Quote:
Originally Posted by dlphg9
Honestly no neither of those answer my question. How is it game changing when they supposedly ran 44% of their plays away from him 56% of their plays went towards him? It seems that they'd run away from him more times than not if they were scared of him. I know Stout is good at breaking down film, but he obviously hasn't looked at the trends of the Ravens.
When looking at the numbers from the 1st two weeks of the season you can easily see that the Ravens have better run blockers or like to run to the right side more than they do the left. In the 1st 2 weeks the Ravens had 56 runs that they ran to the right or to the left, but doesn't include runs up the middle. The Ravens ran to the right on 61% of those runs and to the left on 39% of those runs.
So with a little digging you can see that they weren't running away from Clark, they were just doing what they've been doing all season long. If they were running away from Clark you would think that once they moved him to the other side that they would start running the other way, but that is not what happened.
Now back to the video, Stout says that Clark was "solid", but not "exceptional". Don't you give up what we gave up for exceptional? This next statement is about the article, when I see someone say that FC was double and triple teamed against the Ravens, then I'm not going to take that source seriously. I watched him on every play that I could and not once did I see him get double teamed and he damn sure wasn't ever triple teamed.
Now please explain to me how running a play towards a player more than you went away from that player is game changing.
|
Respectfully, this premise is incorrect.
It does not follow that if 44% of plays are not run at him, therefore 56% of play must be run toward him. In fact, some of those other plays might be pass plays. Clark wasn't on the field for some of those plays. And so on.
But the fact that of the plays the Ravens did run, 44% were run away from his side is statistically a huge number.
I readily admit that before listening to the podcast, I didn't know who Mr. Stout was. However, as I understand it, he gets paid to analyze film for the Chiefs. I'm going to believe him before I believe you,. No offense.
I watched the film of the Chiefs-Ravens game twice, and I don't know what you were watching, but Frank is doubled several times during the game. He is also chipped several times. I noticed that at some point during the game Frank starts lining up in different spots. I also noted that he spent some time chasing TEs. Side note: he played those MUCH better than Dee ever did.
Spags is asked about this in his presser, and he acknowledges that he wanted to move him around to try and hamper Baltimore's ability to double him. Spags says that out loud to a room full of reporters. He also says that they're asking Frank to do a lot of things besides rush the passer, and that Clark has been all in on taking up these extra responsibilities, even though they are limiting his chances to actually rush the passer.
Again, no disrespect, but I'm going to go with the word of the Defensive Coordinator over yours.
One of these guys broke down FC's effectiveness against runs to his side, and found that runs against him are averaging less than 2.2 yds/carry. That is statistically significant, and is an exceptional number. And Frank was originally pursued as a run stopper.
The consensus about FC by people that get paid to look at these things so far been that FC has played consistently solid mistake-free, smart football, but that he hasn't posted much in the way of splash plays.
And finally, as I and others have said multiple times, it's only been three weeks. Reggie White had a season when he didn't have a sack for 5 consecutive games. Derrick Thomas had multiple seasons in which he didn't post sacks for multiple games in a row. No one ever said those guys weren't performing to their contracts after three weeks.
Bottom line, Baltimore didn't run at FC more than they did away. The eye test proves that alone. No OC in his right mind would do that.
But I think the most important thing about this whole argument/conversation, is that Frank himself isn't concerned about his numbers. In his post-game locker room interview, you can tell he's happy he got the sack, especially against Lamar, but when asked about his numbers, he just smiles and says he's not interested in stats, just wins. I believe that's telling.
P.S. this week we're facing a far more traditional QB that mostly stays in the pocket, with an ability to scramble. but not run. And the most experienced proven QB we've faced this season. It should give us a better idea of what our 'base' defense should look like. If we can get stops against the run/get a two score lead, we should see FC rushing the passer more than he has up to this point. At least in theory. We'll see how the Lions address this, but we should also see how FC is doing from a physical standpoint. Will he show the power and burst he wowed everyone with last year? How healthy does he look? And so on.