Waiting til 2018 for a Qb?

[sandman]

Assuming we can't sign Mike Glennon or trade for Jimmy G, I think what I would do, and I'm being totally serious, is simply cut Osweiler and take the additional $6m cap hit this year such that we don't have to worry about his contract at all past this year. Draft a QB high enough and ride with him, Weeden and Savage. Weeden and Savage are cheap, so they make up for that $6m additional loss, and their contracts are up at the end of 2017. This way, we don't have any cap money on any QB except the rookie going into the 2018 FA period and draft. I think that gives us more flexibility and we don't get worse at QB for 2017 (Savage and Weeden can give us what Brock did last year). The only downside is losing $6mil of cap to spend for our 2017 season, which really ought to not be a huge problem. We could create that $6mil by cutting Newton and Bergstrom. We've got enough money to spend to improve the holes on the roster as is, assuming we don't pay Bouye, which I don't want to do anyway. I also don't see us splurging on FAs this year.

Contracts guru question: I thought all the guaranteed money was tied into the first two years and the Texans could cut him after that with no cap impact?

 

[Number19]

Assuming we can't sign Mike Glennon or trade for Jimmy G, I think what I would do, and I'm being totally serious, is simply cut Osweiler and take the additional $6m cap hit this year such that we don't have to worry about his contract at all past this year. Draft a QB high enough and ride with him, Weeden and Savage. Weeden and Savage are cheap, so they make up for that $6m additional loss, and their contracts are up at the end of 2017. This way, we don't have any cap money on any QB except the rookie going into the 2018 FA period and draft. I think that gives us more flexibility and we don't get worse at QB for 2017 (Savage and Weeden can give us what Brock did last year). The only downside is losing $6mil of cap to spend for our 2017 season, which really ought to not be a huge problem. We could create that $6mil by cutting Newton and Bergstrom. We've got enough money to spend to improve the holes on the roster as is, assuming we don't pay Bouye, which I don't want to do anyway. I also don't see us splurging on FAs this year.

I agree 100%. This has been my personal preference since the end of the season. But I've been convinced that Osweiler is not likely to be let go. I also agree that we'll likely see some degree of improvement in Osweiler's play with another training camp under his belt.

 

[TexansSeminole]

Contracts guru question: I thought all the guaranteed money was tied into the first two years and the Texans could cut him after that with no cap impact?

My understanding is:

The dead cap figure starts at the guaranteed amount of the contract (which is his 2016 and 2017 base salary, his 2016 roster bonus, and the signing bonus broken down over each year of the contract). So in Brock's case, $37mil. That number is reduced each subsequent season by the way in which it was structured, detailed in parenthesis above. The base salary, signing bonus allocation, and roster bonus figures each year make up his cap hit for that year. The dead cap figure will continue to decrease in this way until their total reaches the guaranteed amount, in Brock's case $37mil. So for Brock, he had a $5mil roster bonus, a $4mil base salary, and a $3mil signing bonus allocation in 2016. That's a total of $12mil, so his dead cap figure changes from $37mil to $25mil in 2017. His cap figure for 2017 is $19mil ($16mil base salary, $3mil signing bonus allocation). At that point, $31mil of the $37mil in guaranteed money will have been accounted for against the cap. That brings his dead cap figure down to $6mil for 2018, which is the remaining amount of the signing bonus allocations. That's the $6mil that I'm talking about. We could either cut him in 2018, eating the $6mil in dead money that year, make him a June 1st cut this year and still eat the remaining $6mil in 2018, or cut him pre-June 1st and eat the remaining $6mil this year.

Basically, we either cut him pre-June 1st this year or wait till the end of the year to cut him. Making him a June 1st cut is the same as cutting him after the season, cap wise, but we don't have him on the roster for 2017. I don't think that would make much sense.

 

[sandman]

My understanding is:

The dead cap figure starts at the guaranteed amount of the contract (which is his 2016 and 2017 base salary, his 2016 roster bonus, and the signing bonus broken down over each year of the contract). So in Brock's case, $37mil. That number is reduced each subsequent season by the way in which it was structured, detailed in parenthesis above. The base salary, signing bonus allocation, and roster bonus figures each year make up his cap hit for that year. The dead cap figure will continue to decrease in this way until their total reaches the guaranteed amount, in Brock's case $37mil. So for Brock, he had a $5mil roster bonus, a $4mil base salary, and a $3mil signing bonus allocation in 2016. That's a total of $12mil, so his dead cap figure changes from $37mil to $25mil in 2017. His cap figure for 2017 is $19mil ($16mil base salary, $3mil signing bonus allocation). At that point, $31mil of the $37mil in guaranteed money will have been accounted for against the cap. That brings his dead cap figure down to $6mil for 2018, which is the remaining amount of the signing bonus allocations. That's the $6mil that I'm talking about. We could either cut him in 2018, eating the $6mil in dead money that year, make him a June 1st cut this year and still eat the remaining $6mil in 2018, or cut him pre-June 1st and eat the remaining $6mil this year.

Basically, we either cut him pre-June 1st this year or wait till the end of the year to cut him. Making him a June 1st cut is the same as cutting him after the season, cap wise, but we don't have him on the roster for 2017. I don't think that would make much sense.

Gotcha. Thanks.

 

[idymoe]

Since when is a 4th and 1 QB sneak a dumb-ass playcall? They converted it. How many QB's gets concussed on QB sneaks?

He also missed games with an elbow infection. Weeden had to be activated as the back-up.

Among the three QB's currently on the roster, I like Savage the best. But he simply cannot stay healthy. He has rightfully earned the injury prone moniker.

I think it was dumb-ass because of the situation. The ball was on their own 41. So they got the firs down, still on their own 42. If they don't make it, Titans take over in excellent field position. Where is the reward for taking that kind of risk. Forget about the concussion. It was early second quarter, and I highly doubt another coach calls that type of play in that situation.

 

[Corrosion]

I think it was dumb-ass because of the situation. The ball was on their own 41. So they got the firs down, still on their own 42. If they don't make it, Titans take over in excellent field position. Where is the reward for taking that kind of risk. Forget about the concussion. It was early second quarter, and I highly doubt another coach calls that type of play in that situation.

On the opponents ~40 is the prime spot to go for a 4th and short , its not much of a risk at all. Too long for a field goal and the punt often results in a touchback .... Basically its either extend the possession or give up 20 yards in field position ....


We just have sh!t for luck in Houston .... Schaub got the lisfranc effectively ruining him permanently , Savage breaks his head ....

 

[steelbtexan]

Agreed

I don't think Savage was hurt that bad.

I mean he did comeback into the game.

This was just an excuse to get Os back into the lineup.

 

[Runner]

He had his shot, but called in sick that day.

Shot(s).

 

[Mollywhopper]

I think it was dumb-ass because of the situation. The ball was on their own 41. So they got the firs down, still on their own 42. If they don't make it, Titans take over in excellent field position. Where is the reward for taking that kind of risk. Forget about the concussion. It was early second quarter, and I highly doubt another coach calls that type of play in that situation.

Belichick wrote the blueprint on calling that play in that situation.

 

[idymoe]

On the opponents ~40 is the prime spot to go for a 4th and short , its not much of a risk at all. Too long for a field goal and the punt often results in a touchback .... Basically its either extend the possession or give up 20 yards in field position ....


We just have sh!t for luck in Houston .... Schaub got the lisfranc effectively ruining him permanently , Savage breaks his head ....

Texans were on their own forty, not the opponents forty.

 

[idymoe]

On the opponents ~40 is the prime spot to go for a 4th and short , its not much of a risk at all. Too long for a field goal and the punt often results in a touchback .... Basically its either extend the possession or give up 20 yards in field position ....


We just have sh!t for luck in Houston .... Schaub got the lisfranc effectively ruining him permanently , Savage breaks his head ....

Texans were on their own forty, not the opponents forty.

Belichick wrote the blueprint on calling that play in that situation.

Yeah, I remember all those times Brady ran a qb sneak on 4th and 1 from N.E.'s own 40.

 

[JB]

Texans were on their own forty, not the opponents forty.



Yeah, I remember all those times Brady ran a qb sneak on 4th and 1 from N.E.'s own 40.

I agreed with the call at the time. Texans were down and hadn't done anything on offense to that point. But that drive they were actually moving the ball pretty well. Made sense to try to keep it going if you wanted to try to win the game

And getting hurt on that play was just bad luck... if he was really hurt

 

[idymoe]

I agreed with the call at the time. Texans were down and hadn't done anything on offense to that point. But that drive they were actually moving the ball pretty well. Made sense to try to keep it going if you wanted to try to win the game

And getting hurt on that play was just bad luck... if he was really hurt

Some of you guys just like to argue. It was the beginning of the 2nd quarter and they were down one touchdown. Do you really think they were going to win the game with a risky play, down one score with 3 quarters left to play? Think.

 

[JB]

Some of you guys just like to argue. It was the beginning of the 2nd quarter and they were down one touchdown. Do you really think they were going to win the game with a risky play, down one score with 3 quarters left to play? Think.

Since when is it all that risky? If you don't make it you give them a short field and put your #1 defense back on the field. Their offense hadn't done anything either. If you make it you can continue your drive and maybe do something. You also show confidence in your players. Plus you still have 3 quarters to play. You think

 

[sandman]

I think it was dumb-ass because of the situation. The ball was on their own 41. So they got the firs down, still on their own 42. If they don't make it, Titans take over in excellent field position. Where is the reward for taking that kind of risk. Forget about the concussion. It was early second quarter, and I highly doubt another coach calls that type of play in that situation.

The Titans offense to that point had managed 22 yards on three possessions, all punts. OB was making a confidence bet on Savage after that Fumble-6. Was it a calculated risk? Sure. Was it "dumb-ass"? Not at all.

And if it's not about the concussion, why does it matter? The Texans had already clinched the division, had no way to change their playoff seeding and were resting several players. There was NOTHING to be gained by winning this game.

 

[idymoe]

Tell me how did that drive end up? So they made the first down, sixty yards from the goal line. You guys are funny.

 

[sandman]

Tell me how did that drive end up? So they made the first down, sixty yards from the goal line. You guys are funny.

So it's not about the concussion. It's not about the play call. It's now about how the drive ended.

 

[idymoe]

So it's not about the concussion. It's not about the play call. It's now about how the drive ended.

You're not the only one jumping in on this that I was responding to. Now you're trying to get cute by saying I'm trying to move the goalpost. Nice. My first post on the matter said "he was concussed by yet another dumb-ass playcall." Then I gave the reasons for my opinion. Enjoy your day.

 

[Speedy]

Some of you guys just like to argue. It was the beginning of the 2nd quarter and they were down one touchdown. Do you really think they were going to win the game with a risky play, down one score with 3 quarters left to play? Think.

A majority of games are so close in this league that we're always going back and looking at plays that shoulda/coulda been made during that game that may have made a difference at the end. A dropped TD on the opening drive, a turnover midway through the 3rd, a 4th and 1 conversion in the 2nd, it all matters.

You may not agree with the call but it doesn't make it a dumbass call. As mentioned, the Texans were already down, had nothing going on offense to that point, and they took a risk to keep a possession alive.

The way you describe is like no one should ever throw a pass in the 1st quarter because that's not when the game is won or lost. That's simply not the truth. Plays that are made, or not, throughout the whole game, will put you in the position you'll be in at the end.

Do the Texans win the game punting there? Probably not. Do they win if they'd scored a TD the play before? Still probably not. But they were in a position to keep a valuable possession alive, when to that point, they hadn't done anything offensively.

Risky? Yes. Dumbass call? No.