What is it, that the Ravens are always accused of playing dirty?

[cobrajet]

Eric Edholm wrote an article for Yahoo sports about the Eagles claiming Suggs is a dirty player for his hit on Bradford. I thought most NFL fans would side with Suggs after his explanation, because I thought fans were becoming sick and tired of quarterbacks being so untouchable but 95% of the comments were about how dirty Suggs and the Ravens are. How did the Ravens get such a bad reputation? I have never seen a Ravens player do what Albert Haynesworth did Andre Gurode (dirtiest play I have ever seen) or Suh stomping Evan Dietrich-Smith, but reading the comments to any Ravens article and you would think that we were the most dirty team in the world. I imagine it was because for many years, no one was able to push our defense around. If you google "dirtiest NFL players," eventually you get to a few Ravens players outside the top ten but Pittsburgh has just as many or more on the list. It just seems like NFL fans, in general, dislike our organization to the point that we constantly being accused of playing dirty. I know the truth, which is that we are a classy organization, but I admit it does bother me that outside of our fan-base others constantly call our players "thugs" and "dirty." IMHO, it is a reputation we DO NOT deserve.

[jaege]

Jealousy. Anger at how an upstart team can be so good. Insecurity with their own team.Ignorance. Take your pick.

[redlobster]

Hard hitting defense also plays into it, the ravens , for better or worse, have always been defined by their defense and hard hitting.

 

Suggs bleaching his wife

Rays murdering charge

Rice Beating his wife 

 

all don't help that image to ignorant fans.

[Static]

Who cares lol?

 

 

Although if they want us to play like they think we do , they should be careful what they wish for.

[balfan23]

We've always had the bad boy image. "Baltimore Bullies" was the title of the SI super bowl victory edition. The fact that Ray Lewis was the face of this franchise since its beginning and how he appears to the rest of the NFL fans plays strongly into it. Along with Ray, we've found ways to have that sentiment reinforced. 

 

I think the NFL and their media  plays it to some degree. While the NFL isn't quite the WWF, having a bad guy definitely has its positives. We have kind of become a team people like to hate. This is nothing compared to the Raiders of the late 60s early 70s. They defined the bad boy team. 

 

That Oakland team embraced it. Their fans embraced it. The Ravens have also to some degree embraced it. We should embrace it too. 

[usmccharles]

I always embrace it.... Just a way to get into teams heads and for us fans to hold a chip on our shoulder. Like in our superbowl run, I made numerous bets that we were going to win the game against the pats easily bc I knew we were just going to best them up. We made Welker work for every single yard and you can tell he was hating it.

[redrum52]

I don't mind it and hope we get back to scaring offenses. Time we became the Baltimore Bullies again. I couldn't care less about what the rest of the league thinks about us. Don't want your fragile qb getting hurt, don't out him in harms way.

[jimmypowder]

The Suggs hit was absolutely a proper hit!!! If you are gonna run the option,your QB runs the risk of getting hit like that. 

 

The penalty was one of the most ridiculous penalties I have seen yet. 

 

They love to go after Suggs. 

 

After that,it was a penalty free for all against us.

[BOLDnPurPnBlacK]

It's stated in the rules that when running the read option, since the possibility exists that the QB will pull the ball and run, he is to be treated like a running back.

If Suggs hit a RB like that no one at all would complain.

Chip Kelly is an idiot for putting a guy coming off 2 ACL tears in that situation. The way you play the read option on defense is to always hit both the RB and QB. Plain and simple. You can't expect a rule change bc the read option would then become impossible to defend.

You expect guys running full speed to stop and wait til they're 100% sure the QB has the ball before they hit him? That's absurd.

And Suggs could've laid a shoulder into him. He pulled off and just stuck an arm out. I imagine it looked worse on TV bc in live action at the game almost no one, even Eagles fans thought anything of it.

[Static]

Last year we had 7, which is tied with Pats, Bills and Titans. Fewer than the Bears, Bengals, Seahawks, Steelers, Giants, Rams, Niners and Jets.

[JoeyFlex5]

We've always had the bad boy image. "Baltimore Bullies" was the title of the SI super bowl victory edition. The fact that Ray Lewis was the face of this franchise since its beginning and how he appears to the rest of the NFL fans plays strongly into it. Along with Ray, we've found ways to have that sentiment reinforced. 

 

I think the NFL and their media  plays it to some degree. While the NFL isn't quite the WWF, having a bad guy definitely has its positives. We have kind of become a team people like to hate. This is nothing compared to the Raiders of the late 60s early 70s. They defined the bad boy team. 

 

That Oakland team embraced it. Their fans embraced it. The Ravens have also to some degree embraced it. We should embrace it too. 

the difference is, the raiders WERE the team that everyone accused them of being. they took pride in cheap tactics like stick'em, routine facemask tackling, and actively trying to put other players on IR, that was their image and thats how they played and ran their team, their coach used to smoke cigarettes on the field for crying out loud, they loved it because it was them. 

 

for us though... this is just a false image thats been given because we are in baltimore which, for some reason, automatically makes the NFL and the whole fanbase despise us, we have been one of the most physical teams of the past 20 years, we won a SB purely on defense, the face of our franchise was confident and abrasive, the NEW face of our(defensive side) franchise is also confident and abrasive, and these things paired with a few legal troubles make the whole ignorant fanbase of the NFL see us as dirty players, if we lost all the time then nobody would even care, but when you are basically the bully of the AFC by being a consistent winner and doing it by means of physicality and hard hitting, then of course the angry and jealous fanbase finds something to cling onto, the first unneccessary roughness flag thrown = dirty players.

[PuRock]

Eric Edholm wrote an article for Yahoo sports about the Eagles claiming Suggs is a dirty player for his hit on Bradford. I thought most NFL fans would side with Suggs after his explanation, because I thought fans were becoming sick and tired of quarterbacks being so untouchable but 95% of the comments were about how dirty Suggs and the Ravens are. How did the Ravens get such a bad reputation? I have never seen a Ravens player do what Albert Haynesworth did Andre Gurode (dirtiest play I have ever seen) or Suh stomping Evan Dietrich-Smith, but reading the comments to any Ravens article and you would think that we were the most dirty team in the world. I imagine it was because for many years, no one was able to push our defense around. If you google "dirtiest NFL players," eventually you get to a few Ravens players outside the top ten but Pittsburgh has just as many or more on the list. It just seems like NFL fans, in general, dislike our organization to the point that we constantly being accused of playing dirty. I know the truth, which is that we are a classy organization, but I admit it does bother me that outside of our fan-base others constantly call our players "thugs" and "dirty." IMHO, it is a reputation we DO NOT deserve.

 

The bolded statement is your problem. Haters gonna hate.  

 

I find it more appalling that a coaching staff would call a read option for its fragile QB.  Good luck Philly with Sanchez as your QB.  Your coach jettisons a bunch of your top players then does stupid things like run read options with Sam Bradford in PS.  

[jimmypowder]

The bolded statement is your problem. Haters gonna hate.  

 

I find it more appalling that a coaching staff would call a read option for its fragile QB.  Good luck Philly with Sanchez as your QB.  Your coach jettisons a bunch of your top players then does stupid things like run read options with Sam Bradford in PS.  

+1

[JacktheRaven]

There's a number of reasons.

1. We stole our team.

2. Ravens are built on their D & toughness.

3. Other players with drugs, DUI, etc. ( Not the most by far).

3. Ray Lewis incident, Suggs, Rice, and now even the ex-cheerleader, and the security officer.

Geesh

[FlackAttack]

couldnt care less if some moronic pundit says ravens play dirty.

[TDubbs]

It's stated in the rules that when running the read option, since the possibility exists that the QB will pull the ball and run, he is to be treated like a running back.

If Suggs hit a RB like that no one at all would complain.

Chip Kelly is an idiot for putting a guy coming off 2 ACL tears in that situation. The way you play the read option on defense is to always hit both the RB and QB. Plain and simple. You can't expect a rule change bc the read option would then become impossible to defend.

You expect guys running full speed to stop and wait til they're 100% sure the QB has the ball before they hit him? That's absurd.

 

 

You're 100% correct. But I also think its a double standard between 'conventional' QB's and 'running' QB's.

 

We've all seen Vick and RG3 run the read option and get crushed without the ball, no one bats an eyelash. We assume, oh well they could have held the ball and torched us for yards.

 

Now you get a guy like Bradford run the exact same play, but because he's not the same threat if he pulls the ball down and runs it, everyone puts up a big stink. 

[ravensdfan]

The Suggs hit was legal and that was just a BS call.

 

But, there was the punch elsewhere in the game lol

Edited August 23, 2015 by ravensdfan

[cobrajet]

We've always had the bad boy image. "Baltimore Bullies" was the title of the SI super bowl victory edition. The fact that Ray Lewis was the face of this franchise since its beginning and how he appears to the rest of the NFL fans plays strongly into it. Along with Ray, we've found ways to have that sentiment reinforced. 

 

I think the NFL and their media  plays it to some degree. While the NFL isn't quite the WWF, having a bad guy definitely has its positives. We have kind of become a team people like to hate. This is nothing compared to the Raiders of the late 60s early 70s. They defined the bad boy team. 

 

That Oakland team embraced it. Their fans embraced it. The Ravens have also to some degree embraced it. We should embrace it too. 

Maybe you are right, I never really thought about embracing the hate before. I always felt I had to defend my team to the haters, but it does get very tiring. I know Skip Bayliss on ESPN is a big time Ravens hater, and when Suggs called him a "container used by females" on First Take, I have to admit I thought he deserved it because of all the times he disrespected Joe Flacco's last name. As someone posted, "Haters are going to hate"......so if T-Sizzle can embrace it, I think it may be time to enroll myself at Ball So Hard University!

[52520Andrew]

Run the option and the QB is a runner and open to being hit. That strategy is exactly what we did in the Super Bowl in 2012. You would think Chip Kelly and Eagles fans of all people would know that.

[Runnin Raven]

Balfan23 nailed it.  There's always gotta be a bad guy, somebody riding the black horse, wearing the black hat, looking to ruin the day for the white hats.  Look around the NFL...who is that team?  It's not the Raiders any more - it's us.  Heck Steeler fans have made it part of their religion.  Might as well embrace it.  It has its advantages.

[balfan23]

Maybe you are right, I never really thought about embracing the hate before. I always felt I had to defend my team to the haters, but it does get very tiring. I know Skip Bayliss on ESPN is a big time Ravens hater, and when Suggs called him a "container used by females" on First Take, I have to admit I thought he deserved it because of all the times he disrespected Joe Flacco's last name. As someone posted, "Haters are going to hate"......so if T-Sizzle can embrace it, I think it may be time to enroll myself at Ball So Hard University!

I know ... I actually went out to ESPN to look at the rash of articles they've written ... it is not just the fans commenting - it is the writers of these articles. They flat out called Suggs' hit cheap and frame the entire discussion against us. That does anger me - because the primary take away from that play needs to be that the refs made the wrong call. Instead it is about the dirty Ravens. 

 

I do defend our team as well in these public forums... I can't help it. But then I realize there is nothing I can do change the minds of the brainwashed. It is better to play that bad guy role back to the people whining about us, because that gets them even more irritated. 

[CalvinSmoke]

The Ravens win without flash, and we often ruin the day for flashy teams. That instantly makes us bad guys. We give Tom Brady hell by smacking guys around with physical play. That is the perfect narrative to paint a team as the bad guy. Take it as a compliment, you have to be good for someone to care.

[reed20]

Hard hitting defense also plays into it, the ravens , for better or worse, have always been defined by their defense and hard hitting.

 

Suggs bleaching his wife

Rays murdering charge

Rice Beating his wife 

 

all don't help that image to ignorant fans.

Every team has had their share.

 

We all know about the Raiders.

 

The Bengals' many criminals.

 

Roethlisbergers rape case.

 

List goes on.

[salamander]

Agree Balfan23. I read the ESPN article and was really annoyed at the author blatantly focusing on Suggs as a dirty player for a totally legal hit. The fan comments bashing Suggs were predictable. Comments of course extended to the dirty Ravens and went on include to Ray Lewis, Ray Rice, etc  attacks, blah blah blah. Glad there was some support from the NFL network for Suggs on Total Access repeatedly throughout the day that Suggs made a legal play and they would have done the same. Haters troll the internet looking for opportunities to interject their venom.

Edited August 24, 2015 by salamander

[FastEddie]

Like most have already said, I think in the ravens case its more of respect for physicality.

 

I also think that Oz & co. are trying to bring that aspect back to our team with the addition of Steve Smith. He brings that nasty side that we missed when we lost most of our vets. Having him on our team exposes a lot of the rookies and younger players to his work ethics and playing style. Hopefully it rubs off somewhere along the line.

[redlobster]

Every team has had their share.

 

We all know about the Raiders.

 

The Bengals' many criminals.

 

Roethlisbergers rape case.

 

List goes on.

 

Agreed but besides Pittsburgh, the others listed aren't known for physical play.

[Blackbirds Rule]

The Suggs hit was absolutely a proper hit!!! If you are gonna run the option,your QB runs the risk of getting hit like that. 

 

The penalty was one of the most ridiculous penalties I have seen yet. 

 

They love to go after Suggs. 

 

After that,it was a penalty free for all against us.

I completely agree after that call it seemed every flag was on us. Then you look at the replay and go wow they really called that. We couldn't even get back in the game or build any momentum. It was like every third down stop was a penalty and automatic first down. We have a big run holding or formation penalty. The last two times we've played Philly there we had the replacement ref's and then these new ref's trying to get in the NFL.

[The Mom Gene]

That play was NOT cheap....  NOT dirty at all...  and if you really watch it... He could have gotten him a lot worst than he did.  He actually "wrapped him up" pretty good.  You can see that Suggs grabs him around the legs..  He doesn't go in with his pads and helmet and target the legs.

 

All of this, just really ticks me off.  I see Bradford as one of those delicate QB's that needs more protection, or to be taught how to escape the wrath of the pass rush.  He's always had that deer in the headlights look.  And other teams will definitely expose it even more than we did.

 

Notice that not many people are talking about the Brandon Williams hit, which I found to be far more aggressive than Suggs...  but again...  That's on their O-line.

[The Mom Gene]

You're 100% correct. But I also think its a double standard between 'conventional' QB's and 'running' QB's.

 

We've all seen Vick and RG3 run the read option and get crushed without the ball, no one bats an eyelash. We assume, oh well they could have held the ball and torched us for yards.

 

Now you get a guy like Bradford run the exact same play, but because he's not the same threat if he pulls the ball down and runs it, everyone puts up a big stink. 

 

exactly...  I have also used this example

[TDubbs]

So here is a pretty good timeline of the situation (I know it's Deadspin, but its actually pretty decent) 'http://deadspin.com/eagles-accuse-terrell-suggs-of-targeting-sam-bradfords-1726080414?utm_campaign=socialflow_deadspin_twitter&utm_source=deadspin_twitter&utm_medium=socialflow'

 

Dean Blandino came out and said the hit was legal and shouldn't have even been flagged. Good enough for me, but fans and media will still crucify Sizzle. Like I said in an earlier post, it's a double standard on QB's. At the end of the day who cares though, we know Sizzle will shrug it off and keep moving forward. 

Edited August 24, 2015 by TDubbs