@the-gipper said:

OK, right. (but the Steelers had Neil O'Donnell in between...who was pretty good. Good enough to get to a SB).

As for whether drafting any of the guys this year very high would be a mistake? To me it is a pure crap shoot.

You can draft a guy high and get a John Elway or Peyton Manning....or a Ryan Leaf or Jamarcus Russell.

I suspect that the teams that chose Russell and Leaf thought they were making a pretty good move at the time.

I forgot about O'Donnell, I liked him. Not spectacular but in ratio of touchdowns to picks very very good, way better than Bradshaw in that respect. You indeed could win with a QB like that. I just don't see the QBs this year as translating to great NFL talents. I have been wrong before, though.

@buck-the-frowns said:

OK, right. (but the Steelers had Neil O'Donnell in between...who was pretty good. Good enough to get to a SB).

As for whether drafting any of the guys this year very high would be a mistake? To me it is a pure crap shoot.

You can draft a guy high and get a John Elway or Peyton Manning....or a Ryan Leaf or Jamarcus Russell.

I suspect that the teams that chose Russell and Leaf thought they were making a pretty good move at the time.

@buck-the-frowns said:

The point about Otto Graham etc. was merely to show that the Browns have done better getting their QBs elsewhere besides the Draft.

Even the machinations involved in getting Bernie Kosar here in the supplemental draft was quite the unconventional method. Trading first round picks to Buffalo for the right to choose #1 in the Supp.

The best QB they may have ever taken in the regular draft may be a guy they picked up in the 13th round (Sipe) (that is if you discount the disparity in the record between what Sipe had and what Milt Plum had....the best record wise whom they traded...but did get in trade a guy that took them to a title).

The other point is to show how unlucky the Browns have been in making draft picks of QBs anywhere high: Couch 1st round, Frye 3rd round, McCoy 3rd round, Quinn 1st round, Weeden 1st round.

This is just an incredibly fucked up streak of bad luck. The Browns have not drafted a decent QB now in 30 years....since Kosar. Over 40 if you just count the regular draft.

I am certainly hoping this silly streak ends.....now.

(and, by the way...it was 34 years between Bradshaw and BR...in terms of years they were drafted)

felt bad the kid got injured but that comes with the game.

is the guy working out for you or what?

I don't think that any of the QBs this year have true first round talent. It is an odd draft, deep in many areas but lacking any QBs who have no weaknesses. If they are smart the Browns will go for those other positions and get their QB next year.

I don't see what this has to do with Otto Graham, etc. In general teams will have more misses than hits. Pittsburgh had twenty years between Bradshaw and BR. And who knows if one of the Browns QBs might have developed if a coach and system ever was allowed to be in place a few years.

@tim-couch-pulls-out said:

@tim-couch-pulls-out said:

I doubt Graham would be a great QB today. I doubt any players from earlier eras would be able to keep up today. Benefits of performance enhancers.

I'd take Tannehill's QB rating of 80 over Weeden's 71. I'd also take Tannehill's 36 TD's and 30 INT's over Weeden's 23 TD's and 26 INT's. And his 60% completion over Weeden's 55%.

There's a reason one starts and the other doesn't.

@the-gipper said:

The point about Otto Graham and others is the fact that he was not drafted by the Browns. Neither was Frank Ryan. No QB ever drafted by the Browns ever won a title. You can go back to Butch Songin in 1950 or Brandon Weeden.

And FYI, if OG played today, he would probably be a great QB....time would not have mattered.

As to 2007...you make my point. No QBs worth spit came out that year.

As for Weeden/Tannehill....honestly, Tannehill may only be marginally better than Weeden.

I doubt Graham would be a great QB today. I doubt any players from earlier eras would be able to keep up today. Benefits of performance enhancers.

I'd take Tannehill's QB rating of 80 over Weeden's 71. I'd also take Tannehill's 36 TD's and 30 INT's over Weeden's 23 TD's and 26 INT's. And his 60% completion over Weeden's 55%.

There's a reason one starts and the other doesn't.

@tim-couch-pulls-out said:

The point about Otto Graham and others is the fact that he was not drafted by the Browns. Neither was Frank Ryan. No QB ever drafted by the Browns ever won a title. You can go back to Butch Songin in 1950 or Brandon Weeden.

And FYI, if OG played today, he would probably be a great QB....time would not have mattered.

As to 2007...you make my point. No QBs worth spit came out that year.

As for Weeden/Tannehill....honestly, Tannehill may only be marginally better than Weeden.

@the-gipper said:

@tim-couch-pulls-out said:

Let's strive for mediocrity and stick with an FA QB.

Otto Graham was a FA QB. So? You think 57-13 is mediocre? (actually I believe it is the very best win pct. of all time for a QB)

Or let's have some balls and actually draft one of the top rated QB's for the first time in about 15 years.

That would be great....if they could get it right. My point is they have never really gotten it right.

None of this wait and see shit. That's what got us Weeden and Quinn.

I guess we could have traded up for Jamarcus Russell....the only QB drafted ahead of Quinn. Or we could have taken Ryan Tannehill in lieu of TR...probably woulda been a good move...but I am not sure Tannehill is much better than Weeden.

Can we can it with the Otto Graham talk? Trying to compare his game to today's NFL is like trying to compare Pele's game to the NFL.

And check the 2007 Draft, no QB's drafted that year are currently starters now. Most aren't even on a roster.

Would you rather have Weeden over Tannehill?

@cvcanedy said:

Well, it is indeed "precedent", i.e. it is the the historical record that has preceded the current moment in time.

But, yes, I understand the illogic in saying that "since we have done so poorly in the past we will do poorly again".

I posted it more out of entertainment and information than out of argument.....but yes, I do carry out the narrative to make the arguement about the bad track record. Even if it is for devil's advocated sake.

@tim-couch-pulls-out said:

The Browns have taken chances on plenty of players, but their

criteria for drafting was screwed up.

Seattle didn't take a chance on a guy who was in the top ten.

They....drafted....a ...qb...in....the....third...round.

But they knew he was their guy to do what they wanted to do.

Nobody is saying bargain shop. Several of us are saying that to just draft a media

hyped qb really high, and hope maybe he can turn out to be your guy is really counter-productive

to building successful football team.

Luck.

What you could end up with, is a Ryan Leaf, or a Jamarcus Russell.

Seattle did pretty good with a 3rd rounder. The ratbirds nabbed Flacco in the first at 18, when some write ups had him

as a 2nd rounder. Andy Dalton has done pretty well with the Bengals, he

was a second round pick.

It isn't where you draft them so much as WHO you draft. If you know he's your guy, you

draft him before he falls to somebody else as best you can.

And, I'm soooooooo tired of rehashing the failures of the past. It's there, never gonna change -

it's always going to be that history.

But with Farmer as GM, once and for all, we havea FO and coaching staff that

sees character, work ethic, and love for the game as a primary criteria for

players that will be good on and off the field, making for a winning locker room.

It shows in the FA's they signed, and this draft will be a gigantic breath of fresh air -

and I plan on enjoying it without wailing about the stinkin air from the past.

Movin on, says I. If you have to take a big chance on a qb, you sure as hell don't do it

at 4. But, if Farmer and co draft a qb at 4, we'll all know they know he's their guy and they

figure they are not taking a huge chance on him.

I don't see it, but I don't know diddley.

Or let's have some balls and actually draft one of the top rated QB's for the first time in about 15 years.

None of this wait and see shit. That's what got us Weeden and Quinn.

@calfoxwc said:

Yep, & proud of it!!

Canton Mike is an old fart.

@the-gipper said:

OMG, Milt Plum! I used to call him the King of the screen pass....to Jimmy Brown & Bobby Mitchell. THAT was fun to watch and, even though Mitchell was only in Cleveland a few years before the trade to the Redskins, as exciting a pair of backs as you would care to see in the same backfield. Plum was blessed to have a GREAT Team around him.

Mike

@the-gipper said:

it is not meaningless in all situations, just this one when we essentially have a new organization drafting a QB .

The track record is horrible - no argument there - I wish I were alive to see Otto Graham play...really the last great QB we had.