Terrell Suggs on TV

[PurpleCityLights]

So many people act like this was a sole act by the Ravens "to get rid of" Anquan Boldin. Suggs was indecisive on that issue on NFL Network.... and yet made it known he disapproved of it. I will maintain that Boldin made a choice when he CHOSE to turn down the $4M offer the Ravens made him... He CHOSE not to accept that... So the Ravens found him a team out there that would give him what he wanted, and in return they got the CAP space and a 6th round pick. He wanted more money... He lost his bargaining power when he stated that "he would prefer to retire rather than play for any other team in the NFL".

When you start to realize how bad our defense was in 2012... Who we lost in players after the Super Bowl... in Kruger, Ellerbe, Williams, Lewis, Reed, and even McClain with his spinal cord injury... We Had No Choice but to find Defensive players... And that is what the FO did. Imagine had they not... What would our defense have looked like this year?

That relates back to the topic at hand.... When asked, Suggs should have backed management and mentioned all of these things, because he ACTUALLY IS a defensive player, and knows how all of that impacted him and the rest of the team...

The fact that he kinda waffled, and threw the organization under the bus on that trade/move...... again??? Actually may not help him either... Boldin was a casualty... and there will be some more this year folks. We cannot afford all of the guys we have... again... Just my Opinion folks....

He didnt want more money......

[Poes Crows]

He didnt want more money......

 

Name me one category the championship defense was better than this year's defense. I haven't heard any. There could be one, but I know our schedule was harder and we allowed fewer points and fewer yards than last year.

Last year's safety (Reed) was beat by our very own Jacoby Jones for a TD this season. What's your point about Elam getting beat deep? You wanted to keep Reed?

Our team was disbanded? Who did you want to overpay for? Reed? Ellerbe? Kruger? Williams? I'm just confused as to what you are complaining about. If we don't trade Boldin we have no defense. Even after cutting Boldin we still couldn't afford the contracts our players were getting elsewhere. Please explain to me your plan for last year's off season. Just curious.

 

Jacoby who?

[BloodRaven]

Suggs is like Lebron where hes at the point where he needs to shave his head or use some black ice spray or something.

[2legit2quit]

Jacoby who?

Jones, like it says above. What I think your getting at is, Jones won't be with us next year?? If so, I bet the opinion would be to travel back in a time machine not pay flacco and give Jacoby 6 million for next year to have some random dude throw him the ball. When I say random I mean it, we haven't drafted early enough to get any top qb (Russell Wilson though!) and apparently giving money to established qb's is off the table. So next year we will have Jones at WR and Tim Tebow at qb with no improvements to the rest of the team(we'd keep pitta too but I think he's staying anyway and we'd probably bang out a Eugene Monroe deal) . Sound good?

[jaege]

Suggs was doing his very best to not say anything truly critical of the Raven Front Office.  We don't have that limitation here, candidly, that front office has been inept for some time now.  In that regard, you are correct, it wasn't just about getting rid of Boldin.  It's been a litany of errors in the past year that have undermined this team for years to come. 

 

The errors are so manifest that pre Free Agency and Draft this fan is confident in stating that the Baltimore Ravens will have a Losing Record in 2014.  Having predicted prior to the first game, that the best the Raven's could hope for in 2013 was an 8-8 record, for the coming year the prediction is 6-10.

 

A.J. Green was not running behind our safeties last year.  Neither was Jordie Nelson. Our 2013 defense was stout in the Red Zone. It bent, but rarely broke. The more this fan reads that the 2013 Defense was more effective than the Championship Defense  the more cover it provides our negligent management.

 

It's known here that this fan has been among the advant-garde as it pertains to what ails the Ravens. What ails the Ravens more than any specific player weakness is the weakness in the Front Office. It has literally been incompetent this past year and poor decisions have been made the last few years as well. It's been both incompetent and unaccountable.

Sure we won a Championship, but that was with a team that was negligently disbanded and still we underachieved during that era.

Not going to get into the specifics of Oz missteps. They are well known. To a certain extent this opinion has had scant support, however there has been a significant change of late. Bisciotti defined Failure as missing the playoffs and stated that 2013 was a Failure. He stated he is going to defer to Oz and DeCosta this coming year, but if they Fail again, he will intervene. Oz is on Bisciotti's "Watch List". What form that intervention takes will likely depend upon whether Oz fails and how badly he fails.

Bisciotti has developed difference of opinion with Oz on personnel decisions. He is not happy but is not articulating what he's upset about. The mistakes are there for all to see. First and foremost Bisciotti is transparent but self interested. Don't expect a robber baron to tell you what's really on his revenue fixated mind. The belief here is that Bisciotti's primary vent is about the large contract paid to Flacco, but there's plenty to be steaming about.

If it were up to this poster Oz would not be involved in this next round of player decision making. Bisciotti is slowly realizing things are not right, but he won't pick it all up quick enough to avoid a longer mediocre to middling period of Raven's football. The die has been cast we will likely be playing another year or two on modern Oz Time.

All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.

 

 

Wow. Really. Wow. Full of yourself often? From your post you seem to be suggesting that you are more knowledgeable about the team than even the owner. You said that he is "slowly realizing" where as you are already certain.  For the sake of argument, lets assume you are correct, and are, in fact, more knowledgeable than Ozzie et.al. Lets go back in time to the end of 2012, you are the GM. What would you have done differently? What cuts would you have made to meet the cap? Who would you have kept and how? Who specifically would you have drafted and/or picked up via FA?

 

 

Its easy to point the finger and find fault. Finding solutions is the real trick.

[FerrariFan87]

So many people act like this was a sole act by the Ravens "to get rid of" Anquan Boldin. Suggs was indecisive on that issue on NFL Network.... and yet made it known he disapproved of it.   I will maintain that Boldin made a choice when he CHOSE to turn down the $4M offer the Ravens made him...  He CHOSE not to accept that... So the Ravens found him a team out there that would give him what he wanted, and in return they got the CAP space and a 6th round pick.  He wanted more money...  He lost his bargaining power when he stated that "he would prefer to retire rather than play for any other team in the NFL". 

 

When you start to realize how bad our defense was in 2012... Who we lost in players after the Super Bowl...  in Kruger, Ellerbe, Williams, Lewis, Reed, and even McClain with his spinal cord injury...  We Had No Choice but to find Defensive players...  And that is what the FO did.  Imagine had they not... What would our defense have looked like this year?

 

That relates back to the topic at hand....  When asked, Suggs should have backed management and mentioned all of these things, because he ACTUALLY IS a defensive player, and knows how all of that impacted him and the rest of the team...   

 

The fact that he kinda waffled, and threw the organization under the bus on that trade/move......  again???  Actually may not help him either... Boldin was a casualty... and there will be some more this year folks.  We cannot afford all of the guys we have... again...  Just my Opinion folks....

I completely understand players refusing outright pay cuts... I mean, would any of us really take a 33% pay cut? I seriously doubt it!

[The Mom Gene]

Name me one category the championship defense was better than this year's defense. I haven't heard any. There could be one, but I know our schedule was harder and we allowed fewer points and fewer yards than last year.

Last year's safety (Reed) was beat by our very own Jacoby Jones for a TD this season. What's your point about Elam getting beat deep? You wanted to keep Reed?

Our team was disbanded? Who did you want to overpay for? Reed? Ellerbe? Kruger? Williams? I'm just confused as to what you are complaining about. If we don't trade Boldin we have no defense. Even after cutting Boldin we still couldn't afford the contracts our players were getting elsewhere. Please explain to me your plan for last year's off season. Just curious.

Thank you...  Geez... 

[The Mom Gene]

I completely understand players refusing outright pay cuts... I mean, would any of us really take a 33% pay cut? I seriously doubt it!

I understand that too...  but then don't make a statement a week after the championship stating that you would retire before you would want to play for another team...  You lose bargaining power... and credibility if you do that.  You're basically saying that you would rather "take nothing" and move on.

[gabefergy]

I completely understand players refusing outright pay cuts... I mean, would any of us really take a 33% pay cut? I seriously doubt it!

I wouldn't take a straight up pay cut. I think an extension could be useful though, especially if I am close to the end of my career.

[Militant X 1]

I completely understand players refusing outright pay cuts... I mean, would any of us really take a 33% pay cut? I seriously doubt it!

 

Absolutely not!  That is why I don't have a problem with a player wanting to get their money!  This is a business so now; let's do business!

 

I understand that too...  but then don't make a statement a week after the championship stating that you would retire before you would want to play for another team...  You lose bargaining power... and credibility if you do that.  You're basically saying that you would rather "take nothing" and move on.

 

That's his prerogative Gene.  He has the right to accept or reject any "offer" being made.  Just cause the Ravens say; "We'll give you this or that," it doesn't mean that these players should always bow down to the organization.  Smh!  Do what is best for you and your family cause at the end of the day....to every organization...including the Ravens....players are expendable!  They trade, release and cut players constantly!  And to think; both Boldin and Michael Huff are still balling in the playoffs and the Ravens are sitting at home watching!  lol!  I expect Suggs to follow in like manner.

 

#Mili

[FlocksGottaFeed]

Absolutely not!  That is why I don't have a problem with a player wanting to get their money!  This is a business so now; let's do business!

 

 

That's his prerogative Gene.  He has the right to accept or reject any "offer" being made.  Just cause the Ravens say; "We'll give you this or that," it doesn't mean that these players should always bow down to the organization.  Smh!  Do what is best for you and your family cause at the end of the day....to every organization...including the Ravens....players are expendable!  They trade, release and cut players constantly!  And to think; both Boldin and Michael Huff are still balling in the playoffs and the Ravens are sitting at home watching!  lol!  I expect Suggs to follow in like manner.

 

#Mili

I agree that every player has the right to accept or reject offers as they see fit and I think that Suggs is very aware of that. I'm sure that his agent is just as aware (his livelihood is just as 'at risk'). We need to stop putting NFL in the 'box' of our normal work relationships - their NFL pay-cuts, contracts, extensions and bargaining is not of the 'regular' working fan's world. It's a whole different planet where nothing is personal and nothing is 'black and white'.

For Example: Suggs is not Boldin and/or Huff when it comes down to market value. He and his agent know that he commands more non-Ravens money from commercials, guest appearances, retail endorsements, product merchandise sales, brand value, etc. Some of the main 'blue-chip' aspects that plays a 'big' role in determining his brand value are: He was drafted a Raven, successful as a Raven, has a dynamic personality as a Raven spokesmen, and last but not least - he will retire only having played for one team (You can never underestimate that factor as it relates to market value currently or after you retire). Ex: Suggs as one the SNF pre-game 'Marquee Players' brand, Suggs as guest host of premiere networks, etc. Does anyone think that if he lands on another team he will re-command that kind of brand immediately? He could lose millions over a 30 year span if it doesn't. Most players are stuck with local car dealership/insurance commercials and/or stripper events guest appearance posters during their careers and for 2 or 3 years after retirement than nothing or a whole lot less (if you can imagine).

If Suggs is considering the next 30 years (I'm confident that he is) he's very aware of the risk it is to go for 'now' money. His agent may not agree. They always lean to 'now' money if it's not close. NFL business - It's never personal.

There are many ex-Raven players looking at the playoffs at home this season (like every other team's ex-players). The law-of-averages may suggest that 1#: None of them are taking it 'personally' that other guys are there and they aren't. That's business - and 2# - Ex-Raven's 'still ballin' for the SB are not texting 'lol' comments to current Ravens (nothing personal).

[Militant X 1]

I agree that every player has the right to accept or reject offers as they see fit and I think that Suggs is very aware of that. I'm sure that his agent is just as aware (his livelihood is just as 'at risk'). We need to stop putting NFL in the 'box' of our normal work relationships - their NFL pay-cuts, contracts, extensions and bargaining is not of the 'regular' working fan's world. It's a whole different planet where nothing is personal and nothing is 'black and white'.

For Example: Suggs is not Boldin and/or Huff when it comes down to market value. He and his agent know that he commands more non-Ravens money from commercials, guest appearances, retail endorsements, product merchandise sales, brand value, etc. Some of the main 'blue-chip' aspects that plays a 'big' role in determining his brand value are: He was drafted a Raven, successful as a Raven, has a dynamic personality as a Raven spokesmen, and last but not least - he will retire only having played for one team (You can never underestimate that factor as it relates to market value currently or after you retire). Ex: Suggs as one the SNF pre-game 'Marquee Players' brand, Suggs as guest host of premiere networks, etc. Does anyone think that if he lands on another team he will re-command that kind of brand immediately? He could lose millions over a 30 year span if it doesn't. Most players are stuck with local car dealership/insurance commercials and/or stripper events guest appearance posters during their careers and for 2 or 3 years after retirement than nothing or a whole lot less (if you can imagine).

If Suggs is considering the next 30 years (I'm confident that he is) he's very aware of the risk it is to go for 'now' money. His agent may not agree. They always lean to 'now' money if it's not close. NFL business - It's never personal.

There are many ex-Raven players looking at the playoffs at home this season (like every other team's ex-players). The law-of-averages may suggest that 1#: None of them are taking it 'personally' that other guys are there and they aren't. That's business - and 2# - Ex-Raven's 'still ballin' for the SB are not texting 'lol' comments to current Ravens (nothing personal).

First; as a business man myself....business is business no matter what "level" it may be.  The principles of business work the same.  And of course Suggs and his agent know this that's why I said he needs to look out for his own interest.  Secondly; boy did you misunderstand my little insertion of Boldin and Huff still balling in the playoffs!  I mentioned them in reference to players looking out for their own interests and not what is best for the organization (i.e. like taking a pay cut or hometown discount etc.) even if that interest means they move on to another city and team.  And in the case of Q and Huff...they just "happen" to still be balling in the playoffs as a result of being traded, released or just moving on!

 

#Mili

[FlocksGottaFeed]

First; as a business man myself....business is business no matter what "level" it may be.  The principles of business work the same.  And of course Suggs and his agent know this that's why I said he needs to look out for his own interest.  Secondly; boy did you misunderstand my little insertion of Boldin and Huff still balling in the playoffs!  I mentioned them in reference to players looking out for their own interests and not what is best for the organization (i.e. like taking a pay cut or hometown discount etc.) even if that interest means they move on to another city and team.  And in the case of Q and Huff...they just "happen" to still be balling in the playoffs as a result of being traded, released or just moving on!

 

#Mili

I'm not questioning your business awareness. You are one of the strongest and more thoughtout posters on this subject. My post is much more general. I'm just wondering why those who say,"Oz said this and Suggs said that and because of that Suggs should just walk or Ozzie this..." (you know what I mean) haven't considered that it's just business and agents are just as self-interest driven as teams and players.

My point simply is that considering Suggs' current value on the Ravens (non-Raven $) is just as critical to his negotiations as cap, extension or all those other things that we fixate on. With all do respect: Players like Q, Huff or anybody still playing in the playoffs this season won't have a lot to do with what his market value will be in the next 30 years.

 

Unless, maybe just maybe - Q was brought-up just to give Suggs a talking point to openingly recant or add counter-arguement to Oz's pre-scripted negotiation press statement. Maybe both Q&A s were arranged and directed by agents and lawyers. It's just business.

[flynismo]

Name me one category the championship defense was better than this year's defense. I haven't heard any. There could be one, but I know our schedule was harder and we allowed fewer points and fewer yards than last year.

Last year's safety (Reed) was beat by our very own Jacoby Jones for a TD this season. What's your point about Elam getting beat deep? You wanted to keep Reed?

Our team was disbanded? Who did you want to overpay for? Reed? Ellerbe? Kruger? Williams? I'm just confused as to what you are complaining about. If we don't trade Boldin we have no defense. Even after cutting Boldin we still couldn't afford the contracts our players were getting elsewhere. Please explain to me your plan for last year's off season. Just curious.

He's a troll

[Guest Omerta]

Yep. Loyalty is a two way street, and it is not free. It has to be earned. The way Ozzie was talking about Suggs doesn't breed a lot of loyalty. It sure wouldn't with me.


I understand Ozzie's attitude. He has the cap to deal with and has some really tough decisions to make. But that is a management problem. It is why he gets paid the big bucks.

Exactly what you said, but a different perspective. I like stuffs he brings an edge to the tan if nothing else.

To what you said though that is why he gets paid the big bucks. And who would you rather have in the NFL calling the shots other than Ozzie ? The guy imo is the best GM in the NFL. Until he cuts flacco and brings in Sanchez or three years of just horrible decisions I will ride with whatever decision he makes. He is far better at evaluating trades and s feel for the market than I have seen from anyone else.

[Poes Crows]

Wow. Really. Wow. Full of yourself often? From your post you seem to be suggesting that you are more knowledgeable about the team than even the owner. You said that he is "slowly realizing" where as you are already certain.  For the sake of argument, lets assume you are correct, and are, in fact, more knowledgeable than Ozzie et.al. Lets go back in time to the end of 2012, you are the GM. What would you have done differently? What cuts would you have made to meet the cap? Who would you have kept and how? Who specifically would you have drafted and/or picked up via FA?

 

 

Its easy to point the finger and find fault. Finding solutions is the real trick.

 

Frozen Joe Flacco said it best:

 

"If Oz and Harbaugh are top caliber they will have this team back in the playoffs next year and if they fail again, correction is in order."

 

That's a paraphrase but it's close enough for NFL drafting purposes.  It's essentially what Bisciotti said too.

 

The seminal event is obviously the Boldin trade, or the "Giveaway".  Let's be fair and call it the Giveaway from this point forward, because its going to be discussed for a number of years to come.  Don't believe there was any "dead money" with the Giveaway, so subsequently Oz had about 6 million to work with.  But let's not lose sight of the fact that Oz wanted to keep Boldin, but insisted upon a 2 million dollar salary forfeiture.  So the Giveaway is really about 2 million and that's the figure folks should use when weighing the soundness of Oz's decision making.

 

Before we go any further, what monetary value would one place upon a playoff berth?  Whats it worth?  What is it really worth? Let's not forget to factor that into the equation.  Certainly, Bisciotti is factoring it, isn't he? 

 

So the Front Office, (Oz), was hardballin Boldin for a measly 2 million dollars. What kind of convoluted thought processing was going on with that?  And before all you Fantasy Football and Cap Analysts start up again with your statistics that are only relevant to lie or mislead with, let's look at what the once great and powerful Oz did with his scrooge dollars. 

 

Let's start with Michael Huff.  Somebody brave step up to the fore and tell us how much Oz spent on Michael Huff and how much of that was forfeited when he was cut!

 

When the brave soul is finished with that assignment do the same for the following players:

 

Marcus Spears;

Dwight Clark;

and Brandon Stokely.

 

Granted Clark and Stokely contributed some, but Come On Man!

 

When you add it all up come back with the number and then we'll move on to the Safety Position and Offensive Line and Oz on Cleats Elam and Eugene Monroe.

 

To his credit Oz did sign Daryl Smith

 

and to lesser credit Chris Canty who was far too valuable on this "rebuilt defense".

[Militant X 1]

I'm not questioning your business awareness. You are one of the strongest and more thoughtout posters on this subject. My post is much more general. I'm just wondering why those who say,"Oz said this and Suggs said that and because of that Suggs should just walk or Ozzie this..." (you know what I mean) haven't considered that it's just business and agents are just as self-interest driven as teams and players.

My point simply is that considering Suggs' current value on the Ravens (non-Raven $) is just as critical to his negotiations as cap, extension or all those other things that we fixate on. With all do respect: Players like Q, Huff or anybody still playing in the playoffs this season won't have a lot to do with what his market value will be in the next 30 years.

 

Unless, maybe just maybe - Q was brought-up just to give Suggs a talking point to openingly recant or add counter-arguement to Oz's pre-scripted negotiation press statement. Maybe both Q&A s were arranged and directed by agents and lawyers. It's just business.

Gotcha! :D

 

And yes!  I believe that is why Q was brought up....to give Suggs a talking point on the show as to see what his point of view was about the Ravens organization letting a good player like Q..."walk out the door" (as Ozzie said....in reference to Suggs) and how he could find himself in a very similar situation.  Did you get his response about Q's trade?  Suggs kept saying; "For a 6th rounder!"  Definitely not a favorable statement about the move!  As far as Suggs' value to the Ravens.  Perhaps at one time he was! 

 

But now; Ozzie has made it perfectly clear in his presser in front of the entire sports world that he will not restructure contracts and that he has no problem letting a good player walk out the door!  Suggs' contract is the elephant in the room when you read between the lines.  And upon hearing that, to me; Suggs needs to look out for and do what is best for the Suggs family cause the Ravens organization will always to what is best for itself!  So, if that means go test the market and see which team would match or even offer you more money than the Ravens....so be it!  11 years in Baltimore or not....cause after all,  we all know that this is business!

 

#Mili

[Ravenseconbeast]

Been incredibly fun watching Suggs all day last night on t.v....he was also in Dave Dameshek's podcast.   

 

He might be an animal on the field, but his pretty laid back and knows his stuff when his talking about football

[Cville-Raven]

Sizzle has always been funny on TV

[FlocksGottaFeed]

Gotcha! :D

 

And yes!  I believe that is why Q was brought up....to give Suggs a talking point on the show as to see what his point of view was about the Ravens organization letting a good player like Q..."walk out the door" (as Ozzie said....in reference to Suggs) and how he could find himself in a very similar situation.  Did you get his response about Q's trade?  Suggs kept saying; "For a 6th rounder!"  Definitely not a favorable statement about the move!  As far as Suggs' value to the Ravens.  Perhaps at one time he was! 

 

But now; Ozzie has made it perfectly clear in his presser in front of the entire sports world that he will not restructure contracts and that he has no problem letting a good player walk out the door!  Suggs' contract is the elephant in the room when you read between the lines.  And upon hearing that, to me; Suggs needs to look out for and do what is best for the Suggs family cause the Ravens organization will always to what is best for itself!  So, if that means go test the market and see which team would match or even offer you more money than the Ravens....so be it!  11 years in Baltimore or not....cause after all,  we all know that this is business!

 

#Mili

Okay. Is there something wrong with the (period) on your keyboard?

I'm glad we're on the same page here (somewhat), but I'm not shouting about it. It's cool. However, I don't fully believe that the FO has completely given-up on Suggs as being an asset to the team (his cap is just too heavy a load take). And further, I don't believe Suggs has decided that he should test the market or anything at all based on press statements so far. My point is these 'sound-bite' press releases are not to be taken too seriously. It's all theater. If Suggs wants to voice his final decision - he just voices it.

Sugg's is on the wrong side of 30 and still holds Raven 'marquee' value even with 2 years with missed playing time and not ranking in the top 10 at position. A new contract for less against the cap (4 million) yearly extended through approx. 4 years would put him and the team where both need to be. The FO has more flexibility and Sizzle sets himself up to go out like Ray (approx. 3 million yearly leading up to retirement and 2 million for the next 10+ years broadcasting). Like Ray, Sizzle won't have to rank in the top 10 every year leading up to his retirement and can focus more on revenue outside of the Ravens and have the chance to garner Ring of Honor and HOF respectability in the process. At this time in a player's career, chasing money can lose you money in the long-run. The less risky thing to do is to protect your brand at all cost. That's business and looking out for your own interest and family, as well.

If your assessment is true and the Ravens FO is truly convinced that they don't want or need him then this all is a mute point. I can understand your position, but I just respectfully have a different opinion on this one. We're good.

[jaege]

Exactly what you said, but a different perspective. I like stuffs he brings an edge to the tan if nothing else.

To what you said though that is why he gets paid the big bucks. And who would you rather have in the NFL calling the shots other than Ozzie ? The guy imo is the best GM in the NFL. Until he cuts flacco and brings in Sanchez or three years of just horrible decisions I will ride with whatever decision he makes. He is far better at evaluating trades and s feel for the market than I have seen from anyone else.

 
 
I didn't say or even suggest that someone else should be calling the shots.Nor did I suggest he is not worth the big bucks, since he is worth every penny he gets paid (as far as I am concerned) All I did suggest was he has a difficult job trying to stay under the cap even though we fans often do not like the hard decisions that he makes.

[jaege]

Frozen Joe Flacco said it best:

 

"If Oz and Harbaugh are top caliber they will have this team back in the playoffs next year and if they fail again, correction is in order."

 

That's a paraphrase but it's close enough for NFL drafting purposes.  It's essentially what Bisciotti said too.

 

The seminal event is obviously the Boldin trade, or the "Giveaway".  Let's be fair and call it the Giveaway from this point forward, because its going to be discussed for a number of years to come.  Don't believe there was any "dead money" with the Giveaway, so subsequently Oz had about 6 million to work with.  But let's not lose sight of the fact that Oz wanted to keep Boldin, but insisted upon a 2 million dollar salary forfeiture.  So the Giveaway is really about 2 million and that's the figure folks should use when weighing the soundness of Oz's decision making.

 

Before we go any further, what monetary value would one place upon a playoff berth?  Whats it worth?  What is it really worth? Let's not forget to factor that into the equation.  Certainly, Bisciotti is factoring it, isn't he? 

 

So the Front Office, (Oz), was hardballin Boldin for a measly 2 million dollars. What kind of convoluted thought processing was going on with that?  And before all you Fantasy Football and Cap Analysts start up again with your statistics that are only relevant to lie or mislead with, let's look at what the once great and powerful Oz did with his scrooge dollars. 

 

Let's start with Michael Huff.  Somebody brave step up to the fore and tell us how much Oz spent on Michael Huff and how much of that was forfeited when he was cut!

 

When the brave soul is finished with that assignment do the same for the following players:

 

Marcus Spears;

Dwight Clark;

and Brandon Stokely.

 

Granted Clark and Stokely contributed some, but Come On Man!

 

When you add it all up come back with the number and then we'll move on to the Safety Position and Offensive Line and Oz on Cleats Elam and Eugene Monroe.

 

To his credit Oz did sign Daryl Smith

 

and to lesser credit Chris Canty who was far too valuable on this "rebuilt defense".

 

 

You're ducking the question. Do you think you are better qualified to run the Ravens than Ozzie or Biscuitti? Simple yes or no question. I fully expect you will not bother to answer. I noticed you also avoided the "if you were the GM what would you have done" question. Complainers always have a hard time with that one too.

 

On another note, I do agree that dumping Boldin over 2 million was..... mystifying. Particularly since it was supposedly to sign guys that made little impact. Mistakes were made. No one is perfect, well, almost no one.;) But Ozzie has been the GM for a lot of years and we were successful for a good number of those years. We are not the Browns, after all. The team still has some good pieces on it brought to you by Ozzie. And that cap is a looming boulder hanging over the heads of the team. Realistically it must be catered to when players are hired. All these realities do make it difficult to hire the team that many fans think should be hired. 

[TXRavensFan]

I think something to remember when talking about the cap is that the Ravens are committed to putting a winning product on the field every year, which means they spend up to the cap for good players every year; but they are committed also to not got over the cap too. So while they don't hoard cap space (like the Browns), or consistently find themselves over and have to constantly release and restructure (like the Steelers or Cowboys), they will be up against the cap every year which can lead to some tough decisions.

[Guest Omerta]

I didn't say or even suggest that someone else should be calling the shots.Nor did I suggest he is not worth the big bucks, since he is worth every penny he gets paid (as far as I am concerned) All I did suggest was he has a difficult job trying to stay under the cap even though we fans often do not like the hard decisions that he makes. Man, the reading comprehension of many folks is abysmal.

Apparently your comprehension is not as prolific as you imply either. I never said you did. It was merely a question or really an illustration of my point that I would rather have no one else make this decision based upon a proven track record for excellence. It was not an indictment on your thoughts of Ozzie, it was to put in sharp relief that there could be a different perspective based upon what you have said.

 

You said Ozzie's approach would not harbor any loyalty or charitable feelings toward the organization come time to sit at the bargaining table and talk bread. I was just pointing out that if Ozzie feels as though he can cut/release suggs and get production from elsewhere by using that cap hit we are just going to have faith in his decision seeing as he is a frequent of practice, until he does something not to earn it.

I never said you did not like Ozzie or even suggest it, this board is pretty sensitive...

[HoldingCall]

I think it was a surprise to get what we got for him. Most people thought he would be cut dating back to 2011.

I don't believe most people thought Boldin would be cut in 2011. Myself and many could see through the criticism of his ability by a vocal minority who undervalued his worth. It never stops amazing me that some justified their thoughts by what the FO did when it's clear the FO decision was based on the fact that they could not afford to keep him, not that he was no longer worth it. The same may happen with Suggs and it will not be a reflection on Sugg's talent or ability but will be due to the increasing revolving door within the NFL.

[Poes Crows]

I don't believe most people thought Boldin would be cut in 2011. Myself and many could see through the criticism of his ability by a vocal minority who undervalued his worth. It never stops amazing me that some justified their thoughts by what the FO did when it's clear the FO decision was based on the fact that they could not afford to keep him, not that he was no longer worth it. The same may happen with Suggs and it will not be a reflection on Sugg's talent or ability but will be due to the increasing revolving door within the NFL.

 

Cut in 2011? He was cut/traded in 2013.

 

This assignment is yours. You've been volunteered. Your task is to ascertain how much Cap was allocated to Michael Huff, Marcus Spears, Brandon Stokely and Dwight Clark.  You should have an aggregate figure and the individual obligations.  When you have that at your disposal come back and repost what you just posted, if you think you can.

[HoldingCall]

Cut in 2011? He was cut/traded in 2013.

 

This assignment is yours. You've been volunteered. Your task is to ascertain how much Cap was allocated to Michael Huff, Marcus Spears, Brandon Stokely and Dwight Clark.  You should have an aggregate figure and the individual obligations.  When you have that at your disposal come back and repost what you just posted, if you think you can.

What? Boldin was a mistake, I was among the first to state it. The FO thought they were doing the right thing. I disagreed! But their trade was not based on them no longer wanting Q but he was a cap casualty. Then they made more bad choices and did a few panic signings in Clark and stokley, along with other bad signings that didn't work out.

 

My previous post was in response to gabefergy who stated "I think it was a surprise to get what we got for him. Most people thought he would be cut dating back to 2011." I disagreed!

 

Seems you misunderstood the post.

[Poes Crows]

...

On another note, I do agree that dumping Boldin over 2 million was..... mystifying. Particularly since it was supposedly to sign guys that made little impact. Mistakes were made. No one is perfect, well, almost no one. ;) But Ozzie has been the GM for a lot of years and we were successful for a good number of those years. ...

 

That's part of the point. 

 

Oz has been here a long time.  He dates to another era.  The game has changed. Certainly teams still need to run the ball and the remaining playoff teams all run the ball well, however, this is an era where changes in the game have made offense and throwing more important.  Offense is Oz's weakness and he hasn't been setting any defensive records lately either.

 

Oz wasn't the G.M. during the 1st Championship.  He did draft Suggs and Ngata, Rice and Flacco. He did sign Boldin and Jacoby Jones and deserves credit for bringing Baltimore it's second Championship, but that era, that team is gone now.  Oz did what he was hired to do. He's 57 or 58 and not in ideal health.  The view here is that his recent decision making has been very questionable. The times and team have changed now.  Do Raven fans really want to start again with Oz? 

[Poes Crows]

What? Boldin was a mistake, I was among the first to state it. The FO thought they were doing the right thing. I disagreed! But their trade was not based on them no longer wanting Q but he was a cap casualty. Then they made more bad choices and did a few panic signings in Clark and stokley, along with other bad signings that didn't work out.

 

My previous post was in response to gabefergy who stated "I think it was a surprise to get what we got for him. Most people thought he would be cut dating back to 2011." I disagreed!

 

Seems you misunderstood the post.

 

No not at all, the issue is with the premise. 

 

The 'defense' put forth by the Front Office and it's fellow travelers is that it was necessary.

 

The assignment was part of the process to lead others to the truth.

[Juviebest]

Cut in 2011? He was cut/traded in 2013.

This assignment is yours. You've been volunteered. Your task is to ascertain how much Cap was allocated to Michael Huff, Marcus Spears, Brandon Stokely and Dwight Clark. You should have an aggregate figure and the individual obligations. When you have that at your disposal come back and repost what you just posted, if you think you can.

Ok Troll, you baited me into responding. First of all, it's not Dwight...it's Dallas. Him and Stokley were signed later in the off-season as a direct result of Pitta getting injured...had nothing to do with the cap saved from Q. Leave them out. The dudes that were brought in as a result of that $6 mill...Doom, Canty, Huff and Spears. Obviously Huff and Spears were busts but not much money was invested in them. However our defense this year was much better with the money saved from Q and spent on Doom and Canty. You can even make a case to include Daryl Smith in that grouping. Q had a tendency to disappear for games on end anyways so who is to say we would have been better off with one year of him and no Doom contract (which helps soften the blow if Suggs does in fact leave) and not seeing Daryl and Canty help our defense look good again. Just stop posting your lunacy.