joe flacco #74 on nfl network top 100

[leachisabeast]

Heath Evans lol, they have some bad analysts on the network.

[Ravenswintitle]

I don't get the Romo comparisons; the guy broke the all time NFL passing rating where he is now second only to Rodgers. It's not even close between him and Flacco IMO and I am a big Flacco fan. It was Dallas' defense that let them down time and again, for the most part.

[HoustonRaven]

I don't get the Romo comparisons; the guy broke the all time NFL passing rating where he is now second only to Rodgers. It's not even close between him and Flacco IMO and I am a big Flacco fan. It was Dallas' defense that let them down time and again, for the most part.

And their offensive line. I agree.

[wickedsolo]

I don't get the Romo comparisons; the guy broke the all time NFL passing rating where he is now second only to Rodgers. It's not even close between him and Flacco IMO and I am a big Flacco fan. It was Dallas' defense that let them down time and again, for the most part.

I think the biggest reason is because Romo threw some really dogged passes last year and literally lost a couple of games for them.


I'm not one of those Ravens fans who think Flacco is the ever greatest best thing ever, but I do strongly feel that Tony Romo is pretty overrated. He's had some of the best receivers to throw the ball to over the past couple of years and that can really help any QB look good. Could you imagine if Flacco had Jason Witten, Miles Austin, & Dez Bryant as his top 3 receivers?

[Haloti92]

I think the biggest reason is because Romo threw some really dogged passes last year and literally lost a couple of games for them.


I'm not one of those Ravens fans who think Flacco is the ever greatest best thing ever, but I do strongly feel that Tony Romo is pretty overrated. He's had some of the best receivers to throw the ball to over the past couple of years and that can really help any QB look good. Could you imagine if Flacco had Jason Witten, Miles Austin, & Dez Bryant as his top 3 receivers?

Miles Austin the undrafted FA? And Bryant who showed up in 2010 after Romo already had 4 straight years of QB Ratings of well over 90? And Laurent Robinson's 858 yards (and 11 TDs) when he had averaged exactly 250 yards (and 1 TD) per season for the previous 4 seasons, how to explain that? Austin only had 579 yards last season due to injury.

It is easier to say Romo (and their scheme) makes them than the other way around. I am not saying it can be proven, just that it is easier. With Peyton Manning, I think it can be proven (e.g. Collie, Stokley).

That said, their offensive scheme has been a lot better and more focused on the pass than ours; but even this could be explained by the fact they have a consistent QB.

[wickedsolo]

Miles Austin the undrafted FA? And Bryant who showed up in 2010 after Romo already had 4 straight years of QB Ratings of well over 90? And Laurent Robinson's 858 yards (and 11 TDs) when he had averaged exactly 250 yards (and 1 TD) per season for the previous 4 seasons, how to explain that? Austin only had 579 yards last season due to injury.

It is easier to say Romo (and their scheme) makes them than the other way around. I am not saying it can be proven, just that it is easier. With Peyton Manning, I think it can be proven (e.g. Collie, Stokley).

That said, their offensive scheme has been a lot better and more focused on the pass than ours; but even this could be explained by the fact they have a consistent QB.

I didn't say he wasn't a good QB...I'm just saying I think he's overrated. He's a choke artist and granted, like I think Houston Raven pointed out, the Cowboys defense and OL didn't exactly do him any favors, but when the pressure is on it seems like he crumbles.

Regarding his receivers, who gives shit if Miles Austin WAS an undrafted free agent? He's one of the better receivers in the league and he's better than any receiver the Ravens currently have and have had while Flacco has been here. Dez may have been a rookie, but show me a better receiver on the Ravens roster? There are none. Same with Witten. Jason Witten is arguably the best all-around TE in the NFL. Explaining Laurent Robinson is easy - he was healthy all of last year and wasn't the #1 guy defenses accounted for. I'm not 100% positive, but I don't think Robinson has played a healthy year ever as a pro prior to last year with the Cowboys.

Marques Colston was a 7th rounder, Victor Cruz was undrafted, Wes Welker was undrafted. That doesn't mean anything at all and I don't know many who'd argue that those guys are not better than any receiver the Ravens currently have.

My point was that if you give Joe weapons like the Cowboys have given Romo or the Giants have given Eli and continue to develop and foster those weapons then it could lead to some great things.

I'm not saying that Tony Romo isn't a good QB. He's better than half of the league's starters, no doubt, but at the end of the day it's about W's and L's and how a guy performs when the pressure is on. Last year, Flacco responded when the pressure was on. Romo didn't.

[bmorecareful]

I didn't say he wasn't a good QB...I'm just saying I think he's overrated. He's a choke artist and granted, like I think Houston Raven pointed out, the Cowboys defense and OL didn't exactly do him any favors, but when the pressure is on it seems like he crumbles.

Regarding his receivers, who gives shit if Miles Austin WAS an undrafted free agent? He's one of the better receivers in the league and he's better than any receiver the Ravens currently have and have had while Flacco has been here. Dez may have been a rookie, but show me a better receiver on the Ravens roster? There are none. Same with Witten. Jason Witten is arguably the best all-around TE in the NFL. Explaining Laurent Robinson is easy - he was healthy all of last year and wasn't the #1 guy defenses accounted for. I'm not 100% positive, but I don't think Robinson has played a healthy year ever as a pro prior to last year with the Cowboys.

Marques Colston was a 7th rounder, Victor Cruz was undrafted, Wes Welker was undrafted. That doesn't mean anything at all and I don't know many who'd argue that those guys are not better than any receiver the Ravens currently have.

My point was that if you give Joe weapons like the Cowboys have given Romo or the Giants have given Eli and continue to develop and foster those weapons then it could lead to some great things.

I'm not saying that Tony Romo isn't a good QB. He's better than half of the league's starters, no doubt, but at the end of the day it's about W's and L's and how a guy performs when the pressure is on. Last year, Flacco responded when the pressure was on. Romo didn't.

Spot on post. Romo has never been without elite talent around him at the skill positions--literally never. His first few years he had Terrell Owens and Jason Witten, two players who will probably both be in Canton one day. Even when TO left they continued on with Miles Austin and then Dez Bryant.

They've also gotten good per-play production out of their RBs during that time. Did you know the Cowboys have been a better per-play rushing team than the Ravens EVERY YEAR since 2008?

Also, this stuff about the Cowboys having a bad OL is false. Maybe recently, but not for Romo's career. They had 2 Pro Bowl OL in 06 (Adams and Gurode, Kosier was also very good at G,) 3 in 07 (Adams, Gurode, Davis) 3 in 08 (same as 07,) 2 in 09 (Gurode, Davis,) and just 1 in 10 (Gurode.) Their OL certainly tailed off starting in 2010, but it was one of the league's best units in 06-09, serviceable in 10 (Romo was hurt most of the year then anyway,) and bad in 11.

The bottom line is that Romo has been surrounded by perhaps the league's best and most complete offensive talent over the past few years. He has produced staggering, video game type numbers in that time and deserves some credit for that. But the bottom line is that he has had no lasting success because he collapses under pressure and chokes when the game is on the line.

[JAB1985]

Wicked and Bmore are dead on.

We have to compare QB to QB and when looking at stats you cant take into account that the WRs on this team have NEVER been comparable to the QBs that hes being compared to, 4000 yards and a higher completion percentage are factors of the offense and the players that surround you. its a position completely dependent upon other players abilities. Boldin was a 2nd option on a good offensive team and had 1k seasons, here hes been our #1 and hasnt surpassed 900 yards yet. Its also not taking into account the offensive schemes in addition to personnel. Its hard to really compare but i dont think there is much of debate as to the fact that Romo has been surrounded with more talent than Flacco even if they were UDFA originally. If youre just looking at numbers its nearly impossible to get an accurate comparison, but if youre looking for something definitive, youre not going to find it.

[wickedsolo]

Spot on post. Romo has never been without elite talent around him at the skill positions--literally never. His first few years he had Terrell Owens and Jason Witten, two players who will probably both be in Canton one day. Even when TO left they continued on with Miles Austin and then Dez Bryant.

They've also gotten good per-play production out of their RBs during that time. Did you know the Cowboys have been a better per-play rushing team than the Ravens EVERY YEAR since 2008?

Also, this stuff about the Cowboys having a bad OL is false. Maybe recently, but not for Romo's career. They had 2 Pro Bowl OL in 06 (Adams and Gurode, Kosier was also very good at G,) 3 in 07 (Adams, Gurode, Davis) 3 in 08 (same as 07,) 2 in 09 (Gurode, Davis,) and just 1 in 10 (Gurode.) Their OL certainly tailed off starting in 2010, but it was one of the league's best units in 06-09, serviceable in 10 (Romo was hurt most of the year then anyway,) and bad in 11.

The bottom line is that Romo has been surrounded by perhaps the league's best and most complete offensive talent over the past few years. He has produced staggering, video game type numbers in that time and deserves some credit for that. But the bottom line is that he has had no lasting success because he collapses under pressure and chokes when the game is on the line.

We have to compare QB to QB and when looking at stats you cant take into account that the WRs on this team have NEVER been comparable to the QBs that hes being compared to, 4000 yards and a higher completion percentage are factors of the offense and the players that surround you. its a position completely dependent upon other players abilities. Boldin was a 2nd option on a good offensive team and had 1k seasons, here hes been our #1 and hasnt surpassed 900 yards yet. Its also not taking into account the offensive schemes in addition to personnel. Its hard to really compare but i dont think there is much of debate as to the fact that Romo has been surrounded with more talent than Flacco even if they were UDFA originally. If youre just looking at numbers its nearly impossible to get an accurate comparison, but if youre looking for something definitive, youre not going to find it.

:word

[Haloti92]

I didn't say he wasn't a good QB...I'm just saying I think he's overrated. He's a choke artist and granted, like I think Houston Raven pointed out, the Cowboys defense and OL didn't exactly do him any favors, but when the pressure is on it seems like he crumbles.

Regarding his receivers, who gives shit if Miles Austin WAS an undrafted free agent? He's one of the better receivers in the league and he's better than any receiver the Ravens currently have and have had while Flacco has been here. Dez may have been a rookie, but show me a better receiver on the Ravens roster? There are none. Same with Witten. Jason Witten is arguably the best all-around TE in the NFL. Explaining Laurent Robinson is easy - he was healthy all of last year and wasn't the #1 guy defenses accounted for. I'm not 100% positive, but I don't think Robinson has played a healthy year ever as a pro prior to last year with the Cowboys.

Marques Colston was a 7th rounder, Victor Cruz was undrafted, Wes Welker was undrafted. That doesn't mean anything at all and I don't know many who'd argue that those guys are not better than any receiver the Ravens currently have.

My point was that if you give Joe weapons like the Cowboys have given Romo or the Giants have given Eli and continue to develop and foster those weapons then it could lead to some great things.

I'm not saying that Tony Romo isn't a good QB. He's better than half of the league's starters, no doubt, but at the end of the day it's about W's and L's and how a guy performs when the pressure is on. Last year, Flacco responded when the pressure was on. Romo didn't.

The point is you and others use circular logic in an effort to make your points. You define "good receivers" as guys who put up stats, you then use "good receivers" to argue the QB has it easier. But of course the QB can be and is responsible for the "good stats" in the first place. Likewise, you use "bad stats" to argue that the receiver isn't great, of course in the case of Robinson, you claim he was a good receiver all along despite the bad stats because the contrary doesn't fit the narrative. A similar argument of convenience is used to explain Boldin's dropoff.

At the end of the day the W's and L's argument when describing individuals is stupid, for all the reasons given multiple times on this forum and elsewhere. Romo has choked a few times but that moniker, much like P. Manning's is overdone; many times people ignore the fact Romo gave the team the lead in the first place with his 90-100 QB rating, before the rare "choke". We have no idea what happens if Romo and Flacco switched places, but I can tell you with 100% confidence that if the Ravens defense and the Cowboys defense switched places, we don't win against Houston in the playoffs, nor do we win about 4-5 other games last year; and likewise Dallas wins a handful more games easily.

[JAB1985]

The point is you and others use circular logic in an effort to make your points. You define "good receivers" as guys who put up stats, you then use "good receivers" to argue the QB has it easier. But of course the QB can be and is responsible for the "good stats" in the first place. Likewise, you use "bad stats" to argue that the receiver isn't great, of course in the case of Robinson, you claim he was a good receiver all along despite the bad stats because the contrary doesn't fit the narrative. A similar argument of convenience is used to explain Boldin's dropoff.

At the end of the day the W's and L's argument when describing individuals is stupid, for all the reasons given multiple times on this forum and elsewhere. Romo has choked a few times but that moniker, much like P. Manning's is overdone; many times people ignore the fact Romo gave the team the lead in the first place with his 90-100 QB rating, before the rare "choke". We have no idea what happens if Romo and Flacco switched places, but I can tell you with 100% confidence that if the Ravens defense and the Cowboys defense switched places, we don't win against Houston in the playoffs, nor do we win about 4-5 other games last year; and likewise Dallas wins a handful more games easily.

do the cowboys have Cameron and our receiving core in this scenario? because no, Romo doesnt throw for 4k and 90-100 rating in this system with our WRs and likely doesnt win as many games as Flacco has even with our defense. in a more open offense (that most of us here would like) and more talented receiving core does Flacco throw for 4k and a 90-100? I think he easily can as hes thrown for 3.6 and has had a low 90s rating. Hes built for this system, but this system is greatly limited in statistical ability. Romo isnt built for this system and wouldnt produce as well as he does in his system, where hes an ideal QB, although lacking clutch ability. Its a scenario we wont ever know a true answer to, at least not until they get rid of cam and his outdated system and get Joe some better talent and maybe can compare apples to apples a little more but even then itll be difficult.

ftr... bad stats dont always mean a bad WR, and good stats dont always mean youre great either. there is such thing as a system WR, guys that arent very good but can produce good numbers in a particular system taking advantage of their strengths. one would think this is the job of every OC in the league, but there are plenty that dont adjust their system to their talent.

[Ravens44]

The point is you and others use circular logic in an effort to make your points. You define "good receivers" as guys who put up stats, you then use "good receivers" to argue the QB has it easier. But of course the QB can be and is responsible for the "good stats" in the first place. Likewise, you use "bad stats" to argue that the receiver isn't great, of course in the case of Robinson, you claim he was a good receiver all along despite the bad stats because the contrary doesn't fit the narrative. A similar argument of convenience is used to explain Boldin's dropoff.

At the end of the day the W's and L's argument when describing individuals is stupid, for all the reasons given multiple times on this forum and elsewhere. Romo has choked a few times but that moniker, much like P. Manning's is overdone; many times people ignore the fact Romo gave the team the lead in the first place with his 90-100 QB rating, before the rare "choke". We have no idea what happens if Romo and Flacco switched places, but I can tell you with 100% confidence that if the Ravens defense and the Cowboys defense switched places, we don't win against Houston in the playoffs, nor do we win about 4-5 other games last year; and likewise Dallas wins a handful more games easily.

Ok, but you could say the exact same thing about the Steelers and the Cowboys. Switch those defenses and Ben loses more games and Romo wins more games. Like I have said before, when you have players like Eli, receivers making miracle catches ontop of their helmet, or two defenders on them and reach out and catch the ball and get their feet inbounds just to continue drives, any QB can look good.
How many times has Joe put the pass right on our receivers' hands and they simply dropped them. A number of them would have been game winning touchdowns. Take those drops away and Joe might have been in 3 out of the last 4 super bowls.
How would everyone look at him then?