+- Cincinnati Bengals Message Board / Forums - Home of Jungle Noise (https://thebengalsboard.com)
+-- Forum: Cincinnati Bengals / NFL (https://thebengalsboard.com/forum-3.html)
+--- Forum: Draft Central (https://thebengalsboard.com/forum-9.html)
+--- Thread: Why'd The Browns Take Two QBs? (/thread-40462.html)
Why'd The Browns Take Two QBs? - BFritz21 - 04-27-2025
I realize that one was taken in the 2nd or 3rd round and one was taken in the fifth, but why the hell would they take two quarterbacks?
They do realize that you only start one quarterback, right?
Are they just hoping that some team has an injury and offers a trade for one of them?
Was it just too much value?
Also, they still owe Watson 92 million over the next two years, so how does that pick make any sense?
RE: Why'd The Browns Take Two QBs? - Stewy - 04-27-2025
Because they're the Browns.
RE: Why'd The Browns Take Two QBs? - BFritz21 - 04-27-2025
(04-27-2025, 12:44 PM)Stewy Wrote: Because they're the Browns.
I know but that seems like a move that's even too Brownsy for the Browns lol
RE: Why'd The Browns Take Two QBs? - CKwi88 - 04-27-2025
Looking at the Brown's QB room, it makes sense. They're clearly in a (perpetual for the Brown's I guess) bridge year at the position. Flacco is a has been. Pickett is a (in all likelihood) never will be. Watson's career is over.
Think what you want about Sanders, but his talent is a steal in round five. Character and baggage maybe not as much, but it's essentially a risk free move.
RE: Why'd The Browns Take Two QBs? - bfine32 - 04-27-2025
(04-27-2025, 01:13 PM)CKwi88 Wrote: Looking at the Brown's QB room, it makes sense. They're clearly in a (perpetual for the Brown's I guess) bridge year at the position. Flacco is a has been. Pickett is a (in all likelihood) never will be. Watson's career is over.
Think what you want about Sanders, but his talent is a steal in round five. Character and baggage maybe not as much, but it's essentially a risk free move.
I'd like to give them credit for playing world-class chess. If a contender takes an injury to their starter, they have trade capital.
Deshawn has taken his last snap in Clev and Flacco is older than Demetris Knight, so you have Picket, Gabriel, and Sanders
RE: Why'd The Browns Take Two QBs? - Clark W Griswold - 04-27-2025
(04-27-2025, 01:54 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I'd like to give them credit for playing world-class chess. If a contender takes an injury to their starter, they have trade capital.
Deshawn has taken his last snap in Clev and Flacco is older than Demetris Knight, so you have Picket, Gabriel, and Sanders
Seriously they still have no trade capital. Every team passed on Sanders multiple times and he’s still a better bet than Gabriel who is at best a career back up. There are much better targets if you need a QB. I don’t think anyone is going to go dumpster-diving into the Browns QB room if they need a QB. If they do manage to trade one they would probably get a worse pick then what they used to get them.
I think ownership called the Sanders pick because the football people already made their choice for a QB.
Taking 2 back-up level QBs in the same draft was a very Browns thing to do.
RE: Why'd The Browns Take Two QBs? - HarleyDog - 04-27-2025
Browns are gonna Brown!
RE: Why'd The Browns Take Two QBs? - SunsetBengal - 04-27-2025
IDK why the Browns took two QBs, neither of which are likely to end up as franchise players for any NFL team, but I'm glad that they did. I've resisted the urge for a day and a half now to call my son and say "I told you Sheduer Sanders would be a Brown". I'll just wait and slip that one in tomorrow, as he usually calls me on his ride home from work.
RE: Why'd The Browns Take Two QBs? - BFritz21 - 04-27-2025
(04-27-2025, 05:09 PM)Clark W Griswold Wrote: Seriously they still have no trade capital. Every team passed on Sanders multiple times and he’s still a better bet than Gabriel who is at best a career back up. There are much better targets if you need a QB. I don’t think anyone is going to go dumpster-diving into the Browns QB room if they need a QB. If they do manage to trade one they would probably get a worse pick then what they used to get them.That's what I'm saying!
I think ownership called the Sanders pick because the football people already made their choice for a QB.
Taking 2 back-up level QBs in the same draft was a very Browns thing to do.
It's like every year they trade back to get more picks and build their draft capital, but they always seem to just keep building draft capital and not their team, or waste picks on players like Gabriel, Sanders, and throwback to Johnny Manzel!
(04-27-2025, 05:40 PM)HarleyDog Wrote: Browns are gonna Brown!ALWAYS!
(04-27-2025, 05:45 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: IDK why the Browns took two QBs, neither of which are likely to end up as franchise players for any NFL team, but I'm glad that they did. I've resisted the urge for a day and a half now to call my son and say "I told you Sheduer Sanders would be a Brown". I'll just wait and slip that one in tomorrow, as he usually calls me on his ride home from work.
I thought he for sure would but then I thought there was no way after they took Gabriel, but the Browns are the Browns!
I appreciate it because they make me realize that having a traumatic brain injury isn't so bad!
RE: Why'd The Browns Take Two QBs? - BFritz21 - 04-27-2025
(04-27-2025, 05:09 PM)Clark W Griswold Wrote: Seriously they still have no trade capital. Every team passed on Sanders multiple times and he’s still a better bet than Gabriel who is at best a career back up. There are much better targets if you need a QB. I don’t think anyone is going to go dumpster-diving into the Browns QB room if they need a QB. If they do manage to trade one they would probably get a worse pick then what they used to get them.
I think ownership called the Sanders pick because the football people already made their choice for a QB.
Taking 2 back-up level QBs in the same draft was a very Browns thing to do.
What I'm wondering is who's going to ever want to trade for either of them?
This was a pretty terrible draft for quarterbacks and neither one is likely to do anything, especially when they're stealing each other's reps in practice and only one is likely to play per game on Sundays. What team is going to come calling with anything to make a trade worthwhile?