Week 15: The Good, The Bad and the Ugly Comment/Vent/Rant Eagles Version!

[jimmypowder]

Marty put Joe in a very bad position by making the worst play call in Ravens history. 

Did the play call remind anyone else almost immediately of the dumb Pete Carroll call in the Super Bowl

to call an inside slant pass that was picked?  It sure did with me.  

[Tru11]

2 hours ago, rmcjacket23 said:

Was just saving the defense the embarrassment of another 60-70 yard scoring drive that the defense would have given up as they get manhandled up and down the field.

funny cause the only 60-70 yard scoring drive the eagles had ended in a FG.
they had 11 drives not counting the 1 before half time.

might wanna check them facts before spouting anymore none sense.

 

 

Edited December 19, 2016 by Tru11

[ravensdfan]

10 minutes ago, Tru11 said:

funny cause the only 60-70 scoring drive the eagles had ended in a FG.

might wanna check them facts before spouting anymore none sense.

 

 

 Matthews was just running right through them so it just felt like 60 or 70 yd drives. The defense forced 2 punts in the first quarter and not another.

Furthermore, when one drive was 79 yds (ending in a FG) and another was 59 yds (ending in a TD) you're being pretty disengenous making the claim that the ONLY 60-70 yd drive ended in a FG. Please.

The defense couldn't get off the field to save their lives despite the fact that the Eagles handed off to Matthews 90% of the time- and it certainly was not the fault of the offense.

Edited December 19, 2016 by ravensdfan

[ravensdfan]

11 minutes ago, jimmypowder said:

Marty put Joe in a very bad position by making the worst play call in Ravens history. 

Did the play call remind anyone else almost immediately of the dumb Pete Carroll call in the Super Bowl

to call an inside slant pass that was picked?  It sure did with me.  

I truly don't HATE the call. We've been clamouring for the offense to keep the pedal to the metal around here. Flacco should know better than to throw that ball. If it's there, fine, if not, throw it away and take the 3 pts. It was a boneheaded play period. It happens. I know it's hard to believe, but I've even seen Peyton, Aaron and Brady do it too! I know, shocking.

[trevorsteadman]

This defense looks like a high school defense without Jimmy Smith even in the run game... This reminds me of the tweet I saw on this site before the game... The team drops from the #1 defense to the #27 defense without Jimmy Smith. It held true yesterday when the defense looked mediocre against an Eagles team that in my opinion has way under average talent at offensive skill positions. I respect Ryan Matthews but still that game shouldn't of been that close at all.  

 

[Gtown Purple]

Was it just me or were there some bad penalty calls. How does Orr get holding when Ertz runs into him?

[trevorsteadman]

2 minutes ago, Gtown Purple said:

Was it just me or were there some bad penalty calls. How does Orr get holding when Ertz runs into him?

Yep there were two ghost penalties in the game that made me scratch my head I believe there was another one as well. 

[Rebel Raven]

I actually thought the playcall for eagles final play was worse than marty's. A pass for the win when your running game is averaging what seems like 8 ypc? Anyways my main point is, that redzone int is more on Flacco than Marty imo. No reason to throw that ball, even if the LB wasnt there that pass wasnt going to be completed.

[Tru11]

21 minutes ago, ravensdfan said:

 Matthews was just running right through them so it just felt like 60 or 70 yd drives. The defense forced 2 punts in the first quarter and not another.

Furthermore, when one drive was 79 yds (ending in a FG) and another was 59 yds (ending in a TD) you're being pretty disengenous making the claim that the ONLY 60-70 yd drive ended in a FG. Please.

The defense couldn't get off the field to save their lives despite the fact that the Eagles handed off to Matthews 90% of the time- and it certainly was not the fault of the offense.

i dont care about your emotions.
how you feel has nothing to do with this.

facts say only 1 drive covered 60+ yards and it only went for a FG.

not my fault he picked the wrong numbers in his reply.

also the defense forced 1 turnover which pray to the sun ended in a TD.
they also forced 2 turnovers on down giving the offense excellent field position.

so they did a lot more then those 2 drives when they forced a punt.
not a surprise you conveniently forgot to mention that....

4 out of the eagles 11 drives can be considered long covering close to 50 or more yards.
only 1 ended in a TD while the other 3 ended in FGs.
it counted 15 of the eagles 26 points.

guess where the other 11 points came from ....

Edited December 19, 2016 by Tru11

[trevorsteadman]

1 minute ago, Tha Next SBChamps said:

I actually thought the playcall for eagles final play was worse than marty's. A pass for the win when your running game is averaging what seems like 8 ypc? Anyways my main point is, that redzone int is more on Flacco than Marty imo. No reason to throw that ball, even if the LB wasnt there that pass wasnt going to be completed.

I agree it was only a bad play because of what happened but hindsight is 20/20. If it was completed or even fell incomplete would we still be talking about the play being a bad situation? No. And I completely agree that the Eagles final play was terrible they completely abandoned their run game that final drive and that is what had them marching all day. Lucky for the Ravens they threw the ball. But the defense is completely atrocious without Jimmy Smith both in run defense and pass defense. I don't know how Pees will adjust this for Bell/Brown. May be a long day game on Christmas....

 

[Edgar]

All will be forgiven, if only for a day or two with a win in Pittsburgh.

[ravensdfan]

23 minutes ago, Tru11 said:

i dont care about your emotions.
how you feel has nothing to do with this.

facts say only 1 drive covered 60+ yards and it only went for a FG.

not my fault he picked the wrong numbers in his reply.

also the defense forced 1 turnover which pray to the sun ended in a TD.
they also forced 2 turnovers on down giving the offense excellent field position.

so they did a lot more then those 2 drives when they forced a punt.
not a surprise you conveniently forgot to mention that....

 

We got it on our own 39 and our own 34 on those turnovers on downs. That's good field position - it isn't excellent.

Facts say they had a 59 yd drive for a TD - so going after someone for a difference of a yd is being disingenous.

Facts also say that after the offense had a scoring drive of over 5 mins the defense promptly allowed a 7 minute scoring drive by the Eagles. I guess they were tired from being on the sidelines. They also gave up nearly another 8 minute scoring drive.

They were also given (yet again!) a 10 pt lead into the 4th quarter. Thank the Eagles for going for 2 there and throwing the ball rather than running it. They also got gashed for over 169 yds on the ground. 128 yds were all Matthews. So they literally couldn't find one man and stop him. Not surprised you forget to mention those things.

 

reply to your edit: Regarding the 11 pts - so you're now blaming the offense because ST allowed a 22 yd return on a punt? Because that would be the short drive for a FG. Or are you blaming the offense for not driving down and scoring when pinned deep inside their 5? Because if you expect the offense to perform under those conditions, then you must expect the defense to perform on the other end.

 

 

 

 

Edited December 19, 2016 by ravensdfan

[rmw10]

13 minutes ago, Tha Next SBChamps said:

I actually thought the playcall for eagles final play was worse than marty's. A pass for the win when your running game is averaging what seems like 8 ypc? Anyways my main point is, that redzone int is more on Flacco than Marty imo. No reason to throw that ball, even if the LB wasnt there that pass wasnt going to be completed.

Agreed.  I think it's an awful call, but Marty didn't throw that INT, Joe did.  If Joe had completed it, we might be singing a different tune.  Regardless, it was an awful decision all the way around.

[rmcjacket23]

44 minutes ago, Tru11 said:

funny cause the only 60-70 yard scoring drive the eagles had ended in a FG.
they had 11 drives not counting the 1 before half time.

might wanna check them facts before spouting anymore none sense.

 

 

Cute try.

If I had one single yard to that range and make it 59-70 yard scoring drive, we can go ahead and add another two drives and nine points to that list.

17 plays, 59 yards for a FG.

13 plays, 79 yards for a FG.

11 plays, 49 yards for a FG... off an INT that put them at their own 40, which evidently is an insurmountable distance for the defense to recover from.

9 plays, 59 yards for a TD.

This ain't hard to understand folks.

Edited December 19, 2016 by rmcjacket23

[Tru11]

1 minute ago, ravensdfan said:

We got it on our own 39 and our own 34 on those turnovers on downs. That's good field position - it isn't excellent.

Facts say they had a 59 yd drive for a TD - so going after someone for a difference of a yd is being disengenous.

Facts also say that after the offense had a scoring drive of over 5 mins the defense promptly allowed a 7 minute scoring drive by the Eagles. I guess they were tired from being on the sidelines. They also gave up nearly another 8 minute scoring drive.

They were also given (yet again!) a 10 pt lead into the 4th quarter. Thank the Eagles for going for 2 there and throwing the ball rather than running it. They also got gashed for over 169 yds on the ground. Not surprised you forget to mention those things.

 

 

 

 

its excellent field position cause if they went for a punt you would start at your own 20 which would have been considered good.
NFL punters can pin a team inside their 5 yard line and with such a short field to the endzone it makes the job easier.

Call me whatever you want but the facts are what they are.

I have not said anything about fatigue so you might wanna quote the person you want to discuss that with.

Why should i mention any of that when i was not discussing any of it?

The lead could have been bigger if flacco did not throw that stupid pick.
Could have been at least a 13 point lead which would have forced the eagles to go for the TD rather then settle for the FG.
They had 0 of these prior to their last drive.

I had actually little issue with them running the ball TBH.
It keeps the clock running.
Perhaps the offense can learn a thing or 2 from this since they cant even pick up a first down or burn at least half a minute when needed.

fact remains of the eagles 4 long drives they only scored 15 points.
15 points is pretty darn good in today NFL.

the eagles other 7 drives only netted them 11 points with 8 coming after a fumble which only had them needed to go 8 yards for a TD.
the other 3 points came after the only needed 16 yards to be in FG range.


 

 

[rmcjacket23]

23 minutes ago, Tru11 said:

i dont care about your emotions.
how you feel has nothing to do with this.

facts say only 1 drive covered 60+ yards and it only went for a FG.

not my fault he picked the wrong numbers in his reply.

also the defense forced 1 turnover which pray to the sun ended in a TD.
they also forced 2 turnovers on down giving the offense excellent field position.

so they did a lot more then those 2 drives when they forced a punt.
not a surprise you conveniently forgot to mention that....

4 out of the eagles 11 drives can be considered long covering close to 50 or more yards.
only 1 ended in a TD while the other 3 ended in FGs.
it counted 15 of the eagles 26 points.

guess where the other 11 points came from ....

Why did you choose 50 yards as the metric for a "long drive"? What's the basis for that?

Perhaps if we put some numbers behind this it would help you a bit...

For the Ravens defense, averaging starting field position on the season is the 28 yard line. So we would expect the Eagles to, on average, start at the 28 yard line when they received the ball. Knowing this, any drive that netted them roughly 40 yards or longer would put them in a position to kick a reasonable FG (less than 50 yards). 40 yards would put the ball at the 32 yard line. 

So it would seem more reasonable that your metric for a "long drive" would be significantly shorter than 50 yards, because in most cases, a mere 40 yard drive would result in points allowed for the defense. 

So, if I do like you did, and just apply some subjective yardage number to my analysis to try to push my narrative (though I at least have some statistical backing for my subjectivity), we now go from 4/11 "long" drives to 6/11 "long" drives, which is over 50% of the time. 

And perhaps most importantly... 5 of 5 drives in the 2nd half were ALL at least 40+ yard drives by the Eagles.

[Tru11]

11 minutes ago, rmcjacket23 said:

Cute try.

If I had one single yard to that range and make it 59-70 yard scoring drive, we can go ahead and add another two drives and nine points to that list.

17 plays, 59 yards for a FG.

13 plays, 79 yards for a FG.

11 plays, 49 yards for a FG... off an INT that put them at their own 40, which evidently is an insurmountable distance for the defense to recover from.

9 plays, 59 yards for a TD.

This ain't hard to understand folks.

it is for you apparently.

if it wasn't that hard you would have said it from the start since you love to lecture everyone and pride yourself on thinking you are right all the time.

 

[rmcjacket23]

6 minutes ago, Tru11 said:

it is for you apparently.

if it wasn't that hard you would have said it from the start since you love to lecture everyone and pride yourself on thinking you are right all the time.

 

Sometimes you just have to dumb it down for the audience...

[FerrariFan87]

46 minutes ago, Tha Next SBChamps said:

I actually thought the playcall for eagles final play was worse than marty's. A pass for the win when your running game is averaging what seems like 8 ypc? Anyways my main point is, that redzone int is more on Flacco than Marty imo. No reason to throw that ball, even if the LB wasnt there that pass wasnt going to be completed.

Pees called an all out blitz, so theoretically a running play would've been blown up in the backfield... we just got lucky.

[Tru11]

3 hours ago, rmcjacket23 said:

Was just saving the defense the embarrassment of another 60-70 yard scoring drive that the defense would have given up as they get manhandled up and down the field.

 

9 minutes ago, rmcjacket23 said:

Why did you choose 50 yards as the metric for a "long drive"? What's the basis for that?

Perhaps if we put some numbers behind this it would help you a bit...

For the Ravens defense, averaging starting field position on the season is the 28 yard line. So we would expect the Eagles to, on average, start at the 28 yard line when they received the ball. Knowing this, any drive that netted them roughly 40 yards or longer would put them in a position to kick a reasonable FG (less than 50 yards). 40 yards would put the ball at the 32 yard line. 

So it would seem more reasonable that your metric for a "long drive" would be significantly shorter than 50 yards, because in most cases, a mere 40 yard drive would result in points allowed for the defense. 

So, if I do like you did, and just apply some subjective yardage number to my analysis to try to push my narrative (though I at least have some statistical backing for my subjectivity), we now go from 4/11 "long" drives to 6/11 "long" drives, which is over 50% of the time. 

And perhaps most importantly... 5 of 5 drives in the 2nd half were ALL at least 40+ yard drives by the Eagles.

the basis was you talking about scoring drives and not drives in general.
 

[Tru11]

1 minute ago, rmcjacket23 said:

Sometimes you just have to dumb it down for the audience...

pretty much backfired since some of your audience apparently knew the facts better then you did.

probably a good lesson for the next time.
 

[RavensDieHard21]

17 hours ago, Doomville said:

This team plain sucks. I don't have much hope of ravens making the playoffs if they keep playing like this.

#1 defense lol. This defense was finally exposed for everyone to see. Was #1 because we played bad teams this year..,

Joe keeps throwing boneheaded picks and people still defend him to death.

As much as I was ticked off with the defenses performance. To say we played bad teams is laughable. Raiders, Giants, Dallas, Patriots are all SB contenders. Redskins and Pitt still have potent offenses. Dolphins and Cincy can still put up points at a solid rate. Obviously theogony terrible teams we faced were the Browns, jets and jags 

[Edug27]

48 minutes ago, rmw10 said:

Agreed.  I think it's an awful call, but Marty didn't throw that INT, Joe did.  If Joe had completed it, we might be singing a different tune.  Regardless, it was an awful decision all the way around.

Yes! And that's my problem. Harbaugh is quick to point out the awful playcall.... but ignores the ridiculously awful throw there by our veteran QB.

[rmcjacket23]

3 minutes ago, Tru11 said:

pretty much backfired since some of your audience apparently knew the facts better then you did.

probably a good lesson for the next time.
 

And the lesson would be that I can manipulate statistics to make your narrative look bad better than you can. I did that at least twice above.

And the audience sees that as well.

[rmw10]

3 minutes ago, Edug27 said:

Yes! And that's my problem. Harbaugh is quick to point out the awful playcall.... but ignores the ridiculously awful throw there by our veteran QB.

Yep.  Flacco locked onto the WR almost immediately.  That's entirely on him.  He didn't even look at the other parts of the field.

[rmcjacket23]

17 minutes ago, Tru11 said:

 

the basis was you talking about scoring drives and not drives in general.
 

So you picked 50 because you realized that if you picked 40 (which could easily be considered a long drive as well) that your narrative wouldn't work?

Got it. That's all I needed to know.

Next time, just shoot for the moon. Say that it must be 80 yards to be a long drive or something even more absurd to make your argument look more viable. I mean if you're going to begin, continue, and end with shear subjectivity, max out on it. 

[Tru11]

Just now, rmcjacket23 said:

And the lesson would be that I can manipulate statistics to make your narrative look bad better than you can. I did that at least twice above.

And the audience sees that as well.

you can manipulate what ever you want.

the fact remains you talked about scoring drives of 60-70 yards and more and the eagles only had 1 of those drives that ended in a FG.

 

 

[rmcjacket23]

4 minutes ago, Edug27 said:

Yes! And that's my problem. Harbaugh is quick to point out the awful playcall.... but ignores the ridiculously awful throw there by our veteran QB.

There's no question its both. But the far more disappointing aspect of that play isn't the fact that Joe locked onto a receiver and threw a pick. Its that between John, Marty and Joe, not one of them had the wherewith all or brains to stop that play from happening and do the smart thing, which was to run the football.

If we get to 2nd and long or 3rd down and Joe does that same thing, sure, its all on Joe at that point, because that's a spot you probably should throw the ball. That field position and that time and circumstance of the game isn't one of them, and one of those three guys has to know that.

 

[rmcjacket23]

1 minute ago, Tru11 said:

you can manipulate what ever you want.

the fact remains you talked about scoring drives of 60-70 yards and more and the eagles only had 1 of those drives that ended in a FG.

 

 

But you gave me permission to manipulate didn't you? So I manipulated that down to 59 yards, as you requested.

And then I manipulated down your baseless "50 yards is a long drive" argument because you never even started to think it through or come up with what an actual "long drive" in the NFL should even look like. 

If you at least had a better argument, manipulating yours wouldn't be this simple. But it is, as I've shown several times now.

[frozen joe flacco fan]

1 hour ago, jimmypowder said:

Marty put Joe in a very bad position by making the worst play call in Ravens history. 

Did the play call remind anyone else almost immediately of the dumb Pete Carroll call in the Super Bowl

to call an inside slant pass that was picked?  It sure did with me.  

Yep. Not to mention what message the play call sent to his two  Running Backs. Marty should not be coming back!