Ray_T

agreed. Baker has historically been fairly healthy, so the need hasnt arisen much of late. but they also signed some big dollar contracts lately, so maybe its a case where they couldnt sign a good backup because of the contract money that is already outstanding.

for some reason I seem to think they had an injury or two to the O line. I'll admit I am going from memory (which may not be as good as I'd like) and I'm too lazy to look it up but I seem to think that was a bit of a thing in Philly. if that is the case we'd be ignorant to think that wont affect the underlying numbers in the run game as well as the offense as a whole. its also possible its a superbowl hangover and the team is just not taking things as serious as its not yet playoff time.

lots of QB get named the starter after a decent performance. then lose the job 2-3 games later. being named the starter means absolutely nothing at this point. it just means hes gonna start the next football game. if his performance is questionable and the off field stuff becomes an issue it is very possible they give him the hook. right now its not like the team has a whole lot of choice. The only player likely to unseat him got hurt and may not be 100%. I'm not sure what the recovery timeline was looking like but at this point the team naming him the starter means absolutely nothing if there is nobody on the roster in line to unseat him if he doesnt perform. so yeah, interesting in the sense that Cleveland really has little choice in the matter of who starts. but that's about it.

oh just to clarify. when I said average to above average starter, I meant that is what his upside is. there is still the possibility he never becomes a regular starter. but he has the look of a guy who can possibly play. if he can keep his off field stupidity to a minimum

Less than that. but not by much. either way, you have made your point and I dont disagree. hes likely to be an average to slightly above average NFL starter with some off field issues. I felt it was the clown show and his immaturity as a player keeping him off the field more than it was his talent. When a player is a clown show off the field, you dont generally want them leading your team unless they can put up all star calibre play. when the play is THAT good you can get away with some of those intangibles being bad. but when it isnt THAT good, the intangibles turn into a cancer in the dressing room. I think he will perform at a decent level. But not good enough given the off field clown show that seems to follow this guy. That said, he has had some humble pie. and you have to hope if you are a cleveland fan that this dose of humble pie is enough. Personally I think he needed to sit a little longer. but the injury forced the team into this move. if the kid performs there will be all kinds of pressure to stick with the kid. if he performs.... Hopefully he remembers the humble pie at the draft table and in waiting for a chance to start. if he forgets, he may soon find himself on the bench again in the near future.

Hey guys, I debated not making this post public, cuz this kind of post really gets people riled up........but after thinking about this, I have to speak out. Bowers is the concensus #1 TE in the NFL this year. I'm telling you I dont think hes gonna be #1. here is why: Pete Carroll historically his offenses do not Feature a TE. for the most part he doesnt have TE that finish in the top 10 or even top 15. then one year he traded for Jimmy Graham. who was the concensus top TE in the NFL with the Saints. he played 3 seasons in seattle. one Meh season, one good season (TE3) and another Meh season and then he was traded. that's literally the only sniff of the top 10 any of his TE's have had during his tenure in Seattle. due to the talent, Im sure he will utilize Bowers. but I do not think he finishes #1. I think he tops out at #4 or #5. Top 3 if everything goes right. But there is a lot more risk here than people think there is. This is not a Criticism of Bowers. Hes a superb talent. This is all about the Pete Carroll offense. say what you will about the guy, but TE are historically not productive under him. thats my prediction. I fully realize a lot of you will be mad at me for making this prediction, but see for yourself. Look at how Carrolls TE's have historically produced. It aint pretty.

well, my philosophy is not many TE can score at the pace of a starting WR. So if a TE capable of doing that is on the board in round 3-5 I take him. At that point you are into WR2/3 territory and you are filling a spot that for some teams will be a dead spot on the roster getting no more than 5 or 6 points per week. and when a player gives you an advantage of 3-5 points every week they are worthy of an early round pick. only downside, if you take a TE that early you had better be sure of what hes gonna deliver. you take a TE early and whiff on the pick thats a big loss. so if taking a TE (or QB) early you NEED to nail the pick.

I've liked Iosivas for a while. but hes just not getting the looks. and fair enough.... with Chase and Higgins on the roster why would you give him a lot of looks? So with Chase gone for a game or two, I dont mind Iosivas.

no guarantee he is horrible as a player. one of the negatives that caused him to slide was the attitude he took with him into interviews. if he came off as an entitled (or spoiled) brat, that attitude could have actually been what has kept him off of the field. Talent wise I feel hes the best QB in Cleveland. but succeeding at QB requires more than just talent. it requires committment, a willingness/desire to learn the right attitude, and an ability to lead others. and the clown show likely didnt endear him to management. sometimes the decision not to play someone comes down to the off field stuff. And I think that especially goes for Sheduer. it is far too early to judge if hes got what it takes. lots of QB have flopped in their first pro game. John Elway and Peyton Manning are two of those. its how you bounce back that counts. so I'd say at this point we need to see if hes got some bounce back in him

yeah given time missed I'd say looking at this as a fantasy points/Games played. might give you a better indicator of who is the better player.

the odds of him being a worthy start are considerably higher with MHJ out of the lineup. Mooney is a guy cousins had a connection with when he did play last year. that familiarity likely makes him a reasonable candidate to be a solid play. obviously if you have good options at WR3 you can sit him. but if you have been bitten by the injury bug and are in need, hes a reasonable option. quite often when a backup QB gets thrown in to start, someone from the backup squad ends up having a mini breakout of sorts because they have a connection with the backup QB due to practice reps together. This is no different. I'm not predicting a huge week but I dont think hed be a terrible start if you were in need. dude is likely on the wire in a lot of leagues and can be had for free. its not like its a high risk move even if he sits on your bench. Most teams have a scrub backup that this guy can likely outperform. at the very least... he should be rostered.

with Cousins at QB I can see Mooney being a must grab pickup for WR3 production. With cousins he put up solid stats last year. I think they re establish that connection. obviously if cousins gets benched at any point, Mooney's value returns to what his value has been so far this year.

well, he missed the start of the season due to injury. then he came back and got hurt again (unrelated) this is looking more and more like a wasted year for him. I hope I'm wrong. I am a fan. but sometimes when a player misses time like this they cant get into a groove. does he have the potential to breakout once healthy? for sure. problem is... we dont know how healthy he is. and hes still likely not in game shape, so hes sort of running out of time as the rest of the league is in mid season form and hes not. good news is... I think we will be able to get him for a bargain for next years draft.

but man is he FAST.

honestly, when players miss the start of the season like Godwin did, they come back and they are not in game shape. seems like a small thing but when you are not in game shape, you are not only not as fit as normal but you are also more likely to get hurt. now that he has gotten hurt again, I'd probably be inclined to bail. I'd still draft him next year. but I think this year is a writeoff. he might be able to put something together in the fantasy playoffs for you, but if you have a need now and are at risk of not getting that far, I'd bail. obviously this is assuming you find someone decent to pickup. if your league allows him to be placed on IR, that can solve your problem without dropping him. I know my yahoo league has gotten real lax about the IR designation. if player is listed as out, then you can put him on the IR. I dont agree with it, but I did take advantage of the rule once earlier in the year.

well, given the price its a reasonably low risk trade. with potentially high risk upside

and for the record, I dont think he has EVER had WR of this calibre, so I do expect he will continue to produce against all but maybe one or two of the elite defenses. and if the team continues to lose games after scoring 35+ points they may just shelve Burrow for the year. No point bringing him back if the team isnt in contention for a playoff spot. Might as well give him the time to fully heal. and that Defense is Horrible.

when is Reed supposed to return to the lineup? after playing in week one and getting hurt, they said hed be out 6 weeks. At this point he has yet to return to the lineup. if it doesnt happen soon, this could be a lost season for him. dude still needs to get into game shape.

well, hes gonna get a chance to learn on the fly. Sometimes that works. sometimes not. we will find out soon enough. but I fully agree, hes likely the only game in town for the moment.

true. but he needs to learn the playbook first. might take 2 or 3 weeks until he performs to his potential in this offense (possibly longer). it all depends on whether he can make that connection with his starting QB quickly.

I'm not sure fields is the answer either. Fields is an adequate starting QB. but not a championship calibre starting QB. if the goal is to win a championship, the move to Caleb seemed logical. kid had considerable upside andI do think there is still considerable upside. and more than Fields had. fields first season 7 TD 10 INT playing 12 games his second season 17 TD 11 INT playing 15 games. and the pass yardage in both years wasnt great. as a rookie Caleb had 20 TD and 6 INT and 3500 yards passing This year he has 12 TD and 4 INT and so far 1900 yards passing in 8 games which pro rates to a 4000 yard season. (roughly) Fields has never thrown for 3000 yards in his career. though likely would have hit 3000 (barely) in the 2023 season if he had played all the games I know Fields gets more yards on the ground, but still, thats not elite play. The big difference is Caleb actually seems to do a better job of looking after the ball and still puts up a decent amount of yardage. dont get me wrong, he still has things to work on, but I do think he has the ability to be a good starting QB at some point in the future. I'm not sure he will ever be elite, but he looks like he may eventually be good enough that if they can draft and upgrade the defense to a point where it is elite or close to it, they may have a chance to contend. of course the Jury is still out on that. but the numbers are better already and Caleb is younger. for the record, I'm not a fan of either player. but based on the numbers and metrics I'm looking at, Caleb is further along at this point in his career than Fields was. and hes a fair bit younger. as such, I'd have to conclude this was likely the right move. Was it the best move Chicago could have made? likely not. but it was a better move than keeping Fields would have been.

yeah it looks like the Zonovan knight experiment is done. 9 carries for 27 yards doesnt scare anyone. Demarcardo may be the guy going forward

well, you can run against this squad if your RB is good enough.. and I think thats where the Giants scorched them (in part) though honestly it seemed like an anomaly. I never saw the game but a buddy of mine said when Skattebo was on the field it looked like their D sold out to stop the run and it opened things up in the pass game. his analysis seems to make sense as Their run game had been pretty good the previous game or two. however you are a New York Homie, you can likely give us a better analysis of what happened there. if so.... do share. not many know more about the Giants than you do and if you know something I dont, then I wanna know what you know.

Denver D has been very good most of the year. you pretty much need to be an elite offense to move the ball against this squad

you sure that is wise? Hock is a good enough player that he should be rostered if your league is deep enough to have 2 TE on your roster. I'll admit I was expecting more, but the soft schedule coming up likely will make up for any shortcomings