Should Flacco be finished as a starting QB?

[everlong]

10 minutes ago, Danand said:

If you prefer stats over playoff wins and super bowl wins, then yes, lol

Flacco is not exactly that great in the playoffs. Outside of his one anomaly Super Bowl run, his playoff stats look this:

180/321, 2083 yards, 14 TD, 10 INT, 77.4 passer rating, 6-5 record

Is that really worth being the #1 cap hit in the league?

[Danand]

5 minutes ago, everlong said:

That was like a century ago and he has only one playoff game since.

Sure dude, whatever fits your narrative. Still better results than 90% of the quarterbacks in the league since he was drafted.

[everlong]

1 minute ago, Danand said:

Sure dude, whatever fits your narrative. Still better results than 90% of the quarterbacks in the league since he was drafted.

But is he REALLY worth being the #1 cap hit in the league?

[TheKillerNacho]

I think it's really hard to justify Flacco being a starting-quality QB right now, and impossible to justify being worth his current contract.

Ravens should absolutely move on.

[lancerman]

I like how everyone knew his contract was stupid when they signed it, but you "just have to give a QB who just won a Super Bowl a big deal". It was the most predictable thing ever. 

[lancerman]

19 minutes ago, Danand said:

If you prefer stats over playoff wins and super bowl wins, then yes, lol

More of a talent on the team thing though. Flacco won a Super Bowl in a year where the Broncos were still finding themselves, the Patriots were still in their 09-13 dark years and the NFC was in flux while the Ravens were inching closer each year and had anew motivation with Ray Lewis retiring. Flacco really made his bones in a lightning in a bottle year. It wasn't like he consistently performed like 2012. The last time his team was even relevant was because his team snuck into the 2014 playoffs and got a match with the favorite Patriots and people thought "well maybe they can pull it off again".

[Apparition]

2 minutes ago, lancerman said:

More of a talent on the team thing though. Flacco won a Super Bowl in a year where the Broncos were still finding themselves, the Patriots were still in their 09-13 dark years and the NFC was in flux while the Ravens were inching closer each year and had anew motivation with Ray Lewis retiring. Flacco really made his bones in a lightning in a bottle year. It wasn't like he consistently performed like 2012. The last time his team was even relevant was because his team snuck into the 2014 playoffs and got a match with the favorite Patriots and people thought "well maybe they can pull it off again".

Come on, if you're going to devalue Flacco's championship, you don't need to reach nearly that far.

 

[RavensTillIDie]

There's a lot of things we can talk about here, and I agree that Flacco has been atrocious this year, that much is fact. However, has he had a lot of help? Not really, and I don't think anyone who has watched the games this year could place all the blame squarely on Joe's shoulders. He's simply the figurehead for a blustering storm of ineptitude on offense that ranges from the offensive coordinator on down to the skill positions and offensive line.

With that said, for the people asking the ridiculously stupid question of would you have paid a quarterback who won you a Super Bowl and looked amazing doing it? Hell yes. 10 times out of 10. One championship in the span of a decade is more than 80% of the league has seen in their entire lifetimes. So get out of here with that nonsense about, was he worth the money? Clearly it was not an investment in the long term, but rather a reward for ascertaining the biggest prize in football. That's why you play the game, not for year to year stats to reminisce on.

Oh, and for folks trying to draw ridiculous parallels between Flacco and quarterbacks like Watson, Dalton, Smith, etc. You honestly have no idea how dire the offensive situation is in Baltimore. All the aforementioned names have SOME type of complimentary piece or pieces that aid in the effectiveness of their respective quarterback, whether that be star receivers like Hopkins and Fuller. Or, a star tight end, multi faceted receiver and revelation at runningback (Kelce, Hill and Hunt).Or the ultimate bailout weapon in AJ Green. Not to mention every last one of them has SIGNIFICANTLY better minds calling the offensive plays for their teams, and just look how much of a drastic difference there is in Cincy after they changed coordinators. All these things matter to the QB position. There are maybe 3 or 4 guys left in the league that can elevate even the worst of teams, Flacco was never in that realm. But the situation he's currently in is easily the worst he's had during his entire time in Baltimore, and you add that to the fact that he's only getting older and coming off significant injuries, of course he's going to look horrendous.

And as far as the OP, Flacco isn't done by any means. However, if the Ravens can't put the pieces around him in order for him to be successful, of course he's going to continue to not be effective. At which point, when his contract allows, the team will have to make a decision on whether to move on from him or from the coaching staff/front office.

[Danger]

Looking at his career numbers, wow, he really isn't a good QB in this day and age. 

 

Too bad the Ravens gave him so much money for years to come, he's gonna keep collecting those paychecks regardless tbh.

[Soko]

2 hours ago, RavensTillIDie said:

So get out of here with that nonsense about, was he worth the money? Clearly it was not an investment in the long term, but rather a reward for ascertaining the biggest prize in football. 

Yeah, that’s not really how good contracts are set up. 

[Malik]

1 hour ago, Yin-Yang said:

Yeah, that’s not really how good contracts are set up. 

That's actually the definition of what a bad contract is and why runningbacks almost never get huge deals.

[everlong]

6 hours ago, lancerman said:

More of a talent on the team thing though. Flacco won a Super Bowl in a year where the Broncos were still finding themselves, the Patriots were still in their 09-13 dark years and the NFC was in flux while the Ravens were inching closer each year and had anew motivation with Ray Lewis retiring. Flacco really made his bones in a lightning in a bottle year. It wasn't like he consistently performed like 2012. The last time his team was even relevant was because his team snuck into the 2014 playoffs and got a match with the favorite Patriots and people thought "well maybe they can pull it off again".

Nah, Flacco was legit during that Super Bowl run. It wasn't like Trent Dilfer where all he had to do was not screw up; he threw for 11 touchdowns to zero picks and his deep ball was unstoppable.

And what do you mean "dark years"? I can understand calling 09 and 13 down years, but Brady won MVP in 2010, went to the Super Bowl in 2011 and were in the AFC Championship in 2012.

[Danger]

2 hours ago, everlong said:

Nah, Flacco was legit during that Super Bowl run. It wasn't like Trent Dilfer where all he had to do was not screw up; he threw for 11 touchdowns to zero picks and his deep ball was unstoppable.

And what do you mean "dark years"? I can understand calling 09 and 13 down years, but Brady won MVP in 2010, went to the Super Bowl in 2011 and were in the AFC Championship in 2012.

He went on a hotstreak and got paid. Still, being with a bad contract for winning a super bowl? I'd take that all day versus the alternative.

[Soko]

2 hours ago, everlong said:

 And what do you mean "dark years"? I can understand calling 09 and 13 down years, but Brady won MVP in 2010, went to the Super Bowl in 2011 and were in the AFC Championship in 2012.

The exodus of the defense and limited/predictable offense.

The defense in that period lost a lot of talent from the previous decade. And even though Brady played very well in 2010 and 2011, the offense was still one dimensional. Welker working the slot, no deep threat, mediocre run game (Ridley had one good year), relying heavily on the two tight ends. Those teams got exposed in the post season. 

[theJ]

17 hours ago, RavensTillIDie said:

There's a lot of things we can talk about here, and I agree that Flacco has been atrocious this year, that much is fact. However, has he had a lot of help? Not really, and I don't think anyone who has watched the games this year could place all the blame squarely on Joe's shoulders. He's simply the figurehead for a blustering storm of ineptitude on offense that ranges from the offensive coordinator on down to the skill positions and offensive line.

With that said, for the people asking the ridiculously stupid question of would you have paid a quarterback who won you a Super Bowl and looked amazing doing it? Hell yes. 10 times out of 10. One championship in the span of a decade is more than 80% of the league has seen in their entire lifetimes. So get out of here with that nonsense about, was he worth the money? Clearly it was not an investment in the long term, but rather a reward for ascertaining the biggest prize in football. That's why you play the game, not for year to year stats to reminisce on.

Oh, and for folks trying to draw ridiculous parallels between Flacco and quarterbacks like Watson, Dalton, Smith, etc. You honestly have no idea how dire the offensive situation is in Baltimore. All the aforementioned names have SOME type of complimentary piece or pieces that aid in the effectiveness of their respective quarterback, whether that be star receivers like Hopkins and Fuller. Or, a star tight end, multi faceted receiver and revelation at runningback (Kelce, Hill and Hunt).Or the ultimate bailout weapon in AJ Green. Not to mention every last one of them has SIGNIFICANTLY better minds calling the offensive plays for their teams, and just look how much of a drastic difference there is in Cincy after they changed coordinators. All these things matter to the QB position. There are maybe 3 or 4 guys left in the league that can elevate even the worst of teams, Flacco was never in that realm. But the situation he's currently in is easily the worst he's had during his entire time in Baltimore, and you add that to the fact that he's only getting older and coming off significant injuries, of course he's going to look horrendous.

And as far as the OP, Flacco isn't done by any means. However, if the Ravens can't put the pieces around him in order for him to be successful, of course he's going to continue to not be effective. At which point, when his contract allows, the team will have to make a decision on whether to move on from him or from the coaching staff/front office.

I agree with everything you said, except i think the Ravens probably could have gotten a better deal on that contract than they did.  Either by doing the deal sooner, or later.  As it was, they did the deal at the worst possible time from a team perspective.  But kudos to Flacco for cashing in at the exact right time.