Page 6 of 13 FirstFirst ... 2345678910 ... LastLast
Results 76 to 90 of 190
  1. #76

    Re: Flacco Deal Update...



    Quote Originally Posted by sandiegosean View Post
    I've been sating since last season, you let Eice walk after this season, No recenr championship team, has alot of money tied into one runner. It's the new NFL, thats why this hasn't been done, and i doubt it does. Running backs can be found alot of places, ans thet arent one injury from obscurity. The Superbowl teams are winning it with passing attacks, and defenses equipped to stop them. I love RR, one of my favorite players, but this is a business. RB's aren't as valuable in the new NFL, especially ones who cant convert, third, and fourth, and short, especially in the red zone.
    Exactly. I just dont know why other posters don't get this. Unless, Rice realizes this he will be gone next season. He won't get anymore $ than Foster who can do things Rice
    can't. He should sign a Foster like deal and consider himself
    lucky. For over 10 years now we have basically got the same numbers from RB's in Baltimore no matter who carries the ball, but Rice is not good in short yardage which are the most important plays.




  2. #77

    Re: Flacco Deal Update...

    Quote Originally Posted by B-more Ravor View Post
    Both Flacco and Rice will be on the team in 2013. Both will likely be under long term deals, but, at worst, Flacco will have a long term deal and Rice will be tagged a 2nd time.
    Zero, chance Rice get tagged 2nd time. No RB is getting 9-10 million. Ravens will have replacement by then, the offense will be pass oriented moreso. You don't give Flacco money to be Dilferlike.




  3. #78
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Cockeysville, MD
    Posts
    4,501

    Re: Flacco Deal Update...

    Quote Originally Posted by Boulderraven View Post
    Zero, chance Rice get tagged 2nd time. No RB is getting 9-10 million. Ravens will have replacement by then, the offense will be pass oriented moreso. You don't give Flacco money to be Dilferlike.
    I don't see the offense changing much as long as Cam is still around. No way Flacco can carry the load without a good running game. No. Way.




  4. #79
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    8,168
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: Flacco Deal Update...

    Quote Originally Posted by redmike34 View Post
    I just don't see it. Again, no question Flacco has been the QB for a lot of games won by the Ravens... but that happened as a result of not only him.
    Flacco had a QB rating of 80.9 last year, which put him 18th in the league. Admittedly, QB rating isn't the be-all-end-all, but it does serve as a measure of efficiency that does have some correlation to winning games. So... the Ravens were capable of winning 12 games last year with a QB rating of 80.9. How many more games do they win if it's 90? What's a QB rating of 80 worth? What's the record of other teams who had a QB rating of ~80? Newton 84.5 rating/6 wins, Hasselbeck: 82.4/9, Dalton 80.4/9, Jackson 79.2/7, Fitzpatrick 79.1/6, Sanchez 78.2/8... That works out to an average of 7.5 wins, and a standard deviation of 1.37. So the Ravens got more than three standard deviations more wins than other teams with similar QB play.... that's a pretty FAR outlier. The big difference is the team with 12 wins also had the 3rd-ranked scoring defense... IMO.
    I don't think Flacco gets any kind of a mega-deal from anyone else based on his body of work so far. That's why I'd be willing, were I the Ravens front office, to see what 2012 brings. If Flacco improves, great--it may cost more money, but it could also be a good problem to have. If he doesn't... well, it's frankly not that hard to find QBs who can average a rating of 80 for the year.
    I think your post is so far off, I don't even know where to begin. If you believe posting averages/standard deviations will decrease Joe's value then I strongly disagree. AND if you think it's easy to find a QB like him (" it's frankly not that hard to find QBs who can average a rating of 80 for the year") then you're so beguiled by numbers that you've lost sight of the most important ones...WINS and LOSSES. IMO FLacco is a winner, and if you believe it would be easy to replace him, then we are at opposite ends of the QB spectrum... Bc




  5. #80
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Philly
    Posts
    2,364
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Flacco Deal Update...

    Quote Originally Posted by Terpsfan82 View Post
    I don't see the offense changing much as long as Cam is still around. No way Flacco can carry the load without a good running game. No. Way.
    What would you say he did in the playoffs?
    "What would you give for the man beside you?"




  6. #81

    Re: Flacco Deal Update...

    Quote Originally Posted by Boulderraven View Post
    Exactly. I just dont know why other posters don't get this. Unless, Rice realizes this he will be gone next season. He won't get anymore $ than Foster who can do things Rice
    can't. He should sign a Foster like deal and consider himself
    lucky. For over 10 years now we have basically got the same numbers from RB's in Baltimore no matter who carries the ball, but Rice is not good in short yardage which are the most important plays.
    What don't we get? Your opinion? We get it, becuase you've been very forthright w it. What you don't seem to get is that it is just that: Your opinion. It isn't a fact.

    Now, I'm not saying you pay Rice whatever he wants. Personally, I think a deal in the Foster range, even if it exceeds it by a bit, is fine. An AP or CJ contract is not. However, the idea that we'd somehow be BETTER off w/o Rice, is downright absurd imo.

    This offense has ran through RR for three years now. Flacco struggled imo to adjust w/o Mason and Heap, which is why his numbers were down this year; it would be far worse w/o Rice. I think RR masks alot of Flacco's and the offenses' shortcomings.

    Now, for all the he can't get the 4th-1 talk, he set a franchise record last year for rushing tds, so a few high-profile failures in the playoffs, against D-Lines which were owning our OL, doesn't negate that fact.




  7. #82
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Wilton, CT
    Posts
    16,019
    Blog Entries
    7

    Re: Flacco Deal Update...

    Quote Originally Posted by sandiegosean View Post
    I've been sating since last season, you let Eice walk after this season, No recenr championship team, has alot of money tied into one runner. It's the new NFL, thats why this hasn't been done, and i doubt it does. Running backs can be found alot of places, ans thet arent one injury from obscurity. The Superbowl teams are winning it with passing attacks, and defenses equipped to stop them. I love RR, one of my favorite players, but this is a business. RB's aren't as valuable in the new NFL, especially ones who cant convert, third, and fourth, and short, especially in the red zone.
    They're also winning with better quarterbacks and wide receivers than the Ravens have. If they are committed to Flacco they're going to need a strong running game. If they want to be like the Giants, Packers or Saints they need a better QB and much better receivers.
    He Who Dares.....Wins




  8. #83
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    "Merry old England"
    Posts
    9,307
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: Flacco Deal Update...

    Quote Originally Posted by GOTA View Post
    They're also winning with better quarterbacks and wide receivers than the Ravens have. If they are committed to Flacco they're going to need a strong running game. If they want to be like the Giants, Packers or Saints they need a better QB and much better receivers.
    This ^^^... People need to understand that we are never going to have the offense Green Bay has with our receivers, and I'm not sold that Flacco will ever be as good as Rogers.




  9. #84
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    over by the dental floss bush
    Posts
    17,929
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Flacco Deal Update...

    Quote Originally Posted by leachisabeast View Post
    This ^^^... People need to understand that we are never going to have the offense Green Bay has with our receivers, and I'm not sold that Flacco will ever be as good as Rogers.
    Haven't you heard he's the best in the league?
    World Domination 3 Points at a Time!




  10. #85

    Re: Flacco Deal Update...

    Quote Originally Posted by redmike34 View Post
    I just don't see it. Again, no question Flacco has been the QB for a lot of games won by the Ravens... but that happened as a result of not only him.

    Flacco had a QB rating of 80.9 last year, which put him 18th in the league. Admittedly, QB rating isn't the be-all-end-all, but it does serve as a measure of efficiency that does have some correlation to winning games. So... the Ravens were capable of winning 12 games last year with a QB rating of 80.9. How many more games do they win if it's 90? What's a QB rating of 80 worth? What's the record of other teams who had a QB rating of ~80? Newton 84.5 rating/6 wins, Hasselbeck: 82.4/9, Dalton 80.4/9, Jackson 79.2/7, Fitzpatrick 79.1/6, Sanchez 78.2/8... That works out to an average of 7.5 wins, and a standard deviation of 1.37. So the Ravens got more than three standard deviations more wins than other teams with similar QB play.... that's a pretty FAR outlier. The big difference is the team with 12 wins also had the 3rd-ranked scoring defense... IMO.

    I don't think Flacco gets any kind of a mega-deal from anyone else based on his body of work so far. That's why I'd be willing, were I the Ravens front office, to see what 2012 brings. If Flacco improves, great--it may cost more money, but it could also be a good problem to have. If he doesn't... well, it's frankly not that hard to find QBs who can average a rating of 80 for the year.
    Oh Really??..We were struggling to find a franchise type QB for 12 years before Joe came along.




  11. #86

    Re: Flacco Deal Update...

    Quote Originally Posted by BcRaven View Post
    I think your post is so far off, I don't even know where to begin. If you believe posting averages/standard deviations will decrease Joe's value then I strongly disagree. AND if you think it's easy to find a QB like him (" it's frankly not that hard to find QBs who can average a rating of 80 for the year") then you're so beguiled by numbers that you've lost sight of the most important ones...WINS and LOSSES. IMO FLacco is a winner, and if you believe it would be easy to replace him, then we are at opposite ends of the QB spectrum... Bc
    Flacco doesn't win or lose games... the Baltimore Ravens do. If you think that Joe Flacco is more responsible for the 44 regular season wins over the last four years, when by any statistical measure he's performed as an average-to-slightly-above-average QB over that time, than the defense which has been top-three in the league in scoring defense over that time, then I think you're deluding yourself. Pair the Ravens offense of the last four years with, say, the Cleveland Browns defense, and those 44 wins get cut in half. At least.

    Stats are not the be-all-end-all, but they exist for several reasons, and within their context they describe reality pretty well. That's why every human endeavor, football included, makes use of them so as to improve human performance. What I showed you was that the number of wins the Ravens got last year is FAR out of proportion to the statistical quality of play they got from the QB position. Let's look at it from the other way--what was the average QB rating of teams that got 12+ wins last year? Rodgers 122.5, Brees 110.6, Brady 105.6, Smith 90.7, Roethlis 90.1. See a pattern?

    I'm 100% on board with evaluation on the basis of wins and losses... it helps to have an accurate analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of the team that lead to those wins and losses. By any measure, the Ravens defense is a better unit than the offense is. I believe that has a lot more to do with the number of W/L over the last four years than the fact that Joe Flacco has been the QB for those years.

    I don't see a single thing in your post that makes me believe Flacco is the reason the Ravens are in the playoffs every year. I'm showing you hard numbers which reasonably indicate that it's probably more because of the defense than because of Flacco, or anyone on the offensive side of the ball.




  12. #87

    Re: Flacco Deal Update...

    Quote Originally Posted by pslholder96 View Post
    Oh Really??..We were struggling to find a franchise type QB for 12 years before Joe came along.
    Haha. Well, look on the bright side--you could be a Bears fan. Their all-time leading passer is Sid Luckman, who last played in an NFL game in 1950...




  13. #88

    Re: Flacco Deal Update...

    Quote Originally Posted by redmike34 View Post
    Flacco doesn't win or lose games... the Baltimore Ravens do. If you think that Joe Flacco is more responsible for the 44 regular season wins over the last four years, when by any statistical measure he's performed as an average-to-slightly-above-average QB over that time, than the defense which has been top-three in the league in scoring defense over that time, then I think you're deluding yourself. Pair the Ravens offense of the last four years with, say, the Cleveland Browns defense, and those 44 wins get cut in half. At least.

    Stats are not the be-all-end-all, but they exist for several reasons, and within their context they describe reality pretty well. That's why every human endeavor, football included, makes use of them so as to improve human performance. What I showed you was that the number of wins the Ravens got last year is FAR out of proportion to the statistical quality of play they got from the QB position. Let's look at it from the other way--what was the average QB rating of teams that got 12+ wins last year? Rodgers 122.5, Brees 110.6, Brady 105.6, Smith 90.7, Roethlis 90.1. See a pattern?

    I'm 100% on board with evaluation on the basis of wins and losses... it helps to have an accurate analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of the team that lead to those wins and losses. By any measure, the Ravens defense is a better unit than the offense is. I believe that has a lot more to do with the number of W/L over the last four years than the fact that Joe Flacco has been the QB for those years.

    I don't see a single thing in your post that makes me believe Flacco is the reason the Ravens are in the playoffs every year. I'm showing you hard numbers which reasonably indicate that it's probably more because of the defense than because of Flacco, or anyone on the offensive side of the ball.
    And joe flacco was the 13t highest rated in 2009 and 7th highest in 2010 and then fell off this year adter all of his top recievers were gone. Hes basically supporting your evidence that good qbs make the playoffs. Despite a down statistical year hes still a good qb and history supports that as well as the ravens record/consistency. The ravens dont make the playoffs without him and he doesnt without the rest of the team but qb being the most important position he has a large part in that success.
    -JAB




  14. #89

    Re: Flacco Deal Update...

    Quote Originally Posted by pickles View Post
    What don't we get? Your opinion? We get it, becuase you've been very forthright w it. What you don't seem to get is that it is just that: Your opinion. It isn't a fact.

    Now, I'm not saying you pay Rice whatever he wants. Personally, I think a deal in the Foster range, even if it exceeds it by a bit, is fine. An AP or CJ contract is not. However, the idea that we'd somehow be BETTER off w/o Rice, is downright absurd imo.

    This offense has ran through RR for three years now. Flacco struggled imo to adjust w/o Mason and Heap, which is why his numbers were down this year; it would be far worse w/o Rice. I think RR masks alot of Flacco's and the offenses'
    shortcomings.








    Now, for all the he can't get the 4th-1 talk, he set a franchise record last year for rushing tds, so a few high-profile failures in the playoffs, against D-Lines which were owning our OL, doesn't negate that fact.
    Most of his TD's where longer runs. One thing to remember the Ravens made the AFCC game 4 years ago and Rice was our 3rd leading rusher behind Mcgahee and MCClain. Rice can't get 3rd and short for TD's or first downs consistently everyone knows that.




  15. #90

    Re: Flacco Deal Update...

    Quote Originally Posted by JAB1985 View Post
    And joe flacco was the 13t highest rated in 2009 and 7th highest in 2010 and then fell off this year adter all of his top recievers were gone. Hes basically supporting your evidence that good qbs make the playoffs. Despite a down statistical year hes still a good qb and history supports that as well as the ravens record/consistency. The ravens dont make the playoffs without him and he doesnt without the rest of the team but qb being the most important position he has a large part in that success.
    I'm not putting up any evidence that good QBs make the playoffs... at least, such was not my intent. Judging by Tebow, it's apparent that bad QBs make the playoffs as well, though perhaps less frequently.

    Look--I'm not hating on Flacco. I hope he passes for a zillion yards next year, wins the Super Bowl in a blowout and has the Swedish bikini team fall in love with him. I am not, however, going to be blind to the fact that last year was not as good as it should have been. And if I were the Ravens front office, I'd make damn sure last year was an aberration before I committed a lot of money to him.




Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Russell Street Report Website Design by D3Corp Ocean City Maryland