The reasons Osweiller chose Houston

[Lucky Colts Fan]

30 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

So what would be the issue if he did it for the money? Is it mine or your place to make it an issue one way or another? It was his choice for his own reasons and it's really none of our business. If I want to make a bad guy of him I would just make it an issue of he is now a Texans QB.

 

As I stated earlier, I think the average NFL fan would take less money with a team that just won the SB.  Maybe Houston ends up being the better team this year, but I, personally, would have stayed with the Broncos for less money.

[BloodyChamp]

Ossy isn't an average NFL fan.

[Defjamz26]

No QB should want to play for Kubiak IMO. His best accomplishment with a QB is getting Schaub to throw for 4,000 yards a couple of times and leading the NFL in passing yards in 2008 because all they did was throw the ball. The offense in Denver went from one of the best to one of the worst as soon as he got there. Yes Peyton fell off but that was too drastic of a drop to put it all on him.

 

Thay said I don't think Denver was the best place based in his reasoning. But, they were probably the ones willing to spend the cash. The Jets probably would have been the best place for him in hindsight.

[Ollonesomeme]

On May 29, 2016 at 0:31 PM, Lucky Colts Fan said:

 

As I stated earlier, I think the average NFL fan would take less money with a team that just won the SB.  Maybe Houston ends up being the better team this year, but I, personally, would have stayed with the Broncos for less money.

I always find it interesting that fans think that players should play for less money to stay with some team. I don't think that they would make that decision when they factored in how short their careers will be.

[Lucky Colts Fan]

14 hours ago, Ollonesomeme said:

I always find it interesting that fans think that players should play for less money to stay with some team. I don't think that they would make that decision when they factored in how short their careers will be.

 

Depends on the person.  If they think being an NFL player is the only way to make a lot of money, they might chase the biggest paycheck.  If they realize that they can change careers and still make lots of money when they're 40, 50, or even 80 years old, but they can't change careers and win a SB, maybe they take less money to play on a better team.

 

Ask a retired player if they would go back and give up a SB for more money, or if they would give money back to have that SB.  Some players might want the extra money (Charles Haley could sell off 4 SBs and still be a SB winner), but I would bet that most, especially the ones that never won a SB, would gladly give money back to get that SB (I think Dan Marino actually said this in an interview once).

[aaron11]

On 5/29/2016 at 3:31 PM, Lucky Colts Fan said:

 

As I stated earlier, I think the average NFL fan would take less money with a team that just won the SB. 

i would take the 10 million dollars over joining the best team in the league even if they were heavy favorites to win the super bowl

 

as an average fan like you said, i dont care that much about winning the super bowl.  it would be awesome, but not 10 million dollars worth of awesome. that is more than i would make in a life time as an engineering technician in just one year on BOs contract with the texans

[Colts_Fan12]

I'd gladly take less money to be a winner average fan or not. I wouldn't wanna be one of those great players that chases money and never wins sure you got more money but you wasted your career on the Browns or Bills over money if I was truly great I would want to be a champion. You are still rich with the lesser contracts 

[2006Coltsbestever]

I would rather make 7 Million a year over 5 years which is still 35 Million over time and be on a team that always wins = winning at least 1 or 2 SB's rather than make 10 Million over 5 years = 50 Million and be on a crap team and known as a loser in my sport. That is just me. I want to be rich and happy! 7 Million a year is still plenty and to me my legacy as a player would be very important but I love Football so that is my mentality. If you cant live on 7 Million a year you have major problems anyway IMO.

[crazycolt1]

32 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I would rather make 7 Million a year over 5 years which is still 35 Million over time and be on a team that always wins = winning at least 1 or 2 SB's rather than make 10 Million over 5 years = 50 Million and be on a crap team and known as a loser in my sport. That is just me. I want to be rich and happy! 7 Million a year is still plenty and to me my legacy as a player would be very important but I love Football so that is my mentality. If you cant live on 7 Million a year you have major problems anyway IMO.

Just because BO signed the bigger contract does not mean that is the only reason he went with the Texans. We might figure that is why but we don't know him on a personal level so it is just opinion. You take the taxes and the agent fees out of the difference between the two contracts and that is a lot of money.

[2006Coltsbestever]

1 hour ago, crazycolt1 said:

Just because BO signed the bigger contract does not mean that is the only reason he went with the Texans. We might figure that is why but we don't know him on a personal level so it is just opinion. You take the taxes and the agent fees out of the difference between the two contracts and that is a lot of money.

I also think he didn't want to follow in Peyton's footsteps so you are right that wasn't the only reason. All I did was give a small example of how I would handle things and I would never be afraid to follow in another greats footsteps either. Andrew was licking his chops at the challenge to come here to Indy to follow a legend. I personally think Brock is an overpaid wuss and when we win the Division my opinion will hold serve. Had he played against the Patriots in the AFC Title Game he would've got ate alive, probably turned the ball over 2 or 3 times and the Pats would've won that easily. OK that is all opinion but I am pretty sure that is what would've happened. Denver needed Peyton's leadership to just not Turn it over basically.

[crazycolt1]

8 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I also think he didn't want to follow in Peyton's footsteps so you are right that wasn't the only reason. All I did was give a small example of how I would handle things and I would never be afraid to follow in another greats footsteps either. Andrew was licking his chops at the challenge to come here to Indy to follow a legend. I personally think Brock is an overpaid wuss and when we win the Division my opinion will hold serve. Had he played against the Patriots in the AFC Title Game he would've got ate alive, probably turned the ball over 2 or 3 times and the Pats would've won that easily. OK that is all opinion but I am pretty sure that is what would've happened. Denver needed Peyton's leadership to just not Turn it over basically.

Brock already had a win over the Patriots and helped put up 30 points. He went 23 of 42 for 270 and a TD. Just saying.

[2006Coltsbestever]

Just now, crazycolt1 said:

Brock had already had a win over the Patriots and helped put up 30 points. He went 23 of 42 for 270 and a TD. Just saying.

Do you really think he beats Tom Brady and BB in the Championship game?

[crazycolt1]

1 minute ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Do you really think he beats Tom Brady and BB in the Championship game?

At home maybe. Manning didn't light up the field by any means. It wasn't the QB play that won that game for the Broncos.

[2006Coltsbestever]

Just now, crazycolt1 said:

At home maybe. Manning didn't light up the field by any means. It wasn't the QB play that won that game for the Broncos.

Peyton set the tone and dominated early getting a nice lead with 2 TD's plus he didn't turn it over. I don't think Brock throws 2 early TD's and goes turnoverless. JMO

[crazycolt1]

1 hour ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Peyton set the tone and dominated early getting a nice lead with 2 TD's plus he didn't turn it over. I don't think Brock throws 2 early TD's and goes turnoverless. JMO

Brock and the Broncos beat the Patriots when the Patriots were undefeated so we never really know. I think Brock may be a little better than some think. JMO.

[2006Coltsbestever]

1 minute ago, crazycolt1 said:

Brock and the Broncos beat the Patriots when the Patriots were undefeated so we never really know. I think Brock may be a little better than some think. JMO.

We will see. It will be an interesting season. I will still stick with my opinion that Denver isn't winning the SB with him at QB last season. I realize he beat the Pats in the Regular Season and the Defense is the main reason why Denver won the SB but I just cant picture him beating Tom Brady/BB in a Championship situation. Peyton played mistake free and threw 2 early TD's to help his Defense. Brady losing to Brock would've been the biggest upset of all-time and down right embarrassing. That is why most Pats fans were praying Brock would keep playing. They even knew Peyton's presence was scary in itself.

[Lucky Colts Fan]

On ‎5‎/‎31‎/‎2016 at 3:33 PM, aaron11 said:

i would take the 10 million dollars over joining the best team in the league even if they were heavy favorites to win the super bowl

 

as an average fan like you said, i dont care that much about winning the super bowl.  it would be awesome, but not 10 million dollars worth of awesome. that is more than i would make in a life time as an engineering technician in just one year on BOs contract with the texans

 

Fair enough.  I'm just saying there are always other ways to make millions, but there's only one way to win a SB, and that's being on the best team possible.  The defending SB champ should be at the top of that list.

 

This might be a little too simplistic, but if someone thinks their only chance to make enough money for them and their families to live comfortably is to take the biggest contract possible while they are in the NFL, they are really selling themselves short, and maybe they aren't ready for that much money in the first place.

 

There are safer ways to make lots of money, I would think NFL players play because they love the game and want to win SBs.  Maybe that's just me though.

[jvan1973]

49 minutes ago, Lucky Colts Fan said:

 

Fair enough.  I'm just saying there are always other ways to make millions, but there's only one way to win a SB, and that's being on the best team possible.  The defending SB champ should be at the top of that list.

 

This might be a little too simplistic, but if someone thinks their only chance to make enough money for them and their families to live comfortably is to take the biggest contract possible while they are in the NFL, they are really selling themselves short, and maybe they aren't ready for that much money in the first place.

 

There are safer ways to make lots of money, I would think NFL players play because they love the game and want to win SBs.  Maybe that's just me though.

There are only a handful of jobs on the planet that pay starting qb money

[Lucky Colts Fan]

5 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:

There are only a handful of jobs on the planet that pay starting qb money

 

Seriously?  Did you even try to google that before you posted it?  There are literally thousands of jobs, just in this country, probably just with the company Google, that pay more than $20 mil/year.

 

Do you remember the "Great Recession" of '08?  How many CEOs made $20+ mil for getting FIRED?  It was more than a "handful".

 

And if you consider "owner" as a "job", that number is like exponentially bigger than "handful"...

 

Sheesh, just in a different sport, there are more than a "handful" of NBA athletes making more money.

 

C'mon man.

[jvan1973]

16 minutes ago, Lucky Colts Fan said:

 

Seriously?  Did you even try to google that before you posted it?  There are literally thousands of jobs, just in this country, probably just with the company Google, that pay more than $20 mil/year.

 

Do you remember the "Great Recession" of '08?  How many CEOs made $20+ mil for getting FIRED?  It was more than a "handful".

 

And if you consider "owner" as a "job", that number is like exponentially bigger than "handful"...

 

Sheesh, just in a different sport, there are more than a "handful" of NBA athletes making more money.

 

C'mon man.

World wide  if there are 1 million jobs that pay 20 million or more that is only a handful of jobs.  When you have a degree in interdisciplinary studies from Arizona state,    I don't think you are going to land more than the one he has

[aaron11]

1 minute ago, Lucky Colts Fan said:

 

Seriously?  Did you even try to google that before you posted it?  There are literally thousands of jobs, just in this country, probably just with the company Google, that pay more than $20 mil/year.

 

Do you remember the "Great Recession" of '08?  How many CEOs made $20+ mil for getting FIRED?  It was more than a "handful".

 

And if you consider "owner" as a "job", that number is like exponentially bigger than "handful"...

 

Sheesh, just in a different sport, there are more than a "handful" of NBA athletes making more money.

 

C'mon man.

 

here's some perspective on the 10 million dollar example again.  that is 5 life times worth of work for the average person with a bachelors degree.  almost 10 lifetimes worth of money for high school grads.

 

5-10 life times worth of money in just one 16 game season in the nfl.  with money like that it's understandable why players like BO, josh norman and Revis leave good teams and chase the money

 

 

 

[Lucky Colts Fan]

2 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:

World wide  if there are 1 million jobs that pay 20 million or more that is only a handful of jobs

 

I don't want to get into percentages, because that's worldwide, and subjective as far as what a "handful" is.    A disproportionate amount of wealth resides in the US, paying for all these athletes and celebrities, and the US is going to skew that number.

 

Even if the US only had a proportionate amount of those 1 million $20+ mil jobs, that's still a lot more than 32 opportunities, a lot more of them safer for your body than playing in the NFL.

[Lucky Colts Fan]

13 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:

World wide  if there are 1 million jobs that pay 20 million or more that is only a handful of jobs.  When you have a degree in interdisciplinary studies from Arizona state,    I don't think you are going to land more than the one he has

 

9 minutes ago, aaron11 said:

 

here's some perspective on the 10 million dollar example again.  that is 5 life times worth of work for the average person with a bachelors degree.  almost 10 lifetimes worth of money for high school grads.

 

5-10 life times worth of money in just one 16 game season in the nfl.  with money like that it's understandable why players like BO, josh norman and Revis leave good teams and chase the money

 

 

 

 

I think I'm just jealous because he has the option of staying with the defending SB champs or getting frickin $37 million GUARANTEED to be the only guy in Houston.

 

I'm disappointed because I could have rooted for him in Denver.  I was going to root against whoever the Texans QB was, and now it's him.

[jvan1973]

12 minutes ago, Lucky Colts Fan said:

 

I don't want to get into percentages, because that's worldwide, and subjective as far as what a "handful" is.    A disproportionate amount of wealth resides in the US, paying for all these athletes and celebrities, and the US is going to skew that number.

 

Even if the US only had a proportionate amount of those 1 million $20+ mil jobs, that's still a lot more than 32 opportunities, a lot more of them safer for your body than playing in the NFL.

The CEO of PepsiCo makes 19 million a year.   Those jobs are extremely rare and very unattainable for a person with his education

[Lucky Colts Fan]

1 hour ago, jvan1973 said:

The CEO of PepsiCo makes 19 million a year.   Those jobs are extremely rare and very unattainable for a person with his education

 

Some jobs you apply for.  I was thinking of ways to make $100 million (for those of us that can't play NFL QB).  Like a killer wing recipe.  Perfect that, sell them thangs til you make $100 mil.  Without the risks of playing football.

 

But playing QB would be more fun.  Especially if you could point to one ring and say "Thanks Peyton!", and then point to the other one and say "That one's all me though, , but also, thanks Von, for both."

 

Who knows, maybe Osweiler and Watt will be thanking each other for a SB.   Then Brock will just say "This is my practice ring, and this is my real ring"

[Lucky Colts Fan]

Apparently, Osweiler is not going to the White House with his Broncos teammates.

 

Former Broncos Manning, Malik Jackson, and Danny Travathan are going.  But Osweiler has more important things to do in Houston.  I get it, Houston is paying him all that money, and he wants to prove that he is committed to the Texans.  But I think he might still be salty about getting benched last year.

 

He is saying all the right things, but it's still kind of a snub for both the Broncos and the White House.

[crazycolt1]

40 minutes ago, Lucky Colts Fan said:

Apparently, Osweiler is not going to the White House with his Broncos teammates.

 

Former Broncos Manning, Malik Jackson, and Danny Travathan are going.  But Osweiler has more important things to do in Houston.  I get it, Houston is paying him all that money, and he wants to prove that he is committed to the Texans.  But I think he might still be salty about getting benched last year.

 

He is saying all the right things, but it's still kind of a snub for both the Broncos and the White House.

He did not get benched. He assumed his backup position behind the starter Manning. Even though he started a few games he was never the Broncos starter. I don't understand why you don't understand that?

[Lucky Colts Fan]

4 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

He did not get benched. He assumed his backup position behind the starter Manning. Even though he started a few games he was never the Broncos starter. I don't understand why you don't understand that?

 

[Lucky Colts Fan]

On ‎6‎/‎2‎/‎2016 at 1:06 PM, crazycolt1 said:

He did not get benched. He assumed his backup position behind the starter Manning. Even though he started a few games he was never the Broncos starter. I don't understand why you don't understand that?

 

If Brocks' 1st half stats in that win against the Chargers had been 200 yds, 4 TDs, 0 Ints, 0 sacks, 0 fumbles, he would have stayed in the game, and been the starter for the next game.  Manning was healthy enough to start the game against the Chargers, but came off the bench in the 2nd half instead of starting.

 

Once you get on the field, the job is yours to lose, regardless of if you're still "technically" #2 on the depth chart.  Brock lost his starting job with bad play in the games leading up to, and in, the Chargers game.  If he won every game he played with a 125+ QB rating, he would have stayed the starter, up to, and through the SB.

 

You can't convince me otherwise.  Let's just call "benching" semantics, and agree to disagree.

[Lucky Colts Fan]

On ‎6‎/‎2‎/‎2016 at 1:06 PM, crazycolt1 said:

He did not get benched. He assumed his backup position behind the starter Manning. Even though he started a few games he was never the Broncos starter. I don't understand why you don't understand that?

 

It's not like Kubiak found out in the middle of the 3rd quarter of the game that "Oh, Manning is healthy now?  Ok, time to assume your role as starter.  Sorry, Brock."

[Jason_]

54 minutes ago, Lucky Colts Fan said:

 

If Brocks' 1st half stats in that win against the Chargers had been 200 yds, 4 TDs, 0 Ints, 0 sacks, 0 fumbles, he would have stayed in the game, and been the starter for the next game.  Manning was healthy enough to start the game against the Chargers, but came off the bench in the 2nd half instead of starting.

 

Once you get on the field, the job is yours to lose, regardless of if you're still "technically" #2 on the depth chart.  Brock lost his starting job with bad play in the games leading up to, and in, the Chargers game.  If he won every game he played with a 125+ QB rating, he would have stayed the starter, up to, and through the SB.

 

You can't convince me otherwise.  Let's just call "benching" semantics, and agree to disagree.

 

So then you would also agree that, if Hasselbeck had put up those same numbers every game he played, that he would have remained the starter even if luck had returned to 100%? Luck would have then become hassellbeck's backuo and only won his starting job back if MH got hurt?

[Lucky Colts Fan]

1 minute ago, Jason_S said:

 

So then you would also agree that, if Hasselbeck had put up those same numbers every game he played, that he would have remained the starter even if luck had returned to 100%? Luck would have then become hassellbeck's backuo and only won his starting job back if MH got hurt?

 

That's kind of apples and oranges because of the age disparity, and role reversal.  Typically, you want to see if the younger guy is your future starter.  If Brock proves himself to be "the guy", why bench him?  If Tom Brady proves himself to be "the guy", why bench him for Drew Bledsoe, the proven veteran?  If Tom Brady had fallen on his face and played bad when given the opportunity to start (like Brock), he would have been benched, and Drew Bledsoe might have been the hero in New England.

 

Everybody in the Broncos organization thought Brock was the QB of the future.  The job was his to take from Manning.  It was his to keep once Manning retired, but he felt wronged, and left for "greener" pastures.

[crazycolt1]

2 hours ago, Lucky Colts Fan said:

 

If Brocks' 1st half stats in that win against the Chargers had been 200 yds, 4 TDs, 0 Ints, 0 sacks, 0 fumbles, he would have stayed in the game, and been the starter for the next game.  Manning was healthy enough to start the game against the Chargers, but came off the bench in the 2nd half instead of starting.

 

Once you get on the field, the job is yours to lose, regardless of if you're still "technically" #2 on the depth chart.  Brock lost his starting job with bad play in the games leading up to, and in, the Chargers game.  If he won every game he played with a 125+ QB rating, he would have stayed the starter, up to, and through the SB.

 

You can't convince me otherwise.  Let's just call "benching" semantics, and agree to disagree.

It doesn't matter what his numbers were. He was not the starter for the Broncos. The job was never his to lose. His job was to back up the starter Manning. Back up QBs job is to back up. He was never listed as a starter. You may want to argue this but Manning was that starter and until he lost that job it never changed. Not one time did Manning lose his starting position. There is nothing to disagree on. Manning was the starter from day one and continued till he retired.

[Lucky Colts Fan]

Just now, crazycolt1 said:

It doesn't matter what his numbers were. He was not the starter for the Broncos. The job was never his to lose. His job was to back up the starter Manning. Back up QBs job is to back up. He was never listed as a starter. You may want to argue this but Manning was that starter and until he lost that job it never changed. Not one time did Manning lose his starting position. There is nothing to disagree on. Manning was the starter from day one and continued till he retired.

 

Then why didn't Peyton start against the Chargers if he was the starter and he was healthy?

[crazycolt1]

3 minutes ago, Lucky Colts Fan said:

 

Then why didn't Peyton start against the Chargers if he was the starter and he was healthy?

 You are asking me a question that only Kubiak can answer. No where did any media guides or team pages list Brock as the starter. Do you think that Luck was not the Colts starter when Matt filled in for him while he was injured? Matt was the back up and was always the back up just the same as Brock.

[Lucky Colts Fan]

3 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

You are asking me a question that only Kubiak can answer.

 

I think Kubiak answered it when he started Brock, even though Peyton was healthy enough to start, then benched him for playing like poo.

 

3 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

Do you think that Luck was not the Colts starter when Matt filled in for him while he was injured? Matt was the back up and was always the back up just the same as Brock.

 

That's a complete role-reversal.  Kubiak would want to give the younger QB a chance to prove he is "the guy" going forward.  Pagano knows Luck is "the guy" going forward, no matter how good Hasselbeck plays. 

 

But if Hasselbeck is winning games and not making mistakes, then by all means, let Luck hold the clipboard and watch a professional veteran show him how it's done.  Why "bench" someone who is doing their job well?

 

That was not the same situation/dynamic as Denver last year.  But you saw the flip side of the coin.  Why give a rookie a "tryout" when you have a HoFer ready to lead the team?

[crazycolt1]

7 minutes ago, Lucky Colts Fan said:

 

I think Kubiak answered it when he started Brock, even though Peyton was healthy enough to start, then benched him for playing like poo.

 

 

That's a complete role-reversal.  Kubiak would want to give the younger QB a chance to prove he is "the guy" going forward.  Pagano knows Luck is "the guy" going forward, no matter how good Hasselbeck plays. 

 

But if Hasselbeck is winning games and not making mistakes, then by all means, let Luck hold the clipboard and watch a professional veteran show him how it's done.  Why "bench" someone who is doing their job well?

 

That was not the same situation/dynamic as Denver last year.  But you saw the flip side of the coin.  Why give a rookie a "tryout" when you have a HoFer ready to lead the team?

You are arguing a mute point. Brock was never the starter for the Broncos. Brock was the back up QB. End of story.  Is that too hard for you to comprehend? You are arguing just for the sake of arguing at this point.

[Lucky Colts Fan]

35 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

You are arguing a mute point. Brock was never the starter for the Broncos. Brock was the back up QB. End of story.  Is that too hard for you to comprehend? You are arguing just for the sake of arguing at this point.

 

Oh my gosh. Moot point.  Brock was the backup rookie QB, who took over for the injured HoF vet.  When the injured HoF vet was healthy enough to start, Kubiak chose to let Brock start instead and see if he was the (starting) QB of the future.  When Brock stumbled, he got BENCHED, and Manning RESUMED his role as starter.  For at least one game, they were both up in the air as the possible starter moving forward.

 

Perhaps we're both right?

[2006Coltsbestever]

Not to interrupt but I guess I will, no way in hell Peyton wasn't going to be the starter entering the Playoffs. Brock could've thrown for 400 Yards and 4 TD's in the final week but Peyton was playing regardless come Playoffs. The Coaching staff was smart enough to know Brock wasn't winning no SB. He definitely doesn't beat the Pats in a Title Situation.

[crazycolt1]

3 minutes ago, Lucky Colts Fan said:

 

Oh my gosh. Brock was the backup rookie QB, who took over for the injured HoF vet.  When the injured HoF vet was healthy enough to start, Kubiak chose to let Brock start instead and see if he was the (starting) QB of the future.  When Brock stumbled, he got BENCHED, and Manning RESUMED his role as starter.  For at least one game, they were both up in the air as the possible starter moving forward.

 

Perhaps we're both right?

 You sure will go to great lengths than to admit you could be wrong.