Because you can't get rid of him and you aren't starting a rookie and if you add Romo, you'll need a new starter after he's injured in the first quarter of the first game.
If this happens, I'd be totally fine with drafting someone to sit behind Romo, as QB3 (this season), and learn for a year or two, and releasing Savage. Much as I like Savage, he's got no place here. I hope he goes on to have a nice career to be honest.
maaan we have to try for Romo, right? If released, how much do you think he's asking for? Texans vs Cowboys Super Bowl, Romo vs Dak
Another old(er) QB coming off injury is interested in the Texans? Texans will probably pass again. And that may not be a bad thing.
There are quarterbacks that are markedly better than Osweiler that will be available as short term fits..... we will see what the Texans... err McNair chooses to do. My guess? They screw it up, and they don't have an adequate QB until it is time to pay the defense, and the Texans are mediocre on that side of the ball.
Romo is injury prone. He got injured behind the best o-line in the league; he will get decimated behind ours. Do not want. Keep our eyes on the draft.
If he's cheap enough then there's no harm in it, even if they draft a QB he wouldn't start this year anyway. So basically with Romo you get a few quarters out of him before he gets hurt before going to Osweiler without Romo you have a QB competition between Savage and Osweiler and it's that guy from the start. Pretty much the only difference it would make.
Mario cares nothing about football, he only cares about making the most possible money, he won't get that here.
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap30...mock-draft-top-talent-drops-with-early-qb-run Four round Mock Draft Spoiler By Chad Reuter Draft analyst Producing a four-round mock draft two weeks before the NFL Scouting Combine is done for one of two reasons: 1) You're certifiably insane. 2) You want a snapshot of how players are viewed going into an event many refer to as the "Underwear Olympics." I'll claim it was done for the latter reason, though most who know me will choose the former. Either way, I hope you enjoy viewing one potential scenario of how things could play out in the draft. 25 TEXANS Garett Bolles - OT, Utah: Injuries and ineffectiveness have made tackle a need spot for theTexans. 57. Houston Texans: Budda Baker, S, Washington 89. Houston Texans: Tanoh Kpassagnon, DE, Villanova 126. Houston Texans: Brad Kaaya, QB, Miami (Fla.)
Speaking of cap casualties, the Texans have quite a few that could be cut to save cap room. Tony Bergstrom Brandon Weeden Derek Newton (post June 1st) Eddie Pleasant Tom Savage Chris Clark (I wish) Jonathan Joseph would be a good restructure candidate if not an actual casualty because he has no guaranteed money left Cushing is in the same boat, he'd be a good cap casualty, but they need him so he's a prime restructure guy because after June 1st he only has 2.5 mil guaranteed left
Duane Brown is in the same boat (restructure candidate) I don't see them cutting Pleasant, but I could be wrong. Bergstrom and Newton are almost assuredly going to get cut. What's the contract like for Jeff Allen?
Jeff Allen has a cap hit of almost $6.5M this season, with a dead money value of $5.75M. And, unfortunately, if i recall, it's a back-loaded contract. That was a disastrous signing all around.
I don't think they cut Newton, and absolutely no way they begin the season with rookie tackles starting at both ends. Rookie Olinemen usually perform better when they are beside successful vets. Newton might be IR or PUP and I think there is a chance they keep Clark as the swing.
There is no reason to keep Newton. He is done for the year next year and would be coming off massive injuries and you can save like $3 million by cutting him.
I'm not saying they should keep him. I just think they keep him. Texans don't have a record of cutting long-time players due to injury. That's why I think they IR or put him on PUP.
Jeff Allen would only cost 3.25 mil to cut post June 1st meaning it would save about 3.2 mil by cutting him.
