Jump to content

Talk:List of Cleveland Browns starting quarterbacks

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled

[edit]

The changes made on 7/2/08 deleted pertinent information for no good purpose, specifically, removing the years each quarterback played and deleting records from the AAFC, where the Browns played from 1946-49. I propose that that information be put back.Hanksummers (talk) 02:03, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Otto Graham's numbers

[edit]

The W/L records for Otto Graham seem to be inconsistent across tables. His info/stats should be probably double checked for accuracy wherever they appear. Zaqwert (talk) 03:45, 29 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ordering for "Starters per season"

[edit]

How should the names within each year be sorted within this section? Should they be ordered chronologically by first start of the year? Or should they be ordered by decreasing number of starts per season.

For example, as I write this, the third game of 2016 has finished, and now the 2016 list is ordered "Griffin, J. McCown, Kessler", which is the order in which the three QBs started games for the Browns. If Kessler also starts 2016 Game 4, should the order of starters for 2016 be changed? 75.179.162.24 (talk) 21:52, 25 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Felt this topic needed revisiting. I know the way names are ordered varies within the lists of starting quarterbacks for all the NFL teams here (and that can be a discussion in it of itself), but regardless of which way they're ordered, it should be consistent.

For example, in 2010, Jake Delhomme started Week 1 for the Browns. However, the 2010 order has Colt McCoy listed first, because he wound up starting the most games at quarterback for the Browns in that season. Meanwhile, for the 2018 season, Tyrod Taylor is still currently listed first, despite Baker Mayfield having started more games so far in the season. I personally think it should be ordered by decreasing number of starts, but if it's going to be ordered chronologically, it should be consistent all throughout the list. S1tbd (talk) 18:14, 5 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Reluctantly, I guess I'll have to agree with this for now. Listing players chronologically provides more information than by rank. But, short of doing the work to find references for past seasons, listing them by order of games started, at least, makes it consistent. 75.188.230.160 (talk) 18:14, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of Cleveland Browns starting quarterbacks. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:49, 9 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of Cleveland Browns starting quarterbacks. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:36, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Uniform Numbers?

[edit]

Sometime between the end of the 2017 NFL season and the start of the 2018 season, the column for uniform numbers was removed. Why was this? While it is true that the title of this page is not "Uniform numbers of Cleveland Browns Starting Quarterbacks", I think uniform number would likely be interesting to people reading this page.

Was there any disussion at the time? Was this just done unilaterally? Was it the correct change? 2607:FCC8:D680:A300:6C15:887C:3261:A876 (talk) 19:35, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"Rowspan in tables?"

[edit]

What's with the change in formatting to include "rowspan" in tables when the data is the same, such as if the same quarterback started the same number of games in more than one season? Was there any discussion? Does anyone like it better this way? To me, it makes the page look awkward and less usable. Unless there's concensus to keep it this way, I will likely change it back at some point in the future. 75.188.230.160 (talk) 19:15, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder: This is a History Page

[edit]

As I write this on 20 October 2021, it's been announced that Case Keenum has been slated to start at quarterback in tomorrow's Cleveland Browns game. While we appreciate the enthusiasm, please don't update this page with information like that until a player has actually started a game. 75.188.230.160 (talk) 16:12, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

How Long Will the Team Be "notable for its instability at the quarterback position"?

[edit]

After Baker Mayfield started 45+ straight games for the Browns after earning the starting job in 2018, I thought that we might be able to consider the Browns' "instability at the quarterback position" a thing of the past. He missed 3 starts in 2021, but this was due to disease or injury; he remained the undisputed "starter". So, Mayfield was the Browns' "regular" starting quarterback for 3 games short of 4 straight seasons.

At some point (I don't recall when) I changed the text to say that the Browns had been notable for quarterback futility/instability.

For 2022, despite starting fewer games than Jacoby Brissett, Deshaun Watson was the undisputed starter (when available to play). This was never in dispute.

However, on 6 December 2022, Vjmlhds changed the wording back to have been notable...

How much longer does this have to go on? What additional evidence is needed to be able to consider this a thing of the past? As I write this in January 2023, it appears that Watson will be the undisputed started going into the 2023 season. The references documenting this "instability" are all from 2016, and will be about 7 years old by the time the 2023 season starts.

Unless there is discussion here (and there rarely is) and if the team's quarterback situation in September 2023 looks the same as it does in January 2023, I think we should consider this reputation to be a thing of the past. Of course, if newer published sources can be found, those should also be considered.

75.188.230.160 (talk) 21:33, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]