Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Pickle20

A hypothetical question

26 posts in this topic

Would you prefer:

1. The current situation, 4-5 with Flacco as QB.

2. Colin Kaepernick as QB with the Ravens 6-3.

Not saying that CK would have gotten us to that record. Not saying that had the Ravens signed him that he'd even be starting over Flacco. I just want to know that despite all the political stuff that CK brings to the table, would you prefer him as QB if he had the Ravens at 6-3?

Edited by Pickle20

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well it's kind of a moot point because like Flacco, CK cannot throw the ball and catch it himself :)

But no, I wouldn't want CK even if it meant being 6-3. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO, CK is not the answer, regardless of  the political stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No thanks. As bad as team is, the last thing it needs is a distraction like that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I really thought Kaepernick could succeed here, sure. I don't think he can. He's mobile, but even a mobile QB needs a good O-line, which the Ravens do not have, in general. He would likely be equivalent to Joe, at best, and would also come with a lot of baggage. He'd drive off a subset of Trump supporters and the team does not need that.

Edited by Evil Yoda

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't care about the politics so yeah I'd take the 6-3 record.

Doesn't matter because Perriman will drop CK's passes just as well as Flacco's.  :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would gladly take 6-3 over 4-5, but I highly doubt they'd be 6-3 under CK... and not because of CK, but because they'd still have Marty. And I think he's problem 1 through 5 with the offense (and thus the team) right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hell, if you're going to go with an offense better suited toward a running quarterback, why not bring back Keenan Reynolds? He ran the wildcat and the triple option in college, so the transition to more of a zone read type of offense would be a bit more seamless with a guy who's at least familiar with the Ravens' playbook.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, bmore_ken said:

I’m surprised Houston hasn’t signed him.

:Houston's owner is Bob McNair.  He's the owner who made the remark about the inmates running the asylum.  I think he'd rather lose every game than sign Kapaernick.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, cprenegade said:

:Houston's owner is Bob McNair.  He's the owner who made the remark about the inmates running the asylum.  I think he'd rather lose every game than sign Kapaernick.  

I forgot about that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Better get in all those mentions of "owners" while you can. That's going to change very soon too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Pickle20 said:

Better get in all those mentions of "owners" while you can. That's going to change very soon too.

What do you mean by that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, cprenegade said:

Maybe CEO would be better?  Works for the rest of the business world.  :D

CEO and owner are not equivalent things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, alienrace said:

CEO and owner are not equivalent things.

True, but it's close enough for this manufactured problem. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, cprenegade said:

True, but it's close enough for this manufactured problem. 

Definitely a manufactured problem!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Getting off topic, but I'll continue.  I made this case first as a joke many moons ago, but it doesn't have to be a joke.

If players in any pro sport don't like the way they're treated, walk away.  En masse.  What does that mean?  Play out your existing contracts, then don't renew with ANYONE.  Ban together and start a "player's league"... owned and operated by the players, where all profits go to the players.

Take the same risk that many businessmen do... risk bankruptcy, fail, learn, fail again, learn some more, etc.  Eventually it'll happen.

The problem there is... just assuming in dream-world for a second that they would collectively have the will to try it... is that the guys making the most money NOW would want to be the ones profiting from it the most later.  And why not?  If 30 guys (players) with a billion dollars in their coffers collectively bankroll the lion's share of the start-up costs for the "new league"... those 30 guys are going to want their money back first, and a higher percentage of the profits as time goes on.  They're going to want to decide how the league is run, how business is handled, how players are treated, etc.  They'll want far more say in matters, even in the "player's league" than the rest of the players / co-owners, like the 51st guy on the roster, or next year's #1 draft pick.

Ultimately, they'll become the new set of "owners"... and the same problems / complaints will arise...

 

Edited by Ravens2006

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Speaking of owners...and power struggles...

Goodell might be in trouble if what is in the news today is true.  Jerry Jones is sueing him, and also seems to have a good amount of owners on board with at least pushing Goodell out.  Goodell's new contract is a bit of a "time to move on buddy" type of thing from what the talking heads are saying.  Not sure if any other owners join the suit, but it looks like Goodell could be in trouble.

Edited by alienrace

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jones has threatened to sue the other NFL owners in the past, so it isn't as if they all haven't been down this road before. And he and the other 31 owners voted back in May to authorize the competition committee to finalize an extension for Goodell. Once a vote is cast, it can't be undone.

Jerruh must think of himself as the modern-day version of Al Davis. Like Al Davis, he's acting out of naked self interest.

Edited by mdrunning

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's the thing, it's not just Jerry that 

are looking to push Goodell out.

 

Prediction - Goodell is not the commish this time next year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, alienrace said:

That's the thing, it's not just Jerry that 

are looking to push Goodell out.

 

Prediction - Goodell is not the commish this time next year.

True but far from a majority

Quote

Sources told Outside the Lines that Jones is one of "four or five owners" who believe Goodell should not continue as commissioner. Another half-dozen owners were called "fence-sitters" by one source

http://www.espn.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/21342623/jerry-jones-dallas-cowboys-threatens-sue-nfl-roger-goodell

At this point it's still mostly speculation whether anything happens to Goodell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0