Gunz41

Completely true. BUT, you want us to side with you and the opinion he has been a bad teammate over the ones that are around him? You don't see how offbeat that sounds? And Icecube has some kind of vendetta against OBJ. I don't think anyone on here would be able to figure it out. And before he responds, no matter what his intentions are, it comes off as just disliking him, not just that he could conceivably be a bad fit. And if needed, there are examples of guys changing their spots so to speak in a different location whether that is through play or actions

No please explain, and certainly no need to call names. If it is just your opinion that Teller is better, then just say that. I don't know how that makes it a joke, but it is what it is. If it is because of some kind of measurable/metric, then please provide. And if it is going off of this year's grading, great. But you can't be taken seriously when you use that to justify it for Teller/Decastro but want to ignore it for Baker/Burrow. As for your other point, I don't think the Browns should give up on Baker. There have been too many variables that could be factors in his stunted growth. But you come off here as someone who thinks anyone without the same opinion is just so wrong and have to be "high". But you also are leaving out context for your arguments. Young was behind one of the best QBs ever, THAT had more to do with it than late development. As for Dilfer, no he was never great but did win a SB, so I am not sure where you were trying to go with that??? He was also a very high draft pick. IMO, unless he completely falls on his face the rest of the year, Baker should be given the opportunity this and next year to see how he can do in this system. And while he isn't setting the league on fire, he has the team at 4-2. And getting a new QB for the team can go either way very easily. The fact of the matter is that they lost to two TEAMS who are/were better than them. The only difference a good BM would have made is by appearance and the score being closer

You know its awfully telling that your decision to just laugh as a reply when you have no argument back. So again ill ask. What did you use to make the comment that its a joke of DD over WT? And if your argument is based on what has happened this season (which is the only possible sane argument), then why wouldn't it be just as fair for someone to use this year to say JB over BM? Or maybe it is as simple as you didn't think you would be called on wanting to use counter productive arguments to make your case, or simply not knowing what the history for the 2 OG was.

Well there is a difference, i.e. Baker isn't considered at the top of his position. But its not so much of thinking Teller will be better. Its the fact you actually tried to make it look as if it was so bad of a take. The way this reads, since there is no conceivable way you have based this off anything aside from the 1st 5 games this year, then Teller is the best OL in the league (since that is what his grade would tell you). And I hate to tell you this, but since you alluded to it here, Burrow would then be better than Baker by that same metric.

That was the exact point I was making. I know he was rated at the best, and he very well may end up being better in the long run. Well 1st nobody said he was a HOF player, and nobody said anything about upside, but you did say it was joke to rank DD over WT based on something? So are you of the opinion that what Teller has done in his 5 games this year has given him the huge jump to surpass him? Because based off of last season, Teller was rated at 56.8 grade, while Decastro was a pro bowler. And heading into the season, Decastro was rated as the 5th best interior OL in the entire league.

Teller has played extremely well this year, but at the start of the year his position was the ONLY question mark on the offense. And this isn't a ranking on just the games played so far this season, as a number of factors can go into a good/bad start. Now if you want to do on just this year based on stats, etc. then Conner would be ranked ahead of Chubb and Claypool over both OBJ and Landry. Or we can go on a broader spectrum: Keelan Cole and Cole Beasley are better than Mike Evans and Julio Jones, Kenyan Drake and Miles Sanders are better than Zeke, Aaron Jones, and Josh Jacobs. Or QB, Minshew is better than Burrow, Brady, Wilson, Rodgers, etc. But sure, lets just go ahead and agree with you on this one for argument sake. 13-9

Not one receiver in the league would command that in a trade. Here are some notable trades for top receivers Hopkins: 2nd and 4th and David Johnson Diggs:.Vikings did get a 1st, 4th, 5th, 6th, but that 1st was #22 OBJ: 17th, 3rd and Peppers. Cooper: 27th overall Cooks: 23rd (Pat's to Rams), and 32nd (NO to NE) Harvin: 24th, 3rd, 7th Moss: 7th overall and 7th round (Min to Oak, 4th round pick (Oak to NE) Antonio Brown: 3rd and 5th round picks. And with all these complaints about his attitude/behavior/etc., the value would be looked at around Moss to NE and Brown. And here is the list of WR drafted in Top 10 last decade. 2010: 0 2011: AJ Green, Julio Jones 2012: Justin Blackmon 2013: Tavon Austin 2014: Sammy Watkins, Mike Evans 2015: Amari Cooper and Kevin White 2016: 0 2017: Corey Davis, Mike Williams, John Ross 2018: 0 2019: 0 2010: 0 I don't want the Browns to get rid of any of them. Take out Hooper and rookies, ALL of these guys have dealt with AT LEAST 1 coaching/system change. And for what ever reason it seems we have posters who ONLY want to rip this player or thst player. Maybe we should give them all ONE season to see what they can do together

You can't believe this can you? Let's go through the 22. QB: Not even a discussion, BR WAY over BM RB: Hunt/Chubb over Conner WR1: OBJ over JuJu WR2: Landry over Washington WR3: Claypool over Higgins TE: Hooper by a bit LT: Villanueva over Wills LG: Bitonio over Feller C- Pouncey over Trotter RG: Decastro over Teller RT: Conklin over Okorafor Offense: Cleveland 6 Pittsburgh 5 DE: Garrett over Twitter DT: Heyward over Ogunjobi NT/DT/DE: Alualu over Richardson/Vernon OLB: Watt WAY over Wilson ILB: Bush WAY over Goodson ILB: Williams over Phillips OLB: Dupree WAY over Takitaki/Smith CB: Ward over Haden CB: Nelson over Mitchell FS: Fitzpatrick WAY over Sendejo SS: Edmunds WAY over Joseph Defense: Pittsburgh 9 Cleveland 2 Total: Pittsburgh 14 Cleveland 8 Baker was terrible, but to think that the teams up and down the roster are even is when you get unreachable expectations. While unlikely, if the Browns are fully healthy and play a very good game with the right game plan they can beat Pittsburgh. But they are a bad match up for Browns anytime they play. They have an above average Offense (while the Browns have a below average defense at best) and they have probably the best defense in the NFL and the Browns have a very good explosive offense (especially with Chubb and IF Baker is having a good day). But they DON'T have the NFL best offense

No, you don't get your own facts to back up your assertions. Nobody compared their careers. I simply pointed out that BOTH had Terrible days. And yes one has earned that right and the other has not. There is NO ARGUMENT there. But I will spell it out even clearer/slower for you. BAKER MAYFIELD WAS HORRENDOUS YESTERDAY AND DESERVES NO PASS. BUT, for the posters who ONLY show up when Baker has a putrid game and use THAT GAME to justify just how incredibly bad he is to justify everything wrong with him is disingenuous. Again, you are confusing pointing out that it does happen to others as deflecting criticism/apologizing when the two AREN'T connected. The reason in the same thread I said that IF BM were to turn around and throw for 500 and 6 TDs against Cincinnati thst doesn't mean he has suddenly make some miraculous turn is because its an outlier. But we can leave Rodgers out of this now, as he was ONLY used to show to those who ONLY post about Baker in his worst moments that it can happen to someone who is WAY OUT OF BAKERS LEAGUE. Now, without you trying to accuse me of deflecting criticism again, do you think that yesterday was synonymous of what Baker is as a whole? Or was he worse than usual? And how do you explain his play before the Steelers game (4-1)? Again not an excuse/deflecting/etc., but its almost as if you play weaker competition you play better, and better competition you play worse. And while I understand and agree with your premise, if you want to hang on every word I wrote then why shouldn't you be held to the same standard? Saying as a professional you're only as good..., but you don't use that for another professional. And as for LeBron, i don't think you understood the parallels. Sure, he has earned the right to save himself for the playoffs and a rookie hasn't. But that has NOTHING to do with what I said. That is you trying to shift an argument to fit your narrative. So again, lets use him. I won't use actual game stats, just a fictional one. LBJ: 5-21 FG, 5 Reb, 4 Ass. and 8 TOs London Ball: 3-19, 4 REB., 4 Ass. 8 TOs Now, if I were someone who liked the Pelicans and got on their site to blast Ball and call for his head, post after post, but didn't post when the Pels had done well the last few weeks, but wanted to use THIS GAME as a barometer for what he is, when one of the all.time great players has an extremely similar game that night, it just shows that no matter what level of player (great/average/barely in the league) it can happen. It doesn't mean that the 2 are even comparable, it doesn't mean that the game Ball had was in any way excusable, and doesn't mean that after the entire career of greatness that the great isn't allowed to have an off night. What it does mean to me, is that using one game to justify a position is foolish. And when some who only want to comment when someone has a very bad game but not when there are any positives is just having a pre judged bias. So again I will say it AGAIN. The game Baker had was inexcusable. The game Rodgers had was an outlier. Rodgers has EARNED the benefit of having a game like that and Baker has not. Baker is WAY more inclined to have it repeat again. Baker is not even close to even comparing to Rodgers. Baker has shown OVER HIS CAREER to be average AT BEST. But I am one who will not take his performance in one game and use that as his litmus test. And I won't use his next good performance (if he has one) to proclaim he has arrived and will then every week "wake up feeling dangerous". Last word, it may be kind of telling that after originally posting, tiamat63 appwars to have understood the point I was making, and yet you refuse to and continue to push a narrative that I am somehow absolving Baker when that has been continuously shown to not be the case. But you (who isn't one of the ones I was referring to) and the only Terrible Baker Poster club can have at it. I'm done. Have a good one

Umm ok??? I have no clue what you are talking about. But I think the issue here is that you and I have a different view on criticism. You see, silly ole me thinks saying how Terrible Baker was is CRITICISM. But I guess that its not. And of course that (as well as other things like it) was in my original post. To me, deflecting criticism is "Baker was off BECAUSE of something outside of his control." When I used Facts/Stats to show Rodgers had a similar story THAT DAY, that isn't taking criticism off Baker, not giving Rodgers more, not comparing the CAREERS of the two COMPLETE opposites. If you can't comprehend that, then I can't help you because we just have a fundamental difference in interpretation. I will just leave it at that. I feel no need to continue on with the useless back and forth with you over trivial things. Peace out, have a good day and God Bless

No that isn't. At least to me. But I am not some brainiac. I'm just some dumb jock coach apparently. I never said a thing about not criticizing him. Didn't even try to explain away why he played bad. He played bad because he played bad. I don't know why you are of the opinion that pointing out that it does happen to others deflects criticism? But we can use another subject they may not be as sore apparently. If I were to point out that X player only did this is in a certain game, But LeBron James had a similar game that isn't saying don't criticize that player, its just pointing out the fact that an all time great can do the same thing. So in summary, Baker is ABSOLUTELY entitled to criticism, especially for today's game. And based on today's game, Rodgers would also be entitled to the same criticism. It's not an either or thing

No, you still aren't getting the point. I am not denying ANY of that. And I am not saying YOU or half the other posts in those 2 threads haven't had that opinion these 3 years. I have the same thoughts. When I say using one game I am speaking of the posters who I only notice post something when things aren't going well. Those same guys who I haven't notice say anything the last 4 games or had no moving criticism before. I have zero issue saying Baker hasn't even come.close to living up to #1 pick. And have even less issue with fair criticism from guys who post regularly, whether it happens on that subject or not. But when it APPEARS that the only reason someone is posting is to speak on how terrible he (or anyone) is when you use a single sample size that is not genuine. The point being they can all be exactly correct. But just like the one guy who seemed to have a man crush on a few players, when one of those guys had a good play/game and came bragging they didn't appear to be taking the totality of work into play.

Maybe try reading and comprehend before trying to go down that road. I put up the exact numbers for this reason. Aaron Rodgers never has sucked, and that there is no trying to deflect criticism off Baker. You are trying to make it seem this way because of the argument. As said earlier in the 2 threads, people were using TODAY'S PERFORMANCE to illustrate how bad Baker Mayfield IS. No, not how bad he was TODAY, but as a whole. And to illustrate how using this ONE GAME to point that out is the wrong way to get that conclusion, I used Aaron Rodgers from TODAY. Again there is no comparison to Baker and Rodgers throughout their careers. There isn't but a handful of players in history that could compare to Rodgers. In all honesty, there are at least half the leagues QBs I would rather have than Baker. But seriously, if both those stats had no name on them would you know that one was an all time great and the other an average at best QB? THAT is the point. Again, I challenge you to find anywhere where I said anything even remotely resembling Baker is close to as good as Rodgers, or even something that Baker is any good. If you find it I will leave and never post again. You won't find it because it doesn't exist.

Yes, exactly. And I specifically pointed out in the subsequent message that it was pointed to more so for the folks that decided today was the day to pile on to him. You know, the guys who didn't come around when they won. So again, unlike others on here who just post as a fan (or to just talk) I respect your thoughts, but tell me ONE thing I said that is incorrect? I never tried to even infer that Baker is even a 10th of Rodgers. The only point was showing that someone universally respected can do the same thing. In fact, I'll bet if you wanted to (not saying I would), I would venture to guess that a whole bunch of the terrible talk about Baker in the 2 threads are folks who don't post much/only post negative things/didn't post a thing with a W/etc. And those are also the ones who will refuse to factor in anything else aside from Baker just being terrible. The Steelers had nothing to do with it, the DNP had nothing to do with it, and his own injuries had nothing to do with it. And his development has zero to do with the influx of changes he has had to endure in his short career. But just to say it one final time: Baker is NOT Rodgers, Baker very well could not be the answer to the QB position in Cleveland, Baker was TERRIBLE today, In his time in the NFL Baker has been average at best. But to base it on one game is foolish, as even all time greats have bad games, and to only want to write to post how bad he is is jerkish.

Ugh terrible history there sir. 2005: 65 yards 0 TD 1 INT 2006: 46 yards 0 TD 0 INT 2007: 218 yards 1 TD 0 INT This is the EXACT thing I am talking about.

No its not. You obviously missed the ENTIRE point, and you are one that I actually respect their opinions. When you use this one game to point out how bad Baker is (again, not saying he isn't) but to use it to justify something well on the exact same day Rodgers would statically have had a worse game. Does that mean Rodgers is terrible? Obviously not. It really isn't a post taking up for Baker, certainly isn't anything negative about Rodgers, its just pointing out that using the worse to justify (specifically those who only come to talk negatively) is asinine. But let's look at it the complete opposite. If Baker goes out next week and throws for 400+ and 5 TDs does that mean he finally made the correct adjustments to his game and should be the franchise QB for 10 years? Of course not. And before anyone asks like before in this thread, I was in the Allen camp mainly because of his physical traits. And I would have had Darnold over Baker too. As for the other years recently, hated Trubisky, liked both Mahomes and Watson, didn't like Kyler and didn't like Rosen or Lamar. Some have been good and some not. But nowhere in there did I say Baker was the answer, etc. I am just pointing out the fact that an all-time great (which Baker IS NOT, WILL 99.9% NEVER BE) can have just as bad if not worse statistical game. But I am not going to completely write him off at this point. As the QB, he has the team 4-2 (no not because of him), and many here probably have little idea how difficult things he has dealt with are on him. The different coaches/systems, and its certainly not easy to play through an injury. And speaking of Rodgers, as a Top 10 QB ever, exactly how much progression, etc did we see at this point in his career?

It is amazing to me how people are so quick to just talk after a bad game, and don't get me wrong it was a TERRIBLE game. But there are actually people on this thread and the GameDay one who seems to only come post when a bad game happens and to run their mouth how bad the team/Baker is. But since one game is the determining factor in how bad Baker is, apparently a bust who must be run outta town, I guess Aaron Rodgers and the Packers suck too. Rodgers: 0 TD Baker 1 TD Rodgers: 2 INT, Baker 2 INT (both 1 pick 6) Rodgers: 160 yards in 3+ quarters, 119 in 2+ Rodgers: 4.6 yard average, Baker 6.6 Rodgers: 46% completions, Baker: 56% Rodgers: lost 38-10 to 3-2 team, Baker lost 38-7 to a 4-0 team Now Baker is no where near as good as Rodgers, never will be. I am not even saying that he is a franchise QB, but wanting to use one game to try and make a point is just uninformed. You guys do realize that sometimes the other team is just better. Whether that is that day, that season, etc. PITTSBURGH IS BETTER. And all the not afraid of Steelers talk etc leading up just makes the result much harder to stomach. Does 2 blowout losses look bad? Obviously. And maybe the Browns aren't ready to take that next step. But I would imagine that most people on here etc. wouldn't have had the team better than 4-2 at this time. And for those in this or that thread saying the missing players don't matter, nope they don't in the grand scheme of things, and they wouldn't have made a difference in the 2 losses from the outcome, BUT just think back on these last 6 games and how everyone ripped the defense. Now imagine taking some of the starters out, probably doesn't make them better. Now imagine having a limited QB, losing one half of what has been said here and nationally as the best backfield tandem, and your RG who has been raved about after being said coming into the year as one of the biggest weaknesses. Yes it is always next man up. Yes these are all professionals who are still at the top of their field, but for the few on this board who I have read are coaches like myself or seem to have a good grasp on it, you know how things like this can happen and are extremely likely to be a negative result.

I think you have to have McCaffrey and Kamara in the convo if we are using when healthy.

The things people say just to be negative... Example: how the Browns stack up against a good team like Baltimore. Could very well be true most likely is that they aren't as good as them. But basing it off one game? I seem to faintly remember this team that had had best regular season record lost to a 6-10 team with a terrible coach. Must have been a long time ago. If I am remembering correctly, the score was 40-25. But since that must have been so long ago, lets look at the last 2 SB Champs (and NO, I am not comparing Browns to them, just showing how uninformed using one game to discredit a team is). 2019: Chiefs: Colts (7-9) 2018: Patriots: Jaguars (5-11), Lions (6-10), Dolphins (7-9) I just don't understand the need for people to always want to point out negatives for just about every subject now. This doesn't just happen for the Browns, doesn't just happen in football, does it just happen in sports, doesn't just happen in entertainment, etc. Its actually incredibly sad that that is people's go to now a days for whatever topic.

We know you don't like OBJ. Nothing wrong with that. And I assume you are of the mind he is more trouble than he is worth. You could certainly be right. But your argument is terrible here. There is only a handful of guys in the NFL who wouldn't get traded if offered a 1st. I don't know how much further the lost goes past: Julio, Hopkins, Tyreke, Adams, Thomas, Evans, Godwin, Cooper (probably), Metcalf, Diggs (just because he was just acquired) and the 1st round rookies. There could be a few I am missing.

But Ryan Shazier has officially retired. Such a tough thing to lose your career like that. Wish him best in his future endeavors.

They didn't can Golic. They removed their show (idiotic for ESPN to do). Golic is calling college games at least for the remainder of this year. His contract is up end of year. I have heard that Wingo is being let go though as they have nothing for him.

Kevin Johnson lacerated his liver in practice today

Dickerson D. Sanders Reed Gilmore Sherman ???

I wasn't even thinking of what metric someone used. I was just going off of what would be considered statically speaking considered the best seasons. So no issue with you, with them, etc. I guess I was just thinking of different criteria etc.