Flacco's poor play common thread in all 4 losses

**TL24x7** · 01-13-2012, 12:11 PM

There is obviously a lot of controversy this season regarding Flacco's poor play. Even that statement will render the homers out to defend him. But the fact of the matter is that statistically this season was a significant downturn for Flacco. Those defending his play cite the typical "intangibles" and other immeasurable reasons as to why he really "improved," but the fact of the matter is that he has contributed less to wins this season than he did last season or the season prior. More relevantly, and as the title of this piece suggests, he did contribute significantly to the team's four losses.

Granted, those four losses were on the road, but even looking at a few of the home wins this season it becomes clear that he did little to contribute to the team winning several of those games.

Against the Cardinals it was Flacco's fumble and ensuing INT that were responsible for 14 of Arizona's 27 points. The special teams unit, which played respectably otherwise throughout the game, was responsible for another 7 by allowing an 82-yard punt return. The defense otherwise can be tagged with the remaining 6 points in a 3 point win. The running game contributed nearly 100 yards with no turnovers as well. The weak link in this home game was Flacco.

In the road game vs. Cleveland Flacco was even worse, "contributing" 0 TDs and 1 INT in a game where he completed a mere 43.5% of his passes and where his lone fumble contributed to 3 points for the Browns, more points than he contributed to for the Ravens in that game. It was the running game and its near 300-yard performance with over 200 by Rice and the play of the defense that won that game. Again, Flacco was a liability.

In the home Cleveland game Flacco was not quite as abysmal with a 45.8% completion percentage and 132 yards with a well below average rating of 73.6. His only complete pass on the first TD drive was in fact the actual 5-yard TD pass to Dickson.

In the Jets game Flacco was nothing but a liability. The Ravens defense directly scored 21 of the team's 34 points without which they never would have won. Flacco posted an abysmal completion percentage of 32.3% with a mere 163 yards, no TDs, and 1 INT posting his lowest rated game of the season at 37.4. This was against the Jets' tremendously average defense at home for Flacco. His only TD in the game was to David Harris of the Jets. The D played lights out, the running game yielded 115 rushing yards by the RBs.

Rest of article HERE

**alienrace** · 01-13-2012, 12:15 PM

What a complete bullshit article. That is an embarrassment.

**bt12483** · 01-13-2012, 12:15 PM

Jesus Christ I haven't seen such negativity and hatred since the Sun forums.

I thought this place was supposed to be better?

The author conveniently left out Phillip Rivers in SD torching the Defense OVER AND OVER again. Funny that such a thing would be left out...

**bt12483** · 01-13-2012, 12:23 PM

I can only imagine they are trying to increase the ad revenue and page visits by posting such an article 2 days before the playoffs.

I mean...not only are there tons of factual inaccuracies, but also plenty of opinion labelled as fact.

Honestly, I expected more from this place. If I wanted to read such garbage I'd have stayed at the Sun Forums. I can take criticism of Flacco, but the article is over the line in so many ways, one can only assume it is meant to increase mouse click$.

**Justlovemybirds** · 01-13-2012, 12:24 PM

Heading into the playoffs, of the 8 remaining QBs, the one QB that can be counted on the least to rally his team from behind is Flacco, arguably with the exception of Yates, yet at this point this analyst's money would go on Yates over Flacco in ability to rally his offense.

**pslholder96** · 01-13-2012, 12:25 PM

The timing of this article makes me scratch my head

**wickedsolo** · 01-13-2012, 12:25 PM

Yea, that was a big heaping pile of shite.

**festivus** · 01-13-2012, 12:25 PM

Originally Posted by TL24x7

There is obviously a lot of controversy this season regarding Flacco's poor play. Even that statement will render the homers out to defend him.

Yeah, when your second sentence already breaks out the ad hominem attacks on anyone who might have the nerve to disagree, expectations are low for the rest of the article.

What a @#$!ing Debbie Downer, posting that today, too. Blaming all the losses on Flacco? Nothing about the defense in TEN? Or the special teams in Seattle? No, it's enough to say that Flacco's "poor play" was the reason for each loss, and then call anyone who disagrees a "homer."

Dumb.

Sorry, Tony. I love ya, but this one is some weak sauce.

**wickedsolo** · 01-13-2012, 12:27 PM

Originally Posted by Justlovemybirds

Yea, cause I'm sure if the Ravens were to trade Flacco for Yates the Texans would turn their noses and scoff.

**wickedsolo** · 01-13-2012, 12:28 PM

I never really thought about it, but it would appear that Tony is very anti-Flacco.

**TL24x7** · 01-13-2012, 12:29 PM

Originally Posted by bt12483

Jesus Christ I haven't seen such negativity and hatred since the Sun forums.

I thought this place was supposed to be better?

The author conveniently left out Phillip Rivers in SD torching the Defense OVER AND OVER again. Funny that such a thing would be left out...

Hey guys, it's a man's opinion and our goal is to provide a forum for expressing those opinions. We try to be fair in presenting all sides and of course you are entitled to agree or disagree, sometimes vehemently.

**wickedsolo** · 01-13-2012, 12:31 PM

Originally Posted by TL24x7

Hey guys, it's a man's opinion and our goal is to provide a forum for expressing those opinions. We try to be fair in presenting all sides and of course you are entitled to agree or disagree, sometimes vehemently.

Come on Tony, there is a such thing as at least having a decent argument to back up such a wild argument, no?

Does that "author" even understand that football is a team sport and rarely - if ever - comes down to 1 person or not?