Are you Impressed with the Defense?

**Culex** · 11-19-2017, 05:35 PM

Originally Posted by Terpsfan82

We. Lost. Remember that?

Not. Because. Of. The. Defense. Remember the 9 pts we scored?

**Jay D83** · 11-19-2017, 05:36 PM

Originally Posted by Terpsfan82

We. Lost. Remember that?

And the fact that they gave up a 10 minute drive in the FIRST QUARTER!

**Culex** · 11-19-2017, 05:36 PM

Originally Posted by Terpsfan82

Point is, when we needed a stop we couldn't get it. Remember that?

We should not have even been in that position. You can't blame the D for one late drive after they kept us in the game the entire day.

**Terpsfan82** · 11-19-2017, 05:41 PM

Originally Posted by Culex

We should not have even been in that position. You can't blame the D for one late drive after they kept us in the game the entire day.

Ok. You can be impressed with them all you want. I'm not stupid enough to set myself up for disappointment when:
A). We face a real quarterback, or
B). We need a stop late in a tight game. I've seen that movie before.

**Culex** · 11-19-2017, 05:43 PM

Originally Posted by Terpsfan82

Ok. You can be impressed with them all you want. I'm not stupid enough to set myself up for disappointment when:
A). We face a real quarterback, or
B). We need a stop late in a tight game. I've seen that movie before.

The answer to the issues isn't always obvious. Even the greatest defenses will give up a score if the opposing teams offense is given enough opportunities to push their buttons long enough to finally figure them out.

**shana** · 11-19-2017, 05:46 PM

Originally Posted by Culex

We should not have even been in that position. You can't blame the D for one late drive after they kept us in the game the entire day.

The defense was put in that position starting in the offseason when Harbs decided to keep Pees and Ozzie compounded that error by giving the defense expensive FA signings and all of the day 1 and 2 picks.

The big acquisition for this offense was Woodhead, supplemented by a couple of day 3 linemen.

So spare me “The biggest problem with this defense is the offense.” rhetoric. This is what the Ravens wanted. It’s what they paid for.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

**Culex** · 11-19-2017, 05:48 PM

Originally Posted by shana

The defense was put in that position starting in the offseason when Harbs decided to keep Pees and Ozzie compounded that error by giving the defense expensive FA signings and all of the day 1 and 2 picks.

The big acquisition for this offense was Woodhead, supplemented by a couple of day 3 linemen.

So spare me “The biggest problem with this defense is the offense.” rhetoric. This is what the Ravens wanted. It’s what they paid for.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You can blame the front office then, sure. The defense didn't say "focus entirely on us and ignore the offense." They're as good as we have built them to be. Just because we focused solely on defense in the offseason doesnt mean we should have unrealistic expectations that literally no defense in NFL history will meet.

**shana** · 11-19-2017, 05:48 PM

Originally Posted by Culex

The answer to the issues isn't always obvious. Even the greatest defenses will give up a score if the opposing teams offense is given enough opportunities to push their buttons long enough to finally figure them out.

False. Remember the 2000 D? Or the Broncos 2015 D? Or even the 2013 Seahawks D at times. They dominated regardless of what was going on on the other side of the ball.

Does the Ravens D suck? No, of course not but let’s not pretend their woes only stem from a short handed offense.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

**shana** · 11-19-2017, 05:53 PM

Originally Posted by Culex

You can blame the front office then, sure. The defense didn't say "focus entirely on us and ignore the offense." They're as good as we have built them to be. Just because we focused solely on defense in the offseason doesnt mean we should have unrealistic expectations that literally no defense in NFL history will meet.

No, they’re not as good as they were built to be. Not even close. When you look at the defense from a personnel standpoint, where is the weakness? Talent-wise, this defense is outstanding. But the coaches have not put players in positions to succeed consistently and the philosophy and play calling have been atrocious.

And again. There are defenses have met those expectations.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

**WNCRavensFan** · 11-19-2017, 05:55 PM

Originally Posted by Terpsfan82

They ran the ball on us.

We lost that game. Remember?

This is the key point.

In the Ravens losses, nearly all of them, the winning team ran all over them.

Jacksonville - 166 yds, 1 TD
Pittsburgh - 173 yds, 2 TD
Chicago - 231 yds
Minnesota - 169 yds, 1 TD
Tennessee - 71 yds, 1 TD

The last loss, at Tennessee is the only one the run D showed up for.

**GaTechRavens** · 11-19-2017, 05:56 PM

Facing a bad quarterback does not automatically preclude a performance from being impressive. It's not like the Packers are being shut out every single game, or even close to it.

**Desert Raven** · 11-19-2017, 05:59 PM

Originally Posted by shana

No, they’re not as good as they were built to be. Not even close. When you look at the defense from a personnel standpoint, where is the weakness? Talent-wise, this defense is outstanding. But the coaches have not put players in positions to succeed consistently and the philosophy and play calling have been atrocious.

And again. There are defenses have met those expectations.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

A road shutout doesn't get them a day off from the fan's pointless bitching? For one day? Aren't they probably a top five defense now? Haven't they cleaned up teams being able to run all over them?

This defense is not the problem. Any issue they have is that much more magnified just because the offense consistently does nothing.