Page 1 of 11 1 2 3 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 156

Thread: Bold Prediction

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    413

    Why Osweiler is a win-now pick: the Bubby Brister scenario

    The debate on this seems to be whether we should have spent a 2nd round pick on someone who's not going to see the field for years, vs. the people who think if you get a potential franchise-caliber QB late in Round 2, you take him. The logic on those opposing the selection is that if Manning goes down we're toast and will get the top pick in the next year's draft or close, so you get your new QB then.

    I feel this is an oversimplification. Manning is 36, and so is at greater risk of getting non-season-ending injuries as he ages and his mobility declines. In fact, that's probably more likely than a season-ending or career-ending injury. Here are Manning's sack totals for his entire career:

    1998: 22
    1999: 14
    2000: 20
    2001: 29
    2002: 23
    2003: 18
    2004: 13
    2005: 17
    2006: 14
    2007: 21
    2008: 14
    2009: 10
    2010: 16
    2011: --

    The impression people have is that Manning never gets sacked. Clearly this isn't true; even Manning gets sacked about once per game even in very good years, and absorbed 29 sacks in his 2001 campaign, and with each sack comes injury risk. The sack rate isn't entirely a function of Manning's speed of decisionmaking; it also depends on whether his Oline is protecting him and his receivers are getting open, as well as what the defense is doing and how good they are at bringing pressure.

    So we don't only need to worry about whether Manning goes down, we also need to worry about whether his LT Ryan Clady goes down, whether his receivers get injured and he's playing with backups, etc. In such cases it's possible that the sack rate might approach Manning's 2001 campaign.

    Another reason to be concerned about a somewhat higher sack rate in 2012 is that Manning is learning a new offense and so is his entire team. It's going to be a hybrid of what he did in Indianapolis and Mike McCoy's stuff, but there's enough of a learning curve there for Manning and his receivers that it's possible his speed of decision-making will be a tick slow at first relative to the polished perfection we were used to seeing when he was with the Colts, which was built up over more than a decade and did not suffer through changes at offensive coordinator.

    So let's say it's mid-season and we're 5-2. Then Manning goes down with a high ankle sprain and is out for a month. What then? Well, if you have a backup who is capable of eking out a couple of wins with help from the defense and the running game, then Manning comes back and you're still in the playoff hunt at 7-4 after Osweiler kept the seat warm with a 2-2 record.

    By far the easiest route to a Super Bowl with the team we have now is to win home field advantage and let Manning run the hurry-up at Mile High. If we have to go to Foxborough or Pittsburgh in the middle of winter we're underdogs. Even playing at sea-level in Houston could be tough. But to get home field advantage, every win is probably going to be critical, which is why if you've got a scrub as the backup who goes 0-4 when Peyton's out with a month-long injury, you're fighting for a wildcard at best when he comes back at 5-6 in my scenario. Even if you win out from that point you're only 10-6. Maybe that gets you the division, but you're going to play in the wildcard round for sure with that record.

    So in the scenario where Manning gets a non-catastrophic injury, Osweiler -- should he pan out -- is in fact a win-now sort of pick. Having a decent backup will be critical to getting to the playoffs if that happens.

    This exact scenario played out in Elway's second Super Bowl-winning campaign. Elway battled injuries for all or part of six games and failed to start four of them. Bubby Brister not only kept the seat warm, but was able to go 4-0 in his four starts, which was critical for winning home field advantage and going 14-2 for the season. Elway's memory of this is probably a factor in bringing in Osweiler and getting some competition for Caleb Hanie, who was 0-4 backing up Cutler last season, although dealing with key injuries to skill players and a terrible Oline in the process.

    Note too that the backup QBs are important for the starting team's performance even if they don't ever play. The backup QBs have to help run practices. If they do well in practice it helps train the backup wide receivers, tight ends, running backs, etc., some of whom will inevitably play as starters due to injuries at other skill positions. How well the backups can simulate the real thing with Peyton Manning for these players will be critical in their performance on the field. Manning will often run practices for the first-string at game speed. Can your backup do that too for the second stringers, some of whom will be first-stringers before the season's over? So Osweiler will be contributing to the on-field product whether he sits or plays.
    Last edited by CasualFan; 04-28-2012 at 11:07 PM.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Castle Rock, CO
    Posts
    589
    I love you
    DENVER STAND UP!!!

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    2,140
    Osweiler clearly needs some time, however I take your point to be he will see the field before Peyton's contract runs out which is very fair.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    29
    Kubiak won a couple pretty big games in his time at backup. If we had won at Buffalo in the AFC championship game, Elway wouldnt have been able to go in the Super Bowl. Elway has seen enough to know he needed a solid qb in this draft. Osweiler has all the physical tools and can make all the throws. His ceiling is very high. I have no problem with where he was taken.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    391
    I expect the sacks to go down behind a good o-line, the last 3 years manning had literally under 2.5 seconds to get rid of the ball,unlike other QBs who get 5 seconds plus

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    2,093
    Great argument! If we didn't all ready have two QB's on the roster, Hannie is a very serviceable Backup to boot, put him behind a decent line like say ours and he can do some things...

    But hey I'm sure glad we got Oswieler instead of say

    1. Thompson
    2. Trumaine
    3. Curry
    4. Randle
    5. David

    You know all of those guys can pretty much help NOW! And not the play (practice help now) but the REAL (on the field) help now...

    Bottom line is that we picked a guy in the 2nd round of Payton Mannings going to the SB or Bust tour, who is going to sit on the sidelines for the next 3 plus years.. Instead of a guy that is actually going to help him by PLAYING ON THE FIELD and getting to the Superbowl...

    AHH! I see their and your logic now...

    BRILLIANT!

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Castle Rock, CO
    Posts
    589
    Quote Originally Posted by SammyWinder View Post
    Great argument! If we didn't all ready have two QB's on the roster, Hannie is a very serviceable Backup to boot, put him behind a decent line like say ours and he can do some things...

    But hey I'm sure glad we got Oswieler instead of say

    1. Thompson
    2. Trumaine
    3. Curry
    4. Randle
    5. David

    You know all of those guys can pretty much help NOW! And not the play (practice help now) but the REAL (on the field) help now...

    Bottom line is that we picked a guy in the 2nd round of Payton Mannings going to the SB or Bust tour, who is going to sit on the sidelines for the next 3 plus years.. Instead of a guy that is actually going to help him by PLAYING ON THE FIELD and getting to the Superbowl...

    AHH! I see their and your logic now...

    BRILLIANT!

    Hanie is a TERRIBLE back up..... Also his name is Peyton Manning.... nice spelling. The picks EFX made obviously showed that we have enough confidence in the rest of the roster. Thomas is WR1 Decker is WR2 Caldwell/Stokely is WR3. I don't see how RR would of been of any help. We basically got a top 10 pick a year early for the 2nd round. If Osweiler ends up being a Tier 1 QB such as other QB's considered T1: Brady, MANNING (both 1 and 2), Rodgers, and dare I say it.......Rivers (PUKE). Then we will consider getting Brock anywhere between 46-56 picks late a blessing.

    Not only that but as an FO and Elway has said this many times, its his job to bring Denver Championships and to set us up to be a contender as much as possible. This pick does just that if it turns out correctly. Manning will keep us in the picture for 3-4 years and by that time Brock will only be 24/25 at the oldest, that gives up 13-15 years with Brock leading the charge and almost 2 decades with a good qb.

    The NFL is a win now league, but EFX probably weighed the options, on the table and decided Brock was a better selection!

    Manning makes everybody around him better, stop crying.
    DENVER STAND UP!!!

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    2,093
    Quote Originally Posted by BroncosFanAddict23 View Post
    Hanie is a TERRIBLE back up..... Also his name is Peyton Manning.... nice spelling. The picks EFX made obviously showed that we have enough confidence in the rest of the roster. Thomas is WR1 Decker is WR2 Caldwell/Stokely is WR3. I don't see how RR would of been of any help. We basically got a top 10 pick a year early for the 2nd round. If Osweiler ends up being a Tier 1 QB such as other QB's considered T1: Brady, MANNING (both 1 and 2), Rodgers, and dare I say it.......Rivers (PUKE). Then we will consider getting Brock anywhere between 46-56 picks late a blessing.

    Not only that but as an FO and Elway has said this many times, its his job to bring Denver Championships and to set us up to be a contender as much as possible. This pick does just that if it turns out correctly. Manning will keep us in the picture for 3-4 years and by that time Brock will only be 24/25 at the oldest, that gives up 13-15 years with Brock leading the charge and almost 2 decades with a good qb.

    The NFL is a win now league, but EFX probably weighed the options, on the table and decided Brock was a better selection!

    Manning makes everybody around him better, stop crying.
    "Manning makes everyone better." Go away with that crap, that's the Indy style of thinking and reason number 1 why perhaps the best QB to ever play the game has only 1 championship.

    "If Osweiler ends up being a Tier 1 QB." So we are wasting 2nd round picks on IF's now right?...It was a reach, we had more important holes to cover then to reach and waste a pick. And Hannie is horrible based on what, a crappy Chicago offensive line? Yeah he was so horrible we offered him money to be our back-up QB. EFX was right about Osweiler but wrong about Hannie right?.. /hush

    Don't get me started about about our WR's...Decker drops almost as many balls as he caught last year so does DT for that matter. Both of them are in the bottom 15 in drop rate(look it up). And DT can't stay healthy to save his life, the guy goes to the grocery store and come's up limping. Meanwhile the guy we passed up to pick DT is number 2 in the league at catching the ball last year!... Caldwell (yawn) and Stokely is 60.. No we didn't need a WR, not at all...

    If I'm "crying" you must be sucking up. Cause this draft was not well played. Guess they took a page out of our number 1 and 2 WR's and Dropped the Ball aye?../laff

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Grand Rapids, Michigan
    Posts
    93
    Quote Originally Posted by CasualFan View Post
    The debate on this seems to be whether we should have spent a 2nd round pick on someone who's not going to see the field for years, vs. the people who think if you get a potential franchise-caliber QB late in Round 2, you take him. The logic on those opposing the selection is that if Manning goes down we're toast and will get the top pick in the next year's draft or close, so you get your new QB then.

    I feel this is an oversimplification. Manning is 36, and so is at greater risk of getting non-season-ending injuries as he ages and his mobility declines. In fact, that's probably more likely than a season-ending or career-ending injury. Here are Manning's sack totals for his entire career:

    1998: 22
    1999: 14
    2000: 20
    2001: 29
    2002: 23
    2003: 18
    2004: 13
    2005: 17
    2006: 14
    2007: 21
    2008: 14
    2009: 10
    2010: 16
    2011: --

    The impression people have is that Manning never gets sacked. Clearly this isn't true; even Manning gets sacked about once per game even in very good years, and absorbed 29 sacks in his 2001 campaign, and with each sack comes injury risk. The sack rate isn't entirely a function of Manning's speed of decisionmaking; it also depends on whether his Oline is protecting him and his receivers are getting open, as well as what the defense is doing and how good they are at bringing pressure.

    So we don't only need to worry about whether Manning goes down, we also need to worry about whether his LT Ryan Clady goes down, whether his receivers get injured and he's playing with backups, etc. In such cases it's possible that the sack rate might approach Manning's 2001 campaign.

    Another reason to be concerned about a somewhat higher sack rate in 2012 is that Manning is learning a new offense and so is his entire team. It's going to be a hybrid of what he did in Indianapolis and Mike McCoy's stuff, but there's enough of a learning curve there for Manning and his receivers that it's possible his speed of decision-making will be a tick slow at first relative to the polished perfection we were used to seeing when he was with the Colts, which was built up over more than a decade and did not suffer through changes at offensive coordinator.

    So let's say it's mid-season and we're 5-2. Then Manning goes down with a high ankle sprain and is out for a month. What then? Well, if you have a backup who is capable of eking out a couple of wins with help from the defense and the running game, then Manning comes back and you're still in the playoff hunt at 7-4 after Osweiler kept the seat warm with a 2-2 record.

    By far the easiest route to a Super Bowl with the team we have now is to win home field advantage and let Manning run the hurry-up at Mile High. If we have to go to Foxborough or Pittsburgh in the middle of winter we're underdogs. Even playing at sea-level in Houston could be tough. But to get home field advantage, every win is probably going to be critical, which is why if you've got a scrub as the backup who goes 0-4 when Peyton's out with a month-long injury, you're fighting for a wildcard at best when he comes back at 5-6 in my scenario. Even if you win out from that point you're only 10-6. Maybe that gets you the division, but you're going to play in the wildcard round for sure with that record.

    So in the scenario where Manning gets a non-catastrophic injury, Osweiler -- should he pan out -- is in fact a win-now sort of pick. Having a decent backup will be critical to getting to the playoffs if that happens.

    This exact scenario played out in Elway's second Super Bowl-winning campaign. Elway battled injuries for all or part of six games and failed to start four of them. Bubby Brister not only kept the seat warm, but was able to go 4-0 in his four starts, which was critical for winning home field advantage and going 14-2 for the season. Elway's memory of this is probably a factor in bringing in Osweiler and getting some competition for Caleb Hanie, who was 0-4 backing up Cutler last season, although dealing with key injuries to skill players and a terrible Oline in the process.

    Note too that the backup QBs are important for the starting team's performance even if they don't ever play. The backup QBs have to help run practices. If they do well in practice it helps train the backup wide receivers, tight ends, running backs, etc., some of whom will inevitably play as starters due to injuries at other skill positions. How well the backups can simulate the real thing with Peyton Manning for these players will be critical in their performance on the field. Manning will often run practices for the first-string at game speed. Can your backup do that too for the second stringers, some of whom will be first-stringers before the season's over? So Osweiler will be contributing to the on-field product whether he sits or plays.
    This is a nice, well laid-out post. However, I think there is a pretty big hole in your argument. If Osweiler was drafted to play emergency games in the case of Manning injuries, then Brock was not the best choice. The Osweiler pick makes sense because he is a raw talent who, with work, could improve into a top quarterback. The keyword here is raw, however; he is going to take some time. That is why Denver is an ideal fit - it has the luxury of waiting for him to develop so that he can hopefully pay big dividends three, four, or five years down the line.

    You mention the scenario that Manning goes down for four games next year. If this were to happen, all of the rationale for why Osweiler was a good pick disappears. Brock fell to the bottom of the second because he is not ready to play right away. If the Broncos wanted to draft a decent backup for the win-now scenario of Manning missing a few games, then a more polished quarterback like Kirk Cousins would have been a better choice. Even that is a stretch, however. Asking a (non top-ten pick) rookie quarterback to step right in and win games for you is risky at best. I would argue that, for short term purposes like that, a veteran quarterback would be a better option.

    This is not to say that I think the Brock Osweiler pick is a bad one. I think the selection makes great sense, because the Broncos have the unique luxury of drafting a guy in the low second and developing him into a franchise quarterback. Brock is raw, though, and needs time to learn and grow. If all goes as planned, Denver does not have to worry about the position for another decade. If he is immediately thrust into action, however, I think Broncos fans may be disappointed.

    Could he win a spot game here or there? Anything is possible, and I'd certainly be rooting for him. But expecting Osweiler to step right in and be able to lead the team in Manning's absence is a stretch at best.

    Here's to hoping he pans out.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    1,012
    I love the Osw pick. IMHO he is the best prospect in the draft outside of Luck and RGIII. Not the most polished or NFL ready, but he has all the tools we will need when Manning retires, and he's got years to develop them. We are in WAY BETTER shape for when Manning retires than we were with Elway. I for one do not want to suffer through years of Brian Griese's and Kyle Ortons.

    Could we have waited a year or two and grabbed a QB then? Yes, but this way we can really develop Osw while Manning plays, and if he is a bust, we'll know if before Manning retires. There are no guarantees we could get someone with Osw's talent level later, and likely not if we need NFL ready. Getting him now in the 2nd round is cheap insurance.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Castle Rock, CO
    Posts
    589
    Quote Originally Posted by SammyWinder View Post
    "Manning makes everyone better." Go away with that crap, that's the Indy style of thinking and reason number 1 why perhaps the best QB to ever play the game has only 1 championship.

    "If Osweiler ends up being a Tier 1 QB." So we are wasting 2nd round picks on IF's now right?...It was a reach, we had more important holes to cover then to reach and waste a pick. And Hannie is horrible based on what, a crappy Chicago offensive line? Yeah he was so horrible we offered him money to be our back-up QB. EFX was right about Osweiler but wrong about Hannie right?.. /hush

    Don't get me started about about our WR's...Decker drops almost as many balls as he caught last year so does DT for that matter. Both of them are in the bottom 15 in drop rate(look it up). And DT can't stay healthy to save his life, the guy goes to the grocery store and come's up limping. Meanwhile the guy we passed up to pick DT is number 2 in the league at catching the ball last year!... Caldwell (yawn) and Stokely is 60.. No we didn't need a WR, not at all...

    If I'm "crying" you must be sucking up. Cause this draft was not well played. Guess they took a page out of our number 1 and 2 WR's and Dropped the Ball aye?../laff
    I say "IF" because the future is unknown, Big Ben got in a near fatal motorcycle accident, things happen. Osweiler has the raw tools you look for and the buzz from analysts was somebody would take a chance on him in the 2nd round. We just happen to be that team.

    Manning DOES make everyone around him better, he makes everybody take responsibility for their role. Decker said the same thing, its not like i'm the only one who thinks that way. He makes everybody better he's a General on the field. Which is exactly what you want in any franchise QB.

    Caldwell is actually a very good WR if you'd actually do your research he will make an excellent slot WR.

    FYI: Decker/Thomas only dropped balls because of Tebows wobbly throw. The man can't throw a spiral to save his life, the ball was always rumbling around.

    I'll concede the point about Chicagos Offensive line. But it wasn't JUST the offensive line, they abandoned him for McCown who walked in off the street....Wouldn't surprise me if Hanie is cut in TC.

    "DT can't stay healthy to save his life" once he got the opportunity to come back he didn't get injured again. This is his 3rd year in the league. I bet he stays healthy now.
    DENVER STAND UP!!!

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Nebraska
    Posts
    19,815
    the osweiler pick is the future no 2 ways about it if has to play this year were toast...hes only had 15 starts in college yes he has the arm n can make all the throws but he is no where near ready but he has 2 HOF's to learn from...if all works out right he'll take over in 3 years like rogers did...n even he went 6-10 his 1st year w/ a loaded GB team n hes awesome now which i hope osweiler will be in 3 yrs...

    PM is not learning a new offense hes bringing what he did in INDY to us...hes the OC the o-line, wr's n rb's are learning his offense...as it said in the paper 7-10 days broncos putting in PM's hurry up offense...

    the bubby brister case is totally different he was a veteran yes he played well but our offense was loaded mac, rod, shannon, TD n the o-line was top 5 if not the best...not counting elway we had 6 pro bowlers just on offense on those back-back SB teams...

    this denver team going forward has alot prove yet on both sides of the ball...yes our offense should be alot better n score more points which will help the defense...

    but w/ the schedule this year it'll be tough our division got alot better to...

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    2,093
    Quote Originally Posted by BroncosFanAddict23 View Post
    I say "IF" because the future is unknown, Big Ben got in a near fatal motorcycle accident, things happen. Osweiler has the raw tools you look for and the buzz from analysts was somebody would take a chance on him in the 2nd round. We just happen to be that team.

    Manning DOES make everyone around him better, he makes everybody take responsibility for their role. Decker said the same thing, its not like i'm the only one who thinks that way. He makes everybody better he's a General on the field. Which is exactly what you want in any franchise QB.

    Caldwell is actually a very good WR if you'd actually do your research he will make an excellent slot WR.

    FYI: Decker/Thomas only dropped balls because of Tebows wobbly throw. The man can't throw a spiral to save his life, the ball was always rumbling around.

    I'll concede the point about Chicagos Offensive line. But it wasn't JUST the offensive line, they abandoned him for McCown who walked in off the street....Wouldn't surprise me if Hanie is cut in TC.

    "DT can't stay healthy to save his life" once he got the opportunity to come back he didn't get injured again. This is his 3rd year in the league. I bet he stays healthy now.

    Who cares about the "Buzz" by bringing in Manning, we said we want to Win now. Why else would you take the chance on a aging QB... So just like most people thought (well those of us who don't have orange/blue tented goggles) you bring in guys that will help him do that.. Osweiler (a project) does not do that as someone clearly pointed out a post or two ealier. He might turn out to be GODLY, but you better believe it won't be anytime in the near future...So how exactly does that make us win the Superbowl NOW?...Hey but win they start having Practice squad playoffs, we are a ringer...

    Of course Manning makes everyone better, so what? So we just give up on drafting guys that will have a immediate impact because we have Peyton Manning?...

    Caldwell is decent, nothing special. This will be his 5 year and he has a whopping 6 TD's... He had a Avg of 8.6 yrds per catch last year.. Yes someone needs to do their "research" but its clearly not me../hint-hint

    And sure lets blame all drops on Tebow.. Sure, why not!! I mean I'm a million dollar WR who's job is to catch a ball for a living, unless of course they are not the perfect tight spiral, that's not part of my contract... You did watch games last year, cause the butterfinger brothers dropped a lot of catchable balls..

    And you think Denver is going to cut Hannie? ORLY, for who your green behind the ears power-forward who is the next Brady? Or maybe Adam Weber.. /laff

    And you sure you wanna make that bet about DT? Tell you what I'll let you think about it after he recovers from his CURRENT surgery...Look I want DT to stay healthy too, but given his track record.. I doubt it...Which is why Denver should have picked that other guy who currently is a STUD for the Cowboys...

    We have the second toughest schedule in the NFL this year... This draft did very little to help us in that aspect...

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    413
    Quote Originally Posted by Manning2BayBay View Post
    I expect the sacks to go down behind a good o-line, the last 3 years manning had literally under 2.5 seconds to get rid of the ball,unlike other QBs who get 5 seconds plus
    I hope you're right that the novelty of the offense and the players doesn't significantly slow down Manning's reaction time more than our likely superior pass protection helps him.

    The funny thing about the people saying the Osweiler pick was wasted is that they don't seem to sense the irony in what they're saying. YOU SHOULD HOPE AND PRAY IT'S A WASTED PICK. Right??? Because then that means Manning stayed healthy, his neck turned out to be fine, we didn't blow a huge amount of money bringing him in, and we've got ourselves a HoF quarterback. And I'll bet that the same people carping about bringing in Manning (neck surgeries, he's 36, too expensive, blah blah blah) are whining about drafting Osweiler (is raw, won't see the field for years, we have other needs, blah blah blah). If you're complaining that Manning is old and injury-prone then you have to like EFX getting an insurance policy, unless what you like is complaining about everything.

    Think about the decision this way: Let's suppose that, instead of cutting Manning, the Colts put him on the trading block, and in order to get him we had to take over his Colts contract and give the Colts a conditional second round pick -- conditional on Manning staying healthy. Everyone in the world except hardcore Tebowites would be jumping out of their chairs to make that deal. The "wasted" pick for Osweiler produces essentially that outcome -- if indeed it's wasted in the narrow sense that he's on the bench for several years, then Manning stayed healthy, his contract with us is basically a continuation of his Colts deal, but you used your second-rounder on a player who's not on the field. That doesn't seem like an exorbitant price to pay.

    On the other hand, if Manning gets injured and Osweiler turns out to have the potential franchise-level talent Elway thinks, or is even a semi-competent backup who at least doesn't lose the game for you singlehandedly, then it's clearly not a wasted pick.

    One other thing the Osweiler pick points out is what was wrong with keeping Tebow here to back up Manning instead. The best possible second-string quarterback is a guy who's a near-clone of your first-stringer quarterback. Osweiler might be that guy or could become that guy; Tebow clearly wasn't. Tebow's a left-handed, running quarterback who you'd want to run a totally reconfigured offense for vs. the pocket-passing offense you run if you've got Manning on the field. So in practice, either your second-string guys are practicing the Tebow offense (or against it if on defense) and so aren't prepared to play with Manning if they have to sub for a first-stringer, or else Tebow is struggling to play like Manning rather than practicing to be some embellished, more polished version of the quarterback he was in 2011. Either way, some of your players are unavoidably practicing the wrong stuff. With Osweiler, you're not doing that: he's practicing the Manning offense, and so are your other second-stringers.

    So maybe you're wasting the pick, but you're not wasting your practices.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Wyoming- GOD's country
    Posts
    2,588

    Question

    At least from my point of view, if Peyton can't play this year Os would be too raw to put on the field. He would still be watching from the bench.
    RIP Cameron

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •