Quote Originally Posted by Ravens44 View Post
I understand and to a large degree, I do agree.
Here is my problem. It shouldn't come down to one play or two plays where the execution has to be absolutely perfect.
It seems like every game plan is set in stone and in-game assessment and adapting does not take place...or if it does, it is a quarter latter than everyone watching the game has already figured out. Why is that? I know there is a host of coaches up in the booth and on the sideline. Do they not see? Just wondering.
Every play is pretty simple and the player HAS to be superior in ability to win the battle to make the play succeed. At the pro level, we are talking about the best to begin with, so to be superior at every position is a little too much to expect.
So... not just the game plan, but the designed plays have to create space for receivers, misdirection for runs and pass plays alike. Yes, Bill Walsh was great at this, but it doesn't take a rocket scientist to design the plays to actually move the defenders around to create the needed space. The Steelers do it all the time with trips to one side.

And that is a huge flaw in the Ravens' offense. Flacco is consistently required to thread the needle while under duress and that is too much to expect of any quarterback.
Opposing players and analysts have stated the shortcomings of the Ravens play designs as one reason why they are easy to defend.

At some point, learning has to be taking place among the coaching staff.
Yes, Evans didn't hold onto the ball, but we could have passed all day long and deep, as well, if Oline adjustments had taken place and the obvious lack of any Pat defender keeping up with Torrey or Boldin (a short WR covering him and we don't throw to him-REALLY?!) underneath. Pats were next to last in defending the pass.
This. Fact is, the AFCCG should not have come down to that play. The Ravens were the better team. Period. Opposing players have stated onseveral occasions that they knew what play was coming before the snap of the ball.