Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
BIgBoii

Sam Darnold vs Baker Mayfield

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Yin-Yang said:

The Jets don’t have more offensive talent on paper than the current Browns’ roster.

Using records from previous records is pretty pointless, since both teams had lots of roster turnover. Plus, using records to decide positional battles is dumb. Does Philly have a better secondary than the Jags because they won the SB last year? Do the Ravens have better wide receivers than the Texans because they had a better record?

Jets produced and won games, the Browns did not...like at all. A team with zero wins cannot boast anything regarding talent level. Talent alone should win you a few games and the Browns went 0 for everything LMAO. All they have is names guys recognize honestly. Browns suck, Jets aren't world beaters but we aint Cleveland. Darnold is better than Mayfield on top of that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, KingOfTheDot said:

Jets produced and won games, the Browns did not...like at all. A team with zero wins cannot boast anything regarding talent level. Talent alone should win you a few games and the Browns went 0 for everything LMAO. All they have is names guys recognize honestly. Browns suck, Jets aren't world beaters but we aint Cleveland. Darnold is better than Mayfield on top of that.

Again...that’s just stupid reasoning. Do the Ravens have better receivers than the Texans because they won more games? Do the Patriots have a better defense than the Jags? 

You're not accounting for roster turnover at all. The Jets offense is pretty talentless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
10 minutes ago, Yin-Yang said:

Again...that’s just stupid reasoning. Do the Ravens have better receivers than the Texans because they won more games? Do the Patriots have a better defense than the Jags? 

You're not accounting for roster turnover at all. The Jets offense is pretty talentless.

A lot of people said that last year and predicted the Jets would go 0-16. Then they went out and competed and beat 3 playoff teams including the Jags who everyone says are stacked. Have to wait to play the games. Team chemistry, offensive philosophy, scheme fit, team leadership etc all play a role in performance. 

Edited by SDotNova

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, SDotNova said:

A lot of people said that last year and predicted the Jets would go 0-16. Then they went out and competed and beat 3 playoff teams including the Jags who everyone says are stacked. Have to wait to play the games. Team chemistry, offensive philosophy, scheme fit, team leadership etc all play a role in performance. 

No doubt. That’s why I said “on paper” in my initial post. 

Less talented teams beat more talented teams all the time in the NFL for all the reasons you described, amongst others. That’s why using wins (wins that happened last season, thus they don’t take into account all the offseason acquisitions) to measure talent isn’t a particularly smart thing to do. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Yin-Yang said:

Again...that’s just stupid reasoning. Do the Ravens have better receivers than the Texans because they won more games? Do the Patriots have a better defense than the Jags? 

You're not accounting for roster turnover at all. The Jets offense is pretty talentless.

It’s stupid because you’re an idiot who thinks name value is actual talent. Remember the Jets were supposed to go 0-16 last year with their lack of talent? That was actually the Browns. 

The Browns are a joke at this point, you’re bringing up other teams without realizing the point is being made. How can they have better offensive player and defensive players than a team who won 5 games yet win 0 games. 

This entire debate is stupid anyway, Browns made a huge mistake again passing on the classes #1 QB(Wentz, Watson and now Darnold). New regime, same theme but hey Browns gonna Brown.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, VanS said:

That's the classic sign of a bust about to happen.  When the only positives people talk about are stuff not related to your on field TALENT then you know you didn't draft the right guy #1 overall.

The #1 overall pick is supposed to be an elite talent.  Not a guy who is good at attracting attention.

Pretty much, just like his agent coming out and doing damage control after. Everyone knows the Browns made a colossal mistake.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, KingOfTheDot said:

It’s stupid because you’re an idiot who thinks name value is actual talent.

Right...”name value”. Josh Gordon and Jarvis Landry are better than anything NY has had in a while. Njoku with more talent. Tackles are all washes, but interior o-line isn’t even close. Neither is the RB position. 

Yeah, sorry bud, it’s stupid to use last season’s record when a decent amount of the players in discussion weren’t on the roster last year.

Quote

The Browns are a joke at this point,

 

buttfumble-2.gif?w=650

Quote

you’re bringing up other teams without realizing the point is being made.

No, I’m bringing up other teams to show you how illogical it is to measure talent with wins. 

Especially when comparing one year’s roster to another’s. 

Quote

How can they have better offensive player and defensive players than a team who won 5 games yet win 0 games. 

First of all, never said anything about the defense. Read much? 

But there’s a litany of reasons why the Jets won 5 games and the Browns won none that have nothing to do with their 2018 talent. The coaching. The quarterbacks (McCown>Kizer). Their defenses. Landry. Gordon. Hyde and Chubb. Seriously, who uses win-loss as a measurement of offenses? 

Guess those Saints teams pre-2017 were all bad on offense too because they didn’t get many wins, lol. 

 

Edited by Yin-Yang

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Yin-Yang said:

Right...”name value”. Josh Gordon and Jarvis Landry are better than anything NY has had in a while. Njoku with more talent. Tackles are all washes, but interior o-line isn’t even close. Neither is the RB position. 

Yeah, sorry bud, it’s stupid to use last season’s record when a decent amount of the players in discussion weren’t on the roster last year.

 

buttfumble-2.gif?w=650

No, I’m bringing up other teams to show you how illogical it is to measure talent with wins. 

Especially when comparing one year’s roster to another’s. 

First of all, never said anything about the defense. Read much? 

But there’s a litany of reasons why the Jets won 5 games and the Browns won none that have nothing to do with their 2018 talent. The coaching. The quarterbacks (McCown>Kizer). Their defenses. Landry. Gordon. Hyde and Chubb. Seriously, who uses win-loss as a measurement of offenses? 

Guess those Saints teams pre-2017 were all bad on offense too because they didn’t get many wins, lol. 

 

If the Butt Fumble justifies your point in a discussion regarding talent and production then I’m wasting my time. Enjoy winning 0 games then picking the wrong guy at the top of the draft again. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO the Jets are better than the Browns because of Todd Bowles being WAAAAAY better than Hue Jackson and that Jets defense being better than the Browns, along with competent QB play, which the Browns haven't had in a LONG time. In terms of sheer offensive help in terms of talent, Cleveland has the edge in a vacuum, which I assume is what the poll question is implying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, KingOfTheDot said:

Browns are trash, FF just knows all their players names. 

lol. Solid argumentative basis here. You could write a college thesis on this to prove your point.

6 hours ago, KingOfTheDot said:

It’s stupid because you’re an idiot

Nice contribution to the discussion. Sounds like you enjoy your life and aren't mad at the world at all.

6 hours ago, KingOfTheDot said:

Remember the Jets were supposed to go 0-16 last year with their lack of talent? That was actually the Browns.

Yeah, but the Browns started an insane amount of rookies, had an incompetent coach, and had the worst QB situation they've ever had, which is saying something.

6 hours ago, KingOfTheDot said:

hey Browns gonna Brown.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_all-time_NFL_win–loss_records

The Jets are a historically worse franchise than the Browns. But keep thumping your man boobs if it makes you feel better about yourself.

 

 

Image result for butt fumble gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, MWil23 said:

IMO the Jets are better than the Browns because of Todd Bowles being WAAAAAY better than Hue Jackson and that Jets defense being better than the Browns, along with competent QB play, which the Browns haven't had in a LONG time. In terms of sheer offensive help in terms of talent, Cleveland has the edge in a vacuum, which I assume is what the poll question is implying.

In no world is Sam Darnold more excited to throw passes to those WR's, TE's and RB's behind that OL than he would be in Cleveland. It's not even close who has more raw talent to work with. @KingOfTheDot is just mad with his life and taking it out on the Browns on a football forum. It's sad, really. I don't know whether to laugh at him or link him up with a therapist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, KingOfTheDot said:

If the Butt Fumble justifies your point in a discussion regarding talent and production then I’m wasting my time. Enjoy winning 0 games then picking the wrong guy at the top of the draft again. 

yin isn't even a Browns fan lol. He just has a functioning brain. 

Oh, and the butt fumble doesn't justify his point...the entire rest of this thread & the one over in the NFL Comparisons section justifies the point being made.

I shouldn't be able to tell how tall you are based on your abrasive posting style.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
12 hours ago, Yin-Yang said:

No doubt. That’s why I said “on paper” in my initial post. 

Less talented teams beat more talented teams all the time in the NFL for all the reasons you described, amongst others. That’s why using wins (wins that happened last season, thus they don’t take into account all the offseason acquisitions) to measure talent isn’t a particularly smart thing to do. 

The Jets didn't lose a major contributor to their 2017 team that didn't get replaced by a similar player. The Browns lost Joe Thomas. The Jets beat the Browns last year when the Browns had Garrett.

Bleacher Report rated both these teams as  teams that improved the most during free agency. Pff rated the Jets draft elite.

I understand the debate is names on paper, but this idea that the Browns are ready to roll and Jets will have a shot at a top 3 pick doesn't add up to me. Like KotD said, the Jets over the last couple decades have not been the Steelers or the Pats. But the Browns are on different level. And that is something they will have to overcome. Baker should help with that.

Vegas thinks the Jets are the better team. Not by much and both are not expected to win much, but Vegas is betting on the Jets.

Another factor, on paper Darnold fits Bates WCO scheme better than Baker fits Haley's offensive scheme.

Edited by SDotNova

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, SDotNova said:

The Jets didn't lose a major contributor to their 2017 team that didn't get replaced by a similar player.

You had nothing, you still got nothing.

Edited by Danger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  



×