DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Your Choice for Brown's Starting QB

A post that is on topic. Thank you.

Do we have anything substantial to suggest Rosen doesn't want to play for the Browns?

Personally, I think the fact he declared for the draft highlights that he's willing. The kid is arguably the most consistently ranked #1 QB in the class, and he declared for a draft in which Cleveland has the #1 pick and a need at QB.

Rosen doesn't strike me as a guy who desperately wanted the NFL. I think he'd have been perfectly content to remain at UCLA for another year if the possibility of going to Cleveland bothered him.

We've seen this suggestion a lot. People were utterly convinced that Garrett didn't want to be a Brown, even prior to Dallasgate, but here we are.

I don't know if we're just conditioned to expect the worst, especially when basically every QB prospect in the class has been tied to some "dodge Cleveland" rumour, so far it seems that all of them will happily welcome the opportunity to be the #1 selection and, with any luck, a potential franchise quarterback for the Browns.

BTW - I'm all in with you on the Kizer love. I still can't wrap my mind around how quickly people quit on the kid. I've never seen a 21 year old kid show so much potential yet be written off with such immediacy.

I'm looking forward to seeing what he does with his offseason off. I saw the other day on Twitter that he's apparently been working damn hard. The kid is tough as nails and got a great education in the rigors of the NFL. I've got no doubts that he won't relinquish the QB1 role without a fight.

I love Rosen's ability. Has all the necessary skills to be a franchise QB in the NFL. My concern is his headspace. Whenever anyone inquires about whether he wants to be the #1 pick, he deflects by saying he wants to be on the right team in the right system to be successful. Can't help but believe that he truly does not want to be picked by the Browns at #1 and I think that will come off when Dorsey sits down with him to get a true understanding of what Rosen is all about.

I have seen many on topic. Some have strayed, but not that many.



At the beginning you requested we name a QB and simply talk about him.

First, one post a person would be all that is needed. Second, that doesn't lead to much discussion.

Discussion is where things can lead astray, but that is better than 20 people stating their view then never come back to discuss views.


See, even you were off topic, in discussion, leading me to these comments.

I think this has been a good thread.

I think Rosen’s carefully worded answer to the question means that he will be a Giants player.

If we don't draft him, it would be a good sign that he didn't want to play here. We'll ask him privately in the interview,

It could be, or we simply like one of the other guys better.


I don't think the kid is going to come out and say I don't want to play for the Browns, but sure, his voice inflections and body language can say a lot.

I guess the bottom line is if he doesn't want to play for us, I would want him to say so. I'd rather know it before the draft then after the draft. I'd give him credit for being honest.

Ideal QB Cousins
- we draft pieces around him to get better instantly and convince JT to stay another year.

Realistic.. Kizer
- Draft sits on the bench to learn as long as possible (Rosen best case) or (Mayfield worst case)

I'd say it's too soon to tell on Kizer. He's had from the end of last season and will have until the beginning of the next to get better. After a year, he has a better grip on knowing what he doesn't know. Hopefully, unlike Kessler's regression in year two, he will progress.

Aaron Rodgers played in 7 games his first three years (59 total pass attempts). How would he have performed if thrown to the wolves in year one?

I agree with the ideal situation.

I hope Kizer isn't the only realistic option. There are other QB's out there to be had, and we better have one of them until our drafted QB is deemed ready, and I hope coach is right and isn't inserting him in a panic move because we lost our first two games.

Cousins allows us to draft Barkley and Fitz. Cousins can play another 7 years. That is as long term as we need to think at this point.


We haven't had 5 years of good QB play since we returned. Let's stop thinking about 12-15 years. Let's just get a guy who can give us 4-5-6 years, and go from there.

Then take the QB at #1 and trade up to #2 from #4 so we get Barkley too. We NEED a running back. Asking a rookie QB to throw the ball every stinking down just gets the kid killed. Once we get the QB and RB we can start looking for a #1 WR and we have an offense. Until we can run the ball it doesn't matter who we have at QB, he's going to get killed.

Whatever we do at #1 for QB we should do what it takes to get Barkley too. He is the #1 back in this draft by a long way.

We should take Barkley at 1, there are a few acceptable QBs to get at 4.

If you're taking a QB at #4, you should probably just take that QB at #1. There is no reason to screw around when taking your franchise QB.

Just imagine this scenario:

#1 Barkley
#2 First QB you want
#3 Trade up, second QB you want
#4 Take the third QB you want

How does the above scenario make any sense?

Saquon Barkley is very good. He is not worth screwing around with the QB position.

If I were the GM, it would really depend on how closely I rated the top 3 QB's and how high I rated Barkley.

Even if the QBs were rated very closely, wouldn't you want the one that you like the best?

The only I, if I were the GM, would take Barkley first would be if I knew I was trading up to the second pick (and I would never do that).

We have the chance to get, who we perceive to be, the best QB in a very good QB draft. Don't mess around, just take the guy we like and move on. Also, my guess is that it is much more likely that Saquon Barkley would be available with the fourth pick than "our favorite" QB.

(None of this even mentions the fact that drafting running backs this high in the draft is a horrible value play, we already have a running back whose skills overlap with Barkley, and this draft is loaded with several other very good running backs.)

I agree. If we take Barkley at #1, we are doing it wrong.

wrong thread

I agree, but you know as well as I, things morph as threads get longer.

One guy says we don't need a QB at one. We can get his guy at 4, leaving it open to who would you take at 1....now RB has entered the discussion.

As for QB...I am not sure who I want. Now I am leaning a bit towards Mayfield. I was listening to one of the talk shows out of Cleveland on my phone yesterday. They had some guy from Pro Football Focus. He has broken down the tape and Mayfield grades out the best by a long shot.

By and large I think PFF is a pretty good web site. I don't know who this guy was, how he breaks down film, or if he is any good at it, but he sounded very compelling.

If I'm at the point where I'm flipping a coin between the QB's and I believed that Barkley was the best player in the draft, I'd do it.

I'm not, and it doesn't sound like Dorsey is at this point, but I could see another team in the same situation doing exactly that.

Darnold, Rosen, Mayfield, Allen, Jackson, and Rudoulf. The top three are a wash in strengths and potential imho. Adding to that we have a QB we selected in the second round last year, hopefully a free agency signing, and two picks in the top 4. I almost feel like we're nuts not to take Barkley at 1 and Fitzpatrick, Chubb, or (worst case QB) Orlando Brown at 4!

We have a chance to get two top flight players and I don't think any of these QBs is a lock to be the FQB. So I'm willing to gamble the QB slot to at least make sure we get one top flight player.

QB > RB

QB > All other positions

QB = what this team's needs for several years

... stop messing around, trading away picks for other teams to get QBs, taking worthless crap instead of and JUST PICK THE GUY!

I'm 100% convinced we will always be "us" until we get a QB to operate efficiently and enable us to build around. Plus other teams need QBs, so we have a chance to take the cream of the crop per our talent deptartment, and get a skilled guy.

They better never be at that point.

It happens more than you think with GMs, but they aren't dumb enough to let the fans know that.

I doubt that.

Serious question - if they do not let the fans know this, then how do you know this?

Is it the same coin that won that one season in The League?

That GM's can value two or three players at the same position equally?

That is just common sense.

After the draft, whichever guy they draft though, they are going to tell fans that they had that player rated higher on their draft board and talk about the other guy's flaws.

If they don't do that, and the one they picked under performs the one that they didn't pick, fans would give them hell.

I agree....they throw a dart.




Just kidding.....no doubt they finally settle on a player. If they can't do that, they trade down.

Plan A: Sign Cousins, draft a developmental guy round 3 or later.

Plan B: Sign Bridgewater, draft Darnold #1.

Yeah, drafting a great running back would be stupid. Zeke didn't help Dallas one little bit two years ago and they sure didn't miss him when he was suspended lol. Wouldn't want a back like that on the team. SO much better having a rookie QB throw the ball every stinking down. That always works great. Why wouldn't you EVER trade up to #2 and take a stud RB? Barkley is worlds better than any RB we have on the team. He's a game changer. Like Gurley. If you want a rookie QB then you better get him some help and the best friend of a rookie QB is a running back.

Just because someone quotes you, it doesn't mean they read what you wrote.

Let me ask you a question, do you think Jacksonville even SNIFFS the playoffs without Leonard Fournette? Blake is an average QB at best. But having a killer defense and a stud running back that can get you yards even when they know it's coming is a real asset. I am fine with taking a QB if they are SURE he IS a franchise QB but do us all a favor and trade up for #2 to get us a real running back. Then there is no WAY they can excuse throwing every down. In this division, you must run the football and having a top talent at the position really helps that happen. Coach can't wait around to win later. He needs to pile up some wins right away. He's got to be on a very short leash. 0-3 or 0-4 and the death watch will start. Best way to win early without a veteran quarterback is to play D and run the ball.

Interestingly, your argument works for taking Fitzpatrick as well. As you point out, we need a killer defense as well as a stud running back. Drafting Fitz could go a long way to doing that. Dorsey has demonstrated the ability to find stud RB later in the draft, and this is a deep RB draft. So in my mind, taking the QB at #1, Fitz at #4, and adding the RB in round 2 may actually work better at accomplishing your goal.

I am not a fan of taking a corner that high unless he is a Rod Woodson/Deon Sanders kind of player. If Fitz is a sure thing top five cornerback then maybe... however, I would point out that a serious running game helps the defense too. Keeps the defense fresh. Wears the opponents defense down.

This is how I THINK when it comes to finding these RBs in the middle rounds of the draft.

You identify that RB. Then you actually GIVE them the damn ball. Don't bury him on the depth chart. That's what Dorsey did in KC.

I'm really watching Darnold's running mate Ronnie Jones II. Some big evaluators compare him to KCs Charles. He's a threat to take it home every play. Jones and Johnson would be a solid 1-2 punch.

No one is really saying that. Our need at QB trumps the need at RB.

We need a QB in the worst way. And have needed one for a long time. I cannot imagine that of all the QBs coming out, there is not one the team wants more than the others. Even a little bit. I find it hard to believe it is a dead nuts 3 or 4 way tie at the top of the heap.

When you need a QB, you take your guy at #1. You do not wait and take an "acceptable" QB at #4. I know you did not say that, Spirit, but someone did. That reeks of settling for what is left.

If we wait until #4 to take what QB others left for us, and one of the ones taken before #4 turns into a franchise, pro bowler while our leftover consolation prize does not, then that is one more stupid team move to add to the pile. Worse than taking your guy at one and having someone you passed on do much better. At least then you made your choice and did not let other teams decide for you.