[News] Late For Work 12/15: Buy Or Sell? Ravens Will Win Out And Make Playoffs

[eze17]

How great would it be for the Bungals to beat the Sqeelers this week and then we beat them Christmas day. Our last game against the Bungals wouldn't mean anything for us. That is the route i am hoping for.

Nice optimistic post. Hard to see the Squeelers dropping two divisonal games in a row, but anything could happen. Unlikely scenario, but certainly the best thing that could happen for the Ravens.

[Drew P]

7 minutes ago, Black&purple#55 said:

I know ozzie dont mind giving 2nd chance, We should go after Michael Floyd Since we cant seem to draft a elite WR

Then they would run the ball only 3 times in a half

[budkretz]

Why does everyone assume Pitt is going to beat Cincy this weekend. I understand Pitt being favored by a couple points; however, the game is at Cincy, they are rivals, Cincy still can win the division (with a lot of help) and they must start by beating Pitt this weekend, A J Green may play. Marvin Lewis is still a good coach and the Bengals have many reasons to play hard in addition to just for professional pride. I'm not counting on it but I won't be surprised if the Bengals pull it out. If this happens then the Ravens just need to take care of business one game at a time. Beat Philly on Sunday and then focus on Pitt for Christmas Day.

GO RAVENS!!.

[eze17]

  1 hour ago, whobilly said:

  1 hour ago, VermontRaven said:

  1 hour ago, Derrel said:

Easy win for the Pats, actually a laugh-er.

DId you watch the game?  We were in it until the very end, despite a horrible first half.  Obviously, I am very disappointed that we lost and how we played for much of the game, but to say it was an "easy win" by the Patriots is "a laugh-er"  I bet the Patriots are hoping they don't see us again in the playoffs!

We are nowhere near the same team that went to New England in 2012 and 2013. Brady will dissect us all day just like he did Monday night. They put us back in the game with two terrible plays on special teams.

"They put us back in the game with two terrible plays on special teams."

Why do we not get credit for forcing a fumble. I'll give you 1 terrible play by Cyrus, but we EARNED that second turn over, just like they earned their blocked kick. Dude didn't drop it. We forced it out.

Special teams are just as important as offense and defense, and the plays made in those situations are often the most pivotal. I hate the thought process of "oh if it weren't for these special teams plays". It's part of the game. That's why our head coach, and BB for that matter, were special teams guys.

Wow, a voice of reason...thank you, You would think that Ravens fans would realize that we have one of the better special teams units in the NFL, but some people just don't realize the importance of special teams. Good, accurate post.

[DBsRAVENS]

Why didn't Ravens report Steve Smith Sr. had an outburst during the first hour of Ravens practice Thursday after Joe Flacco overthrew the wide receiver on consecutive deep passes along the sideline. LOL & SMH!

Also why do the Ravens offfense always figure out what they should have done after games instead of during games?

[eze17]

  1 hour ago, Derrel said:

Belichek and his defensive coaches knew Flacco doesn't effectively read defenses and make appropriate changes under center. He showed the league how to control this offense. Als, so much for the dink and dunk Brady comments, he threw a winning 79 yard TD pass to a backup receiver. Easy win for the Pats, actually a laugh-er.

We lost by 7 points.  If anything, it give me hope, considering we played like garbage basically the whole game and it was a single possession game at the end.  If that's a laugh-er....I cant wait till we blow out the eagles by 3 points

HA! Very true. People tend to skim over the fact that all our losses have been to winning teams, and all have been really close games. Except the Jets game. That was an unexcusable loss that could easily be looked back upon as the game that will kill us this year.

[gr2522]

Coach Harbaugh is a master communicater who has the full attention of his team as evidenced this season. There is no doubt Harbaugh will rally his players who wI'll find a way to win the remaining 3 games. Nobody else is better suited for this upcoming task. Keep up the great coaching Harbaugh. "In Ozzy We Trust". Go Ravens!!!

[RowdyMan52]

I think we are in a bind if Joe don't step up and take charge.. As we have seen time and time again a lack of urgency has been a problem all  year long. When will we make a change that will take this offensive unit to the next level I'm burnt out on excuses to many times we let games get away the main problem I feel is we play down to other teams and not to our full potential.. Raven for Life!! I expect the best for the remaining games..

[eze17]

The Squeelers own the Bungles.

Get a set and audible at the LOS Joe. Don't be afraid of deviating from that useless ding dong MM.

Morny is still better than Trestman.

And the Bungles should have beaten the Squeelers in the play-offs last year except for a total meltdown by their defense. So no, I wouldn't say the Squeelers "own" them. Especially if Green can play. The yellow and black's defense is still suspect.

[Raveforlife19]

I see a lot of people on here saying Flacco doesn't know how to read defenses, but he finished with 71% completion 325yds 2TD's and 92.1 QBR. I mean John Gruden was (obnoxiously) flabbergasted by the defensive scheme so it couldn't have been a cake walk for Flacco and he still put up those numbers. Not to mention the countless drops or flubs by his receivers (Wallace). So my question is: was that just luck on his part, or maybe he was reading the defense well and we just have mediocre weapons who only win occasionally in man-to-man and subpar coaching/game-planning?

On the topic of calling audibles and "taking command of the offense", how does everybody so confidently know that it is Flacco's deficiency and not due to helicopter coaching by Harbaugh/Marty with a "stick to the gameplan we gave you Joe" type deal? In other words, is it because Flacco doesn't know how to/isn't good at it or is it because he is being restricted? I don't know, I don't think anyone but Flacco and the FO know, but this is something I have been asking myself for a while -- maybe there's a way to tell. I'd argue, however, given Harbaugh's coaching style, and how Marty reacted when Flacco called him out (he should do it more often), that Flacco has been and is being stifled/micromanaged when it comes to plays. Also there is evidence to support that on the field: when do we see Flacco picking apart defenses and getting into a rhythm? When he goes NO HUDDLE, it's what he did in college and in the first few years of his career. In the hurry up, he's in the driver's seat or at the very least has the final decision making ability and logistically cannot be vetoed by Marty and Harbs.

Anyway just food for thought, Go Ravens!

Edited December 15, 2016 by Raveforlife19

[usmccharles]

6 minutes ago, DBsRAVENS said:

This site is always on point:

http://russellstreetreport.com/2016/12/15/tale-of-the-tape/the-joe-flacco-check-down/

Interesting break down, good points.  The Pats just had a perfect scheme that confused him early so it made it harder to go through his reads.  Its like years past when we would get to Brady early and we seen how he became over anxious towards the end, getting rid of the ball early, throwing into the ground, etc.  I just don't get with the ability to throw the ball like Joe can, for him to want to settle for these 3 yard passes into coverage, not even allowing YAC. 

[fusuymada]

just heard during the open part of practice, Flacco continued to miss Smith on passes with his inaccuracy and it got so bad that Smith threw his helmet across the field, kicked the ball and went and sat out the rest of the practice open to the media. Clearly, Flacco's inaccuracy and lack of fire is starting to deteriorate the locker room. You couldnt miss on TV when Flacco was missing passes, being inaccurate, not showing any urgency, Suggs was over making faces, cussing, obviously irritated with the lack of performance and desire from Flacco.

It may be at the point now that Flaccos urgency and fire is noticed by his teammates and they are not happy with their 120 million dollar QB acting like a diva, not caring about his teammates by not showing that winning games is a little more important to him, and I am sure there are dollar questions based on production. Hey, if we talk about it here, players aren't dumb, they see it too. If Flacco was my QB and he played the way he has the last couple losses with his lack of motivation, I would definitely have a face to face and it could get nasty. I'm sure there are players who feel the same way.

Some say Smith is just throwing a fit, but he is down to his last three games, he has got to win, and he wants more from his QB, the same as we do.

[rmcjacket23]

just heard during the open part of practice, Flacco continued to miss Smith on passes with his inaccuracy and it got so bad that Smith threw his helmet across the field, kicked the ball and went and sat out the rest of the practice open to the media. Clearly, Flacco's inaccuracy and lack of fire is starting to deteriorate the locker room. You couldnt miss on TV when Flacco was missing passes, being inaccurate, not showing any urgency, Suggs was over making faces, cussing, obviously irritated with the lack of performance and desire from Flacco.

It may be at the point now that Flaccos urgency and fire is noticed by his teammates and they are not happy with their 120 million dollar QB acting like a diva, not caring about his teammates by not showing that winning games is a little more important to him, and I am sure there are dollar questions based on production. Hey, if we talk about it here, players aren't dumb, they see it too. If Flacco was my QB and he played the way he has the last couple losses with his lack of motivation, I would definitely have a face to face and it could get nasty. I'm sure there are players who feel the same way.

Some say Smith is just throwing a fit, but he is down to his last three games, he has got to win, and he wants more from his QB, the same as we do.

And I'm sure Joe wants more from his receivers, also.

Its a two way street, not a one way street.

[RavensBaltimore]

  2 hours ago, VermontRaven said:

Mostly true, but not completely.  If the Bengals beat the Steelers and we lose to the Eagles, we could still win the division by beating Pitt and Cincy. 

I guess what I'm saying is that I get the narrative from a media standpoint, but it still makes me nervous as a fan when the next game for the Ravens is almost completely overlooked.

I mean technically yes. The issue is that if you can't beat Philly at home, there's really no rational reason to think you're going to beat Pittsburgh and Cincinnati on the road. 

I'm not saying we will technically be eliminated from playoff contention, because I don't believe we can be eliminated even if we lose and Pittsburgh wins. Its more of a "realistic elimination" in the form of we're not a good enough team to do what we need to do to make up the ground.

In regards to your first paragraph, that's not how it works. We lost to the Jets, and we beat the Steelers in our very next game. In years past, we have beaten a very good Steelers team, then lost to a sub .500 team the next week. In 2012, we got blown out by Den at home, in Dec, and we beat them at their place in Jan. So, if we lost to phi, that doesn't mean we can't turn around and beat pits the next week. I think it's a moot point though, because i think we'll beat the Eagles.

[rmcjacket23]

18 minutes ago, RavensBaltimore said:

In regards to your first paragraph, that's not how it works. We lost to the Jets, and we beat the Steelers in our very next game. In years past, we have beaten a very good Steelers team, then lost to a sub .500 team the next week. In 2012, we got blown out by Den at home, in Dec, and we beat them at their place in Jan. So, if we lost to phi, that doesn't mean we can't turn around and beat pits the next week. I think it's a moot point though, because i think we'll beat the Eagles.

You just described losing a ROAD game to a bad team and then winning a HOME game against a good team the next week.

In this case, we would be losing a HOME game to a bad team and then winning a ROAD game against a good team.

2012 isn't a very good example of this, because there's like 4-5 weeks between those two games. We don't have 4-5 weeks to right the ship from a home loss to an inferior team... we have 7 days.

I looked back a few years and don't really see any instances where we lost a home game to a team viewed as inferior, and then subsequently went on to beat a better road team the next week. 

Edited December 15, 2016 by rmcjacket23

[RavensBaltimore]

  30 minutes ago, RavensBaltimore said:

In regards to your first paragraph, that's not how it works. We lost to the Jets, and we beat the Steelers in our very next game. In years past, we have beaten a very good Steelers team, then lost to a sub .500 team the next week. In 2012, we got blown out by Den at home, in Dec, and we beat them at their place in Jan. So, if we lost to phi, that doesn't mean we can't turn around and beat pits the next week. I think it's a moot point though, because i think we'll beat the Eagles.

You just described losing a ROAD game to a bad team and then winning a HOME game against a good team the next week.

In this case, we would be losing a HOME game to a bad team and then winning a ROAD game against a good team.

2012 isn't a very good example of this, because there's like 4-5 weeks between those two games. We don't have 4-5 weeks to right the ship from a home loss to an inferior team... we have 7 days.

I looked back a few years and don't really see any instances where we lost a home game to a team viewed as inferior, and then subsequently went on to beat a better road team the next week. 

You're arguing semantics. The fact is that, almost every year, including this year, we beat the Steelers and lose to a sub .500 team the week before or after. Some of those wins against pits were on the road. You're acting like where the game is played is the end all, be all. It isn't. The Jets are a horrible team no matter where you play them. And the 2012 example is legit despite there being 4 weeks between games, because we have often seen a drastic difference from one week to the next with this team. The specific details you picked out don't change the overall point that this team can look horrible one week and great the next, and vice versa, and the same is true for Pitts.

[Drew P]

1 hour ago, eze17 said:

Morny is still better than Trestman.

And the Bungles should have beaten the Squeelers in the play-offs last year except for a total meltdown by their defense. So no, I wouldn't say the Squeelers "own" them. Especially if Green can play. The yellow and black's defense is still suspect.

I am not sure how you quantify "better" but neither one of those schmucks are NFL caliber OC's.

If you recall when CIN should have (whatever that means) beaten PIT that LBELL was out and CIN had more horses than this year most notably M. Jones, Sanu and now Gio. I would even go on to say that not having the red bb gun out there was actually a good thing.

[rmcjacket23]

10 minutes ago, RavensBaltimore said:

You're arguing semantics. The fact is that, almost every year, including this year, we beat the Steelers and lose to a sub .500 team the week before or after. Some of those wins against pits were on the road. You're acting like where the game is played is the end all, be all. It isn't. The Jets are a horrible team no matter where you play them. And the 2012 example is legit despite there being 4 weeks between games, because we have often seen a drastic difference from one week to the next with this team. The specific details you picked out don't change the overall point that this team can look horrible one week and great the next, and vice versa, and the same is true for Pitts.

I'm not acting like anything. I'm saying, with almost undeniable factual evidence, that the location of the game is an absolute gigantic factor into whether we have a realistic chance to win. The home/road splits in the Harbaugh era lean drastically in one direction. If it was semantics that the location of the game doesn't matter, then said home/road split differential wouldn't exist, because there isn't a particular lean in the direction of quality of opponents in home vs road games... that's relatively flat over time.

And for the record, when you say "The fact is that, almost every year, including this year, we beat the Steelers and lose to a sub .500 team the week before or after", you clearly didn't bother to fact check this, because its not accurate even a little bit. 

It happened this year and last year, and there's obviously some added context to both of those situations.

This year, we beat Pittsburgh at home. That was coming off a bye week, and we dominated Cleveland the following week. We lost to the Jets on the road two weeks prior (which I'm sure you will somehow attempt to argue is semantics, though its clearly not, since it again fits the mold of exactly what I've been saying). 

In 2015, we beat Pittsburgh in Pittsburgh, sandwiched between home losses to the Bengals and Browns. That's great, except for the added context that it was an OT win against a Pittsburgh team led by Michael Vick, which is kind of a big difference. When we beat them at home later in the year, it was sandwiched between losses to two playoff teams.

What you said happens "almost every year"  didn't happen in 2014, 2013, 2012 or 2011... and then I stopped looking for obvious reasons.

This team hasn't been the kind of team that plays bad at home and then plays well on the road week-to-week. That's the major difference here. One of the key reasons why a team like Baltimore or Pittsburgh looks different week-to-week is a ton based on whether they are playing at home or on the road. Pittsburgh is an unbelievably different team at home than on the road, and frankly, so are the Ravens.

[Purple Dawg 96]

That spanking Monday night mite help motivate our squad because Joe is still getting use to a new OC! The Ravens walked into a meat grinder but unlike some I saw alot of positives Monday night out my squad and I'm confident they will learn from all their experiences and make a good run to the AFC Championship and beyond! Roll your sleeves up or Kick Rocks!

[PalmBayRaven]

  2 hours ago, fusuymada said:

just heard during the open part of practice, Flacco continued to miss Smith on passes with his inaccuracy and it got so bad that Smith threw his helmet across the field, kicked the ball and went and sat out the rest of the practice open to the media. Clearly, Flacco's inaccuracy and lack of fire is starting to deteriorate the locker room. You couldnt miss on TV when Flacco was missing passes, being inaccurate, not showing any urgency, Suggs was over making faces, cussing, obviously irritated with the lack of performance and desire from Flacco.

It may be at the point now that Flaccos urgency and fire is noticed by his teammates and they are not happy with their 120 million dollar QB acting like a diva, not caring about his teammates by not showing that winning games is a little more important to him, and I am sure there are dollar questions based on production. Hey, if we talk about it here, players aren't dumb, they see it too. If Flacco was my QB and he played the way he has the last couple losses with his lack of motivation, I would definitely have a face to face and it could get nasty. I'm sure there are players who feel the same way.

Some say Smith is just throwing a fit, but he is down to his last three games, he has got to win, and he wants more from his QB, the same as we do.

And I'm sure Joe wants more from his receivers, also.

Its a two way street, not a one way street.

Sorry it's more on Joe than the Receivers. I don't know what you have been looking at? Definitely all Joe. Personally I am sick of Joe Flacco's back foot lobs and piss poor throwing. I would rather start over with a rookie quarterback than stick with Joe and the amount we are paying him. Sorry he is a 9 year Vet and he has sucked since the Super Bowl. Still can't read Defenses and audible or throw a screen pass.

[rmcjacket23]

1 minute ago, PalmBayRaven said:

Sorry it's more on Joe than the Receivers. I don't know what you have been looking at? Definitely all Joe. Personally I am sick of Joe Flacco's back foot lobs and piss poor throwing. I would rather start over with a rookie quarterback than stick with Joe and the amount we are paying him. Sorry he is a 9 year Vet and he has sucked since the Super Bowl. Still can't read Defenses and audible or throw a screen pass.

Well I mean its definitely not ALL on Joe. I mean you've got film of receivers not gaining any separation whatsoever and not making any effort to make a play on the ball on numerous occasions. Those issues aren't a QB issue.

He's probably the primary reason at this point, but he's certainly not alone.

[steelraven]

13 minutes ago, rmcjacket23 said:

Well I mean its definitely not ALL on Joe. I mean you've got film of receivers not gaining any separation whatsoever and not making any effort to make a play on the ball on numerous occasions. Those issues aren't a QB issue.

He's probably the primary reason at this point, but he's certainly not alone.

In the NFL there's no such thing as separation, only separation you get is from a busted coverage. How many times Thursday night did you see Brady throw the ball with the corner or safety all over them? The touchdown pass when he zipped between 2 defenders come to mind, with about 20 more passes along with that. You throw your WR open, it's the NFL not college. 

[rmcjacket23]

2 minutes ago, steelraven said:

In the NFL there's no such thing as separation, only separation you get is from a busted coverage. How many times Thursday night did you see Brady throw the ball with the corner or safety all over them? The touchdown pass when he zipped between 2 defenders come to mind, with about 20 more passes along with that. You throw your WR open, it's the NFL not college. 

Not disagreeing with that. But no NFL QB is making throws like the one Brady did there on every single pass attempt. There will be a lot of incompletions if that's the case, regardless of the QB. 

Good QBs can throw their receivers open but they can't throw their receivers open EVERY TIME. No shortage of throws Brady made in that game that were more or less just backyard pitch and catch.

The TD pass to Hogan, for example, is about as easy a throw as any NFL QB will ever have. Granted its on a partial busted coverage, but there's plenty of other examples.

[Drew P]

10 minutes ago, steelraven said:

In the NFL there's no such thing as separation, only separation you get is from a busted coverage. How many times Thursday night did you see Brady throw the ball with the corner or safety all over them? The touchdown pass when he zipped between 2 defenders come to mind, with about 20 more passes along with that. You throw your WR open, it's the NFL not college. 

Great point. I commented about WR separation so many time's on here that I got carpal tunnel from it.

[hen826957]

If the Ravens want to make a run at a Super Bowl, what we first need to do is to somehow win this division. In 2012, we won the division (have at least a home playoff game) and then went on the road the next 2 games to get to the Super Bowl. If we go to the playoffs as a wild card team it's gonna be extremely hard to make it there because we have to go on the road the entire playoffs and that sets us up for failure. If we want a shot at a Super Bowl, win this division now.

[poescrows]

I see a lot of people on here saying Flacco doesn't know how to read defenses, but he finished with 71% completion 325yds 2TD's and 92.1 QBR. I mean John Gruden was (obnoxiously) flabbergasted by the defensive scheme so it couldn't have been a cake walk for Flacco and he still put up those numbers. Not to mention the countless drops or flubs by his receivers (Wallace). So my question is: was that just luck on his part, or maybe he was reading the defense well and we just have mediocre weapons who only win occasionally in man-to-man and subpar coaching/game-planning?

On the topic of calling audibles and "taking command of the offense", how does everybody so confidently know that it is Flacco's deficiency and not due to helicopter coaching by Harbaugh/Marty with a "stick to the gameplan we gave you Joe" type deal? In other words, is it because Flacco doesn't know how to/isn't good at it or is it because he is being restricted? I don't know, I don't think anyone but Flacco and the FO know, but this is something I have been asking myself for a while -- maybe there's a way to tell. I'd argue, however, given Harbaugh's coaching style, and how Marty reacted when Flacco called him out (he should do it more often), that Flacco has been and is being stifled/micromanaged when it comes to plays. Also there is evidence to support that on the field: when do we see Flacco picking apart defenses and getting into a rhythm? When he goes NO HUDDLE, it's what he did in college and in the first few years of his career. In the hurry up, he's in the driver's seat or at the very least has the final decision making ability and logistically cannot be vetoed by Marty and Harbs.

Anyway just food for thought, Go Ravens!

You also make it a little tuff on your QB when you only call 4 run plays in a half.

[RavensBaltimore]

  1 hour ago, rmcjacket23 said:

Well I mean its definitely not ALL on Joe. I mean you've got film of receivers not gaining any separation whatsoever and not making any effort to make a play on the ball on numerous occasions. Those issues aren't a QB issue.

He's probably the primary reason at this point, but he's certainly not alone.

In the NFL there's no such thing as separation, only separation you get is from a busted coverage. How many times Thursday night did you see Brady throw the ball with the corner or safety all over them? The touchdown pass when he zipped between 2 defenders come to mind, with about 20 more passes along with that. You throw your WR open, it's the NFL not college. 

Brady completed a lot more passes to open receivers than he did to well covered ones. The 2 biggest plays, the 79 yd TD, and the 61 yard catch and run, where they had a RB one on one with Mosely, were easy throws to WIDE OPEN receivers. The pats use their scheme to get receivers wide open all the time. There's a reason their backups are so successful when Brady goes down. Their receivers get consistent separation.

[whobilly]

If the Ravens want to make a run at a Super Bowl, what we first need to do is to somehow win this division. In 2012, we won the division (have at least a home playoff game) and then went on the road the next 2 games to get to the Super Bowl. If we go to the playoffs as a wild card team it's gonna be extremely hard to make it there because we have to go on the road the entire playoffs and that sets us up for failure. If we want a shot at a Super Bowl, win this division now.

Mediocre teams do not go to the Super Bowl. The Ravens are very mediocre.

[whobilly]

  6 hours ago, nj_ravens said:

  7 hours ago, whobilly said:

  7 hours ago, VermontRaven said:

  7 hours ago, Derrel said:

Easy win for the Pats, actually a laugh-er.

DId you watch the game?  We were in it until the very end, despite a horrible first half.  Obviously, I am very disappointed that we lost and how we played for much of the game, but to say it was an "easy win" by the Patriots is "a laugh-er"  I bet the Patriots are hoping they don't see us again in the playoffs!

We are nowhere near the same team that went to New England in 2012 and 2013. Brady will dissect us all day just like he did Monday night. They put us back in the game with two terrible plays on special teams.

"They put us back in the game with two terrible plays on special teams."

Why do we not get credit for forcing a fumble. I'll give you 1 terrible play by Cyrus, but we EARNED that second turn over, just like they earned their blocked kick. Dude didn't drop it. We forced it out.

Special teams are just as important as offense and defense, and the plays made in those situations are often the most pivotal. I hate the thought process of "oh if it weren't for these special teams plays". It's part of the game. That's why our head coach, and BB for that matter, were special teams guys.

Wow, a voice of reason...thank you, You would think that Ravens fans would realize that we have one of the better special teams units in the NFL, but some people just don't realize the importance of special teams. Good, accurate post.

When the punt returner doesn't get out of the way and lets the ball hit his foot that is more on him then the Ravens "Making a play".

[RavensBaltimore]

  3 hours ago, RavensBaltimore said:

You're arguing semantics. The fact is that, almost every year, including this year, we beat the Steelers and lose to a sub .500 team the week before or after. Some of those wins against pits were on the road. You're acting like where the game is played is the end all, be all. It isn't. The Jets are a horrible team no matter where you play them. And the 2012 example is legit despite there being 4 weeks between games, because we have often seen a drastic difference from one week to the next with this team. The specific details you picked out don't change the overall point that this team can look horrible one week and great the next, and vice versa, and the same is true for Pitts.

I'm not acting like anything. I'm saying, with almost undeniable factual evidence, that the location of the game is an absolute gigantic factor into whether we have a realistic chance to win. The home/road splits in the Harbaugh era lean drastically in one direction. If it was semantics that the location of the game doesn't matter, then said home/road split differential wouldn't exist, because there isn't a particular lean in the direction of quality of opponents in home vs road games... that's relatively flat over time.

And for the record, when you say "The fact is that, almost every year, including this year, we beat the Steelers and lose to a sub .500 team the week before or after", you clearly didn't bother to fact check this, because its not accurate even a little bit. 

It happened this year and last year, and there's obviously some added context to both of those situations.

This year, we beat Pittsburgh at home. That was coming off a bye week, and we dominated Cleveland the following week. We lost to the Jets on the road two weeks prior (which I'm sure you will somehow attempt to argue is semantics, though its clearly not, since it again fits the mold of exactly what I've been saying). 

In 2015, we beat Pittsburgh in Pittsburgh, sandwiched between home losses to the Bengals and Browns. That's great, except for the added context that it was an OT win against a Pittsburgh team led by Michael Vick, which is kind of a big difference. When we beat them at home later in the year, it was sandwiched between losses to two playoff teams.

What you said happens "almost every year"  didn't happen in 2014, 2013, 2012 or 2011... and then I stopped looking for obvious reasons.

This team hasn't been the kind of team that plays bad at home and then plays well on the road week-to-week. That's the major difference here. One of the key reasons why a team like Baltimore or Pittsburgh looks different week-to-week is a ton based on whether they are playing at home or on the road. Pittsburgh is an unbelievably different team at home than on the road, and frankly, so are the Ravens.

Since 2011, our record against the Steelers at home and on the road is about the same. If we can dominate them at home(it was 21-0 before we played prevent defense) after losing to the Jets, regardless of where it was, it's not "unrealistic" to think we could lose to phi and beat Pitts at their place, where we have won our last 2, and most of our losses have been extremely close.

I never said Home/Road games don't matter. I said they aren't the end all/be all. And yes, you are arguing semantics. Overall, we are a better home team than road team, but most of the games against Pitts and Cin have been so close that we had a REALISTIC chance to win or lose the vast majority of them, home or road, no matter how well or poorly we played the week before. You can look that up, and you'll see that it's true.