DawgTalkers.net Forums Active Threads

I can understand your opinion.

However, I do not share that opinion.

Before any QB discussion takes place , this franchise wont get out
Of the cellar till Stefanski and Berry are replaced.
The NFL is set up where teams can go from drafting in the top 10
To being in the playoffs the next season.
Stefanski and Berry have had 6 years to make the Browns into a contender
And both have failed . 2025 will be another 3 win season and
Let's no forget, ZERO wins in the AFC North this year .
It really doesn't matter who the Browns draft at QB as long Berry and Stefanski
Are in Berea .

If you put Shedeur's college numbers against Mendoza, Moore and Simpson.

Shedeur's numbers were better.

There are other factors.

"Intangibles" count.

Josh Allen is a prototype who has elite physical tools. However, that alone is not enough. You have to be a leader of men. You have to process the game and make the right decisions. Guys like Drew Bees can still excel.

When I look at the top three guys. Simpson, Moore, Mendoza. They all look the part. They have good numbers. They are solid prospects that will be first rounders.

What I do not see are single elite skills. None have the arm of Matt Stafford. None have the running capability of Lamar or Allen.

I know you can succeed without that. But when you select the top guy. You would like to have it.

I watched Purdy shred the Colts. Shedeur certainly has his physical tools. He is getting his chance to prove if he can be the man.

Evaluation of quarterbacks is crazy hard.

Great reply, FQBs happen when they have competent OL personnel.

Whenever and whomever we draft at QB I just hope we draft a guy with height and arm strength this way there will be no debate about it and no issues. Obviously, he will have to have other attributes that make a very good QB but at least we won't have to argue those 2 points like with Dillon, Baker and even Shedeur.

Mahomes was drafted #10, Love was in the 20's, Maye had a down year in college his Senior year like some of the top names from the beginning of this year, so I don't think everyone saw them coming out of college. If you knew who Josh Allen would become you certainly would not have selected Baker.

Mendoza and Moore have prototypical size, arm, and speed that would project them top of the draft board most years. Sampson is on the shorter side at 6'1 so that is main reason he will slide to back of the 1st round. After season ends I will not be surprised if a name that was hot before the season resurfaces as a potential 1st round pick. Maye had a disappointing senior year but his measurables were still what NFL scouts look for.

I look forward to watching Mendoza, Moore, and Simpson next week and beyond. The playoffs are as good of a tell to how the QB performs under pressure situation. Simpson looked pretty good on the road vs Oklahoma last week. Can he do the same vs Indiana? Can Mendoza look good vs Alabama, and Moore vs what looks like a really good Texas Tech defense. Playing James Madison at home did not really tell us anything about who Dante Moore is.

If your reasoning is you don't think there is a QB worthy of a second or third pick in the draft that's a different story. It seems you have been better at evaluating QB's than the NFL has been. But could you list all of the QB's you thought were "can't miss" that you were wrong about for a more proper perspective?

And don't get me wrong. Baker is a pretty good QB. But the best he has done since leaving here is win division titles in one of the weakest divisions in the NFL. Thus far nothing has been shown that would make him be considered a SB winning QB. There is no doubt he is far better than anything we've had since.

The only odd thing I find about your post is that all along you've been saying we shouldn't draft a QB without building the team first. Now you seem to be employing a different strategy.

Splitting hairs in a way here...but IMO guys like Baker/Mahomes/Love/Maye/Herbert/etc. fall/fell into my 'can't-miss' group...even though not as 'can't-miss' as Luck. I knew those guys were legit NFL QBs without any clue as to how good they may actually become. I don't see that in Mendoza-Moore-Simpson.

I agree with everything you said there ^ except this 'not being about AB'. But he isn't the point right now so I'll move on...sort of.

I don't see a QB in THIS draft worthy of the #2 overall pick...even if our OL & WR were decent...which they are not. So I'm trading down again. I'm not sold on any of the 'top 3' of Mendoza-Moore-Simpson where they are likely to go so I'm going after the best WR or LT with our 1st Rd pick. (Where AB creeps into the picture is the '25 draft and talking Graham over the top LT/WR...then postponing the drafting of any WR/LT to '26.) Had we taken the best WR/LT in LAST year's draft at #5 we probably aren't having this discussion...or are having a different discussion.

So what to do with the JAX pick? Can you use that premium pick on a QB? A QB likely not yet ready to play? The 4th QB on the roster? I'm likely not doing that. Maybe Simpson if he falls that far.

So when DO you draft a QB to build around? Meaning in the '26 draft. I like the 1st tier and a couple 2nd tier QBs better than DG or SS (not saying much there)...but wouldn't draft the 1st tier guys where they will go and another not-ready-to-start QB in the late 1st or second is the last thing we need going into TC '26.

You typed this above: "It's about the process. It's about the best strategy which will lead us to the place we all want to arrive at." I completely agree...it's been the best route for many years now...I just don't see these guys getting it right.

If Mendoza falls into our lap...I'm all in on the process to 'build around the QB'. Otherwise, I'm building the team and waiting on the unicorn.

Willie it's like the chicken or the egg scenario LOL! Bottom line is we have to finally draft the right QB and then draft or sign solid players to put around him. Up until now we haven't quite been able to do that.

If you look at the NFL standings today.

Look at the top two teams in each division.

What is the common denominator?

They have their quarterback.

You always start there.

So what if you have two guys who can start? Green Bay went from Farve to Rodgers to Love. Three times the replacement was on the team.

The 49ers had Montana and Young. Two HOFers.

Quarterbacks are assets.

Get your quarterback and then build around him. That is way easier for many reasons. Position players are easier to evaluate.

DE have techniques to rush. Tackles have techniques to block.

No position is as as complex as quarterback or harder to evaluate.

The last QB that was a consensus can't miss was Andrew Luck.

Only one real reason for the White House to attack the Smithsonian they way they are,, To get rid of anything they feel casts the USA in a bad light.


As a country, we've made plenty of mistakes, Hiding them would/could cause future generations to do it again.

I agree...the dilemma is do you go ahead and draft a QB at #2 - even though TB couldn't win with this team - and build from there? Or do you focus on not being atrocious at OL & WR before attempting to find the future QB?

Ordinarily I tend to get the QB first if he's a can't-miss prospect and build from there. I just don't see a can't-miss guy in the '26 draft...and if there were a guy who was close to can't-miss, I still don't think I'd pick him given just how bad over offensive team is right now and I get better at OL & WR first.

That's right. You get a QB and build stability around that QB.

Let me explain the process many are supporting and the results that come from it.

They suggest you build the OL and WR positions first.

The result? With a better OL you have a better run game. This helps open up the passing game where even a mediocre QB, as you saw the results of yesterday, can be rather productive.

With a better running game and thus making it easier to pass the ball you win more games.

Your QB isn't good enough to win the division and even if you squeak into the playoffs you won't really get anywhere.

So where are you then? You're drafting in the middle of the round where it would cost you a kings ransom to move up to get a top rated QB if you could even manage to move up that far at all.

This isn't about AB. None of us know at this point in time who will be in charge by the time the draft arrives. It's about the process. It's about the best strategy which will lead us to the place we all want to arrive at.

People seem to act as if the Browns drafting a QB with their first pick they can't add good players to the OL or the WR position. That's simply not true. They have 2 first round picks, a second and third round pick, the second round where you can still get a very good upgrade at WR and the third round where a lot of good G's haven been drafted and they have the FA market.

You may not be able to totally rebuild the OL and WR positions in one year if they draft a QB with their top pick but you can get it off to a good start.

IMO you need a semblance of both. A solid competent QB and good talent around him. Tom Brady or any great QB couldn't win here with what we have on O and any great HC you can name couldn't win with the players we have on O. It's a combination of both like 2 gears working together for the common goal in this case winning.

So...you are saying that all we need is a talented team for a competent QB to have success.

I watched (3) teams yesterday with 3rd string QBs be very competitive...with one of those QBs having a stat line that looks like a misprint. The talent surrounding those backup QBs is so much better than that of the Browns it's like a different game. Not to mention the playcalling and coaching that allowed those stiffs to have success.

While the generally-accepted blueprint suggests to build around a FQB or hoped-to-be FQB...when your team is as devoid of offensive talent as the Browns are today you better get some stability around that QB or he doesn't stand a chance. AB has delivered us to that point and I have zero confidence that he can lead us out of this mess that HE delivered.

No I did not prove your point.

Winning and quarterback play go hand in hand.

Winning creates culture.

#clickbait

I agree that I don't care what party or how powerful the people are on that list. They all need to go down. A lot of Republicans ran on releasing the Epstein files until it came time to release them.

It is accurate that some prominent Republicans and the Trump administration shifted their stance on releasing the full Jeffrey Epstein files. Initially, the administration opposed the release, but a growing bipartisan push in Congress, which included some Republicans, forced a reversal, leading President Trump to ultimately sign legislation mandating the disclosure.

Shifting Positions

Initial Opposition: For months, the Trump administration and some Republican leaders in Congress worked to block or slow-walk the release of the files, with some calling the push a "Democratic hoax" or a distraction. The White House reportedly lobbied senators to oppose a vote on the matter.

Growing Bipartisan Pressure: A group of Republican representatives, including Thomas Massie, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Lauren Boebert, and Nancy Mace, joined with Democrats to force a vote on the "Epstein Files Transparency Act" through a discharge petition. This reflected significant pressure from a large segment of their base, who widely supported transparency on the issue.

The Reversal: When it became clear that congressional action was inevitable and enough Republicans were poised to vote for the bill, President Trump abruptly changed his public position. In November 2025, he posted on social media that Republicans should vote for the release because "We have nothing to hide," and he later signed the bill into law.

Congressional Vote: The House ultimately passed the legislation in a near-unanimous 427-1 vote (with Rep. Clay Higgins of Louisiana as the sole dissenter), and the Senate approved it unanimously, sending the bill to the President.

Neither am I. That's just more BS you and your kind made up. I'm not a fascist either if that makes you feel any better so I don't fit into your club.

I highly doubt that. Why are those owners successful? The QB. Plain and simple. Makes the coach look good, makes the GM look good, makes the owner look good. I hate to say it but the best ownership in the NFL resides in Pittsburg. The owner and his simple philosophy has allowed the only 3 coaches of my lifetime to all be successful and even without great QB's. When they do get great QB play, they win super bowls.

The culture of the franchise comes from the owner. That is seen when teams show ability to win and make playoffs without a great QB. The coach is able to install a philosophy supported by that culture and is stable in place and changes not. Get a great QB and the winning is amplified.

I agree that the Epstein file was not handled correctly. If you're a pedophile I don't care what the financial hit is when you're brought down but you need to go down. Trump ran on releasing the files and I think he never expected some of the names to be as powerful and important to the economy people as they were.

Let me ask you. If you were coaching in the NFL and you had the opportunity to work with your son who got a HC'ing job, would you pass it ?

The answer to that question should be an obvious one.

I am not a mindless commie though!!!