• Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
  • Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!

Cleveland Browns (2016 thread of unrelenting dumpster conflagration)

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
tsteele316 said:
statistically top 5 qbs are the most sustainable qb bets in terms of the draft. taking the #1 qb in the draft is by far your best statistical option. the failure rate for qbs outside of that is quite high.
Click to expand...
I took a look back at these since 1990...with a couple of obvious exceptions like purple drank, this is quite true.i also had forgotten just how horrible some of the QB classes were in the 90s. Some of the best (most passing yardage) include: 1990, Jeff George (yes, he still had more passing yards than any QB that year); 1992, Brad Johnson; 1994, Gus Frerotte; 1996, Tony Banks (may be the worst class ever); 1997, Jake Plummer and no one else even passed for 2000 career yards

Among terrible 1st QB off the board since 1980:
1981, Rich Campbell; 1982, Artie; 1988, Tupa; 1991, Dan McGwire; 1992, Klingler; 1994, Shuler; 1997, Druckenmiller; 2006, VY; 2007, purple drank
 
Upvote 0
If given the opportunity between Goff, Wentz and Bosa... I'm probably going to lean towards Bosa.

It's a weak QB class and I feel the top prospects have been propped up by that. However I do like Wentz a fair bit. He is the opposite of Johnny Manziel in almost
every regard and that's exactly what we've clamored for as fans for quite a long while now.
 
Upvote 0
tsteele316 said:
statistically top 5 qbs are the most sustainable qb bets in terms of the draft. taking the #1 qb in the draft is by far your best statistical option. the failure rate for qbs outside of that is quite high.
Click to expand...

- This is a pretty terrible draft class for top 3 QBs, let alone top 5
- The failure rate is higher, but the investment and opportunity cost is also significantly less
 
Upvote 0
tsteele316 said:
Top 5, as on picked in the top 5, not the top 5 qbs. Trying to pick qbs later in the draft is mostly a losing proposition.
Click to expand...

Well unfortunately there's no Peyton Manning, Andrew Luck, Carson Palmer, etc. this draft. You've kinda put the cart before the horse here... the act of picking any QB in the top-5 clearly doesn't work. It works b/c those QBs are usually legit talents warranting a top-5 selection.

And yea... finding one later is more of a crap shoot. But it's also far less costly when you miss. Blowing a 2nd overall pick is devastating, and exactly what I expect the Browns to do.
 
Upvote 0
kujirakira said:
Well unfortunately there's no Peyton Manning, Andrew Luck, Carson Palmer, etc. this draft. You've kinda put the cart before the horse here... the act of picking any QB in the top-5 clearly doesn't work. It works b/c those QBs are usually legit talents warranting a top-5 selection.

And yea... finding one later is more of a crap shoot. But it's also far less costly when you miss. Blowing a 2nd overall pick is devastating, and exactly what I expect the Browns to do.
Click to expand...

No less devastating than taking Trent Richardson or Justin Gilbert. And picking a qb later isn't just a crap shoot, it's a power ball ticket.

And the Peyton Manning and Andrew luck caliber qbs come around once every 15 years, so waiting for a qb of that caliber to fall in your lap is an even bigger losing proposition.
 
Upvote 0
I hate the way the stats get conflated on picking QBs. Yes, QBs picked higher in the draft are more likely to be successful. People (and ESPN especially) take that stat and use it to seemingly say that picking a QB earlier will somehow MAKE him more successful. The thought process seems to be: picking a Brady Quinn in the 20s won't solve problems but spending the #3 pick on him instead will ensure success because his draft position is the determining factor, not the talent that makes a pick at that part of the draft a good value.

Take a look across the division. The other three teams all have successful QBs. Each came from a small school (yes, TCU was and still is a small school.) Two were picked in the first round, but outside the top 5. The other was picked in the early second round. If the new brass feel that a guy like Lynch or Wentz is the right guy I won't shit on that idea. A lot of QBs that end up being successful in the NFL are the kind that have to put a team with lesser talent on its shoulders and carry it to a level of achievement beyond what it should be otherwise capable of. Those players inherently come with question marks. I think that kind of player can be worth the risk, but not as the #2 pick. If they want one of those guys they should be looking to trade down. If they don't think the right guy will be available at a spot they could trade down to then they should let some other sucker franchise overdraft them and address other needs instead for now. It's not as if the Browns are only a QB away from turning into a winner.

Call it the Blake Bortles Principle. There's a guy who seems on track to have a lengthy, half-decent career of not winning a damn thing. He was drafted #3 overall. A Top-5 pick at QB should be a guy who is a lock to get you to the playoffs not a guy who might only keep the seat warm for six to eight years. Picks 8-24... That's the sweet spot for getting value out of a high-ceiling small-school QB, depending on their level of accomplishment. That's where Bortles should have fallen, and if Wentz or Lynch are drafted above the middle to low end of that range the team that does it is insane.
 
Upvote 0
The Browns of any franchise have consistently risked early round picks on QBs that just didn't have it and have not panned out. Why they would do it again in this case falls right in line with the definition of insanity. The Lions have had their fair share of that as well. Really, where has their first round pick in Stafford got them....
 
Upvote 0
buckeyebri said:
The Browns of any franchise have consistently risked early round picks on QBs that just didn't have it and have not panned out. Why they would do it again in this case falls right in line with the definition of insanity. The Lions have had their fair share of that as well. Really, where has their first round pick in Stafford got them....
Click to expand...

this is shoddy logic. where did the first round pick of mario williams get the texans? Where did drafting Joe Thomas #3 overall get cleveland? Where did drafting braylon edwards #3 instead of taking aaron rodgers because of his college system get cleveland? I could go on and on with this. these guys aren't in the blaine gabbert, christian ponder tier of qbs. let's at least have a little perspective.
 
Upvote 0
buckeyebri said:
The Browns of any franchise have consistently risked early round picks on QBs that just didn't have it and have not panned out. Why they would do it again in this case falls right in line with the definition of insanity. The Lions have had their fair share of that as well. Really, where has their first round pick in Stafford got them....
Click to expand...

They haven't picked a QB in the top half of the first round since Tim Couch. They've been firmly in lottery ticket territory and wondering why they're not striking it rich.

I can't believe people want to argue against the idea that you're more likely to find a good quarterback earlier in the draft - as if every statistic you could imagine doesn't point to this conclusion. Everybody likes to point to Tom Brady - as if the seventh round is just stockpiled with HOF quarterback talent every year. The thing nobody talks about with Tom Brady - he wasn't drafted to be a starter. He was drafted to hold a clipboard for a team that already had an established QB... one that was picked number one overall and had previously led the franchise to a Super Bowl appearance. The Patriots Tresselballed their way to that first Super Bowl win. Tom Brady had a ring before he even became a good QB.

Not to mention that Browns fans don't really have room to shit on a player like Stafford. He's seen more of the playoffs than we have.
 
Upvote 0
If the analyics tell them that the top QB's this year are actually mid 1st to 2nd round talents I think you draft the highest rated player on your board. If you can trade back to where the QB that you like is also a good value then you take him. If we've learned anything don't pick a QB that was supposed to go top 10, but falls out of the top 20 since that likely means there are issues that other teams are avoiding. Over the past decade+ only 1 QB (this year will either give that QB 2 or add another to the list) that was taken in the first 10 picks won a Super Bowl. To me it seems you are much better off building a great D and hoping you can find a good to great game manager or strike gold on a guy like Brady. If the Browns could somehow find a way to turn the rotten lump of swiss cheese that played defense for them this year into a good defense McCown and Davis aren't a bad fallback plan while they develop a project. I don't know if I can continue watching this shit show if they use the #2 pick on a QB from bum fuck cow college Fargo campus.
 
Upvote 0
jlb1705 said:
They haven't picked a QB in the top half of the first round since Tim Couch. They've been firmly in lottery ticket territory and wondering why they're not striking it rich.

I can't believe people want to argue against the idea that you're more likely to find a good quarterback earlier in the draft - as if every statistic you could imagine doesn't point to this conclusion. Everybody likes to point to Tom Brady - as if the seventh round is just stockpiled with HOF quarterback talent every year. The thing nobody talks about with Tom Brady - he wasn't drafted to be a starter. He was drafted to hold a clipboard for a team that already had an established QB... one that was picked number one overall and had previously led the franchise to a Super Bowl appearance. The Patriots Tresselballed their way to that first Super Bowl win. Tom Brady had a ring before he even became a good QB.

Not to mention that Browns fans don't really have room to [Mark May] on a player like Stafford. He's seen more of the playoffs than we have.
Click to expand...

Nobody is arguing that. We're arguing that they're not top-5 talent.
If we drafted Manziel or Quinn in the top-10 like the media wanted... would they have had a better chance of succeeding just b/c they weren't 22nd?
Reaching for a QB doesn't make the QB better.
Cart before the horse.
 
Upvote 0
exhawg said:
If the analyics tell them that the top QB's this year are actually mid 1st to 2nd round talents I think you draft the highest rated player on your board. If you can trade back to where the QB that you like is also a good value then you take him. If we've learned anything don't pick a QB that was supposed to go top 10, but falls out of the top 20 since that likely means there are issues that other teams are avoiding. Over the past decade+ only 1 QB (this year will either give that QB 2 or add another to the list) that was taken in the first 10 picks won a Super Bowl. To me it seems you are much better off building a great D and hoping you can find a good to great game manager or strike gold on a guy like Brady. If the Browns could somehow find a way to turn the rotten lump of swiss cheese that played defense for them this year into a good defense McCown and Davis aren't a bad fallback plan while they develop a project. I don't know if I can continue watching this [Mark May] show if they use the #2 pick on a QB from bum fuck cow college Fargo campus.
Click to expand...

There is absolutely no data that shows this is a more viable option than drafting a qb high. i think what the "analytics" will tell you is that someone like Jared Goff is probably a top 5-7 player in this draft, much like Matt Ryan was. Given the position he plays, that basically makes him your pick at #2. This discussion wouldn't even be happening if Joey Bosa didn't go to OSU. You draft Jared Goff, solve your qb issue, and build the rest of your team, end of story. Tryign to patchwork the qb spot with has beens and washouts in hopes of striking gold gets you nowhere.
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top