Keep Texans Talk Google Ad Free!
Venmo Tip Jar | Paypal Tip Jar
Thanks for your support! 🍺😎👍

Official Brock Osweiler MVP Watch Thread!

Its not Brock.....or the oline....or the rb......or any of the personnel.....

The offensive coaching is absolutely dreadful.

Give a better coach this same exact talent and they're not last in the league in ppg.


There are coaches that have done better with worse talent on offense.

I can totally agree with this, tho it's hard to imagine succeeding at all behind the woeful OL. Maybe better coaching would equal better play
 
Its not Brock.....or the oline....or the rb......or any of the personnel.....

The offensive coaching is absolutely dreadful.

Give a better coach this same exact talent and they're not last in the league in ppg.


There are coaches that have done better with worse talent on offense.


I agree with that. I'm hoping they're still trying things out. Sort of preseason plus. As soon as they get that out of the way & get down to coaching to win, much like the difference we saw on defense last season, about this time, then we'll finally see the team we thought we would.
 
I can totally agree with this, tho it's hard to imagine succeeding at all behind the woeful OL. Maybe better coaching would equal better play

While I'm railing about our line talent in another thread, there are certainly coaches who can turn what we have into lemonade. Or at least lemon-water until a couple drafts have passed. When you look at some of the better running teams most years, they create linemen - as opposed to relying on them. Belichick is churning out solid linemen, Kubiak does, Shanahan does, Harbaugh and Tomlin would if they could stay healthy. Sure a first rounder at LT and a high pick or two is required to anchor the unit (which we have), but coaching and a favorable scheme can work wonders for making a bad line look adequate. Or, if like I tend to preach in the draft threads, someone tells the owner where to stick it and drafts a bunch of offensive lineman - all of a sudden things start magically working out (*cough* Dallas).
 
[Note not only Os's ranking, but also the disparity between Hoyer and Fitzpatrick.]


CugR5rqW8AUboIt.jpg:large


ProFootballReference ‏@pfref 17h17 hours ago
Bottom 5 QBs in ANY/A: Flacco, Winston, Fitzpatrick, Osweiler, Gabbert http://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/2016/passing.htm#passing::26…
 
Last edited:
Walk into a 12 win team ... blow it up! And selectively bring everyone back because your future signings suck ass. 3 years later you're forced to quit dicking around at quarterback, break the bank, and he's worse than the place-holder you were gifted in the beginning (who is starting elsewhere).

Is our front office the drunk guy that calls into radio shows at 7pm on Sundays?
 
Why do so many fans try their best to throw in the notion of a player being in the league for more than a year. It's pretty redundant and really doesn't make any sense. Brock being in the NFL for 5 years but only played half of season is basically a sophomore at this point. Another thing all because there are a few rookies that are playing good right now should not be an indictment on Brock's play. You have to factor in every component to make a team successful. Brock doesn't have the luxury of a healthy good offensive line. Brock doesn't have a good running game. Finally we don't have a good coaching staff. Yes his mechanics doesn't look good, his decision making isn't good and his mental time clock is racing at a high rate.

As we all can see there are different scenarios going on here. So we can not knock Brock for not being in a good situation like Dak and Wentz. Plus those two are not tasked with the entire playbook like Brock either. They are being brought along slowly
They are only being asked to do what they have shown they can do, just as Brock is. They are looking good, Brock is not. Is it 100% Brocks fault no. The Dumb throws yes, the bad blocking no, not every pick is because of pressure just bad choices. Someone needs to step up, if Dhop looses faith in him, won't be long till everyone follows. 1 bounce passes, over throws, wide left throws, he plays tight and he plays scared, happy feet. He does need O-line help, the rest is in his head.
 
Sorry, I'm not responding to this line of "argument".

you just did...

If you don't want to share your thinking, why are you here? I'm not trying to argue but to learn. I don't see how Osweiler can be evaluated as a 5th year player when he didn't play for the first 3 and played less than half of the 4th year. He's here learning a new way of doing things, he hasn't been learning it for 5 years as you imply
 
you just did...

If you don't want to share your thinking, why are you here? I'm not trying to argue but to learn. I don't see how Osweiler can be evaluated as a 5th year player when he didn't play for the first 3 and played less than half of the 4th year. He's here learning a new way of doing things, he hasn't been learning it for 5 years as you imply

I get what you're saying, but does it really matter?

He's being compared to rookies & still coming out on the bad end...

No matter how you look at it, he doesn't compare well, right now.

He's at the bottom of the league with Fitzpatrick, Keenum, & Gabbert.

But I do agree with you... it doesn't mean what they think it means. Not now. I'd rather wait until the end of the year before I'd say anything definitive about Osweiler. At least then I can assume the coaches tried everything they can think of to make him successful.

Even the eyeball test isn't definitive now either. He looks easily rattled when that was the one thing you could say the Texans based their decision to get him, cost being no object. Last year in more meaningful situations, he didn't look so skittish & his OL was just as bad.

For whatever reason, he was much more comfortable in that situation than he is now. Maybe because he knew the offense well enough then, that he didn't have to think. Maybe because he wasn't worried about living up to a $37M guaranteed contract. Maybe because he's worried about proving something now that he wasn't trying to prove then... who knows.

But right now, he doesn't compare well against anyone.
 
you just did...

If you don't want to share your thinking, why are you here? I'm not trying to argue but to learn. I don't see how Osweiler can be evaluated as a 5th year player when he didn't play for the first 3 and played less than half of the 4th year. He's here learning a new way of doing things, he hasn't been learning it for 5 years as you imply
There's plenty of things a FB player can learn from the bench.

But since you don't believe that, I saw no use to counter.

My response was to acknowledge that I had read your post.
(And had decided that further discourse would lead nowhere).
 
I do believe this, but don't believe the game will slow down for him sitting on the bench
OK, if you insist to be entertained, look up the quote by Osweiler what he "supposedly" learned from Peyton Manning.

I'm positive there are plenty football players out there that will tell you about their mentor(s); and it wasn't just at the QB position.

There are also many QBs that had said how much running the scout teams had benefited them.

There's a boat load to learn.
It's up to the individual player to recognize the thing he needs to learn to advance himself in the trade.
 
They are only being asked to do what they have shown they can do, just as Brock is. They are looking good, Brock is not. Is it 100% Brocks fault no. The Dumb throws yes, the bad blocking no, not every pick is because of pressure just bad choices. Someone needs to step up, if Dhop looses faith in him, won't be long till everyone follows. 1 bounce passes, over throws, wide left throws, he plays tight and he plays scared, happy feet. He does need O-line help, the rest is in his head.


It would be in your head to if you know your blindside isn't being protected. Or when you know you doesn't have enough time or consistent time in the pocket. We witness this with Carr but without the mobility.
 
OK, if you insist to be entertained, look up the quote by Osweiler what he "supposedly" learned from Peyton Manning.

I'm positive there are plenty football players out there that will tell you about their mentor(s); and it wasn't just at the QB position.

There are also many QBs that had said how much running the scout teams had benefited them.

There's a boat load to learn.
It's up to the individual player to recognize the thing he needs to learn to advance himself in the trade.


Mallett said he learnt a lot from Brady and how did that translate on and off the field? Sometimes what a person learn from a great mentor just doesn't manifest or register like we think it would.

Coaching has to put a young player in the right situation to succeed. Currently our offensive staff is not getting it done.
 
Mallett said he learnt a lot from Brady and how did that translate on and off the field? Sometimes what a person learn from a great mentor just doesn't manifest or register like we think it would.

Coaching has to put a young player in the right situation to succeed. Currently our offensive staff is not getting it done.

Just let the words "Mallet said he learned a lot from Brady" really sinks in for a moment.

Did Mallet say it?
He did.

That means he believes it was beneficial to him.

Or perhaps, read what Jaworski and Vick had to say about the matter.
http://www.pressofatlanticcity.com/...cle_8a42ef78-3337-11e6-8621-5b1938aaff78.html

They clearly believed they had benefited from the time on the bench.

You don't have to "listen" to me.
 
Just let the words "Mallet said he learned a lot from Brady" really sinks in for a moment.

Did Mallet say it?
He did.

That means he believes it was beneficial to him.

Or perhaps, read what Jaworski and Vick had to say about the matter.
http://www.pressofatlanticcity.com/...cle_8a42ef78-3337-11e6-8621-5b1938aaff78.html

They clearly believed they had benefited from the time on the bench.

You don't have to "listen" to me.

You've heard of the law of diminishing returns, right?

Plus former starters put in backup roles always say they benefit as ordinary course, it's just being a good teammate, fill the interview without griping, player speak. But that's very different than sitting for years after coming out of college.
 
Look up the story for Kurt Warner.

Some NFL coaches believed that he had the talent, but he wasn't ready.
He was a PS player in 94.
He played in the AFC before became a third stringer in 1998.
And then he emerged big time in 1999.

Tell me he didn't learn anything from the bench.
 
After 12 starts;

QB (A)
55.7 % completions
19 TD, 23 INT
67.3 passer rating
6.2 Y/A

QB (B)
60.4% completions
15 TD, 12 INT
80.4 passer rating
6.7 Y/A

Even though Brock is statistically one of the worst QBs in the league right now, and it's frustrating as hell seeing guys like Wentz and Prescott with the fast starts, 12 games does not a career make.

(A) is Peyton, BTW.
Speedy it is frustrating but those two young quarterbacks have much better offensive lines. Especially the Cowboys offensive line. History has not been kind to young QB's who were forced to start on teams with bad to barely average offensive lines.

We experienced that with David Car who still gets scapegoated for doing poorly on a team with hardly any kind of offensive line.
 
Look up the story for Kurt Warner.

Some NFL coaches believed that he had the talent, but he wasn't ready.
He was a PS player in 94.
He played in the AFC before became a third stringer in 1998.
And then he emerged big time in 1999.

Tell me he didn't learn anything from the bench.

Nice omissions like say he started 1995-1997 in the Arena Football league not rode the bench and started in Europe in 1998. That bears no comparison to riding the bench now.
 
Just let the words "Mallet said he learned a lot from Brady" really sinks in for a moment.

Did Mallet say it?
He did.

That means he believes it was beneficial to him.

Or perhaps, read what Jaworski and Vick had to say about the matter.
http://www.pressofatlanticcity.com/...cle_8a42ef78-3337-11e6-8621-5b1938aaff78.html

They clearly believed they had benefited from the time on the bench.

You don't have to "listen" to me.

Everybody including us are molded differently. Some people are the hands on type of learner while you have some that learn from reading it and then applying it.

I'm not disputing the fact that some can learn from the bench.
 
So, if there's no benefit in sitting a QB, why bother drafting any guy and do so.

Just start your NFL team by drafting a QB, and let him play right away.
It doesn't matter who's his backup.

And then do it all over again.
 
So, if there's no benefit in sitting a QB, why bother drafting any guy and do so.

Just start your NFL team by drafting a QB, and let him play right away.
It doesn't matter who's his backup.

And then do it all over again.

Who said no benefit? What I see people arguing is diminishing return.
 
So, if there's no benefit in sitting a QB, why bother drafting any guy and do so.

Just start your NFL team by drafting a QB, and let him play right away.
It doesn't matter who's his backup.

And then do it all over again.

I just don't understand your argument. No one is saying that sitting on the bench can't be benificial.

And sitting and learning benefits each differently. But the original point that a much lesser talent in Os wasn't (nor should be expected to be ) that far ahead of #1 pick P. Manning.
 
you just did...

If you don't want to share your thinking, why are you here? I'm not trying to argue but to learn. I don't see how Osweiler can be evaluated as a 5th year player when he didn't play for the first 3 and played less than half of the 4th year. He's here learning a new way of doing things, he hasn't been learning it for 5 years as you imply
Let me see if this analogy makes sense.

You learn driving with a small 4-door automatic.

Later on, you was given a stick-shift, or a 2-door, or a station wagon, or a van, whatever.

Didn't you learn the rules of the road?
Didn't you learn certain skills about handling a car?
 
you're the one taking the discussion in a different direction
Whether I did, or somebody else started for me, is irrelevant.

That was why I didn't even want to venture down the road, and had said so.

You want me to expound and now you start with the accusation.
Nice!
 
After 12 starts;

QB (A)
55.7 % completions
19 TD, 23 INT
67.3 passer rating
6.2 Y/A

QB (B)
60.4% completions
15 TD, 12 INT
80.4 passer rating
6.7 Y/A

Even though Brock is statistically one of the worst QBs in the league right now, and it's frustrating as hell seeing guys like Wentz and Prescott with the fast starts, 12 games does not a career make.

(A) is Peyton, BTW.
Here's the point.

And I reply that one cannot compare a rookie with a 5th year veteran.

It's implied in the response that a 5th year QB had had plenty of chances to learn about the NFL, and thus gains an automatic advantage (unless he's not any good to begin with and has a low capacity of learning.)
 
He does need O-line help, the rest is in his head.
You are correct. However the other young Qb's have better o-lines and they also have coaches who know how to utilize thier young Qb's when those o-lines allow considerable pressure.

We can not change who we have on the o-line but with proper coaching we can get more out of our offense than we have for the most part.

Two examples of situations that lend themselves to good and bad.

In the Titans game Brock and the offense was creative and successful early on. The o-line gave him adequate time. However that changed and the coaches had no answers for the Titans defensive adjustments. Brock held up okay but at times he does try to press the issue by zeroing in on receivers and trying to force things. That is bad but it is not like something that is uncoachable.

As far as the game against the Vikings. Brock and the offense was ineffective from the start and before Brock and his teammates knew it they were down 14-0 and the Vikings could Tee off on Brock.

Not much longer than that the score was 24-3 and Brock was pressing to get the team back in the game. That usually is not a good place to be.

Brock got pressured so much early that when there was time he had no comfort level and played like there was pressure at all times when there wasn't and he had some opportunities wasted.

Brock has flashed signs of being pretty good so I will not write him off after only 5 games as a Texan. I will take all things into consideration.

What we can't have is teams jumping on us quick and having to play from behind. Unlike the Titans who adjusted things it seems our coaches are not good at adjusting.

It was that way for parts of last season so it's no mirrage.

The season is still somewhat young but our coaches must step up and show us they can utilize what we have at it's best.

Of coarse Brock must work on his bad tendancies to be most effective. He wanted to come and prove he can be a top Qb so there are no excuses for him to make. He needs to prove he has the IT factor. If he does not have the IT factor or at least show more signs of becoming a Qb with the IT factor we stand no chance.

I could list the Pats game but this is already too long. Lets just say it had simlarities to the Vikings game.
 
Last edited:
Here's the point.

And I reply that one cannot compare a rookie with a 5th year veteran.

It's implied in the response that a 5th year QB had had plenty of chances to learn about the NFL, and thus gains an automatic advantage (unless he's not any good to begin with and has a low capacity of learning.)

And I just think you are putting too much weight on the "years advantage"

There are a lot more reasons to compare than not to.

12 starts = 12 starts

1 off season, tc, preseason as the clear undisputed starter = 1 offseason, tc, preseason as the clear undisputed starter

So it's does the other years of learning different stuff = Much greater talent and ability... yes and maybe smarts too
 
Just wanted to interject quickly about the "he's shown flashes" line of thinking. Every single QB that's made it to the NFL can "flash" greatness. They are all superior athletes and within the top percentile of all college QBs. The difference between someone who "shows flashes" and someone who is good/great or even average is consistency. Even the worst nfl QB in history could show flashes. This doesn't tell me anything about Brock's long term likeliness to succeed.

Is it early? Yeah, absolutely
Is he a bust? Not yet
Is he doing well? Hell no

So far he sucks. Big time. Maybe he'll turn it around, maybe not. Comparing him to Peyton is silly. Peyton was a fresh rookie on one of the worst teams in the NFL. We were supposedly "one piece away" and spent big in FA to bolster our offense.
 
And I just think you are putting too much weight on the "years advantage"

There are a lot more reasons to compare than not to.

12 starts = 12 starts

1 off season, tc, preseason as the clear undisputed starter = 1 offseason, tc, preseason as the clear undisputed starter

So it's does the other years of learning different stuff = Much greater talent and ability... yes and maybe smarts too
You see, I was expecting this.

That was why I didn't think expounding on the matter would lead anywhere.

:worldpeace:
 
Just wanted to interject quickly about the "he's shown flashes" line of thinking. Every single QB that's made it to the NFL can "flash" greatness. They are all superior athletes and within the top percentile of all college QBs. The difference between someone who "shows flashes" and someone who is good/great or even average is consistency. Even the worst nfl QB in history could show flashes. This doesn't tell me anything about Brock's long term likeliness to succeed.

Is it early? Yeah, absolutely
Is he a bust? Not yet
Is he doing well? Hell no

So far he sucks. Big time. Maybe he'll turn it around, maybe not. Comparing him to Peyton is silly. Peyton was a fresh rookie on one of the worst teams in the NFL. We were supposedly "one piece away" and spent big in FA to bolster our offense.
We were all worried about the offensive line this season and so far it seems we were correct in doing so. That is not a total excuse but it is a solid reason for poor Qb play. Along with no solid direction being shown from our coaching staff.

The NFL is full of wasted Qb talents by way of playing with crap for offensive lines. Ours is not crap but so far they are not very good either. They aren't as bad as those lines David Carr had to play behind.

As a team there is not a lot to be happy about.

I can live with Brock failing if he does. He has this season and maybe part of next season to at least look like someone we can win games with and not have the better share of our failures rest on him.

So far I am calling it a wash. The team is in serious need of improvement all around. Lets see if coach O'Brien is the right coach for this team as much as we look to see if Brock is our future at the Qb position. These two men are tied together so most likely if things do not go well they both will be done as Texans.
 
Last edited:
You see, I was expecting this.

That was why I didn't think expounding on the matter would lead anywhere.

:worldpeace:

So you don't want to talk about it because you can't change any minds? Sorry, thought this was a MB for an exchanging of thoughts and ideas
 
So you don't want to talk about it because you can't change any minds? Sorry, thought this was a MB for an exchanging of thoughts and ideas
No, I never had any thought about changing anybody's mind.

To be honest, since I've already grasped the extent of others' opinion on a certain matter; I just figure it's best to let it rest.

All the arguments for and against are already there before I said a single word on the matter.

There was nothing left to "share".
 
No, I never had any thought about changing anybody's mind.

To be honest, since I've already grasped the extent of others' opinion on a certain matter; I just figure it's best to let it rest.

All the arguments for and against are already there before I said a single word on the matter.

There was nothing left to "share".

Yeah ok :ok: But you shouldn't belittle yourself like that. I think you have some good observations when you care to "share"
 
No, I never had any thought about changing anybody's mind.

To be honest, since I've already grasped the extent of others' opinion on a certain matter; I just figure it's best to let it rest.

All the arguments for and against are already there before I said a single word on the matter.

There was nothing left to "share".

It's not even about arguing at all. We are just sharing our opinions just like you. You made some good points but so have everyone else.
 
Yeah ok :ok: But you shouldn't belittle yourself like that. I think you have some good observations when you care to "share"

Well, this is what I "like" about TK.

A lot of time he plays contrarian.
Some time ago (a few years ago), I "compared" him with a politician that can swing both ways.

(And I mean a good politician, not the garbage kind we often see).

Sometimes, he would be baiting; but I wouldn't bite, of course.
But I had to admit, he's really good at what he's been doing.
And I often enjoyed exchanging ideas with him (even though there are many instances where they are simply hypothetical.)

I can tell he never meant to attack anybody in the slightest.

I'll never be that good (and that's a compliment to TK); I realize that some time I can be "too passionate".

Once in a while, I would come back and read, and re-read what I wrote, as a self-check of my behavior.

I like this forum, but I had liked even more before the "merger".

There was Harry (Eagles), who had since passed away, whom I thought of as a great contributor to the Texans board. We "maligned" each other, but became good friends. He confessed to me that he enjoyed his time on the Texans board - something he wasn't able to achieve elsewhere.

There were a couple of great contributors that were Titans fans.

Some female contributors, like SheTexan, brought a different dimension to the board.
Diapher, a Cornhusker, also helped in lighten the mood of the board.

And of course, TexansBill, and other members of the Blue Crew; many hardly post any longer.

We also had young people like Gary and Youngsportswriter, to name a few, (who hardly post nowadays).

It had more of a "community" feel back then.
Not so much any more.
 
It had more of a "community" feel back then.
Not so much any more.

Couldn't agree more...

but even then we had disagreements and discussions on various issues. And I was just trying to discuss, not argue, about the topic. Some comments elicit a response and some don't.

Totally agree with you about TK also. Thought provoking is a good thing in my mind
 
Yeah ok :ok: But you shouldn't belittle yourself like that. I think you have some good observations when you care to "share"


Yup. 76 is one of the guys willing to break down film and analyze it step by step for what it is while so many others regurgitate something a talking head said. His Kareem Jackson posts were epic. He should contribute more then he does now - but i get him being hot and cold about being on this mb.
 
General rule of thumb for NFL QBs, after 20 starts you pretty much know what you got.

Generally i agree. However, tell it to the carr fan base who blamed an ol. 3 years later it was still the ol's fault and rarely Carr's. the ol might've helped him become what he ultimately was but he had control over it as well.

10 yrs (?) later it's oz's turn and again lots of folks are blaming the ol. There's some truth to that and the book isn't closed yet. Oz can turn it around but im not willing to only blame the ol. He needs to improve a LOT in order to succeed consistently.

I guess we're all seeing the same results but some are placing more blame on the qb or the ol. Truth is, oz will never be surrounded by10 probowlers. At some point imo, he has to carry the load. 16 games sounds about right to me.
 
To me the deal is they took a chance, looked like a reasonable chance, and it hasn't worked out so well so far. And yes, doesn't look good for the immediate future either. But, you know, you pays your money and takes your chance.
 
Back
Top