It is extremely over used and abused on this board
Keep Texans Talk Google Ad Free!
Venmo Tip Jar | Paypal Tip Jar
Thanks for your support! 🍺😎👍
We suck...
- Thread starter EllisUnit
- Start date
It is extremely over used and abused on this board
Uncle Rico
Ur apology should be as loud as Ur disrespect was
Well I can definitely throw a tight spiral from the bumper of my rape van to the edge of my clothes line, and that is further than 5.79 yards so there is that.
TexansSeminole
Hall of Fame
Drew Brees started his first season as a 2nd year pro. This is Brock's 5th year as a professional football player.
Anyway, my point was pretty clear and I think rather obvious, without any undertones. If y'all want to argue pointlessly on and on for no reason, by all means, have at it. I shouldn't have joined this conversation to begin with. By the way, you don't look at yards per completion in the way that you have here. You look at yards per attempt, it's much more information rich as a statistic for obvious reasons.
Have fun.
Texansphan
Football connoisseur
Fair chance with the rise of the TE group. Plus, BOB has had better second halves in his two previous seasons
maverick512000
Hall of Fame
Practice is not the same as in the pocket with the game on the line. And yes he practiced against great defenses keep in mind also those defenses are not doing everything they can to get to him so they can drag him down hard.
Players rarely practice as hard as they play because they have to save their bodies and they never hit the quarterback. In the back of their minds all QBs know that they are not going to get hit in practice so it makes them a little braver.
To quote Down Periscope " A simulator is not a boat, nobody talks about brave men and their proud simulators." Well practice isn't game time no matter how hard you practice it's different. Also the very idea that all or even most of us here could play as well as him is frankly a very stupid statement.
Even the worst NFL player makes the average person look like a 3 year playing with a football. It's why so many great college players fail, they play against second rate players that are mostly there just for the scholarship and then they hit the NFL where everyone has devoted their life to that goal and they realize they weren't as great as they thought.
Texecutioner
Hall of Fame
Ok I was with ya right up until that last part. It's laughable to think that almost any of us here could throw a spiral, much less a NFL pass under pressure. And if you could consistently throw for 5.79 yards per attempt you would be in the NFL, not flapping your gums on a MB
Come on, that statement was golden. Lol! Accurate statement for the most part as much as I don't want to admit or agree. Oz is a check down machine.
EllisUnit
Vote RED!!!
Ok I was with ya right up until that last part. It's laughable to think that almost any of us here could throw a spiral, much less a NFL pass under pressure. And if you could consistently throw for 5.79 yards per attempt you would be in the NFL, not flapping your gums on a MB
Yeah throwing a spiral for 6 yards is tough, my son's pretty good at though. Although he's a short little **** I'm gonna let him know he obviously has NFL QB skills.....
Scooter
Funky
Your charts continue to state that Oz is the worst quarterback that our opponents face ... again I'm arguing with my favorite contrarian. MY EYE says the same thing it has since I scouted him before the draft - not an NFL starting quarterback. Teams get confused by his size and arm and athleticism, aka the least important parts of being a quarterback. "Much better". Point to me one way that he is 'Much Better' over the past several games - unless of course your baseline is highschool dropout - then of course "much better" is potentially accurate. Footwork? no. Accuracy? no. Reads? no.
Agree to disagree. "Excellent player" is not what was asked.
Has nothing to do with Brock.
Brock has made a few throws that I thought were pretty impressive.
One issue that I do see, is that he's not as mobile as many here want their QBs to be. He's a drop back pocket passer. He's not going to extend plays like Prescott or Wentz. When the play breaks down, for whatever reason, we see those guys get out of the pocket & improvise. So they make up for not getting the ball out on time.
Brock... not so much. If he can't get it out on time, his protection isn't good enough to buy him extra time & he's not athletic enough to create that extra time.
The good thing, if you want to call it a good thing, is that Brock has to improve in that area & that's the area that makes QB's really good for a long time.
Because of that extra athleticism, those other QBs may not progress fast enough & get themselves hurt, like RGIII. Even Luck. I think if his coaches would have worked more with him to play from the pocket he'd be even better than he is now (I'm thinking back to last season when Hasselbeck came in & ran the offense the way it was supposed to be ran. If Luck could do that, plus improvise like he does, he could be an all time great. Right now, I doubt he'll be "best of our time," more like "he had a good few years there (Matt Schaub)).
My much better refers to his being comfortable... confident on the field. The first five games, I thought he played scared. To me, that's a foundation piece that should help him start making the leaps a 5th year player should make this time of the season that a rookie most likely wouldn't (they're usually hitting the wall after about 10 games or so).
I think I'm being as objective as I can. I didn't think much of Osweiler at any time. Not before the draft, not in Denver, & definitely not when he came here. But... O'b said he can make a starting QB out of him. I'm waiting to see how that turns out.
I will say that Os seems to have regressed since the begining of this yr and certainly since last yr. His accuracy seems to be his biggest issue, this is related to poor footwork and because of this Os isn't trusting what his eyes are seeing. In short, he's playing scared, which is leading to all of the check downs and ints.
with or without a bunch of 300-lb guys coming at you with bad intentions.
Texas Jake
Rookie
Consider this, a 5 yard pass could be a 25+ yard throw.with or without a bunch of 300-lb guys coming at you with bad intentions.
Mr teX
Hall of Fame
No, most players good and bad have to overcome the speed of the game, but on the whole your statement is asinine. what part of "practice enviornment isn't the same as a game enviornment" is hard for you to grasp? Yeah he's been a professional for 4 years.....With a grand total of 7 starts under his belt..............in a different/easier offensive system to grasp................. throwing to different recievers............& when he was playing he was mostly in a different enviornment (practice vs. game). Quite honestly, learning how to be a professional in showing up for practice, film study & dealing with the media is about all he's had the opportunity to really learn in 4 years.
You sound silly in your assertion that it's just that easy...it ain't & some guys take longer to develop...Somebody mentioned Kurt Cousins upthread...he's closer to about 16 full starts but there are others who took much longer.
Steve Young....basically took him 4 years.....Sure there were other forces at work there, but In his time in TB & SF he had the equivalent of almost 2 full years worth of starts at various times before he finally started playing well. ........& if you add in the 20 or so starts he had in the 2 years in the USFL before even coming to the NFL, its 6 full seasons & well over 3 years worth of starts as a "professional".
Rich Gannon...Not even counting the years he bounced around in KC, it took him what like 6 years & 30 something odd starts before it finally clicked for him with chucky in OAK?
So there's obviously more to it than just years you spend in the league. There's a reason most ex-players who know say there's no substitute for game reps & if it was so easy to transfer practice over to live reps, teams would be way more patient with developing guys & we wouldn't see the desperation money thrown around at QB's we do....
TexansSeminole
Hall of Fame
You can't have it both ways. You can't say, "well he only has x starts, the number of years he's been in the league isn't valuable enough to even be considered," while also saying "we paid him so much because he's been sitting behind Manning with great coaching and thus is more ready than a rookie."
If his 4 years as a backup doesn't give him an appreciable upper hand, then we seriously miscalculated the risk involved in signing him. We would likely be better off with a rookie when you factor in salary cap implications, age, etc.
Brock Osweiler has 15 starts in the NFL now, one short of a full season. With the way the NFL is officiated nowadays, we should start to see a version of him that we should come to expect in the future. This isn't the era of Steve Young or even young Brees, this is an era in which young QBs have been much more successful than in previous eras.
If his 4 years as a backup doesn't give him an appreciable upper hand, then we seriously miscalculated the risk involved in signing him. We would likely be better off with a rookie when you factor in salary cap implications, age, etc.
Brock Osweiler has 15 starts in the NFL now, one short of a full season. With the way the NFL is officiated nowadays, we should start to see a version of him that we should come to expect in the future. This isn't the era of Steve Young or even young Brees, this is an era in which young QBs have been much more successful than in previous eras.
Outside of Prescott this year and Russell Wilson, which "young" QBs have been successful within the first 16 (I'll give them a season's worth of games) starts of their career.
Carr looks good, but he's in his third year about to make his 41st real game start.
Things look like they're finally starting to come together for Mariotta. But, again, he's got 20-something starts under his belt.
Proficiency takes time; not calendar time, game time.
...I'm actually looking at things this way so I won't go batsh!t pissed off myself
TexansSeminole
Hall of Fame
Outside of Prescott this year and Russell Wilson, which "young" QBs have been successful within the first 16 (I'll give them a season's worth of games) starts of their career.
Carr looks good, but he's in his third year about to make his 41st real game start.
Things look like they're finally starting to come together for Mariotta. But, again, he's got 20-something starts under his belt.
Proficiency takes time; not calendar time, game time.
...I'm actually looking at things this way so I won't go batsh!t pissed off myself
You'd be better off trying to find those that have not played well or atleast better than Brock. Find me a list of guys of the last 5 years who have done worse than Brock in their first 16 games.
Carr was better in his first 16, then got much better thereafter.
maverick512000
Hall of Fame
And which rookie were we suppose to take? That's the thing I don't get about everyone saying we should have gone with a rookie, where was this magical rookie suppose to come from?
Not the draft because we were to far back with to many other teams ahead of us that needed QBs. I suppose we could have sold the farm to the Titans and then yeah we'd have our rookie QB but no first round picks for years while one of our division rivals gets to freely build their team up with our picks. That's not just bad football that's bad business period.
I suppose we could have gotten Lynch but he hasn't been any more impressive than Brock and to me has a lower ceiling. Any other draft Lynch would have fallen to second round at the earliest. This particular draft had lots of teams desperate for a QB and he still was the last one taken in round one by a team that everyone knows just uses their offense to let their defense rest. The guy was in no way ready to be the kind of QB we needed.
So yeah next up is FA, let's look at that list.
http://www.fftoday.com/nfl/freeagents.php
Now look at that list and tell me who on there was a better choice than Osweiler? I don't mean looking now in hindsight I mean sitting in Rick Smiths chair looking for a Quaterback with that list in front of you who would you pick. Only ones I might have gone for were Bradford or Cousins. Cousins got franchised by Washington and no one really thought Bradford would be an opinion until after the draft when philly went QB after trading with Browns. Still say biggest winner out of that deal was the Vikings.
That just leaves Savage, the person that many seem to think will be the Quaterback savior of the Texans. Never mind that his numbers aren't really any better than Brock's and he started even fewer games than Brock had. There is something about Savage that either the front office or the coaches or both don't trust because he hasn't really been in the talk for starting at all.
I'm not saying Savage is a bad Quaterback but the way some talk he would be a game winning franchise Quaterback from day one and the Texans would putting the fear of Houston in all other teams under him. The fact is there is nothing to show he would have been any better and it was reasonable to assume that he would have been worse.
We have lost three games against three of the top 5 teams so far, can anyone honestly say we would have for sure won those games if Savage was QB? Some might say "well at least it would have been closer" guess what, close means nothing in football. This isn't horseshoes and it doesn't matter if you win by one or one hundred a win is a win. So even if those three games a had all been settled by 1 point our record would look the same. Only thing different is everyone would be griping that Texans can't score the last points needed to overcome elite teams.
TexansSeminole
Hall of Fame
I was on record as saying I liked the move to get Osweiler, and I still like the move that they made, given how they've handled it in the past. I would have liked drafting a rookie just as much, if not better, but I liked the move. At this point, it looks like a failed move, but there is still time. My main point was that you don't get to act like his years on the bench are not beneficial when comparing him to other guys. I'm of the opinion that they are/were beneficial, which makes his performance look even worse.
Mr teX
Hall of Fame
They are beneficial....but they are for the most part negated when u experience all the change that he has. His advancement is also further delayed by this supposedly extremely complicated offense bill obrien runs...and when u factor all this into the equation, it's kinda easy to see why he's struggled as much as he has.
As far as the money...look, we're in an era where guys that have been largely doo-doo their entire careers like Ryan Fitzpatrick can hold out and get 14 million. Do you really think that you'd be able to pay any less than that for a younger guy with better tools and potential? We know the broncos were prepared to give him 16...so really Texans fans are fretting over a measly 1 million more...
TexansSeminole
Hall of Fame
I don't have a problem with the money spent (based on my assumption that his first 4 years were beneficial), but my point is that if the Texans viewed his 4 years on the bench (and playing some) of an extremely successful team under a HOF QB to be negated due to change that had or would occur (easily assumed), then this was a bad move. My assumption is that you are just wrong on that; the Texans most certainly thought that that experience was beneficial to a measurable degree. I don't see how signing him is any better than scouting and drafting a QB that they liked, even in the 3rd round, under your assumption.
Texansphan
Football connoisseur
I was pretty excited we got Brock too but unfortunately he has had a bumpy ride so far.
We should not be shocked as he came from a different system so there is indeed time for him to improve and gel so I am convinced the accuracy and footwork and even the read issues will get better with a dose of confidence as the system becomes more second nature to him.
I see a lot of people say those issues I just mentioned are not a good sign but I bet the good QB's who took time to get their acts together didn't look pretty for their adjustment periods either.
It's amazing what confidence will do for a person so I am prepared to give him more time in OUR system.
I too was pissed when we passed on a couple of QB's in that '14 draft - I was just plain mystified when they passed on Carr, I just couldn't believe it. Then they passed on Jimmy G as well. How good would that draft have looked if we took Clowney and Carr with those first two picks?
Anyway, there was just no way we could have done any better these last two drafts unless we sold the farm and there is no way I would have been happy with that - first round picks are just too valuable to squander on untried rookie QB's so all in all, the route they went with Osweiler was really the best option, especially when you consider he is a day 1 starter whereas you would not like to throw your shiny new rookie QB in the deep end.
I agree the extra time should have benefited Brock. I just don't think it means instant success given the other things going on with the team.
Again we're saying, "if our defense had started as strong as they finished last season."
& if our run game was as explosive as Dallas'
I think it's possible Brock would look better. instead Brock has had to deal with a lot more adversity, looked bad, but he helped the team win those games.
still, I think the biggest benefit to signing Osweiler in lieu of drafting a rookie, we should see him progress faster. where we've seen how far Derek Carr has come in three years, it should be possible for Brock to make that same kind of progress in half the time.
at the same time, maybe he regresses as much as Bortles did in less time... who knows?
sandman
Brexit Advisor
Ok, just looked at his stats for the last two half seasons between the Broncos and Texans.
60%+ completion rate, almost 3,700 yards, 19 TDs and 15 INTs, and around 80% rating. Oh, and has been 10-5 as a starter.
Is this considered abject failure in the NFL these days?
Uncle Rico
Ur apology should be as loud as Ur disrespect was
You have every right to call my take 'asinine' and I respect that. I'll say I'm tired of all the pathetic excuses to support mediocrity around here. If you see positives in Brock Osweiler then cool, you seem to have foresight that I, and many others do not. You want to compare HOF'ers and SB winning QB's to Brock Osweiler? Okay. Maybe it sounds good in your head and you think it might make your point, but honestly its just more depressing company line thinking and pretty silly in its own right, almost as much as those guys who expect late round drafted QB's to turn into Tom Brady.
Kirk Cousins? Sigh, thats what we can expect with Brock Osweiler after he gets better? Color me non-impressed.
I appreciate your response and history lesson though.
Texansphan
Football connoisseur
What makes you so sure Osweiler is destined for mediocrity?
Of course you need a decent situation in which the whole team or the rest of the offense can provide the help for a QB to have some degree of success.Outside of Prescott this year and Russell Wilson, which "young" QBs have been successful within the first 16 (I'll give them a season's worth of games) starts of their career.
Carr looks good, but he's in his third year about to make his 41st real game start.
Things look like they're finally starting to come together for Mariotta. But, again, he's got 20-something starts under his belt.
Proficiency takes time; not calendar time, game time.
...I'm actually looking at things this way so I won't go batsh!t pissed off myself
But I see these guys recently:
Matt Ryan, Joe Flacco, Tyrod Taylor, Cam Newton, Andy Dalton, Matt Stafford, Andrew Luck, RG III, Bridgewater, Mariotta.
To be honest, I see Keenum as a better QB than Osweiler at every turn of their comparative careers even though he's limited in physical abilities.
TexansSeminole
Hall of Fame
Quarterbacks drafted since 2012 in first 16 starts (I included others that are starting or have started but with less starts in parenthesis):
Round 1: Jameis Winston: 4042 yards passing; 22 TDs/15 INTs; 7.6 YPA; 58.3 % completion percentage; 213 yards rushing with 6 TDs and 2 lost fumbles. 28 total TDs/17 total turnovers; 58.64 QBR.
Round 1: Marcus Mariota (12 starts): 2818 yards passing; 19 TDs/10 INTs; 7.6 YPA; 62.2% completion; 252 yards rushing 2 TDs and 7 lost fumbles; 1 TD reception. 22 total TDs/17 total turnovers; 61.01 QBR.
Round 7: Trevor Siemian (7 starts): 1487 yards passing; 8 TDs/4 INTs; 6.9 YPA; 30 rushing yards. 8 total TDs/4 total turnovers; 55.2 QBR
Round 1: Blake Bortles (12 starts): 2908 yards passing 11 TDs/17 INTs; 6.1 YPA; 58.9% completion; 419 yards rushing with 0 TDs and 4 lost fumbles. 11 total TDs/21 total turnovers; 25.2 QBR.
Round 1: Johnny Manziel (8 starts): 1675 yards passing; 7 TDs/7 INTs; 6.5 YPA; 57.0% completion; 259 yards rushing with 1 TD and 6 lost fumbles. 8 total TDs/13 total turnovers; 54 QBR.
Round 1: Teddy Bridgewater (12 starts): 2919 yards passing; 14 TDs/12 INTs; 7.3 YPA; 64.4% completion; 209 yards rushing with 1 TD and 2 lost fumbles. 15 total TDs/14 total turnovers; 56.89 QBR.
Round 2: Derek Carr: 3270 yards passing; 21 TDs/12 INTs; 5.5 YPA; 58.1% completion; 92 yards rushing with 0 TDs and 6 lost fumbles. 21 total TDs/18 total turnovers; 38.16 QBR.
Round 6: Zach Mettenberger (10 starts): 2347 yards passing; 12 TDs/15 INTs; 6.7 YPA; 60% completion; 12 yards rushing with 1 TD and 7 lost fumbles. 12 total TDs/22 total turnovers. 18.5 QBR.
Round 1: EJ Manuel (14 starts): 2810 yards passing; 16 TDs/12 INTs; 6.4 YPA; 58.5% completion; 238 yards rushing with 3 TDs and 4 lost fumbles. 19 total TDs/16 total turnovers. 39 QBR.
Round 2: Geno Smith: 3046 yards passing; 12 TDs/21 INTs; 6.9 YPA; 55.8% completion; 366 yards rushing with 6 TDs and 5 lost fumbles. 18 total TDs/27 total turnovers. 38.56 QBR.
Round 3: Mike Glennon (18 starts): 4025 yards passing; 29 TDs/15 INTs; 6.8 YPA; 58.8% completion; 86 yards rushing with 0 TDs and 4 fumbles lost; 29 total TDs/19 total turnovers. 49.8 QBR
Round 1: Andrew Luck: 4374 yards passing; 23 TDs/18 INTs; 7.0 YPA; 54.1% completion; 255 yards rushing with 5 TDs and 8 fumbles lost; 28 total TDs/26 total turnovers. 67.41 QBR.
Round 1: Robert Griffin (15 starts): 3200 yards passing; 20 TDs/5 INTs; 8.1 YPA; 65.6% completion; 815 yards rushing with 7 TDs and 8 fumbles lost; 27 total TDs/13 total turnovers. 75.63 QBR
Round 1: Ryan Tannehill: 3294 yards passing; 12 TDs/13 INTs; 6.8 YPA; 58.3% completion; 211 yards rushing with 2 TDs and 8 fumbles lost; 14 total TDs/21 total turnovers. 47 QBR.
Round 1: Brandon Weeden: 3385 yards passing; 14 TDs/17 INTs; 6.5 YPA; 57.4% completion; 111 yards rushing with 0 TDs and 4 fumbles lost; 14 total TDs/21 total turnovers. 29.34 QBR.
Round 3: Russell Wilson: 3118 yards passing 26 TDs/10 INTs; 7.9 YPA; 64.1% completion; 489 yards rushing with 4 TDs and 3 fumbles lost; 30 total TDs/13 total turnovers. 72.46 QBR.
Brock Osweiler (15 starts): 3686 yards passing; 19 TDs/15 INTs; 6.44 YPA; 60.2% completion; 97 yards rushing with 1 TD and 5 lost fumbles. 20 total TDs/20 total turnovers. 48.78 QBR with Denver, 50 QBR with Texans.
Disclaimer: I'm not sure every fumble lost stat is accurate. All stats are from pro-football reference and it's difficult to find fumbles lost on there. If you can find a more accurate statistic, let me know.
I didn't feel like extrapolating the first 4 games of Mariota's 2016 season, first 4 games of Bridgewater's 2015 season, or 3 games of Bortles 2015 to make it 16. You're welcome to, they only improve and make their numbers better over that time. I did not include Jimmy Garoppolo or AJ McCarron who both played well in spot duty (better than Brock). I also didn't include Nick Foles as his numbers are inordinately high in his first 16 games. I also did not include Kirk Cousins. He started a few games a year until he first started a full season, in which his stats for that season are among the best on this list. The rookies of this year are not included, but they are among the top of this list as well. Case Keenum is not included because he was undrafted and off the list I worked with, you can compare his stats on your own.
What you'll find is that every single one of these guys started in their first year and into their second year. Brock is the only player that did not do that and that is on this list. Every guy that has played 16 games is on here. So, what you see is that Brock is the most well prepared/pampered of the group and is among the worst in regards to guys that are still actually starting for a team. You'll also see that some of these guys have played WAY better in their next 16 games (Derek Carr, some others) and you hope that Brock can join that group.
Another large point is that being that Brock is the only guy that wasn't started as a rookie or second year guy, he played with far better teams. The Broncos were Super Bowl champions and the Texans are ATLEAST on par, if not more talented, than the teams these guys stated for when they were rookies. So, you have to factor in teammates. Go down the list and look at how bad each team was, and most of the time the QB still played better as rookies than Brock has as a 4 and 5 year veteran with a Super Bowl team and now the Texans (he's been way worse with us).
But this is your list, you can compare how you like.
Last edited:
sandman
Brexit Advisor
You are definitely very passionate in your opinion that Brock has, does and will suck.
driller80545
Noob
All these numbers are insufficient in themselves. Brock would almost surely look like a much better qb with an offensive line like Dallas has this year coupled with a hard nosed fast running back. But the reality is that we have a very porous line and a so so running back tandem, so more pressure is forced on Brock's shoulders to perform in a very difficult environment. Not really that surprised that he has trouble living up to that billing. Few could. But now to put the icing on the cake, what the Texans really need is a scrambling gunshooter qb along the lines of Johnny Manziel. Hahahaha. Seriously kinda.
Texansphan
Football connoisseur
You missed a tiny stat - only 1 other of the QB's on the list has what Osweiler has - a ring.
Edit - all these stats do not mean that Os is automatically going to be a bust. For example, compare stats with some HoF qb's first seasons and he compares favourably or better.
Please do not cherry pick your stats.
Last edited:
TexansSeminole
Hall of Fame
Lol, cherry pick stats, ok? Every relevant stat is there except sacks. You're welcome to give better ones.
What a waste of time that was.
Texansphan
Football connoisseur
Yo
You took the words right out of my mouth.
Texian
Hall of Fame
To the point that Texansphan pointed out that Osweiler is the only one with a ring means he played on a much better team than the others listed. Had Osweiler played on the teams listed in your comparison, most assuredly his stats would've been far worse.
wait a minute... are we saying Carr was "much' better than Brock in his first 16 starts? Are these numbers supposed to support that?
Texansphan
Football connoisseur
Then Texans must be a very good team - 5-3 baby.
dream_team
Hall of Fame
If we're looking at just QBR, Os is right in the middle. I'm not really sure what we're supposed to take from Seminole's post?
TexansSeminole
Hall of Fame
Carr's numbers are a bit of an outlier, they are very odd. He got some horrible protection that first year and that team was downright terrible. I still think he played better than Brock during those 16 games (rookie year) if you actually watched him. That's supported also by the fact that Carr was much better the next year after the team itself improved from terrible to near average.
You can be lazy and simply look at QBR if you like @dream_team. It's pretty obvious I'm not going to convince some of you of anything.
TexansSeminole
Hall of Fame
I think maybe some of you don't watch a lot of football outside of the Texans. If you need this much convincing that Brock has been really bad compared to recent rookies and veterans, you need to branch out in what you're watching. It's not rocket science, he's got the lowest rating of any starting QB in the league right now.
Texansphan
Football connoisseur
I agree he has not looked good, but the stats you proffered do not prove that Osweiler is going to be a bad QB.
I do notice though that the pooh-poohers always neglect to mention that Osweiler has a winning record as a starter - on two different teams no less.
Anyone would think he is 5-10 instead of 10-5.
I also find it short-sighted that these same folk seem to forget he is adjusting to a new system with new team members.
Give the guy a break for Pete's sake.
dream_team
Hall of Fame
Ummm... you don't have to convince me Brock has looked bad and so far a disappointment. You are the one that posted stats to make some point, but I'm still not sure what those stats were supposed to prove? The stats show he's middle of the road compared to those guys.
Now if you say, "We should be watching the games and not the stats." Once again, I agree. But you are the one that posted stats to make some point.
That may be the case. it may also be that you remember other team's mediocrity in a better light than Texans mediocrity.
Derek Carr had flashes of really good potential. but he also looked pretty bad at times. When the Raiders run game went to sht his rookie season, then again when Amari Cooper got hurt.
as for Brock, all I've ever said was it's too early.
I expected him to struggle... not as much as what we've seen, but I didn't expect much from him our first eight games. By the time the playoffs starts, I'm hoping he's going to be a much better player, someone who will give us a chance to advance past the divisional round.
FuzzyLogic
Mathematically Possible
I have no doubt that you believe what you are saying - and I even understand that you aren't saying Brock can't improve. But at least be consistent... above you use BO's low rating to prove he is bad, and here...
You call someone lazy for looking at stats.
Regardless - I have no issue with what you are saying - BO hasn't been great and you seem to hope he can get better - agree with you. And I think a few others probably agree with you too. But you seem to be all over the place in proving your point.
even worse, dream team was using the stats TexansSeminole provided.
I got nothing against TexansSeminole, but that was pretty funny.
Just curious, how many of those QB's got their first 16 starts with two or more different teams, different OL, different WR's, different RB's all at the same time? Not to mention more than 2 very different schemes and responsibilities as the QB of said team?
You have to look at all the circumstances surrounding each player not just the player. It's not just the QB
Mangler
Toro de España
How did they grow? Uh, let's see...
They actually invested in their offensive line, and made whatever sacrifices they had to make. Jerry Jones also didn't have this "win now" mentality that our retarded front office has.
Dallas built that offensive line, then went after the best running back to come out of the class of '16 and drafted the QB we passed on three times. Now, imagine what they'll be capable of after the '17 draft? They may end up being like the Old Cowboys. All they need is maybe one more good Running back, a good receiver, and a couple of upgrades to their defense and they're set. And, unlike us, Jerry Jones is not scared to draft a RB in the first round.
In the meantime, we will be waiting on our guys to jell while they learn O'Brien's cute little complex system while picking up a few more QB's from the NFL's scrap yard. Yawn!
EllisUnit
Vote RED!!!
Come on now Dallas did it wrong for years, let's not pretend Jerry Jones is all mighty. He finally got it right, McNair hasn't had near the time Jones has had.
sandman
Brexit Advisor
This is typical for this board. In 20 seasons after winning 3 of 4 Super Bowls, they missed the playoffs 12 times and won a total of 3 playoff games. With SIX different coaches. But now that they are 7-1, people are like "why can't the Texans be like the Cowboys???"
Like they did when NO won their Super Bowl. Like they did when Seattle won their Super Bowl. Like they did when Denver won their Super Bowl. It's pretty much the flavor of the month around here with some fans.
