DawgTalkers.net
Posted By: bonefish Back to Football - 07/02/22 12:42 PM
The title I was thinking of was "no quarterback thread."

However, I will start with DW will play games this year. Maybe I am wrong but I don't think so.

Now the rest of the team. The secondary will be one of the best in the NFL. A real plus for the secondary is depth. I really like the linebacking room. Glad that Wilson is gone. Walker and Phillips may not be all pros but they are good players. Phillips has good length and moves well in space. Walker is a smart player who can keep people in order. JOK IMO will be a stand out player. He has rare talent.

The DL with Clowney and Myles will be a solid unit. The interior will need to sift out who can do what. It may have some bad times but over time will be above average.

Obviously the offense is still to be decided. Brissett is more than capable to handle some games for this team. He is an upgrade over the way Baker played last year. If Brissett plays he will be good enough with this team to win games.

The reason is because he has loads of talent around him. Up front the OL should be better overall. Wills should improve and I believe he will. Losing Conklin for most of last year was a huge loss. He is an excellent RT when healthy. Hubbard has returned and Hudson should improve after a solid rookie season.We have the best guard tandem in the game. Harris and Pocic should not be much of a drop from Tretter. They will be have great guards around them.

Our runningback room is crazy good and very deep. I do not need to go into that.

We have improved the TE position by subtraction of Hooper. I expect Njoku to have a great season. Bryant can catch and is an improving player.

Cooper is a pros pro. He does everything a receiver should do. He is good at every aspect of the position.

DPJ, Schwartz, Bell and whoever else plays are good enough when looked at inside of the full offense.

The offense is run centric. That is how the team was built. No matter who plays quarterback there is plenty to fall back on. When DW does play. He will elevate the entire offense. He is a top five quarterback all day long.

The Browns are a talented team. We should win a lot of games.
Posted By: mgh888 Re: Back to Football - 07/02/22 01:11 PM
Originally Posted by bonefish


The Browns are a talented team. We should win a lot of games.
Yes and Yes ! Like every team we have a few questions - but we have a very good team.
Posted By: Versatile Dog Re: Back to Football - 07/02/22 01:27 PM
You are naturally more optimistic than I am. This is no exception, but I also think we have a very good team.

It starts and ends w/Watson. I think we can survive him missing 4 games. Anything more than that and I think we are toast in regards to getting to the Super Bowl. The AFC is just loaded w/good teams and quarterbacks. Watson is one of the elite qbs in the league. Certainly in the top 7 and maybe higher. He can elevate others and make game-changing plays.

I think we have the best stable of RBs in the league.

Our guards are the best combo in the league. Conklin, if healthy, is a top tackle in the league. Wills is good enough. Not sure about our center? Still, the OL is one of the very best in the league.

Our TEs are probably below average.

Cooper is a #1, but I question his desire. We do not have a proven #2, #3, or #4 yet.

Our corners are ranked #3 overall by PFF. That's impressive.

Our safeties are probably middle of the pack. Maybe a little bit lower, but that ranking can improve.

I think our LBers are probably below average as a group. Maybe average.

Our two Edge guys our near the top of the league.

The DTS are a question mark.

Not sure about the place kicker and punter at this point.

Coaching is very good. FO is very good.

I think this team is good enough to challenge for the Super Bowl. They will have to stay healthy, have Watson available for all--or almost all--of the season, catch a few breaks, and get momentum on their side at the right time. I had pretty much given up hope after I saw all the talent at qb in the conference, but we now have a shot and it's a great thing to have hope.
Posted By: bonefish Re: Back to Football - 07/02/22 01:55 PM
Well if we challenge for a Super Bowl. I am good with that.

I disagree about the TE's. I don't think they are below average. Last years stats or the years before will not indicate how the TE's will play this year. So, in this case PFF grades or other stats will not predict this year. IMO Hooper hurt the Browns. He took reps away from better players because he was being highly paid. That can happen even though he did not deserve to play. In addition I think Brissett and or DW will use the TE's more.

Safety. An injury like Delpits normally takes two years to truly recover. It takes the mind some time to believe you are fully fit. IMO Delpit will show the player he is this year. John Johnson is better than he played last year but he has to prove it.

I don't question Cooper. He may not be all world but he is a good receiver. I think DPJ has shown enough to be considered a solid number two. Baker's play last year hurt him.

I totally disagree about linebacker. Phillips missed time when he was improving. I stand behind JOK.

Place kicking reamins to be seen. However, Cade is a big investment. They did their homework on him. He should be at least an upgrade. That alone is a positive.

Brissett just needs to lean on what is around him. He is not going win on his own. He doesn't have to. Hand the ball off. Hit guys who are open. Give up on plays not there. Don't be afraid to punt.

The AFC is loaded. I really like the Bills. The road to the SB will be hard. A lot will depend on the playoff bracket.
Posted By: Iluvmyxstripper Re: Back to Football - 07/02/22 04:03 PM
I think the game is evolving where you need a franchise QB and franchise WR.
The Browns have 1 of 2.
The Browns will be able to run the ball effectively .but if the offense can't get enough
Big plays out of the WRs then defenses will just crowd the box.
I'm not as high on DPJ as most. He is too inconsistant . I think he only had 2 or 3 games
Over 70 yds last year. Landry did nothing last year much like Higgins
And DPJ failed to step up and make plays when those 2 couldn't

I think somebody like Woods could push Schwartz down the depth chart
Schwartz lacks football instincts for the position

I wouldn't be surprised if David Bell ends up with more targets than DPJ.
DPJ was drafted in the 6th RD for a reason

Jedrick Willis needs to take his game to another level.he has to develop more tenacity
It's a big year for young OT to develop and evolve. Conklin may be injury prone from here on out

Defensively the talent is unabundant. But this defense couldn't make enough plays in the 4th q.last year
I think another LB needs to Rachet his game up.
The defense needs to create more turnovers and takeaways.
NFL games are so decided on the turnover differential and possessions in the 4th q.

I don't think the Browns are a SB team. It's a wild card team. All the better AFC teams
Have stability at the QB position and better WRs overall.
A loaded RB room can't you to the SB anymore
That went out with the 72 Dolphins
Posted By: Homewood Dog Re: Back to Football - 07/02/22 04:57 PM
Yes, we do have a good team. An argument could be made we have top 5 talent in the league. That's why we went out and signed DW. Our ownership and FO determined that QB was the weak spot. If DW plays, we have a shot at the SB. If not, getting to the playoffs will be tough. JMO
Posted By: mgh888 Re: Back to Football - 07/02/22 05:58 PM
I thought about doing a positional breakdown - but decided to look at this another way: We have no glaring weakness. To win - you do not need a stud at every position. You need a few stars and then decent/good enough players in the other slots to let them do their job or do something special. It's why - despite Clowney not being a stud anymore, just him being good, let's MG be a superstar. It's why Philips, Walker and Taki are good enough to let JOK look like something very special. It's why Harris doesn't need co come in and play like Alex Mack.

I think RB is elite. OL is possibly elite depending on the recovery of Conklin. DL isn't elite across the board - but MG is. LB - JOK is potentially a break out superstar, Walker is good enough and Phillips has a chance to take a giant step forward. CB we are elite. JJ3 and Delphit - I like very much as a safety duo. Harrison is ok if he doesn't keep doing dumb schtick. DT is out most "meh" position. Maybe WR too - but Cooper is better than any WR we've had on the team for a while. DPJ was hurt last year and I think Bell is going to absolutely impress everyone. Interesting the one segment of 92.3 (I think it was) during training camp they had Schwartz on - I'll believe it when I see it but it sounded genuine that this guy is going to break out and contribute too.
Posted By: bonefish Re: Back to Football - 07/02/22 06:55 PM
Good points.
Posted By: THROW LONG Re: Back to Football - 07/02/22 07:44 PM
Depodesta on CBD, (Cleveland Browns Daily) once again parrots the line.
" you don't win a lot of games in the NFL by scoring field goals."

I take this line, which I've heard this current group of the Browns coaching staff and head front office guys say on multiple occasions now,
as a way to excuse that they won't put in proper perspective, what is one of the top 2 ways to score points in an NFL Game.

When you have a chance at a field goal, you have to take that field Goal.
And Taking those field goals sends a message to your offense also.

It reminds the offense how important 3rd downs are.
If the Head, front office coaching cooperative constantly decides to forego field goals and not get the 3 points, and go for an offensive play on 4th downs, then the Head coaching coop, sends a wrong and damaging message to their own offense,
a message that 3rd downs are somehow less important than they've always been,
and therefore, going the extra mile in effort and precision on 3rd downs isn't as important, because the coach isn't going to make you sit down, they will let you give you another shot, and one which often goes bad, to miss out on the field goal points,
and make a turnover on downs possible.

Field goals matter, those 3 points additions to your score, they add up!
Posted By: mgh888 Re: Back to Football - 07/02/22 08:07 PM
You win less games by going for it on 4th down and failing.
Posted By: THROW LONG Re: Back to Football - 07/02/22 08:18 PM
No Quarterback thread.
Drafting the Cleveland Browns roster, mine vs. yours. more specifically drafting the Browns defensive line.
I'm drafting Clowney with the first pick, and assuming the rest of the DTMB would take Myles Garrett.
With the next pick of drafting the Browns DL I'm taking Alex Wright the rookie DE with his potential and leave the next pick, because there is a philosophy to building that defensive line, and the defensive front 7. And you have to have the front 7 to have the back 5.
Once the DL is finished, the Board can have the first pick of any other position.
Posted By: DeisleDawg Re: Back to Football - 07/02/22 08:33 PM
Pretty much know what to expect with the Offense and Defense, excited about the rookies and seeing the upgrade in the back up positions.

What excites me the most is seeing how the special teams play !

The player I want to see the most successful is Cade York ! I'm excited to see his play ! I really feel he is going to rock this and get the stadium team and fans fired up with his Leg !
Posted By: bonefish Re: Back to Football - 07/02/22 09:27 PM
What a great thing to read.

I usually cringe about ST. Mostly because we have been so bad. Dawson was the last good kicker that I can think of.

Josh Cribbs was the last ST player that pops to mind.

So hellya go Cade.
Posted By: Ballpeen Re: Back to Football - 07/02/22 10:08 PM
Originally Posted by mgh888
You win less games by going for it on 4th down and failing.

Very true.

I guess the thinking is one TD and extra point is worth more than 2 field goals, and that does make some sense.

It also makes sense to take points when you can get them, especially early in the game. In ways, I would rather go for it on 4th and 2 when you are outside field goal range. Between the 40's is prime real estate to go for it.
Posted By: Versatile Dog Re: Back to Football - 07/02/22 10:29 PM
I thought most of this board liked analytics?

Data shows that going for it on 4th down is better than kicking FGs. It's complicated and there are many factors, but that is the general consensus.


https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id...-plus-2-point-conversion-recommendations

https://bestballstats.com/2021/01/26/go-for-it-a-guide-to-optimal-fourth-down-decision-making/

https://www.nfl.com/news/introducin...guide-a-new-analytics-tool-for-fourth-do
Posted By: DeisleDawg Re: Back to Football - 07/02/22 10:31 PM
Bonefish, I'm also excited about having Jakeem Grant on STs

It was an area of much needed improvement.

Excited about the ones who will be on STs, Lets see who ends up on that squad !
Posted By: bonefish Re: Back to Football - 07/02/22 11:57 PM
Interesting take. Grant is bonafide. Cade is a big investment. The roster has enough good athletes that the whole unit should improve. It was an area that was strongly addressed. Berry wanted improvement in ST.

Camp is not far away. My favorite time of year. Baseball is climbing the mountain. Football just woke up. The players know camp is for real.

Posted By: bonefish Re: Back to Football - 07/03/22 12:36 AM
This is giant. I don't know why? sorry

Posted By: THROW LONG Re: Back to Football - 07/03/22 02:14 AM
What does PFF say about the Patriots roster, the Patriots, cleaned the Browns Clock(s) last year, and they did it with whatever roster, the game wasn't even close,
So a top 10 roster won't guarantee any wins whatsoever.

They'll have to find out how to actually earn the wins, find out what that recipe is.
Posted By: 10YrOvernightSuccess Re: Back to Football - 07/03/22 01:02 PM
What’s ironic about the QB fixation this off-season is that I feel like, if coached properly and the right sort of offense and defense is maximized, this is an excellent team for a “manager QB” to succeed in. What’s probably going to be a top 10 and maybe top 5 D, excellent OL and maybe the best running game in the league, and decent if not spectacular possession reviewers. Not perfect but if played right could be methodical, lunchpail, clock chewing team. In fact, a Brissett type might actually thrive more than a gunslinger Mayfield type even though he’s not as talented. Of course if you have Watson it opens up a whole different chapter of the playbook but this team can consistently beat all but the top tier with a manager who doesn’t turn it over and gets simple first downs IF the coaching is smart.
Posted By: bonefish Re: Back to Football - 07/03/22 02:05 PM
Obviously PFF factored for DW on the team.

However, this is a good roster. No team is perfect. In fact there are no truly dominate teams. That is by design of the NFL.

So, if you have a roster that is considered top eight. Once the playoffs begin. Many things factor into winning it all. One of them is luck.

We have a good team. A team I am excited to watch. How we end? Who knows. Thinking back to when a winning season was the high water mark.

I am all in this year.
Posted By: THROW LONG Re: Back to Football - 07/03/22 02:07 PM
Top 5 Rb duo and top 5 Defense, ( The players were here last year and where was it?)
Posted By: THROW LONG Re: Back to Football - 07/03/22 02:20 PM
Originally Posted by bonefish
Obviously PFF factored for DW on the team.
This may have been explained on the podcast that originates from the team facility in Berea. Discussing the top 10 roster ranking, A representative came on and said they factored Watson avail.to the Browns for a full year, but that the system docks points from anyone who for whatever reason, didn't play at all the previous year.
Posted By: Versatile Dog Re: Back to Football - 07/03/22 02:54 PM
Originally Posted by THROW LONG
Top 5 Rb duo and top 5 Defense, ( The players were here last year and where was it?)

Our qb last year was ranked 30th by PFF. He was dead last in 4th quarter QBR. Watson is a top-tier qb. That should help winning some close games.
Posted By: PitDAWG Re: Back to Football - 07/03/22 03:41 PM
Originally Posted by Versatile Dog
Our *injured* qb last year was ranked 30th by PFF. He was dead last in 4th quarter QBR. Watson is a top-tier qb. That should help winning some close games.

Fixed it.
Posted By: PrplPplEater Re: Back to Football - 07/03/22 03:47 PM
Originally Posted by Versatile Dog
Originally Posted by THROW LONG
Top 5 Rb duo and top 5 Defense, ( The players were here last year and where was it?)

Our qb last year was ranked 30th by PFF. He was dead last in 4th quarter QBR. Watson is a top-tier qb. That should help winning some close games.


To be fair, as bad as he was, Baker was still ranked way above Watson last year.

The year prior, Watson was Top 5 and went 4-12, Baker was Top 10 and went 11-5 and won a playoff game.
Better, but close to interchangeable.
Posted By: FrankZ Re: Back to Football - 07/03/22 03:57 PM
Originally Posted by PitDAWG
Originally Posted by Versatile Dog
Our *injured* qb last year was ranked 30th by PFF. He was dead last in 4th quarter QBR. Watson is a top-tier qb. That should help winning some close games.

Fixed it.

And yet he played. There is a saying "you are what you put on tape". If he was injured to the point he couldn't put good football on tape maybe he should have sat his butt down.

He showed very poor play last year after the injury.

I had hopes for Baker after the playoff win. After his injury it became apparent he wasn't playing well, he continued to play. It was quoted that it was his choice. He choose poorly, now he has to live with that.
Posted By: Versatile Dog Re: Back to Football - 07/03/22 03:58 PM
I was just answering Throw's question about why PFF might have us ranked so high and what might be the difference from last year to this year.
Posted By: THROW LONG Re: Back to Football - 07/03/22 04:08 PM
I thought
Originally Posted by bonefish
The title I was thinking of was "no quarterback thread."
Anyway, Carry on. ...
Back to Football
Drafting the Browns' Defensive line, on my side, I have Clowney, and 2nd round pick Alex Wright.
On the opposing side, Y'all have Myles Garrett and the next player is up in the air.

Given those choices, is the 4th best, or next draftable player from the Browns current Defensive Line to pair with Myles Garrett on a side where the other side includes Wright, and Clowney, is the next best choice.
A. Perrion Winfrey - the rookie 3rd round pick who had a passionate interview introduction.
B Taven Bryan - the Former 1st round pick of the Jaguars who the Jags declined a 5th year on
C Jordan Elliott who is the projected starter after the departure of Malik Jackson from last year.
D. Sheldon Day- the long tenured Brown who hasn't started a lot,
Or someone else, maybe one of the remaining Defensive Ends.
Chase Winovich, Stephen Weatherly, Curtis Weaver, Isaiah Thomas, or Isaac Rochelle,
or could it be, Tommy Togiai- going into his 2nd year, or Glen Logan the LSU DT udfa who has played at a large weight in the past.
Or someone I forgot. Stephen Weatherly, Roderick Perry,
( Because, who is going to stop the run?)
Posted By: PrplPplEater Re: Back to Football - 07/03/22 04:19 PM
I'm looking forward to camp starting and being able to get a look at Winfrey and the DT's. This defense really will go only as far as they hold up.... otherwise, it will be like last year when a non-running QB will be able to scramble for an eleventy-seven yard first down and there'll be nothing we can do about it.
Posted By: THROW LONG Re: Back to Football - 07/03/22 04:35 PM
There is! actually a point: because in the 2000-and ahem Super Bowl, the Arizona Cardinals with Kurt Warner,
(Hall of Famer Kurt Warner.) (Hall of famer?, should be.) the Arizona Cardinals met the Pittspuke steelers and the Cardinals got Robbed by the Refs, and the Cardinals lost the game even if they may have had an advantage early in the game, (memories?)

But! What I do remember, from that game. And, even if the Cardinals got Jobbed and Robbed by the refs, what stands out in my memories, and is of the UTMOST importance in football, (even American 7s' football where they don't wear helmets)
the basic staple food of football is Run Defense, and the Arizona Cardinals, a Super Bowl Participating team in that year,
had Piss Poor Run Defense on at least 2 major plays in that game.
Not just "oops" but "what the freak" run defense in that game. The Super Bowl. The Browns are 3 months from game 6 or 7 of their regular season schedule and even PFF and others agree the only weakness of the Browns roster are the interior defensive tackles.
What the heck?
You mean the run stoppers, the line holders?

Don't worry, Jordan Elliott, ( Jordan rollerskates Elliott ) is going to start?

Everyone on this message board has seen 100,000 football games. If your team can't stop the run, EVERYONE knows what happens.
What the heck are the Browns going to do, if they can't stop the run.
The 2 Maliks' aren't coming back. Larry O and whoever they had in 2020 isn't back either. Somebody has to stop the Run or it doesn't matter what Anybody else does on the entire team. Anybody.
If you don't stop the run you lose.
(Unless of course it's the 2021 Browns who lost a game with a ton of offensive rushing yards, but hey, analytics thumbsdown)
Posted By: bonefish Re: Back to Football - 07/03/22 04:35 PM
There are a good number of players I am super curious about come camp.

They include:

JOK, where does he go from last year?

Njoku how will handle being a primary target?

Anthony Schwartz can he show that he is a legit receiver?

Grant Delpit how does he play now being fully recovered?

Jacob Phillips and Jordan Elliott have they developed into contributing starters?

Perrion Winfrey are you the guy I think you might be?

DPJ has shown consistent improvement. Become a strong number two.

Can David Bell replace Jarvis?

Posted By: THROW LONG Re: Back to Football - 07/03/22 04:39 PM
I don't think the field is eleventy-seven yards long, maybe diagonaly, it'd stop when he crosses the goal line. wink
Posted By: PitDAWG Re: Back to Football - 07/03/22 05:01 PM
Originally Posted by FrankZ
If he was injured to the point he couldn't put good football on tape maybe he should have sat his butt down.

The HC makes the starting roster, not the players. And when he did finally make his own decision to sit in the last game of the season when they were no longer any playoff implications, people say he quit on the team. It seems according to many fans it was a "heads I win, tails you lose" situation of what choice was made.

Quote
He showed very poor play last year after the injury.

He most certainly did. Which is exactly why I pointed out he was playing injured. He played much better the season before, led the Browns to the playoffs and won a playoff game when he wasn't injured. He threw for over 80% completions in the first two games in 2021 before his injury. I find it quite disingenuous when people try to isolate his play based on the worst while omitting the best.

Quote
I had hopes for Baker after the playoff win. After his injury it became apparent he wasn't playing well, he continued to play. It was quoted that it was his choice. He choose poorly, now he has to live with that.

If in fact the HC allows his players to dictate who starts, that means the HC has relegated his responsibility to his players. That's not how any of that is supposed to work. You can choose to blame the player for that if you like.
Posted By: THROW LONG Re: Back to Football - 07/03/22 05:44 PM
Andy Kauffman was going to go back to reading "the Great Gatsby" on stage if the crowd didn't behave.
Posted By: Ballpeen Re: Back to Football - 07/03/22 05:45 PM
I think Harrison Bryant is going to make a big jump.
Posted By: FrankZ Re: Back to Football - 07/03/22 06:40 PM
Originally Posted by PitDAWG
The HC makes the starting roster, not the players. And when he did finally make his own decision to sit in the last game of the season when they were no longer any playoff implications, people say he quit on the team. It seems according to many fans it was a "heads I win, tails you lose" situation of what choice was made.

And yet players make the final call on if they can play. No one shoved him on the field and said "play or die".

And to be fair none of us know what happened in the locker room, but we know Baker was still going on on the field and he can override everyone and not play. He is also the only person responsible for his play. The coaches can help him succeed, and the can set him up to fail, but he is a professional at his job and he bears the ultimate responsibility for his play.

By the end of the season he had played half a season too long, then stopped. That really wasn't a good look either, especially with him walking out on the press etc. He already had a reputation (rightfully or wrongly) for being immature and last season he really didn't do anything to change that.

You are only as good as your last game or only as good as your tape. He was horrible last year, it will be an uphill climb for him, the reputation forimmaturity will only make it harder on him.
Posted By: PitDAWG Re: Back to Football - 07/03/22 06:59 PM
Originally Posted by FrankZ
And yet players make the final call on if they can play. No one shoved him on the field and said "play or die".

You're right, the medical staff makes the call if they're able to play. Not if they can play well or as good as normal, but that the injury is not severe enough to stop them from playing nor that the injury has much of a chance to get worse if they do play. So much for the dramatic, "play or die" part.

Quote
And to be fair none of us know what happened in the locker room, but we know Baker was still going on on the field and he can override everyone and not play. He is also the only person responsible for his play. The coaches can help him succeed, and the can set him up to fail, but he is a professional at his job and he bears the ultimate responsibility for his play.

Sure, once the medical staff clears him to play and the coach names him the starter, he can refuse to play. Speaking of immaturity and quitting on the team. Even you know how everyone would have reacted to that. Baker is a competitor. I can't think of any athlete that would choose to sit on the bench if he has been cleared to play by the medical staff and named the starter by his coach. That is the very reason the HC has the final say. If you left it up to the athlete a lot of them would still play if they just had a kidney removed.

Quote
By the end of the season he had played half a season too long, then stopped.

And you blame that on the coach not sitting him down.

Quote
You are only as good as your last game or only as good as your tape. He was horrible last year

I'm sure those who are actually in professional sport understand how playing with an injury, especially a shoulder injury, not to mention the leg injuries during the season, especially by a QB hampers his production and performance. I'm sure they have his 2020 game film as well as the game film of his first two healthy games of 2021. Now if you're speaking about fans who have chosen not to be objective I agree with you.
Posted By: FrankZ Re: Back to Football - 07/03/22 07:06 PM
Originally Posted by PitDAWG
You're right, .

Really you could have just stopped there.
Posted By: PitDAWG Re: Back to Football - 07/03/22 07:10 PM
No, not really but great way to dodge the discussion. Touche' if that was your goal. #you'rejustheretofight
Posted By: steve0255 Re: Back to Football - 07/03/22 07:15 PM
I totally disagree, the final say is the HC. He has the responsibility to field the best team possible week in and week out. I don't care if Mayfield had the Pope next to his locker supporting him playing, if Mayfield was unable to perform at a satisfactory level due to injury, then the HC had the responsibility to yank him from the lineup. If Mayfield was hampered yet still was the best they had, then the HC should have taken responsibility for the lack of production due to his not having a qualified backup that could step in and manage the team better than an injured QB. Any player worth his salt in self esteem and competitiveness would demand that they play if they could crawl out there on the field. That is the exact type of guy a team wants playing every position. As the HC, you have a responsibility to shut said player down if the injury could get worse or if the player just can't perform as close to normal as possible. I challenge anyone on this forum to say that the way Mayfield performed after his injury was anywhere close to the way he performed the previous 12 games. That's a HC issue and has been an issue. It would be nice if Stefanski was held responsible for some of the issues caused last year - but no, it's all Mayfield's fault. That's not even taking in consideration that both OT's were out or injured, both RB's missed time, and a WR corp that was suspect at best with no #1 and a #2 admitting he played the year injured and was not up to par. Hmmm, still all Mayfield's fault.
Posted By: FrankZ Re: Back to Football - 07/03/22 07:18 PM
Originally Posted by PitDAWG
No, not really but great way to dodge the discussion. Touche' if that was your goal. #you'rejustheretofight

Do you think Stefanski asked Baker the simple question of "Can you go?" Did Baker answer yes when he should have answered no? Simple put, Baker is responsible for Baker.


So yes, you could have just said "you are right" and stopped. All your dancing deflects from this being Baker's responsibility. He is a professional athlete. He has final say on what he eats, what he lifts and when he plays (well, doesn't play).

And to the silly remark about fans. If Baker says "I can't go" do you think Stefanski would say to the press "Baker's being a baby and won't play?"
Posted By: steve0255 Re: Back to Football - 07/03/22 07:25 PM
It doesn't matter if Baker said he could go. The HC has to evaluate the play on the field. I mean, what the hell is his job anyway if he's not going to evaluate the players performance but just play him because he said he wanted to play. Again, why do the Browns need a HC if he isn't going to have the final say on who plays or who doesn't? Certainly, he shouldn't be giving up that responsibility to a player, you think?
Posted By: mgh888 Re: Back to Football - 07/03/22 07:29 PM
HC is resppndible for who plays. Period. Baker played badly. Yes. Baker was willing to go out and play... He may have even desperately wanted to play. The decision on who plays is the HC
Posted By: PitDAWG Re: Back to Football - 07/03/22 07:31 PM
Originally Posted by FrankZ
Do you think Stefanski asked Baker the simple question of "Can you go?" Did Baker answer yes when he should have answered no? Simple put, Baker is responsible for Baker.

Stefanski is the HC. It's his responsibility to watch the players during practice that week, talk to the medical staff and determine who the starter should be. And "Can you go"? Baker could go, he did go, he did play those games. Once again, you act like an athlete would want to sit on the bench if he thought he could play. That's why it's the decision of the HC based on what he had seen during the week in practice and medical staff clearing the player to play. Between the medical staff and the coaching staff they are paid millions upon millions of dollars to make such decisions. That's actually in their job descriptions to do so. And you act as if the responsibility they get paid to do is somehow Baker's fault becaue you disagree with the calls they made.


Quote
And to the silly remark about fans. If Baker says "I can't go" do you think Stefanski would say to the press "Baker's being a baby and won't play?"

Why wouldn't they? You claim he played a half a season too long. There are a lot of fans claiming he quit on the team by doing exactly what you propose he should have done by mid season. He took himself out of the last game and we have all seen the claims that meant Baker quit on the team. Have you been reading the board? Yes athletes who are competitive and cleared by the medical staff to play should be expected to say they don't want to play. That's why these decisions are the responsibility of the medical and coaching staffs instead of the players.
Posted By: FrankZ Re: Back to Football - 07/03/22 07:46 PM
Originally Posted by PitDAWG
Once again, you act like an athlete would want to sit on the bench if he thought he could play.


And yet he couldn't play. That's also part of the immaturity.

Baker is still ultimately responsible for Baker. And yes, an athlete should know if he can go or not. Obviously Baker thought he could and was wrong.

It wasn't just his physical play that has been questioned, his decision making was as well, and this demonstrates that was faulty.
Posted By: PitDAWG Re: Back to Football - 07/03/22 07:49 PM
Yeah, the coach making the call on who starts is a sign that Baker is immature. I'm not the only one who sees the frivolity of your assertions.
Posted By: keithfromxenia Re: Back to Football - 07/03/22 08:00 PM
Frank, a few years ago there was a radio, then tv show in the morning on espn , mike and mike. It was Greenberg and former nfl d lineman mike Golic, our bob golic’sbrother. Greenie once asked Golic if he ever had an injury , the coach asked him if he was able to go that day , and he answered no. Golic replied never. That football players, at the pro level have it ingrained in them that they play. Period. He said he had seen players set down by the coach but he could not remember hearing a player beg off due to injury. Speaking of game day only of course.

So the fact that baker played thru injury does not surprise me . The fact that the coach kept running him out there when he clearly could not perform at the accustomed level does surprise me, especially given coach’s experience with case k.
Posted By: Versatile Dog Re: Back to Football - 07/03/22 08:03 PM
Back to football.

The Browns have a real shot if Watson can play all or all but four games this year. It's just hard to be definitive because we don't know how Judge Robinson will rule and if there will be an appeal.

So, my two biggest concerns are the WRs after Cooper. We need some real consistency from at least two of the guys. Bell and DPJ are probably the two I have the most hope for, but nothing is a given.

The other that is a huge question mark are the DTs. It's a bit surprising we didn't bring in one vet considering that the 4-2-5 is best if there is a big DT who can eat up blocks and allow the smaller, faster guys to run wild chasing down the ball.
Posted By: FrankZ Re: Back to Football - 07/03/22 08:06 PM
Originally Posted by PitDAWG
Yeah, the coach making the call on who starts is a sign that Baker is immature. I'm not the only one who sees the frivolity of your assertions.


Oh yeah.. that's what I said... aw shucks. Quit trying to twist things. The coach makes the call on who plays, ones the decision is made on who CAN play.

I said Baker makes the decision if he CAN play. If he says he can't play Stefanski can't force him to do so.

I am a professional. I know if I am too sick to work. I tell my boss I can't go if I can't go.
Posted By: bonefish Re: Back to Football - 07/03/22 09:39 PM
DT is a question for sure.

Jordan Elliott is expected to deliver? He added weight and knows this is his chance.

I don't know what to expect from Taven Bryan? The rest Sheldon Day ok backup. Togiai?

I like Perrion. He is a rookie. So we shall see how he does in camp.
Posted By: Versatile Dog Re: Back to Football - 07/03/22 09:48 PM
I am a "show-me" kind of guy. Thus, I question the DTs and the WRs after Cooper. But, that doesn't mean I think these guys suck and can't do the job. I just haven't seen it on the field yet. Hopefully, we get some production from a couple of these guys. We very well could. I just need to see it to believe it.
Posted By: oobernoober Re: Back to Football - 07/03/22 10:15 PM
This will be ~100th time we've hashed this out. Nobody is going to be convinced at this point.

KS makes the ultimate call on who starts. Baker has a bunch of input, but (except in cases of extremely serious injury where Medical says they need to shut him down). Baker was playing for his contract, and has a history of betting on himself. It's up to the coach to make roster decisions that are in the best interest of the team.

So if we absolutely must blame one person (these situations rarely come down to one scapegoat) I'm pointing at KS.
Posted By: bonefish Re: Back to Football - 07/03/22 10:17 PM
They are unproven no question.

Hopefully they are at least average and not a liability.

Receiver outside of Cooper is like a package. I expect more TE passes and more throws to backs.

DPJ has showed steady improvement and I thought suffered last year from poor qb play.

Schwartz, Bell and any of the UDFA's go get you some. Prove you can play. Camp competition.
Posted By: FL_Dawg Re: Back to Football - 07/04/22 01:00 AM
Originally Posted by Versatile Dog
I am a "show-me" kind of guy. Thus, I question the DTs and the WRs after Cooper. But, that doesn't mean I think these guys suck and can't do the job. I just haven't seen it on the field yet. Hopefully, we get some production from a couple of these guys. We very well could. I just need to see it to believe it.


I am too, but I am not as concerned about the DTs' for this season, because to me it's been a weakness for a number of years and they would really need to play very poorly to be as bad as they have been. The one thing we have going for us this season is that we wont be counting on an older guy there who should have previously been retired. Winfrey is also a wild card here, because he could be a quick student (or not) of his position ... we just don't know that much yet ... at least we have him for an option going forward. Elliot and probably Day will be our NTs' ... and that position is not one for the box scores (in our defense) to know how they are playing as far as their assignments go.

With WR, Bell is the main guy that we hope can contribute right away ... I am not as high on DPJ as some others, because I think that he has some limitations to his game, but he is a guy who can and will contribute to our success from that position too. Schwartz is the guy who will show us whether we need to bring in another Veteran receiver or not, and I believe that it is a legitimate concern at this time.
Posted By: bonefish Re: Back to Football - 07/04/22 11:00 AM
Good take.

Team play. You can not have a team of stars. Units need to perform together.

DL for Berry is a unit he likes to keep players fresh. He wants guys in rotation. We have some young guys that were drafted. Clowney and Myles will do their work. The others need to go hard when they rotate in.

The backend is tight. I like the defense. I think the overall defense will be good.
Posted By: PitDAWG Re: Back to Football - 07/04/22 04:09 PM
Originally Posted by FrankZ
I said Baker makes the decision if he CAN play. If he says he can't play Stefanski can't force him to do so.

This isn't complicated. The coach watches every practice all week. It's his duty to determine who is performing and who is not. It is his call to make based on what the medical staff tells him and what he sees in practice. That's why the call rests on his shoulders, not the players. How many weeks do you think Stefanski could watch Baker perform poorly with this/these injuries and not sit him? How many weeks do you think are reasonable to continue to play him no matter what he says in terms of being able to play? It seems that even if your scenario were correct, that you think Stefanski has no responsibility for continuing to trot Baker out there when it's obvious he can't perform to his normal level. Yeah, keep beating that drum.
Posted By: steve0255 Re: Back to Football - 07/05/22 10:01 AM
Originally Posted by Versatile Dog
Back to football.

The Browns have a real shot if Watson can play all or all but four games this year. It's just hard to be definitive because we don't know how Judge Robinson will rule and if there will be an appeal.

So, my two biggest concerns are the WRs after Cooper. We need some real consistency from at least two of the guys. Bell and DPJ are probably the two I have the most hope for, but nothing is a given.

The other that is a huge question mark are the DTs. It's a bit surprising we didn't bring in one vet considering that the 4-2-5 is best if there is a big DT who can eat up blocks and allow the smaller, faster guys to run wild chasing down the ball.

Outside of QB, the Browns have more than a few question marks going into 2022.

OL, no doubt, the Browns have the best OG tandem in the league. Harris replacing Tretter was the right move but is he really ready to call the line plays and lead the group? We'll find out early if he is going to be the leader of the OL. OT has more questions than some would want to admit. Conklin is a huge question mark. Aside from the fact that his contract voids the 2023-2024 years on the 5th day of the 2023 league year waiver period, his injury concerns could put the Browns in a similar position as last year which wasn't good. Wills is in a prove it year since the Browns must decide next May 2023 whether to exercise the 5th year option or not. Wills cannot continue to be just a serviceable LT, he needs to step up to the plate and become a dominate LT and the anchor of the OL. OT has some huge question marks that will need to be answered early because they will affect 2022 and certainly 2023 going forward.

TE, the Browns took the gamble and signed Njoku to a big deal. I don't understand after 5 years of below average play that the Browns believe the light is finally going to come on for the 1st round pick that has averaged only 30 catches per year. Normally, teams don't talk about the upside of a player after being in the league for 5-years, pretty big gamble on the part of the Browns on this player. Actually, Bryant might be the guy at TE. It'll be interesting to see if he continues to improve and pressures Njoku for catches.

WR, Cooper is clearly the #1WR. Is he an upgrade over OBJ? IMHO, considering the production the Browns got out of OBJ, Cooper will be an upgrade. Let's just hope he doesn't get banged up. DPJ and maybe Bell might be WR2 with a crap shoot for WR3 but need to show big improvement to fill Landry's shoes. There's been a lot of production out of the WR2 in the Browns offense. Huge question marks as to whether either one of these guys can step up to the plate to fill that void. The Browns have plenty of cap, maybe they'll be looking to add a vet during camp. As of today, WR has not been an upgrade and will be a concern if these young guys don't step up early in 2022 and a nightmare if Cooper goes down.

The defense is looking pretty good in all areas except for DT. PFF graded the Browns DT's at the bottom of the league in 2021. What was a concern in 2021 is still a huge concern in 2022. The Malik's are gone but Elliott PFF graded out worse than the Malik's did in 2021. That doesn't look promising since it would appear Elliott needs to get better to reach the Malik's level. Stopping the run starts with your DT's and the Browns have been weak for decades in the critical points of the game. There's a lot of moving pieces with new faces and a rookie. This has been the Browns achilles for years especially late in games when teams run out the clock controlling the ball with the run against the Browns. The Browns were 3rd in the division in stopping the run and needs to get better to win the AFC North.

RB, best tandem in the league.
Posted By: steve0255 Re: Back to Football - 07/05/22 10:38 AM
9 players count for over $18 million dead cap space for Browns
Jared Mueller
Mon, July 4, 2022 at 9:42 AM

The Cleveland Browns salary cap will be discussed significantly over the next few years. For fans, the team having highly paid players at multiple positions is unique. Myles Garrett, Denzel Ward, Nick Chubb, Joel Bitonio, Wyatt Teller and David Njoku have signed long-term deals after being drafted and/or developed by the team.

In the past, fans have only looked forward to Joe Thomas, Joe Haden or free agents from other teams making big money in Cleveland. In 2022, and beyond, the Browns are full of well-paid talent.

With that comes a limit with the salary cap. While many will say ‘the salary cap is fake’ because it can be manipulated, the salary cap is a reality that, at times, can cause the middle of the roster to move on to other teams leaving some highly paid players and players on rookie contracts to make up most of the roster.

Going into 2022, almost $19 million of the team’s salary cap space is taken up with dead money paid out to nine players. Of those nine players, two are still on the team’s roster, two were traded and the other five were released:

TE Austin Hooper - $3.75 million
Perhaps Andrew Berry’s worst decision so far, Hooper flopped as a top-level free agent addition and was released this offseason. His $3.75 million cap hit is the 15th highest on this year’s Browns roster.
His dead cap jumps to $7.5 million in 2023.

DE Jadeveon Clowney - $3.6 million
One of the recent salary cap techniques used recently is void years. The void years allow teams to spread out salary cap hits. Clowney returned on another one-year contract for 2022 that also includes another 4 void years.
His 2021 contract had a similar structure which, when he didn’t sign an extension before the new league year, voided creating the $3.6 million in dead cap for 2022 despite him being back on the team.
Combined, his two cap hits are around $7 million for 2022 but is set to be over $6 million in dead cap hit in 2023.

CB Troy Hill - $2.6 million
Another free agent addition that didn’t pan out, Berry traded Hill back to Los Angeles during the NFL draft. Cleveland still has $2.6 million on their cap for Hill in 2022.

QB Case Keenum - $2.3 million
The other traded player, Cleveland moved Keenum to Buffalo this offseason and replaced him with Jacoby Brissett for the 2022 season. Keenum played well at times for the Browns but was limited.

DT Malik Jackson - $1.9 million
Cleveland used the void years to add veteran Malik Jackson as well. Jackson was a stopgap measure who showed his age throughout the season. Due to the void years, Jackson (who is still a free agent) will cost almost $2 million against the salary cap and the Browns defensive tackle room is still full of questions.

OL J.C. Tretter - $1.6 million
The NFLPA President is still a free agent but the Browns will be moving forward with Nick Harris as their center. Tretter played well in Cleveland and played despite a lot of injury issues.
The dead cap on his extension is just a little under $2 million.

WR Jarvis Landry - $1.5 million
Jarvis Landry was the heart and soul of the Cleveland revival since coming over in a trade with the Miami Dolphins. While there were some reports that he could return after being released, Landry instead signed for an incentive-laden contract with his home state New Orleans Saints.
Landry’s release saved the team significant cap space but still costs $1.5 million against the salary cap.

LB Anthony Walker Jr. - $1.2 million
The other player still on the roster for 2022 is Walker. Like Clowney, Walker signed a one-year deal with the team in 2021 and again in 2022. Like Clowney, Walker’s new deal also had void years which will create over $2 million in dead hit in 2023.

S Sheldrick Redwine - $180K
The least of the dead cap hit, some fans may not remember much about Redwine’s time with the team. Since being released, the former Miami University product signed with three teams and is set to start training camp with the Miami Dolphins. The minimal dead cap space comes from his rookie contract with the Browns after being a fourth-round pick.
Posted By: eotab Re: Back to Football - 07/05/22 12:30 PM
I think a big key for our D will be the play of Taven Bryan. In the right defense he can be great. He is still young 26 for a DL. He has been thinking too much instead of just relaxing and playing football. He has excellent speed and good size playing with Clowney and Garrett will have him looking real good. Key is stopping the run on first down and get our opponents in pass mode then we can bring in Alex Wright as our 4th DL and attack the OL against the pass.

jmho
Posted By: PrplPplEater Re: Back to Football - 07/05/22 12:35 PM
To give the Yin to the Yang that is the dead money listed, how much did the team roll over from the previous year?

I mean, if they want a balanced article, don't just count the dead money without including the bonus money. The difference between the two is the REAL number.
Posted By: MemphisBrownie Re: Back to Football - 07/05/22 12:38 PM
According this website, that dead cap figure list us as 17th in the league. I'm not too worried yet.
https://touchdownwire.usatoday.com/lists/nfl-teams-dead-money-salary-cap/
Posted By: IrishDawg42 Re: Back to Football - 07/05/22 04:41 PM
Originally Posted by PitDAWG
Originally Posted by FrankZ
I said Baker makes the decision if he CAN play. If he says he can't play Stefanski can't force him to do so.

This isn't complicated. The coach watches every practice all week. It's his duty to determine who is performing and who is not. It is his call to make based on what the medical staff tells him and what he sees in practice. That's why the call rests on his shoulders, not the players. How many weeks do you think Stefanski could watch Baker perform poorly with this/these injuries and not sit him? How many weeks do you think are reasonable to continue to play him no matter what he says in terms of being able to play? It seems that even if your scenario were correct, that you think Stefanski has no responsibility for continuing to trot Baker out there when it's obvious he can't perform to his normal level. Yeah, keep beating that drum.


Unfortunately for Stefanski it came down to Hurt Baker vs. Keenum... Not hurt vs not hurt Baker. If Baker says he can go and a 60% healthy Baker gives you a better chance than a healthy Keenum, then Mayfield plays. I think this is the part that is lost too often. Do I think Mayfield was effected by the injuries? Absolutely. Were the injuries of the type that would have healed by sitting for two weeks? It didn't sound like it. Were they the type of injuries that were high risk of getting worse if playing? From both the medical and coaching staff, they said no. So.. the question comes down to, how much of Baker are you getting? Once that is determined, is that % of Baker better than what you can do on offense with Keenum? In nearly every case each week, it was the % of Baker available.

You can't simply say, if Baker isn't 100%, don't play him. The decision needs to be made on what available players give you the best opportunity to win. A 60% healthy Baker Mayfield equals a 90-100% healthy Case Keenum or Jacoby Brissett. As long as the injury isn't at risk of getting worse by playing.
Posted By: PitDAWG Re: Back to Football - 07/05/22 05:17 PM
I agree with you. So far the argument seems to have been that even if week after week the coach saw Baker was under performing, it was not his responsibility to determine if he should still start Baker. That no matter what he saw on film, no matter what he saw in practice, he should ignore all of that because Baker said he could play and that's somehow all Baker's fault. It was a silly premise as anyone can see.

We know Stefanski saw the game film and broke it down every week. We know he saw Baker in practice every week. We know he talked to the medical staff every week. We know the sole responsibility of who starts rests with Stefanski. Based on these fact it appears he felt an injured Baker gave them a better chance to win than a healthy Keenum. Now people may very well disagree with that decision. But make no mistake you are cortrect that this is what the decision boiled down to.
Posted By: steve0255 Re: Back to Football - 07/05/22 05:58 PM
Then holding Mayfield accountable because he only performed up to that 60% level as the reason the Browns didn't make the playoffs when you knew he wasn't up to the level he has exhibited is just plain wrong. That brings us back to Stefanski. If in his mind Mayfield needed to perform at 80% of his former self but Mayfield could only give 60-65% due to injury limitations, why the hell did he keep trotting out a QB that couldn't perform up to expectations? Sooner or later, you'd think the ultimate decision maker would be held accountable for his decision making, up to and including his play calling and leaving an injured QB out there on an island with a Tackle that was clearly outclassed by one of the league's best pass rushers who's abusing your franchise QB and never making any adjustments. That said, any NFL player worth his salt would expect to play if they could make it on the field. The ultimate decision maker on the lineup is the person who's supposed to be the evaluator of the performance on the field and that's Stefanski. Stefanski still trotted Mayfield out there which ultimately led to leg injuries and even more lack of mobility. Player's play hurt all the time but if they can't perform to expectations then the HC is the ultimate decision maker and Stefanski not only failed Mayfield but the team as a whole by not addressing the obvious poorer play than expected.
Posted By: PitDAWG Re: Back to Football - 07/05/22 06:11 PM
I think the point he is trying to make is that Stefanski must have felt that an injured Baker gave the Browns a better chance to win than a healthy Keenum. As I stated in my post above I'm sure there are fans who disagree with that based on Baker's performance and I understand why they would feel that way. Keenum was paid very well as a backup which I'm sure has an impact on why people would feel that way. If one thiks about it, Keenum would have been playing with the same OL as Baker.

I want to point out that I'm not trying to make excuses or agree with Stefanski's decision in continuing to start Baker. I felt very much the same way as yourself at the time. I'm just trying to keep in mind that I didn't have access to the game field nor the ability to see them both in practice with which to make an informed decision.
Posted By: bonefish Re: Back to Football - 07/05/22 06:37 PM
I don't know a thing about Bryan. Glad to hear you have an opinion on him.

I watched the Senior Bowl line practice. Came away very impressed by Perrion Winfrey. Nobody handled him at practice. I looked into his college tape. It seemed like he was misused. He is not a gap eater. He is an upfield pressure tackle.

I think that the tackle positions will be manned by a four guy rotation.

So if each guy can hold his own and someone is able to step up and make some plays. We should be ok. I am not expecting miracles.

Posted By: IrishDawg42 Re: Back to Football - 07/05/22 06:38 PM
Originally Posted by steve0255
Then holding Mayfield accountable because he only performed up to that 60% level as the reason the Browns didn't make the playoffs when you knew he wasn't up to the level he has exhibited is just plain wrong. That brings us back to Stefanski. If in his mind Mayfield needed to perform at 80% of his former self but Mayfield could only give 60-65% due to injury limitations, why the hell did he keep trotting out a QB that couldn't perform up to expectations? Sooner or later, you'd think the ultimate decision maker would be held accountable for his decision making, up to and including his play calling and leaving an injured QB out there on an island with a Tackle that was clearly outclassed by one of the league's best pass rushers who's abusing your franchise QB and never making any adjustments. That said, any NFL player worth his salt would expect to play if they could make it on the field. The ultimate decision maker on the lineup is the person who's supposed to be the evaluator of the performance on the field and that's Stefanski. Stefanski still trotted Mayfield out there which ultimately led to leg injuries and even more lack of mobility. Player's play hurt all the time but if they can't perform to expectations then the HC is the ultimate decision maker and Stefanski not only failed Mayfield but the team as a whole by not addressing the obvious poorer play than expected.

I couldn't agree more. I absolutely think Stefanski is more accountable than Mayfield. Maybe moreso, Berry for not having a better backup option ready in case of injury. At no point should the backup be a bigger liability than a 75% starter...80-95%, sure, I get it, but Mayfield was lucky if he was 70% during the majority of his playing time last year. When you have a middle of the road starter, it shouldn't be that difficult to find a backup that doesn't cause you to go to 50% of you playbook when missing time.

If that's the case, than 1) your GM needs to provide you with a better player or 2) the coach needs to make sure that backup is ready to go at all times. That is from training camp through the end of the season. If it doesn't happen, then one or the other need to be held accountable.
Posted By: Versatile Dog Re: Back to Football - 07/05/22 07:08 PM
How did this turn into another poor Baker thread while bashing others members of the team? Btw---it's a rhetorical question. No need to answer. The same few folks force-feeding their opinions down the throats of everyone else.
Posted By: mgh888 Re: Back to Football - 07/05/22 07:37 PM
Originally Posted by Versatile Dog
Originally Posted by THROW LONG
Top 5 Rb duo and top 5 Defense, ( The players were here last year and where was it?)

Our qb last year was ranked 30th by PFF. He was dead last in 4th quarter QBR. Watson is a top-tier qb. That should help winning some close games.

This was how Baker got introduced into the thread. No specific reference to Baker before this post that I see. From here people discussed the omission of "injured" which led to a discussion about whose responsibility it was to play Baker.

But in answer to the question "How did this turn into a Baker thread" - yes - it's the same source as normal.
Posted By: Versatile Dog Re: Back to Football - 07/05/22 07:39 PM
PFF released an article on June 30th entitled "NFL roster rankings for all 32 teams for 2022: Strengths, weaknesses and X factors for every starting lineup" They had the Browns 6th overall. The only teams ahead of them were Buffalo, Tampa Bay, Chargers, Rams, and Green Bay. Those are in order. I would say that Super Bowl aspirations are not out of the question.



6. CLEVELAND BROWNS
Biggest strength: Few teams have invested more in their offensive line than the Browns, and few teams have a better running back room than Cleveland. The result is one of the more devastating rushing attacks in the NFL. The Browns have averaged 4.8 yards per designed rushing attempt over the past two seasons under coach Kevin Stefanski, which is tied for highest in the league with the Baltimore Ravens. The right side of Cleveland's offensive line — Wyatt Teller and Jack Conklin — is an excellent run-blocking tandem.

Biggest weakness: Jadeveon Clowney‘s return on another one-year deal helped solidify the defensive end spot. Defensive tackle is a different story. Jordan Elliott, Taven Bryan, Perrion Winfrey, Sheldon Day and Tommy Togiai will be battling it out for snaps in 2022, but none of them profile as the run-stuffing defensive tackle that the Browns need to produce in the light boxes that defensive coordinator Joe Woods wants to operate out of. Cleveland's defensive tackles cumulatively earned the fifth-lowest PFF grade of any interior defensive line group in the league last season.

X factor for 2022: A lot of the focus at wide receiver in Cleveland is going to be placed on the new faces: Amari Cooper and David Bell. Nonetheless, 2022 is also going to be a big season for third-year wide receiver Donovan Peoples-Jones. The former five-star recruit averaged nearly 19 yards per reception across his first two NFL seasons, with some impressive highlight-reel plays that showcase his explosiveness and body control. The Browns will be counting on another jump from Peoples-Jones this season after he saw his targets increase from 20 as a rookie to 58 in 2021.

2022 Browns
OFFENSE ---------------------------------------------------DEFENSE
QB Deshaun Watson (92.5*)----------------------------- DI Jordan Elliott (41.6)
RB Nick Chubb (81.7) -------------------------------------DI Perrion Winfrey (59.7**)
RB Kareem Hunt (74.4)------------------------------------Edge Myles Garrett (92.0)
WR Amari Cooper (73.0)---------------------------------- Edge Jadeveon Clowney (66.5)
WR Donovan Peoples-Jones (65.7)----------------------- LB Jeremiah Owusu-Koramoah (76.5)
WR David Bell (87.5**)----------------------------------- LB Anthony Walker (69.1)
TE David Njoku (70.9)-------------------------------------CB Denzel Ward (76.9)
LT Jedrick Wills Jr. (66.1)----------------------------------CB Greg Newsome II (68.1)
LG Joel Bitonio (93.6)------------------------------------- CB Greedy Williams (64.6)
C Nick Harris (70.0)--------------------------------------- S John Johnson III (68.7)
RG Wyatt Teller (84.9)------------------------------------ S Ronnie Harrison Jr. (60.8)
RT Jack Conklin (78.8)------------------------------------ S Grant Delpit (63.3)
Posted By: Versatile Dog Re: Back to Football - 07/05/22 07:48 PM
Our roster is so solid. Lots of talent thanks to Berry and Dorsey making good trades and draft choices. We finally have some continuity in the FO and hopefully the coaching staff. We seem to have a ton of really smart guys who are willing to put their necks on the line to bring Cleveland a winner. I think that managing the salary cap won't be a big issue for our FO. I trust their intelligence and savvy.

Our roster is really good in several key areas. We have a top flight QB. One of the best--if not the best--offensive lines in football. Our Edge rushers are damn good, maybe elite. We have excellent corners. Those are the foundations of teams. Those are the units who are the most important. In addition, our RB room is as good as it gets, even if that isn't one of the cornerstones of a great football team.

Things are looking up for the Browns and I'm really excited to see how this unfolds.
Posted By: Versatile Dog Re: Back to Football - 07/05/22 07:57 PM
If anyone is interested, Cinci was 8th, Baltimore 12th, and Pittsburgh 22nd.
Posted By: bonefish Re: Back to Football - 07/05/22 08:14 PM
I agree this is a well built roster. One of the first moves Berry made was extending Myles.
He is a great player in his prime.

Berry was very methodical. He built the OL. He secured the running backs. Then went to work on the defense. We have a really good secondary that is deep.

We have a good balance of guys in their prime and really good young talent.

Going forward the Browns will be an easy roster to keep up.

In my humble opinion Andrew Berry is one the best young GM's in football. I have no issue with Stefanski. I like the guy. He made some mistakes but he is not an egotist. He will learn from his mistakes. I like the offense and the defense. I believe in both schemes. Once DW plays I think we will be dynamic offensively.

We have a bunch of exciting players to watch. I can not remember having a roster like this that was for the part developed.

The Browns are in position to be really good for a long time.

I hope that the Haslams keep management together. Continuity is paying off.
Posted By: CapCity Dawg Re: Back to Football - 07/05/22 08:23 PM
Originally Posted by IrishDawg42
Originally Posted by PitDAWG
Originally Posted by FrankZ
I said Baker makes the decision if he CAN play. If he says he can't play Stefanski can't force him to do so.

This isn't complicated. The coach watches every practice all week. It's his duty to determine who is performing and who is not. It is his call to make based on what the medical staff tells him and what he sees in practice. That's why the call rests on his shoulders, not the players. How many weeks do you think Stefanski could watch Baker perform poorly with this/these injuries and not sit him? How many weeks do you think are reasonable to continue to play him no matter what he says in terms of being able to play? It seems that even if your scenario were correct, that you think Stefanski has no responsibility for continuing to trot Baker out there when it's obvious he can't perform to his normal level. Yeah, keep beating that drum.


Unfortunately for Stefanski it came down to Hurt Baker vs. Keenum... Not hurt vs not hurt Baker. If Baker says he can go and a 60% healthy Baker gives you a better chance than a healthy Keenum, then Mayfield plays. I think this is the part that is lost too often. Do I think Mayfield was effected by the injuries? Absolutely. Were the injuries of the type that would have healed by sitting for two weeks? It didn't sound like it. Were they the type of injuries that were high risk of getting worse if playing? From both the medical and coaching staff, they said no. So.. the question comes down to, how much of Baker are you getting? Once that is determined, is that % of Baker better than what you can do on offense with Keenum? In nearly every case each week, it was the % of Baker available.

You can't simply say, if Baker isn't 100%, don't play him. The decision needs to be made on what available players give you the best opportunity to win. A 60% healthy Baker Mayfield equals a 90-100% healthy Case Keenum or Jacoby Brissett. As long as the injury isn't at risk of getting worse by playing.

Serious question - How do you all think it would have played out had Stefanski sat Baker while Baker was in the press and on social media saying that he can play?
Posted By: steve0255 Re: Back to Football - 07/05/22 08:49 PM
Then that would show me that Stefanski doesn't have control of his team. That should be rule one of any HC that any concerns or disagreement are settled and kept in house. It should be assumed that Mayfield and Stefanski are watching the same film. If so, then it's Stefanski's responsibility to point out the issues he's having with Mayfield's play and his concern that the injury is having a bigger impact than what any of them thought. Maybe, that's the issue between Mayfield and Stefanski that they are not open and truthful with one another. Having been a corporate manager for decades and dealing with people on a daily basis, show me a poor communicator and I'll show you a poor manager.
Posted By: WSU Willie Re: Back to Football - 07/06/22 12:24 PM
I'm going to point to the turd in the koolaide punch bowl here:

We have (2) very, very good Gs...a very average-at-best-at-the-moment LT...an oft-injured RT coming off a serious knee injury who is very good when healthy (which wasn't a thing last year)...and a 5th Rd C with (2) career starts who has shown promise and has the confidence of the staff. It's a good OL...not dominant...nor was it last year outside of G-C-G...the backups look promising with many to choose from;

There is no place on earth where our TEs are cause for optimism...they continue to be nothing but P-O-T-E-N-T-I-A-L;

We have (1) WR who would see the field if he were a Bengal...which is (1) more guy than we had last year...we need (2) young guys to figure it out and have a 3rd Rd rookie compensatory pick who is very promising;

We are loaded at RB...absolutely loaded...just like we were last year;

We have either a very, very good QB or we have a very marginal QB...I'll leave it at that;

We have (2) very good DEs...the backups look promising with many to choose from;

We have a bunch of DTs...none of whom are thought of as being a run defender...I fear we are boom-or-bust here...we have a lot of backup-quality guys to choose from here...but (2) will have to start;

We have (1) LB who I'd say is very good and a difference-maker...there is potential in really only (1) other guy...a dud vet in the mold of Rainier/DQ/Kirksey...a good situational guy...and a bunch of 3rd-string quality backups;

We are - dare I say - loaded in the defensive backfield.

Regardless of who plays QB...we need a lot of improvement from the pass-catchers (again) or any QB will struggle (again). When a team unloads its top TE and top (3) WRs from the prior year...you know you had crap at the positions. You have to score points in the NFL or you are going nowhere...and outside of our RBs...we don't have the explosiveness that the "good" teams have at their disposal.

I realize that my take here is pessimistic...and I hope guys like bone are correct and I am mistaken...but the QB uncertainty aside, there are a lot of things that have to fall right for us to be a playoff-caliber team...including players doing things they've not yet done in the NFL.
Posted By: Ballpeen Re: Back to Football - 07/06/22 12:41 PM
First, things always have to fall right. No matter how good, there is always some degree of luck involved. Or maybe rather than saying luck, a lack of misfortune.



Just to focus on two areas of positions.

Center. I am not a big fan of Harris, but most of that comes from his poor play at guard. The coaches say he is ready. We'll soon enough find out if that is true or them just flapping their lips. Behind him I see two pretty good options. Pocic and Deason both look like good options IMO if Harris proves to be a "guy".

Receivers.

I think teams waste too much time on guys. Either you can catch or you can't. If the guy doesn't already know how to do it by the time he is 20, you are wasting your time. Just cut them. I don't care if they are fast or not, I don't care how tall they are, etc. If they can't catch, cut them. Keep the guys who can. I don't care if all receivers are rookies. If they can catch, keep them. Again, cut the guys who can't. You started to learn to catch at whatever age it was when a parent or sibling threw that first ball that hit you in the face.
Posted By: PrplPplEater Re: Back to Football - 07/06/22 01:00 PM
Perhaps pessimistic, perhaps more a dose of reality than folks want to admit.
Posted By: Versatile Dog Re: Back to Football - 07/06/22 01:05 PM
j/c:

The Browns had PFF's #1 ranked OL in 2020.

Even w/all the injuries in 2021, the Browns OL ranked 8th overall in 2021.

This year, the preseason PFF rankings have the Browns at number 3 overall.

Our RBs are very good and will succeed. Our QB this year won't take a ton of needless sacks. Unless the injury bug rears its ugly head, the OL is not a concern. In fact, it is a strength.
Posted By: Versatile Dog Re: Back to Football - 07/06/22 01:07 PM
Yeah, WSU is much more knowledgeable than the analytics department at PFF.
Posted By: IrishDawg42 Re: Back to Football - 07/06/22 01:07 PM
Originally Posted by CapCity Dawg
Originally Posted by IrishDawg42
Originally Posted by PitDAWG
Originally Posted by FrankZ
I said Baker makes the decision if he CAN play. If he says he can't play Stefanski can't force him to do so.

This isn't complicated. The coach watches every practice all week. It's his duty to determine who is performing and who is not. It is his call to make based on what the medical staff tells him and what he sees in practice. That's why the call rests on his shoulders, not the players. How many weeks do you think Stefanski could watch Baker perform poorly with this/these injuries and not sit him? How many weeks do you think are reasonable to continue to play him no matter what he says in terms of being able to play? It seems that even if your scenario were correct, that you think Stefanski has no responsibility for continuing to trot Baker out there when it's obvious he can't perform to his normal level. Yeah, keep beating that drum.


Unfortunately for Stefanski it came down to Hurt Baker vs. Keenum... Not hurt vs not hurt Baker. If Baker says he can go and a 60% healthy Baker gives you a better chance than a healthy Keenum, then Mayfield plays. I think this is the part that is lost too often. Do I think Mayfield was effected by the injuries? Absolutely. Were the injuries of the type that would have healed by sitting for two weeks? It didn't sound like it. Were they the type of injuries that were high risk of getting worse if playing? From both the medical and coaching staff, they said no. So.. the question comes down to, how much of Baker are you getting? Once that is determined, is that % of Baker better than what you can do on offense with Keenum? In nearly every case each week, it was the % of Baker available.

You can't simply say, if Baker isn't 100%, don't play him. The decision needs to be made on what available players give you the best opportunity to win. A 60% healthy Baker Mayfield equals a 90-100% healthy Case Keenum or Jacoby Brissett. As long as the injury isn't at risk of getting worse by playing.

Serious question - How do you all think it would have played out had Stefanski sat Baker while Baker was in the press and on social media saying that he can play?


Wow, not sure there is a more difficult question to answer...

My hypothesis would go something like this...

Baker is pulled week 6 after injury in Cardinals game. Going into the game they were 3-2, came out of game 3-3, go on to a 6-11 or 7-10 season. They blame the injury to Mayfield and his full recovery is making headlines to why they are back as a contender in 2022. They also have a built in reason for evaluating Mayfield in year 5.

I can tell you this, if they never went after Watson, we would have had a MUCH more exciting Browns talk in every way possible. The 2022 season would seem like the great battle of the North coming up.

Now it is just, how many games will Watson get, where is Baker going to play and what will Brissett's team look like... It is quite depressing.
Posted By: Versatile Dog Re: Back to Football - 07/06/22 01:09 PM
peen, I agree w/you about catching the football. I do want to add that route running is huge in the NFL. Also, you need smart guys that can make sight adjustments and hot reads, especially if you have a qb who can do the same.
Posted By: bonefish Re: Back to Football - 07/06/22 01:14 PM
I understand your points.

However, everything in football is relative to who you play. IMO the Browns roster by comparison to others is very good.

Of course quarterback is huge. Brissett is a backup. If he plays a lot of games. You can not expect great results. If he can win against average teams that is plus.

We can win with Brissett but I would not expect to much more than 500.

DW playing. We are in the mix to win it all.
Posted By: eotab Re: Back to Football - 07/06/22 01:15 PM
whatever age it was when a parent or sibling threw that first ball that hit you in the face.

Dare I say Peen you then played OG...getting hit in the face was a deterrent to catch the ball in the future...lol laugh
Posted By: oobernoober Re: Back to Football - 07/06/22 01:18 PM
Originally Posted by Versatile Dog
Even w/all the injuries in 2021, the Browns OL ranked 8th overall in 2021.

This is unbelievable.
Posted By: Versatile Dog Re: Back to Football - 07/06/22 01:25 PM
oober, I don't make things up.


Quote
8. CLEVELAND BROWNS (DOWN 3)

LT Jedrick Wills Jr. | 65.9
LG Joel Bitonio | 93.6
C J.C. Tretter | 79.4
RG Wyatt Teller | 84.4
RT Blake Hance | 56.5

Cleveland’s starting five forms one of the best offensive lines in the game. However, Jack Conklin played in only seven games before injury shut him down at right tackle, and Blake Hance produced a 36.9 PFF pass-blocking grade in his stead on over 600 snaps. Jedrick Wills Jr. missed several games at left tackle, at times leaving the Browns with backups at both tackle spots against some elite pass-rushers.

Few lines were as good in the run game, with Wyatt Teller backing up his breakout season last year with an 84.4 overall PFF grade this year and an 87.7 mark as a run-blocker
.
Posted By: WSU Willie Re: Back to Football - 07/06/22 01:32 PM
Originally Posted by oobernoober
Originally Posted by Versatile Dog
Even w/all the injuries in 2021, the Browns OL ranked 8th overall in 2021.

This is unbelievable.

Per this website of Browns 2021 roster:

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/cle/2021_roster.htm

Conklin started (7) games last year. I believe he left injured in (2) of the (7).

Hance played in all (17) games and started in (8)...a G playing LT/RT...again.

Hudson played in (12) games and started (4)...I wonder if he has more post-high school snaps at OT than DL yet.

Wills started (13) games...can't remember how many times he left during a game.

Stats are fun...actually watching the games and remembering the ebb and flow of the season is much more fun tho.
Posted By: WSU Willie Re: Back to Football - 07/06/22 01:45 PM
Originally Posted by Versatile Dog
oober, I don't make things up.


Quote
8. CLEVELAND BROWNS (DOWN 3)

LT Jedrick Wills Jr. | 65.9
LG Joel Bitonio | 93.6
C J.C. Tretter | 79.4
RG Wyatt Teller | 84.4
RT Blake Hance | 56.5

Cleveland’s starting five forms one of the best offensive lines in the game. However, Jack Conklin played in only seven games before injury shut him down at right tackle, and Blake Hance produced a 36.9 PFF pass-blocking grade in his stead on over 600 snaps. Jedrick Wills Jr. missed several games at left tackle, at times leaving the Browns with backups at both tackle spots against some elite pass-rushers.

Few lines were as good in the run game, with Wyatt Teller backing up his breakout season last year with an 84.4 overall PFF grade this year and an 87.7 mark as a run-blocker
.

So...our G-C-G combo was really good and our OTs were average or bad...hmmm...where did I read that already...in this thread even?

I love how the stats then included Hance's pass-blocking grade and noted that the starting OTs were out against some elite pass-rushers. Elite pass rushers make their money on the edge...where we had backups more often than normal. What could go wrong? At least PFF graded us at #8 tho.
Posted By: oobernoober Re: Back to Football - 07/06/22 01:51 PM
Originally Posted by Versatile Dog
oober, I don't make things up.


Quote
8. CLEVELAND BROWNS (DOWN 3)

LT Jedrick Wills Jr. | 65.9
LG Joel Bitonio | 93.6
C J.C. Tretter | 79.4
RG Wyatt Teller | 84.4
RT Blake Hance | 56.5

Cleveland’s starting five forms one of the best offensive lines in the game. However, Jack Conklin played in only seven games before injury shut him down at right tackle, and Blake Hance produced a 36.9 PFF pass-blocking grade in his stead on over 600 snaps. Jedrick Wills Jr. missed several games at left tackle, at times leaving the Browns with backups at both tackle spots against some elite pass-rushers.

Few lines were as good in the run game, with Wyatt Teller backing up his breakout season last year with an 84.4 overall PFF grade this year and an 87.7 mark as a run-blocker
.

I know our interior was really good, but our tackles were BEAT UP last year. At one point we had both starters and the primary backup out. When Wills came back he struggled on account of the ankle.
Posted By: Versatile Dog Re: Back to Football - 07/06/22 01:54 PM
You could have said "thank you" for providing proof.

Regarding your reply..........that is why we slipped from #1 to #8. It's also why we are ranked 3rd going into this season. And this thread was supposed to be about what the team looks like going into this upcoming season. Our roster is not nearly as bad as some are making it out to be.
Posted By: oobernoober Re: Back to Football - 07/06/22 02:06 PM
... and that's why I said it's unbelievable that we were still that high even after the injury hell we had.

Pending Conklin's health/status for Week1 and Harris success in picking up where Tretter left off0, this Oline should come back with a vengeance.
Posted By: Versatile Dog Re: Back to Football - 07/06/22 02:14 PM
Ever since I have been on this board, I have stated that it's really hard for people to evaluate OL play. They see a qb get sacked and they immediately blame the OL. They see a long completion and immediately praise the qb. Just think about this...........the pass blocking win rate is set at 2.5 seconds. Release the ball w/in that time frame and you are doing you job as a qb. Hold it longer and it is too long. Pretend you are under center. Drop back and try to process some moving information in less than 3 seconds.

Think about some of our guys over the years. Timid got sacked a ton. Holcomb came in and the sacks went down. Frye got sacked a ton. DA came in and was hardly ever sacked. Baker got sacked quite a bit, but in the three games in which he did not play, our two other qbs were sacked once. It matters.
Posted By: WSU Willie Re: Back to Football - 07/06/22 02:34 PM
Originally Posted by Versatile Dog
Ever since I have been on this board, I have stated that it's really hard for people to evaluate OL play. They see a qb get sacked and they immediately blame the OL. They see a long completion and immediately praise the qb. Just think about this...........the pass blocking win rate is set at 2.5 seconds. Release the ball w/in that time frame and you are doing you job as a qb. Hold it longer and it is too long. Pretend you are under center. Drop back and try to process some moving information in less than 3 seconds.

Think about some of our guys over the years. Timid got sacked a ton. Holcomb came in and the sacks went down. Frye got sacked a ton. DA came in and was hardly ever sacked. Baker got sacked quite a bit, but in the three games in which he did not play, our two other qbs were sacked once. It matters.

If your OTs are backups blocking like an office chair (if that good) - and/or are actually Gs - and your starting #1 WR runs his own routes...and your most-explosive pass-catcher is a 6'5" 250+ lb TE you might need some time to throw the ball in the unlikely event a guy gets open.

QB play is difficult to evaluate...people see a QB get sacked and say he holds the ball too long...when he's throwing to cancers and injured possession WRs...and a plodding TE who falls down every three yards. Tie your opposite arm down to your chest and pretend you are throwing a football.

See how that works? Before you get all butt-hurt and make this a Baker thang...what you and I both posted apply to every team and every QB.

In our case, we had bad OT play and bad pass-catchers who were not invited back this year...along with our QB. Must be everyone's fault except for the Head Coach.
Posted By: CapCity Dawg Re: Back to Football - 07/06/22 03:55 PM
Originally Posted by IrishDawg42
Originally Posted by CapCity Dawg
Originally Posted by IrishDawg42
Originally Posted by PitDAWG
Originally Posted by FrankZ
I said Baker makes the decision if he CAN play. If he says he can't play Stefanski can't force him to do so.

This isn't complicated. The coach watches every practice all week. It's his duty to determine who is performing and who is not. It is his call to make based on what the medical staff tells him and what he sees in practice. That's why the call rests on his shoulders, not the players. How many weeks do you think Stefanski could watch Baker perform poorly with this/these injuries and not sit him? How many weeks do you think are reasonable to continue to play him no matter what he says in terms of being able to play? It seems that even if your scenario were correct, that you think Stefanski has no responsibility for continuing to trot Baker out there when it's obvious he can't perform to his normal level. Yeah, keep beating that drum.


Unfortunately for Stefanski it came down to Hurt Baker vs. Keenum... Not hurt vs not hurt Baker. If Baker says he can go and a 60% healthy Baker gives you a better chance than a healthy Keenum, then Mayfield plays. I think this is the part that is lost too often. Do I think Mayfield was effected by the injuries? Absolutely. Were the injuries of the type that would have healed by sitting for two weeks? It didn't sound like it. Were they the type of injuries that were high risk of getting worse if playing? From both the medical and coaching staff, they said no. So.. the question comes down to, how much of Baker are you getting? Once that is determined, is that % of Baker better than what you can do on offense with Keenum? In nearly every case each week, it was the % of Baker available.

You can't simply say, if Baker isn't 100%, don't play him. The decision needs to be made on what available players give you the best opportunity to win. A 60% healthy Baker Mayfield equals a 90-100% healthy Case Keenum or Jacoby Brissett. As long as the injury isn't at risk of getting worse by playing.

Serious question - How do you all think it would have played out had Stefanski sat Baker while Baker was in the press and on social media saying that he can play?


Wow, not sure there is a more difficult question to answer...

My hypothesis would go something like this...

Baker is pulled week 6 after injury in Cardinals game. Going into the game they were 3-2, came out of game 3-3, go on to a 6-11 or 7-10 season. They blame the injury to Mayfield and his full recovery is making headlines to why they are back as a contender in 2022. They also have a built in reason for evaluating Mayfield in year 5.

I can tell you this, if they never went after Watson, we would have had a MUCH more exciting Browns talk in every way possible. The 2022 season would seem like the great battle of the North coming up.

Now it is just, how many games will Watson get, where is Baker going to play and what will Brissett's team look like... It is quite depressing.

Thanks, Irish, for the response. My question was not clear. I was not asking how the season would have turned out had we sat Baker, though I can see how my question could have been interpreted as such. My question was more about Baker being on social media and all, saying it was up to him whether or not he would play and he was good to go. If Stefanski would have sat him while Baker was insisting it was his call and he was going to play, how would that have played out? Would Baker have quietly gone along with it? Would there have been even more drama?
Posted By: Versatile Dog Re: Back to Football - 07/06/22 04:33 PM
Yeah, the Browns FO and coaching staff must have seen things just like you and polar opposite to me. That's why they rewarded Baker w/a brand new contract that made him one of the highest paid players in the league.

Or, maybe the Browns are just dumb? Surely not all other teams are that dumb. That's why they have been lining up offering multiple first round picks to the Browns to acquire Baker and are willing to give him a new, fully-guaranteed contract.
Posted By: IrishDawg42 Re: Back to Football - 07/06/22 04:47 PM
Originally Posted by CapCity Dawg
Originally Posted by IrishDawg42
Originally Posted by CapCity Dawg
Originally Posted by IrishDawg42
Originally Posted by PitDAWG
Originally Posted by FrankZ
I said Baker makes the decision if he CAN play. If he says he can't play Stefanski can't force him to do so.

This isn't complicated. The coach watches every practice all week. It's his duty to determine who is performing and who is not. It is his call to make based on what the medical staff tells him and what he sees in practice. That's why the call rests on his shoulders, not the players. How many weeks do you think Stefanski could watch Baker perform poorly with this/these injuries and not sit him? How many weeks do you think are reasonable to continue to play him no matter what he says in terms of being able to play? It seems that even if your scenario were correct, that you think Stefanski has no responsibility for continuing to trot Baker out there when it's obvious he can't perform to his normal level. Yeah, keep beating that drum.


Unfortunately for Stefanski it came down to Hurt Baker vs. Keenum... Not hurt vs not hurt Baker. If Baker says he can go and a 60% healthy Baker gives you a better chance than a healthy Keenum, then Mayfield plays. I think this is the part that is lost too often. Do I think Mayfield was effected by the injuries? Absolutely. Were the injuries of the type that would have healed by sitting for two weeks? It didn't sound like it. Were they the type of injuries that were high risk of getting worse if playing? From both the medical and coaching staff, they said no. So.. the question comes down to, how much of Baker are you getting? Once that is determined, is that % of Baker better than what you can do on offense with Keenum? In nearly every case each week, it was the % of Baker available.

You can't simply say, if Baker isn't 100%, don't play him. The decision needs to be made on what available players give you the best opportunity to win. A 60% healthy Baker Mayfield equals a 90-100% healthy Case Keenum or Jacoby Brissett. As long as the injury isn't at risk of getting worse by playing.

Serious question - How do you all think it would have played out had Stefanski sat Baker while Baker was in the press and on social media saying that he can play?


Wow, not sure there is a more difficult question to answer...

My hypothesis would go something like this...

Baker is pulled week 6 after injury in Cardinals game. Going into the game they were 3-2, came out of game 3-3, go on to a 6-11 or 7-10 season. They blame the injury to Mayfield and his full recovery is making headlines to why they are back as a contender in 2022. They also have a built in reason for evaluating Mayfield in year 5.

I can tell you this, if they never went after Watson, we would have had a MUCH more exciting Browns talk in every way possible. The 2022 season would seem like the great battle of the North coming up.

Now it is just, how many games will Watson get, where is Baker going to play and what will Brissett's team look like... It is quite depressing.

Thanks, Irish, for the response. My question was not clear. I was not asking how the season would have turned out had we sat Baker, though I can see how my question could have been interpreted as such. My question was more about Baker being on social media and all, saying it was up to him whether or not he would play and he was good to go. If Stefanski would have sat him while Baker was insisting it was his call and he was going to play, how would that have played out? Would Baker have quietly gone along with it? Would there have been even more drama?

Oh, got it.. That's even harder to respond to. Now, I would put the probability of Emily saying something moreso than Baker. If asked in a presser or something, I would have been surprised if Baker said anything more than he's definitely hurt, he felt like he could go, but coach is doing what he thinks is best for the team. Remember, he would have had time to think about what he was going to say. It isn't like a post game presser, where the adrenaline is flowing and he sticks his foot in his mouth. Also, during season, I don't recall Baker saying things out of line on social media, that was after the season.
Posted By: FloridaFan Re: Back to Football - 07/06/22 04:51 PM
Originally Posted by Versatile Dog
Yeah, the Browns FO and coaching staff must have seen things just like you and polar opposite to me. That's why they rewarded Baker w/a brand new contract that made him one of the highest paid players in the league.

Or, maybe the Browns are just dumb? Surely not all other teams are that dumb. That's why they have been lining up offering multiple first round picks to the Browns to acquire Baker and are willing to give him a new, fully-guaranteed contract.

I think it's more complex than that. If I were a GM, and looking to upgrade my QB situation, but not necessarily in dire need of one. I'd wait and see, knowing that there is a 95%+ chance that Cleveland will have to release Mayfield. Especially knowing there's also a chance Garappolo may be released as well. Why pay 18m for 1 year when you can wait it out and get it much cheaper?

Yes that changes if you are in dire need of a starting QB, but there's really not many teams in that position at this point that really have much shot at competing.
Posted By: PitDAWG Re: Back to Football - 07/06/22 04:51 PM
So you created a "what if" question. Okay....
Posted By: Versatile Dog Re: Back to Football - 07/06/22 05:02 PM
I was being sarcastic, but the point is that if everything around Baker was so bad and the injury was so significant and if Baker was such a good qb........the Browns would have kept him and given him a new contract. Teams would trade for him if he was so good. Look at what teams were willing to give up for Watson in spite of all his off the field issues. There is a ton of evidence out there that Baker is not nearly the qb that some folks on this board say he is.

Anyway.........back to the roster. My feelings on the roster are very similar to PFF's. They have us ranked 6th overall. I have a hard time ranking things, but I think we are top ten for sure. Maybe top five???? Of course, we have to have Watson to vault us into those lofty standards. In the end, we have a realistic shot of potentially competing to win it all. That gives some of us a lot of hope.
Posted By: IrishDawg42 Re: Back to Football - 07/06/22 05:12 PM
Originally Posted by FloridaFan
Originally Posted by Versatile Dog
Yeah, the Browns FO and coaching staff must have seen things just like you and polar opposite to me. That's why they rewarded Baker w/a brand new contract that made him one of the highest paid players in the league.

Or, maybe the Browns are just dumb? Surely not all other teams are that dumb. That's why they have been lining up offering multiple first round picks to the Browns to acquire Baker and are willing to give him a new, fully-guaranteed contract.

I think it's more complex than that. If I were a GM, and looking to upgrade my QB situation, but not necessarily in dire need of one. I'd wait and see, knowing that there is a 95%+ chance that Cleveland will have to release Mayfield. Especially knowing there's also a chance Garappolo may be released as well. Why pay 18m for 1 year when you can wait it out and get it much cheaper?

Yes that changes if you are in dire need of a starting QB, but there's really not many teams in that position at this point that really have much shot at competing.

I think the Panthers are in dire need.

1) Darnold played there last year, they know first hand what the Jets also found out the hard way, he isn't a starting caliber QB in the NFL.
2) Matt Rhule is 10-23.. He blamed that record on his coaching staff and rebuilt that staff this off season. If he falters again, the blame will land squarely on his shoulders. I would say he has to win 8 games to keep his job. That would be a 38% improvement over either of the past two years. Darnold has won 7 games once in his 4 years as a starting QB and possibly with better teams than he will have in 2022 in Carolina.
3) Fitterer didn't hire Rhule, however Rhule has been given a second chance to improve this team's record. I don't think Fitterer gives him a 3rd chance if he doesn't make a big improvement. I think he will want a chance to put his own coach in place before his chances are used up in Carolina.

With Rhule and Fitterer under the gun, I do think they are desperate and putting your careers on the line with Sam Darnold is borderline insane. That is why I think Baker ends up in Carolina prior to training camp starting. They are probably waiting to see if Watson gets a short suspension which lowers Baker's value. Anything short of a year suspension and I think Baker is traded prior to training camp, most likely to Carolina.
Posted By: PitDAWG Re: Back to Football - 07/06/22 05:22 PM
The fact is that the Browns extended his contract. They saw proof positive that a healthy Baker was a good enough to help lead this team to the playoffs. So did the rest of us for anyone willing to admit it and not downplay his contribution to that. But it's the job of every FO to try and improve players at every position. People have told you over and over again that watson is the better QB on the field. So I have no idea WTH you're trying to argue here. Unless it's just to further trash Baker.... Hmmmm.....
Posted By: CapCity Dawg Re: Back to Football - 07/06/22 05:55 PM
Originally Posted by PitDAWG
So you created a "what if" question. Okay....

As Stefanski did not sit Baker, yes it was a "what if" question.
Posted By: PitDAWG Re: Back to Football - 07/06/22 06:21 PM
In that case.... I think it's a fabricated narrative based on nothing. The only time Baker ever really spoke out about the management of this team was after they publicly told him and everyone else he would be the starting QB only to find out they were in pursuit of watson. Then it wasn't like he trashed them. He simply said they had not been honest with him and wanted to be traded. Even the QB we traded for did that exact same thing.
Posted By: Ballpeen Re: Back to Football - 07/07/22 08:12 AM
Originally Posted by Versatile Dog
peen, I agree w/you about catching the football. I do want to add that route running is huge in the NFL. Also, you need smart guys that can make sight adjustments and hot reads, especially if you have a qb who can do the same.

I understand that. On timing routes you need to be where the QB expects. You have to get open. If you can't get open the QB isn't or shouldn't throw you the ball.

You can teach that at the pro level. If you are trying to teach a guy to catch a ball, you are wasting your time. If he keeps dropping the ball, that is the same as knocking it to the ground IMO...send him to the DB room and see if they can do something with the guy.
Posted By: Ballpeen Re: Back to Football - 07/07/22 08:19 AM
Originally Posted by PitDAWG
The fact is that the Browns extended his contract. They saw proof positive that a healthy Baker was a good enough to help lead this team to the playoffs. So did the rest of us for anyone willing to admit it and not downplay his contribution to that. But it's the job of every FO to try and improve players at every position. People have told you over and over again that watson is the better QB on the field. So I have no idea WTH you're trying to argue here. Unless it's just to further trash Baker.... Hmmmm.....

Not quite.

I understand your point, but they exercised his 5th year option.

I guess you can say that is extending, but it really isn't. It's just exercising an option that was already written in to the current contract. Extending would be adding additional years that aren't in the current deal.

Again, maybe I am picking nits as I do understand your point. I also agree with your point that the team saw a opportunity to improve the position, and they did.
Posted By: mac Re: Back to Football - 07/07/22 11:42 AM
...deleted
Posted By: Bard Dawg Re: Back to Football - 07/07/22 11:54 AM
Just to add to this with something we all know or should, but are not focused on and speaking about currently. Regardless of contract specifics, BM is history. And even as we contend with the DW issues, Berry or someone must keep an eye on that position for replacement/upgrade post- DW. The need for this trade is a relief. Wish him well and a solid recovery. But fans need to fairly acknowledge that the FO has responsibility to always be looking for upgrades to consider for very position. Wouldn't want their job with the likes of us to deal with. <G>
Go, Browns!
Posted By: Versatile Dog Re: Back to Football - 07/07/22 01:29 PM
Bard, I have been looking at possible options at qb for awhile now because as I stated quite some time ago, I didn't think Baker would play another snap w/us. The pickings are slim. I haven't went crazy w/my research because we really don't know if Watson will be suspended or not. If Watson avoids suspension or get something like 2, 4, or 6 games....I would say we stand pat. Anything more than that and the Browns will need to get another qb because I don't think they would want to see Dobbs playing if JB is injured.
Posted By: PerfectSpiral Re: Back to Football - 07/07/22 01:43 PM
Mr. Haslam, you are losing the game of money ball. Time to ditch that s….
Posted By: PitDAWG Re: Back to Football - 07/07/22 04:51 PM
Originally Posted by Ballpeen
Originally Posted by PitDAWG
The fact is that the Browns extended his contract. They saw proof positive that a healthy Baker was a good enough to help lead this team to the playoffs. So did the rest of us for anyone willing to admit it and not downplay his contribution to that. But it's the job of every FO to try and improve players at every position. People have told you over and over again that watson is the better QB on the field. So I have no idea WTH you're trying to argue here. Unless it's just to further trash Baker.... Hmmmm.....

Not quite.

I understand your point, but they exercised his 5th year option.

I guess you can say that is extending, but it really isn't. It's just exercising an option that was already written in to the current contract. Extending would be adding additional years that aren't in the current deal.

I do think you are nitpicking and I doubt we will agree on this. Not that I really expect us to or don't understand what you're saying.

But let's look at it. Yes, the team has the 5th year option. But by the very fact they exercised that option they extended his time here from four years to five. I would also add that there was no existing contract for that fifth year unless the Browns picked that option up. So that fifth year contract only came effective when the Browns chose to extend his time here for a fifth year.
Posted By: FrankZ Re: Back to Football - 07/07/22 04:58 PM
Originally Posted by PitDAWG
Originally Posted by Ballpeen
Originally Posted by PitDAWG
The fact is that the Browns extended his contract. They saw proof positive that a healthy Baker was a good enough to help lead this team to the playoffs. So did the rest of us for anyone willing to admit it and not downplay his contribution to that. But it's the job of every FO to try and improve players at every position. People have told you over and over again that watson is the better QB on the field. So I have no idea WTH you're trying to argue here. Unless it's just to further trash Baker.... Hmmmm.....

Not quite.

I understand your point, but they exercised his 5th year option.

I guess you can say that is extending, but it really isn't. It's just exercising an option that was already written in to the current contract. Extending would be adding additional years that aren't in the current deal.

I do think you are nitpicking and I doubt we will agree on this. Not that I really expect us to or don't understand what you're saying.

But let's look at it. Yes, the team has the 5th year option. But by the very fact they exercised that option they extended his time here from four years to five. I would also add that there was no existing contract for that fifth year unless the Browns picked that option up. So that fifth year contract only came effective when the Browns chose to extend his time here for a fifth year.

Technically the 5th year option is built into the contract, so it isn't a contract extension, it is exercising the current contract.

But I know how much you hate to nit pick.
Posted By: WSU Willie Re: Back to Football - 07/07/22 05:05 PM
Originally Posted by FrankZ
Originally Posted by PitDAWG
Originally Posted by Ballpeen
Originally Posted by PitDAWG
The fact is that the Browns extended his contract. They saw proof positive that a healthy Baker was a good enough to help lead this team to the playoffs. So did the rest of us for anyone willing to admit it and not downplay his contribution to that. But it's the job of every FO to try and improve players at every position. People have told you over and over again that watson is the better QB on the field. So I have no idea WTH you're trying to argue here. Unless it's just to further trash Baker.... Hmmmm.....

Not quite.

I understand your point, but they exercised his 5th year option.

I guess you can say that is extending, but it really isn't. It's just exercising an option that was already written in to the current contract. Extending would be adding additional years that aren't in the current deal.

I do think you are nitpicking and I doubt we will agree on this. Not that I really expect us to or don't understand what you're saying.

But let's look at it. Yes, the team has the 5th year option. But by the very fact they exercised that option they extended his time here from four years to five. I would also add that there was no existing contract for that fifth year unless the Browns picked that option up. So that fifth year contract only came effective when the Browns chose to extend his time here for a fifth year.

Technically the 5th year option is built into the contract, so it isn't a contract extension, it is exercising the current contract.

But I know how much you hate to nit pick.

So...they CHOSE to exercise a contract option to keep Baker for another year...they could have CHOSEN to do nothing. Choice...it's a thing.
Posted By: Versatile Dog Re: Back to Football - 07/07/22 05:19 PM
The Browns "chose" to trade Baker for a ham sandwich while paying him $10.5 million to get the hell out of town.
Posted By: PitDAWG Re: Back to Football - 07/07/22 05:29 PM
Yet there is no fifth year or fifth year contract if a team doesn't exercise it. By definition a team extends a players contract to five years by picking up the fifth year option. Without it you have a four year contract. The team and only the team has the power to make it a five year contract.
Posted By: PitDAWG Re: Back to Football - 07/07/22 05:31 PM
Originally Posted by Versatile Dog
The Browns "chose" to trade Baker for a ham sandwich while paying him $10.5 million to get the hell out of town.

They chose to take whatever they could get to undo the disaster they had created and they knew it the day they went after watson. They knew it and the entire NFL knew it.
Posted By: PitDAWG Re: Back to Football - 07/07/22 05:33 PM
Originally Posted by WSU Willie
So...they CHOSE to exercise a contract option to keep Baker for another year...they could have CHOSEN to do nothing. Choice...it's a thing.

That's exactly what they did. They chose to extend that contract for the fifth year.
Posted By: mgh888 Re: Back to Football - 07/07/22 05:36 PM
Originally Posted by PitDAWG
Originally Posted by Versatile Dog
The Browns "chose" to trade Baker for a ham sandwich while paying him $10.5 million to get the hell out of town.

They chose to take whatever they could get to undo the disaster they had created and they knew it the day they went after watson. They knew it and the entire NFL knew it.

Who the hell brought Baker into this thread??? ... Oh I remember now.

Wentz was traded for two third round picks. Baker is as good as Wentz - better in my opinion and many others, but for the point of this discussion we will say they are comparable. The fact one team received two 3rd round picks and the other got a conditional 4th ... says everything you need to know about who was operating from a position of leverage and who screwed the pooch. Jimmy G is still out there - some have opined he is better than Baker (I disagree) ... another possible factor.

None of that matters - Baker will be playing soon. He's going to be on a really bad team who Vegas believes will win less than 6 games. No doubt there will be plenty to pile on Baker about during the season. No doubt who will start that convo either.... probably while claiming it was someone else.
Posted By: Swish Re: Back to Football - 07/07/22 05:43 PM
lets hope these guys are getting more consistent conditioning. between the physical injuries and COVID, our entire roster was injured for too long of a stretch last season. our defense really picked it up mid season, even with all the injuries. it'd be nice if the injuries god's can bless this team this season.
Posted By: FrankZ Re: Back to Football - 07/07/22 06:11 PM
And yet the 5th year is included in the rookie contract.

The team has to choose one way or the other. So they can take a 5 year contract and shorten it to 4.

Or you could stop always picking nits daily.
Posted By: Versatile Dog Re: Back to Football - 07/07/22 06:15 PM
A few things. You are misrepresenting things again. Throw asked what was different from this year's team than last year's team. I brought up Baker being ranked 30th by PFF. Am I not allowed to answer a question just because the answer involves Baker? Secondly, the hijacking of the thread had nothing to do w/my comment. It was all about who was at fault for Baker playing while injured. Most of you blamed Stefanski. Next, when Wentz wanted traded from Philly, the Colts gave up more than 2 3rds or whatever you said. Maybe you are referring to what the Colts got from Washington, but Wentz did not ask to be traded from Indy. He asked to be traded from Philly. Let's look at the compensation, shall we:

Quote
The Indianapolis Colts' first-round pick in the 2022 NFL Draft is firmly in the hands of the Philadelphia Eagles.

That became abundantly clear on Saturday when Carson Wentz took all 63 offensive snaps in the Colts' 22-16 win over the Arizona Cardinals. Per the terms of the trade that sent Wentz from Philly to Indy this past offseason, the Eagles received a conditional second-rounder that would become a first-rounder if Wentz played 75 percent of the Colts' snaps in 2021. The trade also stipulated that the second-rounder would become a first-rounder if the Colts make the playoffs and Wentz took 70 percent of the snaps. But while the Colts have yet to clinch a playoff berth, Wentz has clinched the 75-percent threshold.


https://www.nfl.com/news/eagles-to-receive-indianapolis-colts-first-round-pick-from-wentz-trade


Finally, I am going to put you on ignore just like I did w/Pit because I am tired of you falsely portraying things when it comes to me. I had some hope you would become more reasonable, but it's not to be. I am telling all this because I have a strong suspicion that you will keep replying to me even though you know I won't read it. It's never really been about you debating me. Instead, just like Pit........you just want others to see me in a certain light. It's a message board and you have that right. Enjoy.
Posted By: IrishDawg42 Re: Back to Football - 07/07/22 06:20 PM
I can't believe there are this many people who care to argue about the 5th year option
Posted By: PitDAWG Re: Back to Football - 07/07/22 06:22 PM
Originally Posted by FrankZ
And yet the 5th year is included in the rookie contract.

The team has to choose one way or the other. So they can take a 5 year contract and shorten it to 4.

Or you could stop always picking nits daily.

Yes, they can decide whether to extend that contract to a fifth year or not. You should stop trying to make points that do not exist.
Posted By: FrankZ Re: Back to Football - 07/07/22 07:17 PM
Originally Posted by PitDAWG
Originally Posted by FrankZ
And yet the 5th year is included in the rookie contract.

The team has to choose one way or the other. So they can take a 5 year contract and shorten it to 4.

Or you could stop always picking nits daily.

Yes, they can decide whether to extend that contract to a fifth year or not. You should stop trying to make points that do not exist.

They can decide to utilize the fifth year that is already in the contract. The contract doesn't get longer. The player doesn't sign anything additional. The team notifies the league it will keep the fifth year in the contract.

They can, however, decide to shorten the contract by declining the option.

If you don't like my points don't read them and certainly don't try to sell me tinkle in a bottle and tell me it's Mountain Dew.
Posted By: CapCity Dawg Re: Back to Football - 07/07/22 07:27 PM
Originally Posted by IrishDawg42
I can't believe there are this many people who care to argue about the 5th year option

You've been here long enough. This cannot surprise you.
Posted By: PitDAWG Re: Back to Football - 07/07/22 07:32 PM
Originally Posted by FrankZ
Originally Posted by PitDAWG
Originally Posted by FrankZ
And yet the 5th year is included in the rookie contract.

The team has to choose one way or the other. So they can take a 5 year contract and shorten it to 4.

Or you could stop always picking nits daily.

Yes, they can decide whether to extend that contract to a fifth year or not. You should stop trying to make points that do not exist.

They can decide to utilize the fifth year that is already in the contract. The contract doesn't get longer. The player doesn't sign anything additional. The team notifies the league it will keep the fifth year in the contract.

They can, however, decide to shorten the contract by declining the option.

If you don't like my points don't read them and certainly don't try to sell me tinkle in a bottle and tell me it's Mountain Dew.

If they do not choose to pick up a fifth year option it's a four year contract. If they choose to pick up that option it extends the contract to five years. The choice the team makes actually decides if the contract will be extended to five years. In Baker's case they extended his contract from four years to five. This isn't difficult. I read your points for the entertainment value.
Posted By: FrankZ Re: Back to Football - 07/07/22 07:40 PM
Originally Posted by PitDAWG
[quote=FrankZ]

If they do not choose to pick up a fifth year option it's a four year contract. If they choose to pick up that option it extends the contract to five years. The choice the team makes actually decides if the contract will be extended to five years. In Baker's case they extended his contract from four years to five. This isn't difficult. I read your points for the entertainment value.

Since the year is part of the contract they can shorten not extend.

When a team pays the roster bonus they aren't giving the player a raise. When they exercise the option they haven't extended the contract. The contracts starts as a 5 year contract (4 plus 1).

Actually is seems you only read posts around here to have something to fight about.
Posted By: PitDAWG Re: Back to Football - 07/07/22 07:55 PM
It starts out as a four year contract with an option by the team to extend it to five years. I didn't start this fight, you did. It's only a four year deal unless the team decides to extend the contract to five.
Posted By: lampdogg Re: Back to Football - 07/07/22 08:37 PM
Read the room, guys.
Posted By: Pdawg Re: Back to Football - 07/12/22 02:38 AM
Posted By: Versatile Dog Re: Back to Football - 07/12/22 11:44 AM
Thanks for posting that. What a great hire Callahan has turned out to be. Our zone blocking is a joy to watch. Also, did anyone else notice the power in the punch from Teller? Damn, that man is strong. I also liked how he chipped the D-lineman so the OT could clean up while Teller went to the second level and completely engulfed the LBer.
Posted By: Versatile Dog Re: Back to Football - 07/13/22 01:15 PM
Jeremy Fowler polls NFL coaches, players, scouts and executives to compile lists of the top 10 players at various positions. I posted the results of the top 10 QBs on another thread. Yesterday, the top 10 RBs were revealed. Here is the list.

1. D. Henry
2. J. Taylor
3. N. Chubb
4. D. Cook
5. A. Kamara
6. J. Mixon
7. C. McCaffrey
8. N. Harris
9. A. Jones
10. J. Williams

I also saw a quick screen shot of the top 10 WRs this morning while I was doing payroll. I don't believe A. Cooper was on that list, but I'm not positive.
Posted By: superbowldogg Re: Back to Football - 07/13/22 07:22 PM
McCaffrey hasn't played a full season in years. not sure how he can be top 10?

In fact, he has had 3 seasons with 450 yards or less

He has had 1 season with 1387 yards in2019.
He barely eclipsed 1,000 years in 2018.

not exactly top 10 materials IMO
Posted By: Versatile Dog Re: Back to Football - 07/13/22 07:25 PM
He got ranked because he is so good. Runner and pass catcher. The quote attributed to him was that was so low because he has missed so many games, but the exec said he expected McCaffrey to be much higher next year. The dude is a special talent.
Posted By: IrishDawg42 Re: Back to Football - 07/13/22 08:46 PM
Originally Posted by superbowldogg
McCaffrey hasn't played a full season in years. not sure how he can be top 10?

In fact, he has had 3 seasons with 450 yards or less

He has had 1 season with 1387 yards in2019.
He barely eclipsed 1,000 years in 2018.

not exactly top 10 materials IMO

That 2019 season he also had 1,000 yards receiving and 19 TDs

Hell, last year he had almost 800 total yards and 2 TDs, behind arguably the worst offensive line in the NFL and only played in 7 games.

#10 there, Javonte Williams only had 900 yards rushing and 4 TDs, if running is all you are looking at.

I think these lists that Vers is talking about is the one's that Fowler is asking these sources, if you had your choice THIS year, who would you want? In this case, by all accounts, McCaffrey is supposedly fully healthy(which he wasn't entering training camp in 2021). So it is most definitely speculative on his part, but if he stays healthy he is one of the most dynamic players in the NFL. I can see where coaches, players, etc. would name him as one they would want.
Posted By: Versatile Dog Re: Back to Football - 07/13/22 08:53 PM
Obviously, there is a difference between fantasy football numbers and best players, but there is some correlation. This is from Fantasy Football Calculator.


https://fantasyfootballcalculator.com/rankings/rb


Rank Name Team Pos Bye
1. Jonathan Taylor IND RB 14
2. Christian McCaffrey CAR RB 13
3. Derrick Henry TEN RB 6
4. Austin Ekeler LAC RB 8
5. Najee Harris PIT RB 9
6. Dalvin Cook MIN RB 7
7. Nick Chubb CLE RB 9
8. D'Andre Swift DET RB 6
9. Javonte Williams DEN RB 9
10. Alvin Kamara NO RB 14
11. Aaron Jones GB RB 14
12. Saquon Barkley NYG RB 9
13. Ezekiel Elliott DAL RB 9
14. Leonard Fournette TB RB 11
15. Antonio Gibson WAS RB 14
16. Joe Mixon CIN RB 10
17. David Montgomery CHI RB 14
18. J.K. Dobbins BAL RB 10
19. Elijah Mitchell SF RB 9
20. Cam Akers LAR RB 7
21. James Conner ARI RB 13
22. Josh Jacobs LV RB 6
23. Travis Etienne JAX RB 11
24. Damien Harris NE RB 10
25. A.J. Dillon GB RB 14
26. Miles Sanders PHI RB 7
27. Breece Hall NYJ RB 10
28. Rashaad Penny SEA RB 11
29. Kareem Hunt CLE RB 9
30. Tony Pollard DAL RB 9
Posted By: mgh888 Re: Back to Football - 07/13/22 10:27 PM
I can only imagine the ridicule if the Fabulous Baker Brothers had used fantasy football to try to support anything regards Baker in a pure football thread. Ey Ey Ey.
Posted By: Versatile Dog Re: Back to Football - 07/14/22 11:56 AM
Continuing the ranking series. Jeremy Fowler polls NFL coaches, players, scouts and executives to compile lists of the top 10 players at various positions. Here is the list for the top 10 wide receivers.


1. D. Adams--Raiders
2. C. Kupp--Rams
3. J. Chase--Bengals
4. J. Jefferson--Vikings
5. T. Hill--Dolphins
6. S. Diggs--Bills
7. D. Hopkins--Cardinals
8. M. Evans--Bucs
9. D. Samuel--49ers
10. DK Metcalf--Seahawks

Surprised Keenun Allen isn't on this list. One could argue for M. Thomas even though he missed most of the last two years.
Posted By: Versatile Dog Re: Back to Football - 07/15/22 12:16 PM
Continuing Jeremy Fowler's list of top 10 players at each position by polling 50 plus coaches, players, and executives.

Tight Ends:

1. G. Kittle
2. T. Kelce
3. D. Waller
4. M. Andrews
5. K. Pitts
6. D. Goedert
7. TJ Hockenson
8. D. Schultz
9. D. Knox
10. H. Henry
Posted By: eotab Re: Back to Football - 07/15/22 01:47 PM
Something has been bugging me for days and guess this is the best place to discuss.

OL our LT Wills. One thing about OL I know it more than any other position. As a coach I got the most satisfaction coaching OL than any other including HC, OC and DC which I have been all on several levels. Youth to Semi Pro.

My point is not to pat myself on the back. It is something that if I watch I do not need any PFF bs to tell me who what and where. If I don't watch I appreciate the info to educate my self a bit on the players. Now in Wills case. He played almost all last season on a bum ankle. I believe he saw Baker playing hurt and he did so also. But what ever problems he had in his Pass Pro and run blocking was retarded by his bum ankle. There were occasions that he just sucked it up and when he did so his technique was more than satisfactory. The kid can drop kick with the best of them. Also when healthy his zone blocking skills will be better. I understand when you all read the PFF grades and he is pretty low and a label is put on him in a negative. He is a lot better than the PFF grade. You have to have eyes on him to tell.

jmho
Posted By: bonefish Re: Back to Football - 07/15/22 03:11 PM
PFF is an analytical grade. It is not and end all in research.

It is more of a starting point. There are things it does not factor like health and playing hurt. If you are hurt and the injury impacts performance. PFF can not see that.

The Browns extended and paid Njoku. It was not based upon PFF grade. It was based upon what they see in him and what they are expecting from him.

Wills has the talent. He needs to be more consistent. That is what Joe Thomas stated. At times he loses technique. Injury? Maybe. Mentality just as likely.

You play each down to perfection. You can only control what you do on each snap. Young guys sometimes fall into dwelling upon getting beat and then get beat again.

Berry has complete faith in Wills. I believe that his off season to do list was made clear to him and waht he needed to do.
Posted By: Versatile Dog Re: Back to Football - 07/15/22 03:57 PM
I think this is a big year for Wills. Not sure or not if he has Berry's complete faith in him? I also think that the PFF grade is more than a "starting point." It far greater than a fan saying that a guy stinks because he gave up a sack after the qb held the ball way too long or fled a secure pocket.

I have some thoughts on Wills.

--He commits too many penalties. 11 in 2020 and 4 last year. 15 in two years is too much.

--He has good agility and is pretty explosive coming out of his stance.

--The injury was an issue for him last year.

--He has been inconsistent.

--Sometimes takes bad angles.

--Has struggled in the running game at times due to angles and footwork.

--I wonder if moving from RT to LT has been an issue?

--Has the talent, but I heard he needs to work harder. Not sure if that is true or not?

--Has the talent to be a Pro-Bowler.

--Wirfs and even Becton have been better than he is and they were drafted after him. However, it has become hard to evaluate collegiate offensive line, much like college qbs.

--Even w/all the negatives I included, he is still good enough. We could do a lot worse. He's good enough to win with right now and we has the potential to get much better. You can't have an All-Pro at every position.
Posted By: bonefish Re: Back to Football - 07/15/22 04:30 PM
PFF has value. It is a deep dive into analytics. However, it is not an end all.

Like I stated there are things it can not measure.

I think you look at the grade and then study film. A lot goes into the PFF grade so there is for sure value.

However, there is more to evaluating a player than the PFF grade.
Posted By: Iluvmyxstripper Re: Back to Football - 07/15/22 04:43 PM
Originally Posted by Versatile Dog
I think this is a big year for Wills. Not sure or not if he has Berry's complete faith in him? I also think that the PFF grade is more than a "starting point." It far greater than a fan saying that a guy stinks because he gave up a sack after the qb held the ball way too long or fled a secure pocket.

I have some thoughts on Wills.

--He commits too many penalties. 11 in 2020 and 4 last year. 15 in two years is too much.

--He has good agility and is pretty explosive coming out of his stance.

--The injury was an issue for him last year.

--He has been inconsistent.

--Sometimes takes bad angles.

--Has struggled in the running game at times due to angles and footwork.

--I wonder if moving from RT to LT has been an issue?

--Has the talent, but I heard he needs to work harder. Not sure if that is true or not?

--Has the talent to be a Pro-Bowler.

--Wirfs and even Becton have been better than he is and they were drafted after him. However, it has become hard to evaluate collegiate offensive line, much like college qbs.

--Even w/all the negatives I included, he is still good enough. We could do a lot worse. He's good enough to win with right now and we has the potential to get much better. You can't have an All-Pro at every position.
Originally Posted by Versatile Dog
I think this is a big year for Wills. Not sure or not if he has Berry's complete faith in him? I also think that the PFF grade is more than a "starting point." It far greater than a fan saying that a guy stinks because he gave up a sack after the qb held the ball way too long or fled a secure pocket.

I have some thoughts on Wills.

--He commits too many penalties. 11 in 2020 and 4 last year. 15 in two years is too much.

--He has good agility and is pretty explosive coming out of his stance.

--The injury was an issue for him last year.

--He has been inconsistent.

--Sometimes takes bad angles.

--Has struggled in the running game at times due to angles and footwork.

--I wonder if moving from RT to LT has been an issue?

--Has the talent, but I heard he needs to work harder. Not sure if that is true or not?

--Has the talent to be a Pro-Bowler.

--Wirfs and even Becton have been better than he is and they were drafted after him. However, it has become hard to evaluate collegiate offensive line, much like college qbs.

--Even w/all the negatives I included, he is still good enough. We could do a lot worse. He's good enough to win with right now and we has the potential to get much better. You can't have an All-Pro at every position.
1. I think moving him from RT to LT has been a struggle. I don't have a football
Almanac or team guide in front of me.....but how many drafted RTs have
Made a successful transition to LT in the last 20 years ?
When you do that , the OT has to relearn muscle memory , hand placement
Etc etc.

2.I don't think he plays with enough aggression from play to play

3.his effort isn't 100%

4. Will the team pick up his 5th year option ?
Posted By: archbolddawg Re: Back to Football - 07/15/22 08:12 PM
Originally Posted by Versatile Dog
I think this is a big year for Wills. Not sure or not if he has Berry's complete faith in him? I also think that the PFF grade is more than a "starting point." It far greater than a fan saying that a guy stinks because he gave up a sack after the qb held the ball way too long or fled a secure pocket.



--The injury was an issue for him last year. .

Interesting. Do you think his injury affected his play in the other areas you mentioned? And, if so, we could take it a step further. Couldn't we?
Posted By: Versatile Dog Re: Back to Football - 07/15/22 08:36 PM
Quote
1. I think moving him from RT to LT has been a struggle. I don't have a football
Almanac or team guide in front of me.....but how many drafted RTs have
Made a successful transition to LT in the last 20 years ?
When you do that , the OT has to relearn muscle memory , hand placement
Etc etc.

Here is an article about it:

Quote
What will go into moving Jedrick Wills Jr. from right tackle to left for Browns?

Jedrick Wills
By Tom Reed
Apr 21, 2020
9

Grab a toothbrush, apply some paste and begin your normal cleaning routine. (Don’t forget the gumline, kids.) Now, take the toothbrush in the opposite hand and repeat the process.

It feels a bit awkward, right? The technique a little sloppy.

What does good dental hygiene have to do with trying to convert a right tackle to a left tackle? You might be surprised.

“I don’t do this with everybody, but there are times I will have a guy do that or pick up objects with their hand that isn’t dominant,” said Duke Manyweather, an offensive line scouting and development consultant. “It’s just a little thing that helps wake up that side of the brain.”

Baker Mayfield will need more than ambidextrous tooth brushers to keep T.J. Watt out of his grill this season. But every tip and tweak is likely appreciated by offensive tackle candidates looking to fill a hole on the left side of the Browns’ line.

Cleveland holds the No. 10 overall pick in the NFL Draft, which opens Thursday night. The club clearly has a need at left tackle, and there are four enticing first-round options: Jedrick Wills Jr. (Alabama), Tristan Wirfs (Iowa), Mekhi Becton (Louisville) and Andrew Thomas (Georgia). (Editor’s note: Wills was drafted by the Browns with their first-round pick Thursday night)

But Wills and Wirfs were primarily right tackles in college. Is there significant risk in drafting a player that high and switching him to the other side of the formation?

It depends on whom you ask.

“Can you switch from right to left tackle? Yes, you can,” said Manyweather, who’s worked with NFL standouts such as Lane Johnson and Trent Brown. “Is it easy? No, it is not. Especially when you have volume accumulation on one side.”

Former NFL offensive lineman Geoff Schwartz, who played six NFL seasons, agrees with Manyweather.

“Moving Wills or Wirfs to left tackle is scary in my opinion because there’s a reason they weren’t there in college,” Schwartz said. “You can argue Wills wasn’t (moved) because Tua (Tagovailoa) is left-handed and they wanted him protecting Tua’s blindside. … (But) I don’t really know if that’s the way you want to do this. Becton and Thomas might be better options.”

Future Hall of Famer Joe Thomas, whose retirement following the 2017 season created the Browns’ void at left tackle, believes it takes about three months of training to make the conversion. Becton would be his first choice, but, he added, the lack of game experience on the left side shouldn’t be a deal breaker for Browns management.

“I would have zero concerns for Wirfs or Wills making the switch,” Thomas wrote in a text message to The Athletic several weeks ago.

A year ago, the Browns were one of the NFL’s most hyped teams heading into the draft. Mayfield and running back Nick Chubb were coming off excellent rookie seasons. The club acquired receiver Odell Beckham Jr., adding to an offensive arsenal that contributed to seven wins in 2018.

But the Browns crumbled under the weight of expectations. Multiple factors contributed to a 6-10 record that cost John Dorsey and Freddie Kitchens their jobs. Mayfield regressed in his second season in part because of his lack of trust in the offensive line, specifically at the two tackle positions.

Andrew Berry, the club’s new head of football operations, quickly addressed right tackle needs in free agency by adding Jack Conklin. In a recent conference call, Berry was asked about shifting offensive linemen from one side to another to fill positions.

“From my perspective, tackles are tackles,” he said. “In terms of guys making the switch, certainly, there is an element of muscle memory that needs to be reprogrammed, so to speak, for people who have played one side or the other for a long period of time. If you look, Jack Conklin was a college left tackle that has been a pretty well-accomplished right tackle in our league.”

Schwartz is familiar with another such story. His brother, Mitchell, played left tackle at Cal before blossoming into a stud right tackle with the Browns and the Chiefs, with whom he won a Super Bowl last season.

The transition from left to right seems to have a higher success rate, Geoff Schwartz said, in part because right tackles don’t need as much athleticism at the NFL level. While it’s true pro defenses have moved their best pass rushers all over the formation in recent years — think of Von Miller’s versatility in Denver — left tackles remain the most important position on the offensive line. They often protect the quarterback’s blindside in a predominantly right-handed throwing league.

“It’s not as much now, but the left tackle is still typically more athletic than the right tackle,” Geoff Schwartz said. “There is a reason they go from left (in college) to right in the NFL and not as much the other way around.”

Manyweather is a big proponent of “cross-training” pupils. Whether working with tackles or guards, he drills them on the left and right sides. The purpose is getting both body and mind out of their comfort zones.

One of Manyweather’s best success stories is Trent Brown, who’s made the transition on multiple occasions during his five seasons with San Francisco, New England and Oakland.

“From a biomechanics standpoint, it helps balance out the body,” said Manyweather of his cross-training approach. “If you take a guy on the right side and expect him to be the same all-world player on the left side, you are doing him a disservice. Can he be good? Of course he can, but it takes a lot.

“Set points change, where you need to expand to at the top of the rush changes, the overall footwork … it is completely backward.”

Manyweather would like to see Wills remain on the right side.

“I think he’s going to be a very good pro,” he said. “I can see him becoming a dominant right tackle. I wouldn’t switch him to the left side. I think you would be doing the kid a disservice. If you draft him, let him eat where he’s hunted at for the past couple years.”

There are examples of tackles moving from right to left early in their careers and flourishing as blindside protectors. The most obvious is two-time All-Pro Tyron Smith of the Cowboys. Smith is among the outliers, however.

Manyweather, Schwartz and former longtime NFL offensive line coach Paul Alexander agree the earlier a player makes the transition, the better the chance for success.

One mistake some teams make is trying to move a player in season or during training camp from one side to the other.

“You don’t have enough time to practice it,” Thomas wrote.

“It’s a learned skill, not genetic right/left hand (kind of thing). So it’s just a matter of the reps at the other side needed to get comfortable.”


Tristan Wirfs of Iowa is expected to be a first-round pick in the NFL Draft. (Justin Hayworth / Associated Press)
Geoff Schwartz seldom had trouble practicing at left guard. He knew the assignments. He could get into the sets. Taking meaningful reps in two regular-season games, however, short-circuited his brain.

“I couldn’t play left guard worth a damn in the NFL when I was put there,” he said. “Practice? I was fine. But in a game my hands and footwork weren’t in sync. Then, you start to revert back to what you know. … When I would get my hands on someone, my feet switched back to playing right guard.”

Alexander watched Panthers offensive lineman Daryl Williams, who recently signed with Buffalo, endure similar struggles last season. Tackle blocking is an “inside hands activity,” Alexander explained.

“You control the inside pad of the rusher with your inside hand,” he said. “The outside hand is used as a guide hand to ward off the defender or to slow him down and control him or hook him. A lot of guys will switch from right (tackle) to left (tackle) without learning how to switch hands.

“(Williams) kept trying to block guys with his left hand. That’s what you do as a right tackle.”

Complicating issues this offseason is the COVID-19 pandemic, which has limited interactions and scrubbed private workouts. Obviously, coaches can learn only so much from putting players through drills in a single workout, but it supplies position coaches with valuable intel.

Alexander was given a hypothetical situation. How would he react to his team wanting to select a Wills or Wirfs and switching him to left tackle without the luxury of a private workout?

“If they were to come to me and say, ‘Hey, Paul, how do you feel about that,’ I would say I don’t feel good about that at all,” Alexander said. “In the first round, you cannot miss. Why not take a real left tackle? I would take Becton or Thomas or trade back and take (Josh) Jones (from the University of Houston).”

Some believe the Browns are considering trading back to select Ezra Cleveland of Boise State.

“I like him,” Alexander said. “He’s got a chance, but he has some major technical development ahead of him.”

In media conference calls, Berry and Paul DePodesta sound as if they are taking a longer view with the franchise’s approach, not expecting an immediate impact from their draft picks. But given Mayfield’s regression and the glaring need at left tackle, can the Browns afford patience in this circumstance?

The disclosure of Becton’s flagged drug test at the combine adds another layer to their decision. “I’m not going to comment on specifics for individual guys, but we’ll take all information into consideration,” Berry said Monday.

Trading for Redskins veteran tackle Trent Williams remains an option. So does signing 38-year-old Jason Peters. There’s much to consider with the draft rapidly approaching.

Experts interviewed for this story all agree the Browns made a wise choice in hiring Bill Callahan as their offensive line coach and adding Scott Peters as his assistant. Their experience could prove invaluable in preparing a young left tackle for a potential abbreviated run-up to the regular season.

“The unknowns with this offseason could be a challenge for some teams, but with Bill Callahan and Scott Peters, I don’t care who you guys end up drafting, they will have that guy ready to go,” said Manyweather, who has been training Becton. “Bill Callahan is one of the best offensive line coaches in the league. He’s a grinder. He’s a hard-ass coach who gets the most out of his players.”

With social distancing still recommended and no timetable set for a return to practice, draft choices must continue to train on their own.

Is the extended period a benefit or detriment for offensive tackles looking to transition from right to left? Time will tell.

Until then, keep brushing those teeth with both hands.

https://theathletic.com/1760974/202...jr-from-right-tackle-to-left-for-browns/
Posted By: PitDAWG Re: Back to Football - 07/16/22 03:34 PM
No, injuries that hamper performance are restricted to Wills. We can't carry that any further.
Posted By: eotab Re: Back to Football - 07/17/22 12:27 PM
Originally Posted by Versatile Dog
I think this is a big year for Wills. Not sure or not if he has Berry's complete faith in him? I also think that the PFF grade is more than a "starting point." It far greater than a fan saying that a guy stinks because he gave up a sack after the qb held the ball way too long or fled a secure pocket.

I have some thoughts on Wills.

--He commits too many penalties. 11 in 2020 and 4 last year. 15 in two years is too much.

--He has good agility and is pretty explosive coming out of his stance.

--The injury was an issue for him last year.

--He has been inconsistent.

--Sometimes takes bad angles.

--Has struggled in the running game at times due to angles and footwork.

--I wonder if moving from RT to LT has been an issue?

--Has the talent, but I heard he needs to work harder. Not sure if that is true or not?

--Has the talent to be a Pro-Bowler.

--Wirfs and even Becton have been better than he is and they were drafted after him. However, it has become hard to evaluate collegiate offensive line, much like college qbs.

--Even w/all the negatives I included, he is still good enough. We could do a lot worse. He's good enough to win with right now and we has the potential to get much better. You can't have an All-Pro at every position.

15 in 2 seasons I think is a bogus point there Vers you show 11 in his rookie year making the switch from RT to LT. OK but then you state last year he had only 4. That is tremendous improvement considering it was only his 2nd season. Obviously even with the injuries he kept it to 4 that is great not a point of him committing too many penalties???

The I can agree with it was just the statement about penalties made me go HUH??? Wrfs n Becton do they have chip blockers to help???
Posted By: Versatile Dog Re: Back to Football - 07/17/22 12:37 PM
That's fair about the penalties. Then again, I can't make anyone happy. I'm either too lenient on Wills or too hard on him. LOL......
Posted By: eotab Re: Back to Football - 07/18/22 03:56 PM
Dont' take it so personal. Its not a Poll on who is making others happy...lol laugh Just keep with discussion and sharing knowledge and all will be happy. As for me I see and made my decisions on their work. I have a good eye for OL and the kid has talent I like the improvement from year 1 to 2.

jmho
Posted By: THROW LONG Re: Back to Football - 07/20/22 01:19 AM
Originally Posted by bonefish
The title I was thinking of was "no quarterback thread."

However, I will start with DW will play games this year. Maybe I am wrong but I don't think so.

Now the rest of the team. The secondary will be one of the best in the NFL. A real plus for the secondary is depth. I really like the linebacking room. Glad that Wilson is gone. Walker and Phillips may not be all pros but they are good players. Phillips has good length and moves well in space. Walker is a smart player who can keep people in order. JOK IMO will be a stand out player. He has rare talent.

The DL with Clowney and Myles will be a solid unit. The interior will need to sift out who can do what. It may have some bad times but over time will be above average.

Obviously the offense is still to be decided. Brissett is more than capable to handle some games for this team. He is an upgrade over the way Baker played last year. If Brissett plays he will be good enough with this team to win games.

The reason is because he has loads of talent around him. Up front the OL should be better overall. Wills should improve and I believe he will. Losing Conklin for most of last year was a huge loss. He is an excellent RT when healthy. Hubbard has returned and Hudson should improve after a solid rookie season.We have the best guard tandem in the game. Harris and Pocic should not be much of a drop from Tretter. They will be have great guards around them.

Our runningback room is crazy good and very deep. I do not need to go into that.

We have improved the TE position by subtraction of Hooper. I expect Njoku to have a great season. Bryant can catch and is an improving player.

Cooper is a pros pro. He does everything a receiver should do. He is good at every aspect of the position.

DPJ, Schwartz, Bell and whoever else plays are good enough when looked at inside of the full offense.

The offense is run centric. That is how the team was built. No matter who plays quarterback there is plenty to fall back on. When DW does play. He will elevate the entire offense. He is a top five quarterback all day long.

The Browns are a talented team. We should win a lot of games.
To say Brissett will be an upgrade over the way Baker played last year, is that an assumption that Brissett will be healthy and consistently so?

Back to the "No Quarterbacks Thread"
How are the Linebackers going to play behind this DL middle on roller skates?
I wonder if if Jordan Elliott is going to play, can he knock down a few passes this year. Can Jordan Elliott get to 1 pass defensed per month of the season, that is an achieveable goal.
Not for a nosetackle! Not for a nosetackle? how about one quarterback pressure a game. A month? A quarter? How many Qb pressures is it reasonable to expect from the Browns (playing) left defensive tackle. I used playing instead of starting. Will any Browns IDL really play like a starting DL?, yes somebody has to start.

How are the linebackers going to play behind the question marks on the Browns in the interior of the DL >
Posted By: Versatile Dog Re: Back to Football - 07/20/22 01:24 AM
No offense, but you have mentioned the No Quarterback Thread multiple times.

So........take a look at the actual title. Then, read the first line after bone said he was thinking of naming this the No QB thread.


Quote
However, I will start with DW will play games this year. Maybe I am wrong but I don't think so.

Not sure, but isn't DW a QB?
Posted By: THROW LONG Re: Back to Football - 07/20/22 01:38 AM
Originally Posted by superbowldogg
McCaffrey hasn't played a full season in years. not sure how he can be top 10?
Shouldn't McCaffrey actually be one spot higher and ahead of Joe Mixon. If your team plays against them, McCaffrey is more dangerous especially if they both have a good day, if they both have a good day, Mixons' is not as good as McCaffreys, or not as dangerous imo.
Posted By: THROW LONG Re: Back to Football - 07/20/22 01:47 AM
Originally Posted by Versatile Dog
No offense, but you have mentioned the No Quarterback Thread multiple times.
Just thought.
If we have to endure Jacoby Brissett for the full year, maybe every thread will become the "No Quarterback Thread." rofl Hope it ain't so. Praying hands emoji! We still love you Jacoby emoji! brownie
That's a +1, maybe a -1 take your pick of whichever perspective. (One more mention, one less time avoiding to mention.)
© DawgTalkers.net