View Full Version : Lincoln Kennedy or Orlando Brown Anyone??
Tspot-D-Ravenator
10-03-2006, 09:39 PM
Just as a saftey measure...Just a thought:eyes: Orlando still knows our offense and he could step in at gaurd:nerd: I'm not crazy:insane: Just tryin to think outside the box:nerd:
MikeinGlennDale
10-03-2006, 10:16 PM
I'm not for another Zues episode...still haven't gotten over his penalties in the Titans playoff game I guess.
Kennedy is intriguing...As always I'll make the assumption (making an ass of you and umption) that the front office has already considered this.
ClericBlackDave
10-04-2006, 01:31 AM
No and no.
I love these kind of responses. Care to discuss WHY you say no and no? Otherwise, you're not really moving the discussion forward, you're just trying to kill it, or just make a bootleg statement.
I think Kenedy has to be an intriguing option, although probably not the best one. I wonder if he'd even be interested?
UKRavenStockers
10-04-2006, 03:08 AM
Lincoln Kennedy hasn't played for about two years and would be so far out of shape that it's not true, he's nicely comfortable in his suit on NFL Network now and wouldn't be interested in playing again I'd guess.
Zeus is one of my favourite Ravens ever, but he went at the right time for my money, no need to bring him back and see how much further he's slipped especially without an off-season of conditioning and preparation.
I love these kind of responses. Care to discuss WHY you say no and no? Otherwise, you're not really moving the discussion forward, you're just trying to kill it, or just make a bootleg statement.
I think Kenedy has to be an intriguing option, although probably not the best one. I wonder if he'd even be interested?
Well, I thought it wouldn't require an explanation, but UKRavenStockers covered it pretty well.
highwater
10-04-2006, 07:36 AM
Zeus is done -- I'd be shocked if he was in shape to play. You could probably say the same thing about Kennedy. We're really stretching to even consider these guys seriously.
FHRaven
10-04-2006, 08:13 AM
Both of those guys are done. Fans knee jerk reaction is to always to start throwing around names of players that they remember, regardless of their playing ability.
The NFL is a young man's league. The Raven's would be much better off to scour other team's practice squads for possible talent.
FHRaven
braven98
10-04-2006, 08:39 AM
Thanks funny because Jamal was on 1300 last week and menion the Big O was working out and waiting for a phone to ring
camdenyard
10-04-2006, 08:52 AM
I love these kind of responses. Care to discuss WHY you say no and no? Otherwise, you're not really moving the discussion forward, you're just trying to kill it, or just make a bootleg statement.
The answers were obvious, at least to me.
Kennedy is retired.
Brown retired years ago, he just didn't know it.
Neither is likely in any kind of football shape anyway.
We have enough dudes that are long in the tooth on the line.
PARavensJeff
10-04-2006, 08:59 AM
I thought Zeus was done after last year, his knees are shot & his back is bad. So I would have to say pass on him.
As far as Kennedy, he seemed like a decent OL when he played, but I would guess if he's been out 2 years, that's a long time not playing for an OL. A skill position player might be able to come back after a couple year layoff, but the big guys bodies are different. So I would say no to him too. I don't know what he looks like now since I don't get the NFL Network in Southern York County on cable. Adelphia sucks, thank God Comcast is on the way. Hopefully we will get NFLN before Thanksgiving. I'd hate to miss all those Thursday/Saturday night games.
ravensfan1996
10-04-2006, 09:41 AM
These discussions of always bringing in an aging or retired vet thinking its a quick fix arent the answer. The new guys are the better choice to give them expierence and will probably as good or better then the injured older retired player.
Lincoln Kennedy did have a workout with the Bucs before the season started...even they didnt want him!
http://llnlb.us.publicus.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060825/NEWS/608250360/1009/SPORTS02
AZRAVEN
10-04-2006, 10:39 AM
I would be against bringing in an aging vet who hasn't played for two years or one who played but not very well . Now is the time to bite the bullet and see exactly what we have in all of these developmental players we have been feeding for a couple years. IMO this OL situation must be resolved next off season, as with the arrival of McNair the ability to blame its performance on poor quarterback play has evaporated, so work these young guys in and let them sink or swim. We'll know more what we have to work with before the draft.
Art-Florida
10-04-2006, 11:28 AM
If we are going to win our second Superbowl in a row in January of 2008, that offwnsive line must be overhauled this coming offseason.
AZRAVEN
10-04-2006, 12:00 PM
You are sort of getting ahead of yourself there, Art, let's win one before we start the dynasty :laugh:
highwater
10-04-2006, 12:25 PM
The OL needs some work but it certainly doesn't need a major overhaul. Sacks and turnovers by our QB are way down, and a lot of that is due to the huge upgrade at the QB position, not the OL playing that much better.
Yes, the OL does need a major overhaul. In spite of the "huge upgrade at the QB position" we have the 28th ranked offense after four games. 28th! The OL has a lot to do with that. We are obviously winning games because of our defense, which has been awesome, but they should be getting some help.
Orlando Brown and Lincoln Kennedy are definitely not the answer, but there needs to be some changes. Play the young guys. We liked Chester and Brown enough to draft them, let's play them.
Art-Florida
10-04-2006, 01:31 PM
If we are going to win our second Superbowl in a row in January of 2008, that offwnsive line must be overhauled this coming offseason.
Oh, ye of little faith...that's a quote either from scriptures or an issue of 'Rolling Stone' from the 80s - I forget which.
Computer bulletin boards are 3/4 speculation (1\4 masturbation) anyway, do why not do it big?
Denver - going down!
Carolina - W'ell never play finah.
After that, we'll see...
highwater
10-04-2006, 01:55 PM
You also mistakenly seem to give all the credit for winning to the defense, yet the defense is not producing crucial game winning drives, nor is has it caused the big decline in turnovers/ versus TD passes out of the QB position.
I have not given all the credit to the defense, but if I did I wouldn't be wrong. If not for McAlister's interception in the end zone in Cleveland, we would not have had a chance to see Stover kick a game-winning 52 yard field goal. If the defense hadn't shut out San Diego in the second half, we wouldn't have had a chance to see McNair throw a game-winning TD pass to Heap.
Read this carefully -- we are second in defense, 28th in offense. I am thrilled that we are 4-0, but it's largely because our defense has been lights out. The offense has to get better.
ravensfan1996
10-04-2006, 02:19 PM
Im not defending the offense, they obviously need to get better, but rankings and statistics can be deceiving. Total offense rank is based on one stat....total yards. Yes that means you move the ball, but doesnt mean you score. Or it means you are always backed up at your 10 and have to go 90 yds to score.
We are 28th in total yards...the NY Giants are ranked 2nd in offense and are 1-2 and in last place. The stat that wins games is total points scored....we are 11th.
highwater
10-04-2006, 02:25 PM
The stat that wins games is total points scored....we are 11th.
I agree, but the defense and special teams has set up a lot of those scores, not the offense. That can't happen all year long. Maybe if we're lucky it will keep up, but I doubt it. We're off to a great start but it hasn't been because of the offense. They need to get better (and I think they will, btw).
AZRAVEN
10-04-2006, 02:26 PM
Who cares what the offense is rated when we are 4-0? Again this isn't Fantasy Football League its the real-life NFL. I would agree with you if the team wasn't scoring points, but last time I checked they were pulling down over 20 per game. Sure the OL needs improvement but all teams have some area of weakness.
You also mistakenly seem to give all the credit for winning to the defense, yet the defense is not producing crucial game winning drives, nor is has it caused the big decline in turnovers/ versus TD passes out of the QB position. This offense is nothing like the 2000 TD drought offense until Dilfer took over, so again, I don't get all the complaining. Why don't you save it for when we actually lose some games?:hammer:
The only game I remember us scoring more than 20 points was the opener against the Bucs and if I recall about half of those points were, indeed, scored by the defense. It isn't the defenses job to "produce crucial game winning drives" that job belongs to the offense. At least the defense is making it possible for McNair to be the two minute hero. It does matter that our offense is ranked at 28, sooner or later such dismal offensive performance is going to start costing wins. This team cannot even run the ball anymore, the one thing we have always been able to do very well and that is directly related to offensive line performance ~ unless, of course, Jamal has fallen into another snit over someting.
ravensfan1996
10-04-2006, 03:05 PM
Well actually we have scored, 27, 28, 15, and 16 pts in our 4 wins. Of the 86pts scored, the def has scored 10pts. the rest is the offense. Im not saying the offense is great and shouldnt get better, its just not as awful as we make it to be.
the "yeah but the defense has set up the offense" is a little bs to me. Yeah they have a time or too put the offense inside the 10yd line, mainly the def is keeping them in games, not helping the offense score! yeah mcallister intcepted the ball but the offense had to then get in fg range to score...thats like saying the offense was resposible for the browns marching on down to the 4 yd line. The offense cant play d and the d cant move the ball on offense.
The ravens have scored 7 offensive td's this year. The offense on avg had to move the ball 62 yds. Hardly a def set up. Of all scores 16 total, they had to move the ball on avg 40yds.
Tampa (score/total yards of drive)
td-80yds
fg- 7yds
fg 13yds
td 61yds
Oakland
fg-25yds
fg-20yds
fg-11yds
td 65yds
fg-11 yds
td 81 yds
Cleveland:
fg 30yds
td 68yds
fg42yds
SD:
fg 47yds
td 22yds
td 60yds
highwater
10-04-2006, 03:17 PM
[Of the 86pts scored, the def has scored 10pts. the rest is the offense.[/QUOTE]
I don't really care how we score as long as we score, but this "the rest is offense" comment is a little off the mark. If Sams or somebody returns a kickoff to the other teams 30 yard line and the offense goes three and out and they kick a field goal, that's not great offense. If Ray Lewis or someone intercepts a pass and runs it back into field goal range and the offense goes nowhere and kicks a field goal, that's not great offense. That is special teams and the defense setting up the offense.
Not that I'm complaining about that -- we won a Super Bowl with a similar formula in 2000. I'd be happy to see it again if it results in a Super Bowl win. But please, don't talk about how the offense is generating points. They are doing it when it counts the past two weeks, which is what really counts, but 28th in the league is 28th in the league, which isn't good, no matter how you spin it.
ravensfan1996
10-04-2006, 04:24 PM
28th in the league, which isn't good, no matter how you spin it.
Its not a spin, that stat is based on total yards, nothing else, thats why in the super bowl season our def was ranked number 2 because of total yds given up, not total pts. Its not the stats that wins games, its the pts.
Would you like to be the 16th ranked offense like Detriot is? they are 0-4. There is no spin, thats a fact.
Like i said stats are fun to play with but total pts is all that matters on either side of the ball. We could have the 28th ranked offense but lead the league in scoring. This offense needs to move the ball a little more then it has but when they "need" to, they have.
We are ranked 13th in avg total pts scored per game (21 avg) and 3rd on the def side on 8.2 pts a game given up. 21-8 is a nice stat.
AZRAVEN
10-04-2006, 04:38 PM
That's right, I had forgotten the Oakland score.. my bad..
ravensfan1996
10-04-2006, 08:11 PM
Its not bad at all.....its all good when you are 4-0 and lead the division......
How sweet a weekend would it be to see the steelers get mopped up by SD and then we win on monday night....
ChixDigLongBall
10-04-2006, 10:41 PM
No to both.
I would love to give Willie Roaf a call and to see how he'd like to play for the 4-0 Ravens, though. It's worth a shot.
Filmstudy
10-07-2006, 12:36 PM
I hear George Kunz may be available!
If we sign a backup, I want 2 things:
1. Someone who would not be terrible right now
2. Someone who we might be able to get 2-3 years as a backup or even has a chance to become a starter.
If we get someone to try and help win it this year (meaning we are replacing Vincent), I would like to trade a draft pick for an established lineman on a team that will lose him to FA at the end of the eseason in any case.