Joe Flacco called overrated on NFL.com

[Guest RBates]

No where did I say Flacco isn't to blame. But to say he's entire 2010 season was terrible because of one game is terrible. I have never will nor I start to give Flacco a pass for anything. My point was simple, if you are gonna say team when the Ravens win thus saying Flacco benefited from having those guys around him, then the Team needs to be Blamed when things go wrong as well.

 

Again, I said i saw a TEAM who couldn't get over the notion of beating the Steelers. I didn't say I saw QB overcoming all odds to try and will his team to victory. Just like you say me and others seem to always need to defend Flacco, you and others seem to play sole blame on Flacco when things go wrong. Now i'm smart enough to know this is not the case on either side and you are too, but that's what the preception is because it's hard to truly judge the intent of words when they are written and not spoken.

 

However when comments like, "if Brees was our QB we would have won the Super Bowl every year" that leads people like myself to laugh. It's not that I have a need to defend Flacco, nor do I have to praise him at every turn. There were times through his first 3 seasons where he was terrible, hell there were times last year were he was terrible. But act as if the team was all set up to win without Flacco and has played well enough to win, but FLACCO's poor play has held the team back is not accurate. The point of my post is that no other QB would have changed the outcome of those plays in that game,  because those plays weren't a result of Flacco's play. Yet he seems to get sole blame for the game. There were plenty of throws that Joe missed in that game. Again as I'vve said I've watched every throw of his career which I'm sure you have as well. There has been great moments and not so great. Which is why I said his inconsistency is what holds him back and you seem to be saying the same. We just have 2 very different says of saying it.

I'm sorry i should have been more clear about what i agree with.  This is definitely not how i see things.  In fact can Brees even see over a AFC north front line?  Just kidding.  

 

But you sound like a a knowledgeable football fan and its good to hear that at least someone else sees things for what they are.  Your right we just have to different ways of explaining it. 

 

I appreciate your post!

[Guest RBates]

I'll break some things down for you:

 

Post-season numbers since 2010

8 games, 6-2 record, 18 TD, 2 INT, 105.0 QB Rating, #1 post-season QB Rating in the NFL since 2010.  2nd place is Drew Brees, 3 games, 1-2 record, 9 TD, 2 INT, 104.2 Rating.

 

So to answer your question:

 

His post-season numbers for the 2010 and 2011 seasons

4 games, 2-2 record, 7 TD, 2 INT, 93.0 QB Rating

 

That's still pretty good.

 

Flacco is currently sitting on a 6-game streak of 2+ TD games in the post-season.  The only other quarterbacks to ever have 6 straight post-season games with at least 2 TDs in each of them are Terry Bradshaw, Joe Montana, and Drew Brees.

 

He is also the only QB in NFL history to have 3 consecutive post-season games with at least 3 TDs and NO INTs in each of them.  (And only Bernie Kosar, Kurt Warner, and Aaron Rodgers have ever matched 3 consecutive post-season games with 3 TDs, but all 3 of them threw at least 1 INT during that streak... Nobody has ever had 4 consecutive post-season games with 3+ TDs).

 

The level of play Flacco has accomplished in his past 3 years in the post-season has only ever been done by two other QBs.

That's 8 straight post-season games with a cumulative total of at least 2000 yards, 18 TDs, and no more than 2 INTs:

 

Joe Montana and Drew Brees and Joe Flacco are the only QBs to ever do that.

 

But heck, even Flacco's 2010-2011 stats of over 850 yards, 7 TDs, and 2 INTs over 4 consecutive post-season games has only ever been matched or bettered before by:

 

Bart Starr, Daryle Lamonica, Ken Anderson, Joe Montana, Troy Aikman, Dan Marino, Steve Young, Neil O'Donnell, Brett Favre, Rich Gannon, Peyton Manning, Tom Brady, Jake Delhomme, Kurt Warner, Drew Brees, Mark Sanchez, Aaron Rodgers, and Eli Manning.

 

That's pretty good company.  Even the players on that list who aren't considered to be great quarterbacks (Mark Sanchez, and Jake Delhomme, for example) were surprisingly great in some of their post-season appearances, making Joe's 2010-2011 accomplishments still stand out as being among very good company.  Who isn't on that list, for example?  Ben Roethlisberger, Philip Rivers, Tony Romo, Matt Ryan... All have played in at least 4 post-season games but never had that level of statistical accomplishment over a 4-game post-season span.  Flacco's 2010-2011 post-season stats are really nothing to sneeze at.

 

In fact, now Flacco has had 5 distinct 4-game post-season spans that all match that criteria.  The only QBs with more are Drew Brees (6) and Joe Montana (7).

 

But Flacco's 3-years, 8-game cumulative stats are just phenomenal.  One of only 3 QBs in NFL history to do that in the post-season over 8 games.  Heck, if we take the post-season part out of it and just look at how many times a QB has ever had an 8-game stretch with stats like that, it's only happened 24 times in NFL history, and literally half of them (seriously, 12 out of the 24) were done by Tom Brady.

 

The only QBs whose names you will find on a list of players with an 8-game stretch like that (post-season, regular season, or combined) are Joe Montana, Steve Young, Brett Favre, Peyton Manning, Tom Brady, Drew Brees, Aaron Rodgers, Matt Ryan, and Joe Flacco.

 

At the rate the media and fan love for Matt Ryan is going, he has a shot to make the Hall of Fame some day, which would mean Joe Flacco is the only guy on that list that isn't on track to be a Hall of Famer... but perhaps he should be?

All of this and you neglect to answer...... Before this year what was Flacco's  Postseason numbers?  

 

Here you go! 170.2 yards a game, eight touchdowns and eight picks. 2 fumbles.  If people call him overrated its because of this,  That's all i'm saying.

 

 

Can i set the Mic down now?

 

EXIT stage left.  I'll be here all week. 

[PurpleCorsair]

People tend to forget...

 

Flacco was drafted as a project player in 2008. He wasn't supposed to start.

The fact that he made the playoffs let alone won a few games was a wild over-achievement by his part and the Ravens.

 

In 2009 Flacco got injured late in the season, and his numbers fell dramatically as he wasn't able to drive the ball like he normally can. 

 

The poor numbers do still count towards his playoff record, though 2009 aside there has been a clear upward trend in his numbers.

[codizzle]

U know.. Callahan's extremely long posts are the only ones I read..

I normally don't read any post longer than a short paragraph

[Tank 92]

As a generation it sometimes feels like we are obsessed with making lists out of things and doing rankings all the time.

 

Personally I've always felt that you should wait to rank players until their careers are done so you can see everything in context, how many times have we heard that the team to win a Super Bowl or NBA FInals is the "next" dynasty only to have fall apart and never get back in the following years?

 

Its not fair to compare someone in the middle (one might even say prime) of their career to someone who is near the end or retired (Manning or Favre respectively). I would rather just enjoy the ride and the quality play from all the guys being discussed, because despite everyone's opinions they all can play football at a high level, and then when their time in the NFL is done we can debate where they rank with the other greats.

 

Just my two cents (and perhaps its my rational to keep myself sane during the off-season of ranking everything lol).

 

 

Well said.........

[callahan09]

How about I show you the chain of this conversation:

 

Last 3 postseasons (8 games) he has thrown 15tds and 2 ints
7 of the 8 games he had a rating of 95 or higher.


Peyton manning can't say that
Tom Brady can't
Aaron rodgers is close but can't
Only drew Brees can say that.

Flacco may not be "regular season elite" but he's postseason untouchable...

 

 

He put up 11 of those this year.  What were his numbers before that?

 

 

I'll break some things down for you:

 

Post-season numbers since 2010

8 games, 6-2 record, 18 TD, 2 INT, 105.0 QB Rating, #1 post-season QB Rating in the NFL since 2010.  2nd place is Drew Brees, 3 games, 1-2 record, 9 TD, 2 INT, 104.2 Rating.

 

So to answer your question:

 

His post-season numbers for the 2010 and 2011 seasons

4 games, 2-2 record, 7 TD, 2 INT, 93.0 QB Rating

 

That's still pretty good.

 

Flacco is currently sitting on a 6-game streak of 2+ TD games in the post-season.  The only other quarterbacks to ever have 6 straight post-season games with at least 2 TDs in each of them are Terry Bradshaw, Joe Montana, and Drew Brees.

 

He is also the only QB in NFL history to have 3 consecutive post-season games with at least 3 TDs and NO INTs in each of them.  (And only Bernie Kosar, Kurt Warner, and Aaron Rodgers have ever matched 3 consecutive post-season games with 3 TDs, but all 3 of them threw at least 1 INT during that streak... Nobody has ever had 4 consecutive post-season games with 3+ TDs).

 

The level of play Flacco has accomplished in his past 3 years in the post-season has only ever been done by two other QBs.

That's 8 straight post-season games with a cumulative total of at least 2000 yards, 18 TDs, and no more than 2 INTs:

 

Joe Montana and Drew Brees and Joe Flacco are the only QBs to ever do that.

 

But heck, even Flacco's 2010-2011 stats of over 850 yards, 7 TDs, and 2 INTs over 4 consecutive post-season games has only ever been matched or bettered before by:

 

Bart Starr, Daryle Lamonica, Ken Anderson, Joe Montana, Troy Aikman, Dan Marino, Steve Young, Neil O'Donnell, Brett Favre, Rich Gannon, Peyton Manning, Tom Brady, Jake Delhomme, Kurt Warner, Drew Brees, Mark Sanchez, Aaron Rodgers, and Eli Manning.

 

That's pretty good company.  Even the players on that list who aren't considered to be great quarterbacks (Mark Sanchez, and Jake Delhomme, for example) were surprisingly great in some of their post-season appearances, making Joe's 2010-2011 accomplishments still stand out as being among very good company.  Who isn't on that list, for example?  Ben Roethlisberger, Philip Rivers, Tony Romo, Matt Ryan... All have played in at least 4 post-season games but never had that level of statistical accomplishment over a 4-game post-season span.  Flacco's 2010-2011 post-season stats are really nothing to sneeze at.

 

In fact, now Flacco has had 5 distinct 4-game post-season spans that all match that criteria.  The only QBs with more are Drew Brees (6) and Joe Montana (7).

 

But Flacco's 3-years, 8-game cumulative stats are just phenomenal.  One of only 3 QBs in NFL history to do that in the post-season over 8 games.  Heck, if we take the post-season part out of it and just look at how many times a QB has ever had an 8-game stretch with stats like that, it's only happened 24 times in NFL history, and literally half of them (seriously, 12 out of the 24) were done by Tom Brady.

 

The only QBs whose names you will find on a list of players with an 8-game stretch like that (post-season, regular season, or combined) are Joe Montana, Steve Young, Brett Favre, Peyton Manning, Tom Brady, Drew Brees, Aaron Rodgers, Matt Ryan, and Joe Flacco.

 

At the rate the media and fan love for Matt Ryan is going, he has a shot to make the Hall of Fame some day, which would mean Joe Flacco is the only guy on that list that isn't on track to be a Hall of Famer... but perhaps he should be?

 

 

All of this and you neglect to answer...... Before this year what was Flacco's  Postseason numbers?  

 

Here you go! 170.2 yards a game, eight touchdowns and eight picks. 2 fumbles.  If people call him overrated its because of this,  That's all i'm saying.

 

 

Can i set the Mic down now?

 

EXIT stage left.  I'll be here all week. 

 

Did you follow that?  Tiz made a post about Flacco's last 3 post-seasons, represented by 8 games where he threw 15 touchdowns and 2 interceptions.  By the way, he's not even giving Flacco his due, because he is actually 18 TDs to 2 INTs in that span, something I corrected when I made my reply to you.

 

In response to Tiz, you said "He put up 11 of those this year.  What were his numbers before that?"

 

"11 of those this year"... The implied meaning of "those" in this instance is "the 15 touchdowns he put up over the past 3 years."  So you're trying to make an argument that while his last 3 years look great, it's really only because this year was great, but the last two years were not.  You didn't realize, first of all, that Tiz was slightly mistaken with his numbers.  15 touchdowns less 11, means he would have had 4 TDs in 2010-2011.  I demonstrated the correct numbers, and answered your rhetorical question, that Flacco had 7 touchdowns in the previous 2 years.

 

I then continued on to demonstrate why a 4-game stretch with 7 TDs and 2 INTs and over a 90 QB Rating is still considered very good in the history of the post-season in the NFL.

 

The entire chain of the conversation relied on the implication that the previous 2 years were not good, despite that those years included with this year make it appear to be a good 3 year span.  I picked that argument apart.  Never was there any implication that you we were talking about Flacco's previous FOUR years.  Just the previous two.

 

If you want to get cutesy and talk about the previous four years... Well keep in mind that over 20% of Flacco's career post-season pass attempts came during his rookie year.  That compares to a league average of 3.0%.  A full one third of Flacco's post-season pass attempts occurred between his rookie & 2nd seasons, where as the percentage of all post-season pass attempts in league history performed by rookies or sophomores is just about 10%.  In other words, Flacco's overall career post-season numbers are marred by an overwhelmingly large quantity of attempts that occurred while he was an inexperienced QB.

 

The average rookie QB rating in the post-season in league history is under 60.  If you include sophomores, it is under 70.  Flacco happened to also be injured during his 2nd post-season run.  Pretty badly so in fact.  Really, the numbers from those two seasons isn't worth much attention.  90% of post-season experience amongst all QBs in NFL history happens after their third season in the league, and there is very little precedent for excellent QB play in the post-season as a rookie or second year player, so frankly I put a lot more stock into what he's accomplished since his third year than I put into what he did during his first 2 years.

[dscola1974]

How about I show you the chain of this conversation:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Did you follow that?  Tiz made a post about Flacco's last 3 post-seasons, represented by 8 games where he threw 15 touchdowns and 2 interceptions.  By the way, he's not even giving Flacco his due, because he is actually 18 TDs to 2 INTs in that span, something I corrected when I made my reply to you.

 

In response to Tiz, you said "He put up 11 of those this year.  What were his numbers before that?"

 

"11 of those this year"... The implied meaning of "those" in this instance is "the 15 touchdowns he put up over the past 3 years."  So you're trying to make an argument that while his last 3 years look great, it's really only because this year was great, but the last two years were not.  You didn't realize, first of all, that Tiz was slightly mistaken with his numbers.  15 touchdowns less 11, means he would have had 4 TDs in 2010-2011.  I demonstrated the correct numbers, and answered your rhetorical question, that Flacco had 7 touchdowns in the previous 2 years.

 

I then continued on to demonstrate why a 4-game stretch with 7 TDs and 2 INTs and over a 90 QB Rating is still considered very good in the history of the post-season in the NFL.

 

The entire chain of the conversation relied on the implication that the previous 2 years were not good, despite that those years included with this year make it appear to be a good 3 year span.  I picked that argument apart.  Never was there any implication that you we were talking about Flacco's previous FOUR years.  Just the previous two.

 

If you want to get cutesy and talk about the previous four years... Well keep in mind that over 20% of Flacco's career post-season pass attempts came during his rookie year.  That compares to a league average of 3.0%.  A full one third of Flacco's post-season pass attempts occurred between his rookie & 2nd seasons, where as the percentage of all post-season pass attempts in league history performed by rookies or sophomores is just about 10%.  In other words, Flacco's overall career post-season numbers are marred by an overwhelmingly large quantity of attempts that occurred while he was an inexperienced QB.

 

The average rookie QB rating in the post-season in league history is under 60.  If you include sophomores, it is under 70.  Flacco happened to also be injured during his 2nd post-season run.  Pretty badly so in fact.  Really, the numbers from those two seasons isn't worth much attention.  90% of post-season experience amongst all QBs in NFL history happens after their third season in the league, and there is very little precedent for excellent QB play in the post-season as a rookie or second year player, so frankly I put a lot more stock into what he's accomplished since his third year than I put into what he did during his first 2 years.

Don't hurt him Callahan

[flynismo]

All of this and you neglect to answer...... Before this year what was Flacco's  Postseason numbers?  

 

Here you go! 170.2 yards a game, eight touchdowns and eight picks. 2 fumbles.  If people call him overrated its because of this,  That's all i'm saying.

 

 

Can i set the Mic down now?

 

EXIT stage left.  I'll be here all week. 

 

I definitely think you should put the mic down and exit...

[RedFire]

Ravens had Steve "Air" McNair, may he rest in peace, and they were one and done.

You do realize McNair was injured, right?

[RedFire]

As a generation it sometimes feels like we are obsessed with making lists out of things and doing rankings all the time.

Personally I've always felt that you should wait to rank players until their careers are done so you can see everything in context, how many times have we heard that the team to win a Super Bowl or NBA FInals is the "next" dynasty only to have fall apart and never get back in the following years?

Its not fair to compare someone in the middle (one might even say prime) of their career to someone who is near the end or retired (Manning or Favre respectively). I would rather just enjoy the ride and the quality play from all the guys being discussed, because despite everyone's opinions they all can play football at a high level, and then when their time in the NFL is done we can debate where they rank with the other greats.

Just my two cents (and perhaps its my rational to keep myself sane during the off-season of ranking everything lol).

M

[RedFire]

As a generation it sometimes feels like we are obsessed with making lists out of things and doing rankings all the time.

Personally I've always felt that you should wait to rank players until their careers are done so you can see everything in context, how many times have we heard that the team to win a Super Bowl or NBA FInals is the "next" dynasty only to have fall apart and never get back in the following years?

Its not fair to compare someone in the middle (one might even say prime) of their career to someone who is near the end or retired (Manning or Favre respectively). I would rather just enjoy the ride and the quality play from all the guys being discussed, because despite everyone's opinions they all can play football at a high level, and then when their time in the NFL is done we can debate where they rank with the other greats.

Just my two cents (and perhaps its my rational to keep myself sane during the off-season of ranking everything lol).

Mid career you realized Aaron Rodgers is better than Favre. He got a Super Bowl and can put up stats. Favre is a HOFer....but Rodgers is better.

[berad]

Callahan is straight beasting. Flacco has always been an underrated component of the Ravens. People like to point to the defense as running backs but if it was that easy to win without a good qb then we'd have been a dynasty through the early-mid 2000s

[CARavensFan]

Mid career you realized Aaron Rodgers is better than Favre. He got a Super Bowl and can put up stats. Favre is a HOFer....but Rodgers is better.

 

He's the best QB in the NFL now and its easy to "project" that he will have better stats, but Favre was an Iron Man who played forever which I doubt Rodgers is able to duplicate. Right now they both have 1 Super Bowl victory, Rodgers could get another one or he could never get back to the Big Game, we don't know yet.

 

But we will be able to compare them when Rodgers is done, that was my point, trying to compare one guy whose career has ended to a guy whose career is still ongoing isn't fair.

[RedFire]

He's the best QB in the NFL now and its easy to "project" that he will have better stats, but Favre was an Iron Man who played forever which I doubt Rodgers is able to duplicate. Right now they both have 1 Super Bowl victory, Rodgers could get another one or he could never get back to the Big Game, we don't know yet.

But we will be able to compare them when Rodgers is done, that was my point, trying to compare one guy whose career has ended to a guy whose career is still ongoing isn't fair.

Rodgers is much more skilled and throws more accurate balls off visuals alone. Skill set alone Rodgers is better and his mental makeup is consistent with making less mistakes than Favre.

We will have to agree to disagree. But at peak performance Rodgers is better. Favre best games have been recievers making spectacular catches as opposed to Aaron Rodgers pinpoint passing.

[ROH522155]

Callahan wins. Thread over.

[admartian]

I'm pretty sure if you win 3 superbowls you get respect.

Usually. But this is Joe we're talking about.

[jimmypowder]

[quote name="admartian" post="1505157" timestamp="1372368956"] Usually. But this is Joe we're talking about.[/quote] Joe will not get any respect if he throws for 30 tds and 1 interception next year Why? Cause he plays for Baltimore .

[Tiz]

Who cares was his QBR? He was he was 8/8 (td's, picks) fumbled twice and averaged 170 yards a game prior to this amazing past year. If people call him overrated then its because of what they have seen prior to this year.

Why is this so hard to understand?

His qbr is an espn stat
His qb rating is an nfl stat

Both define his impact on the game. Td numbers aren't the only defining stat of a passer..I.e.rgiii first pass was a td. Impressive right. It was a screen play where the wr broke it for a long gain.

Anyways if people call him overrated repeatedly and he never falters then its actually a sign that he is underrated. Can't be overrated if everyone thinks you are average or even just ok and you play above that.

Can't be overrated if no one thinks you're a good qb and instead they always wright or say something to down play your production. Thats the exact opposite of overrate.

I.e. if everyone thinks you're not that good but yet you keep producing they aren't rating you that high to begin with

I know its a hard concept and I understand I stumped you with 15-11 but I think you'll eventually get it...I hope

[GrimCoconut]

[quote name="jimmypowder" post="1505295" timestamp="1372377538"]

Joe will not get any respect if he throws for 30 tds and 1 interception next year Why? Cause he plays for Baltimore .[/quote]
No. He won't get respect because he threw 1 INT and under 5000 yards

[Tiz]

How about I show you the chain of this conversation:
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
Did you follow that?  Tiz made a post about Flacco's last 3 post-seasons, represented by 8 games where he threw 15 touchdowns and 2 interceptions.  By the way, he's not even giving Flacco his due, because he is actually 18 TDs to 2 INTs in that span, something I corrected when I made my reply to you.
 
In response to Tiz, you said "He put up 11 of those this year.  What were his numbers before that?"
 
"11 of those this year"... The implied meaning of "those" in this instance is "the 15 touchdowns he put up over the past 3 years."  So you're trying to make an argument that while his last 3 years look great, it's really only because this year was great, but the last two years were not.  You didn't realize, first of all, that Tiz was slightly mistaken with his numbers.  15 touchdowns less 11, means he would have had 4 TDs in 2010-2011.  I demonstrated the correct numbers, and answered your rhetorical question, that Flacco had 7 touchdowns in the previous 2 years.
 
I then continued on to demonstrate why a 4-game stretch with 7 TDs and 2 INTs and over a 90 QB Rating is still considered very good in the history of the post-season in the NFL.
 
The entire chain of the conversation relied on the implication that the previous 2 years were not good, despite that those years included with this year make it appear to be a good 3 year span.  I picked that argument apart.  Never was there any implication that you we were talking about Flacco's previous FOUR years.  Just the previous two.
 
If you want to get cutesy and talk about the previous four years... Well keep in mind that over 20% of Flacco's career post-season pass attempts came during his rookie year.  That compares to a league average of 3.0%.  A full one third of Flacco's post-season pass attempts occurred between his rookie & 2nd seasons, where as the percentage of all post-season pass attempts in league history performed by rookies or sophomores is just about 10%.  In other words, Flacco's overall career post-season numbers are marred by an overwhelmingly large quantity of attempts that occurred while he was an inexperienced QB.
 
The average rookie QB rating in the post-season in league history is under 60.  If you include sophomores, it is under 70.  Flacco happened to also be injured during his 2nd post-season run.  Pretty badly so in fact.  Really, the numbers from those two seasons isn't worth much attention.  90% of post-season experience amongst all QBs in NFL history happens after their third season in the league, and there is very little precedent for excellent QB play in the post-season as a rookie or second year player, so frankly I put a lot more stock into what he's accomplished since his third year than I put into what he did during his first 2 years.

My bad on the overall td numbers. The main point I was getting at was over an 8 game stretch against solely playoff teams all the top qbs didnt blow flacco out the water.

I also like pointing out that every year he has gotten better and pouting out that as pedestrian as he was the first two years his career playoff numbers match all the current elites....

[1/28/01]

Wow...I have a new hero!

[ratedr]

RBates using Flacco's playoff stats from 2008-09 to discredit his recent production. Because we all know stats from 4+ years ago when he was a rookie out of Delaware are more predictive than production from 5 months ago.  :eyes:

 

The desperation is real.

[beanfigger]

He averaged about 170.2 yards a game with eight TDs and eight picks.  With two fumbles.  Not sure what stats you are looking at. These stats reflect all four previous post seasons. 

 

So again if people want to call him overrated, i think this would justify the cause.

 

I wasn't looking at all four postseasons, obviously.  If you were to compare his first four years to any other QB's first four, his numbers do not look so bad.  Brady had a lot of postseason wins, but comparable numbers to Flacco.  Peyton had crazy high numbers, but no postseason success.  Why are we focusing on Joe's early career and ignoring everyone else's?  Why are we rating Joe based on how he started his career rather than how he's improved and playing recently?  And once again, how can he be overrated when so many people feel he's not that good?  Overrated means people think he's great when he's not.

[Guest RBates]

Don't hurt him Callahan

Lmao he is still wrong about the four years prior to this season. I gave the only stats that are relevant to the topic. 

 

This again is why they consider him overrated.  

[Guest RBates]

I definitely think you should put the mic down and exit...

I gave everyone the stats, look it up for yourself! I have no idea what Callahan is talking about.   Obviously he keeps mentioning this season and  last ( I think).  

 

I never mentioned this season.  Why all the numbers.  He reminds me of Richard Gere in the movie Chicago.  "Give the old Rassle Dazzle"!!!!!  To dance around the truth and all of you are eating it up>>>>>SMH 

[Guest RBates]

How about I show you the chain of this conversation:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Did you follow that?  Tiz made a post about Flacco's last 3 post-seasons, represented by 8 games where he threw 15 touchdowns and 2 interceptions.  By the way, he's not even giving Flacco his due, because he is actually 18 TDs to 2 INTs in that span, something I corrected when I made my reply to you.

 

In response to Tiz, you said "He put up 11 of those this year.  What were his numbers before that?"

 

"11 of those this year"... The implied meaning of "those" in this instance is "the 15 touchdowns he put up over the past 3 years."  So you're trying to make an argument that while his last 3 years look great, it's really only because this year was great, but the last two years were not.  You didn't realize, first of all, that Tiz was slightly mistaken with his numbers.  15 touchdowns less 11, means he would have had 4 TDs in 2010-2011.  I demonstrated the correct numbers, and answered your rhetorical question, that Flacco had 7 touchdowns in the previous 2 years.

 

I then continued on to demonstrate why a 4-game stretch with 7 TDs and 2 INTs and over a 90 QB Rating is still considered very good in the history of the post-season in the NFL.

 

The entire chain of the conversation relied on the implication that the previous 2 years were not good, despite that those years included with this year make it appear to be a good 3 year span.  I picked that argument apart.  Never was there any implication that you we were talking about Flacco's previous FOUR years.  Just the previous two.

 

If you want to get cutesy and talk about the previous four years... Well keep in mind that over 20% of Flacco's career post-season pass attempts came during his rookie year.  That compares to a league average of 3.0%.  A full one third of Flacco's post-season pass attempts occurred between his rookie & 2nd seasons, where as the percentage of all post-season pass attempts in league history performed by rookies or sophomores is just about 10%.  In other words, Flacco's overall career post-season numbers are marred by an overwhelmingly large quantity of attempts that occurred while he was an inexperienced QB.

 

The average rookie QB rating in the post-season in league history is under 60.  If you include sophomores, it is under 70.  Flacco happened to also be injured during his 2nd post-season run.  Pretty badly so in fact.  Really, the numbers from those two seasons isn't worth much attention.  90% of post-season experience amongst all QBs in NFL history happens after their third season in the league, and there is very little precedent for excellent QB play in the post-season as a rookie or second year player, so frankly I put a lot more stock into what he's accomplished since his third year than I put into what he did during his first 2 years.

Callahan this is a long winded approach to use to demonstrate what i already know.  if you are arguing the last two seasons and using that as your benchmark to judge Flacco's future,then i say (yes) i can agree. He is really good as of right now. 

 

However the topic is about Flacco being overrated and if you take all four of his postseasons prior to this past year, then you can clearly see why that make this claim.  

 

All the numbers you throw out there you should have been in that movie moneyball. None have anything to do with what i asked you. 

 

So ill try again,  What was Flacco's postseason numbers prior to this past year?  Meaning -do not include any stats from his Super Bowl run.

 

Now can  you see why they call him Overrated?  

 

Now i am dropping the Mic!  Homers feel free to try and help here.  I doubt you can argue the truth.  

[Guest RBates]

I wasn't looking at all four postseasons, obviously.  If you were to compare his first four years to any other QB's first four, his numbers do not look so bad.  Brady had a lot of postseason wins, but comparable numbers to Flacco.  Peyton had crazy high numbers, but no postseason success.  Why are we focusing on Joe's early career and ignoring everyone else's?  Why are we rating Joe based on how he started his career rather than how he's improved and playing recently?  And once again, how can he be overrated when so many people feel he's not that good?  Overrated means people think he's great when he's not.

All of you questions in one answer are because the topic of this thread. That's all not negative just clarifying why people have the right to call him overrated as of today.  

 

The only thing that matters to us Ravens Fans is that the yesterday stats are over and our QB is starting to dominate the games he plays in.  

 

Yet people still have the right to call him overrated because its been one great year, One good year, and three bad years, in the postseason. 

[Guest RBates]

RBates using Flacco's playoff stats from 2008-09 to discredit his recent production. Because we all know stats from 4+ years ago when he was a rookie out of Delaware are more predictive than production from 5 months ago.  :eyes:

 

The desperation is real.

You obviously haven't read the whole thread. Do your homework before typing my name.  

[PurpleCorsair]

 

Without 2012 Superbowl run:

134/247 1532 54% 6.2 YPA 8 TD 8 INT 70.4 Rating

 

Without 2009 and 2012

110/202 1309 54% 6.4 YPA 8 TD 5 INT 77.3 Rating

 

Without 2008, 2009, and 2012

77/127  872  60%  6.8 YPA 7 TD 2 INT 93.0 Rating

 

2010, 2011, and 2012

150/253 2012 59.2% 7,9 YPA 18 TD 2 INT 105.0 Rating

[callahan09]

Callahan this is a long winded approach to use to demonstrate what i already know.  if you are arguing the last two seasons and using that as your benchmark to judge Flacco's future,then i say (yes) i can agree. He is really good as of right now. 

 

However the topic is about Flacco being overrated and if you take all four of his postseasons prior to this past year, then you can clearly see why that make this claim.  

 

All the numbers you throw out there you should have been in that movie moneyball. None have anything to do with what i asked you. 

 

So ill try again,  What was Flacco's postseason numbers prior to this past year?  Meaning -do not include any stats from his Super Bowl run.

 

Now can  you see why they call him Overrated?  

 

Now i am dropping the Mic!  Homers feel free to try and help here.  I doubt you can argue the truth.  

I gave you a detailed analysis of his 2010-2011 seasons.  That's not including this 2012 playoff run.  I showed you how he has had 3 consecutive seasons of exemplary post-season play.  If you want to go back FOUR and FIVE years to try to show that he isn't a great post-season quarterback then I don't know what to tell you.  I made specific mentions of the fact that Flacco's post-season career numbers are overwhelmingly effected by having played so many games in his first & second years in the league, a statistical feature that is highly unusual.  

 

There is very little post-season experience in the history of the NFL in a QB's first two years.  Flacco may not have had the numbers in year 1 in the "overall" sense, but he actually game managed very effectively and helped his team win in the first 2 games of that season, despite that fact not being reflected in the stats as well as you might like to see.

 

Against Miami and Tennessee, Flacco was a reason we were able to win those games.  He didn't hurt us with untimely or costly turnovers, and he made enough plays in *key moments* to win those games.  His stats are simply hurt too much by the third game of that post-season.  He played against the Pittsburgh Steelers, in their house, it was an incredibly hostile environment for a rookie quarterback to have to go play against the #1 defense in the conference championship game.  He was overmatched and didn't perform well, but that doesn't speak one bit about his ability as a quarterback in this league.  A rookie quarterback has a bad game against the #1 defense in the NFL in the AFC championship game, in their house.  And I'm supposed to believe that is a flaw about this player?  Not at all.  It's just unfortunately for his career stats that this one game was so much worse than the previous 2 and makes the overall 3-game stretch look much worse than it was.  Against Miami, he didn't turn the ball over, and he had a critical rushing touchdown.  He was a game manager, but big deal?  He did what he needed to do so we wouldn't lose the game, and that's good enough for a rookie QB on the road in the playoffs against a division winner.  Against Tennessee, again, he didn't turn the ball over, kept us in the game, made no costly mistakes, and threw a critical touchdown in a low-scoring game as well as throwing a critical third down pass to cut a would-be 51 yard field goal attempt down to a 43 yarder, allowing Matt Stover to kick the go ahead field goal.

 

Sophomore season he was very badly injured with a huge swollen wound on his hip, and he probably shouldn't have even been playing.  He went out there because he's a tough, fearless quarterback.  He was ineffective, but that's besides the point and it proves nothing about his ability as a quarterback.

 

When he has gone out on that field as a non-rookie, healthy quarterback these past 3 seasons, he has proven himself to be a great post-season quarterback who is extremely effective in high pressure situations, even despite having a team that likes to do it's best to try to implode around him in the post-season.