DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Hue Jackson indicates he may make Drew Stanton his No. 2 QB over Baker Mayfield

I have no problems putting absolutes on it ...

Stanton has zero chance of playing over Baker if Baker’s healthy ...

Hue was asked a question ... he made one of a few acceptable responses .... this was a good one IMO .... not that Baker needs it but it lets him know to nuttin for granted and to keep working cause its a competiton in both directions for him ...

Other acceptable responses IMO ...

- not ready to make that decision yet theres still two weeks of TC left and we have to see how things shake out ..

- i don’t deal in hypotheticals you’ll know when the depth chart and actives come out for our 9/9 game ..

Whats the upside of saying Bakers #2 today no if and or butts? ...

I don’t get it ... I think Hue said the smart thing ...

What is the problem with what he said? ...

U think if TT goes down and he plays Baker theres gonna be a mutiny by the team and fans for Stanton .... ...

Seriously .. not only do i not see it as a big deal i think it was smart ...

*shrugs* ... sure wish i knew exactly what i was missing ..

You missed nothing except a writer that is pretty much a maroon venting over nothing.

To be fair to this writer, he was piggybacking off the original article written by Mary Bae Cabot. Err, wait...maybe this makes him look even worse.

Answering a hypothetical question from the media has nothing to do with who gets what reps with which players.

It can't be overstated -- Drew Stanton is an awful QB. He has 52.4% of his passes for his career (659 pass attempts). He is really, really bad. If he plays at all we are totally screwed. He makes Josh McCown look like Peyton Manning.

Yet let's look at the flip side of this.

Both Hue and the FO have stated that they don't want Mayfield to start this year. So that's their position at this time and has been since he was drafted.

Given that position, why, at this time would you decide to make the comment that Mayfield is the #2 QB? That would mean a QB you claimed that you didn't wish to play was only an injry away from being your starter.

I don't see how anyone could see a comment like that making any sense.

Sorry bro that didnt help ...

Bakers playing second tonight ... Stantons playing 3rd ... just like it should be and always will be as long as Baker’s healthy ...

Hue would be a MORON to give Baker any first team reps in a pre-season game or a practice open to the public ... as soon as camp closes to the public Baker will get some first team reps just in case ...

No clue where u came up with the notion that the order of the reps was changing or stantonwas getting first team reps over Baker ... quite frankly if it was open to the press or public .. i’d Give them to Stanton also ... just to keep the rumors down as much as possible ...

Your right bro .. your a worry wart ..

If we can't half ass solve the LT position you see a bunch of guys at QB , LOL !

Bitino will be fine ... im way more worried about the rook ...

Game is tomorrow, not today.

I agree .. Just think Haley is trying like hell to keep Joel at LG ( WERE HE BELONGS ) .. With Zietler out ( right now ) you will be moving three pieces of the line around .. New LT , LG and RG .. That be tough to deal with ..

eh... we had the best LT in recent history and still went through QB's like Oreo's. If the other four spots can be solid, we can get by for one season without fully solving LT.

Anyone have Ross Verba on speed dial??
#thirdbestLT

Query: Why in the world did Hue Jackson ever talk about this issue at all in the first place?

Hue Jackson has been the Cleveland Browns head coach for over two and a half years now. That is far more than enough time and experience for Hue to figure out that the Browns fan base and the Cleveland sports media have an understandable but nonetheless weird and twisted obsession with backup quarterbacks.

After 1-31, Hue Jackson is skating on the edge and doesn't need to create problems for himself, whether major or minor.

This silly little brouhaha over Stanton versus Mayfield as the #2 QB is a minor tempest in a teapot, but one of Jackson's own creation. Why is he causing these stupid little kerfuffles? Why can't Hue just keep his mouth shut and carry on head coaching?

Good question.

Is it possible Hue meant that Stanton would be #2 if TT got hurt in the pre-season or a couple games into September, if he felt Baker wasn't ready?

I’m gonna go with to give posters like you two something to whine about ... and once again it worked ...

A few thoughts:

--Hue answered a direct question. He did not bring it up out of the blue. I think it was Grateful who posted the transcript. That segment was next to meaningless, yet Hue haters like cfrs and Baker lovers like tab are making it into something it is not.

--One guy called Hue a moron for what he said. There is a moron talking and it isn't Hue.

--tab, you are worried about Stanton getting Baker's reps. Yeah man, I noticed that in the first game. Stanton had way more reps than Baker. Get a freaking clue.

--And Diam, this is the kind of crap I was talking about that can derail this team quicker than a NY minute. It's going to get worse. Not better. We have finally upgraded our talent and dumb asses are trying to start controversies.

But Hue provides sooooooo much material for us whiners to whine about!

I get it. There is way too much petty, ticky-tack nonsense from the Hue Haters around here. Haters who try to troll and twist every dumb little thing into an epic Anti-Hue Hot Take.

While my comment might seem like a petty anti-Hue Hot Take, Hue does have a pattern of saying unhelpful and needlessly controversial things to the media. This Stanton versus Mayfield #2 QB rubbish is yet another example of this sad trend. So I called it out.

Though I can see the good points in Hue's favor - most skillfully pointed out by Versatile Dog, I have found too many negative points which tip the scales against Hue's favor in my view. These unhelpful media comments are one of those negative points.

Actually, I agree with you for the most part. Earlier I said 4-5, or maybe 5-6 games......maybe it should be 2-3 games.


I expect to see Baker at the helm at some point this season unless TT is strong and we are in the playoff hunt.


If Baker deserves to play game one, play him. I just think the mind set in charge aren't going to allow that to happen.


And no, that isn't a bash on Hue. I think several people have input on that decision. I don't think Hue has sole decision on that one.

I don't begrudge your opinions and you have been cool thus far. I will simply counter that Hue was asked a direct question. He didn't bring it up. He gave a politically correct answer that means next to nothing.

Think about who got the reps last week. Was it Stanton? In fact, how many did he get? I don't remember any. As in ZERO. Of all the qbs, who got the most? Was it even close?

You have to recognize coach-speak for what it is, my man. When you watch Hard Knocks, you can tell that Hue is very high on Baker.

I'm not trying to call you out, but the reporter took a little bit of nothing and ran w/it. He's getting a ton of hits because of it and that was his intent from the beginning. Hue is a easy target.

If Hue Jackson has any sense this is EXACTLY how the depth chart should be.

If Taylor goes down, Stanton should be number 2, and Stanton should play unless he is hurt.

The Browns and our fans just never seen to learn the golden rule which is:

FRANCHISE QB ARE DEVELOPED!
FRANCHISE QB ARE DEVELOPED!
FRANCHISE QB ARE DEVELOPED!
FRANCHISE QB ARE DEVELOPED!
FRANCHISE QB ARE DEVELOPED!


see that underlined word? DEVELOPED

In his rookie season Tom Brady threw only 3 passes in the last minutes of a losing game. He essentially red shirted his first season.

Drew Brees played in one game in 2001 (against KC) where he played average for a rookie, but he didn't play anymore then that...just a little taste, again essentially a red shirt...Brees like Brady was "developed"

Phillip Rivers only threw 8 passes his entire rookie season, and only 22 passes in his second season. Again, Rivers was just given "little tastes" and was "developed" over a period of time.

Aaron Rodgers only threw 16 passes as a rookie, and 15 passes as a second year player. Again, he was given "a little taste" but was developed behind the scenes.

For every Andrew Luck and Ben Rothlisberger that comes out of the draft you have 100 Brady Quinn's.

The Browns need to be "patient" with Mayfield and if Dorsey's handling of Qb is any indicator, Mayfield won't play this year.

did you know John Dorsey was a top assistant at Green Bay when Rodgers sat?

did you also know Mahomes in KC also sat his rookie year and Dorsey was the GM there?

Dorsey has a long history of sitting rookie QB's. I think Mayfield was told day one the plan for him was not to play this year by Dorsey himself. Of course Mayfeild being the competitor he is is trying to force the issue anyways, but to be frank, as long as Taylor stays healthy its not going to happen.

Mayfield has a LOT to work on...His mechanics need a lot of work...he throws off his back foot too much, he doesn't bring the ball up high enough next to his head in his passing stance. He doesn't always set his feet when he throws, and he tends to move laterally in the pocket too much on 3 step drops.

Mayfield is a project, and most of the passes he threw in the 1st preseason game would have been picked off in an actual NFL game when it mattered. Most of the passes he was throwing were against guys that won't even make an active roster, and against very vanilla base D's. Mayfield is no where near ready.

Mayfield could maybe become a franchise QB, but its not this year. Mayfield needs this year and an offseason of seasoning under Haley before he is going to be a viable NFL Qb for us...if Mayfield plays this year, he is going to find out real quick that the NFL isn't college, and the kid is going to struggle big time, and going to kill his confidence.

We have to stop this rushing rookie Qb's to play...look what happened to Kizer...had we waited a year or two and actually developed Kizer he may have ended up a good option for us. Most of Kizer's problems are mechanics and not knowing how to read a D as a 21 year old rookie.

I wasn't a fan of the Mayfield pick, but for petes sake we have to give the kid a chance, and playing him this year is NOT giving the kid a chance...he has so much work to do before he is even going to be close to being ready to play in the NFL in a real game.

We will never find a QB if were not willing to be patient and develop one...most of the great QB (Rodgers, Brady, Rivers, Brees) were developed as rookies, not thrust into the lineup as rookies...seeing Dorsey history with rookie QB...I don't think Mayfield plays this year unless their is simply no other choice and no one to get off the street.

I got a good feeling about Taylor though, I think he stays healthy and plays well enough that Baker gets his development year.

Some of you give me a headache. Your facts are way off and most of Baker's passes would not have been picked in a real game.

I agree with many of your thoughts. That might have been the best post I've read from from you.

That point of KoB's was short-sighted I agree, but generally he's right about getting rookie QBs ready before playing them.

I don't think he is right. I think it's a case-by-case individual.

Wentz succeeded as a rookie.
Watson succeeded as a rookie.
Carr succeeded as a rookie.
Ben succeeded as a rookie.
Luck succeeded as a rookie.
R. Wilson succeeded as a rookie.
Stafford succeeded as a rookie.
Flacco succeeded as a rookie.

I could go on and on.

We can point to guys who failed, as well. We can also point to guys who sat. Some succeeded. Others did not.

Making blanket statements is dumb. You gotta judge each qb individually.

Well yeah, situations are different. Generally speaking - which is what I was going for there, I know it isn't 100 per cent one way - giving a rookie quarterback time isn't a bad thing.

Plenty of QBs have succeeded long-term when they started as a rookie, I know that. I just didn't start following football a couple weeks ago.

I wasn't chastising you, lamp. I just think KOB's post was dumb.

It's all good, no offence taken.

It was a very irrelivent post ... on a bunch of fronts ....

u can point to multiple successes for both sides of that coin ...

Payton started as a rook and threw more pick than td’s .. DIDNT DESTROY HIM ...
Rodgers sat behind FAVRE (a fact KoB forgets to mention when pointing out Dorsey was in GB when Rogers sat ... NOT TO MENTION THAT STANTON AIN’T FAVRE ... i highly doubt Rogers would have sat behind Stanton for even a week of TC)

Anyhow ... sitting didn't destroy Rodgers ...

Brees started right out of the gate and sucked eggs ... hell the offensive mastermind Marty hated him so much he drafted a QB at #4 and let Brees walk ... BRILLIANT ... *L* ... it didn’t destroy him ...

There’s examples on both sides of that coin ...

Then there’s all the rooks playing beyond there years succes wise ...

Its a dumb post ... sorry to be blunt but it is ... IRRELIVENT may be a nicer way of putting it ... please insert IRRELIVENT for the word Dumb in the rest of my post ... *L* ... nevermind i did it ...

Stanton sucks and by all accounts Baker is progressing rapidly ... it would be dumb as hell to sit him if TT goes down of for some reason falls flat on his face for the first 4 - 6 games ...

I don’t think these dawgs realize just how bad Stanton is and the fact Baker at 75% may be better than Stanton ... maybe even 60% ... *L* ...

I agree w/most of what you say, w/two caveats.

--Stanton was one of the guys I said to bring in when we were all discussing veteran qbs. He's smart. His numbers suck, but he wins games. He is a good mind to have in the qb room.

--The second one is that Marty loved Brees. It was A.J. Smith, the GM for the Chargers, who pulled the plug and it was a huge factor in how Marty and Smith's relationship went to hell. In fact, Drew Brees credits Marty for a lot of his successes. Marty was tough on him, but always believed in him.

I agree Drew is good to have in the qb room and a good mentor for Baker along with TT .. but we’ll have to agree to disagree about his ability to win games ... i have no clue what his numbers are ... when i watch him my eyes tell me he stinks ...

I was on board wth bringing him in also ... just don’t want to see him play ahead of Baker at this point...

I remember Marty in week 16 (game 15) screaming at Drew in the 4th quarter at Pitt ... just destroying the kid ... he bad mouthed him the entire year ...

U could be right but i dont remember it that way ... matters not who the genius was ... it didnt destroy Brees ...

The part i never understood about Marty chastising him was that Brees had played better as the season progressed ... that never made sense to me ... and he was brutal to Drew in the press ... brutal .... but u may be right ... it may have been AJ that pulled the plug ... and if Marty liked him he had a wierd way of showing it ... *L* ...

Seems to me KOB took some time and thought to make that post. You don't agree so you just publicly call it dumb? You are everything you rail against here.

It is a no brainer. So how about we leave it at that? I think the reason Hue mentions making Stanton his No. 2 is that it kills all the second-guessers out there from discussing the possibility of Baker catching up with TT and taking over the starting role now. Make Stanton the No. 2 and it looks like that doesn't happen. Speculation over.

It's already working. The conversation has moved from starting Baker day-one to what a stupid decision it would be to make Stanton the No. 2. Now those who were clamoring for Baker at No. 1 are now clamoring for Baker at No. 2. People are a funny lot.

I also believe that if Stanton is the No. 2 and TT goes down Hue will leap frog Baker from No. 3 to the starter, replacing an injured TT. (Didn't Chud do that with Hoyer?) In the meantime idiots can discuss among themselves about what an idiot Hue is. lol

Brees had pretty much destroyed his shoulder in that final game. Had Brees not have gotten hurt it very well could have been Brees still leading the Chargers instead of Rivers. That shoulder injury dictated Brees future. There was a contingency who believed Brees' career was over. However, Rivers allowed him to be expendable.

I don't think it's right to call any post "dumb." I think a debate is the way to go than to simply call someone's post dumb.


I do, however, agree with vers about blanket statements. KOB actually contradicted himself first saying ALL quarterbacks need developed then second admitting some quarterbacks can start right away.

I also don't agree Baker is a project. Everyone here keeps saying that we are starting Tyrod because Baker isn't ready which I also don't believe is the case. Prior to the draft only two quarterbacks were said would be ready to go by the first kickoff. Baker was one of them. If Tyrod wasn't here, it's pretty clear that Baker would be the starter.