DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum AFC North Q&A: Who should start at quarterback for the Browns in 2017?

Another season means another round of questioning the Cleveland Browns' quarterback situation. They traded for Brock Osweiler, drafted DeShone Kizer and kept Cody Kessler. ESPN's AFC North reporters weigh in on which one should start.

http://www.espn.com/blog/cleveland-brown...-browns-in-2017

Jeremy Fowler, ESPN's Pittsburgh Steelers reporter: Not the sexy answer, but probably Kessler. He's not dynamic, but he's accurate, avoids turnovers and seems poised to give the Browns the best chance to win unless Osweiler or Kizer outperform him in training camp. That Hue Jackson called Osweiler a "pleasant surprise" is a nice offseason story, but Osweiler had everything around him to succeed in Houston and played so poorly that the team parted with a second-round pick for the right to dump him. Yes, fresh starts can work for some and Osweiler's arm strength fits Jackson's passing offense. It's just hard to trust him to throw under pressure. Kizer can be the future but probably needs a year to learn and develop.

Jamison Hensley, ESPN's Baltimore Ravens reporter: Carson Wentz. Oh, I digress. That's so 2016 draft. The answer this year should be Osweiler. He's the only one with the combination of experience and an NFL arm. Kessler and Kevin Hogan can't drive the ball downfield. Kizer isn't ready to start right away. Just ask Notre Dame coach Brian Kelly, who suggested Kizer should've stayed in college another season. The Browns took Osweiler and his $16 million salary primarily to get a second-round pick. But Cleveland can't overlook that Osweiler has done something that few Browns quarterbacks have -- win. He's 13-8 (.619) as a starting NFL quarterback. For that reason, the Browns should give Osweiler an opportunity to be a stopgap this season.

Katherine Terrell, ESPN's Cincinnati Bengals reporter: Browns general manager Sashi Brown has already stated he intends to give Kizer some playing time this season. If he proves he's ready, they shouldn't hesitate to see what they have, especially after years of struggling to find a quarterback. But if he's not, let the best man win between Osweiler and Kessler. Kessler knows the offense after playing nine games last season. Osweiler is coming off a terrible season in Houston, but he would give them an experienced starter. The Browns shouldn't throw Kizer to the wolves before he's ready, but it seems likely he'll see the field at some point this season.

God. The deja vu is crushing. Qbs here are like Groundhog Day.

What can possibly go wrong?

Again and again . . . .

Before camp... i'd go with Kessler.

Three different choices for the three different reporters. LOL

That speaks to how unsettled the position is.

Somebody get Crennel on the phone, we need to flip a coin

Can you find a coin w/three sides?

do a round-robin flip-off with all of them to get it down to just two choices, then flip

Rock, Paper, Scissors

I think we'll get a lot more figured out in training camp. Right now, Osweiler and Kizer supposedly look good, but that's with little contact and no pads, etc.


It's not that I don't think Osweiler and Kizer can't do it, I just think, OTA's and Mini-Camp suit them the best. We'll see how their accuracy and technique fairs when you've got the defenders coming at you full speed.

And that's not to say that that's where Kessler excels. We'll also see if this work with Tom House improves anything then as well. I just think that for Brock and Deshone, they're gonna look better in mini-camp and OTA's. We'll have a much more realistic view of how things look during Training Camp.

Either way, I'd like to at least have the QB situation figured out by the end of Week 1's Pre-Season Game.

Has Hensley always been such a boob?

I actually have faith in the FO this year that we won't see Kizer anytime before mid-year. If we're tanking hard at that point and neither Kessler or Osweiler has been productive, I'm fine with seeing what Kizer has so we know whether or not we use our draft capital to pursue Darnold. (although disclaimer...I've watched precious little of Darnold so I'm not anointing him the next big thing quite yet)

I stand by the idea that Kessler will show marked improvement this year and if the OLine can keep him upright, he'll perform well.

We have consensus! No one knows.

I think this is what we should do to anyone that thinks they know which QB should start the season at QB before training camp has even began. lol

THE OBVIOUS ANSWER IS ALL 3!

Now I'm not against, or think finding "the" "guy" is going to not be the best Thing!! Obviously if you can find a winner, a real winner, head and shoulders above the others, YOU STICK WITH HIM, BUT! Get Real

This is maybe the 10th time since 1999 that the Browns are going to (through injury, or ineptitude)"most likely" use 2! 3! or More quarterbacks in the upcoming season.

Didya ever get distracted in the middle of making a poin

+1, best player first. IF/When we are out of contention- Kizer, to determine where we draft QB next year. Hope we have a solution on today's roster. Go Browns!!!!

Nice idea in a perfect world, but the NFL puts a wrinkle in any gameplan. All longtime Dawgtalkers have been watching the Browns long enough to know that since 1999, or since 2002, or since, however recent, even as recent as 2014ish,;;

the idea of sitting the guy because he's not ready goes OUT THE WINDOW, when the coach sees his one guy FAIL on a Grand Scale, and hopes somehow, something different, will be something better.
AKA: starting the next available QB; in the upcoming week.

Doesn't your answer presume that Kizer can't earn it in camp? If he demonstrates he's the best QB by your metric, what then?

If we go by what this Message board read on draft day 2017, and if it is true that the Team wanted (some other guy) at pick #11ish in the 1st round, but did not get him.

If that were true, and then, because of circumstances, IF they decided on Kizer as a consolation prize whom they really didn't want. And If it were true, the "COACHES"/ "TEAM" decided to go with the more experienced guys, Osweiler NFL wise,.. and Kessler 1/2 a year in a Browns uniform wise,..

and didn't play Kizer a single down all year, AND, decided to get a guy with their first pick next year, and part ways with Kizer next offseason, having had him never take a snap.
If the team decided that, then, There would really be no reason to whine; but I think, pretty sure, some fans would pitch a conniption fit.
And I'm not sure why. ( We all know it ain't going to happen, they'll let him play some, this year, )

But! I don't see any reasoning, that demands, that they HAVE to, just because, because of April 2017???,
That's not relevant to me, not if the team likes the others better, all this time going forward.

( And opponents would have a bigger argument, 12 years ago, where the draft picks had big money contracts, but the new labor relations, put the big money with more veteran players.)

^^remember I said if the TEAM decides. ^^

because reporters might say ... If they drafted him they have to try him... and I disagree, I don't think drafting him should force the teams hand any way whatsoever.
(Because at this point, all they'd be talking about is the wasting of a #52 overall picks value, but we've recently seen the totally abysmal return on investments of Justin Gilbert, and Johnny Manziel, and the team survived those; which represent the wasting of a #8's and #20 somethings overall picks value.)

I say we just bite the bullet and bring back Kosar.

Kizer needs to sit even if he's better than Cody and the bum at this point ..

He's not ready ... just cause hes better than the others doesn't make him ready ...

U want to destroy the kids confidence .. play him before hes ready ... look what happend to CK last year ... he wasn't ready and it showed ...

At least the day he is in charge of carpooling people home after practice would be interesting, to say the least.

How do you generally know someone is ready until they play?

How about the one that wins the job in training camp.

Picking winners without relevant sample size is just silliness.

Brock is actually the best fit for Hue's offense, so if it looks even in camp, I bet he gets the nod.

Cody is the safe choice, but doesn't have much upside.

I'll be extremely shocked if Kizer has picked up enough of the basics to even be in the conversation in camp.

OK, so Here's what will happen, I believe.
They will start one of the 3, I'm leaning not toward Kizer because he's technically a rookie, to open the season, and that player will play reasonably well, and as long as they're healthy, and moderately move the ball, they'll get to stay in the whole game.

This will continue, for the first 2 games, before they will go to the Other viable option, (I'm leaning not toward Kizer because he's techinically a rookie, ) and he will start the 3rd game, and come in and play reasonably well, and as long as he moderately moves the offense, He'll get the whole game.

The 4th game, may be a toss up, but Probably all 4 will be losses, and by game 5, Fans will be Klamoring for Kizer to start, but the Coach Won't! Because He's a coach, it's his decision, and Pride have him wait until he's good and ready.
Roudnd about game 7 when the Browns are 1-5, or 0-6, I think Kaiser will get his first action, either to start, or coming in Mid game.

They'll then, Stick with Kaiser too long, though I think he'll struggle, Because techinally he's still a rookie.
The Bye week will bring a lot of questions, but they'll "stick" with Kaiser, even though struggling, and will for the next 4 games until he completely sinks or swims, and the Browns have 3 or less wins coming up on the final 4 games of the season.
Then they'll switch back to the game 1 starter, who'll play consistently average and win 1, maybe of the last 4 games.

^ That's what I think, Will happen, but probably not, it'll probably be influenced by some injuries, and players returning from injuries.

Here's what I'd have them do If I could. It's my theory on Qb's when they're even, ( but this only works for 2 qb's)

If really, 2 are even, and I don't espouse this game 1, I think you'd have to be at least 3-4 games in, the opening day guy should get whole games to prove himself.

If 2 are even, Pick a starter, tell him he gets the whole 1st half, to play the game. ( and tell them this pre game)
Now the backup, get's the first 2 drives of the 3rd quarter, If he can score on those 2 drives, he stays in, and get's another drive to continue.
If he doesn't, go back to the game starter for 2 drives, and if he can score, he stays in.
And Mid 4th quarter, stick with one of them.

Now Given the Browns situation, this year, I'd do this.
If You want to assume Kasiser is the Man, he's the solution, being he's still technically a rookie.

I'd do this. Have Osweiler, and Kessler, battle, till the bye week, with the understanding that Kaiser will get chances after the bye week and be the longterm starter and the, and Kessler will be the longterm backup, and Osweiler will move on.

Or maybe I've got the names wrong.

My feelin is that they want brock to win the job outright so that they can trade him and get another high draft pick

I am not following your logic.

You think they will want to trade their best qb?

If Brock wins it, he starts. Cody become the trade bait.

I don't think they necessarily want Brock to win it, but I do believe that they are hoping Brock does enough to increase his value enough for us to work a trade.

Start with this question: Are we going to carry 3 QB's on the 53 man roster?

Normally, I'd say no - but when you look at how many QB's we went through last year, and then factor in that we have a relatively high investment in a rookie, I think we likely will carry three on opening day.

If Brock plays well and takes the job, we perhaps don't trade him.

By the way, Hogan could outperform CK, there's no guarantee Kessler is even a Brown by September.

Wasn't there a rule change last year where the 3rd Qb doesn't count against the gameday roster?

My feeling is you should always carry 3 QB's. You need a back-up for your back-up.

If QB is the most important position, it requires 3 roster spots IMO. Your 3rd stringer might not be all that good, but he is better than a guy who played QB in HS who is now playing WR or DB in the pro's.

Hogan stinks ... hes worse than BO ....

if CK hasn't shown improvement i could see him getting cut ... but not for Hogan ... a surprise cut ...

If they did cut CK it would impress me in that it would prove there going to admit there bad personal choices and move on ... obviously making a mistake like that is huge and we can't make them too often .... but it would show there willing to admit to there mistakes ....

Hopefully he improves enough to at least keep Kizer where he belongs for at least 1/2 the year ... Kizer needs time ... we can't rush him ...

yes would you turn down a high draft pick for brock?

sorry I would rather get a high pick rather than a conditonal pick if he is 3rd string

I would be surprised if we didn't keep 3 and wouldn't be surprised if we kept 4.

Is that 53rd roster spot on a non-playoff team so important that you drop a young QB that some other team is going to find a roster spot for?

Having extra QB's that are young can only be a good thing when you haven't figured out the QB spot yet.

I think we should do what ever is necessary to get to the top and draft a QB anyway. This "we have to see what we have in whomever before we draft a QB" is crazy. Unless Kizer steps up in camp, starts right away and kicks ASS? We need to draft a QB. Then let Kizer and that guy compete for the spot. I have no problem with them keeping 4 or 5 QB's on the roster until we KNOW for a FACT which guy is the franchise. Hell keep half a dozen. If Brock looks good this year then keep him, Kizer and STILL draft one. We have to find a STUD QB for the longer term stability of this team. Until we have our Brady or Manning we keep looking no matter what.