quote name='Sizzlebshu' timestamp='1356381205' post='1278190']
Like I said I liked the situational strategy it was good, but it makes me question how good the offense really is. I mean was this a sign of things to come or was this just another game like Oakland, ie a bad defense getting abused. If its the latter than this means nothing. If we took advantage of the giants in a variety of ways, I wouldn't have any complaints but since it was almost solely webster it leaves a question mark. Like I said it was good game planning for this game and it worked but, [u][b]I would have liked to see Caldwell call routes that worked no matter the situation[/b][/u] ie give torrey slant that neither hosely or webster can defend or send the tight end up the seam when a receiver is doubled etc... Thats my complaint. I have no complaint about the strategy just what it may mean/imply
[/quote]

huh? you need to call the right plays for the right situation brah! lol! imo, Hosley, who is another one of my VT boys (i.e. Tyrod Taylor, and the giants David Wilson etc.) is a better defender than Webster. that is why this game plan worked to perfection by attacking Webster. i believe that Caldwell did throw in a few wrinkles this game. both Rice and Pierce got significant touches. Jacoby was even targeted. Boldin was working cats across the middle, Torrey was torching deep and even Dickson and Pitta got into the action some. but the main thing was to abuse the giants secondary's weakest link...Webster.....no matter who he was covering. then it opened up that route to Rice underneath for a TD. this is obviously something that Cam didn't do. when belichick does this type of game planning against his opponents defenses for Brady from week to week he gets praised!

~Mili

[ravensdfan]

[quote name='Ravensfan23' timestamp='1356387975' post='1278298']

You can't say, oh i would have loved to see routes that work on any defense, because every defense is played different. That's why it's called "gameplan". What you suggest is similar to what got the Ravens in trouble with Cam, we should run these certain routes every game regardless of coverage.

I understand what you are saying, every team won't have a weak link like Webster, but each team does have a weak link. [b]Can Caldwell and Joe consistently take advantage of it is the question. [/b]This game has no way of saying they will or won't
[/quote]

You're right. Every team's weakness is different and every weakness has a different level of weakness. If that makes sense lol
What this game showed me though, is that Caldwell understands finding the weakness in your opponent rather than stubbornly sticking to whatever it is you've chosen to be your focus that week. This game Flacco passed, Rice got his touches, and Rice/Pierce also utilized the running game. I hope this does signal a continuing trend.

[Ravensfan23]

[quote name='Inqui' timestamp='1356388471' post='1278303']

I agree with this. From the perspective of the game, you can't really expect Caldwell to [b]not[/b] take advantage of (one of) the Giants' big weaknesses. But although it worked, it's not necessarily that much to get excited about either.

"Complaint" may have been a bad choice of words, but I think it's a perfectly fair reason to hold off leaping in the air and proclaiming this team finally becoming the offensive powerhouse we all know it can be.
[/quote]

Howw could you procliam that off a couple games anyway? Thats the trap fans fall into all the time. Oh the offense showed flashes of greatness, so they are great. Or they struggled for a few games and they'll never win again.

That's crazy. I can't tell you what to be excited about, but for me, the fact that we actually attacked defenses weakness at all is an exciting sign for me, because we didn't do it with Cam, which is why I feel we we're so inconsistent. Do that mean this offense is ready to lead this team to the Super Bowl, who's to say after one performance.

However what you can say is that, if the Ravens can continue to gameplan to attack defenses, instead just running their offense, they'll have more success. Will they always have great games not, but they shouldn't be as inconsistent. The Giants wasn't the first team the Ravens have played that had a weakness, however this was the first time in a while that I can remember the offense consistently attacking that weakness and forcing a team adjust.

Again, does it say that the offense is back on track or that Caldwell is the man? No it's just a sign of that. If the Ravens come out and attack the Bengals weakness, whatever it may be, great. It says that this offense actually has a plan now, and with a plan you can start to form your identify. Even if they don't have a great showing like last game, imo, it's still a encouraging sign, because at least the offense has a direction they are headed in. They wanna be a offense that attacks defensive weaknesses, executing that plan consistently is what gets the offense to that next level.

[arnie_uk]

Wasn't not attacking weaknesses and going away from what was working a criticism of cam? Then when Caldwell absolutely destroys a weakness he gets criticised for that?

Some of yous fans aren't happy unless you have something to complain about, I'd bet yous would complain about the gender of your first child.

[Sizzlebshu]

[quote name='Militant X 1' timestamp='1356388608' post='1278309']
huh? you need to call the right plays for the right situation brah! lol! imo, Hosley, who is another one of my VT boys (i.e. Tyrod Taylor, and the giants David Wilson etc.) is a better defender than Webster. that is why this game plan worked to perfection by attacking Webster. i believe that Caldwell did throw in a few wrinkles this game. both Rice and Pierce got significant touches. Jacoby was even targeted. Boldin was working cats across the middle, Torrey was torching deep and even Dickson and Pitta got into the action some. but the main thing was to abuse the giants secondary's weakest link...Webster.....no matter who he was covering. then it opened up that route to Rice underneath for a TD. this is obviously something that Cam didn't do. when belichick does this type of game planning against his opponents defenses for Brady from week to week he gets praised!

~Mili
[/quote]
I agree and said it was good situational football, but how good was the offense really when the defense's corner gave up 150+ and two tds by himself.

I'm just saying for consistency's sake that I would have liked to see us abuse more than one person on offense. The worst offenses in the lague can have a good day when going against a guy like Webster. Good offenses can abuse defenses in a variety of ways and show it even when a guy like Webster is 100% abusable 24/7 (Pats, Pack etc.... didnt care who the corner was they just execute good playcalls)

[TDubbs]

To put it mildly, I'm excited. The 'System' hasn't changed, but the play calling has. Cam Cameron ALWAYS wanted to get the quick strike score, it never failed. He was never satisfied with gaining 5,6,7 yards or more. Cam always just wanted to make Flacco throw 40+ yards for quick scores.

This Caldwell/Hostler combinational game plan is what I have been waiting for. We threw the ball into our playmakers hands and let them do their thing with their athletic abilities. Quicks passes, deep throws, runs. Everything was balanced.

15 play, 75 yard touchdown drives are what will help this team win. We sustain drives through completing positive plays. All the while killing time and keeping the defense fresh to ball out like they did. Cam Cameron prefers 3 play 80 yard drives in 45secs and that right there, is where the difference is.

-Thank you Ownership/Management!!

[izvoodoo]

Anthony Allen playing in the slot was pretty surprising.

[Militant X 1]

[quote name='Sizzlebshu' timestamp='1356394376' post='1278387']
I agree and said it was good situational football, but how good was the offense really when the defense's corner gave up 150+ and two tds by himself.

[b]I'm just saying for consistency's sake that I would have liked to see us abuse more than one person on offense.[/b] The worst offenses in the lague can have a good day when going against a guy like Webster. Good offenses can abuse defenses in a variety of ways and show it even when a guy like Webster is 100% abusable 24/7 [b](Pats, Pack etc.... didnt care who the corner was they just execute good playcalls)[/b]
[/quote]

i understand the point you're getting at. but imo, a game plan is simple....find the weakness and then exploit it! whether that is one man in the secondary, the D-line or a LB etc. study the film...see who is struggling....look at your personnel...then go out there and exploit the match ups...early and often UNTIL they make adjustments to stop it! my thing is this: what will Caldwell (now that he is the O.C.) see by watching film on the bengals and how will he attack them?

~Mili

[Malkavian Raven]

[font=trebuchet ms,helvetica,sans-serif][i]Joe looked like Johnny Moxon out there. [/i][/font]

[font=trebuchet ms,helvetica,sans-serif][i]I just hope the offense continues to roll like this next week, regardless if we play starters or not.[/i][/font]

[font=trebuchet ms,helvetica,sans-serif][i]~ Cosmic[/i][/font]

[SecretAgentMan]

[quote name='CosmicRedPanda' timestamp='1356398479' post='1278412']
[font=trebuchet ms,helvetica,sans-serif][i]Joe looked like Johnny Moxon out there. [/i][/font]
[font=trebuchet ms,helvetica,sans-serif][i]~ Cosmic[/i][/font]
[/quote]
No more making those refrences lol. Moxon only started 2 games.....

[Sizzlebshu]

[quote name='Militant X 1' timestamp='1356398389' post='1278411']
i understand the point you're getting at. but imo, a game plan is simple....find the weakness and then exploit it! whether that is one man in the secondary, the D-line or a LB etc. study the film...see who is struggling....look at your personnel...then go out there and exploit the match ups...early and often UNTIL they make adjustments to stop it! my thing is this: what will Caldwell (now that he is the O.C.) see by watching film on the bengals and how will he attack them?

~Mili
[/quote]
And what I am saying is that not everyone is going to have a liability as big as Corey Webster. What if you go against an average D that has no major flaws, but no major playmakers either. Will our offense be able to function or will it flat line since theres no major liability to take advantage of. That is the problem you seemingly imply with your offense when you 150+ yards of offense comes at the expense of one player. Like I said its good strategy by Caldwell, but I would have rather seen him use routes and schemes to get people open than just play the let's abuse Corey game.

[Malkavian Raven]

[quote name='Mr. Irrelevant' timestamp='1356398780' post='1278416']
No more making those refrences lol. Moxon only started 2 games.....
[/quote]

[font=trebuchet ms,helvetica,sans-serif][i]He started four games. Three of which were victories... one of which gave them their division title and sent to the State Championship.[/i][/font]

[font=trebuchet ms,helvetica,sans-serif][i]There was that one game though. They played real sloppy, like they'd been out all night drinking.[/i][/font]

[font=trebuchet ms,helvetica,sans-serif][i]~ Cosmic[/i][/font]
[font=trebuchet ms,helvetica,sans-serif][i]You leave Mox alone, dang you![/i][/font]

[SecretAgentMan]

[quote name='CosmicRedPanda' timestamp='1356398946' post='1278420']
[font=trebuchet ms,helvetica,sans-serif][i]You leave Mox alone, dang you![/i][/font]
[/quote]
The Jon Voight went all back crap crazy! Ah good time good times!

[Malkavian Raven]

[quote name='Mr. Irrelevant' timestamp='1356399313' post='1278425']
The Jon Voight went all back crap crazy! Ah good time good times!
[/quote]

[font=trebuchet ms,helvetica,sans-serif][i]Mox did cost them a perfect season though with that one loss. Sad. Never did get to be a starter at Brown.[/i][/font]

[font=trebuchet ms,helvetica,sans-serif][i]*chuckles*[/i][/font]

[font=trebuchet ms,helvetica,sans-serif][i]Seriously though... this team better not come out flat next week... PLEASE... don't come out flat next week.[/i][/font]

[font=trebuchet ms,helvetica,sans-serif][i]As soon as the sig image loads up, you'll see the lovely job I did on Joe's stats. [/i][/font]

[font=trebuchet ms,helvetica,sans-serif][i]~ Cosmic[/i][/font]

[Militant X 1]

[quote name='Sizzlebshu' timestamp='1356398786' post='1278417']
And what I am saying is that not everyone is going to have a liability as big as Corey Webster. [u][i][b]What if you go against an average D that has no major flaws, but no major playmakers either. Will our offense be able to function or will it flat line since theres no major liability to take advantage of. [/b][/i][/u]That is the problem you seemingly imply with your offense when you 150+ yards of offense comes at the expense of one player. Like I said its good strategy by Caldwell, but I would have rather seen him use routes and schemes to get people open than just play the let's abuse Corey game.
[/quote]

sure, Webster got [used] all night and i loved it! but, i also saw Caldwell take advantage of using Boldin over the middle (something that Cam didn't do), Pierce got a few more touches as well, we had an option to Rice, a quick slant out of the backfield to Rice for a TD, a slant over the middle to Torrey for a TD, Jacoby gets a pass to the outside for a TD that got called back, Pitta and Dickson got a touch or two and Torrey also went deep a few times. that was attacking more than just one individual. it's all about exploiting match ups and i think we did a great job of that last night.

~Mili

[SecretAgentMan]

[quote name='Militant X 1' timestamp='1356402057' post='1278442']
sure, Webster got [used] all night and i loved it! but, i also saw Caldwell take advantage of using Boldin over the middle (something that Cam didn't do), Pierce got a few more touches as well, we had an option to Rice, a quick slant out of the backfield to Rice for a TD, a slant over the middle to Torrey for a TD, Jacoby gets a pass to the outside for a TD that got called back, Pitta and Dickson got a touch or two and Torrey also went deep a few times. that was attacking more than just one individual. it's all about exploiting match ups and i think we did a great job of that last night.

~Mili
[/quote]
Cam did not use the middle period..... Basic math Cam



The shortest distance between point A to point B is a straight line..... That often means a line is going down the middle. Why did we never go down the middle? IDK, I aint Cam.... Maybe he plays against Flacco every week in Fantasy....

[Malkavian Raven]

[font=trebuchet ms,helvetica,sans-serif][i]I think we can all agree that Cam being gone has really opened up this offense. Sure, they stumbled out of the gate and this week was only one game... but it has to start somewhere, right? Now, lets put five more games like that together and get us a couple more championships to hang up before the post-season is done!![/i][/font]

[font=trebuchet ms,helvetica,sans-serif][i]~ Cosmic[/i][/font]

[Ravensfan23]

[quote name='Sizzlebshu' timestamp='1356394376' post='1278387']

I agree and said it was good situational football, but how good was the offense really when the defense's corner gave up 150+ and two tds by himself.

I'm just saying for consistency's sake that I would have liked to see us abuse more than one person on offense. The worst offenses in the lague can have a good day when going against a guy like Webster. Good offenses can abuse defenses in a variety of ways and show it even when a guy like Webster is 100% abusable 24/7 (Pats, Pack etc.... didnt care who the corner was they just execute good playcalls)
[/quote]

But thats exactly what they did. They not only abused a couple of different guys, but they abused areas off the field as well. Webster just got the worse of it.

Boldin was targeted 7 time and caught all 7 passes for 93 yards. Only one catch for 5the yards came against Webster on the first play of the game. NYG tried to matchup Antrell Rolle #26 on Boldin in the slot and Boldin abused him.

In the 2nd half, Caldwell attacked the NYG LBs, by calling a few play action passes. This made the LBs play honest instead of crashing down to defend run. Because of that slight hesitation by the LBs, the Ravens started picking up 5+ yards on running plays because the oline was able to get to the 2nd level defenders easier.

They didn't just abuse Webster, they had their way with the Giants defense.

[Inqui]

[quote name='Ravensfan23' timestamp='1356392684' post='1278362']
Howw could you procliam that off a couple games anyway? Thats the trap fans fall into all the time. Oh the offense showed flashes of greatness, so they are great. Or they struggled for a few games and they'll never win again.

That's crazy. I can't tell you what to be excited about, but for me, the fact that we actually attacked defenses weakness at all is an exciting sign for me, because we didn't do it with Cam, which is why I feel we we're so inconsistent. Do that mean this offense is ready to lead this team to the Super Bowl, who's to say after one performance.

However what you can say is that, if the Ravens can continue to gameplan to attack defenses, instead just running their offense, they'll have more success. Will they always have great games not, but they shouldn't be as inconsistent. The Giants wasn't the first team the Ravens have played that had a weakness, however this was the first time in a while that I can remember the offense consistently attacking that weakness and forcing a team adjust.

Again, does it say that the offense is back on track or that Caldwell is the man? No it's just a sign of that. If the Ravens come out and attack the Bengals weakness, whatever it may be, great. It says that this offense actually has a plan now, and with a plan you can start to form your identify. Even if they don't have a great showing like last game, imo, it's still a encouraging sign, because at least the offense has a direction they are headed in. They wanna be a offense that attacks defensive weaknesses, executing that plan consistently is what gets the offense to that next level.
[/quote]
Don't get me wrong, I don't think it's bad that Caldwell exploited a weakness like that. From his perspective, it'd be crazy if he didn't.

You're not wrong about not getting excited over two games either, but I think Sizzlebshu is saying this game should go into the "great matchup" category, and that a repeat performance might not necessarily happen again against teams without such a glaring, Webster-shaped weakness.

It's great that Caldwell called such a great game, but I do feel similarly to how I did after that first game against the Bungles: that our no-huddle offense got a nice matchup against their defense that so relied on rotations, so a good performance was more to be expected. Whether we can keep up these performances remains to be seen, but I think that's what you're saying too.

[Ravensfan23]

[quote name='Inqui' timestamp='1356420575' post='1278603']

Don't get me wrong, I don't think it's bad that Caldwell exploited a weakness like that. From his perspective, it'd be crazy if he didn't.

You're not wrong about not getting excited over two games either, but I think Sizzlebshu is saying this game should go into the "great matchup" category, and that a repeat performance might not necessarily happen again against teams without such a glaring, Webster-shaped weakness.

It's great that Caldwell called such a great game, but I do feel similarly to how I did after that first game against the Bungles: that our no-huddle offense got a nice matchup against their defense that so relied on rotations, so a good performance was more to be expected. Whether we can keep up these performances remains to be seen, but I think that's what you're saying too.
[/quote]

Oh neither you nor Sizzlebshu are wrong. We all agree it was a great matchup and would be foolish not to attack Webster. I think we all agree that this was just one game and we hope it can continue moving forward. It was a strong "gameplan" and it will be different based on the defenses we play.

My posts were just pointing out that the things Sizzlebshu said he would have felt better about the offense if he saw it, were the same exact things the Ravens did.

Caldwell and Joe didn't just locate Webster and throw at him no matter what. It was the things they did to create the matchups against Webster that was encouraging to me. Although you cannot judge the future, based off this game, you can be encouraged by the things that we're done. Just like the Broncos game, the outcome sucked, but I was encouraged by the signs I saw. I saw those same things in the NYG.

It wasn't like they just, whoever Webster is lined up against throw to him. No, Caldwell used Dickson to control the middle of the field, which forced the Safety to choose between double outside or given up big plays down the seam. Out of Boldin's 7 targets, 5 came while lined up in the slot on the same side as Webster. This either isolated Webster or Rolle, and both guys struggled in coverage. That's scheme. Something we didn't see a lot of with Cam.

Same plays as Cam, but the scheme was completely different. Again, I can't tell you guys what to get excited about, nor can I say they will never have another poor offensive performance this year. However I feel what the Ravens did scheme wise is something they'll continue to do going forward. Succcess or not

[jdynamite]

As I rewatch this game again. I was really pleased with the work over the middle of the field. A lot of pass routes I have been begging for all season, slants, drags, seams. And they were from multiple positions from the slot WR, from the Outside WR, TE, RB. I loved seeing Boldin line up out wide then running a drag all the way to the other side of the field to create " the separation that people scream for!" Also Boldin lined up in the slot and did a few seam routes down field.
Slant pass TD to Torrey smith, that Rice slant TD was beautiful because Pitta ran a quick slant which caused the LB to roll with him, then it gave Rice a little crease.

I hope Caldwell builds off this and we see some similar stuff. Because even when Cam Cameron called some slants in the Charger game the next week they were non existent.