Shift in Offensive Philosophies?

[jd345]

The missing point in all the posts above (unless I missed something) is the OL. We need improvement there, especially considering our OL's (under) performance tonight. No ofeensive strategy can succeed with a poor OL.

Totally agree. Without an OL that gels all is lost...there is no gameplan that will work. With that said we have to go back and look at our history (at least from the point that Ogden retired) and the talent we cuurently have on the OL.
Yanda= RG=No worries...actually beyond no worries...he kicks ass and takes names

Oher= At RT..slightly above average (no false start damn it) At LT= Average

Birk= Center= He will be there on Monday night versus the Bengals. Look at his game history...he doesn't miss games...drain the knee...do surgery on the vericose veins... :) The man will be out there...average blocker in pass and run situations but he knows how to make the calls on the line.

LG= Losing Grubbs sucks...no other way to say it...but we have enough competition there in camp that I think someone will win the job and perform at least to an average grading.

LT= McKinnie- this guy needs to get healthy and motivated in a hurry...while not an elite player he may just be the key to the season. Reason being if he can play as well as he did last year at LT (which was average and no way Elite) and we can keep Oher at RT the Oline will be playing in their "natural" positions. We will not have a great OL but we will have one that gets the job done (at least better than they did tonight).

My personal opinion...I think we see the same Ravens team as last year with slight improvements to the offense in regards to Flacco's maturity and progression and the addition of Jones opening up the underneath. We see a slightly different defense...the loss of Suggs hurts...who will make up that sack total (Upshaw, Kruger, Kindle...all of the three???) and those forced fumbles. Also, what no one else talks about in any thread that I read is the loss of Jaret Johnson...that man was an unsung hero...no fancy stats to be had but he could set an edge that when I look at the roster I don't see a replacement for. On the back end of our defense I don't see a better unit in the league. Webb (future HOF mark my words), Smith (getting ready to come into his own), Reed (he is still Reed...just doesn't like to hit as hard but still is the best center fielder around), Pollard (he makes up for Reed not wanting to hit hard...this is all Pollard wants to do and he does it well), and Williams (got abused by Julius Jones tonight who is in my opinion the next coming of Calvin Johnson) who is more than capable of being a CB #2 or #3.

All points considered, I think we are slightly better in terms of talent (and maturity) than last year. We missed the big show by one dropped pass (and one shanked field goal for a tie and who the hell knows what would have happened next, hope Tucker earns and wins the job).

Call me optimistic but I think we are going to be slighlty improved from last year...and slightly improved is just what we need. GO RAVENS!

[JimZipCode]

what took them so long?

Maybe just getting some speed at WR. We've always had slow receivers in the Cam-Harbaugh-Flacco era, until Torrey Smith came along last season. Now Smith + Jacoby Jones + the backup guys gives us the first speedy WR corps since – well, in many many years.

the team did go to a very wide open offense at the beginning of Joe's second year. We opened up against KC and we were extremely pass heavy and really stayed that way for the first 4 weeks or so...
But it seemed that as we started to struggle (to no fault of Joe's – Clayton dropped that 4th down pass at the 8, the defense allowed a last second TD against the Bengals and Haushka missed that kick against the Vikings), we pulled in the reigns and we never really came back to that.

Corresponds with Joe's leg injury that year?

[JimZipCode]

Easily the biggest "smh" aspect about this team.

What is "smh"?

[JimZipCode]

We need a slightly more effective passing game. We do not need the "lets throw it everywhere philosophy that Green Bay and the Patriots use (although effectively). My thinking is we brought in Jones to stretch the field along with Torey. Put Boldin in the slot. Now we have safeties back and corners jamming or playing 10 yards off the ball. Back to my point – lean on your best players. Leach and Rice now have room to roam – bring the safeties in the box – and we burn you with our speed WR speed.

Ok, but if we put Jones and Torrey on the outside to stretch the field, with Boldin in the slot, and Leach & Rice in the backfield, that's five guys so that leaves us in a formation with no TE. Can you run the ball consistently with no TE, ie one less run blocker in the formation?

With 5 O-linemen and a QB on the field, there's only room for 5 "other" players on the field. Most commonly that's:

• 2 RBs, 1 TE, 2 WR (standard pro set)
• 1 RB, 2 TE, 2 WR
• 1 RB, 1 TE, 3 WR

And then there's variations, like spread with 1 RB/4WR, or empty backfield with just TEs and WRs, or jumbo/goal-line with 2 RBs and 3 TEs, and so forth.

But there is no formation that gets all of our best weapons on the field at the same time. We just can't have Rice and Leach and Torrey Smith and Boldin and Jacoby Jones and Dickson/Pitta. That's too many guys, unless we take off an O-lineman or Joe.

That's something fans on this board need to think about more often. Every time we put a guy into the offensive formation, we take another guy off the field. If we put a 3 WR out there (Jacoby Jones) to "stretch the field", then Leach or Dickson has to come off. If put a second TE out there, then Leach or a WR needs to come off. Etc. Every time we add a threat we take a different one away.

Our offense just can't be everything at once. It's not within the rules.

[leachisabeast]

Ok, but if we put Jones and Torrey on the outside to stretch the field, with Boldin in the slot, and Leach & Rice in the backfield, that's five guys so that leaves us in a formation with no TE. Can you run the ball consistently with no TE, ie one less run blocker in the formation?

With 5 O-linemen and a QB on the field, there's only room for 5 "other" players on the field. Most commonly that's:

• 2 RBs, 1 TE, 2 WR (standard pro set)
• 1 RB, 2 TE, 2 WR
• 1 RB, 1 TE, 3 WR

And then there's variations, like spread with 1 RB/4WR, or empty backfield with just TEs and WRs, or jumbo/goal-line with 2 RBs and 3 TEs, and so forth.

But there is no formation that gets all of our best weapons on the field at the same time. We just can't have Rice and Leach and Torrey Smith and Boldin and Jacoby Jones and Dickson/Pitta. That's too many guys, unless we take off an O-lineman or Joe.

That's something fans on this board need to think about more often. Every time we put a guy into the offensive formation, we take another guy off the field. If we put a 3 WR out there (Jacoby Jones) to "stretch the field", then Leach or Dickson has to come off. If put a second TE out there, then Leach or a WR needs to come off. Etc. Every time we add a threat we take a different one away.

Our offense just can't be everything at once. It's not within the rules.

Well Boldin can line up as the TE, seeing as he is a better blocker than both our starting tight ends combined.

[GOTA]

Well Boldin can line up as the TE, seeing as he is a better blocker than both our starting tight ends combined.

When has Cam ever done that? The Pats will put a TE and RB and use a RB as a CB but Cam? Nope. Creative use of personnel for Cam is a WR running an end around or Leach going out for a 2 yard swing pass.

[ActualSpamBot]

Putting a 6'1 215 lb WR at tight end isn't creative, it's lunacy.

Boldin may be a better run blocking WR than Dickson or Pitta are run blocking TEs, but that's still an apples to 265 pound oranges comparison.

[JAB1985]

Well Boldin can line up as the TE, seeing as he is a better blocker than both our starting tight ends combined.

whoa whoa whoa.... Boldin is a good blocker against a DB, He has no chance against Demarcus Ware, Harrison, etc. lets not exaggerate too much here. 6'1 220 lbs vs a DB is a lot different than 6'4 250 lbs vs a pass rusher.

[wickedsolo]

What is "smh"?

shaking my head...also similar to the facepalm :grbac:

[steelerhater]

Anyone else catch this nugget hidden in an otherwise fluff story about Flacco on ESPN?

http://espn.go.com/nfl/trainingcamp1...ens-next-level


"Harbaugh said he envisions the offense playing up-tempo, frequently utilizing the no-huddle, with the ball coming out of Flacco's hands quickly. They will look to strike downfield but also rely on Rice to run the ball. Harbaugh said he expects Flacco's completion percentage to climb to nearly 70 percent.

"We're putting in the offense that we've envisioned having," Harbaugh said."


Flacco seems to perform much better in these situations, so we can only hope that this is actually true...

This is pretty funny. Harbaugh is fine with any offense that Cam wants to run.

[The Excellector]

I've seen Boldin put offensive linemen on their ass. Dickson missed a block in the game, as usual, that almost got Ray Rice smeared in the turf.

[OriAl]

I hear ya. I would not call it underachievement though. Think the offense did enough to win if a few guys executed better. NE played better defensively heading into the playoffs (while I will grant you not great). I do agree that the Offense took the foot off the throat/got conservative at times and hopefully thats something they address.

The offense did nothing the entire first quarter. The tone for that may have been set by Cam, on the first offensive play, calling the same first running play that gashed the Pats for an 83 yard TD the previous season (as if that wasn't something their defense would be looking for, considering that Belichik had probably shown the film of that play over and over and over leading up to the game.) Rice was stuffed. Then stuffed again.

Three possessions, zero first downs. Cam finally started calling some rollouts, and that's when the offense started moving. Late in the game, before the final drive, the offense again didn't do much for three possessions.