[News] Late For Work 7/10: Best Five-Year Outlook: Ben Roethlisberger Or Joe Flacco?

[JacktheRaven]

Joe hasn't passed Ben, but maybe one day.

One could argue that he has. 6-3 against the Steelers, since '11. 6 playoff wins in that time. Ben has none. Ben clearly was the better QB, '08 thru '10. But, like I said, not anymore.

[Tank 92]

One could argue that he has. 6-3 against the Steelers, since '11. 6 playoff wins in that time. Ben has none. Ben clearly was the better QB, '08 thru '10. But, like I said, not anymore.

Definitely agree with this. Ben is still good, but is beginning to look sluggish and old. All of that abuse he has taken is catching up with him. Joe is now The Man in the AFCN and will continue to improve.

Edited July 12, 2015 by Tank 92

[JacktheRaven]

Definitely agree with this. Ben is still good, but is beginning to look sluggish and old. All of that abuse he has taken is catching up with him. Joe is now The Man in the AFCN and will continue to improve.

I agree with some of your points Tank. I don't agree with Ben looking old and sluggish. 5000 yds & 11 wins is still top 5 QB. My opinions are based on Joe's success vs Bens in the last 4 years.

[RayRocks]

I think Ben has probably a 2 year window of being a Top 5ish QB in the NFL, while Joe has probably 5-6 top years remaining if he stays healthy.  Given that Ben has endured a lot of injuries and is getting older, I can't see him being nearly as successful after age 35.

 

I would say that for the next 2 years, Ben will probably be the "better" QB than Flacco in terms of stats and maybe even regular season wins, but I'll always take Flacco for his ability to get us to the playoffs and play strong in the playoffs.

[Tank 92]

I agree with some of your points Tank. I don't agree with Ben looking old and sluggish. 5000 yds & 11 wins is still top 5 QB. My opinions are based on Joe's success vs Bens in the last 4 years.

IDK, he's looking battle worn to me. He's still good, but not what he once was.

Joe has improved each and every year and as you say has had more success than Ben lately with arguably fewer weapons.

[bigcatfrank1]

******* JOE *******

[Ravens4Real]

Definitely agree with this. Ben is still good, but is beginning to look sluggish and old. All of that abuse he has taken is catching up with him. Joe is now The Man in the AFCN and will continue to improve.

If sluggish and old means throwing for 4,950 yards and 32 TD's, then by all means, I really hope Flacco looks sluggish and old this year.

[Tank 92]

If sluggish and old means throwing for 4,950 yards and 32 TD's, then by all means, I really hope Flacco looks sluggish and old this year.

Antonio Brown, Leveon Bell, Heath Miller, Marcus Wheaton, Martavis Bryant. How many yards and TDs do you think Joe would have had last year throwing to that group.

Watching him play, IMO Jen looked old and sluggish compared to previous years.

[Ravens4Real]

Antonio Brown, Leveon Bell, Heath Miller, Marcus Wheaton, Martavis Bryant. How many yards and TDs do you think Joe would have had last year throwing to that group.

Watching him play, IMO Jen looked old and sluggish compared to previous years.

Your argument is just pointless. It doesn't matter if he had Randy Moss, Jerry Rice, Calvin Johnson and Bo Jackson. He doesn't have his stats discounted. He still put up those numbers.

We can make arguments all we want about his weapons. Guess what, his only one that was a first round choice is his aging TE. All 3 WR's you mentioned were 3rd, 4th and 6th rounders. With the 3rd being the least productive. Let's not act like Ben sucks and his WR's had him throwing for 5,000 yards. The QB makes the WR.

[1/28/01]

Your argument is just pointless. It doesn't matter if he had Randy Moss, Jerry Rice, Calvin Johnson and Bo Jackson. He doesn't have his stats discounted. He still put up those numbers.

We can make arguments all we want about his weapons. Guess what, his only one that was a first round choice is his aging TE. All 3 WR's you mentioned were 3rd, 4th and 6th rounders. With the 3rd being the least productive. Let's not act like Ben sucks and his WR's had him throwing for 5,000 yards. The QB makes the WR.

Well stated. I cannot stand how it's always the receivers are better on this team, that team etc. But we apparently need to have 3 first round receivers and a 1st round TE.

[Tank 92]

Your argument is just pointless. It doesn't matter if he had Randy Moss, Jerry Rice, Calvin Johnson and Bo Jackson. He doesn't have his stats discounted. He still put up those numbers.

We can make arguments all we want about his weapons. Guess what, his only one that was a first round choice is his aging TE. All 3 WR's you mentioned were 3rd, 4th and 6th rounders. With the 3rd being the least productive. Let's not act like Ben sucks and his WR's had him throwing for 5,000 yards. The QB makes the WR.

lol.....Not sure where you read that Ben sucks, I know it wasn't in any of my posts. And predications of the talent level of his receivers on draft position is pointless. Fact is that he had multiple and capable targets to throw to that certainly helped his stats.

My point was that the beatings he has taken are beginning to wear on his body. Regardless of stats, he is looking old and sluggish compared to what he once was. The fact is that Flacco's stock and ceiling are on the rise, and Ben is on the backside of the parabola headed down. At this point in their careers I think it's fairly obvious who the better choice is at QB.

[Tru11]

Well stated. I cannot stand how it's always the receivers are better on this team, that team etc. But we apparently need to have 3 first round receivers and a 1st round TE.

 

maybe flacco cant make wrs better so he needs top notch talent lol.

 

im with you that i cant stand those arguments either.

 

worst argument is by far : win are a QBs achievement and losses are because of the team or someone else on the team.....

[Tank 92]

The argument about the quality/number of capable receivers has zero to do with the talent level of a QB, and everything to do with stats. It should be obvious that if a ball is caught, it adds to a QBs stats. If that same throw is dropped, no add to the stats. It ain't rocket science, just simple fact.

[Tru11]

talent level of a QB has everything to do with it.

 

how good the QB is will pretty much decide how much production he will get out of the receiving core.

 

that is a fact.

 

if this was not the case then there would not have been a drop off from the starting QB to the back up.

both have the same  quality/number of capable receivers but 1 is clearly better then the other and thus 1 will put up better stats then the other.

 

your argument pretty much suggest that schaub would produce just as good as flacco since both have the same quality of receivers as the talent level of the QB plays no part when it comes to stats.

 

suggesting every QB throws the same is just ludicrous.

[Ravens4Real]

The argument about the quality/number of capable receivers has zero to do with the talent level of a QB, and everything to do with stats. It should be obvious that if a ball is caught, it adds to a QBs stats. If that same throw is dropped, no add to the stats. It ain't rocket science, just simple fact.

Like I stated in an earlier post, if old and sluggish means throwing for 5,000 yards and a division title, then by all means, I'll go to bed each and every night praying that Flacco looks old and sluggish, this year.

[1/28/01]

talent level of a QB has everything to do with it.

how good the QB is will pretty much decide how much production he will get out of the receiving core.

that is a fact.

if this was not the case then there would not have been a drop off from the starting QB to the back up.

both have the same quality/number of capable receivers but 1 is clearly better then the other and thus 1 will put up better stats then the other.

your argument pretty much suggest that schaub would produce just as good as flacco since both have the same quality of receivers as the talent level of the QB plays no part when it comes to stats.

suggesting every QB throws the same is just ludicrous.

Spot on!

[TXRavensFan]

talent level of a QB has everything to do with it.

 

how good the QB is will pretty much decide how much production he will get out of the receiving core.

 

that is a fact.

 

if this was not the case then there would not have been a drop off from the starting QB to the back up.

both have the same  quality/number of capable receivers but 1 is clearly better then the other and thus 1 will put up better stats then the other.

 

your argument pretty much suggest that schaub would produce just as good as flacco since both have the same quality of receivers as the talent level of the QB plays no part when it comes to stats.

 

suggesting every QB throws the same is just ludicrous.

 

 I think Tank is probably more correct on this issue, and that you're misunderstanding his argument. I'm pretty sure he's not saying that QB performance is entirely dependent on the receivers, but rather that the quality of receivers has an effect on passing stats. Therefore, your example is a bit off base.

 

If I understand correctly, he's not implying that a back up QB (Schaub) would have the same stats as the starter (Flacco) just beause the targets are the same. Rather, given Flacco's talent as a baseline/constant, he would have better stats throwing to a group of highly talented receivers than he would throwing to a corps of replacement-level receivers (and the same would hold for Schaub). However, because Flacco is more talented than Schaub, he'd probably have similar/better stats throwing to replacement-level guys than Schaub throwing to all-pros.

 

To get back to the original example, taking Ben's talent as a constant, I doubt there's a question that he puts up better numbers with Brown, Bell, Wheaton, and Bryant than he does with a bunch of scrubs.

 

The way I see it, while a good QB can elevate the game of his receivers, a good receiver can also elevate the game of his QB. The last factor that needs to be taken into account is the offensive scheme in which the QB plays. I doubt anyone would argue that a QB in a pass-oriented scheme would put up better numbers than if he played in a run-oriented offense.

 

Football is a team sport. Even so-called individual passing stats will depend on at least the above three factors: talent of the QB, talent of the receivers, and offensive scheme.

[Tank 92]

I think Tank is probably more correct on this issue, and that you're misunderstanding his argument. I'm pretty sure he's not saying that QB performance is entirely dependent on the receivers, but rather that the quality of receivers has an effect on passing stats. Therefore, your example is a bit off base.

 

If I understand correctly, he's not implying that a back up QB (Schaub) would have the same stats as the starter (Flacco) just beause the targets are the same. Rather, given Flacco's talent as a baseline/constant, he would have better stats throwing to a group of highly talented receivers than he would throwing to a corps of replacement-level receivers (and the same would hold for Schaub). However, because Flacco is more talented than Schaub, he'd probably have similar/better stats throwing to replacement-level guys than Schaub throwing to all-pros.

 

To get back to the original example, taking Ben's talent as a constant, I doubt there's a question that he puts up better numbers with Brown, Bell, Wheaton, and Bryant than he does with a bunch of scrubs.

 

The way I see it, while a good QB can elevate the game of his receivers, a good receiver can also elevate the game of his QB. The last factor that needs to be taken into account is the offensive scheme in which the QB plays. I doubt anyone would argue that a QB in a pass-oriented scheme would put up better numbers than if he played in a run-oriented offense.

 

Football is a team sport. Even so-called individual passing stats will depend on at least the above three factors: talent of the QB, talent of the receivers, and offensive scheme.

Thanks Tex. I thought what I was saying was pretty obvious, but you illustrated my point perfectly.

[Tank 92]

Like I stated in an earlier post, if old and sluggish means throwing for 5,000 yards and a division title, then by all means, I'll go to bed each and every night praying that Flacco looks old and sluggish, this year.

Cool. I could care less about the 5k yards, but I'm with ya on the AFCN title and success in the tournament.

[Tru11]

 I think Tank is probably more correct on this issue, and that you're misunderstanding his argument. I'm pretty sure he's not saying that QB performance is entirely dependent on the receivers, but rather that the quality of receivers has an effect on passing stats. Therefore, your example is a bit off base.

 

If I understand correctly, he's not implying that a back up QB (Schaub) would have the same stats as the starter (Flacco) just beause the targets are the same. Rather, given Flacco's talent as a baseline/constant, he would have better stats throwing to a group of highly talented receivers than he would throwing to a corps of replacement-level receivers (and the same would hold for Schaub). However, because Flacco is more talented than Schaub, he'd probably have similar/better stats throwing to replacement-level guys than Schaub throwing to all-pros.

 

To get back to the original example, taking Ben's talent as a constant, I doubt there's a question that he puts up better numbers with Brown, Bell, Wheaton, and Bryant than he does with a bunch of scrubs.

 

The way I see it, while a good QB can elevate the game of his receivers, a good receiver can also elevate the game of his QB. The last factor that needs to be taken into account is the offensive scheme in which the QB plays. I doubt anyone would argue that a QB in a pass-oriented scheme would put up better numbers than if he played in a run-oriented offense.

 

Football is a team sport. Even so-called individual passing stats will depend on at least the above three factors: talent of the QB, talent of the receivers, and offensive scheme.

 

 

he is saying that if flacco was on that team playing with those receivers in that scheme he would put up better stats.

better then 4952 yards 32 TDs and just 9 INT.

 

ben is just some old sluggish QB who got carried by his receivers.

for the record calling a  player old and sluggish is not a compliment.

 

he is totally downplaying Ben level of talent as a QB because alot of people think he is better then flacco at this moment.

 

its the typical ravens fan argument that if a QB puts up stats its because of his receivers/scheme/whatever . but if flacco puts up stats its because he is great despite his receivers/scheme/whatever.

 

Its really no shame to admit ben is better at this point in their careers.

Ben is older.more experienced, at the peak of his game, had the luxury of having the same OC and 2 of his top 3 targets have grown with him.

 

 

Flacco is younger, still improving , no idea where his peak is and with some luck will have the same OC and receivers to grow with.

In 1 or 2 seasons chances are he will be surpass ben as the best QB in the division and if brady and manning retire probably in conversation for being the best QB in the conference.

[Tank 92]

Maybe some should actually read the article.  Hensley makes some excellent points illustrating why Flacco is the better choice.

Edited July 16, 2015 by Tank 92