Why we need a QB in Top 5
-
I've mentioned it in another thread- around 12 years ago the ping pong balls spit out another NE Ohio kid LeBron James. I think this just might be the year where history is going to repeat itself. The Brown's #1 overall IMHO is playing with house money- we still have the #12 to go for the "safe" pick.
C'mon Shep wannabee, Mitch Trubisky is not the next LeBron James. Don't go getting all senile on us for fucksake.
C'mon Shep wannabee, Mitch Trubisky is not the next LeBron James. Don't go getting all senile on us for fucksake.
OK, no, perhaps not LeBron James....but as I said, I think I see a lot of Aaron Rodgers in him......and I think we can use that.
Fair to say?
-
Let's take a stroll down memory lane of recent DL studs.
Bruce Smith- made the SB, never won one.
Reggie White had the advantage of playing with a guy named Brett Favre.
Ndamukong Suh is the most recent example, and damn I was creaming my pants seeing him playing in college- I won't ever forget his 15' rag doll toss of Colt McCoy. Yup he's a super stud alright- but both him and Fairley (who isn't exactly a slouch either) never got the Lions to a Super Bowl, and I'm betting the Dolphins are going to fall short this year too.
- I'd argue White won in spite of Favre, but the simpler case is to count how many SBs Favre won without Reggie.
- Bruce Smith played with Jim Kelly who last I looked was in the HoF.
- Suh/ Fairley played with Matt Stafford, no slouch there.
So your points fall a little flat. No doubt that QB is the single-most important piece of the puzzle. But there are many, many other important pieces.
There are many examples of average QBs riding their D to SB wins: Flacco and Dilfer with the Ravens, Plunkett (Raiders), McMahon (Bears), Hostetler (Raiders), Johnson (TB), Big Ben's 1st (Steelers), Manning's last (Broncos). I'd even argue the bulk of Aikman's SBs qualify.
Add that there are more than a few great QBs who never won a SB and...
Bottom line: If you see your QB, if you see "the one", then by all means go get him. But don't see things that aren't there just because he's the most important piece of the puzzle.
- I'd argue White won in spite of Favre, but the simpler case is to count how many SBs Favre won without Reggie.
- Bruce Smith played with Jim Kelly who last I looked was in the HoF.
- Suh/ Fairley played with Matt Stafford, no slouch there.
So your points fall a little flat. No doubt that QB is the single-most important piece of the puzzle. But there are many, many other important pieces.
There are many examples of average QBs riding their D to SB wins: Flacco and Dilfer with the Ravens, Plunkett (Raiders), McMahon (Bears), Hostetler (Raiders), Johnson (TB), Big Ben's 1st (Steelers), Manning's last (Broncos). I'd even argue the bulk of Aikman's SBs qualify.
Add that there are more than a few great QBs who never won a SB and...
Bottom line: If you see your QB, if you see "the one", then by all means go get him. But don't see things that aren't there just because he's the most important piece of the puzzle.
No one would debate that there are not other pieces of the puzzle.
But, its like chess......you need rooks, Knights, Bishops and pawns.
But, most importantly you need your Queen.
Your QB is your Queen....your most important, vital, and powerful weapon.
So, we get a Queen with #1.
We get a Rook at #12 (DB/LB)
We get a Bishop at #33 (OL?)
We get a Knight at #52 (defender)
And we take pawns after that....and hope some of them can pull some muscle on the chess board.
-
The big "issue" for us regarding the QB position is that two teams behind us (SF and Chicago) are very likely looking at the same position as well. If a guy like Mitch raises his stock until draft day I wouldn't be surprised at all if he becomes the #1 pick because he wouldn't fall far.
-
I know you are a big proponent of the philosophy that a team can't be competitive without a great QB and that belief is true. However, where you are usually foolish about this is in thinking that a great QB will make the Browns competitive, which is not true.
History should tell you that drafting a top-rated QB is a foolish mistake unless you either have, or are a whisker away from having, a solid team. The Browns are at least another year from that only next year will tell if it is one more year or more.
I know you believe that all the QB's the Browns have tried are all bums but, again, a little common sense might tell you that anyone on the team the Browns have sported for the majority of the last 25 years is going to look like a bum due to a lack of talent, lack of scheme, lack of coaching, lack of leadership, etc. Did the Browns try a host of bums at QB or did the Browns turn every QB prospect into a bum?
The Browns need to establish a system, fill the giant void of talent at key positions, show improvement, and then draft a top 5 QB.
-
OK, no, perhaps not LeBron James....but as I said, I think I see a lot of Aaron Rodgers in him......and I think we can use that.
Fair to say?
The #24 overall pick Aaron Rogers that sat for three years behind an All-Pro and took over a 13-3 team? That Aaron Rogers?
Like I said, if Mitch Tubisky was gonna sit for a few years and mature, and if he was coming into a quality system, sure let's gamble ... but he is not the polished QB that we take as the #1 and toss him into a COMPLETELY screwed up franchise with no all-stars.
No, not like Aaron Rogers .... I'll give you the Tim Couch scenario and how how we abused him though as an anology.
-
I think for the same reason we passed on Wentz, we pass on Trubisky and Kizer. They're not looking for a 'project' guy, who has great physical attributes but needs some 'seasoning' in the pros, they're looking for a guy that will for sure have a long career as a starter.
Just my inkling.
-
Let's take a stroll down memory lane of recent DL studs.
Bruce Smith- made the SB, never won one.
Reggie White had the advantage of playing with a guy named Brett Favre.
Ndamukong Suh is the most recent example, and damn I was creaming my pants seeing him playing in college- I won't ever forget his 15' rag doll toss of Colt McCoy. Yup he's a super stud alright- but both him and Fairley (who isn't exactly a slouch either) never got the Lions to a Super Bowl, and I'm betting the Dolphins are going to fall short this year too.
- I'd argue White won in spite of Favre, but the simpler case is to count how many SBs Favre won without Reggie.
- Bruce Smith played with Jim Kelly who last I looked was in the HoF.
- Suh/ Fairley played with Matt Stafford, no slouch there.
So your points fall a little flat. No doubt that QB is the single-most important piece of the puzzle. But there are many, many other important pieces.
There are many examples of average QBs riding their D to SB wins: Flacco and Dilfer with the Ravens, Plunkett (Raiders), McMahon (Bears), Hostetler (Raiders), Johnson (TB), Big Ben's 1st (Steelers), Manning's last (Broncos). I'd even argue the bulk of Aikman's SBs qualify.
Add that there are more than a few great QBs who never won a SB and...
Bottom line: If you see your QB, if you see "the one", then by all means go get him. But don't see things that aren't there just because he's the most important piece of the puzzle.
Bottom line: If you see your QB, if you see "the one", then by all means go get him. But don't see things that aren't there just because he's the most important piece of the puzzle.
Exactly the same thing I've heard Billick say numerous times. "Need is a terrible evaluator of talent". We need a QB so we're going to over value a QB just because we need one. I think we've done it with Quinn, Manziel, Weeden, etc etc.
The need for a QB doesn't make Tribusky or any of the other QB's in this draft any better.
-
I don't think any of these qbs this year are worth a top 10 pick.
-
I know you are a big proponent of the philosophy that a team can't be competitive without a great QB and that belief is true. However, where you are usually foolish about this is in thinking that a great QB will make the Browns competitive, which is not true.
History should tell you that drafting a top-rated QB is a foolish mistake unless you either have, or are a whisker away from having, a solid team. The Browns are at least another year from that only next year will tell if it is one more year or more.
I know you believe that all the QB's the Browns have tried are all bums but, again, a little common sense might tell you that anyone on the team the Browns have sported for the majority of the last 25 years is going to look like a bum due to a lack of talent, lack of scheme, lack of coaching, lack of leadership, etc. Did the Browns try a host of bums at QB or did the Browns turn every QB prospect into a bum?
The Browns need to establish a system, fill the giant void of talent at key positions, show improvement, and then draft a top 5 QB.
I know you are a big proponent of the philosophy that a team can't be competitive without a great QB and that belief is true. However, where you are usually foolish about this is in thinking that a great QB will make the Browns competitive, which is not true.
Without BR, the Steelers would be about as good as the Browns. So, your statement is foolish. That is because the Steelers are not otherwise all that talented.
While true that a great QB won't make a bad team great, it is still a required commodity. Other things are needed for sure.
But your assumption is that the Browns CANNOT get ahold of those other things. They could, if they do things right.
History should tell you that drafting a top-rated QB is a foolish mistake unless you either have, or are a whisker away from having, a solid team. The Browns are at least another year from that only next year will tell if it is one more year or more.
I know you believe that all the QB's the Browns have tried are all bums but,
Name one that wasn't a bum? Maybe Hoyer a bit.
again, a little common sense might tell you that anyone on the team the Browns have sported for the majority of the last 25 years is going to look like a bum due to a lack of talent, lack of scheme, lack of coaching, lack of leadership, etc. Did the Browns try a host of bums at QB or did the Browns turn every QB prospect into a bum?
Look how good all those QBs did elsewhere: They were bums here, and they were bums after they left.
So, while the Browns may have had all those other problems....lack of yada yada....they also had bums for QBs.
The Browns need to establish a system, fill the giant void of talent at key positions, show improvement, and then draft a top 5 QB.
The biggest void is AT the most key position: QB.
This offense is really not that far away from being pretty good. Its need an OL or two plus a QB.
The defense, yes, is further away.
But, by all means....lets follow your philosophy: Don't draft a possible franchise QB in fear that he will fail. Guarantee failure by not taking one.
-
I know you are a big proponent of the philosophy that a team can't be competitive without a great QB and that belief is true. However, where you are usually foolish about this is in thinking that a great QB will make the Browns competitive, which is not true.
Without BR, the Steelers would be about as good as the Browns. So, your statement is foolish. That is because the Steelers are not otherwise all that talented.
While true that a great QB won't make a bad team great, it is still a required commodity. Other things are needed for sure.
But your assumption is that the Browns CANNOT get ahold of those other things. They could, if they do things right.
History should tell you that drafting a top-rated QB is a foolish mistake unless you either have, or are a whisker away from having, a solid team. The Browns are at least another year from that only next year will tell if it is one more year or more.
I know you believe that all the QB's the Browns have tried are all bums but,
Name one that wasn't a bum? Maybe Hoyer a bit.
again, a little common sense might tell you that anyone on the team the Browns have sported for the majority of the last 25 years is going to look like a bum due to a lack of talent, lack of scheme, lack of coaching, lack of leadership, etc. Did the Browns try a host of bums at QB or did the Browns turn every QB prospect into a bum?
Look how good all those QBs did elsewhere: They were bums here, and they were bums after they left.
So, while the Browns may have had all those other problems....lack of yada yada....they also had bums for QBs.
The Browns need to establish a system, fill the giant void of talent at key positions, show improvement, and then draft a top 5 QB.
The biggest void is AT the most key position: QB.
This offense is really not that far away from being pretty good. Its need an OL or two plus a QB.
The defense, yes, is further away.
But, by all means....lets follow your philosophy: Don't draft a possible franchise QB in fear that he will fail. Guarantee failure by not taking one.
I know you are a big proponent of the philosophy that a team can't be competitive without a great QB and that belief is true. However, where you are usually foolish about this is in thinking that a great QB will make the Browns competitive, which is not true.
Without BR, the Steelers would be about as good as the Browns. So, your statement is foolish. That is because the Steelers are not otherwise all that talented.
While true that a great QB won't make a bad team great, it is still a required commodity. Other things are needed for sure.
But your assumption is that the Browns CANNOT get ahold of those other things. They could, if they do things right.
History should tell you that drafting a top-rated QB is a foolish mistake unless you either have, or are a whisker away from having, a solid team. The Browns are at least another year from that only next year will tell if it is one more year or more.
I know you believe that all the QB's the Browns have tried are all bums but,
Name one that wasn't a bum? Maybe Hoyer a bit.
again, a little common sense might tell you that anyone on the team the Browns have sported for the majority of the last 25 years is going to look like a bum due to a lack of talent, lack of scheme, lack of coaching, lack of leadership, etc. Did the Browns try a host of bums at QB or did the Browns turn every QB prospect into a bum?
Look how good all those QBs did elsewhere: They were bums here, and they were bums after they left.
So, while the Browns may have had all those other problems....lack of yada yada....they also had bums for QBs.
The Browns need to establish a system, fill the giant void of talent at key positions, show improvement, and then draft a top 5 QB.
The biggest void is AT the most key position: QB.
This offense is really not that far away from being pretty good. Its need an OL or two plus a QB.
The defense, yes, is further away.
But, by all means....lets follow your philosophy: Don't draft a possible franchise QB in fear that he will fail. Guarantee failure by not taking one.
You are a glue head with virtually every one of those statements.
The Steelers are one the most talent laden teams in the NFL.
Who's to say the playing for the Browns didn't ruin the QB's?
There is VERY little talent on the Browns, AT ANY POSITION, and the few key players which are talented are on their way to retirement. When a guy like Pryor stands out, it's not because he is great or even good, it's because he looks head and shoulders better than the void around him.
-
I know you are a big proponent of the philosophy that a team can't be competitive without a great QB and that belief is true. However, where you are usually foolish about this is in thinking that a great QB will make the Browns competitive, which is not true.
Without BR, the Steelers would be about as good as the Browns. So, your statement is foolish. That is because the Steelers are not otherwise all that talented.
While true that a great QB won't make a bad team great, it is still a required commodity. Other things are needed for sure.
But your assumption is that the Browns CANNOT get ahold of those other things. They could, if they do things right.
History should tell you that drafting a top-rated QB is a foolish mistake unless you either have, or are a whisker away from having, a solid team. The Browns are at least another year from that only next year will tell if it is one more year or more.
I know you believe that all the QB's the Browns have tried are all bums but,
Name one that wasn't a bum? Maybe Hoyer a bit.
again, a little common sense might tell you that anyone on the team the Browns have sported for the majority of the last 25 years is going to look like a bum due to a lack of talent, lack of scheme, lack of coaching, lack of leadership, etc. Did the Browns try a host of bums at QB or did the Browns turn every QB prospect into a bum?
Look how good all those QBs did elsewhere: They were bums here, and they were bums after they left.
So, while the Browns may have had all those other problems....lack of yada yada....they also had bums for QBs.
The Browns need to establish a system, fill the giant void of talent at key positions, show improvement, and then draft a top 5 QB.
The biggest void is AT the most key position: QB.
This offense is really not that far away from being pretty good. Its need an OL or two plus a QB.
The defense, yes, is further away.
But, by all means....lets follow your philosophy: Don't draft a possible franchise QB in fear that he will fail. Guarantee failure by not taking one.
You are a glue head with virtually every one of those statements.
The Steelers are one the most talent laden teams in the NFL.
Who's to say the playing for the Browns didn't ruin the QB's?
There is VERY little talent on the Browns, AT ANY POSITION, and the few key players which are talented are on their way to retirement. When a guy like Pryor stands out, it's not because he is great or even good, it's because he looks head and shoulders better than the void around him.
Who's to say the playing for the Browns didn't ruin the QB's?
Because ONE of the QB's the Browns drafted if they were worth a crap would have succeeded somewhere else. I'll give you this reasoning for even 2-3 of the guys, but when you think that ZERO prospects did shit past their Browns careers it tells a story that we just didn't take good players. Remember how Brandon Weeden had essentially the same Cowboys team last year (minus one great player sure) but looked like total ass?
-
It would be similar to saying that the Steelers screwed up Landry Jones.
-
I know you are a big proponent of the philosophy that a team can't be competitive without a great QB and that belief is true. However, where you are usually foolish about this is in thinking that a great QB will make the Browns competitive, which is not true.
History should tell you that drafting a top-rated QB is a foolish mistake unless you either have, or are a whisker away from having, a solid team. The Browns are at least another year from that only next year will tell if it is one more year or more.
I know you believe that all the QB's the Browns have tried are all bums but, again, a little common sense might tell you that anyone on the team the Browns have sported for the majority of the last 25 years is going to look like a bum due to a lack of talent, lack of scheme, lack of coaching, lack of leadership, etc. Did the Browns try a host of bums at QB or did the Browns turn every QB prospect into a bum?
The Browns need to establish a system, fill the giant void of talent at key positions, show improvement, and then draft a top 5 QB.
I know you are a big proponent of the philosophy that a team can't be competitive without a great QB and that belief is true. However, where you are usually foolish about this is in thinking that a great QB will make the Browns competitive, which is not true.
History should tell you that drafting a top-rated QB is a foolish mistake unless you either have, or are a whisker away from having, a solid team. The Browns are at least another year from that only next year will tell if it is one more year or more.
I know you believe that all the QB's the Browns have tried are all bums but, again, a little common sense might tell you that anyone on the team the Browns have sported for the majority of the last 25 years is going to look like a bum due to a lack of talent, lack of scheme, lack of coaching, lack of leadership, etc. Did the Browns try a host of bums at QB or did the Browns turn every QB prospect into a bum?
The Browns need to establish a system, fill the giant void of talent at key positions, show improvement, and then draft a top 5 QB.
Nah... you tab a QB when you see he's the one. As the team improves and the record improves it only gets harder (or at least more expensive) to add a QB as a final piece.
As for ruining QBs... clearly we had a hand in ruining a couple, but more failures were due to the over-drafting of marginal talent or over-recruiting of vets on the decline. No better example of the former that Wheezy; no better example of the latter that Delhomme. Both moves were fueled by desperation as were many more in each category.
-
I know you are a big proponent of the philosophy that a team can't be competitive without a great QB and that belief is true. However, where you are usually foolish about this is in thinking that a great QB will make the Browns competitive, which is not true.
Without BR, the Steelers would be about as good as the Browns. So, your statement is foolish. That is because the Steelers are not otherwise all that talented.
While true that a great QB won't make a bad team great, it is still a required commodity. Other things are needed for sure.
But your assumption is that the Browns CANNOT get ahold of those other things. They could, if they do things right.
History should tell you that drafting a top-rated QB is a foolish mistake unless you either have, or are a whisker away from having, a solid team. The Browns are at least another year from that only next year will tell if it is one more year or more.
I know you believe that all the QB's the Browns have tried are all bums but,
Name one that wasn't a bum? Maybe Hoyer a bit.
again, a little common sense might tell you that anyone on the team the Browns have sported for the majority of the last 25 years is going to look like a bum due to a lack of talent, lack of scheme, lack of coaching, lack of leadership, etc. Did the Browns try a host of bums at QB or did the Browns turn every QB prospect into a bum?
Look how good all those QBs did elsewhere: They were bums here, and they were bums after they left.
So, while the Browns may have had all those other problems....lack of yada yada....they also had bums for QBs.
The Browns need to establish a system, fill the giant void of talent at key positions, show improvement, and then draft a top 5 QB.
The biggest void is AT the most key position: QB.
This offense is really not that far away from being pretty good. Its need an OL or two plus a QB.
The defense, yes, is further away.
But, by all means....lets follow your philosophy: Don't draft a possible franchise QB in fear that he will fail. Guarantee failure by not taking one.
You are a glue head with virtually every one of those statements.
The Steelers are one the most talent laden teams in the NFL.
Who's to say the playing for the Browns didn't ruin the QB's?
There is VERY little talent on the Browns, AT ANY POSITION, and the few key players which are talented are on their way to retirement. When a guy like Pryor stands out, it's not because he is great or even good, it's because he looks head and shoulders better than the void around him.
You are a glue head with virtually every one of those statements.
Right....actual facts are not something you have any kind of ability to understand.
The Steelers are one the most talent laden teams in the NFL.
Only if you take those 3-4 players. Otherwise their talent level is pedestrian. If they were so talented besides those guys, ALL that talent would have run over the "Very little talented Browns". Pretty much the opposite happened.
Who's to say the playing for the Browns didn't ruin the QB's?
I say so.....anyone who has seen them play says so. You think they were all so good? Why don't you go ahead an bench BR in favor of Brandon Weeden or Colt McCoy or Derek Anderson or Johnny Manziel or any of those guys. You think they are so good...but I venture you would not went them as the starting QB of your team.
There is VERY little talent on the Browns, AT ANY POSITION,
And yet, without fuckup after fuckup they would have been in position to hammer the Steelers. You prove my point. Steelers have about as little talent as the Browns without those 3-4 guys. (Who, yes, indeed do make a great deal of difference)
and the few key players which are talented are on their way to retirement.
Browns players on way to retirement? Who are you talking about?
Only guy I know who would be retiring is Josh McCown....hardly a key player.
Joe Thomas could play another 7-8 years. Joe Haden probably 3-4 more...unless injuries do him in.
The most key player closest to retirement on either team is your most key player: BR.
When a guy like Pryor stands out, it's not because he is great or even good, it's because he looks head and shoulders better than the void around him.
Or, maybe he is actually pretty good. From what I see, the Steelers would take him in a heartbeat and he would be your top notch 2d receiver.
Could you imagine BR throwing to him? If you say that you wouldn't want that, you would be lying to yourself.
-
As for ruining QBs... clearly we had a hand in ruining a couple, but more failures were due to the over-drafting of marginal talent or over-recruiting of vets on the decline. No better example of the former that Wheezy; no better example of the latter that Delhomme. Both moves were fueled by desperation as were many more in each category. Tour
*******************************************************
TRUE. Take Weeden -
http://www.nfl.com/draft/2011/profiles/brandon-weeden?id=2532970
"
WEAKNESSES
Despite his baseball background, Weeden is only an average athlete and is very limited when scrambling. He has a tough time getting outside the pocket, and his accuracy and touch decrease immensely when he scrambles. He seems to grasp route concepts and looks for his second option, but he will hold the ball for extended periods of times and could be a product of his quick-read offensive scheme."
Why would any NFL team think he was the guy, when the big question was about his slowness in seeing complex reads in
the NFL?
lack of comprehensive criteria on that point. -
So 50% of franchise qbs are found in the top 10 and the other 50% are found after. I can go with those numbers, but obviously drafting a guy higher than his skill doesn't increase his chances of succeeding. I understand this is a qb league and qbs go higher, but even taking that into account I find it hard to see any of these guys as top 10 talent.
-
So 50% of franchise qbs are found in the top 10 and the other 50% are found after. I can go with those numbers, but obviously drafting a guy higher than his skill doesn't increase his chances of succeeding. I understand this is a qb league and qbs go higher, but even taking that into account I find it hard to see any of these guys as top 10 talent.
So 50% of franchise qbs are found in the top 10 and the other 50% are found after. I can go with those numbers, but obviously drafting a guy high than his skill doesn't increase his chances of succeeding. I understand this is a qb league and qbs go higherror, but even taking that into account I find it hard to see any of these guys as top 10 talent.
I guarandamntee you that NFL GMs will not find it quite so hard as you do.
-
Over the last 10 drafts 2007 to 2016, here is the breakdown by position of the players chosen in the Top 5 of these drafts:
Quarterbacks: 13 or 26%
Offensive Tackles: 11 or 22%
Defensive Ends: 7 or 14 %
Wide Receivers: 5 or 10 %
Defensive Tackles: 4 or 8%
Linebackers: 4 or 8%
Running backs: 3 or 6%
Defensive backs: 3 or 6%
-
So 50% of franchise qbs are found in the top 10 and the other 50% are found after. I can go with those numbers, but obviously drafting a guy high than his skill doesn't increase his chances of succeeding. I understand this is a qb league and qbs go higherror, but even taking that into account I find it hard to see any of these guys as top 10 talent.
I guarandamntee you that NFL GMs will not find it quite so hard as you do.
I guarandamntee you that NFL GMs will not find it quite so hard as you do.
Obviously, look at (insert shit QB here). I just see more questions marks than some of the previous top 10 QBS than in years past.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login