Is there ANYTHING Joe Flacco can do to convince the world he's a truly great player?

[bmorecareful]

No player is above compromising the future just to have a good QB.

What good is having a great QB on your roster if he takes up so much cap space you cannot adequately field a team around him to win?

Makes for great fanatsy stats I suppose but if you cannot sign players such an effective O line or decent receivers, what sense does it make to give a QB money that's far and above market value?

Want proof? Just look at Vinta's comments from last week. He's on the side that would want the most of the deal and even he says what I just said. He did the radio circut last week and repeated the same mantra -- Joe is not looking for a deal that will make the team less competative.

So yes, there is a point when it's too burdonsome on the cap to make sense. As a few people have pointed out, its all how the deal is structured.

Thankfully, Joe and the team seem to be on that same page and understand the ramifications of an oppresive cap number.

What is that point? What is "too much?" How do you define "compromising the future?" These are nebulous terms that people are throwing around as if they mean something. They do not; they have no absolutely objective meaning. There's no bright red line you reach with a contract value that suddenly you can't field a competitive team anymore, because all contracts have value only relative to one another. What's to say that as QB contracts don't get bigger as a percentage of the cap, other contracts get smaller? In fact, that's not even a supposition--it's a FACT. We have all seen the dramatic decline in the value of contracts for inside linebackers, and maybe that's just the tip of the spear.

Where's the point of no return? Do you define it as a cap number or as an annual average? Is it $20.5 million? $21.5 million? Somewhere in between? How about we judge the team's investment by its RETURN, instead of what we "feel like" is too much? Whatever contract Joe signs, if the team is competitive during the lifetime of the deal, it will not have been too much. The same is true for Drew Brees and the Saints, or Aaron Rodgers and the Packers, etc. etc.

[Jeremiah W]

And we've seen first hand this season when we have not had the best O line in front of Joe what happens. He did not start really clicking this season until the removal of Cam and the O line getting reworked.

It's a some of the parts, not an either / or debate.

Structure a deal that keeps Joe AND allows us to move around in the cap and it's perfect for both parties and the fans.

Over pay Joe and you have a happy QB on a team that cannot compete as well as they have and fans that are frustrated because things are not running at their best.

Rams are in this very boat right now. They overpaid a talented rookie QB and are in cap jail. He's being asked to rework the deal now.

The Rams?

How about NE, NY, Indy and Pittsburgh? Those are more relavent examples of teams that stayed competitive long term while paying the QB a lot of money.

The Ravens are the perfect team to build around a franchise QB. They draft as well or better than anyone. They do not spend big in free agency, even letting a high number of valuable free agents walk every year. The free agents they do bring in tend to be good value. As long as they manage the rest of the cap well, I see no reason to think that a big QB contract will cripple the depth on the roster.

[HoustonRaven]

What is that point? What is "too much?" How do you define "compromising the future?" These are nebulous terms that people are throwing around as if they mean something. They do not; they have no absolutely objective meaning. There's no bright red line you reach with a contract value that suddenly you can't field a competitive team anymore, because all contracts have value only relative to one another. What's to say that as QB contracts don't get bigger as a percentage of the cap, other contracts get smaller? In fact, that's not even a supposition--it's a FACT. We have all seen the dramatic decline in the value of contracts for inside linebackers, and maybe that's just the tip of the spear.

Where's the point of no return? Do you define it as a cap number or as an annual average? Is it $20.5 million? $21.5 million? Somewhere in between? How about we judge the team's investment by its RETURN, instead of what we "feel like" is too much? Whatever contract Joe signs, if the team is competitive during the lifetime of the deal, it will not have been too much. The same is true for Drew Brees and the Saints, or Aaron Rodgers and the Packers, etc. etc.

Where have I argued the team ahould "feel" it's way through this?

This is an orchistrated process, filled with finesse, as most high level negotiations are. The absense of some magic line that cannot be crossed does not mean the problem of overpaying doesn't exist, espeically when things like prorated bonuses are involved.

Again, as I and others have stated, it's all in the structure of the deal. And again, if you have a problem with that line of thinking, than your issue is with Vinta and Ozzie, not me. They both, publicly, have recognized this as a possible issue and both are working to avoid it. Thankfully.

The Rams?

How about NE, NY, Indy and Pittsburgh? Those are more relavent examples of teams that stayed competitive long term while paying the QB a lot of money.

The Ravens are the perfect team to build around a franchise QB. They draft as well or better than anyone. They do not spend big in free agency, even letting a high number of valuable free agents walk every year. The free agents they do bring in tend to be good value. As long as they manage the rest of the cap well, I see no reason to think that a big QB contract will cripple the depth on the roster.

Those four teams you just mentioned are exactly my point. They don't overpay for anyone, this can manage the cap the best possible way and add players via the draft.

The Rams, on the other hand, have an overly burdonsome contract on their hands with their QB, that has made signing quality players prohibative and are now asking him to take a pay cut.

Funny you mention Indy on that list since it was overly burdonsome contract that led to Manning getting cut and moving to Denver.

As I pointed out to bmorecareful, if you do not agree with this line of thought, your issue too is with Vinta and Ozzie. Both of them are worried about this very same thing.

[bmorecareful]

Those four teams you just mentioned are exactly my point. They don't overpay for anyone, this can manage the cap the best possible way and add players via the draft.

The Rams, on the other hand, have an overly burdonsome contract on their hands with their QB, that has made signing quality players prohibative and are now asking him to take a pay cut.

Funny you mention Indy on that list since it was overly burdonsome contract that led to Manning getting cut and moving to Denver.

As I pointed out to bmorecareful, if you do not agree with this line of thought, your issue too is with Vinta and Ozzie. Both of them are worried about this very same thing.

Your arguments don't support your point at all--whatever that point may be, as you still have not defined what it means to overpay or provide anything definitive of what that looks like.

You claim that the Patriots, Giants, Colts, and Steelers manage the cap well and "don't overpay for anyone," yet EACH of those teams made their quarterback the highest paid player at his position at various points over the last few years! Isn't that "overpaying?" It obviously is not, because those are 4 of the best teams in football over the last decade, so they clearly did a fine job of surrounding their ultra-expensive QB with talent despite making an unprecedentedly large investment in him.

For your points to be true, we would expect most of the teams that have the highest percentage of their cap spent on a single player to be pretty bad. Of the top 6 players by 2013 average salary, 4 of them have rings--7 total between them.

That doesn't mean that teams never make bad investments in specific players, obviously they do. But it disproves this notion of there being some sort of "limit" to how much you can pay ANY player, no matter how good he is. If a guy is the best player in the NFL you're going to need to give him a huge, unprecedented contract. Simple as that.

[Purpleguy]

Here's the question...do we even get to, much less win the Superbowl without Joe Flacco? Do we enjoy the success we've had over the past five years without Flacco? The guy has done nothing but win since he got here, and that was while being handcuffed by Cam.

I hear all of this talk about hometown discounts and I laugh. People even bring in the costs associated with moving to another city. Trust me, unless he plays for the Jets or Giants, those moving costs will be mitigated by tax savings. Ray Lewis didn't take a hometown discount, ever. Neither did Suggs, Reed, Rice, Heap, etc.. Why should Joe? Both sides gambled last offseason by not getting the extension done. Joe won.

He isn't going to cripple the team. Yes, there will always be some sort of damage with such a high payed player, but that damage wouldn't be as bad as not signing him. I don't know when it becomes cap friendly to cut or restructure Rice, but I see that happening. The guy is ridiculously overpaid and is a non-factor come playoff time. He's making more than Arian Foster and he's only good in open space.

[iggyman555]

solve world hunger and the us economy

[Purpleguy]

Also there is no way you can compare this situation to Manning getting released in Indy. Manning is at the end of his career, was coming off a potential career ending injury, and the Colts had just won the "suck for Luck" sweepstakes, so they had a viable path to start fresh. It paid off for them. I don't think the Colts would have gotten any farther than they did, with or without Manning, and in two years they would be in the same boat with the potential of no Luck sitting out there.

Joe is in the prime of his career. He has never missed a game, and there is no can't miss QB in this whole draft, much less the 32nd pick. We would be filling in with stop gap guys like Alex Smith. It would be the pre 2009 Ravens all over again, except without the dominant defense. It's just not an option.

[StingerNLG]

Listening to the Norris and Davis show this morning made me ill. People actually were calling in saying take the 2 1st round picks because Flacco isn't that good, and put Tyrod Taylor in there and run the pistol. I'm dead serious.

It is amazing to me that after over a decade of absolute suck at the QB position, we have our long term WINNING franchise QB who should have had two rings by now, and people are ready to ditch him because he hasn't thrown for 4,000 yards yet.

[bmorecareful]

Listening to the Norris and Davis show this morning made me ill. People actually were calling in saying take the 2 1st round picks because Flacco isn't that good, and put Tyrod Taylor in there and run the pistol. I'm dead serious.

It is amazing to me that after over a decade of absolute suck at the QB position, we have our long term WINNING franchise QB who should have had two rings by now, and people are ready to ditch him because he hasn't thrown for 4,000 yards yet.

This is the problem. I get that we shouldn't listen to SI and PFT and all that. But not only is the under-informed national media running with that whole story, it's STILL hanging around with a lot of true Ravens fans.

I'll admit I doubted Flacco this year, particularly after the Denver home loss when I overreacted badly to his INT. I said at the time that guys with truly elite, top-5 level upside would have the mental acuity to never make that play. But that was an overreaction that I recognize now, and I was wrong at the time and after the fact. Any doubts I may have had are fully erased now.

And yet go to any bar in Baltimore and pick 10 die-hard Ravens fans. Even if all of them are well-informed and football-smart... you're going to have 3 or 4 of them who aren't convinced by Flacco, still don't think he's really all that great, and wouldn't be too sad to see him walk. You're not seeing them right now on this board because they're outnumbered and don't want to admit they're wrong, but they ARE out there.

[Ravenswintitle]

Listening to the Norris and Davis show this morning made me ill. People actually were calling in saying take the 2 1st round picks because Flacco isn't that good, and put Tyrod Taylor in there and run the pistol. I'm dead serious.

It is amazing to me that after over a decade of absolute suck at the QB position, we have our long term WINNING franchise QB who should have had two rings by now, and people are ready to ditch him because he hasn't thrown for 4,000 yards yet.

OMG I thought it was just media trying to incite - geez

[pslholder96]

Not saying we have drafted that bad, but we've been picking high pretty much every year since 2008, and it makes it hard to find REAL difference makers or stars, we haven't found many of them over the years.

Michael Oher is average to solid as a RT, not exactly an amazing pick here.

Paul Kruger has only just emerged into a good pass rusher, and will already be one of our players we've developed nicely that has to go for cap reasons

Webb is a stud but has had two ACL injuries already

Cody and Kindle have been busts

Torrey Smith is good, but hasn't exactly been a number 1 receiver superstar, Jimmy Smith is still up in the air.

Upshaw is pretty much Jarrett Johnson, which is great, but you need more in the front 7 than an edge setting OLB, KO is probably going to be a superstar, Pierce is going to be very good without any setbacks.

So thats pretty solid when you look at it, but its not enough to sacrifice your older players who help you make play offs and win SBs to a 20 + million dollar deal on one player, no matter how good he is.

If you draft well (like the ravens have done in the past) you can overcome an expensive contract given to any one player.

[pslholder96]

I guess living in a small market causes one's mind to go small not to mention suffering amnesia:)
In all seriousness I would love to see the % of fans who were too young to remember all the quarterbacks we went through. I've got to believe these are the ones calling into the talk shows and posting here. As a fansbase we've become very insecure with our quarterback play but if Joe Flacco doesn't make us secure then who will??