DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum What can we expect from DW?

At this point anything is possible. Either good or bad.

Just think if you were a fan of that grocery store. That grocery store GM should’ve been fired immediately for not using the franchise tag on Warner.

Watson is known for everything you say he can't do. He was always commended for his ability to read defenses. Josh Allen running is makes him a threat. His arm is big, but he will give the ball away. In Houston Watson was every bit as good as Allen. You have your right to your opinion, but I would bet that you are way off base here.

That said, I also think he doesn't need to be "the show". Just take what the D gives you. Just moving chains is good enough. The gash plays will happen. Get to the redzone, then strike.

Hi Mac excellent post
Question who on this board feels we could trade Watson straight up for Cousins?
2nd point if Watson was a rookie and he had played this bad would we have drafted his replacement yes or no
My biggest reason for not liking Watson the player
Is that he stunk at the stadium when he played here originally !to me if it looks like garbage smells like garbage
Then it probably is garbage.

That may be good enough to win some games but that's really not much different that what we had in Flacco. I don't see how anyone can say Watson was paid all that money to play like Flacco.

Don't forget there are others on the team.

Who cares if he throws 220 yards and 2 touchdowns.

Watson must be the difference maker when it is time to win the game whether it is maintaining a lead or scoring on the final drive.

I didn't forget. And each of those players are paid according to their skill set and anticipated performance. You either live up to that or you don't. You either earn it or you don't. I have no idea whether watson will do that or not. Only time will tell. If you're being paid enough and were signed to be the show, you need to be the show. Saying that all he needs to do be is average and not make a lot of mistakes isn't why he was given that huge contract. That's all I was saying.

But I certainly agree with you that coming through in the clutch, when the game is on the line is a vital part of it no doubt.

We often hear on this very board how players were overpaid because their performance doesn't live up to their contract. For me watson is no different than the rest of them.

I’m old and just want to see my team play in a Super Bowl. I expect that we’ll have a competitive team this year. As for what I expect from Dashawn, I’d be surprised if he remains healthy enough to play past week 9. That said…. they need to find a way to get it done this year. This is the last good Browns team that many of us will ever see.

I would say we will have a good team for the next 2-3 years. After that, who knows.

I understand. What we don't see is how to distribute the ball to all playmakers.

In a game, there is an average of 24 possessions 12 for each team. Offenses see 60 snaps. If my math still works, that averages 5 plays per possession.

If the goal is to split the plays 50/50 between run and pass, that is 30 each.

Chubb averages 4 yards per carry and 20 carries per game.

Now! In order for Watson to complete 60% of his passes and throw 300 yards per game, he will need to average 15 yards per pass.

In a 5 play possession, Chubb/running back will get two carries and Watson will complete 2 out of 3 passes.

This means the receivers will see 20 catches per game. Your primary receivers are Cooper, Juedy, Moore, and Njoku, so 5 catches each and 75 yards per game.

When people say they want to see Watson look like he did in Houston, how do you want Dorsey/Stefanski to game plan?

I understand your logic. But then the FO just hired a new OC to tailor this O around watson. While you certainly can site the league average, I think you will find those averages don't hold true with teams who have top 10 QB's. Chubb's contract also ends after the 2024 season.

It seems clear that the hiring of Ken Dorsey was meant to tailor this O around watson. I mean after all the Browns made the playoffs with a patchwork quilt of QB's last season so what more could anyone ask for than that? Just look at where Dorsey came from. Buffalo where not only was Dorsey the OC but prior to that he was the QB coach for Josh Allen.

How Dorsey/Stefanski game plan isn't up to me. But for me the writing is on the wall in the direction its headed. I guess my question back to you is why would an NFL team pay 230 million dollars and give up three first round picks for a QB they only ask to be little more than a game manager?

I have no arguments with that.

It will be interesting how they designed this offense for sure.

I do know there are a lot of good players on this offense. They will want to make the best use of them.

The biggest question I have is how they use Chubb. Will they greatly reduce his carries and gear it toward a passing offense? My answer is yes. If this is the case, the Browns game averages I stated earlier will change.

I hope the "run the dang ball" fans don't have too much anxiety!

Change often isn't easy to embrace. Peen used to post all the time about the NFL turning more and more into a passing league. And that's certainly the direction it's been trending ever since. Of course you have to have a very talented QB to make that happen. Obviously there aren't enough of those high caliber QB's to make it possible for all NFL teams to do that. So the Browns went out and bought one with that very idea in mind.

I'm from a different time. I played RB in high school. I remember the days of Jim Brown, Larry Csonka, Leroy Kelly, Franco Harris, Sweetness and the list goes on. I've seen many of the greatest RB's of all time play over the decades. Chubb actually gave me glimpses of those times again and I love it!

But times change. We have witnessed the Browns transform to actually paying up big to get a QB they feel can make this O a passing team. We just witnessed them hire a man to help complete that transformation. To me that's where it stands. How that plays out and what the future holds I have no way of knowing. But one thing I won't do is go kicking and screaming about the direction they have chosen to follow as it pertains to the passing game.

You either keep up or you fall behind. I may not agree with their choice on who they chose to QB this team but it was certainly a bold attempt to keep up rather than fall behind.

So, we turn into the Kardic Kids!!! LOL!

I'm too of the old-school football. I grew up in the Leroy Kelly and both Pruit running backs era. Back then, Cleveland could never have both a strong defense and offense. It would always leave us short of winning it all.

One thing is for sure, when the Browns were their best, they built something unique.

This year has the build-up to the Kardic Kids season. No one knew what to expect having Logan, Newsome, Rucker, and Warfield. How were they going to use Calvin Hill and Greg and Mike Pruit (or was it just Mike)? Sipe played behind a good offensive line too.

The "at home" defense or the "on the road" defense?.................

One challenge for Stefanski and his staff next year will be to figure out why Cleveland’s ballyhooed defense was so inconsistent, depending on whether the Browns were playing at home or on the road.

At home, the Browns’ defense held their opponents to 13.9 points per game, but on the road Cleveland gave up an average of over 31 points per game. That’s a startling differential unseen in the NFL in 40 years.

“You’re going to have to give me some time. I think we have to pull that apart and look at it, said Stefanski. “I mean, it is something that you have to get to the bottom of, and we’ll look at it.”

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jiming...-exit-from-the-playoffs/?sh=6350ba2446fc

This is from a much longer article but directly points out the contrast of the D at home verses on the road.

One would certainly hope they figure it out. I knew there was a difference in how they performed on the road verses how they performed at home but I had no idea the contrast was so stark until I actually looked into the numbers.

Wasn't the road schedule against tougher teams?

That is not to say they should not look to improve. The numbers might be misleading a bit.

Isn't it the better teams you need to beat in order to win a championship? And are you trying to indicate that giving up that many points against "tougher teams" is acceptable?

Let's look at division rivals as an example since we played those same teams both at home and on the road....

Browns verses Bengals...

At home the Browns held the Bengals to 3 points. On the road the Browns gave up 31 points to the Bengals.

Browns verses Steelers...

Away the Browns gave up 26 points to the Steelers. At home the Browns held the Steelers to 13 points.

Browns verses the Ravens...

This one is much closer. at home the Browns gave up 28 points the the Ravens. Away they gave up 31.

If you wish to talk about playing against tough teams. At home the Browns only gave up 17 points to the 49'ers. While on the road they gave up 29 points to the Broncos.

I believe that you are right that the road schedule was tougher. But the average points given up is unacceptable at any level.

In a few of those games, the offense did not help much, but your point taken.

Consistent and healthy all season long in 2024 is what I am hoping and praying for.

The offense had an uncanny ability to turn the ball over deep in their own territory on the road. Uncanny. Then the defense would make a stand to hold the opponent to a fg only to have it unravel with a penalty or penalties. Over and over and over again. Never seen anything like it. Or the offense would give up 6 pts on a turnover on the road. Repeatedly. Then the defense would get slammed for giving up a ton of road points.

There’s nothing wrong with the Browns road defense. It will be fine.

Watson will get hurt if they turn him into a runner, which is what Dorsey is going to do, which is why they brought in Winston. Which I still don’t understand why they did that over Flacco. Maybe the turnovers. Maybe Watson’s feelings.

At any rate DTR will be the starter in 2025.

The defense looked great at home largely due to the QBs they faced. An injured Burrow game 1 in the rain, Ryan Tannehill, Kenny Pickett, Purdy without Deebo Samuel and a banged up McCaffrey, Clayton Tune, an injured Trevor Lawrence who was a game time decision, Trevor Siemian and Justin Fields. Lamar Jackson cooked them in Cleveland.


Tanking for Arch Manning?

I wonder what the Vegas odds are on DW actually taking us to the playoffs this year? I bet the odds of him playing all the games are extraordinarily long. I hope he can get it done or the egg on our faces over that trade will last 50 years.

I don't mean be a game manager...or suppose I am to a degree. Watson needs to exhibit excellence, but he doesn't have to be the show. If that 8 yard crossing route is all that is open or all the play is calling for, then hit the 8 yard crossing route.

We all want gash plays that pick up 40 yards, but not all plays are designed, or at least expected to gain 40 yards.

Last year, any real complaints in Watsons play weren't due to inferior play. It was because of injury. The only way you can help to eliminate game type injuries is if Watson runs, slide 2 yards sooner than he does. When passing, hit the read early to get the ball out sooner.

So.....maybe he does need to play a bit more like Flacco played.

j/c:

Where Deshaun Watson ranks on Pro Football Focus’ list of NFL’s best quarterbacks for 2024

https://www.cleveland.com/browns/20...-of-nfls-best-quarterbacks-for-2024.html

I don’t understand this take. If the Browns were bad, then i could understand it. But the only thing that would make the trade bad is if the trade prevented the Browns from having a good team and that hasn’t happened. If the Browns never win a Super Bowl with Watson it won’t be a bad trade as long as the team remains good.

The 9ers made a similar trade for Trey Lance and no one says a word about it because although he flopped they are a well run organization that has remained good. Believe it or not the Browns are a well run organization with maybe the most talented team in the league from top to bottom.

Do you mean on Dawgtalkers?

I'm pretty sure those who pay the salaries expect the play to equal the pay. Unless of course the business world has been turned upside down. It amazes me how many of the same people that claimed the Browns had signed a QB who was the best thing since sliced bread have already changed course with much lower expectations. And now those much lower expectations would suit them just fine. How did Dylan put it? "These times they are a changing."

That's because the 49ers caught lightening in a bottle and were bailed out by Brock Purdy. The 49ers have been in the Super Bowl and played in the NFC Conference championship two years prior to that. Could have back-to-back Super Bowl appearances but they were down McCaffrey playing QB against the Eagles in 2022.

The Browns got clobbered by a rookie QB in the Wild Card.

I agree, the Browns have the right people in place to be a successful organization. It's worth noting that they did not/have not restructure(d) Watson's contract this offseason which leaves the Browns options open both now and in the future.

Not all of the circumstances are exact but the point remains. Unless the Watson trade impacts the Browns ability to field a good team it was a good trade.

I have a feeling that fan expectations are different than team expectations. As for my expectations, I don't think they have changed at all. The problem with expectations is that most people attach some sort of numbers, be it TD's, Yards, wins, championships. I don't see that as productive.

I think you measure all of that after the player is done playing. I have long said that anything less than a Superbowl win is a failed season. That is the bottom line, but if I use that as an expectation to an individual player, then every player who has played for the Browns since 1964 have been failures.

Nothing about that trade made it easier or more-likely for the FO to otherwise field a good team. It actually did the exact opposite. Had the trade not been made, they'd have (3) more 1st Rd picks on the team...and more...and cap space out the wazoo. They still could have picked up Brissett and Flacco while waiting for the FQB.

Imagine this roster with a 1st Rd LT...1st Rd WR...&...promising 1st Rd QB.

They bet the farm on this trade - when they didn't HAVE to IMO - and the trade will always be about DW winning playoff games and/or being better than the picks they gave up.

The Browns roster is ranked top 5 on every list imaginable and number 1 on many of them. The roster currently has a first round LT and WR on it. (those that think Wills sucks has no idea what they are watching)

Having more first round picks doesn’t mean or guarantee anything. Browns fans of all people should know this. And there continue to be many ways around the cap. The Browns continuously strengthen their team through FA before and after Watson.

The Browns roster has continuously gotten better since acquiring Watson.

Unless the Watson trade is holding the team back I just don’t see how it was a bad trade.

I think people most people consider football a sport. When in fact it is a corporate business. Businesses expect a ROI and that the return be equal to or above the investment. As such if you pay a QB top 10 money you expect top 10 production. You don't expect to pay top 10 money and get less than top 10 production. That simply doesn't make any business sense.


And that would be something I would go along with if the Browns had a crappy team. But they don't. The pieces of the puzzle are in place to succeed. The supporting cast is there. If a QB can't take advantage of that, how do you think the Browns stand a chance of ever winning a SB?