Looking back at the Raven's game.

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

    Re: Looking back at the Raven's game.

    In response to jri37's comment:

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

     

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

     

    They need players.  Without Gronk, the offensive weapons really lack potency, especially in the red zone.

     

     




    The offense is thin + the defense is thinner = Medicore team arounf a HOF QB.

     

     




     

    The offense is only thin a WR and they have addressed that issue in this years draft and FA.

    The Defense is thin at CB if the starters go down and the Safeties are thin if gregory is playing the majority of the snaps. The front 7 is a solid group.

    I just don't see this as a "mediocre" team. I think if you look at the 53 man roster their talent is at least top 10 if not better in the league.

    At least we can agree that the QB is a first year HOFer




    I said THE TEAM AROUND the HOF QB is mediocre. Together it is a good team.

    I wouldn't say this team with an average NFL QB plugged into it is a top 10 team. More like middle of the pack.

     

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: Looking back at the Raven's game.

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    They need players.  Without Gronk, the offensive weapons really lack potency, especially in the red zone.

     




    Yep. That's thin. And the running game still is not reliable.

     
  3. This post has been removed.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Looking back at the Raven's game.

    In response to zbellino's comment:

    In response to pcmIV's comment:

     

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

     

     

    They need players.  Without Gronk, the offensive weapons really lack potency, especially in the red zone.

     



    It's not as simple as just taking away the best player and then talking about the lack of depth.  Consider that the top 4 receiving options in 2007 (Moss, Welker, Stallworth, Gaffney) combined for 3842 (80%) of Brady's 4806 yards and 41 (82%) of his 50 TDs.  Last season the top 4 receiving options combined for 3538 (73%) of Brady's 4827 yards and 26 (76%) of Brady's 34 TDs.  Nobody complained about the lack of offensive weapons on the 2007 team despite the fact that the production was even more concentrated at the top.  Plus I think Ridley is a better back than Maroney.  The difference is that team didn't lose it's best receiving option to injury.  If we took Moss off the 2007 team it would look "thin" as well.  There are not many teams that can lose their top receiving option (to say nothing of Gronk's ability as a blocker) and still field an equally effective offense.

     

     

     

     



    I agree. Gronk is a special case though, considering he is also an extremely vital cog in the running game. The whole offense has to change when he is off the field. 

     

    NE's offense isn't as much thin as it is poorly distributed for how much talent it has. Too much talent between the hashes, not enough outside. 



    That's a fair assessment.  But without Gronk it's not just a between the hashes group, but a smallish group too. Even Hern, while he might be large if he were a wideout, is a smallish TE. 

     

Share