@the-gipper said:

In my opinion.....it could take only 3-4 people to turn this around:    A QB, naturally.   HC.   And 1 or 2 other top notch talented players....in the DB or on offense.....perhaps one of each.

I absolutely agree. It's a matter of selling it to whomever they have high on their board and getting them to buy in.

@the-gipper said:

See my post above.   The fact is, like I said.....3-4 people on the roster would be all it takes to turn things around here.   If a person feels that he doesn't want to come here.....it is, to me, a tacit admission by him that "I am not good enough". And I am talking specifically about a qb.

I want a guy that believes "I am good enough to be a major reason why this team turns things around.....I see enough talent here such that if I, personally do my job as well as I believe I am capable of doing it...this team can win".  

So....give me the list of the people that are saying THAT.....not the ones that are whiners. 

Now...the one caveat on this is this:    IF someone said truthfully  "I just don't want to play for that HC...for Hue Jackson"   Honestly, I am not sure I could fault him for that....if it is that specifically. 

Well said.

@nero said:

If someone was willing to join our current roster, that could become even a reason not to draft him. There's no football intelligence on that, lol.

See my post above.   The fact is, like I said.....3-4 people on the roster would be all it takes to turn things around here.   If a person feels that he doesn't want to come here.....it is, to me, a tacit admission by him that "I am not good enough". And I am talking specifically about a qb.

I want a guy that believes "I am good enough to be a major reason why this team turns things around.....I see enough talent here such that if I, personally do my job as well as I believe I am capable of doing it...this team can win".  

So....give me the list of the people that are saying THAT.....not the ones that are whiners. 

Now...the one caveat on this is this:    IF someone said truthfully  "I just don't want to play for that HC...for Hue Jackson"   Honestly, I am not sure I could fault him for that....if it is that specifically. 

@sd_tom said:

Nobody really wants to play for the Browns. 

Not now 

In my opinion.....it could take only 3-4 people to turn this around:    A QB, naturally.   HC.   And 1 or 2 other top notch talented players....in the DB or on offense.....perhaps one of each.

@sd_tom said:

Nobody really wants to play for the Browns. 

Not now 

If someone was willing to join our current roster, that could become even a reason not to draft him. There's no football intelligence on that, lol.

Not now 

@diehardbrownsfan said:

Tex, this is Cleveland.  This type of thing could happen very easily.

Whew... dodged one bullet yesterday.

@diehardbrownsfan said:

Tex, this is Cleveland.  This type of thing could happen very easily.

Saddleup! JFF returns!

@texasag1969 said:

Watch - it's Browns luck to have Kizer play lights out with two receivers he can't overthrow these next 5 games, retain him as the franchise QB and then stink it up starting from next year on after we select every other position except QB next draft.

Tex, this is Cleveland.  This type of thing could happen very easily.

@tour2ma said:

I thought you were setting up a "Return of the JFF" scenario.

All that was missing was the white horse...

"Believe me" it was very tempting!

But the horse was black. And the Huey said, "No, no,.................no, no.........you're not the one for me."

All that was missing was the white horse...

@skippinturtles said:

This can't happen.  Please take it back.  My god what a horrifying scenario.  Kizer has back-up or third string written all over him.  He better not Case Keenum this team out of the first pick.

OK-it was just a nightmare. Go back to sleep.

@texasag1969 said:

Watch - it's Browns luck to have Kizer play lights out with two receivers he can't overthrow these next 5 games, retain him as the franchise QB and then stink it up starting from next year on after we select every other position except QB next draft.

This can't happen.  Please take it back.  My god what a horrifying scenario.  Kizer has back-up or third string written all over him.  He better not Case Keenum this team out of the first pick.

@nero said:

Another problem with this scenario is that once again you are not going to have a 'veteran presence' in the QB room.

You will have two rookies and Kizer. No way you are going to dump him after only one year. You need at least to let him develop into a backup and try to get a trade in year 3 of his rookie contract, the earliest. And having 4 quaterbacks is not an option in a 53 player roster.

Dat's what I said! More likely is drafting a QB with 1st pick and then grabbing another one like the kid from Virginia in a later round. As much as I personally don't think Kizer has what it takes to be our franchise type QB, it's way too early to write him completely off. I'm pretty sure there weren't a ton of people saying Jared Goff was going to make such a big leap, so he's the guy I keep pointing to whenever I think Kizer is doomed. The ONLY thing that concerns me is Goff received a new coach, and I really don't want to go through that. I'd rather add talent through FA and the draft and see if Kizer develops, and if he doesn't, let's see what the newly drafted guy has up his sleeve. 

I really want fans to temper expectations and reactions to today's game. This is an awful match-up for so many reasons, and I want fans to to look at the overall arc of Kizer's play and not just his stats against the Bolts. I especially believe Kizer is going to have a solid game against the Packers next week. We just need Josh to get through today unscathed. 

I still haven't heard if Bolts' probowl CB is playing or still with his family due to his brother's tragic death. That would actually help us quite a bit, and my heart hurts for that man at the moment. We've all had those late night phone calls that are never good news, and it's got to be very tough for him. That being said, if Bolts are without a stud, it might help Kizer and our offense. This won't be like the Jax game where our offense gets 100 tries to score in a close game. The Chargers are GOING to score, and probably a bunch. This is game where we need our offense to score TOUCHDOWNS when in the red zone, and this is an area Kizer and everybody else HAS to improve in. 

@skippinturtles said:

Assuming the veteran QB you bring is some good-natured father figure who wants to show a young kid the ropes.  He's probably looking out for himself.  This is where coaching comes in.  With Kizer and two prospects, someone should emerge.  Again, this team has no wins.  1 win in 2 seasons.  This is going to take time.

Every QB looks for himself. There's no "mentoring", or there are veeery few quaterbacks to do so in a professor-student ideal scenario.

But having a veteran QB allows rookies to learn by watching and listening to them both in the practices and in the meetings. They have experience facing pro offenses and even though they can be labbeled as 'bad', they have way more studying hours than 1/2 year quaterbacks and that's something rookies can benefit of. 

@nero said:

Another problem with this scenario is that once again you are not going to have a 'veteran presence' in the QB room.

You will have two rookies and Kizer. No way you are going to dump him after only one year. You need at least to let him develop into a backup and try to get a trade in year 3 of his rookie contract, the earliest. And having 4 quaterbacks is not an option in a 53 player roster.

Assuming the veteran QB you bring is some good-natured father figure who wants to show a young kid the ropes.  He's probably looking out for himself.  This is where coaching comes in.  With Kizer and two prospects, someone should emerge.  Again, this team has no wins.  1 win in 2 seasons.  This is going to take time.

You will have two rookies and Kizer. No way you are going to dump him after only one year. You need at least to let him develop into a backup and try to get a trade in year 3 of his rookie contract, the earliest. And having 4 quaterbacks is not an option in a 53 player roster.

@jiggins7919 said:

It's not so much HAVING two blue chippers, it's proving either one can play. First, you know you're going to start off with the dreaded "QB Competition", and then you're going to split reps between 2 guys until one looks better, and you KNOW as soon as the "winner" starts to stink it up, everybody will be clamoring for the OTHER guy. And then you have a full-fledged crap show on your hands. 

The other side of the coin is taking 2 qb's that early means we aren't filling another giant hole on the roster. WR? FS? CB? RB? Those are some heavy needs. While granted, we all know the QB position is the most vital cog of the NFL team, an 0-11 (0-16?) team has a bunch of needs. I think Jared Goff is the best example of what it means to add talent and how it helps a young QB. 

No matter how Kizer finishes the year, take Rosen. There isn't a "Myles Garrett" type defensive prospect, so take the best qb. That gives us a blue chipper and a 22 year old Kizer with a year under his belt. Sign a veteran to bring experience, and then add weapons with draft picks and free agency. Boom, done. 

All the top QB prospects have question marks.  There aren't any can't miss prospects at the other positions.  Due diligence.  Competition at QB isn't ideal unless you haven't had a good one for 30 years.  This team is 5 years away from being competitive.  Rebuild in the meantime, QB first.

@skippinturtles said:

Excellent point.  Mostly just venting about the past.  You're right.  Increasing the odds of solving the most important part of the NFL success equation is the topic.  Having two blue-chip QB prospects on your roster is the best problem to have.  When the hell has a GM tossed and turned at night because he had too many good QB's on his roster.

It's not so much HAVING two blue chippers, it's proving either one can play. First, you know you're going to start off with the dreaded "QB Competition", and then you're going to split reps between 2 guys until one looks better, and you KNOW as soon as the "winner" starts to stink it up, everybody will be clamoring for the OTHER guy. And then you have a full-fledged crap show on your hands. 

The other side of the coin is taking 2 qb's that early means we aren't filling another giant hole on the roster. WR? FS? CB? RB? Those are some heavy needs. While granted, we all know the QB position is the most vital cog of the NFL team, an 0-11 (0-16?) team has a bunch of needs. I think Jared Goff is the best example of what it means to add talent and how it helps a young QB. 

No matter how Kizer finishes the year, take Rosen. There isn't a "Myles Garrett" type defensive prospect, so take the best qb. That gives us a blue chipper and a 22 year old Kizer with a year under his belt. Sign a veteran to bring experience, and then add weapons with draft picks and free agency. Boom, done. 

@the-gipper said:

Probably not with our luck.   Like I said, we could get a combination of Brady Quinn and Brandon Weeden.

Maybe.  Or if it's 2005 you could get Alex Smith and Aaron Rodgers.  Smith went #1.  Rodgers went #24.  Smith would have backed up Rodgers.  What's the problem with that scenario?  It's as likely as drafting a superstar with Houston's pick.

@skippinturtles said:

Or you get the next Jared Goff and Carson Wentz.  If you have NO quarterback and have a chance to bring in two of the top 3 prospects without trading up, the rest of the roster can wait.

Probably not with our luck.   Like I said, we could get a combination of Brady Quinn and Brandon Weeden.

@the-gipper said:

If we drafted two in the first round, we would probably end up with a combination of like  Akili Smith and Cade McNown.

Or you get the next Jared Goff and Carson Wentz.  If you have NO quarterback and have a chance to bring in two of the top 3 prospects without trading up, the rest of the roster can wait.