The Grit, The "C" Team and The Endless Bloody Injuries

[marklar]

1. I think we're well above 50% long term to convert two yards
2. We're moving the ball at will the last two drives because the Packers are playing with 14 point and TD leads in the 4th quarter, meaning their only objective is to not get beat deep and defend in the red zone. If you actually re-watch the game, you'll notice that Green Bay's entire secondary is playing way further off the ball than they were in the first three quarters. That's by design. Wouldn't expect to see that look in OT.
3. What about that game indicated "no functional rushing attack"? Our RBs averaged 5.5 YPC, as did our QB. Was one of the better rushing games for us I've seen in a long time.

Regarding 1: I disagree, we haven't exactly been brilliant in short goal-to-go situations this year. I'd given us a better chance if we first took a false start to move back to the 7.5 yardline. Sort of kidding, but not completely
Regarding 2: IMO, we were moving the ball at will most of the game. The packers defense played like shit and we took advantage of that.
Regarding 3: pehaps wrongly phrased, but when was the last time you saw us successfully run up the middle in short-yardage situations? So the packers were unlikely to be fearful of that which limits our chance of success with a pass play. So I would have preferred a run, or having Huntley bootleg off the left or whatever. My intent was to say that our lack of both trying and succeeding to run in those situations makes it predictable for the defense. Had we done that well before, they have to respect the run more.

 

[marklar]

...and I was happy to see Levine get snaps on defense, if nothing else than for nostalgic reasons.

 

[29BmoreBird22]

So, when I'm referring to the situation of the playbook being different, which it is, I mean this...

With Lamar, the Ravens were running 11 personnel on 38% of snaps (third lowest in the league.) They were running 22 personnel on 18% of snaps (highest in the league with the Rams running 0 such snaps in that time frame.) The Ravens ran 21 personnel on 29% of snaps (second most in the league) They interestingly ran 20 personnel on 9% of snaps (highest in the league.) They ran 0 10 personnel stats.

Huntley has gotten 11 personnel on 77% of his snaps. Huntley has had 0 snaps of 21 personnel. He has had 0 snaps of 22 personnel. He has gotten 4 wide reciever sets on 6% of snaps.

All stats pulled from SharpFootball.

So, when people say the offense is different... it's because it is. The personnel groupings, the reads, and the routes are so much different.

 

[Argentina Raven]

So, when I'm referring to the situation of the playbook being different, which it is, I mean this...

With Lamar, the Ravens were running 11 personnel on 38% of snaps (third lowest in the league.) They were running 22 personnel on 18% of snaps (highest in the league with the Rams running 0 such snaps in that time frame.) The Ravens ran 21 personnel on 29% of snaps (second most in the league) They interestingly ran 20 personnel on 9% of snaps (highest in the league.) They ran 0 10 personnel stats.

Huntley has gotten 11 personnel on 77% of his snaps. Huntley has had 0 snaps of 21 personnel. He has had 0 snaps of 22 personnel. He has gotten 4 wide reciever sets on 6% of snaps.

All stats pulled from SharpFootball.

So, when people say the offense is different... it's because it is. The personnel groupings, the reads, and the routes are so much different.

Thanks,
Now I investigate that it is the 11,12,22 personel and I answer you.
those data are my way of learning

 

[29BmoreBird22]

Thanks,
Now I investigate that it is the 11,12,22 personel and I answer you.
those data are my way of learning

Are you asking what the numbers mean?

They mean the number of tight ends and then the number of running backs. And then 5 minus that number combined is the number of wide receivers.

I think the frustrating thing for me is with Ricard out, the Ravens were probably going to naturally gravitate more to three wide and a more spaced out offense with Lamar, but of course the ankle injury put that to rest.

Either way, hopefully Roman is learning a lesson from Huntley's starts because what he's doing is simple and effective and could help Lamar regain a rhythm.

 

[Argentina Raven]

there I understood, reading a small text.
The initial formation changes with Lamar and Huntley according to the statistics, but what the statistics do not tell you is that they change due to injury, the absences of Boyle and Ricard are notable and of great difference, it is not that they do it by game system, the playbook is minor for injuries not for who is running it.
I repeat what I said on December 1.
Wouldn't it help Lamar to have an experienced qb around to help him stay calm and make better decisions with what he has?
lamar executing the same as huntley: fast passes, diversified, and the gaps appear alone, like the 2 TD of Huntley.
for someone like Lamar 12 or 22 are the best options I think

 

[RavensMania]

[QUOTE = "QuothTheRaven, publicación: 314100, miembro: 294"] Estoy bastante seguro de que ya compartiste esa mala obra de Lamar en particular. Independientemente, ¿cuál es exactamente el ángulo aquí? La junta ya está de acuerdo en que Lamar no ha jugado bien recientemente, así que, a menos que estés argumentando genuinamente que debería ser enviado a la banca por Huntley, ¿qué estamos haciendo aquí?

También el punto del "libro de jugadas" diferente es que podría verse igual, pero a Lamar se le habrá dicho algo como "progresa a través de X, luego Y, luego Z" y tendrá que realizar comprobaciones y ajustes en la línea. A Huntley le dirán "golpea a Mark Andrews cuando llegues a tu punto de caída. Si está cubierto, mira hasta el piso".

Tiendo a estar de acuerdo, y parece que el tablero también lo hace, que tiene sentido mezclar algunas de estas bandejas para ayudar a Lamar a ponerse en ritmo, pero no hay duda de quién es el mejor mariscal de campo. [/ CITA]

no, it's the only time I've posted it, I shared it to refute "the different playbook" that huntley uses, that they wield around here.
You know more than I do, you've been watching the game for a longer time, you've practiced it, it's hard for me to believe what they're saying. There is only one playbook, each play has different situations, different defenses, different executors, different weather inclusive.
the play is the same why? because it is one of the proven ways to break cover 0 / blitz.
be roman, walsh, trestman or whoever.
what changed? the execution one went well, the other bad, why? nervousness, group formation, player in charge, reading, scrolling, you will know what it is.
but do not come with: the simplified playbook because they are just making an excuse. It is the decision of huntley that is taking the first reading because he has no arm for which that, speaks ill of him? no, on the contrary, it does what is most effective for him and in the most efficient way possible.

They are getting more into Lamar defenders than Ravens fans.
huntley's roof is the floor of lamar, like that of dilfer with respect to marino, now who has the ring?

The thing is, it is more simple. They are much less complex plays, especially pre snap. Its not a different playbook, just different plays. We aren't taking anything away from Huntley, because he's done very well. Unfortunately we ran more of these concepts with Huntley than we have with Lamar and it would be great to have a better mix. That's on Roman, not on Lamar. Has Lamar been perfect. No, he has been a bit off trying to get too much done, but again I also feel Roman isn't putting him in the best position to succeed either.

 

[JoeyFlex5]

So, when I'm referring to the situation of the playbook being different, which it is, I mean this...

With Lamar, the Ravens were running 11 personnel on 38% of snaps (third lowest in the league.) They were running 22 personnel on 18% of snaps (highest in the league with the Rams running 0 such snaps in that time frame.) The Ravens ran 21 personnel on 29% of snaps (second most in the league) They interestingly ran 20 personnel on 9% of snaps (highest in the league.) They ran 0 10 personnel stats.

Huntley has gotten 11 personnel on 77% of his snaps. Huntley has had 0 snaps of 21 personnel. He has had 0 snaps of 22 personnel. He has gotten 4 wide reciever sets on 6% of snaps.

All stats pulled from SharpFootball.

So, when people say the offense is different... it's because it is. The personnel groupings, the reads, and the routes are so much different.

No way man Huntley is just better because he takes what the defense gives him

 

[rmcjacket23]

So, when I'm referring to the situation of the playbook being different, which it is, I mean this...

With Lamar, the Ravens were running 11 personnel on 38% of snaps (third lowest in the league.) They were running 22 personnel on 18% of snaps (highest in the league with the Rams running 0 such snaps in that time frame.) The Ravens ran 21 personnel on 29% of snaps (second most in the league) They interestingly ran 20 personnel on 9% of snaps (highest in the league.) They ran 0 10 personnel stats.

Huntley has gotten 11 personnel on 77% of his snaps. Huntley has had 0 snaps of 21 personnel. He has had 0 snaps of 22 personnel. He has gotten 4 wide reciever sets on 6% of snaps.

All stats pulled from SharpFootball.

So, when people say the offense is different... it's because it is. The personnel groupings, the reads, and the routes are so much different.

Well there's one glaring and obvious reason for some of this... Patrick Ricard has been inactive for the last two games, who is a primary snap generator in 22 personnel. He plays 50+% of offensive snaps most games.
So the reason why there's less two-back sets with Huntley could very easily be explained by the lack of a FB available to be in those sets.

So I'm not sure its really about Huntley as it is about the changes in the offense with Ricard (and possibly Boyle) out.

Perhaps a better way to look at the data would be to compare personnel groupings for the Chicago game (where Huntley played the whole game and Ricard played 48 snaps) to Cleveland or Green Bay, where Ricard didn't play.

Or basically, the offense is different, but it may not have much to do with the QB.

 

[RavensMania]

Thanks,
Now I investigate that it is the 11,12,22 personel and I answer you.
those data are my way of learning

It's definitely a learning experience, no matter how long you have watched the game.

That's why we come to message boards. To learn and to have discussions.

I think this board has the best Draft Thread of all the main Ravens boards and there is a ton to learn. Especially since we break down all of the position groups. Anyway, didn't mean to get off topic, but it's a big reason I invited you to these boards. I believe it was on RSR that you were talking about the draft.

 

[rossihunter2]

And I don't disagree with that entirely. The tricky thing with all of this is Lamar's development. If you jump back to this vanilla type of offense that Huntley was running where it's basically one read and throw, you're going to pick up yards and you're going to move the ball. But then that hinders Lamar's development because you're asking him not to make reads and go through progressions. You're not asking him to have any sort of deep ball. You're basically asking him to go out there and perform a script instead of letting Lamar be Lamar. So there's room for simplification but you can't go back to bare bones and limit Lamar from being the dynamic player that he is. Part of the problem is the play calling and asking him to be superhuman and part of it is Lamar putting that pressure on himself. In reality, there probably needs to be something in the middle where we simplify some things and try to get into a rhythm and then let Lamar be Lamar. Too much pressure has been put on him to be the guy and hopefully this simplification allows Harbaugh and company to see that you probably need to sprinkle some of that in to get him back to where he needs to be.

it's about having tools in your toolkit
what we're seeing with huntley is that there are tools in that toolkit that for some reason we havent given lamar

the easiest way to get a QB in rhythm is to simplify things and got to the quick passing game - but we havent done that with lamar really at all

if teams take away the deep and intermediate stuff then we should see these kinds of plays in response - if teams start jumping the short stuff you've got the ability to go over the top - and if you spread them out you can take advantage of lighter boxes in the running game but also can run more RPOs

schematically there are solutions to the challenges defences have been showing us and we can see with the offence they gave huntley to run that they can do that... so we need to be able to see that quick game with lamar when defences take other stuff away - we need to be able to punish teams for playing that inverted cover 2 with shallow safeties

 

[BoredMarine13]

And I don't disagree with that entirely. The tricky thing with all of this is Lamar's development. If you jump back to this vanilla type of offense that Huntley was running where it's basically one read and throw, you're going to pick up yards and you're going to move the ball. But then that hinders Lamar's development because you're asking him not to make reads and go through progressions. You're not asking him to have any sort of deep ball. You're basically asking him to go out there and perform a script instead of letting Lamar be Lamar. So there's room for simplification but you can't go back to bare bones and limit Lamar from being the dynamic player that he is. Part of the problem is the play calling and asking him to be superhuman and part of it is Lamar putting that pressure on himself. In reality, there probably needs to be something in the middle where we simplify some things and try to get into a rhythm and then let Lamar be Lamar. Too much pressure has been put on him to be the guy and hopefully this simplification allows Harbaugh and company to see that you probably need to sprinkle some of that in to get him back to where he needs to be.

I’m honestly confused and this doesn’t make a ton of sense to me. If an offense is successful who cares if it’s seen as vanilla. If the defense adjust to that vanilla offense , then Lamar and Roman will need to adjust to the new defense. Isn’t that adjustment to the adjustment part of Lamar’s development? Then it just keeps on going with the never ending chess match with the D.

Maybe Lamar’s not the guy to run a complicated offense scheme? Idk maybe he is, i couldn’t care less as long as we’re successful. It’s hard to ignore how successful Huntley has been recently compared to a Lamar. It’s certainly not because he is a better Qb , so the obvious answer to me is Roman got his head out of his ass and simplified the game plan. Why not carry that over when Lamar comes back?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Argentina Raven]

It's definitely a learning experience, no matter how long you have watched the game.

That's why we come to message boards. To learn and to have discussions.

I think this board has the best Draft Thread of all the main Ravens boards and there is a ton to learn. Especially since we break down all of the position groups. Anyway, didn't mean to get off topic, but it's a big reason I invited you to these boards. I believe it was on RSR that you were talking about the draft.

Yes, I was talking about abraham lucas and tariq castro fields, the first 2 players that I liked

 

[29BmoreBird22]

Well there's one glaring and obvious reason for some of this... Patrick Ricard has been inactive for the last two games, who is a primary snap generator in 22 personnel. He plays 50+% of offensive snaps most games.
So the reason why there's less two-back sets with Huntley could very easily be explained by the lack of a FB available to be in those sets.

So I'm not sure its really about Huntley as it is about the changes in the offense with Ricard (and possibly Boyle) out.

Perhaps a better way to look at the data would be to compare personnel groupings for the Chicago game (where Huntley played the whole game and Ricard played 48 snaps) to Cleveland or Green Bay, where Ricard didn't play.

Or basically, the offense is different, but it may not have much to do with the QB.

I alluded to the absence of Ricard in a later post. They ran more of their traditional offense against the Bears and I think most people would agree that was a pretty meh game for the offense and super uninspiring like the Ravens offense would be in following weeks as well.

I do believe the offense is drastically simplified and is pushing the ball downfield way less due to Huntley (two read max, no deep ball throws really), but the absence of Ricard is opening the offense into a more spread offense and I hope this continues when Lamar is back.

 

[rossihunter2]

Are we on board with Ben Cleveland?

gonna wait for the coaches film but he didnt have his name called which is always a good sign

 

[rmcjacket23]

Regarding 1: I disagree, we haven't exactly been brilliant in short goal-to-go situations this year. I'd given us a better chance if we first took a false start to move back to the 7.5 yardline. Sort of kidding, but not completely
Regarding 2: IMO, we were moving the ball at will most of the game. The packers defense played like shit and we took advantage of that.
Regarding 3: pehaps wrongly phrased, but when was the last time you saw us successfully run up the middle in short-yardage situations? So the packers were unlikely to be fearful of that which limits our chance of success with a pass play. So I would have preferred a run, or having Huntley bootleg off the left or whatever. My intent was to say that our lack of both trying and succeeding to run in those situations makes it predictable for the defense. Had we done that well before, they have to respect the run more.

1. Sure, we haven't been great in short yardage. We also haven't been great in long TD drives to win games (with Huntley), which is what would be required to happen in order to win. I prefer two yards... for obvious reasons.
2. We were certainly not moving the ball at will. That's not supportable. We had some long drives early in the game, but we also had some stalled drives in the 2nd quarter and didn't do much of anything in the 3rd quarter, which is precisely how you fall behind by 14 and end up with only 17 points scored in three quarters.
3. I'm not sure why you're focused on running up the middle in short yardage on the goal line. You could run outside in short yardage situations, and you're also ignoring the fact that running the ball, in general, near the goal line, is much harder, because you've already got a condensed field, i.e. your safeties aren't 5-10 yards off the ball when the ball is at the 2 yard line.
Teams don't have to do a ton to respect the run when you have such a condensed field. Also true when we go 3-4 wide, like we did. I would have liked a better play call too, but I certainly don't see an alignment from GB that makes me think they didn't expect or respect the run ability in that spot.

Look at the pre-snap photo. I see single man coverage outside on Bateman to the left, I see single man coverage on Andrews (off-screen to the right), and I see single man coverage on Hollywood in the slot. I see seven white jerseys within five yards of the LOS, and another Safety who's probably playing both run and pass.

What about this look gives you any indication that the Packers don't respect the Ravens ability to run here?

Have no issue criticizing the play call, because I hated it. But I don't see the Packers selling out to stop the pass here.

 

[RavensMania]

gonna wait for the coaches film but he didnt have his name called which is always a good sign

I'm hesitant to mention his PFF grades, but his pass blocking, which has been good in most of the games he has played was at it's best yesterday with a 76 grade. Run blocking was 50, but it's not like we even tried to develop a running game yesterday.

 

[Tank]

I get the impression that the answer is "Ben Cleveland".

gold cleats. lol

 

[rossihunter2]

I’m honestly confused and this doesn’t make a ton of sense to me. If an offense is successful who cares if it’s seen as vanilla. If the defense adjust to that vanilla offense , then Lamar and Roman will need to adjust to the new defense. Isn’t that adjustment to the adjustment part of Lamar’s development? Then it just keeps on going with the never ending chess match with the D.

Maybe Lamar’s not the guy to run a complicated offense scheme? Idk maybe he is, i couldn’t care less as long as we’re successful. It’s hard to ignore how successful Huntley has been recently compared to a Lamar. It’s certainly not because he is a better Qb , so the obvious answer to me is Roman got his head out of his ass and simplified the game plan. Why not carry that over when Lamar comes back?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

because that vanilla offence was down 14 points late in the game and needed a prevent defence and some 4th and medium conversions to stay in the game - it moved the ball and it even scored a couple of TDs but vanilla means it's not challenging for the defence - and if not for mark andrews destroying darnell savage and the packers playing some weird soft coverage then

that's the reason you care about vanilla offence - obviously it's fine when it works but it's not threatening the defence really and becomes really hard to score in the redzone - luckily the packers only had 10 men on the field on 1 of our TDs and mark andrews played bully ball on 2 others

 

[rmcjacket23]

I alluded to the absence of Ricard in a later post. They ran more of their traditional offense against the Bears and I think most people would agree that was a pretty meh game for the offense and super uninspiring like the Ravens offense would be in following weeks as well.

I do believe the offense is drastically simplified and is pushing the ball downfield way less due to Huntley (two read max, no deep ball throws really), but the absence of Ricard is opening the offense into a more spread offense and I hope this continues when Lamar is back.

Right, but I'm sure that's also a product of defenses playing Lamar differently than they play Huntley. They're clearly rushing Huntley differently and I've not seen teams play Lamar by giving up the kind of cushion these Corners and Safeties are giving to Huntley.