Seriously, Do The Ravens Need Vonta Leach?

[Jeremiah W]

I don't think we have nearly enough data points to make this kind of statement.

The rules changes have made the passing game easier and more important in general, and this has made the QB position more important. But I would say that all we have definitively learned is that Championships can now be won with no defense (and/or running game) at all, if your passing game is high-powered enough (did not used to be the case). And that you very probably cannot win a Championship with a less-than-average QB regardless of the quality of your defense (and/or running game), a la the 2000 Ravens.

But this is not the same as concluding, imo, that a run-first offense and good defense cannot win a Championship. The 49ers beat the Saints last year and were a muffed punt from being in the SB. We were a dropped pass away from the SB ourselves, though our 542 passing attempts (combined with our win total) certainly was closer to average than below-average.

I think a defense/running/average(efficient)-passing (not below-average) formula is still viable, and more importantly it is almost the only viable formula for teams that do not have one of the small handful of uber-QBs (and their supporting casts). In other words, if Alex Smith is your QB, I would say you have a 0% chance of replicating the Packers, Colts, Saints formula, so why attempt it? And I think you have a better than 0% (and semi-decent even if not excellent) chance of winning a SB with the formula they used in 2011. The choice for the Ravens isn't quite as clear cut because we have a better QB for sure, but I still lean towards trying to keep the pieces in place (minor tweaking only) until our results show clearly that this formula cannot work.

I agree. If the Ravens had Rodgers and the GB skill guys they would be more of a pass heavy attack.
What the Ravens have has not proven they will win the SB, but I think they have proven they are consistantly capable of contending, and CAN win the SB or at least wouldacouldashoula. We were very close to having a Harbaugh SB, and a couple of unlucky breaks is all that kept it from happening, not some sort of flaw in the style of play.

Leach pancaking Pat Willis was all I needed to see. I love having a big bad FB leading the way for Rice and would not have it any other way. I also can not see a better use of 3 mil in cap space. That is not even half what Grubbs cost.

[JustaslowZ06]

I agree. If the Ravens had Rodgers and the GB skill guys they would be more of a pass heavy attack.
What the Ravens have has not proven they will win the SB, but I think they have proven they are consistantly capable of contending, and CAN win the SB or at least wouldacouldashoula. We were very close to having a Harbaugh SB, and a couple of unlucky breaks is all that kept it from happening, not some sort of flaw in the style of play.

Leach pancaking Pat Willis was all I needed to see. I love having a big bad FB leading the way for Rice and would not have it any other way. I also can not see a better use of 3 mil in cap space. That is not even half what Grubbs cost.

Someone else mentioned it, what would a 10M ayear WR bring over a 6M a year one? Would we have better results? I bet tha 10M a year guy doesn't drop that pass that sends us to the SB. Over what did the running game do in the playoffs?

[GOTA]

The Giants where bad defensively during the reg season, but their defense was lights out in the play offs. You cannot argue that their defense played a huge part in winning that SB.

I think yes it seems to be a trend, but I don't believe in the whole "you can't win a SB with a run first team anymore". Because the 49ers and the Ravens came that close to facing each other in the SB, when you get as far as that in the play offs it can come down to anything. In the next 5 years I bet you any money at least ONE team who like to run the ball are going to win the SB (assuming they play good defense too).

If you are happy with coming close then enjoy. I don't look back at the Reid Eagles teams that went to 4 straight NFC Champion games without ever winning a Super Bowl and want to be like them.

I'll take that bet because the NFL made sure it can't happen. Offensive lineman can now hold as long as they want when pass blocking. Quarterbacks can barely be touched. Wide receivers have a huge advantage over the DB trying to cover them. It used to be I would have a nice long drive down the field eating up clock with my running game and then force you to play catch up against my killer defense. Now my opponent can just throw the ball and march right up the field no matter how far back. The NFL is closer to the CFL than it is to the game we used to see. That's the reality and you need to adapt if you want to win a Championship.

[Terpsfan82]

If you are happy with coming close then enjoy. I don't look back at the Reid Eagles teams that went to 4 straight NFC Champion games without ever winning a Super Bowl and want to be like them.

I'll take that bet because the NFL made sure it can't happen. Offensive lineman can now hold as long as they want when pass blocking. Quarterbacks can barely be touched. Wide receivers have a huge advantage over the DB trying to cover them. It used to be I would have a nice long drive down the field eating up clock with my running game and then force you to play catch up against my killer defense. Now my opponent can just throw the ball and march right up the field no matter how far back. The NFL is closer to the CFL than it is to the game we used to see. That's the reality and you need to adapt if you want to win a Championship.

I'll take that bet as well. The NFl has made no bones about the fact that they want to appeal to the casual fan, and the casual fan likes to see scoring.

[ActualSpamBot]

We were a dropped pass and a screwed up special teams play from having a Ravens/9ers super bowl.

People shoveling dirt on the idea that you can win it all with a strong D/ running game and a adequate passing game are simply wrong.

[RavenMaven52]

There is an awful lot of negative Cam Cameron talk going on in here, and I'd like to know why? You guys realize he isn't the guy that drops passes right? Boldin, Housh, and Evans are not Cam Cameron. Just because you all don't think he is creative doesn't mean he isn't successful and good at what he does, nor does it mean he isn't creative. I actually think his pre snap shiftiness can be very creative. He has also run wildcat, double reverses, hb passes and many others. I know winning a Super Bowl would be great, and last year Cam did in fact call all the right plays to get us there. The players were the ones that dropped the ball last year and in years past, not Cameron. I'll be the first to say I don't always agree with his run/pass ratio, but he knows how to win games. That cannot be argued.

[Ravenalytics]

Someone else mentioned it, what would a 10M ayear WR bring over a 6M a year one? Would we have better results? I bet tha 10M a year guy doesn't drop that pass that sends us to the SB. Over what did the running game do in the playoffs?

Did you see the Welker drop in the Super Bowl? Please the break up was actually good defense on the Pats' part.

[jonboy79]

We were a dropped pass and a screwed up special teams play from having a Ravens/9ers super bowl.

People shoveling dirt on the idea that you can win it all with a strong D/ running game and a adequate passing game are simply wrong.

I agree. In fact, I think the opposite is more true. From my vantage point, these pass heavy teams only seem to win it all once their D picks up the pace along iwth their run game. look at Peyton Mannings career. the one time he won it all was the one playoff stretch where his run game and defense played well.

[HoustonRaven]

We were a dropped pass and a screwed up special teams play from having a Ravens/9ers super bowl.

People shoveling dirt on the idea that you can win it all with a strong D/ running game and a adequate passing game are simply wrong.

Agreed.

I suppose I can buy that the league wants more scoring. But then I think about the Ravens v. Steelers match up. It's one of the premiere (arguably the best) match up in the NFL right now. So I don't buy the meme that's the only way you can win a Super Bowl. Or that it's the best way for that matter.

Teams looks at their division opponents and find the best way to win. We found that formula last season and it worked in great fashion.

[GOTA]

The results are the results. Until another 2000 Ravens/2002 Bucs type comes along and wins the Super Bowl I'm not buying that it can be done. The reason is that those teams can't suddenly turn on the passing game when they need to so it does come down to a handful of botched plays. This is what the NFL wants and it's changed the rules to make sure it happens that way.

[HoustonRaven]

The results are the results. Until another 2000 Ravens/2002 Bucs type comes along and wins the Super Bowl I'm not buying that it can be done. The reason is that those teams can't suddenly turn on the passing game when they need to so it does come down to a handful of botched plays. This is what the NFL wants and it's changed the rules to make sure it happens that way.

Correlation does not equal causation.

A lot of those rules changes happened after we started seeing premiere QB's winning the big one.

And I cannot recall another time in the league where we've had this many QB's starting that play at a extremely high caliber.

[leachisabeast]

The results are the results. Until another 2000 Ravens/2002 Bucs type comes along and wins the Super Bowl I'm not buying that it can be done. The reason is that those teams can't suddenly turn on the passing game when they need to so it does come down to a handful of botched plays. This is what the NFL wants and it's changed the rules to make sure it happens that way.

Steelers in 2005? Giants in 2007? The Colts where running the ball quite a bit in 2006, and the team they faced in the SB where the Bears who where a run first team that year. The only reason the Steelers and the Giants running game isn't remembered in those SB years, is because their QB's have gone on to become elite QB's in the league, unlike in those years they where very average QB's and relied a lot on their defense and running games. Even in 2008 the Steelers still relied on their defense some what, and one of the key successes to the Giants SB run this year was the re-emergence of their defense through out the play offs. Oh and btw the Saints where 6th in rushing offense in their SB year.

[GOTA]

Steelers in 2005? Giants in 2007? The Colts where running the ball quite a bit in 2006, and the team they faced in the SB where the Bears who where a run first team that year. The only reason the Steelers and the Giants running game isn't remembered in those SB years, is because their QB's have gone on to become elite QB's in the league, unlike in those years they where very average QB's and relied a lot on their defense and running games. Even in 2008 the Steelers still relied on their defense some what, and one of the key successes to the Giants SB run this year was the re-emergence of their defense through out the play offs.

The rules have changed since then. Just look at scoring and passing yards since 2008. They keep going higher at a crazy rate.

No one is saying that defense and running game aren't important. They're just not as important as they used to be. For years we always said that Defense wins Championships. That's just not the way it is anymore. Teams that can play defense and run the ball at an elite level but are middle to bottom of the pack in passing can be pretty good but they aren't winning any titles. When offensive lineman can hold every play while receivers and quarterbacks can barely be touched you have to change the way you build your team. It's going to get worse too because this emphasis on player safety is going to have a direct impact on how defense is played.

[GOTA]

Correlation does not equal causation.

A lot of those rules changes happened after we started seeing premiere QB's winning the big one.

And I cannot recall another time in the league where we've had this many QB's starting that play at a extremely high caliber.

That's because the rule changes allow them to play at a high caliber. If this was 2005 and I told you there was QB who put up over 3400 yards, completed 55% of his passes and had 26 touchdown passes you would think he was a Pro Bowl player. Those numbers weren't that far off from what Drew Brees was putting up in 2005. Now that player is Mark Sanchez. Is Sanchez an example of just how great QB play has gotten or someone who benefits from the rule changes? Having seen Sanchez, it's has to be the rule changes.

[HoustonRaven]

That's because the rule changes allow them to play at a high caliber. If this was 2005 and I told you there was QB who put up over 3400 yards, completed 55% of his passes and had 26 touchdown passes you would think he was a Pro Bowl player. Those numbers weren't that far off from what Drew Brees was putting up in 2005. Now that player is Mark Sanchez. Is Sanchez an example of just how great QB play has gotten or someone who benefits from the rule changes? Having seen Sanchez, it's has to be the rule changes.

Again, correlation does not equal causation.

For example ...

"Players salaries increased between 2000 and 2012. QB stats have increased over that same time. Ergo, QB stats have increased because the players are getting paid more"

That's a fallacy. I don't believe those rule changes were intended to boost QB play. They were intended to protect the QB.

[wickedsolo]

Again, correlation does not equal causation.

For example ...

"Players salaries increased between 2000 and 2012. QB stats have increased over that same time. Ergo, QB stats have increased because the players are getting paid more"

That's a fallacy. I don't believe those rule changes were intended to boost QB play. They were intended to protect the QB.

There has definitely been rule changes to protect the QB, but I don't see how you can argue that they were not intended to boost the QB/WR play either. Quarterbacks are - more often than not - the most popular player on a team. The average fan probably won't know who the starting cornerbacks are for the New Orleans Saints (for example), but they'll sure as hell know who Drew Brees is. The same can be said for pretty much any team in the NFL. Those same average fans don't want to watch games where the final score is 10-7. The average fan wants to see Tom Brady throw for 300+ yards and 3 TD's.

It's a marketing ploy to make the game more exciting for the average fan. They did the same thing in hockey by changing the rules up so you don't really have too many games with a final score of 1-0, whereas 10 or 15 years ago, that wasn't that uncommon at all.

[HoustonRaven]

There has definitely been rule changes to protect the QB, but I don't see how you can argue that they were not intended to boost the QB/WR play either. Quarterbacks are - more often than not - the most popular player on a team. The average fan probably won't know who the starting cornerbacks are for the New Orleans Saints (for example), but they'll sure as hell know who Drew Brees is. The same can be said for pretty much any team in the NFL. Those same average fans don't want to watch games where the final score is 10-7. The average fan wants to see Tom Brady throw for 300+ yards and 3 TD's.

It's a marketing ploy to make the game more exciting for the average fan. They did the same thing in hockey by changing the rules up so you don't really have too many games with a final score of 1-0, whereas 10 or 15 years ago, that wasn't that uncommon at all.

10-7 games have always been few and far between, even going back to the 80's.

I'm not arguing that the outcome of the rules being altered led to more passing. I just don't buy the media meme that these rules changes, which were all about protecting the QB when they were enacted, were also intended to boost QB play.

One could easily argue that the rule changes means the QB's stay more healthy and the end result is higher QB production.

[GOTA]

There has definitely been rule changes to protect the QB, but I don't see how you can argue that they were not intended to boost the QB/WR play either. Quarterbacks are - more often than not - the most popular player on a team. The average fan probably won't know who the starting cornerbacks are for the New Orleans Saints (for example), but they'll sure as hell know who Drew Brees is. The same can be said for pretty much any team in the NFL. Those same average fans don't want to watch games where the final score is 10-7. The average fan wants to see Tom Brady throw for 300+ yards and 3 TD's.

It's a marketing ploy to make the game more exciting for the average fan. They did the same thing in hockey by changing the rules up so you don't really have too many games with a final score of 1-0, whereas 10 or 15 years ago, that wasn't that uncommon at all.

It's worked too. Sunday Night Football is now the highest rated television show in the US and that's coming off all the negative pub from the lockout. Casual fans love offense.

A couple of years ago my office was buzzing after the Cardinals/Packers playoff game that the Cardinals won in overtime. Multiple people were telling me that it was the greatest game that they had ever seen. All I thought watching it was that the NFL is turning into the Arena league. Each team just marched back and forth up the field without being stopped. I think they scored near 100 points between them. As a lover of defense it was terrible to see but the casual fans ate it up.

As long as scoring = ratings they're going to keep boosting scoring.

[NCRAVEN]

As a lover of defense it was terrible to see but the casual fans ate it up.

As long as scoring = ratings they're going to keep boosting scoring.

[Jayc00]

The rules have changed since then. Just look at scoring and passing yards since 2008. They keep going higher at a crazy rate.

No one is saying that defense and running game aren't important. They're just not as important as they used to be. For years we always said that Defense wins Championships. That's just not the way it is anymore. Teams that can play defense and run the ball at an elite level but are middle to bottom of the pack in passing can be pretty good but they aren't winning any titles. When offensive lineman can hold every play while receivers and quarterbacks can barely be touched you have to change the way you build your team. It's going to get worse too because this emphasis on player safety is going to have a direct impact on how defense is played.

Defense still wins Championships IMO. It was the difference between the Giants and Patriots in the SB, the better Defense won.