Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 12 of 17
  1. #1

    "Dream" offense that won't happen (but good for discussion)



    Right off the bat, this offense will never happen with Billick in town, so it's a very moot point, at least until the end of season results are in and this team succeeds or fails.

    Here is something interesting the team should really consider offensively.

    Run the spread-option, as in Oregon. Even to a certain extent run by the Titans

    The idea is that the offense starts from there and gradually evolves and develops as the QB is forced to become more of a pocket passer later in their career.

    Here goes the argument and debate....

    First, you're in a great place because there isn't a high demand for players that can be great in this offense. For instance in the draft Dennis Dixon or Colt Brennan aren't held in the same regard as Woodson, Ryan, or Brohm. This is EXACTLY like what the 3-4 outside linebacker was for years until it got trendy starting with Lawrence Taylor then moving on to modern players like Ware, the myriad of successful Steeler outside 'backers, and Merriman. Same principle
    1. Ravens already have a player who can effectively run that style of offense in Troy Smith.
    2. So for a second round pick, Dixon or Brennan will be around and boom, two QBs on the team that can run the offense and run it well. Lots of possibilities.


    Second, McGahee would be a complete and total beast in that offense. The defense is further spread out and would be forced to account for multiple potential runners on a play. Smart guys in the offense can neutralize players simply by making good calls on who runs the football. McGahee is a great player for this style of offense because he can decoy a run and then still catch a flair, screen, or swing if the QB decides that's a better option. It also has a smaller demand for pure power running which isn't the big strength of the line or our backs at the moment.

    Third, ok, so you're scared about getting the QB hurt, start running two of McClain, Smith, and McGahee in the backfield and then you can option to any of those three guys. Think of how the Saints were using McAllistor and Bush at the same time with McAllistor being a power between the tackles able to catch some short passes and bush being better at getting space and the corner. Start playing around with that. Force teams to account for McClain or Smith in the backfield...or out of the backfield. Start using those dumb dump passes in the middle of the field like the Pats and Colts.

    Four, personnel the Ravens have RIGHT NOW on offense work. Clayton, Williams, Heap, Quinn S., Wilcox, Mason offer tons of combinations. You can mix between spread and power formations at will. Look at how Norm Chow finds ways for the Titans to run every single week. One week screw with a team by going double tight end and smacking them in the mouth, next week a team prepares and suddenly is dealing with 3 wide outs. Next week there is a random backfield with Smith, McGahee, McClain.

    There is a lot of room for creativity if someone gets the real stones to run that type of offense with a QB that can actually throw.


    Now for the killer...Billick will never do or try something like this. He will also take forever between each play allowing a team to substitute personnel to match the players on the field for the Ravens. Maybe, just maybe....run the no huddle. Or run an offense that doesn't wait until 4 seconds are left on the playclock each time. Right right right control the clock. You're also letting the other team adjust to your plays based on who is in the damn game. Mix it up. Change tempo. Notice how the team seems to do well when there are tempo changes and variations?

    Anyhow, I thought this might be fun to chat about. Just to see if anyone thinks something like this would work. It also seems to play into the strengths of the team if there is a mobile QB that can throw well ....ok maybe we don't have that right now....but in the future it could easily be accomplished.
    Last edited by ExiledRaven; 11-02-2007 at 10:36 AM.




  2. #2

    Re: "Dream" offense that won't happen (but good for discussion)

    It's an interesting idea but you said yourself that (1) we don't have the QB to do it and (2) Billick would never go for it. But are you sure about that? McNair might have some difficulty with it at this stage of his career, but Boller might have the mobility to pull it off. And if Billick thought it would work, I could actually seeing him giving it a try. I think he's a little more open-minded than people think.

    Having said that, the idea of going no-huddle, although I'd like it, is almost laughable seeing as how we usually have trouble just running a two-minute drill the past few years.




  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Baltimore
    Posts
    2,126

    Re: "Dream" offense that won't happen (but good for discussion)

    This Scheme would never work in the NFL. Defenses are too fast and disciplined to be fooled by this type of Offense. It's the same reason NFL teams don't run the Option play.
    • Section 133 for eternity!
    • I know... The family resemblance is uncanny.
    • START WEARING PURPLE!!!!





  4. #4

    Re: "Dream" offense that won't happen (but good for discussion)

    I want to trade in our "offense by accident" to " offense by design"... Don't care how we do it!




  5. #5

    Re: "Dream" offense that won't happen (but good for discussion)

    Quote Originally Posted by pyite32 View Post
    This Scheme would never work in the NFL. Defenses are too fast and disciplined to be fooled by this type of Offense. It's the same reason NFL teams don't run the Option play.
    The offense doesn't need to be run exclusively or all the time. Use certain elements of it to fit the strengths of your players. IE: Saints with two runningbacks in the backfield. Titans with all kinds of funky formations to allow Young and whatever runningback to run. How about Atlanta with Vick getting over 1000 yards. Now that he's not there check out that running game.

    It's just a concept.

    My main point is that the Ravens offense never innovates. Without taking a chance or trying something that looks different it'll always be a vanilla attack unless you get a collection of superstars.

    Why does the offense never work out well? 1) never had a superstar QB 2) the offensive staff has rarely used personnel in a way that gives them the best chance to succeed, ie: building the offense around them with any consistency outside of 2003 in knowing there was Jamal a decent line and no QB or WRs.
    Last edited by ExiledRaven; 11-02-2007 at 10:48 AM.




  6. #6

    Re: "Dream" offense that won't happen (but good for discussion)

    ER, until Mason got here, the *entire* offense was built around using Todd Heap and Jamal Lewis as much as each was capable of handling. I'm not saying the offense was good, but it was certainly built around its personnel.
    Festivus

    His definitions and arguments were so clear in his own mind that he was unable to understand how any reasonable person could honestly differ with him.




  7. #7

    Re: "Dream" offense that won't happen (but good for discussion)

    Point taken. It just bugs the hell out of me that guys who would be great players on other teams or with system tweaks aren't being used like they could the past two years.




  8. #8

    Re: "Dream" offense that won't happen (but good for discussion)

    Part of me wants to agree with Fanman that years of excellence on the defensive side of the ball have been wasted.

    But then the other part of me, which I think is a little more detached, is always saying, yes, sure, but at key skill positions such as qb and wr, over all those years there was virtually nothing to do but run it with Jamal and throw it to Heap, god forbid either one was ever injured. Consider how many years passed between the departure of Brandon Stokley, who to the best of my knowledge has never been better then a 3d receiver since, and the arrival of Derrick Mason. Stokley was arguable the *best* wr we had over those years. Scary, huh? Meanwhile at qb, we've had a string of guys who with the exception of Grbac probably should have been backups to a *real* starter. Hard to blame Billick for liking Boller as a college senior, and hard to blame the FO for making that selection. Though in 20/20 hindsight there might have been better options at 19. . . Anyway the personnel has been what it's been, and as you point out, it has to be part of the equation.

    Anyway I want to see them run that triple option Navy uses. There is no college football team I would rather watch; their offense is like three card monty. I feel like I deserve a prize when I guess who has the ball.
    Festivus

    His definitions and arguments were so clear in his own mind that he was unable to understand how any reasonable person could honestly differ with him.




  9. #9

    Re: "Dream" offense that won't happen (but good for discussion)

    My cousin's husband actually helps run a triple option for a high school team in Indiana. You're right about guessing who has the ball so much of the time.

    Nothing flashy, but the darn offense seems to get 3-5 yards every down and every now and then throws a bomb.




  10. #10
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Houston, TX Y'all
    Posts
    22,958

    Re: "Dream" offense that won't happen (but good for discussion)

    Some here want to tinker with the one aspect of our offense that IS working ... the running game!?!?

    We have the leagues 3rd leading rusher. What you propose is certainly a dream alright.
    WARNING: This post may contain material offensive to those who lack wit, humor, common sense and/or supporting factual or anecdotal evidence. All statements and assertions contained herein may be subject to literary devices not limited to: irony, metaphor, allusion and dripping sarcasm.




  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Southern PA
    Posts
    4,945
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: "Dream" offense that won't happen (but good for discussion)

    Quote Originally Posted by HoustonRaven View Post
    Some here want to tinker with the one aspect of our offense that IS working ... the running game!?!?

    We have the leagues 3rd leading rusher. What you propose is certainly a dream alright.
    I don't think we run it ENOUGH........




  12. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Houston, TX Y'all
    Posts
    22,958

    Re: "Dream" offense that won't happen (but good for discussion)

    Quote Originally Posted by 4G63 View Post
    I don't think we run it ENOUGH........
    Amen!
    WARNING: This post may contain material offensive to those who lack wit, humor, common sense and/or supporting factual or anecdotal evidence. All statements and assertions contained herein may be subject to literary devices not limited to: irony, metaphor, allusion and dripping sarcasm.




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