• How Much Is Joe Flacco Worth

    As we all know, Super Bowl MVP Joe Flacco will be a free agent this year. We also know that he isn't going anywhere. The NFL system is designed to keep franchise quarterbacks with their team as long as the team wants them and is willing to pay. If they can't work out a long term deal before he hits the open market, and I will be surprised if they can, the Ravens will undoubtedly slap the franchise tag on him. The question is, what's he worth? How much would you pay for Joe Flacco?

    Joe Flacco had a tremendous post-season. 11 TDs - 0 INTs, 117.2 rating, only 6 sacks in 4 games. But statistically, he's never been among the elite quarterbacks during his 5-year career. A career rating of 86.3, he's only had 1 season above 90 (93.6 in '10). H's never thrown for more than 25 TDs, only throwing 22 this year. He doesn't throw a lot of INTs, 10 to 12 every year. He moves pretty well, but does take quite a few sacks. Are the lack of eye-popping numbers a sign that he's just an average QB or is it because he plays in a system that doesn't require the QB to carry the team? Was his post-season a sign that's he turned the corner, or just an anomaly?

    Rumor has it, Flacco wants to be paid like the big boys, $20+ million a year for 5-7 years. Can the Ravens make that kind of investment in a guy that has never put together a full Pro Bowl caliber season? Can they risk a hold out if they franchise him, after seeing how slowly Drew Brees started this year? How much would you pay Joe Flacco?

    Comments 7 Comments
    1. Rich Gapinski's Avatar
      I would have tried to pay him $14 Million a season if the playoffs never happened. That is what I feel his rate should be.

      Unfortunately, the Ravens will not get this luxury. The going rate for a quarterback that has been to or can get you to a Super Bowl is in the $16-20 Million range and the franchise tag, though not official until April?, is probably going to be right in the $20 Million range. Of course, with the possibility of signing names like Reed and Boldin to be a pipe dream without cuts and creative financing, the Ravens would do themselves a favor by signing Joe long term in a way that is kindest to the overall books.

      The question comes down to the same question that should come up every time a coach is rumored to be fired: Well, who ya gonna get? In this case, with a weak FA class and a weaker draft class, the Ravens are backed into a corner where their choices are pretty obvious and limited.

      In short, I think the Ravens will be paying $20 Million for a guy in the $14 Million range.
    1. NickMykita's Avatar
      Prior to the Super Bowl, he (or his agent) said he wanted "Drew Brees" money. Had he lost the Super Bowl, I don't think I would give it to him. But considering he won, and looked spectacular in the process, he's more than earned it. The unfortunate drawback is that they're probably going to have to dump several people to make room for that new contract.
    1. wxwax's Avatar
      I've really been hooked by this 5th year thing for QB's. I don't think Flacco is a fluke, a playoff wonder. If they can keep the talent around him, he'll be good for years. So I accept that he's worth big money.
    1. KabaModernFan's Avatar
      I'm just hoping that the team doesn't have Elvis Grbac's number still lying around somewhere.
    1. hobbes27's Avatar
      Flacco doesn't feel like a $20 million/year QB, but I guess part of that is due to the fact that the guy is kinda dull and he doesn't make the eye popping plays other QBs tend to make. Although he made some great throws in the superbowl.
    1. darvon's Avatar
      $16 Million a year and then $1M for each playoff win.
    1. traged's Avatar
      $20 million/year is definitely waaaay too much for him!
  • Recent Forum Posts

    Illegal bat

    Matt Kocsan On Tue, 06 Oct 2015 14:02:30 -0500



    We can't stop here. This is bat country. Go to last post

    Illegal bat

    Matt Kocsan On Tue, 06 Oct 2015 13:37:01 -0500

    By the way:

    (3a) Unless an illegal bat by the offense results in a loss of down, which on a fourth down play would mean a turnover (plus the ball placed either at the spot of the foul or if it... Go to last post

    Illegal bat

    Matt Kocsan On Tue, 06 Oct 2015 13:27:52 -0500

    I more or less agree with all of this, but I'd like to expand on a couple of points here:

    (1) Wright definitely did it on purpose. Unless he's the dumbest man alive or has a broken left hand, no... Go to last post

    Illegal bat

    Patrick Sullivan On Tue, 06 Oct 2015 11:46:54 -0500

    You cannot assume this is a certainty. If a football was round, you could, but that ball could have bounced in any direction when it next hit the turf. Go to last post

    Illegal bat

    hobbes27 On Tue, 06 Oct 2015 11:30:43 -0500

    You are right that on the play, it looks like there wasn't a Lion around. But that doesn't mean there was a zero percent chance that a Lion could not have recovered it. And I am always... Go to last post

    Illegal bat

    Amy On Tue, 06 Oct 2015 10:45:36 -0500

    I don't blame the officials for this at all.

    Let's not forget that not 1, not 2, not 3, but 6 different NFL head coaches gave the competition commitee proposals to allow expanded replay for... Go to last post

    Illegal bat

    hobbes27 On Tue, 06 Oct 2015 10:43:24 -0500

    Yeah, exactly. I say the same thing to whiny Cowboy fans who still complain about the Dez Bryant no catch. Go to last post


    Amy On Tue, 06 Oct 2015 10:39:26 -0500

    Week 4 Update:

    John Hussey: 88 (78 accepted, 6 declined, 4 offsetting)
    John Parry: 80 (67 accepted, 11 declined, 2 offsetting)
    Jerome Boger: 71 (59... Go to last post

    Illegal bat

    Patrick Sullivan On Tue, 06 Oct 2015 05:50:52 -0500

    Dear Detroit Lions -

    Score. More. Points.

    That way, this conversation is moot.


    One very frustrated fan Go to last post

    Illegal bat

    Evan Vracar On Tue, 06 Oct 2015 04:19:08 -0500

    So here's where I come down on this, and I may be completely foolish for thinking so.

    I think this is a rule that can be open to interpretation. Obviously, if a referee doesn't deem that there was... Go to last post