"100% Completion or take a sack..." - ???

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by callahan09

Just decided to look into our third or fourth downs with <= 2 yards to go situations, and here's what I found:

Flacco has a 0.0 QB Rating on 12 such downs. 3 / 11 for 7 yards, 0 TD, 2 INT, 1 Sack. Only 2 first downs. That means 16.7% success rate.

On the other hand, with run plays, we have 18 attempts for 47 yards, 3 TD, 0 Fumbles. 12 first downs. That's a 66.7% success rate.

Remind me again why we ever pass in those situations?

---

Wow, thanks for that. Why the fuck is Cam not seeing that?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by leachisabeast

Wow, thanks for that. Why the fuck is Cam not seeing that?

---

In all fairness the Ravens running game was terrible all night. The Steelers expected run. The chance of it actually working were also very low. I I can understand the pass but here is where you line up in a running formation and pass. Play action with short routes would have been the passing call.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by leachisabeast

I would be inclined to agree with this, because it was Harbaugh who said that Flacco wanted to throw it on 3rd and 2, not Cam.

---

I'm not going to argue the play call, because if three football professionals who have proven to be winners managed to reach a consensus on it, then so be it. I like the faith they show in Joe.

What bothers me about short yardage situations is they drafted Bernard Pierce to be that short yardage back because he is almost 4 inches taller than Rice and 20lbs heavier.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RavensQB

I would call that playing NOT to WIN.

1st down the game is OVER. Not a chance of some miracle play. Or like Tebow did to them in the playoffs. This team still LACKS the KILLER instinct. You think Billacheat and Skirt Brady would have even thought of something that fing stupid?

---

Can you name a game or two that they have lost because of this lack of a KILLER instinct? Just curious. If it is such a problem, there must be many examples where they've lost a game they should have won.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wickedsolo

What bothers me about short yardage situations is they drafted Bernard Pierce to be that short yardage back because he is almost 4 inches taller than Rice and 20lbs heavier.

---

Rice is listed at 212 lbs, Pierce is listed as 218 lbs. Pierce is a big back but he isn't Michael Bush big, Rice has a thicker build.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by leachisabeast

Rice is listed at 212 lbs, Pierce is listed as 218 lbs. Pierce is a big back but he isn't Michael Bush big, Rice has a thicker build.

---

That's funny because in his interview during the pre-season he said he weighed in at around 230lbs.

The listed weights on BR.com aren't 100% accurate. I mean, they have Ngata listed at 330lbs, but there is no way he is 330. He even said he put on weight to get back up to 345.

Finally, that isn't even the point. They drafted Pierce because they weren't happy with their short-yardage abilities last year. Pierce even mentions this in other interviews from the summer about how they want him to be the guy who can pick up those tough yards on 3rd and goal, etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wickedsolo

That's funny because in his interview during the pre-season he said he weighed in at around 230lbs.

The listed weights on BR.com aren't 100% accurate. I mean, they have Ngata listed at 330lbs, but there is no way he is 330. He even said he put on weight to get back up to 345.

Finally, that isn't even the point. They drafted Pierce because they weren't happy with their short-yardage abilities last year. Pierce even mentions this in other interviews from the summer about how they want him to be the guy who can pick up those tough yards on 3rd and goal, etc.

---

I don't think that's entirely true, if anything I think he was drafted for the explosive element he offers, he's actually more of a zone runner than a power scheme runner. If the Ravens where really desperate for a power runner, they would have taken Robert Turbin. If they really drafted him to be a power back, he'd have gotten a load more carries on 3rd and shorts this year, but Rice and Leach are the only backs that have ran it on 3rd and shorts so far. They seem to bring Pierce in for shotgun draw plays and stretch runs more than they do with Rice.

I also really doubt that Pierce is 230 lbs, he was listed 218 lbs at the combine, and he really doesn't look that big, he looks more along the lines of a Darren McFadden/Ryan Matthews type build.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by srobert96

In all fairness the Ravens running game was terrible all night. The Steelers expected run. The chance of it actually working were also very low. I I can understand the pass but here is where you line up in a running formation and pass. Play action with short routes would have been the passing call.

---

Agreed.

I don't think you should be basing a decision like that on stats from prior games - you have to look at what's been happening in that game.

I would have been perfectly fine with a run, but passing wasn't that bad of a call - especially if you say you have faith in Flacco. OTOH, like you, if they were going to pass, I think play action would have made far more sense.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by B-more Ravor

Agreed.

I don't think you should be basing a decision like that on stats from prior games - you have to look at what's been happening in that game.

I would have been perfectly fine with a run, but passing wasn't that bad of a call - especially if you say you have faith in Flacco. OTOH, like you, if they were going to pass, I think play action would have made far more sense.

---

I would have been fine with PA, or how about something like a FB run with Leach or even a QB sneak, we don't seem to do sneaks all that much, and surely it would be effective with Flacco's 6'6 frame...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Captain Silver

This relates to my problem with our coach. Play not to lose as we have in the past. Get a 1st down the game is over. Put in a jumbo package, Leach and Pierce and pound to the right. No, we get cute and lazy.

---

The safe play, the "playing not to lose" play, was the running play. The pass play was a ballsy call and I am happy they did it. As for 50% success mentioned upthread, a short pass has a MUCH higher chance than 50%. Joe is over 50% including all of those deep throws.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Greg

The safe play, the "playing not to lose" play, was the running play. The pass play was a ballsy call and I am happy they did it. As for 50% success mentioned upthread, a short pass has a MUCH higher chance than 50%. Joe is over 50% including all of those deep throws.

---

I am not necessarily against calling the pass play itself, but the way they went about it. First, their formation gave the pass away. The element of surprise was non-existent. Second, telling Joe "100% or take the sack." I don't like that at all. If you want to show some confidence in Joe, call it like any other play and treat it as such. Throwing in that line probably made Joe think "no way in hell I throw this ball" and you could see he pretty much reacted like that. I would bet if they didn't say that to Joe, he completes the pass to a wide open Torrey Smith and the game would have been over.