Marty stays...fixing the offense heading into 2017

[RaineV1]

8 minutes ago, PurpleCity5 said:

This is hilarious. 

So you keep Marty, fine, but the fact that you didn't tolerate other candidates and hold interviews just baffles me. Not to mention that Harbaugh was "pleased" with the improvement the offense made in the final stretch? LOL wuht? What was impressive about games vs New England or Philadelphia? I would love to ask him what the hell happened in that awful, disgraceful performance vs Cincinnati. 

Seriously, this could be something that gets him fired next season. If that's the case, my hope is that Sean Payton just holds out for another year in New Orleans and we could bring him here. 

To be fair, the Ravens offense did put up a decent amount of points against Philly and New England. They were awful at sustaining drives and had chances to finish off games but kept failing to late in the year, but if you just looked at the point total it wasn't bad.

[RaineV1]

3 minutes ago, Deflated Football said:

I'm with you. Marty will be another mid-season firing to save face, but Harbaugh can no longer run from his fate. He goes down with Marty now. I would welcome Payton in Baltimore with open arms. 

I think the chance to get Payton is probably gone. The Saints will trade him and he isn't going to leave after one season with a team.

[donkeyking64]

1 minute ago, rmcjacket23 said:

If all this team did was run the ball for 2 yards a play 40 times a game, we may not have won a single game. You can't win the way we did in 2008, because we aren't built to win that way, don't have the personnel to win that way, and you have to be able to adapt your gameplan to attack the weaknesses in the oppositions defense.

Didn't mean that at all. The balance was not even close in 2016. Someone said earlier it looked like the team had no intention of running.

I saw it in the Cincy game - Joe drops back again and again and again and the defense realizes we can sack him pretty deep in the backfield. It just makes you predictable. It allows for the cover guys to better anticipate cause they know you're not really committed to gashing them with the run.

Like who didn't see that INT icoming in the Colts Saints Super Bowl. Colts had dropped back to pass like 5 or 6 straight times. You had to see it coming from a mile away. Didn't mean to go off on that tangent but you get what I'm saying.

Who doesn't know that the run sets up the big play pass. It's never been the other way around. So even if there is some part of your run game that isn't efficient or effective, that's still no excuse to have like 60/40 or greater pass/run ratio. I don't know what the ratio was for the season but I'll bet it was something unacceptable

[Tru11]

4 minutes ago, R@venFan808 said:

 

i think your almost 100 % right,  more like 90 for right now lol. the offense was close but i think the key missing piece was a speedster some one to take the top off the defense we tried to fill the "Torrey Smith" roll but i don't think we have that person yet. Once we do i think the offense will run a lot more smoothly. 

perriman and wallace?

[PurpleCity5]

1 minute ago, RaineV1 said:

To be fair, the Ravens offense did put up a decent amount of points against Philly and New England. They were awful at sustaining drives and had chances to finish off games but kept failing to late in the year, but if you just looked at the point total it wasn't bad.

Philly was a horrible example of situational football. The throw on goal line when you just need 10 to put them away was just icing on the cake for me. Against New England I don't see it, the offense was awful IMO, the only reason why they were in that game is because of those two back to back fumbles. PPG wise it was an improvement but there was only two games where I can say the offense came to play and that was against Miami and Pittsburgh. Outside of that, you still didn't run the ball much nor did you run the ball effectively and you just didn't see much of an improvement overall. Still some of the same results. 

[RaineV1]

Just now, PurpleCity5 said:

Philly was a horrible example of situational football. The throw on goal line when you just need 10 to put them away was just icing on the cake for me. Against New England I don't see it, the offense was awful IMO, the only reason why they were in that game is because of those two back to back fumbles. PPG wise it was an improvement but there was only two games where I can say the offense came to play and that was against Miami and Pittsburgh. Outside of that, you still didn't run the ball much nor did you run the ball effectively and you just didn't see much of an improvement overall. Still some of the same results. 

Yeah, I agree that the PPG was misleading in terms of what the offense was actually like during those games. But that's how Harbaugh will spin the "improvement."

[Ravensfan23]

1 hour ago, rmw10 said:

I can agree with that.  I've always been one to pin blame on players much more than the coaches.  Marty isn't out there making the rookie mistakes at QB.  Marty isn't out there whiffing on the blocks.  Marty isn't out there running poor routes.  That's on the players and the execution.

With that being said, Marty didn't do them any favors either.  So many drives stalled because of stupid decisions and play calls.

I think my biggest issue with Marty was that Patriots game.  That was the single worst offensive game plan I've seen in my time of watching and understanding football.  It was so outdated and no adjustments were made.  You could consistently see shades of that game plan in the other games.  The Patriots game was just that pit of awfulness.

Agree 100% the Pats game was bad, but also Flacco misses a simple slant to Aiken that would have led to 7 points, instead Butler made a diving play and the FG was blocked the next play. That's where players have to step up and execute no matter the call. If Joe throws a accurate ball, the score is 7-2 and maybe the momentum doesn't get away from the Ravens and the offense might stay on track. Again not excusing Marty but I just feel both players and coaches need to help each other out. The int Joe threw in that game, Wallace has to make a play on that ball in traffic. That's not on Marty. 

I think everyone involved with the offense needs to be held accountable and have their feet held to the fire.

[Tru11]

1 minute ago, RaineV1 said:

Yeah, I agree that the PPG was misleading in terms of what the offense was actually like during those games. But that's how Harbaugh will spin the "improvement."

pats game where pretty much points handed to us by pats special teams fumbling it away at will lol.

 

[ludy51]

1 minute ago, Tru11 said:

pats game where pretty much points handed to us by pats special teams fumbling it away at will lol.

 

To be fair, we forced that kickoff fumble

[redrum52]

All these offensive guys available and we stick with Marty... brilliant.  The Flacco squad clamors for consistency.  Here you go, I guess.

Edited January 3 by redrum52

[AsianRice]

22 minutes ago, PurpleCity5 said:

This is hilarious. 

So you keep Marty, fine, but the fact that you didn't tolerate other candidates and hold interviews just baffles me. Not to mention that Harbaugh was "pleased" with the improvement the offense made in the final stretch? LOL wuht? What was impressive about games vs New England or Philadelphia? I would love to ask him what the hell happened in that awful, disgraceful performance vs Cincinnati. 

Seriously, this could be something that gets him fired next season. If that's the case, my hope is that Sean Payton just holds out for another year in New Orleans and we could bring him here. 

Him is the only HC I want if we need a HC change........

[R@venFan808]

6 minutes ago, Tru11 said:

perriman and wallace?

 Are not getting respect when corners play them. Safeties move up and causes our run game to be atrocious. I think they are fine receivers don't get me wrong. My point was though we need that blazing speed defenses have to respect every play.

[rmcjacket23]

3 minutes ago, donkeyking64 said:

Didn't mean that at all. The balance was not even close in 2016. Someone said earlier it looked like the team had no intention of running.

I saw it in the Cincy game - Joe drops back again and again and again and the defense realizes we can sack him pretty deep in the backfield. It just makes you predictable. It allows for the cover guys to better anticipate cause they know you're not really committed to gashing them with the run.

Like who didn't see that INT icoming in the Colts Saints Super Bowl. Colts had dropped back to pass like 5 or 6 straight times. You had to see it coming from a mile away. Didn't mean to go off on that tangent but you get what I'm saying.

Who doesn't know that the run sets up the big play pass. It's never been the other way around. So even if there is some part of your run game that isn't efficient or effective, that's still no excuse to have like 60/40 or greater pass/run ratio. I don't know what the ratio was for the season but I'll bet it was something unacceptable

There were some games certainly where I thought the balance was lacking in terms of us having the opportunity to run the ball more and just doing it. The Redskins game notably comes to mind.

But there were plenty of games where fans THOUGHT we abandoned the run, and we simply didn't. I think fans far too often just wait until the game is over, go to the box score, see that its like a 2:1 pass:run ratio, and then say "we didn't run enough".

Cowboys game is a textbook example of why that's untrue. People thought we abandoned the run in that game (mostly 2nd half), yet I challenged people to tell me where we could have run the ball more and nobody came up with anything, because there really weren't any other opportunities.

Game circumstances change everything. We're down 14 points almost immediately against the Bengals. Is running the ball a lot going to help us get out of that hole?

[Tru11]

7 minutes ago, ludy51 said:

To be fair, we forced that kickoff fumble

we as in the special teams or we as in the offense?

[Cville-Raven]

Please get flaccco off of throwing to pitta every other down and please actually use perriman. 

[R@venFan808]

5 minutes ago, rmcjacket23 said:

There were some games certainly where I thought the balance was lacking in terms of us having the opportunity to run the ball more and just doing it. The Redskins game notably comes to mind.

But there were plenty of games where fans THOUGHT we abandoned the run, and we simply didn't. I think fans far too often just wait until the game is over, go to the box score, see that its like a 2:1 pass:run ratio, and then say "we didn't run enough".

Cowboys game is a textbook example of why that's untrue. People thought we abandoned the run in that game (mostly 2nd half), yet I challenged people to tell me where we could have run the ball more and nobody came up with anything, because there really weren't any other opportunities.

Game circumstances change everything. We're down 14 points almost immediately against the Bengals. Is running the ball a lot going to help us get out of that hole?

 what really killed the offense in the games you refer to was penalties and when the penalties happened. So many 3rd and 10+ situations it's hard to do anything you want to do especially stick to the game plan. 

[rmcjacket23]

Just now, R@venFan808 said:

 what really killed the offense in the games you refer to was penalties and when the penalties happened. So many 3rd and 10+ situations it's hard to do anything you want to do especially stick to the game plan. 

Correct. Negative plays and penalties were pretty much the biggest detriments to our offense this season.

[cwfRaven]

13 minutes ago, rmcjacket23 said:

There were some games certainly where I thought the balance was lacking in terms of us having the opportunity to run the ball more and just doing it. The Redskins game notably comes to mind.

But there were plenty of games where fans THOUGHT we abandoned the run, and we simply didn't. I think fans far too often just wait until the game is over, go to the box score, see that its like a 2:1 pass:run ratio, and then say "we didn't run enough".

Cowboys game is a textbook example of why that's untrue. People thought we abandoned the run in that game (mostly 2nd half), yet I challenged people to tell me where we could have run the ball more and nobody came up with anything, because there really weren't any other opportunities.

Game circumstances change everything. We're down 14 points almost immediately against the Bengals. Is running the ball a lot going to help us get out of that hole?

I read your post where you broke it down, and you were right - not much else we could do there. You're also right about running the ball not getting us out of a hole - but sadly, neither does passing 3 yards when we need 8. The frustration is that we can't seem to find anything that works, other than occasionally no-huddle (until Joe is intercepted in the endzone).

Edited January 3 by cwfRaven

[AsianRice]

3 minutes ago, Cville-Raven said:

Please get flaccco off of throwing to pitta every other down and please actually use perriman. 

sorry, it's BFF thangs.....

[redrum52]

2 minutes ago, Cville-Raven said:

Please get flaccco off of throwing to pitta every other down and please actually use perriman. 

It wouldn't surprise me if Pitta was cut.

[AsianRice]

Just now, redrum52 said:

It wouldn't surprise me if Pitta was cut.

You will be surprised....

[R@venFan808]

1 minute ago, Cville-Raven said:

Please get flaccco off of throwing to pitta every other down and please actually use perriman. 

I think your right. But it was more about chemistry then anything is what it looked like to me. This was Flaccos first full year with perriman and they didn't really get to practice together in the preseason because of their injuries. I think flacco with an off season to work and get the timing with his receivers will knock some rust off. Same thing with pitta he's been out of football for two years and still played better then our other TE's. Keep in mind we are supposed to have Watson out there as well. This was a year to knock the rust off and let the injury bug fully get out of the Ravens system. Im so excited for next year!

[redrum52]

Just now, AsianRice said:

You will be surprised....

I just don't see the team keeping him at his current price.

[rmcjacket23]

Just now, cwfRaven said:

I read your post where you broke it down, and you were right - not much else we could do there. I also think you're right about running the ball not getting us out of a hole - but sadly, neither does passing 3 yards when we need 8. 

Another sort of "myth" though. Yes, we are throwing to targets short of the line of scrimmage, but as you saw multiple times in the Bengals game, the expectation there is that the receiver will be able to gain the extra yardage himself. Unfortunately we don't have a very talented group in terms of YAC, especially without large space.

Tom Brady has made a living off YAC. He constantly throws passes to receivers short of the line of gain on 3rd down, and his receivers are put in a position to gain those additional yardage. There is no team that consistently runs 12 yard routes on 3rd and 10, because they realize that the defense is defending that boundary more than defending the player.

I would agree that if we don't have the types of receivers that don't allow for YAC then we either need to get them or stop running these players, but those aren't just third down issues either. The reality is that if all we did was throw 11 yard passes on 3rd and 10, you'd see a sharp increase in incompletions and interceptions.

[Edug27]

3 hours ago, usmccharles said:

Wow, should add a poll to this thread, cant imagine anyone here is happy about this. 

You'd have to identify someone better with a similar system. Plus, I don't think you'd go with a former coach who will be sure to leave for coaching again.

[cwfRaven]

1 minute ago, rmcjacket23 said:

Another sort of "myth" though. Yes, we are throwing to targets short of the line of scrimmage, but as you saw multiple times in the Bengals game, the expectation there is that the receiver will be able to gain the extra yardage himself. Unfortunately we don't have a very talented group in terms of YAC, especially without large space.

Tom Brady has made a living off YAC. He constantly throws passes to receivers short of the line of gain on 3rd down, and his receivers are put in a position to gain those additional yardage. There is no team that consistently runs 12 yard routes on 3rd and 10, because they realize that the defense is defending that boundary more than defending the player.

I would agree that if we don't have the types of receivers that don't allow for YAC then we either need to get them or stop running these players, but those aren't just third down issues either. The reality is that if all we did was throw 11 yard passes on 3rd and 10, you'd see a sharp increase in incompletions and interceptions.

Exactly.  I can't tell you how tired I am of seeing other teams execute in these situation yet we rarely do. Which to me is not just a player issue, but a coaching issue. Players need to execute better, but why are we continually calling plays that we have seen time and time again, our players can't execute. Either coach better, draft better, or play-call better but what we've been doing doesn't work.

[donkeyking64]

17 minutes ago, rmcjacket23 said:

There were some games certainly where I thought the balance was lacking in terms of us having the opportunity to run the ball more and just doing it. The Redskins game notably comes to mind.

But there were plenty of games where fans THOUGHT we abandoned the run, and we simply didn't. I think fans far too often just wait until the game is over, go to the box score, see that its like a 2:1 pass:run ratio, and then say "we didn't run enough".

Cowboys game is a textbook example of why that's untrue. People thought we abandoned the run in that game (mostly 2nd half), yet I challenged people to tell me where we could have run the ball more and nobody came up with anything, because there really weren't any other opportunities.

Game circumstances change everything. We're down 14 points almost immediately against the Bengals. Is running the ball a lot going to help us get out of that hole?

That's not my thought process. I'm with you. I understand.

And I guess I didn't properly articulate. I don't think 2nd and 1 means run the ball and I don't think 3rd and 2 means run the ball. I think if you ran for a big chunk of yards on 1st down. Then run again on 2nd as opposed to getting a big gain on 1st down, then passing on 2nd for an incompletion where you are now not really forced to pass, but the defense knows your tendencies.

Those would be the game circumstances where I get frustrated. Obviously, this is not the team of the late great Zeus and Ogden and Casey Rabach and Mulitallo. But you also have some real agile backs in West and Dixon. Also, you could very well call a pass to a runningback a pass play you know what I mean. We have 2 backs that can both catch the ball out of the back field. We just didn't give either one enough touches and that also is part of the problem.

I'm not saying West/Dixon ought to be a focal point of the offense, but if you told me the two of them combined for 40-45% of offensive touches, I would not be upset. I don't even think that was the case at all.

[Edug27]

2 hours ago, jimmypowder said:

Things went downhill fast like I expected when Kubiak left for Denver . 

We need someone of Kubiak's ability as OC and I don't see it with Marty . 

Pees is a good DC until the 4th quarter where we have lost more games with leads than at any time in Ravens history . He is not the answer either . 

No playoffs next year and John , Marty and Dean will all be gone , guaranteed . 

Missing the playoffs again won't get Harbaugh fired. As long as he has control of that locker room. Losing control of that is the only way he gets fired in the near future..

Edited January 3 by Edug27

[jdynamite]

It's really a shame that this team didn't even bother to make any inquiries for a possible OC.  I mean what did he do to show that he could improve this team offensively.  

He took over this offense in week 6. Overall there was no difference in play selection or creativity, and productivity. 

Smh 

[rmcjacket23]

4 minutes ago, donkeyking64 said:

That's not my thought process. I'm with you. I understand.

And I guess I didn't properly articulate. I don't think 2nd and 1 means run the ball and I don't think 3rd and 2 means run the ball. I think if you ran for a big chunk of yards on 1st down. Then run again on 2nd as opposed to getting a big gain on 1st down, then passing on 2nd for an incompletion where you are now not really forced to pass, but the defense knows your tendencies.

Those would be the game circumstances where I get frustrated. Obviously, this is not the team of the late great Zeus and Ogden and Casey Rabach and Mulitallo. But you also have some real agile backs in West and Dixon. Also, you could very well call a pass to a runningback a pass play you know what I mean. We have 2 backs that can both catch the ball out of the back field. We just didn't give either one enough touches and that also is part of the problem.

I'm not saying West/Dixon ought to be a focal point of the offense, but if you told me the two of them combined for 40-45% of offensive touches, I would not be upset. I don't even think that was the case at all.

Right, at that's my point. Running the ball more is secondary to the act of getting more effective at running the ball, which we were not. Our YPC is a reflection of us not running the ball effectively when we did it.

I'd have to look at the stats to back it up, but I'd bet we were one of the worst 2nd and short running teams in the entire league. I recall countless times where we would run the ball on 2nd and 1, 2, 3 yards and gain nothing or lose yardage. 

In general, I would say that when teams know or heavily think we are going to run the ball, and we run the ball, they stop us. There weren't too many instances I saw where we could run the ball at will against teams and they were helpless to stop us. That's a personnel and execution issue for the most part, not a scheme or play calling issue.

The primary focus should be on being more effective with the carries we do use. Then we can focus on running it more, because it yields positive benefits. I have zero interest in seeing us run the ball more until we get better at it.

Edited January 3 by rmcjacket23