Archer: How Brock Osweiler could influence Cowboys' QB decision

Clay_Allison said:
The Texans didn't mind paying him based on 7 games, and unlike the Texans, the Broncos had 4 years of practice to evaluate.

The downside with Osweiler in Denver may have been that he wasn't the current coaching staff's guy. He was brought up mostly in the Jon Fox era. If Fox and Gase were still there they might have been more interested in keeping him.
Click to expand...
Texans are desperate to win with JJ Watt in his prime, so they're willing to gamble. Denver's defense allows them to not have to gamble. I think they think they can win with a game manager, so why pay a fortune to a kid you aren't sure can win long term when that defense gets old?

And practice can only tell you how good a practicer a player is.
 
ravidubey said:
Texans are desperate to win with JJ Watt in his prime, so they're willing to gamble. Denver's defense allows them to not have to gamble. I think they think they can win with a game manager, so why pay a fortune to a kid you aren't sure can win long term when that defense gets old?

And practice can only tell you how good a practicer a player is.
Click to expand...
This is only relevant in Dallas if you actually think Romo will play another four to five years. I don't, Do you?
 
Clay_Allison said:
This is only relevant in Dallas if you actually think Romo will play another four to five years. I don't, Do you?
Click to expand...

You're right, of course.

But if he plays three years, a definite possibility, then you've got one year with a 2nd round pick or two with a 1st rounder after Romo's gone. You still have to eat growing pains for that player, too, especially if the team sucks.

So at that point why not draft the next guy when Romo is truly done?

The exception is an opportunity to land a surefire franchise QB. If that opportunity arises you have to take it.
 
ravidubey said:
You're right, of course.

But if he plays three years, a definite possibility, then you've got one year with a 2nd round pick or two with a 1st rounder after Romo's gone. You still have to eat growing pains for that player, too, especially if the team sucks.

So at that point why not draft the next guy when Romo is truly done?

The exception is an opportunity to land a surefire franchise QB. If that opportunity arises you have to take it.
Click to expand...

Whether they have growing pains or not depends on the player, Rodgers was ready to roll pretty much immediately. I doubt Romo plays 3 years here. If we draft a guy we like, we're not going to want to pay a broken Romo 19.5 million in 2018. We have an offensive line to pay. Having a cheap rookie contract QB instead of an expensive vet can help with that. I honestly don't know if you keep him in 2017 if he ends 2016 on IR and the rookie finishes the season playing well.
 
ravidubey said:
You're right, of course.

But if he plays three years, a definite possibility, then you've got one year with a 2nd round pick or two with a 1st rounder after Romo's gone.
Click to expand...

Yeah and then after those two years you extend him. If he refuses you franchise him. This is easy stuff.

If you wait until Romo is done to draft someone you will guarantee your team is horrible for a couple years. And if that draft sucks for QBs you may end up having to reach horribly for a shitty QB like Blaine Gabbert.
 
Cowboysrock55 said:
Yeah and then after those two years you extend him. If he refuses you franchise him. This is easy stuff.

If you wait until Romo is done to draft someone you will guarantee your team is horrible for a couple years. And if that draft sucks for QBs you may end up having to reach horribly for a shitty QB like Blaine Gabbert.
Click to expand...

Or signing an Osweiler clone like Mike Glennon.
 
Cowboysrock55 said:
Yeah and then after those two years you extend him. If he refuses you franchise him. This is easy stuff.

If you wait until Romo is done to draft someone you will guarantee your team is horrible for a couple years. And if that draft sucks for QBs you may end up having to reach horribly for a shitty QB like Blaine Gabbert.
Click to expand...

Not to mention the fact that we need a good backup QB anyway. Getting one of the top 3 QBs is so obviously the move to me. I am going to be pissed like I've never been pissed before at this front office when we end up with Myles Jack and a TE with our first 2 picks.
 
dallen said:
Not to mention the fact that we need a good backup QB anyway. Getting one of the top 3 QBs is so obviously the move to me. I am going to be pissed like I've never been pissed before at this front office when we end up with Myles Jack and a TE with our first 2 picks.
Click to expand...

Even if the TE is Hunter?
 
Rev said:
Even if the TE is Hunter?
Click to expand...

nPFTjL5.gif
 
dallen said:
Not to mention the fact that we need a good backup QB anyway. Getting one of the top 3 QBs is so obviously the move to me. I am going to be pissed like I've never been pissed before at this front office when we end up with Myles Jack and a TE with our first 2 picks.
Click to expand...

Jack or Ramsey would seriously piss me off. Do they think Jack is the next Cornelius Bennett or LT?

What also concerns me is settling on one of the QB's on the assumption that is the 2004 draft.

Most of the time when there's a 1 and 1a duo touted pre-draft at QB, one of them is a good player and the other one not so much. If there is any suspicions that Goff/Wentz (whoever Clevland doesn't choose) is not that guy, then we must pass at pick #4.
 
Yeah because Cleveland has a history of choosing the right QB.
 
I think it's fair at this point to say that Cleveland could make a draft bust out of Andrew Luck.
 
boozeman said:
It would anger me immensely if we spent more than a fifth round choice on him.
Click to expand...

If we draft him at all it will set us back years.
 
jsmith6919 said:
If we draft him at all it will set us back years.
Click to expand...

Literally. They will "develop" him under the expert tutelage of Wade Effin' Wilson and bypass others while wasting time with him.
 
boozeman said:
Literally. They will "develop" him under the expert tutelage of Wade Effin' Wilson and bypass others while wasting time with him.
Click to expand...

Yep, and by virtue of his being drafted we'll have to waste at least a year seeing his suckass start
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom