Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 25 to 36 of 56

Thread: Ozzie on Lamar

  1. #25

    Re: Ozzie on Lamar

    Quote Originally Posted by Cleo&Dilly View Post
    Its TOO BAD they didn't think of this with Joe - what a radical concept - build your team around your quarterback - INSTEAD of around your coach's ego!

    I think I have finely figured out why they didn't do this. A lot of people won't like the answer. Ever since Joe came on the scene (and to a degree prior to that - with guys like Tony Banks) the Ravens have been trying to find the right black quarterback - so they drafted quys like Troy Smith, Tyrod Taylor and Keenan Reynolds (I know they supposedly drafted him as a wide receiver) - only to have Joe consistently out play them. So at the end of his career they tried one more time - with Lamar. I guess they got their wish
    I consider myself much on the conservative side of things, but you are way off here. So is this why you don't like Lamar? So, based on your "logic" Decosta will look for white QBs to replace Lamar with and all will be right in your little kingdom? Where's the ignore feature?





  2. #26

    Re: Ozzie on Lamar






  3. #27

    Re: Ozzie on Lamar

    Quote Originally Posted by Cleo&Dilly View Post
    Its TOO BAD they didn't think of this with Joe - what a radical concept - build your team around your quarterback - INSTEAD of around your coach's ego!
    Quote Originally Posted by JAB1985 View Post
    I think the OL could use some upgrades, but otherwise Id say he has the tools around him right now, he just needs to be better to utilize them.
    I would argue that they did build the team around Flacco's play-acdtion, big arm style of play. And for the most part those are still the players here, who are not well suited for the kind of offense they need to run to get the most out of Lamar. They need linemen who can move their feet, and move the pile (e.g., Zeus Jr.s linemate at Oklahoma, Cody Ford) and they need stronger, more compact, twitchier receivers who can block, quickly get separation, and excel at YAC. Only Snead and Moore fit that description, and possibly Lasley right now. Crabtree takes forever to come out of breaks and Brown needs time to beat guys deep. They also need Dixon to tap his pass catching skills more than he showed this year...he is adept as a pass catcher, but needs to commit to the program.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cleo&Dilly View Post
    Ever since Joe came on the scene (and to a degree prior to that - with guys like Tony Banks) the Ravens have been trying to find the right black quarterback - so they drafted quys like Troy Smith, Tyrod Taylor and Keenan Reynolds (I know they supposedly drafted him as a wide receiver) - only to have Joe consistently out play them. So at the end of his career they tried one more time - with Lamar. I guess they got their wish
    I'm embarrassed for you, making such a dumb and racist statement.

    The only black quarterback on your list brought in after Joe was Tyrod. He was a sixth round pick who never got a start in Baltimore--hardly the scenario supporting the idea they wanted to supplant Joe with a black QB. Why would they make Joe the highest paid QB in the league when he resigned if they secretly didn't like his skin color? That's nonsense. If Joe hadn't underplayed his contract, they would have never drafted Lamar, and Joe would be getting another extension.





  4. #28
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Balt-Wash corridor
    Posts
    11,067

    Re: Ozzie on Lamar

    Quote Originally Posted by HbgPARavenfan View Post
    TO + Jerry Rice tho lol
    Only his first year (and they went 6-10). And Rice was 38: almost Tom Brady territory.

    Rice was gone to Oakland by the time Garcia got good.





  5. #29

    Re: Ozzie on Lamar

    Quote Originally Posted by Cleo&Dilly View Post
    Its TOO BAD they didn't think of this with Joe - what a radical concept - build your team around your quarterback - INSTEAD of around your coach's ego!

    I think I have finely figured out why they didn't do this. A lot of people won't like the answer. Ever since Joe came on the scene (and to a degree prior to that - with guys like Tony Banks) the Ravens have been trying to find the right black quarterback - so they drafted quys like Troy Smith, Tyrod Taylor and Keenan Reynolds (I know they supposedly drafted him as a wide receiver) - only to have Joe consistently out play them. So at the end of his career they tried one more time - with Lamar. I guess they got their wish
    Crazy talk

    Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk





  6. #30
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    Westminster OG, now behind enemy lines in NE
    Posts
    3,047
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Ozzie on Lamar

    Quote Originally Posted by AmishlandRavenFan View Post
    Lol. The rest of the quote was left out:

    "If our defense had a few more playmakers, we would have held the Chargers under 17. That's the kind of support Lamar should expect next year."

    Sent from my Moto G (4) using Tapatalk
    I seriously can't tell if you are joking or not.





  7. #31
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Behind enemies lines Shitsburgh
    Posts
    1,341

    Re: Ozzie on Lamar

    Are we going back to back offensive heavy draft?
    O Eric Iím in love already
    Playmakers and Oline
    Support for our QB lmao


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    I'm pissed off for greatness!!

    Twitter Bmore Finest





  8. Re: Ozzie on Lamar

    I don't think race has anything to do with it. The decision to draft Jackson was likely because Flacco was one of the worst statistical quarterbacks in the league over the last few years with a certain minimum number of starts (Meaning that his performance was better than a lot of people who got benched, but still not good), he is getting older, and he has some injuries that seem to have affected his mobility. There are some excuses that can be used for Flacco's statistics being what they were, and some are reasonable, but it still is what it is, and he was on a downward trajectory. So, they drafted a guy for the future.

    Even though a first round QB is usually slated to start the first season, either from the get-go, or after a veteran has played some and they real the new QB has had enough time with mini-camps, training camp, pre-season, regular season practice, etc. to really step in at some point during the season, I think Lamar was drafted with the idea of Flacco playing one or two more complete seasons as the starter (i.e. At least 2018 and possibly 2019) because the thought was that Jackson's low completion percentage in college and other factors made him a project. However, Flacco got hurt and was out for multiple games, and Jackson played much better than was anticipated during the regular season, and they at some point made the decision that the future was now with him.

    What I think we saw in the playoff game was, in part, Harbaugh being Harbaugh- meaning that Harbaugh tends to stick by people he likes or thinks are generally the best choice over the longhaul, and tries to give them confidence, sometimes at the expense of winning particular games. It's why he makes odd coordinator decisions and sticks by them till the bitter end. It's part of why he generally didn't want to bring in strong backups to Flacco, so that no one could fault him for sticking by his man not matter what was going on in a game or in a season, and even when it created situations where Flacco had to be rushed back from injuries even when he would have been better off taking more time (i.e. the back issues in 2017 that happened early enough in camp that we could have signed a veteran QB and had him ready to start the season and play till Flacco's back was 100% instead of having Flacco play at less than 100% and take a performance hit and make the overall recovery slower).

    Once the decision was made that Jackson was the man, Harbaugh was not going to budge on it even though the game situation clearly dictated it. And even though it was a playoff game. It was textbook Harbaugh.

    I have no issue with the idea of Jackson as the starting QB in general. I don't know how his run oriented style will work out in the long haul, certainly there is a time limit on it because once run-orient QBs slow down a little speed wise due to injury or age, even just a hair, they usually drop off performance wise significantly, and they are much more likely to get hurt, so the team should invest in a good veteran backup and a low round rookie developmental QB, just so the season isn't "over" if Jackson gets a significant injury (The vet could play), and so we are hopefully ready for the long-term when his feet slow down (the developmental guy). But he was playing well this year and we were successful with it, so I like it for the time being. He's going to have to cut down the fumbles and consistently show he can effectively throw on teams when they put 9 in the box and don't utilize any safeties (or have guys who are normally safeties playing linebacker), to force opposing defenses to at least acknowledge the option of a pass and put no more than 7 or 8 in the box and open up the run for Jackson and Edwards (Or whomever the tailback is), but we have the off-season to work on that with him.

    I do like the idea of a ball control clock-eating run-centric time of possession offense- it limits the number of chances the opposition has to score, wears down the opposing defenses' front 7 and lets us run wild late in games, and keeps our already good defense fresh and makes them a great defense (I think our defense got better late in the year, and that was part of it). I've always liked that idea (Albeit I wouldn't have been in favor of this type of QB 10 years ago- might work now the way the game has changed, though. I would have just been for more handoffs and pitches to the tailback back then.). This is one of the first half seasons I remember when I wasn't yelling at my television for them run the [expletive deleted] football and stop it with the three incomplete passes in a row every series crap.

    However, Harbaugh being Harbaugh was a mistake Sunday.

    I understand that Flacco is going to be traded or cut this off-season. They want Jackson to be the guy long-term, thinking it'll lead them to achieve long-term goals like, I don't know, winning playoff games, and time will tell on that. Once you're in a playoff game, you out all the stops. If Flacco is on the roster, Jackson is having a historically bad game, and Flacco's style of play is much more conducive to the game situation of having to comeback quickly from way behind, you put Flacco in the game. Your goal is right in front of you, you do what it takes to achieve it now. If Jackson's confidence is hurt, you have the whole off-season to work with him to repair it. If Flacco does unexpected well we win a playoff game or two, or he gets real hot and we win the AFC Championship or maybe a Super Bowl Championship, you could suddenly get two 1st round picks for Flacco or more, instead of like the 5th rounder we'll probably get now, or keep Flacco and do the original plan where Jackson doesn't take over till his third year.

    That they were thinking about the future instead of what was out in front of them on Sunday is what really ticks me off about the whole situation. This is the NFL. It's the pros. Your objective is right out in front of you. You do what it takes to win the game and stay alive (figuratively speaking) for the next week, and see what you can win long-term. You don't worry about causing a QB controversy, how the fans will react, a player's fragile ego, or anything like that. You make the right decision for that game.

    The right decision for that game was Flacco taking over after the first or second drive of the second half. Harbaugh refuses to say why he thought about bringing in Flacco and didn't do it, and I think that's because he was focusing on factors that had nothing to do with the game going on at that moment. That's a losing mentality and unacceptable IMO. And I'm not saying that as some kind of Flacco "guy" versus being a Jackson "guy"- I like Lamar and am fine with going forward with that experiment next season. He was the hot hand and I was fine with him continuing to start this season when Flacco got healthy. But Flacco should have been in there in that playoff game when Jackson was floundering.

    One of the biggest issues with Harbaugh is that he often is thinking about things other than winning the game or games in front of him, or winning in general. There's a lot of worrying about egos and wanting to keep his friends around him on the coaching staff and all this random stuff that should be secondary to winning football games. I'm with Vince Lombardi, "Winning isn't everything, it's the only thing".

    I think John's brother Jim would be with me on this. He won't say it publicly because John is his brother, but that is one difference between the way the two of them seem to view the game.

    Winning the AFC North is one goal we should always have, and Jackson was a big part of what got us that banner, and I appreciate that. But if the next goal of winning the playoff game or getting the other two championships we are eligible for meant we needed to use Flacco in the 2nd half Sunday, we should have. Doesn't mean I'm not appreciative of what Jackson did this year or that I don't want him to be the guy next year, it just means that I think we should have pulled out the stops and done whatever it took to win Sunday- and Flacco was our best chance in that 2nd half.

    One of the reasons I don't like preseason games and the NFL is the last sport I will even watch them (Everything else I wait until the games count before even considering tuning it) is that people don't play them to win. I understand why in the case of preseason, but I'd rather watch something where the teams play like they care and the coaches or managers are trying to win the games and not achieve some other objectives or whatever. That's why I am against expanding the season from 16 to 18 games as well- I figure that the more games they play, the less they will feel the need to play to win every week. To see a head coach not coaching first and foremost with winning the game he's coaching in mind during *playoffs* of all times really ticks me off.





  9. #33

    Re: Ozzie on Lamar

    This whole FO situation is weird.

    I know we are used to hearing Ozzie talk about stuff like that but he is no longer GM and still talks as if he is one.





  10. #34
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    7,525

    Re: Ozzie on Lamar

    How would have Vickís resurrection with the Eagles turned out if Andy Reid wasnít there? Show me an example of Marty coaching up a QB on his own.





  11. #35
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    where my head touches the pillow
    Posts
    38,996
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: Ozzie on Lamar

    lol ravens FO is like government state job.... " well we won't demote you but we don't want you to retire either, so we will move your desk over to the office beside your old office and you can still help with your old job but we giving you a new job too"





  12. #36

    Re: Ozzie on Lamar

    Quote Originally Posted by xiao_ke View Post
    How would have Vick’s resurrection with the Eagles turned out if Andy Reid wasn’t there? Show me an example of Marty coaching up a QB on his own.
    THIs





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
  •  
Link To Mobile Site