So... Can you speculate what Harbaugh (and F.O.?) has learned?

**jimjim5** · 12-16-2015, 07:32 PM

In the Ravens vs Seattle post-game conference, Harbaugh stated the following, “I told the guys last night I’ve learned a lot. … I know I’m a much better man and coach than I was four months ago.”

With that being said, what do you speculate he and/or the FO has learned?

I'll start with:

1) Your prospects/youth deserves a chance.
- The NFL is a young man's league.

2) The play maker's in practice and tape are play makers in real life.
- Butler, Daniels. If they can make plays in practice, why would they not perform in games?

3) Regardless of how much a player is in always in position, your team cannot compete without bonafine athletes.

4) The boy scout revolution didn't work.

5) Their drafting strategy, player profile, and roster strategy is outdated on both sides of the ball.

6) Players need to be put in position to win, not just beat their man.

What say you?

**lovefootball** · 12-16-2015, 07:38 PM

No, never. Still trying to figure out why pees is still coaching the defense, LOL.

**PerpetuallyBored74** · 12-17-2015, 07:19 AM

Originally Posted by lovefootball

No, never. Still trying to figure out why pees is still coaching the defense, LOL.

Because there is no immediate in-house replacement?

Let's see if he's retained for next season before we break out the pitchforks and rubber hoses.

**Captain Offense** · 12-17-2015, 08:52 AM

I am not sure that anybody can read anybody else's mind, so all of this is pure speculation. And "learning something" does not mean having an epiphany. It can be as simple as adjusting perceptions and the basis of theories and schemes. People who are successful are able to learn from adversity even more that they learn from prosperity. And sometimes adversity will serve a level of humility after there has been success. There are coaches who have failed in their first attempt to lead and taken that experience to another level to become successful.

As to your points:

1. You cannot live solely with youth. The jump between college and the NFL is too great to give all young players a chance if you want to succeed. A real winner needs a proper mix of youth and veterans to win. Some old QB's can run rings around newbies simply on experience.

2. Practice performance is not a definite indicator of play on the field, especially with the terms of the present CBA. The NFL game, with the physicality and the speed involved, cannot be replicated at practice. Fans fall in love with those who do well in Preseason, but cannot do well in the real game (Stoney Case, Eric Zeier). You can take some things from how players perform in practice and how much effort they put into film study and learning the playbook, but until they are in the real game you have no idea how they can perform.

3. Not sure exactly what this means. If the point is that you need talent, I am not sure that is a new concept. The more important factor is being able to evaluate a player's ability to do his job. There are so many players that are not elite talents but can use what they have to perform well. Making sure that you identify players who can play on the field, and not just be an athlete, is the key. I also embrace the idea that having versatile players is important so that you can try to adjust with injuries.

4. No substance here. Need examples to understand what this simple statement means. Will Hill is a Boy Scout ? Do you need to sign players with rap sheets and off-the-field problems ? Should they focus on the Greg Hardys and Josh Gordons of the world ?

5. Again, no substance to the claim. ID the basis for this point.

6. I think that Ray Lewis and Bill Belichick would disagree with this statement. Do your job. If everybody just does what they are supposed to, then you can win. If you go outside the box, then somebody or something may be exposed. There is no question that some very special players can read some things and make a play (jump a route, Lewis' read in the San Diego game), but most NFL players are not that good. And even the best can cost their team when they free-lance. They can be tolerated of how often they make the good plays. Do your job and let the coaches do theirs.

When a team has a losing season, the difference between good organizations and bad ones is a simple as how much they take away for the future. I do not believe that this organization (or its Head Coach) are so bad that they need to erase the entire board and start all over with their philosophy. And if you believe that then you are talking about firing people and bringing in a whole new culture and direction.

**lovefootball** · 12-17-2015, 09:20 AM

Originally Posted by PerpetuallyBored74

Because there is no immediate in-house replacement?

Let's see if he's retained for next season before we break out the pitchforks and rubber hoses.

The off season was the time to let Pees go. The NE game was proof , pees couldn't develop a secondary last year. Plenty of coaches available then.

Harbaugh seems to have this " hopeful attitude ". Well it didn't work this year. Hoping Pees, and several other players would come thru , just never happened.

**Ravenswintitle** · 12-17-2015, 09:26 AM

I was saying all spring that this team had no pass rush behind Suggs and Doom. Losing Suggs was huge. Can't get in that position again where there is nobody to rush the passer without blitzing.

**Captain Offense** · 12-17-2015, 09:28 AM

Originally Posted by lovefootball

The off season was the time to let Pees go. The NE game was proof , pees couldn't develop a secondary last year. Plenty of coaches available then.

I know that the NE Playoff game is used as an example of Pees' failures, and I am not a big fan of Bend-But-Do-Not Break and complicated schemes for those not qualified, but we have to acknowledge that the Patriots threw the ineligible/eligible plays (and the refs got confused too) for some success. Belichick had to pull out his bag of tricks to get there just as much as Pees failed to adjust or put the best players in the right spots.

**Captain Offense** · 12-17-2015, 09:30 AM

Originally Posted by Ravenswintitle

I was saying all spring that this team had no pass rush behind Suggs and Doom. Losing Suggs was huge. Can't get in that position again where there is nobody to rush the passer without blitzing.

Bingo. I am of the belief that a Pass Rush makes a secondary look a lot better (or covers a lot of holes). And you need to have a good pass rush more often from four, with a few well-timed blitzes only for surprise.

**lovefootball** · 12-17-2015, 09:37 AM

Originally Posted by Captain Offense

I know that the NE Playoff game is used as an example of Pees' failures, and I am not a big fan of Bend-But-Do-Not Break and complicated schemes for those not qualified, but we have to acknowledge that the Patriots threw the ineligible/eligible plays (and the refs got confused too) for some success. Belichick had to pull out his bag of tricks to get there just as much as Pees failed to adjust or put the best players in the right spots.

True But no team was actually frightened of the Ravens defense. Passing the ball was a true way to beat the Ravens last year. They were a wildcard team that got breaks to get to postseason. Dominant in the secondary, no, not at all. The rush helped the secondary last year. The rush wasn't there this year, so the secondary made average QBs look like superstars.

Flacco made the pats use trick plays to get scores, being down 14 points was very hard for belicheat and he needed something to score quick with.

**ravenwoman** · 12-17-2015, 09:42 AM

I hope they learned that they overvalue their players and pay them too much, which causes them to be in salary cap hell. Case in point-- L. Webb, J. Smith, E. Monroe, D. Pitta, R. Rice. I also hope they learned that they need better scouts for the draft, since the last few drafts have not yielded many impact players. Lastly, I hope they learned that you don't trade top line receivers like Anquan Boldin, because he wouldn't take a pay cut for 1 or 2 million, when he was a top receiver for us.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

**lovefootball** · 12-17-2015, 09:50 AM

Originally Posted by ravenwoman

I hope they learned that they overvalue their players and pay them too much, which causes them to be in salary cap hell. Case in point-- L. Webb, J. Smith, E. Monroe, D. Pitta, R. Rice. I also hope they learned that they need better scouts for the draft, since the last few drafts have not yielded many impact players. Lastly, I hope they learned that you don't trade top line receivers like Anquan Boldin, because he wouldn't take a pay cut for 1 or 2 million, when he was a top receiver for us.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Seems to me the FO handled all your points. All your points are on target too.

**esmd** · 12-17-2015, 09:57 AM

Originally Posted by jimjim5

In the Ravens vs Seattle post-game conference, Harbaugh stated the following, “I told the guys last night I’ve learned a lot. … I know I’m a much better man and coach than I was four months ago.”

With that being said, what do you speculate he and/or the FO has learned?

I'll start with:

1) Your prospects/youth deserves a chance.
- The NFL is a young man's league.

2) The play maker's in practice and tape are play makers in real life.
- Butler, Daniels. If they can make plays in practice, why would they not perform in games?

3) Regardless of how much a player is in always in position, your team cannot compete without bonafine athletes.

4) The boy scout revolution didn't work.

5) Their drafting strategy, player profile, and roster strategy is outdated on both sides of the ball.

6) Players need to be put in position to win, not just beat their man.

What say you?

It is a youth and speed league, but they have to have talent. We've been playing a lot of youth due to injury all year, how's that worked out for us? It's not like Butler and Daniels have been lighting it up (I don't even know who Daniels is!). And the "boy scout" narrative is so ridiculously incorrect it's not even worth arguing with you about it.

Now, what have they learned?

-That the team got old and slow, and needs an infusion of youth, speed, and yes, TALENT. Having a young guy who can run a 4.3 40 doesn't do much if he isn't a good football player (see Fabian Washington). Luckily, they're well positioned to fix much of this problem with this years draft, IF they draft well.

-That they need to get playmakers at WR, and not just one or to be overly dependent on an untested rookie. Need more depth at the position.

-Need More depth at CB

-Need a new DC and some new staff

-Need to look at their draft process and try and figure out why they've missed on some key draft picks in recent years

-Need to figure out why Jimmy Smith, Jernigan, and Mosley have regressed (See new DC above)

-Hoepfully they've looked at their defensive personnel and realize they're much deeper and talented on the DL than at LB, and hire a DC who switches them back to a 4-3 defense which better matches their personnel (Urban at LDE backed up by Z. Smith, DT rotation of Williams, Jernigan, Davis, Guy, KLM, & Suggs/Doom at RDE. Mosley at MLB with two new players (rookies and/or FA's filling the Weak and Strong side OLB positions. Maybe Zack Orr or McClellan could adequately fill one of those roles, or dare I even suggest giving Art Brown a shot?!?!?!?

-Get Maxx Williams and Perriman in the weight room and get them ready to contribute in 2016. Have them at the facility working out and watching film as much as permitted by the CBA. They need them to get on the field and deliver on their potential.