Long but good read from Houstonian Ringer Staff writer Shea Serrano: Brock Osweiler vs. Connor Cook: The Worst QB Playoff Matchup Ever A close look at the least-experienced and least-good quarterbacks to face off in NFL postseason history On Saturday, Brock Osweiler, who is like if a person had been born with feet for hands, will start in a playoff game for the Texans against Connor Cook, who is the starting quarterback for the Raiders now because their first-string QB, Derek Carr, broke his leg in Week 16 and their second-string QB, Matt McGloin, injured his shoulder in Week 17. Even though it will likely result in some not all-the-way stellar football, this matchup is decidedly interesting. Now, I’ll admit that a significant part of why I’m interested is because the Texans are my favorite football team. But there are reasons beyond my purview that make it exciting (and even historic). There are six, in fact, two of which are huge. In question form, they are: 1. HUGE: Is this the least-experienced quarterback matchup in playoff history? No, but barely. This is easy to answer because it’s just some numbers you have to look at and that’s it. (It’s also easy to answer because in the playoffs following the 2011 season, the Texans started T.J. Yates in a game against the Bengals, and Yates had only five starts to his name then. People in Houston noticed.) Osweiler has started only 21 games in his NFL career, which is crazy because it’s felt like at least 30, 35 easy. Cook, a rookie fourth-round pick, has started exactly zero games in his NFL career. That’s a combined total of 21 starts between the two of them. Look: 21 + 0 = 21 See? In the Super Bowl era, this is the first time that a starting quarterback will have started zero regular-season games. Three passers have started a postseason game with three-games-started experience (Paul McDonald for Cleveland in the playoffs after the 1982 season, Kelly Holcomb for Cleveland in 2002, A.J. McCarron for Cincinnati in 2015), one player has done it with two-games-started experience (Joe Webb for Minnesota in 2012) and four players have done it with one-game-started experience (Ron Jaworski in 1975, Gifford Nielsen in 1979, Doug Flutie in 1986, Todd Marinovich in 1991). Connor Cook is the only QB to have done it with zero-games-started experience. And no one mentioned above (or even anyone who had four or five or six starts) ever played against each other in the playoffs. So the Brock + Connor 21 Combined Starts is tied for the second lowest in history. The lowest happened in 1971, when Bob Lee and Roger Staubach played each other in a Vikings-Cowboys playoff game. (At the time, Lee had just six starts and Staubach had 14.) Tied for second place was the aforementioned Texans-Bengals game after the 2011 season. (Yates had five starts. His opponent, Andy Dalton, started all the games for the Bengals that season, but it was just his first season, so he had a total of just 16.) So, yes: This is tied for the second-least-experienced quarterback matchup in playoff history. Two things stand out: (1) Bob Lee is the name of Mark Wahlberg’s character in Shooter, so you can imagine my surprise when I read about Bob Lee the football player and found out that he isn’t in the Hall of Fame. (2) Osweiler has started 14 games this season, which is the same number of career starts Roger Staubach had when he faced off against Bob Lee. Staubach’s Cowboys ended up winning the Super Bowl that year. I’m just connecting the dots here. Advantage: Osweiler Here's the rest https://theringer.com/brock-osweiler-connor-cook-raiders-texans-nfl-playoffs-4ebee3256f05#.qa902elsv
I think we can stumble our way into 4 FG's. Of course, all 4 of them will be the result of 4 1st and goal situations.
It's not Savage starting so I'm fairly confident the Texans will manage at least one passing TD, the worry is that there will be interceptions.
Wouldn't surprise me to see McGloin start. I know he's not expected to start...just wouldn't surprise me.
I think the Raiders will surprise people. Their players had too much optimism this year to just go down quietly. They may have quit against Denver but they will be playing much better this week. Also, the Raiders have no pressure. The Texans, being at home, with questions surrounding the coaching staff, have a ton of pressure to win. We all know how this team reacts to tense situations. The fans will be antsy and that will carry over to the players. i'm thinking that this will be an upset more and more. I don't care what our defense does, they will probably play well, but our offense can't score and our QB throws picks. Our special teams has shown the propensity to self destruct by fumbling, and our coaching staff looks to not have a clue half the time. The Texans have gotten lucky in close games this year, I think that luck is about to run out.
Oh wow, that would really move the needle IMO. Losing John Simon sucks, but if the Raiders don't have their LT, I would expect a big game by the pass rush.
I wonder if the x's on that graphic relate to where the ball was thrown or where Nuke was at the time. Typically, those 2 things are nowhere close to one another.
You would likely be the only person that blames Hopkins and not the qb who couldn't hit the ocean from the beach.
Among Texans fans, perhaps I'm the only one that blames the people who are actually responsible for a play ending poorly instead of just finding a scapegoat to blame everything negative on. Perhaps that's right. I'm just not going to blame a QB when a receiver runs the wrong route or when the ball bounces off a receiver's hands or when the receiver allows a defender to take the ball out of their hands. Crazy talk, I know. If you can't see that Hopkins (and other WR's) has played poorly this year in ways that have nothing at all to do with the QB, then....well that's fine, but it'll make it difficult to take your opinion seriously. The QB's struggles are well documented, and no one is disputing that, but you shouldn't be blaming him for things that aren't his fault on top of the things that are his fault.
