26 replies to this topic

[Mackus]

Also, say the Ravens like Orr's potential as a DC, but he's just not seasoned enough yet.... has a team ever demoted and kept a coordinator as a position coach or analyst just to promote them back to a coordinator again?

Seems like an odd thing to do.

I think the strongest thing they might do is to switch play calling duties to Pees or someone else. I don't think they fire Orr in his first year, but its possible I suppose. Demoting him isn't an option, IMO.

[BaltBird 24]

I think the strongest thing they might do is to switch play calling duties to Pees or someone else. I don't think they fire Orr in his first year, but its possible I suppose. Demoting him isn't an option, IMO.

I don't know what a DC does throughout the week, assuming most of the time is spent watching tape and game planning for the upcoming week, which I'd assume Pees is already helping with. If they decide to give Pees play calling duties, I see no reason to keep Orr around.

(I don't like the idea of Pees round 2, probably little to no upgrade over Orr.)

[hallas]

Did any of the reporters ask John why he needed to throw away a challenge/to so quick into a game?

He said he felt like it was clear the ball moved when he went to the ground, same with that 1st down catch near the end of the half. He wanted to get clarification from the league on how much the ball can move before it's considered incomplete.

[hallas]

I think the strongest thing they might do is to switch play calling duties to Pees or someone else. I don't think they fire Orr in his first year, but its possible I suppose. Demoting him isn't an option, IMO.

I dont think playcalling is the problem, I think they're just blowing stuff.

[Ravens2006]

Did any of the reporters ask John why he needed to throw away a challenge/to so quick into a game?

 

Someone did actually, heard it on 105.7 a little bit ago... basically paraphrasing here: "they liked their odds of holding the Bengals to a field goal from the 4 much better than the 2"... or something like that.

 

The truth is he panicked, didn't have enough help from above (whatever happened to the Rosburg idea???) , and took a shot in the heat of the moment egged on mostly by the jumbotron and the crowd grumbling. Followed shortly thereafter by a defense that was unprepared for the pending snap. It was a typical sideline / coaching staff game awareness chit show, burning their second TO in the first 6 minutes of the half. One of which would have been useful in the last 15 seconds...

 

Before Lamar ever touched the ball to start the game, they had burned 2 of their 3 timeouts.

[BSLMikeLowe]

The only other change was the DC.

 

No, not really, and I think this is an under-appreciated part of the issue. In addition to losing Macdonald they also lost Dennard Wilson, Anthony Weaver, and had to replace Orr at ILB coach. That's a loss of coaching continuity at every level of the defense.

[ivanbalt]

Someone did actually, heard it on 105.7 a little bit ago... basically paraphrasing here: "they liked their odds of holding the Bengals to a field goal from the 4 much better than the 2"... or something like that.

 

The truth is he panicked, didn't have enough help from above (whatever happened to the Rosburg idea???) , and took a shot in the heat of the moment egged on mostly by the jumbotron and the crowd grumbling. Followed shortly thereafter by a defense that was unprepared for the pending snap. It was a typical sideline / coaching staff game awareness chit show, burning their second TO in the first 6 minutes of the half. One of which would have been useful in the last 15 seconds...

 

Before Lamar ever touched the ball to start the game, they had burned 2 of their 3 timeouts.

And since the Ravens win more often than not, everyone forgets that something like this happens almost every game.