DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Re-sign Hoyer

And most times, it's just not very smart.

Because Sanchez has been effective in the "QB limited" offense that we want to run.

I am not saying that he is a great QB, not by any stretch of imagination, but he can be effective.

We are limited in our options. Hoyer threw 2 TD and 9 INT in his final 6 games. (5 starts) He also had passes go all over the place, and that got worse as the year went on. Maybe he just had a tired arm, I don't know ..... but I trust the staff to know whether or not they think that he is worth bringing back.

Nice post toad. I agree with a ton of it.



If we didn't have so many injuries on the d line you think we stop the run and rush the passer better?

And did we run block better with Mack, or is it that we just don't have maulers. I thought that before Mack was hurt we were opening some big holes, and in 2nd short, 3rd and short alot.

I also thought we did great in coverage on kick offs and punts. the rest of ST sucked.

I honestly think that part of the problem there is that these are young guys.

Remember how Mangini used to bring in the old ST demons. We had solid ST play, but we had less spots to develop young players. Now we are developing young players, so ST suffer a bit.

I think we are on the right track, and can only imagine what would have happened if we stayed a bit healthier.

i still believe that hoyers prob down the stretch was gordon. waay too many passes thrown to a guy that was brand new to the scheme. i still can't figure out who's fault that was either.
was it shanahan? is hoyer aloud to change the play, so is it him? is it pettine for allowing whoever's at fault to keep doing it? i just can't figure it out.
to me that was the biggest reason of brians downfall. the run game started to decline after mack went down, but he kept hitting the smurfs to keep us in the game. once he started targeting gordon like every other pass, is when we dug the hole.

That's cool and I totally understand where you are coming from..I'm just wondering how much we can expect for wins next year with another QB starting, chemistry, route trusting etc....the hard part is wondering which Hoyer is the real one? If the second 1/2 Hoyer is true to form, then you are correct. If the first 1/2 is true then Sanchez may be a break even..

I guess I'll consult my magic 8-ball and see what it recommends?

Regarding Sanchez, no. There is no upside. Someone said it and I completely agree; Sanchez = Hoyer. Which is to say, he's completely average at best.

Regarding Cutler, you get a stronger arm and more experience. Is it worth the risk or the possible headache that he comes with? If I truly believed the Browns were a QB away from being ready to win in 2015 and Cutler really only has one more guaranteed year on his monster contract and I could get him ultra cheap, I might take that flyer. All things being equal, if I was choosing between Cutler, Hoyer, Manziel, Sanchez or 2015 QB draft pick as a let's-see-what-he-can-do right now, I'd probably roll with Cutler.
Full disclosure, though, I hate all those options.

j/c

Hoyer's downfall began before Gordon returned. Funny how short some peoples memories are. But the answer to all of this will hinge upon how the coaching staff perceives Hoyer. If they wish to go in a direction where they may actually find a long term answer, I believe Glennon would be the odds on favorite. He showed poise and promise in his limited work. In his case you actually have an opportunity of finding a young QB with upside for the future.

With the other QB's I've seen mentioned, ie..... Cutler, Sanchez, what you see are QB's who have trouble in their decision making with no future upside. They're pretty much finished products.

There must be an answer found at the QB position. The only potential target I've seen that could possibly address that is Glennon. Once again it's a risk/reward situation. If Glennon flames out and JFF continues to fall on his face, we're back to square one. But the reward could be that we find an answer at the QB position without investing a lot.

The choice is a band aid or long term potential. With a badly needed answer at the QB position, I think I would be willing to risk the downside for a potential answer.

Glennon could be interesting. I don't know much about his abilities, but his stats are marginally better than Hoyer's.
I've seen Sam Bradford's name mentioned. He could be interesting too, but you better have a solid plan B.

From what I have read on these boards, Pettine seems to be closing the door on Hoyer. Mike Glennon might be a guy that could translate well to this offensive system assuming Shanny comes back. The Bucs are probably going to take Mariotta in the draft, so he will be available.

For me it is the opposite. I kinda though Pettine was Hoyer's biggest backer. It wasn't until several games of bad play, added losses, and dire playoff hopes that you had to see what Manziel brought to the table.

Not sure what we will do with the QB position, but we cannot go into 2015 with Manziel as the incumbent "starter" and Shaw has his backup....which is why I think we might consider Hoyer again and reminisce on how effective he was with a healthy offensive line, with the potential of added receiving weapons.

If there is anything I give Hoyer extreme credit for, it was getting the ball out FAST and that will be a plus with Mack coming back and perhaps an upgrade along the way. That is a luxury in the NFL, but I don't think he has what it takes to be a legit starter. Sadly, we won't be in a position to draft one high, and I don't think there will be many on the market.

In retrospect, Pettine may have wanted Hoyer to succeed, because he knew Manziel was not ready.

As a bridge, I like Hoyer. Who else will know the system, players, playbook and expectations? Anyone better? Until we have a young'un we are grooming or someone better, he is the answer.

Problem is, regardless of what his agent says, I don't think he wants to be here. Guess there is an outside chance if he gets the start.

Just name him if we have no one better and stop the constant QB competition. Manziel is a long way off and Shaw is most likely average at best with work to do.

I would be happy to see Hoyer back as we reassemble the pieces of the broken offensive puzzle that was this year. Boost the D and we may be on our way......oh wait.......maybe not. Been here before!

Hoyer's downfall began when Mack got hurt.

I have no idea what the fo thinks of him. I can guarantee that we won't hear a peep though from either side though.

I have no idea about glennon, or any other guy for that matter. Hoyer is what he is, a guy in his first year starting in the NFL. Will he be more than a backup. Maybe. Or he may like you say, be a bridge.

Either way, we need to be developing someone while Hoyer or someone plays.

Well i really doubt Pettine is posting here. And the rest is just opinion.

We are going to hear nothing but lukewarm talk from both Pettine and Farmer in regards to Hoyer. They aren't going to burn a bridge or dis-respect him for sure.

They may come to the conclusion that some other guy is better and go after him, but I would think that someone is gonna be here next year because Manziel is such a crap-shoot.

Hoyer don't get greedy, and i would think he would be in the mix. We'll see.

I would think Pettine wanted Hoyer to succeed because he wants to win.
Can't see a coach wishing a guy to fail.

In all honesty there are 0 better options I can see out there over bringing Hoyer back. I would give him an incentive laden contract with an opt out after 1 year and tell him he can win the job fair and square.

I am still of the view he hit a rookie wall of sorts. His fundamentals went to hell and that sometimes is a sign of fatigue - technique is the first thing to go.

People also forget the rehab from the knee injury which would have taken a lot out of a person.

Saying that, his last 4 or 5 games do not encourage me but I'm hoping with an offseason to freshen up, another year in the system, he can at least be more the Hoyer of weeks 1-9 rather than the subsequent version.

If, somehow, Manziel makes the leap and light comes on, all good but I get the horrid feeling he just doesn't want it enough despite his assurances through the media.

We have to draft a QB this draft either way. I'd be happy having Hoyer back as a bridge for a year or two as long as he shows progress.

I would think Pettine wanted Hoyer to succeed because he wants to win.
Can't see a coach wishing a guy to fail.


i used to think that until the cinci game. after the 1st half i'm thinking hoyer still has time to pull it out. the longer we went with JM the more i knew this wasn't about the win or making the playoffs.

Im a fan of Hoyer's character. Not a fan of his play on the field.
How many NFL teams could he start for now?
I get it.He's a local kid we all want to cheer for the hometown hero to lead the team to the playoffs.
Don't let the backyard hero thing overshadow his limitations as a QB.
Very weak arm. Misses WRs wide open 20-40 yards downfield. Maybe its the grease from the Mr.Hero Romanburgers on his fingers.
in any game he is in,he's the worst of the 2 QBs on the field.
But its been that way for the time since 1999. The Browns have always had the worst QB on the field 90% of the time. Hence the 1 playoff appearance and one winning record since 2007.
Look at all your playoff QBs. Big frame,big arms that can drive the ball downfield.
thats what the Browns need.
Hoyer doesn't apply.

I said Pettine was posting here?

I think you need to go back and re-read my post.
Geezzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz...............

Agree 100%. We know what we have with Hoyer and when he played with confidence he was very good. We loved him because he made quick decisions and GOT THE BALL OUT QUICKLY. That changed after the Cincy game...and frankly our game plans changed...in addition to losing Mack.

It makes me ill to read some of the discussions of here now about bringing in yet another re-tread/reject QB.

When we started training camp in 2014, we thought had a chance of knowing who our franchise QB is. Here we are a year later and what did we accomplish? The most unimaginable outcome to me is any scenario where we are debating who our franchise QB is in January of 2016.

if you want Hoyer back, then you need to watch the Indy game again. whatever Hoyer had, he lost. the odds of him regaining it here are unlikely and even less likely that he will want to do it here.

he'll be the retread somewhere else and have a middling season with some ups and some downs.

You mean we had what we thought we knew we had in Hoyer..... until that all changed? Because it certainly did change. Everything from his footwork to his accuracy.

I saw nothing in Hoyer's last five starts to indicate he had upside going forward. Eventually the coaching staff saw the same thing. That's why Manziel started. Not that he earned it, but it was the only possibility of savaging anything.

What I want to know is what happened to him?

I've never seen a player do such a complete 180 at the mid-point of a season.

I can't help it... I find mysteries irresistable.

As much as I think the early season is closer to the player he actually is, I think the league caught up to him a bit and the team around him broke down some as well. It happens to most players who are starting for the first time. The rookie wall is not only physical, but it's mental and schematic as well. I think with an off season in the same system he'd be able to correct a number of those mistakes and minimize those tendencies. That's unfortunately not going to give him a cannon for an arm or make him particularly mobile but I think he can be a perfectly servicable quarterback while we try and identify our savior.

I'm inclined to agree with this.

It appears the general consensus here is that we aren't likely to be fielding our "franchise QB" next season. Hoyer, Sanchez, Cutler... we're talking about a bridge QB. While Hoyer will never (and never was) someone you'd put on your fantasy team, I think where he has to get serious consideration from Pettine and Farmer is that Hoyer is a great example of the philosophy Pettine has been trying to instill: play like a Brown.

While Hoyer's subpar play at the end contributed to losses, it was his play in the first place that kept us in games we shouldn't have had a chance at... come back 24 and 27 points down??? Yes we had issues on all phases of the game, but there was always a sense when Hoyer played that no matter how far down, our guys were never out of it. I think you HAVE to contribute that to Hoyer's leadership. I can't remember the last QB we had that the team rallied around as quickly as they had Hoyer (even in his few starts the previous season it was obvious). Contrast this with how uninspired the team played when Manziel got the start. In keeping Hoyer around I think the team benefits both in continuity and in that he's someone the team will rally around.

Now what's it going to take to re-sign him? I think the best situation is to sign him to a 1 year show me contract. Pay him low starter money for the year, incentive laden. Hoyer benefits because he gets a second season in the same offense to redeem this season and increase his value. The team benefits through the continuity and gives Manziel a chance to redeem himself on the bench (or whomever we may draft assuming Manziel is even on the roster next season. I don't see why JM shouldn't think he could possibly go the way of Trent if the club is given the right offer).

Thanks for responding.


Another poster mused that his arm wasn't up to the rigors of a 16-week season, and I kind of agreed with that theory.

I also riffed a bit on my own... and theorized that the mental aspects of holding up to the demands of being a #1 in the NFL might have been too much for him, as well. After all, BH had never been forced to deal with any of that until this year. (I'm only a casual watcher of the Pats, but I can't really remember him playing for an extended period of time in relief of an injured Tom Brady. Some teams really ARE lucky, aren't they?)

Add to this mix: his rehab (which was mentioned in the post I referenced), a totally new O scheme/approach, new coaches, a QB 'controversy' from the start of TC, and rising expectations borne of a successful early-season campaign, and his breakdown makes a bit more sense to me.

I mean... a guy doesn't go from quick-thinking, decisive, and reasonably accurate to indecisive, totally inaccurate and 'pick-prone' over the span of just 4 games. Dude lost ALL of the attributes that gave us those early-season wins.

SOMETHING else had to be in play... and I think your 'rookie wall' mental theory might be what we witnessed. Kid has a LOT more on his plate than the 'average' NFL starter at the QB position.

It was freakish, the way his game fell apart so quickly. He was never going to be the next Aaron Rogers, but I saw a lot of Drew Brees/Joe Montana in his his early game. The fallout HAD to be mostly mental, imho. Nobody goes from poised, come-from-behind wins to total ineptitude in this short a span, without something intangible being the root cause. It just doesn't happen in the NFL.

I think about the Brian Hoyer I saw in those early comeback games, and compare it to the BH I saw in those last games... and it really does make me wonder what he might be able to do in Year Two of a system that was totally new to him a year ago... under the same coaching/management... and with a year's experience under his belt.

For me, the prospect is every bit as much intriguing as bringing in another vet, drafting some unknown, or placing Manziel in the driver's seat.

It's a conundrum, to be sure. There are some on this board who are absolutely convinced that Hoyer is a waste of CLE's time. 'Absolutism' always tells me more about those posters that it does the subject matter at hand. It's why I asked the general question to the board in the first place.

Making these kinds of assessments, when millions of dollars and big contracts are on the line is why guys like Ray Farmer, Ozzie Newsome and Thomas Dimitroff age more rapidly than some schmuck like me.

THIS is why I'd rather be a fan than a GM.



Thanks, Stetson. I enjoyed this.

I'm not sure why so many people want him back to be the starter?

Didn't anyone else notice how his play diminished when the games got more important?

His stats can't ALL be blamed on the Alex Mack injury and Josh Gordon...

8 INTs in 4-games.
Completed less than 45% over a 5-game stretch.
Prior to Carolina he hadn't throw a TD since the 2nd quarter vs. Houston
He led 1 TD drive in 29 possessions.

Brian Hoyer helped us win 7-games, absolutely.

But he had a big hand in us losing 6-games.

He can't generate offense unless everything around him is working perfectly, and honestly he doesn't really have that great of an arm.

If we're going to go with another veteran we can at least find someone with a strong arm.

Jake Locker or Mark Sanchez I think would be the two best names we could attempt to sign.

OR...

Make a trade for Sam Bradford, Nick Foles or Mike Glennon.

After this weekend I'm on the Bryce Petty bandwagon. I sincerely hope we draft him and Jaelen Strong with our two first round picks this year.

And I can't understand why people like you can possibly be so critical of Hoyer. . He won games with almost nothing at WR. I don't know how many times people are always giving all the other QBs in the league passes because they have their star receivers injured. Why do people like you always want to see the next QB... Ever heard of continuity. Nick Foles is the only QB on that list that I would want. The rest are either injury Prone or Suck.

You might as well accept it. Hoyer will be back and starting next year. Not to mention what does it say for your opinion when the team(players) supports and backs Hoyer and you think he sucks.

I was all for Brian Hoyer starting this season. That is, until he went through an absolutely excruciating stretch.

He wasn't just bad, he was terrible to the point that all hope was lost. Sure, Manziel somehow found a way to be even worse, but that doesn't wash the stink off of what Hoyer was doing.

Now, he was not playing all that well through the JAX, Oakland, TB, and Cinci games, but he at least was doing "enough." That ended with the Houston game.

4 game stretch (Houston, Atlanta, Buffalo, Indy):
74/150 980yds 1-TD 8-INT 50-QBrating 6.5-YPA

Yeah! Really can get some accurate information from these boards!

I don't believe anyone here has a clear cut answer to this question but I'll give you my opinion on it.

I look at the QB's this regime acquired. Both Shaw and Manziel are completely different QB's than Hoyer. Both are very mobile guys who use their legs. To me this sends a strong message as to the type of QB they view will be needed to run Shanahan's system. Hoyer simply isn't that guy.

With Hoyer, everything has to be perfect around him. The running game has to be running on all cylinders. Protection must be damned near perfect. Even in the wins you can see that Hoyer is a game manager at best.

The loss of Mack hurt, but also I believe other teams figured it out. If you can stop our run game and force Hoyer to beat you, you have a very high probability to beat us. And from every appearance, as the pressure of that mounted, his footwork, accuracy and overall effectiveness declined. I'm not so sure that tendency can be fixed in a QB who will be 30 years old.

That's why I'm not enamored with the idea of bringing him back. I'm not saying he stinks, but it seems to me that if you have a chance to land a guy that may have more upside and could be a possibility at answering your question at QB, that would be a wise avenue to follow.

We have nothing but question marks at best in JFF. Hoyer, IMO, will never be anything more than a mediocre game manager. Neither of those options appear to be an inevitable answer. So to me, it would seem much wiser to try to acquire someone who at least holds that possibility. That's why my avenue suggested would be Mike Glennon. He's shown at least as much or more than Hoyer and is 25 years old. That allows for a lot of possible upside.

If you don't have an answer at QB you should be looking for one. I don't know that we could get Glennon or what it would cost. What I do know is he's a pretty smart kid who has pretty good decision making and is still very young. Spinning our wheels just doesn't seem to be the right path to follow.

I am not sure why Glennon is being so heralded here. If he has demonstrated what is being reported on this board by hopeful posters, why would Tampa let him go?

As for Hoyer, there also seems to be this contingent that believes he can't improve. How can we be so sure of that?

Hoyer's struggles had nothing to do with Alex Mack. Mack getting hurt simply sped up the process. Run blitz nearly every down and dare the Browns to beat you through the air. Stay home on bootlegs no matter what. Hoyer sucked when other teams began doing this, no doubt about it.

But why do people think he can't improve? Because of his age? Plausible, but I don't think definitive since he really hasn't played a lot of professional football. The best thing I've read here is that he had average accuracy in college so no reason to think it will be any better in the pros.

But here's the thing. We aren't getting Winston, who by all accounts is the most pro ready QB. Mariotta probably won't be there at 12. (If he is, I am 100% positive Farmer takes him.) I'm not a big college football guy, but from what I've read there is a pretty steep drop off after those two ... well, really after Winston ... Mariotta is going to be a big project. The only QB who might be obtainable in the NFL that I think would be an improvement over Hoyer would be Bradford, and he may or may not be available, and he may or may not be able to stay healthy.

Staying with Hoyer makes too much sense. I know people are down on him after his collapse. I was every bit as critical as everyone else. It was downright terrible football. But I don't think that can erase all of the good either. That's what I see being done here. ALL of the good is being erased, and he's being written off as a finished book. I don't think that's fair.

He's smart. He's a hard worker. He has the respect of his teammates. He for the most part has played winning football. And he will provide some continuity which I think can be a good thing.

You have to bring him back as the undisputed starter though. No games. Manziel is told he's #2 or #3...whatever Pettine thinks is appropriate.

To think Glennon will be a franchise QB is a pipe dream. We could spend years spinning our wheels on a silly notion like that. At least with Hoyer, we know he's an Alex Smith type that will make us competitive, and maybe if we catch some luck, can take us on a run. All the while, you hope Manziel or whatever project QB they bring along can develop and take the reins in 2 to 3 years.

To me, it just makes too much sense. I feel this FO is saying Hoyer is a finished product while willing to roll the dice on guys who bring even less certainty to the table. I just don't really get it.

I believe any QB who you must be able to rely on must have the ability to make all of the throws and be able to produce when everything around him isn't perfect. Hoyer doesn't appear to be that guy. I also feel it's much harder to teach an old dog new tricks. Hoyer will be 30 next year. He's had several years in the NFL. No, not as a starter, but he has practiced and been in an NFL system for a very long time.

This produces tendencies and habits that won't easily be broken. I believe people really need to look at how perfect everything around Hoyer has to be for him to succeed. I believe people need to look at how even our coaching staff, when we were winning, depended on the run game in the red zone rather than trusting Hoyer.

I don't have a problem with people who feel differently about our QB situation. I don't have a problem with people wanting Hoyer to return. I just see a QB that when the running game isn't producing, can't make the throws or has the arm to carry the team. A QB who other teams have figured out. A QB, when faced with the pressure of carrying the team, forgets his footwork, loses accuracy and generally collapses in the face of adversity. That's something that I don't believe can be corrected.

Fair enough, but look at the alternatives...all of those same issues (other than potentially the arm strength) with the added issue of learning a new system. It just doesn't make sense to bring in any other vet who will be at best a minimal upgrade. We just need to continue to cycle through fresh meat until we find our "guy" and in the meantime someone who's highs and lows we've seen and even at his lowest he was a missed kick or a dropped pass from a win...

I like Glennon, though not as much as some others do. I think that he can be an effective QB.

For whatever reason, Lovie Smith preferred McCown to Glennon, even when Glennon outplayed McCown.

In 11 games, McCown threw for 2206 yards, 11 TD and 14 INT. He averaged 6.7 yards/throw, and had a 70.5 QB Rating.

in 6 games, Glennon threw for 1417 yards, 10 TD and 6 INT. He averaged 7 yards/throw, and had a QB Rating of 83.3.

Glennon was not perfect, but he was far better than McCown.

As far as why he may become available, the Bucs will almost certainly draft Mariota.

I am not sure if he is the right guy for us, but he was an effective player on a bad team. Last year, in 13 starts, he threw for 2608 yards, with 19 TD and 9 INT. I think that he is a guy with potential. I have no idea why Smith decided to go with a less effective McCown, unless it was to try and secure the to pick in next year's draft.

I'm really not a stat guy. But this is a good example why I believe Glennon would make a lot of sense. He's only finished his second season and in that time has shown that he could develop into a really good QB.

No, it's not set in stone that he will, but early results are good on this kid. As you have pointed out, his availability seems like will be there.

And I'm certainly hot a Hoyer hater. He's a very solid team guy. He's a hard worker and has local ties. There's nothing I would have like to have seen more than him being the answer at our QB need.

Unfortunately, I just don't see it. I believe there is a desperate need to upgrade our QB position. I would certainly like the opportunity to see us attain a guy with a solid start in the NFL, who obviously doesn't have a problem with the speed of the game, the arm to make all the throws and with very good odds of upgrading the position.

It's the possibility to land someone young enough with room to grow rather than some QB's mentioned who I believe pretty much are who they are.

I hear you when it comes to learning the new system, but as I've mentioned, some questions about Glennon have been answered that you simply aren't sure of with any rookie draft pick. The speed of the game and the ability to produce in the NFL and decision making.

In Glennons limited starts, these are things he's shown that he has the ability to handle. While he isn't "fresh meat" he hasn't been in the meat case for long and looks like the best steak on display.

If you trade all the way to 2. You're probably giving up 12, 19, AND next years 1st.. That's a lot..

We'd have to dive deep into FA in that scenario..

But in all honesty, in that scenario.. I'd rather have Winston than Mariota..

IMO Winston can come in and run a ball control offense and play well.. Kinda like Big Ben his rookie year, or Sanchez with the Jets..

Question.

With all the rumors of Kyle possibly leaving..

Doesn't that remove a big reason to bring Hoyer back?

If we are running a new offense, even a similar offense.. That was the big reason to bring Hoyer back, because he knew the offense and anyone else would have to learn it..