Cleveland Browns (2016 thread of unrelenting dumpster conflagration)

[TDunk]

Again, where is your evidence that Wentz and/or Goff are 2nd round QBs? Simply put, there is none. The only people putting a 2nd round grade on Wentz and Goff are Browns fans ... the same Browns fans who were head over heels in love with Johnny Football. Wentz and Goff will both be picked in the top-10, and if the Browns want one of them (which they should) then they will have to take him with the #2 pick.

The Browns drafted Joe Thomas #3 in the 2007 draft. He was the so-called "best player available". Thomas has been a Pro Bowl player in each of his nine seasons (six times All Pro), and he has played every offensive down of every game of his pro career. He will be an NFL Hall of Famer soon after his career is over. The Browns are 47-97 (.326) during Thomas's career. Stop the BPA insanity. Get your franchise QB, and get him now.

I see both sides of the argument. I'm of the belief that you build from the inside out. Get both lines strong and able to plug and play with other pieces. I also know the importance of having a more than capable QB at the helm to lead the team. This all comes down to who is in charge of leading the team and the Browns organization has shown a propensity to F*ck up even the basics. This comes down to the system. Tom Brady can have 3-7 round guys around him because the system is set up with the appropriate pieces, but will still stall out with crap on defense. The Browns need a systemic plan. But that has not been implemented at all because the higher ups do not know what the F*ck they are doing. They cookie cutter picks as being the best available, but is it best for the system... obviously not. There is no identity as to what they want to do. Be a solid/stable O or build a formidable D. Making random picks that do neither seems to be the norm. And unfortunately, that involves drafting several QB's. So I understand the hesitancy to see yet another one that may not work out.

 

[jlb1705]

I see both sides of the argument. I'm of the belief that you build from the inside out. Get both lines strong and able to plug and play with other pieces. I also know the importance of having a more than capable QB at the helm to lead the team. This all comes down to who is in charge of leading the team and the Browns organization has shown a propensity to F*ck up even the basics. This comes down to the system. Tom Brady can have 3-7 round guys around him because the system is set up with the appropriate pieces, but will still stall out with crap on defense. The Browns need a systemic plan. But that has not been implemented at all because the higher ups do not know what the F*ck they are doing. They cookie cutter picks as being the best available, but is it best for the system... obviously not. There is no identity as to what they want to do. Be a solid/stable O or build a formidable D. Making random picks that do neither seems to be the norm. And unfortunately, that involves drafting several QB's. So I understand the hesitancy to see yet another one that may not work out.

That "build from the inside out" plan has worked out great for the Texans. They've had badasses on their teams for years, lousy QBs, and after getting dicked in the playoffs they watched their former coach lift the Lombardi Trophy then threw stupid money at Brock Osweiler.

People really need to stop using Tom Brady and the Patriots as a template for what the Browns should be doing. They didn't build that team for him out of nothing. He got drafted into a playoff organization with a mature system that had already done the hard work of building around a #1 overall quarterback.

I don't know if any of this year's QBs are the answer. The game has changed though. BPA doesn't mean a damn thing if you don't have a competent signal caller.

 

[AKAK]

If you have a chance to change the trajectory of your franchise, you take it. Plugging a roster hole isn't gonna change the trajectory. I understand the "too many problems" if we're talking about giving up multiple picks and future 1st rounders or something. No one is saying that. say whatever you want about the QB's they've drafted before, this (should) be the first time since Couch they've been able to draft the best QB on the(ir) board. They need to do that.

Honestly, there's nothing not to love about Wentz other than his gingerness.

 

[CFPBuckeye]

If you have a chance to change the trajectory of your franchise, you take it. Plugging a roster hole isn't gonna change the trajectory. I understand the "too many problems" if we're talking about giving up multiple picks and future 1st rounders or something. No one is saying that. say whatever you want about the QB's they've drafted before, this (should) be the first time since Couch they've been able to draft the best QB on the(ir) board. They need to do that.

Honestly, there's nothing not to love about Wentz other than his gingerness.

You make a good point about not giving up picks and getting their top guy. I suppose I have less of a problem with them taking QB at 2 since they aren't trading up and they have their choice of every QB available. My opinion of forgetting QB for a draft or two while building the team up first has been stated many times (probably to the point that you guys are all sick of hearing it lol.) With a new staff and the option of taking exactly who they want out of this years QB class, I can live with it.

 

[AKAK]

Certainly, a QB's success is dependent not only on his own talent and work ethic, but also on coaching and scheme. The Browns finally appear to have a competent head coach who also happens to be somewhat of a QB guru. Seems like a talented, hard-working QB could thrive in this organization now, if he is given adequate time to develop.


What's happened in the past really has no bearing on this draft, especially because the Browns have a new team of talent evaluators in place. But if what you're saying is true - that the Browns are somehow incapable of drafting a competent QB - then Haslam might as well move the team to Knoxville because they will never win anything (nor become a more solid/complete team) with the putrid QB play that we've seen for the past 17 seasons.

To add to this... If they take wentz (or Goff, its gonna be wentz, though) And they got rgiii, I think it's a good sign that the past isn't acceptable to them as it relates to qb. Honestly it's hard to know how bad the rest of the team is with Brandon weeden playing. That dude sucked and they kept some of those games close. Shit. Brian hoyer was 10-6 with this shit show over 2 seasons, and its clear that he has limitations.

 

[CFPBuckeye]

And just to defend my reputation (whatever it may be,) @LordJeffBuck... I do not think Wentz, nor Goff, are second round QBs. I also wanted no part of Manziel in any round of the 2014 draft.

I think our difference in philosophies comes down to what to start with in the slow climb out of NFL shame. You would like to see them take a QB and then build around him. I'd rather build and then find a QB. To each his own. I'm just a message board poster. I think I'm more willing to pass on QB this year because although I think that Wentz and Goff are first rounders, I feel they may be reaches at #2 (and I could be totally wrong there just like plenty of NFL GMs are wrong all the time.) I agree with your argument that past QB failures shouldn't deter the Browns from going QB in the first round but I also feel the same argument applies to taking BPA. Just because the Browns failed miserably at building a team around Joe Thomas...doesn't mean you don't take a 9 time pro bowl left tackle who starts every game of his career, at #3 in the draft every time (unless you don't need him, I suppose.) Can't blame Joe Thomas just because the Browns couldn't build a solid team if you spotted them everything except a kicker.

At least we still care about the Browns after 17 seasons of ineptitude. :cheers:

 

[tsteele316]

You make a good point about not giving up picks and getting their top guy. I suppose I have less of a problem with them taking QB at 2 since they aren't trading up and they have their choice of every QB available. My opinion of forgetting QB for a draft or two while building the team up first has been stated many times (probably to the point that you guys are all sick of hearing it lol.) With a new staff and the option of taking exactly who they want out of this years QB class, I can live with it.

and doing your model gets you to be the houston texans. qb purgatory with an all-star surrounding cast to the point you have to shell out $18 million a year to Brock Osweiler.

 

[CFPBuckeye]

and doing your model gets you to be the houston texans. qb purgatory with an all-star surrounding cast to the point you have to shell out $18 million a year to Brock Osweiler.

Yeah? Who was the QB of the Broncos before they signed FA Peyton Manning? They had an attractive team missing one piece, the QB. They built everything else first. And Peyton Manning wasn't even vintage Peyton Manning when they finally won, yet they won the Super Bowl because they had an actual team surrounding an average QB. Just because the Texans chose this year to go after a FA in a weak FA year doesn't mean anything. Nothing says that the Browns can't draft a QB with a lower first round pick and develop him for a year before playing him either. Where was Rodgers drafted? He went to a team that was already solid, got to sit one year and has balled out since. It's hard to fathom that happening in Cleveland, because Cleveland, but it actually CAN happen. My model has many possibilities that doesn't end in paying Brock Osweiler $18 million but I suspect you know that. I'd love to be like the Texans. They've been pretty solid recently and won playoff games. Getting better? What a wonderful problem to have. They needed a QB and maybe they botched it. Why does that mean that the Browns have to botch their signing when it comes time?

Looking back, how many QBs were drafted to bad teams and then went on to win a Super Bowl? Using Peyton Manning, since he just won and retired and was drafted to a bad team right around when Cleveland returned to the league...Manning was drafted in 1998 and didn't win until 2007. Aside from Peyton, how many Super Bowl champion QBs were drafted to bad teams and led that team to a Super Bowl? I can't think of any. The Saints were bad before Brees but they didn't draft him.

As it stands, we are talking about drafting a QB at 2 (which means he plays sooner rather than later,) and putting him out there with a team that just went 3-13, lost four of it's best players (so yes, it is actually worse than that same 3-13 team) and plays the Ravens, Steelers and Bengals 6 times. I've seen that movie before. What I haven't seen and think might be another approach with some promise, is building a team before counting on a rookie/second year QB to carry the Browns to successes not known in over 20 years.

Look, @tsteele316, we both have ideas of how the Browns are going to get from bottom dwelling shit show, to playoff/championship contender. I hate this back and forth because it feels like arguing to me and that's not what I'm trying to do. We both probably think we know better than the Browns front office who have been fucking up endlessly. I'm sure as it is, most people feel they can do better, and rightfully so. In the end, we can only sit back and hope that whichever it is they decide, that it finally works. That's all I hope for. If they go with your plan and it works, then I'll be ecstatic. My feelings won't be hurt. I'll be too drunk to care.

 

[AKAK]

My model has many possibilities that doesn't end in paying Brock Osweiler $18 million but I suspect you know that.

Mercifully the Texans did it instead.

 

[Buckeneye]

and doing your model gets you to be the houston texans. qb purgatory with an all-star surrounding cast to the point you have to shell out $18 million a year to Brock Osweiler.

Going his model also makes you Superbowl champs. Donkeys got it done with have below average QB play. (I'm not saying its the consistent way of doing things, merely devils advocate)

There's more than one way to skin a cat. I'd be happy to take a step in the direction the Texans have gone. At least those fuckers have made the playoffs a few times.

 

[tsteele316]

Going his model also makes you Superbowl champs. Donkeys got it done with have below average QB play. (I'm not saying its the consistent way of doing things, merely devils advocate)

There's more than one way to skin a cat. I'd be happy to take a step in the direction the Texans have gone. At least those fuckers have made the playoffs a few times.

So, the browns need to just sit back and wait for a hall of fame qb to suffer an injury, have his current team end up picking first in a draft with the best qb prospect in 15+ years, thereby releasing said hall of fame qb, then sign that qb.

yeah, i don't think that peyton manning is really a viable example.

i mean if fishing off the garbage heap and hoping to parlay that to a 9-7 season in a down year for your division is the end game, then sure.

but statistically speaking, the best way to procure your franchise qb is by taking them high in the first.

 

[CFPBuckeye]

So, the browns need to just sit back and wait for a hall of fame qb to suffer an injury, have his current team end up picking first in a draft with the best qb prospect in 15+ years, thereby releasing said hall of fame qb, then sign that qb.

yeah, i don't think that peyton manning is really a viable example.

i mean if fishing off the garbage heap and hoping to parlay that to a 9-7 season in a down year for your division is the end game, then sure.

but statistically speaking, the best way to procure your franchise qb is by taking them high in the first.

A weeee bit of an exaggeration. Maybe you didn't watch the NFL this last year but Peyton "hall of fame" Manning was pedestrian at best. Any number of QBs could have won a Super Bowl with that Broncos team. It sure didn't take an all timer to do it. His stats this season should point that out quite easily. This might have been his worst year ever.

The "garbage heap" isn't where the Browns HAVE to get a QB. They CAN draft one. They have drafts every year. This isn't the last one. If the only way to get a good QB is top 5, then the NFLs recent history sure had a funny way of showing it. All of the recent good teams DRAFTED their current QB in the top 5.

 

[Bucklion]

A weeee bit of an exaggeration. Maybe you didn't watch the NFL this last year but Peyton "hall of fame" Manning was pedestrian at best. Any number of QBs could have won a Super Bowl with that Broncos team. It sure didn't take an all timer to do it. His stats this season should point that out quite easily. This might have been his worst year ever.

True...but let's not pretend the Browns roster was full of guys outside of the OL that could have started for Denver, either.

 

[CFPBuckeye]

True...but let's not pretend the Browns roster was full of guys outside of the OL that could have started for Denver, either.

No. That's precisely my point. They need to build a team. They're a long way away and whoever they draft will be in a wheelchair before they get there.

 

[tsteele316]

A weeee bit of an exaggeration. Maybe you didn't watch the NFL this last year but Peyton "hall of fame" Manning was pedestrian at best. Any number of QBs could have won a Super Bowl with that Broncos team. It sure didn't take an all timer to do it. His stats this season should point that out quite easily. This might have been his worst year ever.

Even noodle armed Peyton changes the way teams defend and has an ability to read a defense and check into plays that other qbs don't have. That still doesn't change the underlying argument that Denver is a bad example, and the myth that you can build a team and magically acquire your qb is shaky at best.