Cleveland Browns (2016 thread of unrelenting dumpster conflagration)

[jlb1705]

Why are we entertaining the idea that the Browns could attract a free agent QB that's worth a damn through free agency? Even if they build a strong team and claw their way up to 7-9 where people might be satisfied with finally going after a QB, what kind of player do you think would sign here? The stink isn't going to wear off the Browns that easily. If they want to finally solve the QB problem they're going to have to draft somebody because they're not going to get a useful QB to come here of their own free will.

 

[CFPBuckeye]

Why are we entertaining the idea that the Browns could attract a free agent QB that's worth a damn through free agency? Even if they build a strong team and claw their way up to 7-9 where people might be satisfied with finally going after a QB, what kind of player do you think would sign here? The stink isn't going to wear off the Browns that easily. If they want to finally solve the QB problem they're going to have to draft somebody because they're not going to get a useful QB to come here of their own free will.

Why are we entertaining the idea that the Browns would ever draft a QB that will succeed? (This I don't believe, though. What I believe is a QB drafted to a team that won 3 games and is completely stripped of talent, is set up to fail...especially in Cleveland with all of that "stink" you mention.)

A couple years of decent play and getting some good pieces changes everything. A FA QB comes for a visit, sees what we (hopefully) have done, likes our coaching staffs philosophy (since we are counting on them to still actually be around and therefore know what they are doing,) likes what we have in place...players will go where they can get paid. There are still only 32 teams in the NFL. If the Browns ever want to compete, they are going to have to become one of the better ones and then, a QB would definitely consider.

FA is just one option. A couple of years at 7-9 or 8-8 doesn't magically mean that the Browns can't draft a QB. The Browns aren't going to miss out on drafting a QB if they don't jump on it now. There will be a 2017 NFL draft and a 2018 NFL draft and if the world hasn't blown up, a 2019 NFL draft. The Browns have sucked forever so what is a couple more years at worst of waiting to draft the next failure to try a different approach? A first round QB talent doesn't have to come in the top 5 and if you have a solid nucleus, a QB taken lower in the first round still has a better chance to succeed than a top QB drafted by a 3 win team.

If we're going to convince ourselves that no FA QB would ever come to Cleveland, then you must already be convinced that Cleveland will never draft a good QB either...unless you feel that this new staff can do differently what other staffs haven't and have a plan that leads to winning games. If you can believe that, then you have to believe that they would be capable of attracting a FA QB in the future as well. It can't go both ways where we expect a drafted QB to succeed, despite "Cleveland," but the Browns will never be good enough to convince a decent QB to come on their own free will because "Cleveland."

 

[tsteele316]

Why are we entertaining the idea that the Browns would ever draft a QB that will succeed? (This I don't believe, though. What I believe is a QB drafted to a team that won 3 games and is completely stripped of talent, is set up to fail...especially in Cleveland with all of that "stink" you mention.)

A couple years of decent play and getting some good pieces changes everything. A FA QB comes for a visit, sees what we (hopefully) have done, likes our coaching staffs philosophy (since we are counting on them to still actually be around and therefore know what they are doing,) likes what we have in place...players will go where they can get paid. There are still only 32 teams in the NFL. If the Browns ever want to compete, they are going to have to become one of the better ones and then, a QB would definitely consider.

FA is just one option. A couple of years at 7-9 or 8-8 doesn't magically mean that the Browns can't draft a QB. The Browns aren't going to miss out on drafting a QB if they don't jump on it now. There will be a 2017 NFL draft and a 2018 NFL draft and if the world hasn't blown up, a 2019 NFL draft. The Browns have sucked forever so what is a couple more years at worst of waiting to draft the next failure to try a different approach? A first round QB talent doesn't have to come in the top 5 and if you have a solid nucleus, a QB taken lower in the first round still has a better chance to succeed than a top QB drafted by a 3 win team.

If we're going to convince ourselves that no FA QB would ever come to Cleveland, then you must already be convinced that Cleveland will never draft a good QB either...unless you feel that this new staff can do differently what other staffs haven't and have a plan that leads to winning games. If you can believe that, then you have to believe that they would be capable of attracting a FA QB in the future as well. It can't go both ways where we expect a drafted QB to succeed, despite "Cleveland," but the Browns will never be good enough to convince a decent QB to come on their own free will because "Cleveland."

This is statistically incorrect. the largest success rate for qb's is for those drafted in the top 5. furthermore, the first qb drafted has the best hit rate of any of them.

 

[CFPBuckeye]

Starting this century, the winning QB of the Super Bowl has been...

Kurt Warner (undrafted)
Trent Dilfer (6th overall/2nd QB taken)
Tom Brady (definitely not first QB taken)
Brad Johnson (9th round)
Brady
Brady
Ben Roethlisberger (11th overall/3rd QB taken)
Peyton Manning (1st overall)
Eli Manning (1st overall and traded)
Roethlisberger
Drew Brees (1st pick of 2nd round)
Aaron Rodgers (1st round/2nd QB all the way at pick 24)
Eli
Joe Flacco (1st round/2nd QB at 18)
Russell Wilson (3rd round)
Brady
Peyton

13 of the past 17 Super Bowl winning QBs were not the first QB taken. Since that is how most teams would ultimately define success, instead of just being as you called it "the Houston Texans," I'd say the top QB taken might statistically have more wins than others but that's about it. I'm sure they'd take the Super Bowls instead.

Who cares if they don't get the first QB? Is the second or third QB chopped liver in a world where busts can litter the first round at the top as much as the bottom? If he isn't a Manning Brother, the first QB taken hasn't been the one to actually win the Lombardi. I don't know about you, but I'd like the Browns to win the Super Bowl. Sure, winning games, making the playoffs, and winning a few of those playoff games would be nice...ask the teams that do that and they aren't happy, they want to win the trophy.

It can be done either way but I still stick by the odds of winning it all (which is what the goal is) going up by not being the team shitty enough to take the first QB off of the board. They seem to be better by having a solid team that then finds a QB after the first QB in the draft has been taken, or by finding a QB in free agency.

 

[AuTX Buckeye]

Starting this century, the winning QB of the Super Bowl has been...


Drew Brees (2nd round/last pick of round)
.

Brees was the 1st pick of the 2nd round ... #32 overall.

 

[CFPBuckeye]

Brees was the 1st pick of the 2nd round ... #32 overall.

My mistake. I typed "last" instead of "first." Thanks.

 

[tsteele316]

Starting this century, the winning QB of the Super Bowl has been...

Kurt Warner (undrafted)
Trent Dilfer (6th overall/2nd QB taken)
Tom Brady (definitely not first QB taken)
Brad Johnson (9th round)
Brady
Brady
Ben Roethlisberger (11th overall/3rd QB taken)
Peyton Manning (1st overall)
Eli Manning (1st overall and traded)
Roethlisberger
Drew Brees (1st pick of 2nd round)
Aaron Rodgers (1st round/2nd QB all the way at pick 24)
Eli
Joe Flacco (1st round/2nd QB at 18)
Russell Wilson (3rd round)
Brady
Peyton

13 of the past 17 Super Bowl winning QBs were not the first QB taken. Since that is how most teams would ultimately define success, instead of just being as you called it "the Houston Texans," I'd say the top QB taken might statistically have more wins than others but that's about it. I'm sure they'd take the Super Bowls instead.

Who cares if they don't get the first QB? Is the second or third QB chopped liver in a world where busts can litter the first round at the top as much as the bottom? If he isn't a Manning Brother, the first QB taken hasn't been the one to actually win the Lombardi. I don't know about you, but I'd like the Browns to win the Super Bowl. Sure, winning games, making the playoffs, and winning a few of those playoff games would be nice...ask the teams that do that and they aren't happy, they want to win the trophy.

It can be done either way but I still stick by the odds of winning it all (which is what the goal is) going up by not being the team [Mark May]ty enough to take the first QB off of the board. They seem to be better by having a solid team that then finds a QB after the first QB in the draft has been taken, or by finding a QB in free agency.

nice pigeon hole argument using only super bowl winners where the single greatest statistical anomaly of the nfl greatly skews the results. using this logic, teams should only draft qb's in the 6th round.

 

[AKAK]

Who cares if they don't get the first QB?

Well, problem is, if they don't get the 1st, they'll likely get theat minimum the 3rd and likely the 4th, unless you want to trade back in.. which I don't think you want to. And with the exception of Roethlisberger as the 3rd (who went 11th overall behind Eli and Phillip Rivers - who btw is no slouch) Dilfer, Brees, Rogers, Eli, Peyton and Flacco all were with the first 2 picks. That leaves Johnson, Wilson and "The Early" Brady years on teams with a Dominant Defense, which we do not have... and Warner and the late Brady years as high powered offense outliers. If Belichik was still the coach, I'd be on board, but, we have a QB guy as coach, so, we need a QB. And for sure, if someone said, "Hey look, that's the next Kurt Warner over there at the Safeway bagging groceries" Sign that guy too, doesn't cost you a thing (And sign Isaac Bruce, trade for Marshall Faulk and build a dome while you're at it.)

Other thing you're leaving out is... experience... so, in the outlier department, Johnson was in his 10th season, and Warner was 30. So that leaves Russell Wilson, who, had a dominant D, Beast Mode and 5 years in school at 2 different Universities as the one young guy, along with Brady... who while taken in the 6th round... the one thing we're not mentioning is... the 8.7 MILLLION guys who were taken before that that aren't in the league. And there is and will only ever be one Tom Brady. (See, now you made me feel dirty) Also, only half of the guys taken in the 1st round - regardless of position- started last year. Point is, you build up the team for 2 years, then you end up having to draft a guy, you've got an OK team around a rookie QB.

Now, my one plug, my advice to you is, go check the film on Wentz... then go read about this kid a little bit, about who he is and what he likes to do for fun. Its pretty interesting.

 

[CFPBuckeye]

nice pigeon hole argument using only super bowl winners where the single greatest statistical anomaly of the nfl greatly skews the results. using this logic, teams should only draft qb's in the 6th round.

Facts are simple facts. The Patriots won with a QB drafted in the 6th round. Did I miss where that draft reclassified Brady as the first QB taken? Maybe Brady won those Super Bowls because he was drafted by a good team (he was.) Insane that it could happen, I know. But were the Patriots really the Patriots before Brady came along? They were just solid. And the best part is...ANYBODY can do it. The Patriots don't have a patent on winning. Plus in between those wins by Brady (which conveniently you'd like me to leave out as much as you think it is convenient for me to use them,) other QBs not drafted first overall won Super Bowls as well. Brady is simple another example of a QB who can be great that doesn't have to be drafted at the tippy top by a shitty team to win.

In fact, using recent history this century, it seems like you use the same type argument using an all time great in Peyton Manning and his own blood in Eli to prove that drafting a QB first overall is the way to go. Those seem like exceptions and not realities. I can at least point to other QBs aside from Brady that also prove my point since the Browns have returned to the league.

 

[ArmyVet83]

http://www.drafthistory.com/index.php/superbowl_quarterbacks/

Here is the list of all winning (and losing) QBs in Super Bowl history.

To summarize there have been 60 quarterbacks that have played in the Super Bowl including two teams that played two QBs in the game (Eason and Grogan in the blow out loss to Chicago) and Kelly and Reich in the loss to the Cowboys).

Half (30) were drafted in the 1st round while 2 were undrafted FAs. The rest between the 2nd and 18th rounds with the 2nd most QBs selected in the 3rd (8).

20 QBs have had multiple appearances.

5 QBs with 4 appearances. Staubach (10th Rd), Bradshaw (1st Rd and won all 4), Montana (3rd Rd and won all 4), Kelly (1st round) and Peyton Manning (1st Rd)

2 QBs with 5 or more - Elway (1st Rd) (5) and Brady (6ht Rd) (6)

If you are going to use the Super Bowl as a gauge of a QBs success, you select the QB in the 1st round to INCREASE your chances to get there and win.

However, playoff success, winning seasons, etc. would be really interesting to research. Selecting the number of QBs in each round in the Super Bowl Era as your sample size and rate the success percentages would be really interesting. But I don't have the time.

Bottom line is (as The Highlander would say): "There can only be one."

 

[tsteele316]

Facts are simple facts. The Patriots won with a QB drafted in the 6th round. Did I miss where that draft reclassified Brady as the first QB taken? Maybe Brady won those Super Bowls because he was drafted by a good team (he was.) Insane that it could happen, I know. But were the Patriots really the Patriots before Brady came along? They were just solid. And the best part is...ANYBODY can do it. The Patriots don't have a patent on winning. Plus in between those wins by Brady (which conveniently you'd like me to leave out as much as you think it is convenient for me to use them,) other QBs not drafted first overall won Super Bowls as well. Brady is simple another example of a QB who can be great that doesn't have to be drafted at the tippy top by a [Mark May]ty team to win.

In fact, using recent history this century, it seems like you use the same type argument using an all time great in Peyton Manning and his own blood in Eli to prove that drafting a QB first overall is the way to go. Those seem like exceptions and not realities. I can at least point to other QBs aside from Brady that also prove my point since the Browns have returned to the league.

1. using superbowl winners to determine good qbs is a weak argument at best.

2. tom brady is a statistical anomaly, plain and simple. trying to argue otherwise is simply foolish.

3. plenty of teams have tried to duplicate what the patriots have done. none have succeeded.

4. it still doesn't change the underlying statistical fact that the best success rate for qbs is those drafted high in the first, with the first overall taken being the highest success rate. trying to pigeon hole that into super bowl winners is yet again, a weak argument.

 

[AKAK]

In fact, using recent history this century, it seems like you use the same type argument using an all time great in Peyton Manning and his own blood in Eli to prove that drafting a QB first overall is the way to go. Those seem like exceptions and not realities. I can at least point to other QBs aside from Brady that also prove my point since the Browns have returned to the league.

Dude, they are all exceptions. Lots more guys bust than win superbowls.. But you still need a QB...

And part about taking a guy in the 3rd round, or 6th round is IDENTIFYING that they'll be good. If indeed you could do that, you would. But, usually you get Spurgeon Wynn. The problem here is, you're rationalizing the difference between a coin toss and winning the pick 3.

The other problem is, maybe Wentz is really worth the #10. We ain't got the 10, we got the 2.

Other interesting "fact" for you. :)

3 FCS QB's have been taken in the first round... ever (Edit: Not "ever" Since 1979 when Sims was taken 7th overall)... Phil Sims, the aforementioned Joe Flacco... and Steve McNair, who, if Kevin Dyson had slightly longer arms, would replace Warner on your list. So, we should take FCS QB's in the 1st round all the time, right? You'll at least get 6 inches from a Championship at worst.

 

[CFPBuckeye]

Well, problem is, if they don't get the 1st, they'll likely get theat minimum the 3rd and likely the 4th, unless you want to trade back in.. which I don't think you want to.

They can always use their first rounder next year or the year after. They don't need to trade back up this year.

...with the exception of Roethlisberger as the 3rd (who went 11th overall behind Eli and Phillip Rivers - who btw is no slouch) Dilfer, Brees, Rogers, Eli, Peyton and Flacco all were with the first 2 picks.

Some of those picks were made lower in the first round start and even in the second round with Brees. You don't have to be shitty to have a QB find his way to you.

And for sure, if someone said, "Hey look, that's the next Kurt Warner over there at the Safeway bagging groceries" Sign that guy too, doesn't cost you a thing (And sign Isaac Bruce, trade for Marshall Faulk and build a dome while you're at it.)

Definitely.

And there is and will only ever be one Tom Brady. (See, now you made me feel dirty)

You should.

...then you end up having to draft a guy, you've got an OK team around a rookie QB.

Doesn't that seem more successful than a 3-13 team that just lost 4 of it's best players from said team, surrounding a rookie QB. That rookie QB's confidence is going to get shattered surrounded by the pseudo football players that are currently all over this roster. Nobody to block for him. Nobody to throw it to. Nobody on defense to help keep games close for him. Fail, fail, fail is all he is going to see.

...my advice to you is, go check the film on Wentz... then go read about this kid a little bit, about who he is and what he likes to do for fun. Its pretty interesting.

I actually like Wentz. I really do. I'd love to see the Browns draft him and be successful. I just don't seeing that being a likely outcome. Other QBs come along every year and I'd rather see the Browns get their's when the time is right and that QB can come in and succeed without being swallowed up by the complete failure all around him.




Look, I get it, I'm in the minority here by wanting to see some outrageous concept such as just filling some holes and then finding a guy to QB. The Browns have tried the "draft a QB every other year to be the future" concept so many times that I just want to see an alternative. We all want the Browns to win games. We just have different ideas on how they should do it. Cheers to you guys, @tsteele316 especially, and let's just hope that they finally do something right, whatever it is. And if they do draft a QB at #2 and then proceed to turn it around and not ruin said QB's career, I will be here to tell everyone I was wrong and you all can pummel me with a million "I told you so" and "you're an idiot" comments. It's cool. I really look forward to it if it were to happen. That means the Browns would be better than they have been in a really long time. Now if the QB taken at 2 fails...can I come back and gloat a little? Please?

Edit: "Likes" for everyone just for actually giving a shit about the Cleveland Browns.

 

[CFPBuckeye]

Other interesting "fact" for you. :)

3 FCS QB's have been taken in the first round... ever (Edit: Not "ever" Since 1979 when Sims was taken 7th overall)... Phil Sims, the aforementioned Joe Flacco... and Steve McNair, who, if Kevin Dyson had slightly longer arms, would replace Warner on your list. So, we should take FCS QB's in the 1st round all the time, right? You'll at least get 6 inches from a Championship at worst.

You might be on to something. Ok. I'm all in on the "draft Wentz" train. Seriously, I do like Wentz. I just want to see a QB come in and not be surrounded by what we all know is a roster of bums.

If they do indeed draft Wentz, I'll be rooting for him to succeed, absolutely. I hated the Manziel pick and even wanted him to succeed. I don't care who it is as long as they pull this franchise out from the bottom of Sucktitude Ocean.

 

[Buckeneye]

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.

Admittedly, its not a 'great' example. However the Broncos are a team that just won the Superbowl with below average QB play. That point cannot be denied.

That said, I agree entirely. Having a top tier QB is the key ingredient to prolonged success. That's why I slipped the 'devils advocate' comment in there.