How do you feel about Juan Castillo now?

[Ravenslifer]

He's the same guy he's always been - he had a lot of success running the ball in Philly using, no surprise, the WCO, and now that he's in the same system again, you're seeing the success.  The one criticism Castillo has always gotten is that his lines expose the QB too much, but I think from what we're seeing this season that it had more to do with the styles McNabb and Vick played than the o-line play.  My issue with Castillo was that he brought a different philosophy than Moeller and Caldwell - so in the course of one offseason you had 3 new voices telling the o-line what to do - not to mention with injuries, trades, whatnot, how many different o-linemen were shuffled in and out last year.  Now you have a solid group that, for the most part, has had 2 offseasons to acclimate to each other and to the system, and is running a system that is designed to make it easier for them, not to mention it being an offensive system that Castillo is very, very familiar with.  Ergo the success.

[The Mom Gene]

Castillo only flopped when he switched to the defense in Philly...  Half of our problem in the past has been scheme...  now we are seeing how it can work.

[The Raven]

Came across an article about Castillo and the line that makes me wonder about Caldwell. Castillo said that the offensive line is really trying to be physical and punch people in the mouth this year, which would be a departure from last year's reactionary ZBS. Knowing that Flacco called out Caldwell for having too complex an offense, and now Castillo is saying that they're aim is to get off the ball and hit people this year, it makes me wonder if Caldwell had more to do with the problems than Castillo. 

 

Interesting to note that Caldwell's Lions have the 25th ranked rush offense right now. Only averaging 87 yards a game and under four yards a carry. Reminds me of our season last year. Also, Lions have a third worst 11 sacks allowed. Early in the season now, but these numbers seem to indicate that bad OL play follows Caldwell and Moeller. Lions didn't have the best line before this year, but they have regressed further after looking at the stats.

[GrimCoconut]

Came across an article about Castillo and the line that makes me wonder about Caldwell. Castillo said that the offensive line is really trying to be physical and punch people in the mouth this year, which would be a departure from last year's reactionary ZBS. Knowing that Flacco called out Caldwell for having too complex an offense, and now Castillo is saying that they're aim is to get off the ball and hit people this year, it makes me wonder if Caldwell had more to do with the problems than Castillo.

Interesting to note that Caldwell's Lions have the 25th ranked rush offense right now. Only averaging 87 yards a game and under four yards a carry. Reminds me of our season last year.

How was his Colts? I don't recall them having a good run game either. What were they ranked when he was there?

[The Raven]

How was his Colts? I don't recall them having a good run game either. What were they ranked when he was there?

 

In 2009, they had a league fewest 1294 yards and 3.5 YPC.

 

In 2010, 29th fewest yards and 3.8 YPC.

 

In 2011, 26th fewest and 4.2 YPC. 

 

So there was improvement, but fairly mediocre. That YPC average is just awful for a team that passed as much as the Colts. 

[The Raven]

So, after taking Caldwell's stats with the Colts and current stats with the Lions into account, it seems as though he was more responsible for the shaky run game than Castillo was.

[Ravenslifer]

How was his Colts? I don't recall them having a good run game either. What were they ranked when he was there?

 

They were always bottom 3rd of the league in attempts and yards under Caldwell.  Actually his best was 2011 when Peyton went out, and they finished 26th in yards but 18th in Y/A (the other years they were close to 30th in Y/A).  But I'm not sure what that really means, given they were also as bad in Dungy's final years and haven't finished top 15 in rushing yards since 2004.  Not totally absolving Caldwell of his teams' run game woes, but to be fair look at the QBs he was working with - Peyton and Stafford.  They don't exactly like to share the ball with their running backs unless it's a screen pass.

[The Raven]

They were always bottom 3rd of the league in attempts and yards under Caldwell.  Actually his best was 2011 when Peyton went out, and they finished 26th in yards but 18th in Y/A (the other years they were close to 30th in Y/A).  But I'm not sure what that really means, given they were also as bad in Dungy's final years and haven't finished top 15 in rushing yards since 2004.  Not totally absolving Caldwell of his teams' run game woes, but to be fair look at the QBs he was working with - Peyton and Stafford.  They don't exactly like to share the ball with their running backs unless it's a screen pass.

 

That explains the yardage, but not the mediocre averages. Caldwell has a history of having run games with poor averages.

[GrimCoconut]

So, after taking Caldwell's stats with the Colts and current stats with the Lions into account, it seems as though he was more responsible for the shaky run game than Castillo was.

Accidentally deleted my post but I that. I wasn't a big fan of retaining him as an offensive coordinator and felt his lack of creativity would be an issue. Seems like it certainly was. Happy to have Kubiak and Castillo.

[Ravenslifer]

That explains the yardage, but not the mediocre averages. Caldwell has a history of having run games with poor averages.

 

That's true - whatever the reason, he's never really had an effective run game, whereas Castillo has had several years with excellent ones.

[The Mom Gene]

That's true - whatever the reason, he's never really had an effective run game, whereas Castillo has had several years with excellent ones.

Ding ding ding....   and so many people were ready to hang Castillo out to dry last year....  that's why we must trust in the Great and Powerful OZzie.

[beasy2487]

Revisionist history abounds in this thread...Jim Caldwell had incredibly poor rushing attacks in Indianapolis when he was the HEAD coach, and even then he had an OC, a running backs coach, and an O-Line coach who were responsible for the output of the running game. Tony Dungy had the 31st ranked rushing attack in 2008. Do mediocre running games follow Tony Dungy? He also happened to win the Super Bowl that year. He also had the top 15 rushing attack in 2005 COMBINED with a top 5 passing offense. Was Tony Dungy some kind of offensive mastermind masquerading as a defensive innovator? No. A thousand times, no.

 

It's interesting that in the face of the prospect that Castillo might actually be worth something, rather than just accept and praise that we try to shift the blame. Only once in his career has Caldwell been directly responsible for the product of the O-line, and a confluence of events contributed to our poor rushing attack last year. Too many cooks in the  O-line room, an injury-driven talent deficit on the offensive line, a Super Bowl hangover, injuries to the RB corps, the list goes on. You can point to any of those factors before you point to the play calling--which was also definitely a problem--but all that said, to use the lens of hindsight to declare that Caldwell is some kind of harbinger of poor rushing attacks is...a stretch.

 

On the flipside, a crazy set of circumstances led to the situation we're in now with the rushing game. To name a few:

 

• The Jaguars being the latest hapless franchise to be embarrassed at the negotiating table by Ozzie Newsome to land Monroe (I highlight this not because I don't think they got fair value in the trade, but because it looks like the Jags whiffed hard on Joeckel and could desperately use some veteran leadership on that line) 
• Kubiak falling into our laps.
• Keeping Juan Castillo (in the face of tremendous adversity *cough*),
• Who in turn scouted James Hurst

And so on...but the point is that there is no singular reason why our O-line and rushing offense were historically poor last season, or why we've looked so good this season. Last year it was every possible reason, happening all at once. Thus far this year, it's been elite roster management combined with everything falling our way. Hopefully preparation continues to meet opportunity in our favor all the way through February.

[ravensdfan]

Revisionist history abounds in this thread...Jim Caldwell had incredibly poor rushing attacks in Indianapolis when he was the HEAD coach, and even then he had an OC, a running backs coach, and an O-Line coach who were responsible for the output of the running game. Tony Dungy had the 31st ranked rushing attack in 2008. Do mediocre running games follow Tony Dungy? He also happened to win the Super Bowl that year. He also had the top 15 rushing attack in 2005 COMBINED with a top 5 passing offense. Was Tony Dungy some kind of offensive mastermind masquerading as a defensive innovator? No. A thousand times, no.

 

It's interesting that in the face of the prospect that Castillo might actually be worth something, rather than just accept and praise that we try to shift the blame. Only once in his career has Caldwell been directly responsible for the product of the O-line, and a confluence of events contributed to our poor rushing attack last year. Too many cooks in the  O-line room, an injury-driven talent deficit on the offensive line, a Super Bowl hangover, injuries to the RB corps, the list goes on. You can point to any of those factors before you point to the play calling--which was also definitely a problem--but all that said, to use the lens of hindsight to declare that Caldwell is some kind of harbinger of poor rushing attacks is...a stretch.

 

On the flipside, a crazy set of circumstances led to the situation we're in now with the rushing game. To name a few:

 

• The Jaguars being the latest hapless franchise to be embarrassed at the negotiating table by Ozzie Newsome to land Monroe (I highlight this not because I don't think they got fair value in the trade, but because it looks like the Jags whiffed hard on Joeckel and could desperately use some veteran leadership on that line) 
• Kubiak falling into our laps.
• Keeping Juan Castillo (in the face of tremendous adversity *cough*),
• Who in turn scouted James Hurst

And so on...but the point is that there is no singular reason why our O-line and rushing offense were historically poor last season, or why we've looked so good this season. Last year it was every possible reason, happening all at once. Thus far this year, it's been elite roster management combined with everything falling our way. Hopefully preparation continues to meet opportunity in our favor all the way through February.

 

But, you know, how do you feel about him? I kid, I kid.

[beasy2487]

But, you know, how do you feel about him? I kid, I kid.

 

Haha. I was just confused about how the thread started off talking about how we felt about Castillo and then took this weird turn to Caldwell being the patron saint of 3rd and long lol. It wasn't even tangential it was just...strange. 

[jimjim5]

Still dont like him. He tried to fix something that wasnt broken. The players knew it but the coaching arrogance played it off like it was the players faults. It took a real offensive mind that actually knows what he is doing to make it work(zbs). Thanks Kubes, you took Harbs off the hotseat for him backing Castillos failed plan last year.

 

yep. ... im in on this.

[jaege]

I see your point, but I disagree that it's all cronyism. Nepotism comes into play a lot of times sure, but at the highest level of any industry things become much more about familiarity and trust than they are about skill. All of the people at those levels are pretty damn good at what they do or else they wouldn't even be on the short list, but when it comes to choosing this guy over that guy, if both are a philosophy fit, I go with the guy I know I can trust over the guy who might be a little more talented but is an unknown commodity every time because I'm more interested in mitigating the downside. Yes, I may end up in a situation like the Cam Cameron ordeal where I keep a guy who's not quite good enough for a little too long, but I definitely avoid situations like hiring Lane Kiffin, Dennis Allen, Greg Schiano, or Nick Saban which is MUCH more valuable to me. If I'm running the business, that's how I approach it as well.

 

 

Yes, but most of these guys don't get fired from a position and then get hired for that exact same position right away (unless you've already got a proven track record at that position).

 

When Steve Spagnuolo gets fired as a DC, he doesn't immediately get rehired as a DC somewhere in the NFL. He gets hired as a positional coach. Why? Because if you were good enough to be hired as a DC, then you're probably good enough to be hired as a secondary coach.

 

Happens every year in the NFL, as well it should. It happens all the time with coordinators who become HC, get fired, and then go back to being a coordinator.

 

The truth is... in the real world, a resume consisting of "multiple firings" wouldn't be that prohibitive at all... if the firings are from positions that are amongst the highest in the industry. If I was the CEO of three different companies, and I got fired from all of them, does that mean I should never be employed anywhere again? No, it means I just might not be a good CEO. But tons of companies would gladly hire me as some sort of an Executive... just not at the CEO level most likely.

 

 

Good points.

[jaege]

Quite frankly, what was the reason to fire him?

 

The team was winning football games consistently, and the offensive was statistically improving on almost an annual basis.

 

In the NFL, teams that are generally consistently good for a long period of time don't typically voluntarily make radical coaching changes. Most of the time, the coaching changes (and the Ravens certainly fall into this group) come from coaches who are being elevated and considered for higher-up jobs (Ryan, Pagano, etc.).

 

To put it bluntly... at the time, it was really only fans who wanted him fired. I can't tell you how many articles were written by sportswriters and analysts who not only couldn't believe that he was fired, but also didn't understand why.

Well, quite frankly, he was fired. From a consistently good team that had an offense that was statistically improving on an annual basis. A team that was consistently good for a long period of time, and yet partway through the season, they did make that "radical coaching change".

 

Hmmm.

 

Since the "fans" that wanted him fired, didn't actually do the firing, we must assume that the Ravens FO came to the same conclusion that the fans knew for a long while - that Cam was somehow a detriment to the teams success. Personally, I think that the FO were aware of the issue as long as the fans were, but cronyism or pity or misplaced hope or blind loyalty (take your choice) stopped them from making that move when they should have - two years earlier.

 

And as far as those sportswriters and analysts, they would be the same bunch that gave the Ravens almost no chance of beating the Broncos in Denver, the Patriots in New England and the 49ers in New Orleans. You'll forgive me if their observational skills leave me somewhat unimpressed.

 

The only difference between them and the rest of the fans is that the fans are not paid for their opinion. Sportswriters and analysts have no special powers, no crystal ball, no supernatural capability, to divine a teams success. Essentially, they are professional fans. Nothing more. In many cases the amateur fans are more aware of their teams strengths and weaknesses than any of the pros.

[jaege]

Still dont like him. He tried to fix something that wasnt broken. The players knew it but the coaching arrogance played it off like it was the players faults. It took a real offensive mind that actually knows what he is doing to make it work(zbs). Thanks Kubes, you took Harbs off the hotseat for him backing Castillos failed plan last year.

 

I think that was the problem that most fans had with him. Although I cannot say that things will not be better with this new system. We have to wait and see, but things look pretty good so far.

[The Mom Gene]

Revisionist history abounds in this thread...Jim Caldwell had incredibly poor rushing attacks in Indianapolis when he was the HEAD coach, and even then he had an OC, a running backs coach, and an O-Line coach who were responsible for the output of the running game. Tony Dungy had the 31st ranked rushing attack in 2008. Do mediocre running games follow Tony Dungy? He also happened to win the Super Bowl that year. He also had the top 15 rushing attack in 2005 COMBINED with a top 5 passing offense. Was Tony Dungy some kind of offensive mastermind masquerading as a defensive innovator? No. A thousand times, no.

 

It's interesting that in the face of the prospect that Castillo might actually be worth something, rather than just accept and praise that we try to shift the blame. Only once in his career has Caldwell been directly responsible for the product of the O-line, and a confluence of events contributed to our poor rushing attack last year. Too many cooks in the  O-line room, an injury-driven talent deficit on the offensive line, a Super Bowl hangover, injuries to the RB corps, the list goes on. You can point to any of those factors before you point to the play calling--which was also definitely a problem--but all that said, to use the lens of hindsight to declare that Caldwell is some kind of harbinger of poor rushing attacks is...a stretch.

 

On the flipside, a crazy set of circumstances led to the situation we're in now with the rushing game. To name a few:

 

• The Jaguars being the latest hapless franchise to be embarrassed at the negotiating table by Ozzie Newsome to land Monroe (I highlight this not because I don't think they got fair value in the trade, but because it looks like the Jags whiffed hard on Joeckel and could desperately use some veteran leadership on that line) 
• Kubiak falling into our laps.
• Keeping Juan Castillo (in the face of tremendous adversity *cough*),
• Who in turn scouted James Hurst

And so on...but the point is that there is no singular reason why our O-line and rushing offense were historically poor last season, or why we've looked so good this season. Last year it was every possible reason, happening all at once. Thus far this year, it's been elite roster management combined with everything falling our way. Hopefully preparation continues to meet opportunity in our favor all the way through February.

Not sure that we can fine "one singular" reason... or blame "one singular" person, That's True... But history is generally a good measure of what a person is capable of producing....  History has indicated that the Colts have "historically" had a bad rushing attack under Caldwell.... even under Dungy it wasn't great.  It was hard to see because of the pass-happy Manning offense.  Some teams just aren't built for that.  Like US for instance.  I think this West Coast Offense fits us great.....  We'll just have to see where it takes us.

[rmcjacket23]

Well, quite frankly, he was fired. From a consistently good team that had an offense that was statistically improving on an annual basis. A team that was consistently good for a long period of time, and yet partway through the season, they did make that "radical coaching change".

 

Hmmm.

 

Since the "fans" that wanted him fired, didn't actually do the firing, we must assume that the Ravens FO came to the same conclusion that the fans knew for a long while - that Cam was somehow a detriment to the teams success. Personally, I think that the FO were aware of the issue as long as the fans were, but cronyism or pity or misplaced hope or blind loyalty (take your choice) stopped them from making that move when they should have - two years earlier.

 

And as far as those sportswriters and analysts, they would be the same bunch that gave the Ravens almost no chance of beating the Broncos in Denver, the Patriots in New England and the 49ers in New Orleans. You'll forgive me if their observational skills leave me somewhat unimpressed.

 

The only difference between them and the rest of the fans is that the fans are not paid for their opinion. Sportswriters and analysts have no special powers, no crystal ball, no supernatural capability, to divine a teams success. Essentially, they are professional fans. Nothing more. In many cases the amateur fans are more aware of their teams strengths and weaknesses than any of the pros.

That's why I call it the Cam Cameron effect. We fired a coach ONE time in mid-season, and we went on to play a lot better. Therefore, the fan base has now 100% decided that the exact same scenario will work all the time, and that nothing bad can possibly happen from it. In short, a majority of the fanbase now believes that the solutions to ANY Ravens problem is to fire somebody, or in particular, fire a coach.

 

Offensive line suck? Fire the offensive line coach. Defense sucks (which it never has)... fire the DC. Doesn't matter if there's nobody available to do a better job, lets just make change for the sake of making change.

 

For what its worth... most fans who realized Cam Cameron sucked also realized that about 2-3 years BEFORE he was fired. If anybody thinks Harbaugh is going to make some kind of hasty decision and fire an important coach a year or two into his gig, you've got very wishful thinking. Cam Cameron basically got to suck (my opinion, not statistically accurate) for 4-5 years before the franchise moved on, and I still think it was more of a desperation move to save a team that everybody knew had SB talent but wasn't performing at that level.

[BmoreBird22]

Interesting to note that Caldwell's Lions have the 25th ranked rush offense right now. Only averaging 87 yards a game and under four yards a carry. Reminds me of our season last year. Also, Lions have a third worst 11 sacks allowed. Early in the season now, but these numbers seem to indicate that bad OL play follows Caldwell and Moeller. Lions didn't have the best line before this year, but they have regressed further after looking at the stats.

Wasn't Stafford one of the least hit and sacked quarterbacks last year? I know Bush had 4.5 YPC after looking it up. They lost Raiola, or however you spell it, but their line was really solid last year.

[The Raven]

I have a really hard time buying the petty excuse that Castillo fixed something that wasn't broken. That's a silly excuse.

 

1. The majority of the teams in the NFL run zone running plays. Why did we struggle if numerous other teams do it?

 

2. It makes the team better to be able to run with both zone and gap blocking 

[The Raven]

Wasn't Stafford one of the least hit and sacked quarterbacks last year? I know Bush had 4.5 YPC after looking it up. They lost Raiola, or however you spell it, but their line was really solid last year.

 

You're right, was thinking of the year before that. Lions did have a good line last year, and Caldwell messed it up lol

[jaege]

That's why I call it the Cam Cameron effect. We fired a coach ONE time in mid-season, and we went on to play a lot better. Therefore, the fan base has now 100% decided that the exact same scenario will work all the time, and that nothing bad can possibly happen from it. In short, a majority of the fanbase now believes that the solutions to ANY Ravens problem is to fire somebody, or in particular, fire a coach.

 

Offensive line suck? Fire the offensive line coach. Defense sucks (which it never has)... fire the DC. Doesn't matter if there's nobody available to do a better job, lets just make change for the sake of making change.

 

For what its worth... most fans who realized Cam Cameron sucked also realized that about 2-3 years BEFORE he was fired. If anybody thinks Harbaugh is going to make some kind of hasty decision and fire an important coach a year or two into his gig, you've got very wishful thinking. Cam Cameron basically got to suck (my opinion, not statistically accurate) for 4-5 years before the franchise moved on, and I still think it was more of a desperation move to save a team that everybody knew had SB talent but wasn't performing at that level.

 

 

Cam Cameron effect. Lol.

 

Okay. I see that point. I do not agree that Castillo should be fired, or any other coach for that matter. Besides the "fixing something that wasn't broken" he didn't do anything that was really detrimental to the team. In the long run, as someone else stated, it is better that the team be able to use both methods of blocking anyway. And lets face it, the Ravens were going to be mediocre last season regardless. We just lost too many key players.

 

Cam, on the other hand was holding the team back. Not to say he did not help the team over his tenure. I just think he over stayed his capabilities to help. He should have been released a year or two prior IMHO.

[BmoreBird22]

You're right, was thinking of the year before that. Lions did have a good line last year, and Caldwell messed it up lol

I thought Riola retired, but he didn't. Caldwell and Moeller just botched that one

[BmoreBird22]

Cam Cameron effect. Lol.

 

Okay. I see that point. I do not agree that Castillo should be fired, or any other coach for that matter. Besides the "fixing something that wasn't broken" he didn't do anything that was really detrimental to the team. In the long run, as someone else stated, it is better that the team be able to use both methods of blocking anyway. And lets face it, the Ravens were going to be mediocre last season regardless. We just lost too many key players.

 

Cam, on the other hand was holding the team back. Not to say he did not help the team over his tenure. I just think he over stayed his capabilities to help. He should have been released a year or two prior IMHO.

I just cannot buy into this idea that he tried to fix something that wasn't broken and that's the problem. No, the problem was an injured KO/Shipley, Bryant McKinnie/a new LT with no chemistry, Matt Birk retiring, a hurt Yanda, and Oher, who might as well have just checked out last year.

[jaege]

I have a really hard time buying the petty excuse that Castillo fixed something that wasn't broken. That's a silly excuse.

 

1. The majority of the teams in the NFL run zone running plays. Why did we struggle if numerous other teams do it?

 

2. It makes the team better to be able to run with both zone and gap blocking 

 

Agreed. The team does need to be able to do both. But I think fans were peeved that he was forcing the team to use a system that they were not yet comfortable with and frankly could not do very well yet. Maybe they needed to practice more. Or maybe his teaching technique was not working. Either way, it led to Joe getting sacked quite a lot.

[rmcjacket23]

I just cannot buy into this idea that he tried to fix something that wasn't broken and that's the problem. No, the problem was an injured KO/Shipley, Bryant McKinnie/a new LT with no chemistry, Matt Birk retiring, a hurt Yanda, and Oher, who might as well have just checked out last year.

The reason fans think this is because of how dominant the offensive line was in the 2012 postseason. They completely ignore the fact that the offensive line wasn't dominant at all throughout the 16 games before that. They were pretty mediocre, maybe slightly above average at best.

 

I completely support the idea of adaptation and growth, particularly in the NFL. The "if it ain't broke don't fix it" theory is nice and cute and all, but in modern day society, its antiquated at best. By adopting that strategy, all you'll find is that eventually it will become "broke", everybody else already knew it was going to break, and you're the one playing catchup to everybody else in the league.

[jaege]

I just cannot buy into this idea that he tried to fix something that wasn't broken and that's the problem. No, the problem was an injured KO/Shipley, Bryant McKinnie/a new LT with no chemistry, Matt Birk retiring, a hurt Yanda, and Oher, who might as well have just checked out last year.

 

Admittedly there were numerous problems. So it didn't seem like a good idea to force the line to run a system that they were not yet comfortable using.

[BmoreBird22]

The reason fans think this is because of how dominant the offensive line was in the 2012 postseason. They completely ignore the fact that the offensive line wasn't dominant at all throughout the 16 games before that. They were pretty mediocre, maybe slightly above average at best.

 

I completely support the idea of adaptation and growth, particularly in the NFL. The "if it ain't broke don't fix it" theory is nice and cute and all, but in modern day society, its antiquated at best. By adopting that strategy, all you'll find is that eventually it will become "broke", everybody else already knew it was going to break, and you're the one playing catchup to everybody else in the league.

I don't even think the 2012 playoff was extremely dominant. Joe just was more mobile and willing to move inside and outside of the pocket. The offensive line was good, no doubt, but it also had a lot to do with Joe's sudden found movement.

This is an adapt and evolve league. No one stands pat and just settles for what they have. No, they go out and try to improve as best they can