Updated: Trent Richardson signed by Ravens

[rmw10]

Interesting read on Trent Richardson and his struggles.  It's written by former Ravens reporter, Matt Zenitz, too.

 

https://www.al.com/alabamafootball/index.ssf/2016/03/inside_trent_richardsons_rise.html

Edited March 25, 2016 by rmw10

[ludy51]

3 minutes ago, rmw10 said:

Interesting read on Trent Richardson and his struggles.  It's written by for Ravens reporter, Matt Zenitz, too.

 

https://www.al.com/alabamafootball/index.ssf/2016/03/inside_trent_richardsons_rise.html

Sounds like he is seriously trying to  make a comeback

[rmw10]

Just now, ludy51 said:

Sounds like he is seriously trying to  make a comeback

It's always interesting to me how much off field stuff we don't know about.  It sounds like he made the smart move by shutting all the moochers out of his life.  Now, I don't see how that equates to his vision improving, but the point stands that on the field isn't all you have to look at.  Remains to be seen if he really wants it, but I'm glad something seemed to click with him.  Maybe that's all he needs.  Who knows.

[ludy51]

3 minutes ago, rmw10 said:

It's always interesting to me how much off field stuff we don't know about.  It sounds like he made the smart move by shutting all the moochers out of his life.  Now, I don't see how that equates to his vision improving, but the point stands that on the field isn't all you have to look at.  Remains to be seen if he really wants it, but I'm glad something seemed to click with him.  Maybe that's all he needs.  Who knows.

If he can focus up, and work hard, than I think he can reach that potential that made him a #3(?) pick in 2012.

[The Raven]

On 2/24/2016 at 0:27 PM, sflegend89 said:

I'm just gonna leave this here.

 

 

 

Hate to be the OL nerd that ruins the joke but...

The first one is quite obviously a right side handoff to me, but it's a bad look.  It doesn't show whether he cut, but technically, he's going the right direction. The thing to remember here is that the Raiders have a power running scheme where running backs are going north-south, not looking for cutback lanes. Try running with a full head of steam to a gap and then making a cut. Not so easy, is it?

Second one looks like an inside handoff to the left (maybe right, can't tell), so the highlighted space is that open because that's simply not where the play is going... Lol... That's likee taking a still image of a sweep to the left side, highlighting the right side, and asking why he didn't go right. Also, it might be a draw play, based on the positioning of the LT and LG. Look, they're taking drop steps. Draw plays don't go to the outside, so...

Based on the angles of the blocks and footwork of the linemen, the third is obviously another inside handoff to the left, and it's a north-south running scheme where the RB isn't supposed to look for cutback lanes. Again, try making a cut with a full head of steam. Look at the positioning of the RG - He's on the inside shoulder of the defender. If the run was supposed to go the right, why would the backside linemen be pursuing the inside shoulder and the play side linemen be getting their butt in the hole?

If I could see the film of these plays, I'd be happy to change my mind, but from still images, Richardson isn't really at fault.

Edited March 25, 2016 by The Raven

[omar586]

agree^^, i hope he plays lights out with ravens, we r loaded at RB position if we sign him, we have  buck, west, LT, forsett, magee, richardson,

[Tru11]

On March 25, 2016 at 6:35 PM, The Raven said:

Hate to be the OL nerd that ruins the joke but...

The first one is quite obviously a right side handoff to me, but it's a bad look.  It doesn't show whether he cut, but technically, he's going the right direction. The thing to remember here is that the Raiders have a power running scheme where running backs are going north-south, not looking for cutback lanes. Try running with a full head of steam to a gap and then making a cut. Not so easy, is it?

Second one looks like an inside handoff to the left (maybe right, can't tell), so the highlighted space is that open because that's simply not where the play is going... Lol... That's likee taking a still image of a sweep to the left side, highlighting the right side, and asking why he didn't go right. Also, it might be a draw play, based on the positioning of the LT and LG. Look, they're taking drop steps. Draw plays don't go to the outside, so...

Based on the angles of the blocks and footwork of the linemen, the third is obviously another inside handoff to the left, and it's a north-south running scheme where the RB isn't supposed to look for cutback lanes. Again, try making a cut with a full head of steam. Look at the positioning of the RG - He's on the inside shoulder of the defender. If the run was supposed to go the right, why would the backside linemen be pursuing the inside shoulder and the play side linemen be getting their butt in the hole?

If I could see the film of these plays, I'd be happy to change my mind, but from still images, Richardson isn't really at fault.

kudos to you for trying to drop knowledge on these boards.

Edited March 26, 2016 by Moderator 3
Unnecessary potshot removed

[BmoreBird22]

13 minutes ago, Tru11 said:

kudos to you for trying to drop knowledge on these boards.

He's one of the posters on here that gives me hope.

[Tru11]

9 minutes ago, BmoreBird22 said:

He's one of the posters on here that gives me hope.

when it comes to o-line play and blocking in general ,  he is the guy i would listen to.

i agree on everything he said when it comes to these 3 pictures.

really dont think richardson is the kind of back you want to dance behind the LOS like barry sanders used to do lol

 

[BmoreBird22]

10 minutes ago, Tru11 said:

when it comes to o-line play and blocking in general ,  he is the guy i would listen to.

i agree on everything he said when it comes to these 3 pictures.

really dont think richardson is the kind of back you want to dance behind the LOS like barry sanders used to do lol

 

Anytime I have any blocking question, I immediately consult him.

I still think Richardson can be a great back if he can just get into the right offense. His confidence is shot and right now he just needs strong blocking, something Indi, Cle, and Oak all lacked during his times there.

[ellicottraven]

Well with Richardson, if he comes back strongly motivated and insanely fit, he may do well in Baltimore. John will treat him right, give him confidence and he may actually blossom here. But, then again, what does it matter? If he doesn't make the team, no big loss.

[The Raven]

14 hours ago, Tru11 said:

when it comes to o-line play and blocking in general ,  he is the guy i would listen to.

i agree on everything he said when it comes to these 3 pictures.

really dont think richardson is the kind of back you want to dance behind the LOS like barry sanders used to do lol

 

 

14 hours ago, BmoreBird22 said:

Anytime I have any blocking question, I immediately consult him.

I still think Richardson can be a great back if he can just get into the right offense. His confidence is shot and right now he just needs strong blocking, something Indi, Cle, and Oak all lacked during his times there.

 

Well, while I don't think those three plays were indicative of his vision, he doesn't really have the best vision, and you're right, he's not the kind of guy that you want dancing. That makes me wonder how he'll do in a zone blocking scheme. Last season I started to see more gap blocking and power blocking, but the vast majority was still zone. We may move away from it, as Trestman was more of a gap blocking guy in Chicago, but I don't know. It's something to keep an eye on. Richardson is at his best running with a full head of steam behind a pulling guard, not when he's looking for a lane and then making a cut.

 

Still, I love the move. Worst case scenario is we move on. Best case scenario is we have another starting caliber RB who might actually be a top ten back if he's in shape and playing behind a good line.

P.S. Pro tip for looking at run plays. If it's a gap blocking/power blocking team, look at the asses of the offensive linemen. Typically, the run is designed to go between the two asses.

Edited March 27, 2016 by The Raven

[Tank 92]

23 minutes ago, The Raven said:

 

 

Well, while I don't think those three plays were indicative of his vision, he doesn't really have the best vision, and you're right, he's not the kind of guy that you want dancing. That makes me wonder how he'll do in a zone blocking scheme. Last season I started to see more gap blocking and power blocking, but the vast majority was still zone. We may move away from it, as Trestman was more of a gap blocking guy in Chicago, but I don't know. It's something to keep an eye on. Richardson is at his best running with a full head of steam behind a pulling guard, not when he's looking for a lane and then making a cut.

 

Still, I love the move. Worst case scenario is we move on. Best case scenario is we have another starting caliber RB who might actually be a top ten back if he's in shape and playing behind a good line.

P.S. Pro tip for looking at run plays. If it's a gap blocking/power blocking team, look at the asses of the offensive linemen. Typically, the run is designed to go between the two asses.

How will the chop block ban affect the ZBS?  Could it be that in light of the ban Trent would be a better fit ?

[Mad Puppy]

On 2/24/2016 at 0:27 PM, sflegend89 said:

I'm just gonna leave this here.

 

 

 

I feel sick

[BmoreBird22]

3 hours ago, Mad Puppy said:

I feel sick

Just as someone explains what's wrong with these pictures...

[The Raven]

10 hours ago, Tank 92 said:

How will the chop block ban affect the ZBS?  Could it be that in light of the ban Trent would be a better fit ?

It's going to really hurt the ZBS for teams that have soft left tackles or linemen that have bad footwork/athleticism. The idea of a cut block is to eliminate a defender without having to beat him. This creates cutback lanes, because there's nobody in pursuit, because they're on the ground holding their knee. 

So, if we're running stretch to the right, there are essentially three primary cut back options based on certain reads.

1. Read the end man on the line of scrimmage (EMOS), usually a DE or OLB. If the EMOS gets sealed by the tackle and tight end, go outside. If not, look to read two.

2. Read the next defender in, usually a DT. If the guard is on his outside shoulder, go that way, through the B gap. If the guard is on the inside shoulder, cut through the A gap. 

3. Read the next defender in, which would be a nose tackle or 1 technique DT. Go where he isn't.

Where the cut block rule comes into effect is that third read. The cut block makes it so easy to create a gaping hole on the backside. Now, for right side runs, the LT and LG will actually have to make their blocks. 

What this means is that running backs will probably be looking at the first two reads even more and not looking at hard cutbacks as much. This makes the ZBS less effective, but there are many ways to combat it.

 

TL;DR? The elimination of the combo-cut block makes the ZBS less effective, but it doesn't totally kill the scheme. It just limits it. Whether or not that influences us to run more gap, power, and trap blocking, I don't know yet. There aren't many gap blocking linemen in the college game that do well in the NFL these days. College linemen are built for the ZBS these days.

Edited March 28, 2016 by The Raven

[ravensdan]

4 minutes ago, The Raven said:

It's going to really hurt the ZBS for teams that have soft left tackles or linemen that have bad footwork/athleticism. The idea of a cut block is to eliminate a defender without having to beat him. This creates cutback lanes, because there's nobody in pursuit, because they're on the ground holding their knee. 

So, if we're running stretch to the right, there are essentially three primary cut back options based on certain reads.

1. Read the end man on the line of scrimmage (EMOS), usually a DE or OLB. If the EMOS gets sealed by the tackle and tight end, go outside. If not, look to read two.

2. Read the next defender in, usually a DT. If the guard is on his outside shoulder, go that way, through the B gap. If the guard is on the inside shoulder, cut through the A gap. 

3. Read the next defender in, which would be a nose tackle or 1 technique DT. Go where he isn't.

Where the cut block rule comes into effect is that third read. The cut block makes it so easy to create a gaping hole on the backside. Now, for right side runs, the LT and LG will actually have to make their blocks. 

What this means is that running backs will probably be looking at the first two reads even more and not looking at hard cutbacks as much. This makes the ZBS less effective, but there are many ways to combat it.

 

TL;DR? The elimination of the cut block makes the ZBS less effective, but it doesn't totally kill the scheme. It just limits it. Whether or not that influences us to run more gap, power, and trap blocking, I don't know yet. There aren't many gap blocking linemen in the college game that do well in the NFL these days. College linemen are built for the ZBS these days.

The cut block is not outlawed though. Only chop blocks. Pretty sure you know this but I think it's a misconception floating around. 

[The Raven]

10 minutes ago, ravensdan said:

The cut block is not outlawed though. Only chop blocks. Pretty sure you know this but I think it's a misconception floating around. 

 

That does change things. I've been preoccupied and honestly hadn't been paying attention. Based on what I just read, I still think it's going to be an issue. The rule is outlawing cut blocks to defenders that are being doubled on run plays. What would happen was the LG and C would double team the nose, the LG would then cut the nose, and the C would go to the second level. Now, the LG isn't allowed to cut the nose on that double.

This rule already existed for pass plays. Can't cut players already engaged with another player. But, you can still cut a guy that is unengaged.

Sorry all for messing that up. 

Do I think this will affect things? Hell yeah. Defensive linemen have a tendency to hold the C (which is indeed a penalty but it's hard to call) so that they don't get to the second level. This means guards are going to have to kick more butt and centers are going to have to play faster.

This will ultimately become a judgment call. On some zone plays, a nose will engage a center, but the center will not engage the nose, instead fighting towards the backer. So, if the guard cuts a nose that's holding the center, is that an illegal chop block? By rule, you could argue it is.

Edited March 28, 2016 by The Raven

[ravensdan]

11 minutes ago, The Raven said:

 

That does change things. I've been preoccupied and honestly hadn't been paying attention. Based on what I just read, I still think it's going to be an issue. The rule is outlawing cut blocks to defenders that are being doubled on run plays. What would happen was the LG and C would double team the nose, the LG would then cut the nose, and the C would go to the second level. Now, the LG isn't allowed to cut the nose on that double.

This rule already existed for pass plays. Can't cut players already engaged with another player. But, you can still cut a guy that is unengaged.

Sorry all for messing that up. 

Do I think this will affect things? Hell yeah. Defensive linemen have a tendency to hold the C (which is indeed a penalty but it's hard to call) so that they don't get to the second level. This means guards are going to have to kick more butt and centers are going to have to play faster.

This will ultimately become a judgment call. On some zone plays, a nose will engage a center, but the center will not engage the nose, instead fighting towards the backer. So, if the guard cuts a nose that's holding the center, is that an illegal chop block? By rule, you could argue it is.

Yeah I was listening to Ross Tucker break down the ruling and he explained nearly identical to what you have here. I think you're right there's still going to be a bit of grey area as you describe in your last sentence. You're point on the importance of speed or quickness from the center is well taken. Could have an effect draft day for sure. 

[GrimCoconut]

Puts more emphasis on the interior OL doing its job and playing with good technique, and also means we need a LT that can effectively win their match-up.

Well, I'm loving our OL already. 

[Purple_ICE 81]

I like this move if/when we finally do sign TRich. Just saw a before/after pic that kinda reminded me of the old blue/yellow dress meme dillema...I really can't see a difference but who cares the dress is a dress and T-Rich looks like hes in shape. 

 

With Justin Forsett coming off a broken arm and approaching the RB danger zone age range, and a lot of so-so's behind him, I think T-Rich could atleast make for an exciting training camp competition in an area of need. I'll buy his claims of losing motivation and sandbagging it in Indy and Oakland. If you watched him as a rookie he definitely flashed greatness even against us...he put up 200+yds and a TD in 2 games against us his rookie yr, and finished the year looking like a rising star who can do it all run/block/catch. But when a crummy team trades arguably it's best weapon to a team that then under utilized him, I can see why he would get upset and unmotivated. 

 

I hope we sign this guy but have high hopes with medium/low expectations. Forsett should still be our guy but T-Rich could make for a solid back up/ short yardage bulldozer. 

[BmoreBird22]

1 hour ago, The Raven said:

It's going to really hurt the ZBS for teams that have soft left tackles or linemen that have bad footwork/athleticism. The idea of a cut block is to eliminate a defender without having to beat him. This creates cutback lanes, because there's nobody in pursuit, because they're on the ground holding their knee. 

So, if we're running stretch to the right, there are essentially three primary cut back options based on certain reads.

1. Read the end man on the line of scrimmage (EMOS), usually a DE or OLB. If the EMOS gets sealed by the tackle and tight end, go outside. If not, look to read two.

2. Read the next defender in, usually a DT. If the guard is on his outside shoulder, go that way, through the B gap. If the guard is on the inside shoulder, cut through the A gap. 

3. Read the next defender in, which would be a nose tackle or 1 technique DT. Go where he isn't.

Where the cut block rule comes into effect is that third read. The cut block makes it so easy to create a gaping hole on the backside. Now, for right side runs, the LT and LG will actually have to make their blocks. 

What this means is that running backs will probably be looking at the first two reads even more and not looking at hard cutbacks as much. This makes the ZBS less effective, but there are many ways to combat it.

 

TL;DR? The elimination of the combo-cut block makes the ZBS less effective, but it doesn't totally kill the scheme. It just limits it. Whether or not that influences us to run more gap, power, and trap blocking, I don't know yet. There aren't many gap blocking linemen in the college game that do well in the NFL these days. College linemen are built for the ZBS these days.

I may be misreading, but isn't this just a one year trial change that will be re-evaluated next year?

[ravensdan]

2 minutes ago, Purple_ICE 81 said:

I like this move if/when we finally do sign TRich. Just saw a before/after pic that kinda reminded me of the old blue/yellow dress meme dillema...I really can't see a difference but who cares the dress is a dress and T-Rich looks like hes in shape. 

 

With Justin Forsett coming off a broken arm and approaching the RB danger zone age range, and a lot of so-so's behind him, I think T-Rich could atleast make for an exciting training camp competition in an area of need. I'll buy his claims of losing motivation and sandbagging it in Indy and Oakland. If you watched him as a rookie he definitely flashed greatness even against us...he put up 200+yds and a TD in 2 games against us his rookie yr, and finished the year looking like a rising star who can do it all run/block/catch. But when a crummy team trades arguably it's best weapon to a team that then under utilized him, I can see why he would get upset and unmotivated. 

 

I hope we sign this guy but have high hopes with medium/low expectations. Forsett should still be our guy but T-Rich could make for a solid back up/ short yardage bulldozer. 

It's purple and black. Obviously. 

[The Raven]

5 minutes ago, BmoreBird22 said:

I may be misreading, but isn't this just a one year trial change that will be re-evaluated next year?

Honestly don't know, but many rules have a one year evaluation period. I hope this one gets reversed, if it is up for evaluation.

I know it sounds weird but I really can't think of many times a chop block actually caused a serious knee injury. It hurts like hell but it ain't that big a deal. I've gotten cut and I've been chopped and I've never had a serious issue with it.

Edited March 28, 2016 by The Raven

[BmoreBird22]

Just now, The Raven said:

Honestly don't know, but many rules have a one year evaluation period. I hope this one gets reversed, if it is up for evaluation.

Well, Harbaugh was livid and I'd imagine the teams that do run the ZBS will have the same reaction at the end of the year. I feel like this one only got pushed through because it was from the NFL itself.

[Purple_ICE 81]

14 minutes ago, ravensdan said:

It's purple and black. Obviously. 

???...oh the dress. Lol 

 

[ravensdan]

1 minute ago, Purple_ICE 81 said:

???...oh the dress. Lol 

 

?

[Purple_ICE 81]

19 minutes ago, The Raven said:

Honestly don't know, but many rules have a one year evaluation period. I hope this one gets reversed, if it is up for evaluation.

I know it sounds weird but I really can't think of many times a chop block actually caused a serious knee injury. It hurts like hell but it ain't that big a deal. I've gotten cut and I've been chopped and I've never had a serious issue with it.

It actually is a higher injury risk specifically for knee injuries. It wouldn't have gotten banned if it wasn't an injury risk. Tackling is an injury risk too but chop blocking going low has caused quite a few ACL/MCL injuries and just comes with that higher risk. Players have complained about it...coaches, and ultimately no surprise they banned it.  

 

One day 10 years from now we will all realize that South Park got it right...like they do with most things...and the NFL will turn into sarcastaball, hugs and compliments replacing tackles.

[The Raven]

4 minutes ago, Purple_ICE 81 said:

It actually is a higher injury risk specifically for knee injuries. It wouldn't have gotten banned if it wasn't an injury risk. Tackling is an injury risk too but chop blocking going low has caused quite a few ACL/MCL injuries and just comes with that higher risk. Players have complained about it...coaches, and ultimately no surprise they banned it.  

 

One day 10 years from now we will all realize that South Park got it right...like they do with most things...and the NFL will turn into sarcastaball, hugs and compliments replacing tackles.

Ehh... You might be right but I'd like to see data if it exists.

I firmly believe that the goal of this was not to make the game safer but to help defensive linemen out. Cut blocks make life hard for DL. Limit cut and chop blocks, life gets easier. Makes the league more competitive. I can't remember a single time I saw a cut block result in a knee injury, but I do just have a crap memory so..

Edited March 28, 2016 by The Raven

[GrimCoconut]

19 minutes ago, The Raven said:

Ehh... You might be right but I'd like to see data if it exists.

I firmly believe that the goal of this was not to make the game safer but to help defensive linemen out. Cut blocks make life hard for DL. Limit cut and chop blocks, life gets easier. Makes the league more competitive. I can't remember a single time I saw a cut block result in a knee injury, but I do just have a crap memory so..

Probably all those hits you took blocking, lol.