Results 145 to 156 of 190
Thread: Flacco Deal Update...
-
04-09-2012, 05:15 PM #145Veteran Poster
- Join Date
- Oct 2011
- Posts
- 4,553
Re: Flacco Deal Update...
No way Flacco has earned a Rivers/Eli/BenR type of contract. That said, you won't get him to agree to a deal anywhere near a Kolb or Cassel deal, even if they were egregiously overpaid. Plus QB is the one position where a failure to get an average or slightly above-average player at minimum, guarantees failure (barring a time-machine and an all-time great defense). So you hope to sign him in between these two levels, but would be forced to sign him at the higher level if push came to shove.
From that point, if Flacco keeps improving, you signed a fair to eventually-cheap deal; if Flacco fails to develop and plateaus at around where he is, you overpaid at the position fairly significantly.
If Flacco insists on a deal that is bigger than Rivers/Eli/Ben then I think you make him wait until 2013 and take your chances.
-
-
04-09-2012, 06:58 PM #147
-
Re: Flacco Deal Update...
Noway hes worth rivers money? I realize eli and ben won SBs but at the same point in their respective careers theyre all arguably similar players even statistically. Wanting more isnt necessarily below market price with inflation and considering his age. I believe, may be wrong, but eli has the latest deal and it was signed in 2008? If he was asking to be paid brady or brees money id agree youre better off waiting him out but those deals those guys signed were young qbs you believe will take the next step and can lead your team which i believe he falls under.
-JAB
-
Re: Flacco Deal Update...
I agree. But if you think back to how they developed the defense, they drafted Lewis, Boulware, Sharper, McCallister and Starks. Then they added key veteran free agents. Quality players who still had siomething left in the tank and were itching for a ring (or at least some semblance of success). They haven't quite done that on the offensive side of the ball. They have a solid nucleus, but the ballsy free agent acquisitions have not taken place yet, IMO.
-
Re: Flacco Deal Update...
Really they're all around the same all 100+M contracts which meanbs jacksquat, GUARNTEE'D money is where it at:
Rivers 6 years 39Guarntee
Ben 8 years 36 G
Vick 6 years 37 G
Eli 7 35G
Peyton is under the 100M club but his guarntee'd money is about the ame with 5 years 35G.
Personally I think Flacco is in the land of 7 years 100M(with all the incentives) and about 32G. Incentive laden more than the others, considering he hasn't had the level of success(even at this point in his career) as the others besides Rivers. But personally I don't think Rivers is very elite either. Give Joe a pair of 6'6' and fast damn receivers(who can also catch), along with Gates and a decent running game and I bet he puts up far better stats. They've handed Joe a washedup short Mason, a possesion guy in Boldin, a beatup end of career Heap(thanks to Boller) and scrubs elsewhere, until T.Smith. And a unimaginative bum of a OC who shouldn't even be coaching HS ball let alone the NFL.
-
04-09-2012, 07:40 PM #151
Re: Flacco Deal Update...
add 5-10 mil to whatever matt ryan ends up getting...
-
Re: Flacco Deal Update...
http://blogs.baltimoreravens.com/201...out-to-change/
PFT stated that no progress has been made, but Aaron Wilson has been informed that the Ravens and Joe Linta have met twice since the combine to discuss Flacco's extension.Disclaimer: The content posted is of my own opinion.
-
04-09-2012, 08:58 PM #153Regular 1st Stringer
- Join Date
- Oct 2011
- Posts
- 593
Re: Flacco Deal Update...
-
04-09-2012, 09:09 PM #154Hall Of Fame Poster
- Join Date
- Oct 2011
- Posts
- 5,595
Re: Flacco Deal Update...
He didn't have a great year, but he did look good in the playoffs. As far as his off-year is concerned, its hard to tell how much of that is attributed to his terrible offensive coordinator. When the line isn't blocking and everyone is running 9 routes, its hard to be consistent.
-
04-09-2012, 09:21 PM #155Pro Bowl Poster
- Join Date
- Dec 2011
- Location
- NoVA
- Posts
- 1,235
Re: Flacco Deal Update...
First, QB rating isn't '1 stat,' it's four stats rolled into one number, intended to be a measure of overall efficiency of a QB's play. You can debate its validity if you like, but it exists and is constantly referenced because it is one of the better indicators of how well a team is doing offensively. Not just the QB, I grant you--it also says something for how well the receivers are getting the ball, how far they're making it when they catch a pass, etc. About the only thing it measures that is mostly on the QB is interceptions.
Second, it's like this. Here's two sets of data for you--first, the ratings for all the QBs of the teams that won 12 or more games last year, and then the records of the teams that had QBs which finished the year +/- 5 points of Flacco on the QB rating scale, and who played all 16 games (if you want, throw out Jackson--he only played 15). I posted this earlier, but not in this format, so maybe it'll be clearer this way:
Rodgers-122.5
Brees- 110.6
Brady- 105.6
Smith- 90.7
Roethlisberger- 90.1
Flacco- 80.9
Newton- 84.9/6 wins
Hasselbeck- 82.4/9 wins
Flacco- 80.9/12 wins
Dalton- 80.4/9 wins
Jackson- 79.2/7 wins
Fitzpatrick- 79.1/6 wins
Sanchez- 78.2/8 wins
So what does it tell you? Obviously, it's not a large enough sample size to say anything definitively, but it does show two things--that Flacco's QB rating was by far the worst of the teams that were the 'elite' of the league last year, and that QBs who got ratings similar to Flacco tended to win far fewer games.
So... upon seeing this, it raises a few questions for me, and makes one thing seem likely. The latter first--getting high quality (statistically) play out of whoever is at the QB position is less important to the Ravens than it is to other teams (or, at least it was to the 2011 Ravens--maybe 2012 will be different). If you get 12 wins with an 80.9 rating, you're apparently making up for that deficiency in other areas (defense, running... probably not special teams!). The questions it raises are these--how many wins would that have been at a 90 rating? How many at a 70 rating? If that's the spread you're working with, what's that actually worth paying for?
Is this in any way definitive? Am I saying I'm right? Not at all. But I think it's a logical, cogent viewpoint, and I think that I want to see another year of this offense before I spend any big money on any part of it, if I'm the Ravens FO. You may be right--Cam may be the whole problem. The Ravens should have gotten rid of him just to see what would happen, IMO. But until you've got a better idea as to exactly where the problem is... I wouldn't throw a lot of cash around.Last edited by redmike34; 04-09-2012 at 09:23 PM. Reason: format of stats was effed
-
04-09-2012, 10:52 PM #156
Re: Flacco Deal Update...
If you go to the playoffs with a quarterback for all four years of his career, you keep him.
Redmike, you can draw other conclusions from your same stats. How about this one: Joe Flacco's QB rating was aberrantly low in the 2011 season despite his success as an NFL quarterback.Festivus
His definitions and arguments were so clear in his own mind that he was unable to understand how any reasonable person could honestly differ with him.
Bookmarks