[News] Late For Work 3/2: Someone In U.S. Congress Made Anonymous Edit To Joe Flacco's Wikipedia Page

[ellicottraven]

He is not an elite QB? Sure. So what? He still got paid like one and that is all he really cares about. He makes elite QB money and that is the real indicator of eliteness. Teams aren't fools to pay elite money to non-elite players. Sure, we may have had no leverage in this round of negotiations, but that was the doing of the front office in the first place.

[ravenwildman]

Hey...one thing is for sure.......congress is definitely NOT ELITE! So they should be the last folks to judge anybody! GO RAVENS!

[Ravenous_Ravens]

The harder people try to prove their point about "Flacco not being elite" the more I laugh. Who are they trying to convince? It sure seems they are the ones needing convincing. Being elite does not mean the best or greatest, it just means to be among the upper echelon. Flacco himself doesn't even care about this silly joke that was beaten dead a least over a year ago, now let it rest in peace. Why does no one keep talking about Eli being elite? I mean he has struggled as much as Flacco if not more and Eli actually made it a big deal to tell people he was elite. This subject should be shut, sealed and jettisoned to the center of the sun, never to be mentioned again.

[jravens13]

2 hours ago, rmcjacket23 said:

Well, Gostkowski is better by just about any possible metric imaginable.

Tucker has a higher career FG percentage, Tucker has more FG's of 50+ and has played 6 less seasons. Tucker is 87% from 40-49yds to Goskowski's 79%. He has had a higher touchback percentage in 3 of his 4 years and has a stronger leg. Tucker is 6 years younger than Gostkowski. I can't even remember Tucker missing a kick where the game is on the line. Obviously Goskowski has had his share of clutch kicks, but Tucker is clearly better and is at a much earlier stage in his career. 

Edited March 2, 2016 by jravens13

[rmcjacket23]

10 minutes ago, jravens13 said:

Tucker has a higher career FG percentage, Tucker has more FG's of 50+ and has played 6 less seasons. Tucker is 87% from 40-49yds to Goskowski's 79%. He has had a higher touchback percentage in 3 of his 4 years and has a stronger leg. Tucker is 6 years younger than Gostkowski. I can't even remember Tucker missing a kick where the game is on the line. Obviously Goskowski has had his share of clutch kicks, but Tucker is clearly better and is at a much earlier stage in his career. 

Yeah, but the problem is... nobody cares about career numbers for kickers. The only thing that matters for kickers is how good have you recently been, since great kickers go from being great to being unemployed in a 1-2 year period. They're swapped out like children's toys anytime they become stale, and if you have a bad season, you immediately face competition from your job and are replaced.

Age is entirely irrelevant with kickers, because frankly, older kickers are preferred to younger kickers. Unlike most positions, there's really no risk of injury and there's very little concern over aging standards, since the great kickers kick well into their 40s, which is largely unheard of at any other position.

With a kicker... is it more relevant how good they were 8-10 years ago, or is it more important how good they've recently been? Obviously, the latter.

So in that case, in the last four years (since Tucker has been in the league):

Gostkowski: 91% FG pct, 86% 50+ yards

Tucker: 88% FG pct, 60% 50+ yards

For me, I don't really care what Gostkowski did back in 2006, because, well, it was 2006. If he sucked that bad, he wouldn't have been tenured for a decade in a league that throws away kickers annually.

At the end of the day, I can make statistics say whatever I want them to say. By the way... may want to consider using percentages for your 50+ metrics, because saying "o he's made more 50 yarders" doesn't really mean anything. I would have expected him to make significantly more, considering he's attempted significantly more (a product of how more efficient one offense is over another). Gostkowski's only attempt 22 regular season 50+ yard FGs in 10 years, an average of about 2-3 a year. That's a GOOD thing, not a bad thing. Tucker had 10 attempts last season alone... NOT a good thing. The reason you use percentages? Because while Tucker's made more 50+ yarders than Gostkowski has in six less years, he's also MISSED more 50+ yard FGs than Gostkowski has in six less years. In fact, Justin missed more 50+ yarders in 2015 alone than Gostkowski has in TEN YEARS.

 

[FloridalovesRavens]

Hey...one thing is for sure.......congress is definitely NOT ELITE! So they should be the last folks to judge anybody! GO RAVENS!

Oh yeah. Like your thinking. Go Ravens.

[FloridalovesRavens]

We had to pay Tucker because we need someone who can score points.

That's a low blow from someone who is supposed to be a Ravens fan. I don't get your comment at all. Seems to me except for two seasons we scored enough points to win the majority of our games. ???

[Bat-mite]

Glad to see Joe got a deal worked. Now let's go win some games!

[jravens13]

  46 minutes ago, jravens13 said:

Tucker has a higher career FG percentage, Tucker has more FG's of 50+ and has played 6 less seasons. Tucker is 87% from 40-49yds to Goskowski's 79%. He has had a higher touchback percentage in 3 of his 4 years and has a stronger leg. Tucker is 6 years younger than Gostkowski. I can't even remember Tucker missing a kick where the game is on the line. Obviously Goskowski has had his share of clutch kicks, but Tucker is clearly better and is at a much earlier stage in his career. 

Yeah, but the problem is... nobody cares about career numbers for kickers. The only thing that matters for kickers is how good have you recently been, since great kickers go from being great to being unemployed in a 1-2 year period. They're swapped out like children's toys anytime they become stale, and if you have a bad season, you immediately face competition from your job and are replaced.

Age is entirely irrelevant with kickers, because frankly, older kickers are preferred to younger kickers. Unlike most positions, there's really no risk of injury and there's very little concern over aging standards, since the great kickers kick well into their 40s, which is largely unheard of at any other position.

With a kicker... is it more relevant how good they were 8-10 years ago, or is it more important how good they've recently been? Obviously, the latter.

So in that case, in the last four years (since Tucker has been in the league):

Gostkowski: 91% FG pct, 86% 50+ yards

Tucker: 88% FG pct, 60% 50+ yards

For me, I don't really care what Gostkowski did back in 2006, because, well, it was 2006. If he sucked that bad, he wouldn't have been tenured for a decade in a league that throws away kickers annually.

At the end of the day, I can make statistics say whatever I want them to say. By the way... may want to consider using percentages for your 50+ metrics, because saying "o he's made more 50 yarders" doesn't really mean anything. I would have expected him to make significantly more, considering he's attempted significantly more (a product of how more efficient one offense is over another). Gostkowski's only attempt 22 regular season 50+ yard FGs in 10 years, an average of about 2-3 a year. That's a GOOD thing, not a bad thing. Tucker had 10 attempts last season alone... NOT a good thing. The reason you use percentages? Because while Tucker's made more 50+ yarders than Gostkowski has in six less years, he's also MISSED more 50+ yard FGs than Gostkowski has in six less years. In fact, Justin missed more 50+ yarders in 2015 alone than Gostkowski has in TEN YEARS.

 

How many of those Tucker misses came from 55+ before the half? Goskowski has only made one FG in his entire career of 55+. Tucker has the bigger leg so we attempt more reach kicks. Tucker is more accurate and has a stronger leg. He has never let us down in crunch time. End discussion.

[rmcjacket23]

2 minutes ago, jravens13 said:

How many of those Tucker misses came from 55+ before the half? Goskowski has only made one FG in his entire career of 55+. Tucker has the bigger leg so we attempt more reach kicks. Tucker is more accurate and has a stronger leg. He has never let us down in crunch time. End discussion.

1. Saying "Tucker has the bigger leg so we attempt longer kicks" isn't even remotely accurate. We wouldn't attempt like four times as many longer kicks as a guy who has a very strong leg like Gostkowski. We attempt those longer kicks because our offense stalls between the 30-40 a lot more frequently than the Patriots do. This team doesn't enjoy sending Tucker out for 55 yard kicks on a weekly basis. If he never attempted a kick outside of 50 yards for a whole season, I bet it'd be one of the better offensive seasons for this team ever. That's sort of the goal. 

2. Saying Tucker is more accurate wouldn't seem to be wise given the statistics I just showed you. You're literally just making that up. Since Tucker has been in the league, he has NOT been more accurate than Gostkowski. That's not debatable.

He may have never let us down in crunch time, but there's also been a few seasons where "crunch times" were very few and far between, bordering on now very many to begin with.

Kind of like putting all your eggs in the "but he's a really great postseason player" basket. That's great and wonderful, but if you're average in the regular season and great in the postseason, and your team doesn't make the postseason, guess what that makes you for that season? It makes you average.

Remember, in order to be "clutch", you have to be put into a situation to be clutch. When those opportunities aren't present, you still have to make the kicks.

[jravens13]

4 minutes ago, rmcjacket23 said:

1. Saying "Tucker has the bigger leg so we attempt longer kicks" isn't even remotely accurate. We wouldn't attempt like four times as many longer kicks as a guy who has a very strong leg like Gostkowski. We attempt those longer kicks because our offense stalls between the 30-40 a lot more frequently than the Patriots do. This team doesn't enjoy sending Tucker out for 55 yard kicks on a weekly basis. If he never attempted a kick outside of 50 yards for a whole season, I bet it'd be one of the better offensive seasons for this team ever. That's sort of the goal. 

2. Saying Tucker is more accurate wouldn't seem to be wise given the statistics I just showed you. You're literally just making that up. Since Tucker has been in the league, he has NOT been more accurate than Gostkowski. That's not debatable.

He may have never let us down in crunch time, but there's also been a few seasons where "crunch times" were very few and far between, bordering on now very many to begin with.

Kind of like putting all your eggs in the "but he's a really great postseason player" basket. That's great and wonderful, but if you're average in the regular season and great in the postseason, and your team doesn't make the postseason, guess what that makes you for that season? It makes you average.

Remember, in order to be "clutch", you have to be put into a situation to be clutch. When those opportunities aren't present, you still have to make the kicks.

Please never reply to another one of my comments and I will do the same. 

[jravens13]

Just to be clear Tucker was 3-3 on game winning FG's this year. 52yd make in OT against PIT. 48yd make against STL with 57 sec left. 39 yd make against SD with 0:00 on the clock. #IceInHisVeins

[Halshayeji]

  10 hours ago, budman said:

I see your point but It's hard to justify the label as "1 of the best" when the longest Fg he made last year was 52 yards. Just my opinion but to me, it shouldn't matter how many attempts there are. If you are the best,  most should be made.

Well, he's not the best... that much is clear.

But he also doesn't have to be the best to get paid the best. Payscale is largely just a reflection of opportunity and timing.

It's not clear! It's certainly debatable and your argument is a good one especially after the year Tucker had. What if I told you Tucker was injured all year but didnt wanna attract attention or make excuses. Would that change your mind? If we debated this 6 months ago would you have an case against Tucker especially when you consider his age. Tucker had 3 seasons where he played at an all time great level. It was only this year that he missed quite a few here and there. Thus, making his all time numbers not so great because he's only been a pro for 4 years. His celing is certainly as good as if not higher than gostkowski. I personally don't see him falling outside of the best 5 kickers in the NFL at any given year in the near future. Honestly, a little bit of me was happey that he missed a few because had he not, his agent would be asking for the richest kicker contract ever. Now we have a better chance of keeping Tuck for years to come and I'm beyond satisfied. I also don't remember the last time anyone returned a kickoff against us for a TD. That's mostly because of Tuck.

[rmcjacket23]

9 hours ago, Halshayeji said:

It's not clear! It's certainly debatable and your argument is a good one especially after the year Tucker had. What if I told you Tucker was injured all year but didnt wanna attract attention or make excuses. Would that change your mind? If we debated this 6 months ago would you have an case against Tucker especially when you consider his age. Tucker had 3 seasons where he played at an all time great level. It was only this year that he missed quite a few here and there. Thus, making his all time numbers not so great because he's only been a pro for 4 years. His celing is certainly as good as if not higher than gostkowski. I personally don't see him falling outside of the best 5 kickers in the NFL at any given year in the near future. Honestly, a little bit of me was happey that he missed a few because had he not, his agent would be asking for the richest kicker contract ever. Now we have a better chance of keeping Tuck for years to come and I'm beyond satisfied. I also don't remember the last time anyone returned a kickoff against us for a TD. That's mostly because of Tuck.

Well, no, unless he was injured for like 3-4 years straight, since Gostkowski has been better for that long.

[usmccharles]

15 hours ago, jravens13 said:

Just to be clear Tucker was 3-3 on game winning FG's this year. 52yd make in OT against PIT. 48yd make against STL with 57 sec left. 39 yd make against SD with 0:00 on the clock. #IceInHisVeins

You cant really use the argument that Tucker is more accurate than Gostkowski.  Tucker has been doing this for 4 years while Gostkowski been doing it for 10 years.  Its a lot easier to have a better percentage when you have attempted 148 kicks compared to 316 (exluding PATs).  That's like saying Edelman is the best playoff QB per completion percentage because he's 1/1...You cant just spit out numbers and stats, you need context....

[Halshayeji]

12 hours ago, rmcjacket23 said:

Well, no, unless he was injured for like 3-4 years straight, since Gostkowski has been better for that long.

No he wasn't. They both missed 11 fgs in those 3 years and both were perfect in the playoffs. If I'm not mistaken Tucker has a bigger leg and made a few more tackles on special teams. How was gostkowski better? And those were gostkowskis best years of his career. Tucker being 5 or 6 years younger is just a bonus. You can say Tucker had a bad year or even go as far as say he lost it. But you can't deny that he was great.

[Halshayeji]

On March 2, 2016 at 6:06 PM, bioLarzen said:

TBH, I don't see Aiken receiving a 2-nd round tender. As Ozzie made it quite clear in the year-end presser, they really view him as a backup WR, not a starting one - and I just donb't see Ozzie second-round tendering a backup player, even if he had ample cap space - which he hasn't.
That said, I still expect Aiken back in purple.

You scared me for a min lol. I hope your right and he stays however it happens. Aiken really grew on my last year.

[rmcjacket23]

12 hours ago, Halshayeji said:

No he wasn't. They both missed 11 fgs in those 3 years and both were perfect in the playoffs. If I'm not mistaken Tucker has a bigger leg and made a few more tackles on special teams. How was gostkowski better? And those were gostkowskis best years of his career. Tucker being 5 or 6 years younger is just a bonus. You can say Tucker had a bad year or even go as far as say he lost it. But you can't deny that he was great.

Well, Gostkowski has a better FG made percentage during that span (93% to 87% I believe), and he was exponentially better from 50+ out, as Tucker has not been very good from that distance in his career (or at least not in the last two years). The playoff and PAT kicking stats are basically even.

Age doesn't really factor in when you're a kicker, since the good one's kick into their 40s. In fact, you'll likely find that most teams prefer older, more experienced kickers, because it means they've been good enough for a long period of time that they are still in the league. There's plenty of 30 year old kickers who were great for several years, flamed out, and were out of the league in a mere season or two. Not saying Tucker will be that guy, because he likely won't, but lets not ignore the fact that really good kickers for several years flame out quickly almost annually in this league.

And obviously, I could care less whether my kicker makes a tackle or not, because that's not what he's paid for. That's like me being impressed by a QB making a tackle after he throws an INT. It just doesn't matter to me.