View Poll Results: Bigger Impact?

Voters
28. You may not vote on this poll
  • Ray Rice

    14 50.00%
  • T Sizzle

    8 28.57%
  • Both

    3 10.71%
  • Neitheir absence will have impact

    3 10.71%
Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 12 of 46
  1. #1

    Bigger Impact: No Rice or No Suggs?



    Which player absence will have the bigger impact on the team?


    Im going with Ray Rice. Eventhough Suggs will be miss we have depth on the defense line. It may take 3 players to fill Suggs void on defense but atleast we have 3 players backing him up. Ray Rice is a different story. Without Ray Rice I think our offense would be like watching the lil Giants play. Ray Rice bails out Cam and Flacco every game. If it wasnt for Rice it would be very hard for the Ravens to pick up a first down. Even when Cam forgets about him he still finds a way to make plays when the ball gets in his hands. Ray Rice is our offense until futher notice. Although Flacco last game showed me he can play with a chip on his shoulder and perform in the spotlight at a high level.




  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Frederick, MD
    Posts
    28,344
    Blog Entries
    3

    Re: Bigger Impact: No Rice or No Suggs?

    That would be a tough call.

    Both are incredible impact players for their respective units. Over the course of the last two seasons Rice has contributed or been a part of over 30% of the offensive production. For 1 player, that is A LOT.

    However, I think the offense can still function without Rice. It won't look the same, but I think the offense could still function without him. If I had any faith that Cam Cameron could call a consistent game I would have no problem saying missing Suggs would be a significantly bigger loss than missing Rice, but Cam is as big of a question mark on this team as any, so that's why it would be a tough choice for me. The reason why I voted for Suggs over Rice though is because even with Rice and the OL not playing well and rendered ineffective in the playoffs, Flacco still was able to put the team on his shoulders and make plays. Flacco has the ability to take over a game.


    That said, Rice is going to sign his franchise tender, suck it up, and play this year and continue negotiating, or accept the contract offer that they've already made him (which according to Tony is right on par with what Arian Foster's deal was in Houston). So, Rice will be a part of the team all season long.
    Milk is for babies. When you grow up, you have to drink beer.

    -Arnold Schwarzenegger


    My RSR Blog:
    http://russellstreetreport.com/author/paullukoskie/

    Check out Fatherhood Rules - a blog site dedicated to sports, food, music, movies, and politics.
    http://fatherhoodrules.com




  3. #3

    Re: Bigger Impact: No Rice or No Suggs?

    What is the point of this thread? Suggs is hurt, so he'll miss at least part of 2012 if not all of it, but Rice is not. Are you implying that you expect Rice to hold out into the season? That would be a huge surprise to me. I think odds are fully in favor of Rice playing all of 2012.

    Are you asking what the long-term implications of Suggs' injury and Rice's contract situation are?




  4. #4

    Re: Bigger Impact: No Rice or No Suggs?

    Quote Originally Posted by bmorecareful View Post
    What is the point of this thread? Suggs is hurt, so he'll miss at least part of 2012 if not all of it, but Rice is not. Are you implying that you expect Rice to hold out into the season? That would be a huge surprise to me. I think odds are fully in favor of Rice playing all of 2012.

    Are you asking what the long-term implications of Suggs' injury and Rice's contract situation are?
    No. Im talking about for this upcoming season. Suggs is hurt and Ray Rice might hold out. Which absence will have the bigger impact if they both were out?




  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Frederick, MD
    Posts
    28,344
    Blog Entries
    3

    Re: Bigger Impact: No Rice or No Suggs?

    momma -

    It's just confusing because it is highly unlikely that Rice holds out. The new CBA has some pretty serious consequences for holding out IIRC and that was something that the owners really wanted implemented for enforcement.

    Rice doesn't actually have to report or be anywhere until the end of July/beginning of August when the Ravens start their mandatory training camp. Until then, he can do his own thing. Once that mandatory session starts though, I want to say that every day he misses is something like a $35,000 penalty that the Ravens can enforce.
    Milk is for babies. When you grow up, you have to drink beer.

    -Arnold Schwarzenegger


    My RSR Blog:
    http://russellstreetreport.com/author/paullukoskie/

    Check out Fatherhood Rules - a blog site dedicated to sports, food, music, movies, and politics.
    http://fatherhoodrules.com




  6. #6

    Re: Bigger Impact: No Rice or No Suggs?

    Gotta go with Suggs. When big games came up, he took over. Big games Ray wasn't exactly killing it.




  7. #7

    Re: Bigger Impact: No Rice or No Suggs?

    Quote Originally Posted by mommathurgoesthatman View Post
    No. Im talking about for this upcoming season. Suggs is hurt and Ray Rice might hold out. Which absence will have the bigger impact if they both were out?
    Well, again I find it profoundly unlikely that Rice actually holds out, but let me make it clear that if he does he has no business on this team in 2012 or at any other time in the future. I consider myself generally speaking to be a pro-labor type of guy, but if I'm the GM a holdout would cause me to withdraw any long-term deal on the table and refuse consideration of any future negotiations. So let me just start by saying that.

    I think the answer to the original question is going to be a close one either way. The depth behind both players is unproven, but the depth behind Rice moreso because Pierce and Allen have both done nothing in the NFL. Then again, even if Kruger has been at least a proven situational guy, moving him into Suggs' spot puts Upshaw in at SAM, so you're going to have to deal with a rookie starter at either RB or OLB due to Rice and Suggs' respective absences.

    I think I would agree with Wicked though that Suggs' absence is slightly more impactful. Suggs has been our most consistently excellent defender--run and pass. There really is no replacing him and there's nothing else to lean on with him absent. If Rice is not there, we know that we have a passing game that we can lean on in a pinch--it's not the best in the league but we were able to move the ball in situations last year without Rice, i.e. the final drive vs. Pittsburgh (Rice had 0 catches, 0 rushes,) the entire games vs Houston (less than 3 yards per carry,) and New England (3 yards per carry, 1 catch,) etc.

    I also think Bernard Pierce has a great shot to be a special talent at the RB position and a replacement/successor to Rice, which might be an unreasonable expectation, so that may be clouding my judgment towards Suggs.




  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    over by the dental floss bush
    Posts
    15,463
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Bigger Impact: No Rice or No Suggs?

    hypothetical but it's Suggs no doubt. NFL's top defensive player sets the edge and makes the offense react to his position. You can put Kruger / Kindle / Upshaw in there but the rest of the defense has to make up for the drop in talent.
    World Domination 3 Points at a Time!




  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    "Merry old England"
    Posts
    9,237
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: Bigger Impact: No Rice or No Suggs?

    To me this is a simple answer. Rice would be a bigger loss. I know that alot of this board would disagree, but lets look at it this way. I am not convinced this offense would be able to effectively run without Rice or a proven/good to elite RB. Right now we have four unproven RB's behind Rice on the depth chart, and even though I like Pierce alot, and I even like AA too, they are inexperienced and I'm not sure if they could step up right now, should Rice become injured. Our offense isn't exactly elite right now either, and is inconsistent.

    Our defense on the other hand has more talent all around, and has been much more consistent. Suggs is probably our best player right now, but we can replace him and take the loss (as we have done in the past when we lost players like Ed Reed) with our younger players and still be a great defensive unit. We have so many pro bowl calibre players on our offense, Ray Lewis, Ed Reed, Haloti Ngata, and Webby. Then you have young emerging talents like Jimmy Smith, Terrence Cody, Pernell Mcphee, Courtney Upshaw (unproven), and Paul Kruger. You also have solid players all around like Jameel McClain, and Bernard Pollard. IMO not one starting defensive player is a weak player or even an average player. The only average player I'd say we have who most likely wont be a starting CB for us in 2013 is Cary Williams.

    Our offensive is still young and developing, and apart from Rice, we really only have two elite/pro bowl type players, which are Vonta Leach (a full back) and Marshall Yanda (a guard). Boldin is good, but he isn't what he used to be, Torrey Smith is still young and has potencial to grow into an elite player, Joe Flacco is pretty much in the same catogary as Torrey Smith even though he's significantly older, quater backs take much longer to grow. Michael Oher at this point is probably average to solid, Osemele is an emerging talent (unproven), Matt Birk is like Boldin, good but not what he used to be. Bryant McKinnie is probably currently probably our worst offensive player, Dickson needs to work on his hands but is still an emerging talent, Pitta needs to work on his blocking but is also an emerging talent.

    So I think if you took Rice away from that (our best offensive player right now) this offense would not exactly crumble, but it would even more inconsistent, and at times probably really bad. See Seahawks, and Jags game. Flacco doesn't have the weapons, or the pass protection to run a Patriots style offense right now. I voted both, purely because losing both would be devastating for our SB hopes.

    Pointless question though.




  10. #10

    Re: Bigger Impact: No Rice or No Suggs?

    I'm going to say Suggs. He's more impactful in both the run and pass defense. He's our best player in setting the edge and getting to the QB. Even more importantly he gets the offense more possessions with this uncanny ability to force a lot of fumbles.




  11. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Frederick, MD
    Posts
    28,344
    Blog Entries
    3

    Re: Bigger Impact: No Rice or No Suggs?

    Quote Originally Posted by leachisabeast View Post
    To me this is a simple answer. Rice would be a bigger loss. I know that alot of this board would disagree, but lets look at it this way. I am not convinced this offense would be able to effectively run without Rice or a proven/good to elite RB. Right now we have four unproven RB's behind Rice on the depth chart, and even though I like Pierce alot, and I even like AA too, they are inexperienced and I'm not sure if they could step up right now, should Rice become injured. Our offense isn't exactly elite right now either, and is inconsistent.

    Our defense on the other hand has more talent all around, and has been much more consistent. Suggs is probably our best player right now, but we can replace him and take the loss (as we have done in the past when we lost players like Ed Reed) with our younger players and still be a great defensive unit. We have so many pro bowl calibre players on our offense, Ray Lewis, Ed Reed, Haloti Ngata, and Webby. Then you have young emerging talents like Jimmy Smith, Terrence Cody, Pernell Mcphee, Courtney Upshaw (unproven), and Paul Kruger. You also have solid players all around like Jameel McClain, and Bernard Pollard. IMO not one starting defensive player is a weak player or even an average player. The only average player I'd say we have who most likely wont be a starting CB for us in 2013 is Cary Williams.

    Our offensive is still young and developing, and apart from Rice, we really only have two elite/pro bowl type players, which are Vonta Leach (a full back) and Marshall Yanda (a guard). Boldin is good, but he isn't what he used to be, Torrey Smith is still young and has potencial to grow into an elite player, Joe Flacco is pretty much in the same catogary as Torrey Smith even though he's significantly older, quater backs take much longer to grow. Michael Oher at this point is probably average to solid, Osemele is an emerging talent (unproven), Matt Birk is like Boldin, good but not what he used to be. Bryant McKinnie is probably currently probably our worst offensive player, Dickson needs to work on his hands but is still an emerging talent, Pitta needs to work on his blocking but is also an emerging talent.

    So I think if you took Rice away from that (our best offensive player right now) this offense would not exactly crumble, but it would even more inconsistent, and at times probably really bad. See Seahawks, and Jags game. Flacco doesn't have the weapons, or the pass protection to run a Patriots style offense right now. I voted both, purely because losing both would be devastating for our SB hopes.

    Pointless question though.
    Or the coordinator.
    Milk is for babies. When you grow up, you have to drink beer.

    -Arnold Schwarzenegger


    My RSR Blog:
    http://russellstreetreport.com/author/paullukoskie/

    Check out Fatherhood Rules - a blog site dedicated to sports, food, music, movies, and politics.
    http://fatherhoodrules.com




  12. #12

    Re: Bigger Impact: No Rice or No Suggs?

    Rice isn't going to hold out, so this is a moot point.




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