Who's your QB next week...next year

barrett · #1 03-03-2015, 08:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WMH

Disagree with what it means for Mallett. McCown has zero upside. None, and just about every one knows it. Mallett is an unknown, similar to a draft pick but has a couple of years of league experience. In a QB starved league, I'd bet GM's would rather roll the dice with a Mallett than a McCown type.

Guessing we will see for sure in the next couple of weeks.

I think he has far more upside than McCown. I just don't think he will get top end backup money, that goes to caretaker/mentor types who can start but who can also be happy and productive in the background.

And I don't think any GM is going to hook their wagon to him in a big time deal when they could just go to the draft and spend a late pick and none of the money.

So he either signs a deal as part of a poo poo platter of QBs somewhere (a team gets 3-4 mediocre ones and lets them fight it out), or he re-signs here with an inside track. The guy was shopped for the whole preseason last year and we got him for a 7th because nobody else wanted him. Then he played one game and got hurt with a season ending injury that has a tendency to re-occur. It is a super thin QB market and guys worse than Rick Smith have jobs out there, so anything is possible, but I would guess he gets no more than McCown.

Nconroe · #2 03-03-2015, 04:54 PM

Cleveland just gave Josh McGowan 3 year, 14 mil, 6.25 guaranteed contract for 35 year old QB. so Mallett likely to get more than that .

HPF Bob · #3 03-03-2015, 05:51 PM

I understand what Barrett is saying. I would probably offer Mallett a structured deal that allows him more money based on starts for probably a 3-yr contract. Start 12 or more games, we pay you x. Less than 12 because you got IR'd, we pay you y. Less than 12 but more than 8, we pay you z. Have some other incentives put in it and then a higher guarantee figure to make it marketable.

It would be tricky but it can be done. There has to be rewards for Mallett if he excels and safeguards for the Texans if he doesn't.

Arky · #4 03-04-2015, 01:30 PM

I'd go with Mallet (of course) and I expect to hear some breaking news within the next few days/week on his future.

I'd keep Keenum (cheaper than Fitz) and Savage as 2a and 2b and hope that Mallet stays healthy and neither sees the field. Although, if the Texans have their eye on an early round QB such as Petty, then it could be Mallet with Savage/Petty as the backups...

barrett · #5 03-09-2015, 01:16 PM

Like I said, McCown's deal meant nothing for Mallett. Veteran backups get paid. You only get paid for potential if a team is investing the future in you and it was obvious no team was going to do that for Mallett. I think this is the perfect deal for Mallett and for Houston.

I have mixed feelings on Hoyer. I think he's generally terrible and just does not have the accuracy to play NFL football. But he has the traits you want in your backup and BOB obviously likes him. Oh well.

Arky · #6 03-09-2015, 03:36 PM

One thing today's events do is probably make getting a QB in the draft a non-priority, in fact, they may just skip QB all together....

Roy P · #7 03-09-2015, 06:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arky

One thing today's events do is probably make getting a QB in the draft a non-priority, in fact, they may just skip QB all together....

My sleeper QB in this draft is Shane Carden from East Carolina. He may be available in the 6th round or later. With all the QBs currently on the roster, we could stash him on the Practice Squad. With as little as we utilized Savage last season, I'm not sure why we didn't do that with him or if that's a possibility this season?

WMH · #8 03-09-2015, 03:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by barrett

Like I said, McCown's deal meant nothing for Mallett. Veteran backups get paid. You only get paid for potential if a team is investing the future in you and it was obvious no team was going to do that for Mallett. I think this is the perfect deal for Mallett and for Houston.

I have mixed feelings on Hoyer. I think he's generally terrible and just does not have the accuracy to play NFL football. But he has the traits you want in your backup and BOB obviously likes him. Oh well.

Yep, you were right, and I was wrong. Given the status of the available QB market, I assumed more people would be willing to gamble on an unknown than the slew of mediocre knowns. Not sure I agree with it, but that's certainly what happened.

barrett · #9 03-09-2015, 05:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WMH

Yep, you were right, and I was wrong. Given the status of the available QB market, I assumed more people would be willing to gamble on an unknown than the slew of mediocre knowns. Not sure I agree with it, but that's certainly what happened.

I don't think it is necessarily smart what happened. I just think head coaches usually only get to miss on a QB of the future once. GM's usually get two chances.

If you sign a veteran backup it is not considered missing. He was never supposed to be the answer. Chip Kelly just paid Mark Sanchez a 2nd time after he was bad last year and he still won't be judged until he gets the QB he wants.

But if you sign a guy to actual money based on potential (or draft a guy with a valuable pick), you are making a public bet he is the guy and the clock starts running on you.

So while it would have been smarter for all those teams to go after Mallett vs known mediocrities like Fitz/Hoyer/McCown/Sanchez/etc... Self-preservation says you grab a vet and keep your options open. And I seriously think the majority of the moves in the NFL have as much to do with GM/HC reputation as they do actual talent. These guys know if they play by the rules and fail they get away with it for a while, but if they rock the boat and fail they get fired.