Bone Head Move Of The Decade Goes To The Ravens

[amfootball]

I would tend to think that Flacco would have been Flacco with or without the new contract. He really was just "above average " during the regular season. IMO , much of the post season stuff was due to some pretty great luck and Boldin. I can't prove what you say is false but I'm not buying it. No offense , but somehow you have a knack for turning a thread into something that people could argue back and forth for 25 years with neither side CONCLUSIVELY winning the debate. Kinda like the Colts' tanking. I don't mean this as confrontational but it's true.

Ha,ha. I am sorry man. I think it may be built into me.

 

I don't disagree that Flacco was Flacco for most of the season but I think he also knew his contract was on the line which did help spur his play in the playoffs along with Lewis' retirement. I would have loved to see what Flacco would have gotten if the Ravens were eliminated by the Broncos like they should have been. I wonder if he would have even gotten the $16m.

 

It is also interesting to me that his agent is still talking about it. They must have felt really spurned if his story is in fact true.

[House]

Joe played great in the playoffs, but he also had two of the worst statistical games in the regular season as well.

I won't be surprised if he looks miserable next season at times, and very good at other points. It's not like because he won a SB that all his flaws and weaknesses disappeared.

[Dustin]

Oh for goodness sake.

 

You were working so hard to make some sort of case for your lack of support for Flacco.

 

And then you had to go and write that??    Really?

 

I'm hoping you're just tired and not thinking clearly.   I know I have those moments late at night.   Wake up the next morning and wonder what was I thinking?

 

The Tony Romo with one career playoff win and a tsunami of 4th quarter meltdowns is better than the guy with 8 career post season wins, at least one in every year, including a Super Bowl win?  

 

I get that coming from Gavin.   I assumed he'd correct himself once I pointed out his inclusion of Romo.   But no.   He still thinks Barrett Jones is one of the top 3 OL in the last draft no matter what.

 

But now you write that you'd take Romo over Flacco 10 times out of 10?    And you expect me to believe that you'll someday change your mind about Flacco?

 

Now who's kidding who??

 

Playoff wins= Team accomplishment 

 

Tony Romo has one of the highest Passer ratings ever behind a makeshift O-line.

 

At this point Romo is better than Flacco.

[Dustin]

We should get this thread back on topic. I apologize for derailing it.

[dw49]

I know you said that you really don't want to debate this, but I just wanted to point out that Brady was facing a top 5 defense and Flacco was facing the 2nd worst pass defense in the history of the NFL.

 

So I don't think it's really fair to say that he "outplayed" him as if things were equal on the other side of the ball.

 

 

 

If memory serves me right , most thought he had a better game than Brady but you can make that case. But you could always make a similar case. Couldn't you say something like " that particular defense played the game of their lives"  and make the same case in a game where the defense didn't rank highly ? Things will never be equal on both sides of the ball. You have to look at the game and just decide who played better. Flacco no doubt had the better stats and IMO played a better game than Brady. But you can argue it , especially if it serves your argument.

[dw49]

Ha,ha. I am sorry man. I think it may be built into me.

 

I don't disagree that Flacco was Flacco for most of the season but I think he also knew his contract was on the line which did help spur his play in the playoffs along with Lewis' retirement. I would have loved to see what Flacco would have gotten if the Ravens were eliminated by the Broncos like they should have been. I wonder if he would have even gotten the $16m.

 

It is also interesting to me that his agent is still talking about it. They must have felt really spurned if his story is in fact true.

 

 

Good question on the Bronco fluke. I would guess that he would have received something in the 16-17 mill neighborhood as the market jumped a bit after Brees signed. I also agree that his agent should have kept his mouth shut. Nothing like beating the crap out of someone and then laughing at them.

[dw49]

The story actually seems unbelievable, so perhaps it's not true. Agents have been know to twist stories around. Teams don't care about a million in non-guaranteed money at the tail end of a deal, and the Ravens management isn't going to make a "mistake" the way that this is characterized.

 

It all makes so little sense that a more likely scenario is that the Ravens were putting on a show of negotiating to get a feel, but that either this offer was never on the table in the manner the agent describes, or they used the agents counter offer (which they knew would be coming because that's what agents do) as an excuse to yank it.

 

The thing is, while I was very impressed with Flacco at times this past season - particularly in the playoffs - I never was before. The real story here is that anyone would think (prior to this season) that he was worth $16 in the first place, not that the team missed the golden opportunity to overpay him.

 

I'd actually say that if the story IS true, Flacco and or his agents were extremely short-sighted in not grabbing it when they could. It's nice for a QB to have confidence, but his agent's job is to have a grasp of reality.

 

 

 

That's why I qualified my post with "if this story is true." I would tend to it believe as the Raven "brass" would no doubt defend what appears to be a pretty stupid line of thinking in the negotiation process. Also it would be incredibly unprofessional of the agent to say this if not true. As it is ( if true) , he should have kept his mouth shut. 

[Warhorse]

I would take Romo over Flacco 10 times out of 10.

I would take Flacco over Romo 10 times out of 10.

 

But in respect to the OP...Revisionist history always has a clear window to look through. It would be my opinion that winning a SB is so rare for most NFL teams, that if offered a SB in return for having to pay their QB 120 mil the next season, there are probably 18-20 teams that would jump that idea tomorrow. My point is that the team wanted to see the results before paying the money. Had the team paid up front and then get bounced from the playoffs, there would have been a thread here about how they overpaid the bum. Just sayin.

[NewColtsFan]

2 things:

 

1.I really did not think this needed to be explained  but teams when football games...not numbers or just 1 player.......Trent Dilfer won a SB...does that make him better then Romo?

 

2.Barrett does not have elite strength or athleticism..Thats well documented.....He plays with good technique the majority of the time, Furthermore........Anyone can repeat what the so called experts say....Those experts can be way wrong.........While I love to be right IF I am wrong about a player (everybody is, its just part of the game) then at least I am wrong forming my own opinion, Ill take that over repeating something just to repeat it or just because so and so said so so it must be true, If I see the same thing watching a player then Ill say it...If not then I will say that to

 

Dilfer = one year of post season greatness.

 

Flacco = five years, and they're his first five years.

 

Not hard to compute the difference.    And the difference is huge.

 

As for your #2.   Props to you for forming your view, but you realize that up to the draft Jones and Okafor were 1st round picks in your mind and Jenkins was a 2nd rounder.    They went 4/4/5.     The so-called experts that you like to dismiss as often being wrong are rarely wrong by three rounds.    That happens sometimes,  but not often.

[House]

Dilfer = one year of post season greatness.

Flacco = five years, and they're his first five years.

Not hard to compute the difference. And the difference is huge.

As for your #2. Props to you for forming your view, but you realize that up to the draft Jones and Okafor were 1st round picks in your mind and Jenkins was a 2nd rounder. They went 4/4/5. The so-called experts that you like to dismiss as often being wrong are rarely wrong by three rounds. That happens sometimes, but not often.

All due respect Flacco hasn't had 5 GREAT postseasons. Just 2.

[NewColtsFan]

Playoff wins= Team accomplishment 

 

Tony Romo has one of the highest Passer ratings ever behind a makeshift O-line.

 

At this point Romo is better than Flacco.

 

Couple of final thoughts since we're wrapping this up....

 

Flacco has 9 career playoff wins, not 8 as I wrote last night.

 

You also wrote that Flacco has badly regressed the last two years in the regular season in many categories.   This is based on his lower passing rating the last two year than it was in 2010.     I surfed around...    looked at guys named Rodgers, Peyton, Eli, Brady,  Brees,  Ben...     take a look for yourself...   you'll see that passer rating goes up and down frequently. 

 

There are just too many things on a year to year basis that a QB can't control.   The OL in front of him,  the RB behind him, the WR's he's throwing to and the OC calling plays.    Way too many moving parts.     That's why the QB's I listed,  future Hall of Famers,  all have ups and downs in QB rating.

 

As for Tony Romo,  I like him, I really do.   I'm sorry I'm beating him up in this thread to make a point.   But while he has a nice QB rating, he's got a lousy 4th rating, a lousy playoff rating, and a reputation for playing poorly in the biggest games of the regular season and the playoffs.    Those don't get included in your arguments.

[NewColtsFan]

All due respect Flacco hasn't had 5 GREAT postseasons. Just 2.

 

I know....   but he has had playoff wins in every year he's been in the NFL.   All 5 of them.  9 career playoff wins in all.   That's not an insignificant accomplishment even if you think the rest of the team did the majority of the work and he was just along for the ride.

[House]

I know.... but he has had playoff wins in every year he's been in the NFL. All 5 of them. 9 career playoff wins in all. That's not an insignificant accomplishment even if you think the rest of the team did the majority of the work and he was just along for the ride.

I wouldn't say he was simply just along for the ride in the other appearances, but he certainly wasn't in the drivers seat like he was in the last 2.

[azcolt]

Tough to say Flacco is a top 3 QB? Peyton Manning, Brady, Aaron Rodgers, Drew Brees, Matt Ryan, Tony Romo, Ben Roethlisberger are all better for sure,  A few others are as good or better

You must be Tony's agent.

[Gavin]

I know....   but he has had playoff wins in every year he's been in the NFL.   All 5 of them.  9 career playoff wins in all.   That's not an insignificant accomplishment even if you think the rest of the team did the majority of the work and he was just along for the ride.

By that logic Trent Dilfer was a great QB and again Flacco was 8 and 8 prior to this past post season in the playoffs, As for Jones and Okafor...Okafor only did the bench press and Jones did not even do that. clearly that had an affect on there draft stock......Its extremely hard to go from a 1st round possible selection up till the end of the college football year and then all of a sudden drop as many rounds as they did without something significantly altering a scouts opinion which as we all know was injuries to both players...Okafor dealt with a nagging ankle injury all year (I suspect the reason for not participating in the rest of the Combine drills) and Jones also has a lengthy injury history including a lis franc injury his senior year which in turn can affect his physical conditioning

[MAC]

That's why I qualified my post with "if this story is true." I would tend to it believe as the Raven "brass" would no doubt defend what appears to be a pretty stupid line of thinking in the negotiation process. Also it would be incredibly unprofessional of the agent to say this if not true. As it is ( if true) , he should have kept his mouth shut. 

Well, one of my thoughts as I said was that they may not have really wanted to sign him for $16mil in the first place. They probably wouldn't announce that to their fans as a defense because it will only make things worse. Better to leave worse enough alone. In other words, the agent may be spot on, but maybe it wasn't a "Dumervil fax" type act of idiocy, just that they didn't think that Flacco was a franchise QB. I can understand why.

 

Plus I think that the agent making THIS announcement is incredibly unprofessional even if he is right.  Does he intend to ever negotiate with any other teams, or is he taking his % from Flacco and heading to Florida? Pretty short sighted. If this is how he operates, who knows what games he's capable of.

[NewColtsFan]

Well, one of my thoughts as I said was that they may not have really wanted to sign him for $16mil in the first place. They probably wouldn't announce that to their fans as a defense because it will only make things worse. Better to leave worse enough alone. In other words, the agent may be spot on, but maybe it wasn't a "Dumervil fax" type act of idiocy, just that they didn't think that Flacco was a franchise QB. I can understand why.

 

Plus I think that the agent making THIS announcement is incredibly unprofessional even if he is right.  Does he intend to ever negotiate with any other teams, or is he taking his % from Flacco and heading to Florida? Pretty short sighted. If this is how he operates, who knows what games he's capable of.

 

MAC....

 

My first reaction was also that the agent was unprofessional with his public comments...

 

But,  I've moved off that a bit,  here's why....    I believe the agent is trying to protect his client....   I'm sure he's reading and hearing that some fans are blaming Flacco's big contract on the reason that Baltimore let go of lots of talented players this off season.    In the fan's eyes,  it's Flacco's fault.

 

I think the agent is saying "Don't blame my client,  blame the Ravens front office....  and here's why...."

 

There's no other reason for an agent to be making these comments publicly otherwise.....

[dw49]

Well, one of my thoughts as I said was that they may not have really wanted to sign him for $16mil in the first place. They probably wouldn't announce that to their fans as a defense because it will only make things worse. Better to leave worse enough alone. In other words, the agent may be spot on, but maybe it wasn't a "Dumervil fax" type act of idiocy, just that they didn't think that Flacco was a franchise QB. I can understand why.

 

Plus I think that the agent making THIS announcement is incredibly unprofessional even if he is right.  Does he intend to ever negotiate with any other teams, or is he taking his % from Flacco and heading to Florida? Pretty short sighted. If this is how he operates, who knows what games he's capable of.

 

 

 

Well then either way they are *s. You don't offer 80 million if you "really don't want to sign him." I understand what you are saying but if you have second thought concerning the offer after you make , I would think the smart thing to do is pull it. If the ravens really didn't feel he was a franchise QB , then the 16 mill per was *ic. Don't forget that the highest QB contract was around 18 mill (Peyton Manning deal) per season when he was offered that.

 

I think I can give a pretty good analogy as to what little sense it all makes.

 

Let's say you really have to buy a house in Indy as you have a family you and to be happy you need to own your own house. You find one you fall in love with and you feel it;s worth 160 K. There are really no other easy options to buying this house as it's the only one available in the neighborhood you need to be in. The housing market is like it was pre 2007 , it only goes up. So the seller is kind of hemming and hawing a bit and finally says "for 162K it's a deal." The 2k is the same to 1 mill on 80 mill. Anyway... you say nope 160 K is what I think it's worth and I won't go a penny higher. Now remember you pretty much have to have that house as there aren't others that appear to be readily available. So you rent for a year and go back to that seller as you just really need the house and have no other options. The market has gone up (Brees contract) and there is even more demand for the house. You reluctantly pay around 210K for the home.

 

Would you feel like a donkey ? 

[dw49]

MAC....

 

My first reaction was also that the agent was unprofessional with his public comments...

 

But,  I've moved off that a bit,  here's why....    I believe the agent is trying to protect his client....   I'm sure he's reading and hearing that some fans are blaming Flacco's big contract on the reason that Baltimore let go of lots of talented players this off season.    In the fan's eyes,  it's Flacco's fault.

 

I think the agent is saying "Don't blame my client,  blame the Ravens front office....  and here's why...."

 

There's no other reason for an agent to be making these comments publicly otherwise.....

 

 

 

I do agree with MAC and others who think this should have been left alone but you are 100% correct. With all the Tom Brady nonsense on how he took" less" , many were casting Flacco as a "pig" for taking so much cap room. His agent was defending his client and basically is saying they were *s gambling for a million bucks on an 80 mill $ deal. Whatever the "consequences" were , it was a result of their stupidity.

 

I don't want to get into the Brady thing but all he really did was agree to play for 10 mill per year when he is 38-39 and 40 years old. He took ZERO "less" money. 

[NewColtsFan]

By that logic Trent Dilfer was a great QB and again Flacco was 8 and 8 prior to this past post season in the playoffs, As for Jones and Okafor...Okafor only did the bench press and Jones did not even do that. clearly that had an affect on there draft stock......Its extremely hard to go from a 1st round possible selection up till the end of the college football year and then all of a sudden drop as many rounds as they did without something significantly altering a scouts opinion which as we all know was injuries to both players...Okafor dealt with a nagging ankle injury all year (I suspect the reason for not participating in the rest of the Combine drills) and Jones also has a lengthy injury history including a lis franc injury his senior year which in turn can affect his physical conditioning

 

By WHAT logic?    I already addressed that with you in another post.

 

Dilfer had one great post season run in his entire career.     Flacco has brought his team to the post season all 5 times of his career.   He's brought them to the AFC championship 3 times.    He's put them in the Super Bowl once (won it)  and could've put them in twice.     There's no comparison between Dilfer and Flacco.    I don't know why you think there's any connection.

 

As for injuries....  as I pointed out to some fans here who are convinced that Josh Chapman would've been a first rounder if not for his injury.     You don't fall from a 1 to a 5 over a knee injury.    You can fall,  but not that far.   The most recent evidence of that was Tank Carradine.    He fell to roughly 35-40, top 3rd of the 2nd round.     But you don't fall from a 1 to a 4 (Jones/Okafor) over non-surgery injuries (Lysfranc and ankle) injuries that they suffered.    Heck, Marcus Lattimore had a far more devastating injury and even he only fell to the bottom of the 3rd.

 

You refuse to see that maybe those players weren't as good as you thought to begin with.    Even after every team in the NFL passed on them until the 4th round.    And in Jenkins case, the 5th round.

[NewColtsFan]

I do agree with MAC and others who think this should have been left alone but you are 100% correct. With all the Tom Brady nonsense on how he took" less" , many were casting Flacco as a "pig" for taking so much cap room. His agent was defending his client and basically is saying they were . gambling for a million bucks on an 80 mill $ deal. Whatever the "consequences" were , it was a result of their stupidity.

 

I don't want to get into the Brady thing but all he really did was agree to play for 10 mill per year when he is 38-39 and 40 years old. He took ZERO "less" money. 

 

Peyton Manning is set to make  18-19 million at that age.    I have no idea why you think Brady wouldn't have made same money.    He clearly would have.   He absolutely took less to help his team.    Boggles me why so many Colts fan refuse to give the guy credit for doing the right thing.

[MAC]

Peyton Manning is set to make  18-19 million at that age.    I have no idea why you think Brady wouldn't have made same money.    He clearly would have.   He absolutely took less to help his team.    Boggles me why so many Colts fan refuse to give the guy credit for doing the right thing.

Multi-threads about this, but my (and many peoples) take was that IF he is still playing at a high level at that point they will simply renegotiate. The goal of the contract was to get cap relief NOW, and Brady actually got more money in his pocket NOW than he would have otherwise. I'll applaud him if and when he actually sets foot on the football field, getting paid $10mil while playing like an $18million player, but I doubt that we will see it.

 

In other words, I think that the whole thing was a cynical exercise in cap manipulation. Clever, yet unethical in it's circumvention of the intent of the rules. I really wouldn't care either way if not for the efforts to paint Brady as having made a "sacrifice". To this point he has done no such thing.

[dw49]

Peyton Manning is set to make  18-19 million at that age.    I have no idea why you think Brady wouldn't have made same money.    He clearly would have.   He absolutely took less to help his team.    Boggles me why so many Colts fan refuse to give the guy credit for doing the right thing

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I don't believe Manning has a guaranteed contract at age 39 and 40 and I will be shocked if he collects 19 million at age 39 and 40. Brady didn't receive one penny less for the next two years of his original deal. Whether he's a bargain or eve playing in those years which are no doubt "twilight years" for most QB's I just can't think of too many that lit up the league at ages 38-40. If that is so amazing and "MIND BOGGLING" to you what can I say ? Maybe its more of a question that you don't understand that he didn't give anything back to the club to make cap room for other players. If you said "pay me 12 mill. this year and next" , I would say wowie... like you and most others. Now if he is stellar at ages when most are cooked and done , then you will turn out to be right. As of now all the Pats and Brady did was push money down the road and "MAYBE" provide the team with a bargain when TB is an "old " NFL qb.

[Dustin]

Couple of final thoughts since we're wrapping this up....

 

Flacco has 9 career playoff wins, not 8 as I wrote last night.

 

You also wrote that Flacco has badly regressed the last two years in the regular season in many categories.   This is based on his lower passing rating the last two year than it was in 2010.     I surfed around...    looked at guys named Rodgers, Peyton, Eli, Brady,  Brees,  Ben...     take a look for yourself...   you'll see that passer rating goes up and down frequently. 

 

There are just too many things on a year to year basis that a QB can't control.   The OL in front of him,  the RB behind him, the WR's he's throwing to and the OC calling plays.    Way too many moving parts.     That's why the QB's I listed,  future Hall of Famers,  all have ups and downs in QB rating.

 

As for Tony Romo,  I like him, I really do.   I'm sorry I'm beating him up in this thread to make a point.   But while he has a nice QB rating, he's got a lousy 4th rating, a lousy playoff rating, and a reputation for playing poorly in the biggest games of the regular season and the playoffs.    Those don't get included in your arguments.

 

Not just passer rating.

 

He's regressed in completion percentage, TD percentage, Yards per attempt, and Turnover percentage.

 

As for Romo having a bad 4th quarter rating: http://imgur.com/a/LEEyH#0

[MAC]

Well then either way they are .. You don't offer 80 million if you "really don't want to sign him." I understand what you are saying but if you have second thought concerning the offer after you make , I would think the smart thing to do is pull it. If the ravens really didn't feel he was a franchise QB , then the 16 mill per was *ic. Don't forget that the highest QB contract was around 18 mill (Peyton Manning deal) per season when he was offered that.

 

I think I can give a pretty good analogy as to what little sense it all makes.

 

Let's say you really have to buy a house in Indy as you have a family you and to be happy you need to own your own house. You find one you fall in love with and you feel it;s worth 160 K. There are really no other easy options to buying this house as it's the only one available in the neighborhood you need to be in. The housing market is like it was pre 2007 , it only goes up. So the seller is kind of hemming and hawing a bit and finally says "for 162K it's a deal." The 2k is the same to 1 mill on 80 mill. Anyway... you say nope 160 K is what I think it's worth and I won't go a penny higher. Now remember you pretty much have to have that house as there aren't others that appear to be readily available. So you rent for a year and go back to that seller as you just really need the house and have no other options. The market has gone up (Brees contract) and there is even more demand for the house. You reluctantly pay around 210K for the home.

 

Would you feel like a donkey ? 

Sure, that would be a horrendous mistake for a homeowner. The key difference though is that you are painting a picture in which someone "HAD" to buy a house. They didn't have to sign Flacco. In total, however,  I would agree that the Ravens don't come out of this looking all that great either way. The only question is just how many mistakes they made in the course of this signing.

 

When you get right down to it, the worst part was the new contract. I could see them saying "great, NOW you're worth $16mil per year, here's a contract. I don't really get how Flacco had so much leverage that they felt compelled to make the $20mil deal. They could have franchised him and next year either he would have proved that he deserved it (in which case, who cares, sign him up) or he would have proved that he doesn't.

[Gavin]

By WHAT logic?    I already addressed that with you in another post.

 

Dilfer had one great post season run in his entire career.     Flacco has brought his team to the post season all 5 times of his career.   He's brought them to the AFC championship 3 times.    He's put them in the Super Bowl once (won it)  and could've put them in twice.     There's no comparison between Dilfer and Flacco.    I don't know why you think there's any connection.

 

As for injuries....  as I pointed out to some fans here who are convinced that Josh Chapman would've been a first rounder if not for his injury.     You don't fall from a 1 to a 5 over a knee injury.    You can fall,  but not that far.   The most recent evidence of that was Tank Carradine.    He fell to roughly 35-40, top 3rd of the 2nd round.     But you don't fall from a 1 to a 4 (Jones/Okafor) over non-surgery injuries (Lysfranc and ankle) injuries that they suffered.    Heck, Marcus Lattimore had a far more devastating injury and even he only fell to the bottom of the 3rd.

 

You refuse to see that maybe those players weren't as good as you thought to begin with.    Even after every team in the NFL passed on them until the 4th round.    And in Jenkins case, the 5th round.Im not sure what Jenkins your

Im not sure what Chapman has to do with anything...Different position entirely and a NT at that, Unless he developed Dontari Poe like measurables and got healthy over night he was not sniffing early round (1-2) and if he was healthy its he still likely would not unless his measurable were off the charts, Teams clearly saw he was not healthy and took into account he was nor will be no Dontari Poe in terms of measurables or motor, so take what would have been a 2-3 round pick and add the injury and you have a 2nd or 3rd rounder falling into someones lap late which turned out to be us. As for Lattimore the 49ers could afford to take that gamble plus its fair to say his measurable if healthy would have been signifcantly better then Chapmans. As for Carradine...He posted a 4.75 in a personal workout and was said to be doing much better then most initially thought, I did not hear any read any reports of that nature regarding Brandon Jenkins http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000162142/article/tank-carradine-impresses-with-475-40-in-predraft-runalso(That link is about Carradine)  keep in mind where he went....Also to the 49ers, Thats no pressure for him to be lights out from day one, Aldon Smith is the guy there, As to Lattimore he was said to be climbing up draft boards to some extent after he said he would be ready

[dw49]

Sure, that would be a horrendous mistake for a homeowner. The key difference though is that you are painting a picture in which someone "HAD" to buy a house. They didn't have to sign Flacco. In total, however,  I would agree that the Ravens don't come out of this looking all that great either way. The only question is just how many mistakes they made in the course of this signing.

 

When you get right down to it, the worst part was the new contract. I could see them saying "great, NOW you're worth $16mil per year, here's a contract. I don't really get how Flacco had so much leverage that they felt compelled to make the $20mil deal. They could have franchised him and next year either he would have proved that he deserved it (in which case, who cares, sign him up) or he would have proved that he doesn't.

 

 

I didn't want to make that post any longer than it already was but I'll explain what I left out. Why I said the Ravens like the home owner had "few or no other options" was the make up of the Ravens and NFL. Granted they didn't "have to " but really pretty much did.

 

 

If they were a team rebuilding , they could draft one and let him "grow " with the team. As we saw the contract year , the Ravens were a SB contender as it was only a dropped pass AT NE that prevented the trip that year. Was their window open for foreseeable years ? I don't think so with Lewis , Suggs and Reed all getting up in years. Even Ray Rice wouldn't last forever considering NFL RB's. So pretty much a given that the Ravens time was "then." They had no great young back up waiting to step in. They certainly couldn't expect to find a great replacement in free agency , that would be a real joke of a thought as they didn't want to overpay Flacco . A good free agent QB , are very rare commodities and they don't come at bargain prices.

 

So above is why I felt comfortable making the analogy as I did. If I'm missing some good even "decent" options , I'm all ears. Otherwise I would have never thrown in the part where the home owners had no other choice as I really don't need it to support my point.

[MAC]

I didn't want to make that post any longer than it already was but I'll explain what I left out. Why I said the Ravens like the home owner had "few or no other options" was the make up of the Ravens and NFL. Granted they didn't "have to " but really pretty much did.

 

 

If they were a team rebuilding , they could draft one and let him "grow " with the team. As we saw the contract year , the Ravens were a SB contender as it was only a dropped pass AT NE that prevented the trip that year. Was their window open for foreseeable years ? I don't think so with Lewis , Suggs and Reed all getting up in years. Even Ray Rice wouldn't last forever considering NFL RB's. So pretty much a given that the Ravens time was "then." They had no great young back up waiting to step in. They certainly couldn't expect to find a great replacement in free agency , that would be a real joke of a thought as they didn't want to overpay Flacco . A good free agent QB , are very rare commodities and they don't come at bargain prices.

 

So above is why I felt comfortable making the analogy as I did. If I'm missing some good even "decent" options , I'm all ears. Otherwise I would have never thrown in the part where the home owners had no other choice as I really don't need it to support my point.

Well to clarify one thing, I was talking about the franchise tag instead of the $20mil contract that they just signed him to. I'm pretty sure that last season he played under the last year of his original contract. There was no reason to even talk to him about an extension last summer unless they thought that they could save money long term by doing so, or get better QB out of him by avoiding turning his contract status into a circus.

 

But regardless I understand and it's certainly a good analogy.

 

I may not have had a good opinion of Flacco prior to this past season, but he was still competent and effective. No, there were no better options out there. All this is likely heavily impacted by things that we'd not be aware of unless living in the Baltimore market.

[MAC]

MAC....

 

My first reaction was also that the agent was unprofessional with his public comments...

 

But,  I've moved off that a bit,  here's why....    I believe the agent is trying to protect his client....   I'm sure he's reading and hearing that some fans are blaming Flacco's big contract on the reason that Baltimore let go of lots of talented players this off season.    In the fan's eyes,  it's Flacco's fault.

 

I think the agent is saying "Don't blame my client,  blame the Ravens front office....  and here's why...."

 

There's no other reason for an agent to be making these comments publicly otherwise.....

Could be. I'm familiar with seeing stories about Indy or Denver that spark superficial national criticism, where I sputter in response "but you don't know that whole story!". Who knows what's going on here. But even with all that the agents choice of words doesn't appear to have been wise. BOTH sides should simply be saying "we believe in Flacco and it's a market value contract. This is what winning teams go through. Do you want to have a winning team or not?" In contrast the agents comments suggest a line of thinking more like "I know he isn't worth, it but don't look at me - it was the team's fault. I was just doing my job". Not good.

[NewColtsFan]

Not just passer rating.

 

He's regressed in completion percentage, TD percentage, Yards per attempt, and Turnover percentage.

 

As for Romo having a bad 4th quarter rating: http://imgur.com/a/LEEyH#0

 

Take it up with the rest of the NFL who thinks he folds during key moments of the 4th quarter and the playoffs.

[NewColtsFan]

I don't believe Manning has a guaranteed contract at age 39 and 40 and I will be shocked if he collects 19 million at age 39 and 40. Brady didn't receive one penny less for the next two years of his original deal. Whether he's a bargain or eve playing in those years which are no doubt "twilight years" for most QB's I just can't think of too many that lit up the league at ages 38-40. If that is so amazing and "MIND BOGGLING" to you what can I say ? Maybe its more of a question that you don't understand that he didn't give anything back to the club to make cap room for other players. If you said "pay me 12 mill. this year and next" , I would say wowie... like you and most others. Now if he is stellar at ages when most are cooked and done , then you will turn out to be right. As of now all the Pats and Brady did was push money down the road and "MAYBE" provide the team with a bargain when TB is an "old " NFL qb.

 

I think you're going to have to explain that....

 

That's what EVER restructure does.....   they get guaranteed money up front....   lower contracts salaries during the key years,  that frees up salary cap money,   and then larger salaries in the out years.   And if Brady is still playing,  he'll renegotiate that.

 

That's what everyone does.

 

But, in this case, it's Tom Brady.   It's considered a Crime Against Humanity on this website to give the guy any credit.  The prevailing view here is any thing positive said about Brady MUST be considered a knock against Sainted Peyton Manning.

 

Look at some of the responses in this thread.     I didn't bring up Manning.   But other Colts fans do.    People can not give Brady any credit -- period.

 

Just like some won't give Flacco credit. 

 

By the way,   in the year's to come,  do you know who else will restructure his contract several times?   And he'll take guaranteed money up front for smaller salaries during the key years of the deal?     That name is.....

 

Andrew Luck.    I'd expect him to do that 2-3 times during the course of his career.    Wouldn't surprise me at all.....

 

It's what winning players do......

[NewColtsFan]

Im not sure what Chapman has to do with anything...Different position entirely and a NT at that, Unless he developed Dontari Poe like measurables and got healthy over night he was not sniffing early round (1-2) and if he was healthy its he still likely would not unless his measurable were off the charts, Teams clearly saw he was not healthy and took into account he was nor will be no Dontari Poe in terms of measurables or motor, so take what would have been a 2-3 round pick and add the injury and you have a 2nd or 3rd rounder falling into someones lap late which turned out to be us. As for Lattimore the 49ers could afford to take that gamble plus its fair to say his measurable if healthy would have been signifcantly better then Chapmans. As for Carradine...He posted a 4.75 in a personal workout and was said to be doing much better then most initially thought, I did not hear any read any reports of that nature regarding Brandon Jenkins http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000162142/article/tank-carradine-impresses-with-475-40-in-predraft-runalso(That link is about Carradine)  keep in mind where he went....Also to the 49ers, Thats no pressure for him to be lights out from day one, Aldon Smith is the guy there, As to Lattimore he was said to be climbing up draft boards to some extent after he said he would be ready

 

That point,  which you tap danced around,   is that the guys you like didn't fall to their spots because of injury,  they fell to where they fell because they weren't as good as you thought.

 

Did injury play some part in their position?   Perhaps.   But the main reason they were drafted where they were drafted is they weren't as highly coveted as you thought they were.   

 

As to Chapman,  I only brought it up because he's a Colt, and many posters here think he was a first rounder if not for his injury.

[NewColtsFan]

Could be. I'm familiar with seeing stories about Indy or Denver that spark superficial national criticism, where I sputter in response "but you don't know that whole story!". Who knows what's going on here. But even with all that the agents choice of words doesn't appear to have been wise. BOTH sides should simply be saying "we believe in Flacco and it's a market value contract. This is what winning teams go through. Do you want to have a winning team or not?" In contrast the agents comments suggest a line of thinking more like "I know he isn't worth, it but don't look at me - it was the team's fault. I was just doing my job". Not good.

 

 

Not just passer rating.

 

He's regressed in completion percentage, TD percentage, Yards per attempt, and Turnover percentage.

 

As for Romo having a bad 4th quarter rating: http://imgur.com/a/LEEyH#0

 

Don't those things go into making up passer rating? 

 

That's my understanding at least.    The NFL is a joke when it comes to having it's fans understand things like that.   They're the opposite of baseball who fans know how to compute basic stats.

[Dustin]

Don't those things go into making up passer rating? 

 

That's my understanding at least.    The NFL is a joke when it comes to having it's fans understand things like that.   They're the opposite of baseball who fans know how to compute basic stats.

 

Well yeah sort of, but a player can have his completion percentage and TD percentage rise, but if his INT % rises substantially then his passer rating goes down.

 

Passer rating can totally skewed by one statistic which is why we look at all statistics when we talk about regression.

[Gavin]

That point,  which you tap danced around,   is that the guys you like didn't fall to their spots because of injury,  they fell to where they fell because they weren't as good as you thought.

 

Did injury play some part in their position?   Perhaps.   But the main reason they were drafted where they were drafted is they weren't as highly coveted as you thought they were.   

 

As to Chapman,  I only brought it up because he's a Colt, and many posters here think he was a first rounder if not for his injury.

Chapman was projected to go from anywhere to the 3rd or 4th round according to NFL Draft Scout, He went in the 5th do to injury, Considering Guard and OLB are in all likelihood more coveted positions then NT's that dont have Poe type measurables (An assumption I know but Ill stick with it) its not far fetched that either player could have went a couple rounds higher which could have put Jones somewhere in the 2nd and Jenkins in the 3rd which is where I wanted him if he got him

[MAC]

I think you're going to have to explain that....

 

That's what EVER restructure does.....   they get guaranteed money up front....   lower contracts salaries during the key years,  that frees up salary cap money,   and then larger salaries in the out years.   And if Brady is still playing,  he'll renegotiate that.

 

That's what everyone does.

 

But, in this case, it's Tom Brady.   It's considered a Crime Against Humanity on this website to give the guy any credit.  The prevailing view here is any thing positive said about Brady MUST be considered a knock against Sainted Peyton Manning.

 

Look at some of the responses in this thread.     I didn't bring up Manning.   But other Colts fans do.    People can not give Brady any credit -- period.

 

Just like some won't give Flacco credit. 

 

By the way,   in the year's to come,  do you know who else will restructure his contract several times?   And he'll take guaranteed money up front for smaller salaries during the key years of the deal?     That name is.....

 

Andrew Luck.    I'd expect him to do that 2-3 times during the course of his career.    Wouldn't surprise me at all.....

 

It's what winning players do......

I can't stand Brady, but that had nothing to do with my earlier post on this topic. My response on this subject always has more to do with being irritated at people for applauding Brady's contract as if he had performed a charitable act than it is with Brady's act itself. The fact is that what he did is absolutely nothing, yet he is being bowed down to as if he made a personal sacrifice for the good of the team. He didn't! Isn't that relevant to the conversation? 

 

He was already under contract for two more years at a salary that was record breaking at the time that he signed the contract. He is continuing to get paid the exact same amounts under the new "contract" that he would under the old. In fact he was given an ADDITIONAL handful of millions now for signing the contract. It's the smaller amounts that are in the "out" years, and if - as even you seem to suggest is likely - he renegotiates when the time comes, then he will never have in fact played under an under-market contract - but people are applauding him now as if he's cutting back on his personal expenditures, or crimping his quality of life in his retirement years, because he is so committed to winning. It's nothing but a salary cap shell game. I'm sure it wasn't his idea. Some cap wiz called with a suggestion, and said "sure, where do I sign, and when do I get the check for the extra millions". WOW, I wish I had the chance to make a personal "sacrifice" like that.

 

Once again, the day that he actually trots onto the field while being paid less than he might have gotten in a "real" contract, I'll admit that I was wrong and applaud him. I don't think that I will have to.

 

And the other way of looking at it is that ALL players are expected to decline at a certain age, and $10 mil may be all he deserves at that point. While Peyton's contract appears to be richer, it also puts him in the position of getting released without a penny of compensation when he declines. Brady's give's him a lot more leverage. Playing great, demand a renegotiation. Playing not-so-great, force the team to keep him on the roster or take a cap hit for nothing. None of this meets my definition of putting the team first. It's just shrewd, manipulative, and if it in fact represents a hidden handshake agreement about will happen down the road, than one might call it an unethical step around the salary cap limitations as well.

[NewColtsFan]

I can't stand Brady, but that had nothing to do with my earlier post on this topic. My response on this subject always has more to do with being irritated at people for applauding Brady's contract as if he had performed a charitable act than it is with Brady's act itself. The fact is that what he did is absolutely nothing, yet he is being bowed down to as if he made a personal sacrifice for the good of the team. He didn't! Isn't that relevant to the conversation? 

 

He was already under contract for two more years at a salary that was record breaking at the time that he signed the contract. He is continuing to get paid the exact same amounts under the new "contract" that he would under the old. In fact he was given an ADDITIONAL handful of millions now for signing the contract. It's the smaller amounts that are in the "out" years, and if - as even you seem to suggest is likely - he renegotiates when the time comes, then he will never have in fact played under an under-market contract - but people are applauding him now as if he's cutting back on his personal expenditures, or crimping his quality of life in his retirement years, because he is so committed to winning. It's nothing but a salary cap shell game. I'm sure it wasn't his idea. Some cap wiz called with a suggestion, and said "sure, where do I sign, and when do I get the check for the extra millions". WOW, I wish I had the chance to make a personal "sacrifice" like that.

 

Once again, the day that he actually trots onto the field while being paid less than he might have gotten in a "real" contract, I'll admit that I was wrong and applaud him. I don't think that I will have to.

 

And the other way of looking at it is that ALL players are expected to decline at a certain age, and $10 mil may be all he deserves at that point. While Peyton's contract appears to be richer, it also puts him in the position of getting released without a penny of compensation when he declines. Brady's give's him a lot more leverage. Playing great, demand a renegotiation. Playing not-so-great, force the team to keep him on the roster or take a cap hit for nothing. None of this meets my definition of putting the team first. It's just shrewd, manipulative, and if it in fact represents a hidden handshake agreement about will happen down the road, than one might call it an unethical step around the salary cap limitations as well.

 

I don't know why you just wrote 4 paragraphs to say Brady did nothing.

 

If it was nothing would New England have done it?    If it was nothing would Brady have done it?

 

Fast forward any number of years you want.    When Andrew Luck does the exact same thing he will be hailed here as a God!  A living hero!    Worthy of endless praise.

 

But, it's Brady.   The target of all Manning fans.  

 

You continue to write that what he did was nothing.   Why you do that is a mystery to me.    Why you dismiss it as nothing does not add up for me.    Everyone who renegotiates does this.     It's how the NFL salary game is played at the top of the food chain.

 

Please don't write Brady making $10 Million is all he could get, or is his market value.   Come on now.

 

If he became a Free Agent,  he'd be flooded with offers in the $18-20 Million dollar range.   His play hasn't fallen off despite his age.     He got paid up front and takes lower salary during his years.    Luck will do it repeatedly during his time with the Colts.

 

As for Peyton....   his classy move is to limit the amount of guaranteed money because he's still somewhat damaged goods and he doesn't want to punish Denver for taking a chance on him.    If/when he's done with the game, he walks away and wants to minimize the salary cap Denver might take.    Classy move.   Props to him.    But, until then,  he's still getting paid huge money.

 

Hey, the guy has earned it.    I don't fault him.   The reason he's not doing the same thing as Brady is because if he did,  Denver would have to write a big check.   But the money would be pro-rated over the life of the deal.  And if Manning can't finish the deal, Denver would takes a big salary cap hit when he retired.    The way they've done it,  Peyton gets his money,  Denver still gets salary cap protection.    Perhaps not salary cap relief,  but protection.    It's still win-win for both sides.

[dw49]

I think you're going to have to explain that....

 

That's what EVER restructure does.....   they get guaranteed money up front....   lower contracts salaries during the key years,  that frees up salary cap money,   and then larger salaries in the out years.   And if Brady is still playing,  he'll renegotiate that.

 

That's what everyone does.

 

But, in this case, it's Tom Brady.   It's considered a Crime Against Humanity on this website to give the guy any credit.  The prevailing view here is any thing positive said about Brady MUST be considered a knock against Sainted Peyton Manning.

 

Look at some of the responses in this thread.     I didn't bring up Manning.   But other Colts fans do.    People can not give Brady any credit -- period.

 

Just like some won't give Flacco credit. 

 

By the way,   in the year's to come,  do you know who else will restructure his contract several times?   And he'll take guaranteed money up front for smaller salaries during the key years of the deal?     That name is.....

 

Andrew Luck.    I'd expect him to do that 2-3 times during the course of his career.    Wouldn't surprise me at all.....

 

It's what winning players do......

 

 

I don't know what you want explained. Brady restructured his contract to push salary into future years to make present cap room. He gave up nothing, in fact has more money in his pocket as a result. Players restructure all the time , I can't even think of a instance where a prominent player refused to do so. My point was that the media treated Brady's new deal like he gave up tons of money tho his team mates. If you think I should be giving Brady the same amount of credit that the hundreds of other NFL guys get for restructuring ... I do. However it certainly was not treated this way by the media or patriot fans and there was where my objection lies. My point is we really won't know if Brady actually "gave up anything" until we see if and how good and for how much he is playing for at ages 38-40. I hope that clears things up a bit. Never have I ever made a negative remark about Tom Brady on this or any other forum.

[Superman]

Yea... that was my whole point. What in God's name is Newsome doing ? If he likes the guy after the 2011 season to offer him 80 million , you are doing it because you believe he is a great QB. So by that logic , saying "the heck with the deal" for a lousy 1 million more over the 5 years , you are basically saying .."I'm wrong and we'll sign him for less." So Newsome pretty much put himself in a no win situation. Either he pays way more the following year if he was right and he really only wins if Flacco bombs out in 2012. Usually a team would get killed cap wise trading a player in the 2nd or 3rd year of a huge 6 year deal , but I can't say that without looking at the guaranteed money and when it's being paid. We also need to remember that the 16 million offered was before Brees signed his deal. I think at that time the biggest contract was PM's at 18 mill. So I guess we need to realize that 16 mill was really a bigger deal when it was offered than it appears now.

 

If the agent's story is true, then I agree with this 100%. You don't let a lousy $1m keep you from locking up your quarterback long term. You wound up letting $1m cost you an extra $40m over the life of the contract. 

 

Here's where I differ, though: I wouldn't have been offering Flacco $80m in the first place. The eventual outcome probably would have been the same, because the Ravens couldn't afford to keep him on the franchise tag in 2013 and still make all the roster moves they made this year (contrary to popular belief, Flacco's deal isn't not hurting them this season, it's helping them). But if you think he's worth $80m, why not go to $81m?

 

And now, the structure of the contract makes it very difficult for them to release him in the future. They are set to pay him option bonuses in 2014 and 2015, which will increase the potential cap penalties on his contract pretty drastically. If they were to release him after 2013, they'd have a cap penalty of $23.2m. But if they release him after 2014, they have a cap penalty of $21.15m. They're pretty well stuck with him.

[dw49]

If the agent's story is true, then I agree with this 100%. You don't let a lousy $1m keep you from locking up your quarterback long term. You wound up letting $1m cost you an extra $40m over the life of the contract. 

 

Here's where I differ, though: I wouldn't have been offering Flacco $80m in the first place. The eventual outcome probably would have been the same, because the Ravens couldn't afford to keep him on the franchise tag in 2013 and still make all the roster moves they made this year (contrary to popular belief, Flacco's deal isn't not hurting them this season, it's helping them). But if you think he's worth $80m, why not go to $81m?

 

And now, the structure of the contract makes it very difficult for them to release him in the future. They are set to pay him option bonuses in 2014 and 2015, which will increase the potential cap penalties on his contract pretty drastically. If they were to release him after 2013, they'd have a cap penalty of $23.2m. But if they release him after 2014, they have a cap penalty of $21.15m. They're pretty well stuck with him.

 

 

Yea.. I remember you and I had a long go around on what Flacco would eventually get offered. You are entitled to your opinion on the 80 mill but as you say , its pretty lame to say "I'll give you 80 but not 81." Then go out and fork over 121 with over 50 mill guaranteed.