Peter King :It's time to make room for Flacco in upper echelon of QBs - Page 11 - New England Patriots Forums

***TruthSeeker*** · 01-18-2013, 09:46 AM

I just read the article and am less than impressed.

Peter King spends essentially the entire article on a Hail Mary type throw that clearly was horribly mis-defended - and this is his basis for concurring with Flacco's self-proclaimed status as elite?

Double TE · 01-18-2013, 09:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TruthSeeker

Flacco is like 3 Hall of Fame quarterbacks? A QB who:
- doesn't throw well to his left
- is overly dependent on throwing the long ball to move the team downfield
- struggles if his first receiver isn't open (according to London Fletcher on Colin Cowherd yesterday)

Flacco's good but let's not say he's a Hall of Fame type QB. He's been in a system with (up until now) a great defense, a great running back and a very good offensive line and at times has led the team to victory, but he's also (at times) been very dependent on those around him.

He's above average. He has potential to be great which is just that - potential - until he overcomes some of these flaws noted above. Mark Sanchez was touted as a really good QB as well when he had all the ingredients around him. Not so say that Flacco and Sanchez are all that comparable; Flacco is much better. But it's easy to be overhyped when you are on a really good team.

As far as the post that noted that the Ravens didn't do well in the playoffs until Flacco got there, I'd definitely agree. Flacco is an important piece in being a playoff team. But I think he was the player that put them over the top - not the player that defined the team. Flacco is relying on all the other pieces of the team to be there in order to get them as far as he has. That's what an above average QB can do. But he's not taking them to the next level because he's not quite good enough.

DAMMIT...the first part of the sentence is a cut and paste from the Raven's fan. You basically made my point...with a much longer sentence.

robertweathers · 01-18-2013, 10:20 AM

...and there is Phil Sims who blames the offensive system as the reason why Flacco's stats aren't as glamerous as other QBs. Gimme a break.

I'm on record on this board saying that Flacco is an above-average QB. Flacco's issue is consistiency game-in, game-out.

With Flacco, you will get a 60% passer 3600yds, 21TDs, 10 INTs every year.

Is that uper-eschelon? No. But he is better than 2/3rds of the starting QBs out there and has produced big games in the playoffs. He does deserve some credit.

***Deus Irae*** · 01-18-2013, 10:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ivanvamp

Eli has won two Super Bowls. That you would even suggest that Ryan Fitzpatrick is in the same class as him is crazy.

The Super Bowls thing is where you go to break down the all-timers. It's not where you go to decide who's better in general. Dan Marino was certainly a much better QB than Trent Dilfer, despite the fact that it's Dilfer, not Marino, with a Super Bowl victory.

While I don't think Eli's down with the Fitzpatricks of the world, he's not a top level QB, either, and his career demonstrates that. He's an inconsistent, above average QB who can get very hot for stretches at a time, but is just as capable of stinking out the joint.

***Deus Irae*** · 01-18-2013, 10:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dscola

You are right and thats my point though. What other QB gets so much flak as Flacco. Not even Romo. And why, because he thinks he's elite? I think I'm the best Madden player in Baltimore, even thought I know there are players that could and have beat me.

What the hell are you talking about? Flacco doesn't get flak. For the most part, Flacco gets ignored. The notion that he takes more flak than Romo is absurd.

PatsFanSince74 · 01-18-2013, 10:41 AM

I have a problem with the Headline writer, but not with the article. King's not arguing that Flacco is Elite, but that he deserves more respect. King supports his view with facts on Flacco's performance over the last few seasons, including his completions over 20 yards.

I doubt that anybody who has ever laced 'em up and stepped between the lines during an NFL game would speak lightly of the throw he made to win on Saturday, no matter how "poorly defended" it might have been. He still had to put the ball on the money way down field in the air over the arms of a rusher with no time outs if he took a sack and in sub zero conditions. He did outplay TB last January but got lost the game on a couple of breaks at the end; he also led his team to two scores from behind in the fourth quarter to beat us this year.

I have no doubt that Brady will re-establish the "proper order" of the NFL universe on Sunday, but that doesn't mean I have to take anything away from what Joe Flacco has done. Elite? No way. "Upper Echelon?" Not if it includes Brady. Better than we credit him? Yeah, probably.

Dscola · 01-18-2013, 10:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TruthSeeker

Flacco is like 3 Hall of Fame quarterbacks? A QB who:
- doesn't throw well to his left
- is overly dependent on throwing the long ball to move the team downfield
- struggles if his first receiver isn't open (according to London Fletcher on Colin Cowherd yesterday)

Flacco's good but let's not say he's a Hall of Fame type QB. He's been in a system with (up until now) a great defense, a great running back and a very good offensive line and at times has led the team to victory, but he's also (at times) been very dependent on those around him.

He's above average. He has potential to be great which is just that - potential - until he overcomes some of these flaws noted above. Mark Sanchez was touted as a really good QB as well when he had all the ingredients around him. Not so say that Flacco and Sanchez are all that comparable; Flacco is much better. But it's easy to be overhyped when you are on a really good team.

As far as the post that noted that the Ravens didn't do well in the playoffs until Flacco got there, I'd definitely agree. Flacco is an important piece in being a playoff team. But I think he was the player that put them over the top - not the player that defined the team. Flacco is relying on all the other pieces of the team to be there in order to get them as far as he has. That's what an above average QB can do. But he's not taking them to the next level because he's not quite good enough.

So I ask this; Was Bradshaw, Simms, or Aikman able to carry the team without those around him? No one is comparing him to Brady, or Montana.

No matter how bad the defense plays, if the Ravens win they get most of the credit.

Consequently, if they played say, the 49ers who can make any team look bad and he throws a pick, the whole week is spent talking about how he's a bad QB.

He's in a no-win situation. No matter how well he plays it's Ray's team. I can recall when the Pats were defense first and Ty Law was thought to be more responsible for their success than Brady. But hey, who am I kidding. Brady was the best from day one.

Dscola · 01-18-2013, 10:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PatsFanSince74

I have a problem with the Headline writer, but not with the article. King's not arguing that Flacco is Elite, but that he deserves more respect. King supports his view with facts on Flacco's performance over the last few seasons, including his completions over 20 yards.

I doubt that anybody who has ever laced 'em up and stepped between the lines during an NFL game would speak lightly of the throw he made to win on Saturday, no matter how "poorly defended" it might have been. He still had to put the ball on the money way down field in the air over the arms of a rusher with no time outs if he took a sack and in sub zero conditions. He did outplay TB last January but got lost the game on a couple of breaks at the end; he also led his team to two scores from behind in the fourth quarter to beat us this year.

I have no doubt that Brady will re-establish the "proper order" of the NFL universe on Sunday, but that doesn't mean I have to take anything away from what Joe Flacco has done. Elite? No way. "Upper Echelon?" Not if it includes Brady. Better than we credit him? Yeah, probably.

With all of my posts, this is all I'm saying. I believe Upper Echelon to mean top 10 not Rodgers, Brady, Manning.

***Nikolai*** · 01-18-2013, 10:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dscola

Yea this guy.

Rank the QBs in the NFL, and if you're actually using objective measures, your list won't be that much different. But objectivity and taking time to actually do analysis, rather than regurgitate talking points doesn't seem to be your strong suit.

Eh...

Dscola · 01-18-2013, 11:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nikolai

Rank the QBs in the NFL, and if you're actually using objective measures, your list won't be that much different. But objectivity and taking time to actually do analysis, rather than regurgitate talking points doesn't seem to be your strong suit.

Eh...

1st of all, I've been nothing but respectful to you and your fellow board members. I know my place as a visiting fan. So the fact that you are attempting to attack my intelligence, shows more on your lack of it.

Secondly, I ranked my QBs and where I thought Flacco ranked. Because you obviously didn't see it, I''ll post it again.

Brady
Rodgers
Manning
Brees
Rothilisberger
Ryan
Eli
Flacco