sith13 1,746 Posted December 1, 2017 Share Posted December 1, 2017 Interestingly Ravens won 2 SBs with great defense and questionable QBs. The mistake was that they paid the questionable QB and that didn't work out for them. Flacco is nothing but a product of the system. Smith could easily be a similar QB just like most others in the NFL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KCSLC2008 606 Posted December 1, 2017 Share Posted December 1, 2017 Interestingly Ravens won 2 SBs with great defense and questionable QBs. The mistake was that they paid the questionable QB and that didn't work out for them. Flacco is nothing but a product of the system. Smith could easily be a similar QB just like most others in the NFL. I don't think they paid Trent Dilfer after they won. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Handswarmer 645 Posted December 1, 2017 Author Share Posted December 1, 2017 Flacco is so ridiculously overpaid.... He received a $22 MILLION signing bonus in addition to a 6 year $120 MILLION contract, to produce approximately 3,600 yards and 20 TDs per season... Just insanity, and you know it is Hands. Never said he wasn't over-paid.... Almost every QB in the NFL is over paid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Handswarmer 645 Posted December 1, 2017 Author Share Posted December 1, 2017 But he won a ring, which supposedly trumps everything. Flacco has always been overrated. He lucked into his best supporting cast and an ideal Super Bowl matchup against a sorry quarterback during a contract year. Then he cashed in. I don't think you could be any wrong-er....LOL Best Supporting cast? His WR's were ranked 27th (Bolidin) and 32nd (Torrey Smith) in yds respectively.... His TE was ranked 11th in yds.... His RB was ranked 11th in yds His defense was ranked 12th in PPG..... Oh and they fired the Offensive Coordinator halfway thru the season.... You really blow whatever credibility you have when you post shit like this....then you want us to take you seriously about AS.....Good grief Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Handswarmer 645 Posted December 1, 2017 Author Share Posted December 1, 2017 Interestingly Ravens won 2 SBs with great defense and questionable QBs. The mistake was that they paid the questionable QB and that didn't work out for them. Flacco is nothing but a product of the system. Smith could easily be a similar QB just like most others in the NFL. Dilfer is the only Championship winning QB in the history of the NFL to not return the next season while not retiring. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xen 1,010,220 Posted December 1, 2017 Share Posted December 1, 2017 What you're not taking into account, Hands, is that the Ravens suck ass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Handswarmer 645 Posted December 1, 2017 Author Share Posted December 1, 2017 What you're not taking into account, Hands, is that the Ravens suck ass. I am not sure what you are saying here..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xen 1,010,220 Posted December 1, 2017 Share Posted December 1, 2017 I am not sure what you are saying here..... Public edumacation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhataLerror 370 Posted December 2, 2017 Share Posted December 2, 2017 I don't think they paid Trent Dilfer after they won. Their biggest mistake. Dilfer would have been cheaper than Flacco, and the Ravens could have won a second and even a third ring much sooner. Their cap situation might also be better off today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mloe68 1,521 Posted December 2, 2017 Share Posted December 2, 2017 Their biggest mistake. Dilfer would have been cheaper than Flacco, and the Ravens could have won a second and even a third ring much sooner. Their cap situation might also be better off today. You are VERY confused. Flacco was a sophomore in high school in 2001. And if you somehow think their CAP scenario today would have been helped by something that happened 17 years ago, it explains a lot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calichief 3,016 Posted December 2, 2017 Share Posted December 2, 2017 You are VERY confused. Flacco was a sophomore in high school in 2001. And if you somehow think their CAP scenario today would have been helped by something that happened 17 years ago, it explains a lot.Lol! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhataLerror 370 Posted December 2, 2017 Share Posted December 2, 2017 You are VERY confused. Flacco was a sophomore in high school in 2001. And if you somehow think their CAP scenario today would have been helped by something that happened 17 years ago, it explains a lot. The Ravens are in cap trouble because they overpaid a quarterback who wasn't even the primary reason for the team's past Super Bowl success, and that's practically proven by the seasons that followed. The Ravens struggled offensively for years following the release of Dilfer, and after that interim period, Flacco's slightly-better-than-mediocre play gave them hope for the future. Finally they got their Super Bowl win, and they had to worry about the future: Did Flacco's post-season numbers indicate that they had something special under center? If they had stuck to the philosophy that won them a Super Bowl at the end of the 2000 season, they would had won many more games in the aughts decade, and with the defense they had, probably more Super Bowls. I never suggested that 2001's cap number had a bearing on 2017's cap number. I simply argued (as I have elsewhere for years) that the Ravens grossly overpaid Flacco and have suffered since then. In 2000 they got a Super Bowl win with a quarterback to whom they paid far less, and that should have been a model for the future. With you being new here, I wasn't sure where you were coming from. You had an entire thread to look at here, and you decided it would suit you best to set up a straw man rather than argue the point at hand. Regrettable, but I'm familiar with the practice; a lot of people don't stand up in a straight-up argument, and you're another one of them. I'll keep that mind in my future responses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mloe68 1,521 Posted December 2, 2017 Share Posted December 2, 2017 The Ravens are in cap trouble because they overpaid a quarterback who wasn't even the primary reason for the team's past Super Bowl success, and that's practically proven by the seasons that followed. The Ravens struggled offensively for years following the release of Dilfer, and after that interim period, Flacco's slightly-better-than-mediocre play gave them hope for the future. Finally they got their Super Bowl win, and they had to worry about the future: Did Flacco's post-season numbers indicate that they had something special under center? If they had stuck to the philosophy that won them a Super Bowl at the end of the 2000 season, they would had won many more games in the aughts decade, and with the defense they had, probably more Super Bowls. I never suggested that 2001's cap number had a bearing on 2017's cap number. I simply argued (as I have elsewhere for years) that the Ravens grossly overpaid Flacco and have suffered since then. In 2000 they got a Super Bowl win with a quarterback to whom they paid far less, and that should have been a model for the future. With you being new here, I wasn't sure where you were coming from. You had an entire thread to look at here, and you decided it would suit you best to set up a straw man rather than argue the point at hand. Regrettable, but I'm familiar with the practice; a lot of people don't stand up in a straight-up argument, and you're another one of them. I'll keep that mind in my future responses. For you to not know that Joe Flacco came many years after Trent Dilfer is one thing. For you to make that lack of understand of the facts the premise for your argument and then try to make me the fall guy for pointing it out is laughable. I've seen every home start by a Chiefs QB since 1990. I read many different opinions from all kinds of people who follow, have played in and even coached in this league for years. And I get into a lot of analytics that look at stats from all types of angles. I don't even remotely claim my opinions are the absolute truth, but I'm extremely leery of anyone that does for good reason. Especially when their grasp of history is lacking. That said you are 100 percent right that Flaccos contract has hurt the Ravens by taking to much CAP space for the production he provides.But what your missing is that drafting him is also a big piece of why they won a Lombardi Trophy. He was historically good and made huge clutch plays we haven't seen around here since Jan 1994. And furthermore your again missing a huge fact and that is the reality he was not overpaid until 2015! So I completely agree they shouldn't have given him that huge extension after the Super Bowl title. But drafting him was a key to their overall success. They don't win the Suoer Bowl without his historic playoff performance in 2013. And furthermore.anyone that was at the playoff game at Arrowhead in 2011 could see why we would have been much better off drafting Flacco in 2008 rather than settling for trading for Matt Cassel in 2009. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xen 1,010,220 Posted December 2, 2017 Share Posted December 2, 2017 The Ravens are in cap trouble because they overpaid a quarterback who wasn't even the primary reason for the team's past Super Bowl success, and that's practically proven by the seasons that followed. The Ravens struggled offensively for years following the release of Dilfer, and after that interim period, Flacco's slightly-better-than-mediocre play gave them hope for the future. Finally they got their Super Bowl win, and they had to worry about the future: Did Flacco's post-season numbers indicate that they had something special under center? If they had stuck to the philosophy that won them a Super Bowl at the end of the 2000 season, they would had won many more games in the aughts decade, and with the defense they had, probably more Super Bowls. I never suggested that 2001's cap number had a bearing on 2017's cap number. I simply argued (as I have elsewhere for years) that the Ravens grossly overpaid Flacco and have suffered since then. In 2000 they got a Super Bowl win with a quarterback to whom they paid far less, and that should have been a model for the future. With you being new here, I wasn't sure where you were coming from. You had an entire thread to look at here, and you decided it would suit you best to set up a straw man rather than argue the point at hand. Regrettable, but I'm familiar with the practice; a lot of people don't stand up in a straight-up argument, and you're another one of them. I'll keep that mind in my future responses. Just like we're in trouble now because we overpaid Alex. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieHard 2,061 Posted December 2, 2017 Share Posted December 2, 2017 QB is crazy in this league. Flacco, Smith, Bortles, Brisset, Taylor, Mariota, Eli, Keenum, keep naming away. They are mediocre at best. They basically have to not suck too bad. We are in a serious QB drought in the NFL. Once Brees, Brady and Rogers are gone, it is going to be rough sailing if you are a fan of elite QBs. A return to running game, or do we tweak the rules even further to help the passing game. I hope not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhataLerror 370 Posted December 3, 2017 Share Posted December 3, 2017 For you to not know that Joe Flacco came many years after Trent Dilfer is one thing.... I don't really care about your tenure as a Chiefs fan. And the fact that you try to make me appear ignorant about when Trent Dilfer came into the NFL shows how wanting you are in the actual argument here: There is little non-stat-based evidence that Joe Flacco is a better quarterback than Trent Dilfer was, and Dilfer was a heck of a lot cheaper on the cap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhataLerror 370 Posted December 3, 2017 Share Posted December 3, 2017 Just like we're in trouble now because we overpaid Alex. It's OK, you'll get to enjoy first-rate sandlotting soon enough. Believe me, it's not better than what you've been seeing. It's worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xen 1,010,220 Posted December 3, 2017 Share Posted December 3, 2017 It's OK, you'll get to enjoy first-rate sandlotting soon enough. Believe me, it's not better than what you've been seeing. It's worse.Disagree Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Handswarmer 645 Posted December 4, 2017 Author Share Posted December 4, 2017 You are VERY confused. Flacco was a sophomore in high school in 2001. And if you somehow think their CAP scenario today would have been helped by something that happened 17 years ago, it explains a lot. This is why we can't take him serious anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Handswarmer 645 Posted December 4, 2017 Author Share Posted December 4, 2017 I don't really care about your tenure as a Chiefs fan. And the fact that you try to make me appear ignorant about when Trent Dilfer came into the NFL shows how wanting you are in the actual argument here: There is little non-stat-based evidence that Joe Flacco is a better quarterback than Trent Dilfer was, and Dilfer was a heck of a lot cheaper on the cap. Um, he was talking about Flacco being in High School..... God, you are lost.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BroncoStud 3,253 Posted December 4, 2017 Share Posted December 4, 2017 QB is crazy in this league. Flacco, Smith, Bortles, Brisset, Taylor, Mariota, Eli, Keenum, keep naming away. They are mediocre at best. They basically have to not suck too bad. We are in a serious QB drought in the NFL. Once Brees, Brady and Rogers are gone, it is going to be rough sailing if you are a fan of elite QBs. A return to running game, or do we tweak the rules even further to help the passing game. I hope not. Disagree on Keenum. He has been very good this season. Sometimes you just need the right amount of time in the league, the right system, the right coach, and it comes together. Keenum is having that sort of season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Handswarmer 645 Posted December 4, 2017 Author Share Posted December 4, 2017 The Ravens are in cap trouble because they overpaid a quarterback who wasn't even the primary reason for the team's past Super Bowl success, and that's practically proven by the seasons that followed. The Ravens struggled offensively for years following the release of Dilfer, and after that interim period, Flacco's slightly-better-than-mediocre play gave them hope for the future. Finally they got their Super Bowl win, and they had to worry about the future: Did Flacco's post-season numbers indicate that they had something special under center? If they had stuck to the philosophy that won them a Super Bowl at the end of the 2000 season, they would had won many more games in the aughts decade, and with the defense they had, probably more Super Bowls. I never suggested that 2001's cap number had a bearing on 2017's cap number. I simply argued (as I have elsewhere for years) that the Ravens grossly overpaid Flacco and have suffered since then. In 2000 they got a Super Bowl win with a quarterback to whom they paid far less, and that should have been a model for the future. With you being new here, I wasn't sure where you were coming from. You had an entire thread to look at here, and you decided it would suit you best to set up a straw man rather than argue the point at hand. Regrettable, but I'm familiar with the practice; a lot of people don't stand up in a straight-up argument, and you're another one of them. I'll keep that mind in my future responses. This has to be to most uninformed thing you have aever written. To not have any basic knowledge of the situation, yet write 3 paragraphs of garbage is beyond the pale. And to top it off, the thread was about Alex Smith, not Joe Flacco. Just sign off now.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Handswarmer 645 Posted December 4, 2017 Author Share Posted December 4, 2017 Disagree on Keenum. He has been very good this season. Sometimes you just need the right amount of time in the league, the right system, the right coach, and it comes together. Keenum is having that sort of season. I agree- didn't look anything like the guy who 12 of 26 for 146 yds vs us in 2015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SEMO 6,811 Posted December 4, 2017 Share Posted December 4, 2017 Yep. Keenum has developed nicely on a very solid football team, all the way around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
West 6,714 Posted December 4, 2017 Share Posted December 4, 2017 I missed the memo. I thought we could mention that Flacco sucks on every thread in CTO. w Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.