Joe Flacco: Tough Talk

[BirdWatcher]

15 minutes ago, Ravensfan23 said:

  Quote

"I kind of let him call the game in a lot of ways," Kubiak said. "On Friday, I give him my [play] card, talk to him about what I think we need to be doing, but yet, I let him come to me and say, ‘I like this first, this second, this third.’ So, when you have a player like that, you need to listen. And I tried to do that. Hopefully I’ve done that well, but I think our relationship grows every week. I have a lot of confidence in him, and hopefully he has the same.

So in other words, when Flacco has a lot of input into running the offense (like in the Super Bowl run) he can be successful?  When OCs call stupid plays and tell him to stick with it, he doesn't do as well?  Oddly, in our biggest success this year (Miami) the coaches talked about sitting down with Joe and developing a game plan.  That's the only time we heard about that.

[rmcjacket23]

5 hours ago, JonnyBaltimore said:

It's actually not that far fetched. Taylor has also 1100 yards rushing and another 10 TDs. He threw more TDs and less INTs. I'm not saying I'd rather have Taylor over Flacco to build a franchise but the numbers do not lie. 

In the regular season, Flacco is more like Jay Cutler than he is like anything that resembles "elite". Flacco's best attributes is that he plays well in the clutch--a rare attribute. Unfortunately if he doesn't play in any big games, he is rather pedestrian and the numbers support that. In fact, Jay Cutler's career QBR rating is higher than Flacco's. That I find comical.

Facts:

-Taylor has more WINs the last 2 years

-Taylor has more Pro Bowl nods

-Taylor has thrown more TDs (despite less passing attempts)

-Taylor has thrown less INTs

-Taylor has rushed for over 1100 yards

-Taylor has rushed for 10 TDs

-Taylor has a higher QBR rating over the last 2 years (he is top 10 in QBR rating)

The reason the Bills benched Taylor is because of financial reasons and the guaranteed money in his contract, plus the fact that they have new coaching next year.

 

Again your argument or lack thereof of one is not a very convincing one.

So wouldn't the team of a "good" QB not be concerned about guaranteeing money for a QB who is actually "good"? I mean we're only talking about like, what, $30M guaranteed? Practically chump change for even a "game manager" by NFL standards. So what exactly are they afraid of?

So when the Bills voluntarily don't pick up his option, and make him a FA, what will your explanation for that decision be then?

Can you give me the recent names of "good" QBs who actually ever hit free agency? Would be highly interested in getting the names of those players.

Look forward to that list.

Thanks

Edited January 15 by rmcjacket23

[nextgen_RavensFan]

Just read on the front page that Flacco will have a premier O'line (best in the league) next season, should be exciting.  So we should see a huge jump in the pass and run game.

10 minutes ago, Moderator 3 said:

So in other words, when Flacco has a lot of input into running the offense (like in the Super Bowl run) he can be successful?  When OCs call stupid plays and tell him to stick with it, he doesn't do as well?  Oddly, in our biggest success this year (Miami) the coaches talked about sitting down with Joe and developing a game plan.  That's the only time we heard about that.

I would NOT let Joe take the reigns on the offense until he shows better decision making skills. No way, no how. LOL

[Ravensfan23]

1 minute ago, Moderator 3 said:

So in other words, when Flacco has a lot of input into running the offense (like in the Super Bowl run) he can be successful?  When OCs call stupid plays and tell him to stick with it, he doesn't do as well?  Oddly, in our biggest success this year (Miami) the coaches talked about sitting down with Joe and developing a game plan.  That's the only time we heard about that.

No that's not what it means. It means Flacco is so stupid and doesn't work nearly hard enough to be good at QB so coaches and players have to lie and make him look better when talking to the media. 

No but seriously I think everyone and their blind dog could see Flacco wasn't at his best this season be it the knee or whatever. But what you said is why I thought it was so important to keep Marty. I think Marty did the right thing by trying to build this offense around Joe and giving him a lot of input/control over it. I think he got carried away a little bit because the offense wasn't clicking so for him it was more important to get Flacco into a rhythm each game than to stay balanced if you will. I think he had the right intentions but this offense around the QB position has improve. But with that said I feel the Ravens laid a nice foundation for the offense moving forward. I really hope they are watching the Falcons offense in the playoffs. That offense is built around Matt Ryan but it's not about asking him to throw 40+ times every game. They don't run the ball at a extremely high level but they run it enough and well enough for the play action to be huge. This has to be Joe's offense and I think Marty is the right guy for the job because he and Marty seem to be on the same page. Now it's just about mastering the offense and giving Joe as much control over it as possible. 

[BirdWatcher]

9 minutes ago, nextgen_RavensFan said:

Just read on the front page that Flacco will have a premier O'line (best in the league) next season, should be exciting.  So we should see a huge jump in the pass and run game.

I would NOT let Joe take the reigns on the offense until he shows better decision making skills. No way, no how. LOL

Yet when they fired Cam and put the offense in Joe's hands, he took us to a Super Bowl while throwing 0 interceptions.  I think his decision making might be better than you believe.

[usmccharles]

27 minutes ago, nextgen_RavensFan said:

Just read on the front page that Flacco will have a premier O'line (best in the league) next season, should be exciting.  So we should see a huge jump in the pass and run game.

I would NOT let Joe take the reigns on the offense until he shows better decision making skills. No way, no how. LOL

Um, where on earth are getting this best OL in the league from?

Nice Rob Parker reference

[JonnyBaltimore]

56 minutes ago, rmcjacket23 said:

So wouldn't the team of a "good" QB not be concerned about guaranteeing money for a QB who is actually "good"? I mean we're only talking about like, what, $30M guaranteed? Practically chump change for even a "game manager" by NFL standards. So what exactly are they afraid of?

So when the Bills voluntarily don't pick up his option, and make him a FA, what will your explanation for that decision be then?

Can you give me the recent names of "good" QBs who actually ever hit free agency? Would be highly interested in getting the names of those players.

Look forward to that list.

Thanks

It has nothing to do whether the QB is ''good'' or not. It is a matter whether the QB ''fits'' the philosophy of the organization going forward. As an organization, I think what they are doing is giving themselves flexibility. If they are changing coaching philosophies then they would want to keep their options open. Tyrod is obviously a different type of QB than your traditional pocket passer, but this does not negate the fact that he has performed well over the past 2 years.

If you believe Flacco has outplayed Tyrod in the regular season in the last 2 years, convince me.

Whether an organization chooses to exercise an option on a quarterback has no bearing on whether the QB is good or not. It is a matter of fit and value in most cases.

[RayRayRaven]

19 minutes ago, JonnyBaltimore said:

It has nothing to do whether the QB is ''good'' or not. It is a matter whether the QB ''fits'' the philosophy of the organization going forward. As an organization, I think what they are doing is giving themselves flexibility. If they are changing coaching philosophies then they would want to keep their options open. Tyrod is obviously a different type of QB than your traditional pocket passer, but this does not negate the fact that he has performed well over the past 2 years.

If you believe Flacco has outplayed Tyrod in the regular season in the last 2 years, convince me.

Whether an organization chooses to exercise an option on a quarterback has no bearing on whether the QB is good or not. It is a matter of fit and value in most cases.

we would have finished with a better record with t.taylor fur sur.  still don't want to trade for him. we can get some great draft position by tradin joe though. lemonade from a lemon.  jonny many ravyan fans just aren't gonna let go of joe. hopefully our owner gets dollar wise. if we are gonna hit a dry spell and we have, its best to get something out of it. the way we are goin we gonna be stuck in the same  place well into the next deccade

[JonnyBaltimore]

44 minutes ago, RayRayRaven said:

we would have finished with a better record with t.taylor fur sur.  still don't want to trade for him. we can get some great draft position by tradin joe though. lemonade from a lemon.  jonny many ravyan fans just aren't gonna let go of joe. hopefully our owner gets dollar wise. if we are gonna hit a dry spell and we have, its best to get something out of it. the way we are goin we gonna be stuck in the same  place well into the next deccade

I wouldn't go that far. Joe is part of the solution. We are stuck with Joe because of the contract but if we can draft a guy like Dalvin Cook and run the offence around him, it would be fine. If we expect January Joe to show up in the regular season, I think that is a bit wanting.

[trevorsteadman]

1 hour ago, RayRayRaven said:

we would have finished with a better record with t.taylor fur sur.  still don't want to trade for him. we can get some great draft position by tradin joe though. lemonade from a lemon.  jonny many ravyan fans just aren't gonna let go of joe. hopefully our owner gets dollar wise. if we are gonna hit a dry spell and we have, its best to get something out of it. the way we are goin we gonna be stuck in the same  place well into the next deccade

Lol no. And it is funny because it sounds like Tyrod Taylor won't be in Buffalo next season. Numbers aren't everything. 

[Ravensfan23]

1 hour ago, JonnyBaltimore said:

It has nothing to do whether the QB is ''good'' or not. It is a matter whether the QB ''fits'' the philosophy of the organization going forward. As an organization, I think what they are doing is giving themselves flexibility. If they are changing coaching philosophies then they would want to keep their options open. Tyrod is obviously a different type of QB than your traditional pocket passer, but this does not negate the fact that he has performed well over the past 2 years.

If you believe Flacco has outplayed Tyrod in the regular season in the last 2 years, convince me.

Whether an organization chooses to exercise an option on a quarterback has no bearing on whether the QB is good or not. It is a matter of fit and value in most cases.

This would make so much sense and I'd agree with we weren't talking about the most important position on the field. Good to great QBs win championships coaches don't. A team would much rather sign and be locked into a franchise QB before they get a coach rather than the other way around. I don't care if you're talking about a pocket passer or mobile QB, a good QB is hard to find and you don't need to have flexibility when you believe in your QB. I'm sorry that just doesn't make sense to me. If you know you have a QB you can win with, you don't flirt with losing him. Fact is they don't know believe in Tyrod right now, they want to see if they can get someone better and if not Tyrod is their fall back plan. It's that simple and that's not how good QBs or should I say well respected QBs are treated. 

Now with that being said, I think Tyrod is a heck of a QB and think he's played better than Flacco over the last 2 seasons. However we're comparing a QB with a jacked up knee and plenty of change around him to a QB who is sheltered in his offense and isn't asked to do much. We're talking about Flacco having possibly the worse 2 season stretch in his career. That's pretty low hanging fruit for anyone comparing Tyrod or any other QB for that matter to Joe.  

[ellicottraven]

Well at least one thing is established with this thread. Just going by the total number of responses, Joe Flacco is a lightning rod for differing opinions which makes him interesting and controversial. Its all good fodder for conversation and debate, but the fact is Joe Flacco is not spending a minute of his time worried about anything we discuss here. His focus right now is chilling and playing with his 4 lovely children! 

Edited January 15 by ellicottraven

[K-Dog]

16 minutes ago, ellicottraven said:

Well at least one thing is established with this thread. Just going by the total number of responses, Joe Flacco is a lightning rod for differing opinions which makes him interesting and controversial. Its all good fodder for conversation and debate, but the fact is Joe Flacco is not spending a minute of his time worried about anything we discuss here. His focus right now is chilling and playing with his 4 lovely children! 

And I, for one, have no problem with that. 

August is another story....

[rossihunter2]

2 hours ago, trevorsteadman said:

Lol no. And it is funny because it sounds like Tyrod Taylor won't be in Buffalo next season. Numbers aren't everything. 

Tbf, buffalo are idiots

[JoeyFlex5]

7 hours ago, Moderator 3 said:

So in other words, when Flacco has a lot of input into running the offense (like in the Super Bowl run) he can be successful?  When OCs call stupid plays and tell him to stick with it, he doesn't do as well?  Oddly, in our biggest success this year (Miami) the coaches talked about sitting down with Joe and developing a game plan.  That's the only time we heard about that.

you mean to tell me... that when the qb tells the coaches what he will be able to do best, and they comply, the qb does those things well? no way man, flacco just needs to be cut, he shouldnt get any input.

[JonnyBaltimore]

5 hours ago, Ravensfan23 said:

We're talking about Flacco having possibly the worse 2 season stretch in his career. That's pretty low hanging fruit for anyone comparing Tyrod or any other QB for that matter to Joe.  

I don't think these past 2 regular seasons is that much different than his career averages in the regular season. His QBR is low 80s on average. People have selective memory, they just remember the Super Bowl run and the big games (and rightfully so) but in the regular season, Flacco has been mostly pedestrian.

He's kind of like Peyton Manning except the opposite. He stinks it up in the regular season, but lights it up in the playoffs.

I rest my case.

Flacco is part of the solution, but management would be wise to draft a star on the offence that can actually carry the load in the regular season. History says we just cannot rely on January Joe to show up that early in the season.

[rmcjacket23]

10 hours ago, JonnyBaltimore said:

It has nothing to do whether the QB is ''good'' or not. It is a matter whether the QB ''fits'' the philosophy of the organization going forward. As an organization, I think what they are doing is giving themselves flexibility. If they are changing coaching philosophies then they would want to keep their options open. Tyrod is obviously a different type of QB than your traditional pocket passer, but this does not negate the fact that he has performed well over the past 2 years.

If you believe Flacco has outplayed Tyrod in the regular season in the last 2 years, convince me.

Whether an organization chooses to exercise an option on a quarterback has no bearing on whether the QB is good or not. It is a matter of fit and value in most cases.

No, actually it has nothing with the philosophy of the organization, because if the QB is good enough that the organization has confidence in him to lead them, then the QB isn't the one that changes it philosophy... the organization is the one that changes its philosophy. Specifically, they change their philosophy to fit the strengths of said QBs.

Its actually pretty rare that an organization even has the opportunity or ability to select a QB to lead their team that already matches an organizational philosophy. Due to the extreme scarcity of the position, this rarely happens. In most cases, the organization takes over the identity of the player, because he's that valuable. 

We see them with literally every great QB in this league, past or present.

What we simply don't see is a team moving on from a good QB because they don't think he fits the "philosophy" of the organization. That really doesn't happen in the NFL. 

This has everything to do with one simple question for the Bills... "do I think this guy is good enough to be the QB of the future for this team". If the answer is yes, you pay him. If its not, you move on.

And yes, statistically, Tyrod has been better than Joe the last two years. Personally, that means nothing to me, because the NFL isn't a two year league. I know throughout his career that Joe has been better, and I think what you've seen from Tyrod is the maximum output you're going to get from him, and I think Buffalo realizes that. He's never going to get more weapons on offense than he has had recently, especially if you pay him what they're scheduled to pay him.

That's kind of the point... Tyrod at what I think is his absolute best is only slightly better than Joe, who appears to be playing at far less than what his best is. I think that's a pretty good measurement of both players right there.

We know Joe can be a lot better, because we've seen it. We can't say that at all about Tyrod, and it sounds like the Bills have that very same question.

[rmcjacket23]

3 hours ago, JonnyBaltimore said:

I don't think these past 2 regular seasons is that much different than his career averages in the regular season. His QBR is low 80s on average. People have selective memory, they just remember the Super Bowl run and the big games (and rightfully so) but in the regular season, Flacco has been mostly pedestrian.

He's kind of like Peyton Manning except the opposite. He stinks it up in the regular season, but lights it up in the playoffs.

I rest my case.

Flacco is part of the solution, but management would be wise to draft a star on the offence that can actually carry the load in the regular season. History says we just cannot rely on January Joe to show up that early in the season.

Well, this is partially true, though obviously quite an exaggeration.

He's never going to be Peyton Manning in the regular season. Not required for him to do that in order to win. 

However, if you gave me any of the 09-12 or 2014 seasons from Joe, I'd be quite fine with that. Far from terrible statistical performances, just not the fantasy production of like 40 TDs and 5000 yards, which don't coincide with regular season success at the team level at all.

Its kind of ironic that you would reference "organizational philosophy" in one of your other posts, because it actually fits here. Its not a coincidence that when Joe's overall statistical output is maybe a bit less (usually in the 3,600 yards, 20-25 TDs, 10-12 INT range), the team itself seems to do a bit better. That's called organizational philosophy. Stronger output from your defense and a balanced offense... that is THIS organizations philosophy. 

In pretty much any year where Joe hasn't had adequate statistical production, one of those two factors was lacking significantly. 

He has a lot to improve on, but he's not this horrid regular season QB some make him out to be. 

And just as an FYI, you may not want to reference QBR as an actual statistic, because its not. Nobody takes it seriously. Its a made up number that ESPN conjured out of thin air to try to make themselves feel important. You don't have any idea how its calculated, or what a good or bad measurement is for that number. 

As a general rule of thumb... if you don't hear coaches referencing it as a valid statistic (which you don't), then it really shouldn't matter to fans either.

Edited January 15 by rmcjacket23

[rmcjacket23]

10 hours ago, JonnyBaltimore said:

I wouldn't go that far. Joe is part of the solution. We are stuck with Joe because of the contract but if we can draft a guy like Dalvin Cook and run the offence around him, it would be fine. If we expect January Joe to show up in the regular season, I think that is a bit wanting.

An individual offensive player outside of the QB position isn't going to carry a team through the regular season. Those players are extremely rare and we're not going to get one.

You can just upgrade some of the other players around him and on the defense, and the team will be better. Plenty of teams in the playoffs this year who didn't have a single player carrying them all year. They have balance, which is kind of the goal of most teams that wants to win a SB.

[Ravensfan23]

4 hours ago, JonnyBaltimore said:

I don't think these past 2 regular seasons is that much different than his career averages in the regular season. His QBR is low 80s on average. People have selective memory, they just remember the Super Bowl run and the big games (and rightfully so) but in the regular season, Flacco has been mostly pedestrian.

He's kind of like Peyton Manning except the opposite. He stinks it up in the regular season, but lights it up in the playoffs.

I rest my case.

Flacco is part of the solution, but management would be wise to draft a star on the offence that can actually carry the load in the regular season. History says we just cannot rely on January Joe to show up that early in the season.

My memory isn't selective as all. I remember 2010 being the best year of his career up to that point and the team deciding to get rid of two of his best weapons to rely on  2 rookies(Smith, Doss)  2 2nd year players(Pitta, Dickson) and a new WR(Evans) that was in great decline the next year. So what happened, instead of his production staying the course of the steady incline or even exploding, it dipped because Flacco went from a wealth of experience to being asked to rely on inexperienced kids. Flacco went from a combined 132rec 1,895yds 15Tds from Mason, Heap and Housh to a grand total of 12rec 153yds 1TD to replace that production. Your young franchise QB is taking the next step in his development and you decide to do a overhaul on offense and with inexperienced players no less. I love the Ravens brass but no other top organization would do this foolishness.  This was just one example of factors that has lead to Flacco being so pedestrian in the regular, but I think it was the most defining moment in his career and that's basically how every 2-3 years of his career.  

I agree with you 100% that Flacco has been pedestrian and inconsistent much of the regular season throughout his career, but the Ravens brass has to take a ton of that responsibility because I haven't seen any team mishandle the QB position as bad as the Ravens have. Not comparing Flacco to Brady here, but I think that example is a good one. When the Pats realized that the NFL was no longer a "Defense wins Championships" league and they couldn't rely on their defense like they did for Brady's 1st 7 years, they changed with the times. From 00'-06' Brady's numbers were just as pedestrian as Flacco's. But the Pats knew in order to get ahead of the times or at least keep up, they had to hand the offense over to Brady. So what did they do, They knew added players to hide Brady's deficiencies. Moss for the deep ball, Welker who gets open quick because Brady.wasn't a tigh window passer and Stallworth to take advantage of the other two pulling coverage. Much like Flacco, this was the defining moment of Brady's career because it gave him the confidence that he no only could win a SB but also carry his offense. 

So when you say the Ravens need to supply Flacco with great talent that can help carry this team, I don't see it as a knock to Flacco like so many others do. I actually agree and think it should have been done a long time ago, because that's exactly how the game's greatest QBs were ushered into greatness, the talent surrounding them. Who was Montana without Rice, Aikman without Irvin, Peyton without Harrison, Wayne and James, Rodger without Driver and Gennings and I could go on. Flacco has to be better in the regular season no doubt, but the FO has to take a long hard look at how they want this team to go. You can't scream Flacco is your guy, pay him but don't surround him with adequate talent. I respect the Ravens for wanting to build a balanced team and keep that long standing tradition of Baltimore being known for great defense. However you have to make a decision on either building a great offense or great defense because if you don't the overall team will be mediocre imo and making your QB the highest paid in the NFL should make that decision clear. 

[JonnyBaltimore]

7 hours ago, rmcjacket23 said:

No, actually it has nothing with the philosophy of the organization, because if the QB is good enough that the organization has confidence in him to lead them, then the QB isn't the one that changes it philosophy... the organization is the one that changes its philosophy. Specifically, they change their philosophy to fit the strengths of said QBs.

Its actually pretty rare that an organization even has the opportunity or ability to select a QB to lead their team that already matches an organizational philosophy. Due to the extreme scarcity of the position, this rarely happens. In most cases, the organization takes over the identity of the player, because he's that valuable. 

We see them with literally every great QB in this league, past or present.

What we simply don't see is a team moving on from a good QB because they don't think he fits the "philosophy" of the organization. That really doesn't happen in the NFL. 

This has everything to do with one simple question for the Bills... "do I think this guy is good enough to be the QB of the future for this team". If the answer is yes, you pay him. If its not, you move on.

 

If you are trying to attract an OC like the Bills currently are, you want to keep your options open, so that the personnel you have can actually run the system the new OC wants to run. Tyrod obviously has limitations, so whether the Bills decide to exercise their option is mainly a matter of financial concern. (i.e. guaranteed money if injured).

The Bills are a terribly run organization so I wouldn't try to make sense of their talent evaluation.

When you have coaching changes, the philosophy changes. The personnel you have the ''option'' of changing should be granted somewhat to the influence of the new coaching staff. If they played Tyrod and he got injured severely, the Bills would be stuck and have no flexibility as his contract becomes guaranteed. That's why they benched him. It was not whether he played well or not.

 

[JonnyBaltimore]

Hey I like Flacco, but will he just show up and play up to his potential in the regular season? I hope he proves me wrong.

[rmcjacket23]

19 minutes ago, JonnyBaltimore said:

If you are trying to attract an OC like the Bills currently are, you want to keep your options open, so that the personnel you have can actually run the system the new OC wants to run. Tyrod obviously has limitations, so whether the Bills decide to exercise their option is mainly a matter of financial concern. (i.e. guaranteed money if injured).

The Bills are a terribly run organization so I wouldn't try to make sense of their talent evaluation.

When you have coaching changes, the philosophy changes. The personnel you have the ''option'' of changing should be granted somewhat to the influence of the new coaching staff. If they played Tyrod and he got injured severely, the Bills would be stuck and have no flexibility as his contract becomes guaranteed. That's why they benched him. It was not whether he played well or not.

 

Or, as I said, you bring in an OC who can design a system to fit his personnel's strengths, and that would potentially include Tyrod. A smart organization doesn't do what you're suggesting... pick a coordinator and then pick the personnel. Coordinators aren't important enough and don't have the level of job security that players do, which is they turn over as frequently or more frequently than good players do.

I'm not arguing over why the benched him... it was a smart move on their part. My point is that them benching him also is an indication of a lack of confidence in him long term, as we've seen since they have publicly even acknowledged that they don't know what his situation is or whether he will be with the team next year. 

Put it this way... if it were a Dak Prescott or a Carson Wentz that was QB for the Bills, and they had the same contract and same situation (i.e. they could bench him in week 17 to protect him from injury and help with guaranteed money decisions), I guarantee they send both of those guys out there to play and take the injury risk. 

Basically the Bills are telling us what we already knew... he's a fringe NFL starter and they're not sure whether to roll with him for the next few years or start over at the position again.

[rmcjacket23]

13 minutes ago, JonnyBaltimore said:

Hey I like Flacco, but will he just show up and play up to his potential in the regular season? I hope he proves me wrong.

He'll probably be the same regular season QB we are used to seeing. 

And that should be more than good enough for most fans, because you know the reward at the end of he plays even a little bit better, and especially, if some of the people around him play better.

Based on the talent (or lack thereof) at several key positions on this team, I can see plenty of scenarios where Joe has a pretty solid statistical season (he was pretty good statistically this season, except for TD passes) and we still only win 7 or 8 games.

Everybody points to the 2014 season as a great year for him, and we were still a wildcard team that didn't get in the playoffs until the final weekend.

[JonnyBaltimore]

1 hour ago, rmcjacket23 said:

Or, as I said, you bring in an OC who can design a system to fit his personnel's strengths, and that would potentially include Tyrod. A smart organization doesn't do what you're suggesting... pick a coordinator and then pick the personnel. Coordinators aren't important enough and don't have the level of job security that players do, which is they turn over as frequently or more frequently than good players do.

I'm not arguing over why the benched him... it was a smart move on their part. My point is that them benching him also is an indication of a lack of confidence in him long term, as we've seen since they have publicly even acknowledged that they don't know what his situation is or whether he will be with the team next year. 

Put it this way... if it were a Dak Prescott or a Carson Wentz that was QB for the Bills, and they had the same contract and same situation (i.e. they could bench him in week 17 to protect him from injury and help with guaranteed money decisions), I guarantee they send both of those guys out there to play and take the injury risk. 

Basically the Bills are telling us what we already knew... he's a fringe NFL starter and they're not sure whether to roll with him for the next few years or start over at the position again.

I would not infer too much from that decision as we are talking about a 2nd rate organization. Here is an organization that fired the HC without the GM knowing about it. They did this 1 game prior to the end of the season.

With this much uncertainty in leadership, coupled with wholesale changes at coaching, it is more about flexibility than anything.

Edited January 15 by JonnyBaltimore

[rmcjacket23]

2 hours ago, JonnyBaltimore said:

I would not infer too much from that decision as we are talking about a 2nd rate organization. Here is an organization that fired the HC without the GM knowing about it. They did this 1 game prior to the end of the season.

With this much uncertainty in leadership, coupled with wholesale changes at coaching, it is more about flexibility than anything.

1. Nobody seriously thinks that the GM didn't know they were firing Rex. He likely knew that they were firing Rex weeks before they even decided that they were firing Rex. That's just a PR story he puts out so that he can save face.

2. Whether they are a top tier organization or a joke of an organization doesn't matter a ton, mostly because there are only 32 of said organizations in total. In any given year there's only a handful of teams actively looking for a QB upgrade and are willing to pay somebody like Tyrod decent money to be their guy. So when one of those teams themselves decides that he's not worth it, its very telling to the rest of the league.

I'm not saying he won't get another gig either, because he very well might. But this upcoming offseason will be particularly interesting, mostly because there's some potential for some starting-quality QBs to be available for other teams to have, namely guys like Cutler and Romo potentially.

[JonnyBaltimore]

1 hour ago, rmcjacket23 said:

1. Nobody seriously thinks that the GM didn't know they were firing Rex. He likely knew that they were firing Rex weeks before they even decided that they were firing Rex. That's just a PR story he puts out so that he can save face.

2. Whether they are a top tier organization or a joke of an organization doesn't matter a ton, mostly because there are only 32 of said organizations in total. In any given year there's only a handful of teams actively looking for a QB upgrade and are willing to pay somebody like Tyrod decent money to be their guy. So when one of those teams themselves decides that he's not worth it, its very telling to the rest of the league.

I'm not saying he won't get another gig either, because he very well might. But this upcoming offseason will be particularly interesting, mostly because there's some potential for some starting-quality QBs to be available for other teams to have, namely guys like Cutler and Romo potentially.

-So the GM put out that story to save face at the expense of the owner? That's a pretty bad PR strategy for his longevity.

-Again, in the flux of uncertainty, you want flexibility. They have not made any decision yet. They just sat him to retain that flexibility. 

If I am Buffalo and my goal is to beat New England for the division title, I don't think Tyrod is that guy. He has his limitations.

[RayRayRaven]

1 hour ago, rmcjacket23 said:

 

I'm not saying he won't get another gig either, because he very well might. But this upcoming offseason will be particularly interesting, mostly because there's some potential for some starting-quality QBs to be available for other teams to have, namely guys like Cutler and Romo potentially.

and if we are lucky n stevie b gets smart someone like joe flacco there to. there are still teams that will pay large for a former sb winner like joe.  two number 1's from someone like  the browns.  good for both teams doan think it will happen though. we will play 2017 and after 2018 stevie b will act which will  make getting back harder because draftin @ 16 in 2019 ain't draftin @ 1, 2 or 3 in 2017 and draftin 1,2 or 3 twice in 2018

Edited January 16 by RayRayRaven

[rossihunter2]

1 hour ago, RayRayRaven said:

and if we are lucky n stevie b gets smart someone like joe flacco there to. there are still teams that will pay large for a former sb winner like joe.  two number 1's from someone like  the browns.  good for both teams doan think it will happen though. we will play 2017 and after 2018 stevie b will act which will  make getting back harder because draftin @ 16 in 2019 ain't draftin @ 1, 2 or 3 in 2017 and draftin 1,2 or 3 twice in 2018

are you incapable of listening to facts? it is financially almost impossible to get rid of flacco before 2019

[redrum52]

On 1/14/2017 at 8:14 PM, nextgen_RavensFan said:

Just read on the front page that Flacco will have a premier O'line (best in the league) next season, should be exciting.  So we should see a huge jump in the pass and run game.

I would NOT let Joe take the reigns on the offense until he shows better decision making skills. No way, no how. LOL

My assumption would be if we did have one of the best OLs the running numbers are what you'd see a significant increase in. 

 

It seems he plays better with more control.