I'd say hanging on to him... and hoping he'll magically get better... is a bigger sign of desperation.
No, not really, that made sense even though it didn't work out. I'm talking about the Redskins trading up for RG3, the Chiefs trading for Matt Cassel, the Texans trading for Ryan Mallett, the Jets picking up Fitz again, the Jets drafting Geno Smith, the Cardinals trading for Kevin Kolb and so on. You can find all kinds of stupid things that happen when teams start feeling that QB desperation and almost always it leads to them digging the hole deeper.....you know, the Nick plan.
The Falcons traded up for Matt Ryan, the Texans traded for Matt Schaub, the Giants traded up for Eli, the Packers traded for Brett Favre, the Chiefs traded for Joe Montana, the Broncos traded for John Elway, the Rams traded for Jim Everett... Of course, there's always the "they will be fine if they do nothing" plan, and just try again in 2018...
Its hillarious to see hot takes like Garopolo possibly being better than Schaub as "winning the lottery", yet signing Brock was "defensible". We all know that QB's still have to be in the right situation to succeed... but they also have to have the requisite smarts, athleticism, fundamentals, work ethic, and competitive fire. Most drafted QB's don't make it because its vastly impossible to account for all of those variables... but its clear that the ones that do ultimately can benefit from the watch/develop approach (although it hasn't worked out that well for Brock).
We all also know that improving the QB position isn't done in a vacuum. You have to give up draft picks, cap space or use a premium pick on an unknown. You have to factor in these opportunity costs which include losing some of your guys and/or not being able to address other positions of need. Out of curiosity what is the price you would pay to get Garoppolo? If it was just the 25th pick or just 2 seconds like the Schuab deal I could see taking the risk but the price looks like it's going up.
I think I'm fully on board with the idea of signing Romo and drafting a qb in the early rounds. Because of the history of going after qb's like Garoppolo, I'd have to be very hesitant giving up what it will likely take to get him. I feel like getting Romo will be much like when the Cardinals got Palmer. They went through qb failure after qb failure. Then they got Palmer and became an instant contender. Yes, he's old and a health risk..but a healthy Romo with our defense makes us one of the early favorites to win the AFC. I don't fault the Texans for the Osweiler signing because it's not like others weren't fooled by his success in Denver and the contract was written in such a way that the Texans can get out of it after only 2 seasons. He sucked. He was horrible. He cannot be the starter next season. He can be the most expensive backup in the league. Even then, I'd expect him to be a healthy scratch most weeks when a rookie beats him out for the #2 spot.
Here's my take on the Osweiler signing. It starts with recognizing that at best, there are only enough franchise-quality QB's capable of contention to go around say a third of the league's franchises, then maybe enough not to suck to accommodate half the league's franchises (this would be the Andy Dalton's of the world). It also starts with recognizing that drafting QB's have a 50% success rate IN THE FIRST ROUND, that percentage dropping significantly from there. Three years ago, the Texans had the #1 pick in the draft and were faced with either the 50-50 proposition of drafting a QB in a class with no sure thing at the position, or sign a stop-gap through free agency and draft the best player available. They did what I think was the right move: draft the best player available #1 (Clowney) and sign a stop-gap (Fitzpatrick) and try again next year. It should be noted that they were hoping Bridgewater fell to them in Round 2, but that didn't happen. The following year they decided Fitzpatrick wasn't good enough, the draft again was a lottery at the QB position, and they decided again to stay patient....this time signing Hoyer and trading for Ryan Mallett. Mallett was cut by mid-season and Hoyer ended the season putting a "0" on the board at home in the playoffs against the Chiefs who went on to lose to the Patriots in round 2. Two years of patience had become too trying on the nerves of the owner who publicly delivers a "find a QB or else" message to his GM and coach. After two years of patience and middling results, I can understand the desperation of throwing money at Osweiler to pry him away from the franchise that was grooming him to be next up being that he was considered the best free agent QB on the market at the time. What none of those three off-seasons offered was a proven veteran QB available through free agency, or a sure-fire Andrew Luck-type QB available in the draft (the closest thing being Winston/Mariota). Finally in 2017, for the first time since Peyton Manning became a free agent in 2012, and we all know what happened there, a proven veteran QB is available through free agency. If your franchise is not falling down trying to bring such a rare available commodity into the fold, especially when said-commodity has publicly expressed interest, your franchise is not serious about doing everything it can to win.........but that goes beyond the point of this response.
Chances are only 1 of us and Denver even wants Romo. Are there any reports of either team wanting him? All I've seen is where he wants to go.
And it wasn't even two weeks ago that Ed Werder reported that "Romo's focus is on one team and one team only and that team is the Texans". These reports are leaked to leverage Romo into the best deal he can possibly get. My guess is only Romo and his inner circle know of his true desired destination. Would feel more comfortable if I wasn't hearing crickets from Texans' brass, but then again that would also be their best strategy. I certainly hope behind the scenes they have expressed interest to Romo's camp even if they haven't done so publicly as the Broncos have. Carpe diem Rick Smith.
