Prospects that "Look and play like a Raven", and how it's killing our football team

[Tyler]

As we've seen and heard so many times from guys like Harbaugh, Ozzie, and Decosta, year after year they are looking for guys that "Play like a Raven", so I'm asking you guys, when are they finally going to say enough is enough? I don't know about you all, but I'm sick and tired of this front office taking prospects completely off of their board, simply because they partied a little too much in college, or happen to be a little out there in terms of intensity, and settling for much less talented and impactful prospects that "Look like a Raven". A prime example, passing on a guy (MULTIPLE TIMES) who would have led our entire team in sacks as a rookie(Noah Spence), for Kamalei Correa, who couldn't even perform well enough to dress with the team most games. We've seen it happen numerous other times, and in my opinion, that's what's keeping this team hovering around mediocrity. That's not me saying that I want the next Greg Hardy or Aldon Smith, as domestic violence is a HUGE red flag, but lets be honest, Football is not a sport for choir boys, and sometimes you need guys that have that extra edge. Our best defensive player was labeled by many as a "bad character guy" coming out of Colorado, simply because he smoked a little weed in college, and we all know what our defense looked like without him on the field. So my question is, how many busted picks is it going to take for this team to tweak its drafting strategy? I'm not saying let's be the Cincinnati Bengals, but let's take some calculated risks on guys like Tim Williams, and see what they can do. What do we have to lose, Because "Looking like a Raven" has sure looked a lot like 8-8 as of late. 

Edited January 5 by Tyler

[Jacquouille]

Basically, you're another guy being upset for not taking Spence (who for crying out loud just had 5,5 sacks, the same as ZDS his rookie season). 

Because otherwise this draft is the best we've had in potentially the last 8 years. I don't think people had the same reaction when Terrance Cody and Sergio Kindle were here. They certainly were talented.

[JonnyBaltimore]

21 minutes ago, Tyler said:

As we've seen and heard so many times from guys like Harbaugh, Ozzie, and Decosta, year after year they are looking for guys that "Play like a Raven", so I'm asking you guys, when are they finally going to say enough is enough? I don't know about you all, but I'm sick and tired of this front office taking prospects completely off of their board, simply because they partied a little too much in college, or happen to be a little out there in terms of intensity, and settling for much less talented and impactful prospects that "Look like a Raven". A prime example, passing on a guy (MULTIPLE TIMES) who would have led our entire team in sacks as a rookie(Noah Spence), for Kamalei Correa, who couldn't even perform well enough to dress with the team most games. We've seen it happen numerous other times, and in my opinion, that's what's keeping this team hovering around mediocrity. That's not me saying that I want the next Greg Hardy or Aldon Smith, as domestic violence is a HUGE red flag, but lets be honest, Football is not a sport for choir boys, and sometimes you need guys that have that extra edge. Our best defensive player was labeled by many as a "bad character guy" coming out of Colorado, simply because he smoked a little weed in college, and we all know what our defense looked like without him on the field. So my question is, how many busted picks is it going to take for this team to tweak its drafting strategy? I'm not saying let's be the Cincinnati Bengals, but let's take some calculated risks on guys like Tim Williams, and see what they can do. What do we have to lose, Because "Looking like a Raven" has sure looked a lot like 8-8 as of late. 

Way too early to assess the 2016 draft. I'm optimistic that we can get 1 or 2 more starters out of that draft class. Besides we got Judon late and he had 4 sacks in limited playing time.

[Tyler]

13 minutes ago, Jacquouille said:

Basically, you're another guy being upset for not taking Spence (who for crying out loud just had 5,5 sacks, the same as ZDS his rookie season). 

Because otherwise this draft is the best we've had in potentially the last 8 years. I don't think people had the same reaction when Terrance Cody and Sergio Kindle were here. They certainly were talented.

The fact that you're comparing Noah Spence to Z'Darius Smith says it all. Keep in mind Spence was injured for part of the season, at one point was playing with ONE ARM, dislocated his shoulder, popped it back in, and went on to strike fear in the eyes of Cam Newton. Meanwhile Correa was a healthy scratch in how many game? Spence is going to be a helluva player at a position that this team is sorely lacking ability in. Spence is just an example, am I scratching my head that they passed on him twice? absolutely. That doesn't mean I'm just another guy that's crying over a spilled milk. I'm sure others see the real possibility of them passing on a guy like Tim Williams to add to that list. 

[Tyler]

Ken Weiman from 105.7 the Fan touched on this and I just wanted to elaborate on it as a forum. He's spot on, IMO https://www.google.com/amp/baltimore.cbslocal.com/2017/01/04/ken-weinman-rants-over-ravens-keeping-coordinators/amp/

[Jacquouille]

12 minutes ago, Tyler said:

The fact that you're comparing Noah Spence to Z'Darius Smith says it all. Keep in mind Spence was injured for part of the season, at one point was playing with ONE ARM, dislocated his shoulder, popped it back in, and went on to strike fear in the eyes of Cam Newton. Meanwhile Correa was a healthy scratch in how many game? Spence is going to be a helluva player at a position that this team is sorely lacking ability in. Spence is just an example, am I scratching my head that they passed on him twice? absolutely. That doesn't mean I'm just another guy that's crying over a spilled milk. I'm sure others see the real possibility of them passing on a guy like Tim Williams to add to that list. 

No I'm comparing them because in terms of production Spence has proven absolutely nothing to make me regret him. He had good not great production, but as a prospect we're talking about a guy who had off the field issue AND horrible interviews AND a disappointing combine. So no, passing on Spence is not an issue. 

Asking for A+ characters is the reason this draft class in general is working out, and if even half of them doesn't it still a draft for the ages. Meanwhile we screwed up big time on guys like Kindle or Cody who were the Noah Spence of their draft.

[Moderator 3]

25 minutes ago, Tyler said:

Ken Weiman from 105.7 the Fan touched on this and I just wanted to elaborate on it as a forum. He's spot on, IMO https://www.google.com/amp/baltimore.cbslocal.com/2017/01/04/ken-weinman-rants-over-ravens-keeping-coordinators/amp/

It's Weinman's job to rant.  How else would he have any followers?

[Tyler]

26 minutes ago, Jacquouille said:

No I'm comparing them because in terms of production Spence has proven absolutely nothing to make me regret him. He had good not great production, but as a prospect we're talking about a guy who had off the field issue AND horrible interviews AND a disappointing combine. So no, passing on Spence is not an issue. 

Asking for A+ characters is the reason this draft class in general is working out, and if even half of them doesn't it still a draft for the ages. Meanwhile we screwed up big time on guys like Kindle or Cody who were the Noah Spence of their draft.

I hear you, but Sergio Kindle fell down a flight of stairs, although he had a DWI charge in college. Kindle was a clear miss but no one would have predicted his career would come to an end the way it did. Cody didn't have a single off the field issue in college. The animal cruelty charge came well after he'd already been on the team.

Edited January 5 by Tyler

[rmw10]

I think there's a push and shove.  To some extent, you want some hard working players on your team - guys that represent the Ravens brand of football well.  On the other hand though, those guys aren't always the most athletically gifted.  I'm not saying that we need to go out and draft a team full of murderers and rapists, but sometimes, you have to ignore the leadership aspect and just get the best football player for this team.  I know we have this Red Star process that has often been characterized as someone you want on and off the field, someone who works hard, and someone who shows leadership qualities.  That's great and all, but that doesn't always mean the player is meant for the NFL.  I don't mind some of their so-called Red Star players, but it's often said after the draft just how many of them we end up getting.  Is that really a good thing?  That's the push and shove of it.

[DomMcRaven]

8 minutes ago, rmw10 said:

I think there's a push and shove.  To some extent, you want some hard working players on your team - guys that represent the Ravens brand of football well.  On the other hand though, those guys aren't always the most athletically gifted.  I'm not saying that we need to go out and draft a team full of murderers and rapists, but sometimes, you have to ignore the leadership aspect and just get the best football player for this team.  I know we have this Red Star process that has often been characterized as someone you want on and off the field, someone who works hard, and someone who shows leadership qualities.  That's great and all, but that doesn't always mean the player is meant for the NFL.  I don't mind some of their so-called Red Star players, but it's often said after the draft just how many of them we end up getting.  Is that really a good thing?  That's the push and shove of it.

Somewhat off topic, but it does pertains to the prospects: how's the WaG depth for this class? It's been awhile since I've heard your analysis lol. 

[rmw10]

7 minutes ago, DomMcRaven said:

Somewhat off topic, but it does pertains to the prospects: how's the WaG depth for this class? It's been awhile since I've heard your analysis lol. 

Too early for scouting reports.  Check me again in March lol

[ravefan52]

13 minutes ago, rmw10 said:

I think there's a push and shove.  To some extent, you want some hard working players on your team - guys that represent the Ravens brand of football well.  On the other hand though, those guys aren't always the most athletically gifted.  I'm not saying that we need to go out and draft a team full of murderers and rapists, but sometimes, you have to ignore the leadership aspect and just get the best football player for this team.  I know we have this Red Star process that has often been characterized as someone you want on and off the field, someone who works hard, and someone who shows leadership qualities.  That's great and all, but that doesn't always mean the player is meant for the NFL.  I don't mind some of their so-called Red Star players, but it's often said after the draft just how many of them we end up getting.  Is that really a good thing?  That's the push and shove of it.

This. It's part of the balancing act of building a championship team. So many great players wouldn't be what the FO refers to as red star players, but you do need some real leaders to win a super bowl. It does seem like 'good guys' is all we've been drafting lately. I definitely would like to see us taking some more calculated risks, like Spence or Tim Williams. I get why we wouldn't draft a player with DV background, but there's plenty of 'troubled' players who are making teams pay forpassing on them.

[rmw10]

55 minutes ago, ravefan52 said:

This. It's part of the balancing act of building a championship team. So many great players wouldn't be what the FO refers to as red star players, but you do need some real leaders to win a super bowl. It does seem like 'good guys' is all we've been drafting lately. I definitely would like to see us taking some more calculated risks, like Spence or Tim Williams. I get why we wouldn't draft a player with DV background, but there's plenty of 'troubled' players who are making teams pay forpassing on them.

It doesn't even necessarily have to be a "troubled" player.  I just think we might place a little too much emphasis on character and drive, when sometimes, there's a more athletically gifted and talented player out there.  He may not embody every single trait you're looking for, but if he's the best player for your team, do it.  It's hard to say definitively if this is the case, but based on recent drafts, it looks like there's a little merit to it.

[rossihunter2]

3 hours ago, Tyler said:

As we've seen and heard so many times from guys like Harbaugh, Ozzie, and Decosta, year after year they are looking for guys that "Play like a Raven", so I'm asking you guys, when are they finally going to say enough is enough? I don't know about you all, but I'm sick and tired of this front office taking prospects completely off of their board, simply because they partied a little too much in college, or happen to be a little out there in terms of intensity, and settling for much less talented and impactful prospects that "Look like a Raven". A prime example, passing on a guy (MULTIPLE TIMES) who would have led our entire team in sacks as a rookie(Noah Spence), for Kamalei Correa, who couldn't even perform well enough to dress with the team most games. We've seen it happen numerous other times, and in my opinion, that's what's keeping this team hovering around mediocrity. That's not me saying that I want the next Greg Hardy or Aldon Smith, as domestic violence is a HUGE red flag, but lets be honest, Football is not a sport for choir boys, and sometimes you need guys that have that extra edge. Our best defensive player was labeled by many as a "bad character guy" coming out of Colorado, simply because he smoked a little weed in college, and we all know what our defense looked like without him on the field. So my question is, how many busted picks is it going to take for this team to tweak its drafting strategy? I'm not saying let's be the Cincinnati Bengals, but let's take some calculated risks on guys like Tim Williams, and see what they can do. What do we have to lose, Because "Looking like a Raven" has sure looked a lot like 8-8 as of late. 

you're being very selective here - our 4th round O lineman has served time when we could have drafted all sorts of "choirboys" as you put it, in the same spot who would have been "safer" picks

also to say spence would have led the entire team in sacks is straight up insulting to suggs who got 8 on the season with one arm for half the year

as far as im aware the only guys who come off the draft board are DV cases and people who interview terribly

and yes of course offseason issues are going to affect draft stock - remember when everyone was high on randy gregory but didnt take him because of character issues - then he showed up early and everyone thought it was ok - and now he is literally banned for another whole year - so tell me how that pick worked out for dallas

[rossihunter2]

2 minutes ago, rmw10 said:

It doesn't even necessarily have to be a "troubled" player.  I just think we might place a little too much emphasis on character and drive, when sometimes, there's a more athletically gifted and talented player out there.  He may not embody every single trait you're looking for, but if he's the best player for your team, do it.  It's hard to say definitively if this is the case, but based on recent drafts, it looks like there's a little merit to it.

other than spence who are you referring to?

[rmw10]

3 minutes ago, rossihunter2 said:

other than spence who are you referring to?

I'm not referring to anyone outside of the organization in particular.  I can say definitively that Correa and Kaufusi would not have been my top options where they were picked, and it's been confirmed that both of them are red star guys.  It's just the overall sentiment that those type of guys get bumped up a round in value (according to Harbaugh) when they get that designation, and I'm not sure it's always the best avenue to go.

Edited January 5 by rmw10

[rossihunter2]

Just now, rmw10 said:

I'm not referring to anyone outside of the organization in particular.  I can say definitively that Correa and Kaufusi would not have been my top options where they were picked, and it's been confirmed that both of them are red star guys.  It's just the overall sentiment that those type of guys get bumped up a round in value (according to Harbaugh) when they get that designation, and I'm not sure it's always the best avenue to go.

that's fair if its true - but i never heard that guys get bumped up a round if they get that red star before - it does make sense that a good character guy is gonna be thought of more highly but the front offices are better at this than us - i dont think they get fooled completely by good character

[rmw10]

2 minutes ago, rossihunter2 said:

that's fair if its true - but i never heard that guys get bumped up a round if they get that red star before - it does make sense that a good character guy is gonna be thought of more highly but the front offices are better at this than us - i dont think they get fooled completely by good character

Just as a reference...

“We have something here called a ‘Red Star.’ Every scout chooses one player,” Harbaugh said. “Coaches sometimes get a chance to choose. A player they feel really strongly about, the kind of person they are, character-wise, determination, motivation, those guys generally move up a round or so.”

http://coachingsearch.com/article?a=John-Harbaugh-describes-a-Red-Star-prospect-on-the-Ravens-draft-board

[rossihunter2]

8 minutes ago, rmw10 said:

Just as a reference...

“We have something here called a ‘Red Star.’ Every scout chooses one player,” Harbaugh said. “Coaches sometimes get a chance to choose. A player they feel really strongly about, the kind of person they are, character-wise, determination, motivation, those guys generally move up a round or so.”

http://coachingsearch.com/article?a=John-Harbaugh-describes-a-Red-Star-prospect-on-the-Ravens-draft-board

hmmm that's interesting - and if it does work like that, then whoever red starred correa is gonna be on the hot seat this year

[rmw10]

Just now, rossihunter2 said:

hmmm that's interesting - and if it does work like that, then whoever red starred correa is gonna be on the hot seat this year

It's tough because we don't always know who the red star guys are, but they often brag about getting a lot of them.  I'm not for scrapping the entire process as I do think it's important to have some of those types of players.  I think they just need to find a balance, and not always focus on taking those guys when they're available.

[hn68wb4]

It's got nothing to do with the philosophy of "play like a Raven." Some players pan out and others don't, how they handle themselves off the field is a separate matter entirely. Just because a player has off the field issues doesn't mean they'll be good, doesn't mean they'll have more grit than someone who keeps their crap together when they're not on the field. Sure Spence has looked pretty good in extremely limited time - though vastly overrated by many around here who were never interested in giving Correa a shot to begin with, for them the question is loaded, they aren't going to stop complaining until Correa does something, and even then it's no guarantee that they won't continue regardless - but there are far more examples of players that don't pan out, many times the primary reason that they don't pan out is precisely because of their off the field issues. Manziel is the obvious example, all the talent in the world but couldn't get himself together off the field, right now Randy Gregory is heading down that same road, and the list goes on and on. 

You're conflating two completely separate, unrelated things. There are many players that have that grit and x factor that don't cause any trouble whatsoever on the field or off, Steve Smith is the perfect example of that, you'd be hard pressed to find a more gritty player in the league. There's more than enough reason to remove players from your board all together, and there's no reason to believe Spence wasn't on Ozzie/DeCosta's board, he very well could have been, just not as high as some on here had him.

By the end you completely contradicted yourself btw. Saying we took Jimmy even though he had some minor issues off the field pretty much turns your entire argument that we don't take those players upside down. People like you act as if the FO is like "whelp one off the field problem, off the board completely" when that's rarely the case. When a player has off the field problems their position is adjusted, they aren't dropped immediately, when it comes to how far they fall on the board it's a sliding scale.

[ravefan52]

1 hour ago, rossihunter2 said:

you're being very selective here - our 4th round O lineman has served time when we could have drafted all sorts of "choirboys" as you put it, in the same spot who would have been "safer" picks

also to say spence would have led the entire team in sacks is straight up insulting to suggs who got 8 on the season with one arm for half the year

as far as im aware the only guys who come off the draft board are DV cases and people who interview terribly

and yes of course offseason issues are going to affect draft stock - remember when everyone was high on randy gregory but didnt take him because of character issues - then he showed up early and everyone thought it was ok - and now he is literally banned for another whole year - so tell me how that pick worked out for dallas

Lewis really isn't a good example of an off field issue guy we took a chance on. Didn't he just get in a fight? Big deal, especially for an olineman. And he was a 4th round pick in a round where we had five picks. Almost no risk there. Idk how different the board would look if the FO didn't care about off field as much, but it does seem like almost everyone drafted lately has that red star player feel to them.

[jboy19]

This is dumb. Noah Spence wasn't even that good this season. More importantly, I don't even think that we actively pass on guys with character issues more than other teams do anyway. 

[rossihunter2]

36 minutes ago, ravefan52 said:

Lewis really isn't a good example of an off field issue guy we took a chance on. Didn't he just get in a fight? Big deal, especially for an olineman. And he was a 4th round pick in a round where we had five picks. Almost no risk there. Idk how different the board would look if the FO didn't care about off field as much, but it does seem like almost everyone drafted lately has that red star player feel to them.

anyone other than spence you think we've passed on because of "character concerns"?

[JoeyFlex5]

The thing about Spence is this.... 

He wasn't that great on film. He bombed the combine. I didn't think much of his character concerns and I wrote it off as a dumb kid being a dumb kid and learning his lesson the hard way(and the best way). And when he played far lesser competition he didn't dominate the way Matt judon did. When guys are playing at a small school you wanna see total domination from them, Brandon Williams dominated his small school, Matt judon dominated, lardarius Webb reportedly was a hell of a ballhawk and playmaker at nichols, Spence was just kinda disruptive and played solid when he should've been dominating at EKU. for him to come out as strong as he did in the NFL is a bit of a surprise. I thought he would be a solid player but I expected far less from him because his college tape didn't project this kind of success.

[kjbmore]

3 hours ago, rossihunter2 said:

you're being very selective here - our 4th round O lineman has served time when we could have drafted all sorts of "choirboys" as you put it, in the same spot who would have been "safer" picks

also to say spence would have led the entire team in sacks is straight up insulting to suggs who got 8 on the season with one arm for half the year

as far as im aware the only guys who come off the draft board are DV cases and people who interview terribly

and yes of course offseason issues are going to affect draft stock - remember when everyone was high on randy gregory but didnt take him because of character issues - then he showed up early and everyone thought it was ok - and now he is literally banned for another whole year - so tell me how that pick worked out for dallas

i dont get the interview terribly bit - unless somebody just downright disrespectful or a complete nut job or just seems apathetic

these guys are football players, not looking for ceos, sales manager, engineers, not even checkout people

we just want guys who know where its at when its time to play ball

some people dont interview well, might get nervous, not be that well spoken, have trouble comprehending questions - i can imagine its quite a daunting process having possibly up to 32 interviews in a short timeframe - having ones bad enough - no doubt its a room full of people too - not just one on one, owners, coaches, scouts, dang ive heard of priests being involved

[allblackraven]

50 minutes ago, JoeyFlex5 said:

The thing about Spence is this.... 

He wasn't that great on film. He bombed the combine. I didn't think much of his character concerns and I wrote it off as a dumb kid being a dumb kid and learning his lesson the hard way(and the best way). And when he played far lesser competition he didn't dominate the way Matt judon did. When guys are playing at a small school you wanna see total domination from them, Brandon Williams dominated his small school, Matt judon dominated, lardarius Webb reportedly was a hell of a ballhawk and playmaker at nichols, Spence was just kinda disruptive and played solid when he should've been dominating at EKU. for him to come out as strong as he did in the NFL is a bit of a surprise. I thought he would be a solid player but I expected far less from him because his college tape didn't project this kind of success.

He had phenomenal freshman and sophomore tapes from OSU, then made a long pause due to suspension - I guess that affected him little bit but he was still good at EKU.

Was also absolutely unstoppable at Senior Bowl practices and the game.

[allblackraven]

7 hours ago, Jacquouille said:

No I'm comparing them because in terms of production Spence has proven absolutely nothing to make me regret him. He had good not great production, but as a prospect we're talking about a guy who had off the field issue AND horrible interviews AND a disappointing combine. So no, passing on Spence is not an issue. 

Asking for A+ characters is the reason this draft class in general is working out, and if even half of them doesn't it still a draft for the ages. Meanwhile we screwed up big time on guys like Kindle or Cody who were the Noah Spence of their draft.

My guess is that's because you just read his stat sheet and haven't watched him play at all.

[jboy19]

50 minutes ago, kjbmore said:

i dont get the interview terribly bit - unless somebody just downright disrespectful or a complete nut job or just seems apathetic

these guys are football players, not looking for ceos, sales manager, engineers, not even checkout people

we just want guys who know where its at when its time to play ball

some people dont interview well, might get nervous, not be that well spoken, have trouble comprehending questions - i can imagine its quite a daunting process having possibly up to 32 interviews in a short timeframe - having ones bad enough - no doubt its a room full of people too - not just one on one, owners, coaches, scouts, dang ive heard of priests being involved

There was a video on this site a while ago, I don't know where it is, but it was one of the beat writers getting a mock combine interview with Decosta. Its a really interesting watch if you can find it. 

Basically the interviews serve two purposes: (1) to gather some basic background information about the person, and (2) to evaluate the players temperament. I think the second one is probably the more important purpose as teams gather a ton of the background information beforehand (Scouts are out visiting high school coaches, college coaches, looking for all kinds of deep, borderline creepy information about these kids). It's really important to know a player's temperament because of its connection to things like suspensions, emotional responses to adversity in the game and even small things like drive killing penalties. If a player can't hold himself together during an interview where they should know everything that is at stake, that should definitely affect their draft stock because of how important it is to stay poised and focused in football games. 

It's not even just a Ravens thing either, there's always stories about weird questions meant to upset the player or catch them offguard- such as the infamous question to Dez Bryant about his mother. 

Edited January 6 by jboy19

[JoeyFlex5]

25 minutes ago, allblackraven said:

He had phenomenal freshman and sophomore tapes from OSU, then made a long pause due to suspension - I guess that affected him little bit but he was still good at EKU.

Was also absolutely unstoppable at Senior Bowl practices and the game.

He had good tapes but I think phenomenal is a stretch. He was more disruptive than productive for sure. And I'll give you the senior bowl but that's pretty weak competition as well. 

Idk, I jumped on his hype train at first but the more I looked into him the more I thought he looked decent but nothing special.