The Ravens’ lack of tackle depth was exposed on the 2nd series of the season when Monroe left with his concussion.
After Hurst’s performance, the front office needs to consider what other options exist and reshuffle the line if Monroe is out for an extended period.
Against the Broncos, the Ravens ran just 57 competitive offensive snaps (excludes penalties):
Monroe: Eugene started and played the first series. He allowed a QH to Ware, who beat him outside (Q1, 13:52). Scoring: 6 plays, 4 blocks, 1 missed, 1 QH, 1 point (.17 per play). I won’t give him a grade for just 6 snaps.
Osemele: Kelechi had a difficult day, but I’m not worried about his play dropping off somehow. Why? Because Kelechi had 8 blocks in level 2 and pancaked his man on 4 occasions, both high totals. Malik Jackson bulled him on the first play of the game (Q1, 15:00). He was shed by Jackson for another pressure on the final play of the half (Q2, 0:05). He surrendered his 3rd full pressure to Walker (Q4, 1:49) on the 4th-and-9 conversion to Gillmore. When the Ravens had their lone sequence of rushing success (beginning Q2, 10:20) with successive gains of 6, 4, 8, 3, 4 (doesn’t it kinda suck that constitutes a “sequence of rushing success?”), Kelechi had 2 of his 3 star blocks, a pancake and a block in level 2 and was the most significant contributor among the linemen. He went 8 for 8 in level 2, but missed his only pull. Scoring: 57 plays, 48 blocks, 5 missed, 1/2 penetration, 3 pressures, 41 points (.72 per play). He gets .04 adjustment for quality of competition, but that’s still just a D.
Zuttah: Jeremy was consistent and had a pair of star blocks. He was backed up by Kilgo (Q3, 10:20) for a pressure on a pass that went for a gain of 4 nonetheless. He made 6 of 8 blocks in level 2 and had 2 pancakes. Normally, for a game with this many pass blocking breakdowns, I’d reduce the adjustment for the center, but this was a special case where most of the pressure came from the tackles getting beat straight up, not stunts or failures to pick up blitzes inside. Scoring: 57 plays, 52 blocks, 4 missed, 1 pressure, 50 points (.88 per play). With adjustment, that’s a B (an A at center requires .93).
Yanda: Marshal had his typical outstanding day of avoiding missed blocks (just 1), but was bulled by Walker for a pressure (Q2, 10:56) and missed a cut block on Williams (Q3, 11:38) that resulted in Forsett being taken down for a loss of 1. He made 6 of 7 blocks in level 2 and had 4 star blocks. He was not assigned to pull. Scoring: 57 plays, 53 blocks, 1 missed, 1 penetration, 1.5 pressures, 48 points (.84 per play). With an adjustment of .05, that’s a B+.
Wagner: Ravens fans need to hope this wasn’t evidence of lingering injury concerns. Rick had one of the most difficult draws in football, perennial DPOY candidate Von Miller. Every pass rush event he surrendered involved Miller:
–(Q1, 11:45) He failed to block inside as Bruton blitzed between Wagner and Yanda. Wagner stayed square with Miller, who did not rush.
–(Q1, 4:38) He was bulled by Miller as Hurst was beaten outside by Ware for a shared QH.
–(Q4, 14:12) He was beaten inside by Miller for a pressure that was incorrectly labeled as a QH in the Gamebook.
–(Q4, 1:22) He was beaten outside by Miller for a pressure.
–(Q4, 1:16) He was bulled by Miller as Hurst was beaten outside by Ray for a shared pressure.
–(Q4, 1:03) He was bulled by Miller as Hurst was beaten outside by Ware for a shared pressure.
–(Q4, 0:56) He was beaten outside by Miller as Hurst was beaten outside by Ware for a shared pressure.
–(Q4, 0:46) He was beaten outside by Miller for a QH.
On 4 separate occasions, he shared a pressure event with Hurst. That’s an important definitional difference between my method and PFF. They charge each player with the full event, but I want the total charged events to match so I give partial credit as I see fit. When the pressure comes between 2 side-by-side line mates, I like my method better, but I can definitely see the logic for both getting full charges for the events on Sunday. Juan Castillo talked about the importance of cut blocking in camp, but that was also a problem for Wagner, who missed 4 such blocks. Scoring: 57 plays, 40 blocks, 7 missed, 1.5 penetrations, 4 (2 + 4 x .5) pressures, 1.5 QHs, 24.5 points (.43 per play). His opponent rates an adjustment of the maximum .10, but his grade is still an F.
Hurst: James entered at LT after Monroe left and played 51 competitive snaps. As a run blocker, he missed 3 blocks, but did not allow a penetration. That’s the extent of what I have nice to say. Here is the full list of pressure events allowed:
–(Q1, 4:38) He was beaten outside by Ware to pressure Flacco as Miller bulled Wagner from the other side for a QH.
–(Q1, 0:12) Ware bulled Wagner into Flacco, then chased him down for the horsecollar sack as Flacco was flushed right.
–(Q2, 9:38) Hurst barely was able to touch Ware who sped by outside to knock down Flacco as he dumped off to Juszczyk for a gain of 4.
–(Q1, 2:00) Hurst was again beaten outside by Ware for a pressure as Flacco threw left for a gain of 1.
–(Q3, 12:24) Miller bulled Hurst straight back into Flacco for pressure as Joe threw left for a gain of 9.
–(Q3, 7:02) Hurst was again beaten outside by Ware for a QH as Flacco threw incomplete.
–(Q4, 14:06) Ware beat Hurst inside for pressure as Flacco overthrew Smith on the right sideline.
–(Q4, 2:12) Ware bulled Hurst into Flacco to flush him right. Flacco threw to Forsett for a loss of 2.
–(Q4, 1:16) Hurst was beaten outside by Ray for a pressure shared with Wagner.
–(Q4, 1:03) Hurst was beaten outside by Ware for a pressure shared with Wagner.
–(Q4, 0:56) Hurst was beaten outside by Ware for a pressure shared with Wagner.
–(Q4, 0:42) Hurst was beaten inside by Ware to get in Flacco’s face as he threw the pass Smith could not collect at the goal line. While I think Smith could have caught the ball, he would have had to secure it immediately with both hands to register possession in bounds. Harbaugh’s claim that Smith would have caught that ball 99 times in 100 is mild hyperbole. It was more like a 65-75% chance for a reception that I didn’t score as a drop. Lost in the excitement is the fact that Ware’s pressure kept Flacco from making a much easier pass which would have reached Smith quicker and with ample distance from the sideline.
–(Q4, 0:36) Hurst was beaten outside by Ware for pressure. Flacco’s timing throw didn’t have enough air under it, which made Gillmore’s job to wrench the ball free from Bruton nearly impossible. I don’t think Flacco’s throw was affected specifically by this blind-side pressure, but Flacco’s internal clock settings might well have caused him to release early and inaccurately given the long day of getting hit.
Any defensive player will tell you how tiring it is to rush the passer. That is why you’ll often see a team running the no huddle is able to move the ball more consistently, particularly when using 4 downs. The pass rushers typically can’t keep up with that pace. On the Ravens’ final 16-play drive, Hurst surrendered an astounding 6 pass rush events and Wagner 5. That was actually much worse than at any other point during the game. Scoring: 51 plays, 35 blocks, 3 missed, 7.5 (6 + 3 x .5) pressures, 2.5 QHs, 1 sack, 6.5 points (.15 per play). F. He was left on an island to block DeMarcus Ware, but that’s no excuse for Sunday’s performance. James Hurst had a -.03 per play effort versus J.J. Watt in 33 snaps of relief last December at Houston, but the .15 Sunday is by far the lowest I have ever scored in a game of more than 33 snaps.
The Broncos pass rush did not leave Flacco with many significant opportunities to throw unhindered. To summarize:
–Joe had Ample Time and Space (ATS) on just 5 of 34 drop backs.
–The 15% ATS was the lowest figure in the 91 games I have been scoring it (since the beginning of 2010).
–He twice had just 26% ATS during the 2010 season (at Pittsburgh and vs. Cleveland).
–Since the end of 2010, the Ravens had never given him ATS on less than 31% of throws.
–Joe has had ATS on 1,647 of 3,244 drop backs in the last 5+ seasons (51%).
–The Ravens have gained an average of 8.2 YPP with ATS as opposed to 4.2 YPP without from 2010-14.
–The Broncos achieved this phenomenal pressure rate without frequently bringing numbers (see chart below).
Flacco’s results by ATS status vs. Denver:
Neither of these yards per attempt figures is good. Summarizing the results relative to expectation for the opportunities provided:
The tackle play must improve dramatically if the Ravens are to win in 2015.