Merged: QBs you'd rather have than Flacco

[kennethyamini1989]

lmao y'all some haters. I got 7 downvotes for putting the same players as many others. It is funny though. 

[usmccharles]

This discussion is so out done.  Im shocked some of you still go through with this

[Dfence4champs2052]

On 10/9/2016 at 3:12 PM, RedFire said:

1. Cam Newton

2. Maybe Russell Wilson 

3. Maybe Derek Carr

 

Everyone else that may be better than Flacco is mid 30's plus! Think about it......

Aaron Rodgers???? 

[OLD SCHOOL SMASH BALL]

Wentz, Luck, Wilson, Eli, Ryan

[Virginia 55]

I would almost take every QB in the league over Joe.  Most of the Qb's would be because of  salary and there are at least 10 guys that are just better. 

[Dfence4champs2052]

Rodgers

Cam

Wilson

Ryan

Carr

[SuggsBarber]

On ‎10‎/‎9‎/‎2016 at 6:19 PM, Sami84 said:

 

Flacco is workable but not with this contract. his contract is a killer..

he cant run out the pocket and extend plays..you need that in the NFL these days.. hes a statue QB..makes us even easier to deal with

This.When the protection breaks down Joe pretty much breaks down with it.Quarterbacks that can extend plays by sidestepping or whatever put pressure on the D.Which we never seem to do.Teams tee off on us.

[mdrsharon]

Sorry, still a Flacco fan.

[mmcclend]

Rodgers, Brady, rivers, brees, Carr, Big Ben, some would argue maybe even tyrod lol. I'm sure I'm missing a few. 

[RedFire]

1 hour ago, Dfence4champs2052 said:

Aaron Rodgers???? 

 I mentioned him a few pages ago since he was 32. but only 4 QB's based on age and talent that I feel would be better choice than Flacco. 

[Dfence4champs2052]

3 minutes ago, RedFire said:

 I mentioned him a few pages ago since he was 32. but only 4 QB's based on age and talent that I feel would be better choice than Flacco. 

Oh ok. He was just my first thought as to who I would rather have.

[mmcclend]

I've noticed on this board that many fans feel flacco is overrated and overpaid. I've never been one of those fans but when you look at the top paid qbs it's worth debating. 

1. Colts QB Andrew Luck: $24.6 million
2. Saints QB Drew Brees: $24.3 million
3. Ravens QB Joe Flacco: $22.1 million
4. Packers QB Aaron Rodgers: $22 million
5. Seahawks QB Russell Wilson: $21.9 million
6. Steelers QB Ben Roethlisberger: $21.85 million
7. Cardinals QB Carson Palmer: $21 million
8. Giants QB Eli Manning: $21 million
9. Chargers QB Philip Rivers: $20.81 million
10. Panthers QB Cam Newton: $20.76 million

Some would argue that we lack talent because of Flacco's hefty contract and we'd have a much more talented team without his salary on the books. Others feel that we need a franchise QB so settling for Flacco is fine enough although the rest of the roster may not be as strong as we'd like. Which begs the question......

Which would you prefer? Having flacco and his hefty contract with more average players around him then good players? Or having a much more talented team around a(wayyyyy less expensive) young inexperienced or older journeyman quarterback?

Fire away. 

Edited October 17, 2016 by mmcclend

[Jonah DeVito]

1 minute ago, mmcclend said:

I've noticed on this board that many fans feel flacco is overrated and overpaid. I've never been one of those fans but when you look at the top paid qbs it's worth debating. 

1. Colts QB Andrew Luck: $24.6 million
2. Saints QB Drew Brees: $24.3 million
3. Ravens QB Joe Flacco: $22.1 million
4. Packers QB Aaron Rodgers: $22 million
5. Seahawks QB Russell Wilson: $21.9 million
6. Steelers QB Ben Roethlisberger: $21.85 million
7. Cardinals QB Carson Palmer: $21 million
8. Giants QB Eli Manning: $21 million
9. Chargers QB Philip Rivers: $20.81 million
10. Panthers QB Cam Newton: $20.76 million

Some would argue that we lack talent because of Flacco's hefty contract and we'd have a much more talented team without his salary on the books. Others feel that we need a franchise QB so settling for Flacco is fine enough although the rest of the roster may not be as strong as we'd like. Which begs the question......

Which would you prefer? Having flacco and his hefty contract with more average players around him then good players? Or having a much more talented team around a young inexperienced or older journeyman quarterback. 

Fire away. 

Honestly I don't have a problem with his contract. QBs cost a premium these days, and he keeps us in games, injuries and penalties just sucked the life out of this team today. 

[K-Dog]

I would take any of them but demand they take a pay cut !!!!!!!!!

[/sarcasm]

Hater logic. 

[mmcclend]

1 minute ago, Jonah DeVito said:

Honestly I don't have a problem with his contract. QBs cost a premium these days, and he keeps us in games, injuries and penalties just sucked the life out of this team today. 

Agreed. Going forward say for the next 5 years or so. Which strategy do you think would give us more success?

[FastEddie]

Flacco is a good QB. Not great.

Kudos to him on capitalizing when it mattered most.

[Sami84]

8 minutes ago, mmcclend said:

I've noticed on this board that many fans feel flacco is overrated and overpaid. I've never been one of those fans but when you look at the top paid qbs it's worth debating. 

1. Colts QB Andrew Luck: $24.6 million
2. Saints QB Drew Brees: $24.3 million
3. Ravens QB Joe Flacco: $22.1 million
4. Packers QB Aaron Rodgers: $22 million
5. Seahawks QB Russell Wilson: $21.9 million
6. Steelers QB Ben Roethlisberger: $21.85 million
7. Cardinals QB Carson Palmer: $21 million
8. Giants QB Eli Manning: $21 million
9. Chargers QB Philip Rivers: $20.81 million
10. Panthers QB Cam Newton: $20.76 million

Some would argue that we lack talent because of Flacco's hefty contract and we'd have a much more talented team without his salary on the books. Others feel that we need a franchise QB so settling for Flacco is fine enough although the rest of the roster may not be as strong as we'd like. Which begs the question......

Which would you prefer? Having flacco and his hefty contract with more average players around him then good players? Or having a much more talented team around a young inexperienced or older journeyman quarterback?

Fire away. 

3

3

Philip Rivers would be my pick. He's just brilliant. 

Edited October 17, 2016 by Sami84

[mmcclend]

4 minutes ago, Sami84 said:

Philip Rivers would be my pick. He's just brilliant. 

That's not the question bro. I only put up the salaries so everyone could compare his money to his counterparts. Read the last paragraph. Lol but I do agree. Rivers is a savage!!!

Edited October 17, 2016 by mmcclend

[Militant X 1]

14 minutes ago, mmcclend said:

I've noticed on this board that many fans feel flacco is overrated and overpaid. I've never been one of those fans but when you look at the top paid qbs it's worth debating. 

1. Colts QB Andrew Luck: $24.6 million
2. Saints QB Drew Brees: $24.3 million
3. Ravens QB Joe Flacco: $22.1 million
4. Packers QB Aaron Rodgers: $22 million
5. Seahawks QB Russell Wilson: $21.9 million
6. Steelers QB Ben Roethlisberger: $21.85 million
7. Cardinals QB Carson Palmer: $21 million
8. Giants QB Eli Manning: $21 million
9. Chargers QB Philip Rivers: $20.81 million
10. Panthers QB Cam Newton: $20.76 million

Some would argue that we lack talent because of Flacco's hefty contract and we'd have a much more talented team without his salary on the books. Others feel that we need a franchise QB so settling for Flacco is fine enough although the rest of the roster may not be as strong as we'd like. Which begs the question......

Which would you prefer? Having flacco and his hefty contract with more average players around him then good players? Or having a much more talented team around a young inexperienced or older journeyman quarterback?

Fire away. 

Which would you prefer?

[K-Dog]

The Rviers that plays for the 2-4 Chargers ?

Just checking....

[Willbacker]

16 minutes ago, mmcclend said:

I've noticed on this board that many fans feel flacco is overrated and overpaid. I've never been one of those fans but when you look at the top paid qbs it's worth debating. 

1. Colts QB Andrew Luck: $24.6 million
2. Saints QB Drew Brees: $24.3 million
3. Ravens QB Joe Flacco: $22.1 million
4. Packers QB Aaron Rodgers: $22 million
5. Seahawks QB Russell Wilson: $21.9 million
6. Steelers QB Ben Roethlisberger: $21.85 million
7. Cardinals QB Carson Palmer: $21 million
8. Giants QB Eli Manning: $21 million
9. Chargers QB Philip Rivers: $20.81 million
10. Panthers QB Cam Newton: $20.76 million

Some would argue that we lack talent because of Flacco's hefty contract and we'd have a much more talented team without his salary on the books. Others feel that we need a franchise QB so settling for Flacco is fine enough although the rest of the roster may not be as strong as we'd like. Which begs the question......

Which would you prefer? Having flacco and his hefty contract with more average players around him then good players? Or having a much more talented team around a(wayyyyy less expensive) young inexperienced or older journeyman quarterback?

Fire away. 

Thing is with Flacco you feel like you always gotta shot. Stony Case and Tony Banks not so much. Lack of protection is killing the passing game right now.

[mmcclend]

6 minutes ago, Militant X 1 said:

Which would you prefer?

Honestly, if we would have drafted better for the past couple of years flaccos contract wouldn't hurt as bad. I'm sure we banked on that. But in hindsight it's hard not to say we should build a very talented roster and have a less expensive vet run the show. If I had to be completely real, flacco hasn't earned his money after the super bowl, so yeah. Id go with a better team. especially when you consider the 80/20 rule. Your turn.

Edited October 17, 2016 by mmcclend

[donkeyking64]

I think the better question is would you rather have a great QB vs have one of those dominant offensive lines we had in the past.

like when lewis went for 2k. In which case an average QB like Joe is perfect to go along with all the running backs here.

and before everyone calls for me to be removed from the forum, Joe needs to play like a Super Bowl MVP IN THE REGULAR SEASON.

To be honest he doesn't even have to play that well. Just can't be missing wide open Mike Wallaces when it's crunch time.

[rmcjacket23]

41 minutes ago, mmcclend said:

Honestly, if we would have drafted better for the past couple of years flaccos contract wouldn't hurt as bad. I'm sure we banked on that. But in hindsight it's hard not to say we should build a very talented roster and have a less expensive vet run the show. If I had to be completely real, flacco hasn't earned his money after the super bowl, so yeah. Id go with a better team. especially when you consider the 80/20 rule. Your turn.

Define "less expensive veteran"?

Also, probably a better idea to evaluate QBs in terms of guaranteed money instead of AAV. AAV doesn't really matter when most of these contracts never come close to getting paid out all the way through, and a lot of them get renegotiated after 3-4 years anyway.

[rmcjacket23]

5 minutes ago, donkeyking64 said:

I think the better question is would you rather have a great QB vs have one of those dominant offensive lines we had in the past.

like when lewis went for 2k. In which case an average QB like Joe is perfect to go along with all the running backs here.

and before everyone calls for me to be removed from the forum, Joe needs to play like a Super Bowl MVP IN THE REGULAR SEASON.

To be honest he doesn't even have to play that well. Just can't be missing wide open Mike Wallaces when it's crunch time.

If he needs to play like a SB MVP in the regular season, then the team sucks and it doesn't matter how well he plays, because they aren't going anywhere. No QB has ever played at that level for 16 games. 

And I agree he can't miss open receivers. But then again, it would be nice if some of those open receivers could be a little more consistent catching the ball as well. Some key drops in key spots the last few weeks.

[donkeyking64]

26 minutes ago, rmcjacket23 said:

If he needs to play like a SB MVP in the regular season, then the team sucks and it doesn't matter how well he plays, because they aren't going anywhere. No QB has ever played at that level for 16 games. 

And I agree he can't miss open receivers. But then again, it would be nice if some of those open receivers could be a little more consistent catching the ball as well. Some key drops in key spots the last few weeks.

I've gone to bat for Joe for years. He's a lot better than how he's played this year. I'd like to hope that folks would agree with that.

Yes the line needs to play better and YES the pass catchers need to be more sure handed...but either he needs to look sharper, or the playcalling needs to be better. Not talking Marty or Trestman here. I've always felt that a good scheme with a lot of pass catchers equates to someone being open.

Guy goes deep, guy crosses, guy runs a comeback route, and then you have your backs to dump off to. The defense can't hold everybody when you diversify like that. He's in year 9 now. And to me he doesn't look like a 9 yr QB with a Super Bowl MVP under his belt. Again - blame it on Trestman and/or the line...but the QB should be able to atone for all those shortcomings. Steve when he's healthy, with Crockett and Dennis - those should be his guys and the playcalling should feature them. Dump to Juice when none are there

[OUravensfan]

That was a beautiful bomb to Wallace, shame the face mask happened and we couldn't get the TD

[Warren]

I just wish Flacco had a little more fire. Sometimes he looks "out of it".

[flynismo]

14 minutes ago, Warren said:

I just wish Flacco had a little more fire. Sometimes he looks "out of it".

Sami, et tu?

Edited October 17, 2016 by flynismo

[flynismo]

1 hour ago, donkeyking64 said:

I've gone to bat for Joe for years. He's a lot better than how he's played this year. I'd like to hope that folks would agree with that.

Yes the line needs to play better and YES the pass catchers need to be more sure handed...but either he needs to look sharper, or the playcalling needs to be better. Not talking Marty or Trestman here. I've always felt that a good scheme with a lot of pass catchers equates to someone being open.

Guy goes deep, guy crosses, guy runs a comeback route, and then you have your backs to dump off to. The defense can't hold everybody when you diversify like that. He's in year 9 now. And to me he doesn't look like a 9 yr QB with a Super Bowl MVP under his belt. Again - blame it on Trestman and/or the line...but the QB should be able to atone for all those shortcomings. Steve when he's healthy, with Crockett and Dennis - those should be his guys and the playcalling should feature them. Dump to Juice when none are there

What shortcomings, exactly? I keep mentioning this, because it needs to be -- two bombs to Wallace were halted due to penalties; one a face mask, the other a PI. If those penalties don't occur and he scores, now we're talking about a 37 point showing by the offense. Even if he only scores on one of those two, that's 30 points. All with no Yanda, no Stanley, no SSS, more drops by Perriman and an overmatched OL. What more could we possibly ask for? He did his part...the people around him, as is usually the case, did not do theirs. There is no atoning for the poor play of others.