What Should the Ravens do with Joe Flacco?

Tyler Raborn —  Friday, February 8, 2013 — 9 Comments

In Ivan Hoffman’s “Leverage in Contract and Other Negotiations,” Hoffman defines “leverage” in the first line of the article:

The term “leverage” refers to the principle of using a small advantage (or in negotiating terms, even merely a perceived advantage) to gain a much larger benefit.

In Joe Flacco’s upcoming contract negotiations with the Baltimore Ravens, he has more than a “small” advantage. An impressive playoff run and a high-caliber Super Bowl performance has given Flacco more leverage than arguably any other player in the NFL this offseason. So what should the Ravens do with Joe Flacco? Well, here are their options:

  1. Sign him to a long-term contract
  2. Franchise tag him with an “exclusive” tag
  3. Franchise tag him with a “non-exclusive” tag
  4. Trade him
  5. Cut him

Okay— neither number 4 or 5 is an option so go ahead and throw them out. Realistically, the Ravens will either sign him to a long-term deal or tag him. But which option is the wisest for the Ravens?

The popular answer seems to be the long-term contract with a reluctant, “he deserves it.”

…does he?

The proponents of the Ravens giving Flacco a long-term deal consistently cite Flacco’s win-loss record, Super Bowl victory, and his impressive playoff run.

It astonishes me how often commentators, analysts, and writers refer to win-loss records as a quarterback’s record. During his contract negotiations with the Lions, I guarantee you never heard the Lions say, “Barry Sanders was 5-11 as a starter with the Lions last year, so we don’t think he’s worth that much.” I understand the quarterback position is the most valuable position on an NFL team, especially in today’s pass-happy league. But to attribute 100% of the credit to the quarterback is absurd. If you asked anyone citing Flacco’s win-loss record as a reason why he should receive a long-term deal if they believed he was 100% responsible for winning or losing every game, they’d all tell you no. Yet they’ll still cite it in a matter-of-fact tone as strong evidence as to why the Ravens should give him the contract?

Watch all of the Ravens’ playoff games again (I have with the NFL’s Game Rewind, which is a great deal by the way) and you’ll see how much happened out of Joe’s control that contributed his performance. Obviously this applies to every quarterback, but I’d say it happens for Joe Flacco more so than most quarterbacks. Flacco is the beneficiary of a lot of “high-point” grabs by the big receivers he has in Torrey Smith and Anquan Boldin. He also benefits from great playmakers in the open field, such as Jacoby Jones and Ray Rice.

For instance, in week 12 the Ravens were down 10 to 13 to the Chargers, and on 4th and 29 with 1:50 left in the 4th quarter, Joe Flacco dumped the ball off to Ray Rice, and Ray did the rest. Hey diddle diddle, Ray Rice up the middle…

One isolated instance is nowhere near enough proof to make the statement that “Flacco gets more help than most,” but I can’t prove that statement without forcing you to watch all of Flacco’s game film.

What I can provide you with is applicable stats. Here’s Joe Flacco’s career stats:

Year Comp. % Yards TD INT
2008 60.0% 2,971 14 12
2009 63.1% 3,613 21 12
2010 62.6% 3,622 25 10
2011 57.6% 3,610 20 12
2012 59.7% 3,817 22 10

And here’s his Total QBR and where his QBR ranked in the league for each year:

Year Total QBR Rank
2008 43.2 27th
2009 55.0 15th
2010 60.4 12th
2011 59.7 14th
2012 46.8 25th

Flacco’s agent says Flacco deserves “to be the highest-paid quarterback in the game[.]” And why wouldn’t he? His guy just won the Super Bowl.

But the “highest-paid quarterback” in the game is a fleeting title. As the quarterback position has increasingly gained value, there has been a revolving door of blockbuster deals. Currently, Drew Brees holds the title with a 5 year, $100 million contract.

So let’s say the Ravens make Flacco the highest-paid quarterback in the league with a 5 year, $101 million contract. What does that mean? Well, if it’s structured like Drew Brees’ contract, it’d look something like this:

Year Salary Bonus Cap Hit
2013 $3.0M $7.6M $10.6M
2014 $9.75M $7.85M $17.6M
2015 $10.75M $7.85M $18.6M
2016 $18.75M $7.85M $26.6M
2017 $19.75M $7.85M $27.6M

Brees was 33 when he signed his deal, while Flacco is only 28, so Flacco’s agent may argue that he deserves more guaranteed because he’s younger.

Either way, in this scenario Flacco would have the Ravens on the hook for a lot of money. If they backload the deal, the contract could contain clauses relieving them of contractual obligations if they released him prior to a certain date.

The Ravens’ alternative to committing themselves to a long-term deal such as this one is the franchise tag. The non-exclusive tag would cost the Ravens $14.6M, while the exclusive tag would cost the Ravens between $20M and $21M.

The non-exclusive tag would give other teams the ability to negotiate a contract with Flacco. If another team made an offer, the Ravens would have to match the offer to keep him. Additionally, if the Ravens choose not to match the offer, the team that signed Flacco would have to give Baltimore two 1st round picks as compensation. Yet the Ravens would need to match because there will be no one better than Flacco in free agency or the draft.

If they choose to tag Flacco with the exclusive tag, they will take a $20M+ salary cap hit in 2013. A hit they may not be able to afford.

So here we stand—a long term deal, an exclusive franchise tag, or a non-exclusive franchise tag—a true predicament.

If I was the General Manager of the Baltimore Ravens, here’s the choice I’d make:

The $14.6M non-exclusive franchise tag. 

Here’s why:

I’d gamble on the fact that I don’t believe any team would be willing to pay more than a $21M a year and give up two 1st round picks for a quarterback that hasn’t ranked in the top 10 in total QBR in his career. I say $21M and not $14.6M because if a team offers more than $14.6M, I can still match their offer and keep Joe. The only way it becomes a bad decision is if they offer more than the exclusive tag would have cost me ($20M-$21M). In my mind, here’s the two realistic scenarios:

Worst Case Scenario: A team makes an offer surpassing the $14.6M tag. In response, we would match the offer and negotiate the long-term deal. (The NFL CBA allows a team to negotiate and come to terms with their non-exclusive tagged player until the Tuesday following the 10th week of the NFL season.)

Best Case Scenario: No team is willing to match the $14.6M tag and give up two 1st round picks, so we have Joe Flacco under a 1 year contract for $14.6M. While the cap hit would be $4M more than the cap hit taken in the hypothetical long-term contract, it’s a good trade off for two reasons: (1) it delays the team from having to make a giant financial commitment to Flacco, and (2) it gives Flacco a season where he could possibly, and most likely would, lose a lot of the leverage he had going into the 2013 season.

Joe Flacco will likely play the 2013 NFL season without the likes of Ed Reed, Anquan Boldin, and others (including future Hall of Famer Ray Lewis). If he has a phenomenal year individually, something he has never done, then he deserves the giant long-term deal. But, more than likely, he will lose some of the leverage he currently has over the next year, which would make the negotiation table much more palatable to the Ravens.

… unless they win another Super Bowl. In which case, you just pay up.

A few notes:

  1. In no way am I saying Joe Flacco is a bad quarterback. Joe Flacco is a very good quarterback, but he’s not a top 5 quarterback. Football is a business, and I’m trying to look at it from a business perspective. The less money you have to tie up in your quarterback, the more money you have to spend on other positions.
  2. I had a really tough time deciding between tags here. My eventual decision to choose the non-exclusive tag came down to the limited cap space the Ravens already have for this year. If they commit $20M+ to Joe Flacco, they’ll have to make some major moves, whether that’s restructuring contracts or cutting players.
  3. Salary information was provided by spotrac.com.

————

By: Tyler Raborn

About these ads

Tyler Raborn

Posts

New Orleans Resident, Tulane Law Student, and Mississippi State Alum

9 responses to What Should the Ravens do with Joe Flacco?

  1. 

    Fantastic!! Someone else sees that Flacco has benefited from excellent play around him. I think he’s good, but there are many more qb’s I’d take over him even if its just for one season. Doesn’t need/deserve to be paid more than Breed for sure

  2. 

    Excellent article. Very well written and in depth.

  3. 

    I like your arguments Tyler. I agree that he is a product of those around him. I also agree that he should not be anywhere near the highest paid QB in the NFL. He has proved that he knows how to get his teams, or at least help lead his teams, into the playoffs. And while it doesn’t lie completely on his shoulders, his touchdown passes are what helped them get to the Super Bowl. He is tied for second in the league with four 4th qtr comebacks, a 1.9% interceptions rate, tied for 4th in the league, and in the top 10 for yards per pass with 12. So not to say that I disagree with you as far as his salary, I do think that he has become one of the most reliable, consistent quarterbacks of recent years in the NFL. That is what is going to help get him his big contract. He may not win it every year, but it seems he knows how to get to the postseason.

  4. 

    I agree with the won-lost record that talking heads use for quarterbacks. I have never understood it. What people pay lip service too-only in passing-but has the most impact on wins and losses is who wins the line of scrimmage. Offensive line protects QB and opens lanes for RB they win; Defense pressures QB and plugs holes stopping RB, other team wins. It is just like a war. The soldiers in the tenches win the battle and the genral gets the credit. We need a stats guru to figure out something for line play.

  5. 

    Love this post. Strong arguments and a sensible conclusion. I’ve been a Flacco fan since his time at UD but I can’t dispute what you’ve said here. I hope he’ll prove himself next year but I think he needs to before he can claim that much cash.

  6. 

    He’s our boy here in Baltimore. Of course, I want him to stay…I hope it works out. I never worry about money…or so my husband tells me. ;-)

  7. 

    Very good analysis, Tyler. I’m a big Ravens fan and, although I like Joe, I don’t think he’s worth the same price as Drew Brees. He has really good days and really awful days, like the one I witnessed in Houston this year. Agreed, if they let him go there’s no good alternative. The non-exclusive franchise tag at under $15 mil sounds like the best option.

    I trust Ozzie Newsome to do the right thing. He’s never let us down. It will be interesting. Going to share this post on F’book cause I think some of my other Raven friends would like the analysis.

Comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s