Page 4 of 11 FirstFirst 12345678 ... LastLast
Results 37 to 48 of 124

Thread: McKinnie ?

  1. #37
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    "Merry old England"
    Posts
    9,237
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: McKinnie ?



    I love how you hear fans saying things like "we wouldn't have won the superbowl without.....".

    Yeah no shit, we wouldn't have won the superbowl without a number of different players. Comments like that are silly and obvious.

    Maybe we should live in a world where a superbowl team can win a superbowl without any of their starting players!




  2. #38

    Re: McKinnie ?

    Quote Originally Posted by leachisabeast View Post
    I love how you hear fans saying things like "we wouldn't have won the superbowl without.....".

    Yeah no shit, we wouldn't have won the superbowl without a number of different players. Comments like that are silly and obvious.

    Maybe we should live in a world where a superbowl team can win a superbowl without any of their starting players!
    That's sort of silly. Some players made a bigger impact than others. McKinnie over Oher was clearly, demonstrably better. That's all posters are saying. And while no one is irreplaceable, to date, McKinnie has not been replaced, and there are few options available to replace him, as has amply been discussed.




  3. #39

    Re: McKinnie ?

    Quote Originally Posted by leachisabeast View Post
    I love how you hear fans saying things like "we wouldn't have won the superbowl without.....".

    Yeah no shit, we wouldn't have won the superbowl without a number of different players. Comments like that are silly and obvious.

    Maybe we should live in a world where a superbowl team can win a superbowl without any of their starting players!
    I would say the play of the OL was the single biggest factor in the teams post season success because without that Flacco wouldn't have went on the run he did.It seems like the best lines are the ones that have continuity and not the ones who are constantly shifting players around from position to position.They can depend on the two OG's that are starting right now and on Oher at RT and they should stay put.




  4. #40
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    "Merry old England"
    Posts
    9,237
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: McKinnie ?

    Quote Originally Posted by RavensRule21215 View Post
    That's sort of silly. Some players made a bigger impact than others. McKinnie over Oher was clearly, demonstrably better. That's all posters are saying. And while no one is irreplaceable, to date, McKinnie has not been replaced, and there are few options available to replace him, as has amply been discussed.
    That's not my point. Of course we wouldn't have won the SB without a number of players. We wouldn't have won the SB without Flacco, Yanda, Rice, KO, Tucker, Pitta, Ngata, hell, maybe even Upshaw and Kruger. Its just people like to point at the players that aren't on our roster anymore (I'm obviously hoping McKinnie is back soon) like Boldin, yet they forget to mention that there are a bunch of players on our roster right now, that would have also been irreplaceable in the SB run. There are also additional players added to the roster that would have likely made the SB run even easier.




  5. #41
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    6,944
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: McKinnie ?

    Quote Originally Posted by leachisabeast View Post
    That's not my point. Of course we wouldn't have won the SB without a number of players. We wouldn't have won the SB without Flacco, Yanda, Rice, KO, Tucker, Pitta, Ngata, hell, maybe even Upshaw and Kruger. Its just people like to point at the players that aren't on our roster anymore (I'm obviously hoping McKinnie is back soon) like Boldin, yet they forget to mention that there are a bunch of players on our roster right now, that would have also been irreplaceable in the SB run. There are also additional players added to the roster that would have likely made the SB run even easier.
    leach, you missed the point. Flacco, Rice, Pitta, etc. played at their usual positions. With McKinnie...Oher was back to RT and KO was @ Lg, and that bolstered our OLine to the max.
    Without McKinnie, where/who do you line up the OLinemen at? THAT is the point of his upgrading 3 positions... Bc




  6. #42

    Re: McKinnie ?

    Quote Originally Posted by BcRaven View Post
    leach, you missed the point. Flacco, Rice, Pitta, etc. played at their usual positions. With McKinnie...Oher was back to RT and KO was @ Lg, and that bolstered our OLine to the max.
    Without McKinnie, where/who do you line up the OLinemen at? THAT is the point of his upgrading 3 positions... Bc
    A good comparison might be the two Denver-Baltimore games.The regular season game with Oher at LT that Denver won.Flacco was sacked 3 times and the Denver defense got 9 hits on him.In the playoff game that the Ravens won with McKinnie at LT.Flacco was sacked 1 time and the Denver defense got a total of 3 hits on him.




  7. #43
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    San Dimas, CA
    Posts
    6,419

    Re: McKinnie ?

    Quote Originally Posted by bmorecareful View Post
    I'm not at all sure that McKinnie's play at LT was the SOLE factor, or even the most important factor, in the Ravens' Super Bowl run. Go back and look at Filmstudy's grades of McKinnie during the playoffs, and you'll find that McKinnie wasn't actually playing all that great overall. Flacco and the offense were stepping up and making plays despite that.
    Exactly. The easy answer is that putting McKinnie in as LT made the difference, but correlation is not causation. I am sure I am in the minority, but I think that KO at left guard had the bigger impact. Flacco all throughout the post season was able to step up into the pocket - which never existed when anyone else playing left guard was getting knocked back - and make one big play after another. It is entirely possible that replacing McKinnie with any average LT would net the same results, as long as KO remained at left guard.

    Quote Originally Posted by Purpleguy View Post
    If you watch the mic'ed up highlights of the AFC Championship there is a part where Reed is on the bench saying "this is the o-line we have been talking about all year. They're invincible".
    And if you watch the mic'ed up highlights of the Super Bowl, you can clearly hear Flacco saying - after being sacked on a completely missed blocking assignment, "I don't know what McKinnie was doing out there."




  8. #44

    Re: McKinnie ?

    Quote Originally Posted by leachisabeast View Post
    That's not my point. Of course we wouldn't have won the SB without a number of players. We wouldn't have won the SB without Flacco, Yanda, Rice, KO, Tucker, Pitta, Ngata, hell, maybe even Upshaw and Kruger. Its just people like to point at the players that aren't on our roster anymore (I'm obviously hoping McKinnie is back soon) like Boldin, yet they forget to mention that there are a bunch of players on our roster right now, that would have also been irreplaceable in the SB run. There are also additional players added to the roster that would have likely made the SB run even easier.
    Okay. I see what you're saying.




  9. #45
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    The Land of Verdite
    Posts
    12,102
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: McKinnie ?

    The issue with McKinnie isn't about what you get when he's motivated and properly conditioned, it's that it takes too many circumstances and too much time for him to get there. Ozzie is going to lowball him and he probably won't have much choice, but to take it.
    "When questioned, the Elders explained that they were in search of magical powers. However, they're actually searching for the whereabouts of a certain ring. This ring is a legendary treasure that long ago was known to exist"




  10. #46
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Baltimore
    Posts
    809

    Re: McKinnie ?

    Quote Originally Posted by alien bird View Post
    Exactly. The easy answer is that putting McKinnie in as LT made the difference, but correlation is not causation. I am sure I am in the minority, but I think that KO at left guard had the bigger impact. Flacco all throughout the post season was able to step up into the pocket - which never existed when anyone else playing left guard was getting knocked back - and make one big play after another. It is entirely possible that replacing McKinnie with any average LT would net the same results, as long as KO remained at left guard. (snip)
    I think most would agree with you actually. It's not that Mckinney was that good, it's just that the move improved 3 positions, the biggest jump being at LG. That's why I've been saying I'd sooner take Random Scrub-KO-Gradkowski-Yanda-Oher over any combination featuring Oher at left and KO at right.




  11. #47

    Re: McKinnie ?

    Quote Originally Posted by TheSpiderWebb View Post
    I think most would agree with you actually. It's not that Mckinney was that good, it's just that the move improved 3 positions, the biggest jump being at LG. That's why I've been saying I'd sooner take Random Scrub-KO-Gradkowski-Yanda-Oher over any combination featuring Oher at left and KO at right.
    Wouldn't that also include moving KO to LT? (That you'd be against it, that is.)




  12. #48

    Re: McKinnie ?

    Quote Originally Posted by RavensRule21215 View Post
    Wouldn't that also include moving KO to LT? (That you'd be against it, that is.)
    KO needs to play LG. He even said he isn't fit to play tackle in the NFL.




Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Russell Street Report Website Design by D3Corp Ocean City Maryland