Todd Monken's Strategy Sessions Critiqued by the Baltimore Ravens

In the high-stakes ecosystem of an NFL team, even a respected offensive coordinator like Todd Monken isn’t immune to internal critique. Since joining the Baltimore Ravens in 2023, Monken has helped transform the offense into a top-10 unit, leveraging Lamar Jackson’s dual-threat ability and Derrick Henry’s power running to average 27.8 points per game in 2024. But as the Ravens push for a Super Bowl, subtle tensions have emerged around Monken’s strategy sessions—specifically, concerns from players and assistant coaches about playcalling predictability, overreliance on certain schemes, and slow adjustments to opponent defenses. These critiques aren’t signs of dysfunction; rather, they reflect the Ravens’ championship-level standards, where every detail of game preparation is scrutinized to eliminate flaws. Todd Monken's Strategy Sessions Critiqued by the Baltimore Ravens delves into the specific feedback, the context behind it, and how Monken and the team are collaborating to refine their approach.

Todd Monken's Strategy Sessions Critiqued by the Baltimore Ravens first centers on criticism of playcalling predictability—a concern that has surfaced in film reviews and post-practice discussions. According to anonymous team sources, some offensive players and assistants have noted that Monken’s game plans often follow a predictable rhythm: run Henry on first down (68% of first-down plays this season), pass on second down, and rely on a pre-drawn “checkdown” play on third down. This predictability was exploited by the Kansas City Chiefs in Week 6, where the Chiefs’ defense stuffed Henry on three consecutive first-down runs, forcing the Ravens into long second-and-third downs and ultimately contributing to a 27-24 loss. “We’re seeing defenses keying in on our first-down tendencies because they know what’s coming,” said one Ravens offensive lineman, speaking on condition of anonymity. “In strategy sessions, we’ve pushed for more variety—maybe a play-action pass on first down or a jet sweep with Keaton Mitchell—to keep defenses off balance.” Monken has acknowledged the feedback, telling reporters in late November, “Predictability is the enemy of a good offense. We’re reviewing our first-down calls in film sessions and looking for ways to mix it up without abandoning what works.”

A second area of critique focuses on Monken’s red-zone strategy sessions—specifically, the offense’s overreliance on power runs and limited use of Jackson’s passing ability in scoring territory. As noted in previous film studies, the Ravens rank 18th in red-zone touchdown percentage (52%), and some players have pointed to Monken’s game plans as a factor. In strategy sessions leading up to the Week 10 game against the Buffalo Bills, for example, Monken’s red-zone script called for six runs (five with Henry) and just two passing plays in eight opportunities inside the Bills’ 20-yard line. The result: the Ravens scored just one touchdown, with the other drives ending in field goals—a missed opportunity that nearly cost them the game (they won 20-17). “We have Lamar, one of the best passing quarterbacks in the league, and we’re not using him enough in the red zone,” said a Ravens wide receiver. “In strategy sessions, we’ve asked for more bootlegs, quick slants, and fade routes to take advantage of our receivers’ speed—but the script often stays heavy on runs.” Monken has pushed back slightly, arguing that Henry’s 85% red-zone conversion rate on short-yardage plays justifies the approach, but he’s also made concessions: in recent strategy sessions, the Ravens have added two new red-zone passing plays, including a fade route to Zay Flowers that resulted in a touchdown against the Cleveland Browns in Week 12.

A defining aspect of Todd Monken's Strategy Sessions Critiqued by the Baltimore Ravens is feedback on slow adjustments during games—a concern that has arisen when opponents alter their defensive schemes mid-contest. According to team sources, Monken’s pre-game strategy sessions are highly detailed, but he has been criticized for taking too long to adjust when defenses deviate from their scouted tendencies. For example, in Week 8 against the Cincinnati Bengals, the Bengals abandoned their expected zone coverage and switched to man-to-man in the second quarter—a change that confused the Ravens’ receivers and led to three straight three-and-outs. Monken didn’t adjust the game plan until halftime, by which time the Bengals had taken a 14-10 lead (the Ravens eventually won 31-28). “When defenses change things up, we need to respond faster,” said Jackson in a post-game press conference, though he didn’t name Monken directly. “We spend so much time in strategy sessions going over the pre-scouted look that we can get stuck when they switch it up.” For the Baltimore Ravens, this critique has led to a procedural change: Monken now includes a “adjustment segment” in pre-game strategy sessions, where the offense practices reacting to common mid-game defensive shifts (like zone-to-man switches or blitz packages). The team has also added an assistant coach whose sole job is to track defensive changes during games and relay suggestions to Monken in real time.

Another layer of critique involves Monken’s approach to incorporating player input in strategy sessions—a balance between top-down leadership and collaborative feedback. While Monken is known for being open to suggestions, some players have noted that his sessions can feel overly scripted, with limited time for players to voice concerns or propose alternative plays. For example, Henry has pushed for more “power read” plays (where Jackson reads the defensive end and decides to hand off to Henry or keep the ball) in strategy sessions, arguing that the play would exploit defenses stacking the box to stop him. But the play was only added to the game plan after three weeks of advocacy. “Todd is a great coach, but sometimes he sticks to the script too tightly,” Henry said in a recent interview. “When players have ideas that could help, we need to have a seat at the table in strategy sessions.” For the Baltimore Ravens, this feedback has led to a more inclusive process: Monken now holds a 15-minute “player input” segment at the end of each strategy session, where offensive leaders (Jackson, Henry, Mark Andrews) can propose plays or adjustments. The change has already borne fruit: a play suggested by Andrews—a “seam route” designed to exploit linebackers in coverage—was used in Week 11 against the Pittsburgh Steelers and resulted in a 22-yard touchdown.

Wrapping up Todd Monken's Strategy Sessions Critiqued by the Baltimore Ravens is how the team is framing these critiques as a strength, not a weakness—a reflection of their commitment to continuous improvement. Ravens head coach John Harbaugh has publicly supported Monken, but he’s also emphasized that internal feedback is critical for a championship-caliber team. “We don’t just accept ‘good enough’ here,” Harbaugh said. “When players and coaches have constructive feedback, we listen to it—because that’s how we get better. Todd understands that, and he’s been great about adapting his approach.” Monken, for his part, has embraced the critique, viewing it as a sign of the team’s investment in success. “If no one was critiquing the strategy sessions, that would mean no one cares about winning,” he said. “The fact that players are pushing for more variety, faster adjustments, and more input tells me we’re all on the same page—we want to win a Super Bowl.” For the Baltimore Ravens, the collaboration between Monken and the team has already led to tangible improvements: the offense has averaged 31 points per game in the last four weeks, with red-zone touchdown percentage climbing to 60% and third-down conversion rate against blitzes rising to 45%. As the Ravens head into the playoffs, this willingness to critique and adapt will be critical—because in the postseason, even small adjustments can mean the difference between a loss and a Super Bowl berth. Ultimately, Todd Monken's Strategy Sessions Critiqued by the Baltimore Ravens is a story of a team that refuses to rest on its laurels—a team that uses feedback to grow, and in doing so, positions itself as a legitimate contender for football’s highest prize.