The Ravens organization is stuck in the past.

**CptJesus** · 12-22-2013, 10:32 PM

Originally Posted by GOTA

Was there a great receiver on the market this past year that they should have signed? Wallace? Welker? Amendola? Jennings? Trade for Harvin? I didn't want any of those guys and not 1 of them earned what they were paid. I wouldn't mind signing a true #1 receiver but I sure didn't see one hit the market last year.

Not Welker?

**Dirt1** · 12-22-2013, 10:34 PM

The first order of business this offseason is to decide on what type of blocking scheme they want to run, and then to have OL that can excel in that scheme. So many of the problems on offense have their origin in the OL. Flacco is at his best when he operates as a play action QB. Play action isn't effective when you can't run the ball.

The second order of business needs to be to get another offensive weapon (preferably a WR). Getting a big-time #1 WR is not going to be easy to pull off. The only way I see the Ravens getting such a player is through the draft or signing a guy like Hakeem Nicks as a FA. The Ravens have to prioritize getting another offensive weapon, and sacrifice elsewhere with regard to the cap to make it happen.

**rpcfball** · 12-22-2013, 10:41 PM

Originally Posted by Dirt1

The first order of business this offseason is to decide on what type of blocking scheme they want to run, and then to have OL that can excel in that scheme. So many of the problems on offense have their origin in the OL. Flacco is at his best when he operates as a play action QB. Play action isn't effective when you can't run the ball.

The second order of business needs to be to get another offensive weapon (preferably a WR). Getting a big-time #1 WR is not going to be easy to pull off. The only way I see the Ravens getting such a player is through the draft or signing a guy like Hakeem Nicks as a FA. The Ravens have to prioritize getting another offensive weapon, and sacrifice elsewhere with regard to the cap to make it happen.

This draft is deep on WRs. Mike Evans out of Texas A&M is the one I want. He went for 200+ yards and 4 TDs against my auburn tigers. Granted auburn doesn't have a great secondary, but he was making catches over guys, through guys, and with guys on his back.

Bottom line: Ozzie went D last draft, I fully expect him to go O this draft

**ERey** · 12-22-2013, 10:45 PM

So a team that is still the Super Bowl Champs until another team wins is "stuck in the past". Yea OK. :grbac:

**wickedsolo** · 12-22-2013, 10:45 PM

Originally Posted by Brien Jackson

To be honest, their entire organizational approach to offense is really weird. If they're going to continue running the vertical, Schembecler-esque offense that Harbaugh seems to want them to run, they have to invest in good receivers, particularly big physical ones who can body up defensive backs and win one-on-one match ups. But it's pretty clear that Ozzie isn't interested in devoting those kind of resources to the WR position. This is an impossible impasse, and it's just not going to get resolved unless something gives.

Defensively, I'd like to see them stop putting so much emphasis on big defensive linemen who stop the run first, and get some more athletic guys who can rush the passer and stunt.

This. X infinity.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

**wickedsolo** · 12-22-2013, 10:46 PM

Originally Posted by ERey

So a team that is still the Super Bowl Champs until another team wins is "stuck in the past". Yea OK. :grbac:

It is well known that their offensive design is that of 20-30 years ago.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

**GOTA** · 12-22-2013, 10:47 PM

Originally Posted by ERey

So a team that is still the Super Bowl Champs until another team wins is "stuck in the past". Yea OK. :grbac:

Technically the past is last year.... but I was thinking the same thing.

**Brien Jackson** · 12-22-2013, 10:51 PM

Originally Posted by ERey

So a team that is still the Super Bowl Champs until another team wins is "stuck in the past". Yea OK. :grbac:

Yeah, this just isn't an argument, sorry. It's obviously awesome that they won the Superbowl, but any sort of objectice assessment of the season has to acknowledge that the title came on the back of a) an all-time great run of games by Flacco, b) a highly improbably hail mary play, c) a number of very lucky/unlikely breaks in the regular season, any one or two of which going to other way could have kept them out of the playoffs entirely.

Suffice it to say, "keep doing this" probably isn't going to be a sound strategy towards the goal of winning a bunch more Superbowls.

**Bhcforlife** · 12-22-2013, 11:06 PM

I hear what you are saying, but who are the players they could have acquired to help this offense last offseason? GOTA listed the WRs, none of whom are #1's (IMO) and most of whom are no better than what they already have at a fraction of the cost. I will give you that they could and probably should have used one of their first few picks in the draft on a WR or TE.

**ERey** · 12-22-2013, 11:08 PM

Originally Posted by wickedsolo

It is well known that their offensive design is that of 20-30 years ago.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So a team that utilizes the pistol formation a lot is running a design from 20-30 years ago? The pistol became relatively popular in the NFL that past few years. I'm not denying the Ravens need improvement (that's obvious based on their record), but to say they are "stuck in the past" is just wrong.

iggyman555 · 12-22-2013, 11:15 PM

our first 3 picks should be OL/TE/WR...not necessarily in that order

**ERey** · 12-22-2013, 11:19 PM

Originally Posted by Brien Jackson

Yeah, this just isn't an argument, sorry. It's obviously awesome that they won the Superbowl, but any sort of objectice assessment of the season has to acknowledge that the title came on the back of a) an all-time great run of games by Flacco, b) a highly improbably hail mary play, c) a number of very lucky/unlikely breaks in the regular season, any one or two of which going to other way could have kept them out of the playoffs entirely.

Suffice it to say, "keep doing this" probably isn't going to be a sound strategy towards the goal of winning a bunch more Superbowls.

That's a ridiculous argument. So you're basing whatever it is your trying to say on "Flacco played really, really well so it really shouldn't count". Uh OK. That actually has nothing to do with the actual thread topic of the Ravens are stuck in the past. I can't even entertain a debate with you based on your talking points.