2016 NFL Draft - The Quarterbacks

What was Denvers record those games Manning was benched? Read between the lines and the Bronco's were trying to find out if Brock was good enough to be the man. To give him credit there is only a handful of guys that could be Manning or come close.

Watching the playoffs the thing that stood out to me was that Bronco's defense. Mannings arm looked weak. He could still do the job very well but he is not the same. That defense won the super bowl.

The Browns need a lot more help than just QB. They could need 2 lineman, WR, RB, DE, ILB,OLB,CB and yes a young, talented, QB.

I read somewhere that the Browns have over $39 million to spend this off season. I don't expect this team to go to the Super Bowl next year. I expect improvement, talent and a well coached team. I really like this coaching staff. I hated Farmer and Pettine so I'm going to give these "Money Ball" guys a try.

 

Not sure about that number...they are currently at $138.136M, they are estimating around $153M cap this year, I believe. If Mack Leaves, that will give them another $8M(-whoever takes over his spot on the Top 51) and if they cut Bowe, that will give them another $3.4M (-whover takes his spot on the Top 51)...I don't know how they will get it cut enough to have $39M to spend...

 

http://www.baltimorebeatdown.com/20...rterbacks-have-the-cleveland-browns-passed-up

A good read (even if it's written by a Raven's fan) regarding the Browns' QB situation. As abysmal as our QB position has been, this article does a good job illustrating the point that Cleveland hasn't really taken a shot at one.

Since 1999, we've had 20 first round picks... and only spent four of them on QBs. And only once (Tim Couch) higher than #22 overall.

 

It has now been reported that the Brock Osweiler negotiations have been halted out of respect to Manning...Could they actually think about keeping Manning around?

Personally, I think they want him to retire, so they don't have to cut him.

The Osweiler "negotiations" aren't really important until the week of March 7th..By then they will force Manning to make his decision and that will still give them a couple of days to sign Osweiler. The bigger issue is the franchise tag and Von Miller.

At the same time, I think Manning wants them to cut him so he can explore other options IF he is staying in the NFL. I don't think he will take a pay cut to stay with the Broncos.

 

Could just be the reasoning given and not the actual reason.

Osweiler doesn't look like a "franchise QB" right now, so Denver would be wise not to give him a massive contract. Maybe something along the lines of Andy Dalton that looks like a big deal, but is really a two year with almost all of the power still in the hands of the team after that.

The last thing they want is to let Manning retire and lose a serviceable QB in Osweiler, but is anyone convinced he's going to be special?

During his eight game stretch with the NFL's best defense, he threw for just shy of 2,000 yards, 10 TDs, and 6 INTs but most importantly had a QB rating of 86.4 -- good for t-25th in the NFL.

To give that some flavor, McCown's eight game stretch was a shy over 2,000 yards, 12 TDs, and 4 INTs (93.3 rating -- good for 14th in the NFL).

And lastly, Osweiler would be crazy to try and get a deal done now when he has all the leverage. Hit free agency and see what your value is to some QB-starved team (like a Cleveland). Doing a deal before free agency starts only benefits the Denver Broncos.

 

Seconded by Terry Pluto:

http://www.cleveland.com/pluto/inde...owns_have_terry_ta_51.html#incart_river_index

 

I like the confidence SAS!!

 

I have to admit that I haven't looked at incoming quarterbacks that much. Certainly not as much as Irish or SAS. Of the "top three" (Goff, Wentz & Lynch), I probably have Lynch as my number 3. Of the remaining two, I'm somewhat leaning towards Goff but haven't really seen anything that separates him from Wentz other than the (perceived) level of competition.

I can say this, though. I probably wouldn't draft a quarterback out of the Big Ten (including Cardale Jones) until day three of the draft and then only as a project. But, given the current state of the roster, I think a day three QB project is a luxury and we would be better served to draft for some depth at other positions.

 

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap30...th-reminds-me-of-derrick-johnson?sf21029090=1

A few quick hits on the Draft, in case anyone missed it. I'm putting it here for the QB point:

Throw out Connor Cook, because he seems like a complete dud between the ears to me. The part in bold is what catches me, and what we're hashing out somewhat here.

Take a look at Cardale and see a phenomenal talent set but whose composite score is not higher than the sum of his parts. We've got a head coach who's committed himself to the offense (will call his own plays) and has worked well developing QBs... does Hue have the loudest voice on draft day and do we take a project (Wentz, Hackenberg, Cook, Jones)? Or do we take the "safe" pick with Goff?

Or is this were we rely on analytics?

[*]Hue: I want Wentz... we can really develop him.[/*]
[*]Sashi: I think Goff is the smarter choice. Poised, ready, accurate.[/*]
[*]Podesta: Run 'em through the ANALYTIC-TRON 5000!![/*]
[*]ANALYTIC-TRON 5000: "Take. Goff. Humans."[/*]

 

Also...

http://nflbreakdowns.com/jared-goff-qb-cal-nfldraft2016/?singlepage=1

Couldn't have said it better myself!

Especially that last part... reads like a Cleveland Browns scouting report:

• ... ridiculous amount of drops...[/*]

• ...weak offensive line...[/*]

• ... almost no defense...[/*]

 

Nice article *YES*

I would like to see them write up one for Wentz.

Right now I'm not sure which one of the two I would prefer, yet *SCRATCH* *WRITE* *HIGH* *HELP* . There are pros and cons for both guys.

I am also not sure if there is another team that is more QB needy than our Browns. So, at this point I don't see Tennesee drafting a QB at #1, they have to be committed to Mariota, he did earn the chance.

I can't see anyone jumping ahead of the Browns to snag either Goff or Wentz.

We'll see how the analytics value them both after all the data is calculated. I know there's more weight to the film versus pro-days and the underwear Olympics. Yet, I do think that the interviews have merit and will figure into the equation.

That said the Browns should have their choice at #2, and I like 99.99% of everyone else are of the opinion that the Browns have-to/will/should take a QB with that pick. (Aside: Given that the Browns don't go chase one of those 4th year FA QB's that none of us think the Browns should even consider, if they sign a big FA, drafting a QB at #2 is probably not going to happen)

I don't see how Lynch, Cook or any of those others are even in the discussion right now.

Unless I've missed something *SCRATCH*

 

Be prepared for the Browns to bombard top talent that aren't qb's at their pro days, workouts, etc. I think the team will do a legitimate job of "shielding" their intentions in an attempt to create value with their pick. If they truly believe that they want a QB and he is not worth the pick then they will show hard at the likes of Tunsil, Bosa, Treadwell, Jack, etc in an attempt to fool teams a few spots away. If they do make a move, I would expect it to ]be more along the lines of an ATL type deal vs almost any other move they have made and got hosed on.

I think they do whatever they have to to secure their QB.

 

It's that typical ebb and flow of the season/post-season/draft process, I think.

After the Ole Miss upset, Lynch was put on an unreasonably high pedestal. As soon as Memphis has a few slides, people cool on him and now, he's viewed as he was heading into the season: a tremendous athlete trying to play QB.

Cook, I think, is a bit more legitimate of a concern. Cook was definitely in the running for Top 10 pick and number one QB (with Goff and Hackenberg) but his leadership and maturity have become major questionmarks. No doubt Cook's a terrifically talented QB, but he might not have the personality/fortitude to be an NFL player.

 

Talented, perhaps *SCRATCH*

Watching Cook in the Michigan game I just didn't see a guy who would make the transition at the next level. To me he just didn't seem to have that it factor. He played well enough not to lose, but didn't appear to really take command of the game.

(Honestly I was more impressed with Michigan States freshman RB. I was thinking he would be a good fit at the next level.)

He may become a solid #2 guy, but I just didn't see a guy who would lead a franchise to the postseason and beyond.




As to the bolded part... Seems to me we already have that "guy" on the roster only with more athletic ability.

Need I say More *NO*

 

Connor Cook

http://optimumscouting.com/scouts-n...ok-woes-stanleyoakman-concerns-much-more.html

 

Carson Wentz

http://optimumscouting.com/scouts-n...ok-woes-stanleyoakman-concerns-much-more.html

 

Jared Goff

http://optimumscouting.com/scouts-n...ok-woes-stanleyoakman-concerns-much-more.html

I don't know if we can emphasize that last point enough, given all the strife we've endured the past [del]two seasons[/del] 17 years.

 

Good stuff Sam!!

 

You were right the first time.

 

I dunno... didn't seem right to give the other 15 years a pass. Maybe it wasn't off-field issues that kept us in QB limbo, but we certainly haven't been solid or even had a plan there since about 2002.

Didn't Brady Quinn beat up a gay guy (not Braylon Edwards)?