Five Changes Needed Immediately

[MTRavensFan]

I think he was being facetious. 

[K-Dog]

37 minutes ago, MTRavensFan said:

I think he was being facetious. 

Sadly I don't.

[mmcclend]

11 hours ago, Maryland said:

Our redzone efficiency has gone way down. To fix this, they need to run more wildcat, at least until teams prove they know how to stop it. The key to running a successful wildcat will be bringing Keenan Reynolds up from the PS. Just give Reynolds the ball out of the wildcat inside the redzone and we'll score more TDs; he led the FBS in TDs for a reason. 

Idk man Reynolds seemed more like an emotional pick.  He looked pretty scared out there in preseason. 

[Maryland]

15 hours ago, MTRavensFan said:

I think he was being facetious. 

I'm surprised this forum took me seriously, especially after suggesting Hester wear a shoe that is 10 yds long just a few posts prior. 

[Filmstudy]

On 10/6/2016 at 11:52 PM, Maryland said:

They should have Hester wear one shoe that is 10 yards long, that way he can have a foot out of bounds to field kicks that are just in front of the endzone for a touchback. 

That would help with possession at the 40 as well.  1 foot OOB and 1 foot inside while making a catch is considered OOB for the 40-yard line rule.  A few of the better return men have been able to master that with normal shoes.

[rmcjacket23]

On 10/8/2016 at 5:54 PM, Cillmatic said:

If we lose to the Raiders AND redskins we have no business saying we're a good team, this is a very big game.

Not sure if this is sarcasm or not, but if its not, its completely wrong. For starters, some of our better teams in franchise history had losses to bad football teams during those seasons (see 2011, 2012).

Plus, if fans haven't figured this out by now, the Raiders are pretty good. Look like a shoe-in playoff team to me.

[redlobster]

1 hour ago, rmcjacket23 said:

Not sure if this is sarcasm or not, but if its not, its completely wrong. For starters, some of our better teams in franchise history had losses to bad football teams during those seasons (see 2011, 2012).

Plus, if fans haven't figured this out by now, the Raiders are pretty good. Look like a shoe-in playoff team to me.

I'm not sold on Oakland yet. Do they have a bunch of play makers? Yes but they've struggled to win every game this year against some mediocre teams : New Orleans, Tennessee, San Diego, Baltimore .

 

lucky for them their schedule is probably to softest for any team this year

Edited October 16, 2016 by redlobster

[frozen joe flacco fan]

1) Fire the Head Coach

2) Fix the Offensive line

3) Generate an effective pass rush

4) Trade all of our receivers for Odell Beckham

5) Learn the difference between aggressive playcalling and stupid playcalling.

[mdrsharon]

21 minutes ago, frozen joe flacco fan said:

1) Fire the Head Coach

2) Fix the Offensive line

3) Generate an effective pass rush

4) Trade all of our receivers for Odell Beckham

5) Learn the difference between aggressive playcalling and stupid playcalling.

Whoa. Agree with all but the head coach. Harbs has mad some bonehead choices on 4th downs lately, but for some reason he trusts we will come up with the points. We are really conservative on some things and radical on some of these plays.

timing is everything.

[letitgosometimes]

Last week Harbs said he would not apologize for going for a field goal.  Will he say the same thing this week?  Though most fans if given the opportunity would have likely made the same choices as Harbs, he is not a fan, rather a paid thinker and decision maker.  One week is okay to take a risk, especially at home, but when the game is on the line and you’re playing away, this decision is an automatic: kick the field goal, take the points.  A management discussion is required.  The Ravens have one of the best field goal kickers in the league.  Tucker could have changed the outcome of two games in a row.  A complete rethink of when to take three points is needed or else expect the same results. 

[FastEddie]

On 10/6/2016 at 11:52 PM, Maryland said:

They should have Hester wear one shoe that is 10 yards long, that way he can have a foot out of bounds to field kicks that are just in front of the endzone for a touchback. 

Wow this made me laugh hard.

[frozen joe flacco fan]

4 hours ago, mdrsharon said:

Whoa. Agree with all but the head coach. Harbs has mad some bonehead choices on 4th downs lately, but for some reason he trusts we will come up with the points. We are really conservative on some things and radical on some of these plays.

timing is everything.

For three consecutive weeks, your man Harbs has made the following decisions:

1. Against Oakland at home we went for a 2 pt conversion and missed it. We lost by a final score of 28-27. Had we kicked the extra point, we would have probably extended the game to OT and the way we were dominating the Raiders we would have likely won.

2. Against Washington at home we faked a Left-footed FG (????????????) and Justin Tucker tried to throw a pass when we had a 4th down and 12 to go from the 17 yard line. We came away with zero points. At the time we led by a score of 10-6. We lost the game 16-10.

3. Today at NY we elected to go for it on 4th and goal and didn't make it. At the time, the Giants led 14-10. We came away with zero points.

Its just poor situational decision-making. All three of these bonehead decisions had one thing in common. They were all in the first half of the game. He has no reason to trust that the team will come up with the points as you say. Our red zone offense is one of the worst in the league. Always take the points and build on a lead or cut into the opponent's lead. It is a cardinal rule of football to take points (especially on the road) instead of going for it. Harbs says he wants to be aggressive. The truth is he panics. The only reason to play the first half of a game is to get to the second half when most games are won or lost. Harbs has apparently never heard that pigs get fat and hogs get slaughtered. Don't be greedy but take what the defense will give you. Harbs' main responsibility is to put his team in a position to win. For three consecutive weeks, he has failed to do that all of the other blunders aside.  Its time for him to find another job. He doesn't have what it takes to be the Head Coach. In his post-game presser, he refused to accept any responsibility for the loss and just blamed it on the poor play and poor execution. Coach Harbaugh needs to look at "the man in the mirror." By coaching more conservatively in the first half of the last three games, our record coulda, shoulda and woulda been unblemished at 6-0. The final scores should have been 31-28, 27-16 and 29-27, respectively. You can say what you want about the offense and the defense but we should have averaged 29 pts a game in the last 3 weeks and that would be enough to have won all three games. Quite frankly, I'll be surprised if Coach Harbs lasts through the season. He's tenure as our HC will be over soon. At the risk of disparaging some rocket scientists, its that simple. As a result of his ineptness, my Pre-season projection for a 9-7 season is now in jeopardy.

[letitgosometimes]

15 hours ago, frozen joe flacco fan said:

For three consecutive weeks, your man Harbs has made the following decisions:

1. Against Oakland at home we went for a 2 pt conversion and missed it. We lost by a final score of 28-27. Had we kicked the extra point, we would have probably extended the game to OT and the way we were dominating the Raiders we would have likely won.

2. Against Washington at home we faked a Left-footed FG (????????????) and Justin Tucker tried to throw a pass when we had a 4th down and 12 to go from the 17 yard line. We came away with zero points. At the time we led by a score of 10-6. We lost the game 16-10.

3. Today at NY we elected to go for it on 4th and goal and didn't make it. At the time, the Giants led 14-10. We came away with zero points.

Its just poor situational decision-making. All three of these bonehead decisions had one thing in common. They were all in the first half of the game. He has no reason to trust that the team will come up with the points as you say. Our red zone offense is one of the worst in the league. Always take the points and build on a lead or cut into the opponent's lead. It is a cardinal rule of football to take points (especially on the road) instead of going for it. Harbs says he wants to be aggressive. The truth is he panics. The only reason to play the first half of a game is to get to the second half when most games are won or lost. Harbs has apparently never heard that pigs get fat and hogs get slaughtered. Don't be greedy but take what the defense will give you. Harbs' main responsibility is to put his team in a position to win. For three consecutive weeks, he has failed to do that all of the other blunders aside.  Its time for him to find another job. He doesn't have what it takes to be the Head Coach. In his post-game presser, he refused to accept any responsibility for the loss and just blamed it on the poor play and poor execution. Coach Harbaugh needs to look at "the man in the mirror." By coaching more conservatively in the first half of the last three games, our record coulda, shoulda and woulda been unblemished at 6-0. The final scores should have been 31-28, 27-16 and 29-27, respectively. You can say what you want about the offense and the defense but we should have averaged 29 pts a game in the last 3 weeks and that would be enough to have won all three games. Quite frankly, I'll be surprised if Coach Harbs lasts through the season. He's tenure as our HC will be over soon. At the risk of disparaging some rocket scientists, its that simple. As a result of his ineptness, my Pre-season projection for a 9-7 season is now in jeopardy.

Well stated.

[rmcjacket23]

17 hours ago, letitgosometimes said:

Last week Harbs said he would not apologize for going for a field goal.  Will he say the same thing this week?  Though most fans if given the opportunity would have likely made the same choices as Harbs, he is not a fan, rather a paid thinker and decision maker.  One week is okay to take a risk, especially at home, but when the game is on the line and you’re playing away, this decision is an automatic: kick the field goal, take the points.  A management discussion is required.  The Ravens have one of the best field goal kickers in the league.  Tucker could have changed the outcome of two games in a row.  A complete rethink of when to take three points is needed or else expect the same results. 

 

And a paid thinker and decision maker goes for it there... as do pretty much all coaches.

Actually has nothing to do with the offense at all... has everything to do with the defense, which is something I guarantee no fans really considered.

 

[rmcjacket23]

15 hours ago, frozen joe flacco fan said:

For three consecutive weeks, your man Harbs has made the following decisions:

1. Against Oakland at home we went for a 2 pt conversion and missed it. We lost by a final score of 28-27. Had we kicked the extra point, we would have probably extended the game to OT and the way we were dominating the Raiders we would have likely won.

2. Against Washington at home we faked a Left-footed FG (????????????) and Justin Tucker tried to throw a pass when we had a 4th down and 12 to go from the 17 yard line. We came away with zero points. At the time we led by a score of 10-6. We lost the game 16-10.

3. Today at NY we elected to go for it on 4th and goal and didn't make it. At the time, the Giants led 14-10. We came away with zero points.

Its just poor situational decision-making. All three of these bonehead decisions had one thing in common. They were all in the first half of the game. He has no reason to trust that the team will come up with the points as you say. Our red zone offense is one of the worst in the league. Always take the points and build on a lead or cut into the opponent's lead. It is a cardinal rule of football to take points (especially on the road) instead of going for it. Harbs says he wants to be aggressive. The truth is he panics. The only reason to play the first half of a game is to get to the second half when most games are won or lost. Harbs has apparently never heard that pigs get fat and hogs get slaughtered. Don't be greedy but take what the defense will give you. Harbs' main responsibility is to put his team in a position to win. For three consecutive weeks, he has failed to do that all of the other blunders aside.  Its time for him to find another job. He doesn't have what it takes to be the Head Coach. In his post-game presser, he refused to accept any responsibility for the loss and just blamed it on the poor play and poor execution. Coach Harbaugh needs to look at "the man in the mirror." By coaching more conservatively in the first half of the last three games, our record coulda, shoulda and woulda been unblemished at 6-0. The final scores should have been 31-28, 27-16 and 29-27, respectively. You can say what you want about the offense and the defense but we should have averaged 29 pts a game in the last 3 weeks and that would be enough to have won all three games. Quite frankly, I'll be surprised if Coach Harbs lasts through the season. He's tenure as our HC will be over soon. At the risk of disparaging some rocket scientists, its that simple. As a result of his ineptness, my Pre-season projection for a 9-7 season is now in jeopardy.

This post makes no sense whatsoever.

In particular, its completely flawed in that fans think that the game would play out exactly the same manner if you change something, which obviously is as illogical as it gets.

I see plenty of scenarios where we kick a FG and lose by 20. 

Its sort of ironic in a way. All these clowns that keep this discussion going say that kicking the FG "changes the game". Yet, in a shocking level of absurd irony, they claim that nothing that happens after kicking of the FG would change.

Just stunning the lack of logic here. Really rather disappointing. I would hope the fans that feel this way don't last through the season either. 

Dead serious... do you people intentionally try to embarrass yourselves? I mean did you actually read this post before you wrote and actually actually said to yourself "yes, I think this is a very reasonable, very intelligent, well thought out analysis"?.

I don't see how any human being could answer yes to that question after reading this post.

Just flat out embarrassing. Exponentially more so than the play of the Ravens in the past few weeks.

[frozen joe flacco fan]

53 minutes ago, rmcjacket23 said:

This post makes no sense whatsoever.

In particular, its completely flawed in that fans think that the game would play out exactly the same manner if you change something, which obviously is as illogical as it gets.

I see plenty of scenarios where we kick a FG and lose by 20. 

Its sort of ironic in a way. All these clowns that keep this discussion going say that kicking the FG "changes the game". Yet, in a shocking level of absurd irony, they claim that nothing that happens after kicking of the FG would change.

Just stunning the lack of logic here. Really rather disappointing. I would hope the fans that feel this way don't last through the season either. 

Dead serious... do you people intentionally try to embarrass yourselves? I mean did you actually read this post before you wrote and actually actually said to yourself "yes, I think this is a very reasonable, very intelligent, well thought out analysis"?.

I don't see how any human being could answer yes to that question after reading this post.

Just flat out embarrassing. Exponentially more so than the play of the Ravens in the past few weeks.

I thought my arguments for letting our Pro Bowl kicker get us three points in two different scenarios were more cogent than the negative outcome in both game situations but then it is incumbent on you to understand the meaning of cogent. Coming away from one's opponent's goal line with zero points is what they call a morale buster in the business of football. It is also a morale booster for the opponent. Any coach worth her or his salt knows that with the possible exception of your buddy Harbs. My post was based on logic. Yours defies logic and appeals to emotion. As far as calling me and others who disagree with you "clowns" it takes one to know one but the real Court Jester is the current head coach of the Ravens who stands on the sidelines with his index finger on his mouth. Thanks for the dialog.

[rmcjacket23]

22 minutes ago, frozen joe flacco fan said:

I thought my arguments for letting our Pro Bowl kicker get us three points in two different scenarios were more cogent than the negative outcome in both game situations but then it is incumbent on you to understand the meaning of cogent. Coming away from one's opponent's goal line with zero points is what they call a morale buster in the business of football. It is also a morale booster for the opponent. Any coach worth her or his salt knows that with the possible exception of your buddy Harbs. My post was based on logic. Yours defies logic and appeals to emotion. As far as calling me and others who disagree with you "clowns" it takes one to know one but the real Court Jester is the current head coach of the Ravens who stands on the sidelines with his index finger on his mouth. Thanks for the dialog.

1. The Pro Bowl kicker thing is cute, but irrelevant also. 18 yard FG bud. Any JV soccer player at any high school in the entire State of MD makes that kick most of the time. The cute little "but daddy he's a Pro Bowler" has zero bearing on decision making. Not a coach in the Pros or even college who sits there and say "well gee this kick is a real difficult one... I better go for it because my kicker isn't a Pro Bowler". SMH.

2. You know nothing of the business of football. How about the "morale" of the Giants offense when they start 1st down on their own 1 yard line. I'll give you a hint... the "morale" at that point is quite low... for the Giants. Their entire offensive gameplan revolves around 1 thing... don't get sacked. A 3 and out with a good punt is a moral victory for the Giants. Since we're already playing the hindsight game... how many points did the Giants score on that drive?

I do find your the cool little cliche's like "the cardinal rule of football is you take points on the road" amusing, mostly because NFL teams completely disagree with you. See its fun to throw out cliche's when nobody challenges you on them, but you didn't get away with it this time.

So now you get the opportunity to actually throw support behind some of your little baseless theories... lets play the always fun SHOW ME game. 

Its a simple game...all you have to do is show me a team doing what you said. Show me the similar game situation where the team kicks the FG on 4th and goal on the 1. It should be an easy example to find right? After all, "cardinal rules" are never broken (except when they aren't cardinal rules and teams don't do anything you say they do).

The challenge is out there... can't wait to see what happens next. 

[BOLDnPurPnBlacK]

23 minutes ago, frozen joe flacco fan said:

I thought my arguments for letting our Pro Bowl kicker get us three points in two different scenarios were more cogent than the negative outcome in both game situations but then it is incumbent on you to understand the meaning of cogent. Coming away from one's opponent's goal line with zero points is what they call a morale buster in the business of football. It is also a morale booster for the opponent. Any coach worth her or his salt knows that with the possible exception of your buddy Harbs. My post was based on logic. Yours defies logic and appeals to emotion. As far as calling me and others who disagree with you "clowns" it takes one to know one but the real Court Jester is the current head coach of the Ravens who stands on the sidelines with his index finger on his mouth. Thanks for the dialog.

Well thats pretty simple bc you now know the outcome when going for it in this games scenario.

What you're suggesting instead, to boost morale - is for the coach to not have any faith in his players from the 1 yard line, and instead kick the FG? And this will make his players feel better??

I dont know about you, but if my coaches coached in a way that showed they had 0 faith in me, that would be a "morale booster." In fact, itd be worse than not getting the points. Bc everyone would be questioning the coach and whether they could have got 7.

Hindsight is 20/20. You're real smart when you know the outcome. But any coach worth "his or her salt" goes for in from the 1 yard line unless its a 3 pt or less game with time expiring. In the 3rd qtr or early 4th with plenty of time? Punch it in. Especially when your D has been playing lights out.

 

If a team cant score with 3-4 chances from the 1 yd line you dont deserve to win. And thats not on the coach. And btw, in all 3 games, regardless of Harbs decisions we've had a chance to win all 3 at the death. If we make a play we win. Those are facts.

Trying to play fantasy and figure out what might have happened we kicked FGs instead is absolutely stupid - bc everything there after would change. Maybe we kick 3 and then give up 5 straight TDs? How do you know that wouldnt happen. And then, when you have both results - going for the TD and having a chance to win anyways, or kicking the FG and losing by 28.... which one was the right decision?

Right is affirmative. Its based on reality. Supposing and playing in fantasy doesnt make your right. All you can say is, had we kicked FGs the games would have been different. Not better, not worse, just different. That is literally all you can say.

[Boddiebroadus]

So with all the injuries to secondary (again) are we bringing back Elam? I think I'd rather have him out there then the slowest man alive, Webb. 

[Maryland]

12 hours ago, rmcjacket23 said:

So now you get the opportunity to actually throw support behind some of your little baseless theories... lets play the always fun SHOW ME game. 

Its a simple game...all you have to do is show me a team doing what you said. Show me the similar game situation where the team kicks the FG on 4th and goal on the 1. It should be an easy example to find right? After all, "cardinal rules" are never broken (except when they aren't cardinal rules and teams don't do anything you say they do).

The challenge is out there... can't wait to see what happens next. 

Here's one  

http://www.espn.com/nfl/playbyplay?gameId=400554303

Eagles/Cardinals

[rmcjacket23]

5 hours ago, Maryland said:

Here's one  

http://www.espn.com/nfl/playbyplay?gameId=400554303

Eagles/Cardinals

LOL, no, not even close.

1. In this example, its a tied game at the 2 minute warning. Electing the FG gives the team the lead. If that happened on Sunday, where the FG would have given the Ravens the lead, John kicks it.

2. There's a GIGANTIC difference between needing 1 yard and needing 2 yards. Its 4th and goal at the 2, not the 1, in this example.

I think you missed the "similar game situation" aspect. 

 

Edited October 18, 2016 by rmcjacket23

[Rav'n Maniac]

Five changes needed immediately?

(1) Stop offensive holding calls

(2) Stop false starts.

(3) Stop illegal procedures.

(4) Stop OPI.

(5) Stop delay of games.

Have to start somewhere!

[BOLDnPurPnBlacK]

48 minutes ago, frozen joe flacco fan said:

I must have touched a nerve, rmcJacket23. You shouldn't take things so personally and get so defensive. BTW, is rmcjacket a pseudonym for Coach Harbaugh or R U just his ghostwriter? Your idol Harbs is a mere Bill Belichek wannabe. Belichek is aggressive too but there's a big difference. His team is more disciplined and well coached. Ours isn't. We have a group of under-achievers on the field who would be 5-1 or 6-0 right now under a coach like Bruce Arians or Bill Belichek but that's beside the point. I hate to keep harping on this but your man Harbs says he coaches from his gut. His gut tells him to go for it when his brain should be telling him to kick a FG or extra point in the 1st half of games.

I'm impressed with your 14,155 posts to date. No wonder you're in the Hall of Fame. You have more posts than Steve Smith Sr. has catches! Unfortunately, that does not make you an authority on the business of football either. Chill out & get a life! I have to hand it to you though. Its patently well obvious that you love a little controversy.

WRT your challenge, it doesn't merit a response. If you've never seen a college or pro team kick a FG after three failed attempts to score from the 1 yard line, you must not have watched many games. You fantasy football folks like to fashion yourselves as coaches. Its much easier to go for it on 4th & 1 in your fantasy football computer game, isn't it? You have nothing to lose. It is deserving of mention though that a good team with good O-line surge and blocking should have been able to score a TD. That being said, the playcalling, execution and decision-making on 4th and 1 failed miserably. On that point, I think even you would agree. If not, oh well!  

This is the point.

So, a coach should coach with the assumption that potentially the play call, execution and decision-making will fail? That's coaching not to lose, and most likely results in losses. These are highly paid professionals. They cant get 1 yard? Thats not on the coach. Thats on them.

 

Another thing no one wants to take into account is that this is a game of point differential - not just points. if you just "take the 3" now you also have to stop them from getting 3, otherwise all you did was waste time. If you get the TD, you can give up a FG and still gain on them.

Going for the TD gives you 7, missing gives you 0 and them on the 1 yd line with 65-70 yds to get 3, and 99 yds to get 7.

Going for the FG gives you 3. But only puts them 40 or so yds from getting 3 too.

 

Even if we accept your point, which is, that we've failed to execute meaningful situational football, and Harbs shouldnt have confidence in his squad - that only seems to bolster the argument for going for it. How many times in this season have we gotten to the 1 yd line, let alone how many times could Harbs expect to get back there in that game?

You're there, with a rare golden opportunity. Winners take em. Losers shy away.

The highly paid pros need to get 1 yard. Thats it. Plain and simple, black and white.

 

--

We've kicked tied for the most FGs this year.... while we've outgained our opponents by over 300 yds, gotten way more 1st downs than our opponents, and are positive 5 minutes+ in TOP, yet we've scored 5 less TDs than our opponents over that same span.

 

If anything, we're settling for TOO MANY fgs. 

Edited October 18, 2016 by BOLDnPurPnBlacK

[frozen joe flacco fan]

Your points are well taken. I would agree wholeheartedly that a team should be able to score given four chances from inside the 5 yard line. Here is where we differ. I have zero confidence that John Harbaugh (a highly paid professional)  did what you just did in your post, that is, engage in "What if" thinking before making his decision. He admits freely that he makes decisions based on his gut feeling. I wonder how his gut is feeling right now? The head coach's primary responsibility is to put his team in the best position to win the game. He must take into consideration what happens if they do not score the TD. He must also know the percentages like a baseball manager does. How successful has the team been in the red zone? We have one of the worst scoring percentages in the NFL That's a fact. It was better IMO in that situation for us to come away with 3 points in the 1st half and make the score 14-13 than to do what he did. I want to believe that he is more concerned about winning than just beating the point spread against the Giants. We as fans have the luxury of betting against the spread (hypothetically, of course). Coach Harbaugh does not. I was not impressed by the playcalling, execution or coaching in that situation. I would assume the head coach has veto authority on the playcall and the decision whether to go for it. If I did things just because I had a gut feeling without listening to what my brain tells me to do, I'd be in real trouble. It is plain and simple, but its not black or white. That's why they make chocolate and vanilla ice cream. We don't all think alike, do we? You and rmcjacket23 are entitled to your opinions and I'm entitled to mine. Thanks for the dialog! 

[flynismo]

1 minute ago, frozen joe flacco fan said:

I have zero confidence that John Harbaugh (a highly paid professional)  did what you just did in your post, that is, engage in "What if" thinking before making his decision. He admits freely that he makes decisions based on his gut feeling

Please, explain why you think those two things are exclusive of each other? Can he not weigh the consequences of something, and then make a decision based on his gut feeling of the likely outcome?

[frozen joe flacco fan]

2 hours ago, flynismo said:

Please, explain why you think those two things are exclusive of each other? Can he not weigh the consequences of something, and then make a decision based on his gut feeling of the likely outcome?

He absolutely can weigh the consequences of something and then make a decision based on his gut feeling if that's his management style. Whether its the most effective approach is another question. It just seems to me that gut feelings are based more on emotion and "what if" thinking is based more on logic. I think Harbaugh is an emotional sort of guy. If you saw pictures of him toward the end of the game, it looked like he was scared. It was definitely not a confident look IMHO. A coach must exude confidence if he wants his players to be confident. In the final analysis, its up to the owner to decide whether Coach Harbaugh's style is effective or not but I've already reached a conclusion. What is his record since the Super Bowl? I think he inherited a team with some great players named Lewis, Reed, Flacco, Boldin, Pitta et al and he was the beneficiary. He's won the same number of SBs as Coach Billick won. It will be interesting to see who he will choose to make the next scapegoat if we lose to the Jets. First, it was Justin Forsett. Next it was Marc Trestman. Will it be Joe Flacco, Jerry Rosberger or Dean Pees? Stay tuned for the next episode of "As the Ravens Turn."

[flynismo]

1 hour ago, frozen joe flacco fan said:

He absolutely can weigh the consequences of something and then make a decision based on his gut feeling if that's his management style. Whether its the most effective approach is another question. It just seems to me that gut feelings are based more on emotion and "what if" thinking is based more on logic. I think Harbaugh is an emotional sort of guy. If you saw pictures of him toward the end of the game, it looked like he was scared. It was definitely not a confident look IMHO. A coach must exude confidence if he wants his players to be confident. In the final analysis, its up to the owner to decide whether Coach Harbaugh's style is effective or not but I've already reached a conclusion. What is his record since the Super Bowl? I think he inherited a team with some great players named Lewis, Reed, Flacco, Boldin, Pitta et al and he was the beneficiary. He's won the same number of SBs as Coach Billick won. It will be interesting to see who he will choose to make the next scapegoat if we lose to the Jets. First, it was Justin Forsett. Next it was Marc Trestman. Will it be Joe Flacco, Jerry Rosberger or Dean Pees? Stay tuned for the next episode of "As the Ravens Turn."

This team has been consistently successful under Harbaugh, unlike during the Billick era when we missed the playoffs every other year. That's not even debatable, and neither is the fact that injuries last year is a huge reason we were subpar last year. 2013 is the only season where we missed the playoffs not due to extenuating circumstances under Harbaugh.

You seem to make a pretty huge assumption when you make the claim "he looked scared" and then went on to imply he does not exude confidence. Have anything at all to back that conjecture up? I mean, the players spoke out very clearly against Trestman, they'd do the same about Harbaugh if your accusations are true.

Regarding the "gut feeling" bit, again, that does not mean it precludes logic. He used logic when considering "hey, even if we don't make this 4th and 1 attempt, they're still pinned up against the goal line" and his gut tells him that momentum was on our side and we have a good chance of converting. What's wrong with that? I mean are you seriously suggesting that he is some emotional idiot who cannot make sound decisions? 

Edited October 19, 2016 by flynismo

[letitgosometimes]

5 hours ago, frozen joe flacco fan said:

Your points are well taken. I would agree wholeheartedly that a team should be able to score given four chances from inside the 5 yard line. Here is where we differ. I have zero confidence that John Harbaugh (a highly paid professional)  did what you just did in your post, that is, engage in "What if" thinking before making his decision. He admits freely that he makes decisions based on his gut feeling. I wonder how his gut is feeling right now? The head coach's primary responsibility is to put his team in the best position to win the game. He must take into consideration what happens if they do not score the TD. He must also know the percentages like a baseball manager does. How successful has the team been in the red zone? We have one of the worst scoring percentages in the NFL That's a fact. It was better IMO in that situation for us to come away with 3 points in the 1st half and make the score 14-13 than to do what he did. I want to believe that he is more concerned about winning than just beating the point spread against the Giants. We as fans have the luxury of betting against the spread (hypothetically, of course). Coach Harbaugh does not. I was not impressed by the playcalling, execution or coaching in that situation. I would assume the head coach has veto authority on the playcall and the decision whether to go for it. If I did things just because I had a gut feeling without listening to what my brain tells me to do, I'd be in real trouble. It is plain and simple, but its not black or white. That's why they make chocolate and vanilla ice cream. We don't all think alike, do we? You and rmcjacket23 are entitled to your opinions and I'm entitled to mine. Thanks for the dialog! 

You are on target!

[Maryland]

15 hours ago, rmcjacket23 said:

LOL, no, not even close.

1. In this example, its a tied game at the 2 minute warning. Electing the FG gives the team the lead. If that happened on Sunday, where the FG would have given the Ravens the lead, John kicks it.

2. There's a GIGANTIC difference between needing 1 yard and needing 2 yards. Its 4th and goal at the 2, not the 1, in this example.

I think you missed the "similar game situation" aspect. 

 

I just wanted to post a bad example. I got a kick out of watching that game. 

[usmccharles]

5 hours ago, flynismo said:

This team has been consistently successful under Harbaugh, unlike during the Billick era when we missed the playoffs every other year. That's not even debatable, and neither is the fact that injuries last year is a huge reason we were subpar last year. 2013 is the only season where we missed the playoffs not due to extenuating circumstances under Harbaugh.

You seem to make a pretty huge assumption when you make the claim "he looked scared" and then went on to imply he does not exude confidence. Have anything at all to back that conjecture up? I mean, the players spoke out very clearly against Trestman, they'd do the same about Harbaugh if your accusations are true.

Regarding the "gut feeling" bit, again, that does not mean it precludes logic. He used logic when considering "hey, even if we don't make this 4th and 1 attempt, they're still pinned up against the goal line" and his gut tells him that momentum was on our side and we have a good chance of converting. What's wrong with that? I mean are you seriously suggesting that he is some emotional idiot who cannot make sound decisions? 

his opinion, which lately people dont understand opinions are not facts, somehow this eludes people.