Ravenseconbeast

I think you have a closer agreement to few things than you think. I completely agree with this.

You should only compare what SB winner had on their overall roster. Who told you( or have I told you to) compare what other QB got paid 3-4 years ago is relevant? Don't feed the words to my mouth.

Here is a much easier way: Look at all the SB winners past 5 years and check their contract and their roster. Stop looking at Browns and losers and perceive that as "OUR" ravens market value. That will never work for us. Will never win SB for us.

Based on the roster they have it works for them. That is Vikings GM/FO belief. Doesn't mean anytihng if actually dont mean they win SB.

Market value based on which team? Again, the 'triggered bait' names are the only names that were mentioned. I've answered the questions. If you are really curious about other team with successful contracts that actually won SB, check the structure of those QBs pay that year and the overall team.

I do, like I said, stop pointing out the losers with Flacco. Give me successful QBs that worked well also.

Nope they don't expect Sam Bradford to suck and paid that money. They expect him to take them to the SB and win it.

teams paid, thinking they got a deal. the 'specific' names flacco apologist are putting up are not good comparisons.

Why are you comparing only the losers to Joe Flacco? How about we actually bring up successful ones. You can show their structure of pays also.

Names you pointed out should not have been paid that much. I feel like there is a confusion. 18m is too much. It is not a 'standard' pay for mediocre/borderline franchise QBs.

I was wrong about Ray Rice pay for sure. Don't think i've ever said i wouldn't agree on that part.

Don't pay him. Or structure it so we pay him loads in 1st two year and get rid of him if he doesn't perform like he has in SB. We paid that money based on his SB performances. Our first offer was based on what he did throughout his 4 years. I would've been ok with the first offer Ravens gave him. Would've been easier to get rid of flacco if he did not perform.

I wouldn't have paid either of them tbh. It wasn't a either/or choice. All i am saying is people reason is "Flacco won it" Actually Flacco was part of it, not the whole reason why we won the SB.

Depends on the organization. If you have a winning Organization with the right support, it is a different story. People need to stop thinking we'll turn into the next Browns or another loser team that is dysfunctional.

The Super Bowl win: Somehow the Superbowl effort was soley only Flacco and he should be the one that gets all the reward. Doesn't make sense to me. What about the freakish effort by our Oline? and Anquan freak effort? No Flacco reaped all the reward. Flacco did well, but that wasn't only him.

If we have a starting new QB, no i don't expect us to rotate QBs every 3-5 years. If he is the right player at the right price, then we should pay him.

No you can't bank on a new QB. But if you see an issue, you need to address it. Not let it rot and stink away. (Tony Romo is a great example of a franchise scared they have no other alternative so they paid him) Paying someone just because you fear the mediocre QB can get worse if you choose to let him go to FA is a sure way to lose your chance to a SB. But the way you win the other SB contender is by always having better players than the opponent. "Right player, right price" I always believe in that mantra. If you cannot do this when you pay FAs, you cannot win SBs.

All im trying to point is that rmcjacket was pointing toward the message that paying QBs '18m' is fine and its a standard. What i argue is that it is not. No GM/organization pays these QBs with that expectation. they expect these franchise QBs to be great.

Pointing out that sometimes you don't have to 'pay an adequate' QBs a ransom money to be a SB champs Sometimes you take a shot, and if you have a new QB and a organization that can support him, you can have a successful team.

Cowboys happen to take a shot and actually drafted a QB. Seems like it paid off.

Seriously? you don't really believe they want Joe Flacco at this point with his contract do you? No the jets/browns/bills arent praying decade after decade hoping they get Joe Flacco. That is ridiculous. QB 'as good as Joe' got paid after 2012. Has he performed to his contract? If you say yes, you are a fool. Ravens were the major loser on that contract. Remember, we won the Superbowl before we paid him. The team that won the SB was under Joe's rookie contract.

You can add Brock Osweiler to that list. "You know why? Because the alternative costs them more" Just like Tony Romo sitting on bench for 3 straight years after glassman gets a twinkle hit resulting in multiple surgery. So they needed to pay the man. (sarcasm) The alternative so happens to be, surprising them out of nowhere is Dak Prescott.

How do you justify 6TD/7INT QB that got paid 120m? Because the alternative cost them more im sure. Your 'research' is just all say-so and its perception.

determined by GM rmcjacket23 im sure. no, no one pays 'adequate QBs' knowing they are mediocre. They hoped they got a bargain. Some have, some didn't. And the one that did not, you can be SURE GM/FO/Organization is planning to figure out how to get rid of them asap. Im still amazed you are still trying to justify Flacco's contract and trying to convince folks 'he is worth' that money. Ridiculous...

"It'll be another 3 years years until Joe ever produce single 4TD/0INT game in a single season" -2014. (Before that he achieved this once @2012) Im still right on track. Maybe the hapless browns can be a target to achieve this impossible goal of acheiveing this effort in todays modern passing league.