I need to admit that I was wrong.
keets
Posts: 25,351 ✭✭✭✭✭
in Sports Talk
Last year I was adamant in the opinion that it was a mistake for the Cleveland Browns to consider drafting another Quarterback. I was even more discouraged than expected when they did draft a QB and it was Baker Mayfield. I saw him as another small-ish showboat version of Colt McCoy and Johnny Manziel. Too much hype, too little and just another wasted Top Pick by the Browns.
Each week has proved me wrong. 
He has shown me he has all the tools --- arm strength, quickness, elusive in the pocket, doesn't panic, makes smart choices and doesn't make many mistakes. He has been effective enough so far to take away pressure from a not-very-good offensive line. With time and experience I look for him to prove exactly how wrong I was!!
Al H.
2
Comments
A fundamental mistake that teams with incompetent GM's make is that when they are in a rebuilding stage, and they have a high draft pick, they basically pick the best player rather than the best quarterback.
In that situation, a team has to take the best quarterback. If a team lacks confidence in having the savvy to be able to choose the best QB, then it doesn't matter anyway. Even when they choose the best player and he turns out well, their other draft choices won't amount to a winning team.
There are 32 teams in the league, and so all things being equal, a team is only going to win a Super Bowl once every 32 years. Obviously it's not easy to do. So some if not many pundits out there point to teams that took a QB as a high pick in the first round and they still don't win a Super Bowl, as a reason why that strategy shouldn't automatically be done in a rebuilding situation. It doesn't mean these teams didn't have the correct strategy, they just chose the incorrect QB, or got unlucky and it turned out over time that was a weak draft for QB's. Just bad luck, but it wasn't bad strategy.
If a team doesn't have a successful strategy for winning, then they are going to lose - it's really that simple. The Browns wisely took a QB as the #1 pick in the draft, and perhaps it will turn out well for them. But even if it doesn't, they can't be blamed for being careless and not employing good strategy on that pick.
Forget about the Johnny Manziel comparison. Manziel was the #22 pick in the draft that year. Everyone and their brother knew that Johnny Manziel was a first class joke, and wouldn't be a winning QB in the NFL even if he didn't have the personal problems. Manziel in reality, probably should have gone undrafted and then be invited to a training camp to act as fourth string QB cannon fodder before getting cut.
Picking the wrong quarterback with a top pick can be disastrous and set a team back 4-5 years. How is Winston working out for the Bucs? Getting a mediocre QB at the top of the draft hurts far more than picking the best player available.
We have seen time and again that winning QBs can be found in any round. Russell Wilson (3rd), Dak Prescott (4th), Kirk Cousins (4th), Andy Dalton (2nd). These aren't necessarily HOFers but all of those QBs have lead their teams into the playoffs. Heck Nick Foles won a Super Bowl as a 3rd rounder.
Despite what you would like folks to believe you don't have to start rebuilding at team at QB unless there is a can't miss prospect (Luck). In 2018 it doesn't appear that there was anyone special after Mayfield as Darnold, Allen & Rosen haven't exactly impressed.
Robb
<<< but all of those QBs have lead their teams into the playoffs. >>>
Who the heck cares about quarterbacks leading their team into the playoffs and only getting that far. I'm talking about a strategy designed to win a Super Bowl.
Frankly, I don't wish for a team owner in Philadelphia whose only basic strategy is to have a team good enough to keep selling season tickets, but never fully strives to win a championship. Unfortunately for their fans, the majority of owners in team sports are exactly like that.
An NFL owner who truly wants to build a championship team from a rebuilding effort. They must take the calculated risk with their high draft pick and draft the most important position, by far, in team sports...a quarterback.
I believe something like only 16 Super Bowls have been won by a quarterback taken in the first round, while also still playing for the team that drafted him.
http://www.nfl.com/superbowlchamps/quarterbacks
"Winning Super Bowl quarterbacks have been drafted in the first round 55.3 percent of the time (29.8 percent with the first overall pick)."
MANY of those Super Bowls were not won for the team that originally drafted them, though.
http://www.drafthistory.com/index.php/superbowl_quarterbacks/
Drafting any player is a crap shoot, but if I’m a GM and trying to build a winner fast I’d throw money at a big name free agent QB before drafting one. If I do draft one, he is holding a clipboard for a bit.
I will recheck the rules, Keets, but I believe that acknowledgment of a mistake is not permitted here.
someone shoot me
steve i like you, but i just can't believe you are still going here. you are more stubborn than a mule. we both agreed that the Giants were a complete mess prior to the season starting. we both agreed that they had glaring holes -- plural -- to fill. then, our roads bifurcated. of course you take the best possible player in that instance, especially when all signs point to him being a generational talent and his position is an area of the game in which your franchise has not excelled at in years.
thru week 13, Saquon has almost 1,800 yards from scrimmage and 13 total touchdowns. barring injury, his numbers are going to be obscene by season's end. yet you are still sitting here saying that the NYG should've drafted Sam Darnold? does any part of you realize what a catastrophe it would have been for the G-men to pass up on Barkley? they would have set themselves back 5 more years had they followed your advice and drafted one of those interchangeable QBs.
you'll never be able to outrun a bad diet
if I’m a GM and trying to build a winner fast I’d throw money at a big name free agent QB before drafting one
this is what my thinking has been for awhile.
when the Browns have had multiple years with high picks and the past several years with many picks I thought they should have 1-2 different things with them --- leverage some good starting offensive lineman and trade for Jay Cutler around 2014-16 when he still had life and was available. I thought they wasted too many picks going after a QB when they could have been more patient building the rest of the Team till the right guy showed up.
there is optimism around the Team now, they seem to have arrived at an accidental positive crossroads with Jarvis Landry, Nick Chubb, Baker Mayfield and an ex-Alabama QB as OC in Freddie Kitchens. that combination on the offensive side has put new energy into the Team. I'm not deluded into thinking they are anywhere near World Beaters, but they are finally competitive.
my take on what was wrong earlier in the year was Todd Haley. Hugh Jackson had his shortcomings and probably isn't cut out for HC duties, but Haley was poison. Some of my closest friends are Pittsburgh fans and they were disgusted with the guy, they felt his presence wasted some good years for the Steelers. in Cleveland he was a very divisive force as he seemed to think he should be the HC.
Coinstartled --- have you seen Mayfield play?? I have watched a lot of Football in my life. I have not seen anyone who throws with the authority while running the way that Mayfield can outside of John Elway and Joe Montana. yesterday he threw a dart while running to his left that was perfection for about a 25yd TD. he seems to improve each week and gain the confidence of his Teammates.
next year should be exciting again. I hope I'm not getting ahead of myself, but the Browns may actually be on the verge of challenging the other Teams in their Division. Cincinnatti is a mess and unless they make a Coaching change it won't get better, Baltimore is confused on offense from what I see. we play both those Teams in the next three weeks and it might foretell a lot. as for the Steelers, they are in trouble if Roethlisberger goes down or retires.
Another important note in this equation. I didn't do the math, but take away Brady's Super Bowl wins and Montana's Super Bowl wins and that 55.3% stat becomes much higher.
Of course as we all know Brady and Montana were not first round draft choices. But...those who drafted them, Bill Belichick and Bill Walsh, not debatable, are two of the greatest head coaches in NFL history, and two of the smartest head coaches in NFL history.
So unless some head coach or GM believes they are on a par with Belichick and Walsh, they had better stick with a tried and proven formula for winning a future Super Bowl, and that is to draft a QB as their #1 pick or other high pick when in a rebuilding mode in which most teams that lose enough games to gain a very high draft pick are usually in that mode.
Your premise is flawed. It's a team effort, and building the best overall team is the object. Of all of the Super Bowl winning quarterbacks that have been drafted in the 3rd round or later, all but Theisman won the title with his original team. Take away Terry Bradshaw and Chuck Noll and Troy Aikman and Jimmy Johnson out of the discussion then, too, and the percentages drop significantly on your end. How many first round quarterbacks are the starters for any team in any given year? Most don't end up winning a Super Bowl.
The Giants are currently 5-8 and never once this season even sniffed playoff contention. So what good did the Barkley pick do them as far as future advancement to the Super Bowl? The correct answer in reality is little or nothing.
The Giants still need to address their quarterback situation. But now instead of drafting a top quarterback last April, and that QB would now have a season of professional football experience to grow from, they've still got Eli Manning.
BTW, you should know that the rookie year performance for an NFL QB can be an indicator as to future performance, but is definitely not a certainly. Look at Jared Goff...almost everyone was saying during his rookie season, including me, that he may be a bust...and now a few years later Goff is now one of the top QB's in the league. So the outcome for this season's rookie quarterbacks, will not be fully known for at least a few years yet.
Even more vital with the NFL's various rule changes, a QB is now even more important than he ever was.
Of course some GM's like to think outside the box. Sometimes it works, but usually it doesn't. If an NFL GM wishes to go against that 55.3% stat, they can go right ahead, that's their prerogative, and they'll usually get fired in a few years. LOL
why can't the giants pick up a free agent QB ? Anyone know who is going on the market this offseason? Tom Brady?
Kaep's still available
You have competent management now - most transplants from Green Bay. I wish they were back here now.
please don't remind me of any Green Bay Packers affiliation by "bragging" about it unless you also want to own Mike Holmgren. as a lifelong Cleveland Browns fan I think I can speak for the entire fan base on this topic by saying that the "Holmgren Era" was one of the most destructive and embarrassing periods for the Team in recent memory. we were glad to see that piece of work leave town.
Dorsey certainly did a fine job for the Packers during his time there just as he did a fine job for the KC Chiefs and now seems to be continuing that trend in Cleveland. as a judge of talent he seems to be very good.
Jeez. Relax. Didn't even mention the dreaded Holmgren. Nothing to "own". Talking about the current management group. Eliot Wolf is there now also. Wish the Packers had kept him as well.
How is this thread not LeBron related ?