City's Off-season Signings/Small mock/Top 5 Big Board

[PurpleCity5]

in this case, a good safety isnt getting beat, but thats all hes doing. a good cb who starts getting beat, will have a great safety licking his chops. let a qb get comfortable against a great safety and it results in turnovers.

In todays NFL, you just need to make sure you can at least hold opponents to a field goal. Safeties won't get turnovers every single game. A CB who can shut down an entire field and completely neutralize a #1 rec. option changes the whole dynamic of the game. Having a CB who can be left on an island is something that can have a huge impact overall. 

Edited November 11, 2015 by PurpleCity5

[ravefan52]

I think the CB vs S importance mostly depends on the defensive schemes.

[LosT_in_TranSlatioN]

Here's the way I see it. We have Jimmy, a very good but not great corner(sorry Bmore. He's good enough to be a #1 CB. Easily). We have a crappy safety situation but the situation at CB might actually be worse. Arrington is awful outside of the slot, and Webb is a walking talking glass vase.

I love Ramsey as a prospect. I think he's a superior prospect tbh(not by much though). I think VH3 is not only a better fit for us, but would do more for our defense. He has the potential to completely eliminate a #1 WR in the long run(thus not needing a safety), and healthy Jimmy on a #2 is well... Going to be hilarious. Probably won't need too much safety help, especially when/ if pressing.

I'd be beyond estatic with either. If I'm us, and both are on the board, you take VH3.

[usmccharles]

Here's the way I see it. We have Jimmy, a very good but not great corner(sorry Bmore. He's good enough to be a #1 CB. Easily). We have a crappy safety situation but the situation at CB might actually be worse. Arrington is awful outside of the slot, and Webb is a walking talking glass vase.

I love Ramsey as a prospect. I think he's a superior prospect tbh(not by much though). I think VH3 is not only a better fit for us, but would do more for our defense. He has the potential to completely eliminate a #1 WR in the long run(thus not needing a safety), and healthy Jimmy on a #2 is well... Going to be hilarious. Probably won't need too much safety help, especially when/ if pressing.

I'd be beyond estatic with either. If I'm us, and both are on the board, you take VH3.

I like both as well and im hoping one of these are our picks.  I wish Ramsey was more of a ballhawk but he seems like a playmaker, i havent watched much of VH3, i shall

[arnie_uk]

They'd pick VH3 simply because his off the field stuff fits Harbaughs mould of the type of player he wants.

[Cillmatic]

Here's the way I see it. We have Jimmy, a very good but not great corner(sorry Bmore. He's good enough to be a #1 CB. Easily). We have a crappy safety situation but the situation at CB might actually be worse. Arrington is awful outside of the slot, and Webb is a walking talking glass vase.

I love Ramsey as a prospect. I think he's a superior prospect tbh(not by much though). I think VH3 is not only a better fit for us, but would do more for our defense. He has the potential to completely eliminate a #1 WR in the long run(thus not needing a safety), and healthy Jimmy on a #2 is well... Going to be hilarious. Probably won't need too much safety help, especially when/ if pressing.

I'd be beyond estatic with either. If I'm us, and both are on the board, you take VH3.

Correction Jimmy is great, he was shutting down the top WR's in the league last year and the year before that. The only reason he doesn't look great now is because of his Lisfranc injury, people really don't understand that. Hargreaves would be the #2 CB if we got him.

[BmoreBird22]

Correction Jimmy is great, he was shutting down the top WR's in the league last year and the year before that. The only reason he doesn't look great now is because of his Lisfranc injury, people really don't understand that. Hargreaves would be the #2 CB if we got him.

Well, pretty much stole what I would say, but VH3 would be an amazing addition for the defense. Ask the Broncos how they're doing with two average coverage safeties and two elite cover corners.

[BmoreBird22]

i feel the same, good cb's + great safeties lead to scared qb's, scared receivers, alligator arms, fumbles, coverage sacks, and more importantly, ints. lets not forget the different looks and disguised coverages that a high IQ pair of safeties can offer.

 

great cb's + good safeties leads to coverage sacks and batted balls and the occasional int. 

 

great safeties just offer much more unexpected results to opponents, id rather have a qb refuse to throw a ball past 10 yards because of a lurking ballhawk, than to have a qb refuse to target 1 player because hes covered by a shutdown cb. why do you think the ravens were the only team who consistently made tom brady look average? even when ed reed was a straight up liability, he took away all but the first 10-15 yards of the field in tom bradys mind, and when brady decided to risk it and go deep, ed was there waiting. 

 

i think an elite pair of safeties and a serviceable pair of corners are more suited for todays game, with high volume passing attacks you want players that force turnovers.

Well, for one, the Ravens aren't the only team that consistently gave Tom Brady fits, and in fact, his stats are fairly decent against the Ravens. There are definitely other teams that have caused more fits, but do keep in mind that the Ravens have only played Brady six times in the regular season (five wins), so the sample size isn't huge. But, anyway...

 

You don't think corners can force turnovers? Or linebackers? Look at the NFL interception leaders. The top two are safeties, I will give you that, but you look at the top 17 (players with three or more) and there are 11 corners, five safeties, and one linebacker. Wait, you mean to tell me there's more than twice as many corners as safeties? Wow, wouldn't have guessed. 

 

Go back and look at the statistics from previous years- Richard Sherman led the NFL in interceptions, and actually was one of the biggest ballhawks in the NFL from some period of time. He's had 26 since coming into the league, not including this year. Asante Samuel had a time period of 25 interceptions in three years or something ridiculous like that. 

 

And go back and look at previous years statistics- In only one year, 2014, did safeties make up half or more of the interception leaders (players with four or more interceptions). Sure, since 2010 a safety has led the league in interceptions three times, but that's also just the league leader, quickly followed by a litter or corners. 

Edited November 11, 2015 by BmoreBird22

[BmoreBird22]

In todays NFL, you just need to make sure you can at least hold opponents to a field goal. Safeties won't get turnovers every single game. A CB who can shut down an entire field and completely neutralize a #1 rec. option changes the whole dynamic of the game. Having a CB who can be left on an island is something that can have a huge impact overall. 

Yeah, it allows a safety to roam and create more turnovers... 

[usmccharles]

I just watched VH3 tape and ive decided...i cant decide who id rather have, i would be more than happy to have either.  I like that VH3 could isolate a side of the field and potentially shut down a corner.  I like that Ramsey has a potential to make plays all over the field...win win to me either way with these two. 

[BmoreBird22]

I just think safeties tend to cause more turnovers than corners, especially when combined with a good passrush. Looking at the Ravens' history, none of our corners, not even Chris McAllistar, was able to create turnovers like Woodson and Reed. And looking around the league, currently 4 top 6 defensive players in interceptions are safeties (Mike Adams, Charles Woodson, Rashad Johson, and Marcus Williams).

That's really cherry picking stats because it's actually three corners and three safeties in the top six and the top six is comprised of players with five or four interceptions. And no, Marcus Williams is not a safety, he is a cornerback. So, it's actually 11 of the top 17 (players with three or more interceptions) are cornerbacks.  

 

Go back and look at NFL history- only last year, 2014, had more than half of the league leaders (four or more interceptions) as safeties. Since 2010, the league has seen three safeties lead the league in interceptions and two cornerbacks. Usually about half of the players are corners. 

Edited November 11, 2015 by BmoreBird22

[JoeyFlex5]

In todays NFL, you just need to make sure you can at least hold opponents to a field goal. Safeties won't get turnovers every single game. A CB who can shut down an entire field and completely neutralize a #1 rec. option changes the whole dynamic of the game. Having a CB who can be left on an island is something that can have a huge impact overall. 

revis got toasted by steve smith. 

 

the most flawless cb is not immune to taking a beating. 

 

better have a FS when that happens. 

 

also, i see what youre saying, but the absolute most sure fire way to win, is by forcing turnovers. its a tried and true thing in the NFL, putting yourself in a better position to force more turnovers is the best way to put yourself in a better position to win.

[JoeyFlex5]

Well, for one, the Ravens aren't the only team that consistently gave Tom Brady fits, and in fact, his stats are fairly decent against the Ravens. There are definitely other teams that have caused more fits, but do keep in mind that the Ravens have only played Brady six times in the regular season (five wins), so the sample size isn't huge. But, anyway...

 

You don't think corners can force turnovers? Or linebackers? Look at the NFL interception leaders. The top two are safeties, I will give you that, but you look at the top 17 (players with three or more) and there are 11 corners, five safeties, and one linebacker. Wait, you mean to tell me there's more than twice as many corners as safeties? Wow, wouldn't have guessed. 

 

Go back and look at the statistics from previous years- Richard Sherman led the NFL in interceptions, and actually was one of the biggest ballhawks in the NFL from some period of time. He's had 26 since coming into the league, not including this year. Asante Samuel had a time period of 25 interceptions in three years or something ridiculous like that. 

 

And go back and look at previous years statistics- In only one year, 2014, did safeties make up half or more of the interception leaders (players with four or more interceptions). Sure, since 2010 a safety has led the league in interceptions three times, but that's also just the league leader, quickly followed by a litter or corners. 

youre stating these stats when there is a straight up drought at the safety position though. the quality of FS play is absolutely anemic right now and ever since revis entered the league teams have invested heavily and built schemes around cb's, its a trend that simply led to a decline in quality safety play around the league and now we have very little to base these comparisons on. so youre talking about truly elite cb's vs decent safeties for the most part. and i never said cb's werent incapable of forcing turnovers, its just that when a qb doesnt even look in one WRs direction, its kinda hard to force a turnover there, however with a high IQ free safety lurking and disguising his coverage, the qb can throw the ball anywhere and often times have no clue where said FS is. 

[PurpleCity5]

Yeah, it allows a safety to roam and create more turnovers...

Well yeah, of course.

[BmoreBird22]

youre stating these stats when there is a straight up drought at the safety position though. the quality of FS play is absolutely anemic right now and ever since revis entered the league teams have invested heavily and built schemes around cb's, its a trend that simply led to a decline in quality safety play around the league and now we have very little to base these comparisons on. so youre talking about truly elite cb's vs decent safeties for the most part. and i never said cb's werent incapable of forcing turnovers, its just that when a qb doesnt even look in one WRs direction, its kinda hard to force a turnover there, however with a high IQ free safety lurking and disguising his coverage, the qb can throw the ball anywhere and often times have no clue where said FS is. 

So, then explain to me how a team like Denver, with mediocre coverage safety play, has the most turnovers in the league, or are at least top 5. They have forced 13 fumbles, while recovering eight, and noticed nine interceptions. They don't have elite safety play. You can look at all the teams in the top 10 for turnovers and very few would have elite safety play, the exception being Phili and Arizona. Hell, the Giants lead the league in overall turnovers and Landon Collins is their starting free safety next to Craig Dahl. 

 

Problem with this argument is, most teams want to play a single high look and be aggressive with their safety play to blitz, stuff the run, and cover tight ends given the recent increase on athleticism at the position. You're argument is to rely, in many cases, a single FS to create a massive amount of turnovers, especially in Pees scheme. The problem is, that football field is 53 yards wide and there is zero chance that one free safety will be able to cover every single yard of that field. 

 

Seattle has the best safety tandem in the entire NFL. How many total turnovers do they have? Eight, with only three interceptions. How many turnovers does San Diego have with Eric Weddle? Nine, with five interceptions. Those two teams are 27th and 23rd respectively. The Bengals, who have a damn good safety tandem, and the Patroits, who have McCourty, are tied for 14th in turnovers and could very easily be tied for 20th. If they notched one less. 

 

I think most of us could agree that Will Hill is a very, very good safety, top 10, possibly even top 5, but yet, the Ravens rank dead last in turnovers. 32nd overall. No one is worse. But wait, I thought you said elite safety play forced turnovers against bad corners when a quarterback got comfortable? Then why are the Ravens, who are 29th in passing defense and 30th in YPA allowed, not creating these turnovers? Could it be because such mediocre cornerback play cannot be masked? I'm pretty sure quarterbacks are getting plenty comfortable against this defense. And to make it even worse, the Ravens have a pretty elite run stuffing defense that can win with their front four, if they wanted, and allow more players to be dropped into coverage and create more turnovers. 

You all have been spoiled by Ed Reed. There will almost certainly not be another player with that range and ability to pretty much control the entire field. You will not find that coming out. Your expectations for what a free safety can do are way too high. Remember, he is pretty much the best free safety to ever play, top five safety overall, and considered to be the best ballhawk ever. Obviously he's a generational talent that was one of a kind. Other safeties are not going to have the same range, so there is going to need to be a high level of cornerback play to go along with that safety play, otherwise, those safeties aren't going to be "elite".

And just so we're clear, there have been 18 first round safeties since 2007, or about 6.2% of the picks, as compared to 30 first round cornerbacks, or about 10.2% of the picks. Those percentages would go way up for the safeties if we included players like Weddle, Ward, Cyprien, Collins, etc. that were picked at pick 39 or earlier. Two of those guys were the first pick in the second round, meaning they missed out on being a first rounder by literally one pick. 

You can't sit here and say that teams just ignore the safety position. They draft it at a really high rate when you consider that if teams drafted evenly (DE, DT, CB, S, OLB, ILB, G, C, T, QB, WR, TE, RB), each pick would be picked about 4.5% of the time, and that's not even taking into account scheme fits, like 3-4 OLB/DE, 4-3 DE/OLB, etc. To say that safeties are ignored is just ignorant of draft history. And of course corners are going to be drafted at a higher rate. Teams field three at a time vs two safeties at a time. If we were to break it down, you draft them at about 3.4% per corner on the field and 3.1% per safety on the field. That's not a huge disparity. Teams don't ignore it just because safeties aren't turning into elite players anymore. 

Edited November 11, 2015 by BmoreBird22

[BmoreBird22]

Well yeah, of course.

I think people have this unrealistic idea that the Ravens could field the 2015 Ravens corners all over again, exact same playing field (Jimmy injured, Webb slowly returning to form, Arrington struggling on the outside), but if they added an Earl Thomas or an Eric Weddle, suddenly this pass defense would be top 10. 

And don't get me wrong- I have heavily criticized the free safety play and the inability to have a true center fielder with great athleticism or range, but let's not act like a great safety can mask the play and deficiencies of three cornerbacks.

[PurpleCity5]

I think people have this unrealistic idea that the Ravens could field the 2015 Ravens corners all over again, exact same playing field (Jimmy injured, Webb slowly returning to form, Arrington struggling on the outside), but if they added an Earl Thomas or an Eric Weddle, suddenly this pass defense would be top 10.

And don't get me wrong- I have heavily criticized the free safety play and the inability to have a true center fielder with great athleticism or range, but let's not act like a great safety can mask the play and deficiencies of three cornerbacks.

I used to downplay the need of a CB, but now I strongly believe we need one. The only CB I can assure we'll have in 2016 is Jimmy and thats it, I don't known if Webb is safe either. I'm with ya, we need a FS badly, but CB will be just as big of a need if Webb goes down to injury again or if we flat out cut him. I mean we have Shareece Wright back there.

Yes, FS is the biggest need but you cannot downplay our troubles at CB, its especially bad since Arrington is pretty much losing snaps to everyone and we're bringing off guys from the practice squad. Last season we had Dominique Franks out there and we saw how that turned out. I don't think anyone wants to see that again. Thats what happens when you don't have depth.

Anyways, I don't care if its Hargreaves or Ramsey. I just want a playmaker/different maker for this team. Even if its at DE.

Edited November 11, 2015 by PurpleCity5

[BmoreBird22]

I used to downplay the need of a CB, but now I strongly believe we need one. The only CB I can assure we'll have in 2016 is Jimmy and thats it, I don't known if Webb is safe either. I'm with ya, we need a FS badly, but CB will be just as big of a need if Webb goes down to injury again or if we flat out cut him. I mean we have Shareece Wright back there.

Yes, FS is the biggest need but you cannot downplay our troubles at CB, its especially bad since Arrington is pretty much losing snaps to everyone and we're bringing off guys from the practice squad. Last season we had Dominique Franks out there and we saw how that turned out. I don't think anyone wants to see that again. Thats what happens when you don't have depth.

Anyways, I don't care if its Hargreaves or Ramsey. I just want a playmaker/different maker for this team. Even if its at DE.

Pick position at this very point in time leads me to believe the Ravens won't be able to grab a difference maker at defensive end like I originally wanted, so I've turned my attention to the secondary. 

 

I'm all about Hargreaves because if you have two corners that you can trust to take away their man, your safety becomes less worried about covering up the mistakes of the corner and more about going out there and making a play. 

[PurpleCity5]

Pick position at this very point in time leads me to believe the Ravens won't be able to grab a difference maker at defensive end like I originally wanted, so I've turned my attention to the secondary.

I'm all about Hargreaves because if you have two corners that you can trust to take away their man, your safety becomes less worried about covering up the mistakes of the corner and more about going out there and making a play.

Thats honestly how strongly I feel for a playmaker at this point. I'd prefer Hargreaves or Ramsey to almost anyone but at the same time I don't care who it is we pick as long as it is some one who can make plays and be a difference maker. I don't care if its at Safety, CB, or WR.

[GrimCoconut]

This may be a real exaggeration but I'm going to maintain the position that picking between Hargreaves and Ramsey is like choosing between Thomas and Revis/Sherman (pick your favorite CB). I'm not comparing these players to these pros and saying they are the next [insert name]; rather, I'm saying they're equally as good and will have as great an impact.

I think we could legitimately use either. Jimmy is getting older and he's banged up a lot, sadly. He may be healthy but I won't be upset if we have two elite CB and Hargreaves means we simply have another shutdown CB if Jimmy goes down.

Either pick is a win win. I think people need to realize neither Hargreaves nor Ramsey are better than the other but are rather equals and are equally needed.

[GrimCoconut]

Thats honestly how strongly I feel for a playmaker at this point. I'd prefer Hargreaves or Ramsey to almost anyone but at the same time I don't care who it is we pick as long as it is some one who can make plays and be a difference maker. I don't care if its at Safety, CB, or WR.

I really love Bosa but I'm leaning towards the DBs because I really like the OLB after Bosa in Ogbah and Nassib. I'd even trade up to make sure we got Ogbah.

[PurpleCity5]

I really love Bosa but I'm leaning towards the DBs because I really like the OLB after Bosa in Ogbah and Nassib. I'd even trade up to make sure we got Ogbah.

I think I might join you on that note. We really need a DB reguardless if its at CB or FS. I don't know why people bag on Hargreaves in favor of Ramsey, they're both great and I would he hyped with either.

I like Ogbah a lot, I think the 2nd round is the sweet spot for edge rushers, with Ogbah, Nassib and my man Carl Lawson on the board. If we were to get any pass rusher I'll bet on it being in the 2nd though I do believe trading up for a WR in the 2nd could be ideal as well.

Edited November 11, 2015 by PurpleCity5

[JoeyFlex5]

This may be a real exaggeration but I'm going to maintain the position that picking between Hargreaves and Ramsey is like choosing between Thomas and Revis/Sherman (pick your favorite CB). I'm not comparing these players to these pros and saying they are the next [insert name]; rather, I'm saying they're equally as good and will have as great an impact.

I think we could legitimately use either. Jimmy is getting older and he's banged up a lot, sadly. He may be healthy but I won't be upset if we have two elite CB and Hargreaves means we simply have another shutdown CB if Jimmy goes down.

Either pick is a win win. I think people need to realize neither Hargreaves nor Ramsey are better than the other but are rather equals and are equally needed.

this is more how it is, it comes down to personal preference, and i personally prefer ramsey. it just appears that some of the hargreaves bandwagon is more likely to jam their opinions down the ramsey bandwagons throats and im left defending my favorite prospect against multiple people lol

[GrimCoconut]

this is more how it is, it comes down to personal preference, and i personally prefer ramsey. it just appears that some of the hargreaves bandwagon is more likely to jam their opinions down the ramsey bandwagons throats and im left defending my favorite prospect against multiple people lol

You think so? I think I'm probably the most unbiased person here or one of them and I have to admit I feel like I've seen more people promote Ramsey while criticizing Hargreaves. I could be wrong, but that's just my opinion.

[JoeyFlex5]

You think so? I think I'm probably the most unbiased person here or one of them and I have to admit I feel like I've seen more people promote Ramsey while criticizing Hargreaves. I could be wrong, but that's just my opinion.

im on the ramsey bandwagon but i like hargreaves very much as well, i just feel like everytime i promote ramsey i get 3 hargreaves fans quoting my post on why im wrong lol

[Inqui]

You think so? I think I'm probably the most unbiased person here or one of them and I have to admit I feel like I've seen more people promote Ramsey while criticizing Hargreaves. I could be wrong, but that's just my opinion.

Yeah, I'm a Ramsey fanboy but it feels like he's the more popular one here. Though there's also a strong undercurrent on both sides of not being too fussed if we took either.

[GrimCoconut]

The only thing that holds me back on saying Ramsey will be the pick is how much we've invested into that position. I know I'll hear some people say BPA all day, but what worries me is Ozzie in all honesty.

I'm not calling him out, but here's my concern: Ozzie is a very patient GM and he's invested a ton in the safety position. He gave contracts to Lewis and Hill, and while they're not deal breakers, their contracts aren't huge, but we also drafted two safeties very high with early picks

[52520Andrew]

Yeah, I'm a Ramsey fanboy but it feels like he's the more popular one here. Though there's also a strong undercurrent on both sides of not being too fussed if we took either.

 

This is where I fit in lol, I see both CB and FS as significant needs for this team and I think both players have the potential to be really good at those positions. Personally I don't even care if we don't get either of them as well, just as long as we get an impact player(unless they are a nose tackle(or kicker, punter, fullback, and long snapper. Have to mention it or someone else will lol)that is about the only position I would be angry if we took).

 

There are people vocal about Ramsey over Hargreaves and others vocal about Hargreaves over Ramsey. I think most people have kept it civil for the most part but I would imagine we see this argument developing more and more as more people pour into the war room that is the draft forum.

[The Oakland Cathedral]

Who needs a DB when we could take Goff and solve our biggest problem.

[Cillmatic]

Well, pretty much stole what I would say, but VH3 would be an amazing addition for the defense. Ask the Broncos how they're doing with two average coverage safeties and two elite cover corners.

Lol, TJ Ward is FAR from average, and I wouldn't call Aqib Talib elite, the only reason that defense works is the most pass rush. Edited November 11, 2015 by Cillmatic