Cleveland Browns Get 2 of top 4 picks

[ericanadian]

I think they would be dumb to draft any qb. Either roll with Kizer another year and actually try to develop him, or sign a vet. Draft Barkley and am o-lineman.

Kizer was terrible though. Not every QB is going to pull a Goff and drastically improve their 2nd year, not to mention Goff was a much better prospect than Kizer. Not every middling QB is going to pull a Foles and lead a team to the Superbowl. I believe they have been trying to sign vets, nobody wants to play there. It was a multi-year effort to get to this point to draft a QB in this draft class. It simply wouldn't make sense for them not to take one. If you want to argue they shouldn't take a QB #1 overall, fine. But don't draft one with either pick? Eh, you lose me there.

Cleveland will draft a QB. Haslam fired the GM for blowing up the McCarron deal, which was awful, but indicated how determined Haslam is to give Jackson a QB that he wants. Personally, I think if you're sticking with Jackson, drafting a QB is a mistake. Hue Jackson's QB management was awful last year. The plan was to start Kessler and let Kizer develop on the bench. Instead, Jackson gave Osweiler the bulk of the first team work in the preseason, knowing the team had no plans to keep him, and then inexplicably decided Kizer was ready to start after one pre-season start and some work against second and third team defenses. He the stated committment to riding it out with Kizer only to pull him in week two for Hogan and he continued to give Kizer a short leash for the following several weeks. If Jackson doesn't change, he will break whichever QB they draft like he broke Kizer & Kessler. He's a terrible coach and should've been fired.

[Valhalla]

You don’t go 1-31 without some coaching acumen

[whodunnit]

I think they would be dumb to draft any qb. Either roll with Kizer another year and actually try to develop him, or sign a vet. Draft Barkley and am o-lineman.

Kizer was terrible though. Not every QB is going to pull a Goff and drastically improve their 2nd year, not to mention Goff was a much better prospect than Kizer. Not every middling QB is going to pull a Foles and lead a team to the Superbowl. I believe they have been trying to sign vets, nobody wants to play there. It was a multi-year effort to get to this point to draft a QB in this draft class. It simply wouldn't make sense for them not to take one. If you want to argue they shouldn't take a QB #1 overall, fine. But don't draft one with either pick? Eh, you lose me there.

I'm not saying Kizer wasn't terrible, or that he will be like Goff and turn it around. I'm saying Cleveland has shown 0 ability to draft a QB, so instead of wasting a pick, take the, I guess more guaranteed player (?? if that's a thing) and take Barkley and then pick your next biggest need other than QB. I think their defense is fine. I think their o-line is a piece or 2 away from being fine. They need a qb, yes, but... they haven't been able to draft one in the last, what, 10 years? (Some say, the definition of insanity is doing the same thing but expecting a different result.)

don't waste the pick on a QB. that's all I'm saying.

[Defender]

I think they would be dumb to draft any qb. Either roll with Kizer another year and actually try to develop him, or sign a vet. Draft Barkley and am o-lineman.

Kizer was terrible though. Not every QB is going to pull a Goff and drastically improve their 2nd year, not to mention Goff was a much better prospect than Kizer. Not every middling QB is going to pull a Foles and lead a team to the Superbowl. I believe they have been trying to sign vets, nobody wants to play there. It was a multi-year effort to get to this point to draft a QB in this draft class. It simply wouldn't make sense for them not to take one. If you want to argue they shouldn't take a QB #1 overall, fine. But don't draft one with either pick? Eh, you lose me there.

I'm not saying Kizer wasn't terrible, or that he will be like Goff and turn it around. I'm saying Cleveland has shown 0 ability to draft a QB, so instead of wasting a pick, take the, I guess more guaranteed player (?? if that's a thing) and take Barkley and then pick your next biggest need other than QB. I think their defense is fine. I think their o-line is a piece or 2 away from being fine. They need a qb, yes, but... they haven't been able to draft one in the last, what, 10 years? (Some say, the definition of insanity is doing the same thing but expecting a different result.)

don't waste the pick on a QB. that's all I'm saying.

x2
[but you can never have too many great defensive players ]

[clarion contrarion]

You don’t go 1-31 without some coaching acumen

this made me laugh . thanks pal !

[Valhalla]

...Some say, the definition of insanity is doing the same thing but expecting a different result.

don't waste the pick on a QB. that's all I'm saying.

Some would say passing on yet another chance to take your choice of QB at the top of the draft would be doing the same thing over and over.

[Dynasty DeLorean]

I think they would be dumb to draft any qb. Either roll with Kizer another year and actually try to develop him, or sign a vet. Draft Barkley and am o-lineman.

Kizer was terrible though. Not every QB is going to pull a Goff and drastically improve their 2nd year, not to mention Goff was a much better prospect than Kizer. Not every middling QB is going to pull a Foles and lead a team to the Superbowl. I believe they have been trying to sign vets, nobody wants to play there. It was a multi-year effort to get to this point to draft a QB in this draft class. It simply wouldn't make sense for them not to take one. If you want to argue they shouldn't take a QB #1 overall, fine. But don't draft one with either pick? Eh, you lose me there.

I'm not saying Kizer wasn't terrible, or that he will be like Goff and turn it around. I'm saying Cleveland has shown 0 ability to draft a QB, so instead of wasting a pick, take the, I guess more guaranteed player (?? if that's a thing) and take Barkley and then pick your next biggest need other than QB. I think their defense is fine. I think their o-line is a piece or 2 away from being fine. They need a qb, yes, but... they haven't been able to draft one in the last, what, 10 years? (Some say, the definition of insanity is doing the same thing but expecting a different result.)

don't waste the pick on a QB. that's all I'm saying.

Unless I'm missing something the Browns haven't taken a QB even remotely close to 1st overall since Tim Couch in 1999. So no, they haven't been drafting QB's left and right with the #1 or #2 overall picks and whiffing and/or failing to develop them. There's a reason Qb's fall to the late 1st or 2nd round where the Browns have been selecting them and it's b/c they're much more of a dice roll than the QB's that go 1.01 or 1.02. As Valhalla said, the Browns doing the same thing that doesn't work would be passing up on the opportunity to draft a QB #1 overall. The Browns have drafted a QB with an early-1st once in nearly 50 years.

[AussieMate]

Kizer was terrible though. Not every QB is going to pull a Goff and drastically improve their 2nd year, not to mention Goff was a much better prospect than Kizer. Not every middling QB is going to pull a Foles and lead a team to the Superbowl. I believe they have been trying to sign vets, nobody wants to play there. It was a multi-year effort to get to this point to draft a QB in this draft class. It simply wouldn't make sense for them not to take one. If you want to argue they shouldn't take a QB #1 overall, fine. But don't draft one with either pick? Eh, you lose me there.

I'm not saying Kizer wasn't terrible, or that he will be like Goff and turn it around. I'm saying Cleveland has shown 0 ability to draft a QB, so instead of wasting a pick, take the, I guess more guaranteed player (?? if that's a thing) and take Barkley and then pick your next biggest need other than QB. I think their defense is fine. I think their o-line is a piece or 2 away from being fine. They need a qb, yes, but... they haven't been able to draft one in the last, what, 10 years? (Some say, the definition of insanity is doing the same thing but expecting a different result.)

don't waste the pick on a QB. that's all I'm saying.

Unless I'm missing something the Browns haven't taken a QB even remotely close to 1st overall since Tim Couch in 1999. So no, they haven't been drafting QB's left and right with the #1 or #2 overall picks and whiffing and/or failing to develop them. There's a reason Qb's fall to the late 1st or 2nd round where the Browns have been selecting them and it's b/c they're much more of a dice roll than the QB's that go 1.01 or 1.02. As Valhalla said, the Browns doing the same thing that doesn't work would be passing up on the opportunity to draft a QB #1 overall. The Browns have drafted a QB with an early-1st once in nearly 50 years.

This ^^ x2.
I know it's fun and all the cool kids do it but making fun of the browns is getting old.

[whodunnit]

I'm not saying Kizer wasn't terrible, or that he will be like Goff and turn it around. I'm saying Cleveland has shown 0 ability to draft a QB, so instead of wasting a pick, take the, I guess more guaranteed player (?? if that's a thing) and take Barkley and then pick your next biggest need other than QB. I think their defense is fine. I think their o-line is a piece or 2 away from being fine. They need a qb, yes, but... they haven't been able to draft one in the last, what, 10 years? (Some say, the definition of insanity is doing the same thing but expecting a different result.)

don't waste the pick on a QB. that's all I'm saying.

Unless I'm missing something the Browns haven't taken a QB even remotely close to 1st overall since Tim Couch in 1999. So no, they haven't been drafting QB's left and right with the #1 or #2 overall picks and whiffing and/or failing to develop them. There's a reason Qb's fall to the late 1st or 2nd round where the Browns have been selecting them and it's b/c they're much more of a dice roll than the QB's that go 1.01 or 1.02. As Valhalla said, the Browns doing the same thing that doesn't work would be passing up on the opportunity to draft a QB #1 overall. The Browns have drafted a QB with an early-1st once in nearly 50 years.

This ^^ x2.
I know it's fun and all the cool kids do it but making fun of the browns is getting old.

I'm not even 'making fun of them', just stating that they have needs other than qb too that would make more sense than gambling on another rookie qb. I don't know what's so hard to understand about thinking they should push real hard for Cousins. I also never said they take a QB 1st or 2nd left and right, so not sure where you're pulling that from. QBs need time to develop, and it's hard to do that when you draft a new one every year. That's all I'm saying. Obviously we disagree, DD. That's fine. I hope you're right and if they take a QB 1st overall, he works out. If love to see the browns be more relevant. I actually kind of like the franchise

[Dynasty DeLorean]

Unless I'm missing something the Browns haven't taken a QB even remotely close to 1st overall since Tim Couch in 1999. So no, they haven't been drafting QB's left and right with the #1 or #2 overall picks and whiffing and/or failing to develop them. There's a reason Qb's fall to the late 1st or 2nd round where the Browns have been selecting them and it's b/c they're much more of a dice roll than the QB's that go 1.01 or 1.02. As Valhalla said, the Browns doing the same thing that doesn't work would be passing up on the opportunity to draft a QB #1 overall. The Browns have drafted a QB with an early-1st once in nearly 50 years.

This ^^ x2.
I know it's fun and all the cool kids do it but making fun of the browns is getting old.

I'm not even 'making fun of them', just stating that they have needs other than qb too that would make more sense than gambling on another rookie qb. I don't know what's so hard to understand about thinking they should push real hard for Cousins. I also never said they take a QB 1st or 2nd left and right, so not sure where you're pulling that from. QBs need time to develop, and it's hard to do that when you draft a new one every year. That's all I'm saying. Obviously we disagree, DD. That's fine. I hope you're right and if they take a QB 1st overall, he works out. If love to see the browns be more relevant. I actually kind of like the franchise

We're discussing the Browns taking a QB with a top 4 pick, most likely #1 overall. You said "Some say, the definition of insanity is doing the same thing but expecting a different result...don't waste the pick on a QB." If your response was to be regarded as logical and relevant to the discussion, one would have to assume you meant the Browns have been spending multiple high 1sts (or even 1 at a minimum you would think?) throughout the past decade on QBs. That's where I'm getting it from, you equating them spending a top 4 draft pick as "doing the same thing." Turns out they haven't spent a single high 1st on a QB for well over a decade. The Browns have only used a pick in the top half of the 1st round once in 50 years on a QB. So the only thing they're doing over and over again that's not working is NOT spending a top pick on a QB. By your own logic you should be for the Browns taking a QB #1 overall, not against it. Saying they shouldn't draft a QB #1 or #4 overall in a good QB class because they whiffed on a few late-1st or 2nd round Qb's makes no sense in my opinion as I outlined in my previous post. We've already gone over the point that Cousins probably wants nothing to do with going to the Browns no matter how much money they throw at him. I never said it was a bad idea, only that it likely isn't feasible. QB is the single most important position on the field and can turn around a team/franchise the quickest. In general you don't abstain from obtaining a franchise QB when finally in a position to do so to fix other positions because there will always be other positions that need fixing.

[IBall2]

Haven't heard much from this thread recently. A lot of people have talked about the Browns taking Barkley #1 overall and 'settling' for whatever QB falls to 1.04. This got me thinking as devils advocate.

Why wouldn't they take their favorite QB @1.01 so they know they get their guy, then for the sake of my argument Barkley goes @1.02 or 1.03. Browns take BPA @ 1.04 and then get their choice of most likely all running backs with the 2.01 pick?

Maybe Michel or Guice sneak into the back half of the 1st round but If I was a GM, I would much rather 'settle' for whatevers left at RB in the second round instead of settling for whatever's available at QB at 1.04.

[Valhalla]

Haven't heard much from this thread recently. A lot of people have talked about the Browns taking Barkley #1 overall and 'settling' for whatever QB falls to 1.04. This got me thinking as devils advocate.

Why wouldn't they take their favorite QB @1.01 so they know they get their guy, then for the sake of my argument Barkley goes @1.02 or 1.03. Browns take BPA @ 1.04 and then get their choice of most likely all running backs with the 2.01 pick?

Maybe Michel or Guice sneak into the back half of the 1st round but If I was a GM, I would much rather 'settle' for whatevers left at RB in the second round instead of settling for whatever's available at QB at 1.04.

That would be the smart thing to do. Probably the Sashi thing to do, who wasn't concentrating solely on keeping his own job secured.
I think what Dorsey will end up doing is drafting Barkley at 1 to be popular to the masses and the media, and then take whichever QB falls to them. If they take a QB at #1 and that QB doesn't pan out...that's a quick exit for Dorsey. If they take Barkley and then the QB at 4 doesn't pan out...well there's an excuse there (that the media will back) that they just HAD to take Barkley.
I'm afraid of seeing a Barkley Allen draft...

[skip]

Haven't heard much from this thread recently. A lot of people have talked about the Browns taking Barkley #1 overall and 'settling' for whatever QB falls to 1.04. This got me thinking as devils advocate.

Why wouldn't they take their favorite QB @1.01 so they know they get their guy, then for the sake of my argument Barkley goes @1.02 or 1.03. Browns take BPA @ 1.04 and then get their choice of most likely all running backs with the 2.01 pick?

Maybe Michel or Guice sneak into the back half of the 1st round but If I was a GM, I would much rather 'settle' for whatevers left at RB in the second round instead of settling for whatever's available at QB at 1.04.

That would be the smart thing to do. Probably the Sashi thing to do, who wasn't concentrating solely on keeping his own job secured.
I think what Dorsey will end up doing is drafting Barkley at 1 to be popular to the masses and the media, and then take whichever QB falls to them. If they take a QB at #1 and that QB doesn't pan out...that's a quick exit for Dorsey. If they take Barkley and then the QB at 4 doesn't pan out...well there's an excuse there (that the media will back) that they just HAD to take Barkley.
I'm afraid of seeing a Barkley Allen draft...

The smart thing is definitely to take the QB at 1.01. Then with the draft currency they have to try to move up to 1.02 from 1.04 to take Barkley (if he's their target). The Giants are not taking him at #2. They have a plethora of holes, most notably their QB...BUT they can get that same QB at 1.04 as the Colts should not be taking one (presumably, Luck is healthy). They would be foolish to pass on such a deal, imo. It's possible that the Giants move further back from 1.02 but I don't believe anyone is going to be trading up into that spot for Barkley with the QBs that are in this class. The move will definitely be for a QB. The 1.03 pick is really the key pick if the Browns and Giants don't work out a trade for 1.02. Either the Colts take Barkley there or they trade out of the pick. Much like the 1.02, I expect a trade to again involve a QB - in which case Barkley would be there for the Browns at 1.04.

[Lotto4Life]

QB 1.01
If Barkley goes 2 or 3, then somebody will be willing to move up to take their QB at 4 ahead of Denver and NYJ, so they should end up getting some more premium picks.

[Lotto4Life]

Or, as cleveland.com and/or Mr Haverlack say, maybe McCarron is their QB and they go Barkley at 1.01 and another position at 1.04 (or trade).

https://dynastyleaguefootball.com/player-news?id=1958