Baker Mayfield
-
What was your pre draft assessment on the two MVP's drafted recently Mahomes, and Lamar Jackson?
I know this forum didn't like the idea of taking Kyler Murray at #17 if he was available, which he wasn't, because there is nobody worth their football salt, possessing any decent insight into the game that would let him slide that far down the board.
Didn't watch enough of Mahomes to make an assessment, but early going felt he might be a turnover machine with how he panicked under pressure.
Assessment on Lamar? Special athlete, so-so QB.
Didn't watch enough of Mahomes to make an assessment, but early going felt he might be a turnover machine with how he panicked under pressure.
Assessment on Lamar? Special athlete, so-so QB.
I’d say Lamar is definitely a special athlete but he is a below average QB. He won’t last. As soon as he can’t escape, he will be done
"And they don't really know even what they're talkin' about And I can't imagine what empty heads can achieve." -
Jesus... been a while since I’ve seen this much bitching from grown ass men... They lost a fucking game and are 4-2 with Cincy coming up next week. I feel like some of you haven’t been around/forgot what this shitshow usually looks like this time of year.
The quicker you accept the fact that Baker is the QB in Cleveland for the foreseeable future the better off your going to be. This is the NFL. You either draft a QB or you don’t get one until they are old and flamed out. And no... Case Keenum isn’t better. The guy’s been on 7 nfl teams since 2012. Oh ya... and he is 6’1”
You know who was tall? Brandon Weeden. Ya let’s draft him again in the mid first round... or Brady Quinn! Great idea.
If Baker continues this play he won’t be here in the foreseeable future
The people in charge have no loyalty to him at all
The people in charge have no loyalty to him at all
This is absolutely true.
And after this season Mayfield will be 60% done with his rookie deal. Some hard questions will be asked in Berea regarding if Baker is the guy the current regime wants to build around long term.
-
Didn't watch enough of Mahomes to make an assessment, but early going felt he might be a turnover machine with how he panicked under pressure.
Assessment on Lamar? Special athlete, so-so QB.
I’d say Lamar is definitely a special athlete but he is a below average QB. He won’t last. As soon as he can’t escape, he will be done
I’d say Lamar is definitely a special athlete but he is a below average QB. He won’t last. As soon as he can’t escape, he will be done
I was speaking of my pre-draft assessment on him.
Still stands. He struggles beating man coverage when he has to come off his primary and throw outside the numbers. He'll rack up playoff losses over and over unless they face a team the Ravens can run all over.
-
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.
-
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.
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.
Then this entire post was pointless.
-
I’d say Lamar is definitely a special athlete but he is a below average QB. He won’t last. As soon as he can’t escape, he will be done
I was speaking of my pre-draft assessment on him.
Still stands. He struggles beating man coverage when he has to come off his primary and throw outside the numbers. He'll rack up playoff losses over and over unless they face a team the Ravens can run all over.
I was speaking of my pre-draft assessment on him.
Still stands. He struggles beating man coverage when he has to come off his primary and throw outside the numbers. He'll rack up playoff losses over and over unless they face a team the Ravens can run all over.
You are correct
Playoff teams usually don’t get run all over
And the ratbirds will most likely be in the playoffs every year getting 4-6 wins every year in division
-
Aaron Rodgers had a HOF resume after 3 years
Baker will be lucky to get a contract extension from the team that drafted him
"And they don't really know even what they're talkin' about And I can't imagine what empty heads can achieve." -
Yes, Russell Wilson and Drew Breese are both shorter QB’s
But they both got better in year 2 and 3
Baker has gotten worse in year 2 and 3
-
Aaron Rodgers had a HOF resume after 3 years
Baker will be lucky to get a contract extension from the team that drafted him
Aaron Rodgers had a HOF resume after 3 years
Baker will be lucky to get a contract extension from the team that drafted him
Didn't Rodgers sit the bench for his first three seasons in the NFL?
-
Aaron Rodgers had a HOF resume after 3 years
Baker will be lucky to get a contract extension from the team that drafted him
Didn't Rodgers sit the bench for his first three seasons in the NFL?
Didn't Rodgers sit the bench for his first three seasons in the NFL?
After he started playing he had a hall of fame resume in 3 years. As did Russell Wilson who started week 1
-
Baker is way closer to flaming out of the league then he is to taking a team to a divisional title
-
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.
Then this entire post was pointless.
Then this entire post was pointless.
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?
-
Aaron Rodgers had a HOF resume after 3 years
Baker will be lucky to get a contract extension from the team that drafted him
Aaron Rodgers had a HOF resume after 3 years
Baker will be lucky to get a contract extension from the team that drafted him
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.
-
Aaron Rodgers had a HOF resume after 3 years
Baker will be lucky to get a contract extension from the team that drafted him
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.
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.
He wasn’t the starter those years.
After he was the starter, he won an MVP award and won the superbowl in his first 3 years as a starterDo you really think Baker is going to do that in his 3rd year starting?
-
Then this entire post was pointless.
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?
No its not. You obviously missed the ENTIRE point, and you are one that I actually respect their opinions.
I did not miss anything.
Baker isn't Rogers, you said so yourself. You're right, a single poor statistical day doesn't prove anything. This has been a (going on) 3 year trend with Baker now.
-
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.
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.
This is a wildly stupid false dichotomy strawman. If you think aaron rodgers sucks, good for you - that has ZERO relevance to Baker. It also asserts that the discussion is only about "one game" - which it isn't.
It does, however, threadjack and deflect criticism away from Baker. Is that your objective?
You obviously missed the ENTIRE point,
I'll play this game: You obviously missed the ENTIRE point of this thread.. Baker Mayfield - you know, the subject of the thread.
Does that mean Rodgers is terrible? Obviously not.
So what? Zero anything about Rodgers means anything about Baker.
But nowhere in there did I say Baker was the answer, etc.
I'm glad we agree. Next time, seriously, try just typing your actual point and moving on. This entire mental journey down Aaron Rodgers Cul-de-sac is a waste of time.
The more labels you have for yourself, the dumber they make you. "When you win, say nothing. When you lose, say less." Paul Brown -
No its not. You obviously missed the ENTIRE point, and you are one that I actually respect their opinions.
I did not miss anything.
Baker isn't Rogers, you said so yourself. You're right, a single poor statistical day doesn't prove anything. This has been a (going on) 3 year trend with Baker now.
I did not miss anything.
Baker isn't Rogers, you said so yourself. You're right, a single poor statistical day doesn't prove anything. This has been a (going on) 3 year trend with Baker now.
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.
-
I'm not sure why you all are frying mayfield. He wasn't good today but his ribs are also fucked up and he's already on his second coach since being drafted. It's going to take time and if the Browns reset again it's going to take even longer. Is he worth his draft position? no, is he a bad qb? I don't think he is and he has the confidence to bounce back. The AFC north is a really tough division. You gotta give that guy some credit for trotting out there today, he was hurting.
AKA SNATCH98 or Rorbotron. The boards glorious admins decided to get cute and change my name to "homotron" Classy group of people. (Lost a bet with Columbus king and got banned for a month) -
I did not miss anything.
Baker isn't Rogers, you said so yourself. You're right, a single poor statistical day doesn't prove anything. This has been a (going on) 3 year trend with Baker now.
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.
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.
I'm not saying all of your post is incorrect - it isn't.
But the selected part above is. Baker struggles against quality defenses, has for 3 years now. And he plays in an offense designed to mask his deficiencies as a QB. It's been very obvious from the start of the season.
-
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.
This is a wildly stupid false dichotomy strawman. If you think aaron rodgers sucks, good for you - that has ZERO relevance to Baker. It also asserts that the discussion is only about "one game" - which it isn't.
It does, however, threadjack and deflect criticism away from Baker. Is that your objective?
You obviously missed the ENTIRE point,
I'll play this game: You obviously missed the ENTIRE point of this thread.. Baker Mayfield - you know, the subject of the thread.
Does that mean Rodgers is terrible? Obviously not.
So what? Zero anything about Rodgers means anything about Baker.
But nowhere in there did I say Baker was the answer, etc.
I'm glad we agree. Next time, seriously, try just typing your actual point and moving on. This entire mental journey down Aaron Rodgers Cul-de-sac is a waste of time.
This is a wildly stupid false dichotomy strawman. If you think aaron rodgers sucks, good for you - that has ZERO relevance to Baker. It also asserts that the discussion is only about "one game" - which it isn't.
It does, however, threadjack and deflect criticism away from Baker. Is that your objective?
I'll play this game: You obviously missed the ENTIRE point of this thread.. Baker Mayfield - you know, the subject of the thread.
So what? Zero anything about Rodgers means anything about Baker.
I'm glad we agree. Next time, seriously, try just typing your actual point and moving on. This entire mental journey down Aaron Rodgers Cul-de-sac is a waste of time.
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.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login