Skip to content

EJ Manuel likely to be cut by Bills (rumor)

The Browns Board
28 15 1.3k
  • @tim-couch-pulls-out said:

    He's probably not going to be cut. If anything, they'll try and trade him for peanuts.

    256 - 437 | 58.6% | 2,810 yards | 16 TD | 12 Int | 78.5 Rating

    299 - 534 | 56 % | 3,941 yards | 17 TD | 16 Int | 77.6 Rating

    One of the above is Manuel, the other is Hoyer (in Cleveland). Their stats are remarkably similar. However, Manuel is 6'5", 237 lbs., runs a 4.55, 40, and is 6 years younger than Hoyer. Manuel could come in and challenge Manziel for the starting spot without us having to break the bank on a FA nor having to trade up for one of the top guys in the draft. We could take a mid-late round prospect for development and then let Manziel and Manuel battle it out in camp.

    If Manuel wins, it's pretty clear that Manziel is useless to us and we can then ship him off either this year or in the next offseason. Manuel could get a full season under his belt and then, if we don't like what we see, we may be in position to take Cardale Jones next season.

    If Manziel wins, he gets his shot to prove that he was worth the pick. If he ends up bombing throughout the season, bench him for Manuel and then refer to the above scenario.

    Yeah, Im OK with that thinking.

    Just not sure that they would really cut him on a rookie contract where he has probably already gotten most of the guaranteed money and all they have at qb is this 37 year old career backup who went 1-10 last year.

    Im ok with Browns getting Manuel ... Im not sure why the new guys in Buff wouldnt keep him around this year though.

    Z

    Zombo said:

    Yeah, Im OK with that thinking.

    Just not sure that they would really cut him on a rookie contract where he has probably already gotten most of the guaranteed money and all they have at qb is this 37 year old career backup who went 1-10 last year.

    Im ok with Browns getting Manuel ... Im not sure why the new guys in Buff wouldnt keep him around this year though.

    Z

    I don't think they'd cut him either. I think Ryan will keep him for evaluation.

    @unsympathetic said:

    Why, exactly, would we want Manuel?

    He had Watkins all of last season... so he has already experienced 100% of the theorized "bump" that Hoyer would get if Hoyer was to throw to a 1st round WR. And even with that bump, Manuel still sucks.

    Manuel is living proof that a top WR does not make an avg QB look good.

    The only time i want Manuel wearing a Browns jersey is while he's getting sacked by Kruger.

    We'd want Manuel because he's probably a shitload more affordable than any of the FA QB's, he's younger, and there's still the off-chance that he has untapped potential.

    This theorized bump is overplayed. A good WR can only make an average QB reach his ceiling, just as a good QB can only make an average WR reach his ceiling. I can throw a receiver open but it's up to him to catch it. I can run perfect routes and be wide open but I can't make the QB throw an accurate pass.

    Manuel was flat out garbage last season. A dumpster fire of a QB. But he has everything you'd want in terms of physical attributes. I'd personally rather take a risk on a young, prototypical NFL QB who's only played on one team in his short career than a journeyman veteran who's never stuck anywhere.

    We're not finding a Tom Brady franchise-type QB in FA. That's just not going to happen. So our options are:

    -trade up for Winston (unlikely)

    -trade up for Mariota (slightly more likely)

    -resign Hoyer (unlikely)

    -sign a journeyman FA

    -trade for Sam Bradford (unlikely)

    -trade for Nick Foles

    -hand the reigns to Manziel

    -draft a second day QB like Petty or Hundley and have him battle with Manziel

    -draft a second day QB like Petty or Hundley and have him develop behind Manziel/FA journeyman

    I say fuck it, let's offer a Manziel-Manuel trade. Greg Roman has experience with mobile QB's, so it's not outside the realm of reason.

    If they were the only two QB's available, which would you rather have? Would you rather have the big, strong, less accurate first round bust or the small, improvisational, possible game changing first round bust? There's no wrong answer, it's just a matter of preference for your offensive system.

  • Actually if Johnny Manziel lost that competition it would mean a lot less then you might think.

    Brandon Weeden beat out Jason Campbell and Brian Hoyer in camp.

    WSS

  • Actually if Johnny Manziel lost that competition it would mean a lot less then you might think.

    Brandon Weeden beat out Jason Campbell and Brian Hoyer in camp.

    WSS

    @westside-steve said:

    Actually if Johnny Manziel lost that competition it would mean a lot less then you might think.

    Brandon Weeden beat out Jason Campbell and Brian Hoyer in camp.

    WSS

    It meant that we had to draft Johnny Manziel. If Manziel can't beat out Manuel, then we'll likely be looking at yet another first round quarterback.

  • @westside-steve said:

    Actually if Johnny Manziel lost that competition it would mean a lot less then you might think.

    Brandon Weeden beat out Jason Campbell and Brian Hoyer in camp.

    WSS

    It meant that we had to draft Johnny Manziel. If Manziel can't beat out Manuel, then we'll likely be looking at yet another first round quarterback.

    @tim-couch-pulls-out said:

    It meant that we had to draft Johnny Manziel. If Manziel can't beat out Manuel, then we'll likely be looking at yet another first round quarterback.

    That could be the case anyway. Of course just taking a guy in the first round... Well you've heard that song before. I'm just saying but some guys look great in practice and some guys don't.

    WSS

  • also I think experience as a starter counts for a great deal compared to any rookie regardless of his talent or upside.

    WSS

  • @tim-couch-pulls-out said:

    It meant that we had to draft Johnny Manziel. If Manziel can't beat out Manuel, then we'll likely be looking at yet another first round quarterback.

    That could be the case anyway. Of course just taking a guy in the first round... Well you've heard that song before. I'm just saying but some guys look great in practice and some guys don't.

    WSS

    @westside-steve said:

    That could be the case anyway. Of course just taking a guy in the first round... Well you've heard that song before. I'm just saying but some guys look great in practice and some guys don't.

    WSS

    Very true. Weeden wasn't a world beater in practice, but he did look pretty solid. Solid enough to win that starting job...and we all know how that turned out.

    @westside-steve said:

    also I think experience as a starter counts for a great deal compared to any rookie regardless of his talent or upside.

    WSS

    As do I, there is no substitute for NFL game experience. With that said, I also think that there's a certain ceiling for that. If a guy has played 40-50 games in the NFL, it's highly unlikely that he's going to be anything different than what he's proven to be in the past, especially if the guy has bounced around to a couple different teams.

    That's why I'd rather we take Manuel than McCown. Manuel has the experience of being a starter, but he's still young and he's only been with one team. He hasn't flamed out anywhere else yet. He could still very easily end up being a Josh Freeman or Kyle Boller, but there's still a chance that he just needs a fresh start with a young team.

  • Manuel has shown enough to prove he's terrible, plain and simple. Typical guy who has the size and physical tools but nothing else. The year he was drafted if it had ANY QB's worth a crap he would have been a mid 2nd to 3rd round pick at best. A fresh start won't fix the fact he can't play the position in the NFL.

    Another case of I'd rather see what Manziel's got than go this route.

  • I don't understand why they would fo this. He was raw, but had a great Sr Bowl and seemed like a good development opportunity

  • Manuel has shown enough to prove he's terrible, plain and simple. Typical guy who has the size and physical tools but nothing else. The year he was drafted if it had ANY QB's worth a crap he would have been a mid 2nd to 3rd round pick at best. A fresh start won't fix the fact he can't play the position in the NFL.

    Another case of I'd rather see what Manziel's got than go this route.

    @jrb12711 said:

    Manuel has shown enough to prove he's terrible, plain and simple. Typical guy who has the size and physical tools but nothing else. The year he was drafted if it had ANY QB's worth a crap he would have been a mid 2nd to 3rd round pick at best. A fresh start won't fix the fact he can't play the position in the NFL.

    Another case of I'd rather see what Manziel's got than go this route.

    I don't think it's that plain and simple. Manuel is still quite young and has yet to start an entire NFL season.

    He's for damn sure a better look than most, if not all, of the available QB's in FA. His career rating (78.5) is higher than Hoyer's (76.8), McCown's (76.1) and Ponder's (75.9).

    At this current moment, my hierarchy of potentially available NFL QB's would be:

    -Foles

    -Cutler

    -Manuel

    -Bradford

    -Any FA QB

    To get Foles, we'd have to move a first. That's not worth it. To get Cutler, we'd have to move a first. Plus, he'll be bringing a ridiculous contract that we'd have to renegotiate. Also not worth it. Bradford, in my opinion, is too damaged.

    Manuel is young and still raw, but has NFL experience. He's more polished than any mid-late round prospects we'd get in the draft and he'll at least give Manziel a competition throughout camp. Making Manziel the de facto starter only Connor Shaw and an unnamed rookie on his heels is setting this team up for failure.

    It's not the worst idea in the world. From a cost-benefit standpoint, it makes more sense than shelling out money for McCown.

  • @jrb12711 said:

    Manuel has shown enough to prove he's terrible, plain and simple. Typical guy who has the size and physical tools but nothing else. The year he was drafted if it had ANY QB's worth a crap he would have been a mid 2nd to 3rd round pick at best. A fresh start won't fix the fact he can't play the position in the NFL.

    Another case of I'd rather see what Manziel's got than go this route.

    I don't think it's that plain and simple. Manuel is still quite young and has yet to start an entire NFL season.

    He's for damn sure a better look than most, if not all, of the available QB's in FA. His career rating (78.5) is higher than Hoyer's (76.8), McCown's (76.1) and Ponder's (75.9).

    At this current moment, my hierarchy of potentially available NFL QB's would be:

    -Foles

    -Cutler

    -Manuel

    -Bradford

    -Any FA QB

    To get Foles, we'd have to move a first. That's not worth it. To get Cutler, we'd have to move a first. Plus, he'll be bringing a ridiculous contract that we'd have to renegotiate. Also not worth it. Bradford, in my opinion, is too damaged.

    Manuel is young and still raw, but has NFL experience. He's more polished than any mid-late round prospects we'd get in the draft and he'll at least give Manziel a competition throughout camp. Making Manziel the de facto starter only Connor Shaw and an unnamed rookie on his heels is setting this team up for failure.

    It's not the worst idea in the world. From a cost-benefit standpoint, it makes more sense than shelling out money for McCown.

    @tim-couch-pulls-out said:

    At this current moment, my hierarchy of potentially available NFL QB's would be:

    -Foles

    -Cutler

    -Manuel

    -Bradford

    -Any FA QB

    well at least you can go back to design seeing as your GM skills just suck azz, lol.

  • @jrb12711 said:

    Manuel has shown enough to prove he's terrible, plain and simple. Typical guy who has the size and physical tools but nothing else. The year he was drafted if it had ANY QB's worth a crap he would have been a mid 2nd to 3rd round pick at best. A fresh start won't fix the fact he can't play the position in the NFL.

    Another case of I'd rather see what Manziel's got than go this route.

    I don't think it's that plain and simple. Manuel is still quite young and has yet to start an entire NFL season.

    He's for damn sure a better look than most, if not all, of the available QB's in FA. His career rating (78.5) is higher than Hoyer's (76.8), McCown's (76.1) and Ponder's (75.9).

    At this current moment, my hierarchy of potentially available NFL QB's would be:

    -Foles

    -Cutler

    -Manuel

    -Bradford

    -Any FA QB

    To get Foles, we'd have to move a first. That's not worth it. To get Cutler, we'd have to move a first. Plus, he'll be bringing a ridiculous contract that we'd have to renegotiate. Also not worth it. Bradford, in my opinion, is too damaged.

    Manuel is young and still raw, but has NFL experience. He's more polished than any mid-late round prospects we'd get in the draft and he'll at least give Manziel a competition throughout camp. Making Manziel the de facto starter only Connor Shaw and an unnamed rookie on his heels is setting this team up for failure.

    It's not the worst idea in the world. From a cost-benefit standpoint, it makes more sense than shelling out money for McCown.

    @tim-couch-pulls-out said:

    At this current moment, my hierarchy of potentially available NFL QB's would be:

    -Foles

    -Cutler

    -Manuel

    -Bradford

    -Any FA QB

    You lost me at "Cutler"... but it's moot now.

    McCown, Capt. Rehab and Petty '015!

    Only issue to settle now is whether McCown counts twice as a name on "the jersey"...

  • Jeeezuscrist riding a polarbear!!!

    Can the Browns jump the shark already and just pick up a phone, call Urban (provided he's not still lost in the fog) and trade Johnny Rehab for Cardale?

  • @tim-couch-pulls-out said:

    At this current moment, my hierarchy of potentially available NFL QB's would be:

    -Foles

    -Cutler

    -Manuel

    -Bradford

    -Any FA QB

    You lost me at "Cutler"... but it's moot now.

    McCown, Capt. Rehab and Petty '015!

    Only issue to settle now is whether McCown counts twice as a name on "the jersey"...

    @tour2ma said:

    Only issue to settle now is whether McCown counts twice as a name on "the jersey"...

    yes.....once he starts a game, he's on the jersey.....

  • @tim-couch-pulls-out said:

    At this current moment, my hierarchy of potentially available NFL QB's would be:

    -Foles

    -Cutler

    -Manuel

    -Bradford

    -Any FA QB

    You lost me at "Cutler"... but it's moot now.

    McCown, Capt. Rehab and Petty '015!

    Only issue to settle now is whether McCown counts twice as a name on "the jersey"...

    @tour2ma said:

    You lost me at "Cutler"... but it's moot now.

    McCown, Capt. Rehab and Petty '015!

    Only issue to settle now is whether McCown counts twice as a name on "the jersey"...

    Cutler is my guilty pleasure.

    Dude is a straight up asshole and I love it.

  • @tim-couch-pulls-out said:

    At this current moment, my hierarchy of potentially available NFL QB's would be:

    -Foles

    -Cutler

    -Manuel

    -Bradford

    -Any FA QB

    well at least you can go back to design seeing as your GM skills just suck azz, lol.

    @miktoxic said:

    well at least you can go back to design seeing as your GM skills just suck azz, lol.

    Because the bar on "best FO strategy" has always been set by the Cleveland Browns FO.

  • I can't believe this at all. Ryan was just talking the kid up at the combine and looked like he meant it.