A Winner

[JohnBKistler]

That is Ravors point though. Ben has had MANY games just like this but when he pulls out that one pass to win the game, they forget about how much he looked like crap and laud him for being clutch.

The media attempts to tell folks who is great and who isn't and it's based on marketability for the most part.

Flacco is not marketable and neither is the city of Baltimore. Blue collar is not attractive except for the Steelers and that's only because they've been around for a million years.

I think marketing plays some part in all of this. But I still stand by my original (long-winded) post. In a nutshell, first impressions are lasting impressions.

For Roethlisberger, in the first half of his rookie year, it was magical (in some minds). 100+ QB ratings, winning games on national TV @ Dallas, @ New England (against Brady)...leading the Steelers to the Super Bowl. That makes a great story. And then, the next year, even though he had rather pedestrian stats, they won the SB. His comeback win against the Cardinals in the 2008 SB sealed the deal with many of the "commentators". He's a "great" QB.

By contrast, Flacco came into the league as a "game manager" and then put up some pretty horrid performances in prime-time. Personally, I think his standing among the "commentators" has improved 100% over 2 years ago. Back then, NOBODY was considering him an above-average QB. Every analysis before every game was, "Stop the run and make Flacco beat you. He won't." Now, you have guys like Collinsworth, Jaworski, Simms, others saying that his performance on the field is actually better than his record (which is says something) and he's more than good enough to win games on his own. His game winning drives in Pittsburgh the last 2 seasons, should-have-been GW drive in Foxboro last January, and generally better performances on national TV the last 2 seasons will move the meter.

But human nature comes into play here. If I am a NFL reporter or analyst and I have previously written about, or commented about, Flacco as an "average QB", a "game manager", what have you, it will be hard for me to go back and say, "You know what, I was wrong, he's actually better than that now." Not without a significant performance displays by Flacco. And again, I think that is happening, but you will not see a sea-change in opinion overnight. And Flacco's play is in general very inconsistent. In short, you can probably find cases for/against your position in every one of his games.

As a Baltimore fan, as long as he keeps winning, that is fine by me. But for those that do care what the national consciousness thinks of Flacco (and I guess I am one of those), being perceived as truly "great", "elite", whatever you want to call it, among the media and casual NFL fans will only come with Super Bowl rings. And frankly, that is probably how is should be.

[callahan09]

I saw on the NFLN yesterday how the question was asked if Jay Cutler was an MVP candidate because when he plays the Bears are 15-5. They say he's just a winner.

Really? Joe has never missed a game, has won in the playoffs, and his team averages over 10 wins a year. If that ain't the definiton of a winner, I gotta go and smack my english teacher for teaching me wrong definitions

So the NFL Network thinks Cutler was an MVP candidate because over the past 2 years the Bears are 15-5 with him starting?

Do they not realize that in that same span of the past two seasons, the Ravens are 21-6 with Flacco starting?

15-5 = .750 winning percentage
21-6 = .778 winning percentage

.778 > .750

Does anybody think it's "likely" that Cutler would go 6-1 over his next 7 starts with the Bears to TIE Flacco's current record? He'd have to go an unlikely 7-0 to better Flacco's record over the past 2 seasons. Bigger sample size for Flacco, plus the better win percentage, means their argument is moot, unless they make it doubly so for Flacco.

EDIT: Do you know how many TEAMS have won more games than FLACCO (including post-season) since he entered the league?

0.

ZERO.

NONE.

ZIP.

ZILCH.

NADA.

...

Since Flacco Entered the League
Do you know how many quarterbacks have more wins overall? 0. ZERO. NONE. ZIP. ZILCH. NADA.

Do you know how many quarterbacks have more regular season wins? 0. ZERO. NONE. ZIP. ZILCH. NADA.

Do you know how many quarterbacks have more post-season wins? 0. ZERO. NONE. ZIP. ZILCH. NADA.

[lobachevsky]

(@B-more Ravor: Happy to oblige. Enjoy!)

What we have all overlooked re Joe is that he's a "journalist"'s worst nightmare: He's not particularly demonstrative or flamboyant, & he's not at all articulate in interviews. He's not good copy.

The same exact thing was true of Unitas, but Johnny U. had the two championships & a slew of league passing records & (after 1958) he rarely had a clunker of a game. He demanded their respect as the blue-collar lunch-pail taciturn QB who was also the top man at his craft. Once Joe gets a ring or two & is consistently excellent, he'll get his props.

[LukeDaniel]

Shittsburgh works for him, not to much to select from. I'm sure even Ben stays away from corn bred with mustaches and pot gut.

Having lived in both cities, it's not even close as to which city is nicer. Pittsburgh puts Baltimore to shame in every respect, including the attractiveness of their women. If you prefer silicone-injected, tattoo-ruined, chain smokers, Baltimore definitely is the place for you. If you prefer your women without tramp stamps and smoker's breath, Pittsburgh has far more to select from. It's funny how many people here talk about Pittsburgh in such a bad tone, based on a perception of the city that existed 20-30 years ago. Pittsburgh is a haven for young professionals and is a well-maintained city with a fraction of the bad neighborhoods as Bmore. There really isn't a comparison anymore. Baltimore is staggering backwards as a city, while Pittsburgh is probably right at the top of the list of the most rapidly-improving city in the US.

[StingerNLG]

I think marketing plays some part in all of this. But I still stand by my original (long-winded) post. In a nutshell, first impressions are lasting impressions.

For Roethlisberger, in the first half of his rookie year, it was magical (in some minds). 100+ QB ratings, winning games on national TV @ Dallas, @ New England (against Brady)...leading the Steelers to the Super Bowl. That makes a great story. And then, the next year, even though he had rather pedestrian stats, they won the SB. His comeback win against the Cardinals in the 2008 SB sealed the deal with many of the "commentators". He's a "great" QB.

Again, this is not quite accurate. The media focus, especially in their 2005 SB year was Jerome Bettis, not Ben Rothlisberger. No one called him a "great" QB when he threw the least amount of passes in the entire league for less than 3,000 yards.