Results 1 to 8 of 8
  1. #1

    Peter King Re: Ravens



    I wrote a question to Peter King on why he didn't view the Ravens as potentially one of the AFC powers. Basically went through a list of pros and cons and said that I thought there is a good chance the team can compete with the chargers, pats, and colts.

    Strangely, I am "Matt of Baltimore" took some interesting parts, but the response is worth reading.
    http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/writers/peter_king/06/05/mmqbte/index.html

    At any rate, we'll find about the paper offseason evaluations when the team plays the charges, colts, and pats back to back to back.





  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    SW Florida (Venice area)
    Posts
    532

    Re: Peter King Re: Ravens

    Pete says, "the Ravens gave Indy everything it could handle in the playoff loss."

    Huh? I must have been watching a different channel. We got blown out on the field of play and it was not anywhere near as the score would indicate. The times they are a'changing however.
    ENFORCE THE 1ST AMENDMENT WITH THE SECOND, NEVER DISARM




  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    So Cali
    Posts
    774

    Re: Peter King Re: Ravens

    I’m still trying to figure out how SD ranks as high as they say with all the coaching changes. Sure they have a lot of talent but am I the only one who thinks coaching plays a huge part in a teams production?

    Case in point look at the tumble the Squeelers took last year when the coach just didn’t care anymore.
    Keeping the purple flowing way out on the West Coast!




  4. #4

    Re: Peter King Re: Ravens

    Quote Originally Posted by Khaine View Post
    Iím still trying to figure out how SD ranks as high as they say with all the coaching changes.
    You're not the only one wondering that -- they not only lost their head coach, but their OC and their DC! I know they're talented but that's a lot of turnover on the coaching staff. And for all his playoff failures, anyone who thinks Norv Turner is an upgrade over Marty is




  5. #5

    Re: Peter King Re: Ravens

    Quote Originally Posted by Art-Florida View Post
    Pete says, "the Ravens gave Indy everything it could handle in the playoff loss."

    Huh? I must have been watching a different channel. We got blown out on the field of play and it was not anywhere near as the score would indicate. The times they are a'changing however.
    Maybe I was watching a different game then both of you. Our defense dominated indy's O. If not for good field position, our own TO's, & dropped INTs, Indy might score 9 points. Our offense had a bad game, but I'm not sure how you can say were blown out on the field that day.




  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Glen Burnie
    Posts
    350

    Re: Peter King Re: Ravens

    Quote Originally Posted by TRAP View Post
    I agree. King is right, we gave them everything we could handle. Our D kept the best QB in the game off the board. We came to within 1 play of winning, and that was when Ray batted down a ball with Reed behind him. Reed would have INT it and it might have gone for a score which would have been the difference. As a matter of fact there were 2 balls Ray batted down that Reed would have caught.


    Not to mention the ball he stripped out of AD's hands after he was in the process of scooping up that Indy fumble and taking off!

    Again, Not to rag on Ray, he's the best! It just bugs me when all these people want to rag on him, saying he's lost a step, isn't as good. etc. Well, if that were true we would have Crushed Indy! It was the fact that he was still all over the field and around the ball that may have cost the defense 7-14 points! Not to mention a few less Indy Field Goals!
    ... They shall mount up with wings as Eagles;




  7. #7

    Re: Peter King Re: Ravens

    What I don't get is how people can put the Chargers in ahead of us. I can maybe understand the superbowl champs the Colts being in there above us, and maybe the Patriots because they're always at the top and they got ALOT better on offense. But what really bugs me is that the Chargers get included with those two ahead of us by nearly every sports analyst out there. Their inseason record was only one game better than ours, we had more impressive big wins throughout the season in my opinion, and WE BEAT THEM HEADS UP! So just going off of last season they should not even be above us. Then when you include that they made no major additions this offseason, and lost their entire top of their coaching staff it really should be no question that they're going to be a step back this year behind the Ravens.




  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Perry Hall
    Posts
    2,865

    Re: Peter King Re: Ravens

    Quote Originally Posted by tnsmith90 View Post
    What I don't get is how people can put the Chargers in ahead of us. I can maybe understand the superbowl champs the Colts being in there above us, and maybe the Patriots because they're always at the top and they got ALOT better on offense. But what really bugs me is that the Chargers get included with those two ahead of us by nearly every sports analyst out there. Their inseason record was only one game better than ours, we had more impressive big wins throughout the season in my opinion, and WE BEAT THEM HEADS UP! So just going off of last season they should not even be above us. Then when you include that they made no major additions this offseason, and lost their entire top of their coaching staff it really should be no question that they're going to be a step back this year behind the Ravens.
    The media is in love with LT, and seem to be developing a hard-on for Rivers.




Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Russell Street Report Website Design by D3Corp Ocean City Maryland