The annual Fire Dean Pees thread; 2016 edition

[BOLDnPurPnBlacK]

2 hours ago, Wildabeast88 said:

Die a slow painful death or get it over with quickly. It depends on game flow sometimes but getting methodically worked versus a quick big play score at least gives us a chance to score and bring it back in our favor. I mean last year watching Rivers work us was horrible and many others. Remember a few years back the Vikings game that went back and forth like 4lead changes in the final 4 minutes i would at least like to give Tucker a shot at the W

With 2 minutes left and up 5 we should put our defensive plan together on the basis that they might score and if so we need to make sure we have enough time left?? What?

Thats a losing mentality. I mean, why not call time outs and stop the clock for the other team... ya know just in case they score on the next play. 

Your statement assumed that death is inevitable. That's flawed from the jump. The whole point is to put a plan together that gives you the best chance of preventing the touchdown... not the plan that, when the inevitable TD is scored, gives us the most time to come back. 

If they have to go 75 yards in less than 2 minutes with no time outs it's much better to force quick throws underneath that kill the clock and force them to execute to perfection on as many plays as possible.

We did exactly that and it worked. It would've worked to perfection if we executed and tackled right away in bounds. 

[Tank 92]

1 hour ago, GrimCoconut said:

I wonder if people realize how important Harbaugh is in this whole thing, too. Yeah, he's not calling defensive plays but you have to give him credit for getting the talent here in terms of coaching. Look at some of the coaches he's brought here:  Caldwell, Kubiak, Frazier, Pagano, Monachino, Austin, Castillo, Rosburg. Not one of those guys pre-dates Harbaugh here. Furthermore, they all seemed to do good things with this team to some capacity. He was especially instrumental in bringing Frazier and Kubiak here. 

And people talk about firing him. I'm not trying to turn this into a Harbaugh thread, but it's an interesting aspect that is forgotten in the scheme of things but if things were bad, this would be a subject broached. 

Just as has happened in the past(Cam, Castillo, etc.), if things go south they'll come out of the woodwork complaining about John bringing in his "buddies".  Seems that few fully appreciate the value of the quality network he had developed that has allowed him to build an all star staff.  

[JoeyFlex5]

39 minutes ago, BOLDnPurPnBlacK said:

With 2 minutes left and up 5 we should put our defensive plan together on the basis that they might score and if so we need to make sure we have enough time left?? What?

Thats a losing mentality. I mean, why not call time outs and stop the clock for the other team... ya know just in case they score on the next play. 

Your statement assumed that death is inevitable. That's flawed from the jump. The whole point is to put a plan together that gives you the best chance of preventing the touchdown... not the plan that, when the inevitable TD is scored, gives us the most time to come back. 

If they have to go 75 yards in less than 2 minutes with no time outs it's much better to force quick throws underneath that kill the clock and force them to execute to perfection on as many plays as possible.

We did exactly that and it worked. It would've worked to perfection if we executed and tackled right away in bounds. 

This reminds me...

Did anyone else think we should have let the niners score on us in the SB because we wouldn't be able to stop them and we would've had a better chance on offense? 

Looking back it was dumb... But I really had that thought for a minute when they drove into the red zone with ease lol

[Wildabeast88]

7 hours ago, BOLDnPurPnBlacK said:

With 2 minutes left and up 5 we should put our defensive plan together on the basis that they might score and if so we need to make sure we have enough time left?? What?

Thats a losing mentality. I mean, why not call time outs and stop the clock for the other team... ya know just in case they score on the next play. 

Your statement assumed that death is inevitable. That's flawed from the jump. The whole point is to put a plan together that gives you the best chance of preventing the touchdown... not the plan that, when the inevitable TD is scored, gives us the most time to come back. 

If they have to go 75 yards in less than 2 minutes with no time outs it's much better to force quick throws underneath that kill the clock and force them to execute to perfection on as many plays as possible.

We did exactly that and it worked. It would've worked to perfection if we executed and tackled right away in bounds. 

If our game plan worked great for nearly 3 quarters which it did why would you change that and play 10 yards off the WRs and give up chunks of yardage. Did Cleveland throw the ball and nearly score a TD that is all I am saying is if it ain't broke don't fix it. How much time would have been left had CJ not intercepted that ball as Cleveland ate up all the clock. As I said earlier prevent defense prevents you from winning. I'm not taking a losing mentality if our game plan against a hurt QB was working don't change it if they hit a 50 yard TD so be it that's better than watching 7 yard pass after pass all the way down the field like Rivers did to us last year. 

[rmcjacket23]

13 hours ago, Wildabeast88 said:

Die a slow painful death or get it over with quickly. It depends on game flow sometimes but getting methodically worked versus a quick big play score at least gives us a chance to score and bring it back in our favor. I mean last year watching Rivers work us was horrible and many others. Remember a few years back the Vikings game that went back and forth like 4lead changes in the final 4 minutes i would at least like to give Tucker a shot at the W

Again, implies that dying a painful death or dying at all are the only possible outcomes. At best, they represent maybe 50% of possible outcomes. 

We have multiple examples of times where teams drove down the field on us in a prevent defense and didn't actually score, yielding us a victory. We have similar examples of where we played an aggressive scheme and teams also didn't score on us, yielding a victory.

That's what makes this premise so laughable to me. Its like people legitimately think that prevent defenses only lead to losses. despite the mountains of data that absolutely shatters that theory.

[BOLDnPurPnBlacK]

4 hours ago, Wildabeast88 said:

If our game plan worked great for nearly 3 quarters which it did why would you change that and play 10 yards off the WRs and give up chunks of yardage. Did Cleveland throw the ball and nearly score a TD that is all I am saying is if it ain't broke don't fix it. How much time would have been left had CJ not intercepted that ball as Cleveland ate up all the clock. As I said earlier prevent defense prevents you from winning. I'm not taking a losing mentality if our game plan against a hurt QB was working don't change it if they hit a 50 yard TD so be it that's better than watching 7 yard pass after pass all the way down the field like Rivers did to us last year. 

Tell me the plays that we gave up "chunks" of yardage (there arent any other than an 18 yd catch that was mostly YAC from a missed tackle).

Tell me exactly what we did differently on the final drive (nothing really... we had only rushed 4 most of the game... we just happened to get pressure with it. And If someone's covering a deep zone, why would they press?).

IF they hit a 50 yd TD? You cant plan to make sure you have time unless you EXPECT the 50 yd TD, and if youre doing that your a loser. Plain and simple. Again, if we make the tackle in bounds, its game over. We still won bc the game plan gave us a chance to fight another play. If we're aggressively blitzing and pressing everywhere, that missed tackle likely goes for a TD and we have 30 seconds to kick a FG. Great plan.

On all but 2 plays they got like 4-7 yd completions that took up 10-12 seconds off the clock. You cant knock the game plan for failed execution on a player, bc even if you stay aggressive that risk of failed execution exists, and while being overly aggressive the results are far worse when there is failed execution.

 

We didnt play "Prevent" defense. Prevent defense is a very specific thing... typically with 7-8 DBs, 4 playing deep quarters and the other 3-4 dropping into zones, or 3 deep DBs splitting the field into deep thirds and the rest doing the same as in the previous scenario.

Id agree, aside from Hail Mary attempts, Prevent defense does prevent you from winning. Problem with your theory is, we didnt play prevent even once from my recollection.

What  you're calling "prevent" was really just us rushing 4 (which again we did most of the game it just happened to hit home a lot) and likely the DB you were focused on (Jimmy) covering an intermediate to deep zone on the boundary where it makes NO SENSE at all to press up on the man bc instead of just giving up that 4-6 completion in front of him, the TE or slot receiver will be getting the 20-30-TD completion behind him in the zone he never dropped to in time.

I'd have to go back and watch, but what people are complaining about when they saw the outside corner playing off often was that guy just playing his responsibility and the LB likely was responsible for covering the flat and just didnt get there in time bc our pressure forced a quick throw inside the boundary.... which is what you want anyways.

Take your 4 yards and 10 seconds off the clock.

 

 

 

Edited September 22, 2016 by BOLDnPurPnBlacK

[rmcjacket23]

I did some quick research, and while there's no real definitive standard for what is considered a "prevent" defense, nor is there definitive statistics about its success rate due to the lack of clarity, I did find this from Bleacher Report for 2015. Its an analysis of the numbers of defenders rushing the QB in the fourth quarter for teams that are leading by 16 points or less (a little wider range than I would have liked).

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2640891-which-of-the-nfls-dumbest-strategies-are-smarter-than-you-think

Based on 2015, it would appear the "optimal" strategy for a late game defense with a lead is to do a four man rush, which I would say is probably pretty standard (certainly doesn't qualify as blitzing). Assuming you're playing some sort of zone defense, which this article does (because man coverage doesn't make as much sense in these spots), you're rushing four and dropping 7 into some sort of softer zone coverage.

This yields the lowest yards/play average and the lowest 1st down allowed % rate, while also having the least amount of "big play" risk (plays over 20 yards).

Everything else is a trade off we already knew existed. If you rush 5 or more, you get a higher turnover and sack rate than rushing 4, but your risk of allowing a 1st down increases as well as your big play risk.

If you're looking for the best method for INTs, rushing three seems to be the better decision, which makes sense when you have 8 in coverage defending at most five offensive players.

[BOLDnPurPnBlacK]

4 minutes ago, rmcjacket23 said:

I did some quick research, and while there's no real definitive standard for what is considered a "prevent" defense, nor is there definitive statistics about its success rate due to the lack of clarity, I did find this from Bleacher Report for 2015. Its an analysis of the numbers of defenders rushing the QB in the fourth quarter for teams that are leading by 16 points or less (a little wider range than I would have liked).

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2640891-which-of-the-nfls-dumbest-strategies-are-smarter-than-you-think

Based on 2015, it would appear the "optimal" strategy for a late game defense with a lead is to do a four man rush, which I would say is probably pretty standard (certainly doesn't qualify as blitzing). Assuming you're playing some sort of zone defense, which this article does (because man coverage doesn't make as much sense in these spots), you're rushing four and dropping 7 into some sort of softer zone coverage.

This yields the lowest yards/play average and the lowest 1st down allowed % rate, while also having the least amount of "big play" risk (plays over 20 yards).

Everything else is a trade off we already knew existed. If you rush 5 or more, you get a higher turnover and sack rate than rushing 4, but your risk of allowing a 1st down increases as well as your big play risk.

If you're looking for the best method for INTs, rushing three seems to be the better decision, which makes sense when you have 8 in coverage defending at most five offensive players.

And getting a turnover would be the quickest way to end the drive... but if we rushed 3 - forget about it. People would want to murder Pees... all while preaching that we need to blitz aggressively to force a turnover.

[rmcjacket23]

Just now, BOLDnPurPnBlacK said:

And getting a turnover would be the quickest way to end the drive... but if we rushed 3 - forget about it. People would want to murder Pees... all while preaching that we need to blitz aggressively to force a turnover.

I'm typically not a big advocate of rushing three, just because obviously it makes the QB a bit too comfortable.

Any 4 man rush is fine with me for the most part. You'll have 7 defenders for no more than 5 receivers, oftentimes only 4. Five man rushes are advantageous in some circumstances, but against Cleveland, it really didn't make a ton of sense.

I would be terrified to rush 6 to be honest. If they even complete the pass, its probably for a 15-20 yard gain at a minimum.

[BOLDnPurPnBlacK]

16 minutes ago, rmcjacket23 said:

I'm typically not a big advocate of rushing three, just because obviously it makes the QB a bit too comfortable.

Any 4 man rush is fine with me for the most part. You'll have 7 defenders for no more than 5 receivers, oftentimes only 4. Five man rushes are advantageous in some circumstances, but against Cleveland, it really didn't make a ton of sense.

I would be terrified to rush 6 to be honest. If they even complete the pass, its probably for a 15-20 yard gain at a minimum.

Yea - going man up across the board is a scary proposition with the game on the line. You either HAVE to hit home in just a couple seconds, or you better have 5 serious DBs who can hold up in man to man. Otherwise youre toast.

Im a big proponent of exactly what we did. Rush 4 (bc we were hitting home with it throughout the game) and play a mix of coverages on the back end. Send the occasional 5th man when the situation calls for it, but for the most part just keep the game in front of you, force quick throws underneath, come up and make the tackles. More often than not, thats going to lead to the highest probability of likely resulting in the best outcome..... most of the time.

And thats the thing. It wont work every time. But when we're talking regular season, thats what you want. The strategy that will yield the best probability of positive results across time.

[Wildabeast88]

8 hours ago, BOLDnPurPnBlacK said:

Tell me the plays that we gave up "chunks" of yardage (there arent any other than an 18 yd catch that was mostly YAC from a missed tackle).

Tell me exactly what we did differently on the final drive (nothing really... we had only rushed 4 most of the game... we just happened to get pressure with it. And If someone's covering a deep zone, why would they press?).

IF they hit a 50 yd TD? You cant plan to make sure you have time unless you EXPECT the 50 yd TD, and if youre doing that your a loser. Plain and simple. Again, if we make the tackle in bounds, its game over. We still won bc the game plan gave us a chance to fight another play. If we're aggressively blitzing and pressing everywhere, that missed tackle likely goes for a TD and we have 30 seconds to kick a FG. Great plan.

On all but 2 plays they got like 4-7 yd completions that took up 10-12 seconds off the clock. You cant knock the game plan for failed execution on a player, bc even if you stay aggressive that risk of failed execution exists, and while being overly aggressive the results are far worse when there is failed execution.

 

We didnt play "Prevent" defense. Prevent defense is a very specific thing... typically with 7-8 DBs, 4 playing deep quarters and the other 3-4 dropping into zones, or 3 deep DBs splitting the field into deep thirds and the rest doing the same as in the previous scenario.

Id agree, aside from Hail Mary attempts, Prevent defense does prevent you from winning. Problem with your theory is, we didnt play prevent even once from my recollection.

What  you're calling "prevent" was really just us rushing 4 (which again we did most of the game it just happened to hit home a lot) and likely the DB you were focused on (Jimmy) covering an intermediate to deep zone on the boundary where it makes NO SENSE at all to press up on the man bc instead of just giving up that 4-6 completion in front of him, the TE or slot receiver will be getting the 20-30-TD completion behind him in the zone he never dropped to in time.

I'd have to go back and watch, but what people are complaining about when they saw the outside corner playing off often was that guy just playing his responsibility and the LB likely was responsible for covering the flat and just didnt get there in time bc our pressure forced a quick throw inside the boundary.... which is what you want anyways.

Take your 4 yards and 10 seconds off the clock.

 

 

 

I get what you are saying and my biggest issue is what we were doing was working just fine and if CJ doesn't intercept the ball we very well lose that game. I hate going away from something that was working to let yourself get picked apart. 

[BOLDnPurPnBlacK]

17 minutes ago, Wildabeast88 said:

I get what you are saying and my biggest issue is what we were doing was working just fine and if CJ doesn't intercept the ball we very well lose that game. I hate going away from something that was working to let yourself get picked apart. 

But thats the thing that i dont even think is necessarily true. I dont think we changed all that much from what we had been doing most of the game.

We were rushing 4 most of the time, and getting home. They were trying to push the ball down field though which helped us hit home on occasion. The DBs were often off the line, it just wasnt glaringly obvious bc again - they were trying to push the ball down the field, so it actually played into their hands.

On that last drive, Hue just realized they werent getting anything pushing the ball... so he decided to just take what was underneath and hope for the best... a mistake, missed tackle, or for one of his WRs to win down the field. He was actively trying, imo, to get us to rush more guys or suck our coverage up to open the deeper throws back up.

But we stayed with what we were doing, accepted the short completions if they wanted, bc it only helped us get to our end goal. We just happened to miss a tackle on maybe the most important play of that drive, AND let them get out of bounds which was a double whammy. If we make that first tackle, or just even keep them in bounds I doubt the Pryor play ever happens, and they probably run out of time outside the red zone.

It didnt go as scripted, but it still worked. I really dont think we changed much of what we were doing on that last drive. The Browns just changed how they were attacking it. But, im not 100% sure on that so i could be wrong. But, thats what my perception was watching it live.

 

I mean if you go back and look at the game feed - every time they got a completion it was "Darn it, why do our corners play off so far!!" even when we were dominating in the 2nd-4th qtrs. When McCown had time it was "why are we only rushing 4 guys, it never works...." until it did.

And thats my point. I think people only notice that those things are happening when they dont work. When it does, it was just a good play. And thats just how we are as fans.

Edited September 22, 2016 by BOLDnPurPnBlacK

[Ravensfan23]

Didn't get a chance to see the game today. Obviously I know the outcome, just don't know what led to it. With the Ravens up by 2 Webb jumped a route and tipped a pass leading to Orr's game winning Int. My question is, what type of game did Pees call and does anyone have issue with his end of game play calling?

I know the pass rush wasn't getting home early in the game, but came alive in the 4th quarter. What was the reason? Also I know KC played more defensive snaps and got his hands on a ball, was in playing due to injury or was he apart of the game plan. 

Also, to hold the Jags to 4 yards, 2 ints and a blocked FG in the 4th quarter is huge. So can anyone help me out, how did the D and Pees look?

[kiwi_raven]

I'm honestly starting to think that pees defense isn't as bad as I thought, it seems the entire problem was that he was in the booth, now being on the sidelines his game plans each week have been very good with adjustments being made way faster then before due to players being able to bring things to his attention right away.

[RavensFan34950]

41 minutes ago, Ravensfan23 said:

Didn't get a chance to see the game today. Obviously I know the outcome, just don't know what led to it. With the Ravens up by 2 Webb jumped a route and tipped a pass leading to Orr's game winning Int. My question is, what type of game did Pees call and does anyone have issue with his end of game play calling?

I know the pass rush wasn't getting home early in the game, but came alive in the 4th quarter. What was the reason? Also I know KC played more defensive snaps and got his hands on a ball, was in playing due to injury or was he apart of the game plan. 

Also, to hold the Jags to 4 yards, 2 ints and a blocked FG in the 4th quarter is huge. So can anyone help me out, how did the D and Pees look?

Defense was phenomenal outside of Shareece Wright. Wish we could collapse the pocket a little more but other than that, can't complain. Linebackers were the stars of the game. 

[K-Dog]

8 minutes ago, kiwi_raven said:

I'm honestly starting to think that pees defense isn't as bad as I thought, it seems the entire problem was that he was in the booth, now being on the sidelines his game plans each week have been very good with adjustments being made way faster then before due to players being able to bring things to his attention right away.

There is little doubt in my mind a good amount of the improvement is from him coming down.

[JoeyFlex5]

He called a good game today. Did the exact opposite of last week. He let the jags get lulled into a rhythm against our coverage and then dialed up the heat at the end and it worked like gangbusters. 

He has a tendency to outsmart himself and then he turns right around and calls a perfect game plan. 

[52liveforever]

You know, two years ago I was very defensive of Pees. Last year I lost my faith. This year I'm back on board. What's in common? He's on the sideline. I think that guys like weddle and Suggs coming over and telling him what they are seeing and him making the adjustments is really make a difference.

[GrimCoconut]

1 hour ago, kiwi_raven said:

I'm honestly starting to think that pees defense isn't as bad as I thought, it seems the entire problem was that he was in the booth, now being on the sidelines his game plans each week have been very good with adjustments being made way faster then before due to players being able to bring things to his attention right away.

I think getting Eric Weddle to coordinate the secondary so everyone is on the same page also went a long way, too. 

[Tank 92]

Communication on the back end has been huge and has gone a long way to improve things. If we can get a consistent pass rush it will help even more to cover our weaknesses back there. Add in the stellar line and LB play and we are on our way to getting back to playing Ravens defense. And you can't say enough about the contributions from young guys like Pierce and Young. 

I think this is going to be a great group that should silence the Pees detractors. 

[flynismo]

EVERYONE knows that the key to a good defense is sending in a 6 or 7 man rush every down. Get with the program guys!

[BOLDnPurPnBlacK]

8 hours ago, JoeyFlex5 said:

He called a good game today. Did the exact opposite of last week. He let the jags get lulled into a rhythm against our coverage and then dialed up the heat at the end and it worked like gangbusters. 

He has a tendency to outsmart himself and then he turns right around and calls a perfect game plan. 

Did he dial up the heat, or was the 4 man rush just hitting home? Jernigans sack was a 4 man rush if i remember correctly. Both of Suggs' were.

I could be wrong, i havent rewatched. But i dont think our final drive defense was all that much different against the Jags than the Browns. We just got the pressure bc the Jags were trying to hit the downfield pass which played into our hands with the off coverage and gave the 4 man rush time to hit home.

I dont think what he did was the exact opposite... just the end result was. The Browns countered the game plan and therefore we had to ride it out and make the tackles. The Jags with Bortles the gunslinger tried deep drops and long throws to get chunk yards and we suffocated it.

Edited September 26, 2016 by BOLDnPurPnBlacK

[BmoreBird22]

I think the biggest thing for the Ravens is that they are immediately tackling when a receiver makes the catch and also not allowing big plays.

Their long of 47 probably places them in the top 10, allowing 1 40+ yard play probably ranks in the top 10, I think it was 4 20+ yard plays ranking in the top 5, and then top 5 in YPA. That's a huge improvement over last year. The Ravens are forcing teams to beat them underneath and not allowing chunk plays.

This defense is the reason for the 3-0 start while the offense finds an identity.

[BOLDnPurPnBlacK]

3 minutes ago, BmoreBird22 said:

I think the biggest thing for the Ravens is that they are immediately tackling when a receiver makes the catch and also not allowing big plays.

Their long of 47 probably places them in the top 10, allowing 1 40+ yard play probably ranks in the top 10, I think it was 4 20+ yard plays ranking in the top 5, and then top 5 in YPA. That's a huge improvement over last year. The Ravens are forcing teams to beat them underneath and not allowing chunk plays.

This defense is the reason for the 3-0 start while the offense finds an identity.

And thats the beautiful thing about the schedule and the way the defense is playing. With 9/11 guys on offense just playing together for the first time or first time in a year or more - the defense is allowing them to make the mistakes early and allowing the time needed to work the kinks out and get into a groove.

This has been Ravens defense again. We are closing out games and making the big plays when necessary, really in all 3 phases of the games. Theres plenty of mistakes to go around, but the mark of a good team is that they tighten up and get it done when it matters. And in all 3 games, all 3 phases have pulled their weight at one point or another when they needed to. But the defense has for sure been the identity so far - the one constant that you can hang your hat on..

We're not giving up the big plays which marred us the past 2-3  years. We're absolutely suffocating the run (31 yds combined from Jax's RBs yesterday... Ivory in particular gaining only 14 yds on 14 carries!), and forcing teams to dink and dunk down the field. Without a run game thats just not going to be easy for anyone to sustain.

[Tank 92]

8 minutes ago, BmoreBird22 said:

I think the biggest thing for the Ravens is that they are immediately tackling when a receiver makes the catch and also not allowing big plays.

The tackling yesterday was stellar. One of my sons jokingly commented that Ray Ray must have given some lessons pre season because EVERYONE is wrapping up like they should. Great to see.

 

[BOLDnPurPnBlacK]

I know these dont tell the whole story, but its back in our comfort zone - where we're used to seeing Ravens D rank.

Through 3 games:

Pts/G: 4th

Yds/G: 2nd (4 off leader)

Yds/P: T-2nd

1st/G: T-1st

ToP: 8th

Pass Yd/G: 3rd

INT: T-2nd

Sacks: T-7th

QB Rating: 8th (72.2)

 

Top 10's across the board (10th in run/g) and top 3 in a lot of the major categories. This D is for real.

[Tank 92]

28 minutes ago, usmccharles said:

According to ESPN, they have us ranked at #8 for defense, its a good read

http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/page/barnwellx160926/the-best-teams-far-best-defenses-let-rank-top-defenses-overall-2016-nfl

"Baltimore is back. Nobody will argue that they've played threatening competition, given that the Ravens have faced the Bills, Browns and Jaguars in three weeks, but the Ravens have allowed just 44 points total. Their run defense has generally been excellent; they did allow one 85-yard touchdown run to Isaiah Crowell (not good), but the Ravens have held the other 67 rushing attempts they've faced to a total of 173 yards, or less than 2.6 yards per carry (actually great).

The new Ravens are built less around a pair of dominant edge rushers and more around the interior of their defense, where they're strong up the middle. Nose tackle Brandon Williams has to be one of the most underrated players in football, while the breakout season that seemed to be in the cards for Timmy Jernigan in 2015 has begun to unspool this year. Jernigan has three sacks and six hits through three games. C.J. Mosley continues to show off his range as one of the best cover linebackers in the league, while Eric Weddle has solidified things for the Ravens in the backfield since coming over from San Diego.

Weddle is directing traffic, but this is a disciplined, well-coached defense all around. The Ravens don't have a great secondary, but they're often in the right place and have been allowing a league-low 3.46 yards after catch per reception. When the defense gets a hand on running backs, the play stops; Baltimore is allowing 0.99 yards after contact on the ground, the lowest rate in the NFL. They have the second-fewest defensive penalties in the league (four) through three games.

To be fair, their turnover numbers are a little inflated. The Ravens have five picks over three games, but two of them were desperation throws on the final drives of their last two contests. On the other hand, they've also forced three fumbles on defense and failed to recover any of them, which is unlikely to recur. They're still a little rough around the edges, and you would worry about their cornerbacks against top-level receivers, as Dean Pees chose to shadow Allen Robinson with Shareece Wright on Sunday and saw his No. 2 corner walked around the field as a result. With the Raiders, Washington, Giants, Jets and Steelers in store for Wright & Co. over the next five weeks, we're about to see if they can match up against all kinds of quality wideouts."

Good read and thought I would put it over here as well.

Edited September 26, 2016 by Tank 92

[JoeyFlex5]

5 hours ago, BOLDnPurPnBlacK said:

Did he dial up the heat, or was the 4 man rush just hitting home? Jernigans sack was a 4 man rush if i remember correctly. Both of Suggs' were.

I could be wrong, i havent rewatched. But i dont think our final drive defense was all that much different against the Jags than the Browns. We just got the pressure bc the Jags were trying to hit the downfield pass which played into our hands with the off coverage and gave the 4 man rush time to hit home.

I dont think what he did was the exact opposite... just the end result was. The Browns countered the game plan and therefore we had to ride it out and make the tackles. The Jags with Bortles the gunslinger tried deep drops and long throws to get chunk yards and we suffocated it.

I feel like I recall seeing a few 5 man rushes. When I watch 1:00 games in JUST waking up after getting home from a 12 hour shift at 7am so I'm on 4 hours of sleep and can barely focus lol but I thought I saw us in base formation quite a bit and sending 5. I could be wrong though. 

[757RavensFan]

17 hours ago, Ravensfan23 said:

Didn't get a chance to see the game today. Obviously I know the outcome, just don't know what led to it. With the Ravens up by 2 Webb jumped a route and tipped a pass leading to Orr's game winning Int. My question is, what type of game did Pees call and does anyone have issue with his end of game play calling?

I know the pass rush wasn't getting home early in the game, but came alive in the 4th quarter. What was the reason? Also I know KC played more defensive snaps and got his hands on a ball, was in playing due to injury or was he apart of the game plan. 

Also, to hold the Jags to 4 yards, 2 ints and a blocked FG in the 4th quarter is huge. So can anyone help me out, how did the D and Pees look?

Correa almost had a pick early in the game. I think it was during Jax 2nd series of the game.  I don't think he came in b/c someone was injured.  Looks like they made him part of the game plan. 

[Ravensfan23]

16 hours ago, RavensFan34950 said:

Defense was phenomenal outside of Shareece Wright. Wish we could collapse the pocket a little more but other than that, can't complain. Linebackers were the stars of the game. 

 

9 minutes ago, 757RavensFan said:

Correa almost had a pick early in the game. I think it was during Jax 2nd series of the game.  I don't think he came in b/c someone was injured.  Looks like they made him part of the game plan. 

Thx guys. Actually won't get a chance to watch the game until later on tonight.