DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Browns' starting QB battle might be Cody Kessler vs. a rookie

My overall point is... if Kizer can't even beat out Kessler, then he's not ready.

I don't think it could be any more simple than that.

Exactly, he isn't ready so why push him and ruin him like we did others. Look, I'd like to believe my Browns are going to be playoff contenders this season but that is extremely unlikely. I've been saying 5 wins tops and another tough year with hopefully alot of progress and continuity. Let DK sit and learn and just play at the end of decided games. JMO

From what little we've seen, Brock should be our starting QB at this time.

But from all the posters who keep pushing this agenda of not starting the rookie, it didn't seem to hurt Dak, Carr or Wentz.

I think some posters only wish to look at one side of the coin.

It's going the way I thought it would. Brock gives them the best chance to win now. Kessler is most likely never going to be more than a back-up.

Kizer looked like a rookie that is still lost, but he didn't look Johnny Manziel lost. He is farther along than I expected. He'll see some playing time toward the end of the season because he does have a lot of very raw talent and they need to see that on the field at some point before they decide if they need to go high on a QB next year.

Hogan impressed the heck out of me and may show enough for us to keep 4 QB's on the roster.

Point well taken Pit. But being a Browns fan for 50 years I always want to come down on the side of caution. Other teams like the ones you mentioned have started rookie QB's have done o.k. We have too but I never remember one doing as well for us as those you mentioned. If you can think of one let me know. Maybe Bernie?

I guess what I was trying to say is there's no steadfast rule when it comes to starting a rookie QB. Once again, we don't have much actual evidence to go on other than one inter team scrimmage, but based on that evidence I agree that Kizer isn't ready to start. So I don't think that he is a very good example of what my point is.

My point is that I don't believe there should just be some unwritten rule that you should never start a rookie. There are cases where starting a rookie QB makes sense. I gave some examples of how it's worked out just fine.

So I'm very much in agreement with those that don't feel Kizer is ready to start. But it has to do with the fact he's not ready. Not because he's a rookie.

Or they prefer to look at the entire picture and understand that each situation is different ...

I'm pretty sure that all the guys you mentioned weren't BENCHED DURING GAMES in their last year of college .... or they would have been the clear cut starters with no questions asked if they had stood at their colleges for another year ... Kizer would have been in a competition ... theres a reason why a two year starter would have been in a comp with a guy that never started a game ...

being benched during games and being in a comp for the starting job after being the starter for two years doesn't reflect well on Kizer ...

Each situations different ... theres way more than two sides to this coin ...

But thats just me ...

Scratch the above ... i posted before u explained ...

Add Russell Wilson to that list too.

Brockweiler being named the starter for the PRESEASON opener doesn't mean much in the long run.....its all subject to change by week 1.

I agree with the move for several reasons:

-through the training camp up to the scrimmage he's looked good, despite playing with the 2nd unit while Kiser and Kessler have been spotty....can BO still look good with the 1s? The only way they can find that answer is to put him in with the 1s.

- the playing time for preseason games gives the gives the most but gradually decreasing time to 2nd/3rd teams guys. THEREFORE it only makes sense to put the players you want to give the most reps to on the 2nd/3rd units at the start of PRESEASON.

TLDR Kessler and Kiser need the extra work and NO needs to prove he belongs with the 1s.

We will see how Brock does "off the bench" on short notice. Which could be looked at as "#2 practice"

I have to say I have a little renewed faith in Hue. Earlier, this thread probably, I thought the QB competition didn't look to be fair, that Brock was looking like a side show and it looked to be deeply skewed towards Kiser.

I was wrong, and glad I was. Partly for the reason mentioned above, and mostly because I don't think Brock is that bad of a QB. I think Houston was a really bad fit for him.

The guy is in what, his 4th year? Lot's of really good QB took 4-5 years to blossom. If Brock is going to bloom in to a beautiful rose, he is right there, right now. He may never make it, but everything points to this year or next being the time it is either going to show or it isn't. He has flashed in the past, and has been the starter in winning football games. I am pretty sure he has started in more wins than losses.

I am a old guy. I have seen a lot of Browns QB's play. Actually, all of them, be it Otto's last season when I went to my first game with my Dad. This reminds me of when we picked up a guy named Bill Nelson. He was a nobody from the Steelers. He became a really good QB for us. Knees in those day were a shakey thing. He had bad knees and had to hang'em up fairly early, but Bill was a good QB for the Browns....maybe 1968'ish.

I just didn't want to see us pass on a guy who "might" hit his stride and we hit gold for the next 2,3,5 10 years.

When I say I saw them all, that doesn't mean live. Some were TV games. There was a time I couldn't make it back to Clevaland to watch games....work, young family, you folks know the drill.

You go to games when you have the money to burn, and that usually isn't when you are young in your career and have kids you are putting in private schools and have all the associated expenses that kids bring.


My hope is Brock is the guy we can play for the next 10 years. How good would that be??!!


Maybe Kiser becomes our Garappolo?

Just saying.

Alternate Theory: They're preparing Brock to be the backup

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/201...ek-one-starter/



Also, by not starting, the other two get to play more...

I don't see a clear lead by any of these QB's to be honest. I hope something clicks for one of them by the time the season starts. I also hope we find a way to keep Hogan on the roster because he looked decent in that scrimmage.

This is not surprising:



https://twitter.com/JeffRisdon/status/894640334524866560

I honestly don't care which ends up under center as long as they play hard and win some games. Just please don't be embarrassing and I'm good. I don't expect much this season but I want to see growth. I honestly think we've set up next year to draft our Franchise QB. JMHO

I see this article as far fetched and reaking of an agenda. Osweiler has been the whipping boy for many of these "journalists", and the above statements seem to try and convince people that they are in the know and smarter than the people in charge of the team.

It reminds me of the crap that comes from 12up. They act as if covering the Browns requires you to bash them continuosly while reporting on something good that happened at practice.

Everything that I've read so far from training camp points to him being the best of the bunch. IMO it is a no brainer to start the guy. I honestly think keeping Hogan and dumping Kessler is the smart move. Play BO until Kizer is ready, hoping that he does become viable at some point.

I don't think anyone can honestly say what is going to happen with this bunch, hopefully God throws us a bone for a change. Just competent play from any of these guys would be a breath of fresh air.

I said weeks ago that Kessler might be a TC cut, it wouldn't surprise me. I don't think we are showcasing Brock, either. Kizer already has out-performed Cody, from what I can gather. We either make Kiser the starter, or let Brock begin the season as. No. 1, giving Kiser a chance to develop.

I wish CK well, but it probably won't be in Cleveland. Weak arm, folks.

The only thing I have wanted is someone to step up and claim the position. Brock hasn't yet but is starting to pull away.

lol, every year we go through at least 3 QBs. Last year we used 5.

So I would expect us to keep 3 QBs this year on the roster, maybe a QB on the practice squad.

You really think that Kessler will be beat out by Kevin Hogan?


I could see Cody being our third string QB and deactivated on Sundays, but I have a hard time believing he'd be cut. I mean, this is his second year..... and he's already had in-game experience.

If we cut him, who would take that number 3 spot?

Hogan as it stands right now may be a better option than Cody. If nothing else he has a stronger arm which is one of the bigger knocks against CK.

Couldn't agree with u more on rushing Kizer to see what we have being FOOLS GOLD ..

Even if we have to trade up to get who we want ... we have the ammo to do it ...

That doesn't mean that the team sitting up there wants to do it.

Not sure where to put this:

http://nfltraderumors.co/dolphins-inquired-potential-trade-browns-qb-brock-osweiler/

Adam Schefter mentioned during an appearance on “The Dan Patrick Show” Monday morning that the Dolphins inquired about Browns QB Brock Osweiler before signing Jay Cutler. However, Cleveland wasn’t interested in trading him.

“I think the name Brock Osweiler came up [in Miami] … I was told Cleveland was not interested,” Schefter said, per Andrew Perloff.

Mary Kay Cabot has confirmed with sources that the Dolphins did inquire about a potential deal for Osweiler.

Pat McManamon believes it would take a “strong offer” for the Browns to part with Osweiler right now, despite the fact that they had him available for months after they acquired him in a trade with the Texans. In fact, McManamon says that Osweiler is the Browns’ “best option” at quarterback right now.

Earlier in the day, Browns HC Hue Jackson announced that Osweiler will start the team’s first preseason game.

“Brock hasn’t really gotten any first team reps and this will give him that chance,” Jackson said. “We look forward to seeing what he can do with this opportunity throughout the week and against the Saints.”

Osweiler, 26, is a former second-round pick of the Broncos in 2012. He played out his rookie contract with the Broncos before signing a four-year, $72 million contract with the Texans that included $37 million guaranteed back in March of last year.

The Texans traded Osweiler and a 2018 second-round pick to the Browns in return for a 2017 fourth-round pick.

Osweiler stands to make base salaries of $16 million (2017), $18 million (2018), and $13 million (2019) over the remainder of the contract. Although, a team can move on from him next with limited repercussions.

In 2016, Osweiler appeared in 15 games and threw for 2,957 yards while completing 59 percent of his passes to go along with 15 touchdowns and 16 interceptions. Pro Football Focus has him rated as the No. 32 quarterback out of 34 qualifying players.

I thought this was odd from Peter King:



https://www.si.com/nfl/2017/08/14/tampa-bay-buccaneers-roberto-aguayo-jason-licht-draft-bust-nfl

King was pretty accurate on his performance. Right now we're just looking for the best of the worst.

I disagree with King's above quote. I think Brock is still in line to start the season. This comment might have been true if Kessler had improved from last season to this season, but I've read nothing to suggest that that's been the case.

I think Hue needs to win games this season. Of the QBs in the room, only one has done so in the NFL....no matter how bad he played last year. I think it's coming down to Osweiler v Kizer for Week One. I could be wrong, but I think Hue has moved on from Kessler as a starter. Perhaps he is fine as a backup (that's important in the NFL) but I don't think he'll give him a shot to be THE GUY.

We'll see.

This doesn't make any sense. Brock Osweiler won games because he played on the Texans (who had a very good defense in a bad division). Brock Osweiler winning games with the Texans in 2016 has nothing to do with his performance in 2017.

If you're measurement on who should start is measured by who has won games in the NFL, we should go out and sign Tebow. Didn't he win just as many games with Denver as Brock?

And he won a playoff game also ... so he would be way ahead of Brock by that statistical measurement ... *LOL* ....

That playoff game was the first time i ever rooted for tebow ... *LOL* ...

I understand where Memphis is coming from and while games won in the past is not the sole metric (and nobody is saying it is), it does have a place in decision-making. Memphis is not wrong in what he stated...

Thats your and Memphis's opinion ... I couldn't agree less ...

If CK played in Houston last year ... he would have won games ...

I believe BO is our best option right now ... not because i think he's good but because CK hasn't improved one little bit ...

If u want to make the argument BO is the best option now cause he's playing better than the other two ... i wouldn't disagree ... but IMO the fact he won games last year is BS ...

Among the three QBs that are in that room in Berea, I think winning NFL games is an important factor to consider among the three, especially considering what we saw from Kessler who played in many himself. I don't think we are considering bringing in another QB.

Now don't get your britches in a knot, Diam. I was clear in stating that games won is not the only factor. I don't pretend to know how much weight it carries, but certainly is a consideration...

My britches are fine ... BITE ME ... *LOL* ...

For me .. if all things were equal ... then it would become a factor ... in a battle between BO and CK all things are not "equal" ...

BO was in the league how many years going into last year? ... we all know CK was a rookie ... so BO had a big advantage in that category when taking things into acct. .. to counter that CK has an entire year in the system ... so if he couldn't seperate himself from BO that would be a negative for CK ... so maybe things could be equal .. *L* ..

As of right now .. it don't matter .. BO is playing "better" than CK .. so its a mute point ...

j/c:

King's analysis was crap.

I know that most of you do not like Brock and that is fine. However, I don't think the guy is as bad as many of you make him out to be.

When I started going through his available videos, he really surprised me by some of the things he did. Not many of you were willing to actually watch the videos because your minds were made up. That's intelligent.

Brock did some very good things in Denver. I can see why teams [not just a team] wanted him. He is not nearly as bad and hopeless as all the "QB Gurus" on this board say he is.

I don't know if he can be a decent starter, but I'm willing to watch what he does w/an open mind.

I am also willing to trust Hue to play the guy who gives the team the best chance to win games. And I do think it is important that this group wins some games last year after last year's pathetic won/loss record.

Brock's problem is that he has been consistently inconsistent.

We could win with him. He wasn't as poor as his stat line looked, and he was put in a bunch of awful down and distance situations. Hopefully, we'll get things cleaned up around him, and he'll look better this week.

The QB that put him in those awful situations should be held accountable.