DawgTalkers.net Forums The Archives 2015 NFL Season The NFL Draft 2015 Draft Need: QB Part 2

What costs teams is not the drafting of a QB every year, it's sticking with a QB who doesn't look like he's an NFL talent. How many QBs do you see anymore who look completely lost early in their careers that suddenly have the light flip on and become franchise guys? Usually teams know sooner rather than later whether a guy can play... exceptions are rare.

It kills teams because they waste seasons waiting for a guy to develop that could be spent trying out other QBs and developing a guy who might have a chance. When we went into 2013 with Weeden, we KNEW what was going to happen and deserved our fate. That's exactly how it's going to be if we go into 2015 with Johnny.

Look at Trent Richardson. The guy is 24 and only 3 years removed from being our #3 overall selection. Surely our running game must be crippled because he hasn't developed? Except that Banner realized Richardson didn't have it and admitted it early, got a 1st rounder for him and now we have 2 rushers who are both better than Trent.

That HAS to be the approach at QB. It's too important a position to patch or neglect. It used to be a 3 year investment in a QB because of the guaranteed money given to top picks but now, there's absolutely no reason we shouldn't keep taking a shot so long as there's a guy we like and we don't have any faith in the guy we have.

If Mariota is that guy this year (and he probably is because Farmer loves him), take a shot at him. It's either that or look at the rest of the QB draft class (which is one of the worst I've ever seen) and realize that we're going into 2015 with a vet like Hoyer and Johnny again... which is effectively giving up on the season.

No amount of WR or DL drafted is going to save a 2015 that has those guys starting... but getting a legitimate QB might. That's the route I'm going every time until our problem is solved.

If Mariota is that guy this year (and he probably is because Farmer loves him), take a shot at him

which makes me wonder is it better to move up and use more valuable draft picks and more money on the salary cap for a guy who's only claim to grace is athleticism?
or to find a guy in lower rounds that has the tools to exceed at this level. i am not talking about mariota specifically, but any QB with questionable skills.

i'm from the school where the rookie QB sits for a year or two until he is more developed mentally and fundamentally.
both QB's are unknown risks but which can be coached up at a higher rate, the mental or the fundamental?
i would love to have more lucks and (gag) rothlisbergers in the draft every year but they are getting few and far between. i get the feeling that if a lot of these athletic QB's were on losing teams they wouldn't be ranked so high. but such is the trend in college nowdays.

To be honest I am to the point you just make Manziel the starter and give him ALL the reps so there are no excuses and roll with him for this next season.

If he sucks then we will be in position to draft a new QB and we will have the tools from this draft to help that QB succeed.

If he does well then we are that much better off.

A DT and a WR from the first round would really help our overall team If Manziel can play worth a darn.

With a brand new offense they need to go all in with Manziel and emphasize plays that he does best.

Rookie QBs are expected to provide impact right away, even if it’s not great play. The old model of developing a guy for 1-2 years behind a veteran starter is dead (except for the teams with aging stars who have that luxury). Ownership gives coaches short leashes so QBs are given the same. Derek Carr put up a 76.6 QB rating as a rookie coming from a spread offense. Bridgewater put up an 85.5. That might not be greatness, but in terms of Browns QBs since 1999 (assuming at least 10 starts), that would put Teddy #1 and Carr within the Top 5. And those are both guys who should get better from here. An impact from a rookie QB is absolutely possible.



I’d be fine with that as you have a point but I’ll also be fine if they decide to move the circus into someone else’s backyard.

My issue isn’t that we need to move Johnny at all costs but rather, that we need to address the situation as though Johnny isn’t the answer at QB. He not only looked unfathomably bad as a rookie, he has poor work habits and his off field issues speak for themselves.

I look at Johnny like I do Josh Gordon: his value is shot so there’s not a ton of harm in keeping him around and if we end up getting something from him then great. I’m not going to count on him in the future though because with everything going on with him, that would just be foolish. I hear people talk about bringing in a mediocre veteran to start and having Johnny as our “future” and it blows my mind. What about repeating last year’s QB recipe sounds appealing to anyone?

Mariota might require a bit of projection at the NFL level but how often is there a situation where a) a top QB talent doesn’t go #1 to a QB starved team, b) the team picking #2 is willing to deal because they have a young starter and c) the Browns have enough assets to move up without mortgaging the future?

Mariota may not be on Luck's level as a prospect but teams in position to take a Luck never trade the pick anyway. IMO, the stars are aligned for us to finally try a real fix at the position. If the front office lets Johnny Manziel stand in the way, shame on them.

Wise words. Heed them.

This year's QB class is putrid and the top two prospects have far bigger question marks than the top guys of last year's draft.

Winston has a ton of character concerns and throws too many picks.

Mariotta is a one-read qb who doesn't read coverages.

I would not draft either in the first round. I do realize both will be drafted in the first round, but I personally would not draft either in the first round.

This entire draft is very weak. Very boring.

The Browns would be best served by doing one of two things:

--Drafting BPA at 12 and 19

or

--Trading one of those picks for picks in next year's draft.

Vers, correct me if i'm wrong...... also you were worried that he threw with a stiff front leg and could be prone to future knee injuries like he suffered in college.

'Cleveland Browns should resist temptation of mortgaging future to trade up for Marcus Mariota: Tom Reed'

http://www.cleveland.com/browns/index.ss..._social_feature

By Tom Reed, Northeast Ohio Media Group on February 17, 2015 at 4:43 PM, updated February 17, 2015 at 5:39 PM

BEREA, Ohio -- The Browns would be well positioned to draft Marcus Mariota if two of the NFL's most perennially underachievers had played to form a season ago.

In a race to the bottom of the standings the Browns and Bills are usually a good exacta bet. Instead, the Browns won seven games, the most since 2007. The Bills, who surrendered their 2015 first-round pick for the right to draft receiver Sammy Watkins, finished 9-7 on the strength of a terrific defense.

As the Browns head to the NFL Scouting Combine, six weeks ahead of the draft, they are armed with picks 12 and 19 in the first round. The club needs a franchise quarterback -- a statement established in 1999 -- and again has the ammunition to trade up and potentially take Florida State's Jameis Winston or Mariota.

Winston played in a pro-style offense with the Seminoles, and is the most NFL-ready quarterback in the draft. The Buccaneers or Titans likely will take him. That's probably fine with the Browns. His list of off-field transgressions would be a hard sell in Cleveland, where coach Mike Pettine doubled as a pre-school teacher placing Johnny Manziel, Justin Gilbert and Josh Gordon in timeout.

That leaves Mariota, who presents big college numbers and a bigger risk to a team that mortgages its future to move up and snatch him. It's believed the Browns have serious interest in such a bold maneuver.

Despite their obvious need they should not surrender their two first-round picks, and perhaps more, for a dual-threat quarterback who flourished in a spread system.

If the Browns held a top-5 pick along with another first rounder, then my willingness to gamble on another quarterback transitioning to a pro-style offense would be greater. But after whiffing on Brandon Weeden and enduring a tumultuous first season with Manziel the Browns must stop reaching for quarterbacks. Especially in a year when the class is weak.

They need a high-end receiver to replace the suspended Gordon, a run-stopping defensive lineman and perhaps a right tackle. They can address two deficiencies in the first round with little jockeying.

Absent an established quarterback, Pettine's philosophy of trying to win with defense and running the ball is a logical one. It produced a 7-9 record with Brian Hoyer, who faltered down the stretch. If they had not lost All-Pro center Alex Mack in Week 5, however, the Browns might have won nine games.

Why not keep fortifying the team's core to give the eventual franchise quarterback the best chance of succeeding? The Seahawks did it with Russell Wilson. The Ravens did it with Joe Flacco. And, fans sometimes forget the Steelers did it with Ben Roethlisbeger, who arrived in Pittsburgh two seasons after Pittsburgh beat the Browns in the playoffs with Vince Gill impersonator Tommy Maddox.

It's early and much can change between now and the draft, but here's a possible three-point scenario for the Browns' quarterback situation in 2015:

• re-sign Hoyer or trade for Nick Foles or Sam Bradford;

• draft a best-of-the-rest quarterback (Brett Hundley, Garrett Grayson, Bryce Petty, etc.) with a mid-round pick and the idea of developing him; and

• give Manziel at least another season provided he's more committed after emerging from rehab.

I wasn't in favor of the Browns drafting Manziel a year ago. I'm also not ready to cut him without affording him another opportunity.

Despite his made-for-TMZ lifestyle, the biggest red flag regarding Manziel was whether his game would translate to the NFL. Early returns aren't encouraging. That's also the concern with Mariota, who's spent his entire high school and college career in spread offenses.

One of the biggest challenges now facing NFL talent evaluators is projecting system/spread quarterbacks. They don't line up under center. They rarely need to go through progressions. They don't develop pocket awareness or rely heavily on their field vision because they're often making quick, one-read throws.

It doesn't mean they won't become good NFL quarterbacks, but there's more reprogramming involved. It's also troubling the best spread quarterbacks graduating to the league in recent years, Colin Kaepernick and Robert Griffin III, are regressing as they have had to rely more on their arms.

The fact new quarterback coach Kevin O'Connell has been working with Mariota and Baylor's Petty the past month should provide the team with good insight. There's certainly plenty to like about Mariota, a quarterback who's guided the Ducks to back-to-back BCS bowl appearances, including the title game against the Buckeyes.

Mariotta possesses size, a strong arm, good character and the ability to run and process the game. If his former coach Chip Kelly traded up to acquire him, perhaps the Eagles would run a college-style offense suited to Mariota's strengths.

Senior Bowl executive director Phil Savage, a former Browns general manager, told cleveland.com whatever team drafted Manziel needed to make the same sacrifice. The Broncos did something similar with Tim Tebow in 2011 before acquiring Peyton Manning the following year.

Perhaps, that's the direction the NFL is ultimately headed with the influx of spread offenses. O'Connell is a former dual-threat quarterback who bounced around the league as a backup. He understands more than most coaches the environment awaiting Mariota.

NFL defenses are more complex and play the kind of press-man coverage the Heisman Trophy winner seldom saw at Oregon. He wasn't nearly as good throwing into tight windows as Winston. He also had 27 career fumbles with the Ducks.

In a Monday conference call, NFL Network draft analyst Mike Mayock took a dim view of the Browns moving up to draft either quarterback. Here's his assessment of Mariota:

"You don't have any worries off the field and all the individual components are there,'' Mayock said. "He's athletic, he's got a big arm, he's 6-4, 215 pounds, he's got great feet, he's going to run 4.5, 4.55, all of the individual components are available.

"However, can he put them together in a pro-style offense where he has to throw with anticipation, has to go through progressions?"

Sometimes, the best trades are the ones you don't make. Just ask the Redskins, who surrendered three first-round picks to the Rams for Griffin.

Working for a trigger-happy owner, Browns General Manager Ray Farmer and Pettine might feel pressured into making a play for a big-name prospect at the position of greatest need.

Where did that get them with Manziel?

Unless they are convinced Mariota can make a difference next season, the Browns must resist temptation. The alternatives at quarterback aren't particularly attractive or long term, but they allow the Browns to address other needs and build a better all-around team the way the Bengals have.

Are the Bengals, who have made four consecutive trips to the playoffs, any closer to a Super Bowl with Andy Dalton? Maybe not, then again their owner is not having to hold annual press conferences to deny dysfunction within the organization.



(end)

I went back and forth with Tom a bit on this but those "fortified" teams were all solid teams that stunk and underachieved due to sub-par QB play before they went out and got their QB situation righted.

- The Ravens were a playoff team in 2006 when Steve McNair was playing reasonably well but in 2007 when he was marred by injuries and Kyle Boller had to start, they went down the toilet and finished 5-11. They took Flacco the next year and went right back to being a playoff team.

- The Seahawks were coming off back to back 7-9 seasons with Matt Hasselbeck and Tarvaris Jackson at the helm. That off-season, they brought in both Flynn and Wilson. When Wilson beat Flynn out and took over the starting job, they went 11-5 and haven't been worse since.

- The Steelers were a good team in 2002 when backup Maddox bailed them out of the Kordell Stewart mess and played decently well. When he regressed in 2003 though, they went 6-10 with virtually the same roster. They went out and took Big Ben, went 15-1 and never looked back.

If you fix the QB, all the other issues aren't as glaring. Yes, we could use a WR, but when we had Josh Gordon playing out of his mind in 2013, we still finished 4-12 because of the garbage at QB. Sure, a RT would be nice but with 2 All-Pros in Thomas/Mack and a PFF All-Pro in Bitonio, how much more do you really need to invest in OL? A DT would be nice because our run D is putrid but can one DT turn around a defense like one QB can turn around an offense?

This team has a LOT of talent. Every other team with as many Pro Bowlers as we had this year was above .500. But... they also all have better QBs than we do. That's how it's been since 1999 and that's how it's going to be until we fix it. Our strengths mean nothing because awful QB play has been sinking this team for 15 years.

We need to keep trying to fix QB until we get it right because it's holding the entire team back. This year, the QB class sucks except for the top. It is what it is, but Mariota is no reach in the Top 5 even if he is harder to project. If our only avenue to fix things this year is to trade up for Mariota and if Farmer and crew believe Mariota is the answer, they need to pay the price. Period. If not, I fully expect yet another wasted season as is the norm around here, where people argue we need to draft our 4th All-Pro OLman vs. QB as they hope and pray for an Andrew Luck to fall into their laps by 2030.

If Mariota starts falling.. id consider moving up to grab him..

Then I would call Philly and offer them Mariota for the same amount of picks we gave up + Foles.

Then I'd wake up.

One thing I would take issue with Spectre is that none of the teams you mentioned gave up a multitude of 1st rounders to achieve the goal of landing their QB. The rest of their drafts stayed in tact to allow building in other areas of their team.

None of them gave up the farm to draft their QB's. Other than that, I do agree, and I think almost everyone would, that you won't find true success without landing a franchise QB.

I do understand what he's saying.

Teams who draft a QB high in the draft are usually teams with a dire need for a QB or they would have won more games and not be drafting that high.

If we look at some of the QB's drafted last year, most of them were asked to contribute right away. Bortles, Bridgewater and Carr all had significant playing time and were expected to have a positive impact on their teams.

The situation where you sit a QB and let him develop has almost become a lost art form. Rodgers is a perfect example but is far more the exception than the rule.

Hell Ben and Flacco weren't even supposed to play right away.. Maddox got hurt and Troy Smith got sick..

Hell Ben and Flacco weren't even supposed to play right away.. Maddox got hurt and Troy Smith got sick..

Yes, I did one of my reports on him last year. steve can correct me if I am wrong about the timeline, but I think 2-3 weeks later, he blew his knee out after he was hit while planting that stiff front leg.

I actually felt really bad about predicting that. Rationally, I know that had nothing to do w/his injury, but it still made me feel bad.

dude, not sucking up, but it was because of you on the old board about how RG3's legs were too skinny, that i started paying attention to that.

then look what happened with him. dang.

If we were to not get a viable QB that can hold the spot down while Manziel gets his head right, I'd be all in with the "sink or swim" approach to next year. Its well documented of my detest of Manziel's character, lack of NFL skillset, and the fact that pick 22 could have been used to bring in a high calibre WR knowing Gordon's situation. If Manziel performs well and acts like a professional instead of a manchild; I'll be very happy we have a QB. If he tanks, we are looking at probably a top 3 pick (#1 with our schedule), in which case we will have the pick of the litter.

One thing I don't want to see happen is another reach for a QB and sell the farm for Mariota or Winston. A move like that will set this program back even longer because the team isn't quite pieced together for a rookie QB to succeed. There are too many needs to throw away picks in trading up for a great unknown.

I would trade our two first round pick from last year for mariota. If that is the best they can do then why not do it again this year =P

Seriously though I don't see any viable options this year to fix the QB situation. If we draft a QB it will be a project we don't have time to develop before the coaches all get fired anyway.

Oddly enough going all in on Mariota might force Haslem to give the coaching staff a few seasons to allow him to develop because the trade up to get him would leave Haslem to embarrassed for him to fire him after just this season.

hmmm not that I say that the only way Pettine might save his job IS to go get mariotta. A rookie QB would get him a pass for the most part against the upcoming brutal schedule. I won't be that surprised if we do it now that I think it through.

Very true. If Mariota is Farmer's guy, I wish it didn't have to come down to trading up that high in the draft but having an extra 1st round pick at least makes it less painful.

I just don't know what other options there are. Pettine has already said we have to enter FA and the draft looking for a starting QB. That means Johnny starting is unlikely. This QB draft is a disaster waiting to happen after the top two so getting a guy in the teens is not going to happen. The best free agent QBs are guys like Josh McCown and Mark Sanchez. The trade market is slim pickins too.

It might not be my favorite idea to give up multiple 1sts to get "our guy" but it's better than the alternative of sticking with crap and squandering another season IMO.

[quote=Spectre]

I would rather stick where we are and attempt to fix the OL and WRs and not bother in throwing away valuable picks. I'm on board with riding this situation out and if we tank and wind up with a top 3 position next year so be it. In 2016 we will be in better position to get the cream of the crop while giving the supporting cast a year to work into the system. I know it sounds like giving up this year by not addressing the QB situation but trading up for one of the top 2 QBs this year will not pay immediate dividends anyway.

Selling out worked for Indy the year prior to picking up Luck, why couldn't it work in Cleveland? thumbsup

j/c



https://twitter.com/JoeBanner13

YOU TELL 'EM, JOE!!

Wut he didn't even spell his name right

I also want to add this thought. Name the last team that sold the farm for a QB and profited from it?

Hewdawg I agree with you 100% and have stated this on these forums before. Get what we can at qb this year and use the draft and fa to fix our other problems. We may be in a better position next year to fix the qb problem.

This is a horrible year to be looking for a new starting QB. I hope that if we sell the farm to either acquire a QB or to move up in the draft to position ourselves to draft a QB, that the team truly believes that they are getting "the guy" and not doing just to get the best available option.

If Mariota falls to a spot where we can package a lot of stuff to move up to get him, I hope we aren't doing it just because the front office (or some random homeless guy) thinks he's the best one in the draft this year. I would just as soon roll with Johnny and whatever retread we can get in FA and see where we end up.

I think every time we drafted a qb high our front office believes he is the guy. It's usually a crap shoot and we always seem to end up with the crap. Fix our other problems first this year and just get a capable qb to get us through until there are better options.

I disagree Tab. I pointed out how just this past season that Bortles, Bridgewater and Carr all ended up starting. Even Manziel, who wasn't supposed to start, did. I mean yes, you hear the term bridge, but it usually doesn't end up that way.

And while I do understand how money was a huge factor in the recent past, winning is also a huge factor. The fact that a high first round pick is a huge investment from a talent standpoint is also a factor. I find that it's hard to look at all of those who started from just this past draft and claim otherwise.

Sure we can look at what we are told and at catch phrases, but when we look at the evidence, those that draft a QB really high, need a QB and start them.

Yes I hear that. Crap is our MO for QB's since generally we are expecting them to be starters day one. We "need" them to be starters day one. JF has been one of few that hasn't been asked to take the reigns day one, but it apparently meant nothing anyway.

I would agree to the fact that maybe it's just time to build around an average to below average and give that person reliable weapons and lots amount of weight off their shoulders. This means bolstering what should-be an already solid o-line with Mack returning, drafting/acquiring more than two solid WRs... and of course, being that run-first, offense built on the run game or whatever you wish to call it. We needing to rely on our QBs is when we get into trouble.

I would compare Winston to Cam Newton..

Newton had the off field things coming in, and I always questioned whether or not he wanted to be an NFL QB, or just wanted the fame that went with it..

Cam has grown a lot since being drafted, and surpassed my expectations to the point that if Carolina can just hit on some more skill players, they'll be in great shape..

If Winston comes in and puts in the work, and isn't in it just for the money and the fame, he has the talent to succeed..

I compare Mariotta to a better version of Ryan Tannehill. More game experience obviously, but I think he's going to take some time to get to "average" NFL QB, like Tannehill did..

He can succeed, it will just take time.

If Winston had no off field problems, he'd almost be in the Andrew Luck category IMO. But being a douche bag is a big red flag going forward.

No, actually we're not that far off. I didn't say that teams "chose" to start a rookie. I said that they are most often expected to contribute. I also wasn't indicating that it was a teams wish to start their rookie. But circumstances most often dictate that ends up being the outcome.

When you really don't have a solid QB to begin with, often times they crumble and you're forced to start your rookie. Sometimes your OL isn't good and you suffer an injury at QB which forces you to start your rookie. By whatever the situation, many times early picks at QB are required to start their rookie season.

Now when it comes to the term "Bridge QB" it is a new term. However it's not a new concept. Before that term it was called a "stop gap QB". It's the exact same thing only using different terminology.

I am happy to grab Mariotta. I am also happy to trade one of our first to Philly and get Foles and their first next year. Either solution works for me. I might be a little happier with the eagle's trade though since we get a good QB for the cost of trading #12 pick for eagles pick next season and we still have a first round pick this season.

Farmer loved Mariota last year, and I see no reason to think that he would think less of the kid this year.

If he can manage to grab Mariota, I think that he does so. If he falls to us, I think it's a no brainer.

I have no stats to back this view, but it seems to me most championship teams have either a great team and a good QB, or a great QB and a good team. A great QB with a mediocre team might make the playoffs, but isn't likely to win. I think a great team with a mediocre QB has a better chance. Furthermore, adding a good QB to a good/great team is easier than building a team around a good/great QB.

I think we are better off building the team, and worrying about QB down the road, especially with the limited QB options in this year's FA & draft. I certainly don't like the idea of emulating the Redskins and trading the farm for an unproven but highly ranked prospect.