Baker Mayfield
-
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.
-
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.
there is no trying to deflect criticism off Baker
Yes, there is.
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's deflecting criticism, dude.
Try challenging yourself to comprehend what you're typing - or just leave and never post again, as you promised.
Nobody will miss you - except possibly Icecube, but he may ask you out on a date.
The more labels you have for yourself, the dumber they make you. "When you win, say nothing. When you lose, say less." Paul Brown -
Baker still can't read coverages, he's made nearly identical interceptions three times in the four games he's thrown them in this season. He should've accounted for Minkah before staring down the receiver and throwing over the middle, that's a rookie mistake in his 3rd year. Repeated similar mistakes infuriate coaches and get players benched, Stefanski said Baker will start "if he's healthy" which is a caveat to start Case if he decides so.
-
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.
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.
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.
-
there is no trying to deflect criticism off Baker
Yes, there is.
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's deflecting criticism, dude.
Try challenging yourself to comprehend what you're typing - or just leave and never post again, as you promised.
Nobody will miss you - except possibly Icecube, but he may ask you out on a date.
Yes, there is.
That's deflecting criticism, dude.
Try challenging yourself to comprehend what you're typing - or just leave and never post again, as you promised.
Nobody will miss you - except possibly Icecube, but we think he's gay.
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
-
-
Charlie Frye is 6’4”. Give Baker that height and we may have something
You know who was tall? Brandon Weeden
Drew Brees and Russell Wilson are shorter but it doesn't seem to bother them because they know how to maneuver the pocket and find the throwing lanes. Baker needs to be out of the pocket and feels ghosts in the pocket. Since Baker doesn't have the great pocket awareness the others have, being on the short side hurts him.
Brandon Weeden was old enough to retire when we drafted him. Still don't understand that one.
-
I'm gonna agree here... If we get stable qb play today and a stout defense.. we win today.. But the coaching today was exceptionally shitty... So lets not excuse them either... It was a team loss today.. Yeah... Baker sucked... But it was more than him...
It really felt like the Steelers were a step ahead all day. Defensively we had a game plan for what we thought we were going to see, like a bunch of short passes, and seemed prepared early on with some of those getting deflected and almost intercepted, but their offense pulled out more bags of tricks that our defense wasn't ready for. And on offense, the Line looked like they had a rough day, particularly the Tackles. I really think they got exposed today by speed.
It really felt like the Steelers were a step ahead all day.
Yup... I can remember early on wondering if they were in our huddle...
"When you have a shared vision it is a lot easier to make unpopular decisions." - Paul DePodesta "When you win, say nothing. When you lose, say less." - Paul Brown Complete 2017 Browns Board Mock: http://thebrownsboard.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=46196 -
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?
I really enjoy your wit...
... when it's not pointed at me.
"When you have a shared vision it is a lot easier to make unpopular decisions." - Paul DePodesta "When you win, say nothing. When you lose, say less." - Paul Brown Complete 2017 Browns Board Mock: http://thebrownsboard.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=46196 -
Didn't Rodgers sit the bench for his first three seasons in the NFL?
I really enjoy your wit...
... when it's not pointed at me.
I really enjoy your wit...
... when it's not pointed at me.
Oh, I can't pass that up. Been saving this all afternoon and evening so people could see that slowpoke we could have had instead of Coleman @#15 or Ogbah @ #32. ?
This was the best game of the day with Henry punching it in from the Wild-cat in OT for the win.
-
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.
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.
I prefer to think of it as our OFFENSE as a whole has struggled vs top defenses. However, Baker had a very bad game today.
But he played with bruised ribs, a star? ROG out, his main best rb in the NFL ? out, his top two wr's out. "past three years" doesn't tell much, since kitchen's offense was junk - and his play calling was worse. Opposing defenses were telling the Browns players that they KNEW what play they were going to run most of the time.
That isn't on Baker. The defense has major injuries - this year, the offense rocks, it's brilliant. But they couldn't block vs the squealers blitzes. I personally lament running on first down nearly every time except a few times, one of them just before the half, I think. Then they had to throw on 3rd and long, etc.
It isn't all on Baker. I could tell Baker didn't have zip on his passes, that figures. Once they fell behind, they had to start throwing more, and Baker couldn't get it done often.
Every other team has lost to the squealers. Let's see how the Browns come back the next four games.
-
It really felt like the Steelers were a step ahead all day.
Yup... I can remember early on wondering if they were in our huddle...
Yup... I can remember early on wondering if they were in our huddle...
I don't like to write too much after a bad loss, it's better when I have some time to process. I honestly don't know many QBs that could've done jack shit out there, but I don't like how we didn't show up basically across the board. The defense made a small effort in the first half, but it was pointless. Baker had no time to throw and even when he did his first read was almost never open.
People can say that we're 4-2 all they want but it doesn't feel that way right now and we've got a feisty Bengals team coming up that can sure as shit beat our asses it we don't get prepared and play better team ball. Teams are now sitting on the play-action boots and making us pay for our predictable play fakes. (past two weeks)
It might be one game, but Browns were once again humiliated in Pittsburgh and again look like the little brother who hasn't yet hit puberty. It was really bad, and perhaps worst of all, our QB further injured himself and gave the trolls more ammunition.
-
Yes, there is.
That's deflecting criticism, dude.
Try challenging yourself to comprehend what you're typing - or just leave and never post again, as you promised.
Nobody will miss you - except possibly Icecube, but we think he's gay.
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 that isn't. At least to me
All your points are invalid because your points don't address what I double-secret-this-time-swear-intended to say but still haven't. Got it!
Socrates couldn't debate while drinking hemlock, therefore clearly Baker Mayfield is a great quarterback when the moon is in retrograde and I'll leave this forum if anyone debates me on this while holding a left-handed smokeshifter!
The more labels you have for yourself, the dumber they make you. "When you win, say nothing. When you lose, say less." Paul Brown
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