The Brian Hoyer thread...

[AZ_]

I'd argue that Farmer is building the CURRENT team not to have a QB as the lynchpin, but building them to a point where they can take a guy and develop him properly to be the lynchpin.

Because while it's nice that a dominant QB doesn't always win championships, the best way to build a championship team is to find a dominant guy at QB.

 

[Soda]

I'd argue that Farmer is building the CURRENT team not to have a QB as the lynchpin, but building them to a point where they can take a guy and develop him properly to be the lynchpin.

Because while it's nice that a dominant QB doesn't always win championships, the best way to build a championship team is to find a dominant guy at QB.

I'd agree with the mentality you attribute to Farmer, or any GM that is smart.

This Browns team can't have the QB be the lynchpin, so he's addressing areas that he 1) is familiar with evaluating and 2) knows can contribute rather immediately. It also helps that the guys before him put a relatively stout defensive line together, but that's just a part of what Farmer is addressing.

Presumably, Farmer thinks that Johnny has the opportunity to be the guy who can be the lynchpin. I know there are varying levels of belief in this solution being the actual solution, but for conversation's sake let's just assume that he drafted Johnny for the purpose of grooming him to be the potential "lynchpin".

Farmer puts a team that can survive with or without the franchise QB together so that the team can win in spite of that deficiency. Naturally, as you find the franchise QB, you can take the heat off of focusing on areas that need to compensate for lack of QB quality normally. In other words, Farmer can address getting the QB as much as he needs to raise the level of offensive play to a very competitive level.

Now, my personal belief is that while having an Aaron Rodgers would be great, I don't think Pettine or Farmer are dead set on needing to find that guy. I think they believe that running the ball and controlling the passing game as much as possible will set the pace of games. In the future, if Johnny isn't the guy, I see Farmer still looking for a QB later, in the area of Dalton, Kapernick or even Wilson, rather than swinging with your first pick (Jay Cutler, EJ Manual, Jake Locker, etc.).

 

[CleveRocks]

This is a very good point. I believe Farmer is building this team so that the QB is NOT the lynch pin of the entire team. The QB position is incredibly important but as Seattle proved last year that you don't need the prototypical elite QB to win it all. It's not easy to find those elite guys but if you can build your entire team and find a good enough QB you can be a championship contender.

Yeah....no. Farmer is building the best team he can with the assets he has. We are weak at wide reciever, and to make that work you need a peyton manning class quarterback, which we dont have. Our running game has been surprisingly good, but the two opponents have not been great tunning defenses, so jury is out for a few games. We are also weak on the pass rush, and these two weaknesses make us a mediocre team. Better than the cluster f we have bern watching, but not superbowl bound.

So Hoyer has time to refine his game. Why make a QB move, if you dont have the targets to throw to. But if nothing gets better for either Hoyer or Manziel, eventually we fix the other problems, and come back to QB.

And people are right about the average but mistake free QB being good enough, IF you have the stout defense, a solid running game, and the occasional big play. But I think in today's NFL, you need more than that to win it all...

 

[Soda]

So, just so we could get Banner's uninfluenced opinion...

 

[MoFlo]

When the Browns can get a QB who can be as efficient as Wilson in those 25 attempts (based off last year's numbers), then we can tout him as a potential Super Bowl caliber quarterback.

Right now, they've got nothing close.

Never said Hoyer is as talented as Wilson, and even said as much in my post.

However, he still hasn't started enough games to determine whether he can be efficient enough to win the whole thing. With a great running game, a dominant D, I think Hoyer's smart enough to be a QB who can get us there.

As far as Farmer's philosophy about QB goes & how he's building this team, this is from an interview from February:

Q: Aren’t those teams the ones with established elite quarterbacks? So isn’t sustained success a result of finding an elite quarterback?

Some people can define it that way. I don’t know that I would necessarily agree with that.

Q: Why wouldn’t you? Name one team that is constantly in the playoffs without having an elite quarterback?

My question back to you is: Is the quarterback the impetus why they win?

Q: I would answer yes.

I would say the quarterback is part of the puzzle but he doesn’t define those teams.

Q: This concept of drafting for value. Doesn’t Russell Wilson throw that out the window? In other words, teams shied away from taking Wilson until the value was right. But every team waiting for the right value really blew it, didn’t they?

I don’t think Russell Wilson fits for everybody. If you take Russell Wilson and drop him in with a different team, is he the same player? I don’t think his skill set matches everybody’s team. You have to take people that resonate and fit what you’re trying to do. To me, the players that pop are players that are asked to do the things that they do best. If you take a Russell Wilson or a Colin Kaepernick that are not a scheme fit for somebody else and you ask them to do things out of their scope, you’re not going to have the same type of success that you have when you put them in positions to have success. I think that’s a critical component.

That certainly doesn't seem like a guy who thinks the QB position is the lynch pin of the entire team...

Yeah....no. Farmer is building the best team he can with the assets he has. We are weak at wide reciever, and to make that work you need a peyton manning class quarterback, which we dont have. Our running game has been surprisingly good, but the two opponents have not been great tunning defenses, so jury is out for a few games. We are also weak on the pass rush, and these two weaknesses make us a mediocre team. Better than the cluster f we have bern watching, but not superbowl bound.

So Hoyer has time to refine his game. Why make a QB move, if you dont have the targets to throw to. But if nothing gets better for either Hoyer or Manziel, eventually we fix the other problems, and come back to QB.

And people are right about the average but mistake free QB being good enough, IF you have the stout defense, a solid running game, and the occasional big play. But I think in today's NFL, you need more than that to win it all...

-I'm not sure I'd say the running game being good is "surprising". They put a lot of effort into improving the running game & having a stout OL..

-We have 5 sacks through 2 games, T10th in the NFL.

-Nobody said the team is superbowl bound or that we're more than a mediocre team right now. The entire argument is that you can win without an elite QB, if said QB is efficient enough.

-Just last season, Seattle proved your last sentence wrong. Stout D, good running game, stout OL, occasional big play, QB who doesn't throw a lot & is mistake free...

 

[Phills14]

Yeah....no. Farmer is building the best team he can with the assets he has. We are weak at wide reciever, and to make that work you need a peyton manning class quarterback, which we dont have. Our running game has been surprisingly good, but the two opponents have not been great tunning defenses, so jury is out for a few games. We are also weak on the pass rush, and these two weaknesses make us a mediocre team. Better than the cluster f we have bern watching, but not superbowl bound.

So Hoyer has time to refine his game. Why make a QB move, if you dont have the targets to throw to. But if nothing gets better for either Hoyer or Manziel, eventually we fix the other problems, and come back to QB.

And people are right about the average but mistake free QB being good enough, IF you have the stout defense, a solid running game, and the occasional big play. But I think in today's NFL, you need more than that to win it all...

I don't think we are too far apart in our ideas here. If Farmer has an elite QB on the board when he's drafting he's not going to pass on him for a RT. He's going to take the best most impactful player he can. He's going to take the QB but as I said, those opportunities aren't all that often and he doesn't strike me as a guy who is going to reach for a QB because he needs one. Even though I don't like Manziel, I think Farmer truly believes in him. However; he believed in Manziel later in the first rather than panicking and taking him in the top 5.

Ideally, yes they would like to have an elite QB but if one is not available to them they want a team where a smart player that may not have elite skills but still is solid can come in and be successful at QB.

With regards to the surprisingly good run game. I'm not sure why that's surprising. We have an above average offensive line with one of the top centers in the game and a 1st ballot HoF guy at LT. The zone blocking scheme traditionally has produced good running attacks, Shanahan has always had a good run game and our backs aren't trash heap guys like we're used to. I expected a good run game from this team and they doing just that.

 

[Cavsfan1985]

I'd argue that Farmer is building the CURRENT team not to have a QB as the lynchpin, but building them to a point where they can take a guy and develop him properly to be the lynchpin.

Because while it's nice that a dominant QB doesn't always win championships, the best way to build a championship team is to find a dominant guy at QB.

I could not agree more. The key is Hoyer is who we have, IMO Manzel will learn more sitting on the sidelines for a year and developing. While Hoyer has not looked great, we have to understand a few things, this our first year in the new offesive, and we were missing our best TE and WR last game. While I do agree that does not cover all the mistakes (taking bad sacks, bad throws, etc) but the guy only have 5 starts under his belt. If he can keep us in games, we can judge him a lot more at the end of the year. If he fails to improve from now till then, then I agree we need to serious look at other options in the offseason.

 

[SixPACK]

Now, my personal belief is that while having an Aaron Rodgers would be great, I don't think Pettine or Farmer are dead set on needing to find that guy. I think they believe that running the ball and controlling the passing game as much as possible will set the pace of games. In the future, if Johnny isn't the guy, I see Farmer still looking for a QB later, in the area of Dalton, Kapernick or even Wilson, rather than swinging with your first pick (Jay Cutler, EJ Manual, Jake Locker, etc.).

Exactly.

Case in point, SD vs SEA week 2. They controlled the ball, ran their own tempo, and ended up beating SEA. They held the ball 40+ minutes. If we can pound the ball and convert those 3rd downs (I know, CLE has to get better at 3rd downs consistently) and our DEF can get the ball back in our hands as quick as possible, we do not need a top 5 QB. Would it be nice? Yes. But I would rather keep those 2 first round picks and whatever else we would have to give up to get Mariota and keep building a superior TEAM over a superior PLAYER.

We have no idea how this is going to pan out with Hoyer/Manziel/2015 QB, so let's enjoy this ride as much as we can and beat the shit out of the Ravens and go into the bye week feeling great about football in CLE.

 

[Amherstcavsfan]

The NFL has always been about who can control the ball. It's why the running game, no matter what happens with QBs, is always so important. It's why the short passing game is always so important. People always look to the guys who make the biggest or flashiest plays, while it's more important to have more guys who can sustain drives.

So I would say that Hoyer does retain possession of the ball well. He's not great at it, he's not all that mobile, but his short to intermediate passing ability is his highlight and I would say he is good at doing just that. He's also seasoned and plays the mental game well, leading to fewer mistakes.

The reason why Russell Wilson was such a fantastic QB last year and really will be for a while, is that he has two ways to really sustain a drive. He can do it with his arm in the pocket with great accuracy and good strength, or he can do it with his speed out of the pocket. It's why I believe in Manziel, because while he may not be the greatest pocket passer, he can absolutely sustain drives all by himself, he just needs to be able to dissect the game with his brain.

So in reality, while people always look at their QB to be this big arm, massive guy who can throw 50 yard rockets, it's more important to have a guy who has multiple abilities at gaining the first down and keeping the drive going. Or be one of the greatest, most accurate, most cerebral pocket passer in the history of the NFL like Manning or Brady.

 

[The Human Q-Tip]

Exactly.

Case in point, SD vs SEA week 2. They controlled the ball, ran their own tempo, and ended up beating SEA. They held the ball 40+ minutes.

You may want to pick a different example. SD ran the ball 37 times, but gained only 101 yards for a 2.7 YPC.

They also threw the ball 37 times, but for 284 yards, 3 TD's, over 75% completion %, and a QB rating for Rivers of 124. They had 7.7 YPA through the air, versus that 2.7 on the ground. So yes, they did have a run/pass balance in terms of play selection, but the pass provided their offensive firepower. The run just kept the defense honest.

(I know, CLE has to get better at 3rd downs consistently) and our DEF can get the ball back in our hands as quick as possible, we do not need a top 5 QB. Would it be nice? Yes. But I would rather keep those 2 first round picks and whatever else we would have to give up to get Mariota and keep building a superior TEAM over a superior PLAYER.

That's the Trent Dilfer theory. But I'd say that it is harder to build that kind of team and win the whole thing than it is to build a championship team with a Top 5 (or at least Top 10) QB. Baltimore had a historically good defense that year. To build that, you've got to have a high level of talent across the board, and at least a couple of Hall of Fame level talents, and then have everyone else perform really, really well. And the fact that you have to look back to 2000 to find a team that did that, as opposed to every team since then that one with a top 10 QB, tells you how difficult it really is.

And I think it's worth noting that Baltimore didn't set out to build a team with a mediocre QB. They even ditched Dilfer the very next year because they pretty much won in spite of him rather than because of him.

Two top-10 players at their positions other than QB generally aren't going to impact your team as much as a Top 10 QB.

We have no idea how this is going to pan out with Hoyer/Manziel/2015 QB, so let's enjoy this ride as much as we can and beat the shit out of the Ravens and go into the bye week feeling great about football in CLE.

It is entirely possible to enjoy the ride very much while still hoping that the team (including Hoyer) improves.

 

[SixPACK]

I know they ran and threw same amount. The point is they held possession of the ball. Rivers didn't have to go out and throw 50 times to beat a great SEA DEF. If our ground game is sufficient and our D can keep the team in the game, we do not need a top 5 QB to be successful.

No shit, I hope Hoyer improves too, and so do you. But if our team went from the dumpster fire it was last year to possibly making the playoffs and Hoyer's line isn't something horrific, you have to roll with him. Until Johnny proves he is visually better or they feel Mariota is the next son of God, then you stick with Hoyer and draft a QB late.

 

[The Human Q-Tip]

I know they ran and threw same amount. The point is they held possession of the ball. Rivers didn't have to go out and throw 50 times to beat a great SEA DEF. If our ground game is sufficient and our D can keep the team in the game, we do not need a top 5 QB to be successful.

That was a top 5 QB performance from Rivers. But if your point is "see, you don't have to throw the ball 50 times as long as you throw for 3 TD and have a 124 QB rating", we're in agreement.

I agree with the Wilson idea that you don't have to have a QB throw 50, 35, or even 25 times a game to win. But I do believe that no matter how much you throw the ball, it must be thrown accurately and well. Wilson has thrown for more than 7.5 YPA each season he's been in the league, with a QB rating of over 100 each year as well. If he's becoming the model for "you don't need to throw the ball a lot to win", then we have to recognize how well he does throw it when necessary.

Brian's rating has been in the mid-80's this year and last, with a YPA that's never reached 6.5. That's good compared to the QB play the Browns have had since the return, but that's setting the bar so low as to be irrelevant. That's why I'm saying that I want to see improvement from him before saying that the search for a franchise QB should be put on the back burner. And to be really specific, I think the key to being one of those low-volume guys is that you are very good at hitting the guys that are open. Sometimes, your WR's just don't get open, and then the QB is left with either an exceptionally tight window, or no window at all. That's why stats alone -- as useful as they can be -- don't tell the full story. But I've been seeing Brian just flat-out miss guys that are clearly open. Just bad throws-- often not difficult ones -- and I don't think that is good enough even in a low-passing volume offense.

No shit, I hope Hoyer improves too, and so do you. But if our team went from the dumpster fire it was last year to possibly making the playoffs and Hoyer's line isn't something horrific, you have to roll with him. Until Johnny proves he is visually better or they feel Mariota is the next son of God, then you stick with Hoyer and draft a QB late.

Having a QB whose line "isn't horrific" does not seem to me to be a good enough reason to pass on a QB in the first round.

BTW, just so you don't think I've got something against Hoyer, he grew up on my street, which wasn't a big one so I saw him a lot. Sentimentally, I'd love for him to succeed. But I don't think sentiment should be the guide when the primary concern is winning.

 

[Jack Brickman]

I'd say the issue is that it's a lot easier to put together a great defense and a good running game than it is to find a truly elite QB, which forces most teams to build competitors based on their ability to stop other teams and manage games rather than through elite QB play.

Obviously, if we can find a franchise QB or a guy we think can be a franchise QB, we need to jump on him. Guys like that don't grow on trees, though, so until we do, we should focus on building a team the other way.

 

[The Human Q-Tip]

I'd say the issue is that it's a lot easier to put together a great defense and a good running game than it is to find a truly elite QB, which forces most teams to build competitors based on their ability to stop other teams and manage games rather than through elite QB play.

How many teams in the league do you think have a "great defense" and a "good running game"?

 

[Jack Brickman]

How many teams in the league do you think have a "great defense" and a "good running game"?

More than the amount that have elite QBs.