Looks Like DeShone Kizer is Going to Be the Browns Starter

[BringBackOrton]

My point is that getting to the bottom doesn't always get you the qb. The browns got to the bottom and still may not have the qb. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The Browns have taken three QB's in the first in the last decade.

 

Again, not sure how that supports your point.

[PolishDave]

Or perhaps the Browns are learning from the Bills mistakes? That is, deciding it's time to get out of 6-10 hell, even if it means going 1-15 first?

 

Did they try to go 1-15 last year? I don't think so. And even if they did, they still didn't take a QB with their first pick. They didn't even take one in the first round.

 

Not even close to being the same thing as people are clamoring for around here. Nonsense.

[BringBackOrton]

 

Did they try to go 1-15 last year? I don't think so. And even if they did, they still didn't take a QB with their first pick. They didn't even take one in the first round.

 

Not even close to being the same thing as people are clamoring for around here. Nonsense.

Ha ha you think the Browns were trying to win games with RG3 and Cody Kessler?

[GunnerBill]

 

Did they try to go 1-15 last year? I don't think so. And even if they did, they still didn't take a QB with their first pick. They didn't even take one in the first round.

No, not early. But there was a game they pulled Kessler when they were ahead at half time to put in McCown who hadn't played in weeks and he promptly threw a pick. Think it was vs the Ravens. At that point, yes, they were trying to lose.

[BarleyNY]

 

That's great. But how many are actually any good? Or did they just find their place on the depth chart due to circumstances of a bad roster to begin with. At this point we don't know the answer to that question. All we know is they have a lot of young players on the roster and that they were a really bad team last year. Where they go from here we don't know yet.

 

Sure. We don't know. But it's not fair to claim that they got nothing for that draft after one season with a blown up roster either.

[PolishDave]

No, not early. But there was a game they pulled Kessler when they were ahead at half time to put in McCown who hadn't played in weeks and he promptly threw a pick. Think it was vs the Ravens. At that point, yes, they were trying to lose.

 

I looked it up. It was their tenth game of the season in November last year.

 

Hue Jackson pulled Kessler in the drive after the Ravens just took the lead in the 3rd quarter.

 

Kessler was 10-17 for 94 yards to that point - not exactly playing lights out. The Browns had only scored once the whole game to that point. The score was Baltimore 13 the Browns 7 .

 

That doesn't scream tank when your existing QB is losing the game and you make a QB change. It suggests the opposite.

 

More likely it was Jackson trying anything to eek out a friggin win.

 

Sure didn't look like a tank. Browns flat out sucked - not because they weren't trying to win.

 

---------------------------------------------------

 

If anybody wants to compare what the Browns did to what Buffalo is about to do right now, look out. Because the last time the Browns had a .500 season was 2007. Have they really been tanking for 9 years? Come on man. And if so, where has that gotten them. 8 years into the tank they went 1-15. Can't wait for 8 years from now so Buffalo can try to go 1-15.

Edited August 24, 2017 by PolishDave

[GunnerBill]

 

I looked it up. It was their tenth game of the season in November last year.

 

Hue Jackson pulled Kessler in the drive after the Ravens just took the lead in the 3rd quarter.

 

Kessler was 10-17 for 94 yards to that point - not exactly playing lights out. The Browns had only scored once the whole game to that point. The score was Baltimore 13 the Browns 7 .

 

That doesn't scream tank when your existing QB is losing the game and you make a QB change. It suggests the opposite.

 

More likely it was Jackson trying anything to eek out a friggin win.

 

Sure didn't look like a tank. Browns flat out sucked - not because they weren't trying to win.

 

Hmmm. I disagree. I watched the game. Kessler might not have been lighting it up but he was fine they were in the game. Putting McCown in at the start of the 3rd was an attempt to lose.

[PolishDave]

Hmmm. I disagree. I watched the game. Kessler might not have been lighting it up but he was fine they were in the game. Putting McCown in at the start of the 3rd was an attempt to lose.

 

Even if it was. So what. What does it prove? They haven't been .500 since 2007. How many years do you need to tank? Following the Browns model suggests it takes at least 8 years. And that is if the team is a winner this year which is certainly questionable. Could be 9 years. Can I buy a 10?

[Kirby Jackson]

 

Even if it was. So what. What does it prove? They haven't been .500 since 2007. How many years do you need to tank? Following the Browns model suggests it takes at least 8 years. And that is if the team is a winner this year which is certainly questionable. Could be 9 years. Can I buy a 10?

All that it proves is that you need to draft well. They have drafted worse than any team in the league until recently. From 2011 - 2015 their 1st round picks were: Phil Taylor, Trent Richardson, Brandon Weeden, Kiki Mingo, Justin Gilbert, Johnny Manziel, Cameron Erving and Danny Shelton.

 

Things have changed over the last few years. Their class last year had success and this class is off to a good start. In addition, they did a lot in FA. Their OL will be one of the best in football. Their pass rush will be good as well. They have some holes for sure but they have parts of their future that are really bright. They are a much, much different team than 2016.

[GunnerBill]

 

Even if it was. So what. What does it prove? They haven't been .500 since 2007. How many years do you need to tank? Following the Browns model suggests it takes at least 8 years. And that is if the team is a winner this year which is certainly questionable. Could be 9 years. Can I buy a 10?

I was not suggesting we follow their model.

[BringBackOrton]

 

Even if it was. So what. What does it prove? They haven't been .500 since 2007. How many years do you need to tank? Following the Browns model suggests it takes at least 8 years. And that is if the team is a winner this year which is certainly questionable. Could be 9 years. Can I buy a 10?

I'll take 10 over 17 but do you, I suppose.

[BuffaloBill]

 

I hope for their sake that he's not just the latest failed QB in Factory of Sadness.

Personally I would be happy if he has a strong season so the Browns are not among the teams selecting a QB in 2018. It appears as though the Bills will be and the less competition the better.

[26CornerBlitz]

Personally I would be happy if he has a strong season so the Browns are not among the teams selecting a QB in 2018. It appears as though the Bills will be and the less competition the better.

 

It would be great if that actually happens, but I have a feeling they'll be in the market for a QB in '18 even if Kizer shows well this season.

[JohnC]

The below link is a 17 minute segment on WGR with Schoop talking to Erik Galko about last year's qb prospects and this year's crop. He also comments on Tyrod and Peterman. His take of this year's rookie qb class is interesting. He is pretty positive about it. As I said in other postings the ideal situation for us is to be able to get a high end qb prospect without dealing off too many picks.

 

 

http://www.wgr550.com/media/audio-channel/8-24-eric-galko-optimum-scouting-talks-quarterbacks-mike-schoppmp3

[GG]

The below link is a 17 minute segment on WGR with Schoop talking to Erik Galko about last year's qb prospects and this year's crop. He also comments on Tyrod and Peterman. His take of this year's rookie qb class is interesting. He is pretty positive about it. As I said in other postings the ideal situation for us is to be able to get a high end qb prospect without dealing off too many picks.

 

 

http://www.wgr550.com/media/audio-channel/8-24-eric-galko-optimum-scouting-talks-quarterbacks-mike-schoppmp3

He also agreed that next yrs class is deeper gnash this year's. He also liked Mahomes best in this class, but admitted that next year should easily have at least 4 QBs in round 1

[JohnC]

He also agreed that next yrs class is deeper gnash this year's. He also liked Mahomes best in this class, but admitted that next year should easily have at least 4 QBs in round 1

My position is when you are situated to select a franchise qb prospect and you currently don't have one then you should seize the opportunity. In the last draft we could have taken a qb prospect at our draft position without trading away picks to get in position to select a qb. Who is to say that Kizer might turn out to be a good qb? He would have been available to us with the trade down deal we made with KC, and we still would have the added first round pick for the next year.

 

When all is said and done is the qb we select next year (assuming we use a first round pick on a qb) going to be better than the prospect (Mahomes or Watson) we could have had last year? Dithering is not a solution----it is the problem.

[Kirby Jackson]

My position is when you are situated to select a franchise qb prospect and you currently don't have one then you should seize the opportunity. In the last draft we could have taken a qb prospect at our draft position without trading away picks to get in position to select a qb. Who is to say that Kizer might turn out to be a good qb? He would have been available to us with the trade down deal we made with KC, and we still would have the added first round pick for the next year.

 

When all is said and done is the qb we select next year (assuming we use a first round pick on a qb) going to be better than the prospect (Mahomes or Watson) we could have had last year? Dithering is not a solution----it is the problem.

It's not that simple though because they acquired an extra first. So say they take Mason Rudolph (just as an example), is the combination of Mahomes and Courtland Sutton (as an example) better than the combination of Tre White, Mason Rudolph and Courtland Sutton?

[GunnerBill]

I love Sutton. I was so high on him when it looked like he might declare in 2017.

[JohnC]

It's not that simple though because they acquired an extra first. So say they take Mason Rudolph (just as an example), is the combination of Mahomes and Courtland Sutton (as an example) better than the combination of Tre White, Mason Rudolph and Courtland Sutton?

I respect your opinions but on this qb issue I strenuously disagree with you. To start let's put things in perspective: The Bills have not had a legitimate franchise qb for a quarter century. Think about that! While you talk about a hypothetical that might not come to pass I'm talking about a reality that could have happened i.e. a qb prospect in hand.

 

KC and Houston have two HCs who are qb oriented. Each of them was willing to make a rather expensive deal to acquire a qb that this qb starved franchise was willing to pass on.

 

Historically the Bills are a failed franchise. One of the primary reasons, among many, is that they haven't had a franchise qb for a ridiculously long period of time. Without a doubt one of the primary reasons Whaley is out of a job is that he didn't secure a legitimate starting qb. What makes it even more aggravating is that he had opportunities even past the first round to secure one. When asked what he would have done differently after his departure his response was to be more aggressive in finding a franchise qb.

 

As I said on many occasions: Dithering is not a solution-----it is the problem. Talking about a next year's solution when a this year's solution could have been had is a foolish and self-destructive way of doing business. If you don't believe me then you need to review the record of the Bills over the past generations.

 

JeffisMagic may be annoying but he was right!

[Kirby Jackson]

I respect your opinions but on this qb issue I strenuously disagree with you. To start let's put things in perspective: The Bills have not had a legitimate franchise qb for a quarter century. Think about that! While you talk about a hypothetical that might not come to pass I'm talking about a reality that could have happened i.e. a qb prospect in hand.

 

KC and Houston have two HCs who are qb oriented. Each of them was willing to make a rather expensive deal to acquire a qb that this qb starved franchise was willing to pass on.

 

Historically the Bills are a failed franchise. One of the primary reasons, among many, is that they haven't had a franchise qb for a ridiculously long period of time. Without a doubt one of the primary reasons Whaley is out of a job is that he didn't secure a legitimate starting qb. What makes it even more aggravating is that he had opportunities even past the first round to secure one. When asked what he would have done differently after his departure his response was to be more aggressive in finding a franchise qb.

 

As I said on many occasions: Dithering is not a solution-----it is the problem. Talking about a next year's solution when a this year's solution could have been had is a foolish and self-destructive way of doing business. If you don't believe me then you need to review the record of the Bills over the past generations.

 

JeffisMagic may be annoying but he was right!

Im not even sure what your point is? When evaluating the situation you have to take into account the entire scope. If they took Mahomes (as an example) they'd have had 1 pick in 2018 as well (Sutton for this conversation). The trade has turned it into a 3 player situation. If you are to look at the move it is White, Rudolph & Sutton or Mahomes and Sutton. I'm not sure what you are strenuously disagreeing with?