Dean Pees

[JoeyFlex5]

pees is a great defensive mind and has a good feel for countering gameplans, he can struggle to make the right adjustments at times when things arent going right, but last years failures were due to our injured secondary

[TDubbs]

pees is a great defensive mind and has a good feel for countering gameplans, he can struggle to make the right adjustments at times when things arent going right, but last years failures were due to our injured secondary

 

I agree. I was actually pretty happy overall with our defense this year. Sometimes Pee's can annoy fans with some soft coverages and bend don't break approach, however he game plans with what he has. We did not have a Secondary that could compete at a high level, plain and simple. 

[beasy2487]

So, when the players are showing an inability to make open field tackles, you scheme for them to make open field tackles? Come on.

Now, I agree some of the players dropped the ball, but they can't take all the blame like you say. Some fault at least falls on pees.

 

...what? Scheme for them to make open field tackles? Making open field tackles is a fundamental of the game. If you can't make open field tackles, you lose.

[jazz1988]

I'm not the biggest Dean Pees fan but at the same time can't really blame him for everything that went on with our defense.  Pees had his   moments such as  having Chykie Brown cover AJ Green with no safety help, not taking advantage of the chargers weakest link on their offensive line which was their center(I think they were down to their fourth center in that game), Asking Upshaw to cover Antonio Gates(huh?),  and He had moments when he was conservative way too soon..

 

The 2015 season should definitively will give us a better understanding of Dean Pees as a play caller especially if we able to improve our secondary and add more talented players to the defense.  Losing Steve Spagnuolo  may hurt as well since I think he had  a hand  in  The Ravens pass rush scheme  and etc. I'm just not really a fan of Dean Pees bend but don't break philosophy but it works at times.

[Tiz]

Well apparently you and others do when you're all in the thread after the Pitt game asking where was the praise for Pees right?

Always want it both ways.

No way to defend that NE game. Injuries or not, he made no attempt to adjust to anything. Playing 7-10 yards off while they're dumping 5-6 yd passes on every single down is just insanity.

Yeah its always best to assume you know who posts rather than verify. I'll tell you what. Quickly point out where I've based pees bing good or bad off one game.

I'll wait.

[Greatness]

pees is a great defensive mind and has a good feel for countering gameplans, he can struggle to make the right adjustments at times when things arent going right, but last years failures were due to our injured secondary

I wish your optimism could rub off on me. I don't see any of these things you are speaking about in Pees outside of failure to make the correct adjustments. Yes, he forgot more football than I'll ever know, but he really doesn't do it for me. He doesn't put players in positions to succeed and cannot make the proper adjustments as noted before.

[CalvinSmoke]

I wish your optimism could rub off on me. I don't see any of these things you are speaking about in Pees outside of failure to make the correct adjustments. Yes, he forgot more football than I'll ever know, but he really doesn't do it for me. He doesn't put players in positions to succeed and cannot make the proper adjustments as noted before.

I'll give you this, our secondary doesn't mesh. You look at a physical man to man corner in "The Jimmy" then a quick zone corner in Webb. A shifty safety with good burst but limited range in Will Hill, and a bunch of specialists at our other safety and corner positions. There is no scheme that works for everyone, half of us looks like we should be a press/blitz team (Willl Hill/ Elam, Jimmy etc) the other looks like it should be a zone blitz/ bend don't break defense (L Webb, D. Stewart, Rashaan Melvin)

 

Every game Pees is playing chess, putting this piece here, this piece there. He has been using some great schemes to help us achieve. But is also hard on the defenders to learn. 

[stampedehero]

That AND if we were to get rid of him, who would we replace him with?

 

Granted I know there are those here who would insist that they could do better them selves ( see my signature if that is you ) but I am in the real world.

A Realist...... You are one of the few that is not all wind and smoke.   I found out there is always a plan B needed before you initiate plan A 

[redrum52]

Still waiting.....

And you will be for a while.

[Tru11]

I wish your optimism could rub off on me. I don't see any of these things you are speaking about in Pees outside of failure to make the correct adjustments. Yes, he forgot more football than I'll ever know, but he really doesn't do it for me. He doesn't put players in positions to succeed and cannot make the proper adjustments as noted before.

 

it would be nice if you could actually tell the rest of us the adjustments Pees should have made.

or tell us in what position he should have put the players.

[beasy2487]

it would be nice if you could actually tell the rest of us the adjustments Pees should have made.

or tell us in what position he should have put the players.

 

He should've positioned them all on top of the quarterback. Sack every down. I should be DC.

[K-Dog]

He should've positioned them all on top of the quarterback. Sack every down. I should be DC.

[Darth Vader Voice]

The sarcasm is strong with this one.

[/voice]

[JoeyFlex5]

I wish your optimism could rub off on me. I don't see any of these things you are speaking about in Pees outside of failure to make the correct adjustments. Yes, he forgot more football than I'll ever know, but he really doesn't do it for me. He doesn't put players in positions to succeed and cannot make the proper adjustments as noted before.

look at the week 2 game vs pittsburgh, when most dc's would dial up the blitz to take advantage of their horrible OL, pees sent a 4 man rush for a majority of the game and knew that a 4 man rush would take care of the job, dropping 7 into coverage and making bens life miserable. thats the game that stands out the most to me, and then he flipped the script in the playoffs and sent blitzes that even rex ryan wouldnt dream of and buried the steelers. those are just examples but pees really does get too much flack around here, with a secondary that can make a tackle or can press someone without getting beat for a TD i think everyone will see why he is good.

[JoeyFlex5]

I'll give you this, our secondary doesn't mesh. You look at a physical man to man corner in "The Jimmy" then a quick zone corner in Webb. A shifty safety with good burst but limited range in Will Hill, and a bunch of specialists at our other safety and corner positions. There is no scheme that works for everyone, half of us looks like we should be a press/blitz team (Willl Hill/ Elam, Jimmy etc) the other looks like it should be a zone blitz/ bend don't break defense (L Webb, D. Stewart, Rashaan Melvin)

 

Every game Pees is playing chess, putting this piece here, this piece there. He has been using some great schemes to help us achieve. But is also hard on the defenders to learn. 

this, pees plays chess, it isnt about one specific drive or one specific play, its about the overall outcome for him, and there is simply nothing he can do against a quick timing offense when we have a secondary full of players who cant tackle, simple as that.

[BmoreBird22]

The one thing that I really notice stands out is that people will say he sucks because the Ravens didn't rank highly in PYPG allowed, but they were sixth in run defense, eighth in scoring, eighth in total yards allowed, and top three in sacks. Where was the strength of the team? The front seven and pass rush. Was it accurately reflected by the rankings? Four top 10 rankings, one of which was top three. Where was the weakness? The secondary. Was it accurately reflected? It was.

The thing is, most of you will call him plain, vanilla, or conservative, but most of you wouldn't identify the coverages he uses, the blitzes he sends, or in general, probably even the defense he's using. Pees uses an extremely complex defense and with so many revolving parts, he did well

[Tru11]

He should've positioned them all on top of the quarterback. Sack every down. I should be DC.

 

lol you got my vote!!!!

[The Raven]

The one thing that I really notice stands out is that people will say he sucks because the Ravens didn't rank highly in PYPG allowed, but they were sixth in run defense, eighth in scoring, eighth in total yards allowed, and top three in sacks. Where was the strength of the team? The front seven and pass rush. Was it accurately reflected by the rankings? Four top 10 rankings, one of which was top three. Where was the weakness? The secondary. Was it accurately reflected? It was.

The thing is, most of you will call him plain, vanilla, or conservative, but most of you wouldn't identify the coverages he uses, the blitzes he sends, or in general, probably even the defense he's using. Pees uses an extremely complex defense and with so many revolving parts, he did well

 

Maybe we should quiz everyone, and if they can't name/explain the coverages he uses, they can't criticize him.

[Inqui]

Maybe we should quiz everyone, and if they can't name/explain the coverages he uses, they can't criticize him.

Do you know how quiet this place would go?

[The Raven]

Do you know how quiet this place would go?

 

Crickets. Granted, I probably couldn't even recognize some of the more complex ones. Anything above cover 4 is difficult to identify.

[Inqui]

Crickets. Granted, I probably couldn't even recognize some of the more complex ones. Anything above cover 4 is difficult to identify.

Yeah, Ozzie knows I wouldn't be saying anything. Not that I criticise him much as is, but still.

[ravensdfan]

Maybe we should quiz everyone, and if they can't name/explain the coverages he uses, they can't criticize him.

Then perhaps you should have to prove you can play CB and/or Safety better than all those players y'all have been calling trash in this thread right?

 

Pretty sure no one here can play WR better than Torrey, or RB better than Forsett (or Rice when he was bashed last year).

 

Don't think anyone here can play any position better than any player on the team. So I guess we can just close the forum down then right?

 

Or do you mean that rule only to apply to those who disagree with your opinion?

 

So holier than thou around the Pees camp. Quite a few acting the hypocrite too.

 

At the end of the day, your opinion is he did a good job. My opinion is that he's soft, and will continue to be that way because it is his style.

 

You can make arguments that support your opinion, mine is pretty much proven by his resume. Always the same bend but don't break, playing off style.

 

Both are still opinions.

[The Raven]

Then perhaps you should have to prove you can play CB and/or Safety better than all those players y'all have been calling trash in this thread right?

 

Pretty sure no one here can play WR better than Torrey, or RB better than Forsett (or Rice when he was bashed last year).

 

Don't think anyone here can play any position better than any player on the team. So I guess we can just close the forum down then right?

 

Or do you mean that rule only to apply to those who disagree with your opinion?

 

So holier than thou around the Pees camp. Quite a few acting the hypocrite too.

 

You're one to talk.

 

No, I can't do what they do. But I do understand what they're supposed to be able to do. Coaches can't do what players do, so I guess coaches shouldn't criticize players either. That's a dumb point, sorry. Coaches (and me, and others here) understand the role players have, and we're capable of making educated judgments about their performance. Not many here demonstrate a vast (or even average) knowledge of NFL coverage schemes, yet they criticize Pees endlessly.

 

Before making judgments and giving criticism, someone should at least understand the content. Most Pees haters do no such thing. It's the same tired, lame arguments. "Soft! Zone! Blitz more!" And there's no sound basis for those complaints.

[K-Dog]

 

 

Then perhaps you should have to prove you can play CB and/or Safety better than all those players y'all have been calling trash in this thread right?

 

Pretty sure no one here can play WR better than Torrey, or RB better than Forsett (or Rice when he was bashed last year).

 

Don't think anyone here can play any position better than any player on the team. So I guess we can just close the forum down then right?

 

Or do you mean that rule only to apply to those who disagree with your opinion?

 

So holier than thou around the Pees camp. Quite a few acting the hypocrite too.

 

At the end of the day, your opinion is he did a good job. My opinion is that he's soft, and will continue to be that way because it is his style.

 

You can make arguments that support your opinion, mine is pretty much proven by his resume. Always the same bend but don't break, playing off style.

 

Both are still opinions.

Apples and oranges. Like you said, KNOWING and DOING are two different things.

So,,,,,

Can you or can you not..... name/explain the coverages he uses

Wile we are at it.....  Lets play coach.  What would you do as DC in the scenario below?

 

Okay haters. Lets try to think this through.

Say you are a starting C.B. and you are not very good.

You are slower than the W.R. you are lined up against. Not just a little slower, a lot slower.

What to you do to minimize the receivers productivity?

What do you do to prevent the big play ?

[BmoreBird22]

Maybe we should quiz everyone, and if they can't name/explain the coverages he uses, they can't criticize him.

Hahahaha, it's honestly not that I mind people throwing out criticism, but when they throw out the same, baseless "he's soft or vanilla or plain" argument without actually understanding what he wants to do, it's ridiculous

[LosT_in_TranSlatioN]

You're one to talk.

 

No, I can't do what they do. But I do understand what they're supposed to be able to do. Coaches can't do what players do, so I guess coaches shouldn't criticize players either. That's a dumb point, sorry. Coaches (and me, and others here) understand the role players have, and we're capable of making educated judgments about their performance. Not many here demonstrate a vast (or even average) knowledge of NFL coverage schemes, yet they criticize Pees endlessly.

 

Before making judgments and giving criticism, someone should at least understand the content. Most Pees haters do no such thing. It's the same tired, lame arguments. "Soft! Zone! Blitz more!" And there's no sound basis for those complaints.

Disclaimer : I have no knowledge of this crap. I can tell you the difference between man and zone. Pees actually utilizes both, like any coordinator should. 

 

 But I do understand that starting CBs > Practice Squad Corners. Do you really think we give up two 14 point leads with that front 7, and Jimmy and Asa out there? Honestly?  

 

 

Yeah. I'm blaming personel for the first two seasons. And it's a legitimate reason.  We had an insane amount of depth this year. Many clamored for Ozzie's head because of it, but in the NFL, this is a good thing. And if Ngata stays and we retool our secondary, we will have a top 5 defense under Pees..... Think about it. A "soft" or "bad" DC would hold the whole unit back. We almost got their this season. 

 

Also for the whole "No one had no interest in Dean Pees" argument. He's 65 years old with no NFL head coaching experience. Would ANYONE take interest in that as a head coaching option?

[jazz1988]

Disclaimer : I have no knowledge of this crap. I can tell you the difference between man and zone. Pees actually utilizes both, like any coordinator should. 

 

 But I do understand that starting CBs > Practice Squad Corners. Do you really think we give up two 14 point leads with that front 7, and Jimmy and Asa out there? Honestly?  

 

 

Yeah. I'm blaming personel for the first two seasons. And it's a legitimate reason.  We had an insane amount of depth this year. Many clamored for Ozzie's head because of it, but in the NFL, this is a good thing. And if Ngata stays and we retool our secondary, we will have a top 5 defense under Pees..... Think about it. A "soft" or "bad" DC would hold the whole unit back. We almost got their this season. 

 

Also for the whole "No one had no interest in Dean Pees" argument. He's 65 years old with no NFL head coaching experience. Would ANYONE take interest in that as a head coaching option?

 

I'm looking forward to see for sure if we can have a  top 5 defense under Pees. I have my doubts  honestly but  we shall see. I think Pee's is  really  intelligent  but he's not  that Rex Ryan or Chuck Pagano type of defensive coordinator which some Ravens fans like.

[ravensdfan]

 

 

Apples and oranges. Like you said, KNOWING and DOING are two different things.

So,,,,,

Can you or can you not..... name/explain the coverages he uses

Wile we are at it.....  Lets play coach.  What would you do as DC in the scenario below?

 

How is it apples and oranges?

 

If a pass falls short or over, are you the huddle? Do you know where the WR was supposed to cut? Where Flacco expected him to be? No. You can only judge based on what you see however, that doesn't stop any of us here from voicing our opinion on whether Flacco was off with the pass or the receiver ran the route incorrectly.

 

When Harbs calls a time out and we all groan, do we know why? Did he see something he didn't like? Did a coordinator point something out? We don't know but we certainly blast him for poor clock management.

 

It is exactly the same thing.

 

Your opinion is your opinion. Mine is mine.

 

Yours is no better than mine and vice versa. This idea that if you can gather a group of those who share your opinion it makes you right is ridiculous.

 

I'm still waiting on the excuses for why the same issues we had with our defense in 2012 (though to a lesser extent) we're still having now.

Why the same issues brought up about Pees are the same issues they complained about in NE.

But they aren't valid? Whatever dude.

[The Raven]

How is it apples and oranges?

 

If a pass falls short or over, are you the huddle? Do you know where the WR was supposed to cut? Where Flacco expected him to be? No. You can only judge based on what you see however, that doesn't stop any of us here from voicing our opinion on whether Flacco was off with the pass or the receiver ran the route incorrectly.

 

When Harbs calls a time out and we all groan, do we know why? Did he see something he didn't like? Did a coordinator point something out? We don't know but we certainly blast him for poor clock management.

 

It is exactly the same thing.

 

Your opinion is your opinion. Mine is mine.

 

Yours is no better than mine and vice versa. This idea that if you can gather a group of those who share your opinion it makes you right is ridiculous.

 

I'm still waiting on the excuses for why the same issues we had with our defense in 2012 (though to a lesser extent) we're still having now.

Why the same issues brought up about Pees are the same issues they complained about in NE.

But they aren't valid? Whatever dude.

 

I'm not sure you know what the word "injury" means. 

[ravensdfan]

You're one to talk.

 

No, I can't do what they do. But I do understand what they're supposed to be able to do. Coaches can't do what players do, so I guess coaches shouldn't criticize players either. That's a dumb point, sorry. Coaches (and me, and others here) understand the role players have, and we're capable of making educated judgments about their performance. Not many here demonstrate a vast (or even average) knowledge of NFL coverage schemes, yet they criticize Pees endlessly.

 

Before making judgments and giving criticism, someone should at least understand the content. Most Pees haters do no such thing. It's the same tired, lame arguments. "Soft! Zone! Blitz more!" And there's no sound basis for those complaints.

Except that valid arguments have been pointed out time and time again about what he could have done and it has been the same tired argument from you and others here : But..injuries!

 

He is soft. His resume proves it. He is not an aggressive DC and never has been. No one claims he only uses zone, that is just how the argument is regurgitated by the Pees camp.

No one says blitz every down, just the way the Pees camp vomits it up.

In fact, different arguments have been made in difference scenarios. But the cry is the same: Injuries!

 

You can understand all you like about a player's responsibilities, you still do not know what it was on any given particular play. You only know what you see.

Unless, in some presser somewhere, it is pointed out by those involved.

Exactly the same thing.

[Dr. Kelley]

I'm not sure you know what the word "injury" means.

I'm not sure you know what the word "excuses " means.