Where Does Flacco Rank Amongsts the League's Best QB's?

**wickedsolo** · 02-12-2013, 07:35 AM

Originally Posted by RavenScallywag

I think that is why we need to hold our breath a bit on Flacco...Last year, Eli went out and said he thought he was in the Tom Brady class of QBs. He got roasted for it, but he took his team to the Super Bowl and won the Super Bowl MVP, for the 2nd time. And look where he was this year. Now, granted, he's almost always had worse INT numbers than Joe did, but he had a step back season, when everyone in New York was probably thinking "Eli just went out and proved he was good enough to be a Super Bowl MVP AGAIN, he's clearly in the elite class now".

So while clearly Flacco is ahead of Eli RIGHT NOW, it could flip flop in a season.

IMO - and I don't know how this doesn't factor into these types of discussion - Flacco's age in comparison to other's needs to be a VERY important determining factor.

Peyton is 36 years old. He's not likely to get any better. His arm isn't what it used to be. He probably still has lingering issues in his neck. He is trending downwards.
Brady will be 36. He likely isn't going to get any better. Hence, he is trending downwards.
Eli is 32 and while he has flashed brilliance from time to time, he has likely peaked and is as good as he is going to be (which isn't bad...btw).
Aaron Rodgers is even going to be 30 next season. He is arguably the best QB in the NFL and could potentially get better, but likely has peaked as well.

Flacco JUST turned 28 and has been trending upwards (slowly until the playoffs/SB this year) pretty much since he got into the league. If we argue that QB's peak between 30-34 years old, then it is reasonable and logical to think that we haven't seen the best of Flacco at all. Frankly, if he continues to be successful (as we saw in the playoffs) under Jim Caldwell, then I don't think there is any doubt that he will at least be a Top 3 QB for the next 4-6 years.

**leachisabeast** · 02-12-2013, 07:53 AM

Originally Posted by wickedsolo

IMO - and I don't know how this doesn't factor into these types of discussion - Flacco's age in comparison to other's needs to be a VERY important determining factor.

Peyton is 36 years old. He's not likely to get any better. His arm isn't what it used to be. He probably still has lingering issues in his neck. He is trending downwards.
Brady will be 36. He likely isn't going to get any better. Hence, he is trending downwards.
Eli is 32 and while he has flashed brilliance from time to time, he has likely peaked and is as good as he is going to be (which isn't bad...btw).
Aaron Rodgers is even going to be 30 next season. He is arguably the best QB in the NFL and could potentially get better, but likely has peaked as well.

Flacco JUST turned 28 and has been trending upwards (slowly until the playoffs/SB this year) pretty much since he got into the league. If we argue that QB's peak between 30-34 years old, then it is reasonable and logical to think that we haven't seen the best of Flacco at all. Frankly, if he continues to be successful (as we saw in the playoffs) under Jim Caldwell, then I don't think there is any doubt that he will at least be a Top 3 QB for the next 4-6 years.

Just because he's younger, that doesn't mean he should be ranked higher than others who are still better than him. I'm doing a ranking list based on right NOW. I think if this is the Flacco we're going to be getting for the next few years, he'd probably be higher than Eli and maybe even Peyton and Tom Lady, but I still don't 100 % trust Joe to be that consistent. Right now, Joe is the Eli Manning of the AFC, just the way I see it for now, lets see if he changes that perception (which is barely a bad perception anyway).

**Strange Bru** · 02-12-2013, 07:54 AM

I know I shouldn't watch ESPN SportsCenter if I want objective reporting on the Ravens, but the only thing they could bring themselves to say about the upcoming Joe Flacco contract.negotiations was how he is going to get a contract worth $20,000,000.00 a year and in the regular season he ranked 25 in the league, between Jake Locker an Michael Vick. What they continue to ignore is the wins and losses for the past 5 years, playoff appearances, playoff wins, and Super Bowl win and MVP. It's frustrating because he has played every game in the past 5 years, Brady, Manning, Roethlisberger, Brees, and a lot of other QBs can't say that. I'm just tired of all of the haters, I hope Ray Lewis shuts these morons up when he starts working for ESPN.

**Paintballguy** · 02-12-2013, 07:57 AM

Originally Posted by Strange Bru

I know I shouldn't watch ESPN SportsCenter if I want objective reporting on the Ravens, but the only thing they could bring themselves to say about the upcoming Joe Flacco contract.negotiations was how he is going to get a contract worth $20,000,000.00 a year and in the regular season he ranked 25 in the league, between Jake Locker an Michael Vick. What they continue to ignore is the wins and losses for the past 5 years, playoff appearances, playoff wins, and Super Bowl win and MVP. It's frustrating because he has played every game in the past 5 years, Brady, Manning, Roethlisberger, Brees, and a lot of other QBs can't say that. I'm just tired of all of the haters, I hope Ray Lewis shuts these morons up when he starts working for ESPN.

I saw that too. It's the same network that will suck Tebow's nuts for winning a game after throwing 5 passes. They have no objectivity at all.

**wickedsolo** · 02-12-2013, 08:08 AM

Originally Posted by leachisabeast

Just because he's younger, that doesn't mean he should be ranked higher than others who are still better than him. I'm doing a ranking list based on right NOW. I think if this is the Flacco we're going to be getting for the next few years, he'd probably be higher than Eli and maybe even Peyton and Tom Lady, but I still don't 100 % trust Joe to be that consistent. Right now, Joe is the Eli Manning of the AFC, just the way I see it for now, lets see if he changes that perception (which is barely a bad perception anyway).

No, it doesn't mean that he should be ranked higher. However, there is an element of trends involved in this that a lot of people don't want to factor in.

When you (or anyone) says "Here are the top ranked <insert position here>", then you have to take into account who is trending upwards, who has likely peaked, and who is trending downwards. Prior to Jim Caldwell taking the reigns, many on here thought that Flacco's upward trend had stopped and he had peaked. He was as good as he was going to be. After Caldwell, we clearly saw that Flacco had not peaked and was continuing to trend upwards. Hence, why I think he should be ranked higher than Eli.

**leachisabeast** · 02-12-2013, 08:16 AM

Originally Posted by wickedsolo

No, it doesn't mean that he should be ranked higher. However, there is an element of trends involved in this that a lot of people don't want to factor in.

When you (or anyone) says "Here are the top ranked <insert position here>", then you have to take into account who is trending upwards, who has likely peaked, and who is trending downwards. Prior to Jim Caldwell taking the reigns, many on here thought that Flacco's upward trend had stopped and he had peaked. He was as good as he was going to be. After Caldwell, we clearly saw that Flacco had not peaked and was continuing to trend upwards. Hence, why I think he should be ranked higher than Eli.

Not arguing with those facts, but I rank on right now rather than whats going to happen in a few months, depends on what your philosophy is when ranking players I guess.

**psuasskicker** · 02-12-2013, 10:11 AM

You guys knocking Luck are insane. He had one of the greatest rookie seasons ever. He took a team that won two games last year and has such a massive talent deficiency that they're sickeningly under the cap and had no business winning more than five this year, and he turned them into an 11 win playoff team who lost to the eventual Super Bowl champions. If you offered me the chance to pick any QB in the NFL for my team for the next decade at absolutely no cost, it's pretty much a no brainer Luck is the guy to choose.

All the guy has done at every single level is play sick football and win games. He's the best QB prospect in the NFL long term and it's not close.

- C -

**JAB1985** · 02-12-2013, 10:29 AM

Originally Posted by psuasskicker

You guys knocking Luck are insane. He had one of the greatest rookie seasons ever. He took a team that won two games last year and has such a massive talent deficiency that they're sickeningly under the cap and had no business winning more than five this year, and he turned them into an 11 win playoff team who lost to the eventual Super Bowl champions. If you offered me the chance to pick any QB in the NFL for my team for the next decade at absolutely no cost, it's pretty much a no brainer Luck is the guy to choose.

All the guy has done at every single level is play sick football and win games. He's the best QB prospect in the NFL long term and it's not close.

- C -

I certainly think hes promising and under this fantasy draft would be a top pick for sure, but I dont think we can crown him the best of the next decade, by a long shot no less, based off his rookie season alone. 4400 yards and 23 TDs looks damn good but 627 attempts at 54% to get there with 18 INTs isnt exactly awe inspiring. Theres certainly a case to be made that Flacco is better the next 10 years simply because hes in his peak now as opposed to Luck still needing a few years to get there. what happened in Indy is certainly partially due to his credit (no question hes better than what they had out there last year) but I think its pretty well known that team quit last year when manning went down and didnt perform as well as capable. The coaching staff changed the atmosphere which was also a big factor in the turn around.

**jonboy79** · 02-12-2013, 10:38 AM

Originally Posted by leachisabeast

My current top ten assuming everyone's healthy.

1. Aaron Rogers
2. Drew Brees
3. Tom Brady
4. Peyton Manning
5. Eli Manning
6. Joe Flacco
7. Ben Roethlisberger
8. Matt Ryan
9. Collin Kaepernick
10. RGIII

Wilson, and Luck just miss out, Luck landed 12th, Wilson landed 11th. I think Lucks slightly overrated at this point, but I think he'll be better than both RG3 and Wilson in time.

I base my list heavily on play off experience/games won, and how long they've been in the league winning games. The top 7 have all won SBs, pretty crazy when you think of it. I wont get carried away yet with the likes of RGIII having a very good rookie year, because they can come back and have an average year, as seen with Cam Newton. For now, I think Kaepernick and RGIII will be very good, but I'm not yet sold on their long term health or play. I think Andrew Luck and Russell Wilson will both overtake them eventually, because they both look to pass the ball first EVERY TIME in the pocket. No matter how good RGIII or Kaepernick are at throwing, they are always going to try and run and will eventually pay for that.

This would be my list, except:
Place Luck in instead of RGIII.
I'd then put Newton at 12 and RGIII at 13. I simply think that RGIII is set to have the biggest sophmore slumps of them all(including Kaepernick as a "rookie" despite the fact that he was actually in the league and not really playign last year. I jsut think RGIII's small stature and inability to avoid contact cost him a career changing injury, and post injury he will be a shell of what he was this past year.

After that group come the Staffords, Cutlers, Schaub's, Dalton's, etc... and somewhere after every QB that's decent has been listed, we ist Romo before we get to the craptastic likes of Vick, Fitzgerald, Freeman, Bradford, Tebow, etc. Last would be Sanchez, right after Kolb and Lindley,Gabbert, etc.

**jonboy79** · 02-12-2013, 10:42 AM

Originally Posted by psuasskicker

You guys knocking Luck are insane. He had one of the greatest rookie seasons ever. He took a team that won two games last year and has such a massive talent deficiency that they're sickeningly under the cap and had no business winning more than five this year, and he turned them into an 11 win playoff team who lost to the eventual Super Bowl champions. If you offered me the chance to pick any QB in the NFL for my team for the next decade at absolutely no cost, it's pretty much a no brainer Luck is the guy to choose.

All the guy has done at every single level is play sick football and win games. He's the best QB prospect in the NFL long term and it's not close.

- C -

I agree. Throw all the players onto a list, if I'm the first team to pick a player he would be my pick. He appears to have more staying power then the run-first guy's, from my perspective, and basically everyone's in reference to RGIII, who, IMO at this moment, might not even be a first rounder in that same scenario(injury considered).

**alienrace** · 02-12-2013, 10:45 AM

Originally Posted by leachisabeast

Just because he's younger, that doesn't mean he should be ranked higher than others who are still better than him.

That's the thing though for me - IMO right now he IS better than Tom Brady. Brady has been wilting against good teams in big games the past few years, where as Flacco has been flourishing.

I would not be surprised in the least if Flacco puts up bigger numbers than Brady in 2013.

**ActualSpamBot** · 02-12-2013, 10:45 AM

Originally Posted by psuasskicker

You guys knocking Luck are insane. He had one of the greatest rookie seasons ever. -

Not that I agree that Luck won't be great, but 1 year ago people said the same thing about Cam Newton and he followed that awesome season up with a pretty mediocre sophomore campaign.

**alienrace** · 02-12-2013, 10:59 AM

Originally Posted by ActualSpamBot

Not that I agree that Luck won't be great, but 1 year ago people said the same thing about Cam Newton and he followed that awesome season up with a pretty mediocre sophomore campaign.

This, and the 18 INT's and 54% completion percentage weren't exactly great. I think Luck will be a good, if not great QB down the road, but he still has to prove it, just like Newton did(didn't yet).

**StingerNLG** · 02-12-2013, 12:18 PM

1) Brady
2) Flacco
3) Brees
4) Peyton Manning
5) Eli Manning

**jonboy79** · 02-12-2013, 12:24 PM

Originally Posted by StingerNLG

1) Brady
2) Flacco
3) Brees
4) Peyton Manning
5) Eli Manning

Rodgers???

**TTRaven** · 02-12-2013, 12:29 PM

1) Rodgers
2) Brady
3) Brees
4) P. Manning
5) Roethlisberger
6) Eli Manning
7) Flacco

**Bigfish** · 02-12-2013, 12:59 PM

Originally Posted by TTRaven

1) Rodgers
2) Brady
3) Brees
4) P. Manning
5) Roethlisberger
6) Eli Manning
7) Flacco

That's pretty close to me. I could argue for a switching a few around but this is close. I wouldn't put Joe in the top 5, but he's not far away. Joe's won a lot of games in 5 years, but it's not like he carried the team on his back. But he has had some some great games he's shined in. The Ravens win a lot of games because they field a strong team and have won many games despite Joe playing poorly.

**StingerNLG** · 02-12-2013, 01:22 PM

Originally Posted by jonboy79

Rodgers???

Rodgers sucks.

Actually, I just forgot about him. I'd put him 2nd and Flacco 3rd.

**jonboy79** · 02-12-2013, 01:36 PM

Originally Posted by StingerNLG

Rodgers sucks.

Actually, I just forgot about him. I'd put him 2nd and Flacco 3rd.

I figured u forgot him and meant to have him at 1 or 2....

**callahan09** · 02-12-2013, 01:50 PM

Originally Posted by Strange Bru

I know I shouldn't watch ESPN SportsCenter if I want objective reporting on the Ravens, but the only thing they could bring themselves to say about the upcoming Joe Flacco contract.negotiations was how he is going to get a contract worth $20,000,000.00 a year and in the regular season he ranked 25 in the league, between Jake Locker an Michael Vick. What they continue to ignore is the wins and losses for the past 5 years, playoff appearances, playoff wins, and Super Bowl win and MVP. It's frustrating because he has played every game in the past 5 years, Brady, Manning, Roethlisberger, Brees, and a lot of other QBs can't say that. I'm just tired of all of the haters, I hope Ray Lewis shuts these morons up when he starts working for ESPN.

They're also saying he was 25th according to their made-up "Total QBR" statistic, which who the hell knows how the subjective quality of its ranking is actually determined. Flacco had the 12th best traditional quarterback rating in the league, he had one of the lowest INT% ratings as well (top 5), and he won more games than every single player with a lower passer rating than he had, and if you ask me all that makes it mighty damn hard to say that ANY of those players were better than him, and yet ESPN's rating has gone and said that 12 out of 20 of those guys who had a lower rating than him, worse turnover rate, and worse winning percentage, actually had better seasons? Ridiculous.

Actually, if you include post-season statistics then Flacco had a 93.4 QB Rating in 2012, a very good number, and good for 10th best in the league. Last year that would have been 8th in the league, and 2 years ago it would have been 6th. It would have been 10th in 2009 and 7th in 2008. So a rating that high is somewhere in the 6th to 10th best range every season, so I'd call that pretty good. And why shouldn't you include the full body of work into the discussion? Regular season isn't the whole story if you've played in the post-season as well.