DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Stefanski looking to rid us of Baker???

Glad the surgery went well!

Those other teams did not have a QB with a torn labrum. It's funny how you explain the injury as an excuse for Baker and then try and blame the adjustments we had to make because our QB was injured on Stefanski. The two were directly connected. So you either place the blame on both or the blame on neither.

Bonefish posted this on the other thread that was closed.

To many of us, the facts, the rational, reasonable, undeniable conclusions that most everyone should get from the stats/analytics reveal to us, in this video, exactly what our eyes have been showing us, our brains have been processing, and our guts have been telling us.

Four years of data. Not the one injured shoulder year, 4 years of facts.

PFF and QBR just tell us exactly what we’ve seen. We can argue… but, many just aren’t going to listen. (Started on the board, first time in 2004)

To me, the most telling truth of the video is Baker’s success. It explains much about what I am reading from a few of you. The fact that Baker will consistently give you two All Pro games per season (no more, no less) causes many to excuse away the many valid points presented by Bonefish, CFRS, Stripper, and yes… Rish.

Don’t be teased by a quarterback who provides you with two, focused, elite level games per year.

That is who Baker is.

Every year. He is who he is. 2 great games, at least 8 horrible ones, every year. The fourth quarter stats… well we’ve all watched it. He is who he is.

I thought he looked focused during his rookie season. That is in the past.

To me, he looks like players I’ve coached who stay up at night, addicted to video games.

About the only thing that could change my mind at this point, would be if Jimmy could somehow call in a marker with his buddy Peyton, and have him take him through a 12 week Boot Camp on every element it takes, is required, to be a professional NFL QB. An elite, focused, technically sound, obsessed, focused, mentally sharp guy who can execute on nearly every play.

It’s not going to happen.

If the Texans wanted Baker, that is our only shot. But, we really need (Watson) and the 13th pick to get the receiver we need.

Probably not going to happen.

So, we are Browns fans. Screwed, Screwed, Screwed again.

No-one actually knows, and backing up opinions with research and well constructed debate is better than what we normally see when we are talking about Baker. So I have no problem with your view and opinions. You might well prove to be right.

What I did want to point out is the lack of consistency with regards to some of the arguments against Baker and by the Baker detractors.

- Baker's WR core should have been plenty good enough because they were open a lot based on a PFF article that said they had the 2nd most plays with 3 WR open. . . . but our WR core is not good enough for Watson (or future stud QB) and we need to address that for a new better QB.

- Baker is garbage/trash/average - the PFF article showing how many open receivers we have has been used to "prove" that. Endlessly in posts. But then none of the Baker detractors wants to accept that PFF graded Baker the 5th best QB in the NFL over the final 9 games of last season. When I brought this contradiction up a poster said that during those 9 games Baker's play was "acceptable" - but that same poster still valued and trusted the open receiver article as golden and untouchable, and certainly didn't wish to tolerate any questioning regards how the article was compiled.

- A report saying on 37% of plays the Browns had 3 receivers open during a play, 2nd most in the league has been morphed into "The Browns had the most open receivers in the NFL"

- The 3 receivers open stat has been repeated a lot. But those repeating that part of the equation don't tough or repeat the individual WR grades by PFF which were woeful.

- Baker detractors love to say that regardless of all else - winning and driving the team to comebacks, success, 4th Q drives is the only thing that counts. Everything else is an excuse. Yet Baker has a 1-1 play off record. Better than some of the QB's that are being touted as anointed FQB's. Better than the QB's being touted to come and replace Baker. Watson is 1-2. Carr is 0-1 .... many of whom have played on equal or better teams, been in the NFL longer .. and none came to a 1-31 team coached by Hue and then Freddy
in years 1 and 2.

- My final pet peeve is the idea that when you talk about Baker's performance and you mention some of the specific additional factors that impact his play - the idea that these are all "excuses" and that anyone mentioning these additional challenges is laying all the blame elsewhere. The truth is Baker needs to play better - and I don't think there is anyone, anywhere saying different. The other issues are all additional layers to the point that Baker needs to play better - make better decisions, not panic under pressure, put touch in some passes, not miss open WR etc....

I highly value your opinion and I think that you're one of the most rational members on this forum. Unfortunately that doesn't say so much by what I see the last couple of weeks. .

Regarding Baker. Quincy's video "The truth about Baker" is labeled to be "the truth" but it don't take into account that his injury in his last season. Not to mention Hue and Freddy Boy in season one and two as you pointed out. Either we believe the injury affected him and therefore "the truth" isn't the whole truth or we don't accept the injury as an excuse and therefore everything should count. The problem with denying injury as an excuse is that we then have to use the same logic to everyone else involved in these data. The play caller, our GM, WR, OL, TE and so on. Suddenly the picture is a little bit blurrier. If Baker is [censored] then what about Stefanski and the rest? Are they all blameless?

I'm willing to give Baker another season but he has a lot of work to do on his foot work and mechanics before he come back. Maybe he isn't quick enough with his feet and maybe his length is a problem, time will tell. I'm not in any way satisfied with his last season but I also remember the last part of his 3 season and that counts in my book. You take the good with the bad and I don't give up so easlily.

Colin Cowherd said that Cleveland is a small market, the Browns organization is dysfunctional and that their fan base is toxic. I hated him for that but as it seems that maybe his opinion wasn't so far off. Baker isn't perfect but he stood up for himself against Colin, that also heavily counts in my book.

I'm a big fan of that guy's videos, so that one was tough to watch. The only argument (if that's the right word) I would have is that he presents the numbers as they are. Baker has a bunch of good tape and way way too much bad tape. What he doesn't do is try to explain either of those (ex. injuries in 2021). If the FO puts an asterisk on a bunch of Baker's bad games (particularly from this year after his injury), then his overall argument is kinda toast.

There are also portions of Baker's game that can't be explained/excused by injuries (double-clutching and not seeing wide open guys). And there's the simple fact that this offense probably VASTLY prefers more of a steady-eddy QB who probably won't wow you too often, but also won't crap the bed nearly as much. I dunno.... that video was tough to watch and I need to digest it a little more.

I see your confusion because that's not what people, or me as you're obviously eluding to, said at all. I've actually agreed that we need an upgrade to our WR's. What it's saying is that Baker can't find open WR's. He's holding the ball, double clutching the ball and hesitating when there are open WR's available to him. Better WR's aren't going to make him go through his reads better. Those are two different things.


Sort of like how some fans try and blame all the problems on the play calling when Baker's injuries, injuries on the OL and just the rash of injuries everywhere on the team have impacted how much of the playbook Stefanski can use? Yeah, I get it.

I think it's very easy for some of us to get lost in our fandom. I know I've done it. We look at the NFL as a sport and it's our passion. But I try to take a step back and look at it for what it really is for the owner, FO and coaching staff. It's a billion plus dollar corporation and their careers. They approach everything from a business standpoint and not the way we as fans most often view things. From there we can certainly see some things that appear quite obvious.

People speak of this "nine game stretch" Baker had last season. During that stretch in the Raiders game, Nov. 1st, Baker went 12-25 for 122 yards. Verses the Texans on Nov. 15th Baker went 12-20 for 132 yards. Verses the Jets on on dec. 27th he went 28-53 for 285 yard. Now this isn't to try and detract from his good games which there certainly were during that nine game stretch, but it is to point out that this wasn't some flawless nine game stretch of football QB play. There were most certainly some inconsistencies thrown in there.

What we also know is that this FO did not decide to offer Baker a long term extension based on his play in 2020. They weren't as convinced as some fans that Baker was the long term future of the franchise or they would have locked him up ASAP. They did not.

Nothing seen in the 2021 season that anyone saw would have changed their minds on whether to offer him an extension. Sure the injury plays into his performance and it prohibited Baker from being his normal self on the field. But as such it prohibited him from adding to his body of work.

So here we are heading into the 2022 season with this FO as of yet not seeing whatever it is they're looking for in terms of a long term commitment at the QB position. Now people can look at that one of two ways and I have no idea which way is accurate. They either didn't see what they were looking for or they simply want to see a larger sample size before making that commitment. I'm quite sure people see this from both sides.

But for anyone to think this FO will go into this coming season blind with no contingency plan I think would be foolish on their part. I have no idea what that contingency plan will be. It could be to maneuver the draft to stockpile draft picks for next year. I mean that's a win/win situation. Even if Baker is found to be the answer next season it gives you ammunition to place more talent around him. They could make a first round pick at QB this year but I don't see that as a likely scenario. It isn't a strong QB draft class and I think the risk would outweigh the reward. They could take a second or third round draft pick at the QB position but if you're actually looking at solving your QB problem the odds aren't very good that will accomplish your mission.

Many have put forth the idea of signing a veteran or a trade. I could see a possibility of signing a veteran but as far as trades go I don't believe analytics would indicate giving a wealth of draft picks to risk your future would be the answer they would come up with but one never knows.

It appears from the indications thus far Baker will be given the opportunity to be our starter next year without a bunch of pressure by having a Mitch Trubisky sitting on the bench breathing down his neck. But it wouldn't surprise me to see this years draft include trade downs to build up draft capital for the 2023 draft in case we find ourselves in the position of needing a QB.

For people to believe there won't be some sort of contingency plan in place I think would be fooling themselves. Corporations always have contingency plans any time they see a potential problem. And if they didn't see the QB as a potential problem, Baker would have been signed to an extension before now.

We all, at least almost all, hope we see a healthy Baker come back next year and answer all of those questions. I know I don't want to see us forced into having to start from square one again at the QB position.

And I'm quite sure Stefanski isn't trying to "rid us of Baker" to start over again either.

Well said. It'll be very interesting how they approach this draft.

I am not confused.

My points highlighted how some like yourself have embraced and parroted the 3 WR open PFF article as unquestionable ... how the atrocious PFF grades of the WR have been ignored or skirted when we question whether we have a good WR core - and how the PFF grade of Baker being the 5th best QB in the NFL over a span that stretches over more than half a season is also ignored or skirted. . My post was not directed at you - others have and continue to do the same. Although it was you specifically that said Baker's play over that period was 'acceptable'.

I didn't say any of those opinions were right wrong or indifferent - I said they are inconsistent.

PFF graded all teams by the same standard. Trying to avoid that and to try and act as if their numbers are skewed is a you problem. There's no way to grade all 32 NFL teams on the same criteria and come up with some totally false set of numbers. I also pointed out his poor performances during that same time frame and you refuse to address it. While the overall stretch his play was good, there were inconsistencies.

I have repeatedly admitted that we are weak at the WR position. That is no excuse for not being able to identify open WR's. Those are two different things you like to try and package as the same thing. There is nothing inconsistent about that.

So you didn't embrace one PFF article - but then instead of accepting Baker was a top 5 QB by PFF metrics and instead you said his play was 'acceptable' ? That wasn't you?

And no Bad WR play and Baker not finding open WR are not the same thing. One is bad WR play. The other is bad QB play. There is no-one trying to say one is the other - that's you creating a new argument that no-one made than then debating it. It's a familiar pattern.

I think that's it in a nutshell and grossly simplified.

There's Good Baker and Bad Baker. There are some that judge his ceiling based on his worst performances. There are some that think his ceiling is the good Baker. Then there is an awful lot of rancor over what is a valid part of the discussion when talking about Baker's performance and factors that influence his play in addition to his own short comings, trials and tribulations.

* Edit - Sorry, somehow I read this as a new post. It's actually from the first page.

Oh I see the consistent pattern. Baker good. Stefanski bad. Baker was limited due to his injuries. Stefanski bad because you won't admit those same injuries limited what plays Stefanski could use on offense.

At least you're starting to come around in being more honest Bakers part in it.

And yes, just to agree with you, Baker was great in those last nine games in 2020. Even the ones where his inconsistency reared its ugly head.

Oh - I've been honest when Baker played bad. It's just that people see a post about an additional layer and they accuse you of putting "all" the blame elsewhere. A bit like you seem to be suggesting regards the play calling and Stefanski. ... you've clearly missed the many posts where I mentioned Stefanski's play calling and the team have been hampered by injuries more than we mostly acknowledge. However that does not mean KS has not made mistakes that have cost us a game this season. He gets conservative, he gets cute and he gets predictable (or doesn't make adjustments). That happened last year too. Maybe you don't remember several big leads where we ended up winning in a close game? It's not mutually exclusive to acknowledge that KS had his hands severely tied this season AND think he is eligible for criticism.

I’ll be fine with a BM stat line of 18 of 26 for 190 yards, 1TD, 0 INT, if the game is a W. If the Ws are there,I don’t need a 300 yard game from the QB. Hell, I said to a friend today, bench Mayfield, make Jarvis your QB, and run the wishbone, I don’t care. Ws are what I want.

First thing I’ll say is I’m just a regular Joe fan that has never played football I just love to watch. That being said I haven’t read or heard anyone mention something that to me seems to be a big factor in all of this. Can anyone tell me what factor having so many 3 TE sets on the field does for a QBs vision that is not as tall as the players in front of him with so many players “clustered” in front of him? Wouldn’t that cloud his vision? Does that complicate his throwing lanes? If he comes from a spread type offense it seems to me that there would be more spacing between players giving him easier lanes to see from the snap of the ball.

Like I said I don’t know the game from the inside. Just a fan. I just have a really bad feeling if the FO gives up on what they are currently building after all the woes of the previous 20 years.

What you say makes sense, with regard to getting more bodies in the line-of-sight for him. That is one of the main differences from his college days, and previous systems. Does KS see this? I don’t know.

Does Baker have to be the best QB in the North
In order for the Browns to win the North.
Baker was drafted to produce division titles
Not to almost get to the playoffs.
You continuously bring up completeion %.
But how many good / great defenses has Mayfield beat in his
4 years?
Right now Baker even if healthy isnt a even top 5 AFC QB

I do remember. That's what happens across much of the NFL. Because in the NFL you're supposed to play it smart and the margin of victory isn't important. Only winning is. You get a big lead you eat the clock and sit on that lead. That isn't just a "Stefanski thing". It's an analytic thing. Some people care more about style points than W's. Not me. I can't imagine what you would be saying if he called an aggressive game when we had a big lead and we turned the ball over and blew those leads.



Oh he is eligible for criticism as long as you judge everyone on the same grading scale.

Baker played well.his rookie year.
But fast foward 3 years, the league has film on Mayfield
Baker may not get any better than what he is.
Yes he may have peaked already.

All the Baker fanclub members never want to bring up
His TD to INT ratio of his inability to finish in the 4th q.

Its kinda curious a team drafts a QB number #1 overall
Yet they make TE heavy sets and running the ball the
Identity of the offense and he can only make vertical
Throws downfield off play action.
Seems like to me all the best QBs in the league
Don't need to rely on play action to attack defenses past 15 yards

If his bad percentage stats don't mean anything, than neither do his good ones. You can't have it both ways.



Which way do you want it?

I don't buy the talent part about receivers any longer.. OBJ and Landery are pretty good receivers. Talent wasn't the problem, It's pretty evident to me that it is the offensive system or qb, or some combination of the two that limits the receivers on this team. That is why I think drafting a receiver in the 1st round would be a total waste. Chase would have been a 35 catch, 400 yard receiver with 3TD's on this team.

You hit the nail on the head and IMHO it's more of the offensive system than Baker even though he has blame in this also (mostly mechanics and poor decision making). Unless Stefanski changes his scheme and plays to the skill set of the players, stating that Chase would have had 35 catches and 400 yds with 3 TD's might be a little generous. Which now goes back to what I have been posting, no top tier FA WR or QB is going to consider coming to Cleveland with the scheme Stefanski runs. Unless there's a change in the play caller and the OC coach - most of the suggestions for improvement in this forum are just pipe dreams. The offensive standard in the NFL now is Buffalo, KCC, LAC, LAR, ARI, and yes Cincinnati. If you don't have the offensive scheme or more importantly the player skill sets to battle head-to-head with these teams you are going to be extremely inconsistent with wins and losses. Just ask yourself - as it stands - is Cleveland playing an offensive scheme to come back from 24 points down in the latter stages of the 3rd and 4th quarter? Does the Cleveland Browns have the players with the skill sets or the coach's offensive scheme to score a portion of 25 points in the last 1:55 of a game? The teams listed above have shown the ability to score quickly and with regularity - have the Browns shown anything near that ability or consistency in being able to do such a thing?

The Browns have the opportunity to build that type of a team around Mayfield but their passing attack has to be a weapon rather than a change of pace to support a best in league running attack. You're not going to get those players needed when it's documented proof that the Head Coach's scheme is based on limiting the passing attack and continued failure of not taking advantage of the skill sets of the players he has on offense. His history shows it, his actions on the field show it, and his play calling without a doubt has proven he is weak at best in adjusting to a real live game situation. Fixing a QB's faults is a whole lot different than changing a QB's skill set to fit a scheme. If you're honest and look at Baker from college and years 1 and 2 compared to Baker in years 3 and 4 and you'll see a QB that has been forced to change from his skill set to a scheme QB. That in itself will greatly limit the type of player the Browns can get to bolster their WR group. They've almost ruined Hooper, OBJ has fled, Landry's probably biting at the bit to leave and no top tier WR is going to subject themselves to getting reduced targets and completions between 30-50 percent to play in Cleveland.

Watched yesterday's late game and was amazed at how open receivers were. People gushed about the QB's but they didnt really do much more than hit open receivers who caught the ball. Not saying part of the issue isnt with Baker, but yesterdays players were on the same page and at many times this year our players were not.

Why do I constantly hear that Stefanski's system limits the passing attack and doesnt involve the WR's? Has anyone looked at Stefon Diggs stats in Minnesota the last 2 years that he was the OC?

102 receptions 1,021 yards 9 TD's
63 receptions 1,130 yards 6 TD's

And that was with Kirk Cousins as the QB; so which is it? Is the issue the scheme, or is the issue the QB? That's the question the Browns have to determine. Quickly.

The Browns certainly need help at the WR position. This was 2020 4th round WR pick Gabriel Davis last night...

You answered your own question because Stefanski was a QB coach in 2017 and 2018 and only had the Offensive Coordinator job in 2019. To be correct, Diggs targets dropped from 149 in 2018 to 94 in 2019 (a 36.9% reduction) and receptions from 102 in 2018 to 63 in 2019 (a 38.2% reduction) with Cousins at QB both years so it's obviously the scheme. Diggs demanded a trade after losing almost 40% of his plays under Stefanski - almost identical numbers for OBJ and Hooper so it's a historic trend not a one off.

Secondly, Stefanski has been a QB Coach for 2-years and Asst. QB Coach for 5-years or 43.75% of his 16-years in coaching and we still see mechanics issues with Mayfield? Soon as people get past Stefanski's playoff appearance in 2020 and look deeper you can clearly see that historically Stefanski does not believe in an offensive scheme set to the skill set of his players but wants a run first team with a game manger QB. Maybee in the 1960's and 70's that was the formula but not in 2022. Drafting and acquiring players with no intention of building around the players skill sets is a formula for massive inconsistency and we're witnessing it first-hand in Cleveland. If I can see it and other posters can see it, you can bet your bottom dollar that the players are seeing it and it's going to hamper the Browns ability to rebuild the WR group.

... on the off chance the point needs to be further clarified, compare Diggs' Minn numbers to the Buffalo ones.

j/c

I've been taking a good bit of time to let this last season sink in while shaking my head at a lot of the absurdity I've been seeing around here of late.
I've come to a few thoughts & conclusions on what I feel we saw, and while I cannot find all of the supporting information I was looking for, I think that if found, the below will bear out.

Baker sucked.
Stefanski sucked.
The OLine sucked; specifically the OT's.
The TE's sucked.
The WR's disappeared.

All of this is aside from the fact that the Defense royally sucked for the first half of the season. Oddly, they are the reason we were in any games at all the second half of the season.

So, what's the likelihood that all of that "offensive suck" is related? I'd think that Occam's Razor says it's very likely. A cascading, compounding effect that we did not - or could not - cover.


The offense came out strong to start the season. We looked good in the opener against the Chiefs. Baker looked good. The OLine and running game AND passing game looked good.
But, we lost Hubbard to a triceps in Week 1. He never came back and we'd later lose him for the season following Week 5. In that same Week 1, Wills had his ankle injury, and Tretter hurt his knee which stayed with him the rest of the season.
In Week 2, Baker got his shoulder trashed.

Offensively, this was pretty much the high water mark of the season. We had some fireworks in Week 5 vs the Chargers, but with the exception of the VERY flukey Week 9 Cinci game where we were gifted a ton of points off turnovers and unlikely big plays, the offense never scored above 30 points again the rest of the season. We lost Conklin for the first time to an elbow dislocation in that Week 5 loss to the Chargers. He came back for the Week 12 Ravens 1 game, but was almost immediately lost again. We much pretty played "Musical Tackles" from Week 5, onward.

So, what's this mean?
I believe that the "OLine Roulette" combined with Baker's injuries led Stefanski to lean more heavily on the 3-TE look than we should have.
I think it is clear as day that the offense we had at the end of the season is NOT the offense we began the season with, and anyone thinking that guys suddenly forgot how to do their thing over the course of a couple of months is completely insane.
I cannot find the personnel grouping stats anywhere that isn't behind a pay wall, but I am expecting that our rate of 13-personnel increased as the season wore on, especially relative to what we used Week 1 and Week 2. I do not believe that the scheme usage we were seeing at the end of the season is what we'd have seen if who we had to send out there was more stable.
The injuries at both OT spots limits what you can do. The injuries at QB have their own impacts. Baker was less accurate, made poor decisions, and appeared to not see things. He had "happy feet" and seemed to lose him mechanics. That, actually, can ALL be attributed to injury and OLine. I have little doubt that he was trying to speed up the clock in his head because he couldn't really trust the protection. I also have absolutely zero doubt that the injury forced changes to how he throws. Face it, when you're hurt and you try to use the part of your body that is hurt, your nerves and pain receptors force you into compensatory movements that allow you to approximate what you're doing, but by no means will you be able to do it as well as you could if you weren't injured.
I think that these aspects combined sort of "poisoned" Stefanski's choices and judgements in game planning and play calling. I think it caused him to go far more conservative than he would have, otherwise. We stopped trying to go vertical as much, or we just consistently failed at trying to. Designed rollouts and attempts at Play Action seemed to decrease dramatically. We inexplicably failed to lean more heavily on Nick Chubb even when we weren't playing the Ravens who were particularly good at shutting him down. The only really puzzling thing is with how frequently we went 13-personnel, yet didn't give the OT's help from a TE, letting them flounder against some of the best pass rushers in the league. Perhaps this is part of the attempts at misdirection or keeping the defenses guessing, but in the end, I think it just made us incredibly predictable as we did it to a fault, and it also put a target on the QB's back and caused him to get moved off his mark more frequently.

We've seen that this offense CAN be explosive.
We've seen that the TE's CAN be big play threats.
We've seen that Stefanski CAN be aggressive and use more vertical WR packages.
We've seen that Baker CAN execute every throw there is with a high degree of accuracy and success.
We've seen that the OLine CAN be the absolute best in the league.

We saw VERY LITTLE of any of that this year, and even less where it all happened in a single game, and what we did see of it was almost entirely toward the start of the season..... so, what's that mean when trying to pin all our woes on a single point of failure like we keep seeing so much of on here?

The simple fact is that this past season was undone by a number of factors, and most of those factors were issues that turned areas of the team that were team strengths into liabilities.

We had the best OLine in football at the start of the season. At the end of the season they almost got Baker killed.
We had a Top 5 QB at the start of the season, but now folks are trying to convince us that he's Manziel II, even despite a name like Bernie Kosar commenting publicly on how almost impossible it is to throw accurately with that brace/sling on.
We had the reigning NFL Head Coach of the Year at the start of the season, but now folks (self included here in the past few weeks) have said we'd be perfectly ok if he was canned.
We went into the season feeling like we had one of the best WR groups in the league, only to have our blinders ripped off our faces and be forced to look directly at the fact that we had one charlatan, one WR, and a bunch of JAGs.
We thought we were set at TE only to end up completely misusing them and making them look like underperforming trash.

Add in littler things like missing Kareem Hunt for half the season, the Mysterious & Amazing Disappearing Acts of Rashard Higgins and a defense that easily cost us most every loss in the first half of the season and it is not a wonder in the least why we are at home in January.

I do not believe that Stefanski wants to ship Baker out.
I do not think that Baker wants out.
I do not think that Baker cannot, and will not, have incredible success in Cleveland, with Stefanski. What was is not necessarily how things are. By that, I mean that just because we saw what we saw this year, it doesn't mean that it is how things are, and certainly not how things will be.
We saw what we saw for much of the season due to choices and reactions to challenges and circumstances. We saw what we saw at the start of the season because of what we can do when we aren't being undone.

Great post.

I'll take it one layer deeper as these are my thoughts as of late.

You clearly paint an accurate picture of a team being behind the eight ball from the beginning of the season.

I have a clear mental image of a team that lit some cigars after their playoff victory and simply said "let's run it back"... from locker room on up.


We made it clear (told the league) that we would be running the same offense... (from clevelandbrowns.com around minicamp)


And we just decided to glide into the regular season based on a lazy off-season, zoom meetings, and everybody who plays a role standing on the sidelines for three preseason games.

We were victims of our own success. Everyone played well, together, down the stretch in 2020. Chubb and Hunt split carries, Landry got his 5-8 catches per game. DPJ emerged. The TEs split their targets from week to week and got the job done. The only thing missing was OBJ, but man, have you seen his workout tapes?? He'll be back at full strength too!


What could go wrong with:

Baker Mayfield
O'Dell Beckham
Jarvis Landry
Nick Chubb
Kareem Hunt

They will never all suit up for a single game.


We took haymakers from the opening bell and never really got our legs back. We went from "pound for pound" to a sloppy sparring partner and never looked back.

The OL was immediately patchwork.
Baker broke a wing. Stefanski (the QB whisperer... "trust your eyes, young Luke") had no answers and Baker trusted nothing ... not his arm, not his receivers, not his playbook... certainly never "his eyes".
Then the Jarvis uppercut. The punch that sent us into the ropes to never recover. He's gone before OBJ is "back" and before he returns -- Chubb is also injured. The offense was in a tailspin and would never recover.


Next the sucker-punches.

The Nuclear bombs on Instagram and Twitter.

The narratives from "Baker sucks" to that we are somehow once again a toxic franchise... No QB would want to come here under Stefanski, no WR would want to come here and work with Baker, etc...

And then the last, and cruelest in retrospect, the 2021 AFC North. No one wants to win it. Just show up at the end with a winning record and it could be yours. As long as we just keep punching we have a puncher's chance. Leave Baker in there because we're still competing for the playoffs.

It would have been way better if the Bengals ran away with it. If Baker were shutdown, most of the "narratives" would have never come to life.

Alas, the final beat-down was psychological, straight from the hands of the football gods... the ones that seem to hate Cleveland.

two fine posts in a row.
I could get used to this.


Here's the thing I continually go back to, when I read critiques of KS being too conservative/predictable/run-first in his play calling: The 2020 team was an unpredictable, entertaining team to watch. That's what made them the late-season darlings of the NFL, and gave Rich Eisen a feeling he hadn't experienced since high school. Same coach this year. What was different? It was the team. They wore the same uniforms, but they weren't the same group of players who finished last season (at this point, it should also be noted that CLE was one of the healthier teams down the stretch that year).

2021, we only had 1/2-2/3 the dudes from last year available at any given time. We had half a Baker for 80% of the season. And even with all the adversity and weekly patched-together personnel packages, how many games were decided by 6 points or less? To be truthful, 8-9 isn't so hard to swallow when we zoom out to see the total landscape. Of course, it's a disappointment. But snakebit seasons happen. This one just happened as spirits were climbing, which makes it hurt a little more.

I guess my point is this: two seasons are a pretty small sample size for any casual fan to think they have the book on Kevin Stefanski or the Browns O. I predict that if this team can stay healthy next year, we'll see more of the football that made Ben Roethlisberger cry in January.

.02

My simplified version of what went wrong. There were two things that could derail this past season.....injuries and off the field drama. We had a lot of the first and a little of the second. Both could have been managed much better by the team.