We've been down this road before

We've been down this road before

There are 68 comments on the Baltimore Sun story from Apr 27, 2008, titled We've been down this road before. In it, Baltimore Sun reports that:

After working the phones feverishly and ultimately missing out on their first option, the Ravens selected a quarterback to finally fill that black hole in the pocket, a young arm and sharp mind charged with ...

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Baltimore Sun.

First Prev
of 4
Next Last
Jacob

Catonsville, MD

#1 Apr 27, 2008
Rick, Boller didn't have great college numbers. He completed 47% of his passes at Cal. That's down right bad.

I'll take Flacco's 63%, even if it is I-AA, over Boller's stats anytime.

But the similarities between the Leftwich-Boller and Ryan-Flacco drafts cannot be denied. Here's hoping for a different outcome.
Mike Morgan

Boca Raton, FL

#2 Apr 27, 2008
What a negative article.
John

Ocean City, MD

#3 Apr 27, 2008
Big difference between Boller and Flacco.Flaco doesn't have bad throwing mechanics.The problem is the Ravens have crap recievers that can't get open and a Swiss cheese offensive line.

This was such a thin draft that the Ravens had to calculate who would have the most impact going forward.I liked McKelvin but he wasn't worth an 8th pick.

The real head scratcher to me was the RB in the second round.
Ravens_Flock

United States

#4 Apr 27, 2008
Boller had a 47% completion rate at Cal because his first two years were spent in a fairly piss poor offensive system. Sound familiar?

It wasn't until his third year, when Jeff Tedford came onboard, someone who has a penchant for getting the most out of a QB, and he installed a whole new, and EFFICIENT offense, that Boller suddenly excelled, and had a GREAT year. 28 TDs and 10 INTs is certainly nothing to laugh at, nor was his "Big Game" victory at the end of the year. He set California state records in high school AND college for a reason. And last but not least, as you mentioned, it was in a REAL division, unlike Flacco.

Boller was praised for his final year of college football, not judged on the two poor years prior. It was recognized that he did better because it was a better system, and a better coach. Case in point, there's no telling how far Boller could have gone by now in the NFL, had he stepped into an EFFICIENT passing offense. He was never used right from day one, and in his original years as a starter, he was not only held back by injuries (caused by piss poor pass protection), but he also rarely had good talent to work with. Handing the ball off to Jamal Lewis doesn't count. And his only full season as a starter (in 2004), he was forced to do without the only GOOD target he had, Todd Heap.

Now, suddenly, coming into his sixth NFL season, Kyle Boller is older, calmer, and wider. He no longer quite has the "save our team" weight of the world on his shoulders, and what's more, he now has a new, hopefully more EFFICIENT passing offense to learn, and hopefully thrive in. I'm sure most have long since given up on Boller, if they ever supported him in the first place. But honestly, if you consider that he only has about 3 seasons as a starter under his belt, and just now might finally have the opportunity to have his skills used the RIGHT way, then I hardly think it's fair to throw him under the bus for those early years. He paid his price (although don't think he should have had to), backing up McNair for two seasons. But he also obviously learned a lot from that experience, and I think he is precisely the type of QB that Cam Cameron is so good at getting the best out of.

Poor start, struggling in a weak offense. Now has new coach, new offense, chance for a new start, and could potentially do very well. Sound familiar? Don't get excited about Flacco just yet......the negativity is warranted, because truth is, Joe Flacco is a relative nobody.....to think that Ozzie could actually believe he can be "the QB to lead this team into the future", is laughable. Then again, we're talking about the same guy that thought a broken down Steve McNair, at the end of his career, could lead this team into the future.......
eric

Baltimore, MD

#5 Apr 27, 2008
The Ravens say the difference is accuracy. Flacco has it Boller didn't. We'll see.
Nestor Aparicio

Manchester, MD

#6 Apr 27, 2008
Well-stated about the comparisons with Boller. No doubt that there was MUCH more optimism about Boller five years ago than there is for Flacco this morning. And Boller was a guy other teams might've taken at No. 19. I'm not sure Flacco wouldn't have been there at No. 38 given how far Henne and Brohm fell.
Jacob

Catonsville, MD

#7 Apr 27, 2008
Boller had a 47% completion rate at Cal because his first two years were spent in a fairly piss poor offensive system. Sound familiar?
It wasn't until his third year, when Jeff Tedford came onboard, someone who has a penchant for getting the most out of a QB, and he installed a whole new, and EFFICIENT offense, that Boller suddenly excelled, and had a GREAT year.

Tedford does a great job of masking the deficiencies of the QBs he coaches. And it is a distinguished bunch: Trent Dilfer, Akili Smith, Joey Harrington, and Kyle Boller. I suppose each of these QBs fell into situations where the offensive systems failed them, right?
No matter what "offensive system" you put Boller in, he won't be a starting QB, even if you moved Tedford's system to the NFL.
Ali V

Raleigh, NC

#8 Apr 27, 2008
Well said CHICO!!

Hopefully Cam will hook us up with 3 bad @ss QBs to the point that we would never have to worry about who is our starter!! We have the talent, but NOW we have a fabulous staff who can tun things around. GOD WILLING
sembo

Butler, MD

#10 Apr 27, 2008
Great post Raflock , as opposed to Maese , pandering to the kooks again.And while Boller didn't turn out to be the messiah ,he has shown flashes of quarterback competance .(if competance can be called a flash)The key thing is as you say he's calmer .With him and the new guy , the Ravens could be in pretty good shape .Now if Ossie and Decosta can work some of their magic in the later rounds .........
bill

Lakeland, FL

#11 Apr 27, 2008
This is exactly what I was going to say...except to add,'Rick your a dick.'

"Rick, Boller didn't have great college numbers. He completed 47% of his passes at Cal. That's down right bad.

I'll take Flacco's 63%, even if it is I-AA, over Boller's stats anytime.

But the similarities between the Leftwich-Boller and Ryan-Flacco drafts cannot be denied. Here's hoping for a different outcome."
Paul

Cincinnati, OH

#12 Apr 27, 2008
Rick
here's one thing that appears the same the press is already beating up on him. You talk about the similarities between Leftwich and Boller, let me ask you which is still an NFL player, and which stay with his team. As far as Flacco i think the Raven got the better of the two, Ryan was all hype. Flacco was not only recruited by big college programs but did play some at Pitt before transferring and didn't have just one outstanding year but was consistent when ever he played. I realize you want your glamor boy Ryan , I;m plenty happy with a good worker with a good arm.
Bob

Baltimore, MD

#13 Apr 27, 2008
Here we go ...again ! A .QB who the Ravens claim "can do it all" lol
the one who knows

Broadway, NC

#14 Apr 27, 2008
we should at least have a more exciting offense to watch this year, with two big arms and a 3rd qb who can make plays with his feet.
Andrew

United States

#15 Apr 27, 2008
Leave it to the Baltimore Sun to complain non-stop about the local teams and when the Ravens make a bold move that nearly every expert praises and fans generally agree with, to sour the mood. I grew up in Maryland with the Baltimore Sun and I read it everyday down here in Florida and the negative trend in the articles is beginning to be just sickening.
I have seen both Flacco and Boller play in person. Flacco is bigger, stronger, more poised, and has a more accurate arm than Boller. Kyle Boller did not have a good college career, as stated, he had one good year and has done nothing since. The Ravens offense hoped he could be the next coming, but he was just an average quarterback, a backup in the league. The offense became catered to his style of passing, as he turned the ball over all the time.
Joe Flacco is a good quarterback, who will be a fine NFL franchise QB.
Mikey

Myerstown, PA

#16 Apr 27, 2008
Silly Ravens!!! The guy played in a spread offense! Last time I checked NO NFL team runs one. That may explain the gaudy numbers. Go ahead and wet pants with excitement Ravens fans.........just like when Boller was your top pick. How did that work out for you?
Brian

Severna Park, MD

#17 Apr 27, 2008
Obviously Ozzie wanted either Ryan or Flacco in this draft. The reason he had to move back up to #18 was probably becuase Carolina , who also needed a QB, traded with the Eagles at #19. Only time will tell if moving back up to select Flacco was a good move but Ozzie didn't mortgage the farm to do so. Not sure why he took Rice in the 2nd round. I wasn't impressed with him when Rugers played MD but again, time will tell if this was a good move.
dj khalid

Pompano Beach, FL

#18 Apr 27, 2008
i still likes tha boy troy smith. or maybe they could trade for macnabb. give philly a couple of draft picks and maybe todd heaps.
Dave

Charles Town, WV

#19 Apr 27, 2008
What is with Steelers fans getting on here to make fun of the Ravens draft picks? I wouldn't take the time to read a crappy Pittsburgh paper, let alone their message board. Mikey from York must lead a thrilling life.
Frank

Baltimore, MD

#20 Apr 27, 2008
Flacco will rightly be perceived as a risk because of his small school pedigree and his history of working almost eclusively out of the gun.
Trading out of 8 was the right move but it would have been nice to grab a front-line corner at 26 and the get Flacco (or Henne) at 38. Moving up to 18 was a VERY agressive move and therefore subject to the second-guessing that has surfaced.
I've got my doubts, but based on the track-record, all you can say is, "IN OZZIE WE TRUST"
bob b

Naples, FL

#21 Apr 27, 2008
I hope that I am wrong on this, but the greatest similarity between Boller and Flacco could be that both have to play behind a real bad pass blocking line. The young line will have to step up and play far better than they did last year, or our QB play will be the same as it has been in years past.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 4
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Byron Leftwich Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News 5 Reasons Why Tim Tebow Makes Sense for Pittsbu... (May '13) May '13 29 Bland 10
News Steelers Sign QB from Waivers (Mar '13) Mar '13 Rbohemis 3
News NFL Rumors: Will the Pittsburgh Steelers Sign a... (Nov '12) Nov '12 hammertime 3
News Leftwich to start at QB for Steelers on Sunday (Nov '12) Nov '12 We Are Marshall 8
News Pittsburgh Steelers sign Troy Smith (Jan '12) Jan '12 wOw 1
News Manning-less Colts in tough - just ask Dungy (Sep '11) Sep '11 Streakfarts 2
News Steelers embrace underdog status in Super Bowl ... (Jan '11) Feb '11 The Geno 72
More from around the web