Quote Originally Posted by ERey View Post
I understand what you are saying. I can't speak for other posters obviously, but I actually think national anaylsts, ESPN, etc has been pretty kind to the Ravens. In fact, I think the Ravens got more love than the 49ers last year during the Super Bowl week. That's not to say the 49ers didn't get any love, I just remember watching all the Super Bowl shows thinking it's all about Baltimore.

So with that said I can't put myself in the "Everyone hates Baltimore" category, which is why I don't see my original post as thin skin. I put the line in there about the article being about 3 games so that you guys would know that I read the article and didn't just cherry pick a line about Flacco.

I disagree with the article and how the author goes about deterinming who he thinks is the best through 3 weeks. He's ranking the QBs through 3 weeks based on QB index. I get that. I disagree with the premise on ranking and how he arrived there. I gave my reason why due to the intangibles. For example, a three and out depending on where it is in the game and why it occured is something that should be in the equation, but is not and never will be. Hence his flawed concept of ranking the starters.

Is it possible you're so used to some people playing the "Ravens disrespect" card that you dismiss threads like this?
Well said ERey!

You guys crack me up man.