Fire Marty

[29BmoreBird22]

Well since the entire point was ignoring the offense in higher rounds, I was only talking about round 3 and higher. Since the issue is drafting offense in later rounds and expecting some sort of "gem". Not something we are capable of doing, at least offensively, though other teams do it well.

The issue is that with the exception of 2013 and 2017, the Ravens have always drafted at least one offensive player, if not two or more, in the first three rounds. You could add in 2014 because Gilmore was a third round comp pick.

The Falcons are actually more likely to spend high on defense than they are on offense.

 

[29BmoreBird22]

No because we were not even talking about money. People like you and BMore brought up the cap to try to insinuate that we do not ignore the offensive needs at draft time, which was the entire point, and how we use patchwork answers for offense for the last 9 years.

Okay, I was actually diffusing this false notion that the Ravens don't invest in their offense, which they do.

 

[29BmoreBird22]

Were you blaming him for having cap hits of 6m 14m and 14m because this is where that leads. We delayed the 20m cap hit for 3 years and now its going to get payed off.

I guess they could have extended him again and delayed the problem one more year but eventually you have to eat the big cap hit.

I honestly have no idea what you're trying to get at as it relates to what I said.

 

[Tru11]

No because we were not even talking about money. People like you and BMore brought up the cap to try to insinuate that we do not ignore the offensive needs at draft time, which was the entire point, and how we use patchwork answers for offense for the last 9 years.

Because the initial statement was as follows: "if we had not ignored the offense in the draft then we would have guys here who had some talent and chemistry with Flacco". Then you want to try to use the cap as some indication to make that untrue. It simply is not.

FA is part of the issue. Give me a bit and I will make a list of all those stellar offensive players we've brought in during FA.

Hard to have chemistry with flacco when he hurts his damm back and misses pretty much all of TC and pre season.

Nobody to blame for that although you are trying real hard to pin this on the FO and the receivers.....

Also have you considerd that the ravens have a bad track record in drafting receivers which is why they rather go out and get guys like boldin , SSS, Wallace and now Maclin and woodhead, rather then spend a high pick on them?

If the ravens decided not to draft receivers and not bring in guys like that then you would have a point but again its shows you and others dont have any.

Everybody hated Torrey and wanted him gone except for a few.
Everybody wanted Clayton gone.
Everybody wanted Taylor gone.
Everybody wants Perriman gone.

Id take the guys we signed from FA or traded for over the guys we drafted so far in a heartbeat.

Just because certain drafted receivers do well on the team that drafted them does not mean they would have done the same here.

 

[Tru11]

Okay, I was actually diffusing this false notion that the Ravens don't invest in their offense, which they do.

true i was replying to that false notion as well.

 

[RavensDFan]

Hard to have chemistry with flacco when he hurts his damm back and misses pretty much all of TC and pre season.

Nobody to blame for that although you are trying real hard to pin this on the FO and the receivers.....

Also have you considerd that the ravens have a bad track record in drafting receivers which is why they rather go out and get guys like boldin , SSS, Wallace and now Maclin and woodhead, rather then spend a high pick on them?

If the ravens decided not to draft receivers and not bring in guys like that then you would have a point but again its shows you and others dont have any.

Everybody hated Torrey and wanted him gone except for a few.
Everybody wanted Clayton gone.
Everybody wanted Taylor gone.
Everybody wants Perriman gone.

Id take the guys we signed from FA or traded for over the guys we drafted so far in a heartbeat.

Just because certain drafted receivers do well on the team that drafted them does not mean they would have done the same here.

Oh wait so you are going to make some lame attempt to blame the ONE TIME since 2008 that Flacco gets injured and misses TC? Please.

And as far as not drafting well on the offensive side, that is totally and completely on the FO isn't it? I mean as you just pointed out, not like it is a new thing so shouldn't steps have been taken to improve in that area? Which was the other issue I pointed out. I like how you mention the successful ones and leave out all the others. How you ignore the year that Aiken was our #2 and we have Marlon out there as the main guy too. lol Our receiving corps is miles below that of teams that don't even have their franchise guy and that isn't new. That IS an ongoing issue that should have rendered attempts to fix it.

It is hard to draft a decent receiver however, when you only make an attempt above round 3 twice in 9 years wouldn't you agree?

 

[RavensDFan]

The issue is that with the exception of 2013 and 2017, the Ravens have always drafted at least one offensive player, if not two or more, in the first three rounds. You could add in 2014 because Gilmore was a third round comp pick.

The Falcons are actually more likely to spend high on defense than they are on offense.

The issue is that we attempted to draft a quality receiver twice in the last nine years. Torrey in Round 2 and then not again until 2015. That is what we gave our franchise guy since 2008 to work with other than a constant carousel of aging vets.

Edit: I feel like I should also quantify these statements with the fact that at this juncture, it may be too late. Flacco has not been the same since his ACL injury and not sure he ever will be. Also, none of it matters if we retain Marty.

 

[Tru11]

Oh wait so you are going to make some lame attempt to blame the ONE TIME since 2008 that Flacco gets injured and misses TC? Please.

And as far as not drafting well on the offensive side, that is totally and completely on the FO isn't it? I mean as you just pointed out, not like it is a new thing so shouldn't steps have been taken to improve in that area? Which was the other issue I pointed out. I like how you mention the successful ones and leave out all the others. How you ignore the year that Aiken was our #2 and we have Marlon out there as the main guy too. lol Our receiving corps is miles below that of teams that don't even have their franchise guy and that isn't new. That IS an ongoing issue that should have rendered attempts to fix it.

It is hard to draft a decent receiver however, when you only make an attempt above round 3 twice in 9 years wouldn't you agree?

im not the one complaining about not having any chemistry woman.
i did not even bring it up.
you did.
im not blaming anyone for it.

im telling you that its a FACT that flacco got injured which is a direct indisputable cause of him and the receivers having no chemistry.
IF you want to keep on yapping about there being not chemisty then YOU should start with the guy that guy injured which is also the most important person as well.

However he does seem to have chemistry with Watson and Woodhead off the bat.
Hmmm perhaps its cause they are veteran players.
Hmmm just like SSS and Boldin and Wallace last year.
Wait maybe, just maybe flacco works better with veteran players.

So if flacco does better with veteran players , should we draft rookies or get veteran players?

Its actually funny how most of you want the best for flacco yet actually cry about things that dont work for him....

 

[RavensDFan]

im not the one complaining about not having any chemistry woman.
i did not even bring it up.
you did.
im not blaming anyone for it.

im telling you that its a FACT that flacco got injured which is a direct indisputable cause of him and the receivers having no chemistry.
IF you want to keep on yapping about there being not chemisty then YOU should start with the guy that guy injured which is also the most important person as well.

However he does seem to have chemistry with Watson and Woodhead off the bat.
Hmmm perhaps its cause they are veteran players.
Hmmm just like SSS and Boldin and Wallace last year.
Wait maybe, just maybe flacco works better with veteran players.

So if flacco does better with veteran players , should we draft rookies or get veteran players?

Its actually funny how most of you want the best for flacco yet actually cry about things that dont work for him....

No you are the one yapping about cap spending when that wasn't even the point.
And you are the one yapping about issues like someone was ONLY referencing THIS season when the discussion was overall.
Who says he ONLY has chemistry with vets? lol What a joke. How would we even know? The two times we've actually seen him with a rookie?

Perhaps if you'd read the entire conversation you'd understand the points being made and stop bringing up things that have no bearing on it then right?

Let me help:
1. It was about addressing the offense through the draft: specifically the receiving corp.
2. It was not about spending.
3. It was about the FOs failure to do so early on and leaving any real effort until 2015.
4. It was also about the FOs failure to actually recognize such talent within the draft.
5. Chemistry was mentioned within the framework of having some consistency instead of a carousel of aging vets for nine years.

Or perhaps you're doing what you always do, even on the old boards. Smoke and bullshit because you don't want to answer the question.


Hard to find a quality receiver when you only draft higher than round three twice in nine years, wouldn't you agree?

 

[29BmoreBird22]

No you are the one yapping about cap spending when that wasn't even the point.

Perhaps if you'd read the entire conversation you'd understand the points being made and stop bringing up things that have no bearing on it then right?

You actually quoted me originally and I was talking about the investment in the offense and steered it toward cap hits, so this entire conversation has been about investments in the offense in the form of money. I made it that.

Just so we're clear.

 

[Tank]

What has been spent, cap percentage, number of draft picks, FAs signed, etc. means less than nothing...... nada, zippo, zilcho. The talent pool is what it is and if it remains the same at years end the Ravens will need to give the offensive side of the ball much love in the off season. WR, O line, TE in that order. Hopefully some of the guys in place will wake up, injured players return and perform well, etc..

 

[29BmoreBird22]

What has been spent, cap percentage, number of draft picks, FAs signed, etc. means less than nothing...... nada, zippo, zilcho. The talent pool is what it is and if it remains the same at years end the Ravens will need to give the offensive side of the ball much love in the off season. WR, O line, TE in that order. Hopefully some of the guys in place will wake up, injured players return and perform well, etc..

Well, it actually DOES matter when we try to spread this narrative that the Ravens aren't investing in the offense...

 

[RavensDFan]

I don't get that idea from that quote in the least. Pitta is saying the SYSTEM is garbage, in a nice way. His statement is "It's difficult to play quarterback under those circumstances". He even says the offensive philosophy is the problem which falls on the OC.

Personally, here is what should happen but won't. Fire Marty, give Roman his shot with a promotion (temporary). Let Joe work with Roman, but hand this offense off to Joe. He's the captain on the field period. You'll see what you have with Roman and you'll know exactly where you stand with Joe. Or, you can do what this FO WILL do and has done for years, remain status quo and remain mediocre at best and garbage most of the time. Refusing to move forward into this century of football and continuing to ignore the offense in some attempt to relive glory days of defensive domination that really can't be gotten back on that same level.

The offense never looks different no matter what is done for it in terms of coaching changes, free agency, or the draft.

I'm not even sure if it's wise to invest in the offense. They're mediocre no matter what.

When have we EVER since Joe became the franchise guy? Sure we picked up Torrey in the 2nd...woohoo! Then Max and Perriman - who both had stated issues at draft time and we went there anyway. But when have we ever spent on the offense like we did the defense this past off season? When have we EVER shown them that kind of love? Never. So there is no basis for saying it would not improve if we did.

Kinda ignore how we spend a good bit on a quality offensive line or always put an emphasis on quality replacements (sans 2013). They made a pretty big trade for Boldin. Made concerted efforts to get in veterans like Watson, Wallace, Maclin. Made a massive effort to re-sign Pitta to a very ill advised contract likely because it was Joe who was the quarterback.

The ravens have been spending more of the cap on offense then on the defense for quite a few seasons now.

That is not possible if they are not spending anything on offense as you claim.

Its a false narrative that certain people like keep on pushing but the cold hard factual cap numbers simply dont support this.

The ravens have invested more on offense then they have been doing on defense.
Does not matter if a player is drafted or signed from FA , all of the have cap hits.
Offense has the higher cap hit which means there is more invested in them period.

The question people like you should be asking is where are they spending all that cap on for them to still suck so much year in and year out......

You actually quoted me originally and I was talking about the investment in the offense and steered it toward cap hits, so this entire conversation has been about investments in the offense in the form of money. I made it that.

Just so we're clear.

Wrong.

Above is the meat of the conversation and it was Truth who made it about the cap. Just so we're clear. I will take some of the blame for using the word "spent" in my response. Clearly from the rest of my comment I was talking about overall attention and the draft but can see how that left the door open for someone to twist it around.

 

[Tank]

Well, it actually DOES matter when we try to spread this narrative that the Ravens aren't investing in the offense...

OK then......... the narrative means less than nothing.......nada, zippo, zilcho.

 

[29BmoreBird22]

Wrong.

Above is the meat of the conversation and it was Truth who made it about the cap. Just so we're clear. I will take some of the blame for using the word "spent" in my response. Clearly from the rest of my comment I was talking about overall attention and the draft but can see how that left the door open for someone to twist it around.

No, I made it about the cap (and spending) because I made the initial post and the initial argument. I'm sorry if you're head was somewhere else, but I was always talking about the cap hit implications...

You can't really tell me I'm wrong when I know what I was referring to.

Edit: Actually, you kinda started this discussion. You replied to my initial post and said the FO will continue to ignore the offense (false narrative) and I replied about their spending habits and how they do load up for the offense via FA. So, uh... yeah. Don't tell me what I was talking about.

But if we're going to begin to argue about what was said rather than discuss the actual issue at hand (the Ravens do invest in the offense, sorry it doesn't produce the results you want), then I'm done. This is stupid and pointless.

 

[29BmoreBird22]

OK then......... the narrative means less than nothing.......nada, zippo, zilcho.

That I am willing to agree with to a degree.

 

[Willbacker]

I like the players. Just not the coaches. Clean the damn house. Marty, Pees, Harbs, most of the position coaches. I'd like to keep Roman and Rosburg but it should be left up to whoever the head coach is.

 

[Tru11]

The offense never looks different no matter what is done for it in terms of coaching changes, free agency, or the draft.

I'm not even sure if it's wise to invest in the offense. They're mediocre no matter what.

When have we EVER since Joe became the franchise guy? Sure we picked up Torrey in the 2nd...woohoo! Then Max and Perriman - who both had stated issues at draft time and we went there anyway. But when have we ever spent on the offense like we did the defense this past off season? When have we EVER shown them that kind of love? Never. So there is no basis for saying it would not improve if we did.

The ravens have been spending more of the cap on offense then on the defense for quite a few seasons now.

That is not possible if they are not spending anything on offense as you claim.

Its a false narrative that certain people like keep on pushing but the cold hard factual cap numbers simply dont support this.

The ravens have invested more on offense then they have been doing on defense.
Does not matter if a player is drafted or signed from FA , all of the have cap hits.
Offense has the higher cap hit which means there is more invested in them period.

The question people like you should be asking is where are they spending all that cap on for them to still suck so much year in and year out......

Wrong.

Above is the meat of the conversation and it was Truth who made it about the cap. Just so we're clear. I will take some of the blame for using the word "spent" in my response. Clearly from the rest of my comment I was talking about overall attention and the draft but can see how that left the door open for someone to twist it around.

you really are a terrible liar.

Bmore talked about investing in the offense mentioning FA , Draft and coach changes.

Then you replied asking on why we never spent on the offense like we did on the defense this past season.

I replied to that.

Before this was the initial post by bmore and your first reply to him.

So bmore started this discussion in which you replied to him after a certain point i jumped after bmore has explicity mentioned FA and draft in particular.

You decided to make it just about the draft after you where proven wrong.....

 

[rossihunter2]

Guys I’m not a mod or anything but can I suggest a change in subject or a revamp of the conversation because the tone of this argument feels like it’s about to border on a bit nasty - add to that the fact that we’ve gone round the same sets of facts on both sides at least twice by my recollection and I’d suggest moving on...

 

[Tank]

“discussions” with some always end up in the swamp. Best to just ignore.