[News] John Harbaugh Breaks Down Blocking Issues

[Arch Mage]

It could not have been a worse scenario than starting off the season against last year's OC while trying to use his plays. To use the cliche', this is a copycat league. Now every DC will be able to see how to blunt the Ravens' running game. Fortunately, not every team has the players Denver has, but looking at San Fran last night, I see some teams do.
The good news is, we were still in position to win the game! We saw a good to great defensive effort (losing a future Hall of Famer is sickening - Step Up Ravens). The 16 game season allows teams to learn and grow (remember KC and NE early last year?) and the first teamers did not play much in preseason. We knew the passing game would be a work in progress. Oakland may show us more of who the Ravens can be this year.

Here is hoping this 2nd training camp on the West Coast cures a lot of ills.  Ravens win Super Bowl "L"!!

Edited September 15, 2015 by Arch Mage

[The Greek]

Yeah, they suck - i mean they didn't catch a single ball that Flacco DIDN'T get a chance to throw because he was being pressured on 64% of his drop backs...how can the receivers be blamed for the QB not being able to throw the ball?  I mean Smith Sr had the ball thrown to him on the goal line, hit his hands and he dropped it.  Where is your anger towards him, because Flacco put it right in his hands and dropped it, that catch would have given us the lead and possibly the win...

good receivers would see that their qb has been pressured all day and would break their routes early to give their qb a hand. being more physical would help as well. 

[RicknRoll]

If all the Raven coaches felt that Kubiak knew to defend his own scheme then why didn't we change it up? Dose Tresman have any ideas of his oun? While I love our head coach, he doesn't seem to have a knack for knowing when to make changes in a game. Case in point, last season against JJ Watt, they just let Watt have a field day, never put an extra lineman on the field to help block him, why? Just stupid stuff. Sunday's game, run the unbalanced line with an extra lineman, see if they can stop the run then. There are things that can be done during a game to offset what an opposing team is doing, it's just knowing what to do, when to do it, and Do It!!!!!

[objective view]

Receivers failing to get loose on the short underneath routes hurt when we are up against a solid pass rush. Where Was Camp? We need to win the bump game at the line and shake loose for a short catch and run routes and Joe needs to get rid of the ball quickly when we have that kind of pressure. Not all is on the offensive line IMO.

[ibleedpurpleandblack]

good receivers would see that their qb has been pressured all day and would break their routes early to give their qb a hand. being more physical would help as well. 

 

In a different offensive scheme I would agree but we don't run that scheme now do we?  Most of Joe's throws are timed routes where he throws to a specific spot in hopes the receiver is there; sometimes it works (like when he threw the ball before Gilmore was looking and as soon as he turned his head the ball was in his hands) and sometimes it doesn't (like his INT when Smith didn't get under the corner and was out of position).  If you haven't learned by now that this coaching staff and this offense runs the play called and very seldom does Flacco audible out; unless it's the Playoffs then he's an audibling fool.

 

One could also argue that Flacco should realize his pressure and call hot routes...

Edited September 15, 2015 by ibleedpurpleandblack

[ibleedpurpleandblack]

Receivers failing to get loose on the short underneath routes hurt when we are up against a solid pass rush. Where Was Camp? We need to win the bump game at the line and shake loose for a short catch and run routes and Joe needs to get rid of the ball quickly when we have that kind of pressure. Not all is on the offensive line IMO.

 

Where was the screen game?  Think they ran 1 screen the entire game - not counting the 2 WR screens where Joe bounced the ball in front of the receiver bc he was throwing off of his back foot.

[RavensFootballFan]

I don't see how you could possibly think that having a WR that could draw double teams and get quick separation against press coverage wouldn't have helped against Denver. Our receivers were absolutely blanketed, and Flacco had nowhere to go with the ball, which made it much easier on their pass rush, and because they didn't have to double cover anyone, they could send extra rushers at the qb.

 

 

 

I shorten your comments in reply so it does not look like we are high jacking the comments. We can go back and forth and not change anything because we are grounded in our comments. I respect your comments and will leave it at that. The Denver game imho is an aberration for Ravens offense, not of things to come because of how good the Denver defense was which was nothing short of ferocious and spectacular, almost perfect. Tell you what, if the offense/wide receivers still plays well below expectations in Raiders and Bengals game, especially if Perriman comes back. I will eat my words. Have a good week, onto Oakland. C ya then. 

[January J]

the receivers didnt even have time to get halfway into their routes before flacco had somebody in his face or hitting his arm.  why didnt we bring oversome help from a tight end or with juice? we just kept letting it happen with no adjusments. we also threw ZERO screens. are you kidding me? i thought on that last drive in the redzone that a screen to forsett, or anybody for that matter would have been the perfect play. hadnt ran 1 all game so could have caught them off guard, wouldnt have risked an interception, and would have given our guy an opputunity in space with some blockers to atleast make a play. but no, we just kept letting joe get hurried and basically just hopelessly flingin the ball up for grabs. we didnt even throw to gilmore until the very last drive. and where the heck was camp? why not utilize waller and try to throw a screen to him similar to the one in preseason that he caught for a td? i was just so confused by the lackluster playcalling. got everything i expected on defense and more, and had the game in our hands and just gave it away with poor decision making. not what i expected from trestman or the o line whatsoever. im not gonna overeact bc i know we were playing a very good if not one of the best defenses in the league, but we should have been much much better. and a few different calls and we could have snuck outta denver with a W and been in very good  shape heading into oakland.

[slowboater]

Should have helped their tackles earlier? No kidding??? It should have started with a game plan. Not the same vanilla plan you used during the pre-season. I for one, expected more from the offense. Let's hope the Raiders are just what the doctors ordered.

[RavensBaltimore]

Tell you what, if the offense/wide receivers still plays well below expectations in Raiders and Bengals game, especially if Perriman comes back. I will eat my words. Have a good week, onto Oakland. C ya then. 

I'm not sure you read my whole post, but I never said I expected our WRs to play that poorly against Oakland, and I said that I think Perriman will be better than Torrey. If we have to play more than a couple games without him, or if he doesn't produce like I expect him to, it's going to be a huge blow to our SB chances. Not saying we can't score points and win games without him, but I think having someone that can stretch the defense and get off press coverage is a major, valuable factor for our offense, and if Perriman is as good as I think he is, I think having him would have changed the outcome against Denver. 

 

btw... before the game, I commented on here that not having Perriman will make it easier for their D to leave our WRs in single coverage and come after Joe, so it's not like I'm just reacting to a bad game. I called it before it happened.

 

http://www.baltimoreravens.com/news/article-1/Eisenberg-Gary-Kubiak-Will-Bring-The-Heat-Against-Joe-Flacco/b4230e05-ace1-4941-b022-e9fea6513375#commentSystem       (last comment on page 3)

[RavensFootballFan]

I'm not sure you read my whole post, but I never said I expected our WRs to play that poorly against Oakland, and I said that I think Perriman will be better than Torrey. If we have to play more than a couple games without him, or if he doesn't produce like I expect him to, it's going to be a huge blow to our SB chances. Not saying we can't score points and win games without him, but I think having someone that can stretch the defense and get off press coverage is a major, valuable factor for our offense, and if Perriman is as good as I think he is, I think having him would have changed the outcome against Denver. 

 

btw... before the game, I commented on here that not having Perriman will make it easier for their D to leave our WRs in single coverage and come after Joe, so it's not like I'm just reacting to a bad game. I called it before it happened.

 

http://www.baltimoreravens.com/news/article-1/Eisenberg-Gary-Kubiak-Will-Bring-The-Heat-Against-Joe-Flacco/b4230e05-ace1-4941-b022-e9fea6513375#commentSystem       (last comment on page 3)

 

I read every word you typed. I still think nothing needs to be changed and nothing would have changed the outcome of the game, even if Perriman plays because they have two Pro Bowl corners plus a front 7 who played nearly perfect. If Jimmy Smith can shut down his side of the field, what you think Denver's two Pro Bowl cornerbacks on each side of the field are capable of? If Flacco had an average of even an extra second per play, we would be praising our receivers. 

 

Flacco's average time of releasing the ball is around 2.6 seconds, he was not even close to that on average because of Denver's rushers. That is why the outcome of the game would not changed regardless of who was receiver. 

Edited September 15, 2015 by RavensFootballFan

[HomeoftheBRAVENS]

The problems on offense scare me alot more than losing Suggs.The defense might not be elite without him but they will still be good enough to win with if we can get something going offensively.I knew it was a bad idea to go into the season with the inept WR corp we had hoping one would be a diamond in the rough.

[balfan23]

"They have missed a lot of time together in the preseason."

 

I sincerely hope that's the issue ... I am dying to see this unit get out and perform and prove it isn't the start of another 2013 type year.

[letitgosometimes]

Trestman: You saw the results with high pressure on Joe in the Denver game. It is time to adjust the backfield formation to a two RB formation - they will allow Joe at least another count to make a pass. Once the O-line improves their technique, then maybe return to a one back or empty backfield. Going forward the Ravens need to protect their quarterback. The two best blocking RBs get to take the field. Keep it simple.

[RavensBaltimore]

I read every word you typed. I still think nothing needs to be changed and nothing would have changed the outcome of the game, even if Perriman plays because they have two Pro Bowl corners plus a front 7 who played nearly perfect. If Jimmy Smith can shut down his side of the field, what you think Denver's two Pro Bowl cornerbacks on each side of the field are capable of? If Flacco had an average of even an extra second per play, we would be praising our receivers. 

 

Flacco's average time of releasing the ball is around 2.6 seconds, he was not even close to that on average because of Denver's rushers. That is why the outcome of the game would not changed regardless of who was receiver. 

Flacco was not pressured on 36% of his dropbacks, which isn't much, but it's enough where he could have taken a shot or two if Perriman was in the game.

 

The Broncos top 2 WRs had over 60 yds, so they weren't exactly "shut down". None of ours had over 25 yds, and Flacco has a much better arm than Manning. 

 

A big reason Flacco had so little time to throw is because they could send extra rushers by leaving our WRs in single coverage. Being able to draw double coverage and getting quick separation are extremely basic concepts in beating the blitz. I don't know why you're arguing against that. Just watch the Patriots against the blitz. They frustrate the pass rush with short, quick passes all game.

 

 

If Steve Smith doesn't completely lose his one-on-one matchup with Talib, that pick 6 never happens. No matter how good the other corners are, nobody should be totally shut down by single coverage all day.

[RavensFootballFan]

Flacco was not pressured on 36% of his dropbacks, which isn't much, but it's enough where he could have taken a shot or two if Perriman was in the game.

 

The Broncos top 2 WRs had over 60 yds, so they weren't exactly "shut down". None of ours had over 25 yds, and Flacco has a much better arm than Manning. 

 

A big reason Flacco had so little time to throw is because they could send extra rushers by leaving our WRs in single coverage. Being able to draw double coverage and getting quick separation are extremely basic concepts in beating the blitz. I don't know why you're arguing against that. Just watch the Patriots against the blitz. They frustrate the pass rush with short, quick passes all game.

 

 

If Steve Smith doesn't completely lose his one-on-one matchup with Talib, that pick 6 never happens. No matter how good the other corners are, nobody should be totally shut down by single coverage all day.

 

 

Some sports reporters said Denver's defense was so good that it would not mattered if Perriman played. I agree with them. They also said that Denver shut down the inside routes, knowing Flacco had no time to throw long passes. Flacco attempted 32 passes which translate to only 10.8 plays where Flacco was not rated at least under pressure, by NFL standards, that is very little chances during course of whole game. It is easy to say in hindsight we could have done this or that, fact of the matter is there is consensus that Denver's defense was just too good that day. 

[RavensBaltimore]

Some sports reporters said Denver's defense was so good that it would not mattered if Perriman played. I agree with them. They also said that Denver shut down the inside routes, knowing Flacco had no time to throw long passes. Flacco attempted 32 passes which translate to only 10.8 plays where Flacco was not rated at least under pressure, by NFL standards, that is very little chances during course of whole game. It is easy to say in hindsight we could have done this or that, fact of the matter is there is consensus that Denver's defense was just too good that day. 

I don't think that is the consensus. On "Unscripted", Ryan Mink made the same observation I did about how Talib was playing tight coverage on SSS on the int, and if Perriman had been on the field, his man may have been playing a few steps back, allowing for the quick outlet pass. For me, it has nothing to do with hindsight because I said before the game that we would have trouble making them pay for pressing our receivers with single coverage and blitzing. We'll never know what would have happened had Perriman played that day, but it is a proven fact that lacking any downfield ability, and lacking the ability to get off press coverage makes it much easier for the defense to play tight, single coverage and send everyone else at the qb. That's a non-debatable, basic concept of football.

[RavensFootballFan]

I don't think that is the consensus. On "Unscripted", Ryan Mink made the same observation I did about how Talib was playing tight coverage on SSS on the int, and if Perriman had been on the field, his man may have been playing a few steps back, allowing for the quick outlet pass. For me, it has nothing to do with hindsight because I said before the game that we would have trouble making them pay for pressing our receivers with single coverage and blitzing. We'll never know what would have happened had Perriman played that day, but it is a proven fact that lacking any downfield ability, and lacking the ability to get off press coverage makes it much easier for the defense to play tight, single coverage and send everyone else at the qb. That's a non-debatable, basic concept of football.

 

Great defenses shuts down offenses, Denver has one of the best WR duos (#2) in the NFL and they did not score a single TD and were below average in the game. If the Ravens were able to do that, then surely, the Broncos can easily do the same including Perriman, they proved it again against Chiefs. No sense going into what, if, ands, maybes or buts since Perriman did not play. The Flacco to SSS interception could have easily happened if Perriman was playing. They got two more against Alex Smith. 

[RavensBaltimore]

Great defenses shuts down offenses, Denver has one of the best WR duos (#2) in the NFL and they did not score a single TD and were below average in the game. If the Ravens were able to do that, then surely, the Broncos can easily do the same including Perriman, they proved it again against Chiefs. No sense going into what, if, ands, maybes or buts since Perriman did not play. The Flacco to SSS interception could have easily happened if Perriman was playing. They got two more against Alex Smith. 

So because our defense shut down their offense, you're saying that their defense was going to shut down our offense no matter what? That just doesn't make sense. You're comparing 2 completely different offenses to 2 completely different defenses. Good offenses dominate good defenses all the time in the NFL. In our SB playoff run, our offense destroyed 2 of the top 3 defenses in the league, and there are plenty of other examples of that happening. And did you not see our DBs playing far off of their WRs during the Broncos first 2 FG drives? That happened because our D respected the playmaking ability of their WRs, and it resulted in 2 long drives and 6 points, and it would have been 10 points had Manning not missed a WIDE OPEN WR in the endzone. Flacco didn't get a single easy completion to a WR. Not one. Peyton got a bunch of them.  The pick 6 may have still happened if Perriman was on the field, but I gave sound reasoning why it may not have, and if Perriman had played, we may have never been in that situation in the first place. You've been refuting all my points with massive generalizations, like "great defenses shut down offenses" and "they had good receivers and still didn't do anything." Just because the Broncos had a bad game on offense with good receivers doesn't mean that having a good receiver wouldn't have helped us, and I already gave all kinds of specific reasons as to how.

[RavensFootballFan]

So because our defense shut down their offense, you're saying that their defense was going to shut down our offense no matter what? That just doesn't make sense. You're comparing 2 completely different offenses to 2 completely different defenses. Good offenses dominate good defenses all the time in the NFL. In our SB playoff run, our offense destroyed 2 of the top 3 defenses in the league, and there are plenty of other examples of that happening. And did you not see our DBs playing far off of their WRs during the Broncos first 2 FG drives? That happened because our D respected the playmaking ability of their WRs, and it resulted in 2 long drives and 6 points, and it would have been 10 points had Manning not missed a WIDE OPEN WR in the endzone. Flacco didn't get a single easy completion to a WR. Not one. Peyton got a bunch of them.  The pick 6 may have still happened if Perriman was on the field, but I gave sound reasoning why it may not have, and if Perriman had played, we may have never been in that situation in the first place. You've been refuting all my points with massive generalizations, like "great defenses shut down offenses" and "they had good receivers and still didn't do anything." Just because the Broncos had a bad game on offense with good receivers doesn't mean that having a good receiver wouldn't have helped us, and I already gave all kinds of specific reasons as to how.

 

I am using massive generalizations? And you're not? Ok, if you say so. I still stand by my opinions.