DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Kizer Round 3 ..

Kizer played his best game of his career. I liked his throws and his decision when he wanted and needed to scramble.

By the reaction of Duke, I think Kizer decided to try and be the hero and run the QB sneak.


Hue should have benched him at the half. Unless of course Hue called the play. I don't think Hue is a very smart coach, but I don't think he called that stupid play. I think Kizer was afraid to throw the ball there.

Kizer isn't going to make it. He's done.

Kessler is so bad.

Why hasn't Hogan been reinstated as the backup?

What do you mean the reaction of Duke?

I missed that.

\
Because he might actually be the best QB on the team?



But then again, we aren't concerned with that.

he threw his helmet after the play, cost us 15 yds on the ko , which is a pretty meaningless penalty when they are kicking off.

He took his helmet off and slammed it to the ground.

Kizer is slowly showing some improvement; he has a chance. Cody on the other hand looks totally lost...

I guess you missed the Houston game.

Here's a good synopsis, in video.

https://www.sbnation.com/2017/11/12/1664...-kizer-halftime

KInd of reminds you of the Dwayne Rudd move.

Kizer has potential and it is too early to give up on him. But man, Wentz and Goff look great. We could've had those guys. I loved Wentz, didn't know enough about Goff. I don't know if Kizer can belike them in his second year. If he has a great attitude and is a film room maniac, maybe. But I still would draft a QB in the first. And someone to throw the damn ball to.
Would folks trade Kizer straight up now for Trubisky?

In a ny second .....

Shouldn't this go into that whether a rookie at Qb or the skilled positions, RB, Wr, that we should ignore what happens in the growth process the first 8 or so games of the first year.

There is an article about Kizer from Cle.com or such, from today which mentions he was happy to play the whole game not get benched.

That reminds me.

Kizer did start game 1, and 5 and 1/2 quarters later, he first sat, for the Migraine in game 2.

Then there's been the off and on's, I will be happy when he gets a full four quarter game in and plays all the snaps, if he does and plays well.

He can't control his taking that hit to the ribs today, but it is also a miss of half of the 4th.

Osweiler is playing for the Bronco's vs the Patriots?

Why didn't the Browns hang on to Osweiler, 10 weeks ago, in August?

Osweiler, that's why.

Brock should have been our starter this year.

LOL

Our runaround with Osweilier this offseason cost this team at least 3 victories.

I wasn't joking.

I agree with you. His experience trumped anything the other QB's might have shown. It was a mistake letting him go.

yeah, lets put a guy out there who's even less an NFL qb than what we have...

Brock is completing 52% to Kizers 52.8%, neither one are any good, Kizer is a rookie who came out too early, what's Brocks excuse. For the record, I don't think Kizer is an NFL QB either. But lets not pretend Brock would have won here either

I didn't say he would have won here. I said he should have started here.

The experience is enough that I would have kept Brock and let Kizer sit the season out and learn.

I kinda agree with you, it would have let Kizer sit and learn for 10 games and give him the last 6 games to see what he can do.

It's water under the bridge now.

He wasn't going to learn anything by watching Brock, other than to be exactly how he is now, erratic and unable to read a defense. The reading the defense is going to come from live reps. He's getting much more valuable experience now than if he was watching Brock. Kizer for me still has a ton of question marks, he seems to still be slow reading, he checks into wrong plays quite a bit,(i'm not sure giving a rookie the ability to change plays is smart), and he still makes bad throws. Yesterday there was some growth, but its going to take alot more than that for me to not pick a QB #1 overall. I think you still do regardless and then at worst you have an asset you can trade.

If they wanted to keep a bridge QB for him to learn from they had McCown who would have been perfect mentor.

I disagree. He would have learned a ton. The biggest thing is that he would be working on being a better QB rather than the weekly game plan every week.

He also would have learned that a veteran QB is not going to call a running play with 10 seconds left on the clock.

We'd probably would have had a couple of wins already if Brock was the QB simply because we would not have had as many time management issues.

So we are 2-7 with Brock...that's improvement...Kizer is 21, has all tools, desire, but lacks NFL experience. Do we bench Njoku for blocking stupidity allowing QB hit which could have cost the game, how about Zeitler, our highest paid G for his key screwup. Humans make mistakes and young teams make more than older teams normally. I see Kizer growth, IF...IF he continues to improve we may have something. How'd you like to have Bortles, year 5? throwing like he did...and Jags won, this game is TOO screwy sometimes....GO Browns!!!

While I'm not going to agree or disagree, I will say this. There is no steadfast rule on this. Some QB's flourish by sitting and watching a veteran. Some learn by trial under fire. I don't think anyone can say which would work best for any QB unless they really knew that QB and worked with them on a consistent basis.

As for Kizer, I'm not sure playing him was the wrong thing. I'm not saying it was the best thing, but I think those making assumptions about it being the wrong thing may be incorrect. I've never seen Kizer rattled or lose his composure. He seems to be a smart kid who stands in there. Some rookie QB's simply don't possess that mind set. Some crumble under the pressure. That doesn't describe Kizer to me.

Let's look at Carson Wentz. He started as a rookie. He had an impressive first few games then went straight into rookie mode. He learned under fire. And just look at the QB he is today. Would that have happened if he had sat on the bench last year? Would he have learned his reads and progressions, get up to the speed of the game by sitting on the bench? Did starting him as a rookie ruin his development?

Now before I start hearing this, "But he was more ready to start", I suggest people look at his performance from game 4-16 last year. The kid took his lumps too.

Now I'm not saying it will work out the same for Kizer. What I can say is that while people act like they know the answer, it isn't as clear cut as some make it sound.

To clarify my point about Brock.

--I think having him start would have allowed Kizer to further work on his mechanics. He's made improvements in that area, but being thrown into the fire caused him to resort to some of his mechanical flaws. That is not an insult. It's what almost everyone does.

--We have a very young team w/virtually no playmakers at WR and even TE. A qb that has been there before would have been a calming influence on those guys and Kizer could have learned how to prepare for a game.

--We might have pulled out a couple of victories w/Brock. That doesn't seem that important because we would still suck eggs. However, every week people are piling on Hue regarding the team's record. I don't think many people expected a lot of wins this year and winning a few would have placated the masses to a certain extent.

I'm not saying my claim is correct about starting Brock. It's just my opinion and I don't think it's as outrageous as lead claimed.

Brock is a bad QB and never should have started here, not for a second.

They should have had a vet who could start until Kizer was ready. McCown or Keenum immediately come to mind.

FO and Hue both fell for the Kizer traits and it may have cost them both their jobs.

I tend to agree with you, but I don't think BO would ever last long has the starter.

We just have to see how Chicago is handling Trubisky to see the difference.

What's more important, to win 1-2 games or to develop a QB?

If the Run game does not work, you don't ask the rookie to win games and expose his faults and lack of experience. It will accomplish nothing.

j/c:

As many others said, I think Kizer probably had his best game in a Browns uniform. However, as it stands now, that still doesn't change the fact the QB should be a position we're lookin hard at with our two first rounders. We've seen good games from quarterbacks only to see them crap the bed the next game.

Next week, we play Jacksonville who as a very good defense, particularly in the secondary. I expect it to be a very tough matchup for him. In fact, I think many of the remaining teams we play have pretty good secondaries.

Hopefully Kizer's play (good or bad) tells us what we need to do in the 2018 draft.

Your premise of having someone else start/mentor while kizer sits isn’t outrageous, in fact hind sight it might have been the right move, I’m just saying that guy be Brock, he’s atrocious. Brock wasn’t going to mentor, he still believes he’s a starter, a guy like McCown, yes I would have been onboard with that because by all reports is a great mentor

If we wanted to win games we would've cut Brock after we traded for him and have Hue design a spread read option playbook for Kizer, that requires him to read half the field at a time. Instead we have a smorgasbord of a playbook designed around the talents of BO, Kizer and Kessler, who all couldn't be more different than each other. Kizer and the other players might also know what plays they are running.

As soon as Kiser drop backs and turns his noggin , thats where the ball is going !

No offense, but I think that your speculations about our offense is as far off base as can be.

It's cool. Hue bashing is the fashion of the forum now.