Upcoming Events:  Lil Ravens Camp      Training Camp Stadium Practices      Movie Night   

Watch Training Camp LIVE Thursday at 8:30 am ET

Ravens training camp kicks off Thursday & we're bringing the action directly to you! News, analysis, giveaways and more! More info ยป
Close

Jump to content


Photo

Are the Ravens going back to a run-first team?


  • Please log in to reply
81 replies to this topic

#1 edreedfromtheu

edreedfromtheu

    Pro Bowler

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,391 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 27 January 2014 - 09:46 PM

A year after signing Flacco to a huge contract basically stating "he is the man, he is our offensive leader.... the Ravens sign an offensive coordinator who built his offense around a stron running game using the fullback position more than most.

I have no idea what the Ravens are doing.  I'm not sure they know what they want to do.  They went out and drafted a bunch of receivers for Flacco.... and now it appears they will be trying to go back to a running-first offense with Kubiak.

Ravens looked to be completely done with Leach, and now it looks like they will be keeping him around.  Those dollars take away money to help rebuild the offensive line that everyone blamed this past season.

And does anyone EVER believe a play-fake that Flacco runs?  That's kind of a big part of Kubiaks offense.  I haven't seen Flacco sell a fake that's even half believable

People immediately say "Texans had a top 5 offense 3 out of the last 5 years.... but don't look at everything else.

I guess the positive is... they got this done relatively early.  And the offense can't really go anywhere but up, right?


  • -2

#2 The Raven

The Raven

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,434 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 27 January 2014 - 09:57 PM

We're not trying to be run first or pass first or whatever. We're going to be balanced. We're going to do what works. Kubiak isn't run first. He's balanced. And just lol at run first or pass first. No good offense pigeon holes themselves as run first or pass first. Look at New England. 

 

Yeah, Flacco got a pay day. What does that have to do with our scheme? He got paid because he's a franchise QB. That doesn't mean we're not allowed to run the ball. That doesn't mean Flacco can carry a team that averages 3 yards a carry. Look at the Patriots. They have a great QB in Brady, but they lean on the ground game a lot, more than the media will have you believe. Want an example? AFCCG. Running game didn't work, and the offense fell apart.

 

Texans had the number one passing offense a few years ago, so I don't even see what the point of this thread was. If you're trying to say that running an offense that likes to establish the run and lean on it a bit makes Flacco a waste of money, well, sorry, that's just wrong. 

 

This offense is all about balance, doing what works, doing what fits the personnel, and taking advantage of what the defense gives you.


Edited by The Raven, 27 January 2014 - 09:57 PM.

  • 7

#3 rmw10

rmw10

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,263 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Womb

Posted 27 January 2014 - 10:01 PM

Harbaugh made it clear that we're not going to be the Broncos, and we're not going to be the Texans.  As said above, we're becoming more balanced.  Using the run to set up the pass and vice versa.  Kubiak has ran 2 offenses at completely different ends of the spectrum.  Despite what you saw in Houston, a stellar run game isn't his only philosophy.  He's really good at using what talent he has to the best of their abilities.


  • 2

Proud Owner/GM/Coach of the Portland Peanut Butter and Jelly Sandwiches


#4 Ravenslifer

Ravenslifer

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,197 posts

Posted 27 January 2014 - 10:37 PM

We've always tried to be a balanced offense under Harbaugh.  We couldn't do it this year because we were averaging less than 3 yards a carry.  You can't establish the run at all with numbers like that.  Between Rice and Piece I'm pretty sure we still ran the ball at least 20 times a game while passing about 38, which is pretty much in synch with most offenses these days - and I think shows our commitment to the run in spite of the fact that it was the worst rushing offense in 6 years or something like that.


Edited by Ravenslifer, 27 January 2014 - 10:45 PM.

  • 0

#5 Purple_ICE 81

Purple_ICE 81

    MVP

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,502 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Baltimore MD 21236

Posted 27 January 2014 - 10:42 PM

A year after signing Flacco to a huge contract basically stating "he is the man, he is our offensive leader.... the Ravens sign an offensive coordinator who built his offense around a stron running game using the fullback position more than most.

I have no idea what the Ravens are doing.  I'm not sure they know what they want to do.  They went out and drafted a bunch of receivers for Flacco.... and now it appears they will be trying to go back to a running-first offense with Kubiak.

Ravens looked to be completely done with Leach, and now it looks like they will be keeping him around.  Those dollars take away money to help rebuild the offensive line that everyone blamed this past season.

And does anyone EVER believe a play-fake that Flacco runs?  That's kind of a big part of Kubiaks offense.  I haven't seen Flacco sell a fake that's even half believable

People immediately say "Texans had a top 5 offense 3 out of the last 5 years.... but don't look at everything else.

I guess the positive is... they got this done relatively early.  And the offense can't really go anywhere but up, right?

Well they know how to get a lot out of the playaction...Im pretty sure Matt Schaub had a couple big years under Kubiak so thats something to look forward to. The main thing is that we have a chance to improve our offense in general specifically the running game and get a lot more out of Ray Rice who we also signed to a big contract. Flacco could still be a 4000 yard passer with a run heavy scheme its all about being more effective with the little pass attempts that you have.


  • 2

Welcome WR Steve Smith 5 time pro bowler

Career Stats: 836 receptions /// 12,200 yards /// 67 TDs

 

 

 


#6 I-70WestRaven

I-70WestRaven

    Pro Bowler

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,767 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 27 January 2014 - 10:48 PM

A run first team is nice in theory but the game has changed. Too many factors, weather, opponent, defensive schemes, etc... dictate an over all game plan that it is in flux from game to game what our offense would be better doing. That said, the mere threat of a punishing run game opens up the offense to a play action, deep threat passing attack. The multi dimensional aspects of doing both is something that will make the Raven's a threat to do either, week in and week out. Balance is sometimes over used but threat is never a bad thing, especially when it's us!!


  • 2
The Baltimore Ravens! 'Nuff said!!




#7 TXRavensFan

TXRavensFan

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 568 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:San Antonio, TX

Posted 27 January 2014 - 11:54 PM

To piggyback on what The Raven said, Schaub...Matt Schaub...led the league in passing one year and put up multiple 4,000 yard years in Kubiak's offense, something Joe has yet to do in Cam's "downfield" offense.

Not saying we're going to run the exact same offense, but given Kiniaks stated goal of building around Joe's strengths, I think the passing game will be just fine.
  • 1

Posted Image


#8 bMore Heathen

bMore Heathen

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 753 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ellicott City

Posted 28 January 2014 - 01:06 AM

And people will be biting on Flacco's play fakes if we can actually run the ball. That's what our passing game was based on the first 3 years with Cam. So Joe can defiantly thrive in that system provided we can run the ball.

And who are all theses weapons we drafted for Flacco?!? Torrey and Pitta?!? Sounds like a rant to me.
  • 4

#9 arnie_uk

arnie_uk

    Like a Boss!

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,096 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 28 January 2014 - 03:10 AM

I can see where he is coming if we were to go run first. Why sign a qb tp that contract when u could get one fpr half the price to throw 20 times a game.

But I think we won't be that run first that it will be an issue.
  • 0

#10 T3hRaven

T3hRaven

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,344 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:King's Landing

Posted 28 January 2014 - 03:23 AM

I'd expect balance.


  • 2

#11 PolishRifle

PolishRifle

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,407 posts

Posted 28 January 2014 - 03:43 AM

And people will be biting on Flacco's play fakes if we can actually run the ball. That's what our passing game was based on the first 3 years with Cam. So Joe can defiantly thrive in that system provided we can run the ball.

And who are all theses weapons we drafted for Flacco?!? Torrey and Pitta?!? Sounds like a rant to me.

 

Kubiak made it pretty clear, that he's gonna build around Flacco and that he's gonna meet with him to figure out what Joe wants to run and feels comfortable with. That sounds like an offense build around the QB to me.

Whether we run the ball more often or pass it even more, it still comes down to figuring out, what makes the QB most effective, that's just how the league works now and we already know, that you can build a SB winning team around Joe, so getting back "there" will be Kubiak's goal.

 

BTW, didn't the Pats run the ball alot last year? Didn't Moreno just have a 1000+ yards rushing season for the Broncos with more than 200 touches? Didn't the Packers feature Lacy ALOT in their offense?

I feel like the roles of Brady, Manning and Rodgers in their respective offenses are misrepresented as some kind of "one-man-show", because the media are so in love with those guys.

 

Yes, we never really got Flacco that many weapons. One of the big failures of Ozzie.


  • 2

bJNF689.jpg





#12 Guest_Mr. Nobody_*

Guest_Mr. Nobody_*
  • Guests

Posted 28 January 2014 - 04:14 AM

it will all start to form around Joe and his best mate Pitta, who now's a certainty to get signed (as I said it all along lol); we'll most probably draft a young TE and develop Juice too; a short-intermediate routes / slants WR like Matthews or Robinson is a must too; and there's a high probability we get a big bodied RB to ease the load for Rice and Pierce


  • 0

#13 Tru11

Tru11

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 554 posts

Posted 28 January 2014 - 07:46 AM

without a running game we wont be heading anywhere


  • 2

dq0w81.gif


#14 Bruce_Almty

Bruce_Almty

    Pro Bowler

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,788 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 28 January 2014 - 08:08 AM

Mr. Nobody, on 28 Jan 2014 - 04:14 AM, said:

... a big bodied RB to ease the load...

I was with you all the way until you got here. We only have 3 useable draft picks and 1 of those will go to an o-linesman.

I'd love our 1st 2 picks to be Ebert, Robinson/Matthews but Ozzie has stressed bigger middle of the line and a rangy free safety, although I think FS may be an internal upgrade (Trawick I'm thinking) or next years fill.


  • 0

#15 JoeyFlex5

JoeyFlex5

    Pro Bowler

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,987 posts

Posted 28 January 2014 - 08:41 AM

to OP.. when did they draft a bunch of receivers for flacco? 

 

i mean yea they "drafted" a few, but more than anything they were all project picks that were long shots to even make an nfl roster besides torrey. we got lucky with marlon and doss just kinda floated around for a while


  • 1

#16 Guest_Mr. Nobody_*

Guest_Mr. Nobody_*
  • Guests

Posted 28 January 2014 - 08:43 AM

I was with you all the way until you got here. We only have 3 useable draft picks and 1 of those will go to an o-linesman.

I'd love our 1st 2 picks to be Ebert, Robinson/Matthews but Ozzie has stressed bigger middle of the line and a rangy free safety, although I think FS may be an internal upgrade (Trawick I'm thinking) or next years fill.

we got our original 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 6th; then we get 3 comp picks for Kruger, Ellerbe and Williams; plus the pick from Dolphins for the McKinnie trade - surely we could spare one of these eight picks on a RB


  • 0




#17 H8R

H8R

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,135 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Baltimore

Posted 28 January 2014 - 09:02 AM

As always... the Ravens want balance... A even the best QBs in the league need a good running game. Watch the playoffs?
  • 1

#18 Bruce_Almty

Bruce_Almty

    Pro Bowler

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,788 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 28 January 2014 - 09:45 AM

Mr. Nobody, on 28 Jan 2014 - 08:43 AM, said:

we got our original 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 6th; then we get 3 comp picks for Kruger, Ellerbe and Williams; plus the pick from Dolphins for the McKinnie trade - surely we could spare one of these eight picks on a RB

Not to argue too strongly with you but I did say USEABLE picks. Players after the 4th round, where our comp picks will be, are not likely to be meaningful players. Our impact picks are round 1,2,3.


  • 0

#19 PuRock

PuRock

    Skull Grinder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 31,815 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Maryland

Posted 28 January 2014 - 10:00 AM

Honestly I don't care what we are as long as we are effective in doing so.  Run-first, heavy passing, balanced.  Just give me a team on the field that can execute and move the chains, however that may come.

 

The best way of doing this is using the strengths of your personnel.  Kubiak won't be a square peg into a round hole type of guy.  


  • 2
Posted Image

#20 Guest_Mr. Nobody_*

Guest_Mr. Nobody_*
  • Guests

Posted 28 January 2014 - 10:01 AM

Not to argue too strongly with you but I did say USEABLE picks. Players after the 4th round, where our comp picks will be, are not likely to be meaningful players. Our impact picks are round 1,2,3.

you never know, Pitta was a 4th rounder for example... and you the front office might decide to go offense heavy, they could use 1st and 2nd for WR and TE and 3rd for RB; OL can be "fixed" via FA or some shifting in current personnel (given that we sign Monroe) and defensively there's one biggie we need to address at FS, with DT/DE as a fill-in in the late rounds (again given that we sign Daryl and re-structure Sizzle)

there are so many variables at present, but my hunch is we are getting some RB in the draft at some point (Arian Foster went un-drafted and made quite an impact under Kubiak)


  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users