100 Yard Rusher

[Marc2k6]

After the Ravens vs Giants game we are still on a 28 or 29 game streak without allowing a single 100 yard rusher. For as long as we have been on this streak I have always wondered why this is a big deal? How many teams use more than one RB? Now if the combined total rushing yards is 100 what does it really matter? Most team use a 2 RB system any way. Does any one have the stats on 2 RB's or more vs the Ravens as far as total rushing yards?

[Cabinny_X]

[quote name='Marc2k6' post='92305' date='Nov 17 2008, 10:59 PM']After the Ravens vs Giants game we are still on a 28 or 29 game streak without allowing a single 100 yard rusher. For as long as we have been on this streak I have always wondered why this is a big deal? How many teams use more than one RB? Now if the combined total rushing yards is 100 what does it really matter? Most team use a 2 RB system any way. Does any one have the stats on 2 RB's or more vs the Ravens as far as total rushing yards? [/quote]

Not so many teams do it that do not have one back that tends to more yardage though, what the Ravens just Faced was the best rushing team in the NFL and it showed. I for one am not going to dwell on this game, you face the reigning champs and you get chumped more often then not that is just how it goes. I do agree that is kind of a stupid and misleading stat and by all accounts we should start from scratch and say we had a 100yd rusher from this last game, mad props to the G men and I hope we get a chance to face them again this year

[Sizzle]

Its just a media thing. One of those punch lines to make it look impossible to run on us.

[Black&Purple]

It actually is impressive, it means not one single RB by themselves have broke 100 yds against this team for the past 29 games IN A ROW. Most teams use 1 back primarily more than multiple backs to get a lot of yardage. McGahee has had a few 100 yd games this season, and every top RB in this league has had many already this season. It's very normal for a premier back to get 100 yards in one game. Had Jacobs not been taken out, I think he would have broken our streak.

[march4superbowl]

Jacobs would have gotten 100 if he didn't get hurt, but we did look sad against the run.

[Cabinny_X]

[quote name='Sizzle' post='92313' date='Nov 17 2008, 11:39 PM']Its just a media thing. One of those punch lines to make it look impossible to run on us. [/quote]

Which it really has been for everyone but the G men, I really thought that if one team was going to run on us this was it. Brandon Jacobs is in my mind one of the most underrated RBs ever, he finally does not have Tiki Barber over him and is showing why he probably should have been used more then him in the first place. And Bradshaw is a starter on every other team in the league, the fact that the G men are so deep at RB is what makes them capable of doing what they did to our D. I have nothing but respect for that organization and its fans, they could very well be the best team in the league even over Tenn simply due to the balance they present overall.

[theFRANCHISE]

The streak only has significance because of its relation to football logic, particularly as it relates to old-school football.

The theory is, if you shut down the run, you force the pass and force the QB into making mistakes as he faces constant pressure in the pocket.

It's somewhat appropriate that the streak has been a hallmark of this defense, since the defensive scheme matches its old-school philosophy (stop the run first, and the rest takes care of itself).

Keep in mind, though, the philosophy is old-school for a [i]reason[/i], since that mentality was inspired by Rex Ryan's dear ol' dad, Buddy. And it was in vogue when the vertical passing game was second-fiddle to the ground attack.

So other than the attitude adjustment that this defense has gradually had, maybe they need to work on changing their mindset as well? After all, we've seen what happens when your bread-and-butter doesn't work and you have nothing left to fall back on...

[72Marshall]

The streak is meaningless, Jamal Lewis ran for 98 yards within this streak and the Browns won the game. So you

[Marc2k6]

[quote name='72Marshall' post='92324' date='Nov 18 2008, 12:08 AM']The streak is meaningless, Jamal Lewis ran for 98 yards within this streak and the Browns won the game. So you

[PuRock]

I'm starting to feel sorry for us, that we need to hold onto this streak. We've caught so many lucky breaks with this streak. I wish somebody would break it just to get it over with. At times it seemed like the fans were more concerned with keeping the record going, than they did the horrible loss.

The way I see it. The Giants rushed over 200+ yards on us in total. With 2 90+yard rushers. That's pathetic. And to sit and say "our record is still intact - yay!" is pretty sad. There aren't many pure 1 man shows in the league anymore. So that also diminishes the feat.

[atcsraven]

[quote name='march4superbowl' post='92317' date='Nov 17 2008, 11:44 PM']Jacobs would have gotten 100 if he didn't get hurt, but we did look sad against the run.[/quote]
Agreed. He may have had 150+. I think Coughlin felt bad for us and showed mercy.

[BuckWilds]

[quote name='Marc2k6' post='92305' date='Nov 17 2008, 10:59 PM']After the Ravens vs Giants game we are still on a 28 or 29 game streak without allowing a single 100 yard rusher. For as long as we have been on this streak I have always wondered why this is a big deal? How many teams use more than one RB? Now if the combined total rushing yards is 100 what does it really matter? Most team use a 2 RB system any way. Does any one have the stats on 2 RB's or more vs the Ravens as far as total rushing yards? [/quote]

That stat is nothing but vanity. At the end of the day did you stop the other team from scoring? Did they go off the field smiling or did you? That's all that matters. That stat is something the ESPN nerds decided was something to care about. It should have been discarded by the players as irrelevant after the Indy game (because the defense gave up so much) and definitely after this game.

Unless there's a wildcard playoff spot that is decided by this stat, it's statnerd fodder and that's all.

[tctony]

No way. Before Sunday, this was a very impressive stat.

Somebody said most teams use 2 running backs, but thats not true. Thats a fairly new thing. Before the game, we were giving up about 66 (or whatever it was) rushing yards a game. Number one in the league, thats impressive.

Before Sunday, the last time we gave up 200 rushing yards was almost 10 years ago.

It's not a vanity stat, its a symbol of our dominant run defense. Before Larry Johnson broke it, we had a similiar streak going.

[neepo13]

[quote name='Marc2k6' post='92305' date='Nov 17 2008, 10:59 PM']After the Ravens vs Giants game we are still on a 28 or 29 game streak without allowing a single 100 yard rusher. For as long as we have been on this streak I have always wondered why this is a big deal? How many teams use more than one RB? Now if the combined total rushing yards is 100 what does it really matter? Most team use a 2 RB system any way. Does any one have the stats on 2 RB's or more vs the Ravens as far as total rushing yards? [/quote]

I couldnt agree more. Its nothing but a stupid streak that some stats maniac noticed and decided to start throwing around.It means nothing because it much easier to do it since very few teams actually use only 1 running back now.

[MKdave]

I think the streak's as good as dead now anyway. I doubt we'll be hearing of it again unless we get to 50 or something. The media won't bring it up any more because they'll have a chorus of 'but they gave up 200 yards to the Giants, so who cares?' to deal with.

It holds no ground when a team ripped us up for more than 200. What does it matter if it was one guy or 2 guys or 3 guys? They got the yards and that's all that counts.

[PuRock]

[quote name='MKdave' post='92395' date='Nov 18 2008, 02:15 PM']I think the streak's as good as dead now anyway. I doubt we'll be hearing of it again unless we get to 50 or something. The media won't bring it up any more because they'll have a chorus of 'but they gave up 200 yards to the Giants, so who cares?' to deal with.

It holds no ground when a team ripped us up for more than 200. What does it matter if it was one guy or 2 guys or 3 guys? They got the yards and that's all that counts.[/quote]

The media will still talk about it. They will forget that this game ever happen. And it will be printed out on their stat/fact sheets. Fans on here will continue to wear it as a badge of honor.

[beetus]

Just because the streak is broken doesn't mean that we aren't the top run defense. I actually give little credit to the Giants RBs and most of it to their O-Line. They were opening up holes you could drive a Mack truck through. That's why I think Emmitt Smith is terribly overrated because any RB could have put up those kind of numbers behind that Cowboys O-Line.

[MKdave]

[quote name='beetus' post='92402' date='Nov 18 2008, 07:36 PM']Just because the streak is broken doesn't mean that we aren't the top run defense.[/quote]
Not statistically.
We're 3rd I think now, behind the Steelers and the Vikings.

[T-Sizzle55]

[quote name='Ravens1990' post='92380' date='Nov 18 2008, 12:52 PM']No way. Before Sunday, this was a very impressive stat.

Somebody said most teams use 2 running backs, but thats not true. Thats a fairly new thing. Before the game, we were giving up about 66 (or whatever it was) rushing yards a game. Number one in the league, thats impressive.

Before Sunday, the last time we gave up 200 rushing yards was almost 10 years ago.

It's not a vanity stat, its a symbol of our dominant run defense. Before Larry Johnson broke it, we had a similiar streak going.[/quote]

Travis Henry actually broke it with 107 Yds. when we played Ten. LJ broke a 3 game winning streak after that.

[SteelersProphet]

[quote name='beetus' post='92402' date='Nov 18 2008, 02:36 PM']Just because the streak is broken doesn't mean that we aren't the top run defense. I actually give little credit to the Giants RBs and most of it to their O-Line. They were opening up holes you could drive a Mack truck through. That's why I think Emmitt Smith is terribly overrated because any RB could have put up those kind of numbers behind that Cowboys O-Line.[/quote]

you right but what does say you arent the top run defense is the stats.......the steelers held the giants to 83 yards in 35 attempts that my friend is the top run defense

[MJSMOOTH]

ITS ALL GOOD THE RAVENS WILL LOACK IT DOWN AND AND IN ANOTHER 11 YEARS GO BYE BYE TIL THEY GIVE UP AN ANOTHER 100 YARD GAME WATCH .I WOULD NOT BE SURPRISE IF THE RB IN OUR NEXT GAME HAS LIKE 3 FUM -30 YARD SUM THING LIKE THAT

[72Marshall]

[quote name='Marc2k6' post='92354' date='Nov 18 2008, 09:20 AM']Ok so if Jamal ran for 98, then how many yards did the other back for the Browns run for? I know it had to be more than 2, so there is 100 yards. 100 yards is 100 yards. If you give up 54 yards to one rb and 63 to the other that is 117 yards rushing right. Why does it matter if it was 1 or 2 RB's, that is my question as far as 100 yards goes and this has nothing to do with last weeks game. [/quote]

I don't know but this whole streak thing is only about a single rusher. It's by far the most irrelevant streak I've ever heard of, it's not impressive at all. Now if a single back is getting 35 carries a game and they don't break 100 then that's a little different but still irrelevant, but not giving up 100 yards to a back that's only carring the ball 15 or 20 times a game no big deal. I wonder what the Ravens win lose record is in those 28 games? I bet it's less than .500.

[72Marshall]

I figured it up, in the last 28 games the Ravens are 14-14 so much for this streak meaning anything.

[Gmen170]

[quote name='72Marshall' post='92514' date='Nov 18 2008, 07:56 PM']I figured it up, in the last 28 games the Ravens are 14-14 so much for this streak meaning anything.[/quote]

my fav run of that game was jacobs 2nd big run when he ran for about 20 yards and threw ed reed off his bad like nothing. then the next run when he ran through about 4 guys and got stoped at the 1 yard line, jacobs is just a beats. and another thing for those of you saying it was all of our OLine doing it thats true but also how many broken tackles jacobs had or how many times did ward or bradshaw mad them miss. so it was credit to both the oline and rb's. and sorry just had to say this i think ya had a total of like 47 yards with your running backs in like 20 att's. its good to know who has the best 3 headed monsters

[BuckWilds]

[quote name='STEELERS PROPHET268' post='92441' date='Nov 18 2008, 04:23 PM']you right but what does say you arent the top run defense is the stats.......the steelers held the giants to 83 yards in 35 attempts that my friend is the top run defense[/quote]

Doesn't your mullet have some place to be?

[Marc2k6]

[quote name='beetus' post='92402' date='Nov 18 2008, 02:36 PM']Just because the streak is broken doesn't mean that we aren't the top run defense. I actually give little credit to the Giants RBs and most of it to their O-Line. They were opening up holes you could drive a Mack truck through. That's why I think Emmitt Smith is terribly overrated because any RB could have put up those kind of numbers behind that Cowboys O-Line.[/quote]


The funny thing is that the streak has not been broken. None of the Giant's RB's had over 100 yards on the ground, collectively they had around 207.

[Marc2k6]

[quote name='STEELERS PROPHET268' post='92441' date='Nov 18 2008, 04:23 PM']you right but what does say you arent the top run defense is the stats.......the steelers held the giants to 83 yards in 35 attempts that my friend is the top run defense[/quote]



Seriously, why is this guy here? I know the steeler's have a website or are they still mailing letters to each other?

[CARavensFan]

[quote name='Marc2k6' post='92681' date='Nov 19 2008, 02:23 PM']Seriously, why is this guy here? I know the steeler's have a website or are they still mailing letters to each other? [/quote]
Until we put the Steelers back in their place this December the black and gold trolls will continue to make appearances because they want to remind us that they're leading the division.

[Mahatma_Sloth]

[quote name='march4superbowl' post='92317' date='Nov 17 2008, 09:44 PM']Jacobs would have gotten 100 if he didn't get hurt, but we did look sad against the run.[/quote]
we looked sad aginst three plays other than those we looked alright

[FerrariFan87]

[quote name='CARavensFan' post='92687' date='Nov 19 2008, 05:37 PM']Until we put the Steelers back in their place this December the black and gold trolls will continue to make appearances because they want to remind us that they're leading the division. [/quote]

I don't get it, really... it's not like we were pegged as some amazing team coming into this year, in fact, quite the opposite. The fact we are this close should tell you something about how well this team is being coached and the mindset of our guys. The Frowns were the sexy pick this off-season to run away with the division and now look at them.