@orion said:

So in the early part of the season he was more FORCED to be a more traditional QB.  Which means that we have to strike early and often to get him out of his game.

Certainly a 14 point halftime lead would not suck....

But AZ first...

@tour2ma said:

Bottom line: We and KC jumped out to leads forcing BLT to abandon the run... including the running of their RPO QB

So in the early part of the season he was more FORCED to be a more traditional QB.  Which means that we have to strike early and often to get him out of his game.

@orion said:

Early in the season the Ravens tried to make him more of a traditional QB with running more of a last resort type of thing.   After we shut him down they said, Fuck That!    We're gonna get our assess handed to us.  He's gonna make our lousy tackling secondary look like a lousy tackling secondary.   (of course, I HOPE not)

Not what I remember, O, so I did a little PFR digging... https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/J/JackLa00.htm

In their Greg Roman revamped Louisville style Offense, BLT came into the season prepared to run Lamar as much as necessary. In Week 1 he did not have to in a laugher over MIA in which he sat midway thru Q3, but in Week 2 he ran 16 times for 120 in a close win over AZ.

Week 3 vs. KC the Ravens trailed by 8 midway thru the 2nd and by 17 at the half. Playing from behind forced BLT to the pass. LJ passed a season high 43 times and ran only 8 for 46. He was sacked 3 times.

In Week 4 we scored first and took a 10-7 lead into the half before going up by 14 late in the third. BLT closed to within 6 early in the 4th, but then Chubb broke his 88-yd TD run seconds later. In the game Lamar threw 34 times and ran 9. He was sacked 4 times and we picked him twice.

Bottom line: We and KC jumped out to leads forcing BLT to abandon the run... including the running of their RPO QB.

@mjp28 said:

And yet the early lines only show CLE +7 so should we jump on BAL at that line?

If I were a betting man, I would.  But I'm not, so I won't. 

@orion said:

Early in the season the Ravens tried to make him more of a traditional QB with running more of a last resort type of thing.   After we shut him down they said, Fuck That!    We're gonna get our assess handed to us.  He's gonna make our lousy tackling secondary look like a lousy tackling secondary.   (of course, I HOPE not)

And yet the early lines only show CLE +7 so should we jump on BAL at that line?

I think we're running just fine,maybe Hunt isn't getting the ball a lot, but I can take that. 

The thing that I liked the most against the Bengals was using both of them in some formations. Both are good receivers and can block, so using both at the same time makes a lot of mismatch opportunities.

I especially loved a play they ran at least twice: first time Chubb faked a run to the right with the line blocking to that side, while Hunt received a screen pass on the left side with all the defense moving to the opposite side. Later in the game, defense went for Hunt and Chubb had a big rush to the right. 

Let's keep them guessing. 

@orion said:

Early in the season the Ravens tried to make him more of a traditional QB with running more of a last resort type of thing.   After we shut him down they said, Fuck That!    We're gonna get our assess handed to us.  He's gonna make our lousy tackling secondary look like a lousy tackling secondary.   (of course, I HOPE not)

What I should have said to this post was Thanks.

Thanks a lot.

@orion said:

Early in the season the Ravens tried to make him more of a traditional QB with running more of a last resort type of thing.   After we shut him down they said, Fuck That!    We're gonna get our assess handed to us.  He's gonna make our lousy tackling secondary look like a lousy tackling secondary.   (of course, I HOPE not)

Good point.

Unfortunately.

@gorka said:

The Browns shut him down tho, the only team able to do so

Early in the season the Ravens tried to make him more of a traditional QB with running more of a last resort type of thing.   After we shut him down they said, Fuck That!    We're gonna get our assess handed to us.  He's gonna make our lousy tackling secondary look like a lousy tackling secondary.   (of course, I HOPE not)

@gorka said:

https://www.espn.com/nfl/player/stats/_/id/3916387/lamar-jackson

This was Jackson breakout year. I have faith that defenses will have learned how to play this guy when next season rolls along. Just like they did Baker.

The Browns shut him down tho, the only team able to do so it seams. We'll see if that holds up when they play again.

Most shocking stat is his TD completion improvement over last year.

It won't. They are missing to many guys on defense and at that point the Browns won't even have their 4% playoff chance so half the team will give up.  The Ravens will win and we will have to hear how awesome they are for the rest of the off season. 

This was Jackson breakout year. I have faith that defenses will have learned how to play this guy when next season rolls along. Just like they did Baker.

The Browns shut him down tho, the only team able to do so it seems. We'll see if that holds up when they play again.

Most shocking stat is his TD completion improvement over last year.

The reality is we, and most teams, should be running even less.

Baltimore is a horrible example.  Subtract all of Jackson's runs for starters as they are not traditional runs(the scrambles or the designed runs).  

@icecube said:

THAT was a good team. And I'd take Marty right NOW over what we have at HC. Marty was a much better coach than his general legacy has him. And he did a great job in KC too, and even made the Skins and Bolts better than others have since. 

Marty was a very good regular season head coach. 

@mjp28 said:

THAT was a good team. And I'd take Marty right NOW over what we have at HC. Marty was a much better coach than his general legacy has him. And he did a great job in KC too, and even made the Skins and Bolts better than others have since. 

@the-gipper said:

So, yea....as someone said elsewhere, our OL is Tretter/Bitonio...and who knows who else from week to week.

That was me.   And it's a part of why we can't do too much of either, run or pass.  We've got to set the defensive up for either.

@the-gipper said:

How's this for a lineup?

Landry........OL OL OL OL OL...Njoku.........OBJ

.............................Baker....................................

.............Hunt......................Chubb....................

(does it remind Old Timers of the Old Days?) ---------------------------if only our OL could block consistently.

So, yea....as someone said elsewhere, our OL is Tretter/Bitonio...and who knows who else from week to week.

So, yes, our offensive on field weak link is our OL.....but, of course, our bigger offensive weak link appears to be the Kitchens/Monken combination which at times appears clueless or worse. 

I won't at all be against taking a LT in the draft, to be clear. But in this regard, I'm 110% with you. Our line is consistently ranking "middle of pack" in week to week rankings. I'd argue their overall ranking via NFL (14th) is even skewed downward a bit as we were down 3? starters for two weeks early in the season. Your latter point has been the much, much more important problem.

They also had good defenses for point control and good field position.

A balanced attack.....as old as football itself.

Landry........OL OL OL OL OL...Njoku.........OBJ

.............................Baker....................................

.............Hunt......................Chubb....................

(does it remind Old Timers of the Old Days?) ---------------------------if only our OL could block consistently.

So, yea....as someone said elsewhere, our OL is Tretter/Bitonio...and who knows who else from week to week.

So, yes, our offensive on field weak link is our OL.....but, of course, our bigger offensive weak link appears to be the Kitchens/Monken combination which at times appears clueless or worse. 

@orion said:

Well, actually Baltimore's running attack is their QB.  They're kind of an exception for right now.

I'm really not sure how that alters my point in any way. IDC if the center is running the ball, rush yards are rush yards.

@orion said:

Well, actually Baltimore's running attack is their QB.  They're kind of an exception for right now.

And the hazard of having a running quarterback as your main man, they're not like interchangeable RBs.

The biggest problem I had in terms of running the ball came at an INTEGRAL time of the game. We forced our only 3 and out of the game and got EXCELLENT field position around the 50. We had ALL the momentum. So we run the ball, right? Nope. We dial up a freaking deep shot to OBJ and our TE ends up being 1 on 1 with their best pass rusher and Baker can't do anything but take a sack. Drive over. 

Now, on that same drive, I think OBJ almost makes a circus catch, but honestly it wasn't that close. Then on 3rd down, OBJ did what he's done all year and couldn't come down with the contested catch for 1st down. A catch very similar to the one Jarvis made on 3rd and 15. Was it a VERY difficult catch? Oh yeah. Did OBJ take a shot to the nuts? Yep. But you'd like for your $15 million WR to make that grab. That sets us up 1st and 10 at the 30 and gives us a chance to end the game. 

There were other positives about the game that I want to write about later. It wasn't great by any means, but Jesus, we won and game and I'm tired of people blaming the offense. The Bengals possessed the ball for so many lengthy drives, and they had just no pressure. Our offense can't score without the ball. 

@jrb12711 said:

Not a coincidence.

Well, actually Baltimore's running attack is their QB.  They're kind of an exception for right now.

Here's the thing I'm going to say to anyone in the "running is dead" conversation. The top rushing per game by team? Ravens, 49ers, Seahawks, Vikings, Bills. Arguably the best two teams in the AFC and NFC and playoff teams down from there. Not a coincidence.