The Official QB Thread- JD5 taken #2. Randall 2.0 or Bayou Bob? Mariotta and Hartman forever. Fromm cut

[MisterPinstripe]

28 minutes ago, mistertim said:

 

I wonder if this play by the Browns to not only trade a king's ransom for Watson without his status to play due to all these allegations and legal cases, but also to fully guarantee his $230 million contract, may go down as the single worst decision by a football team in NFL history. 

I feel like we get trashed in the national media more for the Wentz move than the Browns do for Watson. 

[NickyJ]

29 minutes ago, MisterPinstripe said:

I feel like we get trashed in the national media more for the Wentz move than the Browns do for Watson. 

I can't stand Florio, but every once in a while I read his articles to see what the brain dead are occupying themselves with and came across this article:

 

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2022/06/30/heres-a-proposed-deal-to-resolve-the-deshaun-watson-case/
 

Quote

Technically, Watson wasn’t on paid leave in 2021. The league never had to decide whether to invoke the Commissioner Exempt list, because he was on de facto paid leave; he didn’t want to play for the Texans and the Texans didn’t want him playing. He received $10 million from the Texans to not play.

 

Now for the idea. The NFL and the NFL Players Association, acting on Watson’s behalf, could agree that 2021 will be treated as a suspension, with Watson losing the $10 million he was paid. Also, he’ll miss eight games to start the 2022 season.

 

He missed all of 2021. That should count for something. Moreover, this approach would give the league a way to create the impression that it imposed significant punishment on Watson: 25 total games, without pay.

....

Although Watson’s absence in 2021 didn’t technically relate to the off-field issues, he surely would have been traded but for the allegations made against him. If he’s willing to give up the $10 million he made in 2021, why shouldn’t 2021 be treated as part of the final punishment?

I think very poorly of Florio on every day of the week, but I'm floored that he's campaigning for a way to let a creep avoid serving a penalty by trying to "create an impression" that the guy served a penalty.

 

I get that he makes his bucks on opinions more than reporting, but it's a new low to me that his opinion is that the league should lie to the people he's selling his opinion to.

Edited July 1, 2022 by NickyJ

[Skinsinparadise]

I commented before about how insane the Browns looked with the they want an "adult" at QB and then giving up the moon for Watson.

 

Seems like the Browns are walking into bad karma.  

53 minutes ago, MisterPinstripe said:

I feel like we get trashed in the national media more for the Wentz move than the Browns do for Watson. 

 

Not sure about that.  Browns have taken a mega PR hit really from the jump.

 

But we are definitely runners up.

 

Imagine if we traded for Watson considering how things have gotten even uglier for Dan since that time.  The PR hit would be beyond insane.

 

Sheehan among others liked to say go for Watson because they can absorb the PR hit considering things were already bad.  The thing is even if that's true, having 200 million plus is guaranteed money down the tubes would cripple any franchise.  

[mistertim]

I was very against going after Watson and I'm SO glad that it sounds like we weren't even considering it.

 

If Watson gets a long suspension I wonder what a first meeting with Mayfield will be like afterwards. Would they beg him to consider coming back? I have a feeling that bridge is already burned. They might have to trade for Jimmy G or go into the season with Brissett as their QB.

[Always A Commander Never A Captain]

6 minutes ago, mistertim said:

I was very against going after Watson and I'm SO glad that it sounds like we weren't even considering it.

 

If Watson gets a long suspension I wonder what a first meeting with Mayfield will be like afterwards. Would they beg him to consider coming back? I have a feeling that bridge is already burned. They might have to trade for Jimmy G or go into the season with Brissett as their QB.

 

That bridge is burned.

 

It's a little unclear, but the impression I got meant there was a clear falling out and Mayfield isn't welcome at team facilities anymore. He was told to stay home instead of attending OTA's, although I believe he was going to stay home anyways.

Angry divorce where Browns want to pretend he doesn't exist. Baker has heard nothing from anyone in the Browns organization besides we don't want you and stay away.

 

Personally, I think the Browns kind of ruined him, he shouldn't have played through those injuries and there's a risk he's washed already because of it. But it's also clear the Browns took the low road multiple times through this process. They just seem like a petty and spiteful organization. To the point where I wonder if Dan Snyder and Bruce Allen have been giving them tips.

[skinny21]

Is it just me or does Mayfield to Seattle make a good deal of sense?  

[NickyJ]

2 minutes ago, skinny21 said:

Is it just me or does Mayfield to Seattle make a good deal of sense?  

If Seattle is in it to win it now, yes. I haven't kept track of their offseason moves though, so it wouldn't shock me if they use a Drew Lock reclamation project as an excuse to tank and hope the draft has something better to offer. I've generally had a positive opinion of Mayfield's play, but I haven't liked his attitude (not considering the Watson situation, that's burned bridges all around). Russell Wilson was a bit of a diva in my opinion, so I'd be reluctant to pick up another diva in his place.

[Voice_of_Reason]

2 hours ago, mistertim said:

I wonder if this play by the Browns to not only trade a king's ransom for Watson without his status to play due to all these allegations and legal cases, but also to fully guarantee his $230 million contract, may go down as the single worst decision by a football team in NFL history. 

I'm not sure what other football team decisions would come even remotely close.

 

There are some bad transactions out there, off the top of my head:

- Ryan Leaf trade

- Jamarcus Russel #1 overall

- AH contract

...

 

The question will be, what is the end result with Watson.  If he NEVER plays for the Browns, it might go down as one of the top 10 bad BUSINESS decisions of all time, right up there with the Arch Deluxe and New Coke.  (If you don't remember those debacles, go look them up.)  

 

If he's suspended for a year then comes back and balls out?  Eh, is it the worst decision of all time? Depends on the results, I suppose.

 

If he's suspended and then comes back and sucks?  Pretty bad.  

 

 

[MrJL]

I knew the Archdeluxe failed, didn't  realize it was a debacle

[Voice_of_Reason]

23 minutes ago, skinny21 said:

Is it just me or does Mayfield to Seattle make a good deal of sense?  

Well, they would have to clear a bit (not much, but probably about $5-7m of cap space to sign him.  They have ~$16m of cap space available, and Mayfield costs $18m against the cap.  And you always need a few million for in-season transactions.  

 

So, the question is, what would the seahawks be willing to give up to get Mayfield in a rebuilding year on a 1 year rental, and pay him $18m?

 

Carolina makes more sense, they have more room, and maybe a better team.  They do have Corral there, so maybe he is the starter this year over Darnold.  But if they wanted to have a more competent QB than Darnold while Corral learns, Mayfield could fit the bill.

 

The thing is, Baker is on a 1 year deal.  Why would you trade for him for 1 year? If you're Seattle, you only do that if you believe you're going to build around him and extend him.

 

Baker is in a position where he is getting his $18m.  The Browns were stupid.  Now they're stuck.  Trading for a 1 year rental second-tier QB with an $18m cap number is bad.  Because you immediately have to extend him, or if you wait until the end of the season, he has leverage of FA or Franchise Tag.  

11 minutes ago, MrJL said:

I knew the Archdeluxe failed, didn't  realize it was a debacle

It was like a Billion dollar mistake for McDonald's at the time when a Billion dollars was real money.  

[skinny21]

47 minutes ago, NickyJ said:

If Seattle is in it to win it now, yes. I haven't kept track of their offseason moves though, so it wouldn't shock me if they use a Drew Lock reclamation project as an excuse to tank and hope the draft has something better to offer. I've generally had a positive opinion of Mayfield's play, but I haven't liked his attitude (not considering the Watson situation, that's burned bridges all around). Russell Wilson was a bit of a diva in my opinion, so I'd be reluctant to pick up another diva in his place.

Interesting.  I don’t follow the rest of the league much really, so wasn’t aware of issues of that nature with Mayfield (beyond normal qb diva stuff).  

And yeah, tanking, along with the additional 1st rounder they have for 2023 (to potentially go after a rookie qb) were the big arguments that go against the move for me.  If they want some respectable qb play for this year (and possibly beyond) though….

24 minutes ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

Well, they would have to clear a bit (not much, but probably about $5-7m of cap space to sign him.  They have ~$16m of cap space available, and Mayfield costs $18m against the cap.  And you always need a few million for in-season transactions.  

 

So, the question is, what would the seahawks be willing to give up to get Mayfield in a rebuilding year on a 1 year rental, and pay him $18m?

 

Carolina makes more sense, they have more room, and maybe a better team.  They do have Corral there, so maybe he is the starter this year over Darnold.  But if they wanted to have a more competent QB than Darnold while Corral learns, Mayfield could fit the bill.

 

The thing is, Baker is on a 1 year deal.  Why would you trade for him for 1 year? If you're Seattle, you only do that if you believe you're going to build around him and extend him.

 

Baker is in a position where he is getting his $18m.  The Browns were stupid.  Now they're stuck.  Trading for a 1 year rental second-tier QB with an $18m cap number is bad.  Because you immediately have to extend him, or if you wait until the end of the season, he has leverage of FA or Franchise Tag.  

It was like a Billion dollar mistake for McDonald's at the time when a Billion dollars was real money.  

On one hand, I’d assume any trade would include some sort of extension.  On the other hand, given where things stand now, the trade compensation could be quite cheap and so a team may feel alright paying out the 18mil and re-evaluating next year.  Maybe not all that dissimilar to us with Wentz.  Obviously Wentz has the additional 2 years, but my hunch is that his contract changes if the team keeps him past this year.

 

I see/agree with your point about Mayfield as the bridge to a rookie such as in Carolina (Atlanta is another spot - they have Trubisky, but personally that wouldn’t stop me considering Mayfield).  Of course, he could serve the same role in Seattle - if they land a qb next year and they extend Mayfield.  

Bottom line though, is what’s the angle here with Carroll serving this last year?  Almost seems like his job is to lead a season of tanking, take the heat for the poor season (as opposed to a new coach starting off that way), and then they bring in new coach/qb together.  Little surprising from an ego standpoint IMO, but it does make some sense I think 🤷‍♂️

 

So strange the Browns seem to be almost intentionally driving down Mayfield’s worth…

[Chris 44]

1 hour ago, MrJL said:

I knew the Archdeluxe failed, didn't  realize it was a debacle

Personally I always liked the McDLT.   Cool veggies and cheese on one side, hot burger on the other.  Guess I may have been the only one that liked it.

[FootballZombie]

Any team that acquires Mayfield probably will not be stuck with his 18Mil number.

 

The prevailing idea I have seen is that Clev would be expected to eat north of half of his contract to move him, and that idea has been around well before the draft. I figure it ends up more like when we got Keenum, and the Broncos ate a lot of his money and we ended up with the QB that cost us like 3.5 Mil.

 

Whatever team Baker goes to probably wont be shilling out that current 18 Mil hit.

Edited July 1, 2022 by FootballZombie

[Conn]

5 hours ago, mistertim said:

 

I wonder if this play by the Browns to not only trade a king's ransom for Watson without his status to play due to all these allegations and legal cases, but also to fully guarantee his $230 million contract, may go down as the single worst decision by a football team in NFL history. 

I hope so. It would restore a teeny tiny bit of my faith in humanity. 

Edited July 1, 2022 by Conn

[Voice_of_Reason]

5 hours ago, skinny21 said:

 Maybe not all that dissimilar to us with Wentz.  Obviously Wentz has the additional 2 years, but my hunch is that his contract changes if the team keeps him past this year.

The 2 extra years is what makes it entirely dissimilar to Wentz.  If he balls out next year, you don't HAVE to do anything.  You can just sit there and pay him his salary for 2023.

 

No matter what, you HAVE to do something with Baker at the end of the season.  If you've just traded for him, let's say he plays at a "15th ranked QB" level.  Well, guess what that looks like?  KIRK COUSINS in 2015.  Now you've got to figure out how to sign the guy, or he bolts for FA and you end up with nothing.  Or you play the franchise tag game.

 

The 2 years is what make the situations night and day.  

5 hours ago, skinny21 said:

Atlanta is another spot - they have Trubisky, but personally that wouldn’t stop me considering Mayfield).

Just for knowing, Trubs is in Pittsburgh.  Mariota is in Atlanta.  

5 hours ago, skinny21 said:

Bottom line though, is what’s the angle here with Carroll serving this last year?  

The FO desperately wanted him to retire and he didn't, so now they're punishing him.  

4 hours ago, Chris 44 said:

Personally I always liked the McDLT.   Cool veggies and cheese on one side, hot burger on the other.  Guess I may have been the only one that liked it.

Given that it cost McDonalds over a billion dollars, I'd hazard to say you were literally the only one who liked it.

 

They had the iconic quarter pounder with cheese, the regular cheeseburger, and the Big Mac.  When you have perfection and screw with it, you get zapped.  They got zapped.  

[Voice_of_Reason]

4 hours ago, FootballZombie said:

Any team that acquires Mayfield probably will not be stuck with his 18Mil number.

 

The prevailing idea I have seen is that Clev would be expected to eat north of half of his contract to move him, and that idea has been around well before the draft. I figure it ends up more like when we got Keenum, and the Broncos ate a lot of his money and we ended up with the QB that cost us like 3.5 Mil.

 

Whatever team Baker goes to probably wont be shilling out that current 18 Mil hit.

I'm not sure you can do that on a 5th year option?  Maybe?  Somebody else would have to look that up. And also, I think it would take a modifiation/restructure of his contract.  And I'm pretty damn sure he'd have to agree to a change to his contract. The reason I say this is technically he only has base salary left.  I don't think you can split base salary between teams, it's paid by the team you're no when you play the game.  So in order for the Browns to pay him half, I think they'd have to convert some of that to a bonus and pay it up-front, and then the receiving team would pay the salary.

 

I think (I"m not going to go back and look) but with Keenum, I think the Broncos mostly did cap accounting for his bonus, and we picked up the remaining base salary.  It's also possible Keenum agreed to some type of restructure because he kindof had to and was getting a chance to start here where he wasn't going to in Denver.  

 

And if I'm Baker, I refuse any contract modification unless it comes with new money and guarantees.  Why would you help the browns out?  

 

Oh, and he HAS to show up. Unless he's told not to.  But there is no way if I was Baker I would help the Browns move him.  Unless it was a perfect situation.  Sit out a year, make the Browns pay you $18m, and then hit FA and make your own choice.  

 

Now, if he REALLY wanted to play for a team, then fine, do it.  Otherwise, I don't think Baker is going to be in the business of helping the Browns.  So I think in his mind, a trade would almost certainly need to include new guaranteed money, or he would not agree to a restructure.  

[FootballZombie]

5 minutes ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

I'm not sure you can do that on a 5th year option?  Maybe?

 

People have reported on the idea that the Browns would eat most of his salary, so someway, somehow, it can be done.

 

https://sportsnaut.com/cleveland-browns-willing-eat-baker-mayfields-salary/

 

7 minutes ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

Oh, and he HAS to show up. Unless he's told not to.  But there is no way if I was Baker I would help the Browns move him.  Unless it was a perfect situation.  Sit out a year, make the Browns pay you $18m, and then hit FA and make your own choice.  

 

As long as the trade destination is a situation he is comfortable with, I don't see him resisting a restructure. He will still get his 18 Mil and probably would feel even better that most of it comes from the browns. Plus he gets a big fat check upfront instead of waiting for gamedays. I don't think he has to be given new money to be persuaded to make it happen either. I certainly don't see him taking a pay cut but moving a bunch of his money to an upfront payment would not take a cent out of his bank account.

 

Now, if the Browns try to trade him somewhere he does not want to go, then I see the obstructionist angle coming into play. He 'aint helping you send him somewhere he does not want to be.

 

 

[CommanderInTheRye]

9 hours ago, Chris 44 said:

Personally I always liked the McDLT.   Cool veggies and cheese on one side, hot burger on the other.  Guess I may have been the only one that liked it.

 

 

Had to double fist ya cause I loved 'em too!

 

You get your hamburger hot and your lettuce, onion and tomato cool and CRISP!

 

 

Edited July 2, 2022 by CommanderInTheRye

[SkinsFTW]

The Mcdlt is from such a long time ago that I was working in Mcds in high school when those were around and I'll be 50 this year.

 

That was such an odd item for Mcds that the one I worked at always ran out of tomatoes so the manager would send me to the grocery store to buy them. I'm glad that they had tomatoes though because I always put them on the McChicken + cheese for my lunch. I couldn't eat the hamburgers when I worked there because I had to smell them being cooked all day.

11 hours ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

 

It was like a Billion dollar mistake for McDonald's at the time when a Billion dollars was real money.  

 

A billion is an exaggeration but since I was living in Japan when all that happened luckily I never tried one of those. Mcds in Japan was the only time I ever saw the food prepared just like the pictures on the menu.

[Voice_of_Reason]

17 hours ago, SkinsFTW said:

A billion is an exaggeration but since I was living in Japan when all that happened luckily I never tried one of those. Mcds in Japan was the only time I ever saw the food prepared just like the pictures on the menu.

I swear I read an article in Newsweek ages ago that said it was a Billion Dollar mistake.  But now I can't find anything more than a $150M marketing plan.  Though that was 1996 dollars.

 

Maybe it was an exaggeration, but I swear somebody added up all of the R&D, material, shipping and advertising costs, and it was $1B.  

 

But since I can't find it, maybe I dreamed it up.  

[Skinsinparadise]

 

 

[Conn]

3 hours ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

I swear I read an article in Newsweek ages ago that said it was a Billion Dollar mistake.  But now I can't find anything more than a $150M marketing plan.  Though that was 1996 dollars.

 

Maybe it was an exaggeration, but I swear somebody added up all of the R&D, material, shipping and advertising costs, and it was $1B.  

 

But since I can't find it, maybe I dreamed it up.  

I read an article yesterday from last year, or maybe 2020, in order to learn what the hell you were talking about with this burger lol. And in that article they mentioned that McDonalds had projected that the new burger could make them a billion dollars. That’s probably what you’re thinking of, it certainly was a number in the story that would stick in the brain. 

[Simmsy]

I spent an hour and a half trying to find my initial post in this thread. I couldn't find it, but it..3 hours and several bowls.

[Simmsy]

3 hours ago, Simmsy said:

I spent an hour and a half trying to find my initial post in this thread. I couldn't find it, but it..3 hours and several bowls.

My initial post was very unhappy with the Wentz signing, was trying to say that I came around.

[skinsmarydu]

11 hours ago, Conn said:

I read an article yesterday from last year, or maybe 2020, in order to learn what the hell you were talking about with this burger lol. And in that article they mentioned that McDonalds had projected that the new burger could make them a billion dollars. That’s probably what you’re thinking of, it certainly was a number in the story that would stick in the brain. 

I was a Hardee's manager back then.  We laughed and laughed...