Ravens Loss A Total Team "Effort"

by Bruce Raffel on Dec 19, 2011 10:01 AM EST

Complain all you want about the ineffectiveness of the Baltimore Ravens offense in only putting up touchdowns at the beginning and end of their 34-14 loss to the San Diego Chargers last night on prime time television, but when your defense give up scores on six of the opponent's first seven possessions, it's going to be tough for any offense.

If you missed the game and only looked at QB Joe Flacco's statistics from the game and saw his 23-34 performance with two touchdowns but two interceptions and his 81.3 QB Rating, you might even think the Ravens made it close or even won the game. However, when you take a gander across the field at Chargers QB Philip Rivers game stats, you see why San Diego blew out Baltimore. Rivers finished 17 of 23 for 270 yards and one TD, with a QB Rating of a close to perfect 127.

The Ravens supposedly stingy defense gave up an astounding 415 yards of total offense, including an eye-opening 11.7 yards per pass attempt by Rivers. The league-leading sack team in the league could not get to the San Diego signal-caller not even one time, as former Ravens tackle Jared Gaither had the last laugh against his former teammates.

Rookie CB Jimmy Smith and especially Cary Wiliams were burned repeatedly by the Chargers veteran wideouts, Vincent Jackson and Malcom Floyd, who caught eight passes between them for 180 yards, averaging 22 yards per catch. For whatever reason, Ravens safety Ed Reed was invisible and made no impact whatsoever and other than his two interceptions on opening day of the 2011 season versus the Pittsburgh Steelers, has picked off only one pass since then.

Blame Flacco all you want but when your defense gives up 34 points, it's hard to compensate and respond. The Ravens are in the playoffs and once you get in, anything can happen. However, a win would have made a huge difference in the feelings and confidence of all Ravens fans. Football is the ultimate team game and the blame for this loss was a complete team "effort" and should be "shared" by everyone who stepped on the field.

Tweet Comment 35 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

This game was just embarrassing. We simply got whooped on both sides of the ball and that’s all there is to it. I still think we are a good team and can still be contenders, but we got to figure out these road games especially if Pitt wins tonight. Hopefully Jimmy and Cary got some good lessons and learn from it because they were overwhelmed by Jackson and Floyd and if we want to hang with the elite passing attacks they have to get better.Like I said I still feel we can hang with anybody and we have seen how good we can be when we are on our game, but we definitely have some things that need to be corrected and they need to be corrected fast.

On Ed Reed:
"I’ve told him to his face many times, ‘You’re the greatest safety ever to play the game,’"
"We all learn from each other, but we all learn most from him."
- Troy Polamalu

by AV23 on Dec 19, 2011 10:22 AM EST reply actions

Also Flacco has got to protect the ball better. Those Int’s were some of the worst balls I have seen. There was nothing deceptive about the look the D gave or anything he just basically threw it right to them.

On Ed Reed:
"I’ve told him to his face many times, ‘You’re the greatest safety ever to play the game,’"
"We all learn from each other, but we all learn most from him."
- Troy Polamalu

by AV23 on Dec 19, 2011 10:23 AM EST up reply actions

Hopefully Jimmy and Cary got some good lessons and learn from it because they were overwhelmed by Jackson and Floyd

I hope they learn to but i dont understand why chuck didnt allow them used press man coverage more often to atleast slow down the wideouts

by jazz20 on Dec 19, 2011 10:25 AM EST up reply actions

because some of the times they did they completely whiffed and got beat deep. Didn’t really matter yesterday. They were getting man handled regardless of what they tried. Makes me really wish we could have got Malcom Floyd now.

On Ed Reed:
"I’ve told him to his face many times, ‘You’re the greatest safety ever to play the game,’"
"We all learn from each other, but we all learn most from him."
- Troy Polamalu

by AV23 on Dec 19, 2011 10:29 AM EST up reply actions

Barnes and Gaither sure had the last laugh, didn’t they? I still can’t believe that we let those guys go. The worst part is that we could have kept them both for really cheap contracts at the time. Who did we keep/sign instead? Prescott Burgess and Mark LeVoir? Come on…

Those were two of the worst personnel decisions they’ve made in recent history. Not solely because they let good players walk but also because they really needed those players when they let them go. Right after we let Barnes walk, we have franchise low sack numbers and no pass rushers. Now, we’re going to need a LT in the near future because McKinnie is clearly a stop-gap player.

Obviously, Gaither and Barnes didn’t win the game single-handedly, but Gaither has been HUGE for them. Their three game winning streak started with Gaither’s first game, and Rivers has only been sacked twice in that span. He was dominationg last night… Threw Ray to the ground as if to put an exclamation point on his evening. Barnes’ four sacks also stand out. Boy, it would be nice to have him opposite Suggs.

Man, this whole thing leaves a bad taste in my mouth, and I knew this would happen to. That’s what pisses me off. I was hoping we had avoided it when Gaither seemingly flamed-out in KC, but I just had a sinking feeling that we’d regret getting rid of Gaither. It sucks to be right.

Follow @mfrazie

by BAL_Hawk on Dec 19, 2011 10:23 AM EST reply actions

Agreed. Barnes at the time I was real upset over. He was looking great and couldn’t understand why we would trade him. Gaither I was 50/50 on. I felt if we could get him cheap it would have been worth it to hold on because we seen how good he can be. It’s only 3 games with him so we have to see, but he definitely has looked great out there. I didn’t even hear suggs name other than the penalty.

On Ed Reed:
"I’ve told him to his face many times, ‘You’re the greatest safety ever to play the game,’"
"We all learn from each other, but we all learn most from him."
- Troy Polamalu

by AV23 on Dec 19, 2011 10:27 AM EST up reply actions

Gaither I was 50/50 on. I felt if we could get him cheap it would have been worth it to hold on because we seen how good he can be.

That was my point all along. We let Gaither walk and sign a ridiculously cheap $700K contract in KC when we were seriously considering starting Jah Reid at RT with virtually no backups at offensive tackle outside Yanda.

What would have been the harm in signing Gaither when they were clearly desperate at the position? Still one of the most perplexing decisions the front office has ever made in my opinion. I didn’t understand it then and I still don’t now.

Follow @mfrazie

by BAL_Hawk on Dec 19, 2011 10:39 AM EST up reply actions

I’m completely with you. I was one of the few with you that was all for bringing back Gaither if the price was right. Too much talent not to at least give him a chance.

On Ed Reed:
"I’ve told him to his face many times, ‘You’re the greatest safety ever to play the game,’"
"We all learn from each other, but we all learn most from him."
- Troy Polamalu

by AV23 on Dec 19, 2011 10:42 AM EST up reply actions

SD is aying that gaither

was the best waiver pick up in team history.

aka 'Rexx'

by Bruce Raffel on Dec 19, 2011 11:41 AM EST up reply actions

I dont see how the ravens could had been interested in signing gaithers when the raiders didnt sign him after it was reported that he failed a physical

. I think the ravens just were afraid of investing money in gaither when it possible he could had been injuried again and put back on I.R

by jazz20 on Dec 19, 2011 11:02 AM EST up reply actions

He signed for around the vet minimum though. The risk was very minimal.

On Ed Reed:
"I’ve told him to his face many times, ‘You’re the greatest safety ever to play the game,’"
"We all learn from each other, but we all learn most from him."
- Troy Polamalu

by AV23 on Dec 19, 2011 11:11 AM EST up reply actions

He signed for around the vet minimum though. The risk was very minimal.

i know but before he signed a vet minimum his deal with the raiders which most likely was going to be a big deal was denied because he failed his physcal. the cheifs ultimately took a risk with Gaither and when they signed him he wasnt able to go to training camp right away or play in any of the preseason games right away.

by jazz20 on Dec 19, 2011 11:19 AM EST up reply actions

the chiefs didn’t take a big risk though. they signed him cheap. that seems like a lot to us, but it’s not a very big contract. As bal_hawk mentioned we used his spot for Levoir who was eventually cut. Gaither was well worth the risk at the vet minimum when he can potentially be an elite LT. Those are very hard to find and don’t come around everyday. We gave a Mill to Stallworth last year and he was never considered close to elite and didn’t play football for a year to a year and a half.

On Ed Reed:
"I’ve told him to his face many times, ‘You’re the greatest safety ever to play the game,’"
"We all learn from each other, but we all learn most from him."
- Troy Polamalu

by AV23 on Dec 19, 2011 11:27 AM EST up reply actions

I never said they took a big risk but just said it was risk regardless. Gaither health was always the issue doing the free agency period and when the raiders didnt sign him (a team that desperately needed a good left tackle ) because he didnt pass his physical im sure that can push back teams interest in gaither .

The fact that Gaither failed his physical with the raiders was the reason why the cheifs was able to sign gaither to a low contract and that team was probably the only team that showed interest in gaither after he failed his physical.

by jazz20 on Dec 19, 2011 11:48 AM EST up reply actions

Gaither’s season this year is so weird. The guy clearly has talent, but he’s been cut twice.

"It’s easy to lie with statistics, but it’s easier to lie without them." -Fred Mosteller
Follow me on Twitter

by John Stephens on Dec 19, 2011 10:34 AM EST up reply actions

Yeah it’s just a mystery with him. You potentially can have a top 5 LT or he could be out of the league within the next few years. He definitely would have been worth the risk though since he wasn’t making much.

On Ed Reed:
"I’ve told him to his face many times, ‘You’re the greatest safety ever to play the game,’"
"We all learn from each other, but we all learn most from him."
- Troy Polamalu

by AV23 on Dec 19, 2011 10:40 AM EST up reply actions

Gaither had an atrocious track record in university and at work and that’s what made his release an easy decision! He hasn’t shown anything in the past three games to make anyone regret releasing him. But if he goes on to have a decent career, I could understand you feeling that your judgment is better than one of the best GMs in the game.

McKinnie has played well for the Ravens without causing any distractions. You should praise the decision that brought him to town and took away the uncertainty that Gaither caused!

by bshagagi on Dec 19, 2011 12:27 PM EST via mobile up reply actions

Mckinnie actually hasn’t been that great. Has he been better than Oher? Probably, but that doesn’t mean he’s been great and he’s not a long term answer and as of right now we don’t have anybody capable of playing LT. The point was that Gaither has shown the ability to not only be good, but great. Even if he does end up sucking and out of the league next year a potentially great LT at around the vet minimum would have been well worth the risk IMO. Ozzie is amazing and I constantly praise him, but like Hawk said nobody is perfect.

On Ed Reed:
"I’ve told him to his face many times, ‘You’re the greatest safety ever to play the game,’"
"We all learn from each other, but we all learn most from him."
- Troy Polamalu

by AV23 on Dec 19, 2011 12:34 PM EST up reply actions

Rivers had a great game and some of you are turning that into an excuse for Gaither. Come on! So 30 GMs didn’t take a minimum salary chance on Gaither but you, Bal_Hawk and Gaither fans are correct? I don’t see it

by bshagagi on Dec 19, 2011 12:43 PM EST via mobile up reply actions

Nobody is making an excuse as to that’s why we lost. We just got whooped. Just saying it was a small risk with a potentially big reward for a team that has no legit prospects at LT.

On Ed Reed:
"I’ve told him to his face many times, ‘You’re the greatest safety ever to play the game,’"
"We all learn from each other, but we all learn most from him."
- Troy Polamalu

by AV23 on Dec 19, 2011 12:51 PM EST up reply actions

At least we kept Gates in check...

A big reason why Reed wasn’t noticed.

by Mayne_Event on Dec 19, 2011 10:59 AM EST reply actions

Actually no we didn't

Gates was open all night across the middle but Rivers had his wideouts open deeper and choose to throw to them. Reed was invisible because he has been virtually irrelevant most of the season other than causing QBs to throw away from him.

aka 'Rexx'

by Bruce Raffel on Dec 19, 2011 11:43 AM EST up reply actions

i'm wondering

if we’re not seeing the decline of the great safety play in the north. i haven’t noticed reed on your highlights much. just about as much i have noticed troy not playing as well as we’re used to. i have enjoyed watching those two change games over and over again- well, not so much enjoying ed picking off ben- but i like good football, so…

by SamTheButcher on Dec 19, 2011 3:45 PM EST up reply actions

Barnes and Gaither are on a Chargers team that isn’t going anywhere.

by bshagagi on Dec 19, 2011 11:27 AM EST via mobile reply actions

I really hate to say it

But besides from a couple big hits, I didn’t see Ray Ray contribute much else. Ellerbe or maybe even Bynes need to start getting some reps at ILB. On that play where Ray lined up in man coverage outside, I was like ‘Oooh boy here they come’

by CharmCity55 on Dec 19, 2011 11:47 AM EST via iPhone app reply actions

On that play where Ray lined up in man coverage outside, I was like ‘Oooh boy here they come’

ray wasnt healthy at least not a 100 percent healthy they said he had his foot in ice doing the game. I dont think Ray sucks in coverage but overall the cornerbacks just didn’t cover good at all

by jazz20 on Dec 19, 2011 11:51 AM EST reply actions

ray wasnt healthy at least not a 100 percent healthy they said he had his foot in ice doing the game

Than he shouldn’t have played.

Flacco has to trust his receivers to make catches, but shouldn’t throw towards coverage. He needs to attack deep more often, but shouldn’t hold onto the ball so long. He needs to show more awareness in the pocket and move to extend plays, but nothing good comes of him leaving the pocket. He should run with the ball if nobody’s open, but he definitely can’t run with the ball.

Flacco should have the awareness of Roethlisberger, the elusiveness of Vick, the control of the offense of Manning, the leadership of Brady, the accuracy of Brees, and the arm strength of … Flacco? - Ampallang

by Mr MaLoR on Dec 19, 2011 12:26 PM EST up reply actions

And yes, Ray does suck in coverage. ALOT

by Mr MaLoR on Dec 19, 2011 12:26 PM EST up reply actions

Yeah as bad as it is to admit he really is a liability in coverage. He just can’t run anymore. His great instincts allow him to make plays on the ball at times, but more times then not if he’s isolated in coverage he will get burned. He just doesn’t have the speed anymore to cover.

On Ed Reed:
"I’ve told him to his face many times, ‘You’re the greatest safety ever to play the game,’"
"We all learn from each other, but we all learn most from him."
- Troy Polamalu

by AV23 on Dec 19, 2011 12:30 PM EST up reply actions

It feels a little like blasphemy to say so, but . . .

I really feel the D played better, faster, more aggressively without Ray Ray. Some of this may be due to the defensive schemes used, but I wonder if some (or all) of the defensive schemes employed were/are based on the personnel in the game. RR clearly wasn’t 100% (though I think I heard on TV this morning that he was credited with 10 or 11 tackles, but few, if any were for a loss). I don’t understand why the schemes used last night seemed less agressive, particularly if SD’s O-Line was supposedly less than 100%. Seems to me that the more agressive pass rush took some pressure off the secondary. In what clearly was a mismatch on paper between our secondary and their receivers, why in the world was the pass rush so non-existent or ineffectual?

Michael Oher is so fast off the ball that he only appears to be off-sides.

by Raveness on Dec 19, 2011 12:43 PM EST up reply actions

THE CHARGERS JUST HAVE SO MANY WEAPONS

on offense (sorry for the caps)

tolbert and matthews is a hell of a tandem, as is jackson/floyd.

whats the deal with joes short ass drop backs? like 2 stop drops and then standing there in a crowd, no wonder he couldnt get anything going, there were plays where he got sacked where it looked like he could have just simply stepped back a couple steps to buy some more time, but didnt.

that was a frustrating game to watch, really fuckin ugly.

by handlogten on Dec 19, 2011 12:52 PM EST up reply actions

Yeah he didn’t have his best game while Rivers came out and lit it up. Gotta get things fixed and win these last two games.

by bshagagi on Dec 19, 2011 1:00 PM EST via mobile up reply actions

IDM what you do, as long as Flacco is your QB you will continue to fail.

The Ravens are pus*ies compared to the Steelers. - Peyton Hillis 2010

by malaki on Dec 19, 2011 7:04 PM EST reply actions

Thank you for your uneducated opinion!

by bshagagi on Dec 19, 2011 7:33 PM EST via mobile up reply actions

In fairness, by saying it’s an “uneducated” opinion, you are implying that it can be proven wrong.(It can’t, or be proven right) This would also imply that you could see the future. Now if you are able to see the future, and you know for a fact that Flacco will be the QB on a Super Bowl winning team, then I stand corrected, and malaki’s opinion is uneducated.

Boy, I'm three generations deep, in gangstadom

by FrankWyt on Dec 20, 2011 2:55 AM EST up reply actions