Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

BmoreBird22

Top 65 Quarterbacks

94 posts in this topic

So, the Bleacher Report Top 1000 list for the NFL is starting. I'll probably post a link to each one to discuss it. The guy is a huge 49er, Patriot, and Andrew Luck lover, as a note. Here's this list: http://m.bleacherreport.com/articles/1949452-br-nfl-1000-top-65-quarterbacks

Because it's the Ravens board, I'll start with Joe. I found it curious that Joe gets knocked because he often put the ball in a place where receivers had to go up and get the ball, but where only they could get it, but guys like Stafford, Cutler, and Ben get a pass on it. He also gives Brady a pass for new faces on the team and Luck a pass for the lack of talent, but Joe is downgraded for not overcoming it.

As for the rest of the list, I found it interesting that we saw Foles lower than Cutler and Rome despite his impressive play and Russell Wilson at 3? Really?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After I saw Flacco at 27, clicked next and saw Thad Lewis, clicked next and saw Brian Hoyer, I stopped reading. At this point as a Ravens fan, I don't listen to outsiders. It is truly inevitable that Flacco will always get knocked and hated on. For whatever reason, people critique Flacco down to the very smallest of details, but like you said, other quarterbacks get passes for their wrong-doings. It makes me mad, and confuses me, but it is what it is. Wins don't lie. 

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, the Bleacher Report Top 1000 list for the NFL is starting. I'll probably post a link to each one to discuss it. The guy is a huge 49er, Patriot, and Andrew Luck lover, as a note. Here's this list: http://m.bleacherreport.com/articles/1949452-br-nfl-1000-top-65-quarterbacks

Because it's the Ravens board, I'll start with Joe. I found it curious that Joe gets knocked because he often put the ball in a place where receivers had to go up and get the ball, but where only they could get it, but guys like Stafford, Cutler, and Ben get a pass on it. He also gives Brady a pass for new faces on the team and Luck a pass for the lack of talent, but Joe is downgraded for not overcoming it.

As for the rest of the list, I found it interesting that we saw Foles lower than Cutler and Rome despite his impressive play and Russell Wilson at 3? Really?

yeah i saw this and just laughed i know he had a bad season but wth was he smoking while writeing this. he also said joe is very slow and that peyton manning s more mobile than him. lol. and i see this all the time is great fo QB to throw it up and be great but when Joe  does it its bad like what? that makes zero freaking sense. but its ok if matthew stafford does it but Joe flacco better not do it. please.  

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While I wouldn't of put Thad Lewis or Hoyer ahead of Flacco, the whole country might be on to something when they see him as an average QB. Outside of Baltimore he has very few supporters, there is nothing wrong with average. He hasn't been terrible enough to give us a losing season so is say that's pretty good

-1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bleacher Report is joke............. 

 

Phillip Rivers at 2? Russel Wilson at 3? Both are good but seriously?

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was so close to putting this up. I had a whole thread typed and all. Instead I thought it would be better not to give them more page views.

I don't understand how he can put Matt Ryan so far ahead of him. Flacco didn't play like a top 10 QB but putting a few other names like Hoyer and Lewis infront of him loses all credibility.

4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While I wouldn't of put Thad Lewis or Hoyer ahead of Flacco, the whole country might be on to something when they see him as an average QB. Outside of Baltimore he has very few supporters, there is nothing wrong with average. He hasn't been terrible enough to give us a losing season so is say that's pretty good

 

I agree with this list also. Peyton Manning has great mechanics and accuracy, if only he could take a snap properly.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was so close to putting this up. I had a whole thread typed and all. Instead I thought it would be better not to give them more page views.

I don't understand how he can put Matt Ryan so far ahead of him. Flacco didn't play like a top 10 QB but putting a few other names like Hoyer and Lewis infront of him loses all credibility.

 

"The Falcons had a terrible year in 2013, but that wasn’t on Ryan. He remains one of the 10 best quarterbacks in the league."

 

"The Cowboys are heavily invested in their quarterback, and he appears to still have a few more good years left in him."

 

"The Ravens are probably regretting that massive contract extension they gave Flacco last offseason. He didn't have much help in 2013, but he was also a part of the team's problem on offense."

 

So, Tony Romo, who got more garanteed money than Flacco and has only 1 playoff win was well worth the money and Matt Ryan had a bad season, because he simply didn't have enough surrounding him.

Yet in the same time Flacco's contract was a waste in spite of him being a proven winner and the offense as whole having problems is no excuse for Joe's performance.

 

I wouldn't mind this, if this "review" of Flacco's performance was consistent with how the "writer" sees other QBs, but all this looks like is just a very badly researched opinion piece aka BleacherReport article.

5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After I saw Flacco at 27, clicked next and saw Thad Lewis, clicked next and saw Brian Hoyer, I stopped reading. At this point as a Ravens fan, I don't listen to outsiders. It is truly inevitable that Flacco will always get knocked and hated on. For whatever reason, people critique Flacco down to the very smallest of details, but like you said, other quarterbacks get passes for their wrong-doings. It makes me mad, and confuses me, but it is what it is. Wins don't lie.

  

yeah i saw this and just laughed i know he had a bad season but wth was he smoking while writeing this. he also said joe is very slow and that peyton manning s more mobile than him. lol. and i see this all the time is great fo QB to throw it up and be great but when Joe  does it its bad like what? that makes zero freaking sense. but its ok if matthew stafford does it but Joe flacco better not do it. please.

I don't like lists like this because they have too many variables, one being the talent around you. Someone like Stafford van throw into triple coverage and Johnson will bail him out. He'll get praised for a great throw and putting the ball where only Johnson could get it. Joe makes the exact same throw yo Torrey and it gets intercepted, but now it's what the hell were you thinking?
2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"The Falcons had a terrible year in 2013, but that wasn’t on Ryan. He remains one of the 10 best quarterbacks in the league."

"The Cowboys are heavily invested in their quarterback, and he appears to still have a few more good years left in him."

"The Ravens are probably regretting that massive contract extension they gave Flacco last offseason. He didn't have much help in 2013, but he was also a part of the team's problem on offense."

So, Tony Romo, who got more garanteed money than Flacco and has only 1 playoff win was well worth the money and Matt Ryan had a bad season, because he simply didn't have enough surrounding him.

Yet in the same time Flacco's contract was a waste in spite of him being a proven winner and the offense as whole having problems is no excuse for Joe's performance.

I wouldn't mind this, if this "review" of Flacco's performance was consistent with how the "writer" sees other QBs, but all this looks like is just a very badly researched opinion piece aka BleacherReport article.

Agreed.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess they are speaking in terms of 2013 production...yea Flacco sucked I could take rank 27. If we are talking in terms of true skill Flacco is top 10.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess they are speaking in terms of 2013 production...yea Flacco sucked I could take rank 27. If we are talking in terms of true skill Flacco is top 10.

But why does Ryan and Romo get passes? And Hoyer had a better year in like 4 games than Flacco did? when he was 1 game away from missing the playoffs while Certainly not getting help from anyone else on offense.
2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

   I don't like lists like this because they have too many variables, one being the talent around you. Someone like Stafford van throw into triple coverage and Johnson will bail him out. He'll get praised for a great throw and putting the ball where only Johnson could get it. Joe makes the exact same throw yo Torrey and it gets intercepted, but now it's what the hell were you thinking?

 

That's why I think, that comparing QBs directly statistically is nonsensical. They don't throw to the same receivers, stay behind the same OL and play against the same defenses. Heck, sometimes a great defense can have really bad day and vice versa, so their impact on the QBs accuracy for example can fluctuate in a big way.

 

Stats are good for evaluating a QBs development and Joe certainly took a big step backwards, but does that mean Matt Ryan or Tony Romo would've played better behind the Ravens OL?

The Ravens never really build around the QB (ever!) or gave Joe alot of weapons to work with, while the OL was pretty average most of the time during Flacco's carreer and Joe never seemed on the same page with his OCs (which is why his stats aren't usually eyepopping). Well, except once and he ended up leading the team to the SB atleast.

 

The same way as detractors can take credit away from Flacco, because this team was build on defense and running the ball for so long, Flacco supporters can point towards this focus on defense as a prime reason why Joe is underrated.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But why does Ryan and Romo get passes? And Hoyer had a better year in like 4 games than Flacco did? when he was 1 game away from missing the playoffs while Certainly not getting help from anyone else on offense.

Im not even sure why the hell 2 starts gives Brian Hoyer the ability to be on the list at all. He played 2 games than got injured in his 3rd start. In his 2 full games he only put up 321yds/3TDs/3INTs.....and 269yds/2TDs, not overly respectable.

 

And yea I had Matt Ryan and Romo on my fantasy team...I LOST haha

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"The Falcons had a terrible year in 2013, but that wasn’t on Ryan. He remains one of the 10 best quarterbacks in the league."

 

"The Cowboys are heavily invested in their quarterback, and he appears to still have a few more good years left in him."

 

"The Ravens are probably regretting that massive contract extension they gave Flacco last offseason. He didn't have much help in 2013, but he was also a part of the team's problem on offense."

 

So, Tony Romo, who got more garanteed money than Flacco and has only 1 playoff win was well worth the money and Matt Ryan had a bad season, because he simply didn't have enough surrounding him.

Yet in the same time Flacco's contract was a waste in spite of him being a proven winner and the offense as whole having problems is no excuse for Joe's performance.

 

I wouldn't mind this, if this "review" of Flacco's performance was consistent with how the "writer" sees other QBs, but all this looks like is just a very badly researched opinion piece aka BleacherReport article.

Couldn't have said it any better. 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I disagree with his mobility ranking, but agree with everything else, though I think he was generous with his ranking on decision making.  Pretty fair analysis in my book.

 

Let me say I might not agree with where he was ranked, but that's on the system he used.

-2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bleacher Report is joke............. 

 

Phillip Rivers at 2? Russel Wilson at 3? Both are good but seriously?

Rivers had a good season and Wilson just won a SB.  Both were more accurate and better decision makers than Joe this season.  Rivers honestly didn't have much to work with on offense either and Wilsons wr corps is overrated if you ask me.

-1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

That's why I think, that comparing QBs directly statistically is nonsensical. They don't throw to the same receivers, stay behind the same OL and play against the same defenses. Heck, sometimes a great defense can have really bad day and vice versa, so their impact on the QBs accuracy for example can fluctuate in a big way.

 

Stats are good for evaluating a QBs development and Joe certainly took a big step backwards, but does that mean Matt Ryan or Tony Romo would've played better behind the Ravens OL?

The Ravens never really build around the QB (ever!) or gave Joe alot of weapons to work with, while the OL was pretty average most of the time during Flacco's carreer and Joe never seemed on the same page with his OCs (which is why his stats aren't usually eyepopping). Well, except once and he ended up leading the team to the SB atleast.

 

The same way as detractors can take credit away from Flacco, because this team was build on defense and running the ball for so long, Flacco supporters can point towards this focus on defense as a prime reason why Joe is underrated.

This article just completely was bogus. 

Furthermore, what about the effects of a good running game and defense? Russell Wilson rides the coattails of that that defense and running game. There are several games where he is asked to complete 8, 9 passes and the Seahawks win by 30+ points because of that elite defense and running game. That makes him the third best quarterback in the NFL?
I watched him closely in the Super Bowl (since I'm not a Russell Wilson fan at all) and I didn't see any difficult or spectacular throws. I saw his receivers getting open and then making some big plays, like on the Kearse touchdown. 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rivers had a good season and Wilson just won a SB.  Both were more accurate and better decision makers than Joe this season.  Rivers honestly didn't have much to work with on offense either and Wilsons wr corps is overrated if you ask me.

Keenan Allen, Gates, Royal........

 

Wilson was good but not the reason they won..

 

I'm ok with them being ranked higher, they had better years.. But at 2 and 3??? Really?

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm not saying that Joe should be higher (but he's behind Thad Lewis and Brian Hoyer, who played in 2 and a half games?), but this list isn't fair. 

Double standards and bias are all over the place and it's abundantly clear. If he were ranked 27th and it there was no bias or double standards, fine. But that isn't the case and it's just awful

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SB hype and Rivers really did have a good season.  I also guarantee if those were our players people would be complaining about Flaccos lack of weapons still.  Gates has been on the decline, Allen is a rook and Royal isn't that good.  The best weapon from that bunch was probably Keenan, who I think was suppose to be the 3rd wr.  Rivers still made it work and a lot probably had to do with Whisenhut.

 

Also, why the HELL are people in an uproar about an article ANY OF US COULD'VE WRITTEN.  You all realize how BR works right?  Some of y'all are real sensitive.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

SB hype and Rivers really did have a good season.  I also guarantee if those were our players people would be complaining about Flaccos lack of weapons still.  Gates has been on the decline, Allen is a rook and Royal isn't that good.  The best weapon from that bunch was probably Keenan, who I think was suppose to be the 3rd wr.  Rivers still made it work and a lot probably had to do with Whisenhut.

 

Also, why the HELL are people in an uproar about an article ANY OF US COULD'VE WRITTEN.  You all realize how BR works right?  Some of y'all are real sensitive.

I might complain if we had the same weapons that Seattle had just because Zach Miller isn't that great, but you'd be dumb to sell Golden Tate and Doug Baldwin short. Sure, they aren't these really big name receivers, but they are very solid. The Seahawks aren't a very pass reliant system (part of the reason I have a problem with Russell being so high), but if those two were, they'd be doing much better. Still, I'd take Zach Miller over Dallas Clark.

As for the Chargers, if Antonio Gates is on the decline, what is Dallas Clark? He may not be this young blood anymore, but at 33, he's still really capable of putting up good numbers. Tony Gonzalez was doing it until he was 37, so I don't think we can call Gates over the hill or anything like that. Allen was a top 15 talent, but a supposed lack of speed and injuries really took a hit on his draft stock. I am deeply upset the Ravens passed on him (and Alshon Jeffrey), but there wasn't a question of whether or not he could play. He was going to come in and ball. He runs great routes, has good hands, and knows how to get separation. Eddie Royal may not be great (I think injuries really did him in), but would I'd still take him over Jacoby Jones. 

I mean, why not put them with the Ravens weapons and coordinators and see how they do? I don't think they do nearly as well.

 

By the way, I don't think anyone is in an uproar. It's a board for discussing differing things in the football world, and you know, we're discussing.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SB hype and Rivers really did have a good season.  I also guarantee if those were our players people would be complaining about Flaccos lack of weapons still.  Gates has been on the decline, Allen is a rook and Royal isn't that good.  The best weapon from that bunch was probably Keenan, who I think was suppose to be the 3rd wr.  Rivers still made it work and a lot probably had to do with Whisenhut.

 

Also, why the HELL are people in an uproar about an article ANY OF US COULD'VE WRITTEN.  You all realize how BR works right?  Some of y'all are real sensitive.

Matt Miller is one of the few guys they pay.....

 

Royal is still better than any of our #2(sad IK).

 

Gates was better then Clark was....

 

Allen is a good WR. Better then any of our #2 WRs....

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Matt Miller is one of the few guys they pay.....

 

Royal is still better than any of our #2(sad IK).

 

Gates was better then Clark was....

 

Allen is a good WR. Better then any of our #2 WRs....

Holy crap, I forgot Matt Miller was the one who does these off season break downs, so I'll give you that.

 

My guess is a lot teams would take Jacoby and I think that's debatable.  Gates>Clark.  Torrey is still better than Allen.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites