So no one is going to say it

[dc.]

I posted when the season started that Trest's offense was #1 in scoring last year in

Chicago. He has a top 10 here with absolutely no weapons since SR went down.

 

As for Joe, he hasn't been consistent since SB 47. Even in NE last February he screwed up that

last pass. There was time left for a couple of short passes over the middle. That was probably's

Kube's call but Joe changed the play when NE showed him something he saw on film when they

played GB and GB beat them. So he checked off and threw the INT losing the game.

 

Torrey had his man beat. Had Joe thrown to the outside of the hash marks it would have been a TD but he threw inside straight in the CBs waiting hand.

 

Guys on the other board said oh, Flacco has to be perfect all the time. You do if you're going to the

SB and Joe screwed up changing the play and then missing. Fans still tried to blame Torry for

not taking the ball out of the guys hands. ILMAO

 

See, but this last part is where you lose me...

 

Joe has to be perfect all the time because he's being paid a bagillion dollars? I can almost buy that. Not fully, but almost.

 

Joe has to be perfect all the time because... "that's what it takes to win?" ... That I can't buy. Joe has to be perfect, but the rest of the team, well, you know... Because my recollection of that game is that we were TWICE leading by 14 points. But the only conversation we're having is about Flacco. That's where you lose me. (Joe's QBR in that game, by the by, was better than Brady's).

 

Joe's just not the problem. He's not perfect. But he's not this team's problem. And I still don't know what anyone thinks is going to come along to replace him and magically outperform him. You can criticize his NE game all you want - really, you're criticizing one play - but I'm curious where you get the four touchdowns and 300 yards passing with no sacks for the other 59 minutes of the game?

 

Despite all this, here's what I'll give you: the fact that our team has a "high powered offense" by stats is misleading and you won't hear me using it as an excuse. We get lots of points and lots of yards late in games when we're behind.

[papasmurfbell]

Because we're not all idiots.

Yeah nobody thought Ngata would be traded either.

 

 

 

 

See, but this last part is where you lose me...

 

Joe has to be perfect all the time because he's being paid a bagillion dollars? I can almost buy that. Not fully, but almost.

 

Joe has to be perfect all the time because... "that's what it takes to win?" ... That I can't buy. Joe has to be perfect, but the rest of the team, well, you know... Because my recollection of that game is that we were TWICE leading by 14 points. But the only conversation we're having is about Flacco. That's where you lose me. (Joe's QBR in that game, by the by, was better than Brady's).

 

Joe's just not the problem. He's not perfect. But he's not this team's problem. And I still don't know what anyone thinks is going to come along to replace him and magically outperform him. You can criticize his NE game all you want - really, you're criticizing one play - but I'm curious where you get the four touchdowns and 300 yards passing with no sacks for the other 59 minutes of the game?

 

Despite all this, here's what I'll give you: the fact that our team has a "high powered offense" by stats is misleading and you won't hear me using it as an excuse. We get lots of points and lots of yards late in games when we're behind.

Look at Brady. At times while in NE his D blew and he knew it. He knew he had to put up huge points to maintain leads and he would do just that. Joe can't do it. It isnt in his DNA.

[Spen]

He will never admit that

Why would he? He's not looking for serious discussion. He's just trolling. Successfully.

[papasmurfbell]

"Did you realize the Ravens are in the top 10 NFL offenses right now? Averaging 357.3 yards per game. 15th in scoring (23.8 ppg)."

http://espn.go.com/nfl/statistics/team/_/stat/givetake/sort/giveTotal

Top half in giving away the ball.

 

http://espn.go.com/nfl/statistics/team/_/stat/givetake/sort/giveInterceptions

Top 6 in throwing picks.

 

So when was it that a team gets points from just getting yds?

 

 

http://espn.go.com/nfl/statistics/team/_/stat/total/sort/rushingYards

Bmore is 17 on the ground. Does anyone remember what Joes w/l record was when he threw the ball all the time and didn't rely on his run game?

 

The Ravens are 15 in scoring bu they are almost 12 yds a game less than the leader.

 

 

The Ravens are just above average for scoring. 23.31875 So they are running dead middle of the pack.

 

Sobasically this tells me that the Ravens are pretty good at getting empty yds. Move the ball and don't put it in the end zone. Also eventually they like o give the ball away, especially Joe. So a D is basically playing bend don't break on the Ravens waiting to the statistically probably turnover. This is an offense to be proud of?

[dc.]

Yeah nobody thought Ngata would be traded either.

 

 

 

Look at Brady. At times while in NE his D blew and he knew it. He knew he had to put up huge points to maintain leads and he would do just that. Joe can't do it. It isnt in his DNA.

And no one is saying Joe is Brady, or close. But if Brady lost those games, I'm betting few people would blame him... Yet Joe loses a playoff game against the #1 seed on the road throwing four touchdowns and getting two separate 14pt leads... And let's call it his fault? Bottom line: pick another example. His game was as good as Bradys that day and he still can't buy a vote.

[papasmurfbell]

But I look at his attempts and when they are low the Ravens are likely winners and when they are high the Ravens are liely losers. That says that when Joe is in the position to carry the team a loss is the most likely outcome. Go back to 4 completions for a win. Any slap nuts could have won that game.

[cravnravn]

Game against new England is definitely a bad example, you don't get 14 point leads twice in a playoff game without the play of your qb,

 

As far as the last play interception, we will disagree T-bird, I find total fault with Torrey,the season is on the line you make an attempt on the ball at all cost. If that ball was SSS way we would have been in the AFC championship game.

[cravnravn]

But I look at his attempts and when they are low the Ravens are likely winners and when they are high the Ravens are liely losers. That says that when Joe is in the position to carry the team a loss is the most likely outcome. Go back to 4 completions for a win. Any slap nuts could have won that game.

And when the attempts are high it usually means we are behind on the scoreboard.

[papasmurfbell]

Game against new England is definitely a bad example, you don't get 14 point leads twice in a playoff game without the play of your qb,

 

As far as the last play interception, we will disagree T-bird, I find total fault with Torrey,the season is on the line you make an attempt on the ball at all cost. If that ball was SSS way we would have been in the AFC championship game.

So Joe throwing the ball to the wrong place had nothing to do with it.

 

Not always. Sometimes Cam just called tons of pass plays. Joe couldn't carry the team in those games.

[papasmurfbell]

http://russellstreetreport.com/2015/11/05/lombardis-way/what-is-joe-flacco-worth/

 

What is Joe Flacco Worth?

 

Joe Flacco’s cap number next season, as it stands today, is $28.55M. We all know that will change. Joe’s deal was essentially structured as a 3-year deal with a balloon “payment” intended to be refinanced prior to the start of the 2016 season.

The new deal has to happen and it has to happen prior to the new league year in March when the free agency period begins.

But what will it cost?

What is Joe Flacco worth?

If we look at Joe’s statistics since the 2013 season began, the first under his current contract, Flacco has been rather pedestrian.

The passer rating of 81.9 when measured against all other starting quarterbacks this season, ranks 24th. Since the ink on the new contract dried Flacco is 20-20 during the regular season, 21-21 overall.

The passing numbers are average to below average.

The record, right on the average mark.

You are what your record says you are, right?

So if the numbers are your guide, should Joe then receive average pay?

Boy, if it was only that easy.

The Ravens organization is fully aware that a franchise quarterback is a prerequisite for success in the NFL. There’s really no getting around it and for the now, there are no other acceptable options other than Joe. So naturally, they’ll work diligently to get a new deal done. But for how much?

The Ravens could argue that Joe hasn’t performed to the level of his contract and that given the last 2 plus seasons he no longer deserves to be among the highest paid quarterbacks. The leverage he had coming off a Super Bowl MVP is gone.

Flacco and his agent Joe Linta could counter the Ravens claims contending that:

• In 2013 he was hamstrung by a bad running game and a rotten offensive line.
• In 2014 the team would have advanced to the AFC Championship Game if not for a leaky secondary
• In 2015 he’s now forced to throw to four undrafted free agents and a recently acquired receiver from St. Louis – a former 4th round pick.

Oh and let’s not forget that he’s had a different offensive coordinator in each of the last 4 seasons.

Each is a legit excuse preventing the team to really understand who the real Joe Flacco is and what he’s worth. How can they choose to spend so much on Joe and not surround him with the talent to maximize the return on investment?

So once again it would appear that Flacco and Linta have the team over a barrel. They have all the leverage. And don’t think for a second Linta won’t use it.

After the sides came to the table to sign the last deal in 2013, Linta shortly after leaving the table shared these thoughts on the protracted negotiating process in a USA Today interview:

“[The early dispute was about] $1 million six years from now, in the base salary non-guaranteed money, and they walked away. It cost them $35 million. So I have no sympathy. None.”

And then Linta followed up with this doozy.

“I’ve never in my life seen a dumber move. I guess people can say, ‘Well, Joe was dumb, too.’ It could have been (dumb), God forbid, if he got hurt. But $1 million to Steve Bisciotti six years from now? That’s like 100 bucks for you or me today.”

Not very tactful but certainly on point.

The Ravens waited and they were boxed in just as they have been in the past with players like Ray Rice, Terrell Suggs andHaloti Ngata.

We’ll find out in 4-5 months if once more if they’ve been boxed in and forced to overpay yet again.

 

 

[dc.]

But I look at his attempts and when they are low the Ravens are likely winners and when they are high the Ravens are liely losers. That says that when Joe is in the position to carry the team a loss is the most likely outcome. Go back to 4 completions for a win. Any slap nuts could have won that game.

 

That's fair on some level, but the same is true of most quarterbacks: lower attempts correlate with higher win percentage. Now, the line of where too many throws is may differ by QB... But it also depends on the kind of O we run and the tools we have. The Ravens have always been a run-oriented team and never invested heavily in a receiving corps (or O coordinator to do otherwise). Kubiak of course showed another side of that, and Joe showed he could work within it.

 

Again, to me the argument is just not as complete as some make it out to be.

[thundercleetz]

This whole discussion is irrelevant. It's obvious Joe is going to lead us to eight straight wins and get us in the playoffs at 10-6, then win a game on the road like he always does.

[papasmurfbell]

 

That's fair on some level, but the same is true of most quarterbacks: lower attempts correlate with higher win percentage. Now, the line of where too many throws is may differ by QB... But it also depends on the kind of O we run and the tools we have. The Ravens have always been a run-oriented team and never invested heavily in a receiving corps (or O coordinator to do otherwise). Kubiak of course showed another side of that, and Joe showed he could work within it.

 

Again, to me the argument is just not as complete as some make it out to be.

But again Manning, Brady, or Rodgers throws the ball a ton and they win at a really high clip also. Joe is paid commensurate or better than them so that should be expected os him as well.

[cravnravn]

But again Manning, Brady, or Rodgers throws the ball a ton and they win at a really high clip also. Joe is paid commensurate or better than them so that should be expected os him as well.

I'm sorry but doesn't Romo, Dalton, Kapp, Tannenehill make just as much? What do they have 3 playoff wins between the 4 of them.

[RavenMad]

The Ravens could argue that Joe hasn’t performed to the level of his contract and that given the last 2 plus seasons he no longer deserves to be among the highest paid quarterbacks. The leverage he had coming off a Super Bowl MVP is gone.

Flacco and his agent Joe Linta could counter the Ravens claims contending that:

• In 2013 he was hamstrung by a bad running game and a rotten offensive line.

• In 2014 the team would have advanced to the AFC Championship Game if not for a leaky secondary

• In 2015 he’s now forced to throw to four undrafted free agents and a recently acquired receiver from St. Louis – a former 4th round pick.

Oh and let’s not forget that he’s had a different offensive coordinator in each of the last 4 seasons.

 

2013 - Seems like a weak argument. He was probably more hamstrung by the OC than a weak running game/O-Line.

2014 - Yeah team would have advanced to AFC game with a better secondary but they couldn't afford it.

2015 - Forced to throw to UDFAs and 4th round pick because there is no money left to pay anyone else.

4 different OCs yes, but Kubiak was a good one and Trestman has kept the same verbiage and playbook.

 

It's simple, when we are negotiating with Joe we need to go around his agent and stare Joe in the eyes and tell him to take less money so we can surround him with some more talent to get more rings. If he thinks that is a bad idea then we have to move on. He is not getting us back to the Superbowl on his own. Lets not kid ourselves here, Joe is still going to get paid handsomely but that extra $3m a year we save could help get a top notch WR or keep a good O-linemen.

[papasmurfbell]

I'm sorry but doesn't Romo, Dalton, Kapp, Tannenehill make just as much? What do they have 3 playoff wins between the 4 of them.

 

2013 - Seems like a weak argument. He was probably more hamstrung by the OC than a weak running game/O-Line.

2014 - Yeah team would have advanced to AFC game with a better secondary but they couldn't afford it.

2015 - Forced to throw to UDFAs and 4th round pick because there is no money left to pay anyone else.

4 different OCs yes, but Kubiak was a good one and Trestman has kept the same verbiage and playbook.

 

It's simple, when we are negotiating with Joe we need to go around his agent and stare Joe in the eyes and tell him to take less money so we can surround him with some more talent to get more rings. If he thinks that is a bad idea then we have to move on. He is not getting us back to the Superbowl on his own. Lets not kid ourselves here, Joe is still going to get paid handsomely but that extra $3m a year we save could help get a top notch WR or keep a good O-linemen.

So how does that work when Joe is in NJ and Joe is taking the phone calls?

 

 

I'm sorry but doesn't Romo, Dalton, Kapp, Tannenehill make just as much? What do they have 3 playoff wins between the 4 of them.

I said Romo's deal was crap. Kapp's deal is not that bad. I also thought Dalton's deal was stupid.

 

 

http://www.sportingnews.com/nfl-news/4660089-49ers-colin-kaepernick-benched-future-trade-salary-contract

 

The guarantee package was low — just $12.9 million fully guaranteed at signing, about $20-$25 million less in real guarantees than other big-name QBs were earning at the time. He negotiated large injury guarantees, but as a requirement of those guarantees, he had to take out an insurance policy with the 49ers as the benefactor to cover those payments. Those guarantees don’t become real guarantees until April 1 of a given year, giving San Francisco all of free agency to decide on Kaepernick’s fate. He also had $2 million a year tied to being on the roster. (These were unheard of contract mechanisms for a player of this magnitude.)

The 49ers further protected themselves with a small signing bonus, which is used to spread salary cap charges equally over the life of a contract. But when a player is released, all unaccounted-for money accelerates to cap — also known as dead money. The larger the signing bonus, the harder it becomes to release a player from his contract because of this factor.

 

The 9ers made a really smart deal. They can escape it and leave Kapp on the hook.

[oldno82]

2013 - Seems like a weak argument. He was probably more hamstrung by the OC than a weak running game/O-Line.

2014 - Yeah team would have advanced to AFC game with a better secondary but they couldn't afford it.

2015 - Forced to throw to UDFAs and 4th round pick because there is no money left to pay anyone else.

4 different OCs yes, but Kubiak was a good one and Trestman has kept the same verbiage and playbook.

 

It's simple, when we are negotiating with Joe we need to go around his agent and stare Joe in the eyes and tell him to take less money so we can surround him with some more talent to get more rings. If he thinks that is a bad idea then we have to move on. He is not getting us back to the Superbowl on his own. Lets not kid ourselves here, Joe is still going to get paid handsomely but that extra $3m a year we save could help get a top notch WR or keep a good O-linemen.

I agree with that strategy. And so far as going around his agent directly to Joe, now would be a good time to start with him here in Baltimore. If Joe goes for a rework that sustanially drops his cap hit, then keep him. If he doesn't, we have to let him go. The dead money would be unwelcome but at $3 million less that the cap hit we take if he doesn't rework the contract, we can improve the team. 2016 would be another tough year without Joe and you probably wouldn't see great improvement in 2017 either. By 2018 the Ravens should be potent again.

 

This is a long haul issue

 

[DC edit: I hit edit not quote by accident, sorry. Fixed now. Reply below. Working in phone has limits]

[papasmurfbell]

That is how I would assess it.

[dc.]

I'm not sure anyone is arguing Joe is underpaid. And I certainly see arguments for him being overpaid. But as Crav points out, the market seems set at his level - Brady type and Flacco type players.

 

So after all this, the question seems to me to come back to... What's the alternative? Renegotiate, sure. But if that fails?

 

There is no solid strategy for this team to lose Flacco and maintain performance level at the position (even if you don't love it) for less money... And I'd argue there's little argument that his performance is replaceable at all in an acceptable fashion given how this team is built, positioned, etc, especially when you consider the franchise's history with QB development.

[dc.]

 

I agree with that strategy. And so far as going around his agent directly to Joe, now would be a good time to start with him here in Baltimore. If Joe goes for a rework that sustanially drops his cap hit, then keep him. If he doesn't, we have to let him go. The dead money would be unwelcome but at $3 million less that the cap hit we take if he doesn't rework the contract, we can improve the team. 2016 would be another tough year without Joe and you probably wouldn't see great improvement in 2017 either. By 2018 the Ravens should be potent again.

 

This is a long haul issue

 

[DC edit: I hit edit not quote by accident, sorry. Fixed now. Reply below. Working in phone has limits]

I can't get behind this at all. Renegotiate yes. Cut no.

 

"Hi, we'd like to forfeit about 15%of our allotted cap figure for two years in order to receive lesser production from the QB position and gain virtually nothing to improve the team with, especially once it's spent on a replacement QB." ?

[oldno82]

Yes but you can't afford to spend 20% of your total cap (and increasing the next year) for 53 guys year after year starting next year. Better to take the dead money than commit that much of your resources on one guy.

 

I like Joe and think he can be effective with the right supporting cast but I can't see devoting that much of the cap to one guy. If you do that you wind up talent poor at the other positions and we already are.

[cravnravn]

All it takes is one goofy owner to overpay and the market is screwed, in the case of Flacco he was not overpaid, his credentials backed up his pay. But what followed,is what screwed up the market.

 

Romo, Tannehill, Dalton receiving just as big contracts and producing nowhere near the success of what Joe did. Tannehill and Dalton haven't sniffed a playoff victory and last year Romo finally got his first playoff win.

 

As far as surrounding Joe with talent that's on the scouting and coaching staff. And speaking of the coaching staff, Joe's been here 7 1/2 years and been through what 5 offensive coordinators? That's unheard of with a franchise qb, manning Brady nor Rodgers never went through a revolving door of OC's like that.

[dc.]

Yes but you can't afford to spend 20% of your total cap (and increasing the next year) for 53 guys year after year starting next year. Better to take the dead money than commit that much of your resources on one guy.

 

I like Joe and think he can be effective with the right supporting cast but I can't see devoting that much of the cap to one guy. If you do that you wind up talent poor at the other positions and we already are.

But the whole concept of dead money is that you're still committing the call money to the player... They just don't play for you.

[papasmurfbell]

I'm not sure anyone is arguing Joe is underpaid. And I certainly see arguments for him being overpaid. But as Crav points out, the market seems set at his level - Brady type and Flacco type players.

 

So after all this, the question seems to me to come back to... What's the alternative? Renegotiate, sure. But if that fails?

 

There is no solid strategy for this team to lose Flacco and maintain performance level at the position (even if you don't love it) for less money... And I'd argue there's little argument that his performance is replaceable at all in an acceptable fashion given how this team is built, positioned, etc, especially when you consider the franchise's history with QB development.

You go the draft and find a cheaper younger alternative.

 

 

Yes but you can't afford to spend 20% of your total cap (and increasing the next year) for 53 guys year after year starting next year. Better to take the dead money than commit that much of your resources on one guy.

 

I like Joe and think he can be effective with the right supporting cast but I can't see devoting that much of the cap to one guy. If you do that you wind up talent poor at the other positions and we already are.

Bingo.

 

 

All it takes is one goofy owner to overpay and the market is screwed, in the case of Flacco he was not overpaid, his credentials backed up his pay. But what followed,is what screwed up the market.

 

Romo, Tannehill, Dalton receiving just as big contracts and producing nowhere near the success of what Joe did. Tannehill and Dalton haven't sniffed a playoff victory and last year Romo finally got his first playoff win.

 

As far as surrounding Joe with talent that's on the scouting and coaching staff. And speaking of the coaching staff, Joe's been here 7 1/2 years and been through what 5 offensive coordinators? That's unheard of with a franchise qb, manning Brady nor Rodgers never went through a revolving door of OC's like that.

Joe was overpaid. He was paid huge money on one thing wins. If you look more closely at his stats he was less intrinsic to those wins than many want to believe. He was riding a running game and a solid D. He won most of the time when his skills were used the least. Joe is a game mang and $120 is way to much for a game mang. No you just make the conscious decision not to chase the idiot owners down the rabbit hole.

[cravnravn]

It's not a 120 million, its 60 million.