@marvin-the-martian said:

I suspect that will take 2 or 3 games, but with Haslam and what is invested...

Yeah, I did not include the 'Haslam Effect'. Mostly because I'm not sure how strong or in which direction that 'wind' is blowing. Nine months ago at the winter meetings he called the Watson thing a Swing And A Miss. So there's some possibility that Haslam would rather just be done with the Watson deal as a failure and move on (to Sanders or Gabriel for this year) while realizing that the organization cannot just cut him at this time because of salary cap issues. On the other hand, Haslam could be injecting that perhaps Watson was stifled by Stefanski's system and will shine in Monken's. It's hard to predict the Haslam Butterfly Effect somtimes. It's like trying to kick a long FG in the swirling winds of the old Candlestick Park.

@orion said:

Monken's view was that he wasn't really all that interested in how he preformed in Stefanski's system but wanted to evaluate him, Sanders, Gabriel etc., in his own system. There are/were those here, including Dutch, that did not think that Watson was a good fit in Stefanski's system. So, Monken has graded them on what he has seen in real life...on the field, in the meeting room, etc.

When Monken was announced as our new, 1st time HC, I said that it was the best thing that could've happened for Watson. Monken is an older 1st time HC. He wants to win games Right Now. He's got no skin in the game regarding how the players were acquired. He's just going to want to play the guys that give him the best chance of winning games right here and now. And I felt that if Watson was a deserving 1st round pick...and supposedly a pretty talented QB, then he should be able to beat out a 5th round pick that so many league GM's didn't want anything to do with. And if he COULDN'T fend off Sanders, then, the Browns Brass that orchestrated the trade were pretty bad talent evaluators.

We have to entertain the possibility that he was just a bad fit with Stefanski's offense...until he demonstrates that he's just not a good QB.

I suspect that will take 2 or 3 games, but with Haslam and what is invested...

@marvin-the-martian said:

It is appropriate to compare Watson then with Watson now

Monken's view was that he wasn't really all that interested in how he preformed in Stefanski's system but wanted to evaluate him, Sanders, Gabriel etc., in his own system. There are/were those here, including Dutch, that did not think that Watson was a good fit in Stefanski's system. So, Monken has graded them on what he has seen in real life...on the field, in the meeting room, etc.

When Monken was announced as our new, 1st time HC, I said that it was the best thing that could've happened for Watson. Monken is an older 1st time HC. He wants to win games Right Now. He's got no skin in the game regarding how the players were acquired. He's just going to want to play the guys that give him the best chance of winning games right here and now. And I felt that if Watson was a deserving 1st round pick...and supposedly a pretty talented QB, then he should be able to beat out a 5th round pick that so many league GM's didn't want anything to do with. And if he COULDN'T fend off Sanders, then, the Browns Brass that orchestrated the trade were pretty bad talent evaluators.

We have to entertain the possibility that he was just a bad fit with Stefanski's offense...until he demonstrates that he's just not a good QB.

@ballpeen said:

To me it doesn't matter either way.

@tinythinker said:

Yeah, that's the coach's logic for it. And even with all of the sucking, he still sees more potential in Watson for now from what he's seen on the field.

Whatever people make of analyzing Monken's choices, most Browns fans already have their opinions of the QB situation whether they want Watson, Sanders, one of the other QBs, or none of the above. This approach is similar to instructors who start the semester with everyone getting an "A", then keeping it there or lowering it based on the the overall performance of each student through the course.

AS a professor, everyone should start with an A. It is appropriate to compare Watson then with Watson now to see if he can approach the ALL Pro Watson. So I am not at all comforted by this

We all know Watson has sucked donkey dick since the trade. It's not exactly a secret.

I look at it as he is in Monken's system now so they should be focusing on how he looks running the current system. Not how he looked running Stefanski's system.

Could Monken really gain a ton more insight from previous film than what he's been seeing this off-season?