DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Kirk Cousins, we all are already

I might be for sure, I just didn't know what to call either of them.

RG3 was very successful before the injury.

Tannehill might be a strong B for sure, but I didn't think he was worthy of the "A"s (Luck, Newton, Bradford, Stafford, Ryan, Flacco, Cutler, Smith, Rodgers, Manning, Rivers, Big Ben, Palmer).

My "C" were Weeden, Locker, Gabbert, Ponder, Tebow, Sanchez, Russell, Quinn, Young, Leinert, Losman, Leftwich, Boller, and Grossman. Maybe Leftwich and Weeden and Gabbert are "B" since they were\are in the league so long.

Regardless, I'm guessing A&C will be somewhat close to 50/50

I think Tannehill and Tyrod Taylor are perfect examples of 'B' QBs. They're "alright" enough to be starting for their teams these past years.

I can't really argue about your 'C' guys. I'd argue that Cutler and Bradford are in the B-C range.

Do not want Cousins, sorry. And pretty sure he doesn't want to come here.

You all need to get off this "We need a Vet QB"

It's a nice thought.

But in reality...Cleveland is where QBs go to die.

So, any Vet worth anything with any sort of future is not gonna want come here. No matter how much money you throw at them.

We need to draft one. And keep them. That's the only thing that's gonna work.

And we need to not ruin them, the way we ruined Kizer.

I mean, Kizer may or may not start next season.

But no more throwing QBs to the wolves.

Please can our coaching staff have a clue.

So you don't mind only winning one or two games next year? There is no reason we can't draft one of those QB's AND sign Cousins. Or trade from Smith. Let the kid sit for a while and learn the game while Cousins or another veteran plays. Draft one, keep Kiser and sign or trade for a veteran to play while the kids learn the game. MUCH better idea than throwing another rookie out there and have his confidence destroyed in another 1-15 or 2-14 season. We have the cap room, and we have the picks. DO BOTH.

By not signing a veteran you ARE throwing him to the wolves. If we draft a guy at #1 which we absolutely should do, and we DON'T sign a Cousins or trade for another veteran then that kid WILL be starting and he will get the crap knocked out of him and we will lose a LOT of games again next year. The only way to keep that from happening is to get a veteran QB in here and let the kids sit until they are ready.

1 I apologize, if thought a 1st round pick was signed for 4 years, and second for 5 years

2 we can still take a QB at 4, I wouldn't hate it, I'm just looking for a player I can trust, years of production

We all know we are in a hole, I want certainty

Sorry, but that is not true. There is no reason that Kizer cannot start and Rosen can sit.

We do not need some lameo vet. Kizer got thrown to the wolves and took his lumps and will learn in the offseason. He can start next season just fine. It is great for his personal devolpment, even if his is not meant to be the true starter.

Fine, but when we go 2-14 again don't complain. You wanted another year of this.

I probably would not complain.

Because I know it's not a QB problem.

And I know Kizer needs time to develop.

It's a coaching problem. It always has been and it always will be.

I mean....20 QBs? And they all suck...come on man.

Kizer's lack of accuracy is a huge problem in the NFL.

I think it is fair to say that if Kizer had McCown as a mentor to work with and learn from we would have won some games. Possibly even if we had Brock. Sashi did not help Kizer by cutting them.

We need to sign a vet to work with Kizer AND the rookie we will no doubt draft. If we do sign a vet (pretty certain we will) and draft a rookie (guaranteed we will) I predict we keep Kizer and sign Hogan to the PS. We will then try and trade Kessler.

Sashi only cut them because Hue didn't want them he wanted Kizer to start. Hue stated he wanted McCown to be a coach and not a QB McCown still wanted to play. If Hue would have wanted either they would have stayed.

Kizer may be able to be a decent QB now that we have an OC that knows how to coach players, they will put who ever in a position to win instead of forcing them to do things they are not ready or able to do.

B I'd be ok with, but not C. Tannehill and Bradford have almost identical stats. Cutler has 35k yards, good for #27th all time - that's pretty much the definition of successful.

Regardless, we've gotten way off track (though that may be an interesting thread). I think the 50% BuckDawg referred to earlier as being a 1st round success rate is pretty accurate.

We never ruined a QB. They pretty much SUCK all on their own.

Name ONE QB that has been on this Roster that actually had NFL Caliber Talent?

You CAN'T.

We FINALLY are in POSITION to get a QB with NFL Caliber Talent.

Darnold and Rosen have that talent.

actually we have ruined a few promising QBs because for a long while there they refused to build an O-line to protect them. Those QBs got beaten to a pulp. You could see them developing bad habits left and right as they struggled to stay in one piece. Several of them suffered career ending injuries behind our O-lines back then. That's not opinion that is fact. The Browns have definitely ruined the careers of several QB's. it's true some of them just sucked but we definitely ruined several of them.

That's still not fact...

Jeff Garcia

We haven't developed any QB but we certainly have hurt a few. Hopefully those days are over and things will change.

I hope I'm wrong but I doubt very much that Cousins or Brees come here not when there are better teams that need QB's too.

And climates...

Kizer isn't accurate, period.

What we do know is that Sashi had control of the 53 man roster. The rest of this BS you just made up.

He wanted McCown as a coach if he decided to retire.

Signing a top round QB and Kirk doesn't equate to more than two wins. I'm not opposed to a top QB in the draft and a veteran, but the money Kirk is wanting just makes it hard to get on board. I want Kirk, I think he's a solid QB - not elite, not spectacular, but solid... also not worthy of the money he's going to get BUT this is the NFL. Qb position reigns above all else and will get the most money due to the position in itself.

IDK, a top QB and Kirk seems far fetched to believe anyway. If only we could peak into the future, if Kirk would lead us to wins - I'd deplete all the cap on him but nothing is a for sure thing here in Cleveland... nothing!

I have to agree. If you sign Cousins forget about drafting a QB in the first round. Maybe even the second round.

What NFL QB in his prime is going to sign with a team who is going to draft a QB #1 or #4 in the draft?

If you sign Cousins, expect us to draft another mid round long shot that will probably never make it in the NFL. Anyone who signs Cousins will have to be all in on him or he's not signing there.

Any QB who is not afraid of the competition. You're talking about a QB in his prime vs rookie. Not much to fear there.

That said, if we sign Cousins we have no need to draft a QB in the first round. If we sign Cousins for that kind of money on a multi-year contract we'll expect him to be our starter for a rookie QBs entire contract, say 4-5 years. Not much point in that.

You have a point but this is a unique situation. Cousins is going to have several offers. It's not like he won't. When you have the option of signing with a team that insures you that you are their long term plan at the QB position and is committed to that, why would you choose to sign with a team not willing to do that?

See, at his age, Cousins will see yet another long term contract before his career is over. Common sense would dictate he will want an opportunity that best sets him up for his next contract. There's no sense taking a gamble there that you don't need to.

If you sign Cousins, and I would for whatever price he asks, the pieces fall into place so nicely. Take Barkley at 1, take Fitzpatrick at 4, then BPA in the second, or trade up into the first to take a guy you really like.

While Cousins may not be a Ben R., he can certainly be 80% of Ben R. The same can be said of Barkley/ L. Bell, Njoku/J. James, our O-line/Pitt's O-line.

WR's, we still lag behind them, no question, and I don't really see that changing dramatically this year.

Fitzpatrick moves to Williams' "angel", Peppers slides to SS. Defense just gets better overall. (With my standard caveate of "If they played as projected.")

I see Cousins as the real lynchpin in the way forward. Sign him, and a lot of the pieces fall into place with little or no extra costs.

All just an opinion.

Ideally, by that point, we have developed a younger guy to step in for him. Is Kizer that guy? Hell, who knows? But it's a pretty basic, sensible plan.

If Cousins can hit Gordon/Coleman in stride, the gap might not be so large.

Valid point. As I like to say "Every positon affects every other position."

If all we do is cosistently mount drives that take, say, 5 minutes and eat up 60 yards, we're much improved.

If the Browns take anything other then BPA at #1 they deserve to lose. We are NOT a QB away from being a decent team, and we need the BEST talent we can get.

Kizer's problems are over-exaggerated on these forums...Kizer doesn't have accuracy issues anymore then any other 2nd rd rookie(whom the game hasn't slowed down for)...Drew Brees was awful his rookie year, he looked worse at times then kizer did...kizer biggest problem was the lack of talent and the lack of a real running game just made his rookie mistakes and tendacies all the more glaring.

Kizer past performance is NOT an indicator of his future ceiling...he was a project that shouldn't have been starting at all, and to be honest he showed me more this year then I thought he would. I figured on him being much worse then he was.

If the Browns give up on Kizer after a year they are idiots considering they moved down 7 spots in the 2016 draft and traded a draft pick in 2016 to take Kizer last year....in essence Kizer is a late 1st rd investment...absolutely stupid to give up on a kid that will only be 24 years old 3 years from now....

If the Browns had any plan at all, they ride it out with Kizer, draft BPA, get as much talent as they can the next few years, and dig themselves out of this hole. Taking a QB at #1 with the state of this team is a waste.

We a RB, an OG, and OT, 3 WR's and a TE away from having even a middle of the pack NFL O, and Rosen or any other QB this year won't change that. We need to grow what we have invested in(Kizer) and stock the roster with the best players available to us instead of reaching all the time time and squandering our opportunities to get better.

We suck because we reach and squander every opportunity we get by repeating the same mistakes...

Kizer in fact has accuracy issues.

It's this kind of mindset that has resulted in the Browns not having a good QB since Kosar. We have the opportunity to get a franchise QB this year unlike any other year. We should not blow that opportunity.

Expect Kirk Cousins to be a member of the Broncos next season, reports national pundit

http://www.nbcsports.com/washington/reds...national-pundit

Washington Redskins fans may need to accept that Kirk Cousins will no longer be their quarterback.

The Denver Broncos -- a team many consider the favorite to land Cousins -- are going to make a “huge run” at Cousins, and it is “more likely than not” that he plays for them next year, according to Erik Galko of Optimum Scouting.

The Arizona Cardinals are also in the mix, Galko tweeted this week.

Eric Galko
✔
@OptimumScouting

From what I’ve heard, and I asked a lot of people this week, It seems it’s more likely than not that Kirk plays for the #Broncos next year. And the contract details mat be very interesting. Arizona in the mix as well.

If they sign Kirk, I don’t expect a QB at 5. https://twitter.com/skotty_payne/status/956951270287396864 …
2:03 PM - Jan 26, 2018

Earlier in January, Galko reported that the Broncos "made it clear to those close to Cousins that they’re ready to make a big offer."

Tony Pauline, a draft analyst, tweeted Cousins is seeking “in excess” of $25 million a year, or a deal that “rivals or exceeds” Detroit Lions QB Matthew Stafford’s record setting five-year, $135 million contract he signed last summer.

It should be noted that Cousins’ agent also represents Trevor Siemian, the Broncos’ who just had surgery again on his left shoulder.

The start of free agency is getting closer, so Redskins fans should be waiting on pins and needles between now and March 14.

The one who pays the most will get him. I wouldn't trust what anyone says at this point in time.

I have already addressed the competition issue. Don't try to make this that Cousins is afraid of competition.

If we sign him, we won't be looking to draft another QB. We will be looking to build players around him. As I and others have said, he won't sign here if we still plan to draft a QB in the first round. Probably even 2nd. If he commits to us, we have to commit to him. We might draft a Riley Feurgson in the 3rd or 4th as the 3rd QB option.

I think if it's Cousins and we skip the QB in the early rounds then it's Mike White or Kyle Lauletta.

But I also think signing Cousins is akin to passing on Wentz. Why go with what really is a journeyman QB over drafting the best with the first pick. We are the only tram who can do this and still benefit from having a top 5 pick.

Someone posted early, I think it was Pit, that you can't pass on a franchise quarterback. We'd essentially be doing that again. Then I know people are saying that Cousins can be that guy. If that were true, he wouldn't be available.

In my mind, it's simply too risky for the franchise to sign a quarterback who has never won more than 9 games a season and draft a 3rd rd QB rather than draft either Rosen or Mayfield.

I really want to think signing Cousins is off the table for us.

I just threw out Feurgsons name...I am not looking to debate who it might be. I'll leave that up to the club.

I guess it just depends on ones views. I myself like the idea of Cousins. I think him more than a journeyman QB. I also like the fact we will be getting a proven player. No matter what we might think about this QB or that in the draft, you just never know how they will sort out.

To me Cousins offers just as much long term upside as do any of the rookies because in todays NFL it is impossible to really look beyond 1 contract cycle, which in the case of a rook would be 5 years. That is what I would offer Cousins, with a 1 year option.

I think it important we start winning right away, and I think we can if we do this right. Another reason I like the idea of Cousins is that would add free up a #1 pick to add another stud player the the roster, shortening our turn around factor even more. Another possible bonus would be that in signing Cousins, we "could" trade that #1 for a bundle if we chose to do so. I agree with people that I want players, but we would still be able to do that if we didn't drop too far. Again, I am not proclaiming that is what we should do. We would just need to look at it and see what we might get. It might make sense.

I am not going to get upset if we don't sign Cousins, but I do think it would be a big plus if we did.