Flacco had a great season last year...what the hell are you guys talking about? And he did it with a cast of rookie and 2nd year receivers (who probably led the league in dropped passes). He is going to get $100 million...and he is worth it.
Lots of back and forth here. This thread went from "Flacco's deal update" to "Is Flacco worth a big deal". Give him a deal somewhere between Kevin Kolb/Tom Cassell and Eli Manning/Phillip Rivers.
Some ravens fans forget what our QB history looked like in the 12 years before Joe arrived. Maybe we've forgotten what good QB play looks like given the recent of history of bad QB play. Flacco is the real deal. Surround him with a little more talent and creativity (Cam are you listening?) to suit his strengths he will take us to next level.
Originally Posted by BcRaven
Are you talking about the Ravens or the Browns? It seems like you'd like to see the Ravens fail so you could jump on Flacco with both feet, but it hasn't happened yet. You're gonna have to wait some years for that IMO... Bc
No way Flacco has earned a Rivers/Eli/BenR type of contract. That said, you won't get him to agree to a deal anywhere near a Kolb or Cassel deal, even if they were egregiously overpaid. Plus QB is the one position where a failure to get an average or slightly above-average player at minimum, guarantees failure (barring a time-machine and an all-time great defense). So you hope to sign him in between these two levels, but would be forced to sign him at the higher level if push came to shove.
From that point, if Flacco keeps improving, you signed a fair to eventually-cheap deal; if Flacco fails to develop and plateaus at around where he is, you overpaid at the position fairly significantly.
If Flacco insists on a deal that is bigger than Rivers/Eli/Ben then I think you make him wait until 2013 and take your chances.
Noway hes worth rivers money? I realize eli and ben won SBs but at the same point in their respective careers theyre all arguably similar players even statistically. Wanting more isnt necessarily below market price with inflation and considering his age. I believe, may be wrong, but eli has the latest deal and it was signed in 2008? If he was asking to be paid brady or brees money id agree youre better off waiting him out but those deals those guys signed were young qbs you believe will take the next step and can lead your team which i believe he falls under.
Rivers 6 years 39Guarntee
Ben 8 years 36 G
Vick 6 years 37 G
Eli 7 35G
Peyton is under the 100M club but his guarntee'd money is about the ame with 5 years 35G.
Personally I think Flacco is in the land of 7 years 100M(with all the incentives) and about 32G. Incentive laden more than the others, considering he hasn't had the level of success(even at this point in his career) as the others besides Rivers. But personally I don't think Rivers is very elite either. Give Joe a pair of 6'6' and fast damn receivers(who can also catch), along with Gates and a decent running game and I bet he puts up far better stats. They've handed Joe a washedup short Mason, a possesion guy in Boldin, a beatup end of career Heap(thanks to Boller) and scrubs elsewhere, until T.Smith. And a unimaginative bum of a OC who shouldn't even be coaching HS ball let alone the NFL.
add 5-10 mil to whatever matt ryan ends up getting...
PFT stated that no progress has been made, but Aaron Wilson has been informed that the Ravens and Joe Linta have met twice since the combine to discuss Flacco's extension.
Flacco has always had the benefit of a ridiculously good defense to bail him out.
And that absolutely should reflect in his contract.
Second, it's like this. Here's two sets of data for you--first, the ratings for all the QBs of the teams that won 12 or more games last year, and then the records of the teams that had QBs which finished the year +/- 5 points of Flacco on the QB rating scale, and who played all 16 games (if you want, throw out Jackson--he only played 15). I posted this earlier, but not in this format, so maybe it'll be clearer this way:
Newton- 84.9/6 wins
Hasselbeck- 82.4/9 wins
Flacco- 80.9/12 wins
Dalton- 80.4/9 wins
Jackson- 79.2/7 wins
Fitzpatrick- 79.1/6 wins
Sanchez- 78.2/8 wins
So what does it tell you? Obviously, it's not a large enough sample size to say anything definitively, but it does show two things--that Flacco's QB rating was by far the worst of the teams that were the 'elite' of the league last year, and that QBs who got ratings similar to Flacco tended to win far fewer games.
So... upon seeing this, it raises a few questions for me, and makes one thing seem likely. The latter first--getting high quality (statistically) play out of whoever is at the QB position is less important to the Ravens than it is to other teams (or, at least it was to the 2011 Ravens--maybe 2012 will be different). If you get 12 wins with an 80.9 rating, you're apparently making up for that deficiency in other areas (defense, running... probably not special teams!). The questions it raises are these--how many wins would that have been at a 90 rating? How many at a 70 rating? If that's the spread you're working with, what's that actually worth paying for?
Is this in any way definitive? Am I saying I'm right? Not at all. But I think it's a logical, cogent viewpoint, and I think that I want to see another year of this offense before I spend any big money on any part of it, if I'm the Ravens FO. You may be right--Cam may be the whole problem. The Ravens should have gotten rid of him just to see what would happen, IMO. But until you've got a better idea as to exactly where the problem is... I wouldn't throw a lot of cash around.
If you go to the playoffs with a quarterback for all four years of his career, you keep him.
Redmike, you can draw other conclusions from your same stats. How about this one: Joe Flacco's QB rating was aberrantly low in the 2011 season despite his success as an NFL quarterback.
Wanna know what kills me?
Last year, when Flacco's stats were among the best in the league, the usual suspects where all "but that doesn't mean anything, just look at him play".
Now when people are saying the stats don't tell the whole story, Flacco visibly played better, made more clutch plays, etc, those same people are saying "but his stats went down".
Those same people also bashed Flacco for not having good numbers in the playoffs. Now that over the last two years his rating is in the mid-upper 90's, they want to dismiss them.
There is no winning with these people, and quite frankly, I think most of us are getting tired of this stupid, idiotic debate. Look at what this thread, that started out as something informative, has turned into.
Rivers signed in August of 2009. His 2008 season consisted of a 105.5 QB rating (best in league by 8 pts), 34 TDs (tied for best in league with Brees), 11 Ints only (6 less than Brees), 4009 yards (5th in league BUT he had way less attempts than those ahead of him such that his YPA was significantly the best in league at 8.39). In short, Rivers could easily argue he was the best QB in the league in 2008; even if he might not quite win that argument, it wouldn't be a stretch to claim that by any means. And since we all agree that you pay people for their trajectory as much as anything, his huge deal was easy to rationalize. Age also isn't relevant to the comparison because Rivers was roughly the same age as Joe is now when he signed; he had played one extra year in the league but came out 1 year earlier than Joe.
As for BigBen, he signed his 'big' deal in March of 2008. He also had a ring at that point and his stats for the 2007 season, were: QB rating 104.1 (2nd behind Brady), 32 TDs (3rd in league), 'only' 3154 yards, but only 404 attempts, gving him a YPA of 7.81 (4th in the league). He also made the ProBowl. And also the deal was 8 yrs for 'only' $102M, less than $13M per.
As for total 'career' statistics, I would say that they matter less than the trend/trajectory. And more importantly, passing stats have been going up across the league and completely spiked last year, making it harder to compare year to year totals without some kind of adjustment.
Eli's big-money extension was signed in the preseason of 2009. If Eli had not won a SuperBowl in 2007 and then followed it up with a significantly improved year statistically (to his fairly mundane stats from 2003-2007) I don't think he gets anywhere near that extension. Eli is the one that is closest to Flacco in terms of performance in the contract year. Eli's year was better but not by a ton, but more importantly it was better than the year before (he improved). And again he had a SB title and SB MVP under his belt.
While we can agree or disagree about how Flacco's stats are harmed by forces outside his control, the fact remains, he is not coming into the negotiations with as much leverage as these other three were when they signed their deals. QB rating ranking around 15th-18th depending on who you include, TDs tied for 13th, yardage ranked 12th, YPA ranked a pitiful 24th. That doesn't mean he doesn't have leverage obviously, I would just say that it isn't some kind of 'given' that he deserves deals similar to the deals these three signed.
As for inflation, I hear you and agree, though the salary cap in 2009 was $123M, roughly the same as it will be this year (and maybe next). Also, as has been said, the guaranteed money (and structure/details) is really as crucial as the total and yearly average.