DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Browns GM Andrew Berry: ‘No rule against extending’ Deshaun Watson’s contract; QB battle is performance-based

Green offers too much potential to add to the explosiveness to the O to sit the bench for long stretches. The problem with bringing him in for a package of plays here and there is you are telling the D what you are hoping to do. At least do it from a WR slot where the intent isn't as obvious...at least as long as it isn't as obvious as it was under Stefanski where you knew it was some sort of jet sweep or reverse 95% of the time.

Yeah, it was pretty predictable when Elijah Moore showed up it was going to be a jet sweep. A player has to have more than one calling card to be effective. That is on the coaches as well.

Yeah, it was pretty predictable when Elijah Moore showed up it was going to be a jet sweep. A player has to have more than one calling card to be effective. That is on the coaches as well.

Moore was a WR. Green is a QB who is a threat to pass or run the ball. These two situations are not similar.

Except when they are running onto the field, the other team is screaming their name and the probable play.

Once again Moore a WR. Green is an actual QB. Green opens up the option to pass or run from the pocket which does not give the play away when he comes on the field. You do understand the difference there don't you?

Exactly Pit..

You can build a short yardage/red zone scheme based on what Green can do. It won't be 1 or 2 plays, it will be a scheme with 10-15 plays built around the look the defense gives you. Now, given a defense each week, there might only be 4-5 of those plays that will be practiced against their particular defense set. THEN, you take those 5 plays inserted for that weekly game plan and it automatically turns into 10 plays by inverting the alignment.

Nothing is TOO vanilla in the NFL. Monken will be able to hide what he is doing with the limited number of plays schemed to Green.

It's why this type of scheming can work a lot better than the wildcat.

The difference to me is more the coach.

If you run the same play everytime one player is on the filed it's predictable
If you run multiple plays then it is no different than using any other substitution

The difference to me is more the coach.

If you run the same play everytime one player is on the filed it's predictable
If you run multiple plays then it is no different than using any other substitution

WR's aren't a legitimate threat to run or pass equally from the pocket. Your options are far more limited than having a QB in there who can be a legitimate threat to do both. In Monken's first year here they drafted him and gave him an option we didn't see them give Stefanski. I won't try predict or try to guess what Stefanski would have done with such a tool at his disposal but at the same time I'm not going to point the finger at him because he never had such an option. But I am quite convinced that won't prevent others from doing so.

I think in order to make something like this work, the offense first has to establish an identity, and then you can start adding chunks of plays off of a subset of looks.

Ex. Jacoby Brissett and the QB sneaks. We still had a strong Oline and he was really good at executing that play. Then KS added wrinkles to it. I think this is how we build a subset of plays for Green (slowly).

I think him having already been a starting QB that worked in an O where he has already worked well in the run/pass option would make this an easy transition for him. As a senior he rushed for 777 yards and eight touchdowns on 139 carries.

Based on his 2025 season at Arkansas and his performance at the 2026 Senior Bowl, Taylen Green is a dual-threat quarterback who frequently operates out of RPO (Run-Pass Option) and read-option sets, utilizing his 6'6" frame and elite speed.

I don't think there needs to be a big cause for alarm in thinking Monken needs to slow walk this.

I would slow walk him out to the WR position. Assuming he can catch. I don't see why he can't. He aces every other physical attribute. Find out with a machine whizzing balls at him. Find out if he can catch while running. Find out if he can track deep balls. If so, you have an all-pro receiver in a year. I seriously doubt he will ever be an all-pro QB.

There are guys that have been working at the WR position for years, that come in with the "raw" label, that never even come close to a second contract.

This guy would be starting from zero... you're talking about route-running, catching, route trees... the whole thing... starting from zero. Getting to 'almost-nfl-caliber' is probably not going to happen.

J/C
I think Taylen Green is further along at QB than Josh Allen was. His defense (and teammates propensity for fumbling) just had him playing from behind against better defenses. That's not a great recipe. He's not necessarily as (arm) talented as Josh, but was asked to do a lot more. Taylen needs to get quicker in his release and footwork. He's not the tank/magician that Allen is, but I think he's further along on the mental side than Josh was when he came out (that's not saying a ton.) Green has tools worth seeing if they can work at QB before considering a change that rarely ever works out.

That's not to say he'll definitely be a great QB, but he's much more QB than WR, and we've many more questions marks there.

That nay be true, but I remember when Stefanski ran 3rd or 4th and short using Harrison Bryant. I remember that 3 straight times when he was used. All 3 were distinctively different plays, and they were successful. It was a very creative use of one player to offer multiple play options.

Yeah as a player needs to be clutch along the way. Need to move on from Watson but cutting him seems to be easier said than done!

As a QB I would think he has some understanding of route trees. Catching, either he can or can't, and route running can be taught.

Yet when asked the Browns stated they drafted him to play QB and he said he wasn't going to play WR.

I read somewhere about the number of high quality starting NFL QB's there have been that were taken in the 3rd round or later in the last 20 something years. The answer was maybe 2? Brock Purdy being one. Wilson the other. Then you had Warner who wasn't drafted.

The odds for Sanders, Gabriel or Green making an impact are very long - it does not mean they can't ... just that the very large pool of data shows how challenging it will be. Green is something of a freak of nature and it's enticing to think of ways to use that athleticism - but there is still a large gulf between what might be and what is probable.

Maybe even possible. For that reason I don't rule out QB, but knowing the odds I would examine other avenues to tap in to his undeniable physical talent.

Unless everybody gets hurt, he isn't going to see any, or much time at QB. He can see time at some other position.

Warner is well over 20 years anyway. Kirk Cousins would be another one that comes to mind.

I certainly agree with you. That's why I think he was drafted late with a certain purpose in mind. As you stated the odds are very long of him ever being a starting NFL QB. And I'm not saying this FO is ruling that out as a possibility. (I'm being very careful so the "YOU'RE BEING NEGATIVE" crowd doesn't try to climb up my azz again.)

But his skill set I believe would make it easy to put him in on some downs for the RPO option. He certainly can throw and run quite well. Monken has a lot of plays designed in his playbook for Lamar that he could apply when putting Green in on packages.

That was the other one mentioned ... they mentioned Warner too. Hell's teeth. "Well over 20 years" makes me feel ancient.

They would be foolish not to. He has more potential than Lamar. I don’t know what Lamar’s numbers were at the combine but it would be hard to imagine they were as good as Taylens.

My only comment would be that Lamar fell to the 32nd pick in the draft. Barely in the first round but still at the end of it. Green was the 182nd overall pick (sixth round).

To some people that means nothing. For me it speaks volumes. As I said, it's not "impossible" for Green to eventually grow into being a starting QB.

The odds of a sixth-round quarterback pick becoming a long-term NFL starter are low, typically estimated around 5% to 6.38% based on historical data.

Roughly 36% to 50% of first-round quarterbacks become successful, long-term NFL starters.

It appears all 32 NFL GM's do not view him at the value you and some others do.

To me those numbers actually mean something. If you choose to ignore them that's fine.

Most late round QBs are coming in behind established QBs who get most of the work and focus.

If a team invests in a 1st round QB, that QB is generally going to be the focus.

I think the outcomes are as much about situation as player ability. If Bledsoe hadn't gotten hurt, Brady might not have ever been a thing.

Green has interesting ability. Monken likes mobile QBs. The QBs in front of him aren't great. I don't think it's the typical historical situation that he's facing. I also see a path where he could get a small package to see the field early.

Unfortunately, I also see a potential path where he doesn't get much time this year, the Browns draft a QB early next year, and he never really gets a chance.

But, in the 6 round where most players aren't sticking around long, the high upside gamble on the most important position with an unsettled and uninspiring situation on the depth chart looks like good potential value.

I don't think anyone is ignoring the "numbers." Some people just don't give them undue weight as "history" isn't a 1 to 1 match for specific instances.

Edit: Plus, between Watson's health and Sanders' holding the ball, we'll probably need at least 3 QBs.

The historical situation is that players get drafted where they are ranked and according to what teams see their potential as. That didn't change in 2026.


And that's why I see him drafted where he was and what this FO saw him as. An RPO QB for special situations. Had they of seen more he would have been drafted higher. Surely you don't think every QB needy team passed on him five times and some six because they saw more than that do you?

As I said, it's "possible" he becomes more than that. But come on man. This wasn't some new "history breaking precedent" 6th round QB pick.

Or teams just didn't see him as a scheme fit or already had backups they like in that role in place.

Teams passed on Lamar Jackson. Teams passed on Brady. Teams passing isn't the end all, be all on talent.

He's literally the most athletic QB ever. We'll see if he "bucks history." Your taking the negative view is no more valid than others considering the potential positives. It's not decided yet. The numbers don't include him.

Dude, Lamar was drafted at #32. Not at pick #182. Teams passed on Lamar once. Every team passed on Green 5 times and some of them 6 times. I get it. Somehow in your world that's the same thing.

You bring up Tom Brady. You may as well bring up Brock Purdy too. Yes, there are exceptions to the rule that's why 6th round QB picks have a 5% to 6.38% chance of becoming a starter.

And allow me to explain what you claim is a "negative" which seems like a very clear loss of reality.

My assertion is that he is perfectly suited to run the RPO and can be used in schemes on a spot basis to keep opposing D's off balance. I also stated it is possible he could develop into a starting QB over time. Not likely but possible.

Do you have any clue how positive of a comment those things are for a 6th round pick at QB? Most 6th rounds QB's never contribute to any degree. With those statistical facts in mind do you have any clue how positive of a comment those things are for a 6th round pick at QB? t It appears that in Bull_Dawg land you don't.

Just because I'm not declaring him "the most athletic QB ever" or over inflating his odds of success is not negative. Actually I'm giving him a better odds of contributing to this offense than the stats would indicate he will.

I'm just not slobbering all over him which is what in some far off universe is your definition of being positive.

If an NFL GM drafts a QB in the 6th round and he becomes a solid cog in your offense by running the RPO in packages designed for him, you did a great job! You made a sixth round selection that became a sold contributor to your offense. That is a great return on your investment and a positive outcome. There's nothing "negative" about that.

Those guys were QBs that got passed over by 31 teams. Exactly the same? No, but nobody claimed that, before you in your strawman distraction attempt.

Statistics tell you what happened in the past. They don't tell you what will happen in a specific future case. The low percentage of success you keep throwing out has no direct connection to Taylen Green. If he fails or succeeds, it will have nothing to do with that percentage. No one but you is giving a percentage, and yours is being misapplied. You don't know if he's a Brock Purdy or Tom Brady. All 6th round QBs aren't the same. No one is saying he will absolutely be one of those guys. He could be. No one knows the percentage likelihood.

You bring up some good points on the positives.

He does have negatives, but repeatedly saying he'll "fail" ~95 times out of 100, because he's a 6th round QB, feels extra negative. Maybe I just don't like box score scout BS and bad usage of statistics.

Would Dack Prescott fit the definition, unless he isn't considered as good as Cousins?

It's how he rolls. Over and over, and over again.

Dak would fit for sure.