Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Miami Dolphins Forum' started by Galant, Mar 22, 2018.
I kinda like this move - big guy with a strong arm. He just needs to work on his accuracy. Perhaps Gase can help him.
Guess they don't see a way of getting one of the young guns in the draft kicking the tires on some older projects.
I like Osweiler as a pure backup. He's 27, knows Gase, has started 25 games in the NFL, and has now been humbled by being bounced around a bit. I think that he can be a good guy to have in the QB room with RT17, and on the sideline on gamedays. And if RT were to miss 3-4 games, then he's as good as anyone still out there to come in and run Gase's system for a few weeks and not mess up.
The crowd who wants RT gone, and/or wants someone to push him won't be happy. Too bad.
Didn't he have a massive contract though? Hopefully he'd be okay with backup money
Forces the ball to his primary regardless of leverage or coverage played
Lacks eye discipline. Lucky he has a bazooka arm or he’d throw pick 6s out the wazoo
I think he'd just be happy being on an NFL roster at this point.
After all the money that was thrown at him we should get a bargain.
Holy cockadoodie, yer darn tootin he would throw those picker sixers in a heartbeat. Thank cripes he's got a humdinger of an arm. Uf-duh, I hope we don't sign him, no sir-ee boppers.
I would rather the Dolphins sign Manziel or just keep Moore as their backup. Osweiler is horrible and how any team is actually looking to sign him is ridiculous.
I wouldn’t mind them signing Manziel to a small contract and if it doesn’t work out, it’s no big loss. Yet I still think he would be a better signing than Osweiler, who has clearly showed that he is not an effective NFL QB.
I would rather have Miami sign a Dirty Mop to play quarterback than to bring the highly over rated and terrible Manziel as the quarterback.
Osweiler is about 500 times the NFL quarterback than Manziel.
I heard there were 12+ teams watching Manziel throw at his Pro Day workout today. So even if Gase wanted to try and revive his career, I have a feeling that if he looked good he'll get multiple offers. And if he didn't look good, then we don't have to worry about it anyway.
What is the lesser of two evils here? I'd be more inclined to give Manziel a shot, as he seems to have been humbled by his fall out of the NFL and has been working to get back in. He seems a better fit for what Gase wants to do on offense, while Brock will just stand in the pocket and either force a pass or take the sack.
Even better, maybe we could a QB in the third round? If Luke Falk was there, why not grab him to develop? Actually, even if Brock or Manziel signed on as the #2 QB, Falk would be great as the #3 development project QB.
I personally wouldn't be against Manziel as long as it's an incentive contract with virtually nothing to lose. If Gase can help get the kid on track then we have a very talented QB on the cheap; if not then he doesn't make the final cut-down and that's that. Or if he shows anything we don't like....same thing....we cut his butt and lose nothing.
I know some don't like the guy for non-football reasons, but the way I see it there is only upside here and we could end up with a fantastic QB a few years down the road basically for free. Why not roll the dice?
Of course a lot of you think signing Manziel is a rational solution over signing someone who has actually played a snap in the last three years.
Simply put he stinks!!!
Ok so Brock was on the field multiple times, but Im not sure you can really say he "played" while out there. The dude sucks. He's had multiple chances, favorable chances, and sucked badly. There is no upside to bringing in that doofus.
Manziel has potential if nothing else. If the guy legit had mental issues, got help for that and the drugs and is on a better path, no reason to not explore it.
There is no QB that is AVAILABLE that the team would have a chance to win with outside of CKap.
So anyone else they get....who cares? It literally makes no difference.
The best thing we can do is a get someone with the most playing experience in the hopes they can occasionally add something to the QB meetings. That's it.
Osweiler will beat out Tannehill by Week 3, if not training camp.
No and hell no.
And here comes Base of Gase in 3........ 2........... 1.........
Or is it just Baker that has non-football problems?
Just draft somebody to groom!
That doesn't change what I'm saying about a vet back up.
Disclaimer: I'm just bored.
Players certainly have strengths and weaknesses that can be hidden (or accentuated) by scheme and supporting cast. Of course, this is a frequent topic on this forum in particular. It's fair to wonder whether or not players (particularly QBs) were afforded opportunities to display their worth.
People keep saying Foles is an exception and that generally your backup is going to not perform well. This may be true - but it's also true that Philadelphia adapted their scheme for him to succeed (and that 17% of SBs were won with backup QBs). I remember the narrative on hiring Gase was his ability to adapt his scheme to his players.
Had Philadelphia not made the playoffs: there is no hoopla over him. He averaged a paltry 5.3 yards per attempt. He's still a 1 year wonder and the product of Chip Kelly's short lived NFL success. I remember he looked pretty awful playing for Jeff Fisher a few years back and was a bit of a joke.
Austin Davis (who is a FA) actually played better than Foles in STL, putting up a QBR 16 points higher. His next, and only, shot (?) after was in 2 Cleveland divisional games.
I remember watching (free agent) Geno Smith play last year in place of Eli Manning and thinking that he actually looked decent and was a quality backup. He's only seen significant time in his first 2 years, when he struggled with turnovers, but you may also recall his 350 yard 3 TD game as his last NYJ start.
Basically, what I'm getting at, is there have been a number of relative failures that have gone on to have success as lower level FA signings. Jake Plummer, Kerry Collins, Jake Delhomme, Kurt Warner, and Rich Gannon come to mind. Brian Hoyer went 10-6 in Cleveland. It seems more probable than not that there are still potentially successful QBs on the market if given the means to succeed. It's probably not Brock Osweiler though.
I rather bring back Matt Moore. I think its unlikely a qb drops to 11 so we might be looking at Luke Falk in the second round.
Whats the point in wasting money on a vet backup?Tannehill gets hurt the season is over anyway.Let the rookie get some reps.
Because you need 3 QBs.
Hopefully his plane takes a detour and he never even visits
I don't like him for football reasons. I think he is a great college quarterback who does not have the talent to play the kind of ball he does in the pros. He is a back up talent with a super star mindset.
The dude is Jake Locker without the talent with a huge ego.
While it is unlikely that a backup has great success, there have to be better than the Brock Lobster out there. Dude is just flat out bad. That's the point for me. He's not worth a half eaten donut, he doesn't deserve a roster space, he has 0 upside. Take a risk on someone that hasn't had all the chances and failed. If it's coming down to a backup, go for ceiling rather than floor.
Everyone played poorly for Jeff Fischer. Jeff Fischer is a horrifically mediocre coach with a special aptitude for destroying offenses and QBs.
Absolutely nothing good can come from signing Manziel. The dude would corrupt at least part of the locker room. He's toxic.
There is only CKap. If a team isn't willing to grab Cap, then there really isn't anyone significantly better.
What talent did Locker have that Manziel didnt? Size? Big arm? Manziels arm talent as a whole ran circles around Locker. There is one reason Manziel isn't or won't be successful in the NFL and its nothing to do with his football talent.
Locker was an amazing talent.
Manziel is a good college talent with great PR.
I would dispute that. I thought that Locker was a much better college QB than Manziel. Take away the crazy playground nonsense, and I'm not sure how good Manziel would have even been at that level, let alone the NFL.
And then there's of course the fact that he's a pile of **** as a human being.
I agree that Cap is clearly the only proven QB available, and clearly what a team that wants to be the best would do.
However, barring that, not all the rest of the QB's are equal. I would absolutely take Manziel over Brock. Manziel may be terrible or flame out ... but **** who knows. We KNOW Brock is terrible and not worth a used diaper. Take a guy with an unknown but potentially higher ceiling instead of a guy everyone knows is just bad. Try to find a guy who was in a bad scheme fit, who was underutilized, who had poor coaching, etc. Foles was a great example. Some early success, then got into a bad situation with a bad scheme and bad coach.
Manziel is worse than Brock.
I dunno, I just think the chance of Manziel doing anything useful is so slim it isn't worth the headache he'll likely cause.
Bologne. Locker was nothing more than a hype train. Classic big arm QB that couldn't hit the broad side of a barn. I hate how people always forget accuracy as a "talent". I am sure you see Josh Allen as the most talented QB in this class as well.
What on gods green earth were you guys watching? Locker was not a good QB. People can hate Manziel all they want and I agree. Hes a piece of ****. But to say Jake Locker was a better COLLEGE QB than him is one of the most laughable things I have ever seen posted.
Locker College Stats
54% Completion Percentage
1939 Rushing 29 TDs
68.9% Completion Percentage
2169 Rushing 30 TDs
Hahaha. You have to be joking me.