Was it a mistake to not get Mayfield?

Should they have tried to get Mayfield

  • Yes they should of

    Votes: 9 10.8%
  • No it would of been a mistake

    Votes: 62 74.7%
  • Undecided

    Votes: 12 14.5%

  • Total voters
    83

fullquartpress

Active member
Joined
Mar 10, 2022
Messages
219
Reaction score
118
I don't think for a moment that Carroll believes Lock or Geno are the answer. I think it's quite the contrary -- I think he sees them as a liability.


If PC "sees" Geno and Lock as liabilities why, then, did he:
1. give Geno another contract
and
2. ask Paton for Lock(with Fant and Harris) and the picks
?
Are you saying that PC may have been overruled by JS, or by SW...or maybe even by Jody Allen, for either QB?
Or do you think Pete just wanted a 2nd look at Geno, and a 1st look at Lock, and that now, with minicamp knowledge, he regrets having either man?
 
Last edited:

BlueTalon

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 3, 2007
Messages
8,944
Reaction score
1,591
Location
Eastern Washington
If PC "sees" Geno and Lock as liabilities why, then, did he:
1. give Geno another contract
and
2. ask Paton for Lock(with Fant and Harris) and the picks
?
Are you saying that PC may have been overruled by JS, or by SW...or maybe even by Jody Allen, for either QB?
Or do you think Pete just wanted a 2nd look at Geno, and a 1st look at Lock, and that now, with minicamp knowledge, he regrets having either man?
If memory serves, PC said something to the effect that if Lock had come out in this year's draft, he'd be the best QB in it.
 

fullquartpress

Active member
Joined
Mar 10, 2022
Messages
219
Reaction score
118
If memory serves, PC said something to the effect that if Lock had come out in this year's draft, he'd be the best QB in it.
Yes, and I think Pete considers Geno and Lock possibilities, not liabilities.
And there must have been discussion, ending with agreement, among Pete, JS, and SW in asking Denver to include Lock in the RW trade(my speculation regarding Jody's possible influence wasn't intended to be considered seriously)
 

keasley45

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 4, 2010
Messages
3,865
Reaction score
6,773
Location
Cockeysville, Md
I dont think Pete sees either Lock or Smith as a liability.

You have to understand the type of leadership and culture philosophies that he subscribes to. There are books written on the way the guy has built the team. His method is one that transcends sport.

Pete believes in harnessing the intangible strengths within a person that are there, but held beneath mental or emotional restrictions. It's not a pipe dream belief in potential, it's a real ability to create an environment where that potential is unlocked and a person can flourish. Pete runs a football team, and a hot bed for the development of emotional intelligence and strength. He believes that if you can get that right, the individual is better and as a group, the team is stronger.

Some leaders, like those in Denver, look at Lock, they see the raw data, maybe understand that on top of his mediocre plays, he's emotionally bent, and cast him aside for an easier, more traditional path where the measurables and numbers look good. Pete asks why, studies the reason for failure, and decides whether he has the tools to make a guy like Lock work. Will it? Who knows. But if it doesn't, he still has a guy in Geno who can man the cotrols and in maybe then QBing a team that can manage riliable success, unlocks his own confidence, builds experience, and becomes better than he's ever been.

It's a reasonable, one season gamble.

You always hear from players past and present, that the Hawks do things differently , and save for Earl and Sherm for a period, players who have come through here speak incredibly highly of the 'program'. It's not lip service. It's the exact same type of respect and admiration employees feel in the real world for corporations or office cultures that provide them a platform to be themselves, be heard and excel.

That doesn't mean it slways works. But the gamble in Seattle, under Pete has been about expanding the metrics and standards for evaluation beyond the typical NFL measure. And it's worked more often than it hasn't and goes well beyond just winning a football game.

He sees something in Geno and Lock that, in his opinion, is as solid a gamble as going with a rookie this year, or BM, a player who right off the bat, from an emotional intelligence perspective, looks to have a ton of work to do to be close to reaching and successfully bringing into the 'culture' fold in seattle.
 
Last edited:

JerHawk81

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 3, 2007
Messages
1,668
Reaction score
195
Location
Portland, OR
I'm higher on Mayfield than most. In my view, he clearly would have given us a better chance of winning this year, and possibly even gave us a mid-term option to develop a rookie in 2023, or even a long-term option at QB.

I don't worry about his downside. I think any negative impact that he would have on the locker room or in the media are drastically overblown.

I can't comprehend a way in which the price paid wasn't a value. For under $5.5M, on a one-year deal, and a 4th or 5th, for a guy who is likely to start and improve the team is a crazy value in my eyes.

With that said, we are mid-rebuild. We're not a playoff team with Mayfield, or Wilson, or anyone on the roster today. And sucking for <insert your favorite 2023 QB> isn't my preferred option, but I also understand it. So, I clearly would have gone after Mayfield and I do think that we missed an opportunity not trading for him at that price. But I won't fret about it.
 

Ozzy

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 3, 2013
Messages
9,289
Reaction score
3,816
Baker has done it in a system exactly how Pete wants to build a team. Defensive minded, accurate with the football, great running game etc. He did it shortly after a 0-16 season too on a terrible franchise in a tough division. Say what you want but that is light years more than Lock or Geno have shown. But I don't think we have a good roster regardless so Pete is either very arrogant in his philosophy if he thinks he can win with any QB or he realizes the team has a ways to go and a down year to reload isn't the worst thing long term. I think its very unlikely Pete views Geno or Lock as the answer. He probably recognizes Lock has a ton of potential so why not take a flyer and if he doesn't hit try again next year.
 

fullquartpress

Active member
Joined
Mar 10, 2022
Messages
219
Reaction score
118
I don't worry about his downside. I think any negative impact that he would have on the locker room or in the media are drastically overblown.

I can't comprehend a way in which the price paid wasn't a value. For under $5.5M, on a one-year deal, and a 4th or 5th, for a guy who is likely to start and improve the team is a crazy value in my eyes.
Concerns about Baker's attitude seem driven by demand for media ratings, and $5.5 + a 4th or 5th makes me think of most of the 32 teams.
Certainly the Bucs and Rams are ready now, with old QBs but, at that price, why not the Cowboys, or Chiefs, or Bills, or Bears(Nathan Peterman and Trevor Siemian backing up Justin Fields) or 49ers?
 

Spin Doctor

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 8, 2009
Messages
5,235
Reaction score
2,158
If PC "sees" Geno and Lock as liabilities why, then, did he:
1. give Geno another contract
and
2. ask Paton for Lock(with Fant and Harris) and the picks
?
Are you saying that PC may have been overruled by JS, or by SW...or maybe even by Jody Allen, for either QB?
Or do you think Pete just wanted a 2nd look at Geno, and a 1st look at Lock, and that now, with minicamp knowledge, he regrets having either man?
I absolutely think that Carroll doesn't believe that either of these guys are the future. You can't trust anything Pete says on the matter. He's always hyped up his players and outright admitting that your QB room stinks is a fast way to lose the locker room. Deep down, Carroll knows this is a rebuild. We're transitioning to a completely new defense, plus our starting tackles on offense are likely going to both be rookies.

Carroll is looking to set up the team for his next signal caller. Lock and Geno Smith are the whipping boys for the teething process. They're nothing but sacrificial pawns. There is absolutely nothing wrong with a season like this either. In fact, I prefer it to signing one of the perennial free agent QB's such as Bridgewater to a big contract. We simply went for the cheapest options.

Both of these guys are going to be bad but that is okay.
 

Rosco

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 10, 2022
Messages
473
Reaction score
329
I absolutely think that Carroll doesn't believe that either of these guys are the future. You can't trust anything Pete says on the matter. He's always hyped up his players and outright admitting that your QB room stinks is a fast way to lose the locker room. Deep down, Carroll knows this is a rebuild. We're transitioning to a completely new defense, plus our starting tackles on offense are likely going to both be rookies.

Carroll is looking to set up the team for his next signal caller. Lock and Geno Smith are the whipping boys for the teething process. They're nothing but sacrificial pawns. There is absolutely nothing wrong with a season like this either. In fact, I prefer it to signing one of the perennial free agent QB's such as Bridgewater to a big contract. We simply went for the cheapest options.

Both of these guys are going to be bad but that is okay.
Again,if anything you stated were true,PC would have told Denver to keep Lock and would have gotten more draft picks instead. PC didn’t need Lock if tanking was his goal. Going with Geno Smith and the 3rd stringer would have achieved exactly what you’re claiming and would have netted PC more draft picks for the future.
 

fullquartpress

Active member
Joined
Mar 10, 2022
Messages
219
Reaction score
118
I absolutely think that Carroll doesn't believe that either of these guys are the future. You can't trust anything Pete says on the matter. He's always hyped up his players and outright admitting that your QB room stinks is a fast way to lose the locker room. Deep down, Carroll knows this is a rebuild. We're transitioning to a completely new defense, plus our starting tackles on offense are likely going to both be rookies.

Carroll is looking to set up the team for his next signal caller. Lock and Geno Smith are the whipping boys for the teething process. They're nothing but sacrificial pawns. There is absolutely nothing wrong with a season like this either. In fact, I prefer it to signing one of the perennial free agent QB's such as Bridgewater to a big contract. We simply went for the cheapest options.

Both of these guys are going to be bad but that is okay.
Maybe Pete's trusting the opinions of Waldron and Schneider on Lock.
At $1.3 million, Lock (like Baker) looks like decent value.
With 1 or 2 rookie tackles, as you say, survival could be tough for any QB
Colby Parkinson has thrown a TD pass to Davis Mills, so Colby could be another option.
Chris Carson, also, has a 'live arm', and could be a good Wildcat QB.
 

flv2

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 20, 2022
Messages
1,223
Reaction score
922
Location
Bournemouth, UK
Concerns about Baker's attitude seem driven by demand for media ratings, and $5.5 + a 4th or 5th makes me think of most of the 32 teams.
Certainly the Bucs and Rams are ready now, with old QBs but, at that price, why not the Cowboys, or Chiefs, or Bills, or Bears(Nathan Peterman and Trevor Siemian backing up Justin Fields) or 49ers?
Those teams weren't willing to guarantee Mayfield $8.36M as their back-up.
 

Rosco

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 10, 2022
Messages
473
Reaction score
329
Concerns about Baker's attitude seem driven by demand for media ratings, and $5.5 + a 4th or 5th makes me think of most of the 32 teams.
Certainly the Bucs and Rams are ready now, with old QBs but, at that price, why not the Cowboys, or Chiefs, or Bills, or Bears(Nathan Peterman and Trevor Siemian backing up Justin Fields) or 49ers?
His attitude/maturity has always been a issue,nothing to do with media. His attitude,as a matter of fact, was one of the biggest reasons the Browns kicked him to the curb.
Bakers $19M guaranteed contract is cheap for a QB. If Baker were any good, Carolina would not have been the only team trying to get Baker.
 

Appyhawk

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Nov 27, 2019
Messages
3,651
Reaction score
1,363
Location
Ranch in Flint Hills of Kansas, formerly NW Montan
I was totally against Mayfield for many of the reasons already listed here. In particular, he’s not the final answer at QB. Knowing now, that the plan is to grab a QB in next years draft (QB rich/deep), I’m excited to see who we pick. Loving Will Levis.

But….Carolina got a really good deal on Mayfield. Seeing what they gave up makes me wonder if we should’ve jumped on it. They didn’t even eat his salary and IF they do, it’s incentive based on team performance while the Browns still cover the majority of it. Dafuq?

By no means did we “lose” here. That goes 100% to the Browns. That deal was rather sweet for Carolina but still doesn’t make a lot of sense considering they drafted Corral as well.

Considering the deal, I had to vote we lost out here. That doesn’t mean I “wanted” him here. Just think I would’ve jumped on it.
I wouldn't mind seeing us make Carolina an offer for Corral.
 

fullquartpress

Active member
Joined
Mar 10, 2022
Messages
219
Reaction score
118
Those teams weren't willing to guarantee Mayfield $8.36M as their back-up.
I think Mariota got $10M last year to back up Carr.
And Brisset got $15M in 2020 to back up Rivers.
So, yes, they may have considered Baker unsuitable as a backup.
 

flv2

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 20, 2022
Messages
1,223
Reaction score
922
Location
Bournemouth, UK
I think Mariota got $10M last year to back up Carr.
And Brisset got $15M in 2020 to back up Rivers.
So, yes, they may have considered Baker unsuitable as a backup.
The Browns ate $10.5M of Mayfield's $18.86M guaranteed contract. There was $8.36M of guaranteed salary outstanding. Either no team was willing to acquire the remaining guaranteed salary or the Browns weren't willing to trade him to a team that would. Teams other than the Panthers may have been willing to acquire Mayfield on the terms that Mayfield accepted with the Panthers. However, Mayfield was NOT obligated to offer reduced contract terms to teams he didn't want to play for.

The contract Brissett signed with the Colts in a unique and bizarre situation has no relevance to Mayfield.
 

Lagartixa

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 6, 2020
Messages
1,763
Reaction score
3,078
Location
Taboão da Serra, SP, Brazil
His attitude/maturity has always been a issue,nothing to do with media. His attitude,as a matter of fact, was one of the biggest reasons the Browns kicked him to the curb.
Bakers $19M guaranteed contract is cheap for a QB. If Baker were any good, Carolina would not have been the only team trying to get Baker.
To be more specific, the $18.86M guaranteed for the fifth year of Mayfield's first-round rookie contract is less than 40% of top-QB money, and even at that price, nobody wanted him. In fact, even at less than half that price, with the Browns paying $10.5M, there was nobody willing to pay $8.36M for him. The best deal the Browns and Mayfield got was the Panthers' offer to pay him $4.86M, so Mayfield had to take a pay cut even for that weak-ass deal to happen.

NFL front offices do not think Mayfield is worth having as a starting QB. I won't speculate on the reasons, but they appear to have spoken very clearly with their unwillingness to trade valuable personnel or draft capital, and with their payrolls. If Mayfield ends up being the starter for Carolina, he's got some good "weapons" and has to hope to have a season good enough to convince NFL teams he can be effective enough as an NFL QB that it's worth having him on their rosters. But he's got a hill to climb, because as things are now, it's clear that teams just aren't that into him.

What NFL front offices have shown is that even at $8.36M for the season (just over one sixth of top-QB money), nobody wanted Mayfield.
 
Top