The Cleveland Browns draft didn't draw many raves from the experts. Most consider the front office a bunch of C students. Is that fair?
CLEVELAND, Ohio -- Not many of the experts loved the Browns draft.
In fact, most didn't like it very much.
Grading drafts is both fun and dumb. I've never really done it.
I was wondering what the "experts" thought of the Browns delivering a draft of 14 players ... five trades ... four wide receivers ... and a surprising quarterback pick.
Rob Rang (CBS Sports) gave the Browns a C-minus. His main point was this: "The Browns 14 picks look great on paper, but if Carson Wentz proves to be a legitimate franchise quarterback in Philadelphia (and Cody Kessler does not), the passionate fans in Cleveland will once again be left disappointed."
Before looking deeper in the draft, I want a definition of a "franchise quarterback."
For weeks, I kept hearing that phrase...
Franchise quarterback...
Franchise quarterback...
Franchise quarterback...
Is Matt Ryan a franchise quarterback? How about Ryan Tannehill? Or Matt Stafford? Or Jay Cutler?
I'll return to quarterbacks in a bit, but I have major doubts about them being "franchise quarterbacks."
A "franchise quarterback" sounds like a special player.
Heading into 2017, I have these players on my "franchise quarterback" list: Tom Brady, Ben Roethlisberger, Drew Brees, Philip Rivers, Carson Palmer, Eli Manning, Joe Flacco, Aaron Rodgers, Cam Newton, Andrew Luck, Tony Romo and Russell Wilson.
That's 12.
To make it a draft-day dozen, I'll even add Andy Dalton. He hasn't won a playoff game, but he has a 50-26-1 regular-season record.
In my mind, a Franchise Quarterback is a consistent winner who usually has his team in the playoffs.
THE QUARTERBACK HUNT
Carson Wentz is the North Dakota State quarterback who was the No. 2 pick in the draft. The Browns traded that choice to Philadelphia. They made a second deal, dropping from No. 8 to No. 15 in the draft.
Their first pick was Baylor receiver Corey Coleman.
ESPN's Mel Kiper gave the Browns draft a "C", and that's the lowest grade Kiper delivered. He preferred TCU wide receiver Josh Doctson over Coleman.
"In part, this draft will be remembered for what Carson Wentz becomes," wrote Kiper. "With Cleveland, it always comes back to the quarterback."
There was almost a consensus among most experts grading the draft that Wentz is likely to become "a franchise quarterback." He is a 23-year-old who started 23 games for a powerhouse NCAA Subdivision program.
I'm surprised how many people seem so sure about Wentz.
THE NEXT LEVEL
After my group of 13 "franchise quarterbacks," there are some young passers who are very intriguing: Teddy Bridgewater, Derek Carr and Blake Bortles.
Carr and Bridgewater were available to the Browns in 2014 when they drafted Johnny Manziel. The three teams with Bridgewater, Carr and Bortles are content with their quarterback situations. I wish the Browns had any of those guys.
But it's far too early to call them "franchise quarterbacks."
What about Cutler, Stafford, Tannehill and Ryan? Cutler was the No. 11 pick in 2006. He has a career 67-67 record. Clearly, he is a legitimate NFL starter. But a franchise quarterback?
Or how about Stafford, the No. 1 pick in 2009. He has a 42-51 career record with the Lions. Or Ryan, the No. 3 pick in 2008. His record with Atlanta is 74-52, but it's 18-20 in the last three years. Or Tannehill, the No. 8 pick in 2012. He's 29-35 for Miami.
If you want to call these guys "franchise quarterbacks," you are really talking about viable NFL starters. But "franchise quarterback" implies a quarterback who dramatically and positively impacts a franchise.
PLAYING THE ODDS
The odds are none of the quarterbacks in the 2016 draft are truly franchise changers. That includes California's Jared Goff, who was the No. 1 pick to Los Angeles.
At this time a year ago, did you even hear of Wentz or Goff?
Before the 2014 draft, I liked Bridgewater better than any of the quarterbacks in this draft.
Part of the analytics approach to the draft is playing the odds, turning picks into more picks -- so you can pick more players.
Obviously, if you truly are convinced a quarterback is likely to be a real franchise-changer ... or even a possible one such as Bridgewater and Carr ... pick the guy at No. 2. The Browns had major doubts about Wentz, and they decided to cash in the No. 2 pick and go the Mr. Big Volume approach.
Profootballfocus gave them an "A" for the draft. The analytics site rated Coleman as the top receiver in the draft. Another analytic site -- Football Outsiders -- rated Coleman as having the "highest playmaker score" of any player in the draft.
I'm not sure I'm handing the Browns an "A," but I like the Big Volume draft approach of taking college players who have been extremely productive on the field and stayed away from big trouble away from the field.
DRAFTING 14 PLAYERS
Sports Illustrated gave the Browns a "C+," wondering, "How many of this year's 14 newcomers will stick?"
That's the wrong question, at least when framed by "14 newcomers." The real question is how many starters do the Browns find in this draft? If it's 4-5, that's a tremendous draft. It doesn't matter that they had 14 picks to find five starters.
Sports Illustrated raised a good point about pass rushers Emmanuel Ogbah and Carl Nassib playing in 4-3 defenses in college, and how will that translate to the Browns' 3-4. I also wonder about that.
Chad Reuter (NFL.com) gave the Browns a "B+".
He liked the drafting of Coleman. He wrote, "Getting four extra picks to move down eight spots is a good deal, if you buy the 'more is more' theory when it comes to accumulating selection. Only capitalizing on extra selection will make it a great deal... Building on the line was a high priority, and they did just that..."
Capitalizing on your picks obviously is what matters, regardless of how many you have in a draft. But when the Browns opened the 2014 draft with 10 picks ... and ended up with only six players ... that's going from more-is-more to less-is-more.
Players remaining from the 2014 draft are Joel Bitonio, Chris Kirksey, Justin Gilbert and Pierre Desir. They also received a 2015 first-rounder, and that became Cameron Erving.
HOW ABOUT THE QUARTERBACK?
It seems the Browns are the only ones with a high opinion of USC quarterback Cody Kessler, their third-round pick. Actually, he was their THIRD pick in the THIRD round ... No. 93. It's where the Big Volume approach allowed them to perhaps take Kessler "too high."
ESPN's Kiper wrote: "They should have gotten safety Justin Simmons at the end of Round 3 instead of reaching on Cody Kessler, a player who lacks starter upside."
Pete Prisco of CBS wrote: "Using a third-round pick on Cody Kessler is really strange. I know (Browns coach) Hue Jackson has ties to USC, but is he really worth a third-round pick?"
Sports Illustrated wrote: "The Browns sound as if they like QB Cody Kessler a ton, straying quite a bit from the feeling outside their building."
Even Profootballfocus had doubts: "Kessler is as accurate as any quarterback in this draft ... but he doesn't have a great arm and he can be slow to process the pocket at times."
Some experts said Browns fans should compare Kessler to Wentz. That's odd. A better standard is how Kessler performs compared to some quarterbacks drafted after him, such as Connor Cook, Kevin Hogan, Cardale Jones and Dak Prescott.
I like the Browns' overall approach. I also have doubts about Kessler, but he's their third pick in the third round. If it's a miss, it's not a franchise shaker.
Since everyone is grading, I'll use a Hue Jackson line. ... Not the "You gotta trust me on this one" that he uttered about Kessler. Rather, it's when Jackson said this of Corey Coleman: "His arrow goes through the roof."
The Browns grade?
I give them a solid "B" with a chance for their arrow to go through the roof.