Ten Things I Saw On Tape

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SC_Raven_Fan

That is what irritates me. Castillo coached his players to push the envelope, but the Ravens didn't respond to what they were seeing. They have a coach watching the tape as the game is played. The coaches see the game. An adjustment in strategy was obviously necessary, but it didn't happen.
Harbs needs an intervention. Instead of Ali visiting the team, how about Stallone!

---

This. At the end of the day we have to live with the fact that our "genious" of an OC was outcoached by a former offensive line coach who was on the hot seat for much of last year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Excellector

The reason that Williams and Smith have disappointed some is, because they have not been used properly. They are press CBs. Webb is the versatile one. They've been playing these guys in off-coverage and it hasn't been working. They can get better, but these are the struggles they would have to endure to get there.

Pees was afraid of Vick running and, even though Celek was killing them, didn't change up. It cost him.

Once Flacco threw the pick, Cameron got nervous and scaled back the offense. Philly dug in and it cost him.

Harbaugh may not have liked the second half approaches, but I would think he should have done more to fix those problems than what seemed to take place.

---

I agree with virtually every word in this post. I brought up the press stuff and somebody tried to tell me that our CB's can't press the Eagles guys because of a fear of getting beat deep...which I find ridiculous because we played a 2 deep shell for most of the game.

Another observation I made in addition to the shitty play calling, lack of adjustments by our OC and DC...

I will say that the funk Joe was in was pretty bizarre...I get the separation thing and all, but there were still some plays that Joe could have made. On the INT, Boldin was open on an out right at the sticks, but Joe was absolutely zero'd in on Pitta and didn't look at anyone else. That was a big play. Also, on the last drive, on second down, Joe threw a ball down the seem to a well covered Dickson when Torrey was WIDE open on a short crossing pattern that looked like it would have gotten us at least 7-8 yards. The rush seemed to have REALLY rattled him (in addition to the rib injury) and instead of sliding/stepping up in the pocket, most of the time he just drifted back and threw off his back foot. That last play...Joe could have stepped up as the DE's were being pushed behind him, but I definitely think the Eagles D seriously rattled him.

As a fan, I love Joe, but it did look like the rush was getting to him. The way Joe was playing earlier, there is no way he would have missed Pitta on that third and 2.

The team has serious issues of getting receivers open against press coverage. The same thing happened against Jacksonville and Seattle last year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dandrews

The team has serious issues of getting receivers open against press coverage. The same thing happened against Jacksonville and Seattle last year.

---

so spread it out and run a few delayed draws, quick slants. what am I missing?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dandrews

The team has serious issues of getting receivers open against press coverage. The same thing happened against Jacksonville and Seattle last year.

---

Good point.....

You know how you fix press coverage? Slants, screens, rub plays, motion plays, drag routes and run the ball with sweeps or toss plays

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jsmoove

You know how you fix press coverage? Slants, screens, rub plays, motion plays, drag routes and run the ball with sweeps or toss plays

---

Cam is allergic to those West Coast Offensive plays

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jsmoove

You know how you fix press coverage? Slants, screens, rub plays, motion plays, drag routes and run the ball with sweeps or toss plays

---

Actually not screens.

The first play of the second half was a screen that was snuffed out pretty easily. Screens are for zone coverage usually because with man their will be eyes on the back the entire time.

I agree that we should have used motion to our advantage more in the second half.

The screen was a perfect example of where Joe should have checked out of the play. There were eight men in the box, and there was no possible way a screen would have been successful.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by celticrob

The screen was a perfect example of where Joe should have checked out of the play. There were eight men in the box, and there was no possible way a screen would have been successful.

---

Some times eight men in the box means a blitz which is a good play to run a screen on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JMUpurkfool

Actually not screens.

The first play of the second half was a screen that was snuffed out pretty easily. Screens are for zone coverage usually because with man their will be eyes on the back the entire time.

I agree that we should have used motion to our advantage more in the second half.

---

agreed!