Ravens and 'Franchise' QB money

[YardRat]

From Super Bowl champs, to watching the playoffs from home in one season.

Was it really a wise move to give Flacco all that money at the expense of losing a bevy of other players that helped contribute to their success last year?

[The Jokeman]

From Super Bowl champs, to watching the playoffs from home in one season.

Was it really a wise move to give Flacco all that money at the expense of losing a bevy of other players that helped contribute to their success last year?

Once again the first word in "franchise QB" is franchise. Build me a great team and you don't have to worry about your QB being great.

[Night Train]

Their OL sucked all year. Couldn't protect the immobile Flacco and the running game was non-existent.

Secondary was bad. Many players they expected to step forward...didn't.

[Mr. Pink]

Without Flacco that's a 3 win football team.

They put almost every game on his shoulders and his shoulders alone. Their D is nowhere near as good as it was last year for obvious reasons and they completely abandoned Ray Rice in their offense. The game against the Bills alone should prove that one.

[YardRat]

Once again the first word in "franchise QB" is franchise. Build me a great team and you don't have to worry about your QB being great.

They had a great team last year. And then they paid Flacco.


Their OL sucked all year. Couldn't protect the immobile Flacco and the running game was non-existent.

Secondary was bad. Many players they expected to step forward...didn't.

They could have kept some of the players that stepped up last year.


Without Flacco that's a 3 win football team.

They put almost every game on his shoulders and his shoulders alone. Their D is nowhere near as good as it was last year for obvious reasons and they completely abandoned Ray Rice in their offense. The game against the Bills alone should prove that one.

Pure speculation on your part. Of course the D is worse, they had to let their young up-and-comers go.

[Mr. Pink]

They had a great team last year. And then they paid Flacco.



They could have kept some of the players that stepped up last year.



Pure speculation on your part. Of course the D is worse, they had to let their young up-and-comers go.

What speculation?

Flacco had 600 pass attempts on the year. They were like 29th in rushing and averaged like 3 ypc.

Put a bad QB on that team and see how they would do. Wait, I can easily draw that comparison from a team in the same division.

The Cleveland Browns defensively were just as good as the Ravens, couldn't run and threw the ball 600+ times. They went 4-12.

[Joe Fo Sho]

Flacco's cap number for 2013 was like $7 mil I think. That's pretty good for a QB like him. There were other reasons that this team was in financial hell this year. As for the future when his cap number rises, who knows.

[cookie G]

The Ravens went to the playoffs once in the prior 4 years that Flacco got there.

5 straight appearances with him, including 3 conference championship games and a SB victory.

We got McLovin..

[Mace]

From Super Bowl champs, to watching the playoffs from home in one season.

Was it really a wise move to give Flacco all that money at the expense of losing a bevy of other players that helped contribute to their success last year?

I really don't think so. He has his moments but Flacco is not top shelf. Most of his game stats speak for themselves. And that salary cost them players they couldn't keep.

But for all the lip service big bucks QB's give to the concept of team, they worry more about salary structure and peer pressure than regulating themselves. I think we're entering the era of anointed franchise QB's crippling their teams. They'll learn eventually. They never see the total, they can't be idiots. They make themselves expendable earlier, renegotiate the deals endlessly, and ensure the decline of their place in history without a team around them. It's a good era to be an agent though.

I'm still ever waiting for one great guy to stand up and say, "hey, I have plenty of money, I want them to spend it on making a team around me, so I'm going to play for gatorade and make some other people happy."

Is Flacco all that ? Good luck to Baltimore in finding out. Damned if the team pays and damned if they don't though, same for the QB's evidently.

[YardRat]

What speculation?

Flacco had 600 pass attempts on the year. They were like 29th in rushing and averaged like 3 ypc.

Put a bad QB on that team and see how they would do. Wait, I can easily draw that comparison from a team in the same division.

The Cleveland Browns defensively were just as good as the Ravens, couldn't run and threw the ball 600+ times. They went 4-12.

You do understand that you are citing stats from this season, after Flacco was signed and others let go, correct? That's kind of the point, you know.

Maybe a 'worse' QB wouldn't have thrown five picks against Buffalo.

[Mr. Pink]

You do understand that you are citing stats from this season, after Flacco was signed and others let go, correct? That's kind of the point, you know.

Maybe a 'worse' QB wouldn't have thrown five picks against Buffalo.

The point is he carried that team to 8-8 and a worse QB would have them at around the Browns level.

Flacco isn't Peyton Manning, Drew Brees, Tom Brady but he ain't a bottom tier QB either. He's somewhere in that second tier with guys like Wilson, Kaepernick, Dalton.

[Night Train]

Outside of Boldin, who did they lose ?

Lewis and Reed were done, so they had to replace them.

[YardRat]

Outside of Boldin, who did they lose ?

Lewis and Reed were done, so they had to replace them.

Boldin, Kruger, Ellerbe, Cary Williams, Bernard Pollard, just to name a few.

When you have to let go your reception leader, your sack leader, your eventual replacements for Reed and Lewis, and basically 3/4 of your starting secondary (not to mention a vet C, a FB, NT and G depth, and another couple of LBers) you're pretty much gutting your future to pay one guy.

[Mr. Pink]

Apparently the argument here is it is better to have a crappy QB and go 4-12 than a good QB and go 8-8 because you can have better complimentary pieces.

That's the difference between the 2013 Ravens and Browns who played basically the same schedule.

[BillsFever21]

They also lost Ellerbe and Kruger who played big roles in their defense. Ray Rice was useless this season. They don't have many weapons on offense.

Flacco isn't elite and he doesn't look flashy but he helped take the team to 3 AFC Championship games and a Super Bowl victory in his first 5 seasons. He's towards the top of the 2nd tier of QB's in the league.

What option did the Ravens have? They just won a Super Bowl and Flacco played a big part in it. There was no way they were going to let him go and start over again at the most important position in the NFL. What else should they have done? Sign Kevin Kolb? Draft Geno Smith with their first round pick or one of the other rookies this season?

Their defense is still decent and they can rebuild it fairly soon. They're not the first SB winners to struggle the year after and it's not like they totally went in the tank either. Had they let Flacco leave and brought in a veteran scrub or drafted one of these rookies they would've been lucky to win 5 games this season and be screwed for next year too. I'm sure they didn't want to pay him that much but it was hard not to after all the games they won with him and coming off a Super Bowl run.

[YardRat]

The point is he carried that team to 8-8 and a worse QB would have them at around the Browns level.

Flacco isn't Peyton Manning, Drew Brees, Tom Brady but he ain't a bottom tier QB either. He's somewhere in that second tier with guys like Wilson, Kaepernick, Dalton.

Smart move. The team can A-keep the core and future of a reigning champion, or B-gut the team and hope your 'franchise' QB that you just handed over the keys to the Brinks truck to can 'carry' you to a .500 record and completely missing the playoffs. Ozzie Newsome is a genius.

[BillsFever21]

Apparently the argument here is it is better to have a crappy QB and go 4-12 than a good QB and go 8-8 because you can have better complimentary pieces.

That's the difference between the 2013 Ravens and Browns who played basically the same schedule.

These are many of the same people who are still buying into the Bills strategy for most of the past decade which hasn't worked. It's better to sign a bunch of average players for 3-5 million a year then to fork out the money for your most important players and stars. They would rather have 3 average players that doesn't make a huge impact for a total of 11 million instead of a star player for 8 million and fill in the average players with good drafting.

[YardRat]

They also lost Ellerbe and Kruger who played big roles in their defense. Ray Rice was useless this season. They don't have many weapons on offense.

Flacco isn't elite and he doesn't look flashy but he helped take the team to 3 AFC Championship games and a Super Bowl victory in his first 5 seasons. He's towards the top of the 2nd tier of QB's in the league.

What option did the Ravens have? They just won a Super Bowl and Flacco played a big part in it. There was no way they were going to let him go and start over again at the most important position in the NFL. What else should they have done? Sign Kevin Kolb? Draft Geno Smith with their first round pick or one of the other rookies this season?

Their defense is still decent and they can rebuild it fairly soon. They're not the first SB winners to struggle the year after and it's not like they totally went in the tank either. Had they let Flacco leave and brought in a veteran scrub or drafted one of these rookies they would've been lucky to win 5 games this season and be screwed for next year too. I'm sure they didn't want to pay him that much but it was hard not to after all the games they won with him and coming off a Super Bowl run.

Won't argue against most of that, but let's remember this is a team that also won a Super Bowl with Trent Freakin' Dilfer at QB. If anybody should know how important it is to have talent all along the roster and quality depth, not just at QB, it's Newsome.

[BillsFever21]

Won't argue against most of that, but let's remember this is a team that also won a Super Bowl with Trent Freakin' Dilfer at QB. If anybody should know how important it is to have talent all along the roster and quality depth, not just at QB, it's Newsome.

That was over a decade ago and the NFL is a totally different league since then. It's not like the Trent Dilfer types win them on a regular basis. That is definitely the exception to the rule and they had one of the best defenses in the history of the NFL that season. Their defense scored as many points as their offense in many games.

Good luck winning the Super Bowl again without a good QB. It happened once a dozen years ago so that means it can easily be done. All of the Super Bowl winners lately had good QB's. The Packers were 5-2 with Rodgers and they lost 5 of the 7 games he was out after that. That's what a QB means to a team in today's NFL. Flacco is no Aaron Rodgers but it's a perfect example.

The Colts were a 2 win team the year Manning was injured. The following year they draft Andrew Luck and they are automatically a 10+ win team and in the playoffs the following two years. Without a good QB they would be a 4 win team.

[cookie G]

These are many of the same people who are still buying into the Bills strategy for most of the past decade which hasn't worked. It's better to sign a bunch of average players for 3-5 million a year then to fork out the money for your most important players and stars. They would rather have 3 average players that doesn't make a huge impact for a total of 11 million instead of a star player for 8 million and fill in the average players with good drafting.

Well, I agee with most of this...surprise surprise.

Only a fool would compare the "impact" of a franchise QB to a player who gets 4 ints per year, and little else.

Absolutely...its been a failed strategy for a decade.

Time to change things.

Invest the money in the O.
Keep looking for the franchise QB.

[Mace]

Good luck winning the Super Bowl again without a good QB. It happened once a dozen years ago so that means it can easily be done. All of the Super Bowl winners lately had good QB's. The Packers were 5-2 with Rodgers and they lost 5 of the 7 games he was out after that. That's what a QB means to a team in today's NFL.


Blessing and a curse. Look at the teams in the last 10 years of Super Bowls, and how many were back after big money contracts, and how they are doing today, heading up or down or struggling to hold their ground.

Best shot is a QB ascending, stuck in his contract for a couple years. Best result after is that his team will consistently win on his arm in the regular season until they run out of gas, or he does.

Gonna be a while until Baltimore gets anywhere again imho, because Flacco is not the guy who will carry a team. Elder Manning, Brees, Rodgers, Brady, can carry a team to an extent. That extent doesn't mean cranking out titles. Rodgers goes down, look what happens.

New England like it or not is not much of an example. They have a Belichick, like it or not.

How much could those teams have strengthened their foundations with some of that money, or kept people that helped build them ?

If your argument is to make a consistent winner, there is a shot if you nail an elite. Consistent titles aren't going to happen anymore though. Get deep into the playoffs once, you're looking at a big bucks extension. Makes your head spin how many contracts are coming up every year. Makes your head spin how much goes into keeping one guy.

Back to Flacco, does anyone have any real reason to think he's worth that huge money and what it cost the team ? Flacco just went 30 of 50 for 192 yards with 1 TD and 3 ints for a 49.8 big game rating.

[WagonCircler]

Won't argue against most of that, but let's remember this is a team that also won a Super Bowl with Trent Freakin' Dilfer at QB. If anybody should know how important it is to have talent all along the roster and quality depth, not just at QB, it's Newsome.

This is a RIDICULOUS argument.

A team of players wearing similar uniforms won a Super Bowl with Trent Dilfer. Totally different coaching staff, totally different roster. What Dilfer's team did has ABSOLUTELY ZERO to do with what Flacco's team did.

[alohabillsfan]

The ignorance of some posters truly amazes me... Please get vasectamys .

[YardRat]

What good did giving all of that money to Flacco do for Baltimore? Easy question, easy answer.

[YardRat]

It's a legit question in today's league. Who do you pay, when, and how much at what consequences to the team?

Last year, Baltimore's roster was far superior to the Jets. The coaching is, also. Both teams, this season, went 8-8. One with a 'franchise' QB, one with a rookie. If Baltimore had retained the players they lost instead of dumping all of their money into one position why wouldn't one think they could do better than the Jets and make the playoffs instead of missing out?

[EDS]

From Super Bowl champs, to watching the playoffs from home in one season.

Was it really a wise move to give Flacco all that money at the expense of losing a bevy of other players that helped contribute to their success last year?

I would be overwhelmed with joy if the Bills had the Ravens results. I could live with a few SB titles.

[BillsFever21]

I would be overwhelmed with joy if the Bills had the Ravens results. I could live with a few SB titles.

I hear you. The Bills front office(s) have been proven to be far superior to Ozzie Newsome.

[YardRat]

I would be overwhelmed with joy if the Bills had the Ravens results. I could live with a few SB titles.

Me too. But, they have yet to win anything with a big money QB. That remains to be seen.

[WagonCircler]

Me too. But, they have yet to win anything with a big money QB. That remains to be seen.

Bull.******.

Four AFC Championships (consecutive, no less) in NOT nothing. It's not a Super Bowl, but it's a hell of a lot better than anything we've seen since our last big money franchise QB retired.

S.hit.ty QBs are getting the Bills the same ********.ty results, ad infinitum, ad nauseum.

This crew of amateurs showed us, once again, where a team ends up with a crew of talentless nobodies playing QB.

I'd take Flacco AND his contact on this team in a heartbeat.

[RedEyE]

Lol - cause that worked out so well for Baltimore this year.

[YardRat]

Bull.******.

Four AFC Championships (consecutive, no less) in NOT nothing. It's not a Super Bowl, but it's a hell of a lot better than anything we've seen since our last big money franchise QB retired.

S.hit.ty QBs are getting the Bills the same ********.ty results, ad infinitum, ad nauseum.

This crew of amateurs showed us, once again, where a team ends up with a crew of talentless nobodies playing QB.

I'd take Flacco AND his contact on this team in a heartbeat.

Well, we'll have to see how it plays out. The success you speak of obviously was achieved while Flacco was on his rookie contract, not the monster deal he signed last off-season, so you are missing the point. Let's see how he, and the team does, when they've got the money invested in him and not the rest of team. Year #1 = no playoffs, which I believe is the first time with Flacco under center.

I do respect Ozzie Newsome and the job he's done there over the years, however, and if anybody can rebuild under the shackles of that contract it would be him. Once again, however, it remains to be seen if he can do it. This is uncharted waters for Ozzie.

[EDS]

Well, we'll have to see how it plays out. The success you speak of obviously was achieved while Flacco was on his rookie contract, not the monster deal he signed last off-season, so you are missing the point. Let's see how he, and the team does, when they've got the money invested in him and not the rest of team. Year #1 = no playoffs, which I believe is the first time with Flacco under center.

I do respect Ozzie Newsome and the job he's done there over the years, however, and if anybody can rebuild under the shackles of that contract it would be him. Once again, however, it remains to be seen if he can do it. This is uncharted waters for Ozzie.

What have the Bills won since making Mario the highest paid defensive player in NFL history?

[GingerP]

So... you are going to criticize one of the most consistent franchises in the NFL, run by one of the premier front-office guys around, for overpaying the QB who played great last year to help them win a Super Bowl. Really?

Yeah, those Ravens. Always paying big money to talent. Always losing good players because they are tight up agains the cap. How stupid. They should be like the Bills instead, and have lots of cap room but never win anything.

[YardRat]

What have the Bills won since making Mario the highest paid defensive player in NFL history?

Nothing. When did I ever claim it was a wise investment?


So... you are going to criticize one of the most consistent franchises in the NFL, run by one of the premier front-office guys around, for overpaying the QB who played great last year to help them win a Super Bowl. Really?

Yeah, those Ravens. Always paying big money to talent. Always losing good players because they are tight up agains the cap. How stupid. They should be like the Bills instead, and have lots of cap room but never win anything.

It didn't work out for them so well in year one of that contract. Are they immune from making a mistake?

[The Jokeman]

It's a legit question in today's league. Who do you pay, when, and how much at what consequences to the team?

Last year, Baltimore's roster was far superior to the Jets. The coaching is, also. Both teams, this season, went 8-8. One with a 'franchise' QB, one with a rookie. If Baltimore had retained the players they lost instead of dumping all of their money into one position why wouldn't one think they could do better than the Jets and make the playoffs instead of missing out?

Now a harder question looms for the Bears, do they sign Cutler or let him walk?

[BillsFever21]

What have the Bills won since making Mario the highest paid defensive player in NFL history?

Yeah that's even more pathetic. We paid a defensive player who isn't even close to the best defensive player in the NFL around the same amount of money as Joe Flacco and other QB's. So basically we paid a DE the money you pay for a franchise QB and we're having this discussion about which front offices are making wise decisions?

In the end the Williams signing doesn't really matter though. Had we not signed him we would just be 33 million under the cap instead of 18 million. It's not like it's strapping our salary cap.

[alohabillsfan]

They should have Mario play QB can't be any more embarrassing than EJ

[Mace]

I'd take Flacco AND his contact on this team in a heartbeat.

You're just very upset, Thad LewisWho? nearly doubled Flacco's rating in a less meaningful game. Flacco actually succeeded in losing worse to New England with a 56.9 rating for having won a super bowl and gaining the big bucks.

[EDS]

Yeah that's even more pathetic. We paid a defensive player who isn't even close to the best defensive player in the NFL around the same amount of money as Joe Flacco and other QB's. So basically we paid a DE the money you pay for a franchise QB and we're having this discussion about which front offices are making wise decisions?

In the end the Williams signing doesn't really matter though. Had we not signed him we would just be 33 million under the cap instead of 18 million. It's not like it's strapping our salary cap.

Keep in mind the Bills did not have any super bowl ring upcharge to pay on Mario like the Ravens did with Flacco. I am sure they were well aware that they were buying high with Flacco coming off a super bowl win but that is the price of success. If Flacco had the exact same season he had minus a trip to the SB he makes tens of million less.

[Goobylal]

Ray Rice being invisible was a major factor in their demise.

[Oldbillsfan]

The Ravens at least had a chance to make the playoffs. Better than being a bottom feeder for a decade plus.

[stuckincincy]

Ray Rice being invisible was a major factor in their demise.

I'm wondering if he'll hang up the cleats.

[OLDSRIP]

Aaron Rodgers, is he worth paying? I think so.
its only a mistake if you pay the wrong guy. Like Fitz, for example.

[Goobylal]

I'm wondering if he'll hang up the cleats.
I'm sure that was sarcasm, and I wasn't trying to say he's done. But his production was amazingly low for such a young and talented guy.

[stuckincincy]

I'm sure that was sarcasm, and I wasn't trying to say he's done. But his production was amazingly low for such a young and talented guy.

No sarcasm intended. The hip/thigh ankle injuries this season, all the rushing and receiving touches with BAL the past six years, plus the bit of a knock on him when he came out of Rutgers (lotsa touches there, too) makes me think that his career might be coming to an end.

[Mace]

Rolls back to the same thing, you just paid Flacco big huge QB money to be The Man. With playoffs on the line, The Man goes Trent Edwards for 3.8 yards a pop, 1 TD and 3 ints for a 49.8 rating, finishing with the chops to end up beneath Chad Henne and barely above Matt Schaub, well below Carson Palmer and even Mike Glennon, Andy Dalton and even Ryan Fitzpatrick at 11 games and up in rating ending the year with 19 tds and 22 ints.

Was this money well spent ? If it happened here, people would be howling.

[stuckincincy]

Rolls back to the same thing, you just paid Flacco big huge QB money to be The Man. With playoffs on the line, The Man goes Trent Edwards for 3.8 yards a pop, 1 TD and 3 ints for a 49.8 rating, finishing with the chops to end up beneath Chad Henne and barely above Matt Schaub, well below Carson Palmer and even Mike Glennon, Andy Dalton and even Ryan Fitzpatrick at 11 games and up in rating ending the year with 19 tds and 22 ints.

Was this money well spent ? If it happened here, people would be howling.

Well - they'd be pleased about the 2013 Lombardi Trophy. :bandwagon

I'm surprised Harbaugh and his staff aren't taking some hits. That iffy 18-16 win at DET week 14, then being outscored 24 - 75 in their two season-ending losses. Their play calls at CIN, both sides of the ball, were poor. The BAL fans must have been pounding their fists.

[Mace]

Well - they'd be pleased about the 2013 Lombardi Trophy. :bandwagon

I'm surprised Harbaugh and his staff aren't taking some hits. That iffy 18-16 win at DET week 14, then being outscored 24 - 75 in their two season-ending losses. Their play calls at CIN, both sides of the ball, were poor. The BAL fans must have been pounding their fists.

Dilfer was pleased at his too, but I dunno I'd want to hire him for big bucks now as my starting QB. :cheers:.

Baltimore crippled themselves with Flacco. He's not a real good QB if prone to streaks. Save this bookmark, because he's never getting there again and won't ever be compared to Manning, Brees, Brady or Rodgers in 5 years.

Was that contract worth descending into the ranks ? But can you not give him it after ascending the peak ?

A franchise qb is a blessing and a curse unless you get a rare elite.

[stuckincincy]

Dilfer was pleased at his too, but I dunno I'd want to hire him for big bucks now as my starting QB. :cheers:.

Baltimore crippled themselves with Flacco. He's not a real good QB if prone to streaks. Save this bookmark, because he's never getting there again and won't ever be compared to Manning, Brees, Brady or Rodgers in 5 years.

Was that contract worth descending into the ranks ? But can you not give him it after ascending the peak ?

A franchise qb is a blessing and a curse unless you get a rare elite.

I don't think Flacco will get BAL back into the big game, barring pure luck. He had a magic end to win the SB, but in his 6 years, never really hit for average, took a lot of sacks, has coughed up the ball at inopportune moments.

Still, he got the club the trophy, and all jaws would have hit the floor if BAL canned him before or now. 4 out of 6 seasons with him, BAL was in the post-season dance.

[Mace]

I don't think Flacco will get BAL back into the big game, barring pure luck. He had a magic end to win the SB, but in his 6 years, never really hit for average, took a lot of sacks, has coughed up the ball at inopportune moments.

Still, he got the club the trophy, and all jaws would have hit the floor if BAL canned him before or now. 4 out of 6 seasons with him, BAL was in the post-season dance.

Jaws aren't going to drop though when he renegotiates to keep his job or gets cut after another year because he thinks someone is going to pay him that kind of money again. He pocketed his bonus and knows this.

No team really considers this a desirable way to build consistent winners, I don't know why any QB who gives a darn thinks he's pretending it is.

[OpIv37]

From Super Bowl champs, to watching the playoffs from home in one season.

Was it really a wise move to give Flacco all that money at the expense of losing a bevy of other players that helped contribute to their success last year?
Without reading through this whole thread, I think they were screwed either way. If they didn't keep Flacco, the results would have been roughly the same.

As Bills fans, we know first hand what a bad QB means. In 03 and 04, we had a top 3 D and the best ST in the game and still couldn't win ****, mainly because of poor QB play.

[Mace]

Without reading through this whole thread, I think they were screwed either way. If they didn't keep Flacco, the results would have been roughly the same.

As Bills fans, we know first hand what a bad QB means. In 03 and 04, we had a top 3 D and the best ST in the game and still couldn't win ****, mainly because of poor QB play.

I said that, damned if you do and damned if you don't. But Flacco hardly elevated Baltimore this year, and is it worth that money to have him go for 3.8 yards a pop, 1 td and 3 ints, sub 50% rating in a game to get you to the playoffs a year later after you just cut him a huge check ? Will he next year ?

This sort of leads back into the inevitable "One Super Bowl Win or Consistent Winner" argument. But do you pay huge money for one SB win and a 49.8 rating on 19 tds vs 22 ints for "The Man" to get you to 8-8 on 16 games of performance because last year was awesome ? Really good qb's worth a buck sort of give you winning seasons year after year and consistent excellence.

I say again, people would be howling if it happened here, the title forgotten. Holy crap what did we just pay him for ! He blows ! Flacco doesn't really blow, but he's not a really good QB no matter what he thinks of himself and you'd be crazy to pay him that kind of money but I'm glad someone else did.

[YardRat]

Without reading through this whole thread, I think they were screwed either way. If they didn't keep Flacco, the results would have been roughly the same.

As Bills fans, we know first hand what a bad QB means. In 03 and 04, we had a top 3 D and the best ST in the game and still couldn't win ****, mainly because of poor QB play.

Speculation, at best. As is this - They could have kept most of the team intact, and traded San Fran for Smith instead of shipping them Boldin, and maybe still had enough left over to get one or two FA's. Probably would have won the division...definitely would have made the playoffs.

[IlluminatusUIUC]

The entire premise of this thread is flawed to its core, the majority of the players they lost were not due to money.

http://walterfootball.com/offseason2013bal.php (http://walterfootball.com/offseason2013bal.php)
Offseason Losses:
FB Vonta Leach, WR Anquan Boldin, C Matt Birk, G Bobbie Williams, NT Maake Kemoeatu, DE/OLB Paul Kruger, ILB Ray Lewis, ILB Dannell Ellerbe, ILB Brendon Ayanbadejo, CB Chris Johnson, S Ed Reed, S Bernard Pollard.

Twelve guys. Sounds like a lot, right?

Vonta Leach was eventually re-signed after the article was published.

Ray Lewis and Matt Birk retired with years left on their contracts, which left the Ravens down two pro bowlers and holding their dead money.

Ed Reed was openly contemplating retirement even before the 2012 season (http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2012-03-30/sports/bal-reed-keeps-everybody-guessing-20120329_1_ravens-reed-ravens-address-steve-bisciotti) and nursing a serious hip injury after, at 34 years old. Under those circumstances, the Ravens declined to offer him a deal. He missed a huge chunk of the season recovering in Houston, but was so ineffective on his return they cut him in the middle of the year.

Brendan Ayanbadejo, Bobbie Williams, Chris Johnson, and Maake Kemoeatu were career special teamers and reserves who were let go and not picked up by anybody.

Bernard Pollard was and remains a journeyman safety who's mostly known for breaking Patriots. But moreso than that, Pollard was one of the players who stood up to Harbaugh in a contentious team meeting that other players later described as a "near mutiny" (http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000102107/article/john-harbaugh-reportedly-nearly-had-ravens-mutiny). While Reed and others eventually patched up their relationship, it's clear that Harbaugh and Pollard did not and so it's not likely he was coming back regardless.

So that leaves Boldin, Kruger, and Ellerbe as legitimate cap casualties.

Boldin was 32 years old and, like Reed, was openly discussing retirement. He was in the last year of a contract due to pay him 6 million, and they had no guarantee he would play after 2013.

Paul Kruger was a guy who came out of nowhere with a 9 sack season in a contract/Super Bowl year and got crazy paid by the Browns as a result. $40 million? By the end of this season he was already being listed as one of the most overpaid guys in the league (http://www.forbes.com/pictures/emdm45eejkl/4-paul-kruger/). Moreover, they were able to replace him with Dumervil, who is a better player and outperformed Kruger significantly this season.

Dannell Ellerbe was a big loss and he played pretty well for the Dolphins.


Meanwhile, Flacco was a 27 year old Super Bowl MVP who had just come off one of the best postseasons in NFL history, in which he won two road playoff games and scored 27 points on the #2 defense in the Super Bowl, without accounting for a single turnover. They tried to play hardball with Flacco in the previous offseason, and the extension talks supposedly collapsed over $1 million on a deal with only $35 million guaranteed. (http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/ravens/2013/03/07/joe-flacco-2012-negotiations-1-million-apart/1970287/)

So Flacco entered his "prove it" year, and proved it. So what do you do as Ozzie Newsome? Sign the 27 year old QB or let him walk to sign special teamers, two linebackers with one good year to their name each, and a 32 year old wideout who isn't sure he wants to play any more? Newsome's hands were tied. He had to sign Flacco and trust that Harbaugh could elevate his level of play to what he showed in the playoffs. What else was he supposed to do? Draft Geno Smith? Turn the team over to Tyrod Taylor?

A few final points - first, the Ravens were not that dominant last year in the regular season. Recall that they only won 10 games in 2012 even with all those guys. One win came over New England during the replacement ref debacle, another came over San Diego when Rice was able to convert a 4th and 27 on one of the most improbable runs after catch you'll ever see, and still another was a 9-6 snoozer over the 2-14 Chiefs. Second, with Boldin gone, the offense needed to run through Pitta, Rice, and Smith. Pitta was lost for most of the year during the Ravens' first practice, and Rice (and Pierce) fell off a cliff. Smith put in work, but he's a take the top off burner, and with only washed up bums like Dallas Clark working underneath, no one lets him get behind easily. Then Bryant McKinnie, who played very well during the Super Bowl run, himself begins playing so poorly that the Ravens are forced to trade him midseason and reshuffle their OL.

[better days]

Newsome & The Ravens made a HUGE mistake to not get Flacco resigned before his last year on his Rookie Contract.

It was clear he was a very good QB before last year.

Not at the Elite level, but just below it. A QB you can win with.

[GingerP]

Speculation, at best. As is this - They could have kept most of the team intact, and traded San Fran for Smith instead of shipping them Boldin, and maybe still had enough left over to get one or two FA's. Probably would have won the division...definitely would have made the playoffs.

Of course, to make that trade for Alex Smith they would have needed to give up their first round pick, since that pick (#32) was the only pick they had higher than what KC gave up (#34).

They wouldn't have their good, young S in Matt Elam, and they still likely would have to get rid of Anquan Boldin. In fact, they would be in worse cap shape because Alex Smith $8.5M cap number this year is actually higher than Flaccos $6.8M. Plus, since Smith is only under contract through 2014 they would have to find their long-term solution at QB, or face "over-paying" Smith, who has yet to show he can lead a team to a Championship (something Joe has done). It is hard to imagine them being better with Smith at a cost of losing Flacco, Elam & Boldin.

The idea that Flaccos contract somehow killed the Ravens salary cap is laughable and shows remarkable ignorance of how the salary cap works. Joe's number is reasonable for his position, after which it gets real high and will have to be dealt with. It actually was a pretty fair contract for both sides, and it was structured that way for a reason. The Ravens cap issue are due to having good players making good money, but that is a high-class problem to have. In the end, they had to get rid of some aging players and get younger, and they did that admirably and almost made the playoffs.

They are in better cap shape this year, though they still have a couple of contracts to deal with this year (Suggs, Ngata, Webb & maybe Rice & Yanda). However, they understand good players get paid, and you keep your core guys in their prime. You don't get into trouble paying big money to good players because you can manage the cap number until it is time to bite the bullet. They are re-tooling the team and will remain a Super Bowl contender in the next few years, plus they have their young QB locked up. Seems like a pretty smart team who understand to build a team you need some continuity, because you don't win awards for the most cap room.

Signing Flacco didn't hurt the Ravens cap at all. His cap numbers for the first 3 years of the contract are $6.8M, $14.8M & $14.55M, which is pretty reasonable for the position. Over that same period of time Mario Williams cap numbers are $12.4M, $18.8M & $19.4M (maybe higher, since there is an additional $400K in incentives that may turn into LTBE next year).

It is laughable after the years of ineptitude the Bills have displayed to criticize a Baltimore organization that has proven time and again they know what they are doing. Your whole premise, that Flacco's contract has hurt them, shows remarkable ignorance of the situation. You may not think Flacco is "worth the money", but the fact is they have won with the kid (making the playoffs the first 5 years he was their QB, culminating with his Super Bowl MVP performance last year). They have cap troubles, but they have those because they have done a good job accumulating players who deserve to be paid. That is a good problem to have, one the Bills will have if they ever manage to do a good job building their team as the Ravens have.

Do the Giants regret "over-paying" Eli Manning? His contract is reaching cap-killing size ($20.85M this year, $20.4M in 2014, $19.75M in 2015). You probably laugh at them as well, how stupid to lock up a player whose numbers don't seem to match his contract. Of course, there are those 2 Super Bowl victories.

[THATHURMANATOR]

I would love for EJ to turn out like Flacco.

He isn't Manning or Brady but who is?

Ravens would have been in last place without him this year.

[YardRat]

Llumy---your argument is flawed, because if the players you listed stayed with the team it isn't unreasonable to expect them to perform at the same level, as opposed to the level they played in this season under different coaches, different systems, different team mates, etc.

Ginger---you misunderstand the premise of the thread, if you think the ramifications only apply to this season. Sure, Flacco is only 6.8mil this season, but next he is 14.8, 14.55 and then 28.55. If you think that kind of escalation isn't going to have a profound, long-term effect on the team's ability to keep players, or acquire new ones, then yes there is some ignorance by someone regarding how the salary cap works.

Boldin actually came out and said if he wasn't going to stay with the Ravens, he would rather retire. Obviously, he backed off of that.

If the team could resign Flacco at the expense of a bevy of other players and structure the deal so that it was cap friendly in 2013 to attempt to minimize the damage, they certainly could have let him go, re-structured a couple of contracts (Boldin, Suggs, Yanda, Oher, Webb, Ngata, Rice?...several to choose from) and negotiated similar cap-friendly deals with the players they had to let go, and been better off in the long run (possibly, as that obviously remains to be seen).

Year 1 of Flacco's big contract = no playoffs. Scoreboard to date = Don't Pay Him 1, Pay Him 0. Years 2 and 3 will determine whether or not the Ravens made the right move, as IMO there is no way in hell Flacco gets to that 28.55 cap season without re-structuring or getting released outright.

[GingerP]

Llumy---your argument is flawed, because if the players you listed stayed with the team it isn't unreasonable to expect them to perform at the same level, as opposed to the level they played in this season under different coaches, different systems, different team mates, etc.

Ginger---you misunderstand the premise of the thread, if you think the ramifications only apply to this season. Sure, Flacco is only 6.8mil this season, but next he is 14.8, 14.55 and then 28.55. If you think that kind of escalation isn't going to have a profound, long-term effect on the team's ability to keep players, or acquire new ones, then yes there is some ignorance by someone regarding how the salary cap works.

Boldin actually came out and said if he wasn't going to stay with the Ravens, he would rather retire. Obviously, he backed off of that.

If the team could resign Flacco at the expense of a bevy of other players and structure the deal so that it was cap friendly in 2013 to attempt to minimize the damage, they certainly could have let him go, re-structured a couple of contracts (Boldin, Suggs, Yanda, Oher, Webb, Ngata, Rice?...several to choose from) and negotiated similar cap-friendly deals with the players they had to let go, and been better off in the long run (possibly, as that obviously remains to be seen).

Year 1 of Flacco's big contract = no playoffs. Scoreboard to date = Don't Pay Him 1, Pay Him 0. Years 2 and 3 will determine whether or not the Ravens made the right move, as IMO there is no way in hell Flacco gets to that 28.55 cap season without re-structuring or getting released outright.

Your profound ignorance of the cap is stunning. The numbers are meaningless in 3 years, because they aren't guaranteed. His cap numbers are reasonable over the next 3 years, then at that point the deal is restructured and the 28.5M number disappears. The fact is, his cap number remains reasonable and doesn't keep them from doing anything.

Flacco's contract isn't keeping the Ravens from doing anything, your whole premise is flawed. It exists only in your head. The contract is commensurate with the kind of players he is. Yeah, he isn't Peyton Manning, but he isn't being paid like that either. He is a Super Bowl MVP and a guy who has led them to the playoffs 5 of the 6 years he has been there. Good QB's are hard to find, and if you have one you don't "let them go", because then you need a QB. The Ravens spent years with one of the best defenses in the game, but couldn't win because they didn't have one. Now they have one, and you want them to get rid of him because of money? That is assinine.

The whole point of this thing is to keep accumulating good players so you can win. However, good players will get paid, so eventually a good team will have trouble with the cap. That is the way the thing is set up, so they have to make decisions and let players go. Flacco doesn't keep them from doing anything, their cap troubles are due to a lot of good players making good money. Those are the kind of problems good teams have.

Having the most cap room doesn't win anything. Paying a lot of money for a good QB hasn't kept teams with Manning, Brady, Brees or Rodgers from winning. Most of the winning teams, at least those that sustain it, have cap trouble because they have good players that have to get paid. They don't let the cap tail wag the dog.

[IlluminatusUIUC]

Llumy---your argument is flawed, because if the players you listed stayed with the team it isn't unreasonable to expect them to perform at the same level, as opposed to the level they played in this season under different coaches, different systems, different team mates, etc.

Like who? Boldin actually increased his production in San Francisco, Kruger's production was replaced (and improved) by Dumervil. Ellerbe was the loss they couldn't fully replace, but when deciding how to pay, is it going to be a young QB who's just played lights out at the Super Bowl (:rimshot:) or a series of backups, an older wideout, and a linebacker who's had one good season so far?

I mean, your solution is to keep Boldin for one year and turn the team over to Alex Smith, who has had far far less success in his career that Flacco. And then you point out that players can look worse when they move to other teams. So then what? You get Alex Smith for one year (as noted his contract expires) and Boldin for one year. What then if Boldin retires? You now how Smith, a guy notorious for never throwing downfield trying to throw to Torrey Smith, a guy who only runs downfield.


Ginger---you misunderstand the premise of the thread, if you think the ramifications only apply to this season. Sure, Flacco is only 6.8mil this season, but next he is 14.8, 14.55 and then 28.55. If you think that kind of escalation isn't going to have a profound, long-term effect on the team's ability to keep players, or acquire new ones, then yes there is some ignorance by someone regarding how the salary cap works.

Boldin actually came out and said if he wasn't going to stay with the Ravens, he would rather retire. Obviously, he backed off of that.

If the team could resign Flacco at the expense of a bevy of other players and structure the deal so that it was cap friendly in 2013 to attempt to minimize the damage, they certainly could have let him go, re-structured a couple of contracts (Boldin, Suggs, Yanda, Oher, Webb, Ngata, Rice?...several to choose from) and negotiated similar cap-friendly deals with the players they had to let go, and been better off in the long run (possibly, as that obviously remains to be seen).

Year 1 of Flacco's big contract = no playoffs. Scoreboard to date = Don't Pay Him 1, Pay Him 0. Years 2 and 3 will determine whether or not the Ravens made the right move, as IMO there is no way in hell Flacco gets to that 28.55 cap season without re-structuring or getting released outright.

The salary cap is also expected to climb in the future. (http://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2013/2/19/4006302/2013-nfl-salary-cap-going-up)
"The NFLPA also said that the organization expects the cap numbers to climb significantly starting in 2014, when new television deals go into effect. The league has disputed that notion in the past."

The Ravens had a championship window open as long as Reed and Lewis made their D respectable. They squandered almost a decade of it playing around with bums like Kyle Boller, Tony Banks, Elvis Grbac, and over the hill Steve McNair before they finally found Flacco and were able to get over the hump. The Ravens are usually the poster child for the "You don't need a QB to win" crowd, but the Ravens really show how brutally difficult that strategy is. They were due to regress regardless when those two left, and the fact that it coincided with their pro bowl Center retiring, their left tackle's and star halfback's play falling off a cliff exacerbated the issue.

[YardRat]

Your profound ignorance of the cap is stunning. The numbers are meaningless in 3 years, because they aren't guaranteed. His cap numbers are reasonable over the next 3 years, then at that point the deal is restructured and the 28.5M number disappears. The fact is, his cap number remains reasonable and doesn't keep them from doing anything.

Flacco's contract isn't keeping the Ravens from doing anything, your whole premise is flawed. It exists only in your head. The contract is commensurate with the kind of players he is. Yeah, he isn't Peyton Manning, but he isn't being paid like that either. He is a Super Bowl MVP and a guy who has led them to the playoffs 5 of the 6 years he has been there. Good QB's are hard to find, and if you have one you don't "let them go", because then you need a QB. The Ravens spent years with one of the best defenses in the game, but couldn't win because they didn't have one. Now they have one, and you want them to get rid of him because of money? That is assinine.

The whole point of this thing is to keep accumulating good players so you can win. However, good players will get paid, so eventually a good team will have trouble with the cap. That is the way the thing is set up, so they have to make decisions and let players go. Flacco doesn't keep them from doing anything, their cap troubles are due to a lot of good players making good money. Those are the kind of problems good teams have.

Having the most cap room doesn't win anything. Paying a lot of money for a good QB hasn't kept teams with Manning, Brady, Brees or Rodgers from winning. Most of the winning teams, at least those that sustain it, have cap trouble because they have good players that have to get paid. They don't let the cap tail wag the dog.

The numbers only become meaningless if Baltimore returns to the playoffs, or wins another Super Bowl, with Flacco on the roster with those cap numbers. If they don't, than the argument that the cap space could have been used elsewhere to keep them competitive is completely valid.

I'm sorry you don't understand value vs return as it applies to the salary cap.

[GingerP]

The numbers only become meaningless if Baltimore returns to the playoffs, or wins another Super Bowl, with Flacco on the roster with those cap numbers. If they don't, than the argument that the cap space could have been used elsewhere to keep them competitive is completely valid.

I'm sorry you don't understand value vs return as it applies to the salary cap.

Your whole premise is faulty, though. You are letting the cap make your choices, instead of looking at the good football players. You are blaming the Flacco contract for the Ravens cap trouble, which is ludicrous. The mere fact of paying your QB top money doesn't preclude signing a good team around him. Look at the good teams, the majority are paying QBs top money. They manage the cap and field a team, but eventually they have to make choices.

Baltimore had to make hard choices, and they decided to get younger. They have a lot of good players making good money, like Ngata, Rice, Yanda, Webb, Suggs, etc. and they had to make choices. They decided to trade Boldin because he was getting older, if they really wanted to keep him they had the cap room. They would have liked to keep Kruger, but you can only keep so many good players with a hard cap.

No matter the Flacco deal, they would not have kept Kruger or Ellerbe at the money they got because they already had big money invested in core defensive players. You can only pay so many. Every team would like to not pay their players, but when you have good ones you have to make decisions.

The idea of not signing Flacco when he hits free agency is the dumbest thing I've heard. You don't get rid of a young QB. Every team in the league has a QB or is looking for one, because they are hard to find. Buffalo has been looking for one since Jim Kelly. if they finally found one and let him go because they didn't want to pay him, it would be dumb even by their standards.

[BillsFever21]

Every team would like to not pay their players, but when you have good ones you have to make decisions.



You mean every team isn't like Buffalo? They draft very few good players and when it's time to get paid they either trade them for 4th round draft picks or let them leave in free agency. Damn I thought it was just a coincidence, the refs and bad luck that the Bills haven't made the playoffs in an astounding 14 years.

The Bills continue to make cap decisions when there isn't cap trouble anywhere in sight. The ones that defend it always says the money needs to be used for such and such players who will be free agents in 2 or 3 years. Then when them guys become free agents we can't sign them because of the same thing. Wash, rinse and repeat once again.

To think that so many people approve of them being 20 million under the cap almost every season amazes me. Saving cap room is a smart thing if you have plans to use it in the near future. Never using it is another story altogether though. It's okay though because so many fans agree with keeping more money in Ralph's pocket and never using our cap money.