This may or may not become a regular column, but I thought I would give my two cents on a few of the interesting, hot topics that were discussed this week in the NFL. Hopefully, my take offers a fresh view and furthers the dialogue and conversation. 

The Juxtaposition of Richard Sherman
Richard Sherman—great  player, incredible personal story, but a bad show of sportsmanship in his post-game “interview” last week. As a teacher and a father, I wasn’t a fan of kids watching his rant and thinking that it would be cool to emulate.

That being said, a brash, arrogant NFL interview is fairly common, right? And in the heat of the moment right after securing a trip to the Super Bowl? Sherman’s reaction is almost understandable. The problem that so many people had was the personal nature Sherman took against Michael Crabtree.

And this is where I think he had an opportunity to diffuse the situation, but Sherman missed the boat. Sherman could have easily made amends while he was at the podium during the postgame press conference (after he was showered and dressed), but he took the opportunity to reiterate his opinion of Crabtree.

I like Sherman. I think he is smart, articulate, and insightful. I have enjoyed Sherman’s columns this season on Peter King’s MMQB.com. He raised some very valid points with Rachel Nichols this weekend in how society has changed semantics while keeping a hurtful, hateful message out in the open.

I like the fact that people, the casual fan especially, now knows Sherman and his story. I wish it would have been through different circumstances, but his story is being shared.

Eliminating the Extra Point
Eliminating the extra point is too extreme of a change. Yes, this is an automatic play (99.5 percent conversion rate over the last three NFL seasons), but the proposals being suggested alter the game, and its history, too drastically.

It is interesting how the extra point has evolved in professional football. The extra point in football has its origins from rugby and its “try.” In early American football, the touchdown garnered no points, but it only allowed a team a “try” at points. That is where the try after came into play. This was eventually phased out of the game.

Early American football, even after the change above, emphasized the kicking game—touchdowns were four worth points, extra points were worth two points, and field goals were worth five points. The game was predicated on kicking the ball; hence, the name football.

I say keep the extra point, but make it more challenging by spotting the ball for a 47 yard try. This keeps specialists on rosters and allows the kicker to become more valuable. Plus, it still provides me an opportunity to go to the bathroom during the game without missing much action.

Ravens’ Offensive Coordinator Search Will Conclude Monday
This job search is teetering on the brink of dragging on too long. Hopefully the reports are true and an announcement will come tomorrow.

The Ravens need a breath of innovation and creativity blown into the offensive side of the ball. Kyle Shanahan would provide that fresh perspective; however, he does come with some baggage and I am not sure if he is the right person for the job.

Jim Hostler, right or wrong, represents the bland, vanilla past. He has done well in developing the wide receivers in his time with the Ravens—Torrey Smith has grown every year he has been with the team, Marlon Brown became more than a developmental player this year, and even Derrick Mason endorsed his coaching. The question remains if he can make the necessary changes this offense needs.  

The bigger question I have is what are the Ravens planning to do about adding a quarterback coach. Are they even planning this move? If so, who are the candidates?

Mel Kiper Regrades the 2013 Ravens’ Draft
You need an ESPN Insider account to read the whole article, but Mel Kiper has a column up that regrades the 2103 draft. His original post-draft grade for the Ravens was an A-, but his new grade is a B-.

I am not a fan of grading drafts this soon into the process as it takes three years to really see the impact of a draft class. However, in a year that the Ravens needed their rookie class to contribute, they received next to nothing in production. Matt Elam is the only rookie who actually played significantly. Arthur Brown and Brandon Williams were expected to be key reserves, if not push to become starters, yet they played sparingly. John Simon and Kyle Juszczyk were special teamers only. Ricky Wagner was an extra lineman in jumbo packages only. Kapron Lewis-Moore, Ryan Jensen, and Aaron Mellette were injury scratches. Marc Anthony didn’t even make the team.

A grade of a B- is generous.

Pro Bowl
I like my fantasy football the way it is, thank you very much.

This is Part III of the three part End of the Season Reality Assessment. Part I assessed the 2013 season of Joe Flacco, and Part II assessed the roster overhaul that occurred in the 2013 offseason following the Ravens win in Super Bowl XLVII. Part III of the End of the Season Reality Assessment will look ahead to the 2014 roster decisions that will need to be made.

As the NFL prepares to crown the next Super Bowl champion, the Ravens are in full-swing in their preparations for the 2014 season. They have openly discussed the areas of the roster that need improvement whether it be through free agency or through the draft. In addition, they are preparing for the upcoming Senior Bowl, replacing the openings on the coaching staff, and are deep in preparations for draft.

While I am, by no means, a salary-cap guru or a stalwart talent evaluator, I am attempting to outline the important decisions that the Ravens need to make for the 2014 season. Like most decisions in life, these decisions will have a domino effect and there will be various unpredictable variables that may enter the fray as the offseason unfolds.

Below, I have broken the roster decisions into four major areas: possible superstar roster decisions (i.e. superstars in risk of being cut or restructured), current free agent decisions from the 2013 roster, possible cuts to save salary cap space, and free agent/draft priorities. 

The recent hiring of Jim Caldwell by the Detroit Lions was slightly unexpected. Caldwell was not a “sexy” head coaching candidate. As the hiring season began, it certainly seemed as though Caldwell was only included on many search lists because of the Rooney Rule.  However, Caldwell is well respected within league circles. Tony Dungy is someone whose opinion carries much clout and he is a big supporter of Caldwell. I am sure that only helped Caldwell throughout the interviewing process. That is not to say that Caldwell is not deserving of a head coaching position.

In fact, one of the reasons I believe he landed the job in Detroit is the very reason he may not have been the best fit moving forward as offensive coordinator for the Ravens. Caldwell is known as a big picture person. It was reported that Caldwell brought a well organized vision to his Lions’ interview. That all plays to his strengths—calm, steady, big picture oriented, organized, a collaborator, and one who facilitates. He was the perfect person to take over last year late in the season from fired offensive coordinator Cam Cameron. Uncertainty, stubbornness, and narrow-mindedness would be what described the offense last year before the change was made.

However, last year’s team and this year’s team differed greatly. Caldwell had the weapons last year—a strong-armed quarterback, a high performing offensive line, a versatile running game, speed on the outside, and two possession receivers patrolling the middle of the field. This year he had, um, um…well, he had a strong-armed quarterback.

This is Part II of the three part End of the Season Reality Assessment. Part I assessed the 2013 season of Joe Flacco, and Part III will look ahead to the 2014 roster decisions that will need to be made. Part II of the End of the Season Reality Assessment will assess the roster overhaul that occurred in the 2013 offseason following the Ravens win in Super Bowl XLVII.

Many heads people were left scratching their heads during the offseason following the Ravens win in Super Bowl XLVII. The Ravens chose to make an unprecedented move in letting several key players move on after the season. Some of the moves were out of the team’s control, like the retirement of both middle linebacker Ray Lewis and center Matt Birk. Other transactions were made because the team could not afford the player, and/or the team was looking for an opportunity to get younger and faster. Whatever the reason (you can believe the “purging the team of outspoken personalities” if you choose), clearly the Ravens chose an unorthodox path in defending their Super Bowl championship.

It is fair, especially with the Ravens not making the postseason, to assess these offseason moves the Ravens brain trust made to determine if they were in fact prudent. The retirements were out of the control (though not necessarily unwanted) of the Ravens, so we will be assessing only what was in their control. The defense had the biggest makeover as there were five significant changes to that side of the ball. The offense, prior to the in-season shakeup of the offensive line and the injury to Dennis Pitta, had only one major change.

In assessing the replacement players against how the replaced players performed on their respective teams, one has to take into to account how players are used. Teams run different schemes, players are placed in different situations, and players may be asked to perform different responsibilities.

In most circumstances, assessing the former Ravens players’ performances on their 2013 team is not an equal comparison to how they would have performed had they been on the 2013 Ravens. However, Part II of the End of the Season Reality Assessment will attempt to assess the changes made. 

Secondary
The Ravens secondary was the biggest revamped part of the team. The Ravens said goodbye to Ed Reed, Bernard Pollard, and Cary Williams. Including the returning Laradrius Webb, the Ravens had four new players in starting roles—James Ihedigbo, rookie Matt Elam, Jimmy Smith, and Webb.

As most predicted, it took time for this group to gel. After a rough start to the season, Smith made the biggest improvement and he is on his way in becoming an upper echelon cornerback. Webb’s production evolved as the season evolved. As his confidence grew, so did his ability to defend the pass. Webb is still a fearless tackler. Though prone to give up the big play, the Ravens’ secondary became one of the team’s strengths as the season progressed.

When comparing Cary Williams to his replacements, a returning Webb and the emerging Smith, it is clear that the Ravens made the right move in letting Williams go. While Williams had a strong season with the Philadelphia Eagles, he by no means out-performed Webb and Smith, and he certainly was not worth the price tag it would have cost to retain him. This was a perfect opportunity to allow Smith the space to grow and mature as a NFL cornerback.

The biggest change within the secondary was the fact that both safeties, Reed and Pollard, were replaced with Elam and Ihedigbo, respectively. This was especially true when taking into account the Ravens were essentially starting two strong safeties, as Elam played out of position when he played free safety. Overall, Ihedigbo and Elam had solid seasons, but Elam certainly took his rookie lumps.

According to Pro Football Focus, when passes came into the players’ coverage area, Ihedigbo posted a 66.9 QB rating and Elam posted a 117.5 QB rating. Ihedigbo was stout against the run, but he had too many missed tackles—18 missed tackles. Elam also had his share of missed tackles as he had 11 for the year.  

In comparison, Reed and Pollard continued their struggles we witnessed from last year when playing against the pass. Reed posted a 118.3 QB rating and Pollard posted a 100.1 QB rating. Reed, playing for the Texans and Jets, was rarely asked to provide run support as he spent most of his time in deep coverage, thus he was limited in his overall versatility. Pollard continued to excel as sure a tackler and he was above average as a run stopper, but the Titans tried to limit his impact in the passing game. Reed’s coverage skills improved once he landed with the Jets—he was probably right in his assessment that he wasn’t being used correctly when he was with the Texans.

When comparing these four players, what stood out the most was how they were used. Ravens coach John Harbaugh has stated on more than one occasion how the safety position is evolving to keep up with the prolific passing attacks teams use. The day and age of a classic free safety and strong safety is coming to an end, as safeties need to be more versatile.

The Ravens achieved that aspect with Ihedigbo and Elam. Pro Football Focus (PFF) uses a metric that analyzes a player’s time spent as the primary man in coverage relative to the number of receptions he allows. At first glance, the statistics comparing Ihedigbo and Elam to Reed and Pollard look disparaging. 

Reed and Pollard, at this point in their careers, are locked into what they are capable of doing—Reed covers, Pollard is mainly an in-the-box safety. That greatly limits what a defense can do, and it allows offenses to exploit coverages.

While Ihedigbo’s and Elam’s versatility certainly garnered mixed results—giving up the big, leaving voids in the middle of the field, and having miscommunication problems—I believe that the secondary was an upgrade over last year’s secondary. When taking into consideration the money that was already invested into the secondary ($5.4 million for Webb, $2 million for Smith, and $1.2 for Elam) versus what the Ravens saved in salary cap space by letting Reed, Pollard, and Williams (they signed for a total of $7.1 million of salary cap space) this was even more of a well-timed roster makeover.  

Linebackers
The linebacking corps was another area of the roster makeover. The two big decisions the Ravens had to make in the offseason were whether or not they wanted to retain middle linebacker Dannell Ellerbe and pass rushing specialist Paul Kruger. The Ravens were able to replace these two players with middle linebacker Daryl Smith and outside linebacker Elvis Dumervil.

The Ravens scored big with the Dumervil signing, and I do not believe anyone can argue otherwise. The simple statistics are overwhelming in Dumervil’s favor. The Ravens used Dumervil mainly as a pass rusher as he rushed the passer on 49 percent of all plays in which he participated (263 pass rush plays of 574 total plays). Dumervil had 61 total pressures (QB sacks, hurries, and hits) and 9.5 sacks, according to Pro Football Focus. This means Dumervil applied pressure on the quarterback on 23 percent of the plays he was designated as a pass rusher.

In comparison, the Browns tried to turn Kruger into an every down player and the results were not favorable—he compiled 37 tackles, and he whiffed on 14 tackles. Kruger participated in a total of 887 plays, and he was a pass rusher on 339 plays (38 percent). He only managed 51 total pressures (15 percent of all pass rush plays) and 4.5 sacks.  

It is not a clear comparison when comparing Smith and Ellerbe as Smith played in the Ravens 3-4 base defense and Ellerbe played in the Dolphins’ 4-3 base defense. However, their overall statistics are very comparable. Ellerbe was a bit more solid against the run and he played a hair better in coverage, but Smith was a far stronger pass rusher, according to Pro Football Focus.

In the end, the Ravens invested $3.6 million of cap space ($2.5 for Dumervil and $1.125 for Smith) versus the $10.6 million of cap space ($8.2 million for Kruger and $2.4 for Ellerbe) it would have taken to re-sign Kruger and Ellerbe. Taking into consideration the production garnered from Dumervil and Smith, the Ravens spent their money wisely.

Wide Receiver
Obviously, replacing Anquan Boldin was the Ravens’ biggest challenge of the season, and one they were never adequately able to do. Though I didn’t think that Boldin would be able to keep up the incredible production he produced in week one against the Packers, he had a tremendous season. He actually outperformed Torrey Smith, and he outperformed every option the Ravens tried to trot out at the number two receiver position--combined.

The Ravens not only missed Boldin’s production, but they did miss his fire, toughness, and leadership. However, I am not sure if he would have had this level of production on the 2013 Ravens. He would not have solved the disappearing run game and the abysmal play of the offensive line. Could Boldin have helped offset those deficiencies? Maybe. But I do not believe that his production would have propelled this flawed team to a deep run in the 2013 playoffs.

Roster Busts, Cap Space, and Dead Money
As I outlined above, the Ravens made some very strong personnel moves. However, it was not all roses when constructing the 2013 Ravens’ roster.

They made two major mistakes that they quickly corrected during the bye week. Marcus Spears and Michael Huff were two “bargain” priced players that wound up to be poor decisions. Those two moves cost the Ravens $2.55 million of salary cap space.

Another real head scratcher was the song and dance the team played with Vonta Leach. His offseason cut resulted in the team paying $1.33 million in dead money against the salary cap. Yet when they resigned Leach following Dennis Pitta’s injury, his salary cap hit for the 2013 season was $1.47 million. Including his dead money and his new salary cap hit, Leach cost the team $2.8 million of cap space. Add in the fact that he rarely saw the field (19.5 percent of snaps played) and this equals up to a poor management of cap space and use of personnel for what he cost.

Much has been made of the Ravens cutting Boldin and his $6 million salary. However, the Ravens were stuck with $1.5 million of dead money against the salary cap, so they really only saved $4.5 million. At the time, the Ravens used the money saved on Boldin, along with the money saved in cutting Leach, to sign Dumervil, Huff, Spears, and Chris Canty. Later in free agency the Ravens were able to add Daryl Smith.

Did the Ravens make the right decision? Did the money saved on Boldin allow the Ravens to add impactful players to the roster? Did they have to cut Boldin, or was there a way to keep him and add the players above?

Well, it is easy to sit here now (nine months later and after the season played out) and suggest how the Ravens could have constructed the roster. But in the spirit of playing fantasy GM, let’s play along. There was a scenario where the Ravens could have cut Jacoby Jones ($4.9 million in salary, but $1.9 in dead cap space—a total of $3 million in salary cap savings) and Leach, while keeping Boldin, and signing Dumervil, Smith, and Canty (these three signings cost the Ravens $5.1 million). Ah, what could have been!

Conclusion
By and large the Ravens made the right moves. The results were not always pretty, but many of the changes were upgrades to what was already on the roster. The Ravens were in a very difficult salary cap bind at the end of their Super Bowl run, but they were able to find new players that cost less money and whom performed at a higher level. 

This is Part I of the three part End of the Season Reality Assessment. Part II will assess the 2013 roster overhaul decisions, and Part III will look ahead to the 2014 roster decisions that will need to be made. Part I (written prior to the Ravens’ State of the Union) of the End of the Season Reality Assessment will assess Joe Flacco and his 2013 season within the confines of the Ravens’ offense.

I wrote back in July that there was a good chance that we would see Joe Flacco take another developmental step now that he was free from the confines of former offensive coordinator Cam Cameron. After a resurgence of his confidence helped lift his game to new heights throughout the 2012 postseason, Flacco was poised to take command of the offense in 2013. He was expected to live up to the blockbuster contract he signed following the historic run through the Super Bowl and provide leadership to the Ravens after the departure of some high profile leaders. This was to be his team.

Well, it is safe to say that the 2013 season was not a stellar season for Joe Flacco. His 22 interceptions were a career high, his yardage per attempt (6.37) was a career low, and his touchdown production (19) was his lowest since his rookie season. The questions that surrounded Joe Flacco and whether or not he deserved his franchise quarterback contract back in March are being asked a bit louder in the wake of the Ravens missing the playoffs for the first time in five years.

The prevailing opinion is that Flacco cannot effectively elevate the play of those around him. Is this true? Maybe, but maybe not. I certainly take issue with Mike Preston and his assertion that Flacco Is the equivalent of Andy Dalton and Matthew Stafford. However, as you read my views below, we both agree on things that need to change.

Taking a look around the league and at “franchise” or “elite” quarterbacks, you see Peyton Manning making stars out of Demaryius Thomas and Eric Decker. Tom Brady was placed into a similar situation as Flacco this year, as Brady has been surrounded by fresh faces at the skill positions. Yet Brady has kept the New England Patriots chugging away, wining another AFC East division. Drew Brees helped develop seventh-rounder Maques Colston into a top wide receiver in the league, and he is helping develop fifth-round rookie Kenny Stills. Aaron Rodgers has been crucial in the development of Jordy Nelson, James Jones, and Randall Cobb.

When it comes to Flacco, the argument can certainly be made that he has not helped the development of some of the Ravens’ receivers over the past few years. Torrey Smith may be more of a number two wide receiver rather than a true number one (maybe a 1A?). Ed Dickson has regressed in his time as a Raven. Tandon Doss has been a bust. Deonte Thompson has not made an impact.

On the flip side, Dennis Pitta has become a budding star at the tight end position. Torrey Smith has gotten better each and every year. Undrafted rookie Marlon Brown had quite the rookie year.

However, in all of the lists above, the quarterback cannot be given full praise for the success and development of the receivers. Coaching, offensive scheme, talent, and personal drive of the individual player are all in the mix that help determine the outcome of success for any given player. Likewise, the quarterback cannot be the sole cause of the other players’ failures. There are too many factors that are in play when talking about a player’s development.

Keeping to this theme, the Ravens offense in 2013 had many unpredictable factors heading into the season. Not many people predicted that the offensive line would be a mess beyond repair, that the running game would falter, and that the loss of Pitta would be so devastating.

The Ravens running game all but disappeared this season, to the tune of 83 yards per game and 3.1 yards per carry. This is a stark comparison to last season’s averages of 119 yards per game and 4.3 yards per attempt. The drop of production from Ray Rice was dramatic. According to Pro Football Focus, Rice’s elusive rating (a metric that takes into account yards after contact, and missed tackles forced of rushes and receptions) dropped 70% from 2012 to 2013. Bernard Pierce was equally as unproductive, as his elusive rating also decreased by 70%. That is a serious fall for the run game.

The offensive line, a strength of the Ravens during last year’s postseason, collapsed. Micheal Oher took four steps backwards (figuratively, and literally as he was a league leader in false starts). Marshall Yanda, though he claims otherwise, never fully recovered from offseason shoulder surgery. Center Gino Gradkowski could not adequately replace Matt Birk, in the brains or brawn departments. Kelechi Osemele was lost in week four of the season, and his replacement, A.Q. Shipley was physically overmatched. Bryant McKinnie, a questionable re-sign inthe offseason, was a complete bust. To say that this offensive line struggled would be an understatement. Three of the five offensive line players ranked in the bottom of their respective positions—Gradkowksi, Oher, and Shipley—according to Pro Football Focus.

The loss of Pitta was equally crushing to the Ravens’ offense. As we all know, Pitta was to become a focal point of the offense due to the departure of Anquan Boldin. Once Flacco lost Pitta, the roster was practically set, and it was limited. Dallas Clark and Brandon Stokley were not the answer, and there inclusion on the final 53-man roster may have actually hurt the development of Thompson, Doss, and/or caused Aaron Mellette to end up on injured reserve with a “phantom” injury. Smith wasn’t able to beat coverages designed to slow him, Brown is still green (pun intended), and Jacoby Jones is not consistent enough to be a true number two receiver.

How is this all pertinent to Flacco and his ability to carry an offense? Well, I believe that we cannot get a fair read on his ability to carry a team. A weak and struggling offensive line and no running game to speak of made it too obvious to opposing teams what the gameplan of the Ravens was going to be. How can Flacco be expected to make others better when he is running for his life and/or his down and distance is less than desirable? The Ravens lack of running game kept them from staying on schedule most of the season (second and long, third and long situations). The offensive line allowed too many pressures and sacks in obvious passing plays.

All of these factors work in tandem. Teams can be efficient if the run game keeps defenses honest, or if the offensive line is efficient. Offenses become prolific when both the run game and offensive line are effective, and sometimes this true in spite of the quarterback.

Manning has a stellar offensive line, and an effective run game. Sure, his academic acumen and quick release helps both, but there is a reason he chose Denver during his free agent tour in 2012. Brady is playing behind a stout offensive line, and he has the ninth ranked run game in the NFL. And though the New Orleans Saints’ run game is not a juggernaut, it keeps opposing teams accountable, and Bress does play behind a very respectable offensive line (even with the recent switch to rookie left tackle, Terron Armstead). Rodgers now has a run game in Eddie Lacy that is able fully complement the passing attack.

As I stated (well, maybe I ranted) back after the Jets game, every quarterback, and football team for that matter, needs balance. I believe it is a tad premature to conclude that Flacco does not have what it takes to “carry” a team.

Taking this idea a step further, without Joe Flacco the Ravens win four games this year, maybe five. Without him at the helm, the Ravens lose the following games: home game against the Browns, the Dolphins, the Jets, home against the Steelers, and the Vikings. Quite frankly, I do not believe that Justin Tucker’s heroics in Detroit materialize without Flacco making key plays at the end of the game—third and fifteen, Flacco to Jones for 27 yards is one example. Granted, Flacco did have a major hand in the losses against the Bills and the game in Cleveland.

In the end, this year’s Ravens team was majorly flawed. Putting a Manning, a Brady, a Brees, or a Rodgers at quarterback would not have drastically changed the fact that the offensive line was dreadful and the run game was non-existent. Nor would any of those quarterbacks have significantly changed the outcome of the season. The team had too many holes in too many areas.

All of that being said, does this mean Flacco is off the hook for his subpar season? Absolutely not. As the franchise quarterback and the unquestioned team leader, he needs to step up his commitment in the offseason. As John Harbaugh alluded to in a press conference following the season, Flacco needs to start working with his receivers well before OTAs. I would like to hear how he is holding throwing camps with his receivers during the offseason, how they are all mastering the back shoulder throw, how they are developing chemistry with one another that allows them to “think what the other is thinking,” etc. Clearly, the timing was off between Flacco and his receivers this season. With young, lesser experienced receivers this kind of work is invaluable, and it needs to become a reality for the franchise-quarterback.

In addition, Flacco needs to hone his mechanics. He has never been a top-flight accurate quarterback, but his accuracy issues were exacerbated this year. As I wrote a few weeks ago, the deep passing game was sorely lacking this year compared to previous years. Sure, Flacco endured many dropped passes in the beginning of the year and the offensive line provided little protection, but his poor mechanics caused many of these issues.

Furthermore, Flacco forced too many passes this season. Surprisingly, Flacco threw the majority of his interceptions when he was not under any pressure from the pass rush. According to Pro Football Focus, only three of Flacco’s interceptions came from a result of pressure being placed on him. That means that the other 19 interceptions were the result of either a misread, of poor timing, of a late read, or of miscommunication between Flacco and his receiver. That is deplorable.

The Ravens should really be searching for another quarterback coach this offseason. Excluding his rookie season, two of Flacco’s least productive seasons have come in years when he has not had a quarterback coach, 2011 and 2013. A quarterback coach will continue to hone Flacoo’s mechanics and he will help Flacco process the mental aspect of the position with more proficiency. I believe the lack of a quarterback coach was an overlooked deficiency in this year’s coaching staff that had a greater negative impact than people realize.

The coaching staff also needs to provide a better-rounded offensive scheme. This year, we returned to the land of vanilla. The staff never adapted their scheme to best suit their personnel. Granted, the personnel limited what they could do, but that just is more of a reason for the coaching staff to be more creative. The Ravens need to find a way to become more multiple—wide receiver screens, reverses, multiple formations, shits and movements, rollouts, middle screens to the tight end, etc.—in their gameplan approach. Too often the predictability of the offense put Flacco into difficult scenarios. If reports are true, the Ravens need to allow Flacco to regain his input.

The Ravens need to make every effort this offseason in raising the game of Flacco. That means investing in the offensive line, correcting the run game, providing more reliable targets for him, and providing coaches to work on his mechanics. Flacco, in return, needs to uphold his responsibility as the franchise quarterback. He needs to make every effort into raising his game to another level. That means he will need to build better rapport with his receivers on the field and in the classroom, refine his mechanics, and make his voice heard in the offensive gameplan.

While this was a very disappointing season for Joe Flacco, both statistically and team record-wise, the fact that he helped lead this majorly flawed team to eight wins should be acknowledged. Sure, there is plenty of room for growth, no doubt about it.

But if you were told on July 15th that the Ravens would have a turnstile offensive line, zero running game, and that they would lose Dennis Pitta for the majority of the season, how many games would you have predicted the Ravens would win? I am quite certain if you knew the actual circumstances before the start of the season, you would have said that Joe Flacco leading the team to eight wins was actually a success.