Preparing for Cover 0
During last year’s loss in Miami, the Ravens saw 40 cover-0 looks (not all of which became pass plays) from the Dolphins as the Fish dared Jackson and Roman to find a way to beat them.
Clearly, being prepared to counter such alignments was a point of emphasis entering this game.
The Dolphins went with a heavy pass rush by numbers, including:
3: 3 plays, 18 yards, 6.0 YPP
4: 8/88, 11.0
5: 12/97, 8.1
6: 3/22, 7.3
7+: 3/93, 31.0
The Dolphins rushed 5+ on 18 of 29 pass plays (62%) on which Jackson averaged 11.8 YPP.
The Ravens afforded Jackson ample time and space (ATS) on 10 of 29 drop backs resulting in a pass (34%). Under normal conditions, that would be about average, but this was an exceptional result given the Miami pass rush numbers. When Jackson had ATS, he was 9/10 for 85 yards, 8.5 YPP.
Jackson delivered the ball before pressure could develop (BOQ) on 8 of 29 drop backs (28%) with 6 complete for 113 yards (14.1 YPP). When pressured, Jackson completed 7 of 11 passes for 118 yards (10.7 YPP). I’d call this an inverted game, because his numbers were better without ATS than with it, but Jackson was simply dominant across the board.
Even Heavier Packages
Against the Jets, the Ravens used 2.27 heavies (combination of TEs, FB, and 6th OL) per play, far exceeding their 2021 high of 1.96 per play vs the Chargers. They bumped that to 2.39 heavies per play in week 2, including 4 plays with 4 inline TEs (14 personnel–each included Faalele eligible).
The Ravens used 25 Set blockers and 5 chip blockers (1.03 per play), a high rate which (at least in part) reflects the desire to handle the blitz.
The Ravens ran 54 scored snaps (excludes accepted penalties which result in no play, kneels, spikes, and special teams plays that result in a run or pass).
Mekari: Patrick was solid in his first full game at LT. He surrendered two full pressures: he was beaten outside by OLB Phillips then held with no flag (Q4, 7:02); and he was bulled by OLB Ingram (Q4, 2:28). He also had a share (1/3) of a pressure when beaten inside by DT Sieler (Q1, 3:03). He shared 2 penetrations (Q3, 1:23) and (Q4, 9:16). All his 3 missed blocks were losses at the LoS. He was awarded with points on both of his pulls (without connecting) as the trailing line man on counters. He did not make any blocks in level 2 nor deliver a pancake. He did not have a highlight.
Scoring: 54 plays, 46 blocks, 3 missed, 1 (2 x ½) penetration, 2.33 pressures, 39.33 points (.73 per play). That’s a C with or without adjustment.
Powers: Ben took a big step forward from a tough performance against the Jets. He had only 1 negative event, a 1/3 share of pressure when he failed to help with the handoff of DT Sieler (Q1, 3:03). Among his 5 missed blocks only 2 were losses at the LoS (1 L2NB and 3 PNBs). After receiving 0 points on 8 pulls last week, Ben connected on 8 of 10 pulls vs. the Dolphins. He did not have a block in level 2 but delivered 2 pancakes. His highlight was a pair of blocks on S Holland and ILB Roberts when pulling on Jackson’s RM79 TD (Q3, 0:38).
Scoring: 54 plays, 48 blocks, 5 missed, 1/3 pressure, 47.33 points (.88 per play). That’s an A after adjustment.
Linderbaum: Tyler hung in through a difficult size matchup, but his physical tools were not ideal for the Ravens short-yardage efforts. He gave up portions of 3 pressures including a full when bulled by DT Sieler (Q2, 4:23) and 2 half shares (Q2, 0:38) and (Q4, 0:09). The latter was a PD by Ingram where he and Zeitler were not directly engaged. If that charge were removed, his grade would have been a C. Of the 7 missed blocks, 6 were losses at the LoS. He missed his only pull attempt and made 1 block in level 2 but did not deliver a pancake nor did he have a highlight.
Scoring: 54 plays, 44 blocks, 7 missed, 2 (1 + 2 x 1/2) pressures, 40 points (.74 per play). That’s a D+ with adjustment.
Zeitler: Kevin had some pass-blocking difficulties to go with generally good run blocking and mobility. He gave up portions of 4 pressures: full (Q2, 1:01); ½ (Q2, 0:38 and Q4, 0:09); and 1/3 (Q1, 3:03). He had a shared penetration when beaten inside by DT Wilkins (Q4, 7:42). His only missed block came when he tripped over a pile when pulling (Q4, 10:37). He led the team with 5 blocks in level 2 but did not deliver a pancake. He connected on 2 of his 3 pulls. His 2 highlights were both combination blocks (Q1, 10:35 and Q1, 8:42).
Scoring: 54 plays, 48 blocks, 1 missed, ½ penetration, 2.33 (1 + 2*½ + 1/3) pressures, 42.33 points (.78 per play). That’s a B- with adjustment.
Moses: Morgan turned in a fine game as a pass blocker in which he did not allow a pressure event. He had 2 shared penetrations when Wilkins swiped past him (Q1, 1:23) and when he failed to block OLB Phillips (Q4, 7:42). Those were his only negative events. He missed 2 blocks, both of which were losses at the LoS (whiff on Wilkins, beaten inside by Wilkins). He did not make a block in level 2 nor did he have a pancake. He was not assigned to pull. His highlight was a pair of blocks at the LoS on Wilkins then ILB Roberts (Q1, 9:21) to help spring Drake’s RR6.
Scoring: 54 plays, 50 blocks, 2 missed, 1 (2 x ½) penetration, 48 points (.89 per play). That’s an A with or withoutadjustment.
Faalele: Daniel entered as an eligible 6th offensive lineman for 5 plays and made 4 of his blocks. He was late out of his stance on 4th/1 (Q2, 14:47) for what was his only missed block.
If you’re interested in seeing scoring trends for the players this season, those charts will be posted in the Gallery section.