Double standard

**Baltoman07** · 12-31-2007, 11:22 PM

Boller has many supporters, they just are tired of defending him to lamebrains.

**Mwjergs** · 12-31-2007, 11:48 PM

I understand your points.
But, perception has always been about expectations.

Boller was a first round pick. The expectation is that first round selections should be major contributors to the team. The expectation was that he was the QB of the future and someone to build around. He was unfairly "given" the job as a rookie, and forced to learn on the job while the vets he had to lead around him openly questioned the decision. He wasn't ready for it but when the front office gives you the only option of a bum shouldered Chris Redman, what would you do?
Smith was a Heisman winner but as history has told us, that counts in the NFL as much as leading your 9-10 rec team to victory in Pop Warner. He was a sixth round pick. The expectation for him was that he was a third stringer with chance to learn. He wasn't being counted on even in the near future, in fact Billick bristled at even giving him a chance this year. Fate intervenes and injury allows him to play. It's certainly way too early to pronounce Smith a starter based on two games. But, at least you have some small idea of what he might bring to the table as an NFL QB.

This leads to the next point. Has Boller reached the maximum of what he is capable of? He enters year six of his career after playing 53 games and has thrown 45 TDs against 44 INTs.

As the team has reached a crossroads, is he the man to anoint the starter? I feel that it is hard to say that will true confidence. We will see into next year but, you still have 3 QBs under contract? Is McNair done? Do you try and sign a Jeff Garcia or McNabb short term? Do you allow a competition between Boller/Smith, or his Kyle the #1 and Smith the #2 into next season? I can't answer any of these things yet.

So, yes, it's a double standard. Much was expected of him and perhaps unfairly but, the question remains for me- Is he a NFL starting QB? I feel that he is a very capable backup but I'm not sure if he is the next one to lead the Ravens into a new era.

**Purpleguy** · 01-01-2008, 02:24 AM

Originally Posted by StingerNLG

For the love of God this is NOT the time to talk about this!

How about we let Ozzie and Bisciotti find us a new HC and let that person bring in some new coaches before ANY decisions about position players are made???

We have to make sure Ozzie has plenty of time for sleep during this process. That is very imporatant to him.

**BlackOutD** · 01-01-2008, 11:27 AM

Honestly, no matter how you slice it, I don't think either one of them is TRULY the answer

**OriAl** · 01-01-2008, 05:34 PM

If the line doesn't protect, nobody is the answer at QB. That's my primary point.

Peyton Manning is a great quarterback - I think nobody disagrees. Look at his numbers when he's forced from the pocket - far from great. When his left tackle missed a game, and he was pressured on most attempts, he threw six picks. Did he suddenly become a lousy QB that day? Of course not.

People have complained about letting Anderson go, because he's done well in Cleveland. He's also been protected by a good line. Perfect example - Browns' game here. Boller was sacked six times, and hurried ten (our line didn't even show up in the first half.) in the second half, with a little protection, Boller led us to 23 points and a lead the defense blew with 16 seconds left. Anderson was sacked once, and hurried maybe five times.

When Boller gets some protection, he plays well (see New England game.) If he would ever get the protection Manning and Brady get, he'd play well consistently. His entire career here, he played first behind lines built to run block, and now a line with rookies and aging, injured veterans. I think he did a lot better this season than should have been expected with that line. 61.1% completion rate, including big plays downfield. I hope the new staff looks at his games when he got some protection, and doesn't just buy into the media and fans' line re Boller. We CAN win with him.

**BlackOutD** · 01-01-2008, 05:42 PM

I very much agree with what your saying about the Oline and such, good points

**StingerNLG** · 01-01-2008, 08:26 PM

Look guys. Right now our QB situation, as big a lightning rod as the subject is, is on hold right now.

We need to actually have a Head Coach and Offensive Coordinator first. Now we're down our top two positions, and however many coaches were given the boot.

And you have NO idea what any new HC is going to think of who is here. Maybe the next HC thinks he can build the offense AROUND one of our two young QB's. Maybe he comes in and says he doesn't want ANY of them and wants to start with a new QB altogether.

Oh yeah, BTW we have this issue of whether Ogden is going to retire or not. That is going to shape the OL next year.

How about we let some other chips fall first. THEN let's fight about Boller and Smith again?

**Baltoman07** · 01-01-2008, 10:11 PM

No...I want to fight NOW!....just kidding....your exactly right.

**Kevlar** · 01-02-2008, 12:01 AM

Stinger,

if you don't want to talk about it, then butt out. Don't tell other people what they can or can not discuss. Well, unless you are paying for the web space.

Amazingly enough the offensive line seems to have its best games when Boller is not under center. After five years you would think people would notice a trend. Boller doesn't know how to work the pocket. He can't sense pressure, he can't avoid blitzers, and he makes the line look much worse than they actually are. McNair did too when he was in this year, but McNair was playing on one leg.

**Raveninwoodlawn** · 01-02-2008, 09:46 AM

When the OL is perfect and the WR's are catching any and everything in site, guys like Jeff Blake can perform.

I don't see the point of beating the "if the OL gives Boller 5 seconds every time he will be good" drum.

You can say that about every QB this city has ran out of town.

Anyway, we don't have a HC like Stinger has said and I think that is the bigger issue than another Boller Hugger thread.

**nattybohfiend** · 01-02-2008, 11:11 AM

Hmm. . . I think this 'double-standard' perspective might just come from the fact that one player is a turnover-prone fifth year veteran (originally a much-sacrificed-to-earn-first round pick) and the other just finished his second start.

**festivus** · 01-02-2008, 11:45 AM

We sacrificed for Boller at the time because our only other QB was Chris "I wasn't juiced" Redman. We were desperate, and were forced to make sacrifices to get to 19.

Boller has been a disappointment, but other teams have done worse at QB with mid-first picks and higher.

Now it is five years later. We have had long periods with Anthony Wright and Steve McNair starting under center. We had some success with McNair last year, but then he got old suddenly before the Bills game and has not been young again since. Wright was a disaster.

Anyway we are where we are. Entering next year, on paper at least, we have McNair/Boller/Smith. Which means Boller is the backup quarterback today, before the playoffs even start in 07, for the 08 season.

Meanwhile the Entire Organization is in disarray with no coaching staff, and very high ranking officials who have suddenly been effectively told they are out of the loop on key organizational decisions.

Really, it is time for people to let go of their hatred for Kyle Boller, and see him for what he is. A backup quarterback who is under contract for one more year, and who can be cut or released depending on what else goes on in the off season. During his time here other quarterbacks have been equally/more ineffective (e.g., Wright), or starting ahead of him (e.g., McNair).

There, you have the whole story. Can we let it go now, and worry about the future, instead of wringing our hands about the past?