Flacco's fault?

[Elky]

2 hours ago, Broncofan said:

Flacco wasn't worth the 2nd contract.   If he doesn't win the SB, he doesn't sniff that kind of $.    

Even so, there's no way it's all on him.   That kind of contract makes it harder to contend - it doesn't make your team bad by himself.   So as usual, it's a little of "all of the above".

Given a SB win is no small feat, I think the fanbase will take it.  But they're probably also glad the Flacco era likely comes to an end after the season is done.

Flacco's not that different than most vet QB's who know they are on their way out.  I mean, Big Ben is saying just as much.  The difference is Big Ben hinted heavily at retirement - which then led PIT to start planning for the future.  Flacco's play necessitated this move, but it's not like Flacco said anything to make this happen.  So I sympathize with Flacco's situation a lot more than I do with Big Ben.

Well, duh.

Baltimore was backed into a corner. They tried to extend Flacco in July, but he opted to gamble to make more money and it paid off for him. You can't let the guy that was the main reason you won the Super Bowl walk.

[Broncofan]

5 minutes ago, Elky said:

Well, duh.

Baltimore was backed into a corner. They tried to extend Flacco in July, but he opted to gamble to make more money and it paid off for him. You can't let the guy that was the main reason you won the Super Bowl walk.

No, but the gamble that failed 2x is having the team bet against the QB.   WAS could have had Cousins for 4/75M and the first 2 years at 44M - but instead watched him get 44M in franchise tags, and still walk.   Flacco could have been signed to a deal 3-4M less AAV at a minimum before 2012.  That's definitely on the FO.

I mean, the Jaguars were faced with a brutal decision, and the likelihood of a failed physical and renewing the 19M option forced them to commit to Bortles for 2 years at a cheaper AAV rate and some cap relief.  But to put in full context - Flacco & Cousins' play was nowhere near as bad, and from what we now know, the contract they were asking for was pretty much league-average at the time of their original offer.   I don't blame BAL for being the test case, but WAS should have known better. 

[Elky]

6 minutes ago, Broncofan said:

No, but the gamble that failed 2x is having the team bet against the QB.   WAS could have had Cousins for 4/75M and the first 2 years at 44M - but instead watched him get 44M in franchise tags, and still walk.   Flacco could have been signed to a deal 3-4M less AAV at a minimum before 2012.  That's definitely on the FO.

I mean, the Jaguars were faced with a brutal decision, and the likelihood of a failed physical and renewing the 19M option forced them to commit to Bortles for 2 years at a cheaper AAV rate and some cap relief.  But to put in full context - Flacco & Cousins' play was nowhere near as bad, and from what we now know, the contract they were asking for was pretty much league-average at the time of their original offer.   I don't blame BAL for being the test case, but WAS should have known better. 

Not sure what Washington has to do with anything; they clearly didn't value Cousins that much and should have let him go two years ago. Baltimore wanted Flacco in the long run, but he rejected their offer.

No one's "at fault". Flacco wanted to make more money like the rest of us would have and went out and earned it. Not much Baltimore can do when the QB rejects their offer.

[Broncofan]

9 minutes ago, Elky said:

Not sure what Washington has to do with anything; they clearly didn't value Cousins that much and should have let him go two years ago. Baltimore wanted Flacco in the long run, but he rejected their offer.

No one's "at fault". Flacco wanted to make more money like the rest of us would have and went out and earned it. Not much Baltimore can do when the QB rejects their offer.

Ah gotcha.  I remembered they didn't get a deal done before 2012, and then had to pay the big $ after the SB run.   Do you recall what the BAL offer was pre-2012 season?   

I put WAS & BAL together because I know WAS bet against Cousins playing well enough to deserve a 4/75M contract.  WAS then lowballed Cousins to insulting levels after the 1st franchise tag.  So they did want him - they just didn't want to pay the new market rates (but painted him as the bad guy) after losing their gamble.   If BAL made a reasonable offer before 2012 season started, then yeah, apples to oranges, the examples aren't similar.   But if the Ravens had done the same as WAS and gambled on Flacco not playing well enough to get a higher offer, that's a gamble they lost (thus the Q on how much they offered Flacco before 2012).

[Elky]

7 minutes ago, Broncofan said:

Ah gotcha.  I remembered they didn't get a deal done before 2012, and then had to pay the big $ after the SB run.   Do you recall what the BAL offer was pre-2012 season?   

I put WAS & BAL together because I know WAS bet against Cousins playing well enough to deserve a 4/75M contract.  WAS then lowballed Cousins to insulting levels after the 1st franchise tag.  So they did want him - they just didn't want to pay the new market rates (but painted him as the bad guy) after losing their gamble.   If BAL made a reasonable offer before 2012 season started, then yeah, apples to oranges, but if they had done the same and gambled on Flacco not playing well enough to get a higher offer, that's a gamble they lost (thus the Q on how much they offered Flacco before 2012).

The contract they offered in July that year was $16m per year: https://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/05/sports/football/ravens-to-pay-for-joe-flaccos-exquisite-timing.html?pagewanted=all

[nagahide13]

I don't get why people are down on Flacco for not reaching out to mentor Jackson. Right now, Joe is the starter. He should be preparing himself. If Jackson had already been named the starter, I could see where this is coming from. He hasn't. Flacco should be working as hard as he possibly can to make sure Jackson never sees the field as a Raven in the first place.. just not in any kind of antagonistic way.

As far as "who is to blame", it's obviously the front office since they're responsible for building the team, and it's not as though the Ravens have been particularly under-performing in relation to their talent level and expectations.

[DontTazeMeBro]

Harbaugh picked and chose to keep the coordinators. The front office ignored the offensive side of the ball and won’t keep or acquire talent because of outdated “Ravens player, Ravens price.” I guess I’d go with the front office 

Its hard to say whose fault it is for the injuries every year. IDK if it’s FO getting injury prone players. Harbaugh overdoing it in the offseason. Or maybe something else. But I don’t buy that it’s just bad luck 

[KhanYouDigIt]

Joe Flacco threw for 28 yards against the Jags. 1.5 YPA. Never forget.

[Broncofan]

26 minutes ago, KhanYouDigIt said:

Joe Flacco threw for 28 yards against the Jags. 1.5 YPA. Never forget.

To be fair that was a team effort of suckitide.   But Flacco did his part.  Would have had a much higher QBR if he threw every ball in the dirt after the snap.  

[Broncofan]

1 hour ago, Elky said:

The contract they offered in July that year was $16m per year: https://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/05/sports/football/ravens-to-pay-for-joe-flaccos-exquisite-timing.html?pagewanted=all

Link doesn’t work.  But let’s go with that - at the time 16M per year would have been Favre level money 5th.   Now guaranteed $ matters more and with time that would have quickly become more like top 10 $.  

It was a fair offer then given Flacco’s performance.   Very similar to the 4/75M Cousins made to WAS before the 2016 season.   

[Teen Girl Squad]

The post SB contract was an overpay but at least Playoff Joe Flacco was still a thing and you hoped he would continue to grow and be more consistently good. Turns out he was content and is kind of just coasting. The bigger mistake has been the extension and until this year, really ignoring the developmental QB (Tyrod being let go and was drafted in 2011). They should have looked for a successor and let his contract end but much like the NY Giant, the mythology that as long as your a playoff team that SB runs are a realistic option clouded their judgment and they enxtended him to try to free up win now cap space.

[Tugboat]

I don't think it's really Flacco's fault.  It's sort of a byproduct of this goofy system of "good, not great" QBs holding teams hostage with untenable contracts...which makes it extremely difficult to put the right sort of supporting cast in place to win.

He's had a sort of revolving door of weapons, which doesn't help.  But more than that, they've completely forgotten how to run the football effectively for most of those disappointing years.  If you can't supplement a Joe Flacco with a strong run game, you're not going anywhere.

 

I voted Front Office/Rest of Organization, for being unable to find a way to support Flacco to a level he needs to succeed.  But it's really just more about the insanity of QB contracts...and this was one of the milestones in getting to the ridiculous environment we have now.  It was one of the really crippling ones, spending Elite money, on a good but not elite QB.  Putting a team in a situation where they can't afford to keep the guy at the price they command...but they can't really afford to lose them for nothing by letting their franchise QB walk either.  At least the Ravens got their championship out of him first.  Now, it's all about handing this sort of Elite Money to guys who have started like half a dozen games, or barely even taken their teams to the playoffs.

At some point, this QB wage scale arms race has to stop.  Eventually teams will have to start recognizing that at some point...the scale swings the other way, and you're better off just spending your money on a monster of a team, and hoping to hit on a QB out of the draft or a journeyman hitting a career hot streak at the right time.

Joe Flacco kinda feels like where this all started though.

 

So can i vote "Agents" and "QB Desperation"?

[derkommissar]

i vote Harbaugh.

i believe he is the core reason of the team has become so conservative. if you look back at 2008/2009 the playcalling was more interesting. its gotten much worse and i believe its harbaughs fault. i think over the years hes taken more control from coordinators and pushed into a more simplified ideology. (except kubiak. i think kubes demanded offensive control)

on the radio after a game you hear harbaugh saying: "ravens ball is beating your man". well if your running with players from a practice squad. good luck with that.

he reminds me of jeff fisher. harbaugh needs to go.

[JaguarCrazy2832]

I will admit that his weapons were lacking and losing Pitta definitely hurt plus never having a legit #1 but after the SB his TD:INT numbers were 98-84 if i did the math right...that is average and not worth the elite level money he got. Could have restructured to let some cap space help the team i suppose but he may have already did that

[MSURacerDT55]

Neither of the 4, Flacco benefitted from a flawed system