• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

National Football League

Page 355 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Where did you get that info on Chubb going #1? Every mock draft I saw, and I looked at a lot, from CBS to BR, to Walter Football, and many more, had them taking at QB at #1, usually Darnold, sometimes Allen, or maybe Barkley. They may have gotten into Mayfield late, that seems obvious, but if there was any indication it was not over another QB, I'd like to know the source.

As to Taylor, Hue Jackson has said that he's without a doubt their starter. But then again, how many coaches have said just that, and changed their mind and acted like nothing was ever said? So I wouldn't be at all surprised if Mayfield isn't starting within a handful of games, though week #1 seems a stretch.

No, I don't know the Browns will start 2-7, that's a hypothetical because they usually suck, or are good at finding ways to lose. So 2-7 seems plausible. But I was giving a hypothetical.

As to the reason to start a rookie being because the fans demand it because the team isn't playing well, I can't imagine any serious coach worth his salary doing that. Imagine if Bill Belicheck made coaching decisions on what fans want. Recall last year after week #1's bad loss to KC some very vocal fans saying Brady should be benched? This is almost exactly what the Browns did last year with DeShone Kizer and after having the lowest QBR through most of the season, he was dumped by the team and I can't see him every starting another NFL game. Now I agree that Mayfield has WAY more potential than Kizer ever did. But it's food for thought.

However, I do agree you have to look at who you actually have on your roster at any given moment, and who can give the best performance now, and into the future, regardless of who that player was. Some teams have found that in vets (Doug Williams, Jim Plunkett), others in surprising rookies or untested players (Russell Wilson, Tom Brady).
 
Here's one source: "Sportingnews:"

http://www.sportingnews.com/nfl/news/nfl-draft-browns-interested-in-pairing-bradley-chubb-with-myles-garrett/dmf22kdgx5ih16ln2hi0i52bv

> "The Browns are exploring the possibility of selecting NC State defensive end Bradley Chubb with the first-overall pick to pair him with last year's top pick — Myles Garrett."

Of course Jackson has to say that Taylor is the starter - Mayfield hasn't even played a preseason game yet. I would think though that Mayfield would have to perform awful - much like Goff did last year in preseason - to not get the starting nod on opening day. Remember it's Cleveland were talking about here.

Your NE analogy with Brady losing last year's opener is nonsensical. After that loss NE didn't lose another road game going 13-3 and onto the SB! Plus this is a team that has gone to the SB 3 out of the last 4 yrs winning twice with the GOAT at the helm. So, don't insult your own intelligence Alpe...you know what I'm talking about. It's the two dozen plus teams that aren't winning, or not winning good enough in the eyes of the owners.

Look at the Vikings: got hammered by the Eagles in the NFC Championship at home. Keenum & Bradford gone. The Bills make the playoffs for the first time in 18 yrs and lose to Jacksonville in the 1st round. Taylor gone. KC loses a close one at home to the Titans (22-21) in the 1st round. Smith gone (with still a yr left on his contract). And he was coming off a season in which he set career-highs in passing yards, touchdowns and passer rating. But see Smith can't get the job done with a 1-4 postseason record and being surrounded with pretty good talent there. And yes, the fans were getting restless in KC screaming for a QB change. The only paradox to this is that SB winning QBs seem to get a free pass when the team isn't winning or advancing very far in the playoffs, e.g, Eli, Flacco, Brees, Big Ben.

https://ftw.usatoday.com/2017/11/nfl-chiefs-bills-alex-smith-patrick-mahomes-andy-reid
 
Nomad said:
Remember it's Cleveland were talking about here.
That's what makes a lot of this a real crap shoot. Though I would think if Mayfield outplays Taylor at all in camp and the preseason, and Jackson believes the OL can protect him at least some, and they can run some, Mayfield will start if not from week 1, pretty close to it. Logic would think that would happen. But with Cleveland? Who knows?

Edit: I won't be surprised if Cleveland tries what the Rams did with Goff, if the team still loses. Sit Mayfield for a while, then play him in lower pressure situations, even if he struggles. Then can Jackson at year's end, and hire someone younger, and more OC/QB savvy, someone like John DeFilippo, maybe Josh McDaniels, or possibly Todd Downing (depending on how he's grown since leaving Oakland). You get the idea. Then again, this is the Browns we're talking about...

I'm much more interested in what happens in Buffalo. Allen needs to develop, and is a wildcard, but he has a fantastic arm, threw great at the Combine, the competition for the job there is questionable, the team is more solid overall, and I think he really fits the city, and franchise. I see some potentially exciting times ahead for the Bills.

Rosen is going to have a tougher time in Arizona, and Darnold may sit all year in NYJ. Same with Jackson in Balt, which isn't a bad thing for him, really.
 
Regarding that SportingNews article saying Browns were considering Chubb at #1 overall, I would not be one bit surprised if the Browns (doing their due diligence) did consider Chubb at #1, but that does not mean it makes good sense to follow through and make Chubb the #1 overall draft pick. I'm not saying the article is bogus. Just that it was extremely unlikely the Browns would make that choice.
 
Alpe d'Huez said:
Nomad said:
Remember it's Cleveland were talking about here.
That's what makes a lot of this a real crap shoot. Though I would think if Mayfield outplays Taylor at all in camp and the preseason, and Jackson believes the OL can protect him at least some, and they can run some, Mayfield will start if not from week 1, pretty close to it. Logic would think that would happen. But with Cleveland? Who knows?

Edit: I won't be surprised if Cleveland tries what the Rams did with Goff, if the team still loses. Sit Mayfield for a while, then play him in lower pressure situations, even if he struggles. Then can Jackson at year's end, and hire someone younger, and more OC/QB savvy, someone like John DeFilippo, maybe Josh McDaniels, or possibly Todd Downing (depending on how he's grown since leaving Oakland). You get the idea. Then again, this is the Browns we're talking about...
The deal with Goff his rookie season was that he was terrible in preseason and entered the regular season as the #3 guy behind Keenum & Sean Mannion! However, Fisher started him in week #11 and he never looked back from that point:

https://deadspin.com/jared-goff-looks-kinda-butt-1786108221

Let's take a look at the QBs drafted #1 OA in the last 20 yrs:

2016 Goff - started week #11
2015 Winston - started season opener
2012 Luck - started season opener
2011 Newton - started season opener
2010 Bradford - started season opener
2009 Stafford - started season opener
2007 Russell - started week #13 (held out in preseason over contract)
2005 Smith - started week #3
2004 E. Manning - started week #11
2003 Palmer - DNP (sat entire rookie season)
2002 David Carr - started season opener
2001 Vick - started week #9
1999 Couch - started week #2
1998 P. Manning - started season opener

Just an opinion Alpe, but going with the trend I would think that if Mayfield performs pretty good in preseason (grasp of the offense, good TD to Int rate, making some plays, etc.) he'd be the starter for the season opener.
 
That's quite possible, I just don't know why, if they were confident enough with that position, that they'd even trade to get Taylor, why not just sign someone off the wire, like one of the Minnesota QBs?

It's guesswork as to how well a rookie QB is going to pan out starting right away, and really needs to be analyzed on a person to person basis, then look at the team. David Carr is a perfect example of someone who was on a terrible team with no OL, and it basically ruined his career, or any potential he had, starting like that. Same with Couch. Similar maybe was Geno Smith, J.P. Losman and Joey Harrington. Other QBs sure could have learned more. Rick Mirer is a curious example, he needed to learn, but it's also been said that the pressure put on him by Dennis Erickson did more damage to his psyche than that. Alex Smith is another guy who struggled early, but went through numerous OCs and coaches at an absurd rate. But there are also other QBs who had real potential, sat for a bit, and it didn't matter at all. JaMarcus Russell but he was a head case. Brady Quinn comes to mind, but you could create a longer list for sure.

One could also argue some of these guys never would have been above a very average starter, no matter how quick they started, or how long they sat. Losman comes to mind, first round pick, sat a bit, didn't matter, never had it. EJ Manuel is another high draft pick that's now and forever will be a backup.

But some searching shows that having a guy sit all season, or more than one season, and pan out, is a rarity. Sure, Aaron Rodgers and Tom Brady did it, both Eli and Rivers I think sat a lot. But the only guy I could come across in recent years that did that was Colin Kaepernick, whose career got derailed for other reasons. So I would think at the very least the top 4 QBs taken in this draft: Mayfield, Darnold, Allen and Rosen will start at some point this coming season. I'm just always cautious of tossing them in there when they are not ready. Then having their confidence damaged if the team sucks. So, whether these guys start at week 1, remains to be seen. I'm just saying with Cleveland I don't trust them as a franchise, and don't have that much faith in Hue Jackson.

So, causation is essentially impossible to prove one way or another here I guess, when the optimum time is to sit and start a QB for the future. Maybe some sabermetric wizard can prove me wrong.

JMDirt - Which Josh were you referring to?
 
Re:

Alpe d'Huez said:
That's quite possible, I just don't know why, if they were confident enough with that position, that they'd even trade to get Taylor, why not just sign someone off the wire, like one of the Minnesota QBs?

It's guesswork as to how well a rookie QB is going to pan out starting right away, and really needs to be analyzed on a person to person basis, then look at the team. David Carr is a perfect example of someone who was on a terrible team with no OL, and it basically ruined his career, or any potential he had, starting like that. Same with Couch. Similar maybe was Geno Smith, J.P. Losman and Joey Harrington. Other QBs sure could have learned more. Rick Mirer is a curious example, he needed to learn, but it's also been said that the pressure put on him by Dennis Erickson did more damage to his psyche than that. Alex Smith is another guy who struggled early, but went through numerous OCs and coaches at an absurd rate. But there are also other QBs who had real potential, sat for a bit, and it didn't matter at all. JaMarcus Russell but he was a head case. Brady Quinn comes to mind, but you could create a longer list for sure.

One could also argue some of these guys never would have been above a very average starter, no matter how quick they started, or how long they sat. Losman comes to mind, first round pick, sat a bit, didn't matter, never had it. EJ Manuel is another high draft pick that's now and forever will be a backup.

But some searching shows that having a guy sit all season, or more than one season, and pan out, is a rarity. Sure, Aaron Rodgers and Tom Brady did it, both Eli and Rivers I think sat a lot. But the only guy I could come across in recent years that did that was Colin Kaepernick, whose career got derailed for other reasons. So I would think at the very least the top 4 QBs taken in this draft: Mayfield, Darnold, Allen and Rosen will start at some point this coming season. I'm just always cautious of tossing them in there when they are not ready. Then having their confidence damaged if the team sucks. So, whether these guys start at week 1, remains to be seen. I'm just saying with Cleveland I don't trust them as a franchise, and don't have that much faith in Hue Jackson.

So, causation is essentially impossible to prove one way or another here I guess, when the optimum time is to sit and start a QB for the future. Maybe some sabermetric wizard can prove me wrong.

JMDirt - Which Josh were you referring to?
"Edit: I won't be surprised if Cleveland tries what the Rams did with Goff, if the team still loses. Sit Mayfield for a while, then play him in lower pressure situations, even if he struggles. Then can Jackson at year's end, and hire someone younger, and more OC/QB savvy, someone like John DeFilippo, maybe Josh McDaniels, or possibly Todd Downing (depending on how he's grown since leaving Oakland). You get the idea. Then again, this is the Browns we're talking about..."
:lol:
 
Ha! I thought you were referring to Josh Allen or Josh Rosen!

I think it's pretty likely McDaniels is waiting for Belicheck to hand him the keys to the kingdom. However, I don't know how long he's really going to sit around and wait for that. Also, let's just pretend that in 2020 both Brady and Belicheck call it quits, just how good are the Pats going to be in 2021? Is that really the team McDaniels wants to coach?

Presuming the Eagles play at all well again, especially on offense, DeFilippo will be hot property to coach a team with a young QB. If Cleveland finishes something like 5-11 (very possible), I could see them canning Jackson to get him. Wait, this is Cleveland we're talking about, so who knows what they really do.

Interesting article on CBS how the Bills could get the most out of Josh Allen, and a critique of him:

My concerns with Allen are as follows:

• Lack of consistent accuracy
• Habitually leaving the pocket at the first sign of pressure
• Tendency to "overextend" plays while improvising, frequently throwing off-balance into precarious situations

I don't think the first two elements of Allen's game can be "coached out of him" at the level NFL. The last element could be, but it won't be easy and would likely eliminate some of the positive plays he makes outside the pocket due to his impressive athleticism and otherworldly arm.
The first one was actually coached out of Aaron Rodgers for the most part. Then again, he sat nearly three seasons, only seeing some garbage time. Trying hard to think of someone who really improved their accuracy and eliminated wild throws over time.

The second one was never coached out of Colin Kaepernick or Robert Griffin. And coaches tried hard to do it. I'm struggling to think of a QB that was able to do this. Donovan McNabb maybe? He ran more when young, and later turned that into a skill of extending plays without taking off to much, or wildly escaping the pocket the way Kaep did. Andrew Luck used to take off some, and I imagine he will run a lot less now, but he always was capable of sitting in the pocket. Steve Young was a lot like that too. Anyone else? Not many.
For Allen to lead a successful team in western New York for the next decade, the Bills should not waste time and energy trying to fix his faults but -- ready? -- fully embrace them while highlighting his strengths, most namely his rocket arm and athletic talents at 6-foot-5 and nearly 240 pounds. Essentially, Buffalo needs to be content with a boom-or-bust passing attack.

Bills GM Brandon Beane and head coach Sean McDermott were both in Carolina when the Panthers did exactly that with Cam Newton.
I actually don't think this is a bad idea. But he could also actually turn into a more mobile version of Jay Cutler in that process. Jay actually may be more accurate. Is that bad? Good?

I think it may be easier to get a young QB to learn to pull the trigger after 2-3 reads than expect him to see the field the way someone like Tom Brady does, or analyze lanes and throw darts into tight coverage (Mayfield may make a career of this). I could see Allen being pushed by coaches into quick reads, having a parameter for when to risk the throw (man coverage, mismatches, zones, etc), then taking off if it doesn't work. Then, if hit too often, start tossing the ball away more. But if they are successful at stretching the field, and he's definitely got the arm to do it, just a few on-the-money bombs could scare teams enough to really open things up for their offense to where such a boom-or-bust passing attack to win games. I mean, when you have an arm like he does, and some of his deep, deep out passes at the Combine were right on the money, you have to think the Bills will try to make the best of this.

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/news/heres-a-plan-for-the-bills-to-get-the-most-out-of-josh-allen-and-it-involves-cam-newton/
 
Seattle released DE Clif Avril under a failed physical (injury) designation. Here is a really good explanation of what the injury designation means to the player, team CAP space, and how the CAP is calculated in this scenario: https://www.fieldgulls.com/2018/5/5...ahawks-article-45-cba-weekly-payments-aboushi

Big Ben dismayed by the Steelers 3rd round selection of QB Mason Rudolf, and says he will not mentor Rudolf (will just "point to the playbook if asked a question by Rudolf"). Now, I understand being dismayed because a 3rd round pick could be used on another position to help the team now (whereas Rudolf will only backup if he makes the roster). But teams have a right and responsibility to look to the future too. To not be willing to mentor is acting like a child. Little Ben. http://bleacherreport.com/articles/...steelers-drafted-mason-rudolph-wont-mentor-qb
 
on3m@n@rmy said:
Seattle released DE Clif Avril under a failed physical (injury) designation. Here is a really good explanation of what the injury designation means to the player, team CAP space, and how the CAP is calculated in this scenario: https://www.fieldgulls.com/2018/5/5...ahawks-article-45-cba-weekly-payments-aboushi

Big Ben dismayed by the Steelers 3rd round selection of QB Mason Rudolf, and says he will not mentor Rudolf (will just "point to the playbook if asked a question by Rudolf"). Now, I understand being dismayed because a 3rd round pick could be used on another position to help the team now (whereas Rudolf will only backup if he makes the roster). But teams have a right and responsibility to look to the future too. To not be willing to mentor is acting like a child. Little Ben. http://bleacherreport.com/articles/...steelers-drafted-mason-rudolph-wont-mentor-qb

Sounds more like not wanting to face reality for Ben. He hasn't got long until retirement, why would he refuse to help his team ? He was a rookie once.
 
Excellent points. In fact,
Ben was the #11 overall pick in the 2004 draft. Ben started his rookie season as the #3 quarterback behind vets Tommy Maddox and Charlie Batch. When Batch was injured in the preseason, Roethlisberger took over the #2 QB role. Maddox started, and won, the season opener against the Raiders and started versus the Ravens, but after an ineffective outing and third-quarter injury to Maddox, Roethlisberger stepped in for his first NFL action.
Good chances Batch and/or Maddox helped him. Ben ended the 2004 season as offensive rookie of the year.
 
on3m@n@rmy said:
Seattle released DE Clif Avril under a failed physical (injury) designation. Here is a really good explanation of what the injury designation means to the player, team CAP space, and how the CAP is calculated in this scenario: https://www.fieldgulls.com/2018/5/5...ahawks-article-45-cba-weekly-payments-aboushi

Big Ben dismayed by the Steelers 3rd round selection of QB Mason Rudolf, and says he will not mentor Rudolf (will just "point to the playbook if asked a question by Rudolf"). Now, I understand being dismayed because a 3rd round pick could be used on another position to help the team now (whereas Rudolf will only backup if he makes the roster). But teams have a right and responsibility to look to the future too. To not be willing to mentor is acting like a child. Little Ben. http://bleacherreport.com/articles/...steelers-drafted-mason-rudolph-wont-mentor-qb
I've always gotten the feeling that Ben is an arshat. My thought is the same as yours, doesn't he want the team to be successful? Having a prepped and ready QB2 is import, maybe more so for him. I read that Flacco is doing the same to Jackson. I think both guys know that their days are numbered no matter what, and bringing in these young guys doubles the counting.

On that note, I have read that BAL was really impressed with Jackson's first day. Like I posted above, don't be surprised in Jackson is leading the team to a solid season in 18.
 
Re:

Alpe d'Huez said:
That's quite possible, I just don't know why, if they were confident enough with that position, that they'd even trade to get Taylor, why not just sign someone off the wire, like one of the Minnesota QBs?
Cleveland only traded a 3rd round pick for him...nothing special there. And the two Minnesota rejects, Keenum & Bradford, were signed for big time starting QB money with Denver & Arizona.

If the Browns were certain of taking one of the big-4 with either the 1st or at the very least the 4th, then I would think Taylor was acquired soley for a back-up role despite all the rhetoric we're hearing from Jackson. The only two QBs Cleveland had at the time were Stanton and some kid named Joel Stave. Look at it this way; if Taylor is so good & starting material, why did the Bills give him away for a measly 3rd round pick and focus their attention on one of the big 4? You'd think after going to the playoffs for the first time in 18 yrs, Bill's ownership would be doing cartwheels and keep Taylor around for an encore. Lol. Taylor was terrible in that loss to Jacksonville in the WC game; 17/37, 134 yds, 0 TDs, 1 pick & 3 pts offensively (lost 10-3). The harsh reality seems to be with some teams that it's just not good enough to make the playoffs with a veteran QB at the helm anymore (the exception being SB winning QBs).

And the anticipated rookie contract for Mayfield is expected to be around $33 million with a signing bonus of $22 million!!! Similar contracts expected for Darnold, Allen & Chosen Rosen:

http://www.businessinsider.com/2018-nfl-draft-first-round-pick-salaries-baker-mayfield-lamar-jackson-2018-4

All I can say is are you freaking kidding me? A $22 million signing bonus to a guy who's never even thrown a pass yet! So, the owners writing the checks to these guys aren't going to have them sit the bench very long with that kind of dough they're getting.
 
Re: Re:

Nomad said:
Alpe d'Huez said:
That's quite possible, I just don't know why, if they were confident enough with that position, that they'd even trade to get Taylor, why not just sign someone off the wire, like one of the Minnesota QBs?
Cleveland only traded a 3rd round pick for him...nothing special there. And the two Minnesota rejects, Keenum & Bradford, were signed for big time starting QB money with Denver & Arizona.

If the Browns were certain of taking one of the big-4 with either the 1st or at the very least the 4th, then I would think Taylor was acquired soley for a back-up role despite all the rhetoric we're hearing from Jackson. The only two QBs Cleveland had at the time were Stanton and some kid named Joel Stave. Look at it this way; if Taylor is so good & starting material, why did the Bills give him away for a measly 3rd round pick and focus their attention on one of the big 4? You'd think after going to the playoffs for the first time in 18 yrs, Bill's ownership would be doing cartwheels and keep Taylor around for an encore. Lol. Taylor was terrible in that loss to Jacksonville in the WC game; 17/37, 134 yds, 0 TDs, 1 pick & 3 pts offensively (lost 10-3). The harsh reality seems to be with some teams that it's just not good enough to make the playoffs with a veteran QB at the helm anymore (the exception being SB winning QBs).

And the anticipated rookie contract for Mayfield is expected to be around $33 million with a signing bonus of $22 million!!! Similar contracts expected for Darnold, Allen & Chosen Rosen:

http://www.businessinsider.com/2018-nfl-draft-first-round-pick-salaries-baker-mayfield-lamar-jackson-2018-4

All I can say is are you freaking kidding me? A $22 million signing bonus to a guy who's never even thrown a pass yet! So, the owners writing the checks to these guys aren't going to have them sit the bench very long with that kind of dough they're getting.

Yeah they got a good deal for Taylor but at the same time had doubts about him. Not a bad move.
 
They're paying Taylor $16m. Granted, it's a one year deal, and they have liquid cash, but that's not small money. Still, I'll say as I did before, while I don't expect him to start week #1 unless he really impresses, I agree it can't be long until they do play Mayfield, at least if they think they can protect him, and losing doesn't shatter his confidence. Then again, this is the Browns we're talking about. So please don't post here next year selectively quoting me on anything I predict about that organization. :)

Now for a total swing of the pendulum. As to Big Ben, where he's really wrong is if you look at the big picture, the Steelers have been one of the most successful, most stable, most respected organizations in the history of football, if not all sports. They rarely, and I mean rarely make rash decisions at all. This is why they have six Superbowl wins (having been to 8), they have played in, and hosted more AFC Championship games than any other team (16/11) in NFL history, a staggering number really, and won a whopping 23 division titles in the modern era - 48 years, that's nearly a 50% rate, and includes the days when more than 4 teams were in a division. This is also a record. While one could quibble they haven't won a Superbowl since 2011, they are 124–66 under Mike Tomlin. A record almost every coach, and team, in any sport would envy. This is also a very impressive number considering NFL free agency and salary cap rules. I didn't do a full comparison, but I believe the only NFL coach during this time with a better winning percentage is Bill Belicheck, the greatest coach in NFL history, and a team with the best QB in NFL history (Brady, obviously).

I've been following the NFL a long, long time, over four decades actually. One of the things you just never, ever hear, is someone legitimately question the decisions of the front office and coaching staff of the Steelers with any seriousness at all.

The extra irony is that after he retires, if he wished to, the Steelers are a team that would likely help Ben for the rest of his life one way or the other with some form of employment, and the city would embrace him as such. Anyone who has ever been to Pittsburgh immediately understands what I'm talking about here. I'll chalk what he said up to emotion, but what he said was flat out wrong.
 
Re:

Alpe d'Huez said:
They're paying Taylor $16m. Granted, it's a one year deal, and they have liquid cash, but that's not small money. Still, I'll say as I did before, while I don't expect him to start week #1 unless he really impresses, I agree it can't be long until they do play Mayfield, at least if they think they can protect him, and losing doesn't shatter his confidence. Then again, this is the Browns we're talking about. So please don't post here next year selectively quoting me on anything I predict about that organization. :)

Now for a total swing of the pendulum. As to Big Ben, where he's really wrong is if you look at the big picture, the Steelers have been one of the most successful, most stable, most respected organizations in the history of football, if not all sports. They rarely, and I mean rarely make rash decisions at all. This is why they have six Superbowl wins (having been to 8), they have played in, and hosted more AFC Championship games than any other team (16/11) in NFL history, a staggering number really, and won a whopping 23 division titles in the modern era - 48 years, that's nearly a 50% rate, and includes the days when more than 4 teams were in a division. This is also a record. While one could quibble they haven't won a Superbowl since 2011, they are 124–66 under Mike Tomlin. A record almost every coach, and team, in any sport would envy. This is also a very impressive number considering NFL free agency and salary cap rules. I didn't do a full comparison, but I believe the only NFL coach during this time with a better winning percentage is Bill Belicheck, the greatest coach in NFL history, and a team with the best QB in NFL history (Brady, obviously).

I've been following the NFL a long, long time, over four decades actually. One of the things you just never, ever hear, is someone legitimately question the decisions of the front office and coaching staff of the Steelers with any seriousness at all.

The extra irony is that after he retires, if he wished to, the Steelers are a team that would likely help Ben for the rest of his life one way or the other with some form of employment, and the city would embrace him as such. Anyone who has ever been to Pittsburgh immediately understands what I'm talking about here. I'll chalk what he said up to emotion, but what he said was flat out wrong.
RE: CLE/Mayfield: I compare the situation to SEA and Wilson when he came to camp. The obvious difference is that they brought Bridgwater in (he's not the starter from last year). I don't remember anyone suggesting that Wilson would be the man, but... I see Mayfield starting from game one. $16 MIL for a QB2 might be OK in NFL 2018?

Above I am only comparing the situation, but its hard not to compare the size, style and dynamics of the two, but probably not their personalities.
 
Re:

Alpe d'Huez said:
They're paying Taylor $16m. Granted, it's a one year deal, and they have liquid cash, but that's not small money. Still, I'll say as I did before, while I don't expect him to start week #1 unless he really impresses, I agree it can't be long until they do play Mayfield, at least if they think they can protect him, and losing doesn't shatter his confidence. Then again, this is the Browns we're talking about. So please don't post here next year selectively quoting me on anything I predict about that organization. :)

Now for a total swing of the pendulum. As to Big Ben, where he's really wrong is if you look at the big picture, the Steelers have been one of the most successful, most stable, most respected organizations in the history of football, if not all sports. They rarely, and I mean rarely make rash decisions at all. This is why they have six Superbowl wins (having been to 8), they have played in, and hosted more AFC Championship games than any other team (16/11) in NFL history, a staggering number really, and won a whopping 23 division titles in the modern era - 48 years, that's nearly a 50% rate, and includes the days when more than 4 teams were in a division. This is also a record. While one could quibble they haven't won a Superbowl since 2011, they are 124–66 under Mike Tomlin. A record almost every coach, and team, in any sport would envy. This is also a very impressive number considering NFL free agency and salary cap rules. I didn't do a full comparison, but I believe the only NFL coach during this time with a better winning percentage is Bill Belicheck, the greatest coach in NFL history, and a team with the best QB in NFL history (Brady, obviously).

I've been following the NFL a long, long time, over four decades actually. One of the things you just never, ever hear, is someone legitimately question the decisions of the front office and coaching staff of the Steelers with any seriousness at all.

The extra irony is that after he retires, if he wished to, the Steelers are a team that would likely help Ben for the rest of his life one way or the other with some form of employment, and the city would embrace him as such. Anyone who has ever been to Pittsburgh immediately understands what I'm talking about here. I'll chalk what he said up to emotion, but what he said was flat out wrong.


With the impressive numbers/records the Steelers have, this also includes the disastrous decade of the 80's.

I agree with you that Ben is wrong, hopefully it was just emotion talking. Also he was saying he was going to retire not long ago.
 
Re: Re:

Yes, didn't Ben hint at that last year? I'm not looking that up.
jmdirt said:
RE: CLE/Mayfield: I compare the situation to SEA and Wilson when he came to camp. The obvious difference is that they brought Bridgwater in (he's not the starter from last year). I don't remember anyone suggesting that Wilson would be the man, but... I see Mayfield starting from game one. $16 MIL for a QB2 might be OK in NFL 2018?.
It was Matt Flynn who Wilson beat out. But I think that's a good comparison, except Mayfield has to have higher expectations than Wilson did, a higher likelihood of starting right away. The thought in Seattle was that Flynn would start, and at some point, if it panned out, Wilson would take over. But it didn't take long through camp, and the pre-season, for Wilson to get the starting job, and IIRC that pre-season Flynn didn't even play that bad. Wilson was just better.

Bridgewater's rookie year he sat behind...Matt Cassell (or was it Ponder?), who could maybe be compared to Taylor in quality. I'm not looking up how long it took, but it wasn't many games before Bridgewater started. Week 3? Week4? He's now for the NYJ, and that is an interesting situation too. They have McCown, named starter, Bridgewater, and now Darnold, who is pretty green, but has huge potential. I think if the Browns expected their rookie QB to sit for a while behind Taylor, they would have taken Darnold.

The other rookie QBs, it's just a matter of time when Rosen starts in Arizona, whether Bradford gets hurt or not.

I think it's quite possible Josh Allen starts from week 1 in Buffalo. I just don't see him sitting long.

The funny thing in Pittsburgh, Rudolph may never start there, he's really not that much of a threat to Ben's job.
 
Re:

Alpe d'Huez said:
The extra irony is that after he retires, if he wished to, the Steelers are a team that would likely help Ben for the rest of his life one way or the other with some form of employment, and the city would embrace him as such. Anyone who has ever been to Pittsburgh immediately understands what I'm talking about here.

Like these guys?

For some reason, former Pittsburgh Steelers players keep dying at an alarming rate, one that appears to be far higher than that for other NFL teams...

As with all NFL teams that joined the league in its early days -- the Steelers concluded their 75th season earlier this month -- Pittsburgh has lost nearly all of the players from its early teams. Five of the 34 who died since 2000 were in their 80s.

But it is the unusually high number of deaths among players who are relatively young that is uncommon. In 2006, a survey found that nearly one-fifth of the NFL players from the 1970s and 1980s who had died since 2000 were former Steelers.

"I can't explain it," longtime Steelers executive Joe Gordon said Friday. "Maybe it was something in the water."

Despite playing on one of the best NFL teams of all time, both Webster and Gilliam were homeless at times before dying.

Gilliam had cocaine and heroin problems and was once found sleeping in a cardboard box under a bridge in Nashville.

Terry Long, a post-Super Bowl era guard who underwent a dramatic and unusually fast weight gain while in college and the NFL, committed suicide 2 1/2 years ago at age 45 by drinking antifreeze. He tested positive for steroids while playing and once tried earlier to commit suicide by ingesting rat poison.

http://articles.latimes.com/2008/jan/20/sports/sp-steelerdeathdog20
 
Re: Re:

Alpe d'Huez said:
Yes, didn't Ben hint at that last year? I'm not looking that up.
jmdirt said:
RE: CLE/Mayfield: I compare the situation to SEA and Wilson when he came to camp. The obvious difference is that they brought Bridgwater in (he's not the starter from last year). I don't remember anyone suggesting that Wilson would be the man, but... I see Mayfield starting from game one. $16 MIL for a QB2 might be OK in NFL 2018?.
It was Matt Flynn who Wilson beat out. But I think that's a good comparison, except Mayfield has to have higher expectations than Wilson did, a higher likelihood of starting right away. The thought in Seattle was that Flynn would start, and at some point, if it panned out, Wilson would take over. But it didn't take long through camp, and the pre-season, for Wilson to get the starting job, and IIRC that pre-season Flynn didn't even play that bad. Wilson was just better.

Bridgewater's rookie year he sat behind...Matt Cassell (or was it Ponder?), who could maybe be compared to Taylor in quality. I'm not looking up how long it took, but it wasn't many games before Bridgewater started. Week 3? Week4? He's now for the NYJ, and that is an interesting situation too. They have McCown, named starter, Bridgewater, and now Darnold, who is pretty green, but has huge potential. I think if the Browns expected their rookie QB to sit for a while behind Taylor, they would have taken Darnold.

The other rookie QBs, it's just a matter of time when Rosen starts in Arizona, whether Bradford gets hurt or not.

I think it's quite possible Josh Allen starts from week 1 in Buffalo. I just don't see him sitting long.

The funny thing in Pittsburgh, Rudolph may never start there, he's really not that much of a threat to Ben's job.
I was thinking that it was Jackson before Wilson?
 
Re:

Alpe d'Huez said:
They're paying Taylor $16m. Granted, it's a one year deal, and they have liquid cash, but that's not small money. Still, I'll say as I did before, while I don't expect him to start week #1 unless he really impresses, I agree it can't be long until they do play Mayfield, at least if they think they can protect him, and losing doesn't shatter his confidence. Then again, this is the Browns we're talking about. So please don't post here next year selectively quoting me on anything I predict about that organization. :)
No problem...but we'll all look like fools if Cleveland goes 11-5 or something with Mayfield. And that is a lot of $$$ for a player who's probably destined to be a back-up. As I mentioned before, you'd think after going to the playoffs for the first time in 18 yrs, Bill's ownership would be doing cartwheels and keep Taylor around for an encore. But instead they trade him away and trade up in the draft to grab Allen. But it's even more funny with injury-prone Bradford. The Cardinals sign him to a $20m deal with a *$10m* signing bonus and then turn around and trade up to get Chosen Rosen. Lol. And now Wilks says Rosen will compete for the starting job:

https://cardswire.usatoday.com/2018/04/26/steve-wilks-leaves-door-open-for-josh-rosen-to-be-starting-qb/

And unless Darnold really screws it up in preseason, he looks to be the man behind the wheel. From the nydailynews:

"Reduced to simplest terms, the Jets quarterback competition this summer will be Sam Darnold vs. Sam Darnold.

Forget about Josh McCown vs. Teddy Bridgewater vs. the rookie. Gang Green will give the No. 3 overall pick of the 2018 draft every opportunity to be the Week 1 starter without unnecessarily rushing his development."

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/football/jets/jets-sam-darnold-team-week-1-starting-qb-article-1.3968623

And from "coaches say the darndest things" category: Remember last year Bill O'Brien firmly named Tom Savage as the starter at the end of preseason reaffirming that Deshaun Watson wasn't ready and would be the #2 guy. What happened during the season opener? Savage was replaced at halftime with Watson. LOL..Too Funny.
 
Re: Re:

Merckx index said:
Like these guys?
Welcome back Merckx. Yep, well aware of that story. Read the articles, saw the doc on Frontline, saw the movie. I was thinking of Ben in an isolated assumption, yes. I still would imagine they would employ him if that's what he sought, and the city would love him after he retired, even with some of his dark moments. No, I'm not basing that on any objective data. Maybe I'm wrong.

Thoughts on what he had to say about Rudolph? The organization's effort to win? That's the topic at hand, no?
Nomad said:
[No problem...but we'll all look like fools if Cleveland goes 11-5 or something...

And unless Darnold really screws it up in preseason, he looks to be the man behind the wheel..
I'll bet my house the Browns don't go 11-5. I don't care if they bring Otto Graham back to play QB. Not going to happen. Holes in both lines, not much depth, few veterans with experience winning, etc. etc.

As to Darnold, I think that's a real risk if they are just assuming right now he'll start from week 1. He's 20 years old, barely two years out of high school. He has a lot of potential, but just watch film on him, there's a lot of kinks to work out. He has a windup throw that needs work, he often forces the ball, resulting in turnovers. There's just a lot of things he needs work on. Even more than Josh Allen perhaps. Sam didn't throw at the Combine, but Allen did, and he looked superb there. But unlike Allen, he's on a weaker team, without question. Still, it wouldn't surprise me if Darnold, McCown and Bridgewater are all even in camp, and Sam starts from game one or soon after. This is the NFL, and the Jets need some sort of hope for the future.

I said this once before, but it was more about the draft itself. Coaches, owners and fans get blind leading to the draft with QBs. They ignore their limitations, the work they may need, and instead see a player who has never failed in the NFL. What they often don't do is any sort of objective comparison to any other vet that may be around, and just as good or better, and instead roll the dice. They do it with high draft picks, big contracts, and lots of time starting games. Sometimes it works well, sometimes it doesn't. You can list the busts just as well as I can. But they work from the assumption that it will work, it just has to. If you want an example of both here, look at my favorite team, the Raiders. They knew Jim Plunkett could still play when they got him and others wondered if his career was done, and he lead them to two Superbowl wins. They knew Rich Gannon was under utilized as a backup, and he lead them to both a Superbowl, and an MVP season. But they also got giddy about Jamarcus Russell, and you could say the same about Todd Marinovich. But there are examples also where vets were expected to play better than they did. We just talked about Matt Flynn. Matt Schaub is another. Were they bad as starters? No, not bad. But neither really set the world on fire. Schaub starting and playing more than Flynn. What's the old saying? Who's the most popular football player in town? The backup quarterback. That's until the draft comes along.
 
Re: Re:

Alpe d'Huez said:
Welcome back Merckx. Yep, well aware of that story. Read the articles, saw the doc on Frontline, saw the movie. I was thinking of Ben in an isolated assumption, yes. I still would imagine they would employ him if that's what he sought, and the city would love him after he retired, even with some of his dark moments. No, I'm not basing that on any objective data. Maybe I'm wrong.

Of course you would know about all that. If anyone here would, you would.

Thoughts on what he had to say about Rudolph? The organization's effort to win? That's the topic at hand, no?

Oh, I agree that Big Ben is being pretty small. I understand why. He doesn't know how much longer he has, but it could be several more years, and he doesn't want to get pushed out by his heir apparent.

The last years of a great QB are usually difficult for everyone involved. The team has to have someone ready to step into his shoes, but you can't predict the timing. Too soon, and you get conflicts like Favre vs. Rodgers, or even Montana - Young. Too late, and the team has no one. Which seems to be the case for NE, but who am I to second-guess Beli?

Speaking of Rodgers, wasn't Flynn his backup at GB before he went to Seattle? IIRC, that was the year after GB won the SB, they went 15-1, and since they had locked up HFA, Flynn started the final game--and threw six TD passes. And though I can't remember the team he beat, I remember it was in the playoff race at the time, so definitely motivated. I thought Flynn had a great future at the time, but he disappeared. Another one of those QBs that suddenly you think, years later, whatever happened to...?

I know you're a long-time fan of the silver-and-black, Alpe, so here's a great joke involving that team and a QB who never really made it. I'm sure you remember Mark Wilson. Back then, this was a joke about him I loved:

Q: What do Mark Wilson and the Rev. Billy Graham, Jr. have in common?

A: They're the only two men in America who can make a crowd of 80,000 in a football stadium stand on its feet and scream in unison, Jesus Christ!

And since I'm on the subject of NFL jokes, here's another, out-dated now, but which I never got around to posting when it was relevant (i.e., when the butt of the joke--pun intended--was still alive):

Q: If Aaron Hernandez manages to beat the rap, why can't he rejoin the Patriots at his old position?

A: Because since he's been in prison, he's been converted from a tight end to a wide receiver.