Jump to content

ctk232

Members
  • Content Count

    997
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

335 Excellent

About ctk232

  • Rank
    RFA

Recent Profile Visitors

630 profile views
  1. Doesn't necessarily mean we have to let Spain go next year either - Long could be the odd man out at back-up Guard positions if we push Ford inside. in general to Ford, his footwork/agility was always a concern for the Tackle position in the NFL, but the kid is a stud in run blocking and while on his rookie contract there's no reason to dismiss him this early whatsoever. Hopefully Nsekhe is back sooner than later for this season's playoff push, and we can see about other RT options moving forward or if Ford improves with a good offseason. That said, Joe B. is consistently down on him where others have seen promise and good play. No question he's had bad reps against two of the best DE's in the league, as to be expected for any rookie, but he's been able to hold his own when needed as well. We also seem to have played both Denver and Dallas well enough with Ford at RT, so I'm not entirely concerned until Nsekhe's back either.
  2. I’m not advocating for bringing him back so much as saying how do either McKenzie or Foster simulate his size and ability? If any of them, Foster at least compares in size and speed but lacks the change of direction ability. Since we’re at it though, exactly in what ways does a 5’8” 178 lb McKenzie simulate a 6’2” 212 lb Jackson? Why is McD looking then if our roster has that many “Jacksons?” Really couldn’t care less if it’s Tyree or anyone at all frankly, but McKenzie? Mmkay. Roberts I could certainly see helping out here.
  3. More so just in comparison to Foster - to me, Jackson would seem to be the more physical runner, and have better change of direction ability. As such, Foster wouldn't be an accurate simulation at all in that case, but who knows.
  4. He's on an XFL roster, lol - I wasn't thinking bring him back longterm, but if they're looking to find a guy to simulate him for a week, why not?
  5. Interesting - still have a hard time seeing the physicality comparison though. Jackson would appear the far more physical runner, Foster doesn’t really have that.
  6. How do McKenzie and Foster simulate his size? Doubt it's close but wouldn't Tyree Jackson be a better option than those two? Hard to find anyone to match the size and change of direction agility/acceleration.
  7. Good points for sure - only issue though is the Raven's team that lost in that first round didn't have Ingram yet, and Jackson was still a rookie in the system. Andrews was a rookie as well, but still showed glimpses of what was to come this year. I could see the Chargers gameplan working, but I have to wonder given that this year's Ravens is still a different team/overall scheme.
  8. Word. Given Roman's scheme predicated on the two-back RPO/triple option, and Jackson's preference for finding Andrews in both zone beater spots and in man coverage, you'd think we'd certainly need to stack the box, but remain patient, like you mentioned, at the same time. We still have to play some sort of assignment defense if we plan to stop any component of the RPO/triple option threat - turkey brain has me mis-remembering, but I think it was either Dungy or Rodney on SNF that picked on Weddle's comments about not knowing who has the ball before it's too late. If I'm remembering correctly, Dungy said that shouldn't even be an issue if you're matching the scheme correctly, and each defender is responsible for a player assignment (i.e. Ingram-Milano, Jackson-Edmunds, RB2-DE or Nickel, and TE1-Hyde/Poyer). It's a mismatch nightmare the way Roman runs it with their roster, but so many times yesterday we saw a free blitzer crashing to the option fake, and not picking up the assignment leaving Jackson room to run. Essentially, it's much easier to follow your man/assignment than it is the ball in the RPO scheme. If we don't immediately crash the line, and everyone picks up their assignments - theoretically the RPO weapon should be contained with effective tackling (another issue Jackson presents). On passing plays and downs - that's where I'd think the patience comes in, and again borrowing Dungy's analysis, it makes sense to force Jackson to beat you in the pocket by not pressuring him. Andrews and Ingram in the flats create spot concepts to beat zone defenses with mismatched personnel that are schemed by opposing teams to defend the RPO threat; it's a very complementary scheme that way. I'm curious to see how McD and Frasier adapt the zone scheme we play and utilize our personnel, especially with the DL rotation we like to use, it's hard to see how that rotation will consistently match up with the Ravens personnel groupings per se. There's also something we can do with the offense to help defend the RPO/Jackson - and that's to eat up as much clock as possible. If the defense can force a few key stops, keeping their offense off the field as much as possible simply limits the damage they can do. It's a rather obvious statement, but certainly one that can have an equal impact, and keep our defense fresh/rested throughout. As for something we can do - be loud af for the entire time the Ravens have the ball? As per usual?
  9. Well alright then, lol. Easy there champ - let's clear up a few things here before we further digress from a thread topic related to Oliver: 1. Going into this season, most of us were expecting 7-9/8-8 at best, I came in at 6-10 with a hopeful 7-9, and I'm thrilled to have been proven wrong this year. That's just simply true, most of us were not expecting what we've seen unfold thus far this season. Also, why are you talking about 2017? I'd love to know when I specifically was ever in a "panic" about a tank, or even used the words "Jauron Ball" which is the laziest coaching analysis I've heard. I'll happily stand corrected whenever you want to let me know, but no need to get defensive...Jauron. If you meant that this team looked like a 10 win team coming into camp this year, then good for you? I don't know why predictions matter more than reality, but again, here we are. For whatever it may be worth, I've been critical of various moves made, but have also remained consistently hopeful for what McD and Beane have done since the switch was made. 2. My point with playing this draft pick game is you could literally cherry pick any draft pick that we "missed" on, a la the exhaustive Mahomes conversations that seem to come up annually. It's a tired and pointless exercise that literally carries no clout whatsoever - having to write this for the nth time is absurd, but there's no guarantee Metcalf has the same success on any other team this year. He may have, he may not have - we literally will never know, and it's an impossible claim to make. I'm so happy for you that you predicted Metcalf's success this year - I'm equally thrilled that he's proving people wrong with his success in Seattle, but what does that have to do with Ford? It's clear to everyone he's struggled in his rookie year but why is that any reason to play the "we should've taken x guy over y guy" game? He's demonstrated growth the past two weeks and the team has shown we can still compete with critical pieces missing from our starting roster. Bottom line is this, we're 9-3 with Ford and not Metcalf. There's no guarantee we're 9-3 with Metcalf instead of Ford, and there's also no guarantee Metcalf breaks out on the Bills the way he has with the Seahawks. There's also no guarantee it continues whatsoever, enter: Goff. There were definitely people here predicting success, and I'm glad you (possibly) were one of them - there's no denying the the overall feeling of this board and external sources thought differently. Frankly, it really doesn't matter in the least. If we're pleasantly talking draft strategies, I've always been partial to building the trenches before drafting any skill positions for the exact reasons you mention. It takes a couple years to develop new OL talent, and in a year where we literally changed our entire OL save for Dawkins, taking Ford with our 2nd was in response to having no discernible OL for our franchise QB in his rookie season. With an OL foundation moving forward, and both Smoke and Beasley making an impact, in addition to an unprecedented WR draft coming up this year, there's very little room to criticize taking Ford given those variables and perspective and a tremendous amount of room to look forward to adding a few impact skill players this next offseason. Doing so would, theoretically, be the final step in the process and us seeing this team taking the next step in becoming a perennial playoff team.
  10. Not trying to claim conspiracy, fixing, or the like - but you have to admit something is wrong with the “they just warned us” line. I get if they missed it in real time (giving them all the benefit of the doubt there) and realized later they should’ve called it, but to me this falls right in line with what was said to Newton. Again, not conspiratorial, but it raises some flags that they didn’t throw theirs on that play...
  11. So it’s easy to say in retrospect at a 9-3 season that x draft pick maybe would’ve mattered more than y guy in two losses this year. Especially when we all were thinking 7-9 at best this year, more likely 6-10. But frankly, in April, we needed OL - it was our biggest need entering the draft, and even with our haul in FA nothing was guaranteed. Beane made the call this year to do one thing - protect our potential franchise QB, knowing full well the choices of WR depth coming up this year. To be honest, Ford wasn’t my first OL choice, I much preferred Risner or Bradbury - but to play this game disregards so many other variables that went into that choice at that time. It’s not unsurprising for a second round OL to struggle in his rookie year, whatsoever, in fact for OL it’s pretty common. The last two weeks, he hasn’t been perfect at all, but he’s stepped up for us when we really need him to, and against two of the best DE’s in the league. I don’t regret his pick, and he has plenty of time to prove himself a right-side anchor or a bust, but I’ll take Von Miller’s unsolicited credit for face value, and be hopeful for what’s in store for him. I don’t regret “missing” on Metcalf for a single second, and I’m glad to see him tearing it up in Seattle, too.
  12. Showing up for your team would be embarrassing? You care what other people think? Because this team doesn’t, at all. i get the context you’re insinuating, but you can be embarrassed - this was a big deal.
  13. Alright - never mind. I stand corrected - it’s Hauschka. Need those four points guy, come on.
  14. Forget Hauschka, ball on their 30 and we don’t gain a single yard? Mmkay.
  15. Seems like we can’t adjust to the pre-snap motion on defense - it’s setting up their entire offensive game plan and we’re slow to match-up/read the play as a result. For supposed coaches that can’t scheme worth a damn, they did their homework on our defense pretty well. Stark contrast to when they don’t run pre-snap motion.
×
×
  • Create New...