Brock Osweiler/ Franchise/2nd

[Figster]

Hey guys, whats with all the snow, hehe

I'm just going to lay it out there, Myself personally, I think ASU's Big Brock Osweiler could one day be a franchise signal caller and although I don't expect him to still be there when we pick in the 2nd, If he is still available, does anyone feel as strongly as I do about drafting the Big Guy.

Thoughts?

[ThunderGun]

You don't expect him to still be there for us in the 2nd? I bet he'll still be there in the 3rd.

[Mindbender]

ThunderGun's got it.

[k-oneputt]

I'd rather take Weeden.

[Figster]

You don't expect him to still be there for us in the 2nd? I bet he'll still be there in the 3rd.
It would probably not be a very lucrative bet for you to make. With Weeden's age being a concern its very possible Osweiler will be the 4th signal caller taken in the draft. If Tannehill goes top 10 do you realize almost every team would have to pass on Osweiler. It will never happen in this QB happy league.

In my humble opinion...

[JCBills]

Not a huge fan of having 6'7'' of target for DEs to go after.

If he pans out great, but he'll be the first.

Rather have Cousins if we're talking QBs in the 3rd.

[Buffalogic]

Pass. He's big. So what. He was awful at ASU and all they did is throw it straight sideways to hide him. I'd be upset if the bills were dumb enough to take him just because he's a giant

[ThunderGun]

It would probably not be a very lucrative bet for you to make. With Weeden's age being a concern its very possible Osweiler will be the 4th signal caller taken in the draft. If Tannehill goes top 10 do you realize almost every team would have to pass on Osweiler. It will never happen in this QB happy league.

In my humble opinion...

Oh, it could definitely happen. Stranger things have happened (like Christian Ponder going 12th overall last year). So I wouldn't be surprised at all if Osweiler goes at some point in the 2nd. But if I had to guess, I'd say that he'll probably go late-second or early-third. I'd be absolutely shocked if he's gone before we pick in the 2nd.

[ThunderGun]

Pass. He's big. So what. He was awful at ASU and all they did is throw it straight sideways to hide him. I'd be upset if the bills were dumb enough to take him just because he's a giant
Well they passed on Mallet, so hopefully that means that they're not enamored with Osweiler strictly because of his measurables.

[JCBills]

Up until 2 weeks ago he was a 4th rounder at best, you see this every year.

[Figster]

Not a huge fan of having 6'7'' of target for DEs to go after.

If he pans out great, but he'll be the first.

Rather have Cousins if we're talking QBs in the 3rd.

I understand,


I borrowed this from racketmaster on another forum because, well, he's much better at putting forth a sound argument then I am when it comes to a promising young QB prospect. (I hope he doesn't mind)


Maybe it's easier I list it out for you:

1) almost 6'7" prospect
2) basketball background and excellent athlete
3) he has quickness and good foot speed (Nothing like Mallet)
4) has very good arm strength (no problems in the wind)
5) tough, runs hard and is not scared in the pocket
6) can fit the ball into tight windows on crossing routes
7) shows the ability to throw the deep out with accuracy
8) displays a positive personality and emotion on the field (has fun with his teammates and looks to enjoy playing the game)
9) took accountability for mistakes during the Gruden episode.
10) no off the field character issues

Negatives: limited experience, needs more consistency and better accuracy
Ok, at the top of the 2nd round on am all in with this kind of prospect.


Note: The one thing I would like to add myself is we really don't know what kind of impact someone of this height will have on the NFL. Brock Osweiler is unique and claims he has a better field of vision then anyone in the game. There's no denying that what he says is true. Good field of vision in conjunction with an arm that can make all the throws, a mental toughness/ability to stand in there under pressure, and an athletic body to go along with it can only equate to good things in my opinion.

[CleveSteve]

I wouldn't be surprised to see him go in the second to Denver depending on who is available. They may take Harrison Smith now that Dawkins retired, though.

I like Osweiler best of the QBs after the top 2 (Griffin and Luck). I saw his game against Oregon (in Eugene) and he was very impressive. He avoids pressure well while staying in the pocket while Foles scrambles like a startled chicken and Weedon stands still like a juggs machine. I saw some very nice deep, accurate passes from Osweiler. I saw him moving his head around in the pocket, I don't know if he was just looking off the safeties or going through progressions.

I do think his mobility is overrated, though. He's not very fast. I'm surprised he had a basketball scholarship. He's not clumsy, but he's not fast. Tannehill will beat him in a race anytime, but I trust Osweiler with 3rd and 12 a heck of a lot more than I do Tannehill.

[JCBills]

I understand,


I borrowed this from racketmaster on another forum because, well, he's much better at putting forth a sound argument then I am when it comes to a promising young QB prospect. (I hope he doesn't mind)


Maybe it's easier I list it out for you:

1) almost 6'7" prospect
2) basketball background and excellent athlete
3) he has quickness and good foot speed (Nothing like Mallet)
4) has very good arm strength (no problems in the wind)
5) tough, runs hard and is not scared in the pocket
6) can fit the ball into tight windows on crossing routes
7) shows the ability to throw the deep out with accuracy
8) displays a positive personality and emotion on the field (has fun with his teammates and looks to enjoy playing the game)
9) took accountability for mistakes during the Gruden episode.
10) no off the field character issues

Negatives: limited experience, needs more consistency and better accuracy
Ok, at the top of the 2nd round on am all in with this kind of prospect.


Note: The one thing I would like to add myself is we really don't know what kind of impact someone of this height will have on the NFL. Brock Osweiler is unique and claims he has a better field of vision then anyone in the game. There's no denying that what he says is true. Good field of vision in conjunction with an arm that can make all the throws, a mental toughness/ability to stand in there under pressure, and an athletic body to go along with it can only equate to good things in my opinion.


We do have an idea of what kind of impact that height has, see Dan McGwire (brother of Mark McGwire).

Taken ahead of Favre in 1991, the 6'8'' 240 QB posted a whopping 52.8 Rating over a lengthy career from 1991 to 1995.

[CleveSteve]

We do have an idea of what kind of impact that height has, see Dan McGwire (brother of Mark McGwire).

Taken ahead of Favre in 1991, the 6'8'' 240 QB posted a whopping 52.8 Rating over a lengthy career from 1991 to 1995.

So... you're saying the Bills should draft Russell Wilson?

[alohabillsfan]

NO to QB in rounds 3 and beyond its a waste of a pick, unless you are looking for a clipboard holder...And spare me the Brady reference...

[Skooby]

Pass. He's big. So what. He was awful at ASU and all they did is throw it straight sideways to hide him. I'd be upset if the bills were dumb enough to take him just because he's a giant

The Giants have nothing to do with it, it's not Germaine of the situation. :)

[The Jokeman]

So... you're saying the Bills should draft Russell Wilson?
That would be the long and short of it.

[X-Era]

So I'm in the minority but I'd rather have Weeden. I really don't care about his age.

Now, for a more realistic move I'd take Foles in the 3rd or Russell Wilson in the 4th.

[Ed]

If we're going to draft a qb, I'd rather use one of our extra picks in the 4th or 5th.

[Buffalogic]

Weeden > Osweilier

and it's not close.

[Figster]

We do have an idea of what kind of impact that height has, see Dan McGwire (brother of Mark McGwire).

Taken ahead of Favre in 1991, the 6'8'' 240 QB posted a whopping 52.8 Rating over a lengthy career from 1991 to 1995.

One player for comparison doesn't tell us much of anything in my opinion. Especially considering the high number of college prospects that struggle/fail transitioning into the NFL regardless of height.

[Figster]

If we're going to draft a qb, I'd rather use one of our extra picks in the 4th or 5th.
Curious, with a position as important as the QB position why do some of you prefer a prospect that in all probability has even more flaws and less chance of succeeding in the NFL then the signal callers predicted to go in front of them.


If you don't mind my asking

[bigbub2352]

i like him in the third

[better days]

Weeden > Osweilier

and it's not close.

Well, maybe Osweiler will close the gap between them by the time he is 29 years old. And Weeden is 36 years old.

[Figster]

Tannehill - 3744yds 29td 15int 133.2 rating
Osweiler - 4036yds 26tds 13 ints 140.5 rating

[stuckincincy]

Tannehill - 3744yds 29td 15int 133.2 rating
Osweiler - 4036yds 26tds 13 ints 140.5 rating

I'm not sure how one can evaluate college qb stats these days - what with the spread offense thing.

Ratings of 133 and 140? :huh:

[Figster]

I'm not sure how one can evaluate college qb stats these days - what with the spread offense thing.

Ratings of 133 and 140? :huh:


QB ratings are probably not the greatest indicator of a QB's capabilities

[stuckincincy]

QB ratings are probably not the greatest indicator of a QB's capabilities

It's so hard to figure out - myself, I just use gut level feeling, did the fellow move the team down the field in tough times, is he playing in a wide-open offense, playing against a wide-open offense?, etc.

A bunch of ramblings on my part, I know. I pretty much leave it to the folks who have and break down the tapes to the atomic level. :loner: