Why don't we run it to win? Time for Billick to go.

[FHRaven]

Time to vent.

RUN THE F**king ball! Why are we passing with 38 seconds left in the game. RUN THE F**king ball and leave Cleveland with a few seconds to receive the kickoff. :mad:

I'm now in the Billick must be go camp. That was inexcusable. He gave the game to Cleveland. :grbac:

[Purpleguy]

47 yards was still long for Stover. We were trying to pick up a few more yards. People are just looking for reasons to bash Billick with that call. The defense and special teams could have stepped up to stop the browns on 2 back to back drives.

[ExiledRaven]

I really disagree, that was a really bad call there. If billick is THAT scared about Stover kicking a longer field goal then stover needs to go too, he's a liability if he's not got the coach's confidence at range period.

Defense and special teams hurt, sure....but Billick's job is to take all of that out of the equation.

Anyhow, I am in the Billick's got to go side of things, been there for awhile. We'll see what happens the rest of the year...and Boller's improvement, along with the offensive line in the second half is good.

Let's see how this plays out, but I still want Billick gone.

[FHRaven]

47 yards was still long for Stover. We were trying to pick up a few more yards. People are just looking for reasons to bash Billick with that call. The defense and special teams could have stepped up to stop the browns on 2 back to back drives.

I disagree. It wasn't too long, he made the field from there. And the 2 pass attempts were both for 1-2 yards. A smart coach runs the ball, especially the way McGahee had been playing and tries to get a few yards. You DON'T let the other team have the opportunity to beat you. It's coaching 101!

[xmradiodave]

Hmmm... Billick is not going anywhere. With 4 years on contract, it makes it a bit difficult to just fire him. As for the comment that Stover must go... that is just plain stupid. No matter how you try to explain it, it is stupid.

[ExiledRaven]

Sorry, but personal insults are a no no.

[RavenFanatic2k6]

It was stupid not to run it on second down, even stupider not to on third down. This is yet another game Billick has blown because of his obsession with the pass.

[Sephy]

As I said in the thread - Billick learned nothing from that Buffalo game where Ray had to call him out on his radio show. Simply inexcusable. If you don't trust your $40m running back to get at LEAST one yard to get a first and wind the clock down further (you can even pass then, if you want!), what the fuck is he there for? Not to mention he'd been carving up the Browns all day long.

[terpsnoone]

No excuse for not running on one of those downs - especially 3rd - we probably would not have made a 1st down but we would have gotten a few more yards for Stover - used a few more seconds & forced them to use a time out.

Billick gets paid millions for making these crappy decisions over & over again.

A good coach wins that game today period - unfortunately we don't have one of those at the moment

[StingerNLG]

I'm so numb from this I am not even sure how I am typing right now.

The fact that Billick specifically said that he should have called it different after the Buffalo game, only to do the EXACT SAME THING here, shows me that Billick has absolutely no idea how to manage the clock.

This game was won. It was absolutely won. Run the ball, and if you get the 1st down you're even forcing the Browns to use their time outs. Any way you look at it, this game was won and Billick let it get away.


Billick needs to give the offense up. And since we know he isn't going to do that, he needs to go.

It was a long walk from the stadium today, and that's after huddling around the TV's on the lower level after leaving our seats on the FG. But that walk gave me clarity that Billick has to go and a fresh voice needs to come in.

[purplepoe]

I'm so numb from this I am not even sure how I am typing right now.

The fact that Billick specifically said that he should have called it different after the Buffalo game, only to do the EXACT SAME THING here, shows me that Billick has absolutely no idea how to manage the clock.

This game was won. It was absolutely won. Run the ball, and if you get the 1st down you're even forcing the Browns to use their time outs. Any way you look at it, this game was won and Billick let it get away.


Billick needs to give the offense up. And since we know he isn't going to do that, he needs to go.

It was a long walk from the stadium today, and that's after huddling around the TV's on the lower level after leaving our seats on the FG. But that walk gave me clarity that Billick has to go and a fresh voice needs to come in.

My buddy was flipping out as it was happening.

I've tried to give Billick the benefit of the doubt but this was insane.

How many times have we heard Billick say that he runs clock so that the other team doesn't get a chance to score?

Yet he's got 2nd and 3rd and 1 with 36 seconds left and he fuckin throws it twice?

Please.

Of course, the way it unfolded after that was beyond bizarre. The thing is, that stuff should've never happened.

PP

[FHRaven]

My buddy was flipping out as it was happening.

I've tried to give Billick the benefit of the doubt but this was insane.

How many times have we heard Billick say that he runs clock so that the other team doesn't get a chance to score?

Yet he's got 2nd and 3rd and 1 with 36 seconds left and he fuckin throws it twice?

Please.

Of course, the way it unfolded after that was beyond bizarre. The thing is, that stuff should've never happened.

PP

Exactly. He snatched defeat from the jaws of victory. There is NO WAY he can command the respect of his players at this point. And without that he cannot effectively run the team.

The only out he has is to completely and publicly remove himself from the offense at the end of the season. I doubt his ego will allow that though. I just hope Steve can swallow the rest of his contract and let him go.

[highwater]

Yet he's got 2nd and 3rd and 1 with 36 seconds left and he fuckin throws it twice?

I didn't have a problem with Billick calling a pass on second down, but on third down, what the hell? Even if they didn't make a first down, they could have run the clock down, and Stover would still have the same distance field goal. Bad decision.

Of course, we still could have won the game if the defense had not folded up like a cheap lawn chair at the end of regulation and in overtime, but it should never have even gotten to that point.

[StingerNLG]

I didn't have a problem with Billick calling a pass on second down, but on third down, what the hell? Even if they didn't make a first down, they could have run the clock down, and Stover would still have the same distance field goal. Bad decision.

Of course, we still could have won the game if the defense had not folded up like a cheap lawn chair at the end of regulation and in overtime, but it should never have even gotten to that point.

I think you run on both. It's about taking time off the clock at that point. At no point should the Ravens have thrown the ball in that situation, in either down. It was about the 1st down at that time.

[RavensInBrazil]

It makes absolutely zero sense to throw it. First, you risk an interception, which I believe in this situation is more likely than a fumble. Second, you stop the clock. Third, we could win with a FG, so you can't even claim to be going for the TD. It's just BRAINLESS. I know Billick isn't exactly known for his clock managing skills, but this is the straw that broke the camel's back

I'm through with Billick...I always liked the guy, but goddamn

[Tspot-D-Ravenator]

I'm through with Billick...I always liked the guy, but goddamn
This is insulting to me and could you please quit insulting God? Thank you:)

[XXXV]

I always doubt when someone posts something like I'm getting ready to post, and I did not hear this straight from the horses mouth, so take it for what's it's worth.

But

Someone with ties to the owner told me that Bischotti and Billick already have a buyout agreement in place, and it will be executed if there is not marked improvement in the Ravens offense, beginning with the Cincinnati game.

Again, I did not hear this directly, but it is from a person I trust.

We'll see....

[xmradiodave]

Sorry, but personal insults are a no no.

Personal insults? Where was there a personal insult. Did I say anyone was stupid? No. I said that comment that stover needs to go was stupid.

EDIT:
Nevermind... I realize what happened. I did not see the moderator edit tag

[HoustonRaven]

47 yards was still long for Stover. We were trying to pick up a few more yards. People are just looking for reasons to bash Billick with that call. The defense and special teams could have stepped up to stop the browns on 2 back to back drives.

That doesnt make any sense.

Billick did the same thing during the Jets and Cardinals game. By passing, the clock stop on incompletion, giving the Browns the advantage with the clock. Also, the run WAS working. Three runs up the gut in that situation and the Browns dont have enough time to get that gift field goal.

Bye bye, Brian. I got nothing against him personally, but he needs a change of jobs.

[ravenwoman]

I always doubt when someone posts something like I'm getting ready to post, and I did not hear this straight from the horses mouth, so take it for what's it's worth.

But

Someone with ties to the owner told me that Bischotti and Billick already have a buyout agreement in place, and it will be executed if there is not marked improvement in the Ravens offense, beginning with the Cincinnati game.

Again, I did not hear this directly, but it is from a person I trust.

We'll see....

I pray that you are sooooo right!!! Billick is not a smart coach. Never has been, never will be. A good coach makes the difference when he doesn't have very much to work with, because of injuries and personnel. Key decisions yesterday could have resulted in a win for us.

[OwingsMillsAlex]

From what I could stomach reading this thread you all say that Billick should go because he didn't call a running play. YET what would you all be saying if he had called the running play and A) McGhee goes backwards for loss of yards, B) Boller or McGhee drop the ball and Cleveland recovers, or C) both 2-1 and 3-1 the ball goes nowhere fast and were stuck with a long field goal that may or may not make it through the uprights???

Stop blaming Billick for every little thing this team does or doesn't do. He doesn't pick who is on Special Teams...that would be Frank Ganz (sp?) Jr. He doesn't pick who is active for the Defense...again, that would be Rex Ryan. And from what I understand from the Willie McGhee show, Boller has been calling some audibles in the huddle and who knows if and when he decides to make the change in the play. So to say we should have done this or done that is just pointless.

Now I have to go. My posts are malfunctioning so I can't review the play on the field. :D

[RavenTD]

Billick is so wrapped up in calling plays and trying to save his ass in the eyes of the world.He has lost touch with what is happening in the game.Obviously his play calling chart,and what to call in certain situations is totally skewed.

Billick if you want to save your neck,put down your playbook next season and let the new Off' co'ord bring in his own.He should become a Joe Paterno type coach.Just standing on the sideline as a figurehead,letting his co-ordinators run the gametime show.

[AA-Raven]

that series yes you can blame Billick for and the calls that he made/didn't make, but the entire game and the loss is not Billicks fault imo.

Play calling can always be questioned by us the fans, no matter if we win or lose the game.

I am however in the Billick should go band.....this offense with him as the HC (no matter if next season he totally gives up reins of the offense to another or not) will never improve, and after 9 yrs seems as if to me he doesn't have the same ability to get this team prepared week in and week out.......same old song and dance speach probably before the game and during halftime I guess

[WxKevin]

How many timeouts did Cleveland have when they got the ball back? I don't remember. If it was 2 then running and not making the 1st down wouldn't have made a difference.

Second, for those who weren't at the stadium, the wind was swirling in the stadium. FGs were not a given yesterday as could be seen by Dawsons miss in the 1st quarter and his near miss to end the game...oh sorry, the end of the game that was overturned. If for some reason Willis got caught in the backfield now you are talking about a 50 yard FG in that swirling wind.

There were pros and cons to running/not running on that play.

[FHRaven]

From what I could stomach reading this thread you all say that Billick should go because he didn't call a running play. YET what would you all be saying if he had called the running play and A) McGhee goes backwards for loss of yards, B) Boller or McGhee drop the ball and Cleveland recovers, or C) both 2-1 and 3-1 the ball goes nowhere fast and were stuck with a long field goal that may or may not make it through the uprights???

Stop blaming Billick for every little thing this team does or doesn't do.

In all three cases I would say he made that right call. That's the point. Running the ball twice, or at LEAST once is the no-brainer coaching move of the year.

Instead he decided to pass so the negative scenarios were: A) interception, B) incomplete passes that stop the clock and give the other team the opportunity to tie the game. Guess which one happened.

I agree that you can't blame the coaches for every single thing that happens on the field. The players play the game. But this was an obvious case where the coach made the wrong the decisions and it cost the team the game. As purplepoe pointed out, the worst part is he did the same thing earlier this year and ADMITTED he made a mistake. AND THEN HE DID IT AGAIN!! :thumbdown: UNACCEPTABLE!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[WxKevin]

Here is the answer from NFL.com:
---------------------------------------

3-M.Stover kicks 66 yards from BAL 30 to CLE 4. 16-J.Cribbs to CLE 43 for 39 yards (28-J.Winborne). 1-10-CLE 43 (:26) 3-D.Anderson pass short right to 84-J.Jurevicius ran ob at CLE 49 for 6 yards. 2-4-CLE 49 (:11) (Shotgun) 3-D.Anderson pass deep middle to 17-B.Edwards to BAL 33 for 18 yards (21-C.McAlister). Timeout #1 by CLE at 00:03. 1-10-BAL 33 (:03) (Field Goal formation) 4-P.Dawson 51 yard field goal is No Good, Short, Center-64-R.Pontbriand, Holder-15-D.Zastudil. Kick hit crossbars and bounced back. Play Challenged by Replay Assistant and REVERSED. (Field Goal formation) 4-P.Dawson 51 yard field goal is GOOD, Center-64-R.Pontbriand, Holder-15-D.Zastudil. CLV 30 BLT 30 Plays: 3 Possession: 0:26

Cleveland took their 1st time out for the end of regulation FG. Running it on 3rd down would not have changed anything as Cleveland would have immediately taken a timeout to stop the clock. Even if they ran on 2nd AND 3rd down, Cleveland would have taken timeouts on both plays and still have a timeout to set up for a FG.

[FHRaven]

Here is the answer from NFL.com:
---------------------------------------

3-M.Stover kicks 66 yards from BAL 30 to CLE 4. 16-J.Cribbs to CLE 43 for 39 yards (28-J.Winborne). 1-10-CLE 43 (:26) 3-D.Anderson pass short right to 84-J.Jurevicius ran ob at CLE 49 for 6 yards. 2-4-CLE 49 (:11) (Shotgun) 3-D.Anderson pass deep middle to 17-B.Edwards to BAL 33 for 18 yards (21-C.McAlister). Timeout #1 by CLE at 00:03. 1-10-BAL 33 (:03) (Field Goal formation) 4-P.Dawson 51 yard field goal is No Good, Short, Center-64-R.Pontbriand, Holder-15-D.Zastudil. Kick hit crossbars and bounced back. Play Challenged by Replay Assistant and REVERSED. (Field Goal formation) 4-P.Dawson 51 yard field goal is GOOD, Center-64-R.Pontbriand, Holder-15-D.Zastudil. CLV 30 BLT 30 Plays: 3 Possession: 0:26

Cleveland took their 1st time out for the end of regulation FG. Running it on 3rd down would not have changed anything as Cleveland would have immediately taken a timeout to stop the clock. Even if they ran on 2nd AND 3rd down, Cleveland would have taken timeouts on both plays and still have a timeout to set up for a FG.

Kevin, I have to disagree. In fact it underscores the point. They had 3 seconds to kick the field goal. If we run it twice they most likely do not have that time. Even a run for no gain typically takes a few more seconds off the clock than the short incomplete passes we attempted.

At the very least, it puts more pressure on Cleveland knowing they only have one TO left to setup the FG.

[Sephy]

Kevin: I like our chances to convert when running on 2nd or 3rd and 1 better. If you get a first down, not only do you force them to take one TO, but to burn all 3.

Who knows, if you run it, maybe they don't even get to that last pass. The FG was taken at 4 seconds.

[ExiledRaven]

OK....my point about Billick-Stover is very simple

If Billick is so scared that Stover cannot make a 47 yard field goal....making that the reason he decides to throw on 3rd and 1 instead of running....then that is a problem. Stover needs to have Billick's confidence to make a FG of that range...You have to trust your kicker. If Billick can't trust Stover, then what's the point. Get a new kicker that Billick trusts to make a kick you really need to make to be effective in the NFL.

Sorry for the other, but also next time, please look at context. I in no way said Stover sucks and needs to go. I said either Billick doesn't trust him, or Billick called a dumb play independent of that....both of which are bad things.

[AA-Raven]

OK....my point about Billick-Stover is very simple

If Billick is so scared that Stover cannot make a 47 yard field goal....making that the reason he decides to throw on 3rd and 1 instead of running....then that is a problem. Stover needs to have Billick's confidence to make a FG of that range...You have to trust your kicker. If Billick can't trust Stover, then what's the point. Get a new kicker that Billick trusts to make a kick you really need to make to be effective in the NFL.

Sorry for the other, but also next time, please look at context. I in no way said Stover sucks and needs to go. I said either Billick doesn't trust him, or Billick called a dumb play independent of that....both of which are bad things.


oh I would have to say that Stover is the only player Billick has confidence in, and personally speaking why shouldn't he? after all he's been our best player in Billick's tenure as HC here.....

[ExiledRaven]

Hmmm... Billick is not going anywhere. With 4 years on contract, it makes it a bit difficult to just fire him. As for the comment that Stover must go... that is just plain stupid. No matter how you try to explain it, it is stupid.

I disagree. I am not saying stover must go. I am saying if Billick can't trust Stover to make a 47 yard field goal and feels like he's forced to throw on 3 and 1 because of that....then stover needs to either get Billick's confidence or go.

I don't think that's unreasonable or a stupid thing to say. it's a 47 yard field goal, you don't make it in the NFL if you can't kick a 47 yarder.

[ExiledRaven]

oh I would have to say that Stover is the only player Billick has confidence in, and personally speaking why shouldn't he? after all he's been our best player in Billick's tenure as HC here.....

Right...that's just the only compu-coach reason I could even think of that made any kind of sense other than Billick being a total loon.

...I hope it's not true.

[StingerNLG]

Kevin, you have to also take into account they were at 2nd and 1. If we run the ball, and get the 1st down, we could have forced Cleveland to chew up all three of their timeouts at that point.


From what I could stomach reading this thread you all say that Billick should go because he didn't call a running play. YET what would you all be saying if he had called the running play and A) McGhee goes backwards for loss of yards, B) Boller or McGhee drop the ball and Cleveland recovers, or C) both 2-1 and 3-1 the ball goes nowhere fast and were stuck with a long field goal that may or may not make it through the uprights???

That is a chance you have to take. What if Boller didn't incomplete those passes and instead was sacked for a 5-8 yard loss? Then you're out of field goal range AND the clock stopped.

You always run the ball in that situation. That is what you pay Willis McGahee for, to get the ball in the middle of the field and ahead for a single yard.

Passing the ball was the worst mistake in the game. Bottom line.

[RavenLisa]

Yeah should have run the ball. However yes this team is stuck with Billck. They gave him way too long of a contract more years to suffer Raven fans :(

[4G63]

From what I could stomach reading this thread you all say that Billick should go because he didn't call a running play. YET what would you all be saying if he had called the running play and A) McGhee goes backwards for loss of yards, B) Boller or McGhee drop the ball and Cleveland recovers, or C) both 2-1 and 3-1 the ball goes nowhere fast and were stuck with a long field goal that may or may not make it through the uprights???


You can "what if" everything until your blue in the face.......but you can't argue the fact that we were averaging somewhere around 5-6yds A CARRY in the second half and we should have ran it twice in that situation, if for nothing else than to take time off the clock!

McGahee, even on a broken play, rarely goes backwards and I can't see them stopping us in that situation....

[festivus]

How many timeouts did Cleveland have when they got the ball back? I don't remember. If it was 2 then running and not making the 1st down wouldn't have made a difference.

Important point. There were three timeouts. This was NOT the Bills game redux, it was not the same situation. Cleveland had 3 timeouts, clock management was *not* the overriding factor. The overriding factor was putting points on the board, a touchdown if possible.

With 30+ seconds on the clock, inside makeable field goal range but the opponent has all 3 timeouts left, it was a judgement call whether to press for more. If the first pass falls incomplete we are *glad* for that if the second is complete for the first down; we still have time to take shots into the end zone. It didn't happen, instead, two incomplete passes later, all we had to do was (a) kick the field goal, and (b) stop them from scoring with ~30 ticks left on the clock. Well, we didn't do it.

Failures of execution on special teams, and of the offense in the first half, really stood out to me in this game, much moreso then our second guessing of "would've could've" of the coaching staff.

The offense executed poorly in the first half with poor blocking and passing. Special teams executed poorly all game long. The defense played generally well but at the end could not get off the field on two game-deciding drives.

Go ahead and hang Billick from the nearest tree if you all want. I didn't see the game the same way you guys did, I guess.

[terpsnoone]

I disagree - there was no reason to take shots at the end zone

All you had to do was milk the clock & kick a field goal - Game over

We had 2 downs to make 1 yard - we should be able to do that running the ball


If we make the 1 yard running we win.

[festivus]

Yes but if we make the 1 yard passing we win too. That was my point.

[Greg]

47 yards was still long for Stover. We were trying to pick up a few more yards.
And we got no more. We could have run for the first down and probably gotten 5-6 yards, they were playing pass. Even if we just get 2 and a first down we dirt the ball and still have 20 seconds at least left, we are 2nd and 10 with a time out in the pocket. We can then throw.

I was standing there and my wife and the guy next to me can attest to this, AND I SAID THIS TO GET MORE YARDS, "we can still run the ball, let's run it once."

[terpsnoone]

Passing unsuccessfully in that situation is like giving the opposition a free time out

Running unsuccesfully is not - that is the difference

That is my point

[FHRaven]

Yes but if we make the 1 yard passing we win too. That was my point.

The difference is if we run the ball Cleveland likely never gets to try the FG. That's why you run it.

Trying for the 1 yard by a rushing attempt has a better outcome even if you don't get that yard.

[festivus]

The difference is if we run the ball Cleveland likely never gets to try the FG. That's why you run it.

Trying for the 1 yard by a rushing attempt has a better outcome even if you don't get that yard.

They had 3 timeouts. The clock was not as much of an ally as many here are saying. The important thing was the first down, not the running of the clock.

:2c:, I don't anticipate persuading anybody. Just my opinion.

[FHRaven]

They had 3 timeouts. The clock was not as much of an ally as many here are saying. The important thing was the first down, not the running of the clock.

:2c:, I don't anticipate persuading anybody. Just my opinion.

As I posted earlier, the clock was a factor. In fact, it was paramount. They kicked the FG with 3 seconds left! And they could pass to any location on the field because they could stop the clock since we didn't make them burn any TOs!

Running the ball twice would almost assuredly have burned those 3 seconds off. No FG attempt. Ravens win.

[jonboy79]

I've been apologizing for Billick for too long. I'm on the bandwagon... Fire Billick. He can't manage the clock, can't put the best players on the field, and refuses to run the ball anymore. He is simply not putting his players in positions to win the game.

[Greg]

Billick doesn't need to be fired, he needs to hand over running the offense to a better in game manager. I think Billick is top notch in preparation, motivation and organization, but he is weak in the game management area. We see it in many ways.

He needs to let an OC run the offense during the game and stay out of it.

[festivus]

I don't have strong feelings about whether Billick should go one way or the other.

But I will say this.

If he is removed at the end of the year, we will be saying goodbye to a head coach who brought us more good years then bad, turned us from perennial losers to a powerhouse, and who held the team together when off-field issues threatened to tear us apart. More than once.

We *have* had years with an effective offense, and we *have* had (several) years battling deficiencies in personnel, through injury or otherwise. I agree our offense has never been "explosive," but the goal is to win, not to be explosive.

So, I'll understand if the FO decides it's time to part ways. It's their call and this year is such a disaster they will have carte blanche from the fans, including me, to do what they think is best. But it's a serious decision, and for all the demands here, it's just not as simple as many posters want it to be.

[HoustonRaven]

Billick doesn't need to be fired, he needs to hand over running the offense to a better in game manager. I think Billick is top notch in preparation, motivation and organization, but he is weak in the game management area. We see it in many ways.

He needs to let an OC run the offense during the game and stay out of it.

Ummm .... huh???

That "top notch" preperation and motivation has produced anemic offenses season after season. This year, that "top notch" coach has this team leading the league (once again) in penalties. And can you tell me the NFL player who has the most fumbles? Yep, thats right, its Steve McNair.

I dont see how letting an OC call plays translates into even moderate success given camp cupcake and Billick.

[HoustonRaven]

We *have* had years with an effective offense

When????

[festivus]

2001, 2006. 2003. Notable in 2001 and 2003 was that we were also overcoming significant deficiencies in the quality of available personnel. I'm not even including 2000, when our offense was arguably "effective," insofar as we did win the Superbowl.

[StingerNLG]

2001, 2006. 2003. Notable in 2001 and 2003 was that we were also overcoming significant deficiencies in the quality of available personnel. I'm not even including 2000, when our offense was arguably "effective," insofar as we did win the Superbowl.

I wouldn't include 2000 at all. QB change in the middle of the season. 5 games without a touchdown. That's not effective. We just had the defense to overcome that.

Killing Rich Gannon and not allowing New York over the 50 yard line more than once an entire game is how we won the Super Bowl.

[WxKevin]

We could have run for the first down and probably gotten 5-6 yards, they were playing pass.

Probably? Maybe, maybe not. Maybe McGahee gets caught in the backfield and loses 3 yards and puts Stover out of range.

[StingerNLG]

Probably? Maybe, maybe not. Maybe McGahee gets caught in the backfield and loses 3 yards and puts Stover out of range.

True. But with the pass protection not being there all day, who is to say Chester or Odgen doesn't let someone else through to sack Boller for 9 yards, and then you're still out of field goal range.

Running ball was the only real option in that situation. If you can't trust your OL and your RB to get one single yard, then what does that say?

[ClericBlackDave]

Honestly, I agree that on the surface, running the ball is a better decision.


HOWEVER


They had 3 time outs. It really wouldn't have mattered if they had made the stop anyway, which is possible even if we ran the ball. People are acting like that yard is guaranteed when you run it. It isn't, even if you think that running it is better.


If they had no timeouts, or even just 2, I'd agree. But in this case, I can put the loss solely on Billick's playcall there.


the biggest decision has to be kicking to cribbs / not having Rhys Lloyd active.

[StingerNLG]

They had 3 time outs. It really wouldn't have mattered if they had made the stop anyway, which is possible even if we ran the ball. People are acting like that yard is guaranteed when you run it. It isn't, even if you think that running it is better.

BUT..........

It's not 3rd and 1, it's 2nd and 1. Even if we don't make the yard, we have another down to run the ball with. And Cleveland has to take 1, maybe 2 timeouts before we attempt the FG or kick deep and go to overtime. Maybe Cleveland doesn't get the ball down that far and only has one TO to burn at that point.

Passing the ball can stop the clock, and save all Cleveland's TO's. It was the wrong thing to do.

[purplepoe]

BUT..........

It's not 3rd and 1, it's 2nd and 1. Even if we don't make the yard, we have another down to run the ball with. And Cleveland has to take 1, maybe 2 timeouts before we attempt the FG or kick deep and go to overtime. Maybe Cleveland doesn't get the ball down that far and only has one TO to burn at that point.

Passing the ball can stop the clock, and save all Cleveland's TO's. It was the wrong thing to do.

Exactly.

I have yet to hear an argument that makes sense of Billick's play calling in that situation.

Really, it's football 101.

PP

[ClericBlackDave]

Exactly.

I have yet to hear an argument that makes sense of Billick's play calling in that situation.

Really, it's football 101.

PP


I agree on the 2nd and 1. At this same time, think about it. It was a 47 yarder where it stood. Any loss in yardage could be a missed field goal with stover's leg.


If we had gotten it down to the 20, then its obviously to run it twice on 2nd and 1


As it was, I can't put the entire blame on Billick, although I'd rather have a different offense coordinator, I agree.

[WxKevin]

Exactly.

I have yet to hear an argument that makes sense of Billick's play calling in that situation.

Really, it's football 101.

PP

If it were that easy to coach a team, we all would be doing it.

[Greg]

Running the ball at least once was called for if for no other reason that to mix up the play calling for balance. Something bad can happen regardless of what you do. We were averaging over 5 yards per carry in any case.

You run, get the first down, maybe try a pass to get closer in the next 3 plays, a run or two to force their TOs and run clock. If we had gotten that first down their TOs would have been burned up and they still would have had less time than they had. Not getting that first down was a killer.

[4G63]

They had 3 timeouts. The clock was not as much of an ally as many here are saying. The important thing was the first down, not the running of the clock.

:2c:, I don't anticipate persuading anybody. Just my opinion.

But you're forgetting that if they wouldn't have had any timeouts, they wouldn't have had any time to move down the field and make their kick!

[4G63]

BUT..........

It's not 3rd and 1, it's 2nd and 1. Even if we don't make the yard, we have another down to run the ball with. And Cleveland has to take 1, maybe 2 timeouts before we attempt the FG or kick deep and go to overtime. Maybe Cleveland doesn't get the ball down that far and only has one TO to burn at that point.

Passing the ball can stop the clock, and save all Cleveland's TO's. It was the wrong thing to do.

Yes.....

[purplepoe]

If it were that easy to coach a team, we all would be doing it.

Please.

You run the ball AT LEAST once there for all the reasons that have been stated.

Do you have some reasoning as to why it made sense to pass on both plays?

Look, I usually try not to play Monday morning quarterback, but when Im sitting there in real time saying "run the ball" Im gonna question the decision to pass.

PP

[terpsnoone]

Billick has done this crap repeatedly this season :thumbdown: - He just doesn't seem to get the importance of clock management

He talks about clock management in the press conferences but his actions show otherwise on the field

Throwing the ball unsuccessfully is like giving the other team an extra time-out - that is football 101

He cost us this game & the buffalo game

He almost cost us the Jets game, people forget because we won - Ray Lewis had to bail him out of that one with an int.

Come on Steve - Brian needs to go

[StingerNLG]

This is how I continue to see it.

1) Billick has to give up the offensive playcalling duties.

2) Billick has to go.

Those are the only two options as I see it.

[FHRaven]

This is how I continue to see it.

1) Billick has to give up the offensive playcalling duties.

2) Billick has to go.

Those are the only two options as I see it.

I'll go a step farther and say he has to give up playcalling AND allow the new OC to install a brand new system.

I'd like to know what the players thought of those 2 pass plays. Especially after Billick's comments on doing the same thing in the Buffalo game.

[Greg]

I'll go a step farther and say he has to give up playcalling AND allow the new OC to install a brand new system.

I'd like to know what the players thought of those 2 pass plays. Especially after Billick's comments on doing the same thing in the Buffalo game.
Billick's system has running plays. He could have still run the ball.

All NFL teams have the same plays in the playbook, they run the same running plays, blocking schemes, pass routes, etc.

Billick is just not a good in-game manager. He needs too much time to plot things out and plan. When things are happening fast he misses details and logic. When he has time he covers every little thing. He needs a person who may not be as detail oriented as he is but thinks better on his feet, in the heat of the action. I am like that, I am much better in stressful situations than most people, but I am not a great organizer and planner. It is a different skill set and he needs to learn that.

[festivus]

Casey Willet commented this afternoon that, behind closed doors, players who have played for more than one coach speak very highly of Billick *as a HC.*

It struck me as consistent with what many have suggested here, some like DF have suggested on the radio, that Billick will return but the offense will be stripped from him.

Makes sense to me.

[flraven]

I think that Festivus is right on, BB stays but has the offense given totally to an OC who has autonomy to call plays and change strategy as the game dictates. BB is a good head coach, but the in-game strategy should be on someone else. Neuheisel? His Huskies were pretty good back in the day.

Myself, I don't think they should fire BB, but if it happens, Rex Ryan should be the "next man up" to replace him.

[HoustonRaven]

Stripping Billick of his play calling duties could prove fatal.

Billick's ego is wont alow him to do it himself. Therefor, it will take Ozzie, Bisciotti or both to strip him of the job of calling the offensive plays.

The by-product of this will be Billicks command of the locker being compromised and his authority reduced to nothing.

IMO, Billick assuming control of the offense was a zero sum game. He cant go back now unless it of his own choice .... or at least made to appear that way to the team and the media.

[WxKevin]

Billick's system has running plays. He could have still run the ball.

All NFL teams have the same plays in the playbook, they run the same running plays, blocking schemes, pass routes, etc.

Billick is just not a good in-game manager. He needs too much time to plot things out and plan. When things are happening fast he misses details and logic. When he has time he covers every little thing. He needs a person who may not be as detail oriented as he is but thinks better on his feet, in the heat of the action. I am like that, I am much better in stressful situations than most people, but I am not a great organizer and planner. It is a different skill set and he needs to learn that.

I absolutely agree Greg. I still believe he is a good Head Coach in the way he handles the team, protects his players and handles the media. I have said this for many years now but Billick is a genius when it comes to handling the media! He makes me laugh because he uses these terms and phrases that sound like he is an asshole but what he is actually doing is bringing attention to himself and off of his players. It's brilliant!

That being said he does not handle the in-game stuff well, like Greg mentioned. He needs somebody to handle that stuff for him.

I guess the reason I sympathize with Billick during his in-game stuff sometime is because I am just like the description Greg provided. I am horrible in stressful situations. I have to plan everything out and get annoyed when things are not. I was also the person in college who had their papers done days prior to them being due because I couldn't handle the pressure of writing a paper the night before.

My final point is that if Billick is not going to give up control of the offense and game management, then I don't think he should be brought back. Even though I like him as a HC, something has to change.

[b-more_4_Life]

Casey Willet commented this afternoon that, behind closed doors, players who have played for more than one coach speak very highly of Billick *as a HC.*

It struck me as consistent with what many have suggested here, some like DF have suggested on the radio, that Billick will return but the offense will be stripped from him.

Makes sense to me.

Of course the veterans on the Ravens speak highly of him. He let's them have it easy during training camp and takes it easy on them during the season. That works great when nobody is expecting the Ravens to be good. However, in years such as this one where there are a lot of expectations this approach kills the Ravens.

Veterans end up getting hurt because Billick does not have them physically and mentally ready. You could see this on opening night in Cincy and it has carried on throughout the year. Billick's approach has worn thin. I for one would like to have a consistently good team instead of this one good year one bad year that has happened because of Billick's approach toward the veterans.

Treat everyone the same; stop coddling the veterans!

[ExiledRaven]

Casey Willet commented this afternoon that, behind closed doors, players who have played for more than one coach speak very highly of Billick *as a HC.*

It struck me as consistent with what many have suggested here, some like DF have suggested on the radio, that Billick will return but the offense will be stripped from him.

Makes sense to me.

I actually agree with this if it were to really happen. This means no Billick system, no Billick input, the OC runs the show.

Then Billick can do what he does best, and Festivus is right, about every single player talks about how great Billick is as a HC. For instance, Trevor Pryce asked Shannon Sharpe about the Baltimore offer and what it was like to play there and Sharpe said something similar to "If you get a chance to play for Brian Billick you need to go" That's a great thing.

All that said, the offensive system and playcalling in general is dirt along with some very mediocre to bad offensive subordinates in my opinion.

Time will tell

[WxKevin]

Of course the veterans on the Ravens speak highly of him. He let's them have it easy during training camp and takes it easy on them during the season. That works great when nobody is expecting the Ravens to be good. However, in years such as this one where there are a lot of expectations this approach kills the Ravens.

Veterans end up getting hurt because Billick does not have them physically and mentally ready. You could see this on opening night in Cincy and it has carried on throughout the year. Billick's approach has worn thin. I for one would like to have a consistently good team instead of this one good year one bad year that has happened because of Billick's approach toward the veterans.

Treat everyone the same; stop coddling the veterans!

If you look at the Ravens record in November and December since Billick has been the head coach you will see it is one of the best. In my opinion and others as well, this is due to the team being realtively fresh because they didn't beat each other up in training camp.

If you look at the Ravens record in September under Billick, the record is not quite as good. This may be due to them not being in "football" shape.

I don't know what the answer is when it comes to how hard they should be hitting in training camp. Most likely there is no right answer because what works for one p erson on the team might not work for another person on the team.

But if anybody is intimating that this year is due to Billick not having the players beat each other up in training camp, I could not disagree more.

[Greg]

Of course the veterans on the Ravens speak highly of him. He let's them have it easy during training camp and takes it easy on them during the season.
COMPLETELY WRONG!

Shannon Sharpe worked his ass off 12 months a year, just like Ray Lewis and a few other players. They don't slack so they wouldn't appreciate a slacker or easy guy. They appreciate the fact that he works them smart, not hard. He still works them.

Just because Billick doesn't beat players up doesn't mean he doesn't work them hard, there is a difference.

Billick's weakness is in-game situations, he does not do well thinking on his feet. But he is an incredible preparer and planner, he plans camp and the regular season schedule down to the minute. Players don't stand around doing nothing or having their time wasted, that is another thing they appreciate.

[StingerNLG]

COMPLETELY WRONG!

Shannon Sharpe worked his ass off 12 months a year, just like Ray Lewis and a few other players. They don't slack so they wouldn't appreciate a slacker or easy guy. They appreciate the fact that he works them smart, not hard. He still works them.

I will differ with you there Greg. Remember the 1st year Deion Sanders played for the Ravens? Billick was giving veteran players days off and letting them set their own schedule of how much practicing they did. I remember that distinctly.

Shannon Sharpe worked his own ass off. Billick didn't do that.