Ravens 2019 Offense Scheme

[The Excellector]

Honestly I think your takes are right, wrong, or in between as often as anyone else’s. It’s just the way you present them that’s funny to me

Which is why you poke the bear. Don't act like I don't notice. I'm on to you.

[The Excellector]

Do you just roll in ready to argue, to claw and play internet message board games? Does your personal vendetta against me have to cloud every thread every post you respond to?
Or could we just....I don't know....have a discussion?

I could show the same Boykin film I showed in the WR thread, this discussion has been had.....already.
Do you want me to post the film? I could. Just ask nicely. ;)

Moving on...…

No, we can't have a discussion, because halfway through it you go into some speech about wanting to talk X's and O's and not being interested in anyone who doesn't want to talk X's and O's. There was last year, when we argued over how Lamar would be used. There was recently when GreatWhiteNorthRaven had to spend pages trying to explain a simple point about Play-calling verbiage, and now you come in posting gifs calling stuff drops when they aren't. On top of going on all off-season about this brand spanking new offense. In between informing the two guys who are waiting for Godot, about our "From the ground up" offense, I haven't had time to have a discussion.

[The Excellector]

I actually do want to see some cut ups of Boykin because I was agreeing with sword on him. I didn’t see his combine athleticism on tape either but I’m down to be proven wrong.

He'll just post two or three gifs as if he was used that way his entire time at the damned school.

I can't stand Shakespeare.

[The Excellector]

Formation flipped

Bills 2015

Why are you posting Bills gifs? This offense is suppose to be something we've never seen before. From the ground up.

[JimZipCode]

There was recently when GreatWhiteNorthRaven had to spend pages trying to explain a simple point about Play-calling verbiage

That was fun. As I recall, GWNR was trying to make a point about changing one player's route in a play call, and you took that as "proof" that the E-P was not conducive to adjustments. Never mind that the New England Patriots have been the most flexible offense in football over the last 20 years, while running the E-P. Irrelevant!

In between informing the two guys who are waiting for Godot, about our "From the ground up" offense, I haven't had time to have a discussion.

You mean "misinforming".

The frustrating thing is, and I think all of us can see this coming:

1. Roman & Harbs tell us all offseason that the new offense contains regular football concepts, that plenty of teams use.
2. 1st Q of game 1, the Ravens run a play that looks pretty much like something they've run before. And:
3. You instantly come screeching in here about how you were RIGHT ALL ALONG, there is no new offense

The sheer inevitability of it makes me want to throw up.

[GreatWhiteNorthRaven]

That was fun. As I recall, GWNR was trying to make a point about changing one player's route in a play call, and you took that as "proof" that the E-P was not conducive to adjustments. Never mind that the New England Patriots have been the most flexible offense in football over the last 20 years, while running the E-P. Irrelevant.

That's not true.

My point, that Excelletor was agreeing with, is that the purpose of the EP is to simplify by using route combos. So the very reason for making it simplistic (by putting 2 routes together) makes it harder to change those routes on the fly, especially becuase one word represents the combination (I.e. ghost = X 9-route / slot out route).

However, I did agree with the counterpoint that hot routes would be a way to adjust them, but I was referring to in the game on the sideline if somethings not working you can't just say "alright guys, ghost know means the X is running a comeback and the slot is running a whip route".

It wasn't really a big criticism, more just an observation from my use of the system (As an OL coach, so I guess indirect use of the system). But yeah it unnecessarily went on for pages when the point was minor and clear.

[BigPlayReceiver]

So as the club gets ready to roll into 2019, it needs to be understood that Lamar will make more mistakes this season, b/c he will be allowed to do so as each game will not effectively be a playoff game like it was in 2018.

Otherwise, I'll just say this (and GWNR knows this well--I've been saying it often this summer in our Twitter group DMs): I don't know what the 2019 offense will look like and I don't know how the passing game will perform, but if Lamar has a solid/improved 2nd year (this naturally means that Johnny and Greg are retained), I'll expect the 2020 Ravens to go back to Tampa for a 3rd ring.

[RavensFanMania]

Why are you posting Bills gifs? This offense is suppose to be something we've never seen before. From the ground up.

Seems that everyone is taking this "from the ground up" differently. To me, the biggest change will be the verbiage and it will be a change for the Baltimore Ravens. There will be some spread concepts added to the WCO. It's never really a brand new play, it just may be something different about that play and how it is run and from the ground up, includes the verbiage.

[JimZipCode]

if Lamar has a solid/improved 2nd year (this naturally means that Johnny and Greg are retained), I'll expect the 2020 Ravens to go back to Tampa for a 3rd ring.

Yeah.

I have it as '20 or '21. AFCC in '20, SB in '21. But the point is the same: no matter how well we do this season, if Lamar grows with the young skill talent we have, we are extremely well positioned for the next couplefew years after that. Like, "among the top teams in the league" positioned.

(Assuming continuity.)

[JimZipCode]

That's not true.

My point, that Excelletor was agreeing with, is that the purpose of the EP is to simplify by using route combos. So the very reason for making it simplistic (by putting 2 routes together) makes it harder to change those routes on the fly, especially becuase one word represents the combination (I.e. ghost = X 9-route / slot out route).

However, I did agree with the counterpoint that hot routes would be a way to adjust them, but I was referring to in the game on the sideline if somethings not working you can't just say "alright guys, ghost know means the X is running a comeback and the slot is running a whip route".

It wasn't really a big criticism, more just an observation from my use of the system (As an OL coach, so I guess indirect use of the system). But yeah it unnecessarily went on for pages when the point was minor and clear.

I always understood your point.

Mine was, while that sounds very logical, I still think there's a "burden of proof" for the position that the E-P makes it hard (or harder) to change routes – because Patriots. They've been the most flexible, best-at-adjusting offense in football for almost 20 years now. And they popularized the E-P.

Any argument that it's hard to adjust routes in the E-P must account for the Patriots; or it's incomplete.
But of course, there's a lot of ways to account. Like:

• It's so hard, it TAKES a Brady & Belichick to accomplish it
• May be easy for NFL players, but at lower levels the WCO is much easier
• It's probably not that hard, but I'm not sure how the adjustments are communicated

And so forth.

I'm not trying to, uh, trump your experience or anything. You actually coach football! I sure as shit don't. You flat out know more than I do here.

But I am saying, what you reported doesn't seem like the full picture. The absolute greatest masters of improvisation and adjustment in football history have been using the E-P for ~20 years; so it just cannot be too big of a handicap to adjusting routes. There's got to be something else.

Maybe that "something else" is sight-adjustments by the WR, and Brady understands what the WR is seeing. (Or the WR gets the fuck outta Foxboro.) But there's something.

[GreatWhiteNorthRaven]

I always understood your point.

Mine was, while that sounds very logical, I still think there's a "burden of proof" for the position that the E-P makes it hard (or harder) to change routes – because Patriots. They've been the most flexible, best-at-adjusting offense in football for almost 20 years now. And they popularized the E-P.

Any argument that it's hard to adjust routes in the E-P must account for the Patriots; or it's incomplete.
But of course, there's a lot of ways to account. Like:

• It's so hard, it TAKES a Brady & Belichick to accomplish it
• May be easy for NFL players, but at lower levels the WCO is much easier
• It's probably not that hard, but I'm not sure how the adjustments are communicated

And so forth.

I'm not trying to, uh, trump your experience or anything. You actually coach football! I sure as shit don't. You flat out know more than I do here.

But I am saying, what you reported doesn't seem like the full picture. The absolute greatest masters of improvisation and adjustment in football history have been using the E-P for ~20 years; so it just cannot be too big of a handicap to adjusting routes. There's got to be something else.

Maybe that "something else" is sight-adjustments by the WR, and Brady understands what the WR is seeing. (Or the WR gets the fuck outta Foxboro.) But there's something.

My question would be, are you sure that the adjustments they make are adjustments to their established route combinations (i.e. ghost becomes something different)? Or do they just have a lot of combinations that they can utilize when they adjust the overall gameplan (i.e. they're hemming the middle with zones to prevent us from using our meshes, we need to attack the sidelines with these combinations now)?

[JimZipCode]

My question would be, are you sure that the adjustments they make are adjustments to their established route combinations (i.e. ghost becomes something different)? Or do they just have a lot of combinations that they can utilize when they adjust the overall gameplan (i.e. they're hemming the middle with zones to prevent us from using our meshes, we need to attack the sidelines with these combinations now)?

Not the least bit sure! Don't know the first thing damn about it.
Your suggestion sounds as reasonable as anything else I've heard.