JoeyFlex5
Hall of Famer
Must be a cold day in hell
-
Welcome to PurpleFlock! Be sure to sign up here so that you can chat with your fellow Ravens fans.
Signings, Cuts, Trades
- Thread starter RavensMania
- Start date
Old Bay
Veteran
He was one of the Last Chance U guys if I recall correctly. I remember liking him as a developmental guy.
drjohnnyfever
Pro Bowler
I remember the days before Flacco. I also remember the days before Trent Dilfer. I also remember the days before the Ravens. And I remember the days of the Baltimore Colts. I don't remember the days of Johnny Unitas, because that was my parents' team. But despite having a generational player back then, they were still a team and football remains a team sport. I don't ever remember it not being a team sport, in fact.
I've seen more generational talents who have been to the doorstep of championships than I've seen actually taken their team to the promised land in the kind of "dynasty dream" this idea with Lamar seems to be. The only exception is Tom Brady. I don't think we will ever see that again. I'm still left wondering after seeing those generational talents like Warren Moon, Michael Vick, Dan Marino, to name a few, if those teams, the Eagles, the Falcons, the Dolphins might have actually won a SB by trading those guys away or not resigning them in FA and allotting their money differently. It's difficult to speculate on that because they were pre salary cap, except for Vick.
I don't know. I love watching Lamar. He's electrifying and exciting and can, at times, put the OFF on his back. But he's still one player on a team. And I'll continue to argue that until a team gets additional points for pretty runs or beautiful layout catches like fantasy football, it's still a team game where one guy does not a team make.
I mean half the NFL has a franchise QB and about 4-5 others working out if their guy is the guy. As an example though if you offered me Waddle, Hill, and Tua (assuming he was on year 1 of his rookie deal) for Jackson, and 2 first round picks, I would consider that trade. That is essentially what the offer would be though if you hit even an average first round QB (for as little as I think of Tua he is about average for what you get from a first round QB), because you would get 3 1s (one of which goes to a first round QB on a rookie deal) and you save about 40m in cap space which could get you 2 high end players.
It is a risky move to make but at some point someone is going to take the chance that it is better to load up on talent and get an average or better QB in the draft every 4-5 years then pay 15-20% of your cap per year on an elite one.
and how many of those teams that don't have a franchise QB have won the Super Bowl since 2000? It's hard enough to win a SB with an elite QB.
By my count this century we have 4 (and noting that of the Super Bowls held this century 6 were won by Brady). 2000 Ravens, 2002 Buccs, 2015 Broncos, and 2017 Eagles. That is using a VERY low bar for what defines a franchise QB. You can find an Eli Manning with a first round pick.
If we make the sample size reaching the Super Bowl, so that we do not have Brady taking up almost 1/3 of the slots, that number explodes as well and demonstrates that you can make it where you want to go with good QB but do not need elite QB play.
2000 had one of if not the best defense of all time and 2002 was going up against a Raiders team where Gruden knew the coach. 2015 still had a franchise QB and his mind. He may not have been the player he once was but never lost his leadership and I don't count eh Eagles. It never happened. I can't stand the Eagles.....They have an empty trophy case.
That being said, you see how difficult it is and now the offenses are much different as two of the teams you mentioned had elite defenses and were 20 years ago.
drjohnnyfever
Pro Bowler
...we've won two. We're the poster team for that stat.
But to answer your question, and since you explain when it did happen away as mere luck or happenstance because it's not convenient for your argument, there were many in there, like the Pittsburgh-Arizona game that hinged on a spectacular DEF play or two that turned the tide.
What I love about this kind of argument is that it's not winnable and somewhat hypocritical. If I argue that an interception cost us a game because Lamar missed a coverage, where there's no dispute it was on him - for that play, the response is that there were other plays in the game that didn't help us either and that the L can't be pinned on Lamar. OK, so why is he responsible for the wins then. "He played great. He carried the team." OK, but he didn't win the game single-handedly. He played well enough along with his team mates on both sides of the ball to facilitate a victory.
I love watching the guy as much as anyone and hope we can find a way to keep him long term. But it's funny to me how the so called fear of the "Pre-Flacco Era" and our search for a competent QB - not generational talent, just a guy who could not give a game away, fuels this - "We have to sign this guy at all costs" sort of attitude.
I'm reminded of 2007, I think. Steve McNair. Great season. Get home field. Get a Colts team that had a terrible run DEF that year. What happened? That Colt DEF stiffened enough that game to utterly stifle us and left us like WTF! It's a team sport fellas.
I do not think it is really difficult at all. I was stretching the definition of franchise QB to make that work but even stretching it calling 2015 Manning a franchise QB is a bridge to far when Geno Smith is unquestionably a better QB now than Manning was in 2015 and Geno is not a franchise guy. You can find a Eli Manning in the draft fairly consistently in round 1 and I would say you could find someone to do Russel Wilson's job in round 1 easily enough (hand the ball to Marshawn and let the defense win).
So lets reframe the question just to showcase this, of all the teams to make and win the Super Bowl this century, how many of said teams were driven by the QB and how many was the QB a glorified game manager? Once you deal with the effect Brady has on the stats, you see that it is not common for the QB to be elite at the time of the Super Bowl or even the driving force of the team. Basically for most of these teams you just needed a QB playing at the level of an average first round pick and if that is case it might be better to chain together rookie deal QBs, be loaded on first round picks and have the money to sign top tier free agents to supplement said roster.
we are going to have to agree to disagree on this. Can it be done, yes. Is it difficult, absolutely. If it could be done, more teams would have done it the last 20 years or so. Signing players in free agency doesn't always work and if that along with draft picks is your way around it, just look at how many QBs drafted in the first round over the last decade have become franchise QBs.
btw, Eli Manning was one o the most clutch QBs during his times in the league when the Giants were good.
I agree it's a team game, but a franchise QB is the most important piece. If you don't have one, you are behind the eight ball.
At no point during Eli's career would you have ever argued he was top 3, top 5, at best he was borderline top 10 and QB play has gotten FAR better now than it was back then. It is the reason I just laugh when people claim he should be in the HoF.
The reason though, and I think we can agree on this part, that teams will not go for it is that the NFL is VERY risk averse. I believe you have watched even longer than I have so you should remember how teams would until maybe 10-12 years ago just punt from the opposing 40 yard line on 4th and 3 because nobody wanted to make the play that could backfire. If they went for it and it failed they could lose their jobs and be out of the NFL. Similarly GMs tend to also make the safe play because if you take a risk and it fails you are out of a job but if you just play it safe the you can coast for years making very good money.
The Rams are probably the most risk taking organization in the NFL I suspect teams are going to try and mimic them because it has been working. They went against the safe play and would trade 1st round pick and 1st round pick and it has worked for them consistently. They realized what the rest of the NFL did not: it is okay to take the big risks and go for it.
Can't really say the Rams are the most risk taking organization outside of their Personnel department. Sure among the GM ranks they most likely are, but McVay rarely goes on 4th down and he is the Rams coach so he is part of the organization.
BTW, I agree with you, franchises have started changing the way they look at 4th down and how they go for it, for the most part and have brought in analytics as part of the game planning and in game decisions, maybe more than they should, to some extent.
Yes, Eli was top 10 and that is still better than 22 other QBs in the league and I don't think Eli Manning will go to the HOF. All franchise QBs don't go to the HOF, nor should they all go. If he goes to the HOF, Plunkett better go before him and yes as you stated, I've watched football longer than you. I've been watching since the early 70s.
Tank
Hall of Famer
I think he signed last week. Right?
cobrajet
Hall of Famer
I thought he was officially signing today, but I could be wrong.
Corvus Purpura
Practice Squad
I'm really happy to see JPP officially signed. After Houston went down, I feared he'd see the leverage he had and pull a Z Smith, insisting on more money.
Tank
Hall of Famer
You're right.
Jason Pierre-Paul Officially Signs One-Year Deal
Outside linebacker Jason Pierre-Paul, who has 91 ½ career sacks would help boost the Ravens pass rush.
redrum52
Hall of Famer
We finally have a true franchise changer and some are like na... let's just move on if he wants too much money. From 98-06 was dark times at the position. And I don't care what yall say Vinny was a don.
Great signing!
redrum52
Hall of Famer
Hey buddy. Nice win.