Wish to make a one time donation? Make it here.

Texans trade Osweiller to Browns

thunderkyss

It's good to be me... again.
Staff member
Contributor's Club
You might ask Rick and McNair. It's hard to admit your multi-million dollar baby was a mistake.
Not saying you're wrong. I don't know. I'm just having a hard time believing Rick&McNair would ram a player down O'bs throat in January, then pay Cleveland a 2nd round pick to take him in March.

They just don't add up.

Just like you pitching in with the idiotic Ricky McNair diatribe. Just doesn't fit.
 

CloakNNNdagger

Hall of Fame
Not saying you're wrong. I don't know. I'm just having a hard time believing Rick&McNair would ram a player down O'bs throat in January, then pay Cleveland a 2nd round pick to take him in March.

They just don't add up.

Just like you pitching in with the idiotic Ricky McNair diatribe. Just doesn't fit.
Hoping it would save some face by supposedly getting rid of a huge mistake at the same time as trying to make it look like a chunk of entirely wasted money was retrieved. Pointing the finger on this one is far from an idiotic Rick McNair diatribe.........if the shoe fits......and it does perfectly......wear it.
 

paycheck71

Hall of Fame
Brock Osweiler takes blame for 'poor decisions, poor throws' with Texans
ByAaron Wilson

June 15, 2017
In his most candid remarks since being traded to the Browns where he's drawn solid reviews from coach Hue Jackson as he competes for a starting job with Cody Kessler and rookie DeShone Kizer, Osweiler discussed where he regressed with the Texans after signing a four-year, $72 million contract.

"The best part is I'm getting coached hard on my fundamentals," Osweiler told Cleveland reporters. "And I believe firmly that when your fundamentals and your feet are right as a quarterback, you're going to make great decisions and you're going to throw accurate footballs.

"I think that's something that slid last season. I'm not going to go into great detail on that, but they did. My fundamentals slid, and because of that, you saw some poor decisions and some poor throws. If you go back to 2015, I feel like my fundamentals were pretty tight."

Osweiler was essentially sold to the Browns in exchange for the Texans sending them a 2018 second-round draft pick and a 2017 sixth-round draft pick, netting a 2017 fourth-round pick in the exchange as Cleveland assumed responsibility for his $16 million guaranteed base salary. The Texans saved $10 million in salary-cap space and $16 million in cash this season.

Osweiler won one playoff game with the Texans last season, beating an Oakland Raiders team that was without injured starting quarterback Derek Carr. However, he was intercepted three times in their AFC divisional-round loss to the eventual Super Bowl champion New England Patriots.

Benched late in the season and replaced by Tom Savage before Savage suffered a concussion in the regular-season finale that forced Osweiler back onto the field, the towering quarterback finished the regular season with 15 touchdowns and 16 interceptions for a 72.2 passer rating.

In his final season with the Denver Broncos prior to joining the Texans as a free agent, Osweiler went 5-2 as a starter and passed for 1,967 yards, 10 touchdowns and six interceptions and an 86.4 passer rating.

"I think I did a pretty good job in 2015 of protecting the ball," Osweiler said. "Last year, I didn't do such a good job. So coming into this camp and this team and this system, I had a very large focus on making great decisions with the football, and I feel like for the most part, I've done that this camp."
Osweiler was always good at saying exactly the right thing.
 

Scooter

Funky
It sounds like he's putting a bit of blame on weak coaching to me. His fundamentals and form were being coached properly under Kubiak, something that disappeared under O'Brien, but has returned with Hue Jackson. He also snuck in the word 'decisions' a couple times when comparing the 3.

My views on Oz are widely know, with several 'I told you so' posts, but Kubiak got something out of him and Hue seems to be getting something out of him. I think Brock will never be a starting quarterback, but in no scenario should he have been so total fail that he was with us last season.
 

JB

Old Curmudgeon
Contributor's Club
It sounds like he's putting a bit of blame on weak coaching to me. His fundamentals and form were being coached properly under Kubiak, something that disappeared under O'Brien, but has returned with Hue Jackson. He also snuck in the word 'decisions' a couple times when comparing the 3.

My views on Oz are widely know, with several 'I told you so' posts, but Kubiak got something out of him and Hue seems to be getting something out of him. I think Brock will never be a starting quarterback, but in no scenario should he have been so total fail that he was with us last season.
At this point I refuse to believe it is anything other than words. BO stinks
 

OptimisticTexan

Hall of Fame
It sounds like he's putting a bit of blame on weak coaching to me. His fundamentals and form were being coached properly under Kubiak, something that disappeared under O'Brien, but has returned with Hue Jackson. He also snuck in the word 'decisions' a couple times when comparing the 3.

My views on Oz are widely know, with several 'I told you so' posts, but Kubiak got something out of him and Hue seems to be getting something out of him. I think Brock will never be a starting quarterback, but in no scenario should he have been so total fail that he was with us last season.
Damn...O'Brien got more out of a bucket of pi$$-poor QB's than most coaches in the past had. I don't think O'Brien was on board with Osweiler pick-up and therefore imho he was shoved down O'Brien's throat by RS and McNair. I think RS felt like he had pulled off a massive coup, when he out-bid the Broncos for Osweiler's services. The Broncos were PO'd but they just couldn't justify the money RS was throwing at their QB.

Savage appeared to have had the better Pre-Season (probably as O'Brien had expected) but O'Brien was forced to start Osweiler due to the money invested in Osweiler. If you're the HC, how would you feel if the team was forced to start the 2nd best QB on the team due to financial reasons? And, due to financial situations out of your control?

Bottom-line, Osweiler wasn't a fit for this system for several reasons but not being able to hit a crossing pattern or any kind of throw outside the hash-marks at 15+ yards downfield. These failures have zero to do with coaching and everything to do with the QB. A coach shouldn't be expected to scrap his playbook and create a new one to fit his QB's skills. If that were the case, Klingler and Keenum should have had their respective HC's adjust their offenses to more favorable Run-N-Shoot schemes.
 

DocBar

Hall of Fame
Contributor's Club
Damn...O'Brien got more out of a bucket of pi$$-poor QB's than most coaches in the past had. I don't think O'Brien was on board with Osweiler pick-up and therefore imho he was shoved down O'Brien's throat by RS and McNair. I think RS felt like he had pulled off a massive coup, when he out-bid the Broncos for Osweiler's services. The Broncos were PO'd but they just couldn't justify the money RS was throwing at their QB.

Savage appeared to have had the better Pre-Season (probably as O'Brien had expected) but O'Brien was forced to start Osweiler due to the money invested in Osweiler. If you're the HC, how would you feel if the team was forced to start the 2nd best QB on the team due to financial reasons? And, due to financial situations out of your control?

Bottom-line, Osweiler wasn't a fit for this system for several reasons but not being able to hit a crossing pattern or any kind of throw outside the hash-marks at 15+ yards downfield. These failures have zero to do with coaching and everything to do with the QB. A coach shouldn't be expected to scrap his playbook and create a new one to fit his QB's skills. If that were the case, Klingler and Keenum should have had their respective HC's adjust their offenses to more favorable Run-N-Shoot schemes.
I agree with most of this, I guess. I completely disagree with you that a coach shouldn't have to create a playbook that fits his QB's skills. That is exactly what a good coach does and it's something we've seen out of OB with the likes of Weeden, Yates, Fitz and Savage. Tailored offensive scheme leading to productive play by new or inexperienced QBs.
 

Scooter

Funky
Edit: my opinion doesn't matter, I just seem to have the inability to keep comments to myself.
 
Last edited:

PapaL

Loose Screw
What was the logic of starting Osweiler in round 2 if he was such a problem?
In hindsight had we known he was saving his second worst performance of the year for the playoff game then maybe we could have started Weeden or another RB instead.
Savage was cleared from concussion protocol 9 Jan. We played @Pats 14 Jan. Savage was not a real option.
 

thunderkyss

It's good to be me... again.
Staff member
Contributor's Club
Hoping it would save some face by supposedly getting rid of a huge mistake at the same time as trying to make it look like a chunk of entirely wasted money was retrieved. Pointing the finger on this one is far from an idiotic Rick McNair diatribe.........if the shoe fits......and it does perfectly......wear it.
That's what I'm saying, it doesn't fit. Not at all.

January they force the HC to play a guy he doesn't want to. Then in March they "try to save face"

It's one or the other, they either realized it was a mistake in January, in which case they wouldn't force a known mistake on a HC

Or they believed in him, regardless what the HC was saying that they forced said HC to play him... which doesn't jive with paying a high price to be rid of him in March.

HC are usually fired when the FO & the HC do not agree on the potential of a "franchise" QB.


It makes more sense to me, that all three agreed on the potential of Brock Osweiler. They all agreed he should play in that play off game. To me, the only reason to sign him to the $19M/yr contract was because of his play in clutch situations. Against the Patriots he should have scored 3 passing touchdowns but perfectly thrown balls weren't caught & on that Red Zone INT, it could be argued the TE ran the wrong route (not saying that's the case, just that it could be).

While we don't like the offensive performance "overall" from that game, I could argue the Texans got exactly what they thought they were going to get out of Brock Osweiler. Had those two TDs been converted that game would have lined up perfectly with the way he played in Denver (the basis for signing him).

However, it's no secret that O'b & Brock didn't jive. Oil & water so to speak. I can see the front office telling O'b he has to get rid of Godsey. As a concession, O'b demands they get rid of Osweiler. That does not absolve O'bs role in wanting Osweiler here in the first place.

That they went out & got Watson makes that scenario much more likely. Because if O'b was saying, "I didn't want/need Osweiler to begin with." It would have been because he was happy with where Savage was & wanted to go into last season with Savage "competing" for the starting job, & we would have drafted to help Savage succeed... which we didn't.
 

thunderkyss

It's good to be me... again.
Staff member
Contributor's Club
Damn...O'Brien got more out of a bucket of pi$$-poor QB's than most coaches in the past had. I don't think O'Brien was on board with Osweiler pick-up and therefore imho he was shoved down O'Brien's throat by RS and McNair. I think RS felt like he had pulled off a massive coup, when he out-bid the Broncos for Osweiler's services. The Broncos were PO'd but they just couldn't justify the money RS was throwing at their QB.
Or they didn't have the money. Which if you look back at true history & not "blameitonRick" history, was the case.

All they had to work with was the money freed up when Peyton finally decided to retire. $19M for the 2016 year. They couldn't keep Malik Jackson, almost lost Cj Anderson, had no money to sign a starting LT.... Had we backed out when they offered $16M, they wouldn't have signed Okung & Anderson would be a Dolphin.

But you're right, I guess. They couldn't justify spending money they didn't have.


If they didn't "have to" franchise Von Miller, they may have found a way to "justify" $21 million, but the Texans would have bid $23M
 

thunderkyss

It's good to be me... again.
Staff member
Contributor's Club
Savage appeared to have had the better Pre-Season (probably as O'Brien had expected) but O'Brien was forced to start Osweiler due to the money invested in Osweiler. If you're the HC, how would you feel if the team was forced to start the 2nd best QB on the team due to financial reasons? And, due to financial situations out of your control?

Bottom-line, Osweiler wasn't a fit for this system for several reasons...
Savage didn't have a better Pre-Season.

The only reason Osweiler wasn't a fit for this system, was because he & O'b didn't get along.
 

Scooter

Funky
The only two quarterbacks that we're sure O'Brien DIDN'T want are Keenum and Yates ... they're 4-0 and almost the sole reason for 2 playoff births.
 

OptimisticTexan

Hall of Fame
The only two quarterbacks that we're sure O'Brien DIDN'T want are Keenum and Yates ... they're 4-0 and almost the sole reason for 2 playoff births.
IMHO, had Keenum been 6'-2" or 3" O'Brien probably keeps him but I always felt like Keenum was too short to be the pocket style QB that O'Brien coveted.
 

CloakNNNdagger

Hall of Fame
That's what I'm saying, it doesn't fit. Not at all.

January they force the HC to play a guy he doesn't want to. Then in March they "try to save face"

It's one or the other, they either realized it was a mistake in January, in which case they wouldn't force a known mistake on a HC

Or they believed in him, regardless what the HC was saying that they forced said HC to play him... which doesn't jive with paying a high price to be rid of him in March.

HC are usually fired when the FO & the HC do not agree on the potential of a "franchise" QB.


It makes more sense to me, that all three agreed on the potential of Brock Osweiler. They all agreed he should play in that play off game. To me, the only reason to sign him to the $19M/yr contract was because of his play in clutch situations. Against the Patriots he should have scored 3 passing touchdowns but perfectly thrown balls weren't caught & on that Red Zone INT, it could be argued the TE ran the wrong route (not saying that's the case, just that it could be).

While we don't like the offensive performance "overall" from that game, I could argue the Texans got exactly what they thought they were going to get out of Brock Osweiler. Had those two TDs been converted that game would have lined up perfectly with the way he played in Denver (the basis for signing him).

However, it's no secret that O'b & Brock didn't jive. Oil & water so to speak. I can see the front office telling O'b he has to get rid of Godsey. As a concession, O'b demands they get rid of Osweiler. That does not absolve O'bs role in wanting Osweiler here in the first place.

That they went out & got Watson makes that scenario much more likely. Because if O'b was saying, "I didn't want/need Osweiler to begin with." It would have been because he was happy with where Savage was & wanted to go into last season with Savage "competing" for the starting job, & we would have drafted to help Savage succeed... which we didn't.
TK, I have never read a post that has been so circuitous while ignoring the option that OB never wanted Osweiler, the FO paid a ransom's gold and was hell bent to force the HC to make it work (with the HC trying his best to push back by getting Savage in there........and immediately getting push back)..............to the end.........then the FO thinks they can look like they didn't get totally fleeced, by unloading the garbage...........and the ultimate trade for all but the blind was a poor "just do something" big facade to try to cover up original incompetence.............the lipstick on the pig approach.
TK, we're never going to agree on this and so I'm going to let this conversation end now.
 

thunderkyss

It's good to be me... again.
Staff member
Contributor's Club
TK, I have never read a post that has been so circuitous while ignoring the option that OB never wanted Osweiler, the FO paid a ransom's gold and was hell bent to force the HC to make it work (with the HC trying his best to push back by getting Savage in there........and immediately getting push back)..............to the end.........then the FO thinks they can look like they didn't get totally fleeced, by unloading the garbage...........and the ultimate trade for all but the blind was a poor "just do something" big facade to try to cover up original incompetence.............the lipstick on the pig approach.
I did not ignore that possibility. That was included in the "if that were the case, they'd have drafted to help Savage be successful." part of my post. After forcing Osweiler & forcing Watson, it says a lot about O'Brien's backbone (or lack of backbone) & the viability of "options" he'd have if he were to leave the Texans.


TK, we're never going to agree on this and so I'm going to let this conversation end now.
I'm sure we'll get back to this sooner or later.
 

thunderkyss

It's good to be me... again.
Staff member
Contributor's Club
One more thing.

The whole, "The front office forced O'b to play Osweiler" thing doesn't jive with the "O'b could be a great coach if the front office wasn't forcing things on him" argument.

If he's got what it takes to be a great coach in this NFL he'll be able to use his words & convince the FO that he'll achieve their goal if he's allowed to play the guys he believe should play. After all, he has it in his contract that he has control of the 53, as Texian has told us many times.

If he can't convince the people that hired him to allow him to do the job they hired him to do, he does not have what it takes to motivate an avg player to play great, or a great player to play at a HOF level. There is no way he can be a great coach if he can't win a debate about allowing him to do his job.

I think he could be a great coach. But I don't think it's the front office holding him back. I think he's in his own way. Not being able to get along with young QBs. Blame the QB one time, I get it... Mallett. But twice... sorry. As a head coach, you're supposed to be able to influence people & get them to do things they don't know they can do.

& he needs to be looking in the mirror every day trying to figure out how he can be a better head coach. I don't know how that reflection leads a man to delegate part of his HC responsibility to someone else so he can focus carrying out all of the OC duties.

I'd love to be able to tell my boss, I'm going to delegate part of my responsibilities to this guy while I do this job you normally pay people a lot less to do. & I'll be expecting a raise next year. There's some fuzzylogic going on there.
 

cuppacoffee

Resident Grouch
One more thing.

The whole, "The front office forced O'b to play Osweiler" thing doesn't jive with the "O'b could be a great coach if the front office wasn't forcing things on him" argument.

If he's got what it takes to be a great coach in this NFL he'll be able to use his words & convince the FO that he'll achieve their goal if he's allowed to play the guys he believe should play. After all, he has it in his contract that he has control of the 53, as Texian has told us many times.

If he can't convince the people that hired him to allow him to do the job they hired him to do, he does not have what it takes to motivate an avg player to play great, or a great player to play at a HOF level. There is no way he can be a great coach if he can't win a debate about allowing him to do his job.

I think he could be a great coach. But I don't think it's the front office holding him back. I think he's in his own way. Not being able to get along with young QBs. Blame the QB one time, I get it... Mallett. But twice... sorry. As a head coach, you're supposed to be able to influence people & get them to do things they don't know they can do.

& he needs to be looking in the mirror every day trying to figure out how he can be a better head coach. I don't know how that reflection leads a man to delegate part of his HC responsibility to someone else so he can focus carrying out all of the OC duties.

I'd love to be able to tell my boss, I'm going to delegate part of my responsibilities to this guy while I do this job you normally pay people a lot less to do. & I'll be expecting a raise next year. There's some fuzzylogic going on there.[/QUOTE]
TK, if you believe that's the way things went I have a bridge on the west side over the ship channel I'd like to sell you. Cheap.

:coffee:
 

banned1976

American
That's what I'm saying, it doesn't fit. Not at all.

January they force the HC to play a guy he doesn't want to. Then in March they "try to save face"

It's one or the other, they either realized it was a mistake in January, in which case they wouldn't force a known mistake on a HC

Or they believed in him, regardless what the HC was saying that they forced said HC to play him... which doesn't jive with paying a high price to be rid of him in March.

HC are usually fired when the FO & the HC do not agree on the potential of a "franchise" QB.


It makes more sense to me, that all three agreed on the potential of Brock Osweiler. They all agreed he should play in that play off game. To me, the only reason to sign him to the $19M/yr contract was because of his play in clutch situations. Against the Patriots he should have scored 3 passing touchdowns but perfectly thrown balls weren't caught & on that Red Zone INT, it could be argued the TE ran the wrong route (not saying that's the case, just that it could be).

While we don't like the offensive performance "overall" from that game, I could argue the Texans got exactly what they thought they were going to get out of Brock Osweiler. Had those two TDs been converted that game would have lined up perfectly with the way he played in Denver (the basis for signing him).

However, it's no secret that O'b & Brock didn't jive. Oil & water so to speak. I can see the front office telling O'b he has to get rid of Godsey. As a concession, O'b demands they get rid of Osweiler. That does not absolve O'bs role in wanting Osweiler here in the first place.

That they went out & got Watson makes that scenario much more likely. Because if O'b was saying, "I didn't want/need Osweiler to begin with." It would have been because he was happy with where Savage was & wanted to go into last season with Savage "competing" for the starting job, & we would have drafted to help Savage succeed... which we didn't.
Maybe they realized it was a mistake when they found out the chemistry between HC and QB was lousy. Bill O'Brien and Brock did not like each other. Not at all. Had those two talked before sending all that cash to Brock, maybe they wouldn't have signed him.

I'm still of the opinion Brock could have a solid career if and when he finds the right system/coaching staff. I'm also still of the opinion Bill O'Brien is a good coach. The decision to bring in Brock on a big contract though, it smells a little like the Ed Reed signing. You know the one. The one where McNair went maverick putting Ed Reed in his airplane, giving him a contract w/o even telling the HC and DC what he was doing. For that reason it would not surprise me at all if O'Brien had little to no say on Brock. Or he's already given up and just said to himself (and the public) "I do what Mr. McNair tells me to do. He's the owner and my boss". All speculation. I just don't put anything past McNair and the FO.
 

JB

Old Curmudgeon
Contributor's Club
TK, if you believe that's the way things went I have a bridge on the west side over the ship channel I'd like to sell you. Cheap.

:coffee:
TK loves playing devil's advocate... I would love to know what he really thinks
 

banned1976

American
One more thing.

The whole, "The front office forced O'b to play Osweiler" thing doesn't jive with the "O'b could be a great coach if the front office wasn't forcing things on him" argument.

If he's got what it takes to be a great coach in this NFL he'll be able to use his words & convince the FO that he'll achieve their goal if he's allowed to play the guys he believe should play. After all, he has it in his contract that he has control of the 53, as Texian has told us many times.

If he can't convince the people that hired him to allow him to do the job they hired him to do, he does not have what it takes to motivate an avg player to play great, or a great player to play at a HOF level. There is no way he can be a great coach if he can't win a debate about allowing him to do his job.

I think he could be a great coach. But I don't think it's the front office holding him back. I think he's in his own way. Not being able to get along with young QBs. Blame the QB one time, I get it... Mallett. But twice... sorry. As a head coach, you're supposed to be able to influence people & get them to do things they don't know they can do.

& he needs to be looking in the mirror every day trying to figure out how he can be a better head coach. I don't know how that reflection leads a man to delegate part of his HC responsibility to someone else so he can focus carrying out all of the OC duties.

I'd love to be able to tell my boss, I'm going to delegate part of my responsibilities to this guy while I do this job you normally pay people a lot less to do. & I'll be expecting a raise next year. There's some fuzzylogic going on there.
O'Brien is from the Coughlin and Parcels mold. You can't believe that every coach has to be a best bud to young QB's, can you? Some can, some can't. That has no bearing on how successful a team or player is. Some QB's/players are fits for what those tough coaches are trying to do and some aren't. Mallett was a knucklehead and Brock shrunk half an inch every time O'Brien yelled at him. By the middle of the season, or whenever it was he threw that fumble he was playing like he was 5 foot nothin'.
 

CloakNNNdagger

Hall of Fame
For anyone who is having a hard time believing Rick and McNair would force a player down O'Brien's throat might want to review this:

***************************************************************
Bill O’Brien on drafting a QB: My mantra is do what Mr. McNair wants
Josh Alper on February 25, 2016, 11:58 AM EDT

Texans owner Bob McNair hasn’t been shy in recent weeks about expressing the same opinion held by many other people about his team’s biggest need.

McNair has made it clear that the team needs to be better at quarterback in 2016 and said that he doesn’t “know any reason” why the Texans wouldn’t draft one this year. On Thursday, coach Bill O’Brien didn’t bother trying to throw up any misdirection about the team’s intentions this offseason when he was asked about picking a quarterback.

“Whatever Mr. McNair says is what we’ll do,” O’Brien said, via John McClain of the Houston Chronicle. “That’s always been my mantra.”

O’Brien said it’s hard to play quarterback in the NFL and that the Texans will have to “put in a lot of time with [a rookie quarterback] and give him time to develop.” That doesn’t lead to thoughts of instant success, although the plan the team’s employed the last two years hasn’t worked any better and, perhaps more significantly, hasn’t shown many signs that the upside of their current quarterbacks holds promise for better days ahead.
 

TheKDog

Hall of Fame
"Get a good QB already" isn't the same as "sign Brock Osweiler for $37m guaranteed and keep playing him even though he sucks, then trade him with a second round pick, then use 2 picks for a guy who won't be ready to play this year."

Of course after watching the QB carousel of mediocrity the owner wanted a solution there. The problem is this FO can't fix it other than by wildly overpaying for guys.
 

DocBar

Hall of Fame
Contributor's Club
Even if they forced Brock on him, which I don't buy, his other choices were Fitzpatrick, Hoyer, and Mallet.
I don't understand not keeping Fitz for a 2nd year if having a "bridge" QB for Savage was the idea. The only other reason would be the NE connection. It's hard, as a fan who is not in the know, to understand a lot of things that NFL teams do.
 

DocBar

Hall of Fame
Contributor's Club
"Get a good QB already" isn't the same as "sign Brock Osweiler for $37m guaranteed and keep playing him even though he sucks, then trade him with a second round pick, then use 2 picks for a guy who won't be ready to play this year."

Of course after watching the QB carousel of mediocrity the owner wanted a solution there. The problem is this FO can't fix it other than by wildly overpaying for guys.
The problem is that finding an elite NFL QB is about as elusive as a Snipe is. Ever been Snipe hunting? The Texans swung for the fences on Os and struck out 3 times on one swing, ala Bugs Bunny cartoons. IMHO. OB has gone all in on Savage and will not start Watson unless Savage and Weeden simply cannot go or Watson is utterly spectacular in TC and PS.
 

Speedy

Yeller Dweller
I don't understand not keeping Fitz for a 2nd year if having a "bridge" QB for Savage was the idea. The only other reason would be the NE connection. It's hard, as a fan who is not in the know, to understand a lot of things that NFL teams do.
^^^^^THIS^^^^^

Fitz was the bridge guy. There was no reason whatsoever to let him go, with a year already in the system and arguably his best season as a pro, and go get another bridge guy. WTF was that all about?

They should have still brought Fitz in but they should have also drafted Carr, Bridgewater or Garropolo, and we would have never had to have gone through the whole Hoyer, Mallett, Osweiler mess. And until Watson is ready, whenever that may be, we get to deal with Savage now, who couldn't get on the field ahead of any of them. And when he did, he couldn't stay on it.
 

TheKDog

Hall of Fame
^^^^^THIS^^^^^

Fitz was the bridge guy. There was no reason whatsoever to let him go, with a year already in the system and arguably his best season as a pro, and go get another bridge guy. WTF was that all about?

They should have still brought Fitz in but they should have also drafted Carr, Bridgewater or Garropolo, and we would have never had to have gone through the whole Hoyer, Mallett, Osweiler mess. And until Watson is ready, whenever that may be, we get to deal with Savage now, who couldn't get on the field ahead of any of them. And when he did, he couldn't stay on it.
Yep, exactly.

But O'Brien wanted his NE guys (Hoyer and Mallet).

Remember his system is too hard for a rookie to learn and Houston should be proud of those guys as our QBs.
 

TheKDog

Hall of Fame
^^^^^THIS^^^^^

Fitz was the bridge guy. There was no reason whatsoever to let him go, with a year already in the system and arguably his best season as a pro, and go get another bridge guy. WTF was that all about?

They should have still brought Fitz in but they should have also drafted Carr, Bridgewater or Garropolo, and we would have never had to have gone through the whole Hoyer, Mallett, Osweiler mess. And until Watson is ready, whenever that may be, we get to deal with Savage now, who couldn't get on the field ahead of any of them. And when he did, he couldn't stay on it.
Yep, exactly.

But O'Brien wanted his NE guys (Hoyer and Mallet).

Remember his system is too hard for a rookie to learn and Houston should be proud of those guys as our QBs.
 

Number19

Hall of Fame
I don't understand not keeping Fitz for a 2nd year if having a "bridge" QB for Savage was the idea. The only other reason would be the NE connection. It's hard, as a fan who is not in the know, to understand a lot of things that NFL teams do.
I was thinking on this topic this afternoon, but I decided not to post on it; after all it is water under the bridge. But now the topic has been reopened so I might as well put my two cents in.

Fitz was likely a Smith selection, although OB had input. He had just been hired to coach the Texans, his first NFL head coaching gig, the team needed a QB, and in such a situation the tendency would be to rely on his GM to find a veteran QB. Savage was his guy, to be developed.

To jump ahead to year three, after the disaster of 2015, McNair said to find a QB, and Smith's choice was Oz. OB was familiar with OZ from the training camp sessions, and agreed.

Year two is a bit more of a mystery. I agree with DocBar in that it's hard to see why they let Fitz go. In retrospect, OB would likely admit privately he made a mistake. But at the time he probabably wanted, first, Hoyer and then, Mallet, with a competition between the two. The consensus was that both knew and could execute OB's offense. I think year two is largely on OB's shoulders.

Mallet turned out to be a head case and Hoyer just couldn't cut it, leading to McNair's demand to fix the problem and subsequently, Smith's decision with OB's input to go with Oz.

Meanwhile, Smith had seen Watson play in the 2016 championship game (did they meet, I don't remember) and fell in love with the player.

The decision to draft a QB with our first 2017 pick was a decision made by Smith, again under pressure from McNair. Watson was the player Smith wanted. Reports are that OB wanted Mahomes, but it was Smith who got his player.

All along, since the end of last season, I think it's been OB's decision to start Savage going into the 2017 season; and after the draft, to sit Watson for a season or two. I think McNair and Smith are willing to give OB the rope to play this decision out, but it clearly is their intent to start Watson in 2018.
 

TheKDog

Hall of Fame
Agreed with the above except on Watson.

I don't think he was really a Rick guy (I don't think Rick sticks his head out too much period).

Apparently our own scouting department wasn't even that high on him, and the room didn't seem too happy when we traded up for him.

This makes me think it was an OBrien guy. Fits with the O'Brien pattern of trading up aggressively (too much IMO) which we didn't do under Kubiak.

Plus O'Brien seems way too happy to have Watson if he wasn't his choice. He's a winner, leader, clutch, chips are down, biggest stage, has presence, just shuts up and listens, etc.

Also Obrien said he has no idea where the inaccuracy stuff came from. It came from the scouts.
 

76Texan

Hall of Fame
For anyone who is having a hard time believing Rick and McNair would force a player down O'Brien's throat might want to review this:

***************************************************************
Bill O’Brien on drafting a QB: My mantra is do what Mr. McNair wants
Josh Alper on February 25, 2016, 11:58 AM EDT

Texans owner Bob McNair hasn’t been shy in recent weeks about expressing the same opinion held by many other people about his team’s biggest need.

McNair has made it clear that the team needs to be better at quarterback in 2016 and said that he doesn’t “know any reason” why the Texans wouldn’t draft one this year. On Thursday, coach Bill O’Brien didn’t bother trying to throw up any misdirection about the team’s intentions this offseason when he was asked about picking a quarterback.

“Whatever Mr. McNair says is what we’ll do,” O’Brien said, via John McClain of the Houston Chronicle. “That’s always been my mantra.”

O’Brien said it’s hard to play quarterback in the NFL and that the Texans will have to “put in a lot of time with [a rookie quarterback] and give him time to develop.” That doesn’t lead to thoughts of instant success, although the plan the team’s employed the last two years hasn’t worked any better and, perhaps more significantly, hasn’t shown many signs that the upside of their current quarterbacks holds promise for better days ahead.
And that's another thing I don't like about O'Brien.

A HC that is not strong enough to explain to the owner his plan to win a SB has no place on MY team.

Now, IF we establish that O'Brien is a Yes Man, I'll just criticize him for not being able to do his job.

His boss TOLD him to suck up and work to make Osweiler better.
He didn't. He even benched McNair's toy.

He should have asked the Boss what he wants to do regarding Mallett or simply just waited for instruction before yanking his mouth about cutting Mallett.
 

CloakNNNdagger

Hall of Fame
And that's another thing I don't like about O'Brien.

A HC that is not strong enough to explain to the owner his plan to win a SB has no place on MY team.

Now, IF we establish that O'Brien is a Yes Man, I'll just criticize him for not being able to do his job.

His boss TOLD him to suck up and work to make Osweiler better.
He didn't. He even benched McNair's toy.

He should have asked the Boss what he wants to do regarding Mallett or simply just waited for instruction before yanking his mouth about cutting Mallett.
It's certainly easy for an uninvolved party to make the situation sound simple. Mallet was a bargain basement acquisition, Osweiler was McNair's golden calf. If Smith would have pushed McNair anything about Osweiler, there would have been a civil family discussion. If O'Brien would have pushed McNair, it would have been more of a choice between being fired or quitting. O'Brien has enough allegiance to his players to not entertain quitting and to avoid being fired.
 
Last edited:

TheKDog

Hall of Fame
It's certainly easy for an uninvolved party to make the situation sound simple Mallet was a bargain basement acquisition, Osweiler was McNair's golden calf. If Smith would have pushed McNair anything about Osweiler, there would have been a civil family discussion. If O'Brien would have pushed McNair, it would have been more of a choice ofbetween being fired or quitting. O'Brien has enough allegiance to his players to not entertain quitting and to avoid being fired.
Then why was he leaking about leaving during the playoffs last year?
 

OptimisticTexan

Hall of Fame
The look in the War Room after the Watson pick would only indicate that this was a RS move. The only jumping for joy was RS...everyone else looked like they just had their Payday (Candy Bar) stolen.
 

CloakNNNdagger

Hall of Fame
Then why was he leaking about leaving during the playoffs last year?
A HC, especially O'Brien who is all business and all for his players did not leak that information.......especially in the middle of the playoffs. If you can't figure it out, at one point in time I will be able to reveal the history behind the purpose of the "leak." But meanwhile, I'm sure the media would love to get your confirmatory statement.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JB

CloakNNNdagger

Hall of Fame


Osweiler comes a long way (unless the Browns still hope to trade him)

June 17, 2017, 8:23 AM EDT

In little more than three months, the attitude of the Cleveland Browns regarding quarterback Brock Osweiler has changed dramatically. Unless it hasn’t.

After the Browns traded for Osweiler on March 9, making him a footnote to the press release that focused on the second-round pick they acquired from the Texans, the reports emerged quickly and unanimously: The Browns would try to trade him to another team and, if that failed, they would cut him.

Surprisingly (or not), the Browns found no takers for all or a portion of his $16 million fully-guaranteed salary. But then they didn’t cut him, a prudent move given that someone else could have signed him for the veteran minimum, putting the Browns on the hook for more than $15 million in 2017.

So the Browns apparently decided that, if they’re going to pay him more than $15 million, they may as well keep him on the books for $16 million and use him as a camp arm throughout the offseason program. The question now becomes whether they truly and honestly view him as a factor in the supposedly open competition for the starting quarterback job — or whether they’re holding out hope that if they pump him up enough between now and Week One someone will trade for him, especially if one of the other 31 teams endures a Bridgewater-style break-glass emergency.

And so in an industry where prevarication has become standard operating procedure, there are two possible explanations: The Browns decided they were wrong about Osweiler when they traded for him or the Browns are simply setting up a potential eventual trade.

“I will tell you something, and I think coach [Hue] Jackson would back me up on this, Brock has been a pleasant surprise,” quarterbacks coach David Lee told reporters on Thursday. “Say what you want, but the guy in the last two years has taken two different teams to the playoffs and there is no one else in that room that can say that. Plus, he’s got six years of experience, whereas others have no years of experience. [DeShone] Kizer is fresh. He has been here four months, like me, and the other two were rookies last year. He’s the senior citizen, that is for sure. He does a good job with these other guys. DeShone and he have built a good rapport and they communicate a lot.”

But Lee seemed to echo Osweiler’s recent comments about his challenges with quarterbacking fundamentals, lumping the senior citizen in with the rookie by saying that “we have a long way to go with the lower body of Brock and DeShone.”

The praise hasn’t been reserved to Osweiler. Lee threw it around to all four throwers of the football.

“We have got a great room,” Lee said. “All four of those guys are smart, they study, they work and they ask great questions. . . . Cody [Kessler] has really improved here in the end of OTAs just on his distance and his velocity with a few things we have done in the lower body, and Kevin [Hogan] looked good today and went 3-for-3 and a couple touchdowns here in the red zone. They are progressing and getting better.”

That’s fine, but the Browns most likely won’t be keeping four quarterbacks on the 53-man roster. So at some point they’ll have to decide whether to keep Osweiler on the final roster or dump Kessler or Hogan instead. If, along the way, someone offers a 2018 draft pick for Osweiler (and is likewise willing to eat all or most of his salary), they never have to make that decision.

The overriding point is this. If the Browns are smart (and they currently seem to be), they’d be praising Osweiler regardless of whether they truly deem him worthy of praise. With Tony Romo and Jay Cutler retired and Colin Kaepernick de facto blackballed, the guy who was benched for Peyton Manning one year and Tom Savage the next could still have value if/when another team suddenly becomes sufficiently desperate at some point between now and September.
 

TheKDog

Hall of Fame
A HC, especially O'Brien who is all business and all for his players did not leak that information.......especially in the middle of the playoffs. If you can't figure it out, at one point in time I will be able to reveal the history behind the purpose of the "leak." But meanwhile, I'm sure the media would love to get your confirmatory statement.
All business, but when asked about rumors of him leaving he said "what the future holds, it holds." During the playoffs with two years left on his contract.

https://www.google.com/amp/profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2017/01/13/bill-obrien-whatever-the-future-holds-it-holds/amp/

Let's remember what the leaks were:
-a belief that O'Brien hates it in Houston
-he doesn't like working with Rick
-they forced Osweiler on him
-there are plenty of teams that would love to have him as head coach. He would have options, would be a great candidate on the market, etc

Somehow all the leaks make Obrien look good. And it wasn't only that situation, in the Brock situation all the leaks were about how bad Brock was. Even going early to Obriens tenure there were leaks that made others in the org look bad.

McNair had to come out after the raiders game and say he wasn't going to fire him to stop the speculation from the leaks.

I thought it was interesting that it stopped after O'Brien was made OC, which made me think McNair was gonna try to go out and hire a new OC, which O'Brien didn't like.
 

thunderkyss

It's good to be me... again.
Staff member
Contributor's Club
Maybe they realized it was a mistake when they found out the chemistry between HC and QB was lousy. Bill O'Brien and Brock did not like each other. Not at all. Had those two talked before sending all that cash to Brock, maybe they wouldn't have signed him.

I'm still of the opinion Brock could have a solid career if and when he finds the right system/coaching staff. I'm also still of the opinion Bill O'Brien is a good coach. The decision to bring in Brock on a big contract though, it smells a little like the Ed Reed signing. You know the one. The one where McNair went maverick putting Ed Reed in his airplane, giving him a contract w/o even telling the HC and DC what he was doing. For that reason it would not surprise me at all if O'Brien had little to no say on Brock. Or he's already given up and just said to himself (and the public) "I do what Mr. McNair tells me to do. He's the owner and my boss". All speculation. I just don't put anything past McNair and the FO.
I believe they very well could have realized it was a mistake after the first "heated discussion" between them.

I still don't believe O'b was not involved in bringing Osweiler in. When the deal went down O'b said (not someone said, O'b said) he identified Osweiler as the best option

I don't think that's lip service or toting the company line. If that were the case he'd have said Smith identified Osweiler as their guy & he agreed.

The relationship soured, he tried to make the best of a bad situation. McNair let it play out. At most I can see McNair demanding they save him from paying the remainder of Osweiler's guaranteed money.

But I believe O'b wanted Osweiler just like he wanted Hoyer & they both blew up in his face.
 

thunderkyss

It's good to be me... again.
Staff member
Contributor's Club
Again...

After the Texans' 30-0 loss to Kansas City in the playoffs, O'Brien took off a couple of days before returning to the film room. First, he evaluated each of the Texans. Then, he turned to prospective free agents and watched tape before filing his report with Smith.

When O'Brien finished, Osweiler was at the top of his list of quarterbacks.

"We study all these guys," O'Brien said. "We watch their (regular-season) tape (and) their preseason tape. When you threw the tape on from (last season), it was impressive. He played in some very tough games, some very meaningful games.

"It's not easy to be a starting quarterback in this league. It's one of the most difficult things in sports to do. I think we got the right guy."

At the time, though, the consensus among the Texans and every team in the NFL was that Osweiler would re-sign with the Broncos.

The Texans had exhausted their interest in mid-level quarterbacks, nine who played in O'Brien's first two seasons, including seven as starters. Whether through the draft, free agency or even a possible trade, they were determined to get a player they believed could become their franchise quarterback.

Before the scouting combine in late February, Smith brought in his scouts from around the country. They set their draft board. Then, Smith, O'Brien and the assistant coaches reviewed the analysis of each prospective free agent prepared by Gaine and his staff.

Osweiler is the one

They decided how they wanted to attack free agency - what players Smith was going to pursue when the legal tampering period began March 7, two days before the start of the new league year when free agents could sign with other teams.

To make sure they were on the same page, Smith and O'Brien went to the film room and watched hours of tape on the 6-8, 240-pound Osweiler.

"We came out of the film room agreeing that Brock Osweiler was the quarterback to lead us where we want to go," Smith said.
 

banned1976

American
In my mind McNair pressured Smith and O'Brien to get on board with Osweiler. Which, by the way, I still think the Texans (McNair) did right by their fans. It was just a terrible mismatch between QB and HC. You're more apt to blame the HC. I'm more of the opinion it was never going to work out due to personalities (I didn't know that at the time but I should have). Sean Payton drove Dree Brees around New Orleans. He convinced Brees he was going to be a champion for New Orleans. They were a perfect match. O'Brien and Brock never had that opportunity. Tape is meaningless when it comes down to it. That's why I've always been a fan of a franchise taking their time to fully vet players. I still believe Brock was a hasty acquisition. I know O'Brien wanted Hoyer and Fitzpatrick as gap QB's. Osweiler was a big swing and a miss by McNair and the FO, IMHO. And O'Brien just fell in line.
 

76Texan

Hall of Fame
In my mind McNair pressured Smith and O'Brien to get on board with Osweiler. Which, by the way, I still think the Texans (McNair) did right by their fans. It was just a terrible mismatch between QB and HC. You're more apt to blame the HC. I'm more of the opinion it was never going to work out due to personalities (I didn't know that at the time but I should have). Sean Payton drove Dree Brees around New Orleans. He convinced Brees he was going to be a champion for New Orleans. They were a perfect match. O'Brien and Brock never had that opportunity. Tape is meaningless when it comes down to it. That's why I've always been a fan of a franchise taking their time to fully vet players. I still believe Brock was a hasty acquisition. I know O'Brien wanted Hoyer and Fitzpatrick as gap QB's. Osweiler was a big swing and a miss by McNair and the FO, IMHO. And O'Brien just fell in line.
RS should have a dosier on Osweiler from the 2012 draft.
If he doesn't, he didn't do his job.

I'm pretty sure he showed it to O'Brien and the two of them checked out Osweiler's game films with the Broncos (along with other FAs).

They both like him enough and decided they don't want to draft a QB; so they went to seek McNair's approval.

There's no way that McNair can keep track of all the FA QBs as well as the guys to be available in the draft.
 

steelbtexan

Hall of Fame
Why cant McNair, or atleast Cal keep an eye on 5 or 6 QB's a yr that are coming out of college, particularly if YOUR franchise doesn't have a franchise QB?

I'm not saying the owners opinion should trump the GM's QB opinion, but the owner should atleast have an informed opinion.
 

JB

Old Curmudgeon
Contributor's Club
RS should have a dosier on Osweiler from the 2012 draft.
If he doesn't, he didn't do his job.

I'm pretty sure he showed it to O'Brien and the two of them checked out Osweiler's game films with the Broncos (along with other FAs).

They both like him enough and decided they don't want to draft a QB; so they went to seek McNair's approval.

There's no way that McNair can keep track of all the FA QBs as well as the guys to be available in the draft.

I think you give RS and Texans scouting too much credit
 

JB

Old Curmudgeon
Contributor's Club
Why cant McNair, or atleast Cal keep an eye on 5 or 6 QB's a yr that are coming out of college, particularly if YOUR franchise doesn't have a franchise QB?

I'm not saying the owners opinion should trump the GM's QB opinion, but the owner should atleast have an informed opinion.
Obviously you're thinking of a football franchise oriented owner...

like a fan would do.

I don't think we have that here
 


Top