Steve Bisciotti is not going to fire John Harbaugh this off-season.

**psuasskicker** · 11-10-2013, 06:36 PM

Can't tell if serious.jpg

**GaTechRavens** · 11-10-2013, 06:47 PM

Originally Posted by AirFlacco

I thought Ozzie won all those games with all that talent he gave HARBs who still blew 3 or 4 SB opportunities. Ozzie should have at least 3 or 4 more rings with all that talent he gave Billick and HARBs.

He doesn't win 1 playoff game in Buff or half dozen other teams.

It's easy to say they should have won "at least 3 or 4 more rings" out of the blue. Other teams exist, you know.

But hey, why not ask: what years do you think we "should" have won it all?

**Terpsfan82** · 11-10-2013, 06:53 PM

Originally Posted by GaTechRavens

It's easy to say they should have won "at least 3 or 4 more rings" out of the blue. Other teams exist, you know.

But hey, why not ask: what years do you think we "should" have won it all?

2006, for sure.

**GaTechRavens** · 11-10-2013, 07:06 PM

Originally Posted by Terpsfan82

2006, for sure.

Why? Were we better than the Chargers?

**s.r.genovese** · 11-10-2013, 07:15 PM

Originally Posted by Terpsfan82

2006, for sure.

There's no way the ghost of McNair was going to make it through the rest of the playoffs, even if they somehow made it past the Colts. He was done. It's too bad, if they could have eeked out 4 more games out of his body then I would agree.

**Corey** · 11-10-2013, 07:37 PM

Originally Posted by The Excellector

Steve is going to call John to his office and reassure him of why he hired him, to instill discipline, develop consistency and keep the team unified. That is Harbaugh's strength. Steve is then going to tell John what he wants to see from the offense and the defense. Steve will likely tell him that he wants to see more aggression and efficiency from both sides of the ball, a tall order if you think about it, the two don't tend to go hand and hand, but this is what we saw from the defense in years passed, and from the offense during the postseason run.

Steve is going to 'suggest' to John that he hire a new OC and allow that OC to run the offense, thus telling John to stay out of it. Likewise, he'll probably 'suggest' the same for the defense.

I think he should start there now and see what Caldwell can do. Caldwell has pretty much been handicapped with a run centric offense and he doesn't even control the blocking scheme used in the run game.

The Ravens made it clear what they wanted to be this offseason, when they failed to add weapons for Flacco after dumping his go to receiver and kept Leach on the payroll, when he has no value anywhere else on the roster.

**Ravens75** · 11-10-2013, 07:44 PM

Originally Posted by GaTechRavens

It's easy to say they should have won "at least 3 or 4 more rings" out of the blue. Other teams exist, you know.

But hey, why not ask: what years do you think we "should" have won it all?

2006 but it should've been on the back of Jamal in the playoffs. Also 2008 because Pitt was beatable and if not for the hit out of bounds I think the Ravens win it on a last second FG. In all the other years since the first SB victory the Ravens just didn't have good enough QB play or offensive play makers to make it work.

I don't count 2011 because if they had won there's no way they make it in 2012.

**GaTechRavens** · 11-10-2013, 08:26 PM

Originally Posted by Ravens75

2006 but it should've been on the back of Jamal in the playoffs. Also 2008 because Pitt was beatable and if not for the hit out of bounds I think the Ravens win it on a last second FG. In all the other years since the first SB victory the Ravens just didn't have good enough QB play or offensive play makers to make it work.

I don't count 2011 because if they had won there's no way they make it in 2012.

Jamal was terrible in 2006, though. It was widely recognized that the running game was the only thing that truly held us back during the year.

The Steelers were a better team than we were in 2008, and since we're allowed say we "should" have won Super Bowls without earning them in regard to 2006, I would go ahead and say the Titans "should" have won the Super Bowl in 2008.

**The Excellector** · 11-10-2013, 08:31 PM

Originally Posted by Corey

I think he should start there now and see what Caldwell can do. Caldwell has pretty much been handicapped with a run centric offense and he doesn't even control the blocking scheme used in the run game.

The Ravens made it clear what they wanted to be this offseason, when they failed to add weapons for Flacco after dumping his go to receiver and kept Leach on the payroll, when he has no value anywhere else on the roster.

How do you offer a guy a OC job, and go promising certain assistants that regardless of what happens they are going to be retained? Then, you bring in your own guy and changes to the scheme Caldwell may or may not have been on board with and....honestly, I could go on and on.

I think RaveninWoodlawn made a good point that Caldwell offense is not sophisticated and is more simplified that we want to believe, but it is not so unyielding.

**Terpsfan82** · 11-10-2013, 08:34 PM

Originally Posted by GaTechRavens

Why? Were we better than the Chargers?

We beat them.

**HoustonRaven** · 11-10-2013, 08:46 PM

Originally Posted by Terpsfan82

We beat them.

And the Redskins beat us last year. Were they better than us?

**Terpsfan82** · 11-10-2013, 09:01 PM

Originally Posted by HoustonRaven

And the Redskins beat us last year. Were they better than us?

Not sure I follow your logic. We put ourselves in position to go to the AFCCG by virtue of them losing to the Pats, had we beat the Colts. That IMO, while not a slam dunk, was our best shot at getting another ring. The defense was lights out, we were playing at home against a supposedly weaker opponent (though they still had Manning) and an until that game, suspect run defense. I think we beat the Pats, and there was no way we lose to the Bears.