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

[rossihunter2]

2 run the ball EFFECTIVELY, with an emphasis on in the red zone, (Huntley has the same amount of running tds as Lamar on the season) but outside of positive gains, Huntley used his legs to run away from sacks, not into them.

worth pointing out that the running game still wasnt particularly effective, lots of huntley's runs were scrambles (much like lots of lamar's rushing yards)

and maybe most importantly for this game: the packers suck at contain and using controlled rush lanes with mobile QBs - fields killed them for that ill-discipline last week too

 

[purplepittabread88]

Oh and not so being there related takeaways,

Cleveland needs to remain the starter. He gave us an incredible boost in making a push and really helped out Murray. Power runs we’re back tonight to the left side and he was a major reason for that.


Mark andrews is a superstar who will be here for the next decade. First guy for us to hit 1k yards since mike Wallace like 5 ago. Halarious.

 

[purplepittabread88]

worth pointing out that the running game still wasnt particularly effective, lots of huntley's runs were scrambles (much like lots of lamar's rushing yards)

and maybe most importantly for this game: the packers suck at contain and using controlled rush lanes with mobile QBs - fields killed them for that ill-discipline last week too

Yes, I’d say one of my biggest takeaways from all this is how unimpressed with the packers I am. They are frauds with a Swiss cheese defense up the middle. The biggest difference wasn’t there defense though, it was that Huntley was decisive in his runs from broken plays. Lamar has been hesistant all year and it’s been costing the random scrambles we got to expierence today

 

[purplepittabread88]

Please never run devonte freeman on stretches or sweeps.
Loved the essentially 2 man rushes from wink. He’s been under fire recently including from me but it was awesome to only see him blitz intelligently today

 

[Deebo813]

Yes, I’d say one of my biggest takeaways from all this is how unimpressed with the packers I am. They are frauds with a Swiss cheese defense up the middle. The biggest difference wasn’t there defense though, it was that Huntley was decisive in his runs from broken plays. Lamar has been hesistant all year and it’s been costing the random scrambles we got to expierence today

Def not frauds, we just played well

 

[airconteka]

Def not frauds, we just played well

Mods, I think this user account may have been hacked.

 

[Tank]

But then again, our offensive line that year was one of the best we had in a long time.

Yanda, Wagner and Osemele were very good. Monroe, Zuttah, Hurst, not so good. But the scheme and play selection made the whole thing click. There was good reason to feel sad when Kubiak left. Trestman and Marty made that feeling all the worse.

 

[Tank]

No doubt that Lamar is light years ahead of Lamar but he did two things today that Lamar hasn’t been able to do in weeks that ultimately almost got us a win.

1. Throw check downs and short passes. Wasn’t it incredibly refreshing to have 3rd and 2s often instead of 3rd and 10s? Until Lamar stops looking for a td every play, our offense will suck.

2 run the ball EFFECTIVELY, with an emphasis on in the red zone, (Huntley has the same amount of running tds as Lamar on the season) but outside of positive gains, Huntley used his legs to run away from sacks, not into them.


like I said this isn’t anything against Lamar it’s only praise for a remarkable backup qb.

it’s simple stuff that if Lamar fixed we would torch people agai. all year Lamar has been frozen between dump offs and runs and getting rid of the ball that has caused the extremely frustrating picks and sacks. It needs to be fixed somehow. We saw today you can win games if you take what you are given and it was undoublty refreshing.

Huntley was decisive and in command. Even the plays were received and called on time, we weren’t constantly up against the play clock. Dude played remarkably well for having so little experience, especially considering the huge stage of the national game. As you say, Lamar can take a lot away from watching that game and hopefully improve.

 

[rmcjacket23]

As my man Ed Reed once said...

Probably why Ed Reed isn't a coach...

 

[rmcjacket23]

It was definitely the wrong call to go for 2. Call me an idiot, really don’t care because I know what the right plan was

For me, its an irrelevant decision. 40 seconds left and a timeout. Packers getting in FG range, and there's nothing the Ravens can do to stop it.

 

[rmcjacket23]

lol

Next year there will be interest in him . Watch .

You need a specific coordinator and run a specific offense for him. He's not a play and play into any system QB.

 

[rmcjacket23]

This is fucking stupid dude

I mean... it makes plenty of sense. If there's a four way tie, and they all haven't played each other, one doesn't just get to leapfrog the rest.

 

[ndub]

For me, its an irrelevant decision. 40 seconds left and a timeout. Packers getting in FG range, and there's nothing the Ravens can do to stop it.

They had literally just stopped it a couple times before.

 

[rmcjacket23]

They had literally just stopped it a couple times before.

Yeah, and they had literally given up 30 points throughout the game and not stopped them plenty of times before.
So why are you looking at one drive compared to all the drives?

Ravens are going to play a largely prevent defense in that spot, with JV level players, against the best QB in the league. He's getting in range.

The drive before is a completely different mindset. The Packers don't need to score to win on that drive. In fact, the #1 thing they're focused on is running the clock.

 

[QuothTheRaven]

They had literally just stopped it a couple times before.

When the Packers were running the ball to chew the clock though.

However, we still might have won because a field goal is not a given from anywhere with Crosby.

 

[rmcjacket23]

They had literally just stopped it a couple times before.

I mean just play it out...
Ravens take the points and tie the game.
Rodgers gets the ball back with 40 seconds and a timeout.
We just ignore the fact that the Packers had not one, not two, not three, but FOUR 75+ yard scoring drives in the game, and that the Ravens had forced a whopping 3 punts in the game (only one in the second half... on a drive where clock management is the priority).
We stop them.

Then we do the coin flip thing, which will have as much impact on the game as any other decision we'll make.
We manage to win that, and all we need to do is get like a 70+ yard TD drive, something we hadn't done against a non-prevent defense since the first half, to win.

OR, we could just gain two yards.

Yeah......it's a losing argument at a rate no less than 100%.

 

[rmcjacket23]

Now for those who want to question whether John made the right call in going for two, you're actually looking at the wrong call all together...
https://www.yahoo.com/sports/ravens-2-point-conversion-analytics-packers-005823164.html

The REAL question is do you go for two, down 31-23, with under 5 minutes to go. Analytically, you should go for two. John didn't.

 

[ndub]

I mean just play it out...
Ravens take the points and tie the game.
Rodgers gets the ball back with 40 seconds and a timeout.
We just ignore the fact that the Packers had not one, not two, not three, but FOUR 75+ yard scoring drives in the game, and that the Ravens had forced a whopping 3 punts in the game (only one in the second half... on a drive where clock management is the priority).
We stop them.

Then we do the coin flip thing, which will have as much impact on the game as any other decision we'll make.
We manage to win that, and all we need to do is get like a 70+ yard TD drive, something we hadn't done against a non-prevent defense since the first half, to win.

OR, we could just gain two yards.

Yeah......it's a losing argument at a rate no less than 100%.

In your scenario of us losing no matter what, who cares if we go up by 1 or play for OT? One point means nothing if they get 3

 

[rmcjacket23]

In your scenario of us losing no matter what, who cares if we go up by 1 or play for OT? One point means nothing if they get 3

Correct, in my opinion, it's an irrelevant decision.
However, in my scenario, all I said was they'd get in FG range, not make the kick.

What's the outcome of the game if they miss the kick? If we're up 1, we win. If we're tied, we still need about 2-3 different things to happen for us even to win, including, most likely, literally winning a coin flip.

Yet another reason why going for it makes tons of sense.

I will go to my grave never understanding why people think kicking the PAT gives us a better chance to win than converting two freaking yards. I don't even understand the people who think kicking the PAT even gets us to OT. That doesn't make sense to me either.

 

[ndub]

Correct, in my opinion, it's an irrelevant decision.
However, in my scenario, all I said was they'd get in FG range, not make the kick.

What's the outcome of the game if they miss the kick? If we're up 1, we win. If we're tied, we still need about 2-3 different things to happen for us even to win, including, most likely, literally winning a coin flip.

Yet another reason why going for it makes tons of sense.

I will go to my grave never understanding why people think kicking the PAT gives us a better chance to win than converting two freaking yards. I don't even understand the people who think kicking the PAT even gets us to OT. That doesn't make sense to me either.

I see your points and I now agree with you