DawgTalkers.net Forums The Archives 2013 NFL Season NFL Draft (2013) Possible Misconception on the Board

OK, I think sometimes we can lump all of the people we disagree with into one bucket. One opinion that is not mine is not the opinion of everyone who disagrees with me.

For example... let's take, oh, the QB situation. It seems like there are a few realistic options here that people have expressed getting behind.

1) Trade multiple first round picks to move up to #1 and take Luck. He's the best QB prospect to come out in years and fixing the QB position is worth the investment.

2) Draft Robert Griffin III if he's available at 4. He's got great talent and character, but he's also got some questionable traits we've been bitten by in the past (especially size).

3) Be willing to spend what it takes to sign (and/or trade for) Matt Flynn and let him compete for the starting job. He has learned the WCO and has done nothing but produce big numbers when given opportunities (1 game 2010, 1 game 2011, 2010&2011 preseason).

4) Stick it out with Colt and Wallace. Turnover has been holding the franchise back since it's resurrection in 1999. The team was so new and missing so many pieces, we can't even tell if the QB position is broken before we try to fix it.

Now, to be honest, I could be OK with any of those viewpoints. I could certainly rank them in order of how well I relate to each one, and it won't necessarily be the same order as you would rank them.

Here are a couple of stances I have seen people complain about many, many others having... but have not actually seen anyone express as their opinion:

5) Trade multiple 1st and/or 2nd round picks for Robert Griffin at 2. He's the greatest QB ever and his game is perfect and he will make our team the best.

6) Colt is the answer and if we would just replace every other player not named Thomas or Mack with a pro-bowler on offense you guys would all see that colt would lead us to an 11-5 season.

If you agree with viewpoint 5 or 6, as some posters have so vehemently complained about, would you be so kind as to attach your name to it here? Please rephrase it as you like without the silly hyperbole, so long as it reads something to the effect of "QB is the only thing missing from our offense. RGIII will instantly make all of our WRs and TEs better and our running game better. Colt has been the main thing holding this offense back" or "Colt is our best option at QB and trying to upgrade our QB talent would be a waste of resources. Nobody would be able to succeed with the talent we have and Colt has everything you could ask for in a QB."

Maybe some posters will be less angry if they come to realize that the idiotic mob that they think they see doesn't actually exist.

I feel like this is a fast food order menu.

I'll take a #1...biggie size.

To add: I hope everyone can see that we have more than a half dozen gaping holes on this team. We need a couple more drafts that are highly successful to get into the top 1/3 tier of talented teams.

A top of the line QB is like a rocket booster up the ladder though.

But we have holes. Major ones. If Heckert wants to forgo or tack another path on the QB while he fixes those I'm not going to kill him over it.

I think if we want RGIII we will have to trade in to the 2nd pick. I don't think he will be there at #4.


Is he the greatest ever??? Nobody is....Luck has as much chance of busting as Griffin.

Did we really need yet ANOTHER QB thread on this board?

Put me in the "I can't wait for April because I'm tired of EVERY football discussion devolving into the same old urine-fest about the Browns QB courtesy of the same set of posters" category.

/rant

I'll have a #4 over easy please

But I have to be clear here, I'm ok with any option that doesn't call for massive loss of picks to trade up to get anyone.

If, and its a huge if, Luck or RG3 land in our laps, I got no problem taking either kid. Lots has been said about Tannehill and some actually think he'll be there at 22. I'm OK with that.

And yet there is another thought that says Matt Flynn is the guy. I'm OK with that as well.

What I'm 100000000000% against is trading picks to move up to grab a "could" be great QB which could risk the franchise for years the come.

What good is a great QB if he's got nothing around him.

There is not one single, identifiable poster on this board who thinks this:

Quote:

---

Colt is the answer and if we would just replace every other player not named Thomas or Mack with a pro-bowler on offense you guys would all see that colt would lead us to an 11-5 season.

---

And...I don't know one single Browns fan who thinks that outside this board.

New menu item:

#7 - Colt might be the answer. We need to replace players named Obiwancanobee, Massiquoiu, Robiskie, Pashos and get a second year in this offense and we will know whether we need to replace Colt.

That is dramatically different than option #6.

I agree with #5 for the most part. Not the "greatest thing ever" part. But if our FO truly believe he has what it takes to be our franchise guy, then I have no problem trading up to get him.

I'm for # 2 if RG is there with our 4th pick. Never once have I been against using our pick for a qb.

IF he's not there with our 4th pick, I'm for # 4.

I don't think there is a right or wrong answer with any of those.

Not to say I agree with all of them, but who's to say I'm right?

I'm not big about trading up to get a pick, and unloading part of your future, most of the great teams don't do it, the Giants are the exception not the rule, but if Andrew Luck is as good as they are saying, I have no problem with them going to get him. I still think the odds of it are unlikely, as I think the Colts clearing out their front office and coaching staff signals the end of the Manning era and the start of the Luck era.

RG3? I like him a lot. I hope he's there at 4 and our front office thinks he's the guy for the job. If they think he is a franchise QB, you pull the trigger. If they have serious questions about him at the next level, you trade the pick to someone who wants him, and maybe squeak out another extra 1st rounder for next year.

I'm not aboard the Flynn bandwagon or any FA QB bandwagon, but it's just my opinion. I don't think Flynn is a franchise guy. I think it's a likely scenario as Heckert won't have to burn picks, but rather just Randy's money.

Keeping Colt. Won't be a popular choice, but we will have a chance to maybe add a legitimate weapon for him, and 2012 will be a no-brainer in terms of whether or not he's the guy going forward. If he's not, we'll most likely be picking in the top 10 anyway, and could maybe try to add a QB then.

I think regardless of what we do, we're still not a playoff team, but some probably think if you do one thing or the other maybe you will be. That is definitely the case for a lot of teams who turn it around. Really really hard in the AFCN though.

Thank God! I was afraid it might not turn itself into a QB thread. I am relieved. I am okay with the Trey if he is a good fit.

I think there are some posters that would trade up for RG 3 and I'm starting to warm up to this....we need the QB position fixed and letting the next Manning-like and Vick-like QB prospect go elsewhere in a draft holding a 4th overall and another 1st rounder and some multiple mid to late rounders...well, I think it would be incredibly stupid

I'm afraid I be in the same boat with you !

My order would be:

(1) #1
(2) #2
(3) #4/#6 (i see these as being the same)
(4) #3
(5) #5

I say this now but I really want to get a better look at Griffin throwing the ball at the combine, hear reports about his thowing sessions, etc....if he comes back looking like a LONG term project then stick with McCoy w/ upgraded offense/defense and see what happens

Let me put it to you this way:

If the FO believes one of the QB's out there is the guy, do whatever it takes to get them.

If it's Matt Flynn and we're worried about getting into a bidding war with Washington or Miami, I would be ok with giving up #22 in order to get him from GB (I know he's a FA...I'm talking a tag n trade scenario that guarantees us Flynn).

If RG3 is the guy, I'm ok with trading 22 to get up to #2 to take him.

If somehow the FO will try to move up to #1and pry Luck away from the Colts' cold, dead fingers, I'm ok with trading 22, 2nd rounder, 5th rounder, next year's #1 and next year's 3rd rounder in order to do it.

My point: if there's a QB prospect who the Browns covet and determine that this guy can be the franchise guy, who, even when the rest of the team sucks, can at least elevate the team to a 7-9 record (aka no more awful 4-12 seasons), then you must do whatever it takes to get that guy.

No more of this "trying to catch lightning in the bottle with a feel good story of a try hard kid" junk. We've been down that road too many times.

Was Holmgren in GB when they traded for Brett Favre, I know he was in Seattle when they traded for Hasslebeck, Holmgrens teams that he coached and GM'ed have never drafted a first round QB I think, IMO he won't do it this year either.

CLEVELAND, Ohio -- When Mike Holmgren was the coach in Green Bay, it was Brett Favre who was the game changer for the Packers. The future Hall of Fame quarterback was not drafted by Green Bay. Instead, General Manager Ron Wolf obtained Favre in a trade from Atlanta, where he was a backup.

Holmgren's next coaching stop was Seattle, where he inherited quarterback Jon Kitna. After 9-7 and 6-10 seasons, he dumped Kitna and added two quarterbacks -- Matt Hasselbeck and Trent Dilfer.

Also serving as Seattle's general manager, Holmgren signed Dilfer as a free agent after the quarterback had won a Super Bowl for Baltimore. He also made a deal with his former team -- Green Bay -- for Hasselbeck, who was a backup to Favre.

It was Hasselbeck who eventually led the Seahawks to the 2005 Super Bowl.

When he became president of the Browns before the 2010 season, Holmgren signed veteran Jake Delhomme as a free agent and traded for Seneca Wallace, who had been his backup quarterback in Seattle.

What's the point of this history lesson? When faced with a quarterback question, Holmgren has often turned to quarterbacks already in the NFL.

Colt McCoy was the exception to that. Holmgren selected him in the third round of 2010. After Delhomme and Wallace were injured, McCoy took over at quarterback in 2010 -- and had the job at the start of 2011.

Now, Holmgren and coach Pat Shurmur are talking about an open competition at the position in 2012. It wouldn't be a shock if Holmgren and General Manager Tom Heckert look around the league for a quarterback, rather than just use one of their draft picks.

Most of the speculation has been about Matt Flynn, the backup in Green Bay who is probably headed to free agency unless the Packers make him a franchise player for about $14 million -- and then try to trade him and that huge contract.

Either way, Flynn is destined for monster money. He's been with the Packers for four years and has started two games. The first was in 2010, when he was 24-of-37 passing for 251 yards, three touchdowns and one interception. The other game was the 480-yard, six-touchdown explosion in the final game of 2011 against Detroit.

Not exactly a large sample of stats for Flynn, who didn't even start at LSU until his senior season. Flynn then led his team to the national title. But he is in a form of the West Coast offense and he should have at least some appeal to the Browns.

View full sizePaul Connors, Associated PressKevin Kolb's first season as a starter in Arizona was cut short by injuries, including a concussion. But his background with the Eagles makes him a QB of potential interest for Browns GM Tom Heckert.

The Plain Dealer's Tony Grossi raised the idea of Kevin Kolb, now with Arizona. He is due a $7 million roster bonus in March. He is 27 and was 2-6 as a starter for Arizona. He suffered a turf toe injury and a concussion. John Skelton replaced Kolb, and was 6-2 as a starter.

To be completely accurate, there was a game Kolb started, threw one pass, was injured. Skelton took over to lead Arizona to a victory. That's why some places list Kolb's record is 3-6, but the victory in that game really belonged to Skelton. So far, Arizona has not indicated that Skelton is the 2012 starter, but it's possible the Browns could work a trade. Kolb was originally the 36th pick in the 2007 draft by Philadelphia, where Heckert ran the draft and Shurmur was an assistant coach. In that 2007 draft, Kolb was the third quarterback selected -- behind JaMarcus Russell and Brady Quinn.

It's no secret that Heckert has long believed Kolb has the right stuff to start in the NFL, especially in the West Coast offense. Arizona didn't run that offense this season, when Kolb had nine touchdown passes, eight interceptions and a 81.1 rating.

It's early January. So much can happen between before the April 26 draft. There is a free agency. There are trades. I have a feeling the Browns will be in the middle of a deal that involves a quarterback.
http://www.cleveland.com/pluto/blog/index.ssf/2012/01/mike_holmgrens_track_record_in.html

I think that there is a better chance that we will sign a FA QB or take one later in the Draft, then we will trade up to get the 2nd selection for RG3, given Holmgren's history.

If someone could give me a guarantee on a prospect I would do it in half a heart beat, but of coarse there are no such guarantees, so I would defer and hope that he could possible fall to us at #4 if we like him that much.

If the Draft was held today, then I would take Blackmon at 4 (if available) and hope that we can get another QB either at 22 or 37 or later.

Quote:

---

My point: if there's a QB prospect who the Browns covet and determine that this guy can be the franchise guy, who, even when the rest of the team sucks, can at least elevate the team to a 7-9 record (aka no more awful 4-12 seasons), then you must do whatever it takes to get that guy.

No more of this "trying to catch lightning in the bottle with a feel good story of a try hard kid" junk. We've been down that road too many times.

---

This I absolutely agree with.

If there's a guy that our Front Office has absolute confidence in, I want to get him. Get our QB of the future and get it done with. If there isn't, then don't do anything. Let's stick with what we have and move on.

That's why I want Andrew Luck. I'm willing to bet that he's gonna be a really good NFL QB. We can add good players to our team with this draft no matter what. But to me, a good QB is ridiculously important. If you don't see one you really like, then don't force anything. Get us other good players, but if Andrew Luck is the next great thing, try to get the guy. Same thing with RG3 or Flynn or whoever.

That position seems to be worth more than anything, especially in today's NFL

I'm with you.

Progress can be made in any number of ways... and it's VERY possible that this FO might choose a course that doesn't involve taking a QB high in this year's draft.

For instance, if I see:

a D that can shut down the run consistently, get some real QB pressure when they want to
a complete, top 10-15 OL .
a true #1 WR (either by trade, FA OR draft)

in 2012, I'd be quite pleased with our direction.

One of the things I HAVEN'T seen on this board is a discussion about the next class of QB's to come out in the 2013 draft. Like I've said many times, I don't follow the college game, so I wouldn't know. BUT... if the next draft class is particularly QB-rich, I could easily see this FO fixing our other needs this year, and deferring the QB question until next.

Like you've said, Hel... there is room for improvement pretty much everywhere. The order in which we fix our weaknesses is less important to me than seeing the total package fixed going forward.

My only thing w/ trading the bank for one guy is this...

As soon as he's done w/ his first season.. and we STILL have a garbage record.. then we will all agree that the QB needs better talent around him to succeed. Well if we traded all our picks.. good luck giving him help.

Im on board with 2 and 4. If the FO doesnt like RG3 at 4 (much like sanchez) and hes sitting there Im also fine with that, either trading that pick (my favorate option) to move down and get a 1st next year or picking a player they really do covet and rolling with 4.

Jones has ALOT of improving to do if he's ever to be taken in the 1st next year.

Barkley is currently penciled in as the #1 overall pick basically.

Well seeing as he was going top 4 this year. Unless something Matt Lienart style happens (what exactly DID happen?) I can't see him not being the top guy...

thanks, anarchy.

Quote:

---

This is the argument that annoys me the most.

We're not Ditka-ing our entire draft for Luck, people need to stop using this extreme...

---

First, it's NOT GOING TO HAPPEN.. we aren't going to get Luck

second,, the talk was that some were willing to give 3 first round picks. two this season and one next season to move up grab the first pick and choose luck.

That may not be "ditka-ing, but it's pretty damn close.

So excuse me if I don't stop using this because it's just not that EXTREME

Ditka gave up the 7th pick, plus the 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, and 7th in 1999 ..... plus the Saints' 1st and 3rd in 2000. They had also previously offered an additional 2nd rounder to, I believe, the Bengals.

That trade gave the Redskins Lavar Arrington, and Champ Bailey. What it did not do, on either side, was give them a Super Bowl.

Man I wish we would have taken that trade. If any team could add that many draft picks to their roster, that expansion team was the one. Imagine, in hindsight, how much better we would have been with Lavar Arrington and Champ Bailey on defense, and still 6 or 7 other picks to work with in addition to our own. I always though that was a mistake, given that we had nothing and needed a massive jump start.

I would have forgone the QB that year, in that draft, under those conditions. Plus ... that year was the "deepest QB draft since 1983" ........ so the possibility of getting a good QB at 5 was definitely there. (at the time) Hell, we were supposedly debating between Couch and Smith right up till the time Couch out pen to paper ...... and Couch had all kinds of well publicized pre-draft issues, from Palmer trying to figure out if Couch's delivery could be fixed, etc. In retrospect, drafting Couch had Bad Idea written all over it.

Hell yeah, I'd have loved to be on the receiving end of that trade.. and we were in a position to do it, but to be the team that gives that up.. sorry,, Can't do it.

I wouldn't give up a whole draft, but for the right player, I would give 3 first rounders.

I know that you disagree, and that's your right, but I would do so for the right player, at the right position.

Running Back is not the right position.

The point is that you never know when you are "that one player away".