DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum QB choices

That rumor was out there, but Kelly's hiring in San Francisco quelled it a bit.

I have to wonder if Kelly even knows what he wants.

I read somewhere that Kelly was going to pitch Kaepernick to teams in his interviews. He ended just getting hired by the team that already has Kaepernick.

Griffin's contract for 2016 that Washington picked up is $16 million. No one is going to trade for that. That's why they have to cut him.

Manziel's contract is 1.16 million in 2016 and 1.13 million in 2017, that's an attractive contract and if we can't deal him this off season I think we should keep him as 3rd string and see if someone wants him before the trade deadline. QB's get hurt and someone is almost always in need.

Teams that trade for QBs midseason want them to be able to hit the gorund running and learn the playbook quick. Manziel is. . . not that.

Not necessarily. If they have a backup that can take over and have him be their backup is all it would take.

We dropped a 1st on the guy, he's cheap, let's not be stupid and just cut him outright when we don't have to.

He's a sunk cost.

Hue talks too much!

None of you "we gotta draft a qb this year" guys answered this earlier, so I will try again.

What weakness impacted us more this past year? Rank them from 1 to 4.

Poor qb play?

Lack of a stud WR?

Lack of an impact pass rusher?

Lack of a shut-down corner?

QB was certainly number 4, yet you guys wanna gamble on a guy w/the second overall pick who wouldn't have been in the top 5 the year Manziel was drafted. That's pretty freaking dumb.

Not sure what Hue J is going to do with Johnny, But I would like to see what he could do with him.

Hue Jackson: Browns need 'to go get' QB with No. 2 pick in draft

TAMPA, Fla. -- It's been less than a week since the Cleveland Browns announced the hiring of Hue Jackson, but the new head coach is already talking about a draft that is more than 100 days from solving the team's most glaring need.


Bleacher Report SXM Verified account
‏@br_radio

Hue Jackson on the Browns: "If there is a QB at #2 that is a best fit for our team, we need to go get him. It's my opinion we need a QB."

That the Browns would take a quarterback with the No. 2 overall pick in the draft would not be surprising; NFL Media analysts Daniel Jeremiah and Bucky Brooks both have Cleveland taking one in their first 2016 mock drafts that will be published Monday (that's called a tease).

What is a bit surprising, however, is Jackson being so candid about the Browns' draft plans in just his first week on the job. The draft process for most team general managers and coaches starts this coming week at the East-West Shrine Game practices.

Unless the Tennessee Titans, who took Marcus Mariota with the No. 2 pick in the 2015 draft, trade the top pick this year, the Browns should have their choice of quarterbacks. Among the names likely to be tossed around most in the Browns' war room (at least as it looks 100-plus days out) include Cal's Jared Goff, North Dakota State's Carson Wentz and possibly Paxton Lynch of Memphis.

While none are in the Andrew Luck category, all would seem to be an upgrade from every quarterback Jackson currently has on his roster, including Johnny Manziel. NFL Media Insider Ian Rapoport reported that Jackson wants to move on from Manziel, but Jackson has insisted since his hire that he wants to evaluate Manziel before any decisions are made.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000...2-pick-in-draft

The top 3 guys are ranked higher than Manziel was in my opinion and I think we reached drafting Billy football. I do agree with you on QB not being the reason we lost.

I wanted Bridgewater in the worst way. I was--and am---very upset we passed on him. I like smart qbs. Teddy is extremely smart and will only get smarter.

I looked at your rankings and was evaluating them. It's pretty hard to rank them, isn't it? Well, except for number 4. And I completely agree w/you there.

It's really hard to rank the other three. I keep making arguments for all three.

I suppose the point is that all three are pressing needs and we are much more likely to fill one or two of those needs w/our first two picks and even all three w/our first three picks than we are by fixing our 4th problem by reaching for a guy w/the second overall pick.

I get what you're saying (and FWIW I'd rank them 1 - pass rusher, 2 - corner, 3 - QB, 4 - WR), but I don't think ranking them in this way is all that helpful. Maybe rather a grading scale for each of the position groups.

Based on this year I'd grade them (with C being league avg):
QB: C+
WR: C-
RB: C-
TE: A-
OL: C

DL: D
LB: D
CB: C-
S: C+
K: C-
P: A

So yes, on one hand I agree that QB wasn't our worst position group and indeed based on how McCown played, was much better than expected. Competent even.

The problem is, if you have an A at QB, the rest of the offense can be C or worse and you'll win a lot of games. If the QB position is a C or worse, everything else better be a high B or A or you aren't winning very much. QB, while not our worst position, wasn't an A. That leaves us with two options to start winning.

1) Upgrade the QB position to try and find that A guy.
2) Upgrade every other position on the offense/defense in hopes that's enough to overcome an average/competent QB.

Option 1 requires 1 pick. Option 2 requires about 8 (of which you aren't getting all those impact players in one off-season). Both are POSSIBLE. McCown isn't going to magically become an A, nor is he getting any younger, so if the team THINKS any of these QBs in this draft have the chance to become that guy in the next couple years....then you have to take them with the #2 pick.

Look at Pitt and NE and Seattle and Carolina today. Take the QB off any of those teams and they're probably 500 or worse ballclubs (and that's mostly b/c of their defenses).

I like that take. Innovative and well thought-out.

I guess my point is this, Graff.............I do not see any qb in this year's draft class that is worthy of such a high pick and to take one just because we do not yet have our franchise qb while also knowing that we have so many other pressing needs is counter-productive.

Does that make sense?

I would be all for grabbing a qb at number 2 if there was a Bridgewater, Carr, Stafford.........heck, even a Mariotta coming out.

I simply do not like any of this year's qbs that much and I think we have other needs that could be upgraded this year. This year's qb class reminds me of guys like Locker, Ponder, Gabbert, Gino Smith, Manuel, etc.

Now, you might think one or more of these guys is thee guy and that if fine. That would just mean we differ in our evaluations of qbs, but I don't think drafting a crappy qb just because we need one makes more sense than drafting a quality player at another position of need.

One more point to help clarify my position: I do think we are going to have to get a qb. I just don't think this year's crop of qbs is going to solve our problem at the position.

No I agree with everything you're saying. No reason to draft a guy just to draft a guy. That's why I emphasized that the org needs to THINK one of them can be that guy.

Personally, I think both Goff and Wentz have a chance at becoming a quality, winning NFL QB (B or higher based on the grading scale above). Of course they might not. Good people can have differing opinions on that though.

To put it another way, what QB would you rather have at the helm of the Browns in 2018?

Josh McCown at age 38.
Johnny Manziel.
Austin Davis.
2nd year of Jared Goff/Carson Wentz.

Me? I'll take option 4 and take my chances.

And no I don't see any of the late round project QBs in this class being any better than our other options 1-3 above.

I guess one other route would be to find yet another FA vet, but those guys are 1-2 year stopgaps at best (C range based on grading above) and we already have exactly that guy in McCown (unless Hue plans on dumping him) and I'd still rather have a QB for the future, with the CHANCE of becoming an A guy rather than that.

Although that is the title of the article, nowhere, nohow did Jackson say that. Not even in the article that has that headline.

What Jackson said was, "If there is a QB at #2 that is a best fit for our team, we need to go get him. It's my opinion we need a QB."

No way should that be interpreted that Jackson is saying the team needs to spend the #2 pick on a QB. He simply isn't saying that.

The Browns have pick 2 and pick 32.. essentially 2 first round picks. I would love to get Bosa at #2 and pick up Wenz, Cook or Cardale Jones later in the draft. Plus.. don't forget that Pryor is on the roster and Hue has worked with Pryor, as a QB, in Oakland.

I will puke if we draft Cook or Jones at #32. Also, Pryor is not a quarterback. He's an athlete,

I agree Mac. The only question is if there is one worth a selection that high.

If we don't want him, get something, anything for him..

I wouldn't believe anything that anyone says about the draft at this point. Let the cat and mouse games begin.

What makes you believe that?

I don't know. The roster is weak. They will be changing both the offensive and defensive schemes again. It will take awhile for the team's analytics to overhaul the roster. The OL could be drastically weaker and putting a rookie qb behind that type of OL could prove to be a disaster.

I am leaning that way as well. If we want to draft QB high, then trade down and get an extra pick. Otherwise, the class is deep and I wouldn't be opposed to taking 2 QB's in the later rounds.

My biggest problem with Cook is that he's incredibly inconsistent and caves under pressure. He is going to be like a deer in headlights when being rushed by NFL speed.

Yes, the leadership thing is a small worry, but if he had the other tools, I'd take a risk that I could fix that.

I find myself kind of agreeing and disagreeing at the same time with you on this lol though much of my opinion is based on certain unknowns:

On OFF, I think the biggest thing we needed was a gamebreaker at RB and WR. IF Crow had played all season like he did the last few games (and we had committed to the run more), he and Duke would have satisfied that requirement. At WR, I really think if we get a game breaker, the rest of our WR group will be complete. Now whether that gamebreaker WR comes in the form of a prototypical guy like 2013 Gordon, or a Steve Smith Sr (in his Carolina days), I don't think matters. Benji was a deep threat, but we didn't have anyone on the OFF that was a consistent threat to take it to the house any time he touched the ball.

On DEF, man I don't know. It's hard to sort out when your last DC made such a mess of things.

I think the key, and you touched on it, is IF we can keep this Oline together. Analytics might say this is the last optimal time to get rid of Joe T because of the draft picks he can get us. I don't see anything wrong with our players being evaluated in those terms because I'm not so quick to think that just because Sashi walks up to Hue and says the Bat Computer says to trade Joe T that it's an automatic. You would still have to have a result where we get a starter quality LT to replace him, on top of that, there are other considerations in terms of line cohesion, etc. I could be wrong about that. Afterall, it sounded like Chud had zero say when Banner unloaded TRich.

I do agree with you that it'll take awhile for the analytics to revamp the roster, which is why it'll be very interesting to see how they approach it. Let's say on DEF, does Hue care what type of DEF we run, so long as it works? Do we bring in a DC that would gut a lot on that side of the ball in order to build his DEF from the ground up? Or, do we go after a guy like Horton who if memory serves me right the last time, looks to see what he can do with who we already have and build from there?

As for QB, I'm in agreement with you. But I do have to disclose that I don't follow college ball so my opinion isn't nearly as qualified as yours or those who have a favorite for us to get at #2. I AM comfortable with keeping McCown and Austin on the roster though, particularly if we draft someone.

j/c

I'm not advocating a QB at #2. In all honesty I've been too apathetic to really do my normal draft analysis with any real vigor. So I won't even comment on my thoughts as to this QB class. I will however point out a few basic concepts that I believe apply to drafting a QB.

1. If you don't have your QB, you need a QB. No matter a teams weaknesses, the foundation of any team is the QB position. Every new FO and HC wants a QB that fits their scheme and desires in running an O. Whether that sounds like a logical step moving forward, that's what this regime wants unless they see that QB already on our roster. I don't believe they do.

2. Hue is an O coach. To build his O the way he wants, he will want "his guy". Now that could be at #32 for all I know. But if Hue doesn't believe it's a sure bet that his guy will be there at #32, don't be surprised if he takes him at #2.

3. Team chemistry. As much as some people want us to stick with JFF or wish for us to retain him for a future trade, I believe a lot of what will transpire depends a lot on Hue talking to our players. IF Hue finds that JFF is a major distraction to locker room chemistry, Hue may feel that a unified locker room and ridding it of the JFF distraction may be far more valuable than some low round pick you may garner in the future.

I do believe that if Hue sees a QB in this draft that he can build around, he will do what he needs to in order to draft him. I won't say that QB was our #1 problem in 2015, but with a 38 year old McCown and JFF at your disposal, you certainly can see it as a problem moving forward.

Well we have a chance to see whether any other team values a QB at the top of round 1.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2016/01/18/new-titans-gm-welcomes-calls-about-no-1-pick/

My thoughts exactly.

To me this was a foregone conclusion even before it was announced.

I will say this...

If we're going QB again, least we have a head coach with proven success with young qbs and I do love Hue's play calling. We'll obviously, unless Titans trade, will have first stab at any of the top knotch qbs in the draft.

Just hope we can solidify that position, sick of it being a carousel of rotating personnel.

I'd be schocked if they get any bites though unless somebody really wants Tunsil or Bosa.

Yeah the QB position wasn't the worse. But having one QB that can't stay healthy and aged, one QB that doesn't want to be here, and one practice squad QB. So it's either a QB in FA or one in the draft or both. I choose both.

If we determine there is a QB worth the #2 pick and a team is trying to trade up for the #1 pick, then we should also try and trade for the #1 pick.

Just don't pull a Heckert and get suckered into an unnecessary deal.