Perhaps the Harbaugh era needs to come to an end?

[Alaska Alaska!]

Yes, in the long-run, that's the goal.

 

Do you honestly believe that the Oakland Raiders or the Jacksonville Jaguars assembled their 2014 roster with the intent of winning a SB?

 

Maybe they assembled their roster with the intent of winning a 2016-2017 SB, but not this season, and I doubt their FO is judging their overall product by wins/losses on this season alone.

 

And remember, despite what fans have become accustomed to, the NFL is still pretty cyclical. There was a time where the Jags were an exceptional football team for multiple years, and the Raiders were among the elite franchises in this league. There was also a time when the Patriots were dreadful, the Steelers were bad, and the Packers were well below average... all for long stretches of time.

But the point is, they are still acquiring talent to eventually win.  Also, wins matter to both the players AND the fans.  Unless you live in Cleveland, a lot of "fans" aren't patient with their teams.  They want results immediately.  Not saying it's fair, but it's reality. Wins matter most.

[Neal Could Block the SUN!!]

Yes, in the long-run, that's the goal.

 

Do you honestly believe that the Oakland Raiders or the Jacksonville Jaguars assembled their 2014 roster with the intent of winning a SB?

 

Maybe they assembled their roster with the intent of winning a 2016-2017 SB, but not this season, and I doubt their FO is judging their overall product by wins/losses on this season alone.

 

And remember, despite what fans have become accustomed to, the NFL is still pretty cyclical. There was a time where the Jags were an exceptional football team for multiple years, and the Raiders were among the elite franchises in this league. There was also a time when the Patriots were dreadful, the Steelers were bad, and the Packers were well below average... all for long stretches of time.

Get outta here with this mess.

You are honestly saying that a pro football club with millions invested and more to be gained by winning, shows up in week 1 and says the "hell with it, we'll just mail it in this season". I'll give you rebuilding seasons, but still with the approach to be to win as many games as possible. If the rebuilding season turns into a winning season, I promise the coaching staff, front office, and owner are not going decide to go belly up because the play offs were not part of the original plan.

Yes, the Jaguars, Raiders, Jets, and Redskins all started their seasons with play off aspirations.

[Alaska Alaska!]

Great point.  What "cycle" do you think the Ravens are in now?

The Ravens are in a similar cycle to what the Steelers were these past couple of years.  New Offensive Coordinator, just coming off perennial postseason success.  The Ravens are in a good stand.  They are truly a few players away from being the contenders we know they can be

[rmcjacket23]

Great point.  What "cycle" do you think the Ravens are in now?

I think they are still in the "upside" cycle. I think the way this team is presently assembled, its going to be hard for this team not to win at least 7-8 games in any given season. It would probably take a major injury to Flacco for that to deviate much.

 

We aren't close, in my opinion, to the Redskin-esque stretch of many 6-10 or far worse seasons.

[FastEddie]

Kind of shocked that somebody wants Harbs head because of where we are at right now....I mean we are in contention for a playoff spot with potentially a 10-6 record <--(That's over .500 record)

 

....our fans can be really radical at times. These people should try watching some of the other NFL teams around the league and listen to their fans response.

[Rinbee]

I mean really. Its not like we are the RedSkins, or the Browns, or the Raiders...

 

It's not like we are the Patriots or Broncos either. 

[rmcjacket23]

Get outta here with this mess.

You are honestly saying that a pro football club with millions invested and more to be gained by winning, shows up in week 1 and says the "hell with it, we'll just mail it in this season". I'll give you rebuilding seasons, but still with the approach to be to win as many games as possible. If the rebuilding season turns into a winning season, I promise the coaching staff, front office, and owner are not going decide to go belly up because the play offs were not part of the original plan.

Yes, the Jaguars, Raiders, Jets, and Redskins all started their seasons with play off aspirations.

You're missing the point entirely. Nobody is suggesting that teams are going out there with the intent of losing. The players certainly aren't, and the coaching staff isn't either.

 

Think of it along the lines of some NBA teams... your roster is assembled in a fashion that it is designed to make the team and franchise better in the long-run... at the expense of short-term losses.

 

Nobody, and I mean not even the biggest Raider homer, can honestly look at the roster that was assembled in the preseason this season, and say "yes, my FO has done everything they could to assemble a SB caliber team this season". Any thinking like that is incredibly naive and unreasonable. I mean look at the roster moves they made. They brought in two old, aging, veteran RBs on essentially one year deals. They drafted a rookie QB and paired him with another old, aging veteran on a short term deal to help him. Their best offensive lineman, a likely promising future LT or at least a great RT, they allowed to walk uncontested in FA despite having tons of cap space.

 

That's part of the dirty little side of this business nobody wants to talk about. The naive approach is to say that the goal of ownership is 100% to win. I promise you... the very first goal of every single NFL owner (ours included) is to make large quantities of money. Now, you can generally add to that by winning, but I guarantee an owner who is losing money isn't going to be that happy with winning, and NO owner would go into the red just to win, because its not sustainable.

 

The perfect example of this... take a look at the salary caps of some NFL teams. IF every team were 100% committed to winning a SB that season, then every single team would have the incentive to spend as much of their cap space as possible, because it maximizes the potential talent they can get and gives them a perceived better chance to win.

 

So why, then, are teams like Cleveland and Jacksonville voluntarily not spending over $20M in cap space per year? Cincinnati Bengals... undoubtedly a team that thinks its a legitimate SB contender this season right? Almost $10M in cap space that they didn't spend. A notoriously tight franchise financially with a notoriously tight owner, who has an opportunity to spend more money, add another quality player or two at least, and improve his chances to win a SB... chooose NOT to do so.

 

Why is that? I'll give you a hint... that's $10M in potential expenses that he doesn't have to pay this season, which increases his bottom line.

[Rinbee]

Kind of shocked that somebody wants Harbs head because of where we are at right now....I mean we are in contention for a playoff spot with potentially a 10-6 record <--(That's over .500 record)

 

....our fans can be really radical at times. These people should try watching some of the other NFL teams around the league and listen to their fans response.

 

Contention?  Just barely and after we actually controlled our destiny.

[ratedr]

Contention? Just barely and after we actually controlled our destiny.

Second year in a row we're on the verge of losing out in must win games.

All we had to do was beat Bortles, Keemum, and whoever the Browns trot out. Sad.

[rmcjacket23]

Second year in a row we're on the verge of losing out in must win games.

All we had to do was beat Bortles, Keemum, and whoever the Browns trot out. Sad.

Right, and maybe that's the problem... us fans are viewing it as beating bad QBs. As it turns out, and imagine this, there's actually more to a football game than just stopping a QB.

 

By most measurements, we did just fine against Bortles and Keenum. We just didn't do fine in other areas of football.

[FastEddie]

Contention?  Just barely and after we actually controlled our destiny.

 

For real? Gotta be kidding me...being on the verge of a playoff run isn't enough..lol ok.

[Neal Could Block the SUN!!]

You're missing the point entirely. Nobody is suggesting that teams are going out there with the intent of losing. The players certainly aren't, and the coaching staff isn't either.

 

Think of it along the lines of some NBA teams... your roster is assembled in a fashion that it is designed to make the team and franchise better in the long-run... at the expense of short-term losses.

 

Nobody, and I mean not even the biggest Raider homer, can honestly look at the roster that was assembled in the preseason this season, and say "yes, my FO has done everything they could to assemble a SB caliber team this season". Any thinking like that is incredibly naive and unreasonable. I mean look at the roster moves they made. They brought in two old, aging, veteran RBs on essentially one year deals. They drafted a rookie QB and paired him with another old, aging veteran on a short term deal to help him. Their best offensive lineman, a likely promising future LT or at least a great RT, they allowed to walk uncontested in FA despite having tons of cap space.

 

That's part of the dirty little side of this business nobody wants to talk about. The naive approach is to say that the goal of ownership is 100% to win. I promise you... the very first goal of every single NFL owner (ours included) is to make large quantities of money. Now, you can generally add to that by winning, but I guarantee an owner who is losing money isn't going to be that happy with winning, and NO owner would go into the red just to win, because its not sustainable.

 

The perfect example of this... take a look at the salary caps of some NFL teams. IF every team were 100% committed to winning a SB that season, then every single team would have the incentive to spend as much of their cap space as possible, because it maximizes the potential talent they can get and gives them a perceived better chance to win.

 

So why, then, are teams like Cleveland and Jacksonville voluntarily not spending over $20M in cap space per year? Cincinnati Bengals... undoubtedly a team that thinks its a legitimate SB contender this season right? Almost $10M in cap space that they didn't spend. A notoriously tight franchise financially with a notoriously tight owner, who has an opportunity to spend more money, add another quality player or two at least, and improve his chances to win a SB... chooose NOT to do so.

 

Why is that? I'll give you a hint... that's $10M in potential expenses that he doesn't have to pay this season, which increases his bottom line.

Wow- you certainly are pretentious in your naive opinion. Sad fact is your post is full of attempts to sway info to support your claim.

Let keep it simple, concerning the cap space, do you think for a minute it may be a case of unable to find a player willing to come to your team? Jags are hotly rumored to be in the midst of Khan moving to London. How many players and their families do you think are scrambling to play for them? I bet location concerns are keeping players away and having them move onto greener pastures. Raiders are another team that is a hot mess. Davis made a mess and the team is still struggling to return to their former stature. Again, crumbling stadium, playing in Oakland, and front office concerns keeping players away from the team. I'll throw Mike Wallace out their as a high dollar option that may have filled the cap space with an accepted contract to either Jags or Raiders. Wallace was available, he was looking for a team, and he demanded a high dollar contract. Neither team could sign him, why? Re-read my statements above about quality of life, team, and facilities.

Do the Jags and Raiders have front office folk like Ozzie Newsome and Dick Cass? I guess in your skewed perception of life in the business world these employees are allowed to fail at their job and maintain their position. This does not happen in the business world. You perform to the best of your abilities or you are fired. However, in your optic these same positions in the Jags and Raiders front offices are paper tigers and the owner pays them high dollar salaries to produce losing teams year after year.

Let me give you a hint- get out of here with that mess.

[rmcjacket23]

Wow- you certainly are pretentious in your naive opinion. Sad fact is your post is full of attempts to sway info to support your claim.

Let keep it simple, concerning the cap space, do you think for a minute it may be a case of unable to find a player willing to come to your team? Jags are hotly rumored to be in the midst of Khan moving to London. How many players and their families do you think are scrambling to play for them? I bet location concerns are keeping players away and having them move onto greener pastures. Raiders are another team that is a hot mess. Davis made a mess and the team is still struggling to return to their former stature. Again, crumbling stadium, playing in Oakland, and front office concerns keeping players away from the team. I'll throw Mike Wallace out their as a high dollar option that may have filled the cap space with an accepted contract to either Jags or Raiders. Wallace was available, he was looking for a team, and he demanded a high dollar contract. Neither team could sign him, why? Re-read my statements above about quality of life, team, and facilities.

Do the Jags and Raiders have front office folk like Ozzie Newsome and Dick Cass? I guess in your skewed perception of life in the business world these employees are allowed to fail at their job and maintain their position. This does not happen in the business world. You perform to the best of your abilities or you are fired. However, in your optic these same positions in the Jags and Raiders front offices are paper tigers and the owner pays them high dollar salaries to produce losing teams year after year.

Let me give you a hint- get out of here with that mess.

 

 

The old "in the business world" is a fallacy when it comes to the NFL. Why? Because the NFL doesn't run practically at all like a "real business" would.

 

What real world business do you know where all the companies in the industry are required to share revenue with each other? What real world business do you know where all the companies in the industry are allotted a specific/finite amount of money allowed to spend on employees and personnel and face stiff financial penalties for violating those rules?

What real world business do you know where employees and employers both agree to terms of a contract that dictate that a person can be terminated without cause at any time the employer chooses (you might actually be able to find a small number of incidents where this happens, but very rare)?

 

Biggest flawed logic that fans use when it comes to the NFL... "that's not how the real world of business works". That's because the NFL isn't like any other business you know. There are teams that are extremely financially successful that put a crappy product out on the field on an annual basis.

 

If NFL teams operated as you allege that they do, then every single season there should be not less than 20 HC and at least 20 GMs terminated from their job on an annual basis. Any team that doesn't perform at a level that YOU dictate should be fired. Problem is... it doesn't happen that way.

 

As far as why teams can't get certain players, generally speaking, players go to the team that's willing to pay them the most. If you're theory was correct, no player, no matter how much they are offered, would sign with Jacksonville, Oakland, Cleveland, etc. or any other team that isn't perceived as a "winning" team. But yet, Cleveland gets high priced FAs... they just generally have to pay more for them. Oakland gets high priced FAs... they just generally have to pay more for them. The only players that actually go to teams with the intent of "winning" are generally veteran players at the back end of their career, where the money isn't as relevant AND they know they won't be getting much money to begin with.

[codizzle]

It's not like we are the Patriots or Broncos either.

Broncos?

What you even talking about?

Broncos? What have the broncos done?

[Neal Could Block the SUN!!]

 

Yes sir- duped me right into the trap, aw geesh.

Trying to save some board space, apologize for not displaying your whole rant.

You may have missed the recent posting about Ray Rice, but he was suspended and then suspended indefinitely. His UNION reps were able to get this overturned due to legalities denied to the employee. Odd this sounds very much like a REAL WORLD BUSINESS.

Listen- not sure if you're looking to droll on and on and win this by excessive post count. I'm done with this discussion. Obviously, you work in a high profile NFL office and our privy to knowledge that us "naive" fans can not find in our meager daily jobs. Thanks for spewing the verse and testament of the NFL.

I am curious about on minor non-business issue of the NFL though. If the NFL is not a real business why do they operate under a 501©6 status per constraints developed by the Fed Gov and IRS? Seems rather un-necessary for an non- real -world business, would't you say? Little hint for you, read into NFL Ventures and you'll begin to understand why the teams divvy up the funds.

[AsianRice]

Broncos?

What you even talking about?

Broncos? What have the broncos done?

They laid a big egg in the Bengals stadium...

[StingerNLG]

But I think that's your problem.. you THINK the numbers show you that. You presented numbers... that's great. But you didn't actually explain anything. You said "well we only scored less than 15 twice". OK, and? Why is 15 points a relevant measurement? Why did you pick that number? Why not 20 points as a relevant measurement? Or why not 26, our current year average? Or how about 21, the current league average?

Just picking a random number like 15 (which is a low number in today's NFL) and saying "well we are consistent because we've scored under that only twice" doesn't really prove anything. Its just spinning data to support your own conclusion.

That's the thing with presenting statistics... they can be manipulated. I can look at the exact same data set you provided and provide countless examples of "inconsistent" offensive production. I did just that, by referencing the 38 vs 13 games. Playing against extremely similar defenses statistically, we scored 25 less points. That's not consistent.

Same exact logic can be applied to every single team in this league. There is no such things as a "consistent" offense or even a "consistent" team.

Whether or not the "consistency" you came up with leads to wins doesn't really matter, because there's dozens and dozens of factors (some more relevant than points scored) that lead to wins also.

I'm pretty sure I explained it all fully. It's up to you to take it in. I explained our consistency. You claimed it wasn't all offense and I corrected you and explained it fully. There are no other factors here other than the numbers.. End of sentence. You can't derive anything out of those numbers other than what they are which shows at the Ravens, and more specifically the offense, consistently score around the same amount of points every game which is in direct contradiction to the original poster I responded to.

So as it stands were going to be in an impasse here. Im calling it a day on this conversation.

[rmcjacket23]

Yes sir- duped me right into the trap, aw geesh.

Trying to save some board space, apologize for not displaying your whole rant.

You may have missed the recent posting about Ray Rice, but he was suspended and then suspended indefinitely. His UNION reps were able to get this overturned due to legalities denied to the employee. Odd this sounds very much like a REAL WORLD BUSINESS.

Listen- not sure if you're looking to droll on and on and win this by excessive post count. I'm done with this discussion. Obviously, you work in a high profile NFL office and our privy to knowledge that us "naive" fans can not find in our meager daily jobs. Thanks for spewing the verse and testament of the NFL.

I am curious about on minor non-business issue of the NFL though. If the NFL is not a real business why do they operate under a 501©6 status per constraints developed by the Fed Gov and IRS? Seems rather un-necessary for an non- real -world business, would't you say? Little hint for you, read into NFL Ventures and you'll begin to understand why the teams divvy up the funds.

1. No idea why the Ray Rice incident matters in the slightest to this conversation, but in a real world business without a Union (which most businesses don't have a union), Rice would have just simply been fired. There would be no appeal or anything of the sort. He could sue them, but we all know how that plays out anyway. The majority of businesses and employees don't have a union to hold their hand for them and bail them out of their mistakes. Its one of the main reasons why most industries in this country that have unions tend to struggle in the long run. That's not a coincidence.

 

2. Fully aware of why the NFL divides revenue... and either you don't, or you've already contradicted yourself. The "real world business" idea was proposed by you, as you incorrectly attempted to convince yourself that NFL franchises always fire management personnel who are in charge of the team that doesn't perform as expected. As I explained, all the history in the world of the NFL is against you in that regard. There would be no rational for any NFL team to retain any of its management personnel about a bad season... according to you. You said that in a business world they would be fired for that.

 

Prime example... Oakland Raiders. Reggie McKenzie is the GM. By all accounts, he's sucked as such. He's staring at three consecutive seasons at 4 wins or less. Yet, based on multiple media reports I've seen, he's entirely likely to keep his job for 2015.

 

Based on your logic, that's impossible. There's no explanation for it. He should have been fired after 2012. Yet he kept his job for 2013...and for 2014.

[rmcjacket23]

I'm pretty sure I explained it all fully. It's up to you to take it in. I explained our consistency. You claimed it wasn't all offense and I corrected you and explained it fully. There are no other factors here other than the numbers.. End of sentence. You can't derive anything out of those numbers other than what they are which shows at the Ravens, and more specifically the offense, consistently score around the same amount of points every game which is in direct contradiction to the original poster I responded to.

So as it stands were going to be in an impasse here. Im calling it a day on this conversation.

Your understanding of statistics and numbers is fundamentally flawed. I strongly suggest you consider taking a Statistics course or doing some research on the subject online.

 

Presenting a set of data and saying "well they score about the same every game" isn't using statistics... that's just making a hypothesis based on a set of data.

 

If I had more time (and I probably will later), I can literally take the exact same data you provided, change nothing about it, form a hypothesis saying "they DON'T score about the same every game", and can probably prove it through statistical analysis in an Excel spreadsheet.

 

That's why just throwing numbers out and saying "they are what they are" doesn't work.

 

I do find it convenient, however, that you ignored answering the questions that I asked you.

[HazDaGeneral]

I agree with your assessment, buy the way its called "Mouth Breathing"...LOL

 

Yes, I would like to see quality play also, even if we lose its OK. Just don't look like dog sh@t

 

I agree, but why is it coaching or lack of ability?

I think a little bit of both.....I mean when the team have a chance to set them up to take control of our their own destiny.....they come out and play a game like it won't affect their chances.....now the chances is even more slim and I can't see the chiefs beating the chargers

[berad]

Broncos?

What you even talking about?

Broncos? What have the broncos done?

Paper champs, postseason chumps.

Media darlings throughout

[usmccharles]

thank you, i needed a good laugh, this thread has provided more than enough

[ravensdfan]

Yup, that will surely solve our secondary problems...

you are more likely to find adequate secondary players in FA than a above average not out of his prime WR.

[StingerNLG]

Your understanding of statistics and numbers is fundamentally flawed. I strongly suggest you consider taking a Statistics course or doing some research on the subject online.

 

Presenting a set of data and saying "well they score about the same every game" isn't using statistics... that's just making a hypothesis based on a set of data.

 

If I had more time (and I probably will later), I can literally take the exact same data you provided, change nothing about it, form a hypothesis saying "they DON'T score about the same every game", and can probably prove it through statistical analysis in an Excel spreadsheet.

 

That's why just throwing numbers out and saying "they are what they are" doesn't work.

 

I do find it convenient, however, that you ignored answering the questions that I asked you.

 

No sir, your understanding of numbers is flawed.   I answered your questions.  You ignored it and went to something else.   It's ok.

 

We're done with this conversation.   You have no understanding of what consistency is, or you want it to be something it's not.   I'm not going spend anymore time trying to get you to understand how numbers work.   We are done here.

[kassaiscool]

This is the NFL not college Football where you can be the best every year because you get the best recruits and have the most fans. John Harbaugh has faults like any coach, but to consider firing him is laughable. He hasn't had a losing in 6 years as a HC. I am more worried that he will leave to become a college HC at Michigan. Not because its a better job but because of his family ties there, and I think the college game fits his personality better. Also if John Harbaugh was to leave, who would replace him?

[rmcjacket23]

you are more likely to find adequate secondary players in FA than a above average not out of his prime WR.

Yes... for a price. A price that we may or may not be able to afford. High quality secondary players are in high demand. I think you might be able to find a respectable safety in FA, though we've been saying that for a few years now. I also think the Hill/Miles combination has some potential in the long run, though neither is under contract for next season currently.

 

In my opinion, in an ideal world, you'd use an early round pick on a corner, and let him sit and play rotationally for a year to get a feel for the speed of the game.

 

Then you can consider having him replace Webb in 2016, when its entirely possible we move on from his large contract, and also likely the same season we would need to sign Jimmy long term.

[3-4ravdef509]

...lot of good responses from you all who are so happy with mediocre play and coaching...and yea...if that doesn't change, that PSL will be sold...yea I am a fan who expects more...actually I expect the best..."a fan problem"...you're kidding right?

 

Go back be a Steelers fan then, and good riddance to ya.

[rmcjacket23]

No sir, your understanding of numbers is flawed.   I answered your questions.  You ignored it and went to something else.   It's ok.

 

We're done with this conversation.   You have no understanding of what consistency is, or you want it to be something it's not.   I'm not going spend anymore time trying to get you to understand how numbers work.   We are done here.

You didn't answer the questions. I asked you why you referenced using 15 points as your measurement for consistency? I received no response. You said you responded, but you did not. I reviewed.

 

You're talking numbers, I'm talking statistics. They aren't the same thing. Nobody agrees with your assessment or even your logic of your assessment. If that's good enough for you, then so be it. At least you've convinced yourself of something.

[ravensdfan]

Yes... for a price. A price that we may or may not be able to afford. High quality secondary players are in high demand. I think you might be able to find a respectable safety in FA, though we've been saying that for a few years now. I also think the Hill/Miles combination has some potential in the long run, though neither is under contract for next season currently.

 

In my opinion, in an ideal world, you'd use an early round pick on a corner, and let him sit and play rotationally for a year to get a feel for the speed of the game.

 

Then you can consider having him replace Webb in 2016, when its entirely possible we move on from his large contract, and also likely the same season we would need to sign Jimmy long term.

playmaking WRs in FA come at a much higher price than secondary players in FA. That is just fact.

[3-4ravdef509]

I just want consistency.

Even if it's consistently bad...just be consistent.

Don't score 30 pts and look capable one week only to struggle to put up 7 the next. This has been the Ravens m.o. and it's beyond frustrating.

 

Actually, there's a pattern beyond that.

 

We consistently struggle against the Bengals, Steelers, Texans, and to teams we should beat on paper.

 

The First three teams just know us and our weaknesses and have great teams to do exploit those weaknesses with. 

 

The latter teams we usually lose to because the players and coaches seemingly don't match their intensity, almost walking in expecting the win.