MMQB: Why the Browns are making a mistake with Baker Mayfield (by starting Tyrod)

[Thurman#1]

15 hours ago, ScottLaw said:

Good for you.

 

Im a blind TT fan? Because I said he is a solid, not great, starting QB when he has good players around him? What is inaccurate about that statement? 

 

He doesnt turn the ball over and is efficient and can make plays with his legs.... when you win the turnover battle your chances of winning the game increase significantly.

 

He's no franchise QB. He's not Rodgers or Brady, but for fans to say with Tyrod, you have no shot at winning the Super Bowl is just plain stupid considering Blake Bortles just got to the AFC championship game and Nick !@#$ing Foles just won a Super bowl. 

 

I was all for a first round QB. They absolutely needed to take one because the position is just too important to pass up year after year like the Bills have been doing. 

 

 

 

 

Nick Foles didn't win a Super Bowl. The Philadelphia Eagles did ... and if they'd had Foles as their starter through the season they almost certainly would not be holding the trophy. 80% Carson Wentz, 20% Foles, that was the recipe. Philly couldn't have gotten much luckier on the timing of that injury to Wentz. They got Phil Simms-Jeff Hostetler lucky. It's the perfect way to maximize what you get from the second-stringer. Have the starter, Wentz, go 11-2 and get the team in great position to have home-field advantage. Then have three really easy games for your second-stringer, against a 3-13 team, a 6-10 team and a 9-7 team and they go ... surpriiiiiiiiiiiise ... 2-1. Then have home-field advantage thanks mostly to how well the team did with Wentz in charge, so you can have two weeks to put in a very different game plan for the rest of the season to maximize your sub's abilities and minimize what defenses have seen on tape of what you're running. They almost certainly don't win a title last year without Wentz behind center for those first 13 games.

 

And yeah, the Jags with Bortles at QB got to the championship game. Did they get to the Super Bowl? Did they win it? Exactly, and a lot of the reason for that is because their offense just wasn't good enough despite a terrific running game.

 

Fair enough that you shouldn't say that with Tyrod you have no shot. The Ravens won with Dilfer. You don't have no shot. You have a microscopic shot. And you want more than that. 

 

But that's no reason not to play Tyrod a lot, maybe even all season this year. The Browns aren't winning a championship this year. They haven't got the roster. What their goal should be is raising the odds that Mayfield can become a franchise QB, and there's a terrific argument that he can do that as well or better from the bench in his rookie year.

[Thurman#1]

17 hours ago, ScottLaw said:

Did you just start watching the Bills in 2017? 

 

The Bills were among the best in the league at deep passing plays before the new regime basically stripped the team of and deep threat/legitimate WR. With a healthy Watkins and Goodwin the guy was GREAT at the deep passing game. 

 

?. He checked down practically every time? There's a well thought out statement. I'll say it again. Some fans just don't know what they are watching at the QB position. 

 

Tyrods a solid QB to have if you have some good pieces around him. Cleveland will be a lot better this year. Better than the Bills, IMO.(cue the, "GO BE A BROWNS FAN THEN!" Reaction).

 

 

 

 

Sorry, Scott, but that's really not true.

 

The Bills were absolutely terrific at deep passing plays when Tyrod came aboard. I have to agree with you there. But that stopped extremely abruptly after the first year. They were not good at long balls in 2016 and a pretty fair amount of that can be laid right at Tyrod's feet. He threw poorly a bunch of open long balls that year, balls he'd have hit the year before.

 

It wasn't the new regime's fault they couldn't do it anymore last year. The long ball had already been absent in 2016.

 

2015 

21-30 yards, 13/34, 38.2%, 339 yards, 9.97 YPA, QB Rating of 90.6

31-40 yards, 8/21, 38.1%, 314 yards, 14.95 YPA, QB rating of 105.7

41+ yards, 7/14, 50%, 360 yards, 25.71 YPA and 135.4 QB rating

Total yards on passes of 21 yards or more, 1,013 yards, on 69 attempts

 

2016

21-30 yards, 9/28, 32.1%, 228 yards, 8.14 YPA, QB rating of 35.1

31-40 yards 3/17, 17.6%, 168 yards, 9.88 YPA, QB rating of 83.3

41+ yards 4/8, 50%, 237 yards, 29.63 YPA, QB rating of 135.4

Total yards on passes of 21 yards or more, 633 yards on 53 attempts

 

It really is a pretty reasonable argument that after teams caught on to Tyrod he had big problems with longer balls after that first year.

 

I hope Tyrod starts throwing long balls well once again, personally. He'll have a shot at doing so, I think.

 

 

 

 

Edited May 14, 2018 by Thurman#1

[Lfod]

I don't get how the Browns having the #1 and #4 pick in the draft make them go from a winless team to making a playoff push. You are basically making an argument that putting a rookie on to a winless team last season is some how the answer for Cleveland this season. 

 

I mean I seen that the chances of a new QB being successful for the Browns is statistically bad and analysis during the draft was any of the rookie QBs shouldn't want to go to Cleveland just because of those chances being bad. 

 

The argument to start Mayfield over Tyrod isn't a solid one. No one has even seen Mayfield play a NFL game and he is already being touted as the guy that will turn the Browns around over Taylor. Tyrod isn't amazing but he has a winning record. He is a good choice for a bridge. 

 

I'm have to side with Hue Jackson that Taylor should be your starter. I mean if Mayfield is clearly better then Tyrod then go ahead and start him. Just don't forget we are talking about the Browns, a winless team. In your head they might be amazing but in reality they haven't proven they can start a rookie QB and be successful. Not a good argument to make no matter how good you think Mayfield is without him even seeing him play in the NFL. 

 

I don't think you considered how bad it looks if you start Mayfield over Tyrod and you at any point make the switch from Mayfield to Tyrod. You start your Rookie over your vet bridge and have to go back to your bridge looks very bad. 

 

Oh but he's a #1 pick so you invested more into him then Tyrod so naturally he should start. Good I hope they rush that investment. I hope they they put that rookie on a winless team because they invested more into him. I would be salivating to see the massive failure as a result. 

 

I agree with Hue Jackson that Tyrod should start but I really hope they go with the start Mayfield crowd, I really do. I bet the real Browns fans don't think like the bandwagon Browns fans on this board. 

Edited May 14, 2018 by Lfod

[FearLess Price]

14 hours ago, Kelly the Dog said:

The Browns are an enigma. We have no clue how their line is going to perform for example. They are potentially really explosive on offense. If Josh Gordon is back, the WR corps of Gordon, Landry and Coleman is scary. Tyrod could play well enough to keep mayfield on bench just because Hue is fighting for his job. This will be interesting to watch. 

 

Im a Tyrod fan and I think the Browns should start Mayfield. They are going to look pretty good if they start Tyrod. It will be tough to bench him. 

 

Agree. The Browns defense wasnt that bad last year, they had to deal with a lot of turnovers. They hqve potential to surprise this year for sure. With Taylor at QB they have a lot of play makers with Gordon Landry and the top rec RB they got

[Thurman#1]

25 minutes ago, ScottLaw said:

You don't think not having Watkins(for most of the year) and Hogan in 2016 had anything to do with that? 

 

I'd say it's more likely not having those two receivers played a larger part in the drop off of his deep balls than teams "catching on"..... same could be said for 2017. The Bills receivers were awful at getting separation and being vertical threats in the passing game.... it's why I thought the Watkins trade was so awful. 

 

 

 

 

No, I don't. He had Watkins for the first half of the year in 2016 and he wasn't completing a lot of long balls. Goodwin started 9 games and played in 15. 

 

In 2015 when you saw Tyrod throw long you thought he was going to complete it. After the first few games of 2016 seeing him miss a lot - an awful lot - of open guys, when you saw him go long I just felt nervous. Tyrod wasn't as good at long balls, it really was pretty clear.

 

Tyrod didn't throw a lot of highly contested balls. It was a problem with him. When he went long there was almost always someone open. And yet he completed a much lower percentage after his first year, and it was visible that he simply wasn't doing it as well.

 

 

As I say, I hope he gets that back. He's a good guy, a hard worker, a guy you hope succeeds.

Edited May 14, 2018 by Thurman#1

[teef]

scott talk!

[grb]

42 minutes ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

No, I don't. He had Watkins for the first half of the year in 2016 and he wasn't completing a lot of long balls. Goodwin started 9 games and played in 15. 

 

In 2015 when you saw Tyrod throw long you thought he was going to complete it. After the first few games of 2016 seeing him miss a lot - an awful lot - of open guys, when you saw him go long I just felt nervous. Tyrod wasn't as good at long balls, it really was pretty clear.

 

Tyrod didn't throw a lot of highly contested balls. It was a problem with him. When he went long there was almost always someone open. And yet he completed a much lower percentage after his first year, and it was visible that he simply wasn't doing it as well.

 

 

As I say, I hope he gets that back. He's a good guy, a hard worker, a guy you hope succeeds.

 

He had Watkins for two games beginning the 2016 season, but SW was then shut down as ineffectual. This was because he was running on a broken foot. Watkins then sat for eight games before returning, but his injury wasn't healed. The remaining six games of 2016 he played with a broken foot and significant pain. Apparently you closely watched all those games yet still can't get your basic facts straight. But - hey - it's "pretty clear" as you remember it. Go figure......

 

Edited May 14, 2018 by grb

[26CornerBlitz]

 

[The Red King]

TT repeatedly underthrew receivers on deep routes, or put it in the dirt.  Please explain to me how that is the receiver's fault?  "Man, what the hell were you doing running that fast and getting separation?!?  If you had just run slower and let the defender catch up to you, you'd have been right under the pass!  What's wrong with you?!?"  ?

 

We didn't have a single pass of 50+ yards all season.  Are you going to tell me that our receiving corp was so bad that there was not a single time, in the almost sixteen games he played in, not once was a receiver open for such a play?  I've watched The 22, there were several opportunities for such a play.  TT either never saw the guy open, or made a bad throw.

 

Yes, the receiving corp was part of the problem, but to attribute all, or even most of TT's troubles to them is just ridiculous.

[YoloinOhio]

12 minutes ago, The Red King said:

TT repeatedly underthrew receivers on deep routes, or put it in the dirt.  Please explain to me how that is the receiver's fault?  "Man, what the hell were you doing running that fast and getting separation?!?  If you had just run slower and let the defender catch up to you, you'd have been right under the pass!  What's wrong with you?!?"  ?

 

We didn't have a single pass of 50+ yards all season.  Are you going to tell me that our receiving corp was so bad that there was not a single time, in the almost sixteen games he played in, not once was a receiver open for such a play?  I've watched The 22, there were several opportunities for such a play.  TT either never saw the guy open, or made a bad throw.

 

Yes, the receiving corp was part of the problem, but to attribute all, or even most of TT's troubles to them is just ridiculous.

TT had some good chemistry with Sammy for awhile with the deep ball, but for the most part the WRs he played with performed better before/after they played with him.

[Royale with Cheese]

19 hours ago, teef said:

scott talk!

 

Welcome to Scott talk.

Here we complain about the Bills.

Still complain about the Watkins trade 

Constantly defend Tyrod 

Ya know....no big wup.

Edited May 15, 2018 by Royale with Cheese

[BuffaloHokie13]

19 hours ago, ScottLaw said:

You don't think not having Watkins(for most of the year) and Hogan in 2016 had anything to do with that? 

 

I'd say it's more likely not having those two receivers played a larger part in the drop off of his deep balls than teams "catching on"..... same could be said for 2017. The Bills receivers were awful at getting separation and being vertical threats in the passing game.... it's why I thought the Watkins trade was so awful. 

No. If something happens on offense it's because of the QB.*

 

*unless it's scoring, or positive in general, then it's because of the RB.

[Bills757]

10 hours ago, The Red King said:

TT repeatedly underthrew receivers on deep routes, or put it in the dirt.  Please explain to me how that is the receiver's fault?  "Man, what the hell were you doing running that fast and getting separation?!?  If you had just run slower and let the defender catch up to you, you'd have been right under the pass!  What's wrong with you?!?"  ?

 

We didn't have a single pass of 50+ yards all season.  Are you going to tell me that our receiving corp was so bad that there was not a single time, in the almost sixteen games he played in, not once was a receiver open for such a play?  I've watched The 22, there were several opportunities for such a play.  TT either never saw the guy open, or made a bad throw.

 

Yes, the receiving corp was part of the problem, but to attribute all, or even most of TT's troubles to them is just ridiculous.

Classic Billsy revisionist history. Carry on. 

[The Red King]

17 minutes ago, Bills757 said:

Classic Billsy revisionist history. Carry on. 

 

Classic deflection by not actually addressing or refuting anything said.  Carry on.

[Soda Popinski]

It's Cleveland, they'll fight tooth and nail to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.   They could have had the best pass rush tandem in the NFL but they went with a corner.  They could have drafted Wentz two years ago but decided he wasn't going to be successful in the NFL.   

 

And we're supposed to be surprised they are mucking this up?   

[auburnbillsbacker]

Tyrod Taylor will likely be a better qb than Mayfield when the season starts in September.  The Browns have talent so they should let Taylor lead them to some victories while Mayfield learns.  If Tyrod keeps them in playoff contention Mayfield should stay in the bench.  

[grb]

12 hours ago, YoloinOhio said:

TT had some good chemistry with Sammy for awhile with the deep ball, but for the most part the WRs he played with performed better before/after they played with him.

 

As has been pointed out many times in the past : If you take all the time Taylor had Watkins and Woods on the same field it only amounts to fifteen games over two years. During those games, this resulted : 63.6% comp. 8.25 ypa. 27 td passes. 6 ints. Now, look only at bulk numbers, and sure : The Bills were 31st in pass attempts in 2015, and 32nd in 2016, and that means less targets. Though even given that, the sum total of touchdown passes is a decent number. Using the sixteen game '17 regular season as an (inexact) yardstick, that would tie for eighth with Kirk Cousins.

 

Also :  For the most part? Watkins definitely had the best season of his career with Taylor. Hogan is mostly a wash, though there was a one-year spike in yardage (if not number of receptions) his first season with the Patriots. There's little difference in Clay's numbers, Miami to Buffalo. Woods went from a number Two receiver to number One (with Watkins the exact opposite). The inversion of Watkins / Woods from Taylor to Goff is an interesting phenomena, but with the winner (Woods) there was a loser (Watkins). The clearest case is of course Goodwin, who blossomed w/ the Niners. 

 

Edited May 15, 2018 by grb

[YoloinOhio]

56 minutes ago, grb said:

 

As has been pointed out many times in the past : If you take all the time Taylor had Watkins and Woods on the same field it only amounts to fifteen games over two years. During those games, this resulted : 63.6% comp. 8.25 ypa. 27 td passes. 6 ints. Now, look only at bulk numbers, and sure : The Bills were 31st in pass attempts in 2015, and 32nd in 2016, and that means less targets. Though even given that, the sum total of touchdown passes is a decent number. Using the sixteen game '17 regular season as an (inexact) yardstick, that would tie for eighth with Kirk Cousins.

 

Also :  For the most part? Watkins definitely had the best season of his career with Taylor. Hogan is mostly a wash, though there was a one-year spike in yardage (if not number of receptions) his first season with the Patriots. There's little difference in Clay's numbers, Miami to Buffalo. Woods went from a number Two receiver to number One (with Watkins the exact opposite). The inversion of Watkins / Woods from Taylor to Goff is an interesting phenomena, but with the winner (Woods) there was a loser (Watkins). The clearest case is of course Goodwin, who blossomed w/ the Niners. 

 

You can also look at Jordan Matthews  and KB, who had higher production before playing with him, not just WRs who left. Watkins also showed frustration with TT, it wasn’t all great. That’s why I said “for the most part” they had chemistry. 

Edited May 15, 2018 by YoloinOhio

[BuffaloHokie13]

1 minute ago, YoloinOhio said:

You can also look at Jordan Matthews  and KB, who had higher production before playing with him, not just WRs who left. Watkins also showed frustration with TT, it wasn’t all great. That’s why I said “for the most part” they had chemistry. 

Matthews came in during preseason and was injured in his first practice. He ended up playing 10 games all year. KB played 5.1 games and was traded mid-season. Not really sure what you were expecting. Do we bring up Deonte? He had a 100 yard game on Sunday after being signed the Tuesday beforehand.

[elroy16]

 

 

Quote

So over the last 7 years, it’s pretty clear that no quarterback embodied the risk-averse style of player quite like Smith. With a ton of sacks, not many interceptions, and a low yards per completion average, Smith was the most conservative passer in football.

But over the last three years, Tyrod Taylor has taken the crown. In fact, Taylor is more Alex Smith than even Alex Smith! 

 

 

 

I'm not going to miss this for a second.