Why we should not trade a draft pick for a QB.
-
I think we should draft the left handed Tebow to go along with Anderson and Quinn, both being left handed as well, even if they haven't figured that out yet.
(it's a joke folks)
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. -
A healthy Couch was ten times better than Derek Bear.
I would have loved to see Couch in the cockpit of the 2007 team.
A healthy Couch was ten times better than Derek Bear.
I would have loved to see Couch in the cockpit of the 2007 team.
If EVER a QB had grounds to sue a football team for ruining his career, it may be Tim Couch. I will go to my grave wondering what a healthy Couch might have accomplished with a line in front of hom.
Mike
-
Metcalf_FTW said:
QUINN IS JUST AS UNPROVEN AS DEREK ANDERSON. Actually, Anderson as proved that he can make it to the Pro Bowl when he actually has help. Quinn has no arm strength and is not accurate. Anderson is not always accurate, either, but he is far better than Quinn in that field. I guess this is an ongoing argument that will never die until one of these QBS are traded.Stop drinking during the day. Anderson couldn't even complete 50% of his passes this year. Unacceptable for an NFL QB. So please tell me how he is more accurate. I'm tired of people being blinded by his rocket arm.
Stop drinking during the day. Anderson couldn't even complete 50% of his passes this year. Unacceptable for an NFL QB. So please tell me how he is more accurate. I'm tired of people being blinded by his rocket arm.
Blinded by his rocket arm or the 6-10 record over Bradys 3-11 record over the last two years including 3 of the last 4 wins and 4 of all 5 all years. now go and tell everyone that brady completes 73% of his passes. wonder what his completion pct. is over a 10 yrd pss. i would give either if not both a fair shot at the position this year. lets be real we should be building around a running back instead. the real qb is emerge this year. transitional guy to get to next years draft or not.
-
My only question is: whoever suggested that we should trade a draft pick for a QB?
My only question is: whoever suggested that we should trade a draft pick for a QB?
[Well that's what it'd take for one of the premier ones.
{None of whom I want)
We can get one of the bums at #2 or #3 if we just want a warm body.
But why?
WSS
-
Back to your original post...
Giving up a third rounder and maybe even a player they don't intend to use for a veteran QB that offers some stability at the position could be a very smart idea. 11 picks, it's all a crap shoot anyway, in the overall picture giving up one crap shot for a semi-proven commodity seems like a smart idea. Brady Quinn has had three years of coaching staffs watching what he can and can not do in practice, preseason and games. Mangini and Co. have a pretty good idea of what he's capable of.
Now let's be realistic- the only vet qb going after is McNabb agreed? With Warner retiring in Arizona, that changes everything. They just put the Eagles on speed dial. Should Farve decide to hang 'em up in Minnesota, you have the makings of an all out bidding war, that the Browns would be well advised to stay out of.
I'll let QB guru Holmgren make the call- if he thinks Quinn isn't the answer, no harm in qb shopping with one of our extra 3rd round or even 2nd round pick. Way more value down the road than bringing in a two year stopgap to win a few extra games when you're not ready to head to the SB.
I still thing we have to go D with our first pick.
Now let's be realistic- the only vet qb going after is McNabb agreed?
I still thing we have to go D with our first pick.
McNabb isn't the only QB out there. I figure any vet the Browns would bring in would be a 2-3 year stop gap, if he starts it's well worth a 3rd round or lower pick.
I'm in agreement DO NOT WASTE a first rounder, even a 2nd rounder in my opinion, on a QB.
-
I think we should draft the left handed Tebow to go along with Anderson and Quinn, both being left handed as well, even if they haven't figured that out yet.
(it's a joke folks)
I think we should draft the left handed Tebow to go along with Anderson and Quinn, both being left handed as well, even if they haven't figured that out yet.
(it's a joke folks)
Sad thing is, DA is naturally left handed. Who knows, throwing with his left might solve his screen and short passing woes.
-
Now let's be realistic- the only vet qb going after is McNabb agreed?
I still thing we have to go D with our first pick.
McNabb isn't the only QB out there. I figure any vet the Browns would bring in would be a 2-3 year stop gap, if he starts it's well worth a 3rd round or lower pick.
I'm in agreement DO NOT WASTE a first rounder, even a 2nd rounder in my opinion, on a QB.
McNabb isn't the only QB out there. I figure any vet the Browns would bring in would be a 2-3 year stop gap, if he starts it's well worth a 3rd round or lower pick.
I'm in agreement DO NOT WASTE a first rounder, even a 2nd rounder in my opinion, on a QB.
Like who else? Hasselbeck? Delhomme? McNabb is by far the best that might become available.
-
McNabb isn't the only QB out there. I figure any vet the Browns would bring in would be a 2-3 year stop gap, if he starts it's well worth a 3rd round or lower pick.
I'm in agreement DO NOT WASTE a first rounder, even a 2nd rounder in my opinion, on a QB.
Like who else? Hasselbeck? Delhomme? McNabb is by far the best that might become available.
Like who else? Hasselbeck? Delhomme? McNabb is by far the best that might become available.
No doubt.
I also doubt he leaves Philly.....but, if he does we would have to make offers.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. -
The Browns should not trade a draft pick for a QB. Here are my reasons.
1. The Browns need all 11 picks this year. There are many holes to fill on this team. Making good use of these picks can allow the Browns to make great advancement in the rebuilding process.
2. If you trade a draft pick for an aging veteran, you will need to draft a new QB anyways by the time the team becomes seriously competitive. Let's say you trade for injury-prone McNabb. By the time the Browns are ready to make a serious run, he will be at least 35 and over the hill. Then we would be forced to turn things over to a rookie.
3. Quinn is unproven. Quinn has less career starts than Mark Sanchez. Obviously Quinn has not had enough starts to be rationally evaluated. Also he has played in two different systems in 3 years. He has also never enjoyed the full backing of the coaching staff. Mismanagement at its best. Oh, and Quinn also produced comparable if not better numbers than the Jets savior Mark Sanchez.
The best course of action would be to draft you franchise QB in this upcoming draft, and play him immediately. The next best option is to give Quinn a full year complete with all the reps in mini-camp and training camp to see what you have. If he doesn't show improvement, draft a franchise QB next year. And of course get rid of DA.
The Browns should not trade a draft pick for a QB. Here are my reasons.
1. The Browns need all 11 picks this year. There are many holes to fill on this team. Making good use of these picks can allow the Browns to make great advancement in the rebuilding process.
2. If you trade a draft pick for an aging veteran, you will need to draft a new QB anyways by the time the team becomes seriously competitive. Let's say you trade for injury-prone McNabb. By the time the Browns are ready to make a serious run, he will be at least 35 and over the hill. Then we would be forced to turn things over to a rookie.
3. Quinn is unproven. Quinn has less career starts than Mark Sanchez. Obviously Quinn has not had enough starts to be rationally evaluated. Also he has played in two different systems in 3 years. He has also never enjoyed the full backing of the coaching staff. Mismanagement at its best. Oh, and Quinn also produced comparable if not better numbers than the Jets savior Mark Sanchez.
The best course of action would be to draft you franchise QB in this upcoming draft, and play him immediately. The next best option is to give Quinn a full year complete with all the reps in mini-camp and training camp to see what you have. If he doesn't show improvement, draft a franchise QB next year. And of course get rid of DA.
SWISH!!!!! Good points Wesbter!
Another reason you don't trade away draft picks? The beginning of the end for Phil Savage was that brutal 2008 draft with NO day 1 and an overall draft volume of 5 draft picks (Rubin was the only keeper). It looks like even Alex Hall wasn't found rotation worthy once we added Trusnik and Roth. And Savage pretty much had the 2009 draft looking like on oncore where he left us 4 draft picks to our name. That's the SAME guy that confidently told us on day 1 he was here primarily to improve the draft, build through the draft and restore continuity to the franchise through such a PHILosophy.
- Tom F.
-
Well, I don't remember Bernie Kosar ever looking lost as a rookie, like Quinn has often looked.
That's my standard, Bernie Koar.
We need a qb who has the instincts and the keen ability to see the field and react accordingly, a natural qb.
Well, I don't remember Bernie Kosar ever looking lost as a rookie, like Quinn has often looked.
That's my standard, Bernie Koar.
We need a qb who has the instincts and the keen ability to see the field and react accordingly, a natural qb.
Bernie Kosar had Gary Danielson to mentor him and Lindy Infante as a coach. Who did Quinn have, exactly? Daboll, Anderson and the guy from SD? Not a fair comparison at all.
-
In my 800 some-odd posts on this forum, I have bit my lip and purposely avoided the Brady Quinn-Derek Anderson debate. Perhaps, I don't feel strongly enough about either to really get passionate but this thread does speak to something dear to me: draft picks.
If you look at the NFL, there isn't a GM or personnel man that hasn't missed greatly on a highly-touted prospect . That said, between Holmgren's ability to spot offensive skill players and Mangini's eye for defensive players coupled with Heckert's history of successful personnel management I have a very good feeling that the raw materials for a contender in Cleveland could be amassed in short order. You cannot do that however without the currency: draft picks. Surely, a FA sprinkled in here and there can help immensely but they aren't going to build the depth of your team. If they could, then Dan Snyder would have knuckles full of Super Bowl rings. You can not win in this league without using draft picks and using them well. They are to be coveted like gold. They are like those second half time outs that should not be squandered.
The Dallas Cowboys traded Herschel Walker and 4 picks to Minnesota (5 players) and in return they received five players and eight draft picks (13 player equivalents) all but one of which were 3rd rounders or better. This launched a mediocre team into a dynasty. The Ricky Williams trade saw eight picks get sent to Washington. This didn't work out as well and only the Redskins could screw up that deal.
The bottom line is that if you trust your people in the "war room" then you can't hamstring them. Extra picks allows for extra flexibility. Perhaps you only use eight picks but use three to help you move around. That could be important. In 2008, the Jets moved back into the end of the first round to select Dustin Keller who has been a solid pass receiving TE for them.
To me, trading for an aging QB is dicey. You're likely to get an older player commanding more money and more time on the trainer's table. In return, you're going to give up not one but at LEAST two player equivalents and I'll bet that a 3rd round diamond is worth more in the long run than one or two years of Donovan McNabb.
On the other hand....
There is no position in professional sports that is more integral to success and winning championships than NFL QB. I have read countless debates extolling the virtues of #3 and #10. I have read the longwinded apologies for each wanting to give each a "mulligan" because the coach changed or the ball was wet or the receivers couldn't catch or the line didn't block. I've read that one throws too hard and that other too soft. The bottom line in my mind is this: While we are spending so much time dissecting the mediocrity of both, we are losing sight of the fact that most franchise QBs show you something....even in defeat....even without blocking...even without receivers to make you think that they can play this game at a high level if not a championship one.
Aaron Rodgers sat on the bench for three years and didn't see a meaningful snap yet his team knew enough about him to bid Favre adieu. He came out the very first week and beat Minnesota. In week 2, he was the FedEx Air player of the week passing for 328 yards and three TDs. Philip Rivers shined in the first season he played. So did Peyton and Tom Brady. Joe Flacco and Matt Ryan showed you their potential in year ONE with each leading their team to playoff seasons. Even though we fans have not "seen enough" of either guy...the coaches have. Multiple coaches have. On the field, #3 can't throw a freakin' screen pass and hasn't shown me enough to suggest he isn't this generation's Ryan Leaf. #10 throws five-yard slants on every receiver's back shoulder and his deep ball threatens to go out of bounds on a CFL field. He looks like Jay Fiedler. This Browns team went 5-11 DESPITE these two guys not because of them. Even after Jerome Harrison hit the front page of every newspaper, neither one of these passers could really show us 200 yards passing. Hell, not even 100 yards passing in week 17.
You can whine all you want about how #10 is as good as Mark Sanchez (or at least as unproven) but the fact remains that Mark Sanchez has excellent mechanics (neither of our guys does) and has shown that he can make all of the throws at some point during this season. The 80-yard TD to Stone Hands in the AFC Championship was a thing of beauty and I will tell you now that #10 can't make that throw and hit him in stride. Before you Oregonian apologists get too happy....your guy can't put enough touch on that throw either. Mark Sanchez, for whatever faults he has, also has two things of value: toughness and leadership. Time and again, Sanchez stepped into the rush and delivered the damned ball getting destroyed in the process. He doesn't make the best decisions but his toughness and personality has the respect of his teammates. Look back on the games this year and what I see (and this is my opinion) is that no one seems to rally around either one of these QBs. Sure they may be tough. I won't question that but they don't inspire confidence and I seem to recall in the second Baltimore game seeing Joe Thomas roll his eyes at #10.
Maybe I am just too negative. Maybe I'm just tired of the excuses. I don't know. I think the answer here is to pick one to be the stop-gap and cut the other loose. Pick up a QB in the draft to groom. Move on. Don't give up youthful bodies and talent to land a has-been. That's something that you do when the pieces are all in place. That isn't the case here. Build a piss-your-pants defense that'll slap offenses silly. Build a mauling offensive line and get legitimate skill players. Do THAT with all of these picks and a FA here or there. Get the QB when he's available not when you have to reach.
Just my .02.
-
Well, I don't remember Bernie Kosar ever looking lost as a rookie, like Quinn has often looked.
That's my standard, Bernie Koar.
We need a qb who has the instincts and the keen ability to see the field and react accordingly, a natural qb.
Bernie Kosar had Gary Danielson to mentor him and Lindy Infante as a coach. Who did Quinn have, exactly? Daboll, Anderson and the guy from SD? Not a fair comparison at all.
Bernie Kosar had Gary Danielson to mentor him and Lindy Infante as a coach. Who did Quinn have, exactly? Daboll, Anderson and the guy from SD? Not a fair comparison at all.
He had Dorsey.
While not a great player due to limited skills, he knew the position,
BQ had a fine mentor.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. -
-
In my 800 some-odd posts on this forum, I have bit my lip and purposely avoided the Brady Quinn-Derek Anderson debate. Perhaps, I don't feel strongly enough about either to really get passionate but this thread does speak to something dear to me: draft picks.
If you look at the NFL, there isn't a GM or personnel man that hasn't missed greatly on a highly-touted prospect . That said, between Holmgren's ability to spot offensive skill players and Mangini's eye for defensive players coupled with Heckert's history of successful personnel management I have a very good feeling that the raw materials for a contender in Cleveland could be amassed in short order. You cannot do that however without the currency: draft picks. Surely, a FA sprinkled in here and there can help immensely but they aren't going to build the depth of your team. If they could, then Dan Snyder would have knuckles full of Super Bowl rings. You can not win in this league without using draft picks and using them well. They are to be coveted like gold. They are like those second half time outs that should not be squandered.
The Dallas Cowboys traded Herschel Walker and 4 picks to Minnesota (5 players) and in return they received five players and eight draft picks (13 player equivalents) all but one of which were 3rd rounders or better. This launched a mediocre team into a dynasty. The Ricky Williams trade saw eight picks get sent to Washington. This didn't work out as well and only the Redskins could screw up that deal.
The bottom line is that if you trust your people in the "war room" then you can't hamstring them. Extra picks allows for extra flexibility. Perhaps you only use eight picks but use three to help you move around. That could be important. In 2008, the Jets moved back into the end of the first round to select Dustin Keller who has been a solid pass receiving TE for them.
To me, trading for an aging QB is dicey. You're likely to get an older player commanding more money and more time on the trainer's table. In return, you're going to give up not one but at LEAST two player equivalents and I'll bet that a 3rd round diamond is worth more in the long run than one or two years of Donovan McNabb.
On the other hand....
There is no position in professional sports that is more integral to success and winning championships than NFL QB. I have read countless debates extolling the virtues of #3 and #10. I have read the longwinded apologies for each wanting to give each a "mulligan" because the coach changed or the ball was wet or the receivers couldn't catch or the line didn't block. I've read that one throws too hard and that other too soft. The bottom line in my mind is this: While we are spending so much time dissecting the mediocrity of both, we are losing sight of the fact that most franchise QBs show you something....even in defeat....even without blocking...even without receivers to make you think that they can play this game at a high level if not a championship one.
Aaron Rodgers sat on the bench for three years and didn't see a meaningful snap yet his team knew enough about him to bid Favre adieu. He came out the very first week and beat Minnesota. In week 2, he was the FedEx Air player of the week passing for 328 yards and three TDs. Philip Rivers shined in the first season he played. So did Peyton and Tom Brady. Joe Flacco and Matt Ryan showed you their potential in year ONE with each leading their team to playoff seasons. Even though we fans have not "seen enough" of either guy...the coaches have. Multiple coaches have. On the field, #3 can't throw a freakin' screen pass and hasn't shown me enough to suggest he isn't this generation's Ryan Leaf. #10 throws five-yard slants on every receiver's back shoulder and his deep ball threatens to go out of bounds on a CFL field. He looks like Jay Fiedler. This Browns team went 5-11 DESPITE these two guys not because of them. Even after Jerome Harrison hit the front page of every newspaper, neither one of these passers could really show us 200 yards passing. Hell, not even 100 yards passing in week 17.
You can whine all you want about how #10 is as good as Mark Sanchez (or at least as unproven) but the fact remains that Mark Sanchez has excellent mechanics (neither of our guys does) and has shown that he can make all of the throws at some point during this season. The 80-yard TD to Stone Hands in the AFC Championship was a thing of beauty and I will tell you now that #10 can't make that throw and hit him in stride. Before you Oregonian apologists get too happy....your guy can't put enough touch on that throw either. Mark Sanchez, for whatever faults he has, also has two things of value: toughness and leadership. Time and again, Sanchez stepped into the rush and delivered the damned ball getting destroyed in the process. He doesn't make the best decisions but his toughness and personality has the respect of his teammates. Look back on the games this year and what I see (and this is my opinion) is that no one seems to rally around either one of these QBs. Sure they may be tough. I won't question that but they don't inspire confidence and I seem to recall in the second Baltimore game seeing Joe Thomas roll his eyes at #10.
Maybe I am just too negative. Maybe I'm just tired of the excuses. I don't know. I think the answer here is to pick one to be the stop-gap and cut the other loose. Pick up a QB in the draft to groom. Move on. Don't give up youthful bodies and talent to land a has-been. That's something that you do when the pieces are all in place. That isn't the case here. Build a piss-your-pants defense that'll slap offenses silly. Build a mauling offensive line and get legitimate skill players. Do THAT with all of these picks and a FA here or there. Get the QB when he's available not when you have to reach.
Just my .02.
In my 800 some-odd posts on this forum, I have bit my lip and purposely avoided the Brady Quinn-Derek Anderson debate. Perhaps, I don't feel strongly enough about either to really get passionate but this thread does speak to something dear to me: draft picks.
If you look at the NFL, there isn't a GM or personnel man that hasn't missed greatly on a highly-touted prospect . That said, between Holmgren's ability to spot offensive skill players and Mangini's eye for defensive players coupled with Heckert's history of successful personnel management I have a very good feeling that the raw materials for a contender in Cleveland could be amassed in short order. You cannot do that however without the currency: draft picks. Surely, a FA sprinkled in here and there can help immensely but they aren't going to build the depth of your team. If they could, then Dan Snyder would have knuckles full of Super Bowl rings. You can not win in this league without using draft picks and using them well. They are to be coveted like gold. They are like those second half time outs that should not be squandered.
The Dallas Cowboys traded Herschel Walker and 4 picks to Minnesota (5 players) and in return they received five players and eight draft picks (13 player equivalents) all but one of which were 3rd rounders or better. This launched a mediocre team into a dynasty. The Ricky Williams trade saw eight picks get sent to Washington. This didn't work out as well and only the Redskins could screw up that deal.
The bottom line is that if you trust your people in the "war room" then you can't hamstring them. Extra picks allows for extra flexibility. Perhaps you only use eight picks but use three to help you move around. That could be important. In 2008, the Jets moved back into the end of the first round to select Dustin Keller who has been a solid pass receiving TE for them.
To me, trading for an aging QB is dicey. You're likely to get an older player commanding more money and more time on the trainer's table. In return, you're going to give up not one but at LEAST two player equivalents and I'll bet that a 3rd round diamond is worth more in the long run than one or two years of Donovan McNabb.
On the other hand....
There is no position in professional sports that is more integral to success and winning championships than NFL QB. I have read countless debates extolling the virtues of #3 and #10. I have read the longwinded apologies for each wanting to give each a "mulligan" because the coach changed or the ball was wet or the receivers couldn't catch or the line didn't block. I've read that one throws too hard and that other too soft. The bottom line in my mind is this: While we are spending so much time dissecting the mediocrity of both, we are losing sight of the fact that most franchise QBs show you something....even in defeat....even without blocking...even without receivers to make you think that they can play this game at a high level if not a championship one.
Aaron Rodgers sat on the bench for three years and didn't see a meaningful snap yet his team knew enough about him to bid Favre adieu. He came out the very first week and beat Minnesota. In week 2, he was the FedEx Air player of the week passing for 328 yards and three TDs. Philip Rivers shined in the first season he played. So did Peyton and Tom Brady. Joe Flacco and Matt Ryan showed you their potential in year ONE with each leading their team to playoff seasons. Even though we fans have not "seen enough" of either guy...the coaches have. Multiple coaches have. On the field, #3 can't throw a freakin' screen pass and hasn't shown me enough to suggest he isn't this generation's Ryan Leaf. #10 throws five-yard slants on every receiver's back shoulder and his deep ball threatens to go out of bounds on a CFL field. He looks like Jay Fiedler. This Browns team went 5-11 DESPITE these two guys not because of them. Even after Jerome Harrison hit the front page of every newspaper, neither one of these passers could really show us 200 yards passing. Hell, not even 100 yards passing in week 17.
You can whine all you want about how #10 is as good as Mark Sanchez (or at least as unproven) but the fact remains that Mark Sanchez has excellent mechanics (neither of our guys does) and has shown that he can make all of the throws at some point during this season. The 80-yard TD to Stone Hands in the AFC Championship was a thing of beauty and I will tell you now that #10 can't make that throw and hit him in stride. Before you Oregonian apologists get too happy....your guy can't put enough touch on that throw either. Mark Sanchez, for whatever faults he has, also has two things of value: toughness and leadership. Time and again, Sanchez stepped into the rush and delivered the damned ball getting destroyed in the process. He doesn't make the best decisions but his toughness and personality has the respect of his teammates. Look back on the games this year and what I see (and this is my opinion) is that no one seems to rally around either one of these QBs. Sure they may be tough. I won't question that but they don't inspire confidence and I seem to recall in the second Baltimore game seeing Joe Thomas roll his eyes at #10.
Maybe I am just too negative. Maybe I'm just tired of the excuses. I don't know. I think the answer here is to pick one to be the stop-gap and cut the other loose. Pick up a QB in the draft to groom. Move on. Don't give up youthful bodies and talent to land a has-been. That's something that you do when the pieces are all in place. That isn't the case here. Build a piss-your-pants defense that'll slap offenses silly. Build a mauling offensive line and get legitimate skill players. Do THAT with all of these picks and a FA here or there. Get the QB when he's available not when you have to reach.
Just my .02.
Earl love the post man but i would say you are being a little negative towards both guys
First comparing "#3" to ryan leaf is total BS. and you know it. Ryan Leaf was a First overall that barely seen the field and when he did he suucked.
Compare him to Bulger or maddox you know a guy someone picked up or drafted just to fill a spot and worked their ass off to get a chance at the lime light.
never seen leaf have a year like o7. hell what was jeff garcia a three or four time probowler before and after browns, trent dilfer won a superbowl and still neither of them did shit but complain. just think they're was a chance of us getting kurt warner and probably destroying his HOF career in the process.
As for "#10" this guy over the last year has shown me that he may be to injury prone to play everysnap at nfl level, but... when he took over for "#3" in o8 he sure looked alot better in the two games we seen him in then all of this year (Lions dont count). He was throwing the ball down field with accuaracy and authority. sprinkled in the running game just right hit the check down guys at all the right times and should of won the game if it wasn't for the D being injured and used up. For one the absence of the running game has hindered either one of these two guys progression. There comes a point in a game where you need the running back to get you a few first downs to keep the d off the field and the other teams o also off the field. we havent had that till Jerome Harrison.
No team puts their qbs in such a bad position to throw a pick as the cleveland browns. Example: 1st and ten from their own 30 and Lewis runs for a yard maybe a one yard loss, 2nd and 9-11 right xxxx no there was a holding call nowhere near the play now its 1st and 20
so now we have to pass we play it safe and get 3 or 4 of it back on safe pass now 2nd and 15 on the next play you hit braylon in the worst possible place (in the hands or chest) and he drops it would of been 3rd and 5-7 instead its 3rd and 15 wonder what we are doing? shit we would have to pass on 3rd and 5 anyway cause we've never had the creative running game we do now.
Lets just be patient for one more year, they both under contract neither hurting cap, lets see if the best guy takes control of this team whom ever it maybe if not draft one in 011 when rookies wont be able to ask for a 80 million dollar contracts.
Me i go with #3 to start year and if by week 8 or 9 this is not his team simply make the switch to #10 and release other guy making Ratliff the backup and changing status quo with no questions. I'm telling you if only one of these guys goes somewhere else and has success even just a little we will be the fuking laughing stock of the league worse than now.
Ready to Run the Ball.
-
Really, I'm not confident in either QB on our roster. I ask myself.Can they lead us to a conference championship..or the super bowl?.My feeling is a resounding NO they can't.One of them most likely parts ways and the other stays.I'm not in love with any of the QB's in the draft but the kid Lafavour seems like he has the right stuff. great defense..big time running game..young guy who can manage the game..The jets formula..
-
He had Dorsey.
While not a great player due to limited skills, he knew the position,
BQ had a fine mentor.
While Dorsey was smart, he only had one year as a starter (if that), nowhere near the experience that Danielson had as a long time starter in Detroit. The two aren't even close. And throw in the fact that Quinn missed all of TC and the two weren't even in the same universe as far as development as rookies.
-
He had Dorsey.
While not a great player due to limited skills, he knew the position,
BQ had a fine mentor.
Ken Dorsey was a consummate winner in college. I believe he was one of the greatest college QB's to play the game in the last 10-15 years. Granted, he played for a team that was filled to the brim with talent. Dorsey is probably one of the smartest QB's around, and did very well with a clipboard in his hand. I'm sure he had a wealth of information for BQ.
But, he also played very sparingly in the NFL, and it's hard to teach something if you've never really experienced it. The speed, timing and flow of the game are greatly enhanced when you step up to the NFL, from what everyone says. Dorsey probably taught BQ everything he could, but there are some things, without a doubt, an experienced NFL QB could have taught BQ better.
This doesn't clear BQ in any way, shape, or form though. In keeping with the BQ/Sanchez comparisons, I'd like to point out Sanchez's situation. Sanchez had Kellen Clemens to learn from, a career backup. It's not like he was getting tips from the most learned veteran. Granted, Matt Cavanaugh is a fantastic QB coach for the Jets, if only because he's a childhood friend of my father's and I am forced to say that. But I do honestly believe Cavanaugh is a more-than-capable QB's coach with a wealth of experience, as well as a couple of Super Bowl rings.
Throw Ken Dorsey on the sidelines on Saturdays, and I'm positive he'll flourish.
This brings me to another point, however. Do you think our woes with the QB position can also be blamed on the fact that we haven't had a QB coach that's had actual NFL playing experience for a while? I'm not sure who we had before Rip Scherer, but Scherer's tenure dates back 6 years with us, I believe. Do you think we might be better suited if we brought in a former QB with playing experience to coach?
-
None of the QBs has been put in a good position here, not just Quinn.
-
None of the QBs has been put in a good position here, not just Quinn.
None of the QBs in recent years, has been put in a good position here, not just Quinn.
-
Playing time has absolutely nothing to do with understanding a position.
Dorsey didn't flounder in the NFL because he didn't understand how to be or what it took to be a QB.
On the contrary, he got to the NFL because of that.
Over the years, there have been numerous coaches who never had distinguished NFL careers.
Some, as was the case with Dorsey were simply limited by their physical ability.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn.
.jpg.a1a2b9a0c33008fdaf4097d8fe2cfd64.jpg "Riffer X"){kind=avatar}
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