DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Worst trade ever...

I agree and brought up that trade earlier in this thread.

The Phipps thing in interesting. The trade happened one year after I started loving the Browns as an 8-year-old. I remember him well and over time my memory was he was among the all-time lousy "name" QBs. Now that I am retired and love to watch old YouTube videos of "This Week in Pro Football" with Summerall & Brookshier, I have changed my tune a bit.

I didn't realize bow big, strong and athletic he looked. His stats were bad for his career, especially when compared to today's QBs with no play calling responsibility and rules that make them get hit much less frequently, he had some pretty good games. He made a play against Pittsburgh where he broke at least 2-3 sack tackles, scrambled around and threw an accurate deep ball with a charging lineman right in his face. I gained respect for him the past 3-4 years.

It took him a while to break the lineup because we had Bill Nelson still able to walk. That is back when rookies QBs were not expected to start right away, even if they were high draft picks.

I'm sorry but the Mike Phipps trade has to be the worst. At 6'3 and 210 LBS. he was big for an early "70's QB. He was strong and maybe athletic, but he was horrible. 49% completion rate and 55TD passes and 108 INT's for one of the best receivers of his generation. We got fleeced. We're no better at picking QB's now than we were 50+ years ago. At least we got Ozzie Newsome out of it. That's why we had to trade 3 #1 picks and pay DW 230 million.

I thought Phipps was garbage. He had almost twice as many career interceptions as TDs. That is mind boggling.

I loved his replacement, Brian Sipe. He is my favorite Browns QB of all time. Undersized and not a big arm. Not even sure if he was drafted. Came from the USFL. But, the guy was a real leader. Extremely intelligent. Gutsy as the come. And he was productive.

We replaced him w/the stiff that was Paul McDonald. I yi yi yi.


Edit:

I misspoke about Sipe. He was drafted in the 13th round and spent his first two years on the Reserve Squad. He went to the USFL after he left the Browns.

Actually, Sipe was drafted in the 13th round. It's a toss up for me who was my favorite qb - sipe, or kosar.

Sipes USFL career came after the nfl.

You are correct. I edited it a few minutes ago.

I understand the thought on Chubb. As with you I don't want that, andI doubt we will, but long term, Chubb isn't the best type of back to complement Watsons skill set.

As for Garrett, he can play in any defensive front a team wants to play. I don't see any reason to trade him.

Serious question; what is the right type of back to complement Watson's skillset? I mean, if he can't work with a top 5 back and his top 10 backup, I doubt you'll find a type to fit. I assume you are saying he needs a back that is quick to get outside and who is more reliable in the passing game... I put that on the line and coaching more than anything else. Between Chubb and Hunt, Watson should be able to move the ball on the ground just fine. The line must successfully pass block first, though, and play calling definitely plays a factor in the run game's success and how Watson performs.

I don't agree that Chubb isn't the right type of back for Watson. Both could work effectively w/anyone. I think Chubb's age and cost will eventually lead to him leaving the Browns though.

During the playoffs last year, I came to the realization that the Browns were toast w/Baker at qb because the AFC was loaded w/young, stud QBs. These guys might make mistakes. They might play poorly. But, the are difference makers who can still win you a game when they are not at their best. I did not think getting a guy like Matt Ryan, Cousins, Jimmy G, or any of the guys in the draft would be enough to challenge the great, young qbs in the conference. We made the trade for a truly elite qb that is also young and I realized that our leadership finally "gets it." Watson did not look good this year. Perhaps he never will. However, it the reward was worth the risk.

A year later and look at this:

Watson plays best out of the gun of some sort. I don't think that best fits Nicks running style.

Nick isn't a good run at the line type runner. He is better going outside to find his lanes. He also isn't a plus receiver. With Watson I think you need a plus receiver and a one cut runner...similar to a Hunt in his prime.

Again, I don't want Chubb gone and am not saying we should trade him. I am simply saying that if we seek to maximize Watsons skill set, the type of O we need to evolve might not be the best type of O for Chubb to excel.

I love the way you can voice an opinion without including some bias rant. I'm in total agreement with your diagnosis for the changing schemes on the horizon coming out of Berea. With change comes uncertainty and I believe that's what you're trying to express. I've been attacked for voicing these opinions, but I still believe the stats can't be ignored as the Browns head into the 2023 season.

Since 2019 (the last four seasons), a top 5 QB as determined by yardage (current ranking system), has produced over 4500 yards passing in a season. Watson has shown in the past that he has exhibited that skill set leading the NFL in passing in 2020 with 4823 yards. If Watson is to return to that type of form, the offensive scheme the Browns have been running will have to change. IMHO, you don't go out a sign a player to a 230M guaranteed contract and not build your offense around that type of skill set.

For almost a year now, all I've heard on this forum is how the Browns have acquired a top 5 QB now. If Watson is indeed going to be a top 5 QB, then there is going to have to be some unpopular changes on the offense that some here refuse to recognize.

1. As you said: "It is part of the trade effect: We are going to change our offensive commitment to that of a passing attack Our usage of Chubb will go down so I say if that is the case (not my choice) TRADE CHUBB."

2. Wills LT, this is also a part of the trade effect. If the Browns are going to a passing offense, you can't have the most important position on the team outside of Watson being ranked 60th in PFF for all tackles but even more importantly a 31st ranking out of all LT's that played enough snaps. With 230M invested in your QB, putting him behind the 31st ranked LT is a plan for disaster. After three years, the improvement at the position just isn't there.

3. WR upgrades should be without question. If you're going to pass for 4,500 yards or more - the Browns need more and better weapons.

4. Finally, a real OC. Stefanski is here to stay it appears, but something has to change from his documented past if the Browns 230M QB is going to be an elite top 5 player. 3 years in Cleveland and 1 year as OC in MIN, Stefanski hasn't had a team throw for more than 3,610 yards in any season since he's had control of an offense. In Cleveland it hasn't been above 3,540. Even if you look at Minnesota, Cousins threw for 4,298 in 2018, 3,603 with Stefanski in 2019, 4,265 in 2020, 4,221 in 2021, and 4,547 in 2022. If Watson is going to be the top 5 elite QB the Browns are paying for, then the HC has to change his offense to incorporate over 1,000 yards in additional pass offense that his history has shown he will not do. Let me be perfectly clear, I'm not saying Stefanski cannot do it, what I am saying is his historical past says he won't.

IMHO, there's a lot of major question marks for this team on both sides of the ball entering 2023. The defense is certainly going to be a huge question mark this off season, the offense has just as many holes that I think many are ignoring. I'd love to see your take on this off season coming up.

Just my opinion - I don't know that much is going to change on offense. On D it's a different matter and it needs to change and will change with a new DC. But most of the overhaul will happen on the D I believe. Limited draft resources, Cap is obviously impacted by some big contracts to star players like DW, MG, Ward etc. Generally on offense I think:

- I think Nick will average 20-24 touches a game which is about right if we want to look after him long term. Gives him enough touches to make an impact every game. I still see him out for 3rd downs - KS and Berry, Depo think that's a winning formula and I don't see them changing.
- I think KS will continue to be the OC and will continue to fall into bad habits when games are tight or being lost: lack of half time adjustments and getting pass happy. Being too cute on 4th downs. Going for it on 4th down at one of the highest rates in the NFL while being mid pack for successful conversions.
- The Schwartz experiment needs to be over - lots of speed but "not a real football player".
- We do need a burner to stretch the field and keep safeties honest - that might be the only 'starting' addition at skill a position we make (for 3 WR sets) and though past experience we might take a RB project in the mid-later rounds . We'll add some OL depth.
- I honestly have no clue how Watson will play. As Jim Donovan said, and others, Watson had one good half in 6 games. While he was knocking the rust off - there was a lack of consistent progress which is worrying. As a few posters indicated - DW had a full preseason with the Browns, he played 6 games with the Browns. Being so far away from his peak performance by the end of the year compared to what we saw in HOU, after that much prep and game time, is at bare minimum a bit concerning. The good news is he's certainly not going to be worse than previous QB's we've had - the bad news is that "good" QB play is not what you made that trade for or signed that contract for. Just look at what some young QB's ave achieved in the NFL this year for comparison - no better comp than Purdy.

I guess in summary -there are two scenarios I see: Much improved team play all round, better coaching, better D and playoffs ... and Stefanski venerated. Or we continue to muddle through with more of the same that we've seen the last 2 years and even with good QB play from Watson, excuses and deflection but ultimately a neww HC next year.

With better QB play we will have the ball longer on O IMO. Therefore, we will have more O plays which should allow a good balance between runs and passes. That should make everyone happy. JMO

I don't understand why we think that a very good QB cannot learn a different system. So, Watson is better in the shotgun. I think there will be plays he will be in the shotgun in this offense. 3rd and long's, 2-minute warnings, etc.... I don't see why lining up under center will be that much of a problem. Watson is an elite level athlete and once he has a better grasp of the offense and better timing with his receivers, he won't have an issue in the play action.

Chubb is better suited as a down the hill runner, but he also gained some yardage running around the ends out of the shotgun some this year. He two is a great athlete that can adapt.

While we build the offense around a franchise QB I don't understand why we want to change everything. This offense is easy enough to operate a mediocre QB in Baker got the team to the playoffs. When he made the correct reads and took what the defense gave him and spread the ball around. Baker's problem is he thought he was Brett Farve and wanted to be a gun slinger throwing the ball down the field and forcing it in coverage. Watson can do that and make the down the field connections out of this offense that Baker could not make. I don't believe that Watson has to be in the shotgun every down to be successful. And I don't believe that he and Chubb cannot coexist.

And who is it you're going to blame for bringing up Baker this time? Who is it you're going to accuse of not being able to get Baker out their brain this time? Everyone knows who that really is. It's you.

One would think that if watson is the great QB they think he'll be is that it should be no problem having a top 3 producing RB in the same system. I guess some have decided that it's no longer an advantage to be a duel threat O that can both run and pass.

I agree on Garrett. That said, i don't think we switch to a 3-4, so no worries.

I might disagree with Chubb, but agree on Achane. Achane might be there given backs seem to fall, but I doubt we would take him.

As for watson running, i think that is a part of what is being coached, and I can argee with that. If the 1st look isn't open and there is a clear running path for Watson...take the easy 1st down.

If the first look isn't open, go through your progressions. I'm not against a QB running the ball, but making that a part of the game plan often times has its consequences. And those consequences often times turn out not be be good. We're witnessing that in Baltimore.

I am not blaming anyone. However, this was in the very first post on this thread:


Baker has been discussed repeatedly in this thread, but I get it...........it's cool if one says positive things about Baker, but don't say anything that offends the Almighty Pit. You haven't aged well. You are constantly irritable, miserable, and attacking others who don't share your opinions.

Watson will be able to play in any offense. Furthermore, guys who really know the game like Cossell, Burns, etc all talk about how quarterback friendly our offense is. Our offense will naturally evolve due to the special talents of our franchise qb in ways our previous qbs never could. Good times are ahead.

So you're basing a comment you made on page 12 of this thread due to a comment made on page 1 as your excuse for making it? That's a reach of epic proportions. Yeah, we get it.

No, what I'm doing Vers is pointing out the hypocrisy you use on a regular basis. And you forget, I've met you. I mean if you wish to get into the topic of who hasn't aged well. I'm not the control freak on this board who tells people what they're allowed to post in threads. Who blames people of high jacking threads because I don't like their posts. I mean if you want to talk about getting irritable, miserable and attacking others who do not share in your opinions. Would you like a full length mirror for your birthday!

I did not say a freaking word to you. I posted my thoughts on the situation w/out attacking a soul. You quoted me and once again called me out. Baker's name has been all over this thread. You ignore that, get on my case when I was clearly showing support for Watson and the team's chances moving forward, and then have the nerve to say I attack others who don't share my opinions.

I could care less what your opinions are. Voice them, but you don't get to tell me what to post. Btw---you sure as hell didn't attack me when we met. Pffttttt...

Yet here you are.


Where did I tell you what to or what not to post?


Why would I? I had no desire to take advantage of the situation.

So you are saying he was right and wasn't the one that introduced Baker into this thread but it doesn't matter someone else did because it was too early in the thread for your convenience?

And I bet he is the hypocrite too...

Considering he was 40piints below excellent QB that says it all
Did he even measure up to kizers first year

I hope this 'dream' of what you think we got in Watson materializes soon. I'm tired of hearing how good he is and would like to see it myself. We would have been better off with Mayfield under center this year, regardless of what he did when his life got turned upside down during the diva off-season. And the only elite thing we got from DW this year was the price of his contract, the stench of his off-field mess, and excuses for his play. Those were elite. You will never convince me that we could not have won with Baker. He's a damn good QB.

I am not trying to convince you of anything. Get lost.

Unfortunately, better QB play will not net the Browns more plays based on the stats. The top 5 passing teams (top 5 elite QB's) averaged 1074 total plays in 2022. The Browns had 1072 total plays in 2022. That's only 2 total plays difference for the whole season than the teams with the top rated elite QB's in the entire NFL in 2022. Statistically speaking, better QB play will not net the Browns more plays on offense.

Just another quick note, of the top 10 teams in total passing yards for the season, only 1 of those top 10 teams did not make the playoffs and it took until week 18 to eliminate them - the Detroit Lions.

I think in order to justify the trade for DW, the Browns have to be
In the AFC Championship Game every year.
Cause if you can't advance that far then your franchise
Is no better off then when Mayfield was the QB.

I don't disagree in general - although 'Every Year' might be somewhat extreme. Injuries, schedules, matchups all play a part. Assuming the Bengals remain a dominant force in the AFCN, beating them 2 out of 3 times every single year would be tough. I guess my expectation is a Super Bowl appearance at least once in the next 3 years and say 'play offs' the other 2 years, rather than say Championship Game each of the 3 years. But either bar you use - you are correct, without going much deeper into the playoffs the trade becomes a failure imo.

There is going to be so much pressure on Berry , Stefanski, and Watson
To get this turned around as in NOW.
I don't think any of the 3 have ever had this much pressure and urgency
Placed them at anytime previous to their roles with the Browns now.
All this talk about what DC is coming to Cleveland, I think this
Team will go only as far as the offense takes it. The Browns don't
Need a elite defense to reach the SB.
It's needs a elite / top 7 offense. And I'm not so sure that KS
Can produce and Scheme up a Top 7 offense.

The fair expectations would be challenging for AFC North each year, being a perennial playoff team, and knocking on the door to a Super Bowl each year. I think the run the team made between 1985 and 1989. That philosophy says knock on the door enough times and you'll eventually kick down that door.

The late 80's teams would have done that had Modell stayed patient and not demanded Byner to be traded or if he would not have fired Marty. The knocking on the door would have continued and I firmly believe they would have eventually knocked that door down.

Well, the Browns have supposedly gone out and traded for that top 5 elite QB that should produce the type of offense you referenced. The issue that will continue to be a question mark all the way until next September is if the Browns have the capability to over hall their offensive scheme.

As I stated in a previous post, out of the top 10 teams in passing in 2022, 9 of those were in the playoffs and the only miss was eliminated in week-18. The difference wasn't in the number of offensive plays run either because the Browns ran 1072 in 2022 compared to the top 5 passing team's average of 1074. The issue is the number of plays passing the ball compared to running the ball.

The Browns passed the ball 540 times for 3,444 yards in 2022. The top 5 elite QB'd teams passed the ball an average of 673.8 plays for an average of 4,645.4 yards in 2022. The math says the Browns threw the ball 133.8 times less for 1,201.4 yards fewer than the top 5 elite passing teams.

Of the top 5 rushing teams in attempts (the Browns were 5th), only the Eagles made the playoffs. Likewise, of the top 5 elite rushers in attempts in 2022 (Chubb was 3rd), only Barkley from the NYG made the playoffs. The Browns had 532 rushing plays for 2,490 yards in 2022. The top 5 elite passing teams averaged 400.2 rushing attempts for an average of 1,629.8 yards. Again, the math says the Browns ran the ball 131.8 times more and for 860.2 yards more than the top 5 elite passing teams.

Now some have said that a more balanced offensive scheme is the ticket to success in the NFL. Some have even complained very often about Stefanski getting pass happy. Even though the trail to the playoffs confirmed by the stats proves otherwise, each is entitled to their own opinion. However, if you're going to trade for an elite top 5 QB and pay him a 230M guaranteed contract, why would you set your offense up to where the team produces stats comparable to the 22nd rated passing offense in yardage?

Remember, as stated above, the number of plays between the top 5 elite passing offenses and the Browns is only 2 plays. The math says that there aren't extra plays on the horizon. What the numbers do say is there has to be a different distribution, especially if you're going to get the return on your investment for a top 5 elite QB you acquired.

Like I stated, and they are the facts, 9 out of the top 10 teams in passing yardage made the playoffs in 2022. For the Browns to become a top 5 passing team with their 230M top 5 elite QB, the Browns will need to pass the ball approximately an additional 134 times and run the ball 132 times less than in 2022. That's 24.44% less running plays in 2023 than 2022. The elephant in the room is can Stefanski scheme his offense for almost 25% less running plays when he has a history of scheming lower pass totals?

I don't pretend to have that answer nor do I question the vast array of opinions on the forum. What I will say though, IMHO, paying a QB top 5 elite money on the only fully guaranteed contract in the history of the NFL could clearly be classified "as the worst trade ever" if you're not getting top 5 elite QB play and production from the player. Not being in the top 5 elite level in passing yardage would not be getting your return on investment.

The answer to many of those is Jacoby Brissett was the starting QB for 11 games. It amazes me how people forget this on a myriad of topics re: the Browns.

Yep, 11 pages later, out of nowhere he makes a post about Baker unprovoked. Had you have been born with eyes you could see.

First thing that popped into my mind.

I nearly pointed this out - 11 pages and 3 weeks .... there was no relevancy of BM in this thread any longer as a topic to "reply" to ... anyone is free to bring up and talk about any topic/player/coach they like, but let's not pretend the player was part of this thread at the point he was re-introduced. Not a big deal - but here we are.