These Browns great mysteries remain unsolved amid the Deshaun Watson and Baker Mayfield impasses

Editor's note: Tony Grossi is a Cleveland Browns analyst for TheLandOnDemand.com and 850 ESPN Cleveland.

Among the great mysteries of life is who set the order of the alphabet and what’s another word for synonym.

Ah, but life’s great mysteries have nothing on our expanding list of great mysteries of the Cleveland Browns.

Every Browns regime has had its share of unexplained or unresolved occurrences that changed the team’s course of history.

For instance, why didn’t Eric Mangini draft Clay Matthews III in 2009 when he was implementing a 3-4 base defense in his first season as Browns coach?

Three times Mangini traded down in the first round, starting at No. 5, yet he managed each time to ignore this outside linebacker with sterling pedigree as the son of a Browns all-time great linebacker, Clay Jr. – one of the franchise’s most popular players -- with traits perfectly suited for Mangini’s defensive system.

Mangini eventually selected a good player at No. 21, center Alex Mack. He used one of the assets he recovered in the trades on an undersized defensive end from Hawaii named David Veikune. 

Matthews, chosen No. 26 by Green Bay, played 10 years for the Packers and one with the Rams, accumulating 91.5 sacks, two All-Pro designations, six Pro Bowl berths and one Super Bowl championship ring.

Veikune, miscast and over-drafted in the second round, was waived after one season.

Mangini never answered the question why he passed on Matthews.

And we suspect this new batch of mysteries may never be resolved, either.

Mystery No. 1: Given the Browns’ zeal in acquiring Deshaun Watson in March for six draft choices and then enticing him to waive his no-trade clause with a fully-guaranteed contract of $230 million, why did they pass on him with the No. 12 pick of the 2017 draft?

Three of the main men involved in the Watson transaction in March were also involved in the decision to pass on him in 2017 – owner Jimmy Haslam; Paul DePodesta, chief strategy officer; and Andrew Berry, who now is GM but was VP of player personnel back then. 

Former executive vice president Sashi Brown had the draft authority at the time, but surely he leaned on Berry and DePodesta for their expertise.

In fact, in answering a question about their decision to trade down two times from No. 2 overall the previous year, Brown said in his pre-draft presser with Berry at his side, “AB and I talk about this a lot … last year we felt we needed to add a lot of young talent to the roster, so that drove a lot of decisions last year. We think we’re positioned very different than we were coming out of 2015. The need to acquire more picks is less intense this year.”

DePodesta and the analytics department rated Mitchell Trubisky as the No. 1 quarterback in the draft – ahead of Watson and Patrick Mahomes. It has been confirmed by several sources, including former coach Hue Jackson, that DePodesta favored taking Trubisky with the No. 1 overall pick. Jackson and defensive coordinator Gregg Williams vehemently argued for defensive end Myles Garrett, and prevailed.

But the Browns also owned the No. 12 pick. And their fondness for Trubisky was so great, reports at the time said the Browns were trying to use the No. 12 pick to move up and still net Trubisky. The Bears believed it enough to controversially move up from No. 3 to No. 2 to take Trubisky.

The Chiefs then made a huge trade up to take Mahomes at No. 10. As the Browns’ second turn of the first round came up at No. 12, Watson was still on the board. All they had to do was turn in the card.

They traded it to the Houston Texans, who took Watson, who then had a spotless character record and was coming off a national championship season at Clemson.

“We have a lot of holes to fill on this roster,” Brown explained. “For us, it is just about making sure that when we get the quarterback, it is someone that we all believe in and can get behind and move forward.”

Mystery No. 2: Where was the plan to pursue Watson this year conceived – in football operations or the owner’s office?

Haslam insisted in his Zoom call interview on March 25, “It was definitely conceived by football operations. I can tell you it was widely vetted throughout our organization, including ownership, but it was conceived in football operations.”

Earlier in the day, Berry sat to the right of Watson on the dais in the Browns’ interview room, with coach Kevin Stefanski to Watson’s left, during one of the most awkward introductory press conferences ever seen.

Berry and Stefanski were ashen-faced and uncomfortable responding to questions about unsavory allegations made by 22 women accusing Watson of sexual misconduct.

To think that these two Ivy League-educated men, along with DePodesta, who was absent, were in favor of risking six draft picks and imperiling the team’s future salary cap structure on a player facing 22 civil lawuits (now 24) and a probable NFL suspension was just too much to believe.

Why was it worth it? Berry was asked.

“It is a good question,” he replied. “For us, once we got comfortable with Deshaun as a person and Deshaun the person, it became pretty straightforward from a football perspective. We think he is one of the best players at the position in this sport, he is obviously in his prime and we think it is the most important position in this sport. Once we were able to get comfortable with him as a person, the football part in terms of the evaluation was easy.”

Berry and Stefanski explained the team did five months of investigation into the claims against Watson. On the dais, Watson repeated several times he has never disrespected women.

Do you believe him? Berry was asked at the end.

“We feel confident in Deshaun the person,” Berry replied. “We have a lot of faith in him. We believe that as he gets into the community and our organization, he is going to make a positive impact.”

Mystery No. 3: What was the Browns’ Plan B if Watson wouldn’t have taken the money and changed his mind to waive his no-trade clause?

Berry consistently said the team was prepared to run back Baker Mayfield and play him in the final, fifth year of his original contract.

Really?

Mayfield’s confrontational personality had run its course in the building and in the locker room. 

Several players turned against him amid the mid-season divorce with Odell Beckham Jr., whose popularity stretched from the offensive side of the room to the defensive side and into the owner’s suite. When Beckham was released, several players said they didn’t understand why he was no longer a part of the team and they supported him via social media.

Prior to the trade for Watson, venerable ESPN insider Chris Mortensen reported an anonymous Browns source told him the Browns “want an adult” at the quarterback position. Mayfield perceived the comment came from Haslam, which the owner denied. But the bridge was detonated at that point, never to be repaired, and Mayfield demanded a trade.

Further, the relationship between Mayfield and Stefanski disintegrated over the course of the latter half of the 2021 season as the Browns blew several chances to make the playoffs because of quarterback inefficiency and offensive ineptitude.

Later, ESPN’s Jake Trotter reported that sources close to Mayfield believed the team sabotaged him in his final Browns appearance in Pittsburgh in Game 16 to “look as hapless as possible” to justify a quarterback change after the season.

If Watson had not changed his mind, a reunion of the locker room and Mayfield was impossible.

Perhaps not having a bona fide Plan B is the reason the Browns went overboard to secure Watson’s approval.

Mystery No. 4: What happened between Mayfield and Beckham to cause their messy breakup?

New rules negotiated by the players union gave players the freedom to escape for a mini-vacation over the Labor Day weekend. Mayfield organized a getaway to the Yellowstone Club in Big Sky, MT. His invited guests were Beckham, Jarvis Landry and Austin Hooper.

Less than six weeks later, Beckham’s father reposted the infamous video showing Mayfield misfiring for Beckham or ignoring him when open in four games. The video submarined Mayfield's ability to lead the team going forward.

Four days later, Beckham’s rep and the Browns reached a contract agreement to release him, rather than waive him, ostensibly for Beckham to be able to pick his next team.

“Hurt? No. Surprised? Yes,” Mayfield said of the breakup. “I think there are different things that play a factor into it. I have had conversation with his dad before man-to-man, face-to-face. I was pretty surprised by the video and the intentions and the feelings behind it. I would be lying if I said otherwise. But hurt? No. I am good. I will be alright.”

At the Super Bowl with the Rams, Beckham was not sufficiently asked about his parting with the Browns and why he turned on Mayfield.

Recently, Browns players Jeremiah Owusu-Koramoah and Greg Newsome said on a podcast that Beckham was the best teammate they ever had. Newsome said the breakup was a distraction to the team. He walked back the comment this week and said the distraction didn’t cause the team’s demise.

Newsome also contended, “I don’t think I saw a change in their relationship. If you came into our locker room you would think they’re best friends still. And I think they’re still really good friends. Some things just didn’t work out. Everyone has friends where they don’t agree on certain things and that doesn’t separate their friendship or anything. They just didn’t click the best on the field.”

Also, Garrett made an Instagram post to Beckham, who is a free agent, with the caption “Come Home The Fellas Miss You.”

When Beckham replied with smiling emojis, Garrett responded, “It’s time.”

Meanwhile, with Watson’s availability clouded by a possible suspension, no Cleveland Brown has suggested the team should bring Mayfield out of exile to play in Watson’s place.

Why?

Nobody’s saying.