Is It Necessary That We Hate Any Of Our Players That Weren't All-Pro?

[gabefergy]

[quote name='redrum52' timestamp='1336503827' post='1074075']
This is going to turn into a Flacco thread... Now I might be the catalyst, but I can see where this was going to go. Someone is going to call Flacco average, someone defends him and in the words of Fairy Deion, "It's on!".
[/quote]
Flacco is the best QB in the league.

[redrum52]

[quote name='gabefergy' timestamp='1336504017' post='1074078']

Flacco is the best QB in the league.
[/quote]

IT'S ON! I thought this before Calvinsmoke even said anything, it was when Arnie said something about peoples views of players or criticizing them. People criticize Flacco and usually get attacked for speaking their opinions. He's not the onky guy, just using him as an example. I never see anyone defending Michael Oher and he's made many plays for us, I just can't think of any. I also might be lying, but the point is he's always jumping early or holding.

[gabefergy]

[quote name='redrum52' timestamp='1336504271' post='1074080']
IT'S ON! I thought this before Calvinsmoke even said anything, it was when Arnie said something about peoples views of players or criticizing them. People criticize Flacco and usually get attacked for speaking their opinions.
[/quote]
I would say Flacco [i]detractors[/i] get criticized because they often fail to make reasonable or solid arguments. I am not going to criticize someone for having an opinion. I will criticize someone for saying "Flacco sucks because (Arizona game I'm looking at you) he didnt score any TDs so he really did nothing. It was Ray Rice who carried the offense"

Basically, people try to make something Black and White, when in reality everything is shades of grey.

[RavensDE]

[quote name='flynismo' timestamp='1336501844' post='1074054']
Well, that's kind of my point. 'Great' and 'elite' are practically interchangeable. Ray is a great player. Ed is a great player. Suggs is a great player.
JJ is pretty good.
[/quote]

This has become a vocabulary disagreement. Elite to me is someone who is a cut above all other players into an upper eschelon of top-tier talent with maybe one or two guys in the league at a given position. If such a person remains elite they go to the hall of fame.

A great player for me is someone who does their job exceedingly well. There are many great players in the league. JJ was never hurt and did his job exceedingly well. To me he should have went to a few pro-bowls, but there are few stats for good coverage and setting the edge. Ditto for Gregg. Landry...okay he's just good, not great...

[GrimCoconut]

[quote name='RavensDE' timestamp='1336475475' post='1073854']
I get so tired of all the negative talk about players that we have had that really played well for us but for some reason or another things didn't work out, or they never had the potential to be truly great.


Examples
Chris Carr
Chris Carr was signed to be return man and nickel corner and then started almost the whole season and played solid until he was injured. He would tackle and really throw his body around. He outplayed his original contract. We looked thin at CB signed him to a front loaded deal last year for more than we wanted to. He got hurt and this season he was expensive and deep on the bench so we cut him. He was cool with it and we were a good organization about it. No need to say he sucked. He was good for us.

Corey Ivy
We were again thin at CB and we signed Ivy as a nickel package corner. He was physical and typically a smart player. He wasn't a building block but he played well for us and he went on as a journeyman. He has my respect.

Frank Walker
He was terrible. Fire away but he did just enough and was our best option at the time. He did stink though.

Foxworth
Foxworth played well for us for one year then he got hurt. It happens. He wasn't a true shut-down corner but there aren't many of those. We kept him for a reason, we hoped he would return to form. He didn't so he was cut this year. It's okay. He didn't suck it just didn't work out.


I just don't understand why as fans we can't respect players who gave us what they had even if it wasn't the greatness we want. They "played like Ravens" and did their best for this city. We don't have to say they were great when they weren't but they desreve our respect. Except Frank Walker he stunk. (That a joke -kinda). For O's fans Joe Orsulak comes to mind. He was never great but darnit I loved that guy.
[/quote]
Let me say it the way it is--we don't want to be second best, third best, fourth best, etc. We want a team of winners. I'm not saying any of those guys weren't winners, it's just we expect greatness and when it's not obtained we get disappointed as fans. It happens. That's the way the business works, and I can assure you every NFL star knows it.

As for Walker, he was terrible. It pains me to remember how bad he is, though he did go Super Saiyan in the playoffs (if you want to call it that...). Walker was not a good CB. It's almost comical how bad he is.

Regarding Ivy, he just wasn't that good. I think the expectations were perhaps high for him, but oh well. What do you expect from an older CB anyway?

Let's talk about Washington. I never liked him from day 1. He missed tackles like every time he tried to play. I often thought Landry was hooked to him because Landry would always clean up his missed tackles, same for Ed Reed. Washington is a terrible CB and there is a reason why he barely got a job last year only to end up on IR. I don't even know if he is still in the NFL anymore. All he had was speed, and that was it.

And now my favorite, Chris Carr. He isn't the best CB, but he is an OK one. I don't think we had the right system for him. I often wonder if he is better suited to be moved to safety anyway. He gave up way too many yards, too. Like Arnie said, he would just play way too far off of guys and they would just get yards on him and it was annoying. It didn't help that he wasn't a very good returner, though he didn't fumble at least.

Finally, the legend, the great, Foxworth. First of all, he was paid way too much. Second of all, he just wasn't that great. I never wanted him in the first place. Then he goes on IR for two years in a row--yeah, you won't see much love for him.

I think the biggest problem here is a recurring one--they were all at one point apart of the same sorry cornerback unit that was pretty poor. We all wanted that secondary to be improved, so that's why I feel like they get so much hate.

I could name some other pretty bad players, such as Demetrius Williams, Troy Smith, Yamon Figurs, Justin Harper, Marcus Smith, Oniel Cousins, Tavares Gooden, Cedric Peerman, Davon Drew, Jason Phillips. Those are just guys we drafted recently. I mean, all of them were pretty bad. Some of them aren't in the league anymore.

[arnie_uk]

[quote name='RavensDE' timestamp='1336509058' post='1074134']
This has become a vocabulary disagreement. Elite to me is someone who is a cut above all other players into an upper eschelon of top-tier talent with maybe one or two guys in the league at a given position. If such a person remains elite they go to the hall of fame.

A great player for me is someone who does their job exceedingly well. There are many great players in the league. JJ was never hurt and did his job exceedingly well. To me he should have went to a few pro-bowls, but there are few stats for good coverage and setting the edge. Ditto for Gregg. Landry...okay he's just good, not great...
[/quote]he didnt go his job exceedingly well, he did one part out of three extremely well, coverage he was average, pass rusher, he was below average. He was an elite run stopper, but not an elite or great, or exceedingly well overall olb. Thats what terrell suggs is...

[The Raven]

[quote name='flynismo' timestamp='1336496640' post='1074008']
If you think they are great, then it just goes to show how loosely words like "great" and "elite" are thrown around.
[/quote]

It's baffling that an OLB that gets 3 sacks or less in most years gets called great. Or a strong safety that can't make a clutch tackle in an important game is great. Redding? Great? Solid, good player, but not great by any stretch. The closest of any of those players to great is Kelly Gregg, who is nowhere near great now, and hasn't been since 2006.

It is necessary to hate certain players. Guys like Corey Ivy, Frank walker, Carr, and Foxy were embarrassments to Ravens defense. Ravens defense it supposed to be physical. Foxy and Carr are the farthest thing from physical imaginable. At least Walker was physical and aggressive. Some of these guys cost us games, or contributed greatly to losing games.

[wayne]

[quote name='RavensDE' timestamp='1336509058' post='1074134']


This has become a vocabulary disagreement. Elite to me is someone who is a cut above all other players into an upper eschelon of top-tier talent with maybe one or two guys in the league at a given position. If such a person remains elite they go to the hall of fame.

A great player for me is someone who does their job exceedingly well. There are many great players in the league. JJ was never hurt and did his job exceedingly well. To me he should have went to a few pro-bowls, but there are few stats for good coverage and setting the edge. Ditto for Gregg. Landry...okay he's just good, not great...
[/quote]

You have to throw the " solid " category in there and this is where JJ belongs, in the soid category. He wasn't great but he was solid for what he did.

[berad]

[quote name='RavensDE' timestamp='1336488514' post='1073934']
JJ, Redding, Gregg, and Landry are solid? Those guys are almost stars and each is getting paid big bucks because they are more than solid. Those guys are great players. (Gregg is past his prime, but I digress..) Since we drafted him, Cousins was a dissapointment, but I totally agree that those names stink. They are all barely on the team practice squaders, so I think thats fair.[/quote]

They're not great players, good players who were solid starters but never great. And none of those guys are making big dollars, Landry makes the most at a little over $5M a year and that's a bit of an over-payment. None of them made a Pro Bowl or had any All-Pro consideration, they were just good solid players.

[quote name='RavensDE' timestamp='1336488514' post='1073934']
I'm just having a hard time with this idea that anyone who gets beat or gets injured suddenly stinks. Down year, past their prime, injured or whatever some players get labelled as terrible when they are solid and are struggling in the short term. Webb had a terrible year two years ago. Carr really comes to mind because he was never signed to be a shutdown corner and was never paid like one. His first contract was for nickel corner/returner money. Even the last contract was average starter money. We didn't cut him because he stunk we cut him because he wasn't our starter and he was paid like he was.[/quote]

Agree with the injury or down year thing. People wanted to ship Sizzle after he had his lackluster '09 season, as an example. Of course it was his own fault for holding out and coming in out of shape but still... I wasn't disappoint in Carr as a corner, he was solid IMO, but I was disappointed in him as a returner. I thought Carr was an ok signing, wouldn't have re-signed him in 2011 but whatever.

[quote name='RavensDE' timestamp='1336488514' post='1073934']
Why do we need to bash these guys because they aren't perfect? If they screwed up last week/season okay (hrm hrm David Reed last year), but a guy has a bad run and its all "he's terrible" as if we deserve a star at every position on the depth chart.
[/quote]

I defended the knee-jerk reaction to cut David Reed. Sure, he messed up big time in the Seattle game - [b]big time[/b] - but, before that, he was near the top of the league in KR average. He may get cut this pre-season but who knows. I'd still like to find a returner who can do both punts and kicks effectively (not named Webb) - maybe Asa Jackson or the UDFA from Florida?

[flynismo]

[quote name='RavensDE' timestamp='1336509058' post='1074134']
This has become a vocabulary disagreement.
[/quote]

It shouldn't be one, really. The word 'great' has a set definition, as you can see when you look the word up in a dictionary...it isn't a synonym for 'good', 'pretty good' or 'very good'. It is another way of saying that someone or something is without (or very little) peer, so by definition, there are very few great players.
Kind of like the common expression "if everyone is special, then no one is special".

[BALTIMOREFLACCO]

Kind of baffled by this thread, I think every single player on that list received backlash for a reason. Not saying all of it was justified, but not being all pro is completely irrelevant.

[RavensDE]

[quote name='flynismo' timestamp='1336522635' post='1074389']
It shouldn't be one, really. The word 'great' has a set definition, as you can see when you look the word up in a dictionary...it isn't a synonym for 'good', 'pretty good' or 'very good'. It is another way of saying that someone or something is without (or very little) peer, so by definition, there are very few great players.
Kind of like the common expression "if everyone is special, then no one is special".
[/quote]

So...yeah it can be. Language is fluid, my definition of great may be different from yours. Context and writers perspective are central to writing. It's not some black and white, rigid system. Particularly in matters of opinion words can be used differently or have variance within the definition itself. To me solid is someone who doesn't do more than their limited responsibility. I think more of JJ than that. I think many of our players and coaches do too. I'm not sure where he was considered bad in coverage considering he was who we always used in coverage because he covered so much better than our DPOY Suggs (as per Suggs and Pagano). McClain to me is solid. Maake when he was with us the first time was solid. Kim Herring was solid. JJ or Kelly Gregg I valued much higher and they did more than added up in the stat sheets. If you say McLain, Maake and Herring were okay, and I say solid, and I say JJ and Gregg were great and you say solid we aren't really disagreeing about content we are disagreeing about use of vocabulary.


Main Entry:
[b][url="http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/great"]great[/url][/b]
Part of Speech:
[i]adjective [/i]
Definition:
excellent, skillful
Synonyms:
able, absolute, aces, adept, admirable, adroit, awesome, bad*, best, brutal, cold*, complete, consummate, downright, dynamite, egregious, exceptional, expert, fab, fantastic, fine, first-class*, first-rate, [u][b]good[/b][/u], heavy*, hellacious, marvelous, masterly, number one, out of sight, out of this world, out-and-out, perfect, positive, proficient, super-duper, surpassing, terrific, total, tough, transcendent, tremendous, unmitigated, unqualified, utter, wonderful

[The Raven]

[quote name='RavensDE' timestamp='1336527079' post='1074538']
So...yeah it can be. Language is fluid, my definition of great may be different from yours. Context and writers perspective are central to writing. It's not some black and white, rigid system. Particularly in matters of opinion words can be used differently or have variance within the definition itself. To me solid is someone who doesn't do more than their limited responsibility. I think more of JJ than that. I think many of our players and coaches do too. I'm not sure where he was considered bad in coverage considering he was who we always used in coverage because he covered so much better than our DPOY Suggs (as per Suggs and Pagano). McClain to me is solid. Maake when he was with us the first time was solid. Kim Herring was solid. JJ or Kelly Gregg I valued much higher and they did more than added up in the stat sheets. If you say McLain, Maake and Herring were okay, and I say solid, and I say JJ and Gregg were great and you say solid we aren't really disagreeing about content we are disagreeing about use of vocabulary.


Main Entry:
[b][url="http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/great"]great[/url][/b]
Part of Speech:
[i]adjective [/i]
Definition:
excellent, skillful
Synonyms:
able, absolute, aces, adept, admirable, adroit, awesome, bad*, best, brutal, cold*, complete, consummate, downright, dynamite, egregious, exceptional, expert, fab, fantastic, fine, first-class*, first-rate, [u][b]good[/b][/u], heavy*, hellacious, marvelous, masterly, number one, out of sight, out of this world, out-and-out, perfect, positive, proficient, super-duper, surpassing, terrific, total, tough, transcendent, tremendous, unmitigated, unqualified, utter, wonderful
[/quote]

However, you're forgetting that within a language and culture, certain words have slightly different uses. They may generally mean the same thing, but to different extents. For example, "bad", and "terrible" are similar words that mean the same thing, but "terrible" is usually used as a stronger form of the word "bad", just as great is perceived as better than good.

But, I digress. This has become a pointless debate on English instead of about how not great certain players were.

[cursona pirate]

Flacco sucks!!!!
Just kidding Joe, I really love you.

[RavensDE]

[quote name='berad' timestamp='1336510386' post='1074146']
They're not great players, good players who were solid starters but never great. And none of those guys are making big dollars, Landry makes the most at a little over $5M a year and that's a bit of an over-payment. None of them made a Pro Bowl or had any All-Pro consideration, they were just good solid players.
[/quote]

You make great points throughout your post, but isn't the $5mil a year misleading? I mean that does put him in the top ten for safeties (or top 15 depending on what number your looking at). I think his relative youth adds to his numerical value there. Again Landry wasn't great your right, I shouldn't have included him but he's doing better than the average bear. JJ is a bit older and never had sexy numbers but this being the first year of his contract it looks lower than it should ($2.5mil cap) but his average salary is $4.75mil. That puts him in the top 25 of OLB's which is much more than we ever paid him or more than we pay anyone except for stars and key building blocks. It's not stellar but for a 30yo that is not likely to get better thats a pretty good deal. I guess the proof is in the pudding and if plays well and the Chargers look up defensively I'll feel vindicated. If they don't and he doesn't see a jump in numbers than I guess I'll have to eat my words. Kelly had his salary from us, the highest he ever recieved, matched by the Chiefs last year, but he just ran out of time along with Heap and Mason.

[gabefergy]

[quote name='RavensDE' timestamp='1336531071' post='1074684']


You make great points throughout your post, but isn't the $5mil a year misleading? I mean that does put him in the top ten for safeties (or top 15 depending on what number your looking at). I think his relative youth adds to his numerical value there. Again Landry wasn't great your right, I shouldn't have included him but he's doing better than the average bear. JJ is a bit older and never had sexy numbers but this being the first year of his contract it looks lower than it should ($2.5mil cap) but his average salary is $4.75mil. That puts him in the top 25 of OLB's which is much more than we ever paid him or more than we pay anyone except for stars and key building blocks. It's not stellar but for a 30yo that is not likely to get better thats a pretty good deal. I guess the proof is in the pudding and if plays well and the Chargers look up defensively I'll feel vindicated. If they don't and he doesn't see a jump in numbers than I guess I'll have to eat my words. Kelly had his salary from us, the highest he ever recieved, matched by the Chiefs last year, but he just ran out of time along with Heap and Mason.
[/quote]
I don't think his points were great. Just solid.

[RavensDE]

[quote name='The Raven' timestamp='1336527822' post='1074573']
However, you're forgetting that within a language and culture, certain words have slightly different uses. They may generally mean the same thing, but to different extents. For example, "bad", and "terrible" are similar words that mean the same thing, but "terrible" is usually used as a stronger form of the word "bad", just as great is perceived as better than good.

But, I digress. This has become a pointless debate on English instead of about how not great certain players were.
[/quote]

I wouldn't say I forgot that. The two are not mutually exclusive. The use of a thesaurus just highlights that given context and perspective each could be used approriately. The disagreement isn't if good=great, its what constitutes the use of which word. Which of course is a matter of perspective. "A rose by any other name is still a rose."

Your last point however is accurate. I just teach English and Social Studies and don't like being miscorrected and told to look at a dictionary.

[RavensDE]

[quote name='gabefergy' timestamp='1336531625' post='1074704']
I don't think his points were great. Just solid.
[/quote]
Ha. Thats good stuff.

[RavensAllTheWay]

[quote name='redrum52' timestamp='1336504271' post='1074080']
IT'S ON! I thought this before Calvinsmoke even said anything, it was when Arnie said something about peoples views of players or criticizing them. People criticize Flacco and usually get attacked for speaking their opinions. He's not the onky guy, just using him as an example. [b]I never see anyone defending Michael Oher [/b]and he's made many plays for us, I just can't think of any. I also might be lying, but the point is he's always jumping early or holding.
[/quote]

I've actually gone to bat for Oher this offseason.

[PurpleCorsair]

I think people forget that two years ago against NE it was Fabian Washington who made Wes Welker look like an absolute scrub.