I know I've ripped Flacco time and time again on here, but also gave credit where credit was due.

He did an outstanding job during crunch time on Saturday and with a little luck (nothing ever wrong with that) the Ravens won.  My question for the stat junkies who have time to do this (if they want) is what's flacco's stats when competing against the top QBs (Favre, Brady, Manning, etc).  He's outplayed Brady and Manning the last 2 times they've squared off in the playoffs.

I questioned Caldwell's candidacy for OC earlier in the week because of the small sample size we've had with him running the show, but I think he's proven his worth and having McKinnie at LT has really helped Flacco as well.  I think that just goes to show how important a strong OL is...

With Flacco, it's all about perspective. When Manning throws a 70yd bomb to tie the game with 30 secs left, it's the greatness of Manning. When Joe does it, the other team blew the coverage.

Ravenflash52 wrote:

With Flacco, it's all about perspective. When Manning throws a 70yd bomb to tie the game with 30 secs left, it's the greatness of Manning. When Joe does it, the other team blew the coverage.

canonian1 wrote: Flacco plays against defenses. Other quarterbacks play against defenses too.

canonian1 wrote: Flacco plays against defenses. Other quarterbacks play against defenses too.

Ravenflash52 wrote:

With Flacco, it's all about perspective. When Manning throws a 70yd bomb to tie the game with 30 secs left, it's the greatness of Manning. When Joe does it, the other team blew the coverage.

canonian1 wrote:

---------------------------------------------
--- daoriginalmookie wrote:

canonian1 wrote: Flacco plays against defenses. Other quarterbacks play against defenses too.

no sh!t sherlock.  this an attempt at being a douche??  it's a little early for that don't you think...

---------------------------------------------

Why so serious?

naca72 wrote:

---------------------------------------------
--- daoriginalmookie wrote:

I questioned Caldwell's candidacy for OC earlier in the week because of the small sample size we've had with him running the show, but I think he's proven his worth


---------------------------------------------

I actually thought, despite the obviously GREAT outcome, that the playcalling, particularly in the 2nd half, was less than spectacular.

I haven't had a chance to watch the game a 2nd (or 3rd, 4th, 5th) time yet, so I'm speaking off the cuff a little bit...but there we're four or five series in a row where we ran Ray Rice right up the gut on seemingly EVERY 1st & 2nd down. No play action off of it, despite Denver stacking up against the run.

I also thought that we got away from using the center of the field against Denver, whereas I felt like we really saw that intermediate area opened up against Indianapolis. Obviously Denver is a much better defense, so part of that is a reflection of what is available real estate, but at the same time, I find it alarming to be in a position to live or die by the bomb.

RchmondRvnsFan wrote:

naca72 wrote:

---------------------------------------------
--- daoriginalmookie wrote:

I questioned Caldwell's candidacy for OC earlier in the week because of the small sample size we've had with him running the show, but I think he's proven his worth


---------------------------------------------

I actually thought, despite the obviously GREAT outcome, that the playcalling, particularly in the 2nd half, was less than spectacular.

I haven't had a chance to watch the game a 2nd (or 3rd, 4th, 5th) time yet, so I'm speaking off the cuff a little bit...but there we're four or five series in a row where we ran Ray Rice right up the gut on seemingly EVERY 1st & 2nd down. No play action off of it, despite Denver stacking up against the run.

I also thought that we got away from using the center of the field against Denver, whereas I felt like we really saw that intermediate area opened up against Indianapolis. Obviously Denver is a much better defense, so part of that is a reflection of what is available real estate, but at the same time, I find it alarming to be in a position to live or die by the bomb.

That's a pretty good point.

naca72 wrote:

---------------------------------------------
--- SpankyJohnson wrote:

It was not a blown coverage.. Both he and Jacoby did'nt think the ball was going to hang that far, but because Jacoby drifted a bit upfield, he totally mistimed his jump. Just a great throw for Flacco.

---------------------------------------------

It was absolutely a blown coverage.

Denver was is a cover-2 deep man shell. Moore's responsibility in that coverage package is to be over the top of the deepest receiver on that half of the field...he failed to play his responsibility.

naca72 wrote:

---------------------------------------------
--- SpankyJohnson wrote:

It was not a blown coverage.. Both he and Jacoby did'nt think the ball was going to hang that far, but because Jacoby drifted a bit upfield, he totally mistimed his jump. Just a great throw for Flacco.

---------------------------------------------

It was absolutely a blown coverage.

Denver was is a cover-2 deep man shell. Moore's responsibility in that coverage package is to be over the top of the deepest receiver on that half of the field...he failed to play his responsibility.

Mobtown wrote:

naca72 wrote:

---------------------------------------------
--- SpankyJohnson wrote:

It was not a blown coverage.. Both he and Jacoby did'nt think the ball was going to hang that far, but because Jacoby drifted a bit upfield, he totally mistimed his jump. Just a great throw for Flacco.

---------------------------------------------

It was absolutely a blown coverage.

Denver was is a cover-2 deep man shell. Moore's responsibility in that coverage package is to be over the top of the deepest receiver on that half of the field...he failed to play his responsibility.

Joe and Jacoby still have to be able to take advantage of the blown coverage.  There are blown coverages all the time, but they do not all lead to game changing touchdowns.