DawgTalkers.net Forums The Archives 2015 NFL Season The NFL Draft 2015 Browns have real interest in moving up for Mariota

I'm going more that route every day. We need the QB. We don't win until we get that. Its all about the price tag, and evaluations on Hundley, Petty and other QBs.

He has all the physical tools, outstanding speed. Character. He protects the football. Did everything that was asked of him, won a lot of games.

The only "knock" seems to be things he wasn't asked to do. Fair enough. We'll have to trust our new OC/QB coach on that.

Are you Teddy Bridgewater's mother or Teddy himself??...

Genius.

Why thank you Teddy...

I kind of like Brice Petty, don't really think much good or bad about Mariotta or Winston, and looks like if you want Brice Petty you will have a shot at him.

If hindsight, I want them to go back and take Tannehil instead of the Rb. I liked Tannehil largely on his bowl game. Mariotta's bowl games went win, loss, not sure how that projects.

I think this though. You cut the entire roster if you draft Mariotta.

But if you wait and draft Petty, then Manziel, Thaddeus, McCown,(Shaw), and Petty are all going to reach for the starting prize. But if you draft Mariotta it's all your eggs in one basket again.

Agreed.

We've pulled the developmental, non-bonafied QB thing for awhile now. People keep mentioning QB's, but the QB's we've picked have been later first round guys. We haven't gotten a real first pick of the draft since Couch.

We've also tried Charlie Frye and Colt McCoy, like anything was ever going to come of them. A lot of people say our QBs fail because we never gave them enough time to develop.

Take a look at the success rate of 1st round QBs. Then take a look at the success rate of QBs picked 2-7th rounds. The odds continue to be with the 1st rounders.

And I don't really buy the "we didn't let them develop" theory. Our QBs go to different teams and have never had much success. Colt isn't a real starting QB. And Weeden is a joke. Brady Quinn never got it. Turns out he just wasn't particularly accurate. Charlie Frye, he just wasn't that gifted. His arm wasn't at least.

If our staff thinks that Mariota is a real deal top 10 pick, then we should make the move and go for him. Don't see how we can't. Sure, he isn't an Andrew Luck prospect. But who is? As far as I was concerned, he was the best prospect since Peyton. And sure, the Redskins gave up the farm for RG3 and see where they're at. But we didn't, and we aren't in a much better position.

There's plenty of teams with decent support for QBs, but they just don't make it happen. Look at the Houston Texans..... This league is just a ton easier with a decent starting QB than it is with an adequate spot filler.


We have to keep doing our homework, and sometimes rolling the dice on these first round QBs.

Because we can get Danny Shelton or any of these other guys, and they won't improve our team as much as a decent quarterback. Simple as that

You don't teach a guy to read coverages. There are numbers out there that point to Mariota's struggles w/reading coverages.

I have been trying to tell you guys this for years: if you have a qb who can't read coverages post-snap, you don't have a qb.

They either throw picks, take sacks because they hold the ball too long, or begin to check everything down too early because of the two earlier problems.

Teammates begin to take the blame for their inability to read post-snap coverages. It's not good for team chemistry, especially when the fans and media are blaming everyone but the guy who really is to blame.

I agree with this 100%.

It also supports my belief that talent gaps are a myth in the NFL. It's actually not a belief, it's true. When your QB sucks, the OL gets blamed, the receivers get blamed, the defense gets blamed. Next thing you know you have fans clamoring for every position to be upgraded as if you need a first round pick at every position to win.

The thing I am still struggling with is this notion that reading defenses post snap is some magical ability that you are born with. I just can't get there.

Rishuz, I think it can be learned. Problem is nobody has time or patience. Teams need QBs yesterday. Colleges are not supplying pro ready talent like other positions.

If Manziel shows any promise, I think Browns should go all in. At the same time continue looking for his replacement. If not Manziel, I almost think what the heck just make it work with Shaw.

This constant looking for the holy grail is fruitless. It will either happen or it won't. Sometimes you simply need to drawl a line in the sand say it stops here and build. What is the wost that happens? Record last several years pretty much dictates it can only get better.

My biggest concern is we miss opportunities drafting good talent trying to obtain this great QB. See Washington.

Vers talks a lot about pre and post snap reads. Here is my analogy:

I look at it as learning a foreign language.

The pre snap read is like reading a foreign language. You have the time to sit there and look at everything in stationary position and translate the meaning.

The post snap read is like speaking the foreign language. It is a moving flowing conversation that requires you to adapt on the fly. A lot of people can become conversant but few actually become fluent. And like trying to become fluent, it is easier if you start at a younger age and if you immerse yourself.

OK, I get the analogy, but following the same logic, even if one has the capacity to become fluent (beyond simply conversant), they still can't do that until they learn the language. If, as is argued, Mariota has never had to learn to read, that doesn't mean he is incapable of becoming fluent.

W84N, That's exactly where I'm at.

Jester, I get the analogy. I didn't need it to know what Vers is saying. What I can't get my head around is this notion that it can't be learned.

No doubt it's a difficult skill. A hard skill. But is it akin to throwing a 100 mph fastball? Some guys are born to do that. Most aren't.

But when it comes to matters of the mind, I just can't believe it can't be learned.

If that truly is the case then finding a QB is an even bigger crapshoot than we thought.

He has to make reads. Check out his numbers inside the red zone as opposed to his numbers outside the red zone. Once teams aren't spread out and he has to actually read the coverage and go through his progressions, his numbers fall.

The same thing happened in the national championship game.

You can teach guys to read defenses, down and distance tendencies, where they are at on the field tendencies, favorite coverages in all of those situations, etc. However, you can't teach a guy to make a correct read in 1.8 to 2.1 seconds when teams change the coverage on you. Things happen in a blur. You don't teach anticipation. It happens too fast.

You can teach a lot of things that can mask that particular weakness, but there are a ton of qbs who get exposed because they can't read coverages post-snap.

This isn't the best example, but it is one you should be familiar with. Did you notice that Weeden always looked pretty darn good in preseason? Teams don't disguise coverages at that time of the year. Then, once the games started, Weeden went back to his old self.

Did you notice the difference in the amount of sacks and so-called pressure between when Weeden was the qb and when Hoyer took over? Did you notice how much more often Weeden checked down way too early as opposed to Hoyer? And Hoyer isn't even that great.

Some people seem to get irritated and angry when I bring this topic up. Not sure why?

I don't see anyone getting irritated and angry. I see people trying to understand this notion that you can't learn it or improve on it.

You seem to be of the opinion that if someone hasn't shown that skill by the time they reach the professional level, that they don't possess the skill at all.

That's a tough thing to understand. I can't wrap my head around it.

I have always disagreed with Vers on this as well. I think a lot of these kids arent really exposed to the changing, ever evolving motion of NFL secondaries. Its why it is so rare for a rookie QB to be good right out of the gate. It is also why, I am in favor of getting these rookie all the reps they can get.

Bridgewater was fantastic last year with the postsnap reads. he was far ahead of this rookie class. Carr improved throughout the year in his postsnap reads but his big arm and quick release allow him to not be as good as a Bridgewater in this area. I dont think bortles improved at all in this area, he just had not seen anything close to the type of defense that he saw last year.

Usually by the end of year 2 if they havent showed significant progress in develping those instincts, they never develop. A great OL and a quick release can make up for a lot of that lack of instinct however. See Marino lol

I needed it to get what he was trying to say so I figured that I would share it.

I don't believe that it is an impossible skill to learn as vers implies but I agree that it is very difficult and could take many years of immersing yourself in the playbook, film study and game time. And even then I think that there is a certain group of people that will never be able to get it. Just like some people seem to have a knack for math while others struggle no matter how hard they try. Just way brains are wired differently.

If it were truly a skill that is something you're born with, it would seem they could develop some type of standardized test to measure it.

I am making no claims whatsoever that it is easy or anyone can do it with hard work. As Jester said some people good at math, some aren't.

But I have to believe that aptitude and experience play a role here.

Ever watch kids play speed chess or blitz chess. I think that is the best analogy to use here. Some have that natural gift to quickly analyze and anticipate. Others they arent as naturally gifted but they work at it and improve. Those without often need other skill sets to make up for it but they can offset that advantage with work and their own personal skill set advantage.

think Tom Brady vs Big Ben

You don't need to tell me what I already know. I know the QB has to read coverage. He will fail if he can't. The question is whether the prospect has it or not. I don't claim to know, like I said, that's up to the coaches and FO.

On INTs and checking down. Mariota has one of the best INT-attempt ratios in NCAA history. On throws over 15 yards, he was the most accurate of the top 5 prospects in this draft. Those numbers don't tell us he can do that at the next level, but he certainly wasn't checking-down and throwing picks at Oregon.

Fans and media blame everyone but the QB? We hear chants for the backup QB by week 2. We cheer when the starter gets hurt. Gordon is out there winging-it during a playoff run and its Johnny-Time. 5 quarters later he is a bust. I don't think you have to worry about that in Cleveland.

That's a good assessment, Jester. Some will never be good enough, some it will come much more naturally. Just like math.

When Pettine was hired, he emphasized getting players with physical tools and work ethic. You can't coach tall. You can't coach speed. His job is to condition and teach. It would be easy to say Mariota fits his bill. But we'd need an explanation for Manziel, then.

I understand what Vers is saying, there are variances in how different people's nervous system pathways work, and some people have a genetic advantage when it comes to visually processing what they see. I just don't think that is the only dynamic at work when talking about QBs being able to read post-snap defenses. The ability to recognize and react comes with experience, so intelligence plays a factor as well. Yes, there is a hard-wired limit to one's ability to react, but familiarity and recognition can decrease reaction time to that limit.

j/c

Here's what we do know. It's a VERY rare talent to find. When you draft someone who hasn't shown it to this point, you're gambling that this QB is one of those VERY rare people who possess it.

Is it impossible for that to happen? No. Is it likely you're going to beat those long odds? No.

IF the hard-wired limit is the problem, then I agree Pit. I just think that more often than not, experience will make a difference.

I do believe it's a "hard wired/mental process" type thing that either your mind has the ability to perform, or it doesn't.

Now that doesn't mean I'm right, but it's definitely a very strong opinion of mine. The reason being, you never see an abundance of great QB's.

I believe it would be very hard for anyone to name more than a handful of elite QB's and no more than 10 very good QB's playing in the NFL at any one time.

I believe if it were something that could be taught, or wasn't something that a very low percentage of people are capable of doing, finding a great QB would be much easier.

I guess you could say a large part of my opinion is based on the evidence we see in the NFL at the QB position. The odds of finding a QB capable of processing post snap coverage is extremely rare.

Like I said, it's strictly an opinion of mine but I do believe the evidence around the league speaks volumes.

I agree, mostly Pit, but in the case of a MM like QB:

How much of this lack of ability be mitigated by the system he is in? If he never was asked to do it in college did that limit his ability to learn it or if inherent to show it?

Back to the language analogy... if I am fluent in France but my company transfers me to Mexico, never giving me the opportunity to showcase my abilities. End result I am type cast as a system QB who cant read coverages

What I believe it does, is make his ability to do so a complete unknown factor. What it does, is make it a huge gamble whether he has the ability to do this or not. The best indicator I saw was when he played against OSU. When forced to do so, he certainly didn't show the ability to do post snap reads. Does that mean he can't? No I don't believe it does. However, if you look at the very few QB's who have the ability and decide to invest what may cost 3 1st round draft picks on the hope that a QB will have that ability, the risk factor there is huge IMO



I really believe this is a false analogy. MANY people can learn several languages. While it is a gift to some extent, you're trying to compare something a great many more people can accomplish, even from a percentage standpoint than QB's who ever learn or have the gift of reading defensive coverages post snap.

To me it's far more about the odds and risk verses reward considering the HUGE investment it would take to move up to get MM. At some point the risk and reward even themselves out. However, I certainly don't see that being the case with multiple first round picks to take such a risk.

I kinda skim read the latest posts because I got aggravated after reading Rish's and Coyote's posts.

That isn't what I am saying. Hell, I am NOT even saying what Mourg suggested.

Can you improve? Yes.

Is reading things while they are moving at 100 miles an hour taught? No.

Y'all can choose to believe what you want. But, I have called out Timid, BQ, and Weeden because they did not possess this skill and each time you guys lambasted me.

How the hell did that turn out?

You might dismiss what I am saying. You might not even understand what I am saying. You might think there are Xs and Os that help a qb read coverages after the defense changes their pre-snap look. Whatever? But, you ain't changing my mind by having several posters in a row act like I am making crap up.

Take it for what it's worth.

These were my last four posts in this thread. The first one I am agreeing with you on something.









What is there to be aggravated about any of that? I thought you wanted open, honest football discussion. Isn't that what I've quoted?

The last one. And that is the one I was obviously speaking about.

I NEVER said you can't improve w/experience and aptitude. If you think I did, please find the quote where I said that.

My point is that you can improve things in regards to coaching......................crap, do I REALLY need to state it again? I have said it numerous times.

Look, if you think I am full of crap..........no problem. We disagree. I am fine w/that. But, I'm not changing my mind on Mariota because you think reading coverages after a team has changed their pre-snap look and throwing w/anticipation is something that is taught.

Not asking you to agree w/me. But please, don't ask me to agree w/you when I know better.

I thought your position on this whole debate was that it cannot be taught. No, I am not going to look it up, but that's where I am coming from. And it's also clear in my posts that I don't have a position that I am committed to; rather, I am trying to understand the notion that people can't get better at it.

Oh well, I tried.

You said "You can teach guys to read defenses, down and distance tendencies, where they are at on the field tendencies, favorite coverages in all of those situations, etc. However, you can't teach a guy to make a correct read in 1.8 to 2.1 seconds when teams change the coverage on you. Things happen in a blur. You don't teach anticipation. It happens too fast."

So, really, you guys are both correct.

Dude, you have a tendency to get upset.

You're great when you post pure football talk. Sadly, you don't do that enough. Quit getting upset and talk football. Quit making everything a battle.

Talk football. Give your opinion and leave the smack out of it. You'd almost be pleasant to read if you did that.

Here's my assignment for you: Focus on football. That's what I want to see out of you. Can you do it?

I did say that it wasn't "taught."

However, that is a far cry from a guy not being able to improve.

Let me ask you this......well, not really you, because you don't want to understand and your only goal is to discredit what I say......but, for others who might have a similar question to Rish's........I am not a video game guy, but can you improve your speed recognition over time when the attackers are coming at you? Yes, you can. However, are some more gifted at it than others?

It's all about processing what you see in almost no time at all.

Here is my assignment for you.........kiss my behind.

Oh...........before you tight underwear things misunderstand what I just said............it was a joke. A mean joke, but still a joke.

I feel as though you have misunderstood the parameters of the discussion I would like you to follow.

Let's try to keep this on topic. I know you can - you have it in you. Focus.

It was a joke, arch. Relax.

I was speaking football. It's hard to explain, but I am doing the best I can to help people understand what it is I am talking about.

I am NOT saying a guy can't improve in that area.

I am NOT saying that good coaching doesn't help a qb.

I am NOT saying that studying other team's defenses doesn't help a qb.

I AM SAYING that if a team gives you a pre-snap look and you make a call based on all of your studies and what the coaches told you before the game, and the opponent THEN CHANGES THEIR COVERAGE AT THE SNAP, that reading the new coverage AFTER the snap is NOT taught.

I am trying real hard to be clear. I am not sure if it is really that confusing or if some people just don't want to agree........or both.

I'm trying to explain. I really am. But, I don't like when people put words in my mouth.

Fair.


If coaches can teach a pre-snap read................why can't coaches also (in the film room) teach the "after snap" read?

Get to the line - the d is in an apparent coverage. QB makes his pre-snap read, but he's also aware that when the ball is snapped, and the safety goes this way, or the corner changes.........why can't that be coached?

I ask, because it seemed to me you were saying the post snap reads can't be coached.

I understand the post snap reads are tougher, and have to happen quicker than pre-snap reads - but it is possible for a qb to learn, is it not?

I must be doing a bad job of explaining. For that, I apologize.

Coaches can show QBs tape of their upcoming opponents. They can fill them up w/tendencies, such as what they do on 3rd and 3 on their own 33 yard line, this is what they do on 2nd and 2 on the opponents 47 yard line. This is what they do when trailing by x number of points w/this much time on the clock and on this yard line. This is what they do when line-up in this look when they are on this yard line, w/the pt differntial at this number, w/this much time left, etc, etc.

Does that make sense?

Thus, qbs can make the right pre-snap call and read. However, when teams suddenly break "tendencies" [and that is a huge word here] QBs have to process something they have only seen once or twice or perhaps never at all in 2 seconds or less. Combine this w/the amazing speed of defenders, the huge size of the rushers, the fear factor as the pocket breaks down, the doubt as to whether or not your receiver will see the same thing you will, and there are all kinds of problems for a QB.

arch, it's the hardest job in sports. Guys like you and I, who may have been good athletes, would only see a blur. These guys have an innate ability to have the game slow down in their mind and throw w/anticipation.......which means they can read what the receiver and the defender[s] will do before they even do it.

It's actually freaking amazing!

That is why I liked guys like Teddy, Manning[s], Rodgers, Luck, and Wilson while they were in college. They ran offenses where they had to make those types of reads and they succeeded.

It's hard to tell w/most spread qbs, because they were not asked to do it.

Frankly, and I am not sure I am right about this point------I thought Johnny did a better job of reading coverages in college than Mariota did. I could be wrong about that.

Does that help?

I think I understand what you mean, and I'll try to put my simple explanation out there.

I believe you can be taught what to look for, and maybe even have a great knowledge of what to look for, but it is the ability of the person's mind to be able to process the info quick enough. And the persons quickness of taking that info and reacting.

You can teach what to look for, but the mind has to be able to process it at an accelerated speed. That IMO is the part that can't be taught. Either your mind has that capability or not.