Are The Baltimore Ravens Turning Into An Offense-First Team?

[bioLarzen]

Hi,

I have asked this question at the comment section for today's LFW, and I've been suggested it would make a good topic to discuss here. My original comment runs like this:

 

Is it only me, or is it really happening? I mean, are the Ravens on track for a transformation the steelers have been through a couple of seasons ago - to turn a historically D-driven team into an O-driven team? With the arrival of Todd Haley and getting their hands on a couple of offensive gems - the likes of Antonio Brown and Bell - the steelers, who used to be synonymous with quality defense, now have one of the best O's in the league, and a mediocre D. I hope the latter will never be true about us - but I can't help noticing how this off-season Ozzie have been stacking up proven talent on the O side of the ball, giving Flacco an amount of quality targets he may never have had before. On the other side, the only notable addition to the D is Eric Weddle - who's as quality an addition as one gets - still, all in all, the O has been through a much more significant facelift.
So, what do you think? Are the Ravens turning into an O-driven team, too?

 

So, what do you all think?

[Tiznut]

No still looking to be balanced.  We are looking at improving offensively but not while sacrificing defense 

[gtalk12]

I don't think so, aside from the 1st pick almost everything else went to defense....not to mention we got Weddle in here and Powers.

[JoeyFlex5]

I think we lack a identity on defense and our offenses identity is based on too many unprovens. On offense were still a play action offense based on power inside and great speed outside. On defense were just lost and trying to get talent and an identity. I think pees has done a lot to take out the swagger and identity of our defense and the busts on defense over the years have left us lacking talent. Its hard to come back from.

[BOLDnPurPnBlacK]

2 minutes ago, JoeyFlex5 said:

I think we lack a identity on defense and our offenses identity is based on too many unprovens. On offense were still a play action offense based on power inside and great speed outside. On defense were just lost and trying to get talent and an identity. I think pees has done a lot to take out the swagger and identity of our defense and the busts on defense over the years have left us lacking talent. Its hard to come back from.

I can agree with this. 

I don't know if we'll be offensively driven - but we do at least have an identity. We're going to run the ball and use that with play action to take shots down the field with our speed guys on the outside. We're gonna churn yards on early downs and then use our TEs and possession guys to convert 3rd and mediums. And we'll take the occasional shot to take advantage of our speed and QBs big arm. 

On D there's a lot new and a lot of questions. I don't know really what we hang our hat on. I guess we're still stout against the run. I think our pass rush and secondary will be improved, but we're not the hard hitting intimidating D we used to be. We're not the ball hawking, turn the game over with big plays type of D. And we're not really the swarm the ball and gang tackle type of D. I guess our Defensive identity is bend and hopefully only occasionally break.

the talents there to change that, but a lot has to come together. 

So id say, I feel like there are more answers on offense and it's the most fire power we've had in a long while. But I don't know that we're a 30 pt per game team that's going to win shoot outs regularly. 

Were going to need balance. Not necessarily great anywhere, but no weaknesses either. And I can get behind that. 

[Jacquouille]

8 minutes ago, JoeyFlex5 said:

I think we lack a identity on defense and our offenses identity is based on too many unprovens. On offense were still a play action offense based on power inside and great speed outside. On defense were just lost and trying to get talent and an identity. I think pees has done a lot to take out the swagger and identity of our defense and the busts on defense over the years have left us lacking talent. Its hard to come back from.

That's harsh but not false. To me we lack identity on both side. We lack a dominant go to guy on offense and a vocal leader on defense. 

I'm not a Pees hater btw, but I agree we're not there yet to be dominant on defense. 

[bioLarzen]

13 minutes ago, gtalk12 said:

I don't think so, aside from the 1st pick almost everything else went to defense....not to mention we got Weddle in here and Powers.

Well, we also picked a RB, a G, a WR, a KR/RB - in fact, 5 of our 11 picks are on the O side (and 6 on the D). And true, we got Weddle and Powers - but we also got Watson and Wallace. We will almost surely have to cut starting caliber WR's, RB's and TE's - while I don't think any starting caliber guys on the D side of the ball are going top HAVE TO be cut because of position depth...

[Jacquouille]

On the other hand you could say we're pretty freaking deep on the front-3, our LB corps has talent and our secondary will definitely improve a lot this year. So I wouldn't qualify our defense as not good. Just some agressivity would be appreciated.

Edited June 17, 2016 by Jacquouille

[ludy51]

I think if we get even half the offensive talent the steelers have, we would be a better, more balanced team

[harfordravenfan]

59 minutes ago, Tiznut said:

No still looking to be balanced.  We are looking at improving offensively but not while sacrificing defense 

Totally agree with the "balanced" comment. Missing on a couple high defensive picks set us back some but still got youth and talent. Hoping Frazier and weedle can bring that secondary around and I have high expectations for the d-line this year

[DenverRaven]

Oz and Steve have noted that they saw what the Broncos did last year, and they are still big on defensive play. That said, I think we needed some depth on both sides. We'll always be looking for a deep and balanced team. It's how we won in 2012.

I can't imagine Steve/Oz/Harbs are sitting there watching our defense blow games (for the better part of 3 seasons now), and thinking to themselves "if only we had more offensive power to keep up."

[Winchester]

As of yet there is nobody on any side of the ball that scares opponents. Not drafting well and trying to build an offense and defense simultaneously has taken its toll.

[Cillmatic]

There's no way to tell until we see the team play, at this point both units are more or less equally matched.

[K-Dog]

I think it is just the way it panned out for the most part.  I mean there was definitely some intention to get Joe his much needed weapons, and some solid protection.  We invested a ton in our QB, it only makes sense to finish the process. I don't think it was completely at the expense of our defense though.   
I guess what I am trying to say is I think we are closer to balanced now as opposed to any time we had a top five offense. 

[trevorsteadman]

The Ravens in 2012 were average at best at both offense and defense ranking about 15th in each category. You would not have guessed that group later went on to win a super bowl. The Ravens are just looking at balancing out the team because they know they compliment each other. Look at some of the previous Super Bowls... Denver got demolished in 2014 against the Seahawks in the Super Bowl with one of the best offenses the league has seen in history. Look at the Cowboys, Giants, Saints, etc. that always put up a good number of points but their defense can't keep leads. 

 

What made the 2013 Ravens great was the deep threats in Jones and Smith that opened up Boldin and Pitta. The front office is trying to recreate that with Perriman and Wallace now, a bunch of solid tight ends including Pitta still, and Steve Smith Sr. and Kamar Aiken. The Ravens have struggled getting points and when they did lead they would lose it. It has been the story since they held the Lombardi trophy.

 

So when you ask the question.. Are they more offensive? I say no. I think if Dumervil and Suggs return that the defense actually is the strength of this team next season. Because when healthy the linebacker core of Suggs, Dumervil, Mosley, and whoever wins the other linebacker job are still one of the best linebacker cores in the league, along with an up and coming secondary. A big question mark is still the young defensive line but the Ravens have done well getting quality, but still unproven, young guys throughout the last few drafts to start to contribute.

 

The Ravens were ranked near the bottom of the league in scores longer than 20 yards and ranked near the bottom of defending it. That is why they went out to get Weddle and Wallace, two of the guys best at their position respecitvely that fit those bills. To me the Ravens just want an offense that can open up big plays and put up a consistent amount of points and not punt the ball 5 times a game. And they want a defense that can hold a lead when the offense gets them the lead. 

[January J]

If we stay healthy I think we are a very balanced team with tons of potential. Injuries to key players have killed us on both sides of the ball. Had we had Jimmy in that divisional game against new England we could have easily went on to win it all- and suggs injury in week 1 along with no receiver to stretch the feild did us in last year. Health and depth is the key.

[trevorsteadman]

Just now, January J said:

If we stay healthy I think we are a very balanced team with tons of potential. Injuries to key players have killed us on both sides of the ball. Had we had Jimmy in that divisional game against new England we could have easily went on to win it all- and suggs injury in week 1 along with no receiver to stretch the feild did us in last year. Health and depth is the key.

And that is why I think the Ravens are one step further at least on offense this season than last season. There are actualy receivers to stretch the field, proven receivers, and good depth for if guys go out. The one place I see the Ravens a lot weaker at is at offensive line but that can change depending on how Stanley performs. Defense in the secondary there is more depth. Linebacker depth still needs help though both outside and inside depending on how the young guys perform.

[edthehead]

I think not only are we going offense first

but we will become a 

"West Coast " style offense,

naturally our players need to step up,

but look at the type of 

our backs(dixon) and TE's are are receiving type players,

2/3 yrs down the line 

speed WR;  perriman and moore

slot; camp and  reynolds

possession; aiken and butler/mathews

TE's ,,,

RB'S,,,

the future is now as far as our offense is concern

 

[52520Andrew]

I think the offense has been better than the defense actually the past 2 years with an exception probably for the end of this past year when our second and thrid string guys were in on offense. Don't know how that will hold up this year as we will see if the defense can keep up how it ended last year but I think the offense is in pretty good shape assuming certain guys are able to step up.

[Tru11]

we have been spending more of the cap on offense since last season and its project to stay that way for the coming years as well.

so.....

 

 

[ravensdfan]

Eh couldn't let this thread go you know LOL

 

You know where I stand, as long as Pees is here we'd best be going for 30 plus points a game and no less. Otherwise Pees Pushovers will lose it in the 4th.

[Jaybirds]

I feel like we're confusing speed and acceleration here.  The offense has had the most upgrades (well, at least updates) recently because they were so far behind.  That doesn't necessarily mean our approach has changed, just that they needed more help. 

Besides, I think we'd all be a lot more worried if our primary focus, defense, needed that much of an overall. 

Edited June 23, 2016 by Jaybirds

[BOLDnPurPnBlacK]

2 hours ago, Jaybirds said:

I feel like we're confusing speed and acceleration here.  The offense has had the most upgrades (well, at least updates) recently because they were so far behind.  That doesn't necessarily mean our approach has changed, just that they needed more help. 

Besides, I think we'd all be a lot more worried if our primary focus, defense, needed that much of an overall. 

Yea this is a good point.

We havent added or focused on the offense in lieu of the defense. We've upgraded both.

The offense is just finally getting up to NFL standards; and we happened to lose a lot of long time, defensive greats in quick succession to it took a bit of a hit. We've been rebuilding both.

In fact, i dont think our identity has ever been just defense. Its been a rugged, hard nosed offense that runs the ball and controls the clock... taking calculated shots along the way; coupled with a defense that focuses on making big plays/turnovers, that doesnt give up the big play (even if that means at times allowing the short play), but that tightens up in the red zone to force FGs at best.

I think we're still that... Defense is just as important as it ever was, we've just lost some of the great players that made it so great.... and our offense is still our offense, we've just acquired some better talent than maybe we've ever had. I dont think we'll ever just start slinging the ball all over the field 40 times a game, and have a sieve for a defense.

--

I think the perception comes from just the natural ebbs and flows of how often and how well you hit on certain players on either side of the ball. When we were failing on our offensive draft picks a lot, but nailing the D ones - of course it looked like we were a defensive focused team. But i think they wouldve loved for Boller and Clayton and etc... to work out and have had a great offense during that time too.

And now we've hit on Flacco, had some very good RBs, brought receivers and TEs that have panned out and been very good, while we've missed some picks like Elam, Kindle, Cody, brought in FA safeties that didnt really work, while losing some great players, so it looks like weve become more offensive.... but i dont think its by design or that we're trying to make the offense the engine of the team.

We've always strived for a balance, so that no matter the opponent or the circumstances of the game -- either side is capable of stepping up and winning it.

Edited June 23, 2016 by BOLDnPurPnBlacK

[funky141]

The defense hasn't been that good for a few years now. Flacco and the offense had to score to win.

To me the Ravens have been an offense first team the last few years.

[Guest]

On ‎6‎/‎17‎/‎2016 at 5:15 PM, harfordravenfan said:

Totally agree with the "balanced" comment. Missing on a couple high defensive picks set us back some but still got youth and talent. Hoping Frazier and weedle can bring that secondary around and I have high expectations for the d-line this year

You are the first poster here that has stated missing on those draft picks has "set us back".  Youth and talent spring eternal. No horse trainer ever killed himself with a 2 year old colt in the barn.  (That is horse talk, hope the message comes through.)

You said it kind however. I'm wondering how long before the natives really get restless. Maybe the better question is, "will they ever"?

This thread was about the Ravens becoming an Offense First team. The pain is almost unbearable having just read the offense is no longer the Kubiak system, but now its the Raven system, meaning its the Trestman system.  I have to tell you, I have watched Marc Trestman very closely for a number of years and still can't believe we hired him. Who pushed for him?  Who thought he fit Raven football? Who thought he fit Joe Flacco?  What was it about Marc Trestman that made the Raven Front Office say, "We gotta have some"?

 

[redrum52]

I feel like one of these threads is made every year since Harbaugh has taken over.  Sure, we're a pass first offense with a qb who has yet to even crack the 4k yard mark...

 

This whole team, minus ST, seems to lack any form of an identity.

 

Edit:  Reading is a fundamental.

 

 I'd say no, but who the hell knows.  They are going to want to be "balanced" but the run game has been inconsistent as well as the passing game, while the defense seems to still be figuring out the scheme.  Last part still stands.  This team lacks an identity, unless that identity is being inconsistent.

Edited June 28, 2016 by redrum52

[Passepartout]

Joe Flacco is clutch, he doesn't need to have 4,000 yards. 

[redrum52]

On ‎6‎/‎28‎/‎2016 at 1:37 AM, Passepartout said:

Joe Flacco is clutch, he doesn't need to have 4,000 yards. 

Sure...

 

Anyway, the whole left side of the line is basically new.  Joe's coming back from an ACL, Smith from Achilles, Pitta from hip fractures and a lot of new pieces.

 

Defense is the same.  Suggs from Achilles, which is a HUGE part of the defense, pressure and contain wise.  Webb at safety, other ILB, and do our DE maintain or progress from last year.  There is also the question of, is the secondary actually good because they're good or because they're playing against Mallett.  As far as I'm concerned, we're a special teams first team.

[berad]

9 hours ago, redrum52 said:

I feel like one of these threads is made every year since Harbaugh has taken over.  Sure, we're a pass first offense with a qb who has yet to even crack the 4k yard mark...

 

This whole team, minus ST, seems to lack any form of an identity.

 

Edit:  Reading is a fundamental.

 

 I'd say no, but who the hell knows.  They are going to want to be "balanced" but the run game has been inconsistent as well as the passing game, while the defense seems to still be figuring out the scheme.  Last part still stands.  This team lacks an identity, unless that identity is being inconsistent.

If he DID throw for 14 more yards in the 2014 season would it change your opinion about him?

[rmcjacket23]

We've been an offensive driven team since at least 2013, arguably all the way back to the end of 2011.