legacyme3 : I agree with you that youth is not a problem. But with who is out there, even still in College right now, who the heck would suggest? Tim Tebow? I love the guy and all, great athlete, but the Ravens are far from his cup of tea. Matthew Stafford and that draft class all have their own thing going. I think Joe Flacco is fine. He is great with the team, there are no issues with Team Chemistry. But who would you suggest?

GetGot18 :

The problem is they can't GET anyone better right now. That's not because Flacco is good, but rather that the available players aren't good.

The best option for them is to hold onto Flacco, but it won't win them any championships. Ravens fans will just have to accept being a very good team, but not a championship team.

I will say, that they did good on NOT getting involved in the Peyton Manning discussion.

This years draft class was pretty weak for QBs outside of RG3 and Luck, and RG3 wouldn't be a great pick for the Ravens I feel.

Long story short, there's nothing the Ravens can or should do. Being a playoff team is good enough for now.

legacyme3 : The problem with the Ravens seems to be that they are hot and cold--They play some games like they're on fire, and some like they're half asleep. Flacco is part of that, but I think it comes down to coaching actually. The coaches let the good games and big wins get to the players' heads. Also, if you had paid attention, there were two reasons NOT the QB's fault that they lost the AFC Championship game: one, the OPEN WIDE RECEIVER in the end-zone on the last play DROPPED THE PERFECT PASS (I.E. NOT Flacco's fault, he did what he had to do.) Then, the kicker missed the chip-shot ~30 yard field goal. I think GetGot18 knows exactly what he's talking about here, it makes sense to me. Sometimes, although fans can be biased, the ones who are honest with themselves can see the problems other people don't see because they watch pretty much all the games.

GetGot18 : Are there any other teams you are following? What are your thoughts on the Bengals? They're a young team too, and could threaten in a year or two. I think they lost a few key Free Agents, but they kept a lot of the guys that mattered and made (presumably) solid picks with they're two choices so far. Thoughts?

WarpStarFerret :

I'm not looking at JUST last year. I'm looking at the past two or three years.

Yes, the AFC championship game is not the best example of the case I'm trying to make. But you are kidding yourself if you go as far as putting Flacco in the very good QB debate. In my mind he'd be in the third tier of QBs, which I call, the slightly above average brigade.

Again, I'm not looking at the AFC Championship game. Sometimes you lose those games.

I do however agree on the point of the coaches being at least part of the problem. A good coach can't "win" games, but a bad coach can "lose" games. As with all sports, the players play the game. The managers/coaches are just there to assist them with playing, and make decisions. A good coach will make the right decision, which goes a long way, but a bad coach has more negative effect than a good coach does positive effect.

I'm inclined to think GetGot is showing homerism for the Ravens myself, but that's only because of past discussions with him.

I personally think 2012 could be Flacco's last in Baltimore, if he doesn't get the Ravens to the Super Bowl this year. It may sound silly now, but the team is too talented to not make the Super Bowl. And if a team makes the playoffs, the coaches aren't going to be blamed.

legacyme3 : I'll agree with most of that last post. The Ravens ARE talented--the only reason heads aren't rolling already is because they are winning a playoff game or two each year, which is good. That being said, they need to win now, as opposed to later, and drafting a QB takes 2-3 years to get anywhere. That's why they've kept Flacco so far, he's like 3-4 years pro (And he IS getting better gradually, just not as fast as some would like. I feel he might be elite someday, maybe in 2-3 more years when he's like 6 years pro or so, but I'll agree he certainly isn't elite now.) Also, some of their leaders on defense are getting old (Ray Lewis, Ed Reed) and they need to draft heirs apparent for those positions. One of the top linebackers fell, so I think they should grab him, personally. After that, and looking at a few other defensive positions for depth now and starters later and maybe one wideout, I could see them getting a project QB.

A developmental QB isn't out of the question now, and getting one might light a little fire under Flacco. I'll agree that that idea might be a fairly good one if you're suggesting it; it gives Flacco 1-2 years to prove himself once and for all, and if he doesn't then they have the new guy all ready to play. It takes time but it can be effective--(See Aaron Rodgers). Other than that though, I think they pretty much have to go BPA with most of their picks--They have no real needs per se. :/

WarpStarFerret :

That's what I am suggesting, to an extent. Who is the Ravens backup? They need somebody in the case Flacco does leave or gets injured. A developmental QB at this point would NOT be a bad idea.

I think the Ravens chance of winning a Super Bowl is getting lower every year at this stage as well. Like you said, Lewis and Reed are getting older. Once they get too old to effectively play, the current window for winning will probably be shut. Hell, the window may already be closed if the Ravens can't adjust to the improving league.

It takes time, but the results are generally worth the effort, although I will argue I don't ever see Flacco as elite. I think he has a chance to become a very good QB, one of the better NOT in the elite catagory, but he's not really close to that yet. He needs to take that next step, it feels his development is pretty much over, even though he DOES have a little more potential in him.

WarpStarFerret : You want my thought on the Bengals? Umm, well, they are a decent team every 5 years or so. I mean, come on, did you see what they did to us and the Steelers about 5 or 6 years ago? They demolished us. Yeah, they are a young team. I just think they are just a little bit better than the Browns, and a little bit more consistent. Who and what positions have the drafted so far?

As for the teams I follow... none really. I like the Steelers, since that is my Dad's team. I will root for them if they are playing a team I hate, if the Ravens are no longer in the hunt for a championship or play off spot, or whatever. But, if it will effect the Ravens at all. Then screw the Steelers.
I also follow the Seahawks, but nearly as much as I should. Seattle Seahawks are actually my hometown team, but I did not start paying attention to football until 2000, a month or two after the Ravens beat the Giants in Super Bowl 35, with a score of 34-7.

legacyme3 : we have won a Super Bowl before, and we have come close to making it a few other times.
Warp, thanks for seeing where I am coming from. I honestly think that Flacco is our guy. What we are gonna do to get to the Super Bowl, I do not know. Maybe actually be more hot than cold. We are a hype team. If we could keep that hype ALL YEAR LONG, then we would be almost, if not as much or more, fearful as the Steel Curtain era Steelers.

Speaking of which... what did they draft first round?

GetGot18 :

You have, but have you won a Super Bowl with Flacco?

When you won the Super Bowl all those years ago, you had a much more well rounded team. As the current team is, it CAN win a Super Bowl, but they are far from favorites to win. Technically, any team that made the playoffs last year could win the Super Bowl, as could about any team if you want to be literal about it.

The Ravens are missing something, and I think that something is a very good QB. I can see the argument FOR him, but the argument against him makes more sense in this situation. I dunno why you think he is your guy, but I don't see the Ravens winning one with Flacco at the helm as the QB. If they win a Super Bowl, they will do it with defense and ground action. Flacco will for all intents and purposes, be the 3rd or 4th weapon on a championship team, but never the star of it.

legacyme3 : You are right. Flacco is not our star. He is our 3 or 4 star guy. We have Reed, Nagata, Lewis, Oher, Rice, and a few others. Flacco is not the team. I mentioned it before: he is still young, and he knows he still needs a bit more help. I just personally believe that he is out guy, that's all, just like you think Romo is the man for the QB job in Dallas.

GetGot18 :

Now we can actually start discussion on why the Ravens won't win with Flacco.

Now that you've noticed he isn't the star, and only the third or fourth best guy on that team, we can look more in depth.

With a team like the Ravens, who's biggest stars are on defense, and purely ground based guys, you need to have that guy who can throw it deep and teams fear.

If I'm a defender in the NFL, I fear Peyton Manning. I fear Eli Manning, hell, maybe I fear Big Ben. Aaron Rodgers? Those are guys they fear. You can defend all you want against them, and they will still make the tough plays. On the list of players I don't fear? Joe Flacco. I fear the run game more. So naturally they gear up to defend against the run game right?

When they defend against the run game is the best time for the Ravens to take advantage and throw the pass.

Even when they are defending against the run, Flacco doesn't make them pay for it. He doesn't make them fear him. He may get off passes, but that doesn't make him a good QB. Any QB in the NFL can get a pass off if they aren't defending against the pass.

I don't really think Romo is the guy in Dallas, I think he can be the guy if they give him protection, but he isn't the guy. No matter who you throw out there, a poor OL will always lead to disaster when it comes to your QB. There is no guy in Dallas. That's why we haven't won anything in a while. If they get some line help though, watch out, the team's many weapons will become much more apparent.

legacyme3 : Well, every team has their own Style. The teams you mentioned are passing teams, except for the Steelers, who are a mix, or used to be Running. The Ravens are more of a running team. And people may not fear flacco... But he sure as hell can get the job done when it is needed...

GetGot18 :

I think you are missing my point.

The teams that win Super Bowls are generally multi-talented teams. Even if they don't have a terrific running or passing game, they are close enough to each other that teams are kept off balance. When facing the Ravens teams aren't off balance.

I think it's kind of ironic. I think it's possible that the team's running game is also hurting them. Because it outclasses the passing game on the team so much that they know what to expect.

legacyme3 : What about when the Packers won? They were mainly a passing team. No running game. And they won the super bowl. So there is a flaw in your point, but I still see where you are coming from. And the running game outcasts the passing game a little bit, sure. But there is no team that is 100% balanced.

GetGot18 :

Are you kidding?

Ryan Grant isn't a solid running back?

What are you smoking? Ryan Grant was a huge part of that team. Sure he wasn't Aaron Rodgers- level of production as a running back, but he kept teams off-balance. Your argument immedietly makes no sense.

legacyme3 : All I am saying is that the Packers pass before anything else. They run on 3rd and short, and situations like that. The Ravens are a run first, pass later kind of team. That is my argument. That every team has their own ways. Every team is going to have weak points. I do not think that Flacco is the weak point. He may or may not be fully evolved, but he still getting the job done for the time being.

GetGot18 :

While I'll concede the Packers may be a pass first team, they don't have a stagnant running game. When it comes to offensive play, passing is much easier to get away with. If you pass the ball, you have several targets, and the opponents have to scramble back to stop a pass. Whereas on a running play, all it takes is the defense crowding the line to stop you. That's why the Ravens and Packers are not fair to compare. When is the last time a run first team won the Super Bowl?

Every team that has won the Super Bowl in the past however many years has always had an electric passing game as well as a decent running game. The Ravens will never win if their QB cannot force the team to play back on them.

Go cam newton.

legacyme3 : I hear where you are coming from. And I am sure there might be a few run first teams to have done so, but none lately right off the top of my head. I personally think we have the abilities to win a Super Bowl. We got the skills to get a running game going, and a decent enough passing game, even if it may not be much (I think it is alright, but that is just my opinion), we have what we need to get the job done. Our problem is executing it.

GetGot18 :
legacyme3 :

Just for clarity, I think this last superbowl is the only superbowl in the past 6-8 years where the winning team had 100+ yards rushing, and the Giants just barely breached that amount. Just for the record.

Also, GetGot18, I think the Ravens traded all of the way out of the first round. *Checks* Yep, they traded down into the top of the 2nd round with the Vikings for a bonus round 4 pick. Considering that the Rams will probably grab the top wideout regardless of who he is and the Colts will probably grab Coby Fleener, and that the Browns forfeited their 3rd pick, I think the Ravens probably will get whoever they were targeting anyways, so bonus pick for them. I think they'll either get the top center in the draft or grab that top remaining linebacker guy, the one that fell... Forgot his name, but he was projected first round right before the draft.

WarpStarFerret : We do not need a center. We need a Linebacker to replace Ray Lewis, we need a Safety to replace Ed Reed, and we need a darn Kicker, cause Cundiff sucks like it is a Popsicle on a hot summer day in the Arizona desert.