DawgTalkers.net Forums The Archives 2024 NFL Season Looking Back: Browns 16 Raiders 20 The QB in LV

There are several threads about Watson, the FO, KS, Haslam, injuries, money and draft picks, and where the blame goes for the Watson experience. No need to rehash that here.

Earlier this week I said bench him at the half if he’s terrible but now I wouldn’t be unhappy if they just said Winston will start (for now I’m dialling it down on my DTR enthusiasm ;))

At the least pull him by the end of the first quarter.

How much rope would you guys give our franchise QB?

I give him a half. But if there is a INT in the first quarter, I say yank him.

if we lose this game it will get REALLY hard for Watson to come back from IMO ... his leash is short (maybe not with the coaches, but with the fans)

I haven't seen any evidence that the Browns have a franchise QB even though they're paying the bill for one. But I know you mean watson. I have a personal dislike for watson the man so I'm not going to give my opinion as to what I would do in this situation. I'll try to look at it from a FO/HC perspective.

This organization has gone all in on watson. They have put all their eggs in one basket. Winston is the back up QB. Winston isn't a great QB at this point in his career but he's very serviceable. Does this sound like echoes from last season? If you put Winston in the line up and he can win some games and looks competitive there's no going back to watson this season. That ship will have sailed.

I don't think there's a way in hell that's what this FO wants to happen. As such I think they'll give watson more rope than many of us would like to see. What many of us thought would be considered "winnable games" before the season started aren't looking quite so winnable now. But tomorrow and next week would be games that might be more winnable than what will be coming after them. Tougher teams and division games will come after the Commanders game.

So as I see it the Browns have their backs in the corner. I don't believe they feel they have any choice but play watson through the Commanders game in hopes that the light will come on. That he wakes up and gives the team some kind of spark.

If that doesn't happen before the Browns play the Eagles on Oct. 13th I think we will see a change.

Three different perspectives, lamp:

1) Organizational: You have a lot invested in DW and will go/support him as long as possible. At least until the fan base revolts.
2) KS, Head Coach: In 'lock step' with 1) above, you go with DW as long as possible, at
least to the point where his poor play threatens your continued employment in Cleveland.
3) Teammates: If his teammates lose confidence in DW, that is the point at which you pull the plug.

And from a fan's perspective: Go with whomever gives you the best chance to put up a 'W'.

How much rope would you give the team ?

It's a team sport, at this moment. I do think there are a lot of issues over the whole team.

Not just one individual.

What happens if the Offense scores 20 points

The defense gives up 27 points

That on the QB ?

Let the game get played before putting up threads about benching one player.

When the team as a whole looks bad.

I've stated Flacco made this pretty much the same team look different

Watson was 5-1 when he got hurt

There may be more than just one player causing the team to look bad.

Again, a new scheme in place.

The way you posed your post I think there's something you may want to consider. You brought up what if the O scored 20 and the D gave up 27. And I can see that. For many years I held that if your O put up 21 points or more and the team lost, that loss was on the D. Now there is certainly an exception to that. If your O puts up 24 points and turns the ball over in the process giving your opponent extra possessions that skews things. You can't keep putting the ball in your opponents hands giving them that type of advantage, especially in short field situations and not expect them to score more points.

In today's NFL and it becoming more of a passing league I may up that to 24 points. But that seems close to your way of thinking so I think we're pretty much on the same page here.

So if that's true in one direction, wouldn't you say it's fair to look at it the same way in the other direction? I mean what if the Browns score less than 24 points and they win anyway? It seems by both of our logic the O didn't score enough points to deserve credit for the W. So why would you give the QB credit for a W if the O only produces say 17 points? What if the team scores 24 points but it was the D who scored 7 of those points?

If your QB has a poor performance and the run game rushes for over 150 yards and 2 TD's, is it the QB who should get the credit for the W? I know people say, "Well he played good enough to win." But is it the QB who deserves the W all of the time?

As for singling out 1 player, I don't think anyone has actually done that. There has been a lot of talk as to how poorly the OL has played and not only the backups but some of the starters. I don't disagree with you that each player is accountable for their own performance but that doesn't exclude the QB position. The QB is the most critical position on the field and he has the most impact on whether the game is won or lost unless your D is just stinking up the field.

A loss today and our season might as well be over.

without question

It will be over because the first 5 games are the easiest part of our schedule. If we were any good we would have come out of it 4-1. Now it looks like 1-4.