Ongoing Flacco Contract Negotiations (Merged)

[rlh445]

Wins is a terrible measuring stick for a QB. Up until last year, Sanchez had comparable win statistics through his first 3 years, including 2 AFC Championship appearances.

The guy has earned his cash and if/when he wins the Super Bowl it will be a great feeling. However, 3-4 games of amazing play doesn't really assuage worries of inconsistency. The guy is a great QB and will be here for a long time.

However, no one has enough information to say that Flacco has gotten over those consistency issues. 3 games is just not enough time. Which is why you have to base the contract on his entire body of work (0 Pro Bowls, never passed for more than 4000 yards, etc) rather than JUST the past 3 games. The past three games are important. Winning a Super Bowl is important. It's earned him a lot of money. But you can't discount his past inconsistency an,d at times, 'pedestrian' numbers just because he has had a strong playoff run.

That's all I'm saying. The only way to prove he is a consistent QB is to be consistent. And he hasn't had enough time to do that. What if he comes out, god forbid, and throws 2 INTS and goes 12/30 for 170 yards in the Super Bowl? Is he still the 'consistent' QB that you project him to be?

I wasn't referring to wins, I was using the obvious eye test that any football fan could use to assess Joe's level with. Even still the, 'until last year' part says to me that you've just proven my entire point. Even with all the stuff going on in the background with the organization, coaching changes and player changes Joe has stood fast and continued to help the Ravens win games. Sanchez in a word, hasn't. Boom.

Pro Bowls? Oh, that thing that is based entirely off public perception? The same people who put all of the blame on Rahim Moore and give no credit to either Jacoby Jones or Flacco for the 70 yard, accurate bomb to tie it up with nary but less than a minute to win the game? Those people? Yea, that's a REAL bummer dude.

Numbers mean almost nothing. Hey, Matt Ryan's numbers were great. Once again, using the eye test, it's pretty obvious that he plays in a nice comfy dome most of the year, plays against cupcake teams but when the game is on the line he melts like an ice cube in Arizona. Joe doesn't. The numbers may not belie that certainty but the playoffs sure do. Joe hasn't just done it in three games guy, he's been doing it for three years.

If he comes out and throws a stinker, yup. He's still consistent. Weren't you JUST trumpeting that a few games can't decide the level of consistency or not? Over the last three years, he's been about as consistent as you can get at quarterback. Period. If he muffs up the Super Bowl, that doesn't take away how clutch he's been for the other five years he's played here. Unless your own logic is wrong?

[s.r.genovese]

I wasn't referring to wins, I was using the obvious eye test that any football fan could use to assess Joe's level with. Even still the, 'until last year' part says to me that you've just proven my entire point. Even with all the stuff going on in the background with the organization, coaching changes and player changes Joe has stood fast and continued to help the Ravens win games. Sanchez in a word, hasn't. Boom.

Pro Bowls? Oh, that thing that is based entirely off public perception? The same people who put all of the blame on Rahim Moore and give no credit to either Jacoby Jones or Flacco for the 70 yard, accurate bomb to tie it up with nary but less than a minute to win the game? Those people? Yea, that's a REAL bummer dude.

Numbers mean almost nothing. Hey, Matt Ryan's numbers were great. Once again, using the eye test, it's pretty obvious that he plays in a nice comfy dome most of the year, plays against cupcake teams but when the game is on the line he melts like an ice cube in Arizona. Joe doesn't. The numbers may not belie that certainty but the playoffs sure do. Joe hasn't just done it in three games guy, he's been doing it for three years.

If he comes out and throws a stinker, yup. He's still consistent. Weren't you JUST trumpeting that a few games can't decide the level of consistency or not? Over the last three years, he's been about as consistent as you can get at quarterback. Period. If he muffs up the Super Bowl, that doesn't take away how clutch he's been for the other five years he's played here. Unless your own logic is wrong?

He's been consistently above average sure, with spurts of greatness (2012 playoffs). He hasn't been consistently better than Peyton or Brady.

And not that Pro Bowls are the end-all be-all, but they are voted on by the players as well.

Has he ever been top 5 at his position? I'd say no. Why should he be paid as such?

He's going to get paid and he should get paid. Should he get paid better than Peyton just because he had a better game than him? Absolutely not.

[rlh445]

He's been consistently above average sure, with spurts of greatness (2012 playoffs). He hasn't been consistently better than Peyton or Brady.

Has he ever been top 5 at his position? I'd say no. Why should he be paid as such?

He's going to get paid and he should get paid. Should he get paid better than Peyton just because he had a better game than him? Absolutely not.

Who brought up Peyton or Brady? I didn't mention them in the original post you quoted, so why are you bringing them up? They're not even the guys whose contracts Joe's would be measured up against since he's so much younger.

You obviously don't have to be a 'Top 5' at your position to get a big contract, look around at all the young QBs in the league. They're getting top dollar just for being young QBs even if they've never even been to the playoffs. You are making less and less sense to me lol.

[s.r.genovese]

Who brought up Peyton or Brady? I didn't mention them in the original post you quoted, so why are you bringing them up? They're not even the guys whose contracts Joe's would be measured up against since he's so much younger.

You obviously don't have to be a 'Top 5' at your position to get a big contract, look around at all the young QBs in the league. They're getting top dollar just for being young QBs even if they've never even been to the playoffs. You are making less and less sense to me lol.

The original point being made by Excellector was about how he outplayed Peyton and deserves a contract similar to his. I was originally refuting this idea.

He'll get a big contract and he deserves one. He just doesn't deserve to be paid better than Peyton just because he outplayed him in a playoff game. You have to look at his whole body of work, which was my original point I think.

[RavensRule21215]

There's no way you can prove that Cameron was the sole problem. The only way you can prove that is if Joe IS consistent without Cameron. 3-4 games isn't enough to judge. And he looked very much the same in the first Denver game. I get there wasn't that much time for Caldwell, but the fact still remains.

Joe has had great 3-4 game stretches before. I hope it is permanent but it's impossible to say that it will be. 2 quarters ago, this entire board was trashing Jim Caldwell for his playcalling and Joe for his inconsistency. You should have seen this board midway through the Pats game.

I had a few choice words for Caldwell's game calling the first half as well. And guess what? As SOON as Caldwell just put the ball in Joe's hands, Joe won the freakin game! And Joe put the ball right in Evans' hands LAST year as well. And Joe had the Ravens ahead of the Steelers before the team fell apart in the second half several years ago. What the hell MORE do you want in terms of "consistency", man?

[s.r.genovese]

I had a few choice words for Caldwell's game calling the first half as well. And guess what? As SOON as Caldwell just put the ball in Joe's hands, Joe won the freakin game! And Joe put the ball right in Evans' hands LAST year as well. And Joe had the Ravens ahead of the Steelers before the team fell apart in the second half several years ago. What the hell MORE do you want in terms of "consistency", man?

I mean, you can't sit here and say you didn't complain about Joe's offensive struggles (especially on the road), over the past 2 years.

I'm really glad he turned it up when it mattered but it doesn't change the fact that his yards and TD totals are middle of the pack, mainly because of his inconsistency. I don't think top 10 in yards is THAT much to ask over the course of a regular season (which he has done once in his career). It's not the end all be all, clearly, but it's also not too much to ask from a guy who might get paid 18-20 mil per year.

[alienrace]

I mean, you can't sit here and say you didn't complain about Joe's offensive struggles (especially on the road), over the past 2 years.

I'm really glad he turned it up when it mattered but it doesn't change the fact that his yards and TD totals are middle of the pack, mainly because of his inconsistency. I don't think top 10 in yards is THAT much to ask over the course of a regular season (which he has done once in his career). It's not the end all be all, clearly, but it's also not too much to ask from a guy who might get paid 18-20 mil per year.

Having a bunch of yards doesn't mean nearly as much as TD-INT ratio. It really doesn't mean much at all without the context in which those yards were gained.

[s.r.genovese]

Having a bunch of yards doesn't mean nearly as much as TD-INT ratio. It really doesn't mean much at all without the context in which those yards were gained.

That's fair; I could change that statement to: "I don't think it's to much to ask for Flacco to have a QB Rating (which takes into account TD:INT ratio), in the top 10 if we're going to pay him 18-20 mil." Again, he's only done that once.

I'm not saying Joe isn't a good QB, I'm just saying to pump the brakes a little on "pay him WHATEVER he wants." All I'm saying is pay him in relation to his performance over the past 5 years, not just his performance over the past 4 games.

[alienrace]

That's fair; I could change that statement to: "I don't think it's to much to ask for Flacco to have a QB Rating (which takes into account TD:INT ratio), in the top 10 if we're going to pay him 18-20 mil." Again, he's only done that once.

Ratings are tricky too, at least in context of ranking. Playing in the Coryell tends to lead to lower rankings that playing in the WC with the short, safe passes. Joe's rating for his career is around 88, right? I'd be curious to how that compares to some of the great QB's of the past(post 1978, anyway).

[RavensRule21215]

I mean, you can't sit here and say you didn't complain about Joe's offensive struggles (especially on the road), over the past 2 years.

Really? Oh yes, I can. It was obvious the problem was Cameron, and nothing has changed. Joe Flacco has done MORE with less -- less O-line, less elite WRs, and definitely less OC creativity -- than ANY QB in the NFL. That's how I see it, and that's how I've seen it for years. I have no idea what you've been seeing, but clearly, it's not the same.

[s.r.genovese]

Really? Oh yes, I can. It was obvious the problem was Cameron, and nothing has changed. Joe Flacco has done MORE with less -- less O-line, less elite WRs, and definitely less OC creativity -- than ANY QB in the NFL. That's how I see it, and that's how I've seen it for years. I have no idea what you've been seeing, but clearly, it's not the same.

Nope, it isn't the same. Certainly Cameron is partly to blame but it's hard to blame him for the first Denver game debacle, in which Flacco looked like the same inconsistent guy we had seen over the past 4 years.

[s.r.genovese]

Ratings are tricky too, at least in context of ranking. Playing in the Coryell tends to lead to lower rankings that playing in the WC with the short, safe passes. Joe's rating for his career is around 88, right? I'd be curious to how that compares to some of the great QB's of the past(post 1978, anyway).

Thats true. Let's go through some Coryell Qbs in the modern era. The coaches who are Coryell disciples are: Cam Cameron, Norv Turner, Mike Martz, Al Saunders and Tom Moore.

Phillip Rivers: 94.5
Kurt Warner (under Martz): 94.05
Marc Bulger: 84.4
Manning (under Tom Moore): 94.9
Flacco: 86.3

I think he stacks up around the same place as I was saying. Pretty good for sure, but statistically not quite in the top echelon.

Also interestingly enough Dan Fouts' career QBR is 80.2. Yeesh. He was pretty terrible up until about 1979... right around when Don Coryell came to town.

[RavensRule21215]

Nope, it isn't the same. Certainly Cameron is partly to blame but it's hard to blame him for the first Denver game debacle, in which Flacco looked like the same inconsistent guy we had seen over the past 4 years.

[wickedsolo]

The original point being made by Excellector was about how he outplayed Peyton and deserves a contract similar to his. I was originally refuting this idea.

He'll get a big contract and he deserves one. He just doesn't deserve to be paid better than Peyton just because he outplayed him in a playoff game. You have to look at his whole body of work, which was my original point I think.

You're also missing the fact that Joe is nearly a decade younger than Peyton and about 6-7 years younger than Brady.

They're paying for what he has done and what he will do in the future.

Sent from my DROID X2 using Forum Runner

[wickedsolo]

Nope, it isn't the same. Certainly Cameron is partly to blame but it's hard to blame him for the first Denver game debacle, in which Flacco looked like the same inconsistent guy we had seen over the past 4 years.

Haters gonna hate I guess.

Must suck to live in a world where everything is just not quite enough...

Sent from my DROID X2 using Forum Runner

[wickedsolo]

Thats true. Let's go through some Coryell Qbs in the modern era. The coaches who are Coryell disciples are: Cam Cameron, Norv Turner, Mike Martz, Al Saunders and Tom Moore.

Phillip Rivers: 94.5
Kurt Warner (under Martz): 94.05
Marc Bulger: 84.4
Manning (under Tom Moore): 94.9
Flacco: 86.3

I think he stacks up around the same place as I was saying. Pretty good for sure, but statistically not quite in the top echelon.

Also interestingly enough Dan Fouts' career QBR is 80.2. Yeesh. He was pretty terrible up until about 1979... right around when Don Coryell came to town.

And all of those coaches ran completely different variants.

You're also not taking into account adjustments and play calling. In reality, you're doing a pretty good job of cherry picking and goal post moving.

I got news for you duder: Avg QB's dont carry teams through the post season, through two of the top teams in the AFC, and through one of the top rated defenses in the league.

Sent from my DROID X2 using Forum Runner

[leachisabeast]

I just hope that its only the guaranteed money thats an issue here and not the actual cap hit. At this point, I'd say Flacco is worth 16.5 a year, if he wins the SB, it goes up to 17.5, hopefully Flacco agrees to that, and then the guaranteed money will be the only issue, as it was with Rice. Because the franchise tag is so huge for the QB, it is probably the most important contract to get done before the deadline in franchise history. If we can get Flaccos deal done, we can enjoy a solid offseason of one or two FA signings, and enjoy a draft of 11 picks.

[wickedsolo]

I just hope that its only the guaranteed money thats an issue here and not the actual cap hit. At this point, I'd say Flacco is worth 16.5 a year, if he wins the SB, it goes up to 17.5, hopefully Flacco agrees to that, and then the guaranteed money will be the only issue, as it was with Rice. Because the franchise tag is so huge for the QB, it is probably the most important contract to get done before the deadline in franchise history. If we can get Flaccos deal done, we can enjoy a solid offseason of one or two FA signings, and enjoy a draft of 11 picks.

It's all in how they structure it man.

Sent from my DROID X2 using Forum Runner

[bacchys]

I mean, you can't sit here and say you didn't complain about Joe's offensive struggles (especially on the road), over the past 2 years.

I'm really glad he turned it up when it mattered but it doesn't change the fact that his yards and TD totals are middle of the pack, mainly because of his inconsistency. I don't think top 10 in yards is THAT much to ask over the course of a regular season (which he has done once in his career). It's not the end all be all, clearly, but it's also not too much to ask from a guy who might get paid 18-20 mil per year.

His inconsistency, or the inconsistency of the entire offense?

[JAB1985]

That's fair; I could change that statement to: "I don't think it's to much to ask for Flacco to have a QB Rating (which takes into account TD:INT ratio), in the top 10 if we're going to pay him 18-20 mil." Again, he's only done that once.

I'm not saying Joe isn't a good QB, I'm just saying to pump the brakes a little on "pay him WHATEVER he wants." All I'm saying is pay him in relation to his performance over the past 5 years, not just his performance over the past 4 games.

Hes only being paid in part because of his past. Its about trajectory which his is on an upward trend due to having a new OC and realizing how the old one was holding him back. being 27 and making a SB and possibly winning, set you apart from the rest of the pack. What youre arguing im not even sure the team is at this point and theyre the ones trying to make a case to pay him less. Holding against him his OC who the team admitted was an issue by firing him mid season is really hurting that argument.