Notice: All Boston.com forums will be retired as of May 31st, 2016 and will not be archived. Thank you for your participation in this community, and we hope you continue to enjoy other content at Boston.com.

How good were the Ravens

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from underdogg. Show underdogg's posts

    How good were the Ravens

    looks like a couple of turnovers hurt them for scores. 

    Also, without the "a win is a win" response, were pats fans satisfied with the team's play?
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from HOTBLITZ. Show HOTBLITZ's posts

    Re: How good were the Ravens

    Never completely satisfied, but unfortunately for the rest of the league things in NE seem to be coming together nicely. The  defense i gaurantee you will be a force as the season goes on. Dog even you being unbiased have to admit the D looks different from the past few years. Im loving the youth, speed and hard hits all day. I thought Merriweather was fantastic as well Guyton stood out to me. The offense seems to be rounding into form minus Maroney cause he's lost. Welker definitely makes the engine go. Brady looks alot sharper and as soon as the deep ball timing gets there look out.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from cowtherabbit-. Show cowtherabbit-'s posts

    Re: How good were the Ravens

    Flacco is a really good QB.It's not his fault his receiver dropped the ball at the end of the game.He did his job.Mason wasn't the same after the hit he took on his TD.We beat a really good team this Sunday.I'm really proud of the dfense holding Balts. offense to just 14 pts.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from prairiemike. Show prairiemike's posts

    Re: How good were the Ravens

    The Ravens played well and I saw some things from Flacco that make me think he may have some longevity in this league. But the Ravens did something today that, sadly for their fans, they have been wont to do -- and that is match up poorly with a good team. If I'm the Ravens, the team I'm gunning for, obviously, is Bitchburgh, and I would not be surprised to see this team overcome the Steelers this year. But more than anything, what I saw today was bad leadership. I think you can lay this loss right at Harbaugh's feet (well, that and that one last dropped pass -- which Zbellino has correctly pointed out was a result of Brandon Meriweather rapidly becoming the new incarnation of that guy you love to hate so much -- what was his name again?)

    The Ravens' new and improved offense seems to be legit -- but their defense is no longer "lights out" and for all the talk (from some quarters) about how Baltimore was going to come in and smack the Pats in the mouth -- it looked to me like it was the Pats doing most of the smacking.

    Which is bad news for the rest of the NFL.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from underdogg. Show underdogg's posts

    Re: How good were the Ravens

    Blitz - didn't see the game.  Had the colts game here, who were absolutely surgical - up 34-3 before giving up 2 late TDs that were meaningless. 

    sorry for the diversion.  I've only seen the pats play in the first game and was more focused on the offensive play.  Maybe I will see them in the next 3 weeks as they do not play at the same time as the colts. 
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from HOTBLITZ. Show HOTBLITZ's posts

    Re: How good were the Ravens

    Thanks for the response. I've always said the Colts would give NE the toughest game and would rather see someone else knock them out of the playoffs before having to play them. Defense does win superbowls but I think that quote is inaccurate when it comes to Peyton and or Tom.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from prairiemike. Show prairiemike's posts

    Re: How good were the Ravens

    Incidentally, while we have Shoeshine Boy here, it's probaly worth pointing out that the AFC South has that West-West Schedule this year that made Matt Cassell look so good last season.

    Watch out for the Colts.

    Tennessee has turned out to be that mirage some of us observed they were last year, and there is no one on the Colts schedule (outside Baltimore and the Pats) likely to derail them.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from agcsbill. Show agcsbill's posts

    Re: How good were the Ravens

    In Response to How good were the Ravens:
    looks like a couple of turnovers hurt them for scores.  Also, without the "a win is a win" response, were pats fans satisfied with the team's play?
    Posted by underdogg


    The Pats O put up points against a real strong Ravens D with balance.  As for the D, true , they limited the Ravens offense, one of the better squads early in this season, but, their 3rd down stopping ability is a concern.  It wasn't like the Ravens were converting 3 and 1 or something like that, they were converting 3rd and long, 5 - 7 yards most times.  There is always room for improvement, some of the O play calling had some head scratching and Brady did throw some off target passes with no pressure.  Hey, in the end, the Pats defeated a team most in the country had picked to win!
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from DBAZ22. Show DBAZ22's posts

    Re: How good were the Ravens

    Still very early in the season - much like comparing the first 40 games of MLB when the KCs and Diamondbacks of that league look like potential world beaters.  This has to be tempered somewhat, but you know the usual suspects in the AFC will continue to rise to the top - NE, Pitt, Indy, Balt, and possibly SD (still not sold on Norv and lack of LT factor).  NFC looks like NYG, NO, and another team TBD that will get hot down the stretch.  Can't throw Minn or Atl in there just yet, but one of those two could separate themselves.  My guess is NE and Indy will be 7-1 at the time of the showdown, and the "pundits" will crown the winner the SB champion as they always do still only half way through the season.  Regardless, it is shaping up to be another dynamite season.  To answer your question about the Ravens they are gonna be around the season.  Flacco will continue to improve, but their D does not as dominant as it has although they gave their points up to NE and SD -two pretty damn good offenses. 

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from underdogg. Show underdogg's posts

    Re: How good were the Ravens

    Believe it or not I'd prefer some of the adversity that the pats have faced.  Now the colts got that with Miami, and fought for a win vs. Jax (which actually looks better today than it did in week 1). 

    But this is the second game in a row where the colts dominated on both sides of the ball.  They will need to have some games to grind out. 

    Not sure Gonzalez gets his job back.  Was not happy that freeney played.  I'd rather him fully healthy.  Not sure the colts will be better when sanders is back.  Just has not played enough in the last 2 years.  I think he has to earn his spot back.

    Congrats guys.  Strong win for you.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from NickC1188. Show NickC1188's posts

    Re: How good were the Ravens

    I can't believe that they didn't hand the ball to Ray Rice more often.  He ran for 103 yards on a measly 11 carries.  (9.1 ypc).  That was a playcalling oversight.

    Meanwhile, the Patriots beat up on Flacco and the Ravens' receivers to the point where Clayton heard footsteps at the end of the game and dropped the pass with McGowan about to pop him.

    The Ravens could have won just as easily as the Patriots could have.  I'm not prepared to make a final judgment on anyone in Week 4.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Macrawn. Show Macrawn's posts

    Re: How good were the Ravens

    I thought the Ravens played well. They hurt themselves with penalties. Even the mouthy coach got in on that. 

    I think the Pats surprised them with the aggressive play on D. I think BB has a lot of confidence in man to man coverage and is opening the gates to blitzes. Even though the D has played well, they have been picked apart through the air at times with the lack of pressure. 

    What I saw different today was not only the blitz pressure but the corners and safeties were going after the ball not just covering. You can tell they are getting more confident back there. The ball is definitely going to start making it into their hands. 
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from artielang. Show artielang's posts

    Re: How good were the Ravens

    the ravens are a good team, but not the best. actually i think they have generally been an upper echelon team for a long time now, and still are, just not the very best. for some reason they never seem to be able to put it all together. their offense is on the rise, no doubt. but their two best receivers (heap and mason) are fragile, and their defense, while still very physical, looks like its slowing down a bit. the jets hurt us with their blitzes because they got off the line so fast. the ravens dont seem to have that explosiveness (other than suggs).
    but overall they are still an excellent team and this was a huge win for the pats, who are still looking to really hit their stride. and wait till they do!
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from EnochRoot. Show EnochRoot's posts

    Re: How good were the Ravens

    In Response to Re: How good were the Ravens:
    The Ravens played well and I saw some things from Flacco that make me think he may have some longevity in this league. But the Ravens did something today that, sadly for their fans, they have been wont to do -- and that is match up poorly with a good team. If I'm the Ravens, the team I'm gunning for, obviously, is Bitchburgh, and I would not be surprised to see this team overcome the Steelers this year. But more than anything, what I saw today was bad leadership. I think you can lay this loss right at Harbaugh's feet (well, that and that one last dropped pass -- which Zbellino has correctly pointed out was a result of Brandon Meriweather rapidly becoming the new incarnation of that guy you love to hate so much -- what was his name again?) The Ravens' new and improved offense seems to be legit -- but their defense is no longer "lights out" and for all the talk (from some quarters) about how Baltimore was going to come in and smack the Pats in the mouth -- it looked to me like it was the Pats doing most of the smacking. Which is bad news for the rest of the NFL.
    Posted by prairiemike

    Agreed. I think Flacco's got the goods, but I was not impressed by Harbaugh. Sadly, the Ravens team is following suit. There is already an ESPN story by Reese where they are criticizing the refs. Zero accountability from the top down.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from frankdawop. Show frankdawop's posts

    Re: How good were the Ravens

    Usually, this is a rule of thumb ...

    Blitz new or poorer quarterbacks and use coverage defenses for good ones ...

    It worked here.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from prairiemike. Show prairiemike's posts

    Re: How good were the Ravens

    I have a question.

    If what Z just said is true (and I suspect it is), why were so many people in here pontificating about how the rest of the AFC was fortunate the Pats had been edged out the playoffs last season, after having played so well against the dregs of the league?







    Oh . . .   wait.

    Never mind.


    I just realized I already know the answer to that question.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from underdogg. Show underdogg's posts

    Re: How good were the Ravens

    In Response to Re: How good were the Ravens:
    In Response to Re: How good were the Ravens : It's easy to get surgical on a corpse. LOL.  Pretty good analogy.

    The Colts are really hard to figure because they have a total slam-dunk schedule this season, and their offense tends to make bad defenses look like college defenses, and then wither a bit against top defenses. I really can't disagree with this except to say that maybe they have been better against good defenses over the last few years.  But, your point is along the same lines as what I mentioned.  I want the colts to see the good D's.  to have some adversity to play through.  I think it is important to development.

    When they play NE and Baltimore back to back, many in the league will be watching for sure to see how they perform, because Tennesse, St. Louis, Frisco and Houston (4-10) hardly crank the amperage from playing the Jags, Fins, Cards and Seahawks (4-10). Yep.  but the colts (or any other team) better not rest on the Titans.  I don't care who the team is.  You just don't get that bad after going 13-3 the prior year.  Even with the loss of Haynesworth. 

    Posted by zbellino

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from NickC1188. Show NickC1188's posts

    Re: How good were the Ravens

    In Response to Re: How good were the Ravens:
    In Response to Re: How good were the Ravens : I believe it. From a handicapping perspective, I would rather the Pats be 3-1 against three playoff teams and one decent team with some flaws than be 4-0 against really bad teams. At least you know where you stand against the guys you will be seeing in the playoffs. Even if they were that good, you have this uneasy feeling about it while it is happening because they haven't started banging around with the bigboys yet. And you just don't know until the rubber hits the road.
    Posted by zbellino

    Yes!  If the Pats win the division this year, it will mean more than when we destroyed our division in 2007.  The Jets are a tough opponent who will test them.  The Dolphins are still tough to beat at home.  Buffalo has some incredibly talented skill position players.

    As for the Ravens, I'd be worried I couldn't do more against the Patriots defense when the Pats didn't have Jerod Mayo.  It's like they handicapped themselves by passing instead of handing it to Rice.  I'd also be worried about the Ravens' lack of a #2 receiver.  Mason is good, but not quite a top-flight number 1.  Clayton had all three of the final passes hit his hands.  Starting receivers need to make those catches.  Their defense is undoubtedly worse off this year.  There's no way they allow 258 yards through the air (with 67% completion rate) a few years ago.  They have good safeties, but losing Bart Scott cost them.  I also think they don't have very good corners - Fabian Washington is not a #1 corner (although a #1 talent).  With Ray Lewis and Ed Reed both on the wrong side of 30, they have a small window to build around those two before having to rebuild.  They're also in a tough division.  Tonight's game between San Diego and Pittsburgh will say a lot about whether the Ravens have two challengers in the division or just one (Cincinatti).
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from underdogg. Show underdogg's posts

    Re: How good were the Ravens

    In Response to Re: How good were the Ravens:
    In Response to Re: How good were the Ravens : I believe it. From a handicapping perspective, I would rather the Pats be 3-1 against three playoff teams and one decent team with some flaws than be 4-0 against really bad teams. At least you know where you stand against the guys you will be seeing in the playoffs. Even if they were that good, you have this uneasy feeling about it while it is happening because they haven't started banging around with the bigboys yet. And you just don't know until the rubber hits the road.
    Posted by zbellino

    Going into this season, no one was saying that either the phins or the cards were bad teams.  In fact, many were suggesting that the phins would actually be better but their schedule would keep them out of the playoffs. 

    Who knows.  the colts have 12 games left.  I'll hope for a healthy season and a playoff birth and then worry about whether or not they can handle other playoff teams.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from prairiemike. Show prairiemike's posts

    Re: How good were the Ravens

    I haven't read every post here (and have no intention of doing so), but Nick's is the first one I've read that makes the point I was thinking about throughout the game. I thought the running game was supposed to be the Ravens' strength, and yet they went away from it all day. It was almost as if Baltimore believed it was in a shootout before it actually was. I remember thinking how much they were playing right into the Pats' hands right before Rice ripped off that 50-yard scamper (and made it a game).

    I wonder how much the Pats taking away the opening kick-off alterd the Ravens approach -- whether just psychologically or in actual game-planning.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from underdogg. Show underdogg's posts

    Re: How good were the Ravens

    Well my hats off to you for your predictions. 
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from BubbaInHawaii. Show BubbaInHawaii's posts

    Re: How good were the Ravens

    In Response to How good were the Ravens:
    looks like a couple of turnovers hurt them for scores.  Also, without the "a win is a win" response, were pats fans satisfied with the team's play?
    Posted by underdogg


    red zone d still having some problems, benefitted from a drop at the very end of the game.  Punter did a lousy job pinning Ravens in their end.

    Offensive play calling better than the first 3 games, but there were some head scratchers at the end of the game when we were trying to score at least 3 points to put the game away.

    we face Denver next week...woohoo!
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from prairiemike. Show prairiemike's posts

    Re: How good were the Ravens

    In Response to Re: How good were the Ravens:
    In Response to How good were the Ravens : red zone d still having some problems, benefitted from a drop at the very end of the game.  Punter did a lousy job pinning Ravens in their end. Offensive play calling better than the first 3 games, but there were some head scratchers at the end of the game when we were trying to score at least 3 points to put the game away. we face Denver next week...woohoo!
    Posted by BubbaInHawaii


    The punting was atrocious.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from Sam-Adams. Show Sam-Adams's posts

    Re: How good were the Ravens

    Just getting home from the game and I would have to say a win is a win. 

    Kidding, I'm upset they didn't put it away when they had the chance. You get a huge boost from the D with 7:10 left and can't take advantage of it. The Ravens are a good team and we have a ton of film to review to look for improvements for next week but we can do it on a W. I hope Bronco trolls are better than Raven.

    Anyone know the status of the injured Raven (couldn't even see who it was from my seats) I hope he's alright.
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from Davedsone. Show Davedsone's posts

    Re: How good were the Ravens

    Hey.. Rodney Harrison just said that the first 3 games the defense was in all vanilla coverages due to so many new people.  And that this game the playbook was opened up.  Im not too sure if he knows it all, but pretty sure he knows what the defensive playbook looks like, so if he says it, ok.  Really happy with the Defensive play today.  Some breakdowns, but they got pressure and coverage was ok except in a few spots.  Need to do better on 3rd and long, thats an old story though.  Offense looked O.K. but i think it is time to STOP playing Moroney and not sure about Aiken as a number 2.  Love Taylor and the crew, but why are the mixing it up so much with the running backs?  Whatever.  I'll take it, and welcome back, Wes!  Now we need some new plays to face Josh McD with.  Hate being in Denver.  I lived there for 2 years, the altitude really does mess you up.  Oh, well.  Go Pats!
     
Sections
Shortcuts