Any QB Will Do

[Chopper0080]

But it wasn't at QB, either.

Yes, it was primarily bad coaching. With good coaching Goff was put in better circumstances, Gurley was used in an every down role, and they were able to mutually succeed. Are you convinced that Barkley won't fall into the same trap in Cleveland? I'm not. What makes you think that teams won't stack the box against Barkley and dare a rookie QB to make plays in the passing game? RBs can only overcome so much. The right QB can overcome much more, and can put other players is positions to be successful.

 

[Solar7]

If it was either/or, sure. But it isn't. It's best player in the draft, highest potential ceiling RB and a choice between the top 3, relatively equal QB's or take your favorite of the QB class and...? If they take Barkley they get a likely blue-chipper and still get a QB. That much more value than just taking a QB before RB on principle.

Minkah Fitzpatrick? Bradley Chubb? Trade back to a team that needs that last QB available?

 

[Chopper0080]

Every QB in this draft has multiple flaws, none is a day 1 starter or should be, they all are projects. That is why there is not much separating these QBs. Of course QB is more important that RB in the grand scheme of things but any of these guys could go #1 or #6 and the order really doesn't matter.

What QB doesn't have flaws coming from college? Wentz did. Goff did. Luck did. Newton did. Trubiski did. Watson did. Wilson did. Dak did. Cousins did. Rodgers did. And so on and so on.

Which QBs have the skills to be a top level NFL QB...

Sam Darnold
Josh Allen

Both have size, arm, and athleticism. Darnold has ball security concerns. Allen has accuracy concerns.

If you miss on those two players then you are getting a inherently limited QB. Rosen isn't very durable and has a spindly frame. Baker is at the bottom of the size, arm preference being functional at best. Lamar Jackson is a project with multiple areas needed.

Why risk those guys being gone to get Baker or Rosen...or to gamble on being able to improve Allen's accuracy?

All for a guy who at best will be a player that ensures you are 7-9 without a legit QB.

 

[Chopper0080]

I will laugh when the Browns draft Saquon Barkley and Baker Mayfield. At best they will turn into the Jacksonville Jaguars.

 

[moklerman]

Yes, it was primarily bad coaching. With good coaching Goff was put in better circumstances, Gurley was used in an every down role, and they were able to mutually succeed. Are you convinced that Barkley won't fall into the same trap in Cleveland? I'm not. What makes you think that teams won't stack the box against Barkley and dare a rookie QB to make plays in the passing game? RBs can only overcome so much. The right QB can overcome much more, and can put other players is positions to be successful.

I don't think you can have it both ways. You just said it was coaching and not the QB so in Cleveland's case, it wouldn't matter if they had Darnold, Rosen or whoever. If the coaching was Fisher level horrible, it wouldn't matter if they took their QB 1st or 4th.

If Barkley is taken and they go with Kizer, then yes, I'd say the Browns failed. But, I wouldn't pass on a generational talent at RB if the available QB's graded similarly. If I absolutely loved Darnold and thought he was the next great QB, no I wouldn't take a chance on him being gone. But, for this year and these picks, the smart play is to take the stud and still draft one of the best QB's in the class. This isn't Luck and RGIII and no one else(even though Cousins was in that same class, wasn't he?).

I just don't feel that Darnold and Rosen are that much better than many of the other QB's available in the draft.

 

[bg7brd]

QB means more than RB

I agree. How many Lombardi trophies did AP bring to the Vikings?

 

[Zeno]

I agree. How many Lombardi trophies did AP bring to the Vikings?

How many Lombardi trophies would Troy Aikman have won without Emmit Smith?

 

[WildBB]

Agreed on taking a RB over a QB

Don't worry about the roster as long as we get the right QB.

It gets interesting when the Browns do take Barkley and the the Giants and Colts both start to offer their picks. Could happen.

Who really believes Darnold is that guy?!

 

[Solar7]

I don't think you can have it both ways. You just said it was coaching and not the QB so in Cleveland's case, it wouldn't matter if they had Darnold, Rosen or whoever. If the coaching was Fisher level horrible, it wouldn't matter if they took their QB 1st or 4th.

If Barkley is taken and they go with Kizer, then yes, I'd say the Browns failed. But, I wouldn't pass on a generational talent at RB if the available QB's graded similarly. If I absolutely loved Darnold and thought he was the next great QB, no I wouldn't take a chance on him being gone. But, for this year and these picks, the smart play is to take the stud and still draft one of the best QB's in the class. This isn't Luck and RGIII and no one else(even though Cousins was in that same class, wasn't he?).

I just don't feel that Darnold and Rosen are that much better than many of the other QB's available in the draft.

I just don't see how you can not feel like Allen and Mayfield have much more severe question marks than the other two. Accuracy and size are two huge indicators of success and each of those guys have major flaws there.

Just look at the history. In the past ten years you can really only find one example where the guys that went past #1 was better than the guy that went first (Wentz), and it's still up in the air. http://www.nfl.com/draft/history/fulldraft?type=position

There's barely any superstars that weren't the first pick, either. Mariota still needs to pick it up, Wentz is injured and we'll have to see if he returns to form...

When you pick #1 overall, you can ensure that the guy you're picking fits your offensive scheme, locker room, and head coach. You'll have to cater your offense to Mayfield. You'll have to work on Allen's accuracy and level of competition. You should pick the guy you're sure about. You have nearly two months to get this right.

 

[bg7brd]

How many Lombardi trophies would Troy Aikman have won without Emmit Smith?

Who knows?

 

[Zeno]

Who knows?

My point was that it takes more than one player to win a championship. AP or Barry Sanders wasn't going to win with what was around them anymore than Dan Marino was going to win with what was around him.

 

[moklerman]

I just don't see how you can not feel like Allen and Mayfield have much more severe question marks than the other two. Accuracy and size are two huge indicators of success and each of those guys have major flaws there.

Just look at the history. In the past ten years you can really only find one example where the guys that went past #1 was better than the guy that went first (Wentz), and it's still up in the air. http://www.nfl.com/draft/history/fulldraft?type=position

There's barely any superstars that weren't the first pick, either. Mariota still needs to pick it up, Wentz is injured and we'll have to see if he returns to form...

When you pick #1 overall, you can ensure that the guy you're picking fits your offensive scheme, locker room, and head coach. You'll have to cater your offense to Mayfield. You'll have to work on Allen's accuracy and level of competition. You should pick the guy you're sure about. You have nearly two months to get this right.

But that's assuming you're going to be sure about ANY of them, which I'm not. I like Darnold and Rosen because they're "local" guys to me but I wouldn't spend a #1 overall on either one of them. If I'm not in love with any of them, I'm taking the best player available, especially if it's a need.

Picking #1 overall ensures that you get to pick whoever you want but it doesn't mean that someone actually checks all the boxes. I don't think any of these QB's check ALL the boxes so I'd be willing to roll the dice a little with the #4 pick. I'm not convinced that if I'm Cleveland and take Barkley #1 that #2 & #3 are automatically going to be QB's. Probably, but not definitely. But overall, I'm not willing to bet the Browns future that Darnold/Rosen can carry them. I think Barkley and QB "X" have a better chance than Darnold/Rosen and someone else. Darnold/Rosen didn't even carry their college teams. They played well but they weren't elevating their teams just by their presence. If they couldn't do that in the Pac-12 then I don't see how they could do it in the NFL.

If I'm the Browns, I'd rather take Barkley and the best defensive player at #4 and sign McCarron than just take a QB for the sake of it at #1.

 

[Cheesebeef]

So... basically this rumor is that the Browns have no idea which QB to take and thus will let the draft decide for them at #4?

That sounds ludicrous... which means it’s prob true for the Browns.

 

[GimmedaBall]

But that's assuming you're going to be sure about ANY of them, which I'm not. I like Darnold and Rosen because they're "local" guys to me but I wouldn't spend a #1 overall on either one of them. If I'm not in love with any of them, I'm taking the best player available, especially if it's a need.

Picking #1 overall ensures that you get to pick whoever you want but it doesn't mean that someone actually checks all the boxes. I don't think any of these QB's check ALL the boxes so I'd be willing to roll the dice a little with the #4 pick. I'm not convinced that if I'm Cleveland and take Barkley #1 that #2 & #3 are automatically going to be QB's. Probably, but not definitely. But overall, I'm not willing to bet the Browns future that Darnold/Rosen can carry them. I think Barkley and QB "X" have a better chance than Darnold/Rosen and someone else. Darnold/Rosen didn't even carry their college teams. They played well but they weren't elevating their teams just by their presence. If they couldn't do that in the Pac-12 then I don't see how they could do it in the NFL.

If I'm the Browns, I'd rather take Barkley and the best defensive player at #4 and sign McCarron than just take a QB for the sake of it at #1.

Hue Jackson knows McCarron and Browns already tried to trade for him. Now, they can just pay him from their huge salary cap bankroll. Take Barkley and the top DL or CB and compete. Two of the top 10 guys on anyone's board. If the Browns get this draft wrong they need to be blackballed from the NFL.

 

[bg7brd]

My point was that it takes more than one player to win a championship. AP or Barry Sanders wasn't going to win with what was around them anymore than Dan Marino was going to win with what was around him.

I would argue that Aikman was more integral to the Cowboys success than Emmit Smith. You don't need a "generational RB" to win a Super Bowl but it's almost impossible to win one without a good QB. As others have said, it would be a total "Browns" move to take a RB first over all and let other teams decide who they take for a QB at 4.

 

[Chopper0080]

How many Lombardi trophies would Troy Aikman have won without Emmit Smith?

More than Emmitt did without Aikman.

 

[Chopper0080]

My point was that it takes more than one player to win a championship. AP or Barry Sanders wasn't going to win with what was around them anymore than Dan Marino was going to win with what was around him.

There are more recent examples of great RBs not winning titles without a great QB than there are of great QBs not winning titles without great RBs.

 

[daves]

I would argue that Aikman was more integral to the Cowboys success than Emmit Smith. You don't need a "generational RB" to win a Super Bowl but it's almost impossible to win one without a good QB. As others have said, it would be a total "Browns" move to take a RB first over all and let other teams decide who they take for a QB at 4.

Impossible to know for sure... but i remember when Emmit Smith held out for the first two games of 1993 and the Cowboys went 0-2, scoring only one TD per game. Then he came back and they went on to win the Super Bowl.

...dbs

 

[oaken1]

I’ve heard that too but I’m not sure it plays with the fan base unless they also take a QB at 4.

but they can somewhat appease the fanbase with "we just drafted a QB in the second round last year who is developing well,....lets see what he has before we get another rookie"

everyone knew Kizer needed another year...his coach at ND came out and said it before the draft.... he should have spent last season on the bench...instead he was starting and getting sacked on nearly 10% of his dropbacks... but if the kid learned some things he can improve this season... hell, he would almost have to...his stats can only really go up, lol... maybe they think a stronger oline and star RB can help him out and make a difference?

I still think they need to get an OT in the first this year

 

[Zeno]

More than Emmitt did without Aikman.

Actually the answer to both is zero. Aikman was an above average QB surrounded by superior talent, the numbers back that up.

 

[GatorAZ]

So... basically this rumor is that the Browns have no idea which QB to take and thus will let the draft decide for them at #4?

That sounds ludicrous... which means it’s prob true for the Browns.

Sounds like Hue hasn't got over McCarron yet...

This comes from an executive with a historically reliable ear to the ground: Cleveland, with four picks in the top 35 of the draft, is still exceedingly interested in signing free-agent quarterback A.J. McCarron after the trade-deadline-day debacle last fall ... and then backstopping him with a rookie quarterback in the draft. I’m hearing that’s coach Hue Jackson’s preference, having coached McCarron in Cincinnati as Bengals offensive coordinator. --MMQB

They could go with a veteran and lock up 2/3 of Barkley/Chubb/Fitzpatrick

 

[oaken1]

But that's assuming you're going to be sure about ANY of them, which I'm not. I like Darnold and Rosen because they're "local" guys to me but I wouldn't spend a #1 overall on either one of them. If I'm not in love with any of them, I'm taking the best player available, especially if it's a need.

Picking #1 overall ensures that you get to pick whoever you want but it doesn't mean that someone actually checks all the boxes. I don't think any of these QB's check ALL the boxes so I'd be willing to roll the dice a little with the #4 pick. I'm not convinced that if I'm Cleveland and take Barkley #1 that #2 & #3 are automatically going to be QB's. Probably, but not definitely. But overall, I'm not willing to bet the Browns future that Darnold/Rosen can carry them. I think Barkley and QB "X" have a better chance than Darnold/Rosen and someone else. Darnold/Rosen didn't even carry their college teams. They played well but they weren't elevating their teams just by their presence. If they couldn't do that in the Pac-12 then I don't see how they could do it in the NFL.

If I'm the Browns, I'd rather take Barkley and the best defensive player at #4 and sign McCarron than just take a QB for the sake of it at #1.

or...Barkley and Mike McGlinchey at 4 so they have someone to replace Joe Thomas as well as help open holes for Barkley

 

[Chopper0080]

Barry Sanders - no Super Bowl
Tom Brady - lots of Super Bowls
Ben Roethlisberger - Super Bowl win
Le'Veon Bell - no Super Bowl
Eli Manning - Super Bowl
Adrian Peterson - no Super Bowl
Ladainian Tomlinson - no Super BOwl

 

[cardncubfan]

How long is the career of a top QB & how long is the career of a top RB? That should answer whether you take a QB or RB #1 overall.

 

[JeffGollin]

You need to make that decision for your franchise. The top 3-4 QBs are very different guys. Letting someone make the decision for you at the most important position in football is how you stay the Browns.

You might get forced into a corner where you have no choice but to let another team make that decision for you but, that said: I agree you fight like crazy to avoid being put in that position.

Logical strategy would be to get a QB you like via free agency. Problem, from my viewpoint is that, other than a couple of injury-risks, none of those free agents excite me.