Why we should not trade a draft pick for a QB.

[Drunkandstoopid]

Now let's be realistic- the only vet qb going after is McNabb agreed?

I still thing we have to go D with our first pick.

 

McNabb isn't the only QB out there. I figure any vet the Browns would bring in would be a 2-3 year stop gap, if he starts it's well worth a 3rd round or lower pick.

 

I'm in agreement DO NOT WASTE a first rounder, even a 2nd rounder in my opinion, on a QB.

 

 

 

[Drunkandstoopid]

I think we should draft the left handed Tebow to go along with Anderson and Quinn, both being left handed as well, even if they haven't figured that out yet.

 

 

(it's a joke folks)

Sad thing is, DA is naturally left handed. Who knows, throwing with his left might solve his screen and short passing woes.

 

 

[hoorta]

McNabb isn't the only QB out there. I figure any vet the Browns would bring in would be a 2-3 year stop gap, if he starts it's well worth a 3rd round or lower pick.

 

I'm in agreement DO NOT WASTE a first rounder, even a 2nd rounder in my opinion, on a QB.

 

Like who else? Hasselbeck? Delhomme? McNabb is by far the best that might become available.

 

[ballpeen]

Like who else? Hasselbeck? Delhomme? McNabb is by far the best that might become available.

 

 

No doubt.

 

I also doubt he leaves Philly.....but, if he does we would have to make offers.

 

[Flugel]

The Browns should not trade a draft pick for a QB. Here are my reasons.

 

1. The Browns need all 11 picks this year. There are many holes to fill on this team. Making good use of these picks can allow the Browns to make great advancement in the rebuilding process.

 

2. If you trade a draft pick for an aging veteran, you will need to draft a new QB anyways by the time the team becomes seriously competitive. Let's say you trade for injury-prone McNabb. By the time the Browns are ready to make a serious run, he will be at least 35 and over the hill. Then we would be forced to turn things over to a rookie.

 

3. Quinn is unproven. Quinn has less career starts than Mark Sanchez. Obviously Quinn has not had enough starts to be rationally evaluated. Also he has played in two different systems in 3 years. He has also never enjoyed the full backing of the coaching staff. Mismanagement at its best. Oh, and Quinn also produced comparable if not better numbers than the Jets savior Mark Sanchez.

 

Mark Sanchez

 

Brady Quinn

 

The best course of action would be to draft you franchise QB in this upcoming draft, and play him immediately. The next best option is to give Quinn a full year complete with all the reps in mini-camp and training camp to see what you have. If he doesn't show improvement, draft a franchise QB next year. And of course get rid of DA.

 

SWISH!!!!! Good points Wesbter!

 

Another reason you don't trade away draft picks? The beginning of the end for Phil Savage was that brutal 2008 draft with NO day 1 and an overall draft volume of 5 draft picks (Rubin was the only keeper). It looks like even Alex Hall wasn't found rotation worthy once we added Trusnik and Roth. And Savage pretty much had the 2009 draft looking like on oncore where he left us 4 draft picks to our name. That's the SAME guy that confidently told us on day 1 he was here primarily to improve the draft, build through the draft and restore continuity to the franchise through such a PHILosophy.

 

- Tom F.

[SlamBar]

Well, I don't remember Bernie Kosar ever looking lost as a rookie, like Quinn has often looked.

 

That's my standard, Bernie Koar.

 

We need a qb who has the instincts and the keen ability to see the field and react accordingly, a natural qb.

Bernie Kosar had Gary Danielson to mentor him and Lindy Infante as a coach. Who did Quinn have, exactly? Daboll, Anderson and the guy from SD? Not a fair comparison at all.

[Earl34]

In my 800 some-odd posts on this forum, I have bit my lip and purposely avoided the Brady Quinn-Derek Anderson debate. Perhaps, I don't feel strongly enough about either to really get passionate but this thread does speak to something dear to me: draft picks.

 

If you look at the NFL, there isn't a GM or personnel man that hasn't missed greatly on a highly-touted prospect . That said, between Holmgren's ability to spot offensive skill players and Mangini's eye for defensive players coupled with Heckert's history of successful personnel management I have a very good feeling that the raw materials for a contender in Cleveland could be amassed in short order. You cannot do that however without the currency: draft picks. Surely, a FA sprinkled in here and there can help immensely but they aren't going to build the depth of your team. If they could, then Dan Snyder would have knuckles full of Super Bowl rings. You can not win in this league without using draft picks and using them well. They are to be coveted like gold. They are like those second half time outs that should not be squandered.

 

The Dallas Cowboys traded Herschel Walker and 4 picks to Minnesota (5 players) and in return they received five players and eight draft picks (13 player equivalents) all but one of which were 3rd rounders or better. This launched a mediocre team into a dynasty. The Ricky Williams trade saw eight picks get sent to Washington. This didn't work out as well and only the Redskins could screw up that deal.

 

The bottom line is that if you trust your people in the "war room" then you can't hamstring them. Extra picks allows for extra flexibility. Perhaps you only use eight picks but use three to help you move around. That could be important. In 2008, the Jets moved back into the end of the first round to select Dustin Keller who has been a solid pass receiving TE for them.

 

To me, trading for an aging QB is dicey. You're likely to get an older player commanding more money and more time on the trainer's table. In return, you're going to give up not one but at LEAST two player equivalents and I'll bet that a 3rd round diamond is worth more in the long run than one or two years of Donovan McNabb.

 

On the other hand....

 

There is no position in professional sports that is more integral to success and winning championships than NFL QB. I have read countless debates extolling the virtues of #3 and #10. I have read the longwinded apologies for each wanting to give each a "mulligan" because the coach changed or the ball was wet or the receivers couldn't catch or the line didn't block. I've read that one throws too hard and that other too soft. The bottom line in my mind is this: While we are spending so much time dissecting the mediocrity of both, we are losing sight of the fact that most franchise QBs show you something....even in defeat....even without blocking...even without receivers to make you think that they can play this game at a high level if not a championship one.

 

Aaron Rodgers sat on the bench for three years and didn't see a meaningful snap yet his team knew enough about him to bid Favre adieu. He came out the very first week and beat Minnesota. In week 2, he was the FedEx Air player of the week passing for 328 yards and three TDs. Philip Rivers shined in the first season he played. So did Peyton and Tom Brady. Joe Flacco and Matt Ryan showed you their potential in year ONE with each leading their team to playoff seasons. Even though we fans have not "seen enough" of either guy...the coaches have. Multiple coaches have. On the field, #3 can't throw a freakin' screen pass and hasn't shown me enough to suggest he isn't this generation's Ryan Leaf. #10 throws five-yard slants on every receiver's back shoulder and his deep ball threatens to go out of bounds on a CFL field. He looks like Jay Fiedler. This Browns team went 5-11 DESPITE these two guys not because of them. Even after Jerome Harrison hit the front page of every newspaper, neither one of these passers could really show us 200 yards passing. Hell, not even 100 yards passing in week 17.

 

You can whine all you want about how #10 is as good as Mark Sanchez (or at least as unproven) but the fact remains that Mark Sanchez has excellent mechanics (neither of our guys does) and has shown that he can make all of the throws at some point during this season. The 80-yard TD to Stone Hands in the AFC Championship was a thing of beauty and I will tell you now that #10 can't make that throw and hit him in stride. Before you Oregonian apologists get too happy....your guy can't put enough touch on that throw either. Mark Sanchez, for whatever faults he has, also has two things of value: toughness and leadership. Time and again, Sanchez stepped into the rush and delivered the damned ball getting destroyed in the process. He doesn't make the best decisions but his toughness and personality has the respect of his teammates. Look back on the games this year and what I see (and this is my opinion) is that no one seems to rally around either one of these QBs. Sure they may be tough. I won't question that but they don't inspire confidence and I seem to recall in the second Baltimore game seeing Joe Thomas roll his eyes at #10.

 

Maybe I am just too negative. Maybe I'm just tired of the excuses. I don't know. I think the answer here is to pick one to be the stop-gap and cut the other loose. Pick up a QB in the draft to groom. Move on. Don't give up youthful bodies and talent to land a has-been. That's something that you do when the pieces are all in place. That isn't the case here. Build a piss-your-pants defense that'll slap offenses silly. Build a mauling offensive line and get legitimate skill players. Do THAT with all of these picks and a FA here or there. Get the QB when he's available not when you have to reach.

 

Just my .02.

 

[ballpeen]

Bernie Kosar had Gary Danielson to mentor him and Lindy Infante as a coach. Who did Quinn have, exactly? Daboll, Anderson and the guy from SD? Not a fair comparison at all.

 

 

He had Dorsey.

 

 

While not a great player due to limited skills, he knew the position,

 

 

BQ had a fine mentor.

 

[bjh2130]

peen is right on money here. Dorsey was great with clipboard in his hands. He does know that psoition really well even if he didnt have the arm to macth the intelligence.

[cdl15]

In my 800 some-odd posts on this forum, I have bit my lip and purposely avoided the Brady Quinn-Derek Anderson debate. Perhaps, I don't feel strongly enough about either to really get passionate but this thread does speak to something dear to me: draft picks.

 

If you look at the NFL, there isn't a GM or personnel man that hasn't missed greatly on a highly-touted prospect . That said, between Holmgren's ability to spot offensive skill players and Mangini's eye for defensive players coupled with Heckert's history of successful personnel management I have a very good feeling that the raw materials for a contender in Cleveland could be amassed in short order. You cannot do that however without the currency: draft picks. Surely, a FA sprinkled in here and there can help immensely but they aren't going to build the depth of your team. If they could, then Dan Snyder would have knuckles full of Super Bowl rings. You can not win in this league without using draft picks and using them well. They are to be coveted like gold. They are like those second half time outs that should not be squandered.

 

The Dallas Cowboys traded Herschel Walker and 4 picks to Minnesota (5 players) and in return they received five players and eight draft picks (13 player equivalents) all but one of which were 3rd rounders or better. This launched a mediocre team into a dynasty. The Ricky Williams trade saw eight picks get sent to Washington. This didn't work out as well and only the Redskins could screw up that deal.

 

The bottom line is that if you trust your people in the "war room" then you can't hamstring them. Extra picks allows for extra flexibility. Perhaps you only use eight picks but use three to help you move around. That could be important. In 2008, the Jets moved back into the end of the first round to select Dustin Keller who has been a solid pass receiving TE for them.

 

To me, trading for an aging QB is dicey. You're likely to get an older player commanding more money and more time on the trainer's table. In return, you're going to give up not one but at LEAST two player equivalents and I'll bet that a 3rd round diamond is worth more in the long run than one or two years of Donovan McNabb.

 

On the other hand....

 

There is no position in professional sports that is more integral to success and winning championships than NFL QB. I have read countless debates extolling the virtues of #3 and #10. I have read the longwinded apologies for each wanting to give each a "mulligan" because the coach changed or the ball was wet or the receivers couldn't catch or the line didn't block. I've read that one throws too hard and that other too soft. The bottom line in my mind is this: While we are spending so much time dissecting the mediocrity of both, we are losing sight of the fact that most franchise QBs show you something....even in defeat....even without blocking...even without receivers to make you think that they can play this game at a high level if not a championship one.

 

Aaron Rodgers sat on the bench for three years and didn't see a meaningful snap yet his team knew enough about him to bid Favre adieu. He came out the very first week and beat Minnesota. In week 2, he was the FedEx Air player of the week passing for 328 yards and three TDs. Philip Rivers shined in the first season he played. So did Peyton and Tom Brady. Joe Flacco and Matt Ryan showed you their potential in year ONE with each leading their team to playoff seasons. Even though we fans have not "seen enough" of either guy...the coaches have. Multiple coaches have. On the field, #3 can't throw a freakin' screen pass and hasn't shown me enough to suggest he isn't this generation's Ryan Leaf. #10 throws five-yard slants on every receiver's back shoulder and his deep ball threatens to go out of bounds on a CFL field. He looks like Jay Fiedler. This Browns team went 5-11 DESPITE these two guys not because of them. Even after Jerome Harrison hit the front page of every newspaper, neither one of these passers could really show us 200 yards passing. Hell, not even 100 yards passing in week 17.

 

You can whine all you want about how #10 is as good as Mark Sanchez (or at least as unproven) but the fact remains that Mark Sanchez has excellent mechanics (neither of our guys does) and has shown that he can make all of the throws at some point during this season. The 80-yard TD to Stone Hands in the AFC Championship was a thing of beauty and I will tell you now that #10 can't make that throw and hit him in stride. Before you Oregonian apologists get too happy....your guy can't put enough touch on that throw either. Mark Sanchez, for whatever faults he has, also has two things of value: toughness and leadership. Time and again, Sanchez stepped into the rush and delivered the damned ball getting destroyed in the process. He doesn't make the best decisions but his toughness and personality has the respect of his teammates. Look back on the games this year and what I see (and this is my opinion) is that no one seems to rally around either one of these QBs. Sure they may be tough. I won't question that but they don't inspire confidence and I seem to recall in the second Baltimore game seeing Joe Thomas roll his eyes at #10.

 

Maybe I am just too negative. Maybe I'm just tired of the excuses. I don't know. I think the answer here is to pick one to be the stop-gap and cut the other loose. Pick up a QB in the draft to groom. Move on. Don't give up youthful bodies and talent to land a has-been. That's something that you do when the pieces are all in place. That isn't the case here. Build a piss-your-pants defense that'll slap offenses silly. Build a mauling offensive line and get legitimate skill players. Do THAT with all of these picks and a FA here or there. Get the QB when he's available not when you have to reach.

 

Just my .02.

Earl love the post man but i would say you are being a little negative towards both guys

 

First comparing "#3" to ryan leaf is total BS. and you know it. Ryan Leaf was a First overall that barely seen the field and when he did he suucked.

Compare him to Bulger or maddox you know a guy someone picked up or drafted just to fill a spot and worked their ass off to get a chance at the lime light.

never seen leaf have a year like o7. hell what was jeff garcia a three or four time probowler before and after browns, trent dilfer won a superbowl and still neither of them did shit but complain. just think they're was a chance of us getting kurt warner and probably destroying his HOF career in the process.

 

 

As for "#10" this guy over the last year has shown me that he may be to injury prone to play everysnap at nfl level, but... when he took over for "#3" in o8 he sure looked alot better in the two games we seen him in then all of this year (Lions dont count). He was throwing the ball down field with accuaracy and authority. sprinkled in the running game just right hit the check down guys at all the right times and should of won the game if it wasn't for the D being injured and used up. For one the absence of the running game has hindered either one of these two guys progression. There comes a point in a game where you need the running back to get you a few first downs to keep the d off the field and the other teams o also off the field. we havent had that till Jerome Harrison.

 

No team puts their qbs in such a bad position to throw a pick as the cleveland browns. Example: 1st and ten from their own 30 and Lewis runs for a yard maybe a one yard loss, 2nd and 9-11 right xxxx no there was a holding call nowhere near the play now its 1st and 20

so now we have to pass we play it safe and get 3 or 4 of it back on safe pass now 2nd and 15 on the next play you hit braylon in the worst possible place (in the hands or chest) and he drops it would of been 3rd and 5-7 instead its 3rd and 15 wonder what we are doing? shit we would have to pass on 3rd and 5 anyway cause we've never had the creative running game we do now.

 

Lets just be patient for one more year, they both under contract neither hurting cap, lets see if the best guy takes control of this team whom ever it maybe if not draft one in 011 when rookies wont be able to ask for a 80 million dollar contracts.

 

Me i go with #3 to start year and if by week 8 or 9 this is not his team simply make the switch to #10 and release other guy making Ratliff the backup and changing status quo with no questions. I'm telling you if only one of these guys goes somewhere else and has success even just a little we will be the fuking laughing stock of the league worse than now.

 

Ready to Run the Ball.

 

[peterbell]

Really, I'm not confident in either QB on our roster. I ask myself.Can they lead us to a conference championship..or the super bowl?.My feeling is a resounding NO they can't.One of them most likely parts ways and the other stays.I'm not in love with any of the QB's in the draft but the kid Lafavour seems like he has the right stuff. great defense..big time running game..young guy who can manage the game..The jets formula..

[SlamBar]

He had Dorsey.

 

 

While not a great player due to limited skills, he knew the position,

 

 

BQ had a fine mentor.

While Dorsey was smart, he only had one year as a starter (if that), nowhere near the experience that Danielson had as a long time starter in Detroit. The two aren't even close. And throw in the fact that Quinn missed all of TC and the two weren't even in the same universe as far as development as rookies.

[Tim Couch Pulls Out]

He had Dorsey.

 

 

While not a great player due to limited skills, he knew the position,

 

 

BQ had a fine mentor.

 

Ken Dorsey was a consummate winner in college. I believe he was one of the greatest college QB's to play the game in the last 10-15 years. Granted, he played for a team that was filled to the brim with talent. Dorsey is probably one of the smartest QB's around, and did very well with a clipboard in his hand. I'm sure he had a wealth of information for BQ.

 

But, he also played very sparingly in the NFL, and it's hard to teach something if you've never really experienced it. The speed, timing and flow of the game are greatly enhanced when you step up to the NFL, from what everyone says. Dorsey probably taught BQ everything he could, but there are some things, without a doubt, an experienced NFL QB could have taught BQ better.

 

This doesn't clear BQ in any way, shape, or form though. In keeping with the BQ/Sanchez comparisons, I'd like to point out Sanchez's situation. Sanchez had Kellen Clemens to learn from, a career backup. It's not like he was getting tips from the most learned veteran. Granted, Matt Cavanaugh is a fantastic QB coach for the Jets, if only because he's a childhood friend of my father's and I am forced to say that. But I do honestly believe Cavanaugh is a more-than-capable QB's coach with a wealth of experience, as well as a couple of Super Bowl rings.

 

Throw Ken Dorsey on the sidelines on Saturdays, and I'm positive he'll flourish.

 

 

This brings me to another point, however. Do you think our woes with the QB position can also be blamed on the fact that we haven't had a QB coach that's had actual NFL playing experience for a while? I'm not sure who we had before Rip Scherer, but Scherer's tenure dates back 6 years with us, I believe. Do you think we might be better suited if we brought in a former QB with playing experience to coach?

[Drunkandstoopid]

None of the QBs has been put in a good position here, not just Quinn.

[Drunkandstoopid]

None of the QBs in recent years, has been put in a good position here, not just Quinn.

[ballpeen]

Playing time has absolutely nothing to do with understanding a position.

 

Dorsey didn't flounder in the NFL because he didn't understand how to be or what it took to be a QB.

 

On the contrary, he got to the NFL because of that.

 

Over the years, there have been numerous coaches who never had distinguished NFL careers.

 

Some, as was the case with Dorsey were simply limited by their physical ability.

[Flugel]

In my 800 some-odd posts on this forum, I have bit my lip and purposely avoided the Brady Quinn-Derek Anderson debate. Perhaps, I don't feel strongly enough about either to really get passionate but this thread does speak to something dear to me: draft picks.

 

If you look at the NFL, there isn't a GM or personnel man that hasn't missed greatly on a highly-touted prospect . That said, between Holmgren's ability to spot offensive skill players and Mangini's eye for defensive players coupled with Heckert's history of successful personnel management I have a very good feeling that the raw materials for a contender in Cleveland could be amassed in short order. You cannot do that however without the currency: draft picks. Surely, a FA sprinkled in here and there can help immensely but they aren't going to build the depth of your team. If they could, then Dan Snyder would have knuckles full of Super Bowl rings. You can not win in this league without using draft picks and using them well. They are to be coveted like gold. They are like those second half time outs that should not be squandered.

 

The Dallas Cowboys traded Herschel Walker and 4 picks to Minnesota (5 players) and in return they received five players and eight draft picks (13 player equivalents) all but one of which were 3rd rounders or better. This launched a mediocre team into a dynasty. The Ricky Williams trade saw eight picks get sent to Washington. This didn't work out as well and only the Redskins could screw up that deal.

 

The bottom line is that if you trust your people in the "war room" then you can't hamstring them. Extra picks allows for extra flexibility. Perhaps you only use eight picks but use three to help you move around. That could be important. In 2008, the Jets moved back into the end of the first round to select Dustin Keller who has been a solid pass receiving TE for them.

 

To me, trading for an aging QB is dicey. You're likely to get an older player commanding more money and more time on the trainer's table. In return, you're going to give up not one but at LEAST two player equivalents and I'll bet that a 3rd round diamond is worth more in the long run than one or two years of Donovan McNabb.

 

On the other hand....

 

There is no position in professional sports that is more integral to success and winning championships than NFL QB. I have read countless debates extolling the virtues of #3 and #10. I have read the longwinded apologies for each wanting to give each a "mulligan" because the coach changed or the ball was wet or the receivers couldn't catch or the line didn't block. I've read that one throws too hard and that other too soft. The bottom line in my mind is this: While we are spending so much time dissecting the mediocrity of both, we are losing sight of the fact that most franchise QBs show you something....even in defeat....even without blocking...even without receivers to make you think that they can play this game at a high level if not a championship one.

 

Aaron Rodgers sat on the bench for three years and didn't see a meaningful snap yet his team knew enough about him to bid Favre adieu. He came out the very first week and beat Minnesota. In week 2, he was the FedEx Air player of the week passing for 328 yards and three TDs. Philip Rivers shined in the first season he played. So did Peyton and Tom Brady. Joe Flacco and Matt Ryan showed you their potential in year ONE with each leading their team to playoff seasons. Even though we fans have not "seen enough" of either guy...the coaches have. Multiple coaches have. On the field, #3 can't throw a freakin' screen pass and hasn't shown me enough to suggest he isn't this generation's Ryan Leaf. #10 throws five-yard slants on every receiver's back shoulder and his deep ball threatens to go out of bounds on a CFL field. He looks like Jay Fiedler. This Browns team went 5-11 DESPITE these two guys not because of them. Even after Jerome Harrison hit the front page of every newspaper, neither one of these passers could really show us 200 yards passing. Hell, not even 100 yards passing in week 17.

 

You can whine all you want about how #10 is as good as Mark Sanchez (or at least as unproven) but the fact remains that Mark Sanchez has excellent mechanics (neither of our guys does) and has shown that he can make all of the throws at some point during this season. The 80-yard TD to Stone Hands in the AFC Championship was a thing of beauty and I will tell you now that #10 can't make that throw and hit him in stride. Before you Oregonian apologists get too happy....your guy can't put enough touch on that throw either. Mark Sanchez, for whatever faults he has, also has two things of value: toughness and leadership. Time and again, Sanchez stepped into the rush and delivered the damned ball getting destroyed in the process. He doesn't make the best decisions but his toughness and personality has the respect of his teammates. Look back on the games this year and what I see (and this is my opinion) is that no one seems to rally around either one of these QBs. Sure they may be tough. I won't question that but they don't inspire confidence and I seem to recall in the second Baltimore game seeing Joe Thomas roll his eyes at #10.

 

Maybe I am just too negative. Maybe I'm just tired of the excuses. I don't know. I think the answer here is to pick one to be the stop-gap and cut the other loose. Pick up a QB in the draft to groom. Move on. Don't give up youthful bodies and talent to land a has-been. That's something that you do when the pieces are all in place. That isn't the case here. Build a piss-your-pants defense that'll slap offenses silly. Build a mauling offensive line and get legitimate skill players. Do THAT with all of these picks and a FA here or there. Get the QB when he's available not when you have to reach.

 

Just my .02.

 

Moral of the story - don't BITE your lip or a gem like this gets held hostage and nobody can read it. Folks, don't be shy in here - it's a message board designed to invite opinions and differences of them for the purpose of discussion.

 

We've longed for the RIGHT QB here so I'm not changing my criteria because Savage flushed a 1st round pick down the toilet. It seems like people with a wishful thinking mentality want it to be as easy as Brian Daboll just needs to be fired and then we'll see the REAL Brady Quinn. Guess what? Good luck with that! We need to stop blaming everyone from the waterboys to the popcorn vendors for Brady Quinn's mistakes and start holding him accountable. I've seen him miss wideopen targets with a 15 yard cushion and he actually threw the INT to the DB 15 yards behind the intended receiver. The following Monday I heard how crappy Dabolls game plans were even though we rushed for a country mile and WON the game inspite of Quinn's 30% completion rate.

 

Maybe we DID see the real Brady Quinn vrs LSU? If we're gonna hold Troy Smith to his 1 performance vrs Florida - let's do the same for the kid we overhyped and overpaid as a 1st round pick. I've even read Brady had no talent at ND while 2 ofd his lineman are starting in the NFL and 2 of his TEs are starting in Miami and Seattle. Jeff Smardijza WOULD have been playing on Sundays while Maurice Stovall IS playing on Sundays.

 

Calling a spade a spade allows us to move on and PROGRESS instead of firing every coach until Brady Quinn looks like he's playing Army again. We've found 2 equivalents and didn't win EITHER contest (Detroit 09 & Denver 08). Worth noting: I was one of the ones that thought Quinn would succeed here. He didn't. Next? We need a new one and it won't shock me if we draft Bradford if he's on our doorstep.

- Tom F.

[Westside Steve]

I guess if you can definitively say BQ or DA is the missing piece then great.

Trade for a washed up guy and teach him whatever new system we're gonna run.

If he'll learn it at tghis stage of his career.

 

Personally I'd rtather see BQ have a full season and become more in sync with the young receivers.

 

If OTOH we're gonna use a run and gun and IF McNabb hasn't got Lewis Legs by now fine.

Use him until the next Mike Vick pops up in the draft.

(If we're not planning on that system why bother? )

But remember that unless we really suck next season we won't get the hot new future bust.

It's still a team sport.

<G>

WSS

[Tim Couch Pulls Out]

Playing time has absolutely nothing to do with understanding a position.

 

Dorsey didn't flounder in the NFL because he didn't understand how to be or what it took to be a QB.

 

On the contrary, he got to the NFL because of that.

 

Over the years, there have been numerous coaches who never had distinguished NFL careers.

 

Some, as was the case with Dorsey were simply limited by their physical ability.

 

I never said Dorsey didn't understand the QB position. On the contrary, I said the exact opposite. Dorsey can teach anybody the X's and O's. The only thing I wanted to point out was that he couldn't teach BQ how to adapt to the speed of the game. And neither could our QB coach.

 

There's subtle nuances in the game that only people who've played it can explain. Maybe it could have been beneficial if he had an experienced vet to learn from.

 

In the long run, it doesn't matter who coached him up. He still did terrible. I'm not sure a tag-team QB coaching staff of Otto Graham, Dan Marino, John Elway, Joe Montana, and Steve Young could have made much a difference.

 

 

[ballpeen]

How do you teach the speed of the game to someone??

 

The correct answer is you don't. They have to find that out all alone.

[Tim Couch Pulls Out]

How do you teach the speed of the game to someone??

 

The correct answer is you don't. They have to find that out all alone.

 

 

You can't teach the speed of the game. But you can give insight on how to deal in gamtime situations. And you can share the thought processes that run through your head in a game. And you will, no doubt, have little tricks and whatnot that help you adapt that you can share with them.

 

The sun doesn't shine out of Dorsey's ass. Brady Quinn could have learned more from an experienced vet, that's the simple truth. Whether or not you'd like to admit it matters very little to me or to anyone else. It's still the truth, whether or not you'd like to believe it.

[Flugel]

You can't teach the speed of the game. But you can give insight on how to deal in gamtime situations. And you can share the thought processes that run through your head in a game. And you will, no doubt, have little tricks and whatnot that help you adapt that you can share with them.

 

The sun doesn't shine out of Dorsey's ass. Brady Quinn could have learned more from an experienced vet, that's the simple truth. Whether or not you'd like to admit it matters very little to me or to anyone else. It's still the truth, whether or not you'd like to believe it.

 

I think there's some validity to it being beneficial for a young QB learn from a vet like Carson Palmer had to do when he watched Kitna throw 26 TD passes. Parcells made Romo learn from guys with more experience. In that case, he learned what TO do and what NOT to do. Parcells also learned what happened when he sent Phil Simms out to the wolves too early in NY. When he stopped getting killed by defenders the media did their best to kill him in the press. Bernie Kosar learned from Gary Danielson for part of a season. I think it's a good thing for a young QB to learn from a guy with experience IF you have experience in the house.

 

If those examples suck, look at how well Culpepper did after watching Randall Cunningham start there and put up good numbers. Look at Aaron Rodgers. Mark Brunell and Matt Hasselbeck. People often forget Tom Brady wore blue jeans to 15 of his first 16 games. Not everyone starts out like Dan Marino or Matt Ryan.

 

What I didn't know about Dorsey was that he couldn't throw the ball past the line of scrimmage when the wind was blowing. That's NOT a credible veteran and SHAME on Savage for having that kind of crappy veteran here as his ideal QB tutor. Who's gonna take that guy serious when nobody's ever felt comfortable to start him for any length of time? I think Couch Pulls was trying to say this and I couldn't agree more. They're ALL good QBs in college so the young ones need a QB with at least an NFL resume of starts like Danielson.

 

Not sure what's available at the moment especially since alot of teams need starting QBs. Kerry Collins doesn't want to return as a backup but he wasn't exactly playing like a starter when Vince Young goes 8-2 with the same crew he went 0-6 with. Bad idea. I wouldn't be opposed to Chris Simms coming here but I don't think he's impressed anyone after he left Tampa. Maybe the McCown kid we didn't draft (Josh?) or Chris Redman - who had a strong finish in 2007. Not very excited with that. I don't think Jason Campbell is a good idea if our goal is to draft a youngster because it'll turn into wondering how long we have to deem whether or not we're being fair to Campbell if he's the same guy he has been in Washington. They've got some pretty talented WRs in Washington they've underutilized due to Jason's inability to see the field the way they needed him to. Nothing out there excites me in the land of the NFL vets. It's so bad, I'm not opposed to the thought of Anthony Cavrillo coming down from the CFL being our stop gap to teach the younger guys what Marc Trestman taught him. That's a pretty good picture of the supply and demand of skilled vets right about now.

- Tom F.