Baltimore Ravens: Joe Flacco Will Be Vindicated in Time

Recently, I read a piece by Dan Levy (who is a very good writer) about Joe Flacco. I read the piece in its entirety, and I will admit that he makes good points. But I have to disagree with his conclusion.

Flacco gets a lot of flack (ITS A PUN) which I frankly don't understand. People cite his inability to get far into the playoffs and question his overall skill level as a QB. A lot of the criticism is based off of the idea that no success now equals no success ever.

In fact, I have heard discussion that he is in the bottom tier of NFL quarterbacks. Needless to say, I think those people are hilariously wrong. 

Flacco has multiple things going for him that I think people don't often look at. 

For one, besides rival Ben Roethlisberger, I don't think there is a more durable quarterback than Flacco. After all, he has not missed a game in his career, having started in four straight seasons with 44 wins. That is pretty good.

Now of course, some might say that it was his team that won the games, not him. The problem with that argument is that you must realize if a quarterback performs decently or even better, they are probably a reason why the game was won. 

Think about it in this way: Brad Johnson for the 2002 Bucs never put up gaudy stats against teams. But he never lost the game for the Bucs. He would have games where he threw for more touchdowns and yards, which almost certainly would help win the game.

He was an essential part of the team.

Now here is where I turn the tables on the Flacco haters. While you may not agree that Flacco is a top five quarterback, you have to agree that he is a lot better than Trent Dilfer or Brad Johnson.

Don't believe me? What about the fact that he is one of only four quarterbacks to ever bring his team to the playoffs in his first three years and win a game in each? Or that he holds the Ravens franchise records for passing yards and touchdowns?

Okay, maybe that wasn't a very telling stat considering that the Ravens have only been around since 1996.

But don't think I don't have more proof. Consider this: Flacco turned a corner this year when he posted a 96.1 QBR in the postseason, significantly better than his 80.9 regular season rating, which was still good. He achieved this improvement against teams with top defenses like the Texans.

Additionally, he threw for over 250 yards seven times throughout the regular and postseason. The Ravens aren't even that heavy of a passing team.

Now, one thing people also tend to overlook is what the Ravens do on the offensive side of the ball, which explains some of Flacco's troubles. 

While Ray Rice may be one of the best running backs in all of football, sometimes the Ravens sure do make it seem like he is a secondary thought. Four times throughout the season the Ravens gave Rice 10 touches or less in a game. They lost three of those games.

That is one of the points I am trying to make here. Flacco is not meant to be a statistically big quarterback. He is not like Aaron Rodgers because they are two fundamentally different offenses and quarterbacks. 

In this day and age, it almost seems that if a quarterback doesn't light up the stat sheets, they are deemed as not good. This is not true, as quarterbacks like Flacco and such show. They are just as, if not more, reliable than most of the quarterbacks out there.

As for his chances to win a Super Bowl, I actually like them. Better quarterbacks have had a lot worse starts to their careers and still won Super Bowls. Flacco will prove his haters wrong in the coming year or two.

So in conclusion: Flacco is a good, reliable quarterback that will see major success in the near future.