• Changing RCF's index page, please click on "Forums" to access the forums.

Cleveland Browns 2021 Regular Season: RIP

Do Not Sell My Personal Information
I understand your points. But let's look at it like this:

Mayfield doesn't play like the 15th best QB in 2022, but has another shitty year. Haven't we wasted an entire year because our QB is too mentally fragile to handle competition?

Your scenario has us essentially putting all of our eggs in the 'Mayfield will be more like 2020 than 2021' due to health. I'm not sure why our franchise would be willing to do that. We would look pretty stupid if Baker doesn't play to AT LEAST his 2020 overall performance.

Again, you've been one of the people beating the drum about how Baker looks even worse when you look at how good his line and run game have been. I'm not willing to potentially flush an entire season and not have a capable backup because it might hurt Baker's feelings.

My issue with Mayfield is that he's not good enough for the Browns to win a Super Bowl when he is healthy. Forget about 2021, I don't think 2020 was good enough.

My personal overwhelming preference would be to move on from Baker as quickly as possible.

But at the same time, I'm also coming at this from a realistic place as well. As much as it pains me to say, there are scenarios where this all plays out and Baker does return in 2022. Whether I think he should or shouldn't is ultimately irrelevant.

With that in mind, I want the Browns to have the best record as they can possibly have in 2022. I want them to make the playoffs. If that happens with Baker Mayfield as the starting QB, so be it.

I don't see the benefit of potentially imploding the 2022 season before it even begins.
 
My issue with Mayfield is that he's not good enough for the Browns to win a Super Bowl when he is healthy. Forget about 2021, I don't think 2020 was good enough.

My personal overwhelming preference would be to move on from Baker as quickly as possible.

But at the same time, I'm also coming at this from a realistic place as well. As much as it pains me to say, there are scenarios where this all plays out and Baker does return in 2022. Whether I think he should or shouldn't is ultimately irrelevant.

With that in mind, I want the Browns to have the best record as they can possibly have in 2022. I want them to make the playoffs. If that happens with Baker Mayfield as the starting QB, so be it.

I don't see the benefit of potentially imploding the 2022 season before it even begins.
I agree with the bolded.

Isn't there an equal chance Baker plays like shit again in '22 and the season implodes anyway? This is why I think it's incredibly important to have a competent backup in place. If Baker can't handle that, we get rid of him for many reasons, one of which being the bolded above.
 
WTF does cohesion between the offense and defense mean? Defense focusing on defense and offense focusing on offense is a problem?

Sounds like the real issue is each side of the ball blaming the other for problems. If so, why no hate for special teams?
 
WTF does cohesion between the offense and defense mean? Defense focusing on defense and offense focusing on offense is a problem?

Sounds like the real issue is each side of the ball blaming the other for problems. If so, why no hate for special teams?
My guess is that both sides of the ball being siloed off during practices doesn't help prepare them for in-game situations.

I went to training camp this year and like 90% of the practice the players were working on defensive and offense concepts on their own. Offense on one side, defense on the other, and no kind of actual mixing of the two except for a few team drills which were few and far in between. It doesn't help you in-game when a team like the Chargers decide to counterpunch you with deep seams trailing the posts to draw away any safety help.

Perhaps if they practiced more together they could figure out how to counterpunch each other during the week, remedy their weaknesses, and be generally more prepared for it on Sundays.

But that's just speculation on my part.
 
I agree with the bolded.

Isn't there an equal chance Baker plays like shit again in '22 and the season implodes anyway? This is why I think it's incredibly important to have a competent backup in place. If Baker can't handle that, we get rid of him for many reasons, one of which being the bolded above.

I think your last sentence is CBBI’s point, which I happen to agree with.

I don’t think you can have your cake and eat it too. The decision on Baker has to happen in the offseason.

If you believe in Baker turning it around next season, you have to be willing to gamble and go all in on him. You can’t bring in a potential successor. Because he’s so immature and insecure that it will derail any chances of team success at the first sign of adversity.

While it would behoove the team to have a contingency in place in case Baker flops again, he would immediately take that as a slight and lack of faith in him.

You either ride it out with Baker next season and potentially waste the season or you move on.

The compromise of signing a Trubisky to serve as a backup in case we want to pull the plug on Baker isn’t an option. He has enough gall and allies on the team to nuke the locker room.
 
I think your last sentence is CBBI’s point, which I happen to agree with.

I don’t think you can have your cake and eat it too. The decision on Baker has to happen in the offseason.

If you believe in Baker turning it around next season, you have to be willing to gamble and go all in on him. You can’t bring in a potential successor. Because he’s so immature and insecure that it will derail any chances of team success at the first sign of adversity.

While it would behoove the team to have a contingency in place in case Baker flops again, he would immediately take that as a slight and lack of faith in him.

You either ride it out with Baker next season and potentially waste the season or you move on.

The compromise of signing a Trubisky to serve as a backup in case we want to pull the plug on Baker isn’t an option. He has enough gall and allies on the team to nuke the locker room.
I think CBBI and I agree in part, but not entirely.

His stance is that we can't bring in legit competition because Baker won't handle it well and it'll be a lost season.

My stance is that I don't know that to be the case for certain and if Baker doesn't play well, it's a lost season anyway.

So there's option A:
Don't bring in legit competition, hope Baker's play improves dramatically, and the season isn't a waste. I'd counter and say that if we don't bring in competition and Baker's play doesn't improve dramatically, the season is a waste. This option puts all the eggs in the basket where Baker plays as good or better than 2020.

Then option B:
Bring in legit competition, hope it brings the best out of Baker, and if it doesn't, there's another guy available to hopefully salvage the season. CBBI's counter is the competition will make Baker blow up the locker room and season before it even gets under way.

Both options have merit and there's no telling which way is the right way to go. I suppose I have more confidence that Mayfield plays his best when someone is actively trying to take his job, rather than go with another Keenum-esque placeholder.

Ultimately, I have confidence in AB and KS to make the right decision for this team given the options available.
 
I think bringing in “competition” is usually destructive. There used to be a common idea that there should be a competition in the preseason - fortunately that nonsense is a relic of the past. But having a “competition” in general also makes no sense to me. If you have two #1s you really have no #1s. No team in the salary cap era can afford two average starters (let’s say ranked 13-20) so having a “competition” likely means they either both stink or one is an overpaid reach. People like Trubisky and Mariota and Newton and Winston are highly unlikely to get above 25th if they even do that well. Waste of time and money.

Where it does make sense to me is if we can draft a QB fairly high (say second round) and see if that works, but even then it undermines your #1 and there is a chance the draft pick isn’t good AND you lose your #1.

Either stick with Baker or move on. Bringing in some retread to offer “competition” is high risk and low return IMHO.
 
If we're going to be remaking the WR room, then two QB's competing for the No. 1 spot means they are splitting the reps necessary to develop chemistry with those WR's, and splitting the first team reps.

I'd rather just go all-in with Baker and the new WR's this next year, and if it doesn't work, move on the next season.
 
You guys are messed up. It is the prerogative of the Browns organization to put players on the team who give them the best chance to win the most games. This season proved that having the starting QB get a significant injury can cost the Browns a playoff berth, period. It is their right and their obligation to mitigate from that happening again, 2 years in a row.

You guys think you know Mayfield and I don't think you know shit about how he may or may not react. It is up to Baker how he reacts, and it is up to the management to deal with it one way or the other.

Getting a capable backup does not have to be a "challenge" or a "competition". It's just a team trying to ensure they have the best chance to win, come what may. If Baker has a problem with that and if he tries to divide the team over it then you just sit him and play the other guy. It's just as likely that he'll rise to the occasion and fight to regain his reputation in the league.
 
You guys are messed up. It is the prerogative of the Browns organization to put players on the team who give them the best chance to win the most games. This season proved that having the starting QB get a significant injury can cost the Browns a playoff berth, period. It is their right and their obligation to mitigate from that happening again, 2 years in a row.

You guys think you know Mayfield and I don't think you know shit about how he may or may not react. It is up to Baker how he reacts, and it is up to the management to deal with it one way or the other.

Getting a capable backup does not have to be a "challenge" or a "competition". It's just a team trying to ensure they have the best chance to win, come what may. If Baker has a problem with that and if he tries to divide the team over it then you just sit him and play the other guy. It's just as likely that he'll rise to the occasion and fight to regain his reputation in the league.

The Browns went 2-0 in Keenum’s starts :chuckle:
 
This is from the guy who says Keenum is hot steaming garbage.

He is! That's my point! The Browns had a shitty backup QB who was no threat to Baker's job and when called upon, he won both of his starts.

This idea that the Browns need to bring in someone who can "push" Baker - coming off the year that he had and with his possible impending lame duck contract status - just brings more potential problems than it does benefits IMO.

The Browns don't need a better backup QB. They need better play out of their starting QB for goodness sake.
 
Last edited:
He is! That's my point! The Browns had a shitty backup QB who was no threat to Baker's job and when called upon, he won both of his starts.

This idea that the Browns need to bring in someone who can "push" Baker - coming off the year that he had and with his possible impending lame duck contract status - just brings more potential problems than it does benefits IMO.

The Browns don't need a better backup QB. They need better play out of their starting QB for goodness sake.

I actually think that Mullens might be the better QB at this point than Keenum. I just see zero reasons to keep Keenum.
 

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Video

Episode 3-13: "Backup Bash Brothers"

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Spotify

Episode 3:11: "Clipping Bucks."
Top