DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Tailgate Forum Arch Manning

Most analysts and projections lean towards him returning for another year to develop and solidify his status as a top prospect for the 2027 draft, making a 2026 declaration unlikely but not impossible. I mean it could happen but until it's determined whether he will declare or not, for me it's a rabbit hole I'm not climbing into.

Yes this is a report from one pro scout. We have yet another thread describing what their goal is. To create a buzz in order to garner attention. Like I said, it's not impossible. I simply weighed the overwhelming opinion that he stays in school and give that more validity. You do you.

When and if he enters the draft I'll join you.

It will be talked about a lot. Why? Because it garners attention and that attention is how these guys make a living.

Here is what we already know about the QB room so far. Deshawn Watson will be back next season at least that is what the media was told. It also make the most sense salary cap wise. There has been reports he has worked really well with Sanders and Gabriel. I do not think Manning is coming out but I do believe when your name is Manning and you have the measurables and potential upside he would be the #1 pick if he would come out. I do not think he will. If he would and the Browns had the number 1 pick it would be a media/social media disaster to team distraction to have Manning, Sanders, and Watson as the QB room.

I believe that Sanders either comes back in 2026 as the starter or he is traded. Sanders coming back as starter for 2026 makes a lot of sense for the Browns because finding the Browns version of Brock Purdy is the Browns best case scenario to get out from under the Watson salary cap issue. I think Sanders play since being the starter has this as the most likely scenario.

If the Browns do draft a QB in the 1st round next season say Mendoza, Moore, or Simpson they will trade Sanders for what they can get. The problem is Sanders has shown enough upside that the potential is now there that he goes somewhere and looks good and the PR hit of Sanders doing well and Baker still playing decent would really put the pressure on the Browns to win to quite all of that noise.

If Manning was to come out I am not sure Haslam would be able to contain himself to have a Manning being the face of the franchise would be too much for him to pass up and he would tell his FO to do whatever it takes to get Manning.

I think the best option is to move forward for at least next year with Sanders and focus on rebuilding the WR room and the Offensive line in 2026. If Sanders pans out awesome we should see a decent turn around in 2026 which will show in winning games 7 to 10 wins. If not and Sanders does not pan out the team is in better shape if the team needs to go all in for a QB in 2027. That class is looking deep if Manning returns to tExas with him, Sands, Riola, etc all coming out in 2027.

I keep asking this question but nobody seems to have addressed it.

IF the Browns have a top 5-7 pick in this years draft and do NOT take a QB....... IF they build the OL and WR positions first and wait to see IF Sanders pans out........ Wouldn't it be logical to think they would at least win two or three more games anyway?

I mean IF you can run block, have better WR's and your QB doesn't totally crap the bed, wouldn't that improvement dictate you win at least two or three more games?

That would put you further down in the draft order. That would mean moving up to draft a QB would be much more expensive and take away more of your resources.

If they follow such a scenario and ride with Sanders going into next season, that would be one helluva gamble. For me he would have a lot to prove in these remaining games.

That scenario makes sense. To me if we are picking in the top three or four then we should probably take a QB providing it is one we like. Then we can deal with how we handle the QB room. We can have the QB we draft sit and learn. Have Shadeur start,DW 2nd, and the other guy 3rd. Dillon would be the odd man out. If Shadeur plays well or DW then you’re in a good spot for a possible trade depending on how well the team is doing. If the team is doing well you obviously don’t trade any of your QB’s. In this scenario we could end up in a very favorable situation. I believe we need to draft a Quarterback but again it has to be a guy that we like not just for the sake of drafting one.

I agree. Even if we draft at #5 I think that would cost us far less than trying to make a trade up from drafting at #10 or #12 in next years draft.

But like you said, it has to be for a QB they have targeted and deem the future franchise QB and not just to draft a QB.

I think the rules and decision making calculus is different for him than it is for the other QB's. If he goes back I suspect his name will continue to carry him into the 1st round even if he has an off year next year, unless the bottom truly drops out like it did for Allar and he gets benched etc. Short of that, even if he's just middling, he'll still have a pretty cherry market IMO. The name plus the physical characteristics will be too much for many teams to pass. All that to say he has less to potentially lose by going back to school.

If he did come out... oooh boy, that would change a lot.

First off the Jets also have two first round round picks and their second is going to be a lot higher than our second. Their ability to move into the #1 slot is going to be stronger. With Brady now part of the brain trust in Vegas, I would not be at all surprised to see the Raiders make a full court press to get who they think is "the" QB. But we could have a solid claim on the #2 slot and suddenly Mendoza is a real possibility if we want to go get him. I'm no QB guru but I'd take him over Manning as they are now. But if Manning entered, it'd a be good thing. It potentially pushes the other guys down. Incidentally I keep seeing Dante Moore linked to us, especially as he opted to learn under Gabriel when he went to Oregon rather than take an immediate starting role that he supposedly could have easily had elsewhere. Haven't watched him at all but the draftnics sure love him.

But personally, I just don't think Cleveland is the place for a developmental QB, no matter how high the ceiling. We push them out on the field and eat them young here. We need a QB that is more or less ready. I think that needs to be an accepted limiting trait of anyone we seriously look at. I haven't watched a lot of Manning but everything I read says he's under cooked, he's going to need at least a year. The idea of having him sit behind SS, especially if we're losing, has the potential to turn into an incredibly toxic situation. Like hilariously bad.

And I agree with most of the others on this thread. Short of Sanders just balling is brains out.... we do what we have to to take the best damned QB in the class. Period. Sunk cost and all that. Just do the smart thing and get your hammer while your in the hardware store. Don't wait to go get your hammer when your at the grocery store. We're going to be drafting top 5. The guy isn't on the roster. Get the guy.

The way I see things is we should have 4 picks in the top 70-80. If we finish in the top 5, hopefully the top 3, we can take a QB, 2OL, and a deep threat WR. Where they take them will be determined but that first pick should be a QB and again a QB we think can be good and our future not to take one just for the sake of taking one. I hope we can draft one where height is not an issue that way there will be no questions about it.

If history has taught me anything it's that people will question the pick no matter who is chosen. No matter their size, no matter their record, no matter their mobility, there will be questions. If people can't find legitimate questions to bring up some will insist on creating some. It has yet to fail.

Man, I hope so. But I think the top of the draft might turn into a feeding frenzy this year, especially if manning enters. It's rare that so many top teams don't need a QB. Trade down makes a ton of sense for them, especially if it's just a couple spots. It seems there's a steep drop after the top 2-3 QB's, which means those first 2-3 spots in the draft are going to be competitive and expensive. I think I'm growing resigned to the idea that we'll probably need to spend some draft capital including our second 1st if we're any lower than #3. The Jets are probably going up and these things are like dominoes.

Oh yes, the ol'chicken and the egg debate! I am also referring to your earlier post.

What if Sanders becomes your franchise starter, you traded up from the 5th or more to get "the" quarterback, and he fails?

I don't think there is a right or wrong answer.

This draft and most likely the next are void of an Andrew Luck quarterback. This draft is also missing elite talent. Teams not needing a quarterback will want to trade down. Will this affect the price of moving up?

If Manning is predicted to go 1-3, why not come out in this draft? There is no guarantee he'll do better. He could get hurt. Yes, he could get paid more staying in Texas, but your 4-year rookie contract is extended another year. In theory, he'll get one less year of big money.

The one good thing is that Cleveland has some inside information on three of the top quarterbacks. Reese coached Simpson at Alabama. Musgrave coached Mendoza at California. Gabriel played with Moore at Oregon.

This will be an interesting off-season!

I understand you point and don't disagree that your scenario is a possibility. The question actually becomes, "What evidence do you have that Sanders will be your franchise QB and how does that stack up with the draft choices available to you?"

Mahommes wasn't seen as an "Andrew Luck type QB" when he was drafted either. But here we are.

As of this moment I don't believe there is a right or wrong answer to this question just as you don't. In fact there may not be a cut and dry right or wrong answer to this question come draft day.

Here is one thing I can tell you for a fact. Having two great QB's on your roster isn't a problem. Any team in the league needing a QB will give you an arm and a leg in trade for such a QB. Having no great QB on your roster leaves you as a team willing to and maybe having to give up an arm and a leg for a QB. We've already seen that scenario play out here and it didn't end well.

I would much prefer the Browns end up with having two shots at having a great QB than having one chance at it. And it really doesn't matter to me where that QB comes from even of the one who fails was a first round pick or not. Doubling the odds of success sounds very appealing to me. I mean it's been so long since we actually had a QB.

As we get closer to the draft the answer may become more clear. It may cause the decision to be tougher or easier depending on your point of view. One never knows. But as has been stated previously, unless Sanders balls out, it's one helluva gamble to take passing on a QB when you will be drafting this high.

What would be a horrible ending to all of this is to end up once again with no QB if we fail to draft a QB in the first round this year and Sanders fails. Leaving the Browns drafting #10-#15 in the draft moving forward and still not having a QB.

I keep reading that this draft is missing elite talent. Maybe maybe not I don't know enough about it at this point, but don't you think anyone we draft for the O-line and WR will be better than most of what we have right now? I think so. Add a couple of decent FA signings and we could be much better headed into next season.

My 2¢… In my mind there’s only one QB in this draft worth taking, Mendoza. I’ve seen enough of Moore to see his ceiling is Oregon alumni Marcus Mariota. It’s not enough for me. I want nothing to do with Arch when there’ll be better talent at other positions that’ll actually improve the team. Alabama’s QB isn’t head and shoulders better than Sanders, though he has played better competition. Either way, I don’t think of him as a better prospect than Tate at WR. A much needed position to upgrade. Or even a top LT.