The good, the not so good pre-season game 2

[BOLDnPurPnBlacK]

2 hours ago, Ravensfan23 said:

It's really bad. You'd think the 3 of them have worked together long enough that they've improve, at least enough to make each other better, but they haven't. 

I'm usually watching the game on mute or really low volume because it's tough to follow the play of certain players when you're constantly correcting and disagreeing with the commentators

Yea I don't get it. 

I don't live locally anymore so sometimes my only option is to stream the game day radio broadcast and that group is horrendous. 

So many mistakes, often disagree with their takes, and they just don't seem to have insider knowledge/perspective.

And I feel like they distract from the game. They'll still be talking about a past play and you miss out on the current play-by-play. And it's just choppy. No real chemistry, no defined roles, they often misspeak and get players mixed up and confused. 

I don't know. I can't articulate very well exactly what it is that I don't like -- but I often prefer even the opponents local broadcast to our own. 

 

[BOLDnPurPnBlacK]

1 hour ago, EdTheMythicalOne said:

I am not arguing for the sake of arguing, heck, I don't even know what the heck we are arguing about since everybody agrees with me that Matt Elam's option was declined because he was playing poorly and that he is part of the reason why the team went out to get Weddle.

I never said Elam wasn't trying to improve. Please point to a post where I said that because I know I haven't.

That's the thing though, step back from it for a minute and read what people are saying about him. You'd think he was a superstar in the making based off of all the love he's getting....for making a couple of tackles...that any...other...safety...in...the....game....makes. If you want to say he's improved from a guy who could barely tackle to a guy that makes tackles every once in awhile now, fine. He's improved. But don't sit on this board and try to tell me he made impact plays when that's a fact he did not. He didn't force a fumble, he didn't pick off a pass, he didn't record a sack, he didn't have a tackle for a loss. He made general football plays. If that gets people excited then well good on them.

And if people are going to continuously attack my opinion and say I am wrong when I am not, then I am going to voice my opinion, back it up with facts, and ask you all to do the same thing. Stop arguing for the sake of arguing. If you all like Elam and think he's done great, fine. That's awesome. I am not in that camp and it is obvious I am not going to change my mind based off of one game where he shows up in a couple of plays.

How many interceptions, fumbles, sacks, and tackles for loss are there in a game?? So, outside of those plays everything else is just stuff that anyone else should make?? Not sure if that's what you meant but that's kind of how it sounded. 

Elam has improved. Not to the point where it's justifying his first round pick. But he's looked much better. He was solid in coverage on several plays. He made a couple big hits that not everyone makes. 

Him simply making tackles by itself shouldn't be praise worthy - you're right. But it was arguably the biggest knock on him. He'd often get himself in position to make plays and then would miss the tackle. The play making ability flashed at times but he couldn't finish. So seeing him wrapping up and form tackling is a positive bc now you can reasonably expect him to start making those plays. 

And I'd say he made about 4 standout plays that not everyone would make. His play sealed the first game as he knifed through blocks and forced the runner to slow his momentum so a play could be made. In the second game he played tight coverage multiple times and made tackles to eliminate any chance for YAC. 

I don't know what the original argument was but my only point is that he's showed improvement thus far, and if not for this injury was making a legit case to make this team. The most important things we need from a depth safety in his position is the ability to play good coverage and make open field tackles to limit gains. He's shown dramatic improvement in both aspects. Now, since he was so horrendous to begin with, that dramatic improvement isn't to the level of stud or first round pick worthy - but he's shown enough that id be comfortable with him as our 3rd or 4th safety... Which I wouldn't have said coming into the offseason. 

[bMore Heathen]

17 minutes ago, BmoreBird22 said:

Very unlikely, but he should be good to go for week one.

I would think he would be returning to practice, I didn't mean playing on Saturday or anything. 

[BmoreBird22]

Just now, bMore Heathen said:

I would think he would be returning to practice, I didn't mean playing on Saturday or anything. 

Oh, yeah, he'll be out there today, but I don't think he'll be doing contact this week

[Purple_City39]

3 minutes ago, BmoreBird22 said:

Oh, yeah, he'll be out there today, but I don't think he'll be doing contact this week

He's cleared to practice but not cleared for contact as of yet.  He'll be doing walk throughs only 

[BOLDnPurPnBlacK]

I really liked Chris Moore in this game. He showed to be much more than a deep play guy. His routes were crisp, routinely got open on the boundary and showed great hands. His awareness to get beyond the 1st down marker, make the catch and get out of bounds was great. He and Butler looked like seasoned vets on that 2 minute drill. 

And Josh Johnson was very impressive on that 2 minute drill as well. Great rhythm, got the ball out quick, was incredibly accurate, and showed great touch on a couple passes. Really making a push for that back up job. Tight competition between he and Mallett imo, at least based on their performances in the preseason. Johnson has gotten started much quicker, and shown a real command of the offense. 

 

And really happy for Levine making that play. Loved the salute to Tray on the TD. He also had a big play on return coverage. Our punt/kick coverages have looked a bit shaky so I don't think we can afford to lose a guy like Levine who's probably our best ST guy and is a leader -- along with his versatility and improved play on defense... I can't see him not making this team. It'd be a mistake to cut him. And that PI call on him on the boundary was BS. 

[rmw10]

Oh and @Filmstudy since I know you brought it up... it looks like Powers was hurt as he missed practice today.  Probably explains why he got the proverbial hook so early.

[52liveforever]

Just watched the first few defensive drives. Shareece Wright is not looking like an NFL starter. I really hope he picks it up. Wright and Powers looked very suspect not to mention that we are still lining up 10 yards away from the receiver shows Pees learned nothing from last year. Our guys just aren't showing the instincts to play that far off.

[EdTheMythicalOne]

37 minutes ago, BOLDnPurPnBlacK said:

How many interceptions, fumbles, sacks, and tackles for loss are there in a game?? So, outside of those plays everything else is just stuff that anyone else should make?? Not sure if that's what you meant but that's kind of how it sounded. 

Elam has improved. Not to the point where it's justifying his first round pick. But he's looked much better. He was solid in coverage on several plays. He made a couple big hits that not everyone makes. 

Him simply making tackles by itself shouldn't be praise worthy - you're right. But it was arguably the biggest knock on him. He'd often get himself in position to make plays and then would miss the tackle. The play making ability flashed at times but he couldn't finish. So seeing him wrapping up and form tackling is a positive bc now you can reasonably expect him to start making those plays. 

And I'd say he made about 4 standout plays that not everyone would make. His play sealed the first game as he knifed through blocks and forced the runner to slow his momentum so a play could be made. In the second game he played tight coverage multiple times and made tackles to eliminate any chance for YAC. 

I don't know what the original argument was but my only point is that he's showed improvement thus far, and if not for this injury was making a legit case to make this team. The most important things we need from a depth safety in his position is the ability to play good coverage and make open field tackles to limit gains. He's shown dramatic improvement in both aspects. Now, since he was so horrendous to begin with, that dramatic improvement isn't to the level of stud or first round pick worthy - but he's shown enough that id be comfortable with him as our 3rd or 4th safety... Which I wouldn't have said coming into the offseason. 

Which is odd, because I had him making the team easily as a back up safety and I supposedly "hate" him. Take a look at my guess at the 53 man roster if you think I am bluffing. I don't agree with your assessment of his play. I know for a fact that at least a few of his tackles were not "form and wrap up style." One for a fact was a diving sweep of the legs. Another "big hit" was a play that should have been flagged for a horsecollar under the new rule which was on his suplex tackle. The new rule states that you can't grab a player's jersey near the name plate area and drag him to the ground. That's exactly what he did on that play.

[Filmstudy]

21 minutes ago, rmw10 said:

Oh and @Filmstudy since I know you brought it up... it looks like Powers was hurt as he missed practice today.  Probably explains why he got the proverbial hook so early.

Looking at Powers' combination of:

1. Most recent injury (no idea on type or severity)

2. His play in both preseason games

3. The failed conditioning tests to start camp, which are regularly coupled with increased injury risk

4. The flashes from Davis (game) and Young (practice only) at SCB

I think it would be quite possible the Ravens cut Powers if his contract does not make that difficult.  Looking at Brian McFarland's outstanding contract details, however, I don't see Powers listed.  Does anyone know term and signing bonus details?

***Edit***: NM, I found the contract, it's a 1-year deal for $1.75 million with $750,000 guaranteed, so the Ravens will eat $750,000 if they cut him unless that guarantee is conditional upon him making the roster.

Edited August 22, 2016 by Filmstudy

[Ravensfan23]

1 hour ago, BOLDnPurPnBlacK said:

Yea I don't get it. 

I don't live locally anymore so sometimes my only option is to stream the game day radio broadcast and that group is horrendous. 

So many mistakes, often disagree with their takes, and they just don't seem to have insider knowledge/perspective.

And I feel like they distract from the game. They'll still be talking about a past play and you miss out on the current play-by-play. And it's just choppy. No real chemistry, no defined roles, they often misspeak and get players mixed up and confused. 

I don't know. I can't articulate very well exactly what it is that I don't like -- but I often prefer even the opponents local broadcast to our own. 

 

I know exactly what I don't like. These guys have daily access to training camp and they have no better views and opinions then we share here in the Flock. I would much rather create our own  broadcast team with some of the members here and just do a podcast of breaking down the game live. 

I also feel those guys have a responsibility to educate the casual fan on the game more than just highlights. But that's a pet peeve I have about the entire industry. 

But all in all it just seems like they don't know the team nor the game. When they credited Mallett for throwing Aiken open on the TD I was done. Mallett was late on the throw, Aiken was wide open and the ball was behind him. Also I swear Bart Scott was credited for a tackle, but my volume was low so I wasn't sure.

[Purple_City39]

46 minutes ago, 52liveforever said:

Just watched the first few defensive drives. Shareece Wright is not looking like an NFL starter. I really hope he picks it up. Wright and Powers looked very suspect not to mention that we are still lining up 10 yards away from the receiver shows Pees learned nothing from last year. Our guys just aren't showing the instincts to play that far off.

Because I see this mentioned a lot, do people not realize that the DC doesn't tell corners how far or close to line up?  

[rossihunter2]

9 minutes ago, Purple_City39 said:

Because I see this mentioned a lot, do people not realize that the DC doesn't tell corners how far or close to line up?  

probably not - although up to a certain point you could argue if they've been doing it for seasons uncorrected then if they are lining up at an undesirable depth then they should have been coached better (which you could blame on the DC and the secondary coaches) - or they are where they are supposed to be in which case you can also blame the DC if you disagree with that philosophy lol

[52liveforever]

13 minutes ago, Purple_City39 said:

Because I see this mentioned a lot, do people not realize that the DC doesn't tell corners how far or close to line up?  

they line up where they have been coached to line up for that particular defensive scheme. Which falls to the DC. If that is not true and its just something that didn't get corrected than that still reflects on the DC.

[sibelius]

35 minutes ago, Ravensfan23 said:

I know exactly what I don't like. These guys have daily access to training camp and they have no better views and opinions then we share here in the Flock. I would much rather create our own  broadcast team with some of the members here and just do a podcast of breaking down the game live. 

I also feel those guys have a responsibility to educate the casual fan on the game more than just highlights. But that's a pet peeve I have about the entire industry. 

But all in all it just seems like they don't know the team nor the game. When they credited Mallett for throwing Aiken open on the TD I was done. Mallett was late on the throw, Aiken was wide open and the ball was behind him. Also I swear Bart Scott was credited for a tackle, but my volume was low so I wasn't sure.

 

White seems concussed when he speaks; Ismail seems to be thinking, "If...keep...stringing...words...eventually...time...over;" and Sandusky sounds like he's just trying to be as affable as possible because he knows he sounds somewhat competent compared to the others.

White needs to go and Ismail needs to take more pride in his craft. Sandusky is at his ceiling methinks but would be fine if someone else could pull their weight. 

[rossihunter2]

39 minutes ago, Ravensfan23 said:

I know exactly what I don't like. These guys have daily access to training camp and they have no better views and opinions then we share here in the Flock. I would much rather create our own  broadcast team with some of the members here and just do a podcast of breaking down the game live. 

I also feel those guys have a responsibility to educate the casual fan on the game more than just highlights. But that's a pet peeve I have about the entire industry. 

But all in all it just seems like they don't know the team nor the game. When they credited Mallett for throwing Aiken open on the TD I was done. Mallett was late on the throw, Aiken was wide open and the ball was behind him. Also I swear Bart Scott was credited for a tackle, but my volume was low so I wasn't sure.

what i hate about the local beat writers on some of their opinions etc. is that they just parrot each other which is useless to a foreigner like me who can't go down to practices so the only things i see are the "highlights" or the preseason games to work out myself what's going on

some of the members of this forum carry opinions in very educated ways that as a relative newcomer to the game have taught me a lot how to think about football and in particular free agency and offseason related things

i would subscribe to that podcast in a hearbeat as the only thing that gets me close to consistently trustworthy (or in hindsight correct) analysis i find, weirdly, is the around the nfl podcast but it is for the whole nfl so is far too broad for the ravens-centric analysis I'd like

Edited August 22, 2016 by rossihunter2

[Purple_City39]

3 minutes ago, rossihunter2 said:

probably not - although up to a certain point you could argue if they've been doing it for seasons uncorrected then if they are lining up at an undesirable depth then they should have been coached better (which you could blame on the DC and the secondary coaches) - or they are where they are supposed to be in which case you can also blame the DC if you disagree with that philosophy lol

They have to play within their perceived skill level though.  For example, in his prime Chris McAlister played close because he knew he could successfully jam the receiver and that he had the recovery speed to catch up if he didn't.  Samari Rolle played off because he knew speed wasn't his best friend but his reaction time to shorter routes was top notch.  A DC would be stupid to tell a CB to play at a specific distance if that CB isn't comfortable there.  

Now an argument can be made for the type of coverage being called.  It's extremely rare to see a CB close to the line on a cover 1 or cover 0 unless they are extremely confident in themselves.  So I can see arguments about Pees not calling enough over the top coverage that will allow CBs to play closer, but not that he's telling them to play x amount of yards off

[rossihunter2]

Just now, Purple_City39 said:

They have to play within their perceived skill level though.  For example, in his prime Chris McAlister played close because he knew he could successfully jam the receiver and that he had the recovery speed to catch up if he didn't.  Samari Rolle played off because he knew speed wasn't his best friend but his reaction time to shorter routes was top notch.  A DC would be stupid to tell a CB to play at a specific distance if that CB isn't comfortable there.  

Now an argument can be made for the type of coverage being called.  It's extremely rare to see a CB close to the line on a cover 1 or cover 0 unless they are extremely confident in themselves.  So I can see arguments about Pees not calling enough over the top coverage that will allow CBs to play closer, but not that he's telling them to play x amount of yards off

what i meant was, he doesnt seem to be coaching players to play this way - they are all too comfortable giving away that buffer when we know jimmy (for example) can jam effectively at the LoS and has done in the past successfully

players playing badly obviously is on the players first - but when their methods are continually unsuccessful that does have to come onto the coaching too

i however am of the opinion that it is not all pees fault - im just considering the ways you could maybe blame him for the 10 yard drop (which i hate, but understand the reasons for it for the mostpart)

[sibelius]

2 minutes ago, Purple_City39 said:

They have to play within their perceived skill level though.  For example, in his prime Chris McAlister played close because he knew he could successfully jam the receiver and that he had the recovery speed to catch up if he didn't.  Samari Rolle played off because he knew speed wasn't his best friend but his reaction time to shorter routes was top notch.  A DC would be stupid to tell a CB to play at a specific distance if that CB isn't comfortable there.  

Now an argument can be made for the type of coverage being called.  It's extremely rare to see a CB close to the line on a cover 1 or cover 0 unless they are extremely confident in themselves.  So I can see arguments about Pees not calling enough over the top coverage that will allow CBs to play closer, but not that he's telling them to play x amount of yards off

 

I agree with this and I think it's a huge misconception that the coaches are "making" guys play off. Pees is on record encouraging Jimmy to press back in '13 and as soon as he did...voila he started making more plays. I think the quote was "he has a technique (read: press) that if we can just get him to use more he'll be more effective."

That said, I still don't think Pees has a clue how to get the most out of guys in the modern NFL. Exact same issue we had with Mattison except slightly better. 

[BmoreBird22]

11 minutes ago, 52liveforever said:

they line up where they have been coached to line up for that particular defensive scheme. Which falls to the DC. If that is not true and its just something that didn't get corrected than that still reflects on the DC.

No, it's not coached up. It's the players confidence in that particular coverage. If the Ravens played cover zero, that corner has some really big ones down under to be playing press man.

[BmoreBird22]

1 hour ago, EdTheMythicalOne said:

Another "big hit" was a play that should have been flagged for a horsecollar under the new rule which was on his suplex tackle. The new rule states that you can't grab a player's jersey near the name plate area and drag him to the ground. That's exactly what he did on that play.

No, he grabbed in the middle of the number before sliding his hand up to the top of the three. It wasn't illegal. There's actually a replay in the LFW that I'm watching now.

[rmw10]

2 minutes ago, BmoreBird22 said:

No, he grabbed in the middle of the number before sliding his hand up to the top of the three. It wasn't illegal. There's actually a replay in the LFW that I'm watching now.

Lol yeah, that was a clean tackle.  I don't even know how someone could see a horsecollar in that.

[Purple_City39]

1 hour ago, BmoreBird22 said:

No, it's not coached up. It's the players confidence in that particular coverage. If the Ravens played cover zero, that corner has some really big ones down under to be playing press man.

Thank you!

[Tru11]

Technique is trained by the position coach and players use their confidence to decide where to line up.

The DC decides what the play will be and what  a players responsibility is on that play.

It up to the payers to determine how they will take care of that responsibility.

If there is no safety over the top and they are lining up against someone faster then them , then if they had some IQ they would put some space between them and the receiver .
unless they got some major confidence and thus play press cov lel

Quite frankly its impossible for a DC to say how a player should line up since they cant determine pre hand what the match up will be and they can only call the play based on the opponents personal and down&distance.

 

[Cville-Raven]

1 hour ago, BmoreBird22 said:

No, he grabbed in the middle of the number before sliding his hand up to the top of the three. It wasn't illegal. There's actually a replay in the LFW that I'm watching now.

Yeah it's not even close to a horse collar. 

[BOLDnPurPnBlacK]

4 hours ago, EdTheMythicalOne said:

Which is odd, because I had him making the team easily as a back up safety and I supposedly "hate" him. Take a look at my guess at the 53 man roster if you think I am bluffing. I don't agree with your assessment of his play. I know for a fact that at least a few of his tackles were not "form and wrap up style." One for a fact was a diving sweep of the legs. Another "big hit" was a play that should have been flagged for a horsecollar under the new rule which was on his suplex tackle. The new rule states that you can't grab a player's jersey near the name plate area and drag him to the ground. That's exactly what he did on that play.

I didn't say every tackle. No one in the NFL tackles text book anymore. Point is he made the plays. Maybe he's just gotten lucky, idk, but he's wrapped up when he's needed to wrap up, and he's just thrown his body in to make the tackle when he's been able to get away with doing so. If the guy goes down I've got no issue. 

And I think you need to rewatch the "horse collar" play. Your opinion is far from a "fact" and becomes pretty unreliable if you look at that play and see penalty. Not only did the refs disagree, but I've seen the play discussed a lot and not one mention of it being questionable.

Then there's my eyes which make it pretty clear. His hand is in the dead middle of the back, center of his #3 and momentum causes it to slide up maybe a couple of inches toward the top of the 3... But he doesn't even grasp the jersey - let alone anywhere near the collar.

He'd have to be wearing the deepest V-Neck jersey ever made (I'm talking jersey shore bro type deep V) and wearing it backward for his hand placement to be consider "near the collar."

And you mention name plate as being incorporated in the new rule... So just point out where at any point his hand even touches any portion of the name on the jersey, let alone grabs a handful of it. 

But maybe theyre looking for Dean Blandinos replacement and you can set em all straight since we're all missing something. 

Edited August 22, 2016 by BOLDnPurPnBlacK

[GrimCoconut]

16 hours ago, EdTheMythicalOne said:

You are actually making my point for me. If Elam was living up to expectations they would have taken that 5th year option without even a second's hesitation. I'd actually have to do some research to see when the last time the Ravens declined a 5th year option on a first round draft pick. I certainly can't recall the last time it happened.

No doubt Elam has failed to live up to the expectations and has not performed well. Am I making your point for you? I try to remain unbiased with my opinions, therefore, I provided facts that do support your notion if you solely view those facts without other information that is inherent in them. Yes, we declined the fifth-year option, but it is not purely because he is bad but due to the concerns that could come from him getting injured, of which he currently is injured, ironically enough. This was a savvy move done to protect the franchise from investing in another injured player, which appears suddenly brilliant. Does this mean we don't want him? Nope, because we would've cut him if  that were the case. We clearly still have some hope for him, although that may or may not matter anymore. 

As for your other question, this is a rather new thing--the fifth-year option. It started in the most recent CBA, which affected Jimmy Smith first. Since we had no first round pick in 2012 and traded back for Upshaw, the option did not apply. 

[GrimCoconut]

10 hours ago, Newsome is Awesome said:

Eric Reid?.....Yah, not even in the same stadium.  Check out Reid's read, catch and athleticism on his TD vs Denver. Granting it was against a 3rd string QB. Reid had a poor year last year, but not as poor as our 1st rounder from that same draft has played.

Correa deserves time. He's definitely got a high motor and enthusiasm. He reminds me of a young Rey Maualuga.  Not sure about his NFL football instincts, but they can develop.

Really?

You may not understand how the fifth-year option works, but it's not something we really negotiate. It's sorta like the franchise tag. There's no negotiating the price. I never said Elam is of the same skill as Reid. I only alluded to the fact that he would likely be paid the same if given the fifth-year option; however, that may be a better question served to the cap guru around here, @B-more Ravor.

[sibelius]

So we're doing that thing where we let one poster take the whole discussion down a rabbit hole? I love it when we do this. Groundhog Day is one of my favorite films after all. 

What do we think the odds are Pitta makes the team with the news about his finger? Harbs does not seem pleased with him and, frankly, we don't really need him. Other than sentimental value...cutting Pitta would help clear the logjam.

[BmoreBird22]

14 minutes ago, sibelius said:

So we're doing that thing where we let one poster take the whole discussion down a rabbit hole? I love it when we do this. Groundhog Day is one of my favorite films after all. 

What do we think the odds are Pitta makes the team with the news about his finger? Harbs does not seem pleased with him and, frankly, we don't really need him. Other than sentimental value...cutting Pitta would help clear the logjam.

Given it would cost the Ravens to cut him this year, I think he stays, but I wouldn't be drafting him in fantasy leagues