Jump to content

Do you know enough to give up on Deshone Kizer?

brownie man

By brownie man
in Cleveland Browns

Do you know enough right now to say its time to move on from Kizer?  

49 members have voted

  1. 1. Do you know enough to say its time to move on from Deshone?

    • Yes I know enough he will not be a franchise QB in Cleveland ever
      20
    • I will decide after he has more time
      17
    • I will decide after I see him with a better supporting cast
      9
    • I am sticking with him for the forseeable future
      3

Recommended Posts

FGK

FGK

Posted
Posted
57 minutes ago, mistakey said:

no im not giving up on him, but im not sold on him.  he has gotten better.   im not hopefull about his long term prospects but alex smith sucked real hard year one too.

Kizer's #s right now are very, very similar to Matt Stafford's first year.

Year Age Tm Pos No. G GS QBrec Cmp Att Cmp% Yds TD TD% Int Int% Lng Y/A AY/A Y/C Y/G Rate QBR Sk Yds NY/A ANY/A Sk% 4QC GWD AV
2017 21 CLE QB 7 12 12 0-12-0 201 373 53.9 2252 9 2.4 17 4.6 44 6.0 4.5 11.2 187.7 61.2 26.6 29 170 5.18 3.72 7.2    
2009    21 DET QB      9 10 10  2-8-0   201  377     53.3 2267 13    3.4 20    5.3   75 6.0     4.3 11.3 226.7 61.0 40.6 24 169   5.23      3.64 6.0      

Note that Kizer has a LOWER INT % (because Hue has had him throw sooooo much), albeit with a lower TD% as well. Their yards per attempt and adjusted yards per attempt are identical. Their QB rating is identical. Their net yards per attempt and adjusted net yards per attempt are identical. Their yards per completion are identical. Their completion % is identical.

Deshone Kizer is basically Matt Stafford as a rookie. Now, will he improve like Stafford did? Who knows? I have no clue. I basically just wanted to point out that this is pretty much exactly what we should have expected starting the 3rd youngest QB in NFL history from day one (note: Stafford got to wait until week 7 to start).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Thomas5737

Thomas5737

Posted
Posted
17 minutes ago, freakygeniuskid said:

Kizer's #s right now are very, very similar to Matt Stafford's first year.

Year Age Tm Pos No. G GS QBrec Cmp Att Cmp% Yds TD TD% Int Int% Lng Y/A AY/A Y/C Y/G Rate QBR Sk Yds NY/A ANY/A Sk% 4QC GWD AV
2017 21 CLE QB 7 12 12 0-12-0 201 373 53.9 2252 9 2.4 17 4.6 44 6.0 4.5 11.2 187.7 61.2 26.6 29 170 5.18 3.72 7.2    
2009    21 DET QB      9 10 10  2-8-0   201  377     53.3 2267 13    3.4 20    5.3   75 6.0     4.3 11.3 226.7 61.0 40.6 24 169   5.23      3.64 6.0      

Note that Kizer has a LOWER INT % (because Hue has had him throw sooooo much), albeit with a lower TD% as well. Their yards per attempt and adjusted yards per attempt are identical. Their QB rating is identical. Their net yards per attempt and adjusted net yards per attempt are identical. Their yards per completion are identical. Their completion % is identical.

Deshone Kizer is basically Matt Stafford as a rookie. Now, will he improve like Stafford did? Who knows? I have no clue. I basically just wanted to point out that this is pretty much exactly what we should have expected starting the 3rd youngest QB in NFL history from day one (note: Stafford got to wait until week 7 to start).

Yeah there are some examples that prove that Kizer at least has a chance to be a competent QB in the future. There are a lot more examples that show there is a chance he will always be a bad QB too. I'd give him a 25-30% chance of being a long term starter somewhere in the league some day. I say we bring him back next year and see if he shows great improvement, but nothing will be promised to him. He probably will even be a longshot to win the starting job but at least he'll be able to show...something.

It isn't time to give up but it is time to make him plan B or C.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
FGK

FGK

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, Thomas5737 said:

Yeah there are some examples that prove that Kizer at least has a chance to be a competent QB in the future. There are a lot more examples that show there is a chance he will always be a bad QB too. I'd give him a 25-30% chance of being a long term starter somewhere in the league some day. I say we bring him back next year and see if he shows great improvement, but nothing will be promised to him. He probably will even be a longshot to win the starting job but at least he'll be able to show...something.

It isn't time to give up but it is time to make him plan B or C.

Yep. I'd start him over whoever we take #1 to give them a few more weeks to adjust and to give Kizer one more shot at the gig. But then if he flops you put in the #1 guys as soon as he's ready. I'm okay getting a Vet in here, but don't know if it's really necessary if we upgrade our QB coaching situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mtmmike

mtmmike

Posted
Posted
59 minutes ago, freakygeniuskid said:

Kizer's #s right now are very, very similar to Matt Stafford's first year.

Year Age Tm Pos No. G GS QBrec Cmp Att Cmp% Yds TD TD% Int Int% Lng Y/A AY/A Y/C Y/G Rate QBR Sk Yds NY/A ANY/A Sk% 4QC GWD AV
2017 21 CLE QB 7 12 12 0-12-0 201 373 53.9 2252 9 2.4 17 4.6 44 6.0 4.5 11.2 187.7 61.2 26.6 29 170 5.18 3.72 7.2    
2009    21 DET QB      9 10 10  2-8-0   201  377     53.3 2267 13    3.4 20    5.3   75 6.0     4.3 11.3 226.7 61.0 40.6 24 169   5.23      3.64 6.0      

Note that Kizer has a LOWER INT % (because Hue has had him throw sooooo much), albeit with a lower TD% as well. Their yards per attempt and adjusted yards per attempt are identical. Their QB rating is identical. Their net yards per attempt and adjusted net yards per attempt are identical. Their yards per completion are identical. Their completion % is identical.

Deshone Kizer is basically Matt Stafford as a rookie. Now, will he improve like Stafford did? Who knows? I have no clue. I basically just wanted to point out that this is pretty much exactly what we should have expected starting the 3rd youngest QB in NFL history from day one (note: Stafford got to wait until week 7 to start).

Excellent post my reasons for not giving up on him.

1Some take some time to find chemistry with there wide receivers even veterans.

2Look at goff

3 Look at wentz rookie years verses 2nd year.

4He has little time to work on chemistry with gordon

5 njoku and him are only 21  and njoku already broke the all time record for touchdowns as a rookie tight end

6 If both him and Darnold turn out to be that good then you can trade them for a  for 3 number 1s ,3 number 2s, plus additional picks

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bruceb

bruceb

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, freakygeniuskid said:

Yep. I'd start him over whoever we take #1 to give them a few more weeks to adjust and to give Kizer one more shot at the gig.

No way, unless you want to start the season with a handful of losses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
FGK

FGK

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, bruceb said:

No way, unless you want to start the season with a handful of losses.

... Because a rookie is going to be so much better? How many rookie QBs have lit it up right out of the gates in the last decade? Maybe 5-6? I think the Kizer we've seen the last couple weeks gives us about that much of a chance. And that's assuming no growth in the offseason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
LETSGOBROWNIES

LETSGOBROWNIES

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, freakygeniuskid said:

Kizer's #s right now are very, very similar to Matt Stafford's first year.

Year Age Tm Pos No. G GS QBrec Cmp Att Cmp% Yds TD TD% Int Int% Lng Y/A AY/A Y/C Y/G Rate QBR Sk Yds NY/A ANY/A Sk% 4QC GWD AV
2017 21 CLE QB 7 12 12 0-12-0 201 373 53.9 2252 9 2.4 17 4.6 44 6.0 4.5 11.2 187.7 61.2 26.6 29 170 5.18 3.72 7.2    
2009    21 DET QB      9 10 10  2-8-0   201  377     53.3 2267 13    3.4 20    5.3   75 6.0     4.3 11.3 226.7 61.0 40.6 24 169   5.23      3.64 6.0      

Note that Kizer has a LOWER INT % (because Hue has had him throw sooooo much), albeit with a lower TD% as well. Their yards per attempt and adjusted yards per attempt are identical. Their QB rating is identical. Their net yards per attempt and adjusted net yards per attempt are identical. Their yards per completion are identical. Their completion % is identical.

Deshone Kizer is basically Matt Stafford as a rookie. Now, will he improve like Stafford did? Who knows? I have no clue. I basically just wanted to point out that this is pretty much exactly what we should have expected starting the 3rd youngest QB in NFL history from day one (note: Stafford got to wait until week 7 to start).

I'll bet Stafford didn't have ANYONE to throw to either.

Certainly no one like Kenny Britt.

Definitely not a HOFer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bruceb

bruceb

Posted
Posted
Just now, freakygeniuskid said:

... Because a rookie is going to be so much better? How many rookie QBs have lit it up right out of the gates in the last decade? Maybe 5-6? I think the Kizer we've seen the last couple weeks gives us about that much of a chance. And that's assuming no growth in the offseason.

I think we need a MOR vet to start and to let both of the kids sit and learn, for a while at least.

The standard seems to be 7-8 games.

We have and certainly will have enough talent to win with an adequate vet.

No need to reach, again on Kizer, or throw a rookie into the fray.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
FGK

FGK

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, mtmmike said:

Look at wentz rookie years verses 2nd year.

And something that often gets missed in talking about Wentz's first year was the split. First 4 games he had 7 TDs and 1 INT. His last 12 games he had 9 TDs and 13 INTs. A lot of people were talking about how the league had figured him out and how maybe we had dodged a bullet.

I'm not saying don't draft someone #1. I am saying that we shouldn't dump Kizer for whatever we can get in the offseason and that (as he is now, if he regresses the next few weeks maybe this changes) it wouldn't be a bad plan to start him next year so that if he vastly improves we can pull a Brees/Rivers but this time actually trade one of them for really good value. (Or hold onto them both for a couple years and have the best backup QB situation in the league).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
LETSGOBROWNIES

LETSGOBROWNIES

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, freakygeniuskid said:

And something that often gets missed in talking about Wentz's first year was the split. First 4 games he had 7 TDs and 1 INT. His last 12 games he had 9 TDs and 13 INTs. A lot of people were talking about how the league had figured him out and how maybe we had dodged a bullet.

I'm not saying don't draft someone #1. I am saying that we shouldn't dump Kizer for whatever we can get in the offseason and that (as he is now, if he regresses the next few weeks maybe this changes) it wouldn't be a bad plan to start him next year so that if he vastly improves we can pull a Brees/Rivers but this time actually trade one of them for really good value. (Or hold onto them both for a couple years and have the best backup QB situation in the league).

Completely agree.

I wouldn't be mad if we brought in a vet either, but I'm not anywhere near ready to move on from Kizer.  Worst case scenario he's the developmental 3rd qb.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mtmmike

mtmmike

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, freakygeniuskid said:

Kizer's #s right now are very, very similar to Matt Stafford's first year.

Year Age Tm Pos No. G GS QBrec Cmp Att Cmp% Yds TD TD% Int Int% Lng Y/A AY/A Y/C Y/G Rate QBR Sk Yds NY/A ANY/A Sk% 4QC GWD AV
2017 21 CLE QB 7 12 12 0-12-0 201 373 53.9 2252 9 2.4 17 4.6 44 6.0 4.5 11.2 187.7 61.2 26.6 29 170 5.18 3.72 7.2    
2009    21 DET QB      9 10 10  2-8-0   201  377     53.3 2267 13    3.4 20    5.3   75 6.0     4.3 11.3 226.7 61.0 40.6 24 169   5.23      3.64 6.0      

Note that Kizer has a LOWER INT % (because Hue has had him throw sooooo much), albeit with a lower TD% as well. Their yards per attempt and adjusted yards per attempt are identical. Their QB rating is identical. Their net yards per attempt and adjusted net yards per attempt are identical. Their yards per completion are identical. Their completion % is identical.

Deshone Kizer is basically Matt Stafford as a rookie. Now, will he improve like Stafford did? Who knows? I have no clue. I basically just wanted to point out that this is pretty much exactly what we should have expected starting the 3rd youngest QB in NFL history from day one (note: Stafford got to wait until week 7 to start).

I also believe he has john elway like rookie number

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mtmmike

mtmmike

Posted
Posted

Ok game on

I think we can pay cousins 130 million over the 1 st two years of his contract his agent would say due you want us to make the announcement at 8am edt.

2 You trade darnold to new york for there 1,2,3 this year plus there 1,2 next year to not put him out on the market.

3then you trade are first pick in the second round to get next years 1st this would give us Cousins plus 3 first round pick next year.

Then you draft barkley and fitzpatrick.

My guess is that team wins 10 games

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing


×
×
  • Create New...