DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Browns News & Notes (Continued)

If true, which I don't know, and yet, won't concede, this is a far bigger indictment on his future with this team, IMO. However, it's seems to be pretty clear his injuries have been an issue and his poor mechanics have been noted, time and time again.

Like I said more mental than physical. Just speaking the truth.

The shoulder brace he's had to wear all season that both Alex Van Pelt and Bernie Kosar told us makes accuracy on certain throws very difficult isn't mental.

There are posters on this board I often question when they post something like this. I consider it purely speculation on their part. You are not one of them. Thanks.

Passing up wide open receivers for sacks and interceptions is mental.

Did the harness affect Baker's decision making and not seeing wide open receivers on a consistent basis?

Not being sure you can make a throw because you're wearing a brace that inhibits a normal throwing motion is a classic crisis of confidence that is mental. IMO, the genesis of his inability to perform at the level we have all seem him perform before is the injury.

If this is true then he’s not a starter in the league. You have to be able to play banged up.

I don't mean to insult you, but I think you might not understand the mechanics between the lead arm and the throwing arm. (Its important - ask a pitcher.)

I am not referring to any mechanics. I’m saying if you lose your confidence or ability to throw to open receivers because you are injured then you are not mentally equipped to be an NFL starter.

But you are ignoring the core reason for the loss of confidence: the injury. Once he's healed, if he still has the same problem, you can say its mental.

The coaches should have a good idea what the problem is. I trust their judgment after being with the players for two years. I like Baker as a person and think the works hard. My only interest is for the team to be better. If it is determined that the best way to make the team better is to bring back Baker healthy then I am all for it.

I fear the injury was not the problem.

I felt we kinda moved away from FB having a big role in our offense this year (please correct me if I'm wrong). If so, and if we're still going to have a FB on the roster, I wouldn't mind it being Stanton instead of Janovich. Stanton could have a bit more to his game.

add: Janovich was on the field for 92 snaps this year, and 172 last year. Stanton had similar # of snaps from year to year. I'm not really sure what to make of these numbers.

Coach Stef wants him for the Wildcat role on 4th and short in the red zone.

Browns sign 8 players to future/reserves contracts

link


One of the first orders of business for NFL teams in the offseason is to handle the players who ended the season on the practice squad. Those players are not technically under contract to the team any longer.

For the practice squad players or street free agents the Cleveland Browns and other teams wish to keep around to at least start the 2022 offseason, they can sign reserve/future contracts. They are effectively commitments by the team to bring the players back with a chance to compete for spots in the coming season.

Cleveland signed eight of those to reserve/future contracts on Monday:

TE Miller Forristall

OG Hjalte Froholdt

TE Nick Guggemos

CB Nate Meadors

OG David Moore

FB Johnny Stanton

OT Alex Taylor

DE Curtis Weaver

All will be welcomed back to Cleveland once the offseason activities kick off later this winter.

Glad to see Curtis Weaver signed. He was considered a steal in the draft for the Dolphins until he about ripped his big toe off. Then we stole him from the Dolphins, who had to waive him for off season injury rules that I don't understand. This guy was highly rated, and if he is recovered from that injury, we might have Tak's replacement.

You say you trust the coaches, the same ones that let him go out and play week after week?
I don't quite understand that perspective, if he has sucked that bad for so many weeks, and the coaches didn't pull him, then why do they suddenly know what they are doing?

Again, Baker said he could play, the medical staff said he could play, and he was practicing. The only reason to bench Baker was because of his poor play and that wasn’t going to happen.

Baker would say he could play no matter what the injury was.



...with minimal risk of further injury, not that he could perform anywhere near 100%.



With a red jersey on and no chance of getting hit/sacked. The people he faces in practice are getting paid NOT to hit him.


There was another reaon. To allow him to heal and get back healthy as quickly as possible, once it was obvious he couldn't perform in games. This would have been best for everyone involved.

It seems like fans are attributing Baker’s poor performance to his injury much more so than what the Browns are willing to attribute when evaluating his body of work this season.

Here are Andrew Berry’s comment from his Dec. 1st press conference:

On why it was important for Mayfield to play through injuries and not rest before the final five games of the season:

“I think it is a couple of things. I probably should be clear here: For any player in terms of whether they are on the field or not, it is really three separate things. No. 1, are they medically cleared from the perspective that they can’t do anything harmful to their health or significantly harmful to their health. No. 2, are they medically cleared in a manner that would allow them to function in their role on the field and play at a winning level in their role on the field. Then No. 3, does the player both by feel and honestly by evidence throughout the practice week, can he perform all the requirements of his role on gameday. We will never put a player on the field that does not pass those three criteria, whether it is our quarterback, an offensive lineman, a member of the secondary, a punter or a kicker. That holds through for Baker. Our expectation is when guys on the field and players’ expectation of themselves when they are on the field, if they are there, they are going to perform at a high level. The second piece of that is the reality is we are in December in the NFL, and nobody is 100 percent. It does not matter what position you play. Everybody who is there is not only healthy enough to be out there or healthy enough to play but healthy enough to play at a winning level. That is our expectation for guys when they are on the field.”

https://www.wkyc.com/amp/article/sp.../95-18de03a0-ed62-45e0-8710-2796a1e34287

I'm probably getting too far into the weeds here (so ignore if that's the case), but I find that first part (and all of it really) kinda hilarious. We're talking about pro football. Conklin was medically cleared for the elbow only to get a way worse injury to his knee. Shazier nearly paralyzed himself. There's the articles about the linemen putting weight on however they can (usually in extremely unhealthy ways). The simple act of making the team and being on the sideline is doing something harmful to their health.
So from that perspective, not sure how you can make the determination that a guy in a shoulder harness won't be hampered enough in throwing the ball. It requires the Doc and Coach to measure (among other things) his tough-guy-ness.

Now that I wrote this all out, it doesn't seem very productive towards the overall conversation. Baker has more issues going on than the injuries can explain... I just find the back and forth about whether he should/shouldn't have been out there and the team's official line kinda silly.

One problem here. He wasn't and isn't "going to heal" until he has surgery. No amount of rest alone would have gotten him back healthy.

well, it doesn't matter what fans do or don't want... we have Baker next year.

I hope it is a smoke screen. Baker aint the guy.

They are going to say Baker is the guy until he is not the guy. He also may be the guy.

Russell Wilson is at the top of my list. We will need some serious WR talent added and $$$$$$ to have any chance to get him.

Right now Cousins looks like the perfect fit.

Th grass always look greener on the other side. Even when it's not.

OK, we will keep Baker like you want and go 8-9 for 10 more years.

Cousins isn't taking the Browns where they want to go - the Super Bowl. Honestly, I could care less about the playoffs. The goal is the Super Bowl. That's how the team needs to be built. And Baker may not be the guy, but I think we all know that honestly Cousins is not. So for financial sake, there's no reason to bring him here.

Like we did with a healthy Baker last year? You do remember 11-5 don't you?

Nevermind.

"Baker sucks" isn't an idea.

If I were the Haslems, ... Andrew Berry is nothing special imo. Andrew Berry, if compared to the Browns previous 5 GMs, is just a guy.
If I were the Haslems, and it comes to, well the question becomes,
Would I fire Andrew Berry before he waived Baker Mayfield? YES!! Andrew Berry is the most replaceable, well Any Browns GM has been the most replaceable GM/cog in the wheel in the past 20 years.
Easier to replace a GM than a coach, easier to replace a GM than a Quarterback, easier to replace a GM than a Coordinator.

How many times, have we seen a GM, try and be smarter than the whole league and then the Browns
end up with NO Quarterback and get stuck trying to pretend Dishone Kiser is one. For 16 games.

Lemme fix that.
Baker ain't the guy you want to cut and end up with Dishone Kiser 2.0 while he goes to Pittsburgh and beats you for the next 18 years.

We know who ain't the guy. The guy in NY, he ain't the guy, he's proven it for 2 years. The guy in Carolina, Darnold, wasn't the guy he proved it for 2 years. The guy in Indianapolis, Wentz aint the guy, he' proved it over 2+ years. Mariota aint the guy, and Tua ain't the guy. There are 2 guys in Denver that ain't the guy. The Jets don't have a guy, and the Jaguars have a question of a guy who they are in the process of ruining.
The Seahhawks, have a used to be maybe never was the guy. And even with a paycheck, the Vikings don't have "for sure" a guy, in fact Cousins is more often not like a guy than he is one.
The Bears and Lions Don't have a guy as good as Baker either, The Cardinals, and Chargers, only Wish their guy was the guy, but Baker is better. The Saints and Eagles don't have a guy either
The Cowboys guy is often worse than Baker, the Steelers don't have a guy,

IN FACT, there is an Entire NFL of teams that want to Take Baker away from you, and grab him AND THEN, they would finally have their guy!
And if the Browns are stupid enough to let it happen, then they don't care about the constant losing in any way whatsoever.

You are going to find 300 people, to 1, telling you a different message.
BUT, 300 people to 1, are invested in the success of another NFL team at the expense of the Browns, and those 300 don't want to see the Browns have any nice things.

There you go again, putting words in people's mouths. Where did I say that he wouldn't have had surgery and rely on rest alone? I gave no timeframe for his return other than "get back healthy as quickly as possible".

Just Clicking

All the hate for Mayfield is baffling. We went 11/5 last year with a healthy Mayfield. If Baker is Healthy he is our best chance..

There was this Buckeye loss about (5) years ago to a Baker team...an attempted flag plant...and fans with grudges, allegiance to the grail of Buckeye and memories like elephants. I'd peg that as THE reason why half the fan base hates the guy.

Well he can't "come back" in February. Whether he had his surgery then or now he would still be ready for any team activities next season. So to think you meant otherwise didn't make any sense.

And everyone hated Braylon because he played for Michigan. Good God.