Raven' Score Before the Half

[*psychdoctor*]

I was unable to join game day thread for the Raven's game. But damn, that offense sequence by the Bengals just before the half in which Lazor called 3 straight passing plays nearly gave me an ulcer. Allowed the Raven's to score a TD before the half to make the score 28-14 and change the momentum.

I was very happy with the O-Line performance for not allowing a sack.
Nice plays by Kirkpatrick and Williams. Williams had his BEST game as a Bengal.
But damn Marvin. Quit allowing teams score before the half.

Does anyone know if where the Bengals rank in terms of allowing teams to score in the last two minutes of the half under Marvin Lewis?

I think the Bengals made a statement victory during prime time. This team is only a couple players away from being a serious contender for AFC championship. Proud of these guys!

[motoarch]

They went for the throat. They stayed aggressive when it looked like they were on fire. They score there and go up 35-7 that game is over at halftime.

Unfortunately it didn’t work and in hindsight looked foolish but I like the attitude. Just wish it had been played better.

[*psychdoctor*]

(09-14-2018, 07:43 AM)motoarch Wrote: They went for the throat.  They stayed aggressive when it looked like they were on fire.  They score there and go up 35-7 that game is over at halftime.  

Unfortunately it didn’t work and in hindsight looked foolish but I like the attitude.  Just wish it had been played better.

I can understand the goal but I do not understand the passing plays that were called.  Why not send Ross and AJ Green down field for a bomb?  

[Fullrock]

I had no issues with throwing the football there. As much as we bang on Marvin for being ultra conservative, it was refreshing to see him go for the throat. It didn't work out, as it sometimes doesn't when you are aggressive, but I loved the mentality.

[Luvnit2]

(09-14-2018, 07:43 AM)motoarch Wrote: They went for the throat.  They stayed aggressive when it looked like they were on fire.  They score there and go up 35-7 that game is over at halftime.  

Unfortunately it didn’t work and in hindsight looked foolish but I like the attitude.  Just wish it had been played better.

I would have ran the ball at least once. But they saw an exhausted Ravens defense that had been on the field a lot in the first half. They went for the kill, like you said it was aggressive. It did not work, but I love the killer mentality overall.

[BengalD]

It was kind of a catch 22 if I recall because the raisins had all (or most ) of their time outs still. So if you run the ball and don't convert they still get it back with a full minute still on the clock. But now that I just replayed the situation - Yup they should have run the ball. At least they would have made them use up all of their time outs before having to drive the length of the field.

[Au165]

If people want Marvin to be aggressive you have to understand there are consequences when being aggressive doesn't work. I was okay with it based on how well Dalton and crew were functioning before that. Hindsight is always 20/20.

[Sweetness]

(09-14-2018, 09:20 AM)Au165 Wrote: If people want Marvin to be aggressive you have to understand there are consequences when being aggressive doesn't work. I was okay with it based on how well Dalton and crew were functioning before that. Hindsight is always 20/20.

I had no problems with throwing it twice but I felt they should have ran it at least once to either run more clock or make Balt waste a timeout. That was most likely the difference between them scoring a fg vs getting the TD. 

[*bengalfan74*]

Like most of the others have said I will not fault Marvin for being aggressive there. That's been one of his bigger downfalls IMHO. It didn't work. But they should have ran at least once there to make the Ravens burn a time out.

It's football, it doesn't always work. It's just like surprise fake punts or whatever. If it works the coach is a genius, if it fails he's a moron.

[Au165]

(09-14-2018, 09:24 AM)Sweetness Wrote: I had no problems with throwing it twice but I felt they should have ran it at least once to either run more clock or make Balt waste a timeout. That was most likely the difference between them scoring a fg vs getting the TD. 

One timeout there doesn't make a big difference. At that point you have committed to trying to convert meaning a draw or such there on 3rd down would be counter intuitive to being aggressive. 

[corpjet]

(09-14-2018, 07:48 AM)psychdoctor Wrote: I can understand the goal but I do not understand the passing plays that were called.  Why not send Ross and AJ Green down field for a bomb?  

I was surprised we didn't go deep at all the whole night, I think we def need to factor in some deep throws if nothing more that to keep the defense honest!

[Big Boss]

Tackling got a little sloppy in the third quarter. For the life of me, I cannot understand why opposing QB's seem to always escape should-be sacks with us. I recall at least two plays where we had Flacco dead to rights and he still either got away or got the ball out.

[Au165]

(09-14-2018, 09:29 AM)corpjet Wrote: I was surprised we didn't go deep at all the whole night, I think we def need to factor in some deep throws if nothing more that to keep the defense honest!

We did go deep a couple times, once Boyd had to play defense and save Dalton from a pick. They were playing a cover 2 shell most the night meaning getting up over top was going to be difficult. 

[Sweetness]

(09-14-2018, 09:29 AM)Au165 Wrote: One timeout there doesn't make a big difference. At that point you have committed to trying to convert meaning a draw or such there on 3rd down would be counter intuitive to being aggressive. 

You can be aggressive and still be smart in managing the clock. Obviously the Bengals did one and not the other given they have up a TD with like 8 seconds left in the half. If they run just once there's a good chance that doesn't happen. Grant it, I assume they thought they would be able to make at least 1 completion which would have accomplished the same thing. 

[Au165]

(09-14-2018, 09:32 AM)Sweetness Wrote: You can be aggressive and still be smart in managing the clock. Obviously the Bengals did one and not the other given they have up a TD with like 8 seconds left in the half. If they run just once there's a good chance that doesn't happen. Grant it, I assume they thought they would be able to make at least 1 completion which would have accomplished the same thing. 

You can't consider the exact same sequence by the Raven's if the TO is used. It's a butterfly effect, it changes things completely. Maybe they go deep earlier and get the same PI in the endzone? We will never know but going for the 1st down is aggressive and we wanted aggressive. I don't think it's poor clock management and neither would anyone else had they converted lol.

[Big Boss]

All I know is I love watching Harbaugh lose. Can't stand him.

[higgy100]

(09-14-2018, 09:30 AM)Au165 Wrote: We did go deep a couple times, once Boyd had to play defense and save Dalton from a pick. They were playing a cover 2 shell most the night meaning getting up over top was going to be difficult. 

Yep.......The old Eifert running TE skinny posts/seam patterns down the middle would have also worked perfectly.....Just glad to have him back in any capacity and working himself back into the feel of the game...

[Luvnit2]

(09-14-2018, 09:30 AM)Big Boss Wrote: Tackling got a little sloppy in the third quarter.  For the life of me, I cannot understand why opposing QB's seems to always escape should-be sacks with us.  I recall at least two plays where we had Flacco dead to rights and he still either got away or got the ball out.

 

I am not happy about it, but I noticed it as well. We need to clean that up. Maybe Brown and Burfict can help a lot?

[Sweetness]

(09-14-2018, 09:34 AM)Au165 Wrote: You can't consider the exact same sequence by the Raven's if the TO is used. It's a butterfly effect, it changes things completely. Maybe they go deep earlier and get the same PI in the endzone? We will never know but going for the 1st down is aggressive and we wanted aggressive. I don't think it's poor clock management and neither would anyone else had they converted lol.

You don't say. Profound words! 

Throwing the ball at 3rd and 10 was a high risk - low reward situation. Again, I like the aggressiveness but think they should have been smarter about it and I was saying that even before the Ravens scored. We've seen the Bengals give up points and momentum going into half time and time and time again. 

[*bengalfan74*]

(09-14-2018, 09:29 AM)Au165 Wrote: One timeout there doesn't make a big difference. At that point you have committed to trying to convert meaning a draw or such there on 3rd down would be counter intuitive to being aggressive. 

The Ravens were out of time outs when they scored. They had all 3 prior to starting the drive. It absolutely could have made a difference.