DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Quarterback Options

My choice is #2 - as long as whatever veteran is brought in understands that a healthy Baker starts game 1 of regular season. Starting quarterback competition in camp and preseason for the 2022 Browns (while some like this idea) would be a mistake, imo. If Baker struggles mightily or gets hurt again later in the season, I'd rather have this backup (not Keenum or a draft pick) be ready to step up as another possible option for the 2023 season if we should move beyond Baker.

Watson should be on that list.

He is. Having been reviled by therapist in Pittsburgh for the last 20 years - i have no desire to have a serial sex offender play QB for the Browns no matter how the legal system processes and deals with him.

It's a good list. to summarize our options. I too would like option 2.

As for Malik Willis - I have never seen him play and have no clue how he projects to the NFL. I do know I am not a fan of scrambling QB's. For all the love affair the media spotlight has with each version - they all seem to suffer the same fate and none have every won a SB. The Eagles and Randall Cunningham would be the first guy I think of that was a scrambling QB. We've had Michael Vick. We've had RG3. Kaepernick, Cam Newton and now we've got Lamar and Murray. You might argue Josh Allen almost falls into this category, but I think he and Mahomes are supremely gifted all rounders who are QB's before they are scramblers. Just my take. Each of them make stunning highlight reel plays and look like world beaters. None of them have won a SB. Some of them require a team to completely tune their entire offense towards their scrambling talents. Some have had shortened careers. It's not the way I would roll and I don't think Stefanski is creative enough to maximize a QB like that's talent. jmo

I’m taking Willis. That means I’m trading up to #1.

I think option two is what will happen.

My take is at most they draft a developmental QB in the later rounds this year. If anything we trade down in the draft to stockpile draft picks for next year as a contingency plan for the possibility Baker doesn't meet their expectations. It certainly would be a benefit to have extra draft picks next season whether Baker is extended or not. So that is a plan that gives us a win/win scenario either way. In the event they feel the need to go in the direction of QB next year, it gives us extra ammunition to move up while not having to mortgage the future nearly as much.

I also do not see them bringing in someone that appears as a legitimate threat to the starting QB position. Having a QB competition during camp and so on. Berry made it clear he expects Baker to be back and lead the team as our QB. Sending mixed signals at this point only serves to undermine Baker and whether anyone can take Berry at his word. That certainly would not be an attractive quality to FA's considering signing here. I don't know that Case will be retained so I can't go full in on option 1 but the scenario I propose is pretty close to that. Trading back in the draft as a contingency plan for next year also wasn't mentioned in option 1.

You either go full Baker and back him for next year as Berry said they would do, or you might as well just kick him down the road now.

So you feel a QB with a torn labrum should have a higher floor? If Berry was sold on Willis he should not have made his statement about Baker coming back and being our QB.

What it seems to me that you are suggesting is that we ignore the QB who helped lead us to the playoffs last year by trying to use a very limiting injury as some gauge of what his floor is. I'm not going to travel down that road. Now if you wish to get into what you have seen as the floor for Baker without a torn labrum that's a discussion I'm willing to have.

Every QB in the NFL "could get injured". Any QB in the NFL "could struggle".

I'm much like you in some respects. If they decide to move on from Baker I'm not going to raise hell about it. If they swing for the fences by drafting Willis I'm not going to raise much hell about. Because I'm just a fan on a message board. Much like yourself I've been following this team for many decades and watch a lot of games period. Always have. But that certainly doesn't make me an expert about these situations.

But this going all in this year for someone like Russel Wilson by mortgaging your future with this years first round pick and two future first round draft picks is something I certainly wouldn't be a fan of.

But if you're not going to draft a QB like Willis, go all in with Baker. Don't mortgage your future for a guy like Wilson or Jimmy G.

Malik Willis - REALLY? Look, I understand that there's a push on here to rid the Browns of Mayfield. Though I strongly disagree, I get that. However, if you're going to throw out a replacement through the draft or free agency for that fact, why in the world would you be mentioning anyone that doesn't fit the scheme that Stefanski runs. Stefanski currently has the 2018 #1 pick overall and has refused to build the offense to his skill set. He had Kurt Cousins for a single year and cut his passing attempts by 28% compared to the previous year.

I'm not saying that Malik Willis doesn't have a high ceiling - hell I don't know if he does or doesn't. I do know 2 things though, he played at Liberty and the quality of competition is not the greatest but even more disturbing is him coming to the Browns would mean the offense would have to change to take advantage of his skill set and the Browns have a Head Coach that has not even gave a sniff of building a scheme to the players skill sets. Now the Browns can sacrifice their draft for the next 2-3 years and go after a Russell Wilson who has a no-trade clause in his contract. Besides that, Wilson has a cap hit of 37 million in 2022 which leaves Seattle with 26 million in dead cap which I highly doubt they are going to absorb without a major giveback from the trading partner. Wilson's cap hit in 2023 is 40 million for a QB 8 years older the Mayfield.

I have no idea why anyone would want either one of these QB's if Stefanski isn't going to build the offense to their skill set.

If that's what you think - isn't it what most teams in need of a QB will also think? What are you willing to give up? 3 first rounders and 3 second rounders? 4 firsts? 3 firsts and a handful of 3rd and 4th rounders? Because it'll take at least those sorts of picks.

I don' think 2 will happen as written. No way are we giving up a 2nd rounder and adding $18m cap hit for 1 year of Jimmy. And Garoppolo has a No Trade clause - I highly doubt he waves it without a multi-year contract and is the projected starter. If we bring in Jimmy, we sign a long term deal, which means Baker is backup or traded. If Keenum is replaced, it is likely with someone cheaper.

I think we will try for Wilson. I personally don't want anything to do with Watson, and I think Rodgers either stays, retires, or goes to either Denver or TB. I'd think Wilson would have some interest in Cleveland if we keep Jarvis - solid OL, great running game, and there will be good WRs available in the 2nd round (I could see us trying to sign BMW or Allen Robinson to a long term deal too). This said, I don't think we'll land him, the leadership cares too much about draft picks. I wouldn't be surprised if we tried for Carr as well.

Ultimately, I think it will be #4. We'll start Baker, pick up a QB in 2 (Howell or Ridder maybe) or 3 and either cut Keenum for the $7m or re-structure him to reduce his cap hit.

jc

We don't need any running type QBs. No thanks.

You mean the system Stefanski ran that got us to the playoffs or they system he ran with a QB who had a torn labrum after two games this season?

You see, some people want to have it both ways. They want to stick up for Baker because he was injured. I get that. That's pretty much what I've been doing even though some claim otherwise. The only real difference between myself and some of them is that I'm not 100% sure ALL of baker's issues were related to his injury. I am sure some of them were.

But if on one hand you, much like myself, think that Baker was very much hampered by his injury, then you can''t turn around and claim that it was Stefnski's plan to run some different scheme. If Baker was hampered due to his injury then Stefanski too was hampered in what parts of the playbook he could use and plays that he could call.

It's pretty odd how nobody was questioning him when he helped lead us to the playoffs and was coach of the year with a healthy Baker.

Browns fans are always "The grass is always greener" when it comes to QBs.

Baker is the best we are going to get for a really long time.

I have not watched him play, no. From what I have read is that he is a running QB and those have short shelf lives. I prefer a traditional pocket passer.

Quarterback Options:
Russell Wilson
Russell Wilson
Russell Wilson

We were under .500 with a QB who had a torn labrum. We made the playoffs last year when that same QB was healthy.

I want a quarter back that can run as well. Not saying it doesn't come with some risk but I'd rather have that quality in a player than not. I mean it makes sense from a purely logical standpoint. It's another weapon to be used at the player's disposal.

I've questioned Stefanski before he was signed, and he hasn't disappointed. He has done exactly what I thought he would do - 20th century offense in a 21st century league with a lack of ability to adjust during real life game situations. He expects players to play to the scheme rather than building to the players skill sets. Now that method can be successful but it's almost always inconsistent and after 2-years that's exactly what we have seen.

I thought Baker, while he was briefly in one piece coming out of the off-season, looked plenty speedy when he tucked and ran with the ball. Since he's spent off-season time on his body, I think he has a perfect amount of foot speed (enough to pick up yards when a throw isn't there, but not enough to tempt KS to start with QB run plays.

You mean the scheme that got us an 11 game winning season and took us to the playoffs. I can see why that would upset you.

Just wait and see........

I know. It sucks to need a QB but you have to do what it takes to get one if you don’t have one.

Maybe so, but can Baker get you to.the Super Bowl?
Because maybe the best Baker can do is a a playoff appearance every 4 yrs.

Im.not understanding why people are afraid to move on from Mayfield if it means
Improving a teams chance to go to the SB

He is not a elite QB even before the injury.
He simply isnt in.the same class as Mahomes Burrow or Allen

Yep. My biggest concern is a wasted year hoping it works out.

Berry doesn't strike me as a "fingers crossed" kind of guy.

You stole that from me!

Stupid Topic. Baker is your quarterback.

Remember when Stefanski was hired and we were supposed to be strictly a zone blocking team and then we started running a ton of gap running schemes and everyone was shocked because that’s not what was the plan was? And then Stefanski basically said that Bill Callahan said they had the personnel to do both so Stefanski adjusted.

Whatever it takes? 5 first rounders? Six ? What is the price you are willing to give up? And based on your comment and others this year I conclude you have decided that last year was a fluke and this year - injured - is a suitable basis to judge Baker on?

There is a price I would not be willing to pay. The traditional price to move up to the first overall pick is not that price.

I don’t need to clog up the board with anymore Baker takes. They are in all the other threads.

The Baker types are easier to find. Your Luck, Burrow, and Peyton-type quarterbacks are so few and far between. It is actually easier to build a whole team around the Baker type than it is with an elite type.

Wait when Cincinnati must pay their receivers and Burrow. Will Cincy ever have a strong OL? How good will their defense be?

Remember the Colts when Peyton was there? How many Superbowls did they win?

You can build a team in several different ways. Somewhere you'll have a weakness.

Step back and look at the whole picture. What is easiest to maintain? Where is it the most cost-effective to sustain?

I get the argument of having a great QB but it comes at a price.

I think either direction you go, their is a price to pay.

The league has evolved to the point,you have to have that franchise elite level QB
You can afford to have a weakness in other places.
Look at the Browns and Bengals situations
Coming into the season some thought the Browns were a lock for the SB and the Bengals
A lock for the cellar.
The Browns had the elite oline, but average QB
The Bengals, average oline at best and potential great elite QB
Which team beat the Chiefs twice and is in the SB.
Not the Browns.

Up.until early 2000s, you could get to a title game with a average QB. Dilfer, Johnson, Woodley.
Plunkett, Jaworski, McMahon, Ferragamo etc....
Baker is nothing more than Andy Dalton , or Ryan Tanneyhill
He will win you more games than lose, but he cant get you.to the ultimate game

Im sure the Bengals will find away to retain their core of offensive talent

If I recall the following QBs were in Superbowl since 2010 Nick Foles, Colin Kaepernick, Joe Flacco, Matt Ryan, Cam Newton, Jared Golf, and Jimmy Garoppolo all are not considered elite QBs. I almost want to add Eli Manning and Russell Wilson to the list. Both are pretty good QBs but to rank as elite, in my opinion, debatable.

You diss Andy Dalton and Ryan Tannehill, but how does their record stand up to Drew Brees as a playoff contender?

Actually, in my opinion, Cincy is very much built like the Colts during Peyton's years in Indianapolis. They are only as good as Burrow takes them. If he has a bad game, it's a tick in the loss column. Injured and their season is over most likely .500 or worst.

Do you mean Cincy retaining their core offense talents like when Chad Johnson, Terrell Ownes, TJ Houshmandzadeh, Chris Henry, Mohamed Sanu, and AJ Green? To me, it seems like they keep a strong tandem for like a year or two and then release one. I do give Cincy a lot of credit for finding their next superstar receiver. For that matter, they do seem to find pretty good QBs too.

Oh, and who beat the Bengals twice? What is Burrow's record against the Browns?