This team won't have a chance at competing if we pay Flacco big money

[Dirt1]

I guess the difference is that Schaub is probably as good as he's going to get, while Flacco's ceiling is certainly much higher. Whether he'll ever live up to that remains to be seen, though (and it's a big question)?!?

As far as age goes, yes, some QBs have played well into their mid-40s, but most have not. Under that deal, Schaub will never see$14.5M+ in the last year of that deal (he may not even see the 4th year). As you said, Flacco at his age could be able to earn that and, ideally, would be in line for another extension. Teams are always going to bet more on youth.

That said, I think it's either franchise him for a year and see how things go or figure out a reasonable deal (ie one both sides are comfortable with). I just don't think a tag and trade has any chance of being pulled off.

Flacco has been in the league for 5 years. That is not an insignificant amount of time. I think the Ravens should pay Flacco based on what he has shown, not based on some assumption of what he might become. There is no guarentee that he is going to get a lot better than what he is right now. Flacco may just be a very good NFL QB, but not a great NFL QB. There is nothing wrong with that. I added more to my post above about the "tag and trade".

[Corey]

I think that Flacco's deal should be similar to the one that Schaub signed, but it doesn't have to be the exact deal. Basically, Schaub is a very good game manager, just like Flacco. A team can win a SB with Schaub or Flacco at QB, but they are not likely to win a SB because of Schaub or Flacco. Flacco is younger, so he might get a little more than that, but not much more. There have been a number of QBs who have played at a very high level at 35 years of age and even past that, so I am not sure that is a reason for a huge disparity in the contract terms. Also, the Texans probably figure that they can cut Schaub in the final year of his deal if his skills are declining without suffering too much of a cap hit. A younger player like Flacco would likely see the full value of his contract. The Ravens have had a lot of success with the right player right price approach. The price for Flacco may be higher because he is a QB, but they should not deviate too much from that philosophy.

As far as the "tag and trade" goes, I think that the Ravens could pull it off. The Patriots did it with Matt Cassell. The Ravens would tag Flacco, and then give permission for Flacco and his agent to work out a contract that is acceptable to them with another team. If that team is then willing to meet the Ravens terms with regard to the trade compensation, then the Ravens make the trade. The Ravens would probably tell Flacco and his agent plus any interested team what they would want with regard to draft picks ahead of time. Flacco could then make an assessment if there is a sufficient disparity with regard to the contract terms the other team offers and what the Ravens are offerring for him to leave.

Not a good example at all. He was traded to a guy that played a role in drafting him. I'd say that is a special circumstance.

[Dirt1]

Not a good example at all. He was traded to a guy that played a role in drafting him. I'd say that is a special circumstance.

There are enough teams that have cap space and need a QB for a deal to be worked out. If the Ravens cannot work out a "tag and trade", they they would still have Flacco for next season. Then, if he still didn't improve and was still asking for big money, the Ravens would lose him for a 3rd round compensatory pick. Tagging Flacco a second time would get very expensive. I think they could get way more than a late 3rd round pick in a "tag and trade".

[B-more Ravor]

As far as the "tag and trade" goes, I think that the Ravens could pull it off. The Patriots did it with Matt Cassell. The Ravens would tag Flacco, and then give permission for Flacco and his agent to work out a contract that is acceptable to them with another team. If that team is then willing to meet the Ravens terms with regard to the trade compensation, then the Ravens make the trade. The Ravens would probably tell Flacco and his agent plus any interested team what they would want with regard to draft picks ahead of time. Flacco could then make an assessment if there is a sufficient disparity with regard to the contract terms the other team offers and what the Ravens are offerring for him to leave.

The Pats did it with Cassel because it was a pre-arranged deal between Belichick and his outgoing "GM", Pioli. Plus, Cassel wasn't going to be the starter in NE, so he was happy to find a deal somewhere else to start.

I'm not sure telling your QB to go find a deal is the greatest approach, especially if he can't find one. What then? Oh, well, we really didn't want you to leave? I don't think that would work very well for the relationship between the team and Flacco if both sides were then forced to stay together.

Plus, what do the Ravens do in the meantime? Sign a new starter? They won't have to Cap space and no one is going to sign here as long as Flacco is still around. And, if you do sign one, the other team isn't going to be willing to trade as much since you've then got to move Flacco.

So, the timing would have to be really quick for it to happen.

Sorry, I just think there are too much variables - most of them, negative - for it to work.

[StingerNLG]

Well, I am certainly glad our fanbase is able to tell the Ravens organization exactly how much Flacco is worth. I say Ozzie can just go ahead and retire to Alabama where he doesn't have to worry about things like this.

As for Schaub's contract, if Ozzie offers Joe the same type of contract, then those of you pining for Alex Smith will be getting your wish. We can debate whether Joe is going to get top money from the Ravens, but I am pretty confident he would get a much better deal than Schaub got from one of those listed teams.

[B-more Ravor]

Flacco has been in the league for 5 years. That is not an insignificant amount of time. I think the Ravens should pay Flacco based on what he has shown, not based on some assumption of what he might become. There is no guarentee that he is going to get a lot better than what he is right now. Flacco may just be a very good NFL QB, but not a great NFL QB. There is nothing wrong with that.

I really don't disagree with any of that, but with QB contracts, that's sort of the way it goes.

Personally, I think the best way to structure a deal for him is to include a lot of incentives and escalators, so that he gets the base deal if he doesn't improve much, but if he does improve, he gets paid based on that improvement. I would think the base deal would be more in the $80M range, but with the possibility to earn $100M or more if he proves to be the elite QB that he thinks he is.

[Dirt1]

I really don't disagree with any of that, but with QB contracts, that's sort of the way it goes.

Personally, I think the best way to structure a deal for him is to include a lot of incentives and escalators, so that he gets the base deal if he doesn't improve much, but if he does improve, he gets paid based on that improvement. I would think the base deal would be more in the $80M range, but with the possibility to earn $100M or more if he proves to be the elite QB that he thinks he is.

I agree with you about an incentive-laden deal, but I think the deal you just outlined is probably what the Ravens had in mind at the start of the season. That base may have come down to the $65-$70 million range based on Flacco's play this season.

[Ravenswintitle]

I really don't disagree with any of that, but with QB contracts, that's sort of the way it goes.

Personally, I think the best way to structure a deal for him is to include a lot of incentives and escalators, so that he gets the base deal if he doesn't improve much, but if he does improve, he gets paid based on that improvement. I would think the base deal would be more in the $80M range, but with the possibility to earn $100M or more if he proves to be the elite QB that he thinks he is.

That would be the ideal but Flacco may want a bigger deal and he does have some leverage if the team wants to avoid the tag. I think it will be a little richer than that if they sign him.

[redmike34]

Well, I am certainly glad our fanbase is able to tell the Ravens organization exactly how much Flacco is worth. I say Ozzie can just go ahead and retire to Alabama where he doesn't have to worry about things like this.

As for Schaub's contract, if Ozzie offers Joe the same type of contract, then those of you pining for Alex Smith will be getting your wish. We can debate whether Joe is going to get top money from the Ravens, but I am pretty confident he would get a much better deal than Schaub got from one of those listed teams.

I don't think that anyone is "pining" for Alex Smith. I think a lot of people here understand (correctly, IMO) that there's a certain price that Flacco is worth, and that going beyond that price is a mistake for the team.

So let's put hard numbers to this, and for the moment exclude any consideration as to whether or not either Smith or Flacco would actually take any of these deals. Which would you rather have?

Case A) Flacco at 6 yrs/100 mil, or Smith at 5 yrs/60 mil?

Case B) Flacco at 6 yrs/80 mil, or Smith at the Schaub deal (5 yrs/66 mil)?

If you'd take Flacco in case A, then IMO you're more of a fan of Joe Flacco than you are a fan of the Baltimore Ravens. Which is fine, but definitely not the case for me. If you'd take Flacco in case B, I could live with that. I'd probably take him in that case too, without having put any more research into it than I have.

The problem is, none of us know how realistic any of those numbers are. My point has been (and the point of many others as well) that there are definitely scenarios in which Smith might be a better overall deal for the Baltimore Ravens than Joe Flacco is, if Flacco's money demands are particularly high. It isn't about having a better QB, it's about having a better team, and better QB doesn't automatically mean better team. If Smith came in here and gave us an 80-rating year, but enabled us to go get better defensive players/OL/skill position players with the cap savings... that honestly might be a better situation for the team than paying Flacco a lot more money to get another 85-ish rating year, without being able to upgrade the defense/OL/skill position players.

If you can't see that, then I don't know what to tell you, aside from the pretty clear observation that you think Flacco is more important than the team is.

[B-more Ravor]

I agree with you about an incentive-laden deal, but I think the deal you just outlined is probably what the Ravens had in mind at the start of the season. That base may have come down to the $65-$70 million range based on Flacco's play this season.

I had heard their offer was in the $90-100M range, but I guess it depends on whether that was the "base" deal or the "max" deal, which was never disclosed.

[StingerNLG]

I don't think that anyone is "pining" for Alex Smith. I think a lot of people here understand (correctly, IMO) that there's a certain price that Flacco is worth, and that going beyond that price is a mistake for the team.

So let's put hard numbers to this, and for the moment exclude any consideration as to whether or not either Smith or Flacco would actually take any of these deals. Which would you rather have?

Case A) Flacco at 6 yrs/100 mil, or Smith at 5 yrs/60 mil?

Case B) Flacco at 6 yrs/80 mil, or Smith at the Schaub deal (5 yrs/66 mil)?

If you'd take Flacco in case A, then IMO you're more of a fan of Joe Flacco than you are a fan of the Baltimore Ravens. Which is fine, but definitely not the case for me. If you'd take Flacco in case B, I could live with that. I'd probably take him in that case too, without having put any more research into it than I have.

The problem is, none of us know how realistic any of those numbers are. My point has been (and the point of many others as well) that there are definitely scenarios in which Smith might be a better overall deal for the Baltimore Ravens than Joe Flacco is, if Flacco's money demands are particularly high. It isn't about having a better QB, it's about having a better team, and better QB doesn't automatically mean better team. If Smith came in here and gave us an 80-rating year, but enabled us to go get better defensive players/OL/skill position players with the cap savings... that honestly might be a better situation for the team than paying Flacco a lot more money to get another 85-ish rating year, without being able to upgrade the defense/OL/skill position players.

If you can't see that, then I don't know what to tell you, aside from the pretty clear observation that you think Flacco is more important than the team is.

That's the point. No one knows the numbers that are being put out by either side right now. And this has nothing to do with who I think is more important. Other than being a PSL owner, I have no other financial stake in the team, and therefore don't get affected one way or another about how much they offer Flacco.

And I'm not rehashing the whole argument about Flacco's performance. We spent a whole other thread doing that. I just don't care about that anymore. I am just simply pointing out that a $66 million dollar deal will likely mean Joe Flacco is playing for another team next year. And that to me appears to be ok with some people. Personally, I don't think the Ravens FO is that short-sighted as to let Flacco walk away for that price, and I would bet the Cardinals, Titans, Vikings, and 3-4 other teams would have no problem with an $80-90 mil deal for him.

[Carey]

Ravor, if Flacco doesnt like the deal thats on the table and if the Ravens have in apprehension about him long term do you see a scenerio where they can structure the deal so that the Ravens can get out of it in a few years ala the Eagles w/Vick. Do you think Flacco's camp would agree to such a deal if the up front money is to their liking.