DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Baker Mayfield Part VII: The Dawg Awakens

brilliant - dump him for whom, exactly?

Plus, what are our other options? None of the big names are going to come here, we would be getting a retread... maybe a Ryan Tannehill type deal. Anybody seen what's happened to him since Henry went out? We could draft somebody latter half of the first round and start over with a rookie while all of our built up talent just continues to age for another 2 years while we wait for him to figure it out?

I still think Baker is plenty good enough to win with if he's healthy, that he does not need a "perfect situation" to be successful, just good enough...

Nick Mullens are what options are available.

Baker is 10x better than Mullens

Don't throw shade at Mullens, for our third stringer, he played lights out. Scouts visit his alma mater too, and he went undrafted even after breaking Favre's records. Nobody, and certainly not me, expected him to outplay (good) Baker. But along the same lines, he kicked (bad) Baker's ass today.

I disagree with this.

Me too. Only reason somebody would feel that is because of the expectations they went in with... We expect more out of Baker (as we should), nobody had many expectations of Mullens... but if Baker went 20/30 for 147 yards and 1 TD and had no points until near the end of the 3rd quarter, that would rank as one of his worst games of the year.

I give all the credit in the world to Mullens, he played exceptionally well, especially given the circumstances.... so don't take anything I say as a knock on Mullens...

If you take into consideration the drops by DPJ his numbers would be more like 23-30, for over 200 yards. Of course some people would never look at Baker's dropped passes and give him slack.

Think we've seen similar play out of the starting O this season. Baker included. And I said the bad version of Baker.

We have seen similar play out of the offense before... You didn't say he played as good as bad Baker, you said he kicked bad Baker's ass... which is untrue.

Except for that 2 minute drive by Mullens to end the half, that drive actually got first downs.

Of course they do. Some people fail to admit that every QB faces drops by his WR's and TE's and pretend it only happens to Baker.

In three of the last four games 20/30 would have been refreshing when you saw 50%.

I think comparisons between Baker and Mullens are mute. Different situations, play calling, decimated OL for Mullens and lack of reps, lots of variables that make a comparison wholly subjective .... I didn't see Mullens throw any balls Baker can't do or make and many lacked some zip/spiral - and while I didn't see Mullens make some of the bad throws we've seen Baker make the sample size was small and against a so-so defense. So impossible or inaccurate to try and draw any meaningful conclusions. I would stick to saying Mullens and the entire team did enough to win the game. I will say the same thing I have said after some of the other loses - conservative play calling hurt the team and cost the Browns a win. On the one hand - great job getting the team prepared to play under the circumstances, great job getting into a position where a win was a realistic possibility, but another ultra conservative approach and another loss.

I would just like to add that when you're down to your third string QB, his limitations also become the play callers limitations. Mullens doesn't have much arm strength and can only do what he is capable of doing. I actually think the coaching staff made the most out of what he is capable of doing and that Mullens did a petty good job taking advantage of his opportunity.

I agree with that 100% - when I wrote 'play calling' in the first part of my post about QB comparisons, it meant in relationship to what plays Mullens knows and has a higher % chance to successfully complete. That said, regards the conservative play calling at the end of the day - Mullens had done more than enough to demonstrate that a short, medium pass on a roll out or PA had a high % chance of success, especially given the situation and D that was called. * Edit - and if it did not work, adding 30 seconds to the play clock was unlikely to make a difference to the result. Raiders and 2 full minutes and no time outs have more than enough time to get into FG range ... hell, if they had 2 1/2 minutes left, maybe the D would have played to stop them instead of slow them down.

Yes I certainly wasn't trying to indicate the play calling was perfect by any means. I mean play calling only looks good when it works.

I agree with that 1000%.. our coaches, IMHO, have the whole risk/reward thing backwards... they will go for it on 4th and 4 from the 8 in the first quarter of 0-0 game when all we should really do is take the points but they will punt on 4th and 2 from midfield when we have a chance to ice a game away and NOT give them a chance for a game winning drive.

I was actually impressed when we went for it on 4th and goal from the 5 with 4 minutes to go in the game and scored the TD rather than kick the FG and play for a second game tying FG... I thought maybe Priefer was different and would take the chances to win the game... I was wrong... and AVP was equally cowardly in his play calling after the INT...

Mullens had shown more than enough composure and accuracy to be given a chance to throw the ball at least once in that sequence to try to win the game.

Unfortunately, we have a team that doesn't play to win - they play not to lose. As evident by this last game, as I stated here many times, the Browns have no idea how to close out a game and their 2-minute offense is among the bottom feeders in the NFL. Though Stefanski's conservative scheme caught many teams by surprise in 2020 resulting in a playoff appearance, in 2021 teams came prepared and Stefanski has failed miserably in adjusting his game plan.

This inability to adjust is going to cause much bigger issues than the won/loss record of 2021. Last year when the Browns were coming off a playoff season with high hopes for 2021, the FA market was ripe with players that considered becoming a Cleveland Brown. That will not be the case in 2022. As an offense skill player, namely WR, if you ask Landry, Hooper, or OBJ about their feelings and you can bet that having your targets cut by 50% over the last 2 years is not going to be a good selling point for available FA WR's. Especially when you look at where the Browns have scored more than 14 points once in the last 5 games. Defensively, how many players are going to be biting at the bit to get to Cleveland to play for a defense that has allowed 16 points or fewer in eight out of the 14 games with the 13th best scoring defense in the league and you're sporting a .500 record.

Stefanski's conservative scheme and his unwillingness to adjust that scheme is going to have a much bigger negative impact on the Browns future than the 2021 W/L record. I don't believe that OBJ will be the last player the Browns have that will be demanding a trade. The Browns are currently 26th in passing offense and 19th in total offense, not a good ranking if you're trying to recruit skill players. This is especially true when you consider you are only going to see 3-4 targets per game. Stefanski is killing the Browns FA market.

In many ways I agree.

When we went to a 2-3 TE look, I liked the idea.

I don't so much anymore because when we went to that set, I envisioned the TE's actually being a big part of the passing game. That hasn't been the case.

The only question I have is it because the TE's aren't really drawn in to the passing attack, the TE's can't get open, or the QB doesn't look to throw to the TE's?

If we are going to keep running this bunched up set in a wide open league, we have to figure that out.

Take Harrison Bryant. It could be up for debate, but I think he has the best hands in the group. He has 18 receptions on the season. Hooper has 33. Njoku 30. Those 3 combined are near what the top TE's in the league are catching.

Something isn't adding up IMO.

Good points ... and off the subject of Baker but well worth a discussion. Our TE group is the ultimate enigma. Each one individually is "Good". But together they don't seem to be greater than the sum of their parts - in fact it almost seems they are less than the sum of their parts.

Hooper got paid like a stud because of the yardage he racked up in Atlanta - PFF or one of the other quality sports media (The Athletic) did a bit of a deep dive on that and found that most of his catches and yards came in garbage time of Atlanta games where they were in catch up mode. But he is mostly very reliable, if not spectacular.

Njoku can look like a man amongst boys sometimes - he is freakishly athletic and has made spectacular catches - like the one versus the Raiders this Tuesday. But he has been the most inconsistent. He's dropped a lot of routine balls over his time with the Browns and his blocking started off bad - but has improved. He's also the receiver who Collinsworth pointed out was Browns Deep Threat !! Which overall for the offense is a terrible indictment. Sure that game was impacted by injuries and Njoku was forced into that roll (vs Ravens?) - but still.

I agree Bryant has good hands - seems to do everything well enough. Again - a bit like Hooper - you just don't see anything special there, other than maybe the reliable hands? He seemed to flash a couple times last year - but like so many (DPJ, Higgins etc) he's either under utilized or he has regressed.

You'd think by having a 3 TE (13) set with good pass catching ability that somewhere there would be a mismatch and while I don't know what the stats are, overall I'd think we have decent results out of that formation... but the plays result in short conservative completions and rely on long, sustained drives. As soon as we are behind a couple of scores or play a very good defense that prevents the long drive ... we don't have an effective plan B that switches things up. I guess some might say that's because of limitations of our QB - I think it's more scheme. The big plays we do have - and there is probably more than some realize - come off play action. Earlier in games when the game is tied or we have a lead. In games where we are chasing that becomes far less effective.

Anyway - I agree Bryant has good hands. I think he has the most reliable hands while I think Njoku has the ability to make more spectacular plays.

I think I would shop around in the playbook. Three TE hasn't given us an edge IMO. I don't think that phase is paying for its own keep. I agree that it should, and admit that maybe it can. But not as called to repeat my knock on KS and a myopic conservative playcalling. Our hands are good enough, we catch plenty in spite of marginal separation. I would suggest someone with more ability than me analyze and comment on the routes we are using (my point is the routes we are avoiding for the TEs that are effective elsewhere in the NFL) and especially their depth. We are using routes called (?) short of the sticks, Like we need eight but complete it short for three, regularly in Vegas debacle. But the flip side is running a twenty yard pattern (with slower receivers, mind you) when we need less than five, say, to move the sticks.
Look at Kelce's (sp?) patterns. Look at what simple patterns have done to Woods in our defense. Simple, short passes, seam routes, use the middle (which we avoid much of the time). We favor sideline drops. With three, I expect to see more variety from TE. Combos that work ar are discarded if they can't be fixed. I cannot overcome the feeling of more of a very limited same game after game. Refuse to or can't figure it out as to why it fails, so we insist and persist. Most simply put, looking back at this season, we have failed to learn from our mistakes and they are repeated. We can do better, we can adjust, but I am leaving this with the playcaller and hope Berry can address some issues. I feel that, without explanations and favorite rationalizations, this group wasted a bunch of talent. Those "paper" wins don't count for much. Go, Browns.

Your points are solid as well.

I do think it pertains to Baker, or at least potentially. Does he look to the TE enough? I don't think Hooper got bad all of a sudden after catching 70 or so a year in Atlanta. Receivers are only studs if they get the ball thrown their way.

To me it is pretty evident that Baker and Stefanski don't mix when it comes to offensive philosophy. I am not saying one or the other is better or wrong. They are just different.

As for the TE's, and receviers in general, the passing game seems to be a more horizontal, controlled passing game. We just don't seem to push the ball very much until we are forced to do so.

The Browns' passing offense seems self-limiting in the lack of depth our receivers get in their patterns. They almost always seem to be closely covered, contested throws which, even if completed, rarely result in any kind of YAC. Our guys catch the ball and are immediately tackled. Meanwhile, I see our opponents throwing to TE's running free 7-10 yard down the middle. It's beyond maddening to me how much bigger the field looks when we're on Defense.

This 100. Feels like an alternate universe at times.

The window of what is considered "open" in the NFL is certainly not the same as it is in college. If you have a single step on your defender in the NFL, you're considered open. We see it in every game played in the NFL. A QB "throws his WR open". Announcers point out all the time how QB's "placed the ball where only their WR had a shot at catching the ball". To the inside or outside shoulder and so forth.

The vast majority of the time when you see a WR wide open, someone blew the coverage or exploited a mismatch.

or, how we've seemingly had a philosophical regression and have gone back to the days of WR's running 6 yard routes when we need 11 yards for a 1st Down.

The offense that routinely gained us chunk yardage and kept defenses on their heels has been killed off.

So you don't think any of them are running routes that go beyond the first down marker? Or is it the WR or TE the QB chooses as his target hasn't gone beyond the first down marker?

Not any that are getting open, lately, no.... or, not any that are getting open on-time and before the pocket begins to break down.

I don't know if anyone has reported this before, but according to NFL.COM Mullens had a higher QB rating (vs the Raiders) than all but one of Mayfield's starts! Not sure what this is telling us....

Nothing tangible to point to - but I would speculate the TE seam route is a challenge given Baker's height? idk.

The rest of the discussion is interesting and I agree our scheme seems to prevent chunk plays and seems to be more easily neutralized. I still think a large part of this is injuries - Baker, OL, WRs, RBs. We've not had a consistent series of games where everyone is healthy and can get in sync.

On how open the receivers are - and QB's throwing open WR. I've seen Baker throw open WRs more than any other QB in a Browns uniform ... by a country mile. It's something he does well (when he's playing well and not injured). With that said - if you watch our WR and others we face game in game out, I'd argue the eye test says our WR have less separation than the opponents 'most' of the time. Just form the eye test and memory. Subjective but it's what I see and it was something I noticed in the only game I went to this year as well as seeing it on the tv.

It's telling us that we should keep Nick Mullens as our backup next year instead of making Keenum the highest paid backup in the league.

Likely nothing actually meaningful until he does it after there is a ton of tape of him in this offense to see his tendencies.
He throws a VERY ugly ball, and he got lucky a LOT in not having balls picked.

I've seen this posted often as a popular opinion but have not seen the film which would back up that opinion. If you have seen film breakdown that shows this, my apologies. If you haven't, then I'll have to add this to the list of opinions. And once again, the NFL version of "open" doesn't mean wide open. It means having a step on the defender. Often times it simply requires a QB to throw to the inside or outside shoulder which we see in NFL games week in and week out all across the league.

I felt relatively sure that would apply to Mayfields last 4 starts but had no idea it would include every game all season except for one.

It's telling us that any time you manipulate stats subjectively that you open yourself up to questioning...

Raiders Mullen's 20/30 (66.6%) for 147 yards (4.9 ypa) and 1 TD (team scored 14 points) rated at a 89.2
Chargers Baker's 23/32 (71.9%) for 305 yards (9.5 ypa) and 2 TDs (team scored 42 points) rated at a 42.9

Maybe that's the "one"?

Well that sure got a lot of responses. Thanks for the interesting POV's, guys....

Honestly bb, Mullens looked better than Baker throughout the game. I don't know if it is because Baker's injury is holding him way back or not.

Either way, I don't think Baker can lead us to the Super Bowl even if healthy.

No he didnt. All Mullens did is throw 3 yard passes and go 3 and out. And thats not a bash on Mullens. It was probably the play call.