Jump to content
patriotsheatyan

Should Flacco be finished as a starting QB?

Should Flacco be finished as a starting QB?  

60 members have voted

  1. 1. Should Flacco be finished as a starting QB after this year?

    • Yes
      31
    • No, he's fine
      14
    • None of these problems are his fault!
      0
    • He should get one more chance?
      15


Recommended Posts

Just now, everlong said:

Do you have any idea what an anomaly is? Here is Webster's definition: "something that deviates from what is standard, normal, or expected." Flacco's Super Bowl run fits that definition, hence why I factored it out.

Here let's take out his best and worst of the postseason: his 2012 playoff run and his first two seasons in the NFL.

6 games 

13 TDs 4 INTs

238 YPGs 61%

Still pretty good I'd say against the Steelers and Patriots 4/6 games.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Thomas5737 said:

Trade you Ricardo Louis and Rashard Higgins for Wallace and Maclin. Even Watson for Devalve. Throw in Collins for Crowell. Oh, and you can just have Hue.

Flacco doesn't have the GSOT but I'm not sure all of his failures are because of that.

I will without doubt swap everyone on offense with the Browns if we get Hue at OC. Not even a second thought.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, everlong said:

Do you have any idea what an anomaly is? Here is Webster's definition: "something that deviates from what is standard, normal, or expected." Flacco's Super Bowl run fits that definition, hence why I factored it out.

Since 2010 the Ravens have made the playoffs 4 times (2010, 2011, 2012, and 2014). I don't think it's cherry picking to mention his playoff stats since 2010. Cherry picking, in the truest sense of the word, would be picking and choosing years which he had good performances and aggregating them. It's not an anomaly if Flacco's just been good in the playoffs ever since 2010, is it? In fact, one could argue that it probably just means he got better as the years went on. 

I mean, how can you look at this bulk data and conclude that 4 consecutive post season appearance statistics, all aggregated, is "cherry picking" and "an anomaly"?

  Passing Rushing Scoring
Rk Year Date G# Tm Opp Result Cmp Att Cmp% Yds TD Int Rate Sk Yds Y/A AY/A Att Yds Y/A TD TD Pts
1 2008 1/4/2009 17 BAL MIA W 27-9 9 23 39.13 135 0 0 59.1 0 0 5.87 5.87 5 8 1.6 1 1 6
2 2008 1/10/2009 18 BAL TEN W 13-10 11 22 50 161 1 0 89.4 0 0 7.32 8.23 5 5 1 0 0 0
3 2008 1/18/2009 19 BAL PIT L 14-23 13 30 43.33 141 0 3 18.2 3 16 4.7 0.2 2 -8 -4 0 0 0
4 2009 1/10/2010 17 BAL NWE W 33-14 4 10 40 34 0 1 10 0 0 3.4 -1.1 6 5 0.83 0 0 0
5 2009 1/16/2010 18 BAL IND L 3-20 20 35 57.14 189 0 2 48.4 1 6 5.4 2.83 1 2 2 0 0 0
6 2010 1/9/2011 17 BAL KAN W 30-7 25 34 73.53 265 2 0 115.4 4 17 7.79 8.97 7 26 3.71 0 0 0
7 2010 1/15/2011 18 BAL PIT L 24-31 16 30 53.33 125 1 1 61.1 5 34 4.17 3.33 2 -1 -0.5 0 0 0
8 2011 1/15/2012 17 BAL HOU W 20-13 14 27 51.85 176 2 0 97.1 5 36 6.52 8 2 -1 -0.5 0 0 0
9 2011 1/22/2012 18 BAL NWE L 20-23 22 36 61.11 306 2 1 95.4 3 24 8.5 8.36 4 27 6.75 0 0 0
10 2012 1/6/2013 17 BAL IND W 24-9 12 23 52.17 282 2 0 125.6 1 13 12.26 14 3 -3 -1 0 0 0
11 2012 1/12/2013 18 BAL DEN W 38-35 18 34 52.94 331 3 0 116.2 1 7 9.74 11.5 2 7 3.5 0 0 0
12 2012 1/20/2013 19 BAL NWE W 28-13 21 36 58.33 240 3 0 106.2 2 5 6.67 8.33 3 12 4 0 0 0
13 2012 2/3/2013 20 BAL SFO W 34-31 22 33 66.67 287 3 0 124.2 2 13 8.7 10.52 0 0   0 0 0
14 2014 1/3/2015 17 BAL PIT W 30-17 18 29 62.07 259 2 0 114 1 13 8.93 10.31 8 8 1 0 0 0
15 2014 1/10/2015 18 BAL NWE L 31-35 28 45 62.22 292 4 2 92.1 0 0 6.49 6.27 0 0   0 0 0
    15 Games       10/5/2000 253 447 56.6 3223 25 10 88.6 28 184 7.21 7.32 50 87 1.74 1 1 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, everlong said:

Do you have any idea what an anomaly is? Here is Webster's definition: "something that deviates from what is standard, normal, or expected." Flacco's Super Bowl run fits that definition, hence why I factored it out.

10 games in a row of stellar play is not an anomaly. You factored it out because you didn't like what the numbers said. It was clear cherrypicking.

Edited by jrry32

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×