San Jose Bills Fan Posted May 26, 2013 Share Posted May 26, 2013 Many if not most people consider Ravens GM Ozzie Newsome to be the best GM in the NFL. I've been very impressed with the moves he's made this offseason to fill holes created by the departure of players such as Ray Lewis, Ed Reed, Dannell Ellerbe, Paul Kruger, Anquan Boldin, Cary Williams, Matt Birk, and Bernard Pollard. Nonetheless it appears that Newsome made a gaff when the team refused to sweeten their offer to QB Joe Flacco in contract extension talks last year. By paying Flacco a much larger contract this year, the team probably lost players that they would have preferred to retain. http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/ravens/2013/05/26/joe-flacco-contract-never-seen-a-dumber-move-joe-linta/2361599/ The impasse could have been averted had the Ravens stepped up over what Linta said was an extra $1 million in the final year said Flacco's agent Joe Linta. The dispute was about "$1 million six years from now, in the base salary non-guaranteed money, and they walked away," Linta said. "It cost them $35 million. So I have no sympathy. None. "I've never in my life seen a dumber move. I guess people can say, 'Well, Joe was dumb, too.' It could have been (dumb), God forbid, if he got hurt. But $1 million to Steve Bisciotti six years from now? That's like 100 bucks for you or me today.'' Linta knows the Ravens will likely be forced to restructure Flacco's deal when it inflates to a $28.55 million salary-cap figure before to the 2016 season. "I'm not apologetic for the fact this is really a three-year deal, there's no way they can afford $29 million a couple of years from now,'' Linta said. "I'm not apologetic. They chose to walk away.'' It looks like the Ravens gambled and lost. However what exactly were they gambling on? That Flacco would have a bad season? That he would get injured? Was $1 million in difference enough to put the deal in the "bad contract" category? Would the contract last year have been out of line for a QB who had led his team to the AFC Championship Game the year before? I guess even the best aren't infallible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Hindsight Posted May 26, 2013 Share Posted May 26, 2013 Well, theres two sides to every story. But if this is really what happened, then the Ravens really messed up Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beerme1 Posted May 26, 2013 Share Posted May 26, 2013 I wonder if their fans are screaming about this like we would? Truly boneheaded play on their part. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted May 26, 2013 Share Posted May 26, 2013 If true, a huge mistake on their part. I could see them missing the playoffs this year, what with all the talent they lost because of what they had to pay Flacco. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pimp 2 Posted May 26, 2013 Share Posted May 26, 2013 Well at least they have something to show for making what is describe as a "mistake"...As a lifelong fan of this organization, I could live with a few down years after a SB ring. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted May 26, 2013 Share Posted May 26, 2013 Well, in Ozzie's defense Joe's 2011 stats were virtually all down from his 2010 numbers. 2 fewer wins, Completion percentage (attempts were up), net-net on yards, 5 fewer TDs, TD % 3.7 down from 5.1, 2 more INTs, yards per attempt 6.7 down from 7.4, QB Rating 80.9 down from 93.6, net yards per attempt - down, adjusted net yards per attempt - down. Oz probably thought the gamble worth it. If he continued to slide, they'd have leverage to sign him for less. It doesn't seem like a bad bet. But the $1m differential sure makes it seem so now. Then Flacco runs the gauntlet in a charmed 2012 season - but his numbers aren't that much better than 2011, and not as good for the most part as 2010. What does pop out are the 4 fourth quarter comebacks in 2012 - he had 2 in 2010 and 2 in 2011. That team peaked at the right time. Time now to reload and trust in what got them there twice before - the Draft. All in all, it's not a bad cycle to be in - if you grab the brass ring. We got close four times, and once the train ran out of gas, we got nadda for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted May 26, 2013 Share Posted May 26, 2013 Well, theres two sides to every story. But if this is really what happened, then the Ravens really messed up Frankly, flacco was just as ridiculous to risk the injury over 1m in non-guaranteed dollars 6 years away in a season there would be a good chance he'd already have an extension or be cut before. Seems like 2 sides far too prideful to give the other another inch in the name of common sense. Flacco came out ahead but it could've easily gone the other way - it wasn't that long before the ring that they were in a slide and fired their OC and their impending doom was the major talking point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JESSEFEFFER Posted May 26, 2013 Share Posted May 26, 2013 The way I remember it, Boldin had as much to do with their late season run as did Flacco. Once a super Bowl winning QB gets their big payday the chances of their team winning another have to go down. Maybe way down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
San Jose Bills Fan Posted May 26, 2013 Author Share Posted May 26, 2013 Well, in Ozzie's defense Joe's 2011 stats were virtually all down from his 2010 numbers. 2 fewer wins, Completion percentage (attempts were up), net-net on yards, 5 fewer TDs, TD % 3.7 down from 5.1, 2 more INTs, yards per attempt 6.7 down from 7.4, QB Rating 80.9 down from 93.6, net yards per attempt - down, adjusted net yards per attempt - down. Oz probably thought the gamble worth it. If he continued to slide, they'd have leverage to sign him for less. It doesn't seem like a bad bet. But the $1m differential sure makes it seem so now. Then Flacco runs the gauntlet in a charmed 2012 season - but his numbers aren't that much better than 2011, and not as good for the most part as 2010. What does pop out are the 4 fourth quarter comebacks in 2012 - he had 2 in 2010 and 2 in 2011. That team peaked at the right time. Time now to reload and trust in what got them there twice before - the Draft. All in all, it's not a bad cycle to be in - if you grab the brass ring. We got close four times, and once the train ran out of gas, we got nadda for it. The stats tell one story but there are other quantitative and qualitative measures which argue that Flacco was lowballed by Baltimore. While I admit that football is a team sport, it's very hard for a team to advance without good QB play. Flacco has started every game since he was drafted in 2008, a total of 80 regular season games and counting (64 before 2012). He led them to the playoffs each year since he was drafted and was 5-4 in the playoffs before last year's 4-0 run to the championship. In both the 2010 and 2011 playoffs, Flacco had a passer rating above 90 and combined for 7 TDs to 2 ints so he was building a reputation for excellence in the postseason. If Lee Evans hadn't dropped that pass, the Ravens would have gone to the 2012 Super Bowl. Of course this year he had 11 TDs and zero ints in the postseason. It's not a black and white issue but there's a good argument to be made that the Ravens mishandled the Flacco negotiations. The way I remember it, Boldin had as much to do with their late season run as did Flacco. Once a super Bowl winning QB gets their big payday the chances of their team winning another have to go down. Maybe way down. Flacco threw a lot of balls where only Boldin could make the catch. While Boldin was outstanding in extending in some situations, Flacco was equally outstanding in his ball placement. Frankly, flacco was just as ridiculous to risk the injury over 1m in non-guaranteed dollars 6 years away in a season there would be a good chance he'd already have an extension or be cut before. Flacco came out ahead but it could've easily gone the other way - it wasn't that long before the ring that they were in a slide and fired their OC and their impending doom was the major talking point. While this is true, what can you say about an athlete who has a conviction about his abilities and his value and believes in himself enough to play for his next contract? Unlike a lot of players in similar situations, Flacco bet on himself and won (while the Ravens were betting on him to not play as well as he did). You gotta love that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leelee Phoenix Posted May 26, 2013 Share Posted May 26, 2013 Nice posturing by the agent. Most likely, the Ravens had a limit set and would rather wait a year than break the bank. Fully understandable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brucethomas34 Posted May 26, 2013 Share Posted May 26, 2013 Many if not most people consider Ravens GM Ozzie Newsome to be the best GM in the NFL. I've been very impressed with the moves he's made this offseason to fill holes created by the departure of players such as Ray Lewis, Ed Reed, Dannell Ellerbe, Paul Kruger, Anquan Boldin, Cary Williams, Matt Birk, and Bernard Pollard. Nonetheless it appears that Newsome made a gaff when the team refused to sweeten their offer to QB Joe Flacco in contract extension talks last year. By paying Flacco a much larger contract this year, the team probably lost players that they would have preferred to retain. http://www.usatoday....-linta/2361599/ The impasse could have been averted had the Ravens stepped up over what Linta said was an extra $1 million in the final year said Flacco's agent Joe Linta. The dispute was about "$1 million six years from now, in the base salary non-guaranteed money, and they walked away," Linta said. "It cost them $35 million. So I have no sympathy. None. "I've never in my life seen a dumber move. I guess people can say, 'Well, Joe was dumb, too.' It could have been (dumb), God forbid, if he got hurt. But $1 million to Steve Bisciotti six years from now? That's like 100 bucks for you or me today.'' Linta knows the Ravens will likely be forced to restructure Flacco's deal when it inflates to a $28.55 million salary-cap figure before to the 2016 season. "I'm not apologetic for the fact this is really a three-year deal, there's no way they can afford $29 million a couple of years from now,'' Linta said. "I'm not apologetic. They chose to walk away.'' It looks like the Ravens gambled and lost. However what exactly were they gambling on? That Flacco would have a bad season? That he would get injured? Was $1 million in difference enough to put the deal in the "bad contract" category? Would the contract last year have been out of line for a QB who had led his team to the AFC Championship Game the year before? I guess even the best aren't infallible. Hindsight is 20/20...buddy did the exact opposite and look where that got us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
San Jose Bills Fan Posted May 26, 2013 Author Share Posted May 26, 2013 Hindsight is 20/20...buddy did the exact opposite and look where that got us. To equate Flacco's track record with Fitzy's is ridiculous. Flacco proved his value. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malazan Posted May 26, 2013 Share Posted May 26, 2013 (edited) Flacco made a crazy gamble and it turned out in his favor. He doesn't turn in an amazing post season and his deal isn't close to what it is now. Newsome made a wise move. The QB is the one player you can afford to pay and inflated price to if you lose the gamble. Newsome lost the gamble and won a superbowl. Edited May 26, 2013 by jeremy2020 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miyagi-Do Karate Posted May 26, 2013 Share Posted May 26, 2013 Flacco made a crazy gamble and it turned out in his favor. He doesn't turn in an amazing post season and his deal isn't close to what it is now. Newsome made a wise move. The QB is the one player you can afford to pay and inflated price to if you lose the gamble. Newsome lost the gamble and won a superbowl. +1 that's the one bet newsome was glad to lose. I don't even consider flacco to be in the top 10 of QB's in the league, and i pretty sure newsome didnt think so either. flacco forced himself up there $$ wise with that Super Bowl run. Odds are he will never be there again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
QCity Posted May 27, 2013 Share Posted May 27, 2013 I thought this thread was going to be about Lee Evans Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mango Posted May 27, 2013 Share Posted May 27, 2013 Flacco made a crazy gamble and it turned out in his favor. He doesn't turn in an amazing post season and his deal isn't close to what it is now. Newsome made a wise move. The QB is the one player you can afford to pay and inflated price to if you lose the gamble. Newsome lost the gamble and won a superbowl. About to post something similar. If the ravens lost the Super Bowl or don't make it, he does not get anywhere near that contract...ie the Ray Lewis effect. You could make the same arguement about AFC championship game last year with Lee Evans. Good players win the games that matter. This past Super Bowl was a battle of the best defense and the best defensive players emotion, and Ray Lewis won. In a different game against a different balanced team things may be different. All in all Ozzie made the right decision and so did Flacco. Good for the Ravens in if ding their guy, and good for Flacco for really grabbing ahold of his team. I will say if he doesn't meet the standard expect a restructure soon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted May 27, 2013 Share Posted May 27, 2013 (edited) It looks like the Ravens gambled and lost. However what exactly were they gambling on? That Flacco would have a bad season? That he would get injured? Was $1 million in difference enough to put the deal in the "bad contract" category? Would the contract last year have been out of line for a QB who had led his team to the AFC Championship Game the year before? I guess even the best aren't infallible. Yes he gambled and lost, but in a way I understand this move, however ill advised. Stats and superbowl wins notwithstanding, it's hard for me to consider Flacco a great quarterback. I am probably not correct in this assessment, it's just my gut feeling. In my decades of watching football, I have seen a slew of QBs who scared me more than Flacco. How 'bout you? Ozzie is old school, and I guess that he was thinking the same thing.Then, Flacco look the team to a SB victory, and now a team virtually has to cough up the big bucks. Period. Again, we have entered a new era. If Kap, RG111, Luck, or even a small Wilson were UFAs today, they would all come close to, or even surpass 20 million dollar per season contracts. This was the effect of the rule changes and new CBA. In all, I agree that Ozzie made a mistake this time. He missed the boat by a year or so. So yes, even the greats make mistakes. Edited May 27, 2013 by Bill from NYC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tombstone56 Posted May 27, 2013 Share Posted May 27, 2013 SIMILIAR SITUATION OCCURRRED HERE TOO, when ted washingtons contract was up.the going rate was around18-19 mill, but when synder bought skins ,he went out and drastically overpaid for dana stubblefield and big daddy wilkerson to the tune of 27 million the bills got stuck by it, winding up in the same pay range for ted.. not many teams are proactive contractually and it does bite them sometimes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnC Posted May 27, 2013 Share Posted May 27, 2013 (edited) Yes he gambled and lost, but in a way I understand this move, however ill advised. Stats and superbowl wins notwithstanding, it's hard for me to consider Flacco a great quarterback. I am probably not correct in this assessment, it's just my gut feeling. In my decades of watching football, I have seen a slew of QBs who scared me more than Flacco. How 'bout you? Ozzie is old school, and I guess that he was thinking the same thing.Then, Flacco look the team to a SB victory, and now a team virtually has to cough up the big bucks. Period. Again, we have entered a new era. If Kap, RG111, Luck, or even a small Wilson were UFAs today, they would all come close to, or even surpass 20 million dollar per season contracts. This was the effect of the rule changes and new CBA. In all, I agree that Ozzie made a mistake this time. He missed the boat by a year or so. So yes, even the greats make mistakes. Did Ozzie miscalculate in his contract dealings with Flacco? In hindsight you can say yes. But the bottom line is that after the SB Newsome got Flacco signed in quick order. In my view Flacco is not a top tier qb; he is more of a second tier caliber of qb. But there is more to Flacco's game than that is revealed by his stats. He has demonstrated over the past few years that he is a clutch qb who is better than his stats. Ozzie Newsome is one of the best, if not the best, GM's in the game. This offseason he shed and lost some high priced players. He rebounded with a sterling draft class and a cadre of smart free agent pickups that included the acquisition of Dumervil. The bottom line is that his roster got younger and cheaper which allowed him to offset the expensive Flacco contract. All organizations have to deal with the challenge of figuring out the cap puzzle for their respective teams. Good teams with a lot of good players have a more difficult task of apportioning their cap amount to fit their cap allotment. Newsome is one of the smartest at figuring out the best approach to take with this complex issue of the relationship between talent and cost. There are some stalworth Nix supporters on this board. When you compare Buddy to Ozzie you come away very humbled and understand the stark difference between a mediocre and backwater operation to a sterling and forward thinking operation. Edited May 27, 2013 by JohnC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ganesh Posted May 27, 2013 Share Posted May 27, 2013 Well, theres two sides to every story. But if this is really what happened, then the Ravens really messed up I don't know if they really messed up. May be the Ravens are happy that it is a 3-year deal with Flacco and that they are not going to be stuck with him if he has 3 average seasons. Time will tell. Also, the Agent could be trumpeting this out just to promote himself to his potential future clients. SIMILIAR SITUATION OCCURRRED HERE TOO, when ted washingtons contract was up.the going rate was around18-19 mill, but when synder bought skins ,he went out and drastically overpaid for dana stubblefield and big daddy wilkerson to the tune of 27 million the bills got stuck by it, winding up in the same pay range for ted.. not many teams are proactive contractually and it does bite them sometimes. And by being proactive too, it can come back to bite the team badly....Sad exhibits are Dick Jauron and Ryan Fitzpatrick!!! About to post something similar. If the ravens lost the Super Bowl or don't make it, he does not get anywhere near that contract...ie the Ray Lewis effect. You could make the same arguement about AFC championship game last year with Lee Evans. Good players win the games that matter. This past Super Bowl was a battle of the best defense and the best defensive players emotion, and Ray Lewis won. In a different game against a different balanced team things may be different. All in all Ozzie made the right decision and so did Flacco. Good for the Ravens in if ding their guy, and good for Flacco for really grabbing ahold of his team. I will say if he doesn't meet the standard expect a restructure soon Flacco had a dream post-season....Just give credit to where it is due. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts