Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
RavingManiac

Dean Pees

95 posts in this topic

40 minutes ago, OriginalColtsFan said:

Why would you want to take my logic to ridiculous extremes? That's just, by definition, ridiculous, isn't it?

;)

(See my response to Alien.)

Fair enough but to me "never" is in an of itself a ridiculous extreme... We are arguing about degree. You say "never". I say "seldom". Obviously I am right but I'm willing to let you think you are correct. ;)

Sorry. Just having fun. No disrespect intended. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Rael said:

Fair enough but to me "never" is in an of itself a ridiculous extreme... We are arguing about degree. You say "never". I say "seldom". Obviously I am right but I'm willing to let you think you are correct. ;)

Sorry. Just having fun. No disrespect intended. 

I qualified "never" with "sparingly". It has its place depending on the personnel and the opponent and the d/d and the surprise element and the DC that's using it. What I'm saying is that in the hands of Dean Pees, from what I've seen over the years, he'd be better off shelving it and trying something else.

Edited by OriginalColtsFan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You guys have to understand he is always going to find a reason to complain no matter what. I mean think about it. The Ravens defense just shut out the Bengals offense in their own home and he is complaining about the defensive play calling. They gave up zero points!!!! Is this not absurd? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's easy to look good as a coach when you have talented players to work with.  The Raven's have invested heavily on defense for the last several years.  Dean Pees didn't do anything different yesterday than he did the last several years.  The difference is that this year he has some players instead of the garbage he had for the last couple of years.  Ozzie finally assembled a very good unit for him to work with after the post SB purge.  Maybe this year is the year the Ravens move on from Ray Lewis.  Certainly looks like it could be.  Not going to shut everyone out, but they look to be a formidable group.  Now if they could only get an offense that even matches half of that talent.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, cprenegade said:

It's easy to look good as a coach when you have talented players to work with.  The Raven's have invested heavily on defense for the last several years.  Dean Pees didn't do anything different yesterday than he did the last several years.  The difference is that this year he has some players instead of the garbage he had for the last couple of years.  Ozzie finally assembled a very good unit for him to work with after the post SB purge.  Maybe this year is the year the Ravens move on from Ray Lewis.  Certainly looks like it could be.  Not going to shut everyone out, but they look to be a formidable group.  Now if they could only get an offense that even matches half of that talent.  

It sounds like you're confident that Pees can take this group for 16 games and consistently dial up the right D schemes for 60 minutes each game. I do not have that confidence in Pees, regardless of the personnel he has. That's the difference.

Peace.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, OriginalColtsFan said:

It sounds like you're confident that Pees can take this group for 16 games and consistently dial up the right D schemes for 60 minutes each game. I do not have that confidence in Pees, regardless of the personnel he has. That's the difference.

Peace.

I'll give him a chance.  The last few years I have listened to people tell me the Ravens had a very good defense when I believed otherwise.  I think any DC given some of the crap they had since the SB would have had issues.  I honestly feel the FO got it right defensively this year.  So that means that Pees actually has some talent to work with and not the pretenders the Ravens have put out there since their SB purge.  If he doesn't make it work with this year's group then I will say he is more of the problem than the solution.  Now the offense, that is a much different problem.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, cprenegade said:

I'll give him a chance.  The last few years I have listened to people tell me the Ravens had a very good defense when I believed otherwise.  I think any DC given some of the crap they had since the SB would have had issues.  I honestly feel the FO got it right defensively this year.  So that means that Pees actually has some talent to work with and not the pretenders the Ravens have put out there since their SB purge.  If he doesn't make it work with this year's group then I will say he is more of the problem than the solution.  Now the offense, that is a much different problem.  

Cool. And to be somewhat argumentative...

;)

To me, the fact that he had the same talent on the field for 3 + quarters that locked up the opponent, then failed fatally in the 4th says to me it's not specifically a talent/personnel issue. And I believe FilmStudy looked at what changed in the 4th quarter and he saw scheme flaws that were responsible for the meltdowns, not talent. One had to do with the form of rushing or blitzing he was dialing up, and one had to do with DB coverage schemes. So to me, that's coaching, not personnel.

You could point to J Smith going down in the 2nd half and OBJ running roughshod over the D as an example of personnel over coaching. And without a doubt losing Smith was huge -- to the tune of 80 more yards per game without him. But by the same token, I can't even count how many times announcers voiced their disbelief that the Ravens weren't double covering an opponent's go to receiver or TE. So that's definitely coverage scheme/coaching failures at least as much, if not more, than personnel per se. (And I'm pretty sure that FilmStudy pointed to lack of coverage help over the top as one of the main reasons teams were able to get back late in games against the Ravens.)

And all coaches have their comfort zones. I saw it with Schottenheimer. Reid. Cameron. Billick. Etc. Some coaches simply roll up the sidewalks when it's close to the end and go into a shell. And it's hard to move away from those comfort zones. But I certainly agree that this year will be a good test of his abilities, to be sure.

Edited by OriginalColtsFan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm re-watching the game now. On the second Bengals drive, when Mosley got the pick in the end zone, it looks like there was sort of a 3 1/2 man rush. Three pass rushers were around Dalton, and one Raven defender was around the LOS, engaged with either a RB or TE, it's hard to tell. And Mosley was playing sort of center field back in the end zone. So I suppose that was some sort of a variation of the 3 man rush, but not just a straight pure 3 man rush, since a 4th Raven defender was hovering around the LOS. It certainly was effective.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After the Ravens went 3 and out the Bengals had a guy WIDE OPEN down the sideline, and Archuletta said: "This looks like a miscommunication in the secondary. Both the corner back and the safety seemingly playing a different coverage". Dalton just totally overthrew him by 5 yards. Archuletta finished by saying that the Ravens just dodged a major bullet there.

Hmmmmm....sound familiar?

Edited by OriginalColtsFan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then on offense, the Ravens pick up 11 and it's negated by a Boyle hold/tackle/take down. You can only catch a D by surprise so many times. And when you get a great 11 yard run for a first down nullified time and time again by a stupid penalty that results in a 21 yard differential, it's really no wonder this offense can never sustain any kind of rhythm. 2 delay of games and 2 hurried time outs because the clock was running out because they couldn't get the plays in on time. Yes, this was the first game, but this has been the rule, rather than the exception, for this team for years. (Except, again, for when Kubiak was here.) It doesn't factor in in a 20-0 blowout, but it does factor in in the kind of close games the Ravens usually play under Harbaugh and Co.

Fortunately, in that series they dialed up a great play design slant with a legal pick and Joe and Maclin hooked up for a huge TD on a well designed, well executed play. That was a true delight to behold. It should be come a staple in the Ravens playbook rather than the little out to the fullback that HAD been the big "go to" play for years.

Edited by OriginalColtsFan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Towards the end of the second half it looked like a three man rush on a running play to Dalton's right that got strung out and stopped for little or no gain. Then on the Webb interception they had 7 men at the LOS, dropped back 2 and rushed 5. (It seemed like more because the Bengals O-line appeared to be in disarray.)

Archuletta commented that Peas didn't play passive, but sent Webb on a blitz from the slot.

So the 3 1/2 man rush resulted in an int. And the 5 man blitz package resulted in an int.

Edited by OriginalColtsFan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After the Ravens scored the Bengals got it back and the first down was an incomplete. The second down was a running play. And on 3rd and 5 Pees brought the house -- 6 rushers and Dalton went down in a heap of Ravens jerseys.

The one thing that looks different to me is that in the past, when Pees would use the 3 man rush it was obvious from the git go that there were only 3 linemen squaring up against the O-line. Today, he's disguising it much better so it's not clear how many are coming on any given play.

Edited by OriginalColtsFan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And in the final seconds of the half Perriman dropped a pass that would have gotten them a first down and closer to Tucker's range. (The pass wasn't prefect; it was sort of near Perriman's oeft hip and a little behind him but it was more than catchable.) Then Buck Allen had a really nice run after the catch that was negated by an absurd tackle/hold by Jensen.

Edited by OriginalColtsFan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Final note: After the Jensen tackle/hold Buck made a nice run up to around the fifty. The clock most likely would have run out anyway, but the person you see motioning for everyone to get up to the line is Stanley. Joe is nowhere near the LOS. And that's nothing really new for Joe. He just lacks a sense of urgency that his LT certainly doesn't lack. That's tough to take after all these years in the league. It's one thing to be calm. That's a good thing. But to not even be the one leading your offense up to the line to try to spike the ball? That's weak.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2nd half, after the deflected interception off of West, deep in Ravens territory on a second and 8 Pees rushed 3 and even the announcer said: "Dalton with all day to throw finds Greene for a 6 yard completion". So far, this was the least effective defensive play aside from some of the big gains given up on the Bengals one good drive in the first half. This is precisely the kind of 3 man rush scheme that has burned the Ravens time and time again. It didn't result in a TD, but the difference between the previous pressure and its effectiveness, and this slacking off of the pressure and its total ineffectiveness is the very reason I think it should be tossed out of the playbook once and for all. And it should be noted that this was the "classic" 3 man rush formation. No disguise whatsoever. Just three guys lined up giving the QB all day to throw.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the next play from the 6 yard line Suggs stripped Dalton and forced a fumble. So the Ravens dodged a bullet there, both from the interception and from the "vaunted" 3 man rush that had about the same effect as a lot of other telegraphed 3 man rushes deep inside Ravens territory.

The one thing that's clear from re-watching the game is that the final score is really not indicative of what actually happened in this game. Against a team with a better O-line and a better QB the 20-0 final score would not have held up. There are still things that need to be corrected and while some things are related to the lack of cohesion on the offense, other things have been unfixed for years now. The next 3 games will be very interesting to say the least.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's clear is you are trying to paint a picture that the Ravens got lucky and the defense really didn't play all that well. I got news for you. The Ravens dominated the entire game from start to finish. I do agree with you that the score was not indicative of what happened in this game. It was much worse for the Bengals than the score indicated. If there were 5 quarters then the Ravens would have won 30-0. You said it yourself,ocf, that the biggest offensive play the Bengals had was only 6 yards. That's domination whether you like it or not. It's got to bother you that the defense was so dominant which is why you put out pist after post about how the defense wasn't really that good and we were lucky to come out with a victory. There are only two people who will agree with you about the defense really isn't that good and that is jamesdean and bleedingoramgeandblack. Other than that, I think the rest of us saw that this defense simply dominated the game. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, RavingManiac said:

If there were 5 quarters then the Ravens would have won 30-0.

Seeing as how we never passed and scored 3 points in the preceding two quarters I don't see how you assume we would have scored 10 with 15 more minutes...

Just saying...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Rael said:

Seeing as how we never passed and scored 3 points in the preceding two quarters I don't see how you assume we would have scored 10 with 15 more minutes...

Just saying...

Have you gone back and re-watched the game? (Just wondering if you had, and if so, what you thought. Things tend to look different when you know the outcome and aren't caught up in the emotion. I found re-watching it, especially the D formations, was helpful.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, OriginalColtsFan said:

Have you gone back and re-watched the game? (Just wondering if you had, and if so, what you thought. Things tend to look different when you know the outcome and aren't caught up in the emotion. I found re-watching it, especially the D formations, was helpful.)

I have not. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Rael said:

I have not. 

I've been through 3 quarters so far. The third was basically the Ravens inhaling clock with a long, time consuming drive that ended in a FG. What I did see, as I posted, was that the least effective formation so far was the non-disguised 3 man rush. (Since you and I had been discussing it. The 3 1/2 man rush was effective. And variations off of the 6 or 7 man fronts where the disguise factor was effective netted good results. The one straight up 3 man rush in the Ravens red zone, which has been present since the Super Bowl, was the least effective.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, OriginalColtsFan said:

I've been through 3 quarters so far. The third was basically the Ravens inhaling clock with a long, time consuming drive that ended in a FG. What I did see, as I posted, was that the least effective formation so far was the non-disguised 3 man rush. (Since you and I had been discussing it. The 3 1/2 man rush was effective. And variations off of the 6 or 7 man fronts where the disguise factor was effective netted good results. The one straight up 3 man rush in the Ravens red zone, which has been present since the Super Bowl, was the least effective.)

I'm not saying you are wrong because I'm sure you are not. However, I'm not sure it is adequate to look at each play in a vacuum. Our old reliever Greg Olsen's best pitch was the looping overhand curve ball of his. He would have been a disaster if he had decided to throw it every pitch. Everyone is thrilled, and rightfully so, to see the slant pass in our playbook. Should we run it every play? That is all I am saying. It seems unfair to criticize that play without looking at all of the results in their totality.  

Edited by Rael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Rael said:

I'm not saying you are wrong because I'm sure you are not. However, I'm not sure it is adequate to look at each play in a vacuum. Our old reliever Greg Olsen's best pitch was the looping overhand curve ball of his. He would have been a disaster if he had decided to throw it every pitch. Everyone is thrilled, and rightfully so, to see the slant pass in our playbook. Should we run it every play? That is all I am saying. It seems unfair to criticize that play without looking at all of the results. 

I'm not sure how putting all the plays together is not fair. Just looking at 1 isolated play would be unfair. But this is an entire game, looking at all the plays in context. Plus this has been going on for years; it's not one isolated incident. What is shows me is that Pees will continue to use the (non-disguised) 3 man rush, despite the fact that it results in QBs having all day to pick apart the defense. To me it says he never learns from past mistakes. And while this one game was lopsided in the 20-0 result, and that one play "only" resulted in a 6 yard gain and not a TD, against better teams Pees's stubborn reliance on a failed strategy will result in on-going failure. And it's unnecessary when he has much more viable schemes at his disposal. So let's see how it plays out in 2017. Okay?

Edited by OriginalColtsFan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4th quarter:

1. 4 man rush, pass complete to Mixon for short gain.

2. 4 man rush, sack

3. 4 man rush big completion to Greene over the middle

4. 4 man rush, long pass to the goal line to Core, who stretched out, had it in his hands before he hit the ground, then dropped it after he hit the ground. J Smith on coverage. Core has a step on J Smith

5. 4 man rush, Boyd had a step on Webb at the sideline for a first down, Dalton over threw the pass.

4th down and 9, a little under 10 on the clock, down by 20, Marvin Lewis elects to punt. LOL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Next possession:

1. 4 man rush, very short pass over the middle, dropped. It looked like Suggs might have gotten a hand on it.

2. 4 man rush, Weddle blitzing. Lafel dropped ball. 5 yard penalty on Carr. 1st down Cincy.

3. 4 man rush. Holding on Cincy.

4. 4 man rush, screen to Gio. Big 39 yard gain.

5. 3 man rush, pass to end zone to Greene, double covered, pass way over thrown

6. 4 man rush, Suggs almost got a sack, Dalton still pushed out of bounds behind the LOS. 3rd/11

7. 3 man rush, complete pass short of 1st. 4th/5.

8. 3 man rush, Dalton had time, nobody open. Turn over on downs.

Observation: 3 of the 3 "3 man rushes" in the game, 100%, were in the red zone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0