The Frankish Reich Posted March 6, 2016 Posted March 6, 2016 and they benched Osweiler for that Well, Osweiler was really banged up when they went back to Manning, although it is true that by the time Osweiler was ready to go again (the Super Bowl) there wasn't any hint that the Broncos ever considered going back to him ... I didn't see anything great from Brock, but I also saw some promise. Weird how fans evaluate talent. Guy gets drafted in the 2nd round, groomed as the post-Peyton QB, then performs decently when he finally gets a little action in games that count (7 of them), and fans say "we need to draft a QB." It is awfully hard to commit this kind of money to a still unproven commodity, but then again, it makes a whole lot more sense to me than re-signing Sam Bradford for big money. And all things being equal (they're not -- at least salary-wise for 2016), I would still take Brock over Tyrod. Not because I hate Tyrod, but just because I see a better chance of long term success in Brock. But it's close to a toss-up for me ...
PromoTheRobot Posted March 6, 2016 Posted March 6, 2016 Why?To head off any potential disgruntlement over being grossly underpaid for a starting NFL QB.
FireChan Posted March 6, 2016 Posted March 6, 2016 (edited) To head off any potential disgruntlement over being grossly underpaid for a starting NFL QB.Tyrod signed that deal, and he already has had a year voided, no? I don't see Tyrod holding out, so him being disgruntled means little. It's a leap to sign him early so he isn't potentially a little annoyed. Like, a huge leap. Edited March 6, 2016 by FireChan
C.Biscuit97 Posted March 6, 2016 Posted March 6, 2016 Broncos are in a weird spot. They don't really need anyone other than a caretaker of sorts. So maybe they pay a premium for Brock who they know. at worst, he becomes a game manager for them. Yeah, it's a really weird situation. They spent time developing BO and it showed some flashes. I can't imagine a SB champ ever started a rookie qb. It's silly to compare this to the Bills situation. Their hands were pretty much forced. That said, I have no idea who is better between BO and TT. I do think BO fits the mold of what the vast majority of successful NFL Qbs are. I struggle to truly believe in smaller Qbs who have running as a big part of their game. Russell Wilson is the exception, much like Tom Brady in the 6th round.
Mike in Horseheads Posted March 6, 2016 Posted March 6, 2016 Tyrod signed that deal, and he already has had a year voided, no? I don't see Tyrod holding out, so him being disgruntled means little. It's a leap to sign him early so he isn't potentially a little annoyed. Like, a huge leap. Hey we agree! I'm don't believe he's voided year 3 yet, he'd be a fool to if he sucks this year. How does anyone know Osweiller is worth anything, he played a few games but so didn't Rob Johnson. Kirk Cousins finally found himself this year and is worth a bundle? I'll believe it when I see it if he repeats 2015 but at least Washington won't be stuck with him long term. This QB madness is nuts but I wouldn't give Tyrod another penny and IF he has a good year franchise tag him.
3rdand12 Posted March 6, 2016 Posted March 6, 2016 Hey we agree! I'm don't believe he's voided year 3 yet, he'd be a fool to if he sucks this year. How does anyone know Osweiller is worth anything, he played a few games but so didn't Rob Johnson. Kirk Cousins finally found himself this year and is worth a bundle? I'll believe it when I see it if he repeats 2015 but at least Washington won't be stuck with him long term. This QB madness is nuts but I wouldn't give Tyrod another penny and IF he has a good year franchise tag him. if TT has a good year and shows improvement in his weak areas. Just pay him
PromoTheRobot Posted March 6, 2016 Posted March 6, 2016 (edited) Tyrod signed that deal, and he already has had a year voided, no? I don't see Tyrod holding out, so him being disgruntled means little. It's a leap to sign him early so he isn't potentially a little annoyed. Like, a huge leap. Okay, so is it a huge leap to give Brock Osweiler $45MM? As for Taylor, yes he signed a deal. That doesn't mean he won't feel underpaid. Edited March 6, 2016 by PromoTheRobot
Mike in Horseheads Posted March 6, 2016 Posted March 6, 2016 Okay, so is it a huge leap to give Brock Osweiler $45MM$ Yup.
FireChan Posted March 6, 2016 Posted March 6, 2016 Okay, so is it a huge leap to give Brock Osweiler $45MM? As for Taylor, yes he signed a deal. That doesn't mean he won't feel underpaid. Do you you understand the difference between an FA and a player under contract? You seem to be arguing that Tyrod is annoyed (without a shred of evidence that he is) that Brock Osweiler is hitting FA market before him. Even though Tyrod signed a contract with escalators and benefits if he won the starting job. Even though Tyrod knew that there was a possibility he would be perhaps underpaid for the duration of his contract. Even though he knew he had to "prove it" to get a big deal. Tyrod knows all this to be true.
Saxum Posted March 7, 2016 Posted March 7, 2016 Okay, so is it a huge leap to give Brock Osweiler $45MM? As for Taylor, yes he signed a deal. That doesn't mean he won't feel underpaid. Since it goes both ways - some players are overpaid - it is part of the game including that he was not drafted to 6th round. Part of it was HIS choice to go to a team with chance to start without starter getting injured. Yes I know players sit out all of the time but that does not make it right either. We have had players paid contract bonuses for renewal with NO obligation or pressure to sign and then sat their fat ass down all off-season and then were unable to perform and cut so they can go back home, get in shape then and get signed by another team. We have had players be tagged as THEIR union agreed too, sulk and exaggerate injures to last possible week before being willing to play to get their annual year qualifier.
YoloinOhio Posted March 7, 2016 Author Posted March 7, 2016 (edited) Okay, so is it a huge leap to give Brock Osweiler $45MM? As for Taylor, yes he signed a deal. That doesn't mean he won't feel underpaid. i see it more from the angle that he had the opportunity (reportedly for more money) to sign with Denver in FA and chose Buffalo. He thought he had a better chance to start in Buffalo, and he was right... But if he'd been in Denver when Manning got hurt, he might have come in and started 7 games too and maybe he wouldn't have gotten benched like Osweiler did... And could have another SB ring right now. Edited March 7, 2016 by YoloinOhio
Saint Doug Posted March 7, 2016 Posted March 7, 2016 (edited) Okay, so is it a huge leap to give Brock Osweiler $45MM? As for Taylor, yes he signed a deal. That doesn't mean he won't feel underpaid. Ha. Who in the NFL (or on Earth for that matter) doesn't "feel underpaid"? Osweiler finds himself in a position of power. The reigning SB champs are now without a QB. He basically has a monopoly of the QB position in Denver. The Bills otoh have options, because their one year wonder is under contract for another year. Edited March 7, 2016 by Saint Doug
PromoTheRobot Posted March 7, 2016 Posted March 7, 2016 Do you you understand the difference between an FA and a player under contract? You seem to be arguing that Tyrod is annoyed (without a shred of evidence that he is) that Brock Osweiler is hitting FA market before him. Even though Tyrod signed a contract with escalators and benefits if he won the starting job. Even though Tyrod knew that there was a possibility he would be perhaps underpaid for the duration of his contract. Even though he knew he had to "prove it" to get a big deal. Tyrod knows all this to be true. Ha. Who in the NFL (or on Earth for that matter) doesn't "feel underpaid"? Osweiler finds himself in a position of power. The reigning SB champs are now without a QB. He basically has a monopoly of the QB position in Denver. The Bills otoh have options, because their one year wonder is under contract for another year. Yes, all correct. He's under contract. And there is no evidence that TT is unhappy being an NFL starter making 15% of what other QB's make. All true. I just don't want a good thing to go south.
FireChan Posted March 7, 2016 Posted March 7, 2016 Yes, all correct. He's under contract. And there is no evidence that TT is unhappy being an NFL starter making 15% of what other QB's make. All true. I just don't want a good thing to go south. It won't. He's not that stupid.
ALF Posted March 7, 2016 Posted March 7, 2016 Taylor can see the salary cap problem this year. If he plays well he will get a fair deal after next season. Should be less dead cap on the books then and hopefully a good draft can replace a high priced player.
Best Player Available Posted March 7, 2016 Posted March 7, 2016 TT... 4 year, $64 million? Maybe today. But not if he has a year that puts him near top ten. he bolts and the Bills are back to square one. And the beat goes on. OTOH Tyrod did sign here for one reason only. he was given a chance too become the starter. i think He turned down a larger offer(s) elsewhere but knew he would ride the pine. One team may have been the Broncos. He'd have a ring for holding a I-pad.
Maury Ballstein Posted March 7, 2016 Posted March 7, 2016 (edited) Give it away give it away give it away now ! Sometimes Spectacular Tyrod must be paid and stuff. I would be kinda pissed if I were Taylor and I had to play. Fanboy empathy? Which is why I was banging the drum early to be proactive on a deal for Taylor.Banged it before the Eagles and skins pantsed him. Edited March 7, 2016 by Ryan L Billz
machine gun kelly Posted March 7, 2016 Posted March 7, 2016 It sounds ridiculous, but that total includes incentives and there is nothing regarding structure. The reality of the contract might be far less extravagant. Leaking that selective information is probably a tactic used by the Broncos to create public pressure to push him to sign the deal. I bet your correct. When Kaepernick received his contract, people went nuts he wasn't worth it, but turned out it was a year by year deal, lots of incentives and he actually was getting about 12 mil / yr. The problem is not his talent, but the demand. He may be able to turn it down and get LA or Houston to pay him significantly more. Then he may not thrive in their systems. Regarding TT, it should simply be motivation to kick butt this year and will get $18 mil / yr. We don't have any money to pay him this year, and he still is not proven yet. Two years repeating, and hopefully improving with his release and quick throws over the middle and he'll deserve the money.
Maury Ballstein Posted March 7, 2016 Posted March 7, 2016 Regarding TT, it should simply be motivation to kick butt this year and will get $18 mil / yr. We don't have any money to pay him this year, and he still is not proven yet. Two years repeating, and hopefully improving with his release and quick throws over the middle and he'll deserve the money. 1000% agree. Those rushing to pay him baffle me.
Recommended Posts