Where Does Flacco Rank Amongsts the League's Best QB's?

This +1

Not to mention Joe got the job and started right away. He didn't sit and learn from a HOF QB for 3 years.

It's funny to me that there is even one person on the planet that think the ravens have better WR/TE's then the Packers... it's not close.

Here is a HUGE thing we should all recognize as causing problems when comparing Joe with any other quarterback.
Cam was a huge drawback for Joe and it was evident.
And with Caldwell, there has been a 180, BUT, it is such a short subset of Joe's entire career numbers we need to see it continue throughout an entire regular season.

I think Joe has GREAT potential to pick right up where he just left off which could translate into the kind of numbers that leaves no doubt.
But honestly, we have to wait and see.
Right now, Joe has indeed set the stage to be great with an incredible post season performance.

Let's watch and hopefully enjoy witnessing something we have never seen before DURING a regular season from a Raven quarterback.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bacchys

Why wouldn't it be a serious discussion?

---

LOL, apparently you don't know this douche...er I mean dude.

Because Joe Flacco just had an amazing four game playoff stretch, and Aaron Rodgers just had an amazing FIVE YEAR STARTING CAREER.

There is not one metric where Joe Flacco outperforms Aaron Rodgers. Not one. His best regular season mirrors Rodgers' worst. Both have one SB MVP and win, and Flacco's been playing with better teams over the past five years.

You guys act like playoff wins by a QB is the only important metric out there to evaluate a QB. That's nice when you use that as a single metric. But if you want to complain about how Flacco is even better than he looks because, for instance, Lee Evans hanging onto that ball would have given him another win, let's also not pretend that Flacco deserves that 4 of 10 win. And let's also stop pretending that it's the only metric that matters. It's not.

I don't hear a single person trying to argue that Eli Manning is a better QB than Aaron Rodgers. Yet the guy's 8-2 with an incredible four games with a > 114 QB rating.

So feel free to argue it if you want, I guess. Let me know how that goes with non-Ravens fans. I'm pretty sure I'll have given a whole lot more cordial response than most would. Allow me to demonstrate how a typical discussion will go with a non Ravens fan...

[RSR Member]: "I'd rather have Flacco at QB than Aaron Rodgers. Dude's got more playoff wins in his first five years than anyone ever. He won a SB faster than Rodgers. He's better."

[Non-Ravens fan]: .....

[RSR Member]: "Seriously. Flacco's better."

[Non-Ravens fan]: "BAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by psuasskicker

Because Joe Flacco just had an amazing four game playoff stretch, and Aaron Rodgers just had an amazing FIVE YEAR STARTING CAREER.

There is not one metric where Joe Flacco outperforms Aaron Rodgers. Not one. His best regular season mirrors Rodgers' worst. Both have one SB MVP and win, and Flacco's been playing with better teams over the past five years.

You guys act like playoff wins by a QB is the only important metric out there to evaluate a QB. That's nice when you use that as a single metric. But if you want to complain about how Flacco is even better than he looks because, for instance, Lee Evans hanging onto that ball would have given him another win, let's also not pretend that Flacco deserves that 4 of 10 win. And let's also stop pretending that it's the only metric that matters. It's not.

I don't hear a single person trying to argue that Eli Manning is a better QB than Aaron Rodgers. Yet the guy's 8-2 with an incredible four games with a > 114 QB rating.

---

This. It's recency effect that is overrating Flacco right now. Flacco is great. He's top 6 probably. But he's not better than Aaron Rodgers. Every statistical category that matters says Rodgers is better.

I am just trying to understand why Flacco has to be better than anyone? He is the best QB for the Ravens right now.

I think that about wraps up this thread.

Sent from my DROID X2 using Forum Runner

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by psuasskicker

Because Joe Flacco just had an amazing four game playoff stretch, and Aaron Rodgers just had an amazing FIVE YEAR STARTING CAREER.

There is not one metric where Joe Flacco outperforms Aaron Rodgers. Not one. His best regular season mirrors Rodgers' worst. Both have one SB MVP and win, and Flacco's been playing with better teams over the past five years.

---

It's debatable the Ravens have had a better team around Flacco the last five years compared to Rodgers with Green Bay, especially offensively. As a Ravens fan, I'm inclined to think the Ravens have been the better team, but Green Bay has good players on both sides of the ball and they've definitely had better players at wide receiver, especially 1 thru 5, than Flacco has enjoyed.

The offensive scheme at Green Bay also favours Rodgers racking up better stats. The West Coast, even the modified version employed by Green Bay, works to improve a QB's stats, especially QBR, while the Coryell doesn't really give a crap about it (especially the way Cam ran it).

I think if you could have them switch places the last five years each would have quite different stats than those they did compile. Rodgers in a Cam Coryell, with his feet relatively locked in place by the scheme, wouldn't be nearly as successful as he has been in Green Bay. This is the same system that "earned' Matt Flynn a nice payday...and then he couldn't beat out Russell Wilson in Seattle for a starting spot despite getting the bigger check.

Again, given what I've seen of them, Rodgers is the better QB. I'd like to see more from Flacco with a different offensive philosophy, even if it stays in the Coryell family. But I don't think the gap between them is quite as large as I suspect you do.

I never said Joe was better than Rodgers. You have to put things in context. You have to look at the weapons around the QB.

Rodgers inherited a group that had worked with a future HOF QB. He also has yet to play a season without Driver and Jennings.

Joe got a group that had suffered through Kyle Boller and has had an ever changing cast of receivers.

What could Joe have done if he had Driver and Jennings every season?

What would have happened if Rodgers had Housh and stone hands Evans?

Too many variables and differences between the systems, coaches, receivers and even opponents to compare.

I watch a lot of Packers games, and what I notice a lot about Rodgers is two things:

He rolls out and steps up in the pocket, buys some time to get rid of the football.

And when he throws the football, his receiver is often WIDE open.

Now, two things about Joe:

He is clearly adept at rolling out, stepping up in the pocket, shrugging off defenders, and buying some time to get rid of the football. If you pay attention, it was Cam Cameron and his coaching instruction that basically asked Flacco to stand put until a receiver got open. When Flacco plays his way, and Caldwell is obviously honing Flacco's natural abilities rather than limiting them and trying to shape him into what he wants to see (opposite of Cam Cameron's coaching style), you can see that has been doing a great job of this. Our offensive line wasn't even that much better in the post-season if you ask me. He still had guys chasing after him practically all the time. The difference was in his motion and his poise which enabled him to be more elusive, buy time, and throw on the move, and complete plays that way. Flacco made his O line look better than they were by refusing to get hit when he had any control whatsoever in the situation.

And two, he almost NEVER throws the football to a wide open receiver. Flacco has had to deal with throwing into tight windows all his career.

I truly believe that Flacco has had one of the most difficult systems and coaches to succeed under in his time in the NFL so far. But Caldwell will help relieve that situation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by callahan09

I watch a lot of Packers games, and what I notice a lot about Rodgers is two things:

He rolls out and steps up in the pocket, buys some time to get rid of the football.

And when he throws the football, his receiver is often WIDE open.

Now, two things about Joe:

He is clearly adept at rolling out, stepping up in the pocket, shrugging off defenders, and buying some time to get rid of the football. If you pay attention, it was Cam Cameron and his coaching instruction that basically asked Flacco to stand put until a receiver got open. When Flacco plays his way, and Caldwell is obviously honing Flacco's natural abilities rather than limiting them and trying to shape him into what he wants to see (opposite of Cam Cameron's coaching style), you can see that has been doing a great job of this. Our offensive line wasn't even that much better in the post-season if you ask me. He still had guys chasing after him practically all the time. The difference was in his motion and his poise which enabled him to be more elusive, buy time, and throw on the move, and complete plays that way. Flacco made his O line look better than they were by refusing to get hit when he had any control whatsoever in the situation.

And two, he almost NEVER throws the football to a wide open receiver. Flacco has had to deal with throwing into tight windows all his career.

I truly believe that Flacco has had one of the most difficult systems and coaches to succeed under in his time in the NFL so far. But Caldwell will help relieve that situation.

---

This is what Cosell has more or less said. The system does not have any easy QB throws and requires more throws over 20 yards than any other offense. If Caldwell revamps the offense with Joe as the focal point he could see his stats go up significantly.