Results 169 to 180 of 190
Thread: Flacco Deal Update...
-
Re: Flacco Deal Update...
Well damn, I guess someone should let Brees in on that little tidbit because entering his 5th season he was coming off a 3100 yard season! How dare he go to New Orleans and get better each year...he's completely ruining your claim there man. Same with Roethlisberger. Heading into his 5th season he was coming off of a 3100 yard season. The past 3 seasons Roethlisberger has averaged over 3800 yards per season including two over 4000 yard seasons.
The point is, players can get better and the QB is one of the only positions in the NFL where your peak years don't normally come until your late 20's and early 30's.Disclaimer: The content posted is of my own opinion.
-
Re: Flacco Deal Update...
Too add to that sentiment.
48.2% 1043
52.8% 3,762
57.7% 3,244
56.1% 3336
60.3% 3238
Eli Manning's first 5 years. took him 5 years just to get to 60%. the following 3...
62.3% 4021
62.9% 4002
61% 4933
If you think Joe is what he is now and will never get better, i think Eli is the most comparable player to him (as well as the Giants as a whole, good defense, good OL) and quite frankly we never had the receiving corps he did, which says a lot about joes future.-JAB
-
Re: Flacco Deal Update...
-
04-10-2012, 09:52 AM #172Veteran Poster
- Join Date
- Dec 2008
- Posts
- 4,610
Re: Flacco Deal Update...
Your final line says it all. The issue is not Flacco but rather the OC and the offensive philosophy. If the Ravens were to modernize the offense I believe you would see his stats take off. Flacco is the most important player to the long term success of the Franchise. The sooner they start building around him both from a player and a coach standpoint the better. Oline does not block and the wrs do not get open. How do these coaches on the offensive side of the ball keep their jobs?
-
04-10-2012, 09:54 AM #173
- Join Date
- Aug 2009
- Location
- Wayne Manor, Gotham
- Posts
- 48,755
- Blog Entries
- 8
-
04-10-2012, 10:02 AM #174
Re: Flacco Deal Update...
Really??? So Joe should pay for the fact that in a year with no OTA's the Ravens gave Joe one receiver to throw to who had any significant NFL catches (Boldin), a washed up vet (Evans) and a some rookies. Give me one other even decent QB who had less to work with and made more out of it. Lets get real here, it was not until towards end of the year that Torrey Smith became more than a burner who Joe threw really far and he out ran the defense to the ball. Considering what he was given to work with and the fact he had an OC who was oblivious to it and insisted on throwing the ball continuously to receivers who could not get separation, I think he did a pretty damn good job overall.
Treat your franchise QB that way and lowball him and that's a good way to be the Miami Dolphins, Seattle Seahawks, Redskins etc wandering around looking for a QB who can play. It just seems like some people think the only definition of a QB worth keeping is if they are a Rodgers, Manning, Brees, Brady etc. Those guys took some time to grow also they went through there bumps and bruises as well. Flacco compares favorably over his first 4yrs to those type guys. Not saying he is as good or ever will be as them, just saying he compares well enough that your highly unlikely to get a guy anytime soon who will play as well if you lose him. Your far more likely to become one of the lost in the desert teams at QB like the Browns, Seahawks, Redskins, Dolphins, Bills, and the Ravens prior to Flacco's arrival. He is a valuable commodity (far more so than Rice) and will be expensive to keep but worth every dime“A linebacker's job is to knock out running backs, to knock out receivers, to chase the football,”
-Ray Lewis
-
04-10-2012, 10:06 AM #175
Re: Flacco Deal Update...
Who says Cam is staying around?
Just
white+flag.jpg
like a man and be done with it.
Plenty of good young QBs have gotten better at Joe's age and plenty of good young QBs besides Joe have been complemented by elite defenses.
Move on...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.
-
04-10-2012, 10:07 AM #176
Re: Flacco Deal Update...
Really??? So Joe should pay for the fact that in a year with no OTA's the Ravens gave Joe one receiver to throw to who had any significant NFL catches (Boldin), a washed up vet (Evans) and a some rookies. Give me one other even decent QB who had less to work with and made more out of it. Lets get real here, it was not until towards end of the year that Torrey Smith became more than a burner who Joe threw really far and he out ran the defense to the ball. Considering what he was given to work with and the fact he had an OC who was oblivious to it and insisted on throwing the ball continuously to receivers who could not get separation, I think he did a pretty damn good job overall.
Treat your franchise QB that way and lowball him and that's a good way to be the Miami Dolphins, Seattle Seahawks, Redskins etc wandering around looking for a QB who can play. It just seems like some people think the only definition of a QB worth keeping is if they are a Rodgers, Manning, Brees, Brady etc. Those guys took some time to grow also they went through there bumps and bruises as well. Flacco compares favorably over his first 4yrs to those type guys. Not saying he is as good or ever will be as them, just saying he compares well enough that your highly unlikely to get a guy anytime soon who will play as well if you lose him. Your far more likely to become one of the lost in the desert teams at QB like the Browns, Seahawks, Redskins, Dolphins, Bills, and the Ravens prior to Flacco's arrival. He is a valuable commodity (far more so than Rice) and will be expensive to keep but worth every dime“A linebacker's job is to knock out running backs, to knock out receivers, to chase the football,”
-Ray Lewis
-
Re: Flacco Deal Update...
I've gone through 5, 6...7 pages and can't find an update like the title suggest.
Was this a ploy to start a debate about how good Joe is or isn't? I can go to the Joe Comments thread for that.
Does anyone have an actual update on this?
-
04-10-2012, 11:05 AM #178
Re: Flacco Deal Update...
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.
-
04-10-2012, 11:33 AM #179Veteran Poster
- Join Date
- Oct 2011
- Posts
- 4,553
Re: Flacco Deal Update...
It may be true, but it isn't really damning. Also the reverse is true (people bleating "look at his stats" to defend him last year, while claiming they are meaningless this year).
It again comes down to people having different eye tests. The poster you agreed with assumes Flacco played better last year using his eye test, others disagree. I happen to believe Flacco visibly improved last year in some aspects, but not all. I also think he was asked to do more. I don't think it was the case that he was initially (in 2008) given 100% of the offensive possibilities/responsibilities/playbook and asked to learn them all and has since been slowly ticking off things from the list as 'learned.' I think it is more accurate to say they are piecing out the material (over years), and as he gets some stuff down (or gets the supporting players required), they expand and add new stuff, reads that are riskier, harder, or that need to be made quicker, etc. So in any given year it is possible both to say he improved in areas X, but overall his stats/performance as a whole may not have been 'better' in some people's opinions.
As for 2010's stats, they were good, but it was one year. And to claim that people that were hesitant to accept that they meant Joe had reached a level from which he could never go back is unreasonable. Look at Josh Freeman's stats or Matt Cassel's stats in 2010 (or even Vick's); were they anomalous, who knows for sure, but there was a significant drop in one year's time.
My opinion is that in 2010, Joe's stats looked a bit better than his eye test, and his stats in 2011 look at lot worse than his eye test. Such is the nature of "stats." There will never be any consensus on eye tests, and it will always be impossible to convince someone that their eye test is incorrect. The only possible way to do it is with some kind of objective, or mutually agreed to measuring device, which we don't have. The closest we have is stats, and it isn't very close; we all know they are unreliable enough, even if they have some value, that both sides can 'use' them, with enough finessing, to support their opinions or views (eye tests).
-
Re: Flacco Deal Update...
Disclaimer: The content posted is of my own opinion.
Bookmarks