Our teams history with its bad luck of WRs

[CharmCityChampions]

With all the recent questioning with BP's injury status, our teams draft failure with WRs dating back with our first crack at finding a #1 WR (Travis Taylor), and our history since then of not drafting WRs well, its been making me wonder what the problem is. Why do we as a team have so many issues trying to find "that guy" when it seems like many other teams don't strike out as much as we have through our whole history. Now I'm not saying Mark Clayton was horrible (personally I think he was due to our unfortunate QB situation with Boller), It just feels like we are cursed at ever finding a true #1 WR or great WR period. Is it our scouting? Coaches? GM? (I'm not an Ozzie hater), or is it just a product of our drafting position over the past couple of years, even though teams like Pittsburg have found good WR in the later rounds?

Now, I know you don't HAVE to have a #1 WR if you have a roster of a bunch of good ones, but it does help to have that one star player at each position from time to time.

All in all it just has been making me wonder when I watch other teams play, how their WRs can just make it look so easy and go up and get balls, get YAC, and act like its nothing, while our WRs struggle for separation, miss catchable balls, and seem to have consistent injury issues.

[usmccharles]

Since our WRs never develop,  I have to think of either the coaches or the scouts.   

[Tru11]

there are so many factors that play a role TBH.

from coaching/ developing all the way to player execution.

before flacco came around we really had no QB and our whole offense was build around running the ball and controlling which in itself would hurt any WR playing for us.

We simply where not and probably wont ever be a team where  WRs will put up big numbers.

We also like to involve our backs and TE in the passing game as well.

I rather we spread the ball around rather then force feed it to 1 guy.

(gonna get a lot of negs for this)
Also Flacco aint the most accurate QB out there.
He will put the ball in a spot where the receiver has a chance on it but often times its not really the ideal ball placement.
example: on a slant he will often throw the ball above the receivers head or slightly behind the receiver rather then hit the receiver in stride.

his deep passes for instance look like they are underthrown which lead to jump ball rather then they fall right in the receivers arms so he can keep running.

now ofcourse its not all his fault cause he has to rely on the o-line to give him time and he has to hope the receivers actually go where he thinks they are going where in instances we saw receivers either slowing down or totally misjudge the pass.

also you have to remember that we are rarely in the position to get the best WR in the draft and guys like AB are rare.
the chances to find an AB in the draft are slim to none , just like its rare to find the next tom brady in round 6.

i am fine with not having a stud receiver TBH.

id take 3 good ones over 1 great one any time.

[edthehead]

so for the sake of this post,

treadwell is slow but he is good 

I watched him on nfl access last night,  a good kid

I have always been a fan

we are drafting early and need instant coffee 

possibly a trade back, pick him and the rest in defense,

idk

I do agree with tru11 

many factors to or WR's but we need a true #1

[ALPHA]

We're a run first team and thats our identity, the times we've been forced to rely on Joe's arm it hasn't been pretty.

[CharmCityChampions]

2 hours ago, usmccharles said:

Since our WRs never develop,  I have to think of either the coaches or the scouts.   

That too. I have to wonder if the new WRs coach they brought in might help more. Its just crazy to see all the WRs that have been picked by other teams, and we seem to almost always pick the wrong ones lol

[edthehead]

1 hour ago, ALPHA said:

We're a run first team and thats our identity, the times we've been forced to rely on Joe's arm it hasn't been pretty.

I think that was our identity when we had no QB,

we may in fact still be a run first, but times have changed

a team need to be able to pass and pass successfully

I wrote about us being a passing team(possibly west coast)

our RB's are average  - speed, - power and - acuity and balance  

EZE will make us a run first,,,,,,

[Maryland]

If the Cowboys don't snipe Dez Bryant 1 spot ahead of us this thread never gets made  

[ALPHA]

4 minutes ago, Maryland said:

If the Cowboys don't snipe Dez Bryant 1 spot ahead of us this thread never gets made  

We could have used Travis Frederick instead of Elam too

[Wildabeast88]

2 hours ago, edthehead said:

so for the sake of this post,

treadwell is slow but he is good 

I watched him on nfl access last night,  a good kid

I have always been a fan

we are drafting early and need instant coffee 

possibly a trade back, pick him and the rest in defense,

idk

I do agree with tru11 

many factors to or WR's but we need a true #1

In this draft I feel like even the 3rd and 4th round guys are good enough to make a difference. Plus he last 10 or so years we have picked up guys like Mason, Boldin Smith veteran WRs who were 1s on other teams and came to us. Someone like Boyd in the 3rd will be very close to Treadwell in my opinion. 

[ALSKAN RAVEN FAN]

This is definitely a topic to talk/think about. Oz and his staff know how to draft but don't have a great draft record at the WR position (hopefully Breshad Perriman pays off and changes that for the Ravens).  However they are not willing to trade up to get a guy like Julio Jones see how much that move has paid off for the Falcons offense. I don't know but it seems like the scouting has played a big part in this. I honestly thought Mark Clayton was going to be a great one but he never lived up to his hype. Oz has been able to get older proven WR's to come in and perform big such as Boldin, Mason and most recently SSS. But drafting a game changer just has not happened.

[Maryland]

2 hours ago, ALSKAN RAVEN FAN said:

This is definitely a topic to talk/think about. Oz and his staff know how to draft but don't have a great draft record at the WR position (hopefully Breshad Perriman pays off and changes that for the Ravens).  However they are not willing to trade up to get a guy like Julio Jones see how much that move has paid off for the Falcons offense. I don't know but it seems like the scouting has played a big part in this. I honestly thought Mark Clayton was going to be a great one but he never lived up to his hype. Oz has been able to get older proven WR's to come in and perform big such as Boldin, Mason and most recently SSS. But drafting a game changer just has not happened.

The failure/success of this trade is a debate in and of itself.

[Cville-Raven]

1 hour ago, Maryland said:

The failure/success of this trade is a debate in and of itself.

This trade kind of sucked for both teams. While the Falcons got a great player, they're depth became absolutely garbage partially because of it. The Browns hilariously wasted all of the picks they got.

[ALSKAN RAVEN FAN]

37 minutes ago, Cville-Raven said:

This trade kind of sucked for both teams. While the Falcons got a great player, they're depth became absolutely garbage partially because of it. The Browns hilariously wasted all of the picks they got.

Great point. However it was the same front office who made a brilliant move to get one of the best WR's in the NFL who allowed their depth to become so weak. As far as the Browns are concerned they have had enough top 10 picks to field almost a whole starting team and have miserably failed. I swear for every player the Browns get right they get it wrong with the next 3 players. The ownership cant commit to a coach long enough to let the guy put together his own team.

[ALSKAN RAVEN FAN]

2 hours ago, Maryland said:

The failure/success of this trade is a debate in and of itself.

True but boy would I love to have Julio wearing purple and black.

[Cville-Raven]

10 hours ago, ALSKAN RAVEN FAN said:

Great point. However it was the same front office who made a brilliant move to get one of the best WR's in the NFL who allowed their depth to become so weak. As far as the Browns are concerned they have had enough top 10 picks to field almost a whole starting team and have miserably failed. I swear for every player the Browns get right they get it wrong with the next 3 players. The ownership cant commit to a coach long enough to let the guy put together his own team.

The Browns have gotten the last couple drafts so wrong,

[Ravenslifer]

The answer to this topic is in the title - history.  If you start lumping Travis Taylor, Mark Clayton, Patrick Johnson in with the likes of recent draft picks, we might as well talk about Matt Elam and say this front office is terrible at drafting safeties in spite of drafting one of the greatest of all time in Ed Reed.  Focusing on recent history i.e. the Harbaugh era, so far we're 1 for 1, Torrey, when we draft a receiver in the first 3 rounds, with Breshad Perriman's development still up in the air.  And I think Michael Campanaro could carve out a nice niche in this league if he would just stay healthy.  There are multiple reasons why our previous receivers didn't work out, the most important being that maybe the best QB season we had until 2008 was Vinny Testaverde's in 96, and things might have been different if Michael Jackson had stayed healthy and didn't retire at 29.  You could basically go back to any team, look at a ten year stretch in their history, find a position they failed to address, and say they were terrible at drafting that position just because.  I'm happy with what we had in Torrey for a late second round pick, and I think Breshad has the chance to be better than Torrey - if that's the case, I'd say he works out in the end as well.

[Winchester]

21 hours ago, ALPHA said:

We're a run first team and thats our identity, the times we've been forced to rely on Joe's arm it hasn't been pretty.

Much of that is cuz the receivers are so darn mediocre. Demarcus Robinson and Kenny lawyer round4 Jay Lee round5. Receiver shopping spree and dump losers like butler givens Matthews and maybe even aiken. He is just the best of scrubs.

[thieverycorporation]

No one's going to convince me that the problems we've had aren't due to poor scouting and lack of interest by Ozzie to get the position right. I also think they have under valued the position and solely concentrated on the defense as being the be all end all winning formula. Repeatedly they have opted not to select a wide out in rounds with noted high upside and traits that would suggest a better player. Even when we selected Campanaro it seemed like an after thought. Like oh yeah we need a receiver. But the Biggest part of the problem is the coaching staff obviously over estimates their effectiveness with raw projects and they can't seem to coach up a player. Hanging on to a Brown this year whom hasn't been effective in couple of years straight is alarming. Like why ? It's ridiculous.

Total disfunction exist in this area.

Edited April 10, 2016 by thieverycorporation

[Cville-Raven]

1 hour ago, thieverycorporation said:

No one's going to convince me that the problems we've had aren't due to poor scouting and lack of interest by Ozzie to get the position right. I also think they have under valued the position and solely concentrated on the defense as being the be all end all winning formula. Repeatedly they have opted not to select a wide out in rounds with noted high upside and traits that would suggest a better player. Even when we selected Campanaro it seemed like an after thought. Like oh yeah we need a receiver. But the Biggest part of the problem is the coaching staff obviously over estimates their effectiveness with raw projects and they can't seem to coach up a player. Hanging on to a Brown this year whom hasn't been effective in couple of years straight is alarming. Like why ? It's ridiculous.

Total disfunction exist in this area.

You're reading way too much into the team keeping brown. He's a camp body.

[thieverycorporation]

42 minutes ago, Cville-Raven said:

You're reading way too much into the team keeping brown. He's a camp body.

We don't need more camp bodies and if you think we do wouldn't it be more effective to have one that hasn't regressed in your current scheme. If he didn't get it then what would lend itself to be different going forth? He didn't suffer a injury as none was reported. He's not effective in getting separation at any level of the field. He will be taking valuable snaps/position from someone that has not been introduced to our schemes. Wasting roster spots isn't a luxury we can afford. Camp bodies should be for those whom have a realistic chance of making the roster. So yeah it worries me that they continue to put valuable time and resources into failed prospects. Especially after declaring that the wait was over for projects after repeated attempts. I say prove it! And low tolerance of some and seemingly elongated periods for others is inconsistent at best. I'm not taking a homer approach about this topic because it seems to help the organization in enabling poor decisions. It's a poor track record period.

Edited April 10, 2016 by thieverycorporation

[RaineV1]

On 4/9/2016 at 4:38 PM, ALSKAN RAVEN FAN said:

This is definitely a topic to talk/think about. Oz and his staff know how to draft but don't have a great draft record at the WR position (hopefully Breshad Perriman pays off and changes that for the Ravens).  However they are not willing to trade up to get a guy like Julio Jones see how much that move has paid off for the Falcons offense. I don't know but it seems like the scouting has played a big part in this. I honestly thought Mark Clayton was going to be a great one but he never lived up to his hype. Oz has been able to get older proven WR's to come in and perform big such as Boldin, Mason and most recently SSS. But drafting a game changer just has not happened.

The Falcons would probably have been better off not making that trade.

[redrum52]

3 hours ago, RaineV1 said:

The Falcons would probably have been better off not making that trade.

Luckily it was made with the Browns so the move by comparison doesn't look that bad.

[RaineV1]

14 minutes ago, redrum52 said:

Luckily it was made with the Browns so the move by comparison doesn't look that bad.

Yeah. Just imagine if they made that trade with a competent team that could use those extra high picks well.

[BOLDnPurPnBlacK]

6 hours ago, thieverycorporation said:

We don't need more camp bodies and if you think we do wouldn't it be more effective to have one that hasn't regressed in your current scheme. If he didn't get it then what would lend itself to be different going forth? He didn't suffer a injury as none was reported. He's not effective in getting separation at any level of the field. He will be taking valuable snaps/position from someone that has not been introduced to our schemes. Wasting roster spots isn't a luxury we can afford. Camp bodies should be for those whom have a realistic chance of making the roster. So yeah it worries me that they continue to put valuable time and resources into failed prospects. Especially after declaring that the wait was over for projects after repeated attempts. I say prove it! And low tolerance of some and seemingly elongated periods for others is inconsistent at best. I'm not taking a homer approach about this topic because it seems to help the organization in enabling poor decisions. It's a poor track record period.

You need 90 players in camp. There aren't 90 legitimate players for all 32 teams to have only players with a legit chance of making the team.

and right now with SSS and Aiken being the only 2 WRs who really know the offense and have experience going through our training camp, it doesn't hurt to have another guy with experience who can demonstrate how to perform drills, what coaches are looking for, etc...

--

on the overall discussion... How many legit #1 WRs are there really in the entire NFL? A couple teams have found 2, a good amount have 1, and most teams have a few above average guys. 

The position is just hard to scout. There are some can't miss guys but they go way too high and we've never had a chance in the past 8-10 yrs. otherwise it's a total crap shoot. Some teams seem to excel at drafting WRs but often those guys move on to other teams and flop. 

So I don't think it's so much that, but more so that their offense and QB are tailored to making them look good. That's a testament to those teams, but not necessarily that they're better at drafting the position. 

And looking at the best teams, having a #1 WR is not an indicator of team success. Denver has one but he didn't do anything in the playoffs. Carolina doesn't, Patriots don't really (though Gronk is a beast), Seattle doesnt, we haven't, the 49ers didn't when they were a top team, etc...

if we invested enough resources I'm sure we'd land one too. Since there aren't that many team who even have 1 beast WR it's not like any team is just plucking them off trees.. It's just different styles of team building. 

We build our roster a certain way, and choose to address certain positions differently. Since WR has proven to be a difficult position to project, instead of constantly wasting draft picks into addressing the position we've chosen to grab proven, veteran guys who have something left to prove and that we can get a few years out of, and surround them with a few young guys with a particular skill set. And so far, it's worked in terms of team success. 

[thieverycorporation]

1 hour ago, BOLDnPurPnBlacK said:

You need 90 players in camp. There aren't 90 legitimate players for all 32 teams to have only players with a legit chance of making the team.

and right now with SSS and Aiken being the only 2 WRs who really know the offense and have experience going through our training camp, it doesn't hurt to have another guy with experience who can demonstrate how to perform drills, what coaches are looking for, etc...

--

on the overall discussion... How many legit #1 WRs are there really in the entire NFL? A couple teams have found 2, a good amount have 1, and most teams have a few above average guys. 

The position is just hard to scout. There are some can't miss guys but they go way too high and we've never had a chance in the past 8-10 yrs. otherwise it's a total crap shoot. Some teams seem to excel at drafting WRs but often those guys move on to other teams and flop. 

So I don't think it's so much that, but more so that their offense and QB are tailored to making them look good. That's a testament to those teams, but not necessarily that they're better at drafting the position. 

And looking at the best teams, having a #1 WR is not an indicator of team success. Denver has one but he didn't do anything in the playoffs. Carolina doesn't, Patriots don't really (though Gronk is a beast), Seattle doesnt, we haven't, the 49ers didn't when they were a top team, etc...

if we invested enough resources I'm sure we'd land one too. Since there aren't that many team who even have 1 beast WR it's not like any team is just plucking them off trees.. It's just different styles of team building. 

We build our roster a certain way, and choose to address certain positions differently. Since WR has proven to be a difficult position to project, instead of constantly wasting draft picks into addressing the position we've chosen to grab proven, veteran guys who have something left to prove and that we can get a few years out of, and surround them with a few young guys with a particular skill set. And so far, it's worked in terms of team success. 

I respectfully disagree. Successful teams draft receivers that fit there specific schemes period. Numerous picks that haven't panned out can't be simply explained away. Sure we've have had numerous opportunities to draft difference makers in multiple previous drafts. Diggs in the last one but elected to for go for another position. Just the latest example. It's a crapshoot if you have no idea what in the world your looking for or how to utilize the player. Waiting for a cast off or proven player at one specific position is the hallmark card of a supposed GM genius, is it? The whole draft process lends no guarantee at any position.  That's strange.

[Purple_City39]

I think Tru had the best answer here.  At the end of the day, the Ravens system (and being run first) hasn't catered to WRs much.  A team's system dictates a lot.  For example, I can name on one hand the amount of defensive players that have left Baltimore, regardless of age, that played just as well after they left the team.  The defensive system overall is great, especially in the front 7.  The offensive system does well for RBs, guards, centers, TEs, even tackles on occasions but it does nothing for WRs.  Statistically, the best WR in Ravens history was Mason.  Another team's established #1 who came here later in his career.  

That said, a part of it seems to have fallen on the WR coach also.  Bobby Engram has gotten better production out the WRs any previous coach has imo.  I don't think previous WR coaches would have had as many undrafted players looking as serviceable or good as Engram had last year.  We've seen good play from 7th rounder Campanaro when he's healthy.  6th rounder Waller showed decent improvement from his first preseason game on.  Butler looked good when he came in.  Aiken surprised many.  Imagine if Engram can get a few WRs with high pedigrees

[berad]

On 4/9/2016 at 11:46 AM, Tru11 said:

id take 3 good ones over 1 great one any time.

Agree because we've shown we can win championships with only 'good' WRs. We still need to see where all of the unknown variables in our WR group fit in before I can confidently call them good, though.

[BOLDnPurPnBlacK]

13 hours ago, thieverycorporation said:

I respectfully disagree. Successful teams draft receivers that fit there specific schemes period. Numerous picks that haven't panned out can't be simply explained away. Sure we've have had numerous opportunities to draft difference makers in multiple previous drafts. Diggs in the last one but elected to for go for another position. Just the latest example. It's a crapshoot if you have no idea what in the world your looking for or how to utilize the player. Waiting for a cast off or proven player at one specific position is the hallmark card of a supposed GM genius, is it? The whole draft process lends no guarantee at any position.  That's strange.

31 other teams passed on Diggs for 5-6 rounds too. 

You can disagree, but show me a team that's had a meaningful amount of success at drafting receivers. Meaning, over the past say, 10 years, the numbers of draft picks they've used on receivers, how many you'd say "panned out" and then what their careers looked like. 

New England pretty much follows the same suit. Theyve had almost no success drafting WR's and have relied on plucking vets from other teams. BB is typically referred to as a personnel genius as well. Neither him or Oz seem to have nailed drafting receivers, but oddly enough they seem to be pretty good at putting together contending rosters. Maybe theres something to that philosophy.

Sure there are some successful teams that seem to get contributions from even mid-round draft picks, at least recently, on a somewhat consistent basis like Pitt, Cinci, Green Bay and Seattle/Jax (very recently) to an extent.... but aside from those 4 what other teams have even 2 above average starting WR's that they drafted?

There are also very successful teams that most of their notable contributions at the position have come from FA's like us, NE, Carolina (this year), NYJ, KC, Wash, etc.. It's a very difficult position to project to the pro level period. We havent had the success drafting WR's that we have at say linebacker or O-line, but i would guess thats a trend across the league. 

Just a quick sample... I'd say 3 teams that are perceived to draft receivers well are the Bengals, Packers and Steelers.

Since 2008, the Bengals have drafted 13 WR's. Out of those i would say 5 panned out in any sense of the word (Sanu, Jones, Green, Simpson, and Caldwell). Out of the 13, 5 were drafted in the top 4 rounds including 4/5 that "Panned out" and based on draft position id say Sanu and Simpson likely performed below their drafted position. The Bengals have also drafted Mario Alford, James Wright, Cobi Hamilton, Ryan Whalen, Dez Briscoe, Jordan Shipley, Freddie Brown, and Mario Urrutia over that time. A LOT OF MISSES.

Over the same time, the Packers have drafted 9 WR's. Out of those I'd say 2 panned out: Jordy Nelson and Cobb. Both were picked in the top 4 rounds with Nelson a 1st. 3 were misses (Charles Johnson, Kevin Dorsey, and Brett Swain) while the jury is still out on 4 (Ty Montgomery, Davante Adams, Abbrederis, and Jeff Janis). They've picked 4 WR's in the top 4 rounds. So, 3 definite misses, 2 definite hits and 4 TBD's... will have to wait a couple years to really gauge, but still more misses then hits. And the 2 TBD's with the most potential (Montgomery and Adams) were both high picks, so need to pan out to justify the pick.

The Steelers are probably the one that you could say definitely drafts well at the position. Since 2008 they've drafted 9 WR's as well. 3 have definitely panned out (Wallace, Brown, and Sanders) and 2 of those were high picks. 3 are still TBD (Coates, Bryant, and Wheaton) but all 3 were high picks and should be big contributors to justify their position. Bryan could be a stud, but if he continues to be suspended his production in limited action doesnt matter. Then they have 3 misses in Justin Brown, Tony Clemons and Limas Sweed (contributed some but didnt justify the selection imo). So 5 of their 6 high picks invest have either panned out or are likely to pan out... but also out of the 6 good WR picks, 5 were picked high so you'd hope they would.

Now the Ravens.... we've picked 10 WR's over the same time period. For us, its only fair to say 1 panned out in Torrey and he was a high pick. 3 are TBD (Perriman, Waller and Camp). We have 6 misses (Mellette, Streeter, Doss, Reed, Marcus Smith, and Justin Harper) but in those Mellette, Streeter, and Harper were late 6th/7th round picks.... almost UDFA's. Exactly half, 5/10, of our drafted WR's have been 6th/7th round. And as this shows and will show; it's more than a rarity for WR's drafted in those rounds to pan out. Only 2 were drafted high, and so far 1 has panned out with the jury still out on Perriman.

--

So, sure you could look at that as further proof that we can't draft WR's. But what I see is that outside of of the once-in-a-decade Antonio Brown type pick, no one hits on WR's with any consistency beyond the 5th round.

All 3 of the other teams landed a legit #1 receiver, but 2 of them got their guy in the 1st round. Our only 1st round selection is still TBD so if Perriman pans out then its just further evidence that we're right on par. 

And while all 3 other teams have landed more contributing #2/#3 type receivers they have done so with high picks. IMO investing high picks just to get middle of the road contributions out of a WR isnt great value if you're landing starting caliber players at other positions which we HAVE done pretty frequently.

And outside of Antonio Brown, Marvin Jones is the only pick outside of the top rounds for any of the 4 teams that has really "panned out" and he really only contributed for a year or 2 (Abbrederis and Janis i guess the jury's still out)... so that fact that we have Camp who if healthy looks to be a legit weapon means we've done pretty well.  

In terms of getting a #2 type WR the Bengals are 1/8 drafting in the later rounds... The Packers are 0/5.... the Steelers are 1/4... and depending on Camp we're currently 0/7 but more of our picks have been in the 6th/7th rounds than the others who more of their picks that I'm calling later are 4th/5th rounds.

So, unless you're taking a guy in the top rounds the success rate is almost non-existent even for the teams that are "good" at drafting WR's; and then even in the top couple rounds the success rate of landing a legit #1 or #2 WR is only 6/18 for all 4 teams combined so 33%. 

I'd say all considered that's a total crapshoot for even the best drafting teams. In the top rounds if you take into account the overall hit % for all positions its probably on par but right now we're 1 for 2 and could be 2 for 2 if Perriman works out since 2008 so we could be 100%... which would make us among the best wouldnt it? Even at a 50% hit rate thats good compared to these other "good" teams.

And while you can pull out your Diggs or Brown examples all you want... NO ONE is getting guys like that with any regularity or predictability outside of the top 3 rounds.... not even the teams that are supposedly good at drafting the position. I mean I guess everyone else sucks at drafting QB's since SEA and NE got Wilson and Brady in the 3rd and 6th rounds......... except those 2 have never done that outside those 2 specific examples either.

The only formula for getting production consistently from drafted WR's appears to be consistently drafting them in the 1st and 2nd rounds. No ones simply taking guys in the 4th-7th rounds and getting production. Once in 10 years do teams hit with those picks... if theyre lucky.

And im certainly not mad at the Ravens for not selecting WR's more frequently in the top couple rounds. We've been just fine without doing so, and most teams that have done that arent getting more than 1 stud WR out of it. They're getting complimentary guys that we seem to find in the bargain bins of FA frequently enough to remain competitive.

Edited April 11, 2016 by BOLDnPurPnBlacK

[thieverycorporation]

You rebuttal provides much of the explanation. I'd say Seattle, Colts, Pittsburgh, Chicago, Patriots whom you omitted? Cincy and even the lowly Browns have drafted well at the position. One statement you said has credence as they (other then us) have opted to use early round picks to secure that position and sometimes while double dipping. I'd even give the Ravens a pass if they secured a dual threat RB if they chose not to double dip on receiver. An argument can be made that they did at tightend. But the bucket brigade of chain movers isn't the high octane threat in the red zone needed. Nothing can be said other then the Ravens stink/whiffed on multiple picks and the trend up to date continues. I do agree that Engram Has bested his predecessors. The buck stops with Ozzie regardless. He's the GM and owns all picks. Unless it was another teams developmental player we stood no chance. We can debate or list an itemized list but we probably won't agree. History shouldn't be re written nor a skewed as it what is. If there only method of getting better production is to get outside help so be it. But It's not something Ozzie could possibly want on his Resume. There best player available doesn't ring true. 

Edited April 11, 2016 by thieverycorporation