A lot of y'all were miffed that we threw 3 times with a minute left in the 2nd half (and to be fair it set up an easy score for the Ravens), but I do like the mentality in general. Everyone knows ML teams mail it in if they have possession with under 2 minutes and a lead. I like that they didn't want to let the foot off the gas. They saw that Andy was on a roll and tried to capitalize off of it. This offense can be very high octane with a "no amount of points are enough" attitude.

I liked this. Hopefully Marv/Lazor keep this up. Afraid Marv will get discouraged and go back in his shell.

I agree. I can't complain that they tried to go for the throat. But not running it at all with under 2 minutes to go was just plain stupid. Marvin showed can be aggressive, just wish he could be aggressively smart

Having a team down 28-7 before the half and all of the momentum plus having possession in the third quarter goes a long way psychologically in putting a team away. Allowing the team to score a TD before the half sucked the momentum and gave the Raven's hope.

I did not like Lasor's play calling before the half.

Agree with your point Treee. Even though it didn’t quite work out in our favor, it was great to see the aggressiveness to win.

Scared money don't make money.

It was entertaining in the game day thread watching those that always complain about Marvin being too conservative complaining about going for it early.

(09-14-2018, 10:16 AM)bfine32 Wrote: It was entertaining in the game day thread watching those that always complain about Marvin being too conservative complaining about going for it early.

Completely agree. If we would have run it three times, everyone would have been complaining about being conservative. I liked the attempt, hated the results. Hope they keep that mentality.

I loved it and hope they continue to do so if the opportunity presents itself.

Agree with you completely. I loved the aggressive calling. It didn’t work out for us but I hope they keep that mindset.

Let’s not forget the D did make a stop really that was such a ticky-tack call on Dre I lost my shit.

(09-14-2018, 05:40 AM)treee Wrote: A lot of y'all were miffed that we threw 3 times with a minute left in the 2nd half (and to be fair it set up an easy score for the Ravens), but I do like the mentality in general.

I disagree. That was just not smart to do that. You get the ball in the second half anyway, you can fire at will then. With a 28-7 lead, you need to at least make the Ravens burn their timeouts. While still trying to get a first down with two to three runs.
That's not "conservative", that is common sense.

Or at least go for easy completions, not for some hastily thrown out shots. Having an aggressive mentality is good, but being stupid is not.

we will score and score and score and score... that's the offense's job. it's the defense's job to stop and stop and stop and stop the opposing team's scoring. It's the coache's job to strategize both sides to manage the game. I've given up on Marvin in that respect. Just hope we never get Bellicheck in the playoffs..

(09-14-2018, 10:26 AM)hollodero Wrote: I disagree. That was just not smart to do that. You get the ball in the second half anyway, you can fire at will then. With a 28-7 lead, you need to at least make the Ravens burn their timeouts. While still trying to get a first down with two to three runs.
That's not "conservative", that is common sense.

Or at least go for easy completions, not for some hastily thrown out shots. Having an aggressive mentality is good, but being stupid is not.

Run three times give them the ball back and they score a TD and we are here today saying we tried to give the game away being conservative. To be frank fans simply like to second guess anything that doesn't work. No one would have said anything if we get the first down there throwing the ball. As to how we go about throwing, it comes down to what the coverage gives you. 

I'll never fault Marvin for being aggressive. In today's NFL you have to be !

Like Bfine and others are saying the same people complaining are a lot of the same ones who would be screaming if we ran it three times and punted and they scored.

See there's the little problem in this game of the opposing team, they're tryin to win as well. What if's can go on all day long. It didn't work this time. But somewhere down the road playing aggressive will most likely be to our advantage.

I'd a thousand times rather go down swinging than sit there with the bat on our shoulders.

(09-14-2018, 10:47 AM)Au165 Wrote: Run three times give them the ball back and they score a TD and we are here today saying we tried to give the game away being conservative.

I wouldn't. At least they'd have to try to score with no timeouts left. Which makes a TD so much more unlikely.
I'd even be ok with one pass and two runs. But you can't use up 14 seconds, no timeouts and give the ball back with a 28-7 lead. That is just not smart clock management and I am a) astonished how there's even so much dissent on that one and b) like to emphasize that this is not me just complaining that we lost the ball or me complaing for complaining's sake.

Haters gonna hate.

Same people crying about him throwing are generally the same ones that would cry if he did play conservative and burn the clock.

(09-14-2018, 11:04 AM)hollodero Wrote: I wouldn't. At least they'd have to try to score with no timeouts left. Which makes a TD so much more unlikely.
I'd even be ok with one pass and two runs. But you can't use up 14 seconds, no timeouts and give the ball back with a 28-7 lead. That is just not smart clock management and I am a) astonished how there's even so much dissent on that one and b) like to emphasize that this is not me just complaining that we lost the ball or me complaing for complaining's sake.

Yea, this to me is simply revisionist history. If they run three times punt it back and give the Ravens a FG, which is easily obtainable with Tucker, people are still losing their mind about being too conservative. End of half management is a no win situation here. Marvin has earned that though, but I still think the call last night was right. 

To everyone saying go into half with the lead (making assumption they couldn't score with a minute and no TO) then come out with the ball and score to end it, you can take the revisionist stance and say we didn't score another TD after Baltimore made half time adjustments so the best time to score was before half time.

There is aggressive and smart, aggressive and dumb, conservative and smart and finally conservative and dumb. The point of the game is to win. Running the ball 3 times there is conservative and smart. A 21 point lead going into the 2nd half is almost too much to overcome. A win by 30 points counts just as much as a win by 1 point.

Granted I like to see aggressiveness when you're deciding between conservative and aggressive and it's a decision that is "on the fence". For instance, Marvin rarely goes for 4th down when across the 50. He punts. He's defensive minded. Marvin also kneels when he has two timeouts and minute left in a half when he has a lead of 3 points. It's maddening.

He should have run the ball 3 times. He could have potentially had a FG and a 24 point lead. Worst case is a 21 point lead. That's conservative and smart.

(09-14-2018, 11:11 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Haters gonna hate.

Same people crying about him throwing are generally the same ones that would cry if he did play conservative and burn the clock.

Not true in my case. I'm no team apologist by any stretch. I liked what i saw in 2015. So far this season, offseason included, seems a lot better. More urgency all around, including the end of the half. Also no sign of the big game Jitters we have all come to know and love. 

Long season though. 

(09-14-2018, 11:13 AM)Au165 Wrote: Yea, this to me is simply revisionist history. If they run three times punt it back and give the Ravens a FG, which is easily obtainable with Tucker, people are still losing their mind about being too conservative. End of half management is a no win situation here. Marvin has earned that though, but I still think the call last night was right. 

Yeah I do not care about imaginary people losing their imaginary shit in an imaginary situation.
I have a hard time believing that any neutral person watching could quite understand a 14 seconds, no timeout drive with a 28-7 lead. 28-10, I take that too.
Most happily of course, I take the first down after two runs and maybe even a pass. And I take the two timeouts Baltimore loses. Then I can shoot perhaps.

(09-14-2018, 11:13 AM)Au165 Wrote: To everyone saying go into half with the lead (making assumption they couldn't score with a minute and no TO) then come out with the ball and score to end it, you can take the revisionist stance and say we didn't score another TD after Baltimore made half time adjustments so the best time to score was before half time.

Yeah that doesn't make sense to me. We couldn't score after the half time, so we needed to score before half time, so even though we couldn't score there either, it still was the right call to throw in hindsight.

No it was not.