dc.

I still wonder why we let Cousins back on the field. We looked fine with Yanda and Chester. They are far from perfect, but Cousins was just pathetic. I seriously wonder about our coordinators at times. Cam seems to think that Cousins was the better play today. That's obviously awful and we never adjusted. Mattison seems happy to continue to let Walker and Carr hand-check, play 10 yards off the ball, etc etc... and I never see any change in scheme or improvement in play. So what gives??? And how the hell is it that we can get defensive holding 3-6 times a game... but I remember only an handful against our opponents all season long. Are our receivers just that bad about creating the contact?? Our our defenders that stupid?? Both?? Do the officials really have it in for us?? At times I think its a combo of all three.

I disagree about the timeout when the Steelers were pinned. I was laughing at the announcers on that one. I knew the Steelers would go for it big... and I had a good feeling they'd get it too. So let's just give them plenty of time. Even more stupid was the Foxworth corner-blitz later in the same drive. Pathetic. We do it too frequently and never with success. And I do blame the coaches for not teachings these guys how to avoid those bullshit calls. As bad as the call was on Walker on that final play... there needs to be an understanding that ANY penalty in that situation is going to end the game. Period. So you keep your hands and your body to yourself.

Classic 'benefit to the receiver' call. And bull on top of it. There was offensive holding on that play too... anyone want to call that? Of course not. Just bullshit from start to finish. And, as usual, we kill ourselves by just adding to it... Mason... Cousins. Why was Cousins let back in? Yanda-Chester was could have been no worse. It was physically impossible to be worse than Cousins.

I don't think it would come to that tie-breaker... at least not with all of the teams listed. First and foremost, the Jets play Indy. They're done. Secondly, we own the first tie-break with Denver (head-to-head). So, even if we were to somehow lose a tiebreak to the Dolphins, that would leave us and Denver vying for the 6th spot... and we would win that tie-break, reverting to the head-to-head game. But, also, I think the conference record and similar opponent tie-breakers are the first (after head-to-head)... and I doubt that the Dolphins and Ravens are equal in both of those (not in the mood to look it up). Also, 83... why don't you like the sound of Denver coming into Baltimore in the Wild Card??? We did it once....

Batista really wasn't bad defensively. Wigginton, as cleetz said before, had an amazing knack for making even the easiest plays look like webgems. My favorite was the very first time he was put at 2B for the O's (can you imagine, the oaf at 2B?), a light tapper was hit directly at him... and he's running... and charging... and running... and charging... and and and.... Robert Andino, from the SS position, gets across the diamond to the ball before Wigginton does. Runner safe on no throw.

Which I still can't entirely agree with... If the Bengals lose out, we get a home game. And we can certainly win at home - especially against Denver, Jax, Miami, whoever... Meanwhile, we've played everyone else: Beat San Diego Lose by a field goal to Indy Lose by 4 to NE So, as bad as our D was in those games... as awful as they were in so many ways... I still have to think that there's no way we are down and out in any of them. There's a big disconnection in the naysayers... Either (A) this team is bad and has been lucky to hang with the big boys (and lose).... or (B) we've never played to potential and are a disappointment. Logically, it's hard to believe that this bad, bad team continually plays good teams close. That means that we always catch good teams on their worst days or the good teams simply aren't that good. I eliminate the 'always catching a good team on a bad day' line. It makes no sense. Which leaves that other teams aren't as good as they seem. Which plays to our advantage. Which leaves B. And B says that we haven't played well, and certainly not as well as we can. Which means that if we are playing good teams so close, even while playing poorly, we're much better than we appear. And that means that if we ever put it together, we can beat these teams. And really, the games say that. We are 1-2 plays a game from wins. In any case... any game is winnable. Playoffs or not.

So, by now I'm sure most of us know... but it's interesting to see... We can clinch our playoff birth this weekend with a number of scenarios... They all start with a win of course, and then we need: 1. JAX loss/tie AND NJY loss/tie 2. JAX loss/tie AND DEN loss 3. MIA loss/tie, NYJ loss/tie AND DEN loss 4. JAX loss, NYJ loss, TEN loss/tie, AND HOU/MIA tie (haha, like that'll happen). Anyway... a handful of very possible scenarios. Remember, Denver plays @ Philly and Jax plays @ New England. That could make Scenario 2 come true. Also the Jets are @ Indy. So, we could have Scenarios 1 and 2 both come true. But what's really interesting, is that if we win and one of these scenarios comes through... BUT Cincinnati loses, then we have perhaps the weirdest situation in NFL playoff history. If one of these scenarios comes true and the Bengals lose (and HOU/MIA do not tie) ... then the Bengals will remain #1 in the division, without a secured playoff spot, while the Ravens are #2 in the division and have secured a playoff spot. Two words: crazy bananas. haha

What about points allowed? I believe we are second behind only the Colts. For all the crap our D gets (and they deserve a ton of it), I stand by the early early statement that our offense is as much to blame for many of our losses... if you hold the Colts to 13(Forget and not interested in looking it up) or the Bengals to 17 TWICE, I expect to win those games. Even if you want to say "they were playing conservative" and whatever other bull... the points are the points. They were all under 20. We should be able to score 20.

A number of responses to these things... 1. Wigginton's numbers lie. Wigginton was AWFUL last year, all around. He had a few moments of glory here and there, but his occasional pop was far outdone by his unbelievable rally-killing powers. Just unbelievable. I cannot believe he is still on this team. 2. I certainly see Atkins upside. And I am extraordinarily hopeful that it comes through. But that doesn't mean I trust it. I don't at all. Look at his splits. Even in his best seasons, his splits say that he is a product of Coors Field and mile-high baseball. And his absolute collapse last year hardly makes me believe that he'll have any success changing that this year. 3. I will also absolutely agree that Atkins defensive ability is one of his great upsides, but Mora was still solid defensively last year. It didn't do much for the team. 4. Atkins could certainly keep Bell or Snyder out of the majors. Roster space is limited. We've got 4 outfielders fighting for playing time, plus Lou Montanez. You've got Roberts, Izturis, Andino and now Turner in middle infield. You've got Wieters and a back-up catcher. And then Luke Scott, Ty Wigginton and now Atkins. And Michael Aubrey. And we still don't have a legitimate first baseman. While moving Montanez, Andino, Aubrey or Turner may seem easy to option out... except for Turner, they are all short on options. And Turner deserves to be up here. The bottom line is that I simply don't see the Atkins move as improving this team in any meaningful way. But it is taking up roster space and 4 million in payroll. But my biggest problem remains that I am going to be told for the next 5 months (and then months beyond that) about how great Atkins COULD be... but in all likelihood, I'll never actually get to see it. And as positive as I try to be, that's what I see/feel here. Just another player for Thorne and Hunter to rave about while he hits 220, because "when he gets in a groove" or "he's the kind of guy that has the ability to take any pitch out of the park."

The only thing I don't like about Atkins is it's another Ty Wigginton, Kevin Millar, Jay Payton type signing... I'm just tired of them. I get the "upside" argument shoved down my throat all off-season... all early season, even when the guy slumps... and especially during the one or two week hot streak. Every year, there's a couple new faces of the same style... guys who I know won't do anything, but I get to listen to the announcers and Trembley (who I love), tell me how good they are in the clubhouse and how much they really can do "when they find it." If Atkins and Wigginton play the way Wigginton did last year, they should both be cut by June 1 and we can let Snyder, Bell and anyone else with a pulse take a shot. No reason to hold kids back now. A sloppy veteran is a sloppy veteran. Period.

Well, win it in a few weeks or not... they are leading it now. By Papa's logic, before the season started we should have all been able to see them in this position because they 'created' that team before the season started. But the plays and decisions in the game matter - and sometimes a 7-6 team is a lot closer to the team ahead by 3 games than the team behind by 3 games.

Papa... my big question for you then is simple: Do the Bengals deserve to be AFC North Champs this year? Did they build a team that, preseason, you said was playoff bound? The Cardinals last year? Did they put together the finest team $ has to offer? I agree that wishing and hoping are not all that plays into it... but, there's a difference between wishing and optimism. Again, all but a pair of the Ravens losses have been very, very close (@Bengals and Pack were not as close). And if you really believe that we judge teams more on their make-up that gameday, then I say they deserve more credit than you are giving. Because regardless of the apparent 'level' of play... they are a few plays away from 11-2. Simple as that.

Don't forget as well that the Jags are only ahead of us because of the Conference record... right now they are half a game ahead. If they lose to the Colts, we tie in Conf schedule and we move down the tiebreak list (and I'm not sure who wins as we move down it). If we lose to Pitt, we get the bump again... but if they lose to NE, same thing. Just because Jax owns the tie-break today does not mean they will own it after Week 17.

I thought Billick did one of our games last year... maybe it was just preseason though. Also... all coaches duck questions much the same way. That's what I never got about the Billick criticism on 'ducking' questions. What do you want him to say? Is there any right answer to a question about a bad play or player? No. There's nothing. Throw a player under the bus? Forget having a lockerroom to coach in. Say anything else about 'responsibility' or 'accountability' and you sound like you're ducking the question. Say something good about the other team, you're admitting fault and ducking the question. There's no right answer when 1,000,000+ people are watching/judging.

No one else saw this today or reported it... Clayton may be out... Harper might be the fill-in. Could use the speed, I say. http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/sports/ravens/blog/2009/12/ravens_sign_harper_waive_ali.html

Love the move as well. I like Chris Ray, but the injury and continued injury problems are troubling. I think he could definitely be as good as he was in 2006 again. But that's no guarantee. The solid, front-end starter... that we need. If we can get Guthrie back on track a bit... get Bergesen back from injury... and continue to see Matusz and Tillman develop... it could (at the least) be a fun season to watch. And you still have Hernandez, Erbe, Arrietta in the wings...

But Cam's uneven, inconsistent and uncreative play-calling has hardly helped. And it doesnt appear much he has done much to fix the problems of execution (much like Mattison on defense). Regardless, it wasn't calling out Cams... it was calling them out, top to bottom. Cam happens to be top. Also... McGahee's decision to go wide on the play was really not a bad decision. Woodson made an amazing play. Let's start with that. McGahee actually got through most of the tackle, but Woodson somehow got his other hand onto Willis' laces. If McGahee gets past Woodson, he's in the endzone. And inside would hardly have been better off. As for Joe's decisions... I would maintain that they are in large part affected by the success of every play prior. Bad playcalling and execution at the goal line time after time, and every where else on the field, makes Joe feel like he has to make plays - because apparently our wide receivers, offensive line and backs aren't getting it done. In fact, most have said it here... Joe has to make the plays, all his own. Well, there are consequences to that. Forced passes and mistakes are going to be part of that equation. In the meantime, I've never heard so much commotion over a 6-6 team. The Ravens are still relatively young, inexperienced, etc. Imagine the talk in Pittsburgh... SB Champs to 6-6. The Titans from 13-3 to 0-? (now 5-7). The Ravens aren't having a great year, but in a time of parity, it's hardly the end of the world. Problems to fix, let them be fixed.

I think you're talking about different forms of discipline here. Discipline on the field is knowing where to be, keeping your spot, etc. If a player isn't disciplined on the field, then perhaps they shouldn't play or maybe it's just a coaching problem. But a lack of discipline on the field is, generally, a skills/learning problem. There is no set or easy way to fix it. You can't bench everyone. You also can't scare that kind of discipline or knowledge into a player. It's like a teacher-student relationship... you can't shout at a kid until he remembers something. Even if you could it wouldn't work for long. Discipline off the field or behavior issues are different. That's where punishment and yelling and benching really works and comes in. I think the Ravens this year have serious discipline issues in the first trend - guys that don't know where to be, how to play, etc. They can't hold their ground, do the right thing when they have to. The discipline problems of years past were largely of the other variety. Mason's penalties for shouting/throwing things are issues of behavior control. I'm not saying that either are especially excusable... simply that they are different. I think Harbaugh is pretty good (and has been pretty good) about keeping on top of the behavior issues - with Mason seemingly excluded. But I think his treatment of CMac and Scott last year spoke to that. And perhaps his treatment of DWill and Walker speak to that as well. He clearly hasn't had much success in the on-field discipline... but everything, even coaching, is a learning process. What works for one group (last year's team) is not guaranteed to work for another team (this year's).

A bad offense from top (Cam) to bottom (Yanda)

The other piece of the QB sneak is that Rodgers, and many players (Dixon or someone last week) get the courtesy push from their RBs and OL... a move that is technically illegal. (The Reggie Bush Push). I remember the Ravens getting called on it a few years back, though, so I doubt they every try it.

I'll tell you the positive I saw... We at least learned what everyone else has learned in many games against us... how to use the officials to our advantage. Flag happy crew? Throw it deep and let them do all the work. They did. Too bad we frequently couldn't finish ourselves. Meanwhile... I don't blame Harbs too much. Week to week we are putting enough on the personnel that you have choose... is it a coach or personnel? I think mainly personnel. Though, Harbs has been far from perfect. Gameplans and discipline are lacking and that only points to one man.

No. That's the point. The reason you don't throw all the way across the field is that it's not a matter of "easily lobbing it to the corner." From 10 yards out of the endzone to 10 yards deep in the endzone and all the way across the field... that's a 40-50 yard throw. There's a reason that rule #1 is that when you roll out you never throw back across the field. Literally, it's rule #1 of throwing. Just like in soccer, you never cross in front of your own goal... in football, you never cross the field with a pass. Bad judgment as forced by bad circumstances. Execution was lacking everywhere tonight.

Again... just lame and also not true. Even with a loss we're #2 in the AFC North... right now that would mean the Dolphins and Broncos as the two insert teams... aside from that, we get all the same as the Bengals and Steelers (AFC South - Colts and co; and NFC South, I think)

Typical Raven Fan Fickleness. Joe's been set-up for failure as much as he's failed himself. Anyone that doesn't see that is only seeing what they want.

No. He was not open. He appeared open, but that is the classic example of you do not throw across the field ... because even a strong throw allows too many routes to undercut by CBs. The second throw was not as much a bad decision as a great play by Hawk. Regardless... the Ravens this season are a team of big plays and big failures. The McGahee run on 1st and goal was a great play by Woodson... but it changes our whole scheme. Same thing on the swing to Ray Rice the drive prior that lost 7 yards. We seem to find ways to put ourselves in bad positions. The result? Well, the only plays that have worked for the Ravens this game have been high risk, high reward gambles... pray for the flag or a great catch. If you train your team and your QB to play that way... that's what you'll get.