Page 16 of 21 FirstFirst ... 6121314151617181920 ... LastLast
Results 226 to 240 of 301
  1. #226

    Re: The "Flacco Thread" (Merged from 5 threads)



    Quote Originally Posted by Haloti92 View Post
    Those numbers are not actually that close when you adjust for the league-wide explosion in passing. It is better to compare rankings among peers, and Brady was a top 10 QB in about every category for all those years. He led the league in TDs with 28 in 2002, for example.

    But I can't argue with the QB-alone-doesn't-win-SB argument. That is true.
    I think you're correct to point out that peer comparisons are more useful than raw numbers, but I do wonder about the anecdotal impression that passing has "exploded league wide" in recent years--is that born out by the evidence? It may be, but in what ways?

    Take a look at the NFL passing stat averages year-to-year. http://www.pro-football-reference.co...FL/passing.htm

    Virtually all the "volume" statistics are trending upwards, but not by huge margins, some within the range of statistical insignificance. In terms of "efficiency" statistics, yards per attempt and TD% are actually trending downwards from their peaks in the 1960's, stagnant since the 1980's. I don't have the time to do proper analysis at this point, but I'd be interested to hear someone's more carefully crafted effort.

    Here's a VERY half-assed argument: passer rating appears to be trending upward. PR heavily weights completion percentage, which is also increasing while yards per completion decreases. Passing offense is not truly exploding in the NFL, but with the re-emphasis of the 5-yard chuck rule in the early 2000's, passing offenses have become significantly more efficient in the short and intermediate passing game, while deemphasizing the deep passing game that produced higher TD%, INT%, YPA, with lower COMPL% and PR.

    I guess you can anticipate my next argument: that our antiquated deep-ball system doesn't mesh with the overall gains in efficiency being made by the rest of the NFL.




  2. #227
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    where my head touches the pillow
    Posts
    7,203
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: The "Flacco Thread" (Merged from 5 threads)

    Quote Originally Posted by bacchys View Post
    I don't think he's more composed. I think the offensive scheme and the playcalling help him get into the rhythm of the game and get comfortable more than ours does for Flacco.

    I kept hearing the MNF commentators marvel at how wide open the Redskins' receivers were. The Giants made a lot of catches with quite a bit of turf around them, too. We don't hear that when the Ravens are on offense.

    Batch was hit 6 times to Flacco's eleven. He had six or seven plays with a receiver running wide open in the middle of the field. I can't think of a single play except for the PI against Boldin where a Ravens receiver didn't have a defender right on him. It's not just ability: it's the scheme not putting the players in a position to succeed.

    We also, inexplicably, abandoned the run late in the third and the fourth quarter. I know: we only like 7 plays in the 4th. Part of that is on the defense for not stopping Pittsburgh. Part of that is on Cameron/Flacco/ the offense for not getting first downs. IIRC, we ran it one time on those seven plays, for a loss. Rice ran it 12 times for 78 yards. He didn't have any 30+ runs: he was getting good, positive yardage on most of those runs. Pierce ran the ball effectively. Yet, nonetheless, we had Flacco dropping back, no play-action, and trying to hit covered receivers while his o-line crumbled around him.

    He does need to run more. I suspect, though I don't know, that Harbaugh and the coaching staff discourage this. He certainly doesn't seem to look for opportunities to run like he did his rookie season. I think he also has a lot of confidence in his ability to get the ball downfield, so his preference is to hold the ball and give the receivers a chance to get position (forget getting open).

    His deep ball doesn't have the touch you'd like to see. He consistently seems to throw the ball short when Smith or Jones get behind a defender, whether that's in the middle of the field or down the sideline. It's as if he doesn't have an understanding of their speed and underestimates where to put the ball. I know it's not a lack of arm strength: I've seen him overthrow those same routes by a good margin.

    Boldin's drops have become a very troubling development, and I'm probably his biggest fan on this board (if not in Raven country). I was ecstatic when Newsome brought him here, and my standing advice to Flacco is "throw it to Boldin." Well, he's been doing that and Boldin hasn't been producing. He's gotten beat by single coverage defenders more than he used to. Yes, Allen and (I forget who) both made good plays on the ball around Boldin, but that's been his specialty his whole career: out-muscling defenders for the football.

    It didn't help the refs had a quick whistle on the "in the grasp" play, and also an inconsistent one. Batch was "in the grasp" on the incomplete Harbaugh challenged (inexplicably, imo, or at least bad advice) for at least as long. That didn't cost us the game: if you leave it on the refs, you didn't deserve to win. But it does make it frustrating and therefore harder for a QB or any player to produce when you make a play- which Flacco did- and a bad call takes it away from you.

    It's said all the time here: we need more slants and quick routes. If the DB's are playing back, we should hit WR bubble screens and quick hitches more than we do instead of constantly trying to outplay the defense down the field. During Flacco's first two seasons, and perhaps the first three, the mantra was to "take what the defense gives you." Unfortunately, we didn't have a receiving corps that presented many threats for the defense to try and take away. Now, Cameron's mantra seems to be to force the defense to make a play, and that gives small windows for Flacco to throw into and forces our receivers to make great plays over and over as well.

    In sum, Flacco isn't playing great, but he's not being set up for success by how he's being used and the play around him, either.
    very much the case.




  3. #228

    Re: The "Flacco Thread" (Merged from 5 threads)

    In sum, Flacco isn't playing great, but he's not being set up for success by how he's being used and the play around him, either.

    I totally agree with that statement. I believe Joe still has some upside, but he is being held back by the type of offense we run. On a scale of 1-10, Joe has the potential to be an 8. Right now, he is playing like a 5 or 6. He won't ever be a 9 or 10, because he has limited ability to run or extend plays. He is not very instintive and has poor pocket presence. If however, we can ever get a great offensive line and an OC that will call more short and intermediate route plays across the middle, then you will see a much improved Joe Flacco.




  4. #229

    Re: The "Flacco Thread" (Merged from 5 threads)

    When the only type of pass route your offensive coordinator calls are 9 routes that are doubled covered, and when you have an O line that can't protect you for the 10 or 15 seconds it would take to have one of your receivers finally get open, you are not likely to have success in the NFL.

    Joe's problem is CAM - NOTHING more. Get rid of Cam and get someone with half a brain to replace him and Joe will get the Ravens to the Superbowl.




    Quote Originally Posted by ravenwoman View Post
    In sum, Flacco isn't playing great, but he's not being set up for success by how he's being used and the play around him, either.

    I totally agree with that statement. I believe Joe still has some upside, but he is being held back by the type of offense we run. On a scale of 1-10, Joe has the potential to be an 8. Right now, he is playing like a 5 or 6. He won't ever be a 9 or 10, because he has limited ability to run or extend plays. He is not very instintive and has poor pocket presence. If however, we can ever get a great offensive line and an OC that will call more short and intermediate route plays across the middle, then you will see a much improved Joe Flacco.




  5. #230
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Clayton,NC
    Posts
    7,745

    Re: The "Flacco Thread" (Merged from 5 threads)

    Quote Originally Posted by rharris1986 View Post
    When the only type of pass route your offensive coordinator calls are 9 routes that are doubled covered, and when you have an O line that can't protect you for the 10 or 15 seconds it would take to have one of your receivers finally get open, you are not likely to have success in the NFL.

    Joe's problem is CAM - NOTHING more. Get rid of Cam and get someone with half a brain to replace him and Joe will get the Ravens to the Superbowl.


    Dude, I get it. We all do, you hate Cam (as do I). But can we please stop turning every thread into a Cam thread?

    You might be better off making a sign and picketing in front of the Castle
    We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid. - Benjamin Franklin




  6. #231

    Re: The "Flacco Thread" (Merged from 5 threads)

    Quote Originally Posted by bmorecareful View Post
    I think you're correct to point out that peer comparisons are more useful than raw numbers, but I do wonder about the anecdotal impression that passing has "exploded league wide" in recent years--is that born out by the evidence? It may be, but in what ways?

    Take a look at the NFL passing stat averages year-to-year. http://www.pro-football-reference.co...FL/passing.htm

    Virtually all the "volume" statistics are trending upwards, but not by huge margins, some within the range of statistical insignificance. In terms of "efficiency" statistics, yards per attempt and TD% are actually trending downwards from their peaks in the 1960's, stagnant since the 1980's. I don't have the time to do proper analysis at this point, but I'd be interested to hear someone's more carefully crafted effort.

    Here's a VERY half-assed argument: passer rating appears to be trending upward. PR heavily weights completion percentage, which is also increasing while yards per completion decreases. Passing offense is not truly exploding in the NFL, but with the re-emphasis of the 5-yard chuck rule in the early 2000's, passing offenses have become significantly more efficient in the short and intermediate passing game, while deemphasizing the deep passing game that produced higher TD%, INT%, YPA, with lower COMPL% and PR.

    I guess you can anticipate my next argument: that our antiquated deep-ball system doesn't mesh with the overall gains in efficiency being made by the rest of the NFL.
    I do not disagree with your last statement. I have been consistently in the Cam-holds-us-back camp.

    As for the significance of the league-wide changes/increases. You are right that my claim is anecdotal, but I also was probably a bit too general when I said "league-wide" for the purposes of this discussion. I should have said something closer to "league-leaders-wide." Or if we want to simplify, we could say top 10 or top 15. If the leagues' best QBs are performing better (under the new rules/philosophies) and the league's worst QBs are performing worse (teams gambling on less-conventional QBs or trying to force subpar QBs into high-risk high-output philosophies where they fail, etc) then the "league-wide" averages may not actually increase. Conversely, if the league-wide averages have increased, perhaps it is all at the hands of increases by the top 6, 8, 10 QBs, and the bottom half of the league is performing the same as it always has. I suppose either could be the case, but in both cases, the top handful or third of the QBs are putting up better numbers; I would feel safe claiming that. Even if I concede they are no more efficient than the past (i.e. their number of attempts are increasing as much or more than the raw output).

    Regarding the Brady/Flacco first 4-5 years comparison (which is made often), yes, their raw stats are very very similar but their rankings are as follows for their first 5 years. (Ignoring Brady's year on the bench and ignoring the fact he started only 14 games in 2001):

    Brady:

    2001 - Rate: 86.5 (6th) ; TD: 18 (13th) ; Yds: 2843 (22nd)
    2002 - Rate: 85.7 (9th) ; TD: 28 (1st) ; Yds: 3764 (6th)
    2003 - Rate: 85.9 (10th); TD: 23 (10th); Yds: 3620 (6th)
    2004 - Rate: 92.6 (9th) ; TD: 28 (6th) ; Yds: 3692 (10th)
    2005 - Rate: 92.3 (6th) ; TD: 26 (3rd) ; Yds: 4110 (1st)

    compared to

    Flacco:

    2008 - Rate: 80.3 (22nd) ; TD: 14 (20th) ; Yds: 2971 (20th)
    2009 - Rate: 88.9 (13th) ; TD: 21 (15th) ; Yds: 3613 (15th)
    2010 - Rate: 93.6 (7th) ; TD: 25 (10th) ; Yds: 3622 (11th)
    2011 - Rate: 80.9 (18th) ; TD: 20 (13th) ; Yds: 3610 (12th)
    2012*-Rate: 85.0 (19th) ; TD: 20 (19th) ; Yds: 4051 (12th) * - projected

    Looks like TDs are the least changed, though Brady's league-leading 28 in 2002, would have finished a distant 4th, 6th, 6th, and 8th from 2008-2011.

    Yards are the next least changed, though Brady's league-leading 4110 in 2005, would have finished 4th, 10th, 5th, and 9th from 2008-2011.

    And you are correct about rating, it appears to have been the most changed, likely for the reasons you stated.

    I don't disagree with a single thing you just posted.

    I only posted what I did because I think, while not impossible, that the chances Joe (or any young QB) has a career arc like Brady are pretty slim (even ignoring the SB wins) even if their first few years stats look somewhat the same. And for Joe, the chances are especially low if he remains in an outdated offense for too much longer; now is about the time one should expect a break-out to another level under normal circumstances, as it was for Brady. And of course, this whole conversation, and all Joe conversations, are conducted with the elephant in the room if his impending free agency. So trying to predict career arc and potential under various circumstances is a necessary step in determining what kind of contract should be offered/accepted.




  7. #232

    Re: The "Flacco Thread" (Merged from 5 threads)

    Quote Originally Posted by bacchys View Post
    I don't think he's more composed. I think the offensive scheme and the playcalling help him get into the rhythm of the game and get comfortable more than ours does for Flacco.
    This is exactly what the guys on SportsCenter said today. RG3's stats yesterday were pedestrian by naked eye. But he was effective because the coaches put him in a situation to succeed. We don't have that here.




  8. #233

    Re: The "Flacco Thread" (Merged from 5 threads)

    Quote Originally Posted by Haloti92 View Post
    Brady:

    2005 - Rate: 92.3 (6th) ; TD: 26 (3rd) ; Yds: 4110 (1st)
    compared to

    Flacco:

    2012*-Rate: 85.0 (19th) ; TD: 20 (19th) ; Yds: 4051 (12th) * - projected
    OT here, but what a difference 7 years makes. Brady's 4110 yards in 2005 ranked 1st, but 7 years later Flacco's very close 4051 (projected) would only rank 12th.

    That's crazy.
    “Talk's cheap - let’s go play.” - #19, Johnny Unitas

    Follow me on Twitter @ravenssalarycap




  9. #234
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Denver, Colorado (via Gaithersburg, MD)
    Posts
    682
    Blog Entries
    1

    Exclamation I'm losing my faith in Joe Flacco

    Give the kid credit, he erased Boller/Wright from our memories, but his production has plateaued and he lacks the leadership qualities to compensate for his lack of focus.

    For a few years, I felt he was an up and comer, gradually improving. Obviously I didn't see he had plateaued; I was so happy to not have Boller/Wright that I overcommitted emotionally.

    Thanks Joe for everything you did and tried to do.

    Not sure what to do now. Dump Joe and suck. Keep Joe and be good enough to make the playoffs every year and not win the Super Bowl.




  10. #235
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    2,137
    Blog Entries
    3

    Re: I'm losing my faith in Joe Flacco

    I don't think Flacco will prevent us from winning a Super Bowl, but I would like to see them seek out a young QB to groom as a potential replacement if the kid proves good enough (a la San Fran and Colin Kaep)




  11. #236
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Tacoma, WA
    Posts
    169

    Re: I'm losing my faith in Joe Flacco

    I too had a great deal of faith in Joe but he has not taken the leadership role that would be expected of an elite QB. Franchise him and then trade for a 1st round pick if possible but Joe is not going to lead this team to the Super Bowl. He just does not have "it".




  12. #237
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    "Merry old England"
    Posts
    9,307
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: I'm losing my faith in Joe Flacco

    Flacco doesn't have to be elite, he just needs his team around him to be a really talented team on both sides of the ball to get to the SB, and sadly unlike in recent years past, this team is simply not good enough to win with just an above average QB. If Flacco elevated his play this year to the level of the likes of Tom Brady, we would have a much better shot. The problem is, the offensive system is really limiting and not QB friendly what so ever, it's hard for any QB to prosper under it. With that said, I think Flacco's ceiling still isn't elite, but rather a top 10 QB who puts up solid stats every season, but he will need a better OC IMO, and a better offensive system to work in. He can be as good as what Matt Shaubb is right now, but we need to rebuild the defense, and the Oline.




  13. #238

    Re: I'm losing my faith in Joe Flacco

    I feel exactly the same away. I've always been a staunch defender of Joe, even at the beginning of this season I figured him as a top 10 QB. After watching this season though I'm really having my doubts. It's ok to have a bad game - Brees had a 5 pick game, Manning had a 4 pick game, but you keep it to just a game or two a year and that's it. I never know what I'm getting with Joe. Vinny said that there's been 5 "Bad Joe" games this year (passer rating under 75 and passing for about 200 yds on average) to go with 7 "Good Joe" games. That's way too inconsistent. You can't alternate every other game (or even during games as was the case in SD and CLE).

    I want to see him under another OC before I make a final judgement but I feel like he's pretty close to the top of his potential.




  14. #239
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Right Where I need to be
    Posts
    1,573

    Re: I'm losing my faith in Joe Flacco

    Quote Originally Posted by FadeToBlack View Post
    Give the kid credit, he erased Boller/Wright from our memories, but his production has plateaued and he lacks the leadership qualities to compensate for his lack of focus.

    For a few years, I felt he was an up and comer, gradually improving. Obviously I didn't see he had plateaued; I was so happy to not have Boller/Wright that I overcommitted emotionally.

    Thanks Joe for everything you did and tried to do.

    Not sure what to do now. Dump Joe and suck. Keep Joe and be good enough to make the playoffs every year and not win the Super Bowl.
    Joe is not the problem... Go look at his College videos..... That is all




  15. #240
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Nottingham, England
    Posts
    797

    Re: I'm losing my faith in Joe Flacco

    Quote Originally Posted by SeattleRaven View Post
    I too had a great deal of faith in Joe but he has not taken the leadership role that would be expected of an elite QB. Franchise him and then trade for a 1st round pick if possible but Joe is not going to lead this team to the Super Bowl. He just does not have "it".
    Why isn't he going to lead us to a Superbowl? He did it last season. Not a whole lot more he could've done beyond becoming a voice in Lee Evan's head saying "Now Lee, don't drop this perfect Championship Game winning pass."...
    “I told everyone that if I went to Pittsburgh I would have to throw up on my jersey every time I played,” - Double J will always be a Raven




Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Russell Street Report Website Design by D3Corp Ocean City Maryland