#52 DeShone Kizer

[Randolphkeys]

There is no QB on this roster even remotely as talented as Kizer.

Not even close.

His relationship with Hue Jackson, and his improvement to understand the simple things in his dropback will dictate the teams willingness to play him.

I've got no issue with them starting him out of the gate, especially knowing that Hue isn't going to have him out there making multiple progression reads and simplifying the offense to take advantage of his strengths.

I agree with all of the above, especially since we have already seen Hue tailor playcalling to the quarterback's strengths and weaknesses all last season. RG3 couldn't make progressions from the pocket either, so Hue put training wheels on the passing game. When Kessler was behind center, passes were quick, short reads. When Hogan was forced into action, there were a lot of read options. The offense won't always be pretty, but I have full confidence in Hue.

Anything that was said pre-draft becomes irrelevant after time developing under your head coach, your QB coach and off-season QB guru (in this case, Tom House).

Nobody, with the exception of maybe Jaworski, said that Prescott would be able to be a Year 1 guy. But if you simplify your skill-set, let him develop behind an offensive line and running game, you can win some games and give that QB the on-field experience that will be far more beneficial for his development than sitting on the bench.

That's one area I'm not 100% with you. I'd be amazed if all of a rookies bad habits are eliminated in one offseason. For example, Kizer had problems making decisions when pass rush broke through at ND. Sure you can give a rookie a fairly clean pocket with such OL talent, but a good defense will put pressure on him a few times a game. Will he keep his discipline after getting knocked down a few times? We can only wait for the preseason to find out.

 

[dark2332]

There is no QB on this roster even remotely as talented as Kizer.

Not even close.

His relationship with Hue Jackson, and his improvement to understand the simple things in his dropback will dictate the teams willingness to play him.

I've got no issue with them starting him out of the gate, especially knowing that Hue isn't going to have him out there making multiple progression reads and simplifying the offense to take advantage of his strengths.

Anything that was said pre-draft becomes irrelevant after time developing under your head coach, your QB coach and off-season QB guru (in this case, Tom House).

Nobody, with the exception of maybe Jaworski, said that Prescott would be able to be a Year 1 guy. But if you simplify your skill-set, let him develop behind an offensive line and running game, you can win some games and give that QB the on-field experience that will be far more beneficial for his development than sitting on the bench.

I like this take, and I also just wanted to add that it's not like Kessler and Osweiler are savvy veterans. Hue would likely try to do the same thing with them as bolded. That's part of what makes Hue such a good QB coach--the guy tries to take some burden off his players and free them to play the game.

 

[The Human Q-Tip]

I guess that was your view on him. I don't think he falls out of the first round of the draft if he made progressions that well. Greg Cosell voiced issues with his processing and the quickness he makes decisions in the pocket. Mike Maycock said he isn't ready to play in the NFL. The list goes on. It doesn't change that big powerful body and arm, which could end up carrying him to a very good career if he cleans up all the problems he displayed in college.

Honest question here, because I only saw the guy play once.

I know that he had a dysfunctional relationship with Kelly. Is it possible that his problem with progressions was due to not knowing the playbook as well as he should have, rather than due to an inability to process information that he actually knew?

Obviously, it was his job to know the playbook, but if things were bad, maybe he just did not put in the effort he should have.

 

[Randolphkeys]

Honest question here, because I only saw the guy play once.

I know that he had a dysfunctional relationship with Kelly. Is it possible that his problem with progressions was due to not knowing the playbook as well as he should have, rather than due to an inability to process information that he actually knew?

Obviously, it was his job to know the playbook, but if things were bad, maybe he just did not put in the effort he should have.

I don't know as much about that, I know Notre Dame fans are looking for any reason they can find to get rid of Kelly. It's hard to keep track of what really is and isn't Kelly's fault. I do know Kizer was 20 years old last football season. There are plenty of college QBs who aren't polished reading what a defense is taking away from the pocket at that age. I also believe quarterbacks need a few years of work to really make the jump from beating a college defense and beating a pro defense unless they are a prodigy. If Hue rolls with any 21 year old, expect a bumpy road at first.

 

[sportscoach]

There is no QB on this roster even remotely as talented as Kizer.

Not even close.

His relationship with Hue Jackson, and his improvement to understand the simple things in his dropback will dictate the teams willingness to play him.

I've got no issue with them starting him out of the gate, especially knowing that Hue isn't going to have him out there making multiple progression reads and simplifying the offense to take advantage of his strengths.

Anything that was said pre-draft becomes irrelevant after time developing under your head coach, your QB coach and off-season QB guru (in this case, Tom House).

Nobody, with the exception of maybe Jaworski, said that Prescott would be able to be a Year 1 guy. But if you simplify your skill-set, let him develop behind an offensive line and running game, you can win some games and give that QB the on-field experience that will be far more beneficial for his development than sitting on the bench.

Even though he may have the most overall talent, he still has to beat out Kessler and Osweiler regardless of how much he is working with the coaches. Starting preseason camp he will be listed as the 3rd string behind Kessler and Osweiler. The other two are going to get better as well under Jackson so he has a long climb to win the job. Honestly if he wins the job legitimately then I am okay with him starting, but otherwise he has no reason to be starting quickly for this team. If we are out of contention, yeah get him a few starts, but if we are in contention, whichever QB is getting us there, needs to stay in regardlessly.

 

[DaNewCavs]

There is no QB on this roster even remotely as talented as Kizer.

Not even close.

His relationship with Hue Jackson, and his improvement to understand the simple things in his dropback will dictate the teams willingness to play him.

I've got no issue with them starting him out of the gate, especially knowing that Hue isn't going to have him out there making multiple progression reads and simplifying the offense to take advantage of his strengths.

Anything that was said pre-draft becomes irrelevant after time developing under your head coach, your QB coach and off-season QB guru (in this case, Tom House).

Nobody, with the exception of maybe Jaworski, said that Prescott would be able to be a Year 1 guy. But if you simplify your skill-set, let him develop behind an offensive line and running game, you can win some games and give that QB the on-field experience that will be far more beneficial for his development than sitting on the bench.

I agree. I just hope they give it to him because he wins the job and not because they want to develop him on the job. We've had so many cases where they gave the job to the development player who was clearly not ready to be the starting QB (Weeden / Quinn)

 

[Matches]

Clearly we needed to give Weeden a couple years to learn the NFL. Most guys aren't ready to start until they are into their early 30s.

We will never be able to answer the question about what happens to a quarterback when you start them "too early". In recent history is there any evidence of a guy who started as a rookie and was absolute ass, but shook off that stink and whose problems turned out to be correctable?

Usually guys like that don't play in the first place. The rest are the washouts (like every Browns QB they've drafted) who play early, look kinda bad, and then never get much better. The thing is you'll never know what would have happened if they sat a year.

I also highly disagree with the notion that you can throw out pre-draft assessments after an offseason of work with your coaches or gurus. That's patently absurd on its face. If it were that easy to eliminate the flaws you had in college the league would be overflowing with quality quarterbacks, or it so happens that the real problem is that it's the coaching that sucks and Thank God the Browns finally have a staff that can erase bad habits and shortcomings in talented quarterbacks without guy ever stepping on the field.

 

[Kbiz]

Clearly we needed to give Weeden a couple years to learn the NFL. Most guys aren't ready to start until they are into their early 30s.

We will never be able to answer the question about what happens to a quarterback when you start them "too early". In recent history is there any evidence of a guy who started as a rookie and was absolute ass, but shook off that stink and whose problems turned out to be correctable?

Weeden gave us no choice. Dude was like 50 years old when he entered the league.

 

[Randolphkeys]

We will never be able to answer the question about what happens to a quarterback when you start them "too early". In recent history is there any evidence of a guy who started as a rookie and was absolute ass, but shook off that stink and whose problems turned out to be correctable?

I don't know what to tell you, but pervasive belief that rookie quarterbacks need to acclimate to the NFL exists for a good reason. Among the rookie years you should look up off the top of my head:

1. Steve Young before getting fixed in Bill Walsh's care.

2. John Elway as an overmatched scrambling rookie.

3. Troy Aikman, who lost his starting job to Steve Walsh for a portion of his rookie year.

4. Brett Favre, who had pro tools but ran the option in high school and was a running QB in college.

5. Drew Brees, who didn't start as a rookie and struggled in year two.

6. Aaron Rodgers, who waited three years behind Favre.

7. Matt Hasselbeck, who many forget was on the bench behind Favre his first few years as well.

8. Vinny Testeverde, who was a washout in six years in Tampa Bay and resurrected his career once he was demoted to second string with the Browns.

9. Randall Cunningham, who learned to be a pocket passer after Philly gave up on his eroding legs.

10. Tom Brady, who rode the bench behind Drew Bledsoe his rookie year, learning his craft and getting a more NFL body.

 

[Matches]

Keys, you have both a better memory than me and a different definition of "recent"

What I am looking for is some evidence supporting the theory that it's truly ok to throw guys in there when they're not ready. It's super easy to say "ah, that guy blew anyway" about the myriad of players who played as rookies and never amounted to anything close to their potential. It's vogue now to say, "if a guy is legit he can play year 1" because some indeed have. But the counterfactual, that if a guy isn't ready to play year 1, that he's a bum, therefore you must find out what you have" is not necessarily true.

I agree that the Browns current position makes it tougher. The tantalizing prospect of getting WAY ahead of the game by finding out this season that Kizer is the real deal is enough to make people giddy. Also they could make their draft decision next year a lot easier if they run him out there and by December decide that he's just another Brady Quinn. I just think it would be ridiculous to do so.

In all honesty the worst possible short term outcome would be they play Kizer 8+ games and he looks kinda sorta decent. They'll be forced to hitch the team to his questionable wagon and bypass top draft QBs yet again, or basically punt on Kizer or treat him like the Kirk Cousins to whomever they draft to be the "real" franchise quarterback.

 

[Lee]

I don't know what to tell you, but pervasive belief that rookie quarterbacks need to acclimate to the NFL exists for a good reason. Among the rookie years you should look up off the top of my head:

1. Steve Young before getting fixed in Bill Walsh's care.

2. John Elway as an overmatched scrambling rookie.

3. Troy Aikman, who lost his starting job to Steve Walsh for a portion of his rookie year.

4. Brett Favre, who had pro tools but ran the option in high school and was a running QB in college.

5. Drew Brees, who didn't start as a rookie and struggled in year two.

6. Aaron Rodgers, who waited three years behind Favre.

7. Matt Hasselbeck, who many forget was on the bench behind Favre his first few years as well.

8. Vinny Testeverde, who was a washout in six years in Tampa Bay and resurrected his career once he was demoted to second string with the Browns.

9. Randall Cunningham, who learned to be a pocket passer after Philly gave up on his eroding legs.

10. Tom Brady, who rode the bench behind Drew Bledsoe his rookie year, learning his craft and getting a more NFL body.

Peyton manning threw 26 TD's and 28 interceptions his rookie year.

Quite honestly most HOF qb's struggled their rookie year although only 4 on your list are HOFers I believe so far.

 

[bob2the2nd]

I don't know what to tell you, but pervasive belief that rookie quarterbacks need to acclimate to the NFL exists for a good reason. Among the rookie years you should look up off the top of my head:

1. Steve Young before getting fixed in Bill Walsh's care.

2. John Elway as an overmatched scrambling rookie.

3. Troy Aikman, who lost his starting job to Steve Walsh for a portion of his rookie year.

4. Brett Favre, who had pro tools but ran the option in high school and was a running QB in college.

5. Drew Brees, who didn't start as a rookie and struggled in year two.

6. Aaron Rodgers, who waited three years behind Favre.

7. Matt Hasselbeck, who many forget was on the bench behind Favre his first few years as well.

8. Vinny Testeverde, who was a washout in six years in Tampa Bay and resurrected his career once he was demoted to second string with the Browns.

9. Randall Cunningham, who learned to be a pocket passer after Philly gave up on his eroding legs.

10. Tom Brady, who rode the bench behind Drew Bledsoe his rookie year, learning his craft and getting a more NFL body.

so going back the last 30 or so years you have 10 examples. Im not saying there arent more, but thats a very limited sample set. For 10 years i was firmly in the let the QB sit before being thrown to the wolves, but quite frankly there is very little evidence that either way works over the other.

 

[Lee]

so going back the last 30 or so years you have 10 examples. Im not saying there arent more, but thats a very limited sample set. For 10 years i was firmly in the let the QB sit before being thrown to the wolves, but quite frankly there is very little evidence that either way works over the other.

Honestly I used to agree with you, but when you analyze the facts, its that most first year starters have a hard time and sitting doesnt increase their chances for success much.

I am not saying Kizer should start for sure, but he does have a pretty easy path to start because of the lack of talent in front of Him and sitting isnt necessarily the path to success.

 

[Randolphkeys]

so going back the last 30 or so years you have 10 examples. Im not saying there arent more, but thats a very limited sample set. For 10 years i was firmly in the let the QB sit before being thrown to the wolves, but quite frankly there is very little evidence that either way works over the other.

Those were just some big names near the top of the all time passing leaders board off the top of my head. I didn't even include one of the most obvious recent QBs who needed time, Kirk Cousins. Now that I think about it, Joe Montana,Philip Rivers, and Carson Palmer took a redshirt year as rookies as well.

If I have to make a list of quarterbacks who were a huge success right off the bat as drafted rookies and sustained that success, I'd have a much harder time. Marino, Big Ben, Matty Ice, Cam, Prescott, McNabb I guess... most of those players started out on good offenses around them.

That said, my stance hasn't been past players dictate what the Browns do with Kizer. I'm more in favor of Kizer achieving certain goals for cleaning up his specific weaknesses should dictate when Kizer starts. At the very least, he needs to be able to dropback from center and throw with a good base instead of off his back foot.

 

[AZ_]

I don't know what to tell you, but pervasive belief that rookie quarterbacks need to acclimate to the NFL exists for a good reason. Among the rookie years you should look up off the top of my head:

1. Steve Young before getting fixed in Bill Walsh's care.

2. John Elway as an overmatched scrambling rookie.

3. Troy Aikman, who lost his starting job to Steve Walsh for a portion of his rookie year.

4. Brett Favre, who had pro tools but ran the option in high school and was a running QB in college.

5. Drew Brees, who didn't start as a rookie and struggled in year two.

6. Aaron Rodgers, who waited three years behind Favre.

7. Matt Hasselbeck, who many forget was on the bench behind Favre his first few years as well.

8. Vinny Testeverde, who was a washout in six years in Tampa Bay and resurrected his career once he was demoted to second string with the Browns.

9. Randall Cunningham, who learned to be a pocket passer after Philly gave up on his eroding legs.

10. Tom Brady, who rode the bench behind Drew Bledsoe his rookie year, learning his craft and getting a more NFL body.

Everyone with the exception of maybe Rodgers played in a less simplistic offensive era.

You're going back 15-20 years or more on almost all of these guys.