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 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 46
  1. #16
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Wilton, CT
    Posts
    16,030
    Blog Entries
    7

    Re: Bigger Impact: No Rice or No Suggs?



    I have to go with Rice. Cam would be completely lost without Ray Rice. He'd turn Flacco into Mark Sanchez. This offense completely revolves around Ray Rice.
    He Who Dares.....Wins




  2. #17
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Deep in the bowels of Maryland suburbia
    Posts
    1,981

    Re: Bigger Impact: No Rice or No Suggs?

    In such a hypothetical situation, that'd be a tough call, but I'll say losing Rice would have the biggest impact. I have more faith in the Ravens defense adjusting to a key injury than in Cam's offense being able to do so. And while some may argue -- correctly -- that Rice hasn't always come up big in the most meaningful games, the fact is that Rice's contributions have been vital to the Ravens reaching meaningful games in the first place.

    I'm sure Rice won't hold out and will give it his best this year, contract issues notwithstanding. But the loss of Suggs is huge. Looking at that, plus what will apparently be a heavy reliance on relatively unproven rookies/2nd year guys, plus an absolutely brutal schedule, plus the fact that Cam still runs the offense ...I'll be trying to manage my expectations for 2012




  3. #18

    Re: Bigger Impact: No Rice or No Suggs?

    Quote Originally Posted by GOTA View Post
    I have to go with Rice. Cam would be completely lost without Ray Rice. He'd turn Flacco into Mark Sanchez. This offense completely revolves around Ray Rice.
    It could be the other way around though. Ray Rice's absence could force Cam to "unleash" Joe and tap into his potential. You know and I know in some way, shape or form Cam's schemes and lack of creatively is holding Joe back somewhat. The silver lining in all this is to see if Joe is really capable of taking his game to the next level and only RR's absence would force Cam's hand and acclerate that opportunity.




  4. #19
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Greensboro, North Carolina
    Posts
    5,171
    Blog Entries
    3

    Re: Bigger Impact: No Rice or No Suggs?

    Quote Originally Posted by wickedsolo View Post
    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.
    Even though he's technically not under contract until he signs the franchise tag? That seems steep and I can't believe the players agreed to that. More and more it's starting to show that the players were hosed by the new CBA and their "leader".




  5. #20
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Deep in the bowels of Maryland suburbia
    Posts
    1,981

    Re: Bigger Impact: No Rice or No Suggs?

    Quote Originally Posted by pslholder96 View Post
    It could be the other way around though. Ray Rice's absence could force Cam to "unleash" Joe and tap into his potential. You know and I know in some way, shape or form Cam's schemes and lack of creatively is holding Joe back somewhat. The silver lining in all this is to see if Joe is really capable of taking his game to the next level and only RR's absence would force Cam's hand and acclerate that opportunity.
    Anything is possible ...but ... I suspect it's more likely that opposing defenses would be able to concentrate on stopping the Ravens' passing game since they'd have no fear of Rice. And Rice himself is important in the passing game as one of the more dangerous checkdown options in the league. And as far as "unleashing" Joe, I'm not sure how much it'd help given the type of routes Cam usually calls.




  6. #21

    Re: Bigger Impact: No Rice or No Suggs?

    Quote Originally Posted by GOTA View Post
    I have to go with Rice. Cam would be completely lost without Ray Rice. He'd turn Flacco into Mark Sanchez. This offense completely revolves around Ray Rice.
    I'm seeing this theme repeated a lot, but how do you explain the long stretches of games, or WHOLE GAMES, where Rice was either utterly ineffective or didn't even get the ball, yet the offense still moved down the field?

    I cited several examples earlier and I haven't seen any of them answered. Final drive vs. Pittsburgh: Rice did not catch a ball or rush the ball one time, yet we moved 92 yards and scored a TD. vs. Arizona, for much of the game we were running the short passing game, Ray Rice had a few catches and punched in 3 short yardage TDs but was he really the straw that stirred the drink in that game? I submit Boldin, Pitta, and Flacco carried us in that game. Moreover vs. Houston and vs. New England in the playoffs Rice did absolutely nothing, yet we beat Houston (off 2 passing TDs and a great defensive performance) and were 1 dropped pass away from beating New England (again, 2 passing TDs.)

    So if you don't think Flacco and the passing game can take over a game, you weren't watching. I'm not saying they can CONSISTENTLY do it, certainly not, but it has happened. We have won games without Ray Rice and I suspect we can continue to do so.




  7. #22

    Re: Bigger Impact: No Rice or No Suggs?

    Quote Originally Posted by bmorecareful View Post
    I'm seeing this theme repeated a lot, but how do you explain the long stretches of games, or WHOLE GAMES, where Rice was either utterly ineffective or didn't even get the ball, yet the offense still moved down the field?

    I cited several examples earlier and I haven't seen any of them answered. Final drive vs. Pittsburgh: Rice did not catch a ball or rush the ball one time, yet we moved 92 yards and scored a TD. vs. Arizona, for much of the game we were running the short passing game, Ray Rice had a few catches and punched in 3 short yardage TDs but was he really the straw that stirred the drink in that game? I submit Boldin, Pitta, and Flacco carried us in that game. Moreover vs. Houston and vs. New England in the playoffs Rice did absolutely nothing, yet we beat Houston (off 2 passing TDs and a great defensive performance) and were 1 dropped pass away from beating New England (again, 2 passing TDs.)

    So if you don't think Flacco and the passing game can take over a game, you weren't watching. I'm not saying they can CONSISTENTLY do it, certainly not, but it has happened. We have won games without Ray Rice and I suspect we can continue to do so.
    There's a big difference between Rice being out and Rice being either ineffective or underutilize. While my vote still goes to Suggs don't underestimate the impact Rice would have on the offensive side of the ball if he were to holdout or miss the entire season due to an injury. It would not be pretty.




  8. #23
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Wilton, CT
    Posts
    16,030
    Blog Entries
    7

    Re: Bigger Impact: No Rice or No Suggs?

    Quote Originally Posted by bmorecareful View Post
    I'm seeing this theme repeated a lot, but how do you explain the long stretches of games, or WHOLE GAMES, where Rice was either utterly ineffective or didn't even get the ball, yet the offense still moved down the field?

    I cited several examples earlier and I haven't seen any of them answered. Final drive vs. Pittsburgh: Rice did not catch a ball or rush the ball one time, yet we moved 92 yards and scored a TD. vs. Arizona, for much of the game we were running the short passing game, Ray Rice had a few catches and punched in 3 short yardage TDs but was he really the straw that stirred the drink in that game? I submit Boldin, Pitta, and Flacco carried us in that game. Moreover vs. Houston and vs. New England in the playoffs Rice did absolutely nothing, yet we beat Houston (off 2 passing TDs and a great defensive performance) and were 1 dropped pass away from beating New England (again, 2 passing TDs.)

    So if you don't think Flacco and the passing game can take over a game, you weren't watching. I'm not saying they can CONSISTENTLY do it, certainly not, but it has happened. We have won games without Ray Rice and I suspect we can continue to do so.
    How many of Flacco's passes come off of play action? What defense isn't forced to alter their coverage schemes because they are worried leaving a linebacker covering Rice? That's just the effect Rice has in the passing game. It's not even about him running the ball where he is a threat to break one almost every time.

    Rice doesn't have to touch the ball to be effective. He just has to be on the field because he is the one that every defense is out to stop. That makes it a lot easier for Flacco to put the ball in other places. Without Rice out there defense would be pounding Flacco every play because no one is worried about any of the receivers or tight ends on this team and they clearly aren't worried about being beaten by the playcalling.
    He Who Dares.....Wins




  9. #24
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    "Merry old England"
    Posts
    9,307
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: Bigger Impact: No Rice or No Suggs?

    Quote Originally Posted by bmorecareful View Post
    I'm seeing this theme repeated a lot, but how do you explain the long stretches of games, or WHOLE GAMES, where Rice was either utterly ineffective or didn't even get the ball, yet the offense still moved down the field?
    So backs have to be awesome in every single game they play through the season? It must be hard with all the knocks that you take, there isn't a more physically draining position than playing running back, especially when you are 5'8 and often used like a power back. Oh and don't you expect the offense to be able to sustain a drive down the field without relying on Ray Rice? You kind of expect that to happen for a SB contending team, teams like the Packers and the Patriots managed to go through games and win them without running the ball at all. What makes it special that we managed to do it on a couple of drives every other game?

    Quote Originally Posted by bmorecareful View Post
    I cited several examples earlier and I haven't seen any of them answered. Final drive vs. Pittsburgh: Rice did not catch a ball or rush the ball one time, yet we moved 92 yards and scored a TD.
    Well to start with, in the 92 yard drive we where against the clock, I don't think any teams would want to run the ball in that situation, even the Texans. The Steelers also basically know EXACTLY how to stuff our run game, if you put any back out there, I'm pretty sure most of the time the Steelers would be able to stop the run. They game plan around stopping Rice all week, like we game plan all week around stopping Roethlisberger.

    Quote Originally Posted by bmorecareful View Post
    vs. Arizona, for much of the game we were running the short passing game, Ray Rice had a few catches and punched in 3 short yardage TDs but was he really the straw that stirred the drink in that game? I submit Boldin, Pitta, and Flacco carried us in that game.
    In the Arizona game we where down pretty badly at the beginning of the second half, so we couldn't really afford to run the ball with the score being the way it was.

    Quote Originally Posted by bmorecareful View Post
    Moreover vs. Houston and vs. New England in the playoffs Rice did absolutely nothing, yet we beat Houston (off 2 passing TDs and a great defensive performance) and were 1 dropped pass away from beating New England (again, 2 passing TDs.)
    Well if the offense could actually sustain offensive drives without completely relying on Ray Rice, and effectively pass the ball more consistently, maybe teams would respect our passing game more, and not revolve their whole game plan around stopping Ray Rice. I doubt any back in the league would have any more success in those games against the Texans and the Patriots behind our offensive line the way those teams where stacking the box up.

    Quote Originally Posted by bmorecareful View Post
    So if you don't think Flacco and the passing game can take over a game, you weren't watching. I'm not saying they can CONSISTENTLY do it, certainly not, but it has happened. We have won games without Ray Rice and I suspect we can continue to do so.
    I'm not sold on that at all. We haven't proven that we can do it and win games against good defensive teams. The only exception to that is the week 9 game against the Steelers. That's THE ONLY time I've seen them do it. We passed the ball well vs the Patriots, but their secondary was awful all year. Just have a look at the Jags and Seahawks game, look at how we failed miserably when we got away from running the ball. You either roll with Rice, develop Pierce into a good RB, or sign a good RB, either way this offense needs to have an effective rushing game. The Ravens will never EVER have an offense like the Packers or the Patriots with the coordinator we have, the weapons we have, and the offensive line we have.

    Terrell Suggs is a better player, but losing Rice would have a bigger overall negative effect on our team.




  10. #25
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Houston, TX Y'all
    Posts
    27,500
    RBs are a dime a dozen these days.

    Players like Suggs ain't. That's not a knock on Rice either. We'd be more successful over the length of a season without Rice than we would without Suggs.

    No brainer. IMO.
    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. #26
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    "Merry old England"
    Posts
    9,307
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: Bigger Impact: No Rice or No Suggs?

    Quote Originally Posted by HoustonRaven View Post
    RBs are a dime a dozen these days.

    Players like Suggs ain't. That's not a knock on Rice either. We'd be more successful over the length of a season without Rice than we would without Suggs.

    No brainer. IMO.
    That question wasn't anything to do with if running backs are a dime a dozen or not.

    And btw RB's are a dime a dozen, but RB's like Rice aren't.




  12. #27
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    over by the dental floss bush
    Posts
    17,944
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Bigger Impact: No Rice or No Suggs?

    Sadly we're about to find out what it will be like without Suggs, and I think it'll be a bigger loss than many of you seem to think
    World Domination 3 Points at a Time!




  13. #28
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Severna Park
    Posts
    3,441
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Bigger Impact: No Rice or No Suggs?

    Defensive Player of the Year. Period. Done. We've had capable backups like, McGahee, McLain, & Williams that have had great games spelling Rice. Nobody has has taken Suggs spot.

    You people seem to forget, Rice doesn't sack Rothelisburger.




  14. #29
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Houston, TX Y'all
    Posts
    27,500
    Quote Originally Posted by leachisabeast View Post
    That question wasn't anything to do with if running backs are a dime a dozen or not.

    And btw RB's are a dime a dozen, but RB's like Rice aren't.
    In a way, it most certainly was.

    Rice gets hurt and we can sign an adequate replacement with little effort. May take two players to match his offensive output, but it's very doable. Hence the "dime a dozen" reference.

    You don't however pick up the phone and find the DPOY on the open market. And as Capt'n said, Rice can't sack Big Jen.
    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.




  15. #30
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    "Merry old England"
    Posts
    9,307
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: Bigger Impact: No Rice or No Suggs?

    Quote Originally Posted by HoustonRaven View Post
    In a way, it most certainly was.

    Rice gets hurt and we can sign an adequate replacement with little effort. May take two players to match his offensive output, but it's very doable. Hence the "dime a dozen" reference.

    You don't however pick up the phone and find the DPOY on the open market. And as Capt'n said, Rice can't sack Big Jen.
    Name me one RB you could phone up and just sign off the streets who accounted for most of his teams offense production, and who led the league in total yards, a RB who can take it to the house like Rice can. Of course we are going to miss Suggs, but our defense is still going to be a top 10 and maybe even top 5 unit. Without a guy like Rice, our offense will stall on drives one hell of a lot.




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