My Flacco Theory

**purplepoe** · 11-22-2012, 09:17 AM

Originally Posted by HoustonRaven

Huh?

I don't who "they" are, and I've never heard that comparison before.

This is what I'm saying.

Anyone who thinks Flacco is on par with Sanchez is clueless. I freely admit that. It's ridiculous.

And like you, I've never heard that comparision. I'm sure some yahoo has said it but so what? Like I said, a complete minority.

Anyway, it seems like that this will become (as it always done) a circular argument.

Happy Thanksgiving to everyone.

PP

**The Excellector** · 11-22-2012, 09:17 AM

Originally Posted by HoustonRaven

Huh?

I don't who "they" are, and I've never heard that comparison before.

That went down at one point last year. On this board.

**RavensNTerps** · 11-22-2012, 11:18 AM

Originally Posted by purplepoe

This is what I'm saying.

Anyone who thinks Flacco is on par with Sanchez is clueless. I freely admit that. It's ridiculous.

And like you, I've never heard that comparision. I'm sure some yahoo has said it but so what? Like I said, a complete minority.

Anyway, it seems like that this will become (as it always done) a circular argument.

Happy Thanksgiving to everyone.

PP

Yup. There's a clear upper and a clear lower class in the NFL but the middle class is pretty much interchangeable. Sanchez is part of that lower class.

**purplepoe** · 11-22-2012, 11:53 AM

Originally Posted by StingerNLG

But if he's being allowed to lobby for or call his own plays now, such as the 3rd and 2 call against the Steelers, then I don't think the Cam issue is there anymore.

I bet right now there are 9 teams easily who would love to have Flacco over their QB without even blinking an eye. The Eagles, Browns, Chiefs, Cardinals, Jaguars, Titans, Bills, 49ers, and Raiders would love to have Joe Flacco right now if he was available.

And if anyone here would rather have Michael Vick, whoever QB's the Browns (over multiple years), Matt Cassel, or Carson Palmer over Joe Flacco right now, than I have nothing for you. Right now the only QB's I would absolutely take over Flacco would be the obvious choices; Peyton Manning, Tom Brady, and maybe Drew Brees.

So you're telling me there are only two QBs you'd absolutely take over Flacco and one you "might" in Brees?

If I somehow misinterpreted you, please let me know.

PP

**StingerNLG** · 11-22-2012, 12:58 PM

Originally Posted by purplepoe

So you're telling me there are only two QBs you'd absolutely take over Flacco and one you "might" in Brees?

If I somehow misinterpreted you, please let me know.

PP

Yep, that's what I'm saying.

**purplepoe** · 11-22-2012, 01:15 PM

Originally Posted by StingerNLG

Yep, that's what I'm saying.

Okey doke.

PP

**HoustonRaven** · 11-22-2012, 01:16 PM

Originally Posted by StingerNLG

Yep, that's what I'm saying.

Interesting.

So who are the two you'd take over Flacco? I'm assuming Brady and Rodgers?

**purplepoe** · 11-22-2012, 01:18 PM

Originally Posted by HoustonRaven

Interesting.

So who are the two you'd take over Flacco? I'm assuming Brady and Rodgers?

From earlier in the thread.

"Right now the only QB's I would absolutely take over Flacco would be the obvious choices; Peyton Manning, Tom Brady, and maybe Drew Brees."

PP

**HoustonRaven** · 11-22-2012, 01:24 PM

From a raw talent perspective, I'd take Brees & Ben over Joe.

**RavensNTerps** · 11-22-2012, 01:32 PM

I mean I don't even disagree with Stinger all that much. There's a very clear upper class. Anyone who wouldn't trade Joe Flacco for Brees, Rodgers, Brady, or P Manning is crazy. Beyond that, shit, take Stafford, Ponder, Cutler, Schaub, Luck, Locker, Palmer, Rivers, Dalton, Flacco, Newton, Vick, Eli Manning, Ryan, Freeman, Wilson, Alex Smith, Bradford, Romo and Fitzpatrick and switch any of them out with each other and you're probably facing a no net gain scenario.

**StingerNLG** · 11-22-2012, 01:52 PM

Originally Posted by purplepoe

From earlier in the thread.

"Right now the only QB's I would absolutely take over Flacco would be the obvious choices; Peyton Manning, Tom Brady, and maybe Drew Brees."

PP

Good, you did not misinterpret me.

**StingerNLG** · 11-22-2012, 01:53 PM

Originally Posted by RavensNTerps

I mean I don't even disagree with Stinger all that much. There's a very clear upper class. Anyone who wouldn't trade Joe Flacco for Brees, Rodgers, Brady, or P Manning is crazy. Beyond that, shit, take Stafford, Ponder, Cutler, Schaub, Luck, Locker, Palmer, Rivers, Dalton, Flacco, Newton, Vick, Eli Manning, Ryan, Freeman, Wilson, Alex Smith, Bradford, Romo and Fitzpatrick and switch any of them out with each other and you're probably facing a no net gain scenario.

A case could be made for Rodgers too. So there, four. Outside of that, this right here.

**purplepoe** · 11-22-2012, 02:05 PM

Originally Posted by StingerNLG

Good, you did not misinterpret me.

Nope, I already acknowledged that you'd take Joe Flacco over Aaron Rodgers!

Just a difference of opinion.

Many people say that those who don't view Flacco as a top 5 QB don't appreciate him especially since the crap we as Ravens fans have seen at QB over the years.

I look at it the other way. I think that crap we've seen has skewed some people's view of Flacco and elevated him to a level that I just don't see.

I think the Ravens should and will re-sign him. I just don't view him in the same light as many on this board do.

PP

**Dade** · 11-22-2012, 02:23 PM

Originally Posted by purplepoe

I look at it the other way. I think that crap we've seen has skewed some people's view of Flacco and elevated him to a level that I just don't see.

Interesting hadn't thought about it from that perspective.

I would take Flacco over most of the second tier QBs because he still has alot of upside. 4.5 years in and Flacco's ceiling is still sky high. Can't say that about many of the 2nd tier guys.

**purplepoe** · 11-22-2012, 02:33 PM

Originally Posted by Dade

Interesting hadn't thought about it from that perspective.

I would take Flacco over most of the second tier QBs because he still has alot of upside. 4.5 years in and Flacco's ceiling is still sky high. Can't say that about many of the 2nd tier guys.

As RnT has said, it's really a clusterF after the clear cut guys.

I'd take Flacco over some but not all.

Not a real slight I don't think.

PP

**Terpsfan82** · 11-22-2012, 03:27 PM

Originally Posted by purplepoe

Nope, I already acknowledged that you'd take Joe Flacco over Aaron Rodgers!

Just a difference of opinion.

Many people say that those who don't view Flacco as a top 5 QB don't appreciate him especially since the crap we as Ravens fans have seen at QB over the years.

I look at it the other way. I think that crap we've seen has skewed some people's view of Flacco and elevated him to a level that I just don't see.

I think the Ravens should and will re-sign him. I just don't view him in the same light as many on this board do.

PP

This. There's not a G.M. in the league who would take Flacco over Rodgers. I'd be willing to bet. Not one.

**PerpetuallyBored74** · 11-22-2012, 07:05 PM

If you saw the MNF game between the 49ers and Bears, then you might have heard Jon Gruden gushing over the diversity and creativity in the formations and personnel groupings used by the 49ers offense, particularly in their running game.

When the Ravens have been on MNF, can you recall Gruden ever commenting on the diversity or creativity of our offense?

And that's why Flacco can't take the next step--this offense is far too easy for the opposing defenses to prepare for and adjust against, especially since we are often slow to counter those adjustments with our own.
In fact, when you consider that we have arguably the best run blocking guard in Yanda, the best blocking fullback in Leach and an elite RB--a smaller Marshall Faulk--in Rice, then we should have a top 3 rushing attack.

We are currently ranked 16th out of 32 teams in rushing yards per attempt--literally AVERAGE.

We are also ranked 24th and 25th in rushing attempts and rushing yards, though strangely we are tied for 2nd in rushing TDs.

And that actually appears to be the reason for our otherwise improbable 8-2 record, is that we are ranked 7th in Offensive Points and tied for 2nd in Fewest Offensive Turnovers, while ranked 9th in Defensive Points Allowed and 5th in Defensive Turnovers.

Source of Info:
http://www.pro-football-reference.co...s/rav/2012.htm

**RavensQB** · 11-22-2012, 07:34 PM

Originally Posted by purplepoe

From earlier in the thread.

"Right now the only QB's I would absolutely take over Flacco would be the obvious choices; Peyton Manning, Tom Brady, and maybe Drew Brees."

PP

None of the above they all have less than 5 years left. Joe has at least 10...

Joe will not resign with us if CAM is the OC. My guess that is really why talks were cut off.

**bacchys** · 11-22-2012, 08:00 PM

Originally Posted by RavensNTerps

I mean I don't even disagree with Stinger all that much. There's a very clear upper class. Anyone who wouldn't trade Joe Flacco for Brees, Rodgers, Brady, or P Manning is crazy. Beyond that, shit, take Stafford, Ponder, Cutler, Schaub, Luck, Locker, Palmer, Rivers, Dalton, Flacco, Newton, Vick, Eli Manning, Ryan, Freeman, Wilson, Alex Smith, Bradford, Romo and Fitzpatrick and switch any of them out with each other and you're probably facing a no net gain scenario.

I agree with the Rodgers add someone made, but one thing that rarely seems to get brought up in all this is Flacco's toughness and durability. He's started every game of his career. Every. Game. That's not a small thing, as our recent benefit from Roethlisberger getting hurt shows. Roethlisberger is more of an impact player at QB than Flacco, but he's had a harder time staying on the field. Peyton Manning wasn't very good last year because he wasn't in the game.

The problem isn't the offensive system. It's the way Cameron runs it. The Coryell is a tried and true base offense, and there's no reason it can't be updated and adapted to the modern game. It just doesn't seem as if Cameron is the OC to do that. Flacco's numbers would improve dramatically if we worked to get him in rhythm and to disrupt the pass rush with changing tempo on pass plays. We don't do that. We could challenge more secondaries if we had more motion, more crossing routes, and more slants. We don't do much of those, either. We have two decent tight ends who can threaten defenses all over the field, but we don't come out in too many two-tight-end sets. We have the best blocking fullback in the game, but we don't make good use of him.

These things are all fixable, but if Cameron could fix them one would think he would have done it already. It's not just execution. It's the coach's job to put the players into position to succeed, and the Ravens, especially on the road, don't do that. My hope when they brought in Harbaugh- the special teams guy- was that he wouldn't be wedded to one offense or one way of doing things. I don't necessarily think he is, but I do wonder if he's delegating too much responsibility for setting the offensive philosophy onto Cameron- deferring to his greater offensive credentials.