DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Will Watson be the Browns starting QB this season..?

Here is what happened. People used direct quotes from your own posts in your own words showing the "mistruths" you had posted. You had no legitamte response or excuses for them. So rather than address them, you labeled all of those who did that as the liars and and claimed you were misquoted. To this very day you refuse to address that.

You should really invest in a mirror.

You are the perpetual victim...it's everyone ELSE who has a problem.

I am certainly glad you are not resorting to the tactics of pit and 888. It is bad enough that you call browns fans “dumbasses” and call people who think it may not be a good idea to trade for a guy with 20+ women accusing him of sexual impropriety “baker fan boys” and “baker butt kissers”. At least you, versatile, are elevating the…..well never mind.

But how would that further his agenda to derail the watson discussions? How would that help him try to use Baker as a distraction to the 24 allegations against watson and the newest details that have come out?

You see, I haven't seen one poster who denies or tries to ignore that watson isn't the superior upgrade on the field of play. Not one. So the only one he is arguing with is himself. It's an old and simple con game known as the bait and switch. Bait people with something totally unrelated to take the focus off of what is right in front of you.

Hail, hail. The gang's all here.

How can you possibly claim that MOST of Bakers bad throws were nothing to do with his injury and say that's an accurate assessment - the torn labarum, the broken humerus, the various leg/ankle issues, the brace, the mental side of being less mobile and knowing if you do get hit it'll hurt like a MF'er. I know you keep wanting to make this about his "Non Throwing Shoulder" - but we've had a poster with the same off shoulder injury explain you can't even torque your body and raise your off shoulder in a pre-throw motion without pain.

And no-one was discussing his play - they were discussing whether (assuming DW is gone a year) would BM even feasibly be in the discussion because he would be better than Bassett. You even have stated your opinion that BM is an upgrade over Bassett .... so using this discussion to try to manipulate some Baker criticism into the thread isn't even relevant ... AND the discussion mostly went by all who cared to comment - was either: there's not much chance of BM ever playing for the Browns again - or - there's absolutely zero chance.

I have provided video evidence to back up my "ignorant" claims. I'll let others decide who is telling the truth and who is simply trying to attack counter opinions. All I ask is for folks to please watch the videos and you will see proof of what I claimed. My take was not ignorant at all.

The video critiques Baker - and his challenges and issues. It's mostly pretty fair. It does absolutely nothing to provide evidence Baker's bad throws were Mostly nothing to do with his injury.

Like I said, you refuse to address it. People quoted your own words from your own posts and you claimed they made those things up. That was a lie very single time you did it.

The videos show that bad decisions, poor pre-snap reads, problems going through progressions, pocket presences issues, forced throws, struggles when throwing from the pocket, etc, etc resulted in the bad throws. It's the same things I have been saying for years. And my comment earlier was not ignorant. I have provided proof of what I was talking about.

Edit: I misspoke a bit. The Burns breakdown was not a video. I posted the text and a link so that you all could watch the videos w/in the article. Just clarifying in case someone is searching for the second video. My bad.

So will watson be the Browns starting QB this season?

The video highlights a lot of those things. Things discussed ad nauseun.... What it doesn't do is show that Most of his bad throws last year were nothing to with his injury. That's just a jaundiced perspective from someone that's spent years bashing Baker any chance they could. Claiming it is prrof of the injury being a non factor (on most bad throws) is wrong.

And he's not going to be starting for the Browns.

Houston detective has testified that she believes Deshaun Watson committed crimes

Posted by Mike Florio on June 10, 2022, 7:40 PM EDT
link


The civil cases against Browns quarterback Deshaun Watson entail a broad and comprehensive effort to find potentially relevant evidence. That effort recently included securing sworn testimony from a Houston police detective who believes that Watson committed crimes.

Via Brent Schrotenboer of USA Today, detective Kamesha Baker said under oath that she shared this opinion with the office of the Harris County District Attorney. Baker also said she doesn’t know why the grand jury opted not to indict Watson.

Detective Baker, per Schrotenboer, testified that she believes Watson committed criminal indecent assault, sexual assault, and prostitution, at to cases where consensual sex happened and money changed hands.

Baker got this question: “Did you feel confident that you had the evidence needed to pursue those charges?”

“Yes,” she replied.

She then was asked this: “And was there any doubt in your mind as the investigating officer that a crime had occurred?”

“No,” she answered.

She also said there was no disagreement within her team that Watson had committed crimes. Baker testified that she met with prosecutor Johna Stallings to share her opinions on the matter.

“I expressed to her that we did find the complainants credible and reliable,” Baker testified. “That’s why we did a warrant that stated they were credible and reliable.”

Baker did not testify during the Harris County grand jury proceedings on nine criminal complaints. She said she was told by Stallings that Watson’s attorney, Rusty Hardin, would have objections to Baker testifying before the grand jury. That’s confusing, because the suspect’s lawyer has no standing whatsoever to object to anything the prosecutor does during the grand jury proceedings.

“The presumption of innocence is a fundamental tenet of our justice system,” attorney Leah Graham told Schrotenboer in a Friday statement. “It is incredibly unfortunate that this presumption was not given to Deshaun Watson by one of the investigating officers. Ultimately, however, justice was served by two grand juries in two separate jurisdictions who did what this detective refused to do: take a fair and impartial look at all of the evidence before reaching a conclusion.”

Frankly, the playing of the “presumption of innocence” card in this context is extremely disingenuous and deliberately misleading. The presumption of innocence applies only after a suspect is officially charged with a crime. If every police officer went around presuming the innocence of every potential defendant, NO ONE WOULD EVER BE CHARGED.

The police identify the people they believe are factually guilty. The prosecutors, often working with a grand jury, frame the charges, if any, that flow from the available facts. Then, if the suspect becomes a defendant in a looming criminal trial, the presumption of innocence attaches.

Justice, contrary to Graham’s statement, was not exclusively served by the two grand juries. Justice, as a practical matter, was deferred to the civil justice system.

Again, the decisions of the grand jury are not conclusive, especially without access to the full presentation made by Stallings. As explained earlier this week, Stallings quite possibly opted to share the information provided to her by Watson’s legal team in the hopes that the grand jury would not indict Watson, which would have forced her to try to prove multiple crimes beyond a reasonable doubt — while dealing with a dream team of high-priced lawyers who, as Rusty Hardin demonstrated by repeatedly contacting Stallings prior to the grand jury presentations, would have made her life as a practical matter miserable for the duration of the criminal cases.

How great is it that sold the farm for a QB that may never play for us. Makes me warm and fuzzy

I am pretty sure the police do NOT subscribe to the presumption of innocence, that is why they are empowered to arrest people suspected of a crime. In fact there are many areas where the police MUST arrest you unless you can prove your innocence to them prior to arrest.

This deal will go down as the WORST in professional football history! And of course, it's the Browns.

I disagree. This will blow over. It may take a season. Browns front office took a risk. It'll get ugly and then, hopefully, the winning starts. That's what Berry and the Haslams are banking on.

Blow over? LOL! Keep hope alive!!!

Today's Starting QB is sitting Section 312 Row 13 Seat...

Browns back themselves into a corner with Deshaun Watson

by Eric Treuden 14 seconds ago
link


The Cleveland Browns have backed themselves into a corner with controversial quarterback Deshaun Watson.

The Cleveland Browns surely knew what they were getting into when they made a significant trade with the Texans last season to acquire controversial quarterback Deshaun Watson. The club landed Watson and a sixth-round pick in the 2024 draft in exchange for first-round picks in each of the 2022, 2023 and 2024 drafts as well as the Browns’ third-round pick in 2023 and fourth-round picks in 2022 and 2024.

This acquisition came on the heels of a 2021 season in which Watson did not throw a single pass for Houston, instead, spending the season on the sidelines for “non-injury reasons / personal matters”.

Part of the blockbuster trade involved Cleveland signing Watson to a brand new, fully guaranteed contract in the form of a five-year, $230MM deal, one that they are now stuck with through thick and thin, something that the team surprisingly seems to be fine with.

ProFootballTalk
@ProFootballTalk

Browns reportedly remain committed to Deshaun Watson. They don't really have any other choice at this point

profootballtalk.nbcsports.comBrowns remain committed to Deshaun Watson, which is their only viable option at this point -...The NFL has plenty of options for dealing with Deshaun Watson. Deshaun Watson has plenty of options for dealing with his current predicament.Then there are the Browns. What can they do at this point...


Browns have backed themselves into a corner with their current quarterback situation
On the heels of a lengthy and ugly lawsuit against Watson in which he had 24 accusers of sexual assault, his reputation is permanently tainted and he may bring the Browns down with him. The 26-year-old is in for a serious payday whether he throws a single snap for the club or not over the next season or even two seasons.


With the Browns being largely hush-hush on the matter of Watson and his off-the-field issues, one thing the team cannot shy away from is looking ahead to the upcoming season. Four-year quarterback Baker Mayfield remains on the team’s payroll but his relationship with the Browns front office and coaching staff has soured to the point where he should not be able to play another game in Cleveland.

That pushes the QB depth chart all the way down to the No. 3 and No. 4 options in Jacoby Brissett and Joshua Dobbs. Brissett, a 29-year-old journeyman, has not been an everyday starter since 2019 with the Colts and Dobbs has just 17 pass attempts under his belt in his career with zero touchdowns and an interception.

Whether it be via the free-agent market, trade market, or in-house personnel, the Browns have backed themselves into a corner with their current QB situation with the impending suspension of Deshaun Watson. It remains to be seen what exactly the team will do to stay afloat in the upcoming campaign.

Really nothing new here.

The Browns knew Watson was likely facing a suspension. They knew there were a possible few more people to make a claim. None any more credible than the others. As long as things stay in civil court, it is just a disagreement between two parties. If Watson wasn't a high profile figure with deep pockets, this wouldn't even be a story.

I think this is a misleading statement. I am pretty sure that the Browns signed Brissett and Dobbs as the number 2 and 3 QBs because they had no intention of bringing Baker back.

On the official Browns roster as it stand today...our opening day starter is likely to be the 3rd best QB on said roster.

Then the #2 QB needs to get in to camp. Just because the team has excused him from camp doesn't mean he has to stay out.

I think that sort of rationale was why a discussion started over whether there was even a chance the FO would consider that option.... that morphed into more Baker "Analysis" and lots of negative commentary about his play, even though I think everyone agreed BM>JB. To be honest - for once a discussion on Baker's maturity and his mental ability to commit to the team after these events and comments by the team about 'an adult in the room' would have been more relevant to the discussion than simply posting videos of Baker's inadequacies.

My only comment on what you just wrote "Then the #2 QB needs to get in to camp" makes it sound like this is 100% on Baker ... Baker is only 1 part of the equation. Personally I think the players would rally around whoever is back there at QB and who gives them the best chance to win ... I think the bigger issue is KS / FO and BM all being on the same page and being able to move on together. Some have even questioned whether the FO would put themselves in a situation to look bad if BM played up to his ceiling. But it's all 100% speculation.

Hell - It might still be DW but that doesn't look like a strong probability right now.

We traded for Watson, and all his issues, because we had Baker. The team decided they were done with him the moment the trade was initiated.

Of course. We never, ever intended to keep BM. But the situation regards DW has changed since the trade was made. Most assumed a 4-6 game suspension ... now it might be an entire year. Do you think that agile, smart front offices and management should review and assess options when situations change? And as I tried to highlight - this isn't a suggestion, it's not advocating for or wishing for ... it's a conversation about the mere possibility. Although the way I read Peen's post, maybe he is more black and white on the subject?

j/c:

I liked that video and thought it was better than the other one in the tailgate thread. Just tell us what you think - don't try and frame and reframe the discussion based on other people and what they did or didn't do or say. I still think the trade for a top 5 QB in the NFL would make sense based on face value... but I think they are under playing the impact of a potential year long suspension and what that does to the value and optics of the trade. And that's ignoring the impact of trading morals for winning and impact on some parts of the fan base.

I also think the statement that "none of this was a surprise" is a stretch - I think it unlikely 23rd and 24th cases added weren't expected. 66 women in 17 months probably wasn't expected.

I think they reviewed and assessed the situation before trading for Watson and decided they were good with nuking the bridge with Baker.

I mentioned on an earlier post that if we were misled, lied too, etc. then we should be able to null and void DW's contract or the league should allow it whatever. The more I thought about it and after reading other posts and looking at that video I'm starting to realize we should see this through and keep him as our QB. I don't like all the drama surrounding him and his signing but it's not right for me or anyone else to sit as judge and jury. Let due process take its course and then go from there. He is a top 10 QB in this league and that was the missing piece for us; a team that is ready to win now. I really feel Jimmy and Dee Haslam as well as our FO are really trying to bring a winner here and want one as bad as we the fans do. That's why they made this unprecedented trade and signing. I want a Super Bowl win as much as any Browns fan. Other teams were ready to trade for him too. Could it really be because we're the ones that got him everyone is being more critical and tougher about it? Cleveland got him? no way! Let's see how it plays out. JMO

Homes, I replied to the Mary Kay article in the other forum about how I am glad the Browns organization and players are supporting Watson. This year will most likely be ugly, but we will have a top qb for perhaps a decade. Many other athletes have been accused of worse crimes and ended up being revered and even worshipped. I support the Browns standing by Watson and I'm glad they are trying to win.

Well...I certainly feel that way as well because the prospect of Brissett as our starter with Dobbs as backup is a nightmare. Although at the moment, I don't know if that^ will help or hurt. I want a team with a chance to win...and that chance is better with Baker than Brissett.

If you believe certain "sources" out there...the FO was looking into DW as far back as October. If true, that gives me hope that their due diligence on DW is deep and wide. Also if true, it disappoints me that they kept claiming publicly that Baker was going to be the starter next year. Some things are better left unsaid - and that goes for both parties in this debacle.

But we will have a top Qb for perhaps a decade?

The Haslams won't stop poking their finger in the cupcake frosting every 2 and a half years. There is NO WAY we will have anything for perhaps a decade.
Analytics keeps messing with the ingredients with a capital 7th letter.

Get that out of your heads. Look, With the announcement that the Browns have excused Baker from mandatory OTA's it has become CLEAR, Crystal Clear, that they have NO PLANS to play Baker, under ANY/ (ANY) circumstances, this upcoming season. The End.
and if they had Any plans to,
any whatsoever then they wouldn't have excused him from mandatory minicamp.

It's the Browns' Owners, it's what they do. It's analytics, it's what it does. We have a better chance that Aaron Rogers is the Browns 'uarterack in 2022 than Baker Mayfield.
But neither will be, because, Brissett. ( I wonder if 0-I6 is a possibility. )

FYI: What I think the Browns SHOULD do rarely lines up with what the Browns ACTUALLY do...or in this case...don't do.

The House Oversight Committee requested Goodell testify on June 22nd, but I have not seen anything that Goodell has agreed to testify on that date. As recently as June 9th, Goodell had not committed to testifying before the committee.

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.c...-testify-in-oversight-committee-hearing/

They owned up to what they did, paid the price and apologized first. So far we've seen none of that.