Page 3 of 11 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 156
  1. #31

    Re: The Foundation of the Passing Offense is still Intact.



    Quote Originally Posted by RavensRule21215 View Post
    Second, NO QB has ever achieved elite status with crap WRs. NONE. Even going back to Johnny U.
    You quite literally just made this up on the spot..




  2. #32
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    1,790

    The Foundation of the Passing Offense is still Intact.

    Quote Originally Posted by RavensNTerps View Post
    This. If Joe Flacco is worthy of his contract his play will make the WRs effective. Did Drew Brees have more "proven" WRs in his time in New Orleans? Hell no.

    If Flacco is worthy of his contract than his play will turn at least one of Thompson, Reed, Williams, Doss, Streeter or the Elon guy into a solid enough WR.
    I think it's a logical flaw to imply (or flat-out say, as some have) that Tom Brady makes his receivers good. I think his receivers would want a word with you on that line of thinking. No, they were good while playing with Tom Brady. There's a difference. They got open and caught the ball when it came to them, and they got yards after the catch. If the receivers don't, can't, or won't do those things, the quarterback is meaningless. Being accurate and having good timing doesn't do much for you if there's nobody to safely throw the ball to or if they don't catch it when it comes their way. We need our receivers to perform to that level. Joe Flacco can't "make them" do it and it's not his fault if they don't. If the players just don't have it, the quarterback being able to make the throws isn't going to make them suddenly get separation and catch the ball.
    Last edited by callahan09; 07-30-2013 at 04:12 PM.




  3. #33

    Re: The Foundation of the Passing Offense is still Intact.

    Couple of thoughts on the offense. We don't know how it is going to do because we don't know if players are going to step up or not. The NFL in the salary cap era makes teams go into seasons with unproven players. I can tell you the one thing that rarely if ever works is bringing in burned out veterans on the downside of their career.

    It is not on Joe to get the most out the receivers that are on the squad but rather on Caldwell. Green Bay has rotated wrs in and out with success because of the offense they run and the plays they call. Rogers is a great QB but it also helps that the OC creates mismatches for him to exploit. Cam ran the offense he wanted to run regardless of the players and opponent. That is why you have seen all the top offensive players go through droughts while he was OC. You can only run Torrey on so many go routes before defenses start bracketing him.

    Pitta will be sorely missed but I won't miss Boldin. If you take the playoffs out of it Boldin was the 4th best player on offense last year behind Flacco, Tsmith, Rice and Pitta. With Pitta out we could certainly use Boldin. The biggest drag on the offense last year was having Boldin as a #2. Play action out of the I was not effective because teams would cover him with a corner no problem. Tsmith would be bracketed. Joe ended up throwing it up for grabs to Smith hoping for a PI most of the time as no one was open. The offense did not start having success until they moved Boldin inside and put Jones on outside. If Thompson and Jones can burn a few corners on the outside it will open up things.




  4. #34
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Clayton,NC
    Posts
    7,737

    Re: The Foundation of the Passing Offense is still Intact.

    Quote Originally Posted by srobert96 View Post
    Couple of thoughts on the offense. We don't know how it is going to do because we don't know if players are going to step up or not. The NFL in the salary cap era makes teams go into seasons with unproven players. I can tell you the one thing that rarely if ever works is bringing in burned out veterans on the downside of their career.

    It is not on Joe to get the most out the receivers that are on the squad but rather on Caldwell. Green Bay has rotated wrs in and out with success because of the offense they run and the plays they call. Rogers is a great QB but it also helps that the OC creates mismatches for him to exploit. Cam ran the offense he wanted to run regardless of the players and opponent. That is why you have seen all the top offensive players go through droughts while he was OC. You can only run Torrey on so many go routes before defenses start bracketing him.

    Pitta will be sorely missed but I won't miss Boldin. If you take the playoffs out of it Boldin was the 4th best player on offense last year behind Flacco, Tsmith, Rice and Pitta. With Pitta out we could certainly use Boldin. The biggest drag on the offense last year was having Boldin as a #2. Play action out of the I was not effective because teams would cover him with a corner no problem. Tsmith would be bracketed. Joe ended up throwing it up for grabs to Smith hoping for a PI most of the time as no one was open. The offense did not start having success until they moved Boldin inside and put Jones on outside. If Thompson and Jones can burn a few corners on the outside it will open up things.
    We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid. - Benjamin Franklin




  5. #35

    Re: The Foundation of the Passing Offense is still Intact.

    Quote Originally Posted by JohnBKistler View Post
    You think Torrey Smith, Ed Dickson (who only 1 season ago had more catches than Pitta) and Ray Rice out of the backfield is "garbage"? Interesting.

    I don't agree with you.
    No problem. Torrey Smith, Ed Dickson, and Ray Rice are never going to be confused with Julio Jones, Roddy White, Tony Gonzales, and Michael Turner. (And "garbage" was primarily a reference to David Reed & Tandon Doss, the names the Ravens have been using as the reason they didn't pick up any proven NFL WRs. But Ed "Stone Hands" Dickson could easily fall into that category as well, and to date even Jacoby Jones has not established himself as a bona fide NFL #2 WR either.)

    What's funny is how commentators talk incessantly about the need to surround QBs with high level talent if they want the offense to get to the next level. Except when it comes to Joe.




  6. #36

    Re: The Foundation of the Passing Offense is still Intact.

    Quote Originally Posted by RavensRule21215 View Post
    No problem. Torrey Smith, Ed Dickson, and Ray Rice are never going to be confused with Julio Jones, Roddy White, Tony Gonzales, and Michael Turner.
    We don't have the personnel to match Atlanta in the passing game. They designed their offense to play in the dome. But they were also 29th in the league for rushing. We'll be more balanced.




  7. #37

    Re: The Foundation of the Passing Offense is still Intact.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bigfish View Post
    We don't have the personnel to match Atlanta in the passing game. They designed their offense to play in the dome. But they were also 29th in the league for rushing. We'll be more balanced.
    And my whole point IS that the Ravens don't have the personnel to match Atlanta in the passing game. And even WITH that, AND playing in a dome, Joe's stats, when compared to Ryan's, are not all that different. And Joe blows Ryan away in the post season. Yet people still rag on Joe. It's insane.




  8. #38
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Pikesville
    Posts
    4,268

    Re: The Foundation of the Passing Offense is still Intact.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mista T View Post
    I am happy to see that there can be a positive spin on the story of the demise our passing game. Highly optimistic to see the coach and OL overcoming the loss of our two best receivers ---- thanks for making me smile this morning!

    Here's hoping that Ray Rice's little legs are up to the challenge.
    Same thing you said when Mason and Heap left.

    Yet we keep on winning games with a balanced attack that doesn't lean too much on run or pass.
    My motto was always to keep swinging. Whether I was in a slump or feeling badly or having trouble off the field, the only thing to do was keep swinging. -Hank Aaron




  9. #39
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Clayton,NC
    Posts
    7,737

    Re: The Foundation of the Passing Offense is still Intact.

    Quote Originally Posted by ActualSpamBot View Post
    Same thing you said when Mason and Heap left.

    Yet we keep on winning games with a balanced attack that doesn't lean too much on run or pass.
    Yeah imagine that. Guys retire get traded leave via free agency and believe it or not! Someone steps up and plays well in that spot. Whoddathunkit.
    We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid. - Benjamin Franklin




  10. #40
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Pikesville
    Posts
    4,268

    Re: The Foundation of the Passing Offense is still Intact.

    Quote Originally Posted by NCRAVEN View Post
    Yeah imagine that. Guys retire get traded leave via free agency and believe it or not! Someone steps up and plays well in that spot. Whoddathunkit.
    It's almost as if we have a guy or two who's only job is to stock the team with talent. The rest of the league should really copy that concept, I always feel bad when I see a team come to town with only 22 players.
    My motto was always to keep swinging. Whether I was in a slump or feeling badly or having trouble off the field, the only thing to do was keep swinging. -Hank Aaron




  11. #41
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Clayton,NC
    Posts
    7,737

    Re: The Foundation of the Passing Offense is still Intact.

    Quote Originally Posted by ActualSpamBot View Post
    It's almost as if we have a guy or two who's only job is to stock the team with talent. The rest of the league should really copy that concept, I always feel bad when I see a team come to town with only 22 players.
    We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid. - Benjamin Franklin




  12. #42
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    The Land of Verdite
    Posts
    13,321
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: The Foundation of the Passing Offense is still Intact.

    I think some are really overestimating how difficult it will be for this year's passing offense to be an improvement over last year's (Regular Season).
    "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"




  13. #43

    Re: The Foundation of the Passing Offense is still Intact.

    Quote Originally Posted by bmorecareful View Post
    You can stop beating the horse because your point is not a good one, unfortunately. Boldin's numbers don't seem so great without any context, so let's contextualize them. Bare volume numbers on their own don't tell the whole story.

    Sure he only caught 65 passes last year, which doesn't sound great, but Flacco only completed 317 passes--15th in the league. Boldin's reception total is 20% of the team reception total. His 921 yards were 24% of the team total. That's right on par with a low-end WR1, especially considering his depth of target and yards per catch were a lot higher than many other WR1s in the league. Add in Pitta's 20% of team receptions and 17.5% of team yards and you're talking about a passing game that has lost 40% effectiveness on the whole.

    I'm confident the passing offense won't ACTUALLY lose 40% effectiveness, but that is a HUGE hit. FWIW, Calvin Johnson was less than 40% of the Lions' passing game last year. Julio Jones and Tony Gonzalez were just over 40% of the Falcons' passing game last year. When controlled for the Ravens' historically low VOLUME passing the ball, losing Boldin and Pitta are exactly what they sound like--losing your #1 WR and your top-tier TE.
    They didn't lose the opportunity on the field. Someone else is going to replace those numbers from both the WR and TE positions. It is absurd to think that there aren't guys on this roster that can duplicate that level of play. Neither guy was elite, and the Ravens FO is one of the top 3 talent evaluators in the league, so ou can try and invalidate my point, I will let the season play out and one of us will be proven wrong.




  14. #44

    Re: The Foundation of the Passing Offense is still Intact.

    Quote Originally Posted by GOTA View Post
    I agree. Eli Manning turned Steve Smith, Mario Manningham and Kevin Boss into good starting pass catchers. In fact they've now had 3 different Tight Ends in 3 years with big numbers. The only constant is Manning. Joe Flacco is being paid to do the same thing. At least 1 of those guys is going to have a ton of balls thrown his way and is going to step up.

    Yup and do you really think that guys like James Jones, Randall Cobb, Lance Moore, Marques Colston, etc. would be anything without playing with the QBs with whom they play? Go back to the old Colts teams with guys like Austin Collie and Pierre Garcon making plays. And you nailed it with the Eli Manning comp. Kevin Boss, Jake Ballard, Martellus Bennett, Steve Smith, Victor Cruz, etc.

    Not saying that a handful of these guys wouldn't succeed in any circumstance but the truth is they were all products of their QB. If Joe is truly worth his contract than not having 4 pro bowlers to throw to shouldn't matter much.




  15. #45
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    1,790

    Re: The Foundation of the Passing Offense is still Intact.

    Quote Originally Posted by RavensNTerps View Post
    Yup and do you really think that guys like James Jones, Randall Cobb, Lance Moore, Marques Colston, etc. would be anything without playing with the QBs with whom they play? Go back to the old Colts teams with guys like Austin Collie and Pierre Garcon making plays. And you nailed it with the Eli Manning comp. Kevin Boss, Jake Ballard, Martellus Bennett, Steve Smith, Victor Cruz, etc.

    Not saying that a handful of these guys wouldn't succeed in any circumstance but the truth is they were all products of their QB. If Joe is truly worth his contract than not having 4 pro bowlers to throw to shouldn't matter much.
    I'm curious, how exactly do you make your determination that a player was a product of their QB?

    Let's take a guy like Austin Collie... is he a product of his QB just because he was a 4th round pick? Can you not just be a good player on your own merit if you weren't an early round draft pick? Or is it because he hasn't done much since Peyton Manning left town? But that's irrelevant, because the real reason he hasn't performed of late is due to his bad injury issues. But how does that imply that he wasn't just a good receiver when his numbers were good? What are the criteria here?

    Is Torrey Smith a product of Joe Flacco? He was taken at the bottom of the 2nd round, almost a 3rd round pick. He wasn't exactly a high draft pick. And yet he is putting up some great numbers. Maybe we can say Joe Flacco has already done what you say great QB's do, he has made a receiver out of Torrey Smith? Who can say? What is the distinction, what are the rules, what makes a receiver a good player vs a product of the QB?

    It all seems so arbitrary.

    What about a guy like Travis Taylor? He was an early draft pick (10th overall). He didn't do much in his career. He averaged about 40 yards per game with us over 5 seasons. For comparison, Torrey Smith has been averaging over 50 yards per game with us over his first 2 seasons. Taylor's best season for us was 869 yards and 6 TDs. Besides that, he never had more than 3 touchdowns in a season, and never had more than 632 yards. Torrey Smith already has 2 800+ yard seasons and two 7+ TD seasons. In 2 years, he has 2 better seasons than Taylor's best.

    OK... The QB's Taylor had throwing to him were: Tony Banks, Trent Dilfer, Elvis Grbac, Chris Redman, Jeff Blake, Anthony Wright, and Kyle Boller.

    OK, so with that cast of characters throwing the ball, he didn't accomplish much. Are you going to blame him, or the fact that he didn't have a good quarterback to get the ball to him?

    But what if he was drafted into Green Bay and had Brett Favre throwing him the ball?

    Let's say he had the same numbers as he did in Baltimore... Is he just a bust? Or did Favre not do his job to get the ball to him?

    Let's say he had much better numbers and was very successful with Favre as his QB. Not knowing that he would be a failure with Baltimore's QBs throwing the ball to him, do you consider him just a great receiver that Green Bay drafted high to get a weapon for Favre... or is he a product of Favre? A high draft pick that pans out and plays well... with a great QB throwing the ball to him... product of the QB, or just a good player?

    Do you see what I'm getting at?

    The only FACTS are that a player either does his job, gets open, and catches the ball when it comes to him... or he doesn't.




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