DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum QB choices

That was what the first point in the article I linked talked about. If he is who you want, take him and don't worry about if he is "overdrafted" or not.

The key is "if you want him..." I don't see anyone in this draft that I would want.

I know that we talk about getting a franchise qb every year. Perhaps some of you are conditioned to doing so, but really, was it our qb play that led to so many of our losses last year or was it that we lacked impact players in other positions, such as a fearsome pass rusher, an impact WR, and a shut-down corner?

I understand that Mac. That is why I said the odds are stacked against keeping him. But, Jackson is watching tape. I would bet Manziels was some of the first viewed. If he likes what he see's, coaches have a way of thinking they can "fix" a guy where others couldn't.

Based on what Hue said about the QB position, and what he wants from the QB position, Manziel stands about a 2% chance of returning. He would have to completely change who he is at a very basic level, and if you read other things Hue has said, that just doesn't happen all that often.

I think that Manziel is done .... and will be traded/released sooner rather than later.

I agree. Goff may be the best, but he isn't so good that some other team is going to give up 2-3 first rounders to the Titans to draft him.

The only concern for me is that the Titans aren't taking a QB. They could drop down 3-4 positions, get the player they want, and not take a randsom in picks. I mean, if you can still get the player you want, why wouldn't you take a 2nd rounder to move down? I know the history says the move is worth more in the way of picks, but if they determine a guy like Hargreaves is the guy they want, why not take a little more rather than scare people off?

Dalton has more talent, but I agree with your point.

People keep bantering around the term franchise QB. To me, there are maybe 5 of those in the league. What we need if we can't actually get a "franchise" guy is to get a good guy, like a Dalton or Flacco. We need to get over the idea we are going to find a Manning in his prime type of player.

I don't doubt that. That still doesn't mean he is worth the pick. But, it is a QB, so all solid thinking goes out the window when you are seeking one.

I agree. I also know that 2% means it isn't totally out of the question. Understand?

Yes!

I mean really what difference does it make. You can't assume your guy will be there in the middle. What if he is there, then what, you feel better about yourself drafting 18 instead of 2? In the end, it really doesn't matter if he is your guy he is your guy.

QBs are such a necessity they become a burden. Some teams have learned to adapt toward less valued. I still say Manziel can play if he gets his mind into the game. I equally think you can win with Hoyer. With Hoyer, you must remember he completed his first season. He is also on his fourth or fifth OC/HC too.

You don't see Dallas moving up to Tenn. spot ?

Possibly. If so, let them. Then we take Bosa.

Sometimes I think people confuse "best QB in the draft" with "franchise QB." They are not the same thing. If you draft the best QB at #2 just to draft a QB and look like you are addressing the problem, even though you don't think he is the guy to get you where you need to go, then you have hindered the team for 4 years.

If Hue thinks Goff is the guy, then we will take him at #2. If he passes on him at #2 then he does not think he is the guy. And a bunch of people on this board will start questioning his knowledge of QBs.

If Dallas moves up for him at #1, then good for them and Tenn.

You guys wanting to take em at #2 like they are sure things. These guys are 2 to 3 year projects and there are more guys that are close to the same farther down on the list.

I don't see the Cowboys making that move unless they believe that there is only one QB worth an early pick. They could sit at #4 and take the 2nd best available QB. I don't forsee any movement in the top few spots...

Not if they sign RGIII or Manziel.

Teams with QBs don't usually trade up in the draft to get new QBs. Romo is still their starter for at least next season.

I was worried about the 49ers before they hired Chip Kelly, but now it seems like they are going to roll with Kaepernick.

Thank you for your participation as the Cleveland Browns starting QB Mr. McCown.


Mary Kay Cabot Verified account
@MaryKayCabot
#Browns Hue Jackson also says McCown did great things but 'he's getting up there age-wise,' time to look to future http://www.cleveland.com/browns/index.ssf/2016/01/hue_jackson_says_johnny_manzie.html …

Link

#savage

He's not wrong. This is awesome. We have a guy who says what everyone is thinking -- and it's our head coach.

everyone? hardly...you're far from everyone

Sorry. I meant everyone rational.

Does he want to be our QB coach?

He's fine as a backup.

why would we want that?

My bad. I read that wrong. I didn't see 'starting' in that post. Originally, I thought Hue was alluding to not keeping McCown at all. My mistake.

I agree that if they don't want them, they shouldn't take them there just to take a qb. That is how you end up with a Ponder or Locker. I don't know enough about these qbs, I just hope the Bowns do.

I think I am pretty rational, and don't think we just need to slam the door on JM. I am fine if we don't want him. I am fine if we try to salvage something out of him via trade, but to me it is pretty stupid to trash him and kick him to the curb without trying to promote him a bit and trade him if indeed we don't keep him.

Talent isn't his problem. Maturity is his problem. Maturity is something most grow in to, though I admit some don't. If JM can grow in the mind, I still think he can be a pretty good NFL QB. I think it pretty irrational to just get rid of a guy because you don't like him without exploring all options to gain benifit to the team, be it by trade or keeping him and seeing if he grows in to the player you hoped.

I understand your viewpoint, but disagree.

To me the QB's in college are all just mediocre qbs. I mean I just don't see any great QB's coming out for some time. I am not current with freshmen though so forgive me IF I missed someone.

SO

that means no matter who we draft we are going to over draft him. Nothing we can do about that. The thing is we need to use that #2 pick on a QB not because its the best pick but to FORCE out team into developing him and sticking with him.

IF

we are going to be forced to develope our QB either way then it makes sense to take our lumps and go with the guy with the most potential. To me that is Lynch. The guy has monster physical traits. He throws a very nice ball. He is a hard worker and his teammates love him to death. Footwork can be cleaned up a bit with proper coaching and like all these QBs he can learn to read defenses when he gets here. Lynch has the highest chance of becoming a great QB of all the ones in this draft class because his physical tool far exceed anyone else's. I mean his physical frame and arm strength are way better than anyone else and his mobility is just a sweet extra.Lynch is the best QB in this draft potential wise.

Goff is a good prospect but I don't think you will ever see him surpass a Tannahill level per say. That's fine if Hue wants a game manager style QB. I think he would do very well in a WCO.

at 32 I would go with with Wentz if he is still there or maybe move up a little to get him. This is the option to go with if we took BPA at #2. I am not that opposed to this idea but I worry we get stuck in QB limbo by taking a QB late because the team will feel they can discard him instead of develop him vs if we take a QB at #2.

I want to see this team go all in on whatever QB they draft and stick by him no matter what for at least 3 seasons.

Sounds irrational to me. I'd rather see us get a pick, player, or see him make it here rather than see you get a boner because he was cut.


Just saying

Cutting a player who hasn't performed as a first round pick should, lied to his bosses, and is addict seems irrational?

There are rational arguments on both sides, ThomasE's is not one of them (perhaps I should have used a different word).

I am not taking a position against your points. I am simply lookig at the business end of the deal. It's stupid to simply get rid of the guy without exploring all options. Even if you don't like the option of keeping him to see if he grows in to his talent, why not see if you and get a pick or player?

If you would be willing to take a 1st rounder for him,(which you would, and we won't get) why not wait and see if you can get a 6th rounder or some reserve guard with some prospect?


It makes no sense to simply cut the guy at this point. If we were a week away from traing camp, I might agree if we simply decided we didn't want the distraction. Now? No way.

i'd keep manziel and bench him for the rest of his contract. Then suspend him everytime he does something disgraceful

You could always take the Bowe approach instead of suspend ...Healthy inactive..Next year is do/die for Johnny's career (year 3 of 4) imho

At this point you pretty much have to cut Manziel. I understand the want to trade him, but if the market isn't there, then I don't see a point in trying to create one. Best case scenario, you manage to invest time and resources into someone who, at best, could be traded for a third round pick. Unfortunately, you run the risk of him alienating himself further while distracting teammates.


We should cut him soon. And, honestly, good riddance. I'm tired of talking about everything else he does besides playing football games. I'm annoyed that I possess knowledge and, even worse, an opinion on his GF. I'm tired of talking about him like he's an unruly child in a 3rd grade classroom. This nonsense has to stop.

That isn't the way to conduct your affairs. If you keep him, it needs to be out of hope, not spite.

lol that wont end even after he is gone. You know that right?

Honestly, if the Redskins don't think they can get anything for Griffin, does anyone really think any team will offer anything in trade for Manziel?

I say treat him like anybody else with a substance abuse problem should be treated. Tough love. If he proves that he's got his act together, welcome him back. If not, get what you can when his contract is over or next season starts. We don't have to cut our losses right now, nor do we have to play him. We'll know by the time next season rolls around whether he's worth a roster spot. We've got nothing to lose and little to gain by cutting him now.

When Joe Flacco came into the league, he was also seen as a 2-3 year project.

He started from day 1, and the Ravens went 11-5, IIRC.

Roethlisberger wasn't "ready", but he wound up starting 13 games in 2004, and went 13-0.

Sometimes the QB who has the right attitude and desire can overcome the difficulties of not knowing everything yet. (and no QB knows everything as a rookie)

Something to keep in mind: Hue was a HUGE Colin Kaepernick fan. He wanted to draft him in Oakland.