Should the Bengals be shopping for backup QB?

[puddycat]

(08-15-2023, 09:15 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Sorry, not quite making the connection between backups behind Favre and what the Packers attained for Rodgers having to do with the Bengals not having a competent looking backup QB behind Joe Burrow.  You may be onto something, but you're going to have to do a little more leg work, in order to make it cohesive.

I only included what they got for Brunell and Flynn.  I didn't even include what they got for Rodgers, moving two spots up on the first and a second and 5th for a 4th, or, now that you mention it, what they got for Favre (a 4th).  It pays to have good players on your team that you can afford to trade away.  Of all the QBs the Bengals have had over the years, Joe seems like the least likely candidate to be threatened by a good player backing him up.

Yes, you should strive to develop players to be so good as backups that you can't afford to resign them.  The other option is to get bad players or stunt the growth of good players.  The first is a betrayal of the team and the fans because you're purposefully not fielding the best team you can.  The second is a betrayal of the players you drafted who should have the opportunity to become their best.

[wanga]

It’s a worry but who is out there?

[Truck_1_0_1_]

(08-15-2023, 09:15 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Sorry, not quite making the connection between backups behind Favre and what the Packers attained for Rodgers having to do with the Bengals not having a competent looking backup QB behind Joe Burrow.  You may be onto something, but you're going to have to do a little more leg work, in order to make it cohesive.

Exactly.

How about:

- Ty Detmer
- Doug Pederson (didn't draft, but developed him)
- Jay Barker
- Kyle Wachholtz
- Ron McAda
- Aaron Brooks
- Craig Nall
- Ingle Martin
- Brian Brohm (in the 2nd round!)
- BJ Coleman
- Brett Hundley

How about all of those guys? The drafting pretty much stopped when McCarthy came onboard (Brohm and on), but just look at the waste of draft picks on QBs that didn't amount to anything: if this strategy works for 2/10 times, it is absolutely NOT worth it (and while Brooks was good, he was released, so he doesn't fall under the Brunell/Hasselbeck sitch).

To put in perspective, this is what we did in that same time period ('93 to recent):

- John Walsh
- Scott Covington
- Casey Bramlet
- Jeff Rowe
- Macaroni

And one of those (Macaroni) at least started and won games for us (in spite of him, actually lol). So yes, this whole, "draft a QB to develop and trade," almost NEVER works out, thus I wouldn't look to GB as the model on this.

[puddycat]

Seriously? The Packer leading passer has been named Favre or Rodgers for all but one year since 1993. They have been to the playoffs 22 of 30 years and won 2 Super Bowls. The Bengals have had 9 QBs over the same period including 4 1st rounders and 3 #1 picks. The Bengals have been to the playoffs 9 times over the same period and until 2022 hadn't won a playoff game. I don't think it's going out on a limb to say that GB has been better at QB than the Bengals.

[Rotobeast]

Now... hear me out.
He's not getting a huge salary, but I don't think a 3rd stringer (let's face it, Browning looks to be taking #2) is worth his salary. I doubt we are actively talking to legitimately decent free agent QBs.

So you're asking yourself, "Roto...what do you propose ?".

I propose we get more value and versatility for that $1.3 mill. I'd be willing to offer Mohamed Sanu a shot at that 3rd spot. He'd also be able to fill in at WR or RB in a pinch.

He has an 87.5 completion percentage with an average of 29.1 yds, with 50% of throws being tuddy's.


I'm only half serious here, but it would be an interesting emergency QB.


Sent from my SM-S515DL using Tapatalk

[*bfine32*]

(08-23-2023, 12:15 AM)Rotobeast Wrote: Now... hear me out.
He's not getting a huge salary, but I don't think a 3rd stringer (let's face it, Browning looks to be taking #2) is worth his salary. I doubt we are actively talking to legitimately decent free agent QBs.

So you're asking yourself, "Roto...what do you propose ?".

I propose we get more value and versatility for that $1.3 mill. I'd be willing to offer Mohamed Sanu a shot at that 3rd spot. He'd also be able to fill in at WR or RB in a pinch.

He has an 87.5 completion percentage with an average of 29.1 yds, with 50% of throws being tuddy's.


I'm only half serious here, but it would be an interesting emergency QB.


Sent from my SM-S515DL using Tapatalk

FWIW, I think they changed the Emergency QB rule this year. You can have a 3rd that doesn't count.

As to cutting Simien. I think Zac is guilty of the same thing Marvin was when it came to LBs. He sees himself as a QB whisperer. Just stop it and sign a decent QB2

[Rotobeast]

(08-23-2023, 12:37 AM)bfine32 Wrote: FWIW, I think they changed the Emergency QB rule this year. You can have a 3rd that doesn't count.

As to cutting Simien. I think Zac is guilty of the same thing Marvin was when it came to LBs. He sees himself as a QB whisperer. Just stop it and sign a decent QB2

I think you're correct on Zac. It'd be tough to admit you were wrong on your assessment of Siemien if you were considered a really good QB coach.

I was aware of the emergency QB change. That is actually what prompted me to humor the idea that it might be nifty to have a guy who could play 3 spots on the roster, who really didn't count against the roster. I guess if they jumped into a spot that wasn't QB, it would change things. It'd be a fairly nice safety net, though.

Sent from my SM-S515DL using Tapatalk

[coachmcneil71]

(08-23-2023, 12:37 AM)bfine32 Wrote: FWIW, I think they changed the Emergency QB rule this year. You can have a 3rd that doesn't count.

As to cutting Simien. I think Zac is guilty of the same thing Marvin was when it came to LBs. He sees himself as a QB whisperer. Just stop it and sign a decent QB2

Agree! The current weakest link on the team is QB 2. Simien isn't the one.  

[*pally*]

(08-23-2023, 12:37 AM)bfine32 Wrote: FWIW, I think they changed the Emergency QB rule this year. You can have a 3rd that doesn't count.

As to cutting Simien. I think Zac is guilty of the same thing Marvin was when it came to LBs. He sees himself as a QB whisperer. Just stop it and sign a decent QB2

Zac himself has said the backup position is unsettled. Right now I would bet on Jake Browning but this week’s game may flip the script.
Either way they are only going to carry 2 QBs on the 53 man roster. That means for the Bengals the emergency QB rule becomes a moot point. In order to have that 3rd QB available on game day they must be on the roster to begin with.

Whichever QB doesn’t make the 53 will then be signed to the PS. However, there is a distinct possibility that neither guy makes the team and they bring in someone off the streets.

Keep an eye on SaN Francisco, Brandon Allen is going to be the odd man out on their roster. I would not be shocked if he is brought back to be Joe’s backup if neither Browning or Simien show improvement in the last game

[*Go Cards*]

Think Browning has won the #2 spot as well, yet thought the same last season only to see Allen win the job.

[SunsetBengal]

(08-23-2023, 07:24 AM)Go Cards Wrote: Think Browning has won the #2 spot as well, yet thought the same last season only to see Allen win the job.

Between Siemien and Browning, Browning is the clear cut leader in my eyes.  He appears to be able to think on his feet and extend a play when his first or second look isn't open.  Should the Bengals have to rely on a backup for a game or two in regular season play, I feel like Browning would at least have moderate success with the rest of the starting offense.

[Truck_1_0_1_]

Mike Santagata (@bengals_sans) tweeted yesterday (and intimated on LockedOn) that he thinks they have completely changed the scheme around for the PS, to see if the team can switch up if Burrow goes down, 'cause Browning cannot run the spread offense that we run (but Siemien can) and that could be why both have struggled: Siemien because he can't do what we do normally and Browning because he just sucks and causes chaos lol. (FTR, he said he's pick Browning because he'd rather a backup be chaotic)

That was a hypothesis he had, not that it is a dead-on accurate fact or anything.

Still, something to think about.

[XenoMorph]

After these first 2 games im predicting on backup QB isnt on the roster at the moment lol

[*ochocincos*]

(08-23-2023, 12:46 AM)Rotobeast Wrote: I think you're correct on Zac. It'd be tough to admit you were wrong on your assessment of Siemien if you were considered a really good QB coach.

I was aware of the emergency QB change. That is actually what prompted me to humor the idea that it might be nifty to have a guy who could play 3 spots on the roster, who really didn't count against the roster. I guess if they jumped into a spot that wasn't QB, it would change things. It'd be a fairly nice safety net, though.

Sent from my SM-S515DL using Tapatalk

Could also be that Taylor needs more than one offseason to get Siemian where he wants him to be.
Or maybe Siemian isn't as good of a fit for this offensive scheme compared to what he was in at New Orleans.

[740Bengal]

No because the ship is sunk if 9 goes down, no need to waste money, no 9 no super bowl contention, just the facts.

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(08-23-2023, 10:14 AM)XenoMorph Wrote: After these first 2 games im predicting on backup QB isnt on the roster at the moment lol

Just my opinion but Browning is clearly better than Siemian from what I have seen. But still, it isn't a strength that is for sure.

Would be all for adding a QB if there is an upgrade, I just don't think we will and we will roll with Browning.

Could be wrong though and that would be nice. It is true that we are dead in the water if Burrow goes down, but I would like a 
guy that we could put in if we are up big that could get the job done and look decent doing it. I have no faith in Siemian doing 
such from what we have seen, he is crazy inaccurate.

[*Nately120*]

Yea if Burrow goes down we're up a creek, but we supposedly have this ace coaching staff and two #1 WRs, so they should be able to tread water with a backup QB until Burrow can get back in there. A lot of starting QBs miss a few games and the team needs to be OK enough to not blow the entire season while he heals up.

[Whacked]

I can’t believe I’m saying this but we should have kept B. Allen …….and he isn’t even that good.

Someone else (other than him or these 2) that is actually “capable” or even serviceable would be invaluable as we make a SB push.

Look what Dallas, the Stains and RatTurds did last year with their backups.

Yes. I’m jelly.

[*Nately120*]

(08-23-2023, 02:16 PM)Whacked Wrote: I can’t believe I’m saying this but we should have kept B. Allen …….and he isn’t even that good.

Someone else (other than him or these 2) that is actually “capable” or even serviceable would be invaluable as we make a SB push.

Look what Dallas, the Stains and RatTurds did last year with their backups.

Yes. I’m jelly.

The Ravens, exactly.  They made the playoffs and damn near beat us with a backup QB.  I'm not expecting anyone to come in and Nick Foles us into a SB win, but we supposedly have the top WR corps and an elite coaching staff, so I'm not willing to just say "Lose 'em all!" the second we lose Burrow, as crappy as that would be.

Burrow is the top man sure, but this team has too much talent and coaching to just give up without him, right?  Imagine the universe where Burrow goes down during an MVP season and Carson Wentz comes off the bench to be the Foles to Burrow's Wentz.  I've just sat through too many "playing for a draft pick" seasons to do so at this moment. 

[Whacked]

(08-23-2023, 02:34 PM)Nately120 Wrote: The Ravens, exactly.  They made the playoffs and damn near beat us with a backup QB.  I'm not expecting anyone to come in and Nick Foles us into a SB win, but we supposedly have the top WR corps and an elite coaching staff, so I'm not willing to just say "Lose 'em all!" the second we lose Burrow, as crappy as that would be.

Burrow is the top man sure, but this team has too much talent and coaching to just give up without him, right?  Imagine the universe where Burrow goes down during an MVP season and Carson Wentz comes off the bench to be the Foles to Burrow's Wentz.  I've just sat through too many "playing for a draft pick" seasons to do so at this moment. 

Preach !!
X2