- Joined
- Jul 12, 2014
- Messages
- 26,624
- Reaction score
- 55,555
- Points
- 151
-
Changing RCF's index page, please click on "Forums" to access the forums.
Cleveland Browns Quarterback Position
- Thread starter Phills14
- Start date
Matches
Eloquently sarcastic
- Joined
- Oct 13, 2009
- Messages
- 544
- Reaction score
- 708
- Points
- 93
Some data. The players I'm referring to are all players who at one point in their career started at least 9 games in a season, and were drafted since the return of the Browns in 1999.
First, it is clear that in recent years, teams have been more willing to play rookie quarterbacks, and that generally speaking rookie quarterbacks are performing better now than in the earlier part of this study timeframe. This chart shows that in the past, the total number of passing yards in rookie seasons was generally much lower and the trend is toward first year QBs throwing for many, many more yards.
This is not only a function of a more pass-happy league; rookies are starting far more games - a trend that really kicked in around 2008:
This fascinates me as it theoretically flies in the face of the thought that the proliferation of spread offenses means that quarterbacks need MORE time to learn the NFL rather than less.
Earlier in this thread I pointed out that you have to go "all the way back" to Aaron Rodgers in 2005 to find a truly successful quarterback who did not start at least 10 games as a rookie. From 1999 to 2006, 8 quarterbacks started a majority of their teams' games as rookies. The only one to pan out was Fat Face himself, Ben Roethlisberger. Meanwhile, Rodgers, Rivers, Eli Manning, Palmer, Brees, Brady, McNabb and Culpepper all had great success after NOT playing significant time as rookies. Again, since that time there has been only 1 major success story of a quarterback who did not start at least 10 games in his rookie season (Kirk Cousins).
99-06: 8 rookie quarterbacks started.
09-16: 23 rookie quarterbacks started.
My question earlier today was what kind of season would we want to see Kizer have in order to feel comfortable with him enough going forward that we would not use significant capital to draft a quarterback next season?
Here are the top 20 rookie seasons since 1999, by Pro-Football-Reference.com's "Adjusted Value" statistic. The "VAL" column on the left is my secret sauce metric for overall player value over the player's career. It's not perfect, but it will give you an idea at a glance at who's good and who's not.
What I see here is that the among the top 10 rookie seasons, there's only RGIII who ended up being a bust, and that could largely be attributed to injury. Of course there's Prescott and Winston who don't have much career behind them as well, but their respective teams certainly aren't considering a first round QB in the upcoming draft.
I honed in on the top 10 because looking at the guys below the top 10 on the list, I saw a lot of guys I would feel pretty shaky hitching my wagon to, with the exception of Marcus Mariota. Ironically, the bottom 3 of the top 10 on that list just happen to be the other AFC North quarterbacks: Ben Roethlisberger, Andy Dalton, and Joe Flacco. A closer look:
Note how the Steelers protected Roethlisberger, as he had the fewest pass attempts of any one (even prorated over 16 games he'd have thrown only 350-360 attempts.
In any case, I think these are the kind of numbers I want to see from Kizer to pass on quarterbacks next season. Here are these 3 guys' stat lines averaged out, over 16 starts:
278/452 for 60.7% completion percentage. 3121 yards, 18 TD, 13 INT.
A QBR over 55 would be nice. QB Rating is kind of a joke but below 75 would be a major red flag as the only rookie starter who posted a number worse than that who ended up being a quote unquote Franchise Quarterback was Donovan McNabb.
Stafford, Mariota, Bridgewater and Carr are the only "good" quarterbacks that had worse rookie years as starters. 3 of those guys are still young and we're waiting to see how they really pan out. As for Stafford he had a hideous TD/INT and piss-poor completion%, and yet he turned out alright. Again, if his numbers don't match up with what I've outlined above, I'm in the QB market again next year and taking another spin at the wheel.
Full spreadsheet here:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1bl7v0R5a5c0j2SYZC6j9yjq92Zpl1s0TOimCwGGihds/edit?usp=sharing
First, it is clear that in recent years, teams have been more willing to play rookie quarterbacks, and that generally speaking rookie quarterbacks are performing better now than in the earlier part of this study timeframe. This chart shows that in the past, the total number of passing yards in rookie seasons was generally much lower and the trend is toward first year QBs throwing for many, many more yards.
This is not only a function of a more pass-happy league; rookies are starting far more games - a trend that really kicked in around 2008:
This fascinates me as it theoretically flies in the face of the thought that the proliferation of spread offenses means that quarterbacks need MORE time to learn the NFL rather than less.
Earlier in this thread I pointed out that you have to go "all the way back" to Aaron Rodgers in 2005 to find a truly successful quarterback who did not start at least 10 games as a rookie. From 1999 to 2006, 8 quarterbacks started a majority of their teams' games as rookies. The only one to pan out was Fat Face himself, Ben Roethlisberger. Meanwhile, Rodgers, Rivers, Eli Manning, Palmer, Brees, Brady, McNabb and Culpepper all had great success after NOT playing significant time as rookies. Again, since that time there has been only 1 major success story of a quarterback who did not start at least 10 games in his rookie season (Kirk Cousins).
99-06: 8 rookie quarterbacks started.
09-16: 23 rookie quarterbacks started.
My question earlier today was what kind of season would we want to see Kizer have in order to feel comfortable with him enough going forward that we would not use significant capital to draft a quarterback next season?
Here are the top 20 rookie seasons since 1999, by Pro-Football-Reference.com's "Adjusted Value" statistic. The "VAL" column on the left is my secret sauce metric for overall player value over the player's career. It's not perfect, but it will give you an idea at a glance at who's good and who's not.
What I see here is that the among the top 10 rookie seasons, there's only RGIII who ended up being a bust, and that could largely be attributed to injury. Of course there's Prescott and Winston who don't have much career behind them as well, but their respective teams certainly aren't considering a first round QB in the upcoming draft.
I honed in on the top 10 because looking at the guys below the top 10 on the list, I saw a lot of guys I would feel pretty shaky hitching my wagon to, with the exception of Marcus Mariota. Ironically, the bottom 3 of the top 10 on that list just happen to be the other AFC North quarterbacks: Ben Roethlisberger, Andy Dalton, and Joe Flacco. A closer look:
Note how the Steelers protected Roethlisberger, as he had the fewest pass attempts of any one (even prorated over 16 games he'd have thrown only 350-360 attempts.
In any case, I think these are the kind of numbers I want to see from Kizer to pass on quarterbacks next season. Here are these 3 guys' stat lines averaged out, over 16 starts:
278/452 for 60.7% completion percentage. 3121 yards, 18 TD, 13 INT.
A QBR over 55 would be nice. QB Rating is kind of a joke but below 75 would be a major red flag as the only rookie starter who posted a number worse than that who ended up being a quote unquote Franchise Quarterback was Donovan McNabb.
Stafford, Mariota, Bridgewater and Carr are the only "good" quarterbacks that had worse rookie years as starters. 3 of those guys are still young and we're waiting to see how they really pan out. As for Stafford he had a hideous TD/INT and piss-poor completion%, and yet he turned out alright. Again, if his numbers don't match up with what I've outlined above, I'm in the QB market again next year and taking another spin at the wheel.
Full spreadsheet here:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1bl7v0R5a5c0j2SYZC6j9yjq92Zpl1s0TOimCwGGihds/edit?usp=sharing
Last edited:
Jack Brickman
Hall-of-Famer
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2012
- Messages
- 38,456
- Reaction score
- 61,544
- Points
- 148
The Browns should just offer to eat his entire salary this year for another second rounder. 
Kbiz
Situational Showstopper
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2013
- Messages
- 4,990
- Reaction score
- 9,372
- Points
- 113
Welp, there goes my fantasy football team name. You woulda been great, Assweiler's Assassins, you woulda been great.
Hurl Bruce
Logmaster
- Joined
- Apr 21, 2005
- Messages
- 14,672
- Reaction score
- 25,931
- Points
- 135
sportscoach
RD's Guardians PR Man!
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2016
- Messages
- 20,784
- Reaction score
- 9,536
- Points
- 113
I am sure they would take Brock back if we take his contract and ask for only like a very low pick back. There is a good probability though Brock will be a free agent.
sportscoach
RD's Guardians PR Man!
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2016
- Messages
- 20,784
- Reaction score
- 9,536
- Points
- 113
.gif "Doh (31) :doh (31):")
Triple-S
Watch the IndyCar Series on NBC
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2008
- Messages
- 4,453
- Reaction score
- 3,987
- Points
- 113
I think the level of excitement is mainly due to the fact that the level of QB play we're seeing out of him hasn't really been seen since the 02 Browns where Couch and Holcomb were beginning to show promise in regards to their abilities.
(Derek Anderson during 07 was a mirage, and a lot of people were seeing it towards the end of the year.)
But...we need to find a way to not "ruin" this guy. To keep him healthy, encouraged, and to continue to allow him to grow.
I DON'T want to see some shithead from pittsburgh plant him into the turf and we're stuck having this conversation again. We -may- finally have something nice here. How do we keep it that way?
(Derek Anderson during 07 was a mirage, and a lot of people were seeing it towards the end of the year.)
But...we need to find a way to not "ruin" this guy. To keep him healthy, encouraged, and to continue to allow him to grow.
I DON'T want to see some shithead from pittsburgh plant him into the turf and we're stuck having this conversation again. We -may- finally have something nice here. How do we keep it that way?
Jack Brickman
Hall-of-Famer
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2012
- Messages
- 38,456
- Reaction score
- 61,544
- Points
- 148
No real reason for us to eat his salary if all we're getting is a shit pick back. We could eat his salary and just cut him.
Soda
Listen To The Kids!
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2008
- Messages
- 15,063
- Reaction score
- 13,184
- Points
- 123
Wait, what? So the Browns can either A) Pay Brock $16 million and get a late pick or; B) Pay Brock $16 million and get a warm bench spot... Something is better than nothing, which is the real reason for the Browns to eat his salary.
buzzdog
Hall-of-Famer
- Joined
- May 26, 2007
- Messages
- 11,841
- Reaction score
- 17,317
- Points
- 123
Browns will eat most but not all the salary plus get a low round pick back. Anything is better than nothing.
Jack Brickman
Hall-of-Famer
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2012
- Messages
- 38,456
- Reaction score
- 61,544
- Points
- 148
If the other team is just offering a sixth or something, I'd tell them to fuck off. They can pay Brock when he clears waivers if they want him that bad.
sportscoach
RD's Guardians PR Man!
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2016
- Messages
- 20,784
- Reaction score
- 9,536
- Points
- 113
I'd rather have the pick lol
