Passing Game

Jackson was afforded ample time and space (ATS) on 8 of 35 (23%) drop backs resulting in a pass/sack.  With ATS, he was 7 of 8 for 109 yards (13.6 YPP).

He delivered the ball before pressure could develop (BOQ) 8 times (23%) with 7 complete for 58 yards (7.3 YPP).  He was pressured 19 times (54%), on which he completed 7 of 12 passes for 77 net yards (4.1 YPP) including 7 sacks. In total, Jackson outperformed his opportunity set by 50 yards (actual 233, expected 183), which is 1.4 yards per play above expectation.

Jackson also ran Stanley and Faalele out of a shared pressure.

By number of pass rushers:

3: 1 play, -4 yards, 1 sack

4: 16 plays, 74 net yards, 4.6 YPP, 4 sacks

5: 10 plays, 93 net yards, 9.3 YPP, 1 sack

6: 6 plays, 56 net yards, 9.3 YPP, 1 sack

7+: 2 plays, 25 yards, 12.5 YPP

The Ravens used 23 set blocks and 11 chip blocks spread among 35 plays resulting in a pass or sack, 0.97 per play.  This large commitment of eligible receivers is more significant considering the prevalence of set blockers.  Kolar was used 8 times (6 sets, 2 chips), Hill 8 times (5 sets, 3 chips), Andrews 8 times (4 sets, 4 chips), Henry 5 times (4 sets, 1 chip) and Mitchell-Paden 4 times (all sets), accounting for all but 1 of such assignments.

The OL grades were surprisingly good for a night where the run game sputtered and there were 7 sacks.  That’s largely because the Lions used numbers (4.80 pass rushers per play) and manufactured some free runs by scheme.  Both the 54% aggregate pressure rate and the 19/8 ratio of pressures to ATS are wholly unacceptable but that was not entirely the fault of the OL.

OL Scoring

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).

Stanley: Ronnie struggled vs Lions DEs Hutchinson and Muhammad.  He was party to 5 negative events (bulled by stunting DT Williams, pressure, Q1, 2:00; bulled by DE Muhammad, pressure, Q4, 12:54; bulled by DE Muhammad to flush Jackson forward, 1/2 sack, Q4, 11:35; beaten inside by DE Hutchinson, sack, Q4, 6:30; bulled into cone by Muhammad, pressure, Q4, 1:42). Jackson also ran him out of a shared pressure when bulled by Hutchinson (Q2, 0:56). Of his 4 missed blocks, 3 were losses at the LoS.  He had 1 block in level 2 and delivered 2 pancakes. He connected on his only pull.  His highlight was a blitz pick up of CB Arnold (Q3, 11:20).   

Scoring: 54 plays, 45 blocks, 4 missed, 3 pressures, 1.5 sacks, 30 points (.56 per play).  That’s a D after adjustment. 

Vorhees: Andrew took a big step forward from the first 2 games.  He had shares of 2 negative events (bulled into cone by DT Reader, ½ pressure, Q4, 14:11; backed up by Reader, 1/6 sack, Q4, 11:35).  Of his 4 missed blocks, 2 were losses at the LoS. He had 1 block in level 2 but did not deliver a pancake.  He connected on 5 of his 6 pulls.  He did not have a highlight.

Scoring: 54 plays, 48 blocks, 4 missed, 1/2 pressure, 1/6 sack, 46 points (.85 per play).  That’s a B with or without adjustment.

Linderbaum: Tyler had his best game of the season.  He was party to 2 negative events (bulled by DT Williams, pressure, Q1, 3:16; failed to pick up Muhammad crossing his face, 1/3 sack, Q4, 1:37). His only missed block, was a loss at the LoS.  He had 2 blocks in level 2 but did not deliver a pancake. He was not asked to pull and did not have a highlight. 

Scoring: 54 plays, 51 blocks, 1 missed, 1 pressure, 1/3 sack, 47 points (.87 per play).  That’s a B with or without adjustment.

Faalele: Daniel delivered a solid but unspectacular game.  He was party to 3 negative events (bulled by DT O’Connor, 1/4 pressure, Q3, 9:44; beaten outside by DT Reader, 1/3 sack, Q4, 1:37; beaten outside by DT Lopez, pressure, Q4, 1:03). He was also run out of a shared pressure by Jackson when he failed to pick up the stunting Muhammad (Q2, 0:56). All 4 of his missed blocks were losses at the LoS. He had 2 blocks in level 2 and delivered 2 pancakes.  He connected on both of his pull attempts.  He had 2 highlights, the more impressive of which was a top-shelf screen block (Q3, 5:13). 

Scoring: 54 plays, 47 blocks, 4 missed, 1.25 pressures, 1/3 sack, 42.5 points (.79 per play).  That’s a C with or without adjustment.

Rosengarten: Roger had a difficult assignment, facing both Hutchinson and Muhammad.  He was party to 6 negative events (beaten outside by Muhammad, pressure, Q2, 0:48; failed to help on either DT O’Connor or LB Anzalone, ¼ pressure,  Q3, 9:44; beaten inside by Hutchinson to flush Jackson, 1/3 sack, Q3, 9:38; beaten outside by Hutchinson, pressure, Q3, 3:51; beaten outside by Hutchinson spin, ½ pressure, Q4, 14:11; bulled into cone by Hutchinson, 1/3 sack, Q4, 1:37).  Of his 4 missed blocks, 3 were losses at the LoS. He had 4 blocks in level 2 and delivered 4 pancakes. He was not asked to pull. He had 1 highlight combination block (on Henry’s TD run, Q1, 5:47). 

Scoring: 54 plays, 44 blocks, 4 missed, 2.75 (2 + ½ + ¼) pressures, 2/3 (2 x 1/3) sack, 34.5 points (.64 per play). This is a C- after adjustment.

Cleveland: Ben entered once as the 6th offensive lineman in goal line situation and missed his block.

Noteboom: Joe replaced Cleveland as the 6th offensive lineman in goal line situation on the very next play and allowed a penetration (Q2, 2:00).