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).
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).