Free Trial Ad
Why Subscribe?
  • Player/Prospect News
  • Exclusive Insider Info
  • Members-Only Forums
  • Exclusive Videos
  • Subscribe Now!
InboxChat RoomChat Room (0 fans in chatroom)
Reply to TopicPost New Topic
  Page of 3  Next >

Boldin back in town - well adjusted, but still a bit miffed?

Posted: 8/12/2014 10:21 AM

Boldin back in town - well adjusted, but still a bit miffed? 


http://www.baltimoreravens.com/videos/videos/Press er_Boldin_Reflects_On_Trade_Being_Back/cbd61d65-36 35-41bc-83aa-bd4cf3d4fa79

While he's with a good team in the 9ers, and while he says he understand the business side of things . . . watching this video I can't help but think Q still wishes he was here, and is still a bit miffed at management.

In the end, i think things have worked out for both teams, and both Q and the Ravens, but I have to think both sides have some regrets.  Overall, I think the Ravens have shown that they missed Boldin given the Steve Smith acquisition.

Boldin seems to have landed with a perrenial contender that can maximize his talents, but I think would have been a good fit in the Baltimore community if the sides had figured out a contract extension.

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 8/12/2014 10:30 AM

Re: Boldin back in town - well adjusted, but still a bit miffed? 


It was a bad choice and they regret it.  Taking the family to his old neighborhood for a picnic was cool to hear.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 8/12/2014 11:02 AM

Re: Boldin back in town - well adjusted, but still a bit miffed? 



sczepp wrote: It was a bad choice and they regret it.  
Yup.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SBsteelerfan wrote:
 uggh no, im not dense.  according to this dui was for marijuana not alcohol.  so no, he wouldnt have been arrested if weed were legal.


Reply | Quote

Posted: 8/12/2014 11:21 AM

Re: Boldin back in town - well adjusted, but still a bit miffed? 


Well, I think it helped season Marlon Brown, and we got Steve Smith for less than the price of Boldin.  And he might honestly be better, just being honest.

For the 2013 season, it hurt us.  But given the mess our o-line became, etc it wasn't likely we were going to make any noise in the playoffs anyway.

We regret it for what it did in 2013, but i'm not sure we regret it for the long run of the franchise.

I think it worked out well for Boldin overall, but it seems like a part of his heart is in Baltimore.

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 8/12/2014 12:10 PM

Re: Boldin back in town - well adjusted, but still a bit miffed? 


One of Ozzie's biggest blunders. The spin stops here.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 8/12/2014 12:41 PM

Re: Boldin back in town - well adjusted, but still a bit miffed? 


Yeah it's right up there with drafting Boller as far as all time bad moves.

Especially considering the 2012 playoffs were the first time that actually started using Boldin correctly in the offense.


On the brightside it did create an opportunity for Marlon Brown who I think it primed for a big year
...and don't call me Shirley

Last edited 8/12/2014 12:56 PM by DiscoJamal

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 8/12/2014 1:34 PM

Re: Boldin back in town - well adjusted, but still a bit miffed? 



sczepp wrote: It was a bad choice and they regret it.  Taking the family to his old neighborhood for a picnic was cool to hear.
It wasn't a bad choice at the time. Fans act like there was no plan in place. Pitta was going to fill the Boldin role. Unfortunately he suffered a significant injury.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 8/12/2014 1:43 PM

Re: Boldin back in town - well adjusted, but still a bit miffed? 



TTroj52 wrote:
sczepp wrote: It was a bad choice and they regret it.  Taking the family to his old neighborhood for a picnic was cool to hear.
It wasn't a bad choice at the time. Fans act like there was no plan in place. Pitta was going to fill the Boldin role. Unfortunately he suffered a significant injury.


Also, the o-line got injured and **** the bed, which killed the offense in general.

I know many of us (myself included) wanted to crucify Castillo, but the fact is, the cupboard was bare (Yanda, dinged, KO was OUT, Gradowski not ready, McKinnie was Mckinnie, etc)

I'm not sure Boldin helps us do more than make the playoffs, but thats it.

Our long run configuration now is superior, IMO.

Also - the defensive moves we made with the Boldin money didn't work, which added insult to injury.

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 8/12/2014 2:03 PM

Re: Boldin back in town - well adjusted, but still a bit miffed? 


Boldin was asked to take a pay cut to keep the team intact. He said no. Ozzie traded him to strengthen our weaknesses. Boldin was as much to blame for leaving Baltimore as Newsome.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 8/12/2014 2:09 PM

Re: Boldin back in town - well adjusted, but still a bit miffed? 



ClericBlackDave wrote:
TTroj52 wrote:
sczepp wrote: It was a bad choice and they regret it.  Taking the family to his old neighborhood for a picnic was cool to hear.
It wasn't a bad choice at the time. Fans act like there was no plan in place. Pitta was going to fill the Boldin role. Unfortunately he suffered a significant injury.


Also, the o-line got injured and **** the bed, which killed the offense in general.

I know many of us (myself included) wanted to crucify Castillo, but the fact is, the cupboard was bare (Yanda, dinged, KO was OUT, Gradowski not ready, McKinnie was Mckinnie, etc)

I'm not sure Boldin helps us do more than make the playoffs, but thats it.

Our long run configuration now is superior, IMO.

Also - the defensive moves we made with the Boldin money didn't work, which added insult to injury.

CBD is spot-on in my opinion.

Too much other stuff didn't work out for folks to pin things on the absence of Boldin being a major factor in our success or lack of going forward.

As I've said before in other threads, 2013 showed things to this coaching staff and organization that perhaps couldn't be seen unless it played out the way it did. I think Harbs learned FOR SURE what it is that allowed his team to compete those first 5 yrs or so -- and that was being a tough physical team. In other words, being the "hammer" and not the "nail". Waking up on gamedays in 2013 and seeing that your team is the one getting manhandled in the trenches (when that used to be the other way around) is an eye-opener indeed.

In getting back to the Boldin situation, as it has been said it worked out fairly well for Q. He's with a contender and he's making good money. In him not being here we've got a similar player in Steve Smith for much cheaper (capwise) AND we've learned a bit more on what we need to do or be from a team perspective in order to get back to being a perennial contender...

it may've not been pleasant going thru 2013, but it may end up being a good thing for us going forward thru this decade.

That's how I see it. I wish Q the best, and I wouldn't be mad if we see em again in February! wink

C DiP
Poundin' da rock & Punishin' D wins games, period!!!
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 8/12/2014 2:37 PM

Re: Boldin back in town - well adjusted, but still a bit miffed? 


I never thought it was a good decision.  I think the "Pitta will fill his shoes" was after the fact spin.  Pitta, Dickson, Boldin and Smith had a combined 200 catches in 2012.  If the Ravens' plan was to spread 200 catches between Pitta, Dickson, and Smith in 2013 then I will tell you that the Ravens had a terrible plan.  If I sum each of their best individual years before 2013 I get 165 catches.    

I think the PT for Marlon Brown is a positive byproduct, but you have to note that even after seeing what Marlon Brown has the Ravens bought in another vet WR who is above him on the depth chart.  So Marlon's reward is dropping a rung on the depth chart.  

I think the Ravens undervalued and misused  Boldin.  85 catches, almost 1200 yards and 7 TD's is good production for what the 49ers paid last year.  That's with 4 games against the Cards and the Hawks who have two of the best secondaries in football.  It's in line with what he produced in Arizona, and better than any year he had in Baltimore.

I think the Ravens are a great organization, but I think this is one where they messed up...and that's okay.  They don't have to be perfect.  They win more than they lose.  We all appreciate that, but we can't call losses wins.

I don't even think you can say, "We both did things we regret."   Boldin didn't have to take a pay cut and wound up in the NFC conference game as opposed to taking a 33% paycut and ending up 8-8.  Not just that, but catches 85 balls at 33 years old probably earned him a few extra bucks in this new contract.

I think the Ravens realize that and they corrected it.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 8/12/2014 2:49 PM

Re: Boldin back in town - well adjusted, but still a bit miffed? 



stephenjames1979 wrote: Boldin was asked to take a pay cut to keep the team intact. He said no. Ozzie traded him to strengthen our weaknesses.

Boldin was as much to blame for leaving Baltimore as Newsome.
Why? Because he wanted to honor his contract?

DEFINITELY unreasonable on his part......................       rolleyes
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 8/12/2014 3:06 PM

Re: Boldin back in town - well adjusted, but still a bit miffed? 


Trading Anquan Boldin and signing Steve Smith are mutually exclusive.  We traded Boldin with 1 year left on his deal.  Consequently, we would have been able to choose between Boldin and Smith this year.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 8/12/2014 3:08 PM

Re: Boldin back in town - well adjusted, but still a bit miffed? 



smackums wrote: I never thought it was a good decision.  I think the "Pitta will fill his shoes" was after the fact spin.  Pitta, Dickson, Boldin and Smith had a combined 200 catches in 2012.  If the Ravens' plan was to spread 200 catches between Pitta, Dickson, and Smith in 2013 then I will tell you that the Ravens had a terrible plan.  If I sum each of their best individual years before 2013 I get 165 catches.    

I think the PT for Marlon Brown is a positive byproduct, but you have to note that even after seeing what Marlon Brown has the Ravens bought in another vet WR who is above him on the depth chart.  So Marlon's reward is dropping a rung on the depth chart.  

I think the Ravens undervalued and misused  Boldin.  85 catches, almost 1200 yards and 7 TD's is good production for what the 49ers paid last year.  That's with 4 games against the Cards and the Hawks who have two of the best secondaries in football.  It's in line with what he produced in Arizona, and better than any year he had in Baltimore.

I think the Ravens are a great organization, but I think this is one where they messed up...and that's okay.  They don't have to be perfect.  They win more than they lose.  We all appreciate that, but we can't call losses wins.

I don't even think you can say, "We both did things we regret."   Boldin didn't have to take a pay cut and wound up in the NFC conference game as opposed to taking a 33% paycut and ending up 8-8.  Not just that, but catches 85 balls at 33 years old probably earned him a few extra bucks in this new contract.

I think the Ravens realize that and they corrected it.
Smackums, you make some great points, but understand that Jacoby Jones stepped into the starting lineup in Q's place. When folks speak of Pitta "taking Boldin's role" what they mean is the clutch chain-moving catches or aspect of his game -- not actually playing wideout or matching his overall reception total.

As for Boldin putting up strong numbers in SanFran last yr, realize that for much of the season he and TE Vernon Davis were the only real targets in that offense. Crabtree was hurt and then was eased into the offense upon his return. In fact, for much of the season Boldin & Davis had caught ALL of the passing TDs in SanFran's offense...

that type of thing wouldn't happen here -- especially with an emerging Torrey Smith, Jacoby growing into the offense and Ray Rice historically being a receiving target, as well as Pitta being here. Marlon Brown did do some things, but much of his growth and usage was because of the created opportunity with the absence of players.

What the Ravens missed much of was the toughness, the clutchness and such that Q brought to the table. Steve Smith brings much of the same (at less cost). The Ravens within their offense don't need Q or Steve Smith to put up Boldin's SanFran numbers in order to be pleased with him. In fact, the 49ers didn't reeeeeeally expect those numbers from him when they acquired him -- but they were possible again because of the absence of another key wideout and solid wideout depth. Just as Marlon Brown here got many targeted passes because of the absence of others on the field.

This situation simply was an impasse where the team saw it one way and the player saw it another. They worked out a deal and in the end both teams benefitted. One team got a good tough wideout that they were willing to pay for, the other struggled thru a rough patch with the injury bug but learned a very very meaningful lesson in the process -- IMO a lesson that should help them reclaim top-tier status as a team rather shortly.

Anywhoo, both sides are in good places right now, so its all good.

C DiP
Poundin' da rock & Punishin' D wins games, period!!!
Reply | Quote

Posted: 8/12/2014 3:11 PM

Re: Boldin back in town - well adjusted, but still a bit miffed? 



smackums wrote:

I think the Ravens undervalued and misused  Boldin.  85 catches, almost 1200 yards and 7 TD's is good production for what the 49ers paid last year.  That's with 4 games against the Cards and the Hawks who have two of the best secondaries in football.  

It also with these outlier games:  

Sun 9/8W 34-28131720816.0431000.0000

0



Sun 12/29W 23-2091114916.663111111.011000



That's not taking anything away from him in terms of what he brings as a competitor, but particularly the Green Bay game was more indicative of Green Bay playing a soft zone the entire game, and letting him run free.  Anyone who played us knows you really need to play more man on him.

Overall, we missed Q.  Was the Pitta plan spin?  I disagree with your premise on that one.  It was a real plan, derailed by a REAL bad injury.

Re: Marlon Brown, Steve Smith is not an indictment of him.  Its an understanding that you need a slot guy that fulfills a certain role.  Its also why we drafted Campanaro when given a chance.   You need a chain move.  Scratch that, you need MORE than one chain mover, as we learned once Pitta went down.

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 8/12/2014 3:22 PM

Re: Boldin back in town - well adjusted, but still a bit miffed? 



CDiPiranha wrote:
smackums wrote: I never thought it was a good decision.  I think the "Pitta will fill his shoes" was after the fact spin.  Pitta, Dickson, Boldin and Smith had a combined 200 catches in 2012.  If the Ravens' plan was to spread 200 catches between Pitta, Dickson, and Smith in 2013 then I will tell you that the Ravens had a terrible plan.  If I sum each of their best individual years before 2013 I get 165 catches.    

I think the PT for Marlon Brown is a positive byproduct, but you have to note that even after seeing what Marlon Brown has the Ravens bought in another vet WR who is above him on the depth chart.  So Marlon's reward is dropping a rung on the depth chart.  

I think the Ravens undervalued and misused  Boldin.  85 catches, almost 1200 yards and 7 TD's is good production for what the 49ers paid last year.  That's with 4 games against the Cards and the Hawks who have two of the best secondaries in football.  It's in line with what he produced in Arizona, and better than any year he had in Baltimore.

I think the Ravens are a great organization, but I think this is one where they messed up...and that's okay.  They don't have to be perfect.  They win more than they lose.  We all appreciate that, but we can't call losses wins.

I don't even think you can say, "We both did things we regret."   Boldin didn't have to take a pay cut and wound up in the NFC conference game as opposed to taking a 33% paycut and ending up 8-8.  Not just that, but catches 85 balls at 33 years old probably earned him a few extra bucks in this new contract.

I think the Ravens realize that and they corrected it.
Smackums, you make some great points, but understand that Jacoby Jones stepped into the starting lineup in Q's place. When folks speak of Pitta "taking Boldin's role" what they mean is the clutch chain-moving catches or aspect of his game -- not actually playing wideout or matching his overall reception total.

As for Boldin putting up strong numbers in SanFran last yr, realize that for much of the season he and TE Vernon Davis were the only real targets in that offense. Crabtree was hurt and then was eased into the offense upon his return. In fact, for much of the season Boldin & Davis had caught ALL of the passing TDs in SanFran's offense...

that type of thing wouldn't happen here -- especially with an emerging Torrey Smith, Jacoby growing into the offense and Ray Rice historically being a receiving target, as well as Pitta being here. Marlon Brown did do some things, but much of his growth and usage was because of the created opportunity with the absence of players.

What the Ravens missed much of was the toughness, the clutchness and such that Q brought to the table. Steve Smith brings much of the same (at less cost). The Ravens within their offense don't need Q or Steve Smith to put up Boldin's SanFran numbers in order to be pleased with him. In fact, the 49ers didn't reeeeeeally expect those numbers from him when they acquired him -- but they were possible again because of the absence of another key wideout and solid wideout depth. Just as Marlon Brown here got many targeted passes because of the absence of others on the field.

This situation simply was an impasse where the team saw it one way and the player saw it another. They worked out a deal and in the end both teams benefitted. One team got a good tough wideout that they were willing to pay for, the other struggled thru a rough patch with the injury bug but learned a very very meaningful lesson in the process -- IMO a lesson that should help them reclaim top-tier status as a team rather shortly.

Anywhoo, both sides are in good places right now, so its all good.

C DiP
I purposely left out Rice and Jones because those guys couldn't really be expected to add more to the passing game than they already were; especially Rice.  If we factor in Jones we're now spreading 230 passes between Jones, Smith, Pitta, and Dickson.  So you're still in a position where your plan is to have 4 guys have career years.  Plus Rice and Jones aren't really guys on the "upswing".     

You can say that Boldin caught 85 passes because there were no better options, but that would explain targets more than catches.  If he gets the catch, and he gets the yards then there's no real explanation needed.  What I mean is 85 catches, 1200 yards and 7TD's aren't the result of playing in a void.  That's the result of a guy making plays.  I'd argue that his numbers are more impressive because of San Fran's lack of options.  I'd say the the Ravens had a similar void as the 49ers which allowed Marlon Brown to step in and contribute.  

I agree that both parties may benefit.  I think Anquan has already benefitted and I don't disagree that the Ravens may benefit from reclaiming their identity.  But I think the difference between the two parties here is that the Ravens bought it on themselves.  I also am not sure how much I can attribute "long term gains" to jettisoning a one year contract.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 8/12/2014 3:42 PM

Re: Boldin back in town - well adjusted, but still a bit miffed? 



ClericBlackDave wrote:
smackums wrote:

I think the Ravens undervalued and misused  Boldin.  85 catches, almost 1200 yards and 7 TD's is good production for what the 49ers paid last year.  That's with 4 games against the Cards and the Hawks who have two of the best secondaries in football.  

It also with these outlier games:  

Sun 9/8W 34-28131720816.0431000.0000

0



Sun 12/29W 23-2091114916.663111111.011000



That's not taking anything away from him in terms of what he brings as a competitor, but particularly the Green Bay game was more indicative of Green Bay playing a soft zone the entire game, and letting him run free.  Anyone who played us knows you really need to play more man on him.

Overall, we missed Q.  Was the Pitta plan spin?  I disagree with your premise on that one.  It was a real plan, derailed by a REAL bad injury.

Re: Marlon Brown, Steve Smith is not an indictment of him.  Its an understanding that you need a slot guy that fulfills a certain role.  Its also why we drafted Campanaro when given a chance.   You need a chain move.  Scratch that, you need MORE than one chain mover, as we learned once Pitta went down.

Dave I'm not going to try to devalue 85 catches.  I mean if you want to take out the Green Bay game you're now saying, "Well he only caught 72 balls for 1,000 yards in his other 15 games".  He had a good year.  Not just that, he had the kind of year in 2013 that was in line with the rest of his career outside of Baltimore.

My idea of the Pitta thing being spin is just my opinion.  If the Ravens plan was for 3 young players to contribute 120% of the sum of their best career years then I question the validity of their plan.  Even if Pitta stays healthy I question the validity of that plan.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 8/12/2014 4:09 PM

Re: Boldin back in town - well adjusted, but still a bit miffed? 


Who said he didn't have a good year?

I'm saying, Q is a known quantity.  He's the same guy in Baltimore as he was in Arizona, as he now is with the 9ers.  We all missed what he bought to the table.

But lets not make him more than he was, or is.  He had a nice year last year, but also had some teams inexplicaby play him with a soft zone, making for HUGE games.  MAYBE its that they felt compelled to do a soft zone in response to Kaep's legs and the zone read option stuff.  If so, he was never going to get that from Flacco here.

My point is - we weren't configured to win it all in 2013, Boldin or not.  And he wasn't going to have 1200 yards with us last season, regardless of the coordinator. 

The 2012 year we have a convergence of talent along the o-line that allowed Flacco and his weapons to shine.  It wasn't going to get repeated because McKinnie is a headcase turd, Birk Retired, and Yanda opted for surgery on a ailing shoulder.

The decision to let Boldin got to retool wasn't bad in and of itself.  But we did miss him.  I think thats a fair assessment.

pointing to 1200 yards with a different team . . . doesn't change that.  Especially not when I see the outlier games and why they happened.

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 8/12/2014 4:32 PM

Re: Boldin back in town - well adjusted, but still a bit miffed? 


I never understood why they didn't just offer him an extension vs asking for a 1 year pay cut

Seemed pretty clear Q had several years left in the tank.
...and don't call me Shirley
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 8/12/2014 5:26 PM

Re: Boldin back in town - well adjusted, but still a bit miffed? 



zeusman52 wrote:
stephenjames1979 wrote: Boldin was asked to take a pay cut to keep the team intact. He said no. Ozzie traded him to strengthen our weaknesses.

Boldin was as much to blame for leaving Baltimore as Newsome.
Why? Because he wanted to honor his contract?

DEFINITELY unreasonable on his part......................       rolleyes
much like players who want to tear up a deal for more money.

It's the business side of the NFL.

Fans have to deal with it.
Reply | Quote
Reply to TopicPost New Topic
  Page of 3  Next >