Joe Flacco 2012 playoffs vs Matthew Stafford 2021 playoffs

[Soko]

On 2/19/2022 at 6:24 PM, stl4life07 said:

I get your point but I dont mind this thread being made. Its a debate and for anyone to say that there is nothing to debate about then idk what to tell you. Was the pressure on Flacco to deliver in 2012 anywhere near the pressure for Stafford to deliver this season? Yes the only pressure Flacco had was to get a contract. There was no legacy on the line for him. We all knew Flacco wasnt a regular season QB. So its not like his postseason wouldve made him into a top 10 QB or a potential HOF'er. There was no people saying with Flacco its not just good enough for him to make the Superbowl he has to win it. So again nobody is saying Flacco didnt have a great postseason but in context Stafford postseason was under the most scrutiny that had he failed at any point everyone wouldve been out for blood him. That wouldnt have been the case with Flacco. In other words, every playoff game was the Superbowl for Stafford bc he had to deliver for his legacy to not go down the toilet by many people eyes. That wasnt the case with Flacco. And the fact that Stafford did deliver in the fashion that he did makes his postseason run better.  

You guys are keeping the off-season interesting, I’ll give you that much.

 

[WizeGuy]

Flacco seemed to have a much tougher road to the Superbowl while also putting up better stats. 

[JetsCrash]

Flacco had arguably the greatest postseason for a quarterback ever and was nearly flawless against very tough competition (Broncos and Pats on the road and the 49ers in the Super Bowl). Stafford had a great postseason, but almost nothing compares to 2012 Flacco. 

[seminoles1]

On 2/19/2022 at 5:17 PM, FrantikRam said:

Agreed its not as good as Flaccos, but factoring in how good the defenses were that each faced and the 2nd and 4th options being out along with three GW drives, and overall numbers - I'd be pretty confident that it's a top 10 run and probably closer to top 5

That's still a wild take to me. He was good. Can we leave it at that? Just because a recent run was good doesn't make it close to top 5 all-time.

[jrry32]

It's Stafford, and it's not even close.

 

 

 

 

Did I say Stafford? I meant Playoff Flacco. 😉

[Bassomatic]

Matthew Stafford had a lot more help on offense last season than Joe Flacco did 10 seasons ago. In addition, Flacco didn't throw a single INT, and tied Joe Montana for most TD passes in a post-season without an INT (11). My vote goes to Joe Flacco.

[diamondbull424]

On 2/19/2022 at 5:54 PM, stl4life07 said:

I think the narrative does make a difference. If that was the case then Peyton finally breaking through and winning a Superbowl with the Colts dont mean a thing compared to Foles winning a Superbowl with the Eagles. Two totally different situations. For Peyton it was him winning to get that narrative of "only a regular season QB" off his back. Foles winning a Superbowl still didnt truly change the way people saw him. Of course winning a Superbowl means something and Foles had two of the best postseason games ever against the Vikings and then the Pats. I dont think anyone is looking at Foles any differently in general other than him having a great postseason in 2017 to help the Eagles win the Superbowl. Everyone knows the Eagles wouldnt have won it without him. 

Everyone knows the Ravens wouldnt have won the Superbowl in 2012 without Flacco. Nobody is saying Flacco is now a top 10 QB and future HOF'er bc he won the Superbowl. People are saying the only thing that was missing from Stafford was showing he can win on the biggest stage but most importantly can he win with a great organization and he did so.

You’re making it seem like Stafford winning this ring got him into the HOF. Only so many QBs can make it and of the QBs he’s never been considered a legit top 5 QB, he’s been considered a stat padder on bad teams. Maybe if he wins TWO rings, then it would be a conversation. But as it stands Stafford hasn’t had a better career than QBs that might have to wait some but should get in like Big Ben and Russell Wilson.

Heck this one ring doesn’t even make me put Stafford above Eli Manning’s career accomplishments.

You keep using hindsight bias to determine your “narrative” with players.

After Flacco’s run he went from a top 12-15 QB to many talking about him as a potential top 5 QB; the idea was he needed to prove it with a good regular season, but he was entering Matt Ryan (at the time) territory. Then he proved the SB run was a fluke.

Nick Foles after his run had enough in Philly legitimately thinking it might be best to trade promising young QB Carson Wentz (at the time) and go with Foles who the team galvanized around.

The fact that you don’t even remember the Flacco run and feel qualified to give your opinion is tomfoolery. I don’t speak towards the Joe Montana run, you know why? Because I never saw it. Nothing Stafford did this postseason makes legit postseason lore. There wasn’t a Minneapolis miracle or Mile High Miracle moment. You say Stafford’s TD was legendary, I don’t hear anyone nicknaming it due to how special it was. Lore is built around just that and nothing Stafford did was deemed “special” enough to obtain a lore-ish nickname. No one will have it on a playoff top 10 plays list… except maybe you.

I feel your argument to this point has been very Skip Bayless-ish “he’s better because he plays with moxy and guts.”

[stl4life07]

38 minutes ago, diamondbull424 said:

You’re making it seem like Stafford winning this ring got him into the HOF. Only so many QBs can make it and of the QBs he’s never been considered a legit top 5 QB, he’s been considered a stat padder on bad teams. Maybe if he wins TWO rings, then it would be a conversation. But as it stands Stafford hasn’t had a better career than QBs that might have to wait some but should get in like Big Ben and Russell Wilson.

Heck this one ring doesn’t even make me put Stafford above Eli Manning’s career accomplishments.

You keep using hindsight bias to determine your “narrative” with players.

After Flacco’s run he went from a top 12-15 QB to many talking about him as a potential top 5 QB; the idea was he needed to prove it with a good regular season, but he was entering Matt Ryan (at the time) territory. Then he proved the SB run was a fluke.

Nick Foles after his run had enough in Philly legitimately thinking it might be best to trade promising young QB Carson Wentz (at the time) and go with Foles who the team galvanized around.

The fact that you don’t even remember the Flacco run and feel qualified to give your opinion is tomfoolery. I don’t speak towards the Joe Montana run, you know why? Because I never saw it. Nothing Stafford did this postseason makes legit postseason lore. There wasn’t a Minneapolis miracle or Mile High Miracle moment. You say Stafford’s TD was legendary, I don’t hear anyone nicknaming it due to how special it was. Lore is built around just that and nothing Stafford did was deemed “special” enough to obtain a lore-ish nickname. No one will have it on a playoff top 10 plays list… except maybe you.

I feel your argument to this point has been very Skip Bayless-ish “he’s better because he plays with moxy and guts.”

No Im not saying Stafford winning a ring put him in the HOF. All I was saying is that if Flacco failed in the playoffs nobody wouldve thought any differently of him. Yes he was playing for a contract but thats it. Many players play for contracts. Thats nothing new. What Stafford was playing for was his legacy. The notion that he couldnt win in Detroit bc Detroit was this bad organization that never gave him stability was put to the test. The Rams has a winning culture, great players on each unit, and great coaching staff. Stafford wanted to be on the big stage to show what he can do. The amount of pressure on Stafford was extremely high. His first playoff game was a stand alone MNF game. First time in NFL history a playoff game was on MNF. You think the NFL did that on purpose? They knew exactly what they were doing. So either Stafford was going to flop for the world to see or thrive. The Rams obviously made easy work of the Cards and Stafford got his first playoff win. Do you know what the conversation was? It wasnt Stafford finally got the monkey off his back. It was McVay tried to hide Stafford by running the ball with Akers and Michel and Stafford only threw 17 passes so he didnt have no pressure in the game. 

You are right I dont fully remember the run Flacco had. I do think it was definitely special so Im not trying to down play what he did. Im just looking at it from the fact that he nearly didnt have the amount of pressure on him to win that year than Stafford. Stafford had pressure on him from the time the trade went down. He was put under the microscope from Week 1 to the Superbowl with every snap he took. He not only delivered but did it in epic fashion on 3 straight game winning drives in the playoffs and is the first QB in NFL history to have 6,000yds passing and 50tds and won the Superbowl. 

[Soko]

58 minutes ago, stl4life07 said:

Im just looking at it from the fact that he nearly didnt have the amount of pressure on him to win that year than Stafford. 

We have different definitions of the word “fact”…

[JAF-N72EX]

On 2/19/2022 at 11:25 AM, stl4life07 said:

I hardly ever vote on polls so that’s irrelevant. I’m not biased. This was a legacy postseason for Stafford. The way people viewed him coming into these playoffs and the way people now view him after these playoffs are drastic. Nothing Flacco did in his postseason run made people look at him any differently right now. 

You do realize his nickname was "January Joe" and that his playoff run solidified this name, right?

I personally hated the moniker and never believed in it and I was in the minority, but you don't get a nickname like that for no reason either. So to say people didn't look at him any differently after his playoff run is 100% false. In fact, it was the exact opposite. His playoff run made him a household name.

I don't see anyone running around saying "playoff Matthew".

Edited April 24, 2022 by JAF-N72EX

[JAF-N72EX]

On 2/25/2022 at 11:04 PM, jrry32 said:

It's Stafford, and it's not even close.

Your right....Stafford isn't even close. 😉

[rocky_rams]

I’m just glad the Rams won the SB. Don’t care about anything else 
 

But it’s Flacco. 

[JAF-N72EX]

1 hour ago, rocky_rams said:

I’m just glad the Rams won the SB. Don’t care about anything else 

I can't be mad at that outlook either. I would feel the same way.

I don't care how we got there, just as long as we do.

[diamondbull424]

18 hours ago, stl4life07 said:

No Im not saying Stafford winning a ring put him in the HOF. All I was saying is that if Flacco failed in the playoffs nobody wouldve thought any differently of him. Yes he was playing for a contract but thats it. Many players play for contracts. Thats nothing new. What Stafford was playing for was his legacy. The notion that he couldnt win in Detroit bc Detroit was this bad organization that never gave him stability was put to the test. The Rams has a winning culture, great players on each unit, and great coaching staff. Stafford wanted to be on the big stage to show what he can do. The amount of pressure on Stafford was extremely high. His first playoff game was a stand alone MNF game. First time in NFL history a playoff game was on MNF. You think the NFL did that on purpose? They knew exactly what they were doing. So either Stafford was going to flop for the world to see or thrive. The Rams obviously made easy work of the Cards and Stafford got his first playoff win. Do you know what the conversation was? It wasnt Stafford finally got the monkey off his back. It was McVay tried to hide Stafford by running the ball with Akers and Michel and Stafford only threw 17 passes so he didnt have no pressure in the game. 

You are right I dont fully remember the run Flacco had. I do think it was definitely special so Im not trying to down play what he did. Im just looking at it from the fact that he nearly didnt have the amount of pressure on him to win that year than Stafford. Stafford had pressure on him from the time the trade went down. He was put under the microscope from Week 1 to the Superbowl with every snap he took. He not only delivered but did it in epic fashion on 3 straight game winning drives in the playoffs and is the first QB in NFL history to have 6,000yds passing and 50tds and won the Superbowl. 

Again, this is your narrative.

Ray Lewis announced prior to the playoffs that not only would he be coming back after being out for the year (that was the first IR-return season), but that it would be his “Last Ride” as well.

Imagine being the QB of a team where Ray Lewis, one of the all time greats, just announced PRIOR to the start of the playoffs that this is his last series of games.

Now imagine a route where said QB has to go through Andrew Luck, Peyton Manning (top 5 GOAT), Tom Brady/Billichick (GOATs), and then one of the better defensive units of the last 20 years.

Stafford’s “legacy” is currently on the same “ring of honor” tier that Flacco’s is on. He’s not a HOF atm (the next tier up). So this Super Bowl didn’t really change anything. It didn’t really add anything to playoff lore either. As a Rams fan, I’m sure it feels special and great! But in the grand scheme, it was just a quality run.

You keep mentioning legacy as if this has changed his post career trajectory. It might, if he continues winning and places himself within the top 3-5 current QBs. Then he’s got a shot. But as it stands, his legacy will be as a “hall of good” or maybe a “hall of very good” QB. Had he been on the Phillip Rivers career tier and gotten this ring, I might agree with you about “legacy” and “pressure”. But as it stands, this probably just put him on the Matt Ryan career level and nothing more. He’ll need either another ring or an MVP before we can talk about legacy type impact IMO.

So really, Flacco squandering Lewis’ last ride, I feel was more pressure packed than Stafford not getting it done for the Rams this season. Maybe next season the pressure might’ve mounted, but this season was his first year with a new team, he had built in excuses for failure.

Edited April 24, 2022 by diamondbull424

[diamondbull424]

11 hours ago, JAF-N72EX said:

You do realize his nickname was "January Joe" and that his playoff run solidified this name, right?

I personally hated the moniker and never believed in it and I was in the minority, but you don't get a nickname like that for no reason either. So to say people didn't look at him any differently after his playoff run is 100% false. In fact, it was the exact opposite. His playoff run made him a household name.

I don't see anyone running around saying "playoff Matthew".

I hereby dub him… Super Bowl Stafford. Here here! 😂