Foxsports.com Gives Ravens C- In Past 6 Drafts

[theFRANCHISE]

Ravens bias aside, this doesn't surprise me that FOXSports.com's The Czar has written an article that is sure to piss off Ravens fans (and probably other teams' fans as well) everywhere.

[quote][b]BALTIMORE[/b]: For all the praise given to GM Ozzie Newsome, his drafts have produced few stars in recent years. Yes, quarterback Joe Flacco might become one, but the only Pro Bowler in the last six drafts is pass rusher Terrell Suggs from 2003. Yes, there are some decent starters in guard Ben Grubbs and fullback Le'Ron McClain. But they busted out with quarterback Kyle Boller and first-round receiver Mark Clayton in 2005. Running back Ray Rice was a solid choice last season and nine rookies did make the final 53-man roster in 2008.
[b]Picks[/b]: 53
[b]First-round picks[/b]: 6
[b]Starters[/b]: 5
[b]Pro Bowlers[/b]: 1
[b]Grade[/b]: C-[/quote]
Source: [url="http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/9453994/Draft-review:-How-every-team-ranks-from-2003-%2708"]FOXSports.com[/url]

If you read the first paragraph, in explaining his criteria for the number of starters credited to each team, he mentioned that some went on to become starters for teams other than the ones for which they were drafted. Despite his reasoning, the number of starters he listed for Baltimore still doesn't make mathematical sense, even if you were to take away the guys whose starting status is questionable (i.e. Le'Ron McClain as the Ravens' starting RB, despite the three-man rotation where there was no "official" starter, etc.)

By my count, the Ravens have actually produced 20 starters over that span -- nowhere near as low as what The Czar listed. Additionally, the Ravens have produced THREE Pro Bowlers and an alternate: Terrell Suggs, Haloti Ngata (alternate), Le'Ron McClain, and Derek Anderson (for the Browns).

Talk about a blatant disregard for researching facts. Even if you were to look at the information subjectively, the [i]objective[/i] facts are so off-base that it's ridiculous. I have less of a problem with the 'C-' grade than I do the disinformation offered by the so-called breakdown.

I almost want to research the numbers he's listed for the other 31 teams now...just to see how off he was...

[plesiosaur]

[quote name='theFRANCHISE' post='179893' date='Apr 14 2009, 01:00 PM']Ravens bias aside, this doesn't surprise me that FOXSports.com's The Czar has written an article that is sure to piss off Ravens fans (and probably other teams' fans as well) everywhere.


Source: [url="http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/9453994/Draft-review:-How-every-team-ranks-from-2003-%2708"]FOXSports.com[/url]

If you read the first paragraph, in explaining his criteria for the number of starters credited to each team, he mentioned that some went on to become starters for teams other than the ones for which they were drafted. Despite his reasoning, the number of starters he listed for Baltimore still doesn't make mathematical sense, even if you were to take away the guys whose starting status is questionable (i.e. Le'Ron McClain as the Ravens' starting RB, despite the three-man rotation where there was no "official" starter, etc.)

By my count, the Ravens have actually produced 20 starters over that span -- nowhere near as low as what The Czar listed. Additionally, the Ravens have produced THREE Pro Bowlers and an alternate: Terrell Suggs, Haloti Ngata (alternate), Le'Ron McClain, and Derek Anderson (for the Browns).

Talk about a blatant disregard for researching facts. Even if you were to look at the information subjectively, the [i]objective[/i] facts are so off-base that it's ridiculous. I have less of a problem with the 'C-' grade than I do the disinformation offered by the so-called breakdown.

I almost want to research the numbers he's listed for the other 31 teams now...just to see how off he was...[/quote]

What's wrong with Clayton? Did they even mention Ngata? Anyhow, this doesn't surprise me since Fox isn't a news source known for its research or fact-checking.

[Sizzle]

I think the we deserve at least a B. But that said i have always said Ozzie is not THE BEST in the nfl. He is average maybe a little above.

[theFRANCHISE]

[quote name='plesiosaur' post='179899' date='Apr 14 2009, 01:28 PM']What's wrong with Clayton? Did they even mention Ngata? Anyhow, this doesn't surprise me since Fox isn't a news source known for its research or fact-checking.[/quote]
Although I can't say I fully disagree with the guy's assessment of Clayton (even as a solid contributor for us, he's still a borderline bust since we drafted him to be a #1, go-to weapon), I'm shocked that Haloti Ngata didn't factor into any of it as he was voted a Pro Bowl alternate and produced almost as well (if not better) than the two Pro Bowl DT selections for the AFC squad.

[theFRANCHISE]

[quote name='Sizzle' post='179901' date='Apr 14 2009, 01:31 PM']I think the we deserve at least a B. But that said i have always said Ozzie is not THE BEST in the nfl. He is average maybe a little above.[/quote]
I would've settled for a 'B-', but a 'C-' is an insult. I don't care how "catastrophic" the Kyle Boller fiasco was, and I don't care how weak the 2004 draft class as a whole was, but it's hard to say that the team did worse than Atlanta, Buffalo, Kansas City (?!?), and St. Louis, among others.

[MKdave]

Wow. This is a pretty horrendous article. But Fox is hardly a reputable authority on football, and 'The Czar' is one of the worst of the bunch.

[codizzle]

[quote name='MKdave' post='179906' date='Apr 14 2009, 12:35 PM']Wow. This is a pretty horrendous article. But Fox is hardly a reputable authority on football, and 'The Czar' is one of the worst of the bunch.[/quote]
true that and this is the perfect time of the off season to write terrible articles like that also

[plesiosaur]

[quote name='MKdave' post='179906' date='Apr 14 2009, 01:35 PM']Wow. This is a pretty horrendous article. But Fox is hardly a reputable authority on football, and 'The Czar' is one of the worst of the bunch.[/quote]

Yeah, and look who he gave the A's to: Dallas, Indy, NE, Giants, Ketchupville, SD.

[edreedfromtheu]

Yeah, it's just comedy really. The entire article. He says Ray Rice is one of our better picks? I think he was one of the biggest wastes of a pick. He's a downgrade from the other 2 running backs on the team, and he is pretty much exactly the same as the guy we let go in order to draft Rice(Corey Ross). He's just a more expensive version of him with his round 2 draft status.

And let's not forget the supplemental draft where we got Jared Gaither. The guy is the cornerstone of the offensive line and will draw comparisons to Ogden sooner rather than later.

Ravens have had pretty good drafts. Much better than most of the other teams.

Like the original poster said:
I'm not so against the C- grade, but the supportive "facts" and "reasoning" are horrible.

[MadBacker57]

who cares how many starters we have produced the guys we drafted last year and previous have come in when call and made plays when in the game but everone seems to go back to the kyle boller draft if he would not of gotten thrown right in and had some help he may not of been a horriable pick he came in got thrown into it and was surrounded by a bad offense

[darklight1216]

This is almost as bad as saying the NY defense is going to be better than the Ravens...

[Ravnet]

I don't think you can count someone like Derek Anderson because he went on to become a Pro Bowler in a different system, which means that Ozzie failed at improving his own team with that pick.

[theFRANCHISE]

[quote name='Ravnet' post='179929' date='Apr 14 2009, 03:22 PM']I don't think you can count someone like Derek Anderson because he went on to become a Pro Bowler in a different system, which means that Ozzie failed at improving his own team with that pick.[/quote]
But given The Czar's criteria, if you count a player drafted by the team as a starter for that team EVEN if they didn't become a starter until leaving, then you have to do the same for Pro Bowlers.

Regardless, my biggest beef is the glaring discrepencies in the # of starters he listed. I mean, it's one of the simplest statistics to look up, and even without intimate knowledge of a team, you should be able to recognize certain starters' names. Logic dictates that if you somehow know Ben Grubbs' name off-hand as he listed (and most [i]casual[/i] fans don't), then you should definitely know Haloti Ngata's name.

Even though it shouldn't be surprising that FOXSports.com would make a mistake like this, it irks me that one of their "premier" columnists wouldn't bother to do the research in an article that, in of itself, [i]requires[/i] research; you don't present numbers if you don't have the proof to back them up. That's the easiest way to get embarassed.

This really makes me want to research the other teams and come back with my own "revised" version of the article...

[plesiosaur]

[quote name='theFRANCHISE' post='179949' date='Apr 14 2009, 03:50 PM']This really makes me want to research the other teams and come back with my own "revised" version of the article...[/quote]

You the man!

[cm06mrs]

how is this guy calculating the number of starters?

in the thing at the beginning he lists byron leftwich but he hasn't really started a significant number of games since 2006

by that reasoning i count 5 starters in the 2003 draft alone in the form of suggs, boller, jarret johnson, ovie mughelli, and tony pashos

perhaps he only counted the 2003 draft and then got bored with us

[DTenGil]

hey, it's just more fuel for the Ravens to burn going into the season. Thanks Fox Sports. We all know the Ravens play their best when the rest of the NFL refuses to acknowledge them!

[cm06mrs]

its pretty sad that this guy is getting paid to write stuff for fox and he cant even be bothered to do research
where did he get the numbers he is quoting? because it seems he is pulling them out of his ******

it seems likehe messed up his research on all of the teams, read the comments:

Do some research we had 3 probowlers in houston last year

The Jets only have one pro bowl player...last year Nick Mangold Darrelle Revis and Leon Washington made the pro bowl thats 3 rights there

do some research before you write a story. The Packer's Nick Collins was a pro bowl starter last year.

um... the titans have 5 pro-bowlers from the last 4 drafts

[Ravnet]

[quote name='theFRANCHISE' post='179949' date='Apr 14 2009, 03:50 PM']But given The Czar's criteria, if you count a player drafted by the team as a starter for that team EVEN if they didn't become a starter until leaving, then you have to do the same for Pro Bowlers.[/quote]

Gotcha - I didn't look that far into it.

[bossman419]

[quote name='theFRANCHISE' post='179949' date='Apr 14 2009, 03:50 PM']This really makes me want to research the other teams and come back with my own "revised" version of the article...[/quote]
You should be a writer on Bleacher Report.com

[CustomUserName]

I'd say C- is somewhat fair (although I'd give B-more a C+). We have no one left from our 2004 draft class. Our 2005 Draft class that's left is Adam Terry and Mark Clayton (who has yet to pan out as the deep threat we wanted), not to mention the loss of the only pro-bowler from that class to our division rival. Kyle Boller; end of story.

But names like Ngata, Suggs, Grubbs, Le'ron McClain, Jared Gaither (supplemental counts right?), and Dawan Landry should be atleast a C+

[bossman419]

The problem with this writer is I guess he finds no flaw in how players become Pro Bowlers. The big name players, playing for the most popular teams get in. It should not be a basis for rating players talent. Last year 6 Cowboys made it on the roster.

But many of you have also noticed that this writers talent rivals that of Mike Preston so I don't really give a ****** what this Dbag has to say.

[theFRANCHISE]

[quote name='bossman419' post='179983' date='Apr 14 2009, 05:04 PM']You should be a writer on Bleacher Report.com[/quote]
I already write for a site like it, but we won't get into that...the mods don't like spamming, and I can't talk about the site just yet anyway.

[Mahatma_Sloth]

'08-Joe Flacco, Ray Rice(+ more will pan out. I'm lookin at; Tavares Gooden, Tom Zbikowski, Haruki Nakamura, David Hale)
'07-Ben Grubbs, Marshal Yanda, Antwan Barnes, Le'Ron McClain, Troy Smith, Prescott Burgess, Jared Gaither
'06-Haloti Ngata, Chris Chester, Dawan Landry, Quinn Sypniewski, Sam Koch(and a couple CB bound to blow up David Pittman and Derrick Martin)
'05-Mark Clayton, Adam Terry, Jason Brown, Derek Anderson
'04-Dwan Edwards, Devard Darling
'03-Terrell Suggs, Kyle Boller, Jarret Johnson, Ovie Mughelli, Aubrayo Franklin, Tony Pashos

[size=7][b]= > C- [/b][/size]

[justifythegame]

[quote name='theFRANCHISE' post='179893' date='Apr 14 2009, 01:00 PM']Ravens bias aside, this doesn't surprise me that FOXSports.com's The Czar has written an article that is sure to piss off Ravens fans (and probably other teams' fans as well) everywhere.


Source: [url="http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/9453994/Draft-review:-How-every-team-ranks-from-2003-%2708"]FOXSports.com[/url]

If you read the first paragraph, in explaining his criteria for the number of starters credited to each team, he mentioned that some went on to become starters for teams other than the ones for which they were drafted. Despite his reasoning, the number of starters he listed for Baltimore still doesn't make mathematical sense, even if you were to take away the guys whose starting status is questionable (i.e. Le'Ron McClain as the Ravens' starting RB, despite the three-man rotation where there was no "official" starter, etc.)

By my count, the Ravens have actually produced 20 starters over that span -- nowhere near as low as what The Czar listed. Additionally, the Ravens have produced THREE Pro Bowlers and an alternate: Terrell Suggs, Haloti Ngata (alternate), Le'Ron McClain, and Derek Anderson (for the Browns).

Talk about a blatant disregard for researching facts. Even if you were to look at the information subjectively, the [i]objective[/i] facts are so off-base that it's ridiculous. I have less of a problem with the 'C-' grade than I do the disinformation offered by the so-called breakdown.

I almost want to research the numbers he's listed for the other 31 teams now...just to see how off he was...[/quote]
I guess by his reasoning he must give the Redskins and the Lions an "A"

[bmore20]

what really gets me is we got the same rating as the OAKLAND RAIDERS!!! a team that hasn't developed any talent since Charlie Woodson.... and he gave the skins an B???? what???? this guy is a sports writer???? LOL!!!

[Ravensman5220]

Joe Flacco - future pro bowler
Ben Grubbs - future pro bowler
Marshal Yanda - quality starter
LeRon McClain - pro bowler
Haloti Ngata - future pro bowler
Chris Chester - starter/backup
Dawan Landry - quality starter
Sam Koch - future pro bowler
Mark Clayton - quality starter
Adam Terry - starter/backup
Jason Brown - future pro bowler
Derrick Anderson - pro bowler
Terrell Suggs - pro bowler
Kyle Boller - bust
Jarret Johnson - quality starter
Ovie Mughelli - quality starter
Tony Pashos - quality starter

This guy did zero fact finding. I made this list in 5 minutes. What a joke. Who is proof reading this crap. I would be ashamed if I wrote something like this guy did. Just goes to show you take everything you read with a grain of salt.

[Ravensman5220]

Oh and just for the Czar's knowledge its easy to draft starters if the players on your team already SUCK!!!!!

[flynismo]

[quote name='bmore20' post='180259' date='Apr 15 2009, 11:10 AM'][b]and he gave the skins an B????[/b] what???? this guy is a sports writer???? LOL!!![/quote]


that's what really rubbed me the wrong way

[Ravensfan23]

The Ravens have 26 players since 2003 that were drafted and has since went on to become starters or key role players. Now yes some of those players have gone on to other teams but they were drafted by the Ravens none the less. Thats not to mention guys like Burgress, Gooden, Cousins, Hale, and Harper who will get a chance in training camp.

You also have to look at some undrafted free agents Ozzie has come away with and the success they have had. Also the many draft day trade ozzie pulls off to get his guy be a draft pick or NFL player. Do u think the Browns would like to have that 12th overall pick back and take Ngata instead of Wimbley? and what did Ozzie give up for that a 6th round pick?

Out of the 22 starters on Offense and Defense last year 15 of those players were drafted by the Ravens. That is not to mention some key backups and special teams players, such as Ray Rice, Troy Smith, Nakamura, Zibby, Marcus Smith, Edgar Jones, J. McClain, Figurs, Koch, Terry. Lets also not forget the guys that were on IR. C-Mac, Barnes, Burgress, Yanda, D. Williams, Landry, Sypniewski, Edwards.

Now all of these guys aren't great, but every team needs role players. The whole draft thing can be tricky because something find the right player can mean success for years to come, and the same with the wrong player causing problems for years to come. Lets take the Ravens and NE for example. The Pats selected Tom Brady with 199th pick, he turned out to be great. Because of him it is easy for the Pats to draft offensive players(althought their best offensive players are FAs). Brady makes average WRs TEs and Olinemen look great. On the other hand, the Ravens cleary missed up with the Boller pick and it set us back. Because Boller wasn't the guy we thought he would be at QB, some of the average offensive guys we drafted was just that average. Hell having Boller might even have made them look worst then what they were. So it'll be interesting to see Ozzie success on the offensive side of the ball with Flacco.

It's said that if u miss on a 1st round QB it sets your team back for about 4-6 years. Well i think the Ravens proved that and because of it our draft success doesn't seem as good to the naked eye. Also not have a head coach that was willing to let his OCs do their job hurt as well. If u look at the success we had last season with Cam and Joe, the numbers weren't great but the end result was better then what we've had in a long time. If the could have had any offensive success over the last 7 years to go with the great Defense, then we might be talking about the Ravens as a Dynasty. That would have changed many peoples opinion of us.

However that is not the case and i think it can be traced back to missing on Boller in round 1. Ozzie isn't prefect, but you won't find too many GMs that handles the draft with more success then he. The only reason i would put teams like NE, Pitt, and Indy in front of the Ravens is because they had success drafting first round QB(expect Brady). Look at how average Steelers looked both times they won the Super Bowl. That Steelers roster wasn't superior to ours, but they found a way to win late because of their established QB.

Like i said before Ozzie isn't prefect but when it comes to the draft he fits more then he misses. People wanted to give all the credit to Phil, and Shack, and i'm sure many will praise Pat, but through it all Ozzie has still had success without those guys.

I still think he is the best in the Biz and i'm proud to have him on the Ravens side.

[macbrak]

The Ravens have the second number of draft picks still in the nfl. Which by a c- is below average. That's some nice reporting work there Lou.