Do Ravens Really have an 80/20 Rule?

We have heard for years how the Ravens manage their roster with the 80/20 rule. Our dysfunctional cap management and lack of production (and/or opportunities from some of our draft picks and younger players) makes me wonder is the 80/20 Rule in the Castle is urban legend. There are times we let guys walk (Boldin, Torrey,Wagner) thinking they aren't worth the money but it seems that, in many cases, unless you are an end of the roster guy or on special teams, the 80/20 Rule doesn't seem to apply.
The most recent case in point is BWill's huge contract. You could argue that our young DL is the youngest, most talented and deepest position on the team. The FO did a great job in finding Michael Pierce and signing him as an UDFA. It seemed if the 80/20 would ever apply, it would be with Pierce and BWill. In fact, it's more like 80/5 with these 2 guys yet BWill's contract will affect the roster for years.
Should we have taken the comp pick (3rd at worst) and try and fill a need in the draft?
With free agency, you certainly can't keep everybody and guys leave every year for cap reasons. However, is it time to call BS on the
80/20 rule or is it really a factor in our roster and cap management?

Seems like it's 80/20 unless it's a player they like.

IMO they use an 80/20 rule on O, but not on D.

We almost always sign the D guys we like. There are exceptions like McPhee and Kruger, but they improved so much that we just couldn't afford it.

Agreed. The 80/20 rule is only for certain positions, not others. They overpaid for Brandon Williams but no one should have been surprised by that, Ozzie loves overpaying big run stopping NT/DTs. I guess he thought Williams was the next Ngata (and Ngata himself might not have even been worth what we paid him in retrospect).

The FO has weird, antiquated ideas about team construction and the love affair with run stopping DL is just one part of the puzzle, hilarious that after so much investment the Ravens just gave up more than 4 YPC for the first time in history this year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GreatWhiteNorthRaven

IMO they use an 80/20 rule on O, but not on D.

We almost always sign the D guys we like. There are exceptions like McPhee and Kruger, but they improved so much that we just couldn't afford it.

---

Pretty much this. 80/20 only applies to the offense. For the defense, it's just a matter of handing over blank checks. The Wagner vs Williams issue proves it. We had people to replace Williams like Pierce, Davis, or maybe even the freaking rookie from 2016 who never played a snap. We had to go out and find someone to replace Wagner

We signed Joe to a big contract. We signed Ray Rice to a big contract. We signed Dennis Pitta to a big contract. We signed Marshal Yanda to a big contract. And I would assume we will be signing Ronnie Stanley to a big contract. The success hasn't played out on offense, but I don't think the philosophy is any different. We let Wagner and KO walk. But we've also let McPhee, Art Jones, Upshaw, and Kruger walk, to name a few. We kept Ray, we kept Ed, we mostly kept Haloti, we will probably keep Mosley. It's the same on both sides of the ball.

And the 80/20 rule isn't "replace every player on your roster with a guy who can provide 80% of the productivity at 20% of the cost." It's about looking for opportunities to make that happen. If we draft a stud FS in the first round, maybe it applies to Weddle. If Alex Lewis is a decent RT prospect, maybe we let Howard walk.

Carr is a great example where the 80/20 rule could come into play this year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GreatWhiteNorthRaven

IMO they use an 80/20 rule on O, but not on D.

We almost always sign the D guys we like. There are exceptions like McPhee and Kruger, but they improved so much that we just couldn't afford it.

---

100% agree GWNW


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk