DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Kizer rnd. 4

The more I read and think about our QB situation the more I wonder what we should do. I like DK a lot and feel he is making positive strides. If this continues I feel he can be our franchise QB especially if we get him some playmakers which should be a priority in the "18 draft. However, if we see what is deemed a franchise QB at the #1 pick I'm leaning towards taking him. Having 2 very good QB's is better than having none and we can get a lot for one if we decide to trade. JMO

I know you know Cam Newton is a good NFL Quarterback.
Whoa, (Just read his Wikipedia: ) ,
I KNOW I want someone like Cam Newton on the Browns. Wow!
Oh, I know, Baker Mayfield looks like the same type competitor, and I know you want Rosen, to each his own.

Cam Newton is a really good NFL QB. That looks a lot like I'd figure Baker Mayfield is going to look, so, thanks, I've got a good comparision,
Here's to hope the Browns go out and get him, Mayfield, and things look real up in the near future!

I don't see how people can watch this team and don't desperately want to use both 1st round picks to add skill postion talent that can help support the QB.

I don't understand it either. Just the odds alone of a mid second round QB, the fourth one drafted in his draft class, making it to be a franchise QB aren't good odds at all. As I've said many times, it doesn't mean he can't or won't end up a franchise QB, but that's a huge gamble.

We are in the perfect situation to address a position that's haunted our Browns for decades. Even if Kizer only improves a little we'll win some games next year. If it's found that Kizer isn't going to pan out for the long run, we'll be drafting someone elses leftovers yet again.

People wishing to turn their backs on the perfect situation to actually give us the best chance at addressing the franchise QB position, one that could answer the position for well over a decade, totally baffles me.

Goff was drafted. Then we passed on Wentz. I don't want to see that mistake happen again. I haven't called for the FO to be fired even though I've been tempted to. But if they pass on addressing a QB with the first pick, I'll probably hop on that bandwagon.

If we win 2 games out of the last 5, I’m hoping we take the best WR on the board and Barkley.

If we go winless, I hope we get Lamar Jackson and Barkley.

But as I’ve said before, it’s hard to truly know what we have in Kizer when the talent at the skill position is beyond lacking.

I think Sashi is trying to follow how the raiders built their team, which is why they went with Kizer in the 2nd round. I think he FO is going to give hue whatever offensive weapons he wants with the first two picks.

That's if you HAVE your QB. So far the evidence isn't exactly supporting that we do. You wish to gamble that we do. The odds suggest we don't. Kizer was the fourth QB taken in his draft class and was selected in the second round. You may wish to take a look at the odds of that being successful.

Bro

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/agent...likely-to-fail/

http://www.cleveland.com/datacentral/index.ssf/2015/04/success_for_quarterbacks_picke.html

It ain’t all that high in the 1st round either. 36 percent.

Try the first QB taken in the draft. The later you draft a QB, every time you start drafting leftovers, the odds go down.

sure, but just because you draft a guy #1 overall doesn't mean he's guaranteed to be the guy.

which is why i said before, this idea that you take one every year until you have one....how can you evaluate a QB after one year? especially a 1st or 2nd round pick?

to clarify, you already know what QB i would prefer next year. but at the same time, i have to acknowledge that Rosen or lamar could've very well look like Trash with this offense.

then what? we draft another one in 2019 cause the QB didn't look like a goat year 1?

To expand on this even further, people can't even agree on who the "best" college QB is from one year to the next. This time last year, everyone was pimping Darold, now it seems to be every new shiny object that played this year except Darnold. Most peoples' "evaluations" are really just regurgitated flavors-of-the-week based upon whomever the sites they read are pimping or running articles on.

this is true and also fair.

one thing people have said is that Kizer has the size and arm strength.

he's also bigger than Rosen. additionally, he's only a year older than Rosen.

So while i get people want who they want, i feel like -and probably the FO will go the same way - that we need to surround Kizer with some talent.

or it doesn't matter who we have behind center, they will look terrible.

No it doesn't. The odds are just far better than what we currently have.



You look at the odds of success and act accordingly. A mid second round pick, the fourth QB selected in a draft have much lower odds of success.



Josh Rosen is the most NFL ready QB since Andrew Luck. It's not even close.



No. At that juncture you have two young QB's to develop. Considering where Kizer was drafted, you have more than doubled your odds of having a franchise QB on your roster. Something we haven't had for decades.

There's no excuse to kick the perfect opportunity to find a franchise QB square in the nuts.

That's why you pay people seven figure salaries to figure it out and not depend on some internet claimed expert that couldn't sniff an NFL FO.

Yeah, God knows we're starving for draft picks. There's no way we can draft a QB at #1 and give him talent to work with at #7 and #33.

A WR or RB or OL's success is much more individual/independent of the surrounding talent then the QB position.

The QB position, especially a rookie or QB in the grooming phase, is very much dependent on the talent and situation to have easily noticeable success from fans.

A team without sufficient talent will never have a "franchise" QB. And the QB is usually the person bearing the brunt...even if you're Eli Manning.

sure there is. if kizer wins a few games then you can build around him.

and Rosen isn't a sure thing.

Because, IMO, there are legitimate questions about Kizer that extend beyond adding weapons that could/should help him.

He is still rather inaccurate. He is still holding the ball too long (granted, it could be because of WR not getting open, I don't have a whole field view watching games).
I do think it's fair to say, particularly up until two weeks ago when the running game was subpar, that defenses forced us to beat them throwing the ball.

That said, Kizer has shown improvement. I'm not as high as others are on his progress but it certainly has happened.

To me, it's simply about him not showing enough to deter our FO to skip a QB, especially if we end up drafting where many assume we will. You cannot pass up on a QB you like, if you ask me.

But you never know....maybe these final game drastically change the perception of Kizer's future.

But I'm not even talking about Kizer right now. I'm talking about the offense independent of the QB position.

You're taking your opinion of Kizer as fact it guides your thought process. And that's your prerogative that's fine.

But to assume that everyone shares your opinion isn't correct.

Many football people feel it takes ~32-48 games or 3 years for a QB to master an offense.

Regardless of how long it takes I think it's fair to say that it's too early make an assessment of Kizer as the "franchise" QB right now. Especially on a team very clearly devoid of talent at the most integral position to a QBs success.

I'm going to respond further but I'm on the phone.