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

QB Brock Osweiler to start preseason opener for Cleveland Browns

Mollywhopper said:
Wait, you envision us replacing our starting qb despite being in the lead a lot in his first few games?
Click to expand...

Yes. Too much wrapped up in Watson to let him sit on the bench too long. Has a team ever played as much as the Texans to get rid of a QB and then move up to draft one? Even if Savage plays well and lights the world on fire OB will get pressure from McNair, Smith, and the fans. You can't stop them. Its happened in the past. Even if it makes more sense to leave Savage in he will be replaced. Not that i would do that, but that is what the organization will do.
 
Brownsfan said:
I seriously doubt that Watson will be fully ready to start by the fourth game. I think that he, like Kizer and Trubisky, needs a red shirt year. In general, I think that if a rookie quarterback is not fully ready by the start of the season, it is best to wait until the next year. The reason is that a backup doesn't learn much during the season since almost all the attention and reps are showered on the starter. NFL offenses are complex and take some time to learn. The time to learn is in OTAs, spring practices, the offseason and training camp. I think a rookie quarterback starting mid-season is like a student cramming for a calculus test for a month and then waiting a month to take a test.

I think that if he isn't ready to take the test after a month of cramming, he, for sure, won't be ready for the test after waiting a month. And I think that is particularly true with respect to your offense which, as I recall, Weeden once said was like learning Chinese backwards. We know for a fact that one of the problems Osweiler had in Houston was that he never learned the offense well enough to execute the full offense efficiently. I hear that Watson is pretty smart and a quick study. But I just think an extra set of OTAs, spring practices, another off season to refine his fundamentals and then training camp with the first team reps would mean a much better prepared to start Deshaun Watson.
Click to expand...

There will be pressure our owner, GM and fans to start him regardless. It has happened in the past. After one preseason game people have gone nuts over him looking over his weaknesses just to see start.
 
TexansBull said:
There will be pressure our owner, GM and fans to start him regardless. It has happened in the past. After one preseason game people have gone nuts over him looking over his weaknesses just to see start.
Click to expand...

That is sad. But that is also when a coach earns his beans. The important thing is for the quarterback to know precisely what he has to do in order to have a chance to start.

The difficulty is that during the season, it is very hard to maintain a training program for a prospect. There is enormous pressure to game plan for the next game which is always only a few days away. The offense needs to practice with the starting quarterback which means that the backup will get few if any reps. Essentially all he will have are mental reps. Also, somebody has to run the scout team for the defense to practice against. Usually, that task is given to the backup and will likely be your rookie.

To run the scout team for the defense to practice against, the backup needs to learn the rudiments of the opposing teams offense. That means that your rookie is getting further and further away from your own offense, the one he will be expected to run when, in week 7 or 8, he is told to go out and lead the team to victory. But how can he be expected to be at his best when he is asked to run an offense he has not actually practiced for a couple of months?

It is one of the reasons that good prospects often fail.
 
CloakNNNdagger said:
Her is an extensive Q&A.
Click to expand...

I am getting the feeling that Deshone Kizer will likely be the starting quarterback on September 10. I hope not, but it appears to me that Hue Jackson almost desperately wants him to be ready. And if he wants him to be ready bad enough, he may be able to persuade himself that the kid is ready.
 
Brownsfan said:
That is sad. But that is also when a coach earns his beans. The important thing is for the quarterback to know precisely what he has to do in order to have a chance to start.

The difficulty is that during the season, it is very hard to maintain a training program for a prospect. There is enormous pressure to game plan for the next game which is always only a few days away. The offense needs to practice with the starting quarterback which means that the backup will get few if any reps. Essentially all he will have are mental reps. Also, somebody has to run the scout team for the defense to practice against. Usually, that task is given to the backup and will likely be your rookie.

To run the scout team for the defense to practice against, the backup needs to learn the rudiments of the opposing teams offense. That means that your rookie is getting further and further away from your own offense, the one he will be expected to run when, in week 7 or 8, he is told to go out and lead the team to victory. But how can he be expected to be at his best when he is asked to run an offense he has not actually practiced for a couple of months?

It is one of the reasons that good prospects often fail.
Click to expand...

This. Develop a plan, stick to it, and then start them. Make sure they can check off all the boxes and meet all the benchmarks you have set for him. You don't want to set them up for failure. And don't just start him to appease the crowd.

But don't go into the Deshaun Watson thread saying that...
 
Brownsfan said:
That is sad. But that is also when a coach earns his beans. The important thing is for the quarterback to know precisely what he has to do in order to have a chance to start.

The difficulty is that during the season, it is very hard to maintain a training program for a prospect. There is enormous pressure to game plan for the next game which is always only a few days away. The offense needs to practice with the starting quarterback which means that the backup will get few if any reps. Essentially all he will have are mental reps. Also, somebody has to run the scout team for the defense to practice against. Usually, that task is given to the backup and will likely be your rookie.

To run the scout team for the defense to practice against, the backup needs to learn the rudiments of the opposing teams offense. That means that your rookie is getting further and further away from your own offense, the one he will be expected to run when, in week 7 or 8, he is told to go out and lead the team to victory. But how can he be expected to be at his best when he is asked to run an offense he has not actually practiced for a couple of months?

It is one of the reasons that good prospects often fail.
Click to expand...

Did you mean defense?
 
CloakNNNdagger said:
Did you mean defense?
Click to expand...

No. In preparation for a game, the defense needs to spend time practicing against the opposing offense. Therefore they need for the scout team to mimic the opposing offense. To do that effectively, the scout team quarterback must essentially run the opposing team offense and do the things that the scouts tell him that the opposing offense will likely do. To do that effectively, the scout team quarterback must learn the rudimentary aspects of the opposing team offense on the fly so to speak. The better he learns the opposing team offense, the more helpful he is to the defense of his own team.

I don't know who O'Brian will have running his scout team. However, I am told that the scout team quarterback is usually the backup quarterback. It generally isn't much talked about, but I know for a fact that Johnny Manziel ran the scout team in Cleveland on weeks he was not the starter his rookie year and that when he replaced Hoyer as the starter, Hoyer ran the scout team. This originally came up on our board after some defensive players mentioned in the media that Manziel sometimes did his usual adlib as the scout team quarterback when the quarterback he was supposed to be mimicking was essentially a statue. :)
 
Last edited:
TexansBull said:
Yes. Too much wrapped up in Watson to let him sit on the bench too long.
Click to expand...

Personally I don't think that should play a big role in their decision when to start him. I do believe they took it into account when they drafted him though.

However, once they have him in camp & they really see what they got, they need to be honest about it & plan accordingly.
 
TexansBull said:
Yes. Too much wrapped up in Watson to let him sit on the bench too long. Has a team ever played as much as the Texans to get rid of a QB and then move up to draft one? Even if Savage plays well and lights the world on fire OB will get pressure from McNair, Smith, and the fans. You can't stop them. Its happened in the past. Even if it makes more sense to leave Savage in he will be replaced. Not that i would do that, but that is what the organization will do.
Click to expand...

Unless I'm just spacing out completely on a situation, no, I don't think it's happened in the past that a team sat their starting qb in the midst of winning big.
 
Brownsfan said:
No. In preparation for a game, the defense needs to spend time practicing against the opposing offense. Therefore they need for the scout team to mimic the opposing offense. To do that effectively, the scout team quarterback must essentially run the opposing team offense and do the things that the scouts tell him that the opposing offense will likely do. To do that effectively, the scout team quarterback must learn the rudimentary aspects of the opposing team offense on the fly so to speak. The better he learns the opposing team offense, the more helpful he is to the defense of his own team.

I don't know who O'Brian will have running his scout team. However, I am told that the scout team quarterback is usually the backup quarterback. It generally isn't much talked about, but I know for a fact that Johnny Manziel ran the scout team in Cleveland on weeks he was not the starter his rookie year and that when he replaced Hoyer as the starter, Hoyer ran the scout team. This originally came up on our board after some defensive players mentioned in the media that Manziel sometimes did his usual adlib as the scout team quarterback when the quarterback he was supposed to be mimicking was essentially a statue. :)
Click to expand...

I went back and read your statement more carefully and see the point you were making. I guess I was looking at the other side of the coin that prepares these players...........and that is the QB and the offense preparing against the D players that are mimicking the opponent's D.
 
Mollywhopper said:
Unless I'm just spacing out completely on a situation, no, I don't think it's happened in the past that a team sat their starting qb in the midst of winning big.
Click to expand...

Sorry my post has an autocorrect/drunk error. The word "played" is supposed to be "paid" meaning has a team ever paid so much such as draft picks in this case for a player and just let him sit?

But to your second point of ever sitting a QB after they had been winning - Brock Osweiler and Peyton Manning. I want to say the fumble and interception in that game were on the players not Brock. But he got pulled for Peyton.
 
TexansBull said:
Sorry my post has an autocorrect/drunk error. The word "played" is supposed to be "paid" meaning has a team ever paid so much such as draft picks in this case for a player and just let him sit?

But to your second point of ever sitting a QB after they had been winning - Brock Osweiler and Peyton Manning. I want to say the fumble and interception in that game were on the players not Brock. But he got pulled for Peyton.
Click to expand...

Don't think those fall under the 'up by a lot in those games' criteria.
 
CloakNNNdagger said:


There's the kiss of death.......
Click to expand...

While I would not ascribe the it-factor to Brock, there is really no doubt in my mind that he is the best quarterback we can possibly put on the field at this time, and I do basically agree with Joe in practically every thing he says.

Also, in case anyone is interested in the rest of the comments by our All-Pro left tackle, the following is a link to the full video:


In case anyone is interested only in his remarks associated with the subject of this thread, his reasoning for why he thinks Osweiler should start is at about the 4.30 mark. In addition, in response to a question he expanded on his views on rookie quarterbacks starting at about the 17.00 mark.
 
Sorry about the embed. I didn't intend to clutter your board with videos of Browns players. I meant only to post a link to the video. I merely copied a link and the full video came up. Works differently on my board.

EDIT: I was wrong. Did a test and it works there too. Just never did it that way before.
 
Last edited:
Brownsfan said:
While I would not ascribe the it-factor to Brock, there is really no doubt in my mind that he is the best quarterback we can possibly put on the field at this time, and I do basically agree with Joe in practically every thing he says.

Also, in case anyone is interested in the rest of the comments by our All-Pro left tackle, the following is a link to the full video:


In case anyone is interested only in his remarks associated with the subject of this thread, his reasoning for why he thinks Osweiler should start is at about the 4.30 mark. In addition, in response to a question he expanded on his views on rookie quarterbacks starting at about the 17.00 mark.
Click to expand...

Deshone Kizer's name could have been replaced seamlessly with Deshaun Watson in Thomas's responses.
 
CloakNNNdagger said:
Deshone Kizer's name could have been replaced seamlessly with Deshaun Watson in Thomas's responses.
Click to expand...

I think Deshaun Watson was a little ahead of Deshone Kizer coming into the league. However, I have the sense that the Houston offense may be a little more difficult to learn and that is probably an offsetting factor.

Seriously, I don't think you could be more correct.

That doesn't mean that either would immediately fail if put in that position. They might both appear to be successful for a time if the offense is dumbed down appropriately. But I think, for the long haul, it is better for a quarterback to be better prepared from the start and I hope that both teams give their prospects some time to adjust and learn.
 
Looks like Osweiler will be the week 2 preseason starting QB. If history repeats itself..........The last seven Browns quarterbacks to start the first two preseason games also started Week 1 in the regular season.
 
CloakNNNdagger said:
Look at the top bar between the plus sign and the undo sign.......click the icon that looks like a floppy disc......it will give you the option of deleting your draft if you need to.
Click to expand...

& if you click on the plus sign you see the option to quote a selection of text. Kind of counterintuitive. It used to be one of the main selections, now you have to dig to find it.
 
I believe it is appropriate at this point to offer my congratulations for your win over New England earlier tonight and particularly the performances of both Savage and Watson. Here's hoping that Savage continues to impress and that Watson continues to develop. If Savage can continue to perform well, it is a win-win for you in my opinion. I think that there is little doubt that Watson can be your future if he is permitted the time to develop properly, and, at the same time, the veteran who knows the offense gives you your best chance to win this year.
 
CloakNNNdagger said:



Of course, they have...........trying to find a sucker to dump the garbage.
Click to expand...

Well, they gave him a chance. They identified the problem and, in the scrimmage before the first game, he kept his stride tight and it seemed to be working. In the first game, he was hampered with penalties, but in the game Monday night, it was clearly daddy-long-legs again and the ball sailed. What can one say? Under the circumstances, with no clear alternative, Hue seems to be willing to limit the offense to what Kizer can do. We shall see how it turns out. In any case, it does not appear at this point that Osweiler has a future in Cleveland. We are still happy with the second round pick, however.
 
Brownsfan said:
But I disagree that Garrapallo would have been a good choice for us in Hue Jackson's offense. I think that Osweiler is a better, and, certainly, much cheaper, choice for us since Garrapallo would have probably cost us two first round picks. (I think Kizer is a better prospect than either, of course, but that is outside the point being discussed.)
Click to expand...

^^^^ This post just gets funnier and nuttier by the second.


Have you poured cold water on yourself after writing this yet?
 
Texecutioner said:
^^^^ This post just gets funnier and nuttier by the second.


Have you poured cold water on yourself after writing this yet?
Click to expand...

Look, Dude, I generally don't mind being trolled, but this is ridiculous.

If you think Garrapallo is worth two first round draft choices and a starter salary before you even get a chance to kick the tires, I would suggest you go get him. He might not be such a terrible choice for you since he already knows your system, but absolutely no thanks for the Browns as far as I am concerned. Garrapallo is an unproven prospect who would have to learn our system before he could be useful to us--if ever. There are so many pitfalls with that idea. In my opinion, Garrapallo would not be worth even a fraction of the cost.

As for Osweiler, okay, so it appears that that didn't pan out for us. But all it really means is that we will just have to be happy with the 2nd and 6th round picks we got with him in exchange for the 4th round pick we coughed up. Regardless, it was a trade that made sense for us. (And we might yet get another draft selection for him. Stay tuned.)
 
Brownsfan said:
Look, Dude, I generally don't mind being trolled, but this is ridiculous.

If you think Garrapallo is worth two first round draft choices and a starter salary before you even get a chance to kick the tires, I would suggest you go get him. He might not be such a terrible choice for you since he already knows your system, but absolutely no thanks for the Browns as far as I am concerned. Garrapallo is an unproven prospect who would have to learn our system before he could be useful to us--if ever. There are so many pitfalls with that idea. In my opinion, Garrapallo would not be worth even a fraction of the cost.

As for Osweiler, okay, so it appears that that didn't pan out for us. But all it really means is that we will just have to be happy with the 2nd and 6th round picks we got with him in exchange for the 4th round pick we coughed up. Regardless, it was a trade that made sense for us. (And we might yet get another draft selection for him. Stay tuned.)
Click to expand...

Trolled? You're the foolish Browns fan boy that appeared on this site with all these delusions about Osweiller after he completely **** the bed in Houston to where we gave up a 2nd round pick just to get him out of here. You actually have the audacity to act like he's shown as much as Garraopolo when Bellicheck wouldn't even trade him for two first round picks when they didn't even have any 1st round picks and desperately needed picks bad. I mean, you pretty much splattered the egg all over your face yourself. Enjoy another miserable season.
 
Texecutioner said:
Trolled? You're the foolish Browns fan boy that appeared on this site with all these delusions about Osweiller after he completely **** the bed in Houston to where we gave up a 2nd round pick just to get him out of here. You actually have the audacity to act like he's shown as much as Garraopolo when Bellicheck wouldn't even trade him for two first round picks when they didn't even have any 1st round picks and desperately needed picks bad. I mean, you pretty much splattered the egg all over your face yourself. Enjoy another miserable season.
Click to expand...

I don't think I was delusional about anything. In my mind, it was never a case of comparing Osweiler with some other quarterback. Instead, it was merely a case of kicking the tires on a freebie and hoping that that freebie might turn out to be an adequate bridge to Kizer.

I am aware that you brought up Garoppolo and offered your free advice that he would have been a better choice for us. But I have never had any interest in Garoppolo for the Browns. My understanding is that Garoppolo would have cost us two first round draft picks and a starter salary. And after the Banner/Lombardi/Pettine disaster, we need those draft picks to build our team. I think that with three first round draft picks and a second round pick this year, we have improved our team. Also, I think that with two first round picks and three second round picks next year, we have a chance for further improvement--particularly if Kizer becomes our answer at quarterback. If not, we have picks with which to select another prospect.

The bottom line with Garoppolo is that he is a prospect just like any other prospect. He has proven nothing. And since we are talking about prospects, I am not sure that we weren't able to find a better prospect than Garoppolo in the second round of this year's draft. Maybe we will find out Saturday night.
 
Copied from a Colts board in thread about the possible acquisition of Osweiler:

Are we getting a 1st and 2nd pick also?

(Colt fans not too happy with the prospect. Some are saying they would prefer Kaep.)
 
Last edited:
Brownsfan said:
Copied from a Colts board in thread about the possible acquisition of Osweiler:

Are we getting a 1st and 2nd pick also?

(Colt fans not too happy with the prospect. Some are saying they would prefer Kaep.)
Click to expand...

What was copied from the Colts board and do you have a link?
 
JB said:
What was copied from the Colts board and do you have a link?
Click to expand...

Ask and you shall receive:

http://forums.colts.com/topic/53258-could-colts-be-interested-in-osweiler/

Apparently it started with a tweet by Browns beat writer that everybody loves to hate and reputedly does not have good sources. I wouldn't necessarily believe him, but who knows? Like everybody else, I would not be surprised if Osweiler was traded if Sashi could pull in say a fifth rounder. But it takes two to make a deal. In his press conference yesterday, when asked what would have to happen for him to win the starting job in Cleveland, his response was, "I think that's a great question for our general manager."

You can make of it what you will.

Like I have mentioned a number of times here, I was hoping that Osweiler could be a bridge to Kizer, but apparently we won't need a bridge. We will see how Kizer does in Tampa Bay. Hue seems to think he might pass that test. If he does, he will be our quarterback for game 1 with Pittsburgh. At this point, along with most other Browns fans, I guess I am getting the Kizer religion, myself. I still think a bridge would be safer, but Hue seems to be willing to limit the offense as necessary for Kizer. He calls it "raising a quarterback," and claims he knows what he is doing.
 
But I think I really prefer how O'Brian is handling his rookie. (But I am not sure. I guess it is whatever works. :))
 
Last edited:
Brownsfan said:
Copied from a Colts board in thread about the possible acquisition of Osweiler:

Are we getting a 1st and 2nd pick also?

(Colt fans not too happy with the prospect. Some are saying they would prefer Kaep.)
Click to expand...

I really hope the Colts are stupid enough to take one of those clowns. The Texans defense will have a field day for two games of the season with either of them starting at QB.
 
Teams with any interest in Brock Osweiler...
Why not go sign Collin Kaepernick instead?

Osweiler shouldn't be in the league. He's horrendous!
He actually looked decent under Kubiak a few years ago though.
 
Double Barrel said:
I really hope the Colts are stupid enough to take one of those clowns. The Texans defense will have a field day for two games of the season with either of them starting at QB.
Click to expand...
With our luck he'd have his best game since 2015 (when he beat the undefeated Patriots on National TV). LOL. Sort of like when the Colts beat us one time with Dan Orlovsky starting at quarterback. That was also a National TV game if I recall. A Thursday Night game back in 2011. Watt's rookie season. I remember Watt was called for a bogus "roughing the passer" penalty for a helmet hit on Orlovsky. Replay shows it was a great sack.
 
Bulls on Parade said:
With our luck he'd have his best game since 2015 (when he beat the undefeated Patriots on National TV). LOL. Sort of like when the Colts beat us one time with Dan Orlovsky starting at quarterback. That was also a National TV game if I recall. A Thursday Night game back in 2011. Watt's rookie season. I remember Watt was called for a bogus "roughing the passer" penalty for a helmet hit on Orlovsky. Replay shows it was a great sack.
Click to expand...

Yeah, one of the Colts beat writers mentioned that Osweiler basically kept the Colts out of the playoffs by beating them twice last year--which is true, of course. In one of them Osweiler had two touchdown passes in the final 2:37 of play in the fourth quarter to tie the score and then the Texans won in overtime.

Look, the guy has had his moments. You can't take that away from him. If only he was more consistent...
 
Brownsfan said:
Yeah, one of the Colts beat writers mentioned that Osweiler basically kept the Colts out of the playoffs by beating them twice last year--which is true, of course. In one of them Osweiler had two touchdown passes in the final 2:37 of play in the fourth quarter to tie the score and then the Texans won in overtime.

Look, the guy has had his moments. You can't take that away from him. If only he was more consistent...
Click to expand...

If that's what you call moments, then every QB in the league has had moments.

Your attempts to justify him at this point are just strange.
 
Texecutioner said:
If that's what you call moments, then every QB in the league has had moments.

Your attempts to justify him at this point are just strange.
Click to expand...

Tell me, Mr. Texecutioner, why the Texans offered Osweiler a 72 million contract? My guess is that it was because Osweiler had a few moments like the one where he beat Tom Brady and the Patriots in dramatic fashion and your front office thought he was worth the contract they offered. Nobody in Cleveland has made such an offer. Everybody at this point knows he is not consistent, but that doesn't mean that someone in the future may not wonder what it might take for him to be consistent.

I have made no attempt to justify him, I have just made the observation that he does have some characteristics of a good quarterback and suggested that if only he was more consistent, he might have made a starting quarterback. And I have also made the guess that, at some point somebody will be desperate enough for a quarterback that they will offer us a draft choice and give him yet another shot. If not, we are happy with the second round draft pick.
 
Last edited:
Brownsfan said:
Tell me, Mr. Texecutioner, why the Texans offered Osweiler a 72 million contract? My guess is that it was because Osweiler had a few moments like the one where he beat Tom Brady and the Patriots in dramatic fashion and your front office thought he was worth the contract they offered. Nobody in Cleveland has made such an offer. Everybody at this point knows he is not consistent, but that doesn't mean that someone in the future may not wonder what it might take for him to be consistent.

I have made no attempt to justify him, I have just made the observation that he does have some characteristics of a good quarterback and suggested that if only he was more consistent, he might have made a starting quarterback. And I have also made the guess that, at some point somebody will be desperate enough for a quarterback that they will offer us a draft choice and give him yet another shot. If not, we are happy with the second round draft pick.
Click to expand...

I know you didn't ask me but.... you obviously are not familiar with Ricky McNair
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top