It must be nice to get paid 72 million for an internship on how to become an NFL quarterback.

Compare him to Shaub , who also sat on the bench a few years before changing teams and starting. He was better than a typical rookie

 

Yeah, like you said - I don't necessarily disagree... but I DO think the advantages are mitigated somewhat because he's been in three different systems. I think, for instance, that's why Garapollo and, before him, Cassel - as well as one-game wonders like Flynn - can succeed: they've been *in* the system; that, to me, is what would make his experience invaluable.

Having four NFL years - but zero time in this system... that feels far more net-zero. He's starting from scratch. He's a "rookie."

 

He was; Schaub also got better each year - his "rookie" year was by far his worst. Well, until 2013....

And, as I've pointed out, like, a dozen times to you..... Osweiler and Schaub's first seven games in the *same* system look almost pass-for-pass identical. I guess there's a chance Osweiler would have regressed had he stayed in Denver... but I doubt it. Certainly not *this* much. I mean, it wasn't like he wasn't playing meaningful games last year.

 

At least we didn't draft this guy:

 

Jags are failing Bortles every bit as much as Bortles is failing the Jags.

 

Kind of wish we have Tyrod; that's how you get a backup to become a viable starter

 

As I've pointed out, like also a dozen times to you, that's comparing Osweiler's spot duty in Denver over a few years vs. Schaub's first year as a full-time starter in a new system.

And then when it comes to Derek Carr, people want to compare to Derek Carr's 1st year in the league to make Brock look better.

Compare apples to apples. Both first year starting QBs in new system in their 4th/5th years as big acquisitions for a new team. Schaub was a success, Osweiler has been a failure so far.

 

No. Just... no. First of all, you've never pointed that out to me. And I know this because if you had, I would remember blowing it to smithereens because it's 100% wrong.

I don't even know where to begin... Let's start with spot duty... Prior to 2015, Osweiler had made 30 NFL passes, not enough to move a needle either way. But more importantly: that spot duty was under another head coach. Kubiak wasn't his head coach until 2015. If I was comparing Osweiler's performance under Kubiak, why would I include "spot duty in Denver over a few years"? The answer, of course, is that I wouldn't, and I didn't.

Further, I've been explicit in juxtaposing Osweiler and Schaub's first seven starts*... Prior to this year, Brock's seven starts were all under Kubiak, all in his first (and only) year in Kubiak's system after three years as a backup. It is the exact same situation as Schaub.

(* It's actually 7 starts for Osweiler, 11 for Schaub; but they threw almost the exact same number of passes because Schaub was hurt often.)

It was always an apples-to-apples comparison, and the numbers are almost pass-for-pass identical, right down to the number of attempts.

I mean... just take defeat on this one. Seriously. You are wrong, wrong, wrong.

I don't know what this means... but everyone who is retroactively pining for Derek Carr should take a look at Carr's first 16 starts in the NFL to get a little perspective: they're not very good; not appreciably better than Osweiler's.

Read above; you're either dense or being remarkably stubborn; neither look is good.

Under Kubiak, in his fourth year in the league/first with Kubiak, Brock threw 275 passes.
Under Kubiak, in his fourth year in the league/first with Kubiak, Schaub threw 289 passes.

The results:
Brock: 275 attempts: 62%; 1,967 yards (7.2 YPA); 10 TD; 6 INT; 86.4 qbr
Schaub: 289 attempts: 66%; 2,241 yards (7.8 YPA); 9 TD; 9 INT; 87.2 qbr

And Schaub actually came to the table with a bit more experience: 161 pass attempts (+131) with 2 starts (+2) in his first three years.

You're proving way out of your depth on this one; you really would be wise to concede defeat and move on.

 

Possibly, but Bortles is a terrible NFL QB. He makes so many dumb mistakes and bad reads.

 

That doesn't fit the narrative of the "get a franchise quarterback and all your team's problems are solved" group. For every Derek Carr, there is Blake Bortles. For every Aaron Rodgers, there's Alex Smith. For every Roethlisberger, there is Matthew Stafford. Russell Wilson, Mariota. Sure, getting a talented QB makes your team better, but let's not act like it vaults your team into a super bowl contender. Sometimes the team makes the QB and not vice versa.

 

No, because the correct comparison is still Brock this year vs Schaub in his first year as a starter here. Why the rush to throw out Brock's current year and look only at prior years? Isn't he supposed to get better?

The "consider only years under Kubiak" argumentis silly, as if QBs can't do well in their first years under Bill Obrien, or as if Kubiak is now the QB whisperer, even though mediocre journeymen Hoyer and Fitzpatrick posted 90+ QBRatings in their first years under OBrien.

As far as the Carr comparison...trying to make Brock look better by comparing "first 16 starts" without considering that Carr started as a true rookie on a bad team. Really, at least compare him to 2nd year Carr where he posted a 90+Qbarting. The constant cherry picking of stats of other QBs to make Brock look better is getting old.

How about this:
Trevor Siemian: 60% completion, 10 TD, 5 INT, 86 QBRating

How does Brock compare? Or does that not count becasue Siemian is playing for Kubiak?

Or we can throw out the first 7 starts, and look at starts 8-15 of all these QBs. That should be a fair comparison. Both Schaub and Carr did better than an 73 QBrating in starts 8-15.

 

Helps to give them a good OL and weapons to work with like they have in Dallas

 

The problem is that he's so "out of his depth" when it comes to talking about football that he doesn't even realize how badly he's been bested in this discussion so he' won't concede defeat and move on. Basically the only way this ends is if you throw your hands up and give up on him ever learning the error of his ways. Trust me, I've been through this 1000 times with him already. Nothing you do or say will ever sink in.

 

Mr. Clutch, I think Hey Now's big argument is that QBs in their 2nd+ year of the same system have an advantage. Which I think is likely true. Be that Carr in his second year, or Siemian in his second year - even considering he didn't play previously. I think it is true, even if you're not "the guy", if you've been around a system long enough, you absorb it in and it is more natural.

That said, your counter arguments are valid. It's just as valid to compare Schaub's start in a new Kubiak system to Brock's in a new O'brien system. They are both "new system" comparisons. The only potential argument would be that perhaps Brock has just been overloaded with systems at this point - his third in 3 years, and 2nd he's playing in.

And we have heard rumblings about the complexity of O'brien's system.

That said, complexity didn't seem to be an issue for Fitzgerald/Hoyer... well, it was never touted as a problem. They were who they were, only slightly better than career averages (in Hoyer's case) or at career peaks (in Fitzpatrick's case).

I'm not a huge Fitzpatrick fan, or even a Fitzpatrick fan at all, but he's clearly the best of the crop of QBs that O'brien has worked with in Houston to this point.

I think Brock can improve, should get better with time, should get better with better playcalling, should get better with better connection with Hopkins (somehow, not sure where the fault is there)... but I also think increasingly we are seeing who he is as a NFL QB. Which is middling. If he gets better he might be upper middling, which has the long shot of being a superbowl caliber QB assuming the rest of the team is lights out.

Which to me means they need to continue to address QB.

 

Not going to do it, huh?.... OK....

Because... you desperately (based on how often you bring it up) want Schaub's first year here to be an apples-to-apple comparison (since it confirms your already apparent bias) but it isn't; the apples-to-apples comparison is Osweiler's first seven starts because they happened under almost the *exact* same circumstances as Schaub's. And the results are almost identical.

And that's informative because Schaub grew and got much better in that system while Osweiler left the system and promptly regressed, which presents two potential explanations for his poor play: 1) Kubiak's system is just overtly QB friendly and, like his RBs, is designed such that almost anyone can thrive in it, meaning any positives we could have taken from Osweiler's tenure is Denver are immediately irrelevant; or 2) BOB's system is complicated/not very good/a poor fit for Osweiler, and it has r****ded his growth.

Because a switch of systems is significant.

No one is trying to make Brock look better; the point is that it is rather common for first-year starters to struggle. Everyone retroactively pining for Carr is acting like he walked into the NFL and straight to first-team All-Pro, and the truth is: he was bad his first year; better for the first 8 games his second year before massively regressing; he was bad in 24 of his first 32 starts. This year, he has obviously taken a giant leap forward (so far) and, if permanent, would mean he took two full years as a starter before he was consistently really good.

No one is defending Brock's play, other than the potential that his struggles are related to his relative inexperience.

Hey, guess what that looks like? Almost pass-for-pass identical to what Osweiler did in his first seven starts in Kubiak's system.

 

Thanks; you mostly nailed my point.

Hoyer had been in the system previously (3 years with NE) and had 17 starts under his belt by the time he landed here. I don't believe Fitzpatrick had been in the system - but he was a veteran of 77 starts and he was much better in his final 6 starts (105 qb rating) than he was in his first 6 (85.1 qb rating), which lends greater credence to the idea that the system isn't an easy pick-up.

Mr. Clutch has this idea I'm defending Brock Osweiler... who the **** would do that? He's been awful. But if you're looking for a silver lining it's that he isn't the first first-year starter to struggle and if he can play better weeks 9-16, there's hope he'll be able to turn it around on a more permanent basis.

I'll say this... the bye comes at a great time. I hope they take advantage of it by breaking this thing apart and finding what it is he does well and building on it.

 

Yeah, this issue is one can argue either side of every point really. Brock with Kubiak compared to Schaub with Kubiak seems like a better comparison, as its the same coach, the same first starter experience, etc. On the other hand, you'd almost say Brock should have the advantage if you take his play with O'brien - at least on paper. Cause while it is a new system, it is also further along in his career, he's already had that starter experience. And even if you discount that, it is still comparing first in a new system vs. first in a new system.

Which would mean it then comes down to your point about QB friendliness systems of Kubiak vs. O'brien. Which is almost as equally futile as arguing, except it does "seem" like Kubiak generally runs a QB friendly system as a whole... lot's less is put on the QB at the line, lots of use of play action to try and give QBs, unathletic QBs more space in the pocket, etc. More QB friendly, but potentially less QB upside with a great QB capable of being the playcaller at the line, being shifty in the pocket and not having to rely on play action, etc. But that's just my eye test.

Again, overall, who cares about arguing it. The second half of the season will play out regardless, so unless there's some betting going on, we'll see.

The argument will make sense in the offseason, when it might still be the "give it another year" crowd vs. the "he is what he is and kind of sucks" crowd. Unless his play changes drastically one way or another these next 8 games...

 

I think 32 starts is my limit; at that point, we'll know for sure (and we're contractually obligated through that stretch anyway so they might as well let it play out).

The only caveat is if he doesn't show improvement these last 8 weeks; if it's the same Brock we've seen, my hope that more experience/coaching, etc., could salvage this would be all but extinguished. At that point, he's more or less on the shortest rope possible; any regression/lack of improvement next year, starting with week 1, and I'll be officially out on him.

 

Option 3: Brock Osweiler isn't very good. There were many, many people who were saying there was nothing special about Osweiler in Denver. This was repeated many times, that he was just average and the contract was risky. After all, he was benched in Denver.


"Because a switch of systems is significant."

How significant is this? Remember, Hoyer and Fitz came and had career years under BOB. He isn't called the QB whisperer for nothing.

Except for, you know, Schaub. And countless examples around the league occuring this year.

 

He was benched for arguably the greatest QB to ever play football; he wasn't benched based on performance as he was outplaying Manning. Come on; let's not be disingenuous about this.

(ETA: you're right - option 3 is in play, too. Except... he was pretty good last year in Denver. That's the other reason for bringing up Schaub and Kubiak - you keep slagging Osweiler's performance in Denver while praising Schaub's when, under nearly identical circumstances, they were practically the same their respective first years under Kubiak. So which is it?)

See my response to @JayZ750 - Hoyer was in the system for three years; Fitzpatrick had no experience with the system but had 77 career starts. And he was better weeks 9-16 than he was 1-8.

Schaub was good - but he got *better*... That's what competent QBs tend to do; few are polished All-Pros after a handful of starts.

And there aren't "countless examples" this year - there is one: Prescott (playing behind arguably the best OL in football). Wentz is regressing, having posted sub-80 qb ratings in 3 of his last 4 starts, and in 4 of his overall 8. Siemian has two exceptional starts + a good one (v Houston) and a mediocre one. His other 4 starts are below-average and he's officially on the hot seat in Denver after his coach said he "has to get better."