Bad luck on the Flacco deal?

**JohnBKistler** · 12-06-2013, 01:22 AM

I'll be the first to admit that Flacco is not the most the consistent QB in the league....

But WTF...he makes the plays when it counts...HE'S MADE THE PLAYS WHEN IT HAS COUNTED...and I am fine with going down the stretch run this season, or any season, with #5 behind center for the Ravens.

PERIOD.

**Baltimoreboy** · 12-06-2013, 01:25 AM

Originally Posted by FadeToBlack

(BTW, what the hell is a "hard place"?)

You're just to smart for me.

Talk about dumber than a box of rocks.

**ravensnhokies** · 12-06-2013, 01:33 AM

Originally Posted by TTRaven

You think Joe is playing up to his contract?

I don't like the deal, but there was really no other option. Joe got hot at the right time and the Ravens had to pay him. Winning the SB makes the contract a lot easier to accept though.

Sent from my SM-P600 using Tapatalk 2

In 2013, @ $6.8M cap hit... Yea Joe is playing up to the contract. If it was 2016, and the cap hit is $28.55M... HELL NO but it'll be restructured.

I hated the Rice contract when he signed it, b/c I knew he would never live up to it in a dime a dozen position unless you are AP. I do realize that my viewpoint really doesn't mean shit to the Ravens.

**duffybr** · 12-06-2013, 01:37 AM

It's great to beat a dead horse. You are not considering the contracts of 20 ,il signed by Ryan etc, and that guts like Cutler will be pushing 20 mil thid offseason. It was and is a market deal. Absent Pitta and/or kO getting hurt we would be fighting for home field. Get over it

**Beau Petard** · 12-06-2013, 01:38 AM

What's a "hard place"???

Scylla or Charybdis -- take your pick.

And FWIW, I'm not so sure that "caught in bad luck" v. "something the FO could have done to avoid tying up so much money in a QB at the expense of other positions on the field" is a valid or true representation of what the Ravens have experienced. It suggests that those are the only two alternatives, and IMO that is not true.

**Greatness** · 12-06-2013, 01:41 AM

5 winning seasons straight
5 Playoff appearances
3 AFC championship games
1 Superbowl

I'd say The Mighty Joe Flacco is underpaid, but I'm chillin'. I just can't entertain such nonsense.

**TTRaven** · 12-06-2013, 02:09 AM

Originally Posted by ravensnhokies

In 2013, @ $6.8M cap hit... Yea Joe is playing up to the contract. If it was 2016, and the cap hit is $28.55M... HELL NO but it'll be restructured.

I hated the Rice contract when he signed it, b/c I knew he would never live up to it in a dime a dozen position unless you are AP. I do realize that my viewpoint really doesn't mean shit to the Ravens.

You're talking about 2 different things. Joe Flacco is among the top 5 in highest paid QB's. His production certainly does not warrant that.

Sent from my SM-P600 using Tapatalk 2

**ravensnhokies** · 12-06-2013, 02:31 AM

Production is subjective thing. We all have opinions on what type of production a QB should provide. The Ravens run a specific system that we all know is not QB stat friendly. So with that in mind, only Ravens can truly answer whether Joe is producing at a level that warrants the salary they gave him.

**MarkS** · 12-06-2013, 02:57 AM

Originally Posted by TTRaven

You're talking about 2 different things. Joe Flacco is among the top 5 in highest paid QB's. His production certainly does not warrant that.

Sent from my SM-P600 using Tapatalk 2

The devil is in the details though. We won't know the "true" value of the contract until he re-negotiates the deal in 3 years.

Even so, his contract averages a bit more than $20 over 6 years, and when he re-negotiates after 3, he'll have been paid about $62Mil total, or a bit more than $20Mil per.

I think he may be slightly overpaid at that figure - but only slightly:

Matt Ryan averages "only" $19Mil per, but (like Flacco), also pays out about $63Mil per from 2013-2015.
Tony Romo overages about $18Mil, but pays out $57Mil over the 1st 3 years.

That's for 2 guys who have combined for TWO playoff victories in 13+ seasons. Not sure that Flacco is overpaid in comparison.

As to the comparison with the "elites": I don't know that it's reasonable to draw comparisons to the contracts of Manning and Brady: Manning signed his near the end of his career, and with (at the time) MAJOR injury concerns. Brady's "contract extension" is a work of fiction.

The real comparisons are with Brees (2012, $20Mil per) and Rodgers (2013, $22Mil per). His IS overpaid with respect to these guys, who all have the post-season success, a ring, AND the regular season elite-type numbers.

But again: it's not by that much. I would have put the value for a guy with good, not great regular season numbers, post-season success, and a SB ring (and MVP) somewhere in the $17-18Mil per range. So yea, he timed it beautifully, but the difference between what he WOULD have gotten, and the afterglow of the SB victory, is about the cost of one pretty decent role player. That's hardly devastating.

**alien bird** · 12-06-2013, 03:24 AM

I find the entire "playing to the value of his contract", (or "playing up to his draft position") a strange argument during the season. Once the team is assembled under the salary cap and the season begins, what a guy makes (or where he was drafted) is irrelevant. Production is production. Whether Flacco is paid $20M/year or $2M/year, his production is going to be exactly the same. The NFL doesn't have a sliding scale that gives a lower-paid player more points when he scores a touchdown. I get the off-season argument, but this is December.

**arnie_uk** · 12-06-2013, 04:10 AM

Even if you think he's overpaid, you can't blame anyone but the front office who gambled and lost. They had a chance to lock hi know cheaper, didn't, and are now paying for it.