Renck: No reason to rush choice of Brock Osweiler, Peyton Manning

[Denver Native (Carol)]

Quarterback Brock Osweiler sits on the cover of Sports Illustrated. He remains the Broncos starter. Yet, it's not enough. Many antsy Broncos fans want to know that he's the starter. The Broncos have not made a public announcement or told the players privately of their plans.

Why are they waiting? For the same reasons rock stars date super models: because they can.

And they should.

Instant gratification defines modern society. It is followed closely by immediate resolution. Everyone wants an answer yesterday. This works better in life than in sports.

The Broncos continue to handle the situation with Osweiler and Peyton Manning professionally, and correctly. Why? Let's start with Manning.

rest - http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_29205876/renck-no-reason-rush-choice-brock-osweiler-peyton

[Northman]

Meh, i agree and disagree with him. His scenario regarding Oz is plausible but the other side of that is what if Oz continues to play well and continues to win and then Manning gets better? Does Kubes throw Manning back in even though Oz is winning? I think it creates a problem no matter if they decide now or decide later.

[Joel]

It's pretty straightforward: Until/unless Manning's healthy OR Oz bombs no choice is POSSIBLE, so don't foreclose potentially vital options before they even exist. IF Manning can play by Week 16-17 AND Oz is still OK, THEN we must choose, but if EITHER of those things doesn't happen (and let's pray at least ONE does) our sole "choice" is the default.

[Simple Jaded]

I just hope it continues to be a good problem to have.

[TXBRONC]

That will sort itself out soon enough. The most important thing is that Osweiler keep playing well while he's still the starter.

[BroncoWave]

I just hope it continues to be a good problem to have.

I don't think it's a good problem to have. Brock is playing well and winning games and there is the chance we replace him with a guy who has been one of the worst QBs in the NFL this season. It's a potentially disastrous problem to have if we bring back Manning and he continues to shit the bed.

[TXBRONC]

I don't think it's a good problem to have. Brock is playing well and winning games and there is the chance we replace him with a guy who has been one of the worst QBs in the NFL this season. It's a potentially disastrous problem to have if we bring back Manning and he continues to shit the bed.

I don't think there is any sense in worrying about it right now. Brock is starter until further notice.

[BroncoWave]

I don't think there is any sense in worrying about it right now. Brock is starter until further notice.

It sure seems to me like all the signs are pointing to them trying to get Manning back on the field as soon as possible. I just don't understand it at all but that's the vibe I'm getting. I really do hope I am wrong.

[I Eat Staples]

It sure seems to me like all the signs are pointing to them trying to get Manning back on the field as soon as possible. I just don't understand it at all but that's the vibe I'm getting. I really do hope I am wrong.

Yup, I've prepared for the worst. Sounds like Peyton is going to return soon, what with him beginning to throw and participate in drills.

[NightTerror218]

Is it a coincidence that Brock is in the last year of his contract and Elway needed to see him to evaluate an extension. Now he will get his 4th start of the season.

Conspiracy, but was in the plan all along to "rest" Manning for part of the season so that Brock could be evaluated?

Hard to groom a guy for 3 years to see him walk. No idea of his value or what he can do.

[Cugel]

Is it a coincidence that Brock is in the last year of his contract and Elway needed to see him to evaluate an extension. Now he will get his 4th start of the season.

Conspiracy, but was in the plan all along to "rest" Manning for part of the season so that Brock could be evaluated?

Hard to groom a guy for 3 years to see him walk. No idea of his value or what he can do.

But, what you said makes no sense at all. You are confusing what WE know about Brock with what THEY know about Brock. We knew ZIP until we saw him in games, but THEY watched him in practices for 4 years. They coached him and watched his development.

That was the source of all the "Brock is progressing nicely" comments we've heard over the years. They always intended to keep Brock - if they could do so without over-paying. Now they'll have to pay a LOT.

Of course, you can't know for sure about him until he gets into games and you see him in real action. But there's a terrible downside to "finding out what we have in Brock."

That is going to cost them at least $10 million per season. They could have signed Brock to a new $5 million a year contract before this season. If Peyton played the entire season like planned they could have signed Brock to a similar contract next February.

But now that he's proven to the entire league of QB hungry teams that he can play at least adequately in this league (or so it seems which is all anybody can know about a potential FA QB)?

I said before this season and reiterate now. The Broncos didn't sign Brock to a long-term contract NOT because they "needed to see what they have in him" first. If Peyton remained healthy there was no plan to start Brock at all this year, so obviously they weren't going to learn anything.

They didn't want to give Brock $5 M a season if Peyton was going to come back and play another year in 2016 and they couldn't tell that until they saw how he was going to do this year with this OL and the Kubiak system.

Now, it's too late! Unless Brock starts to struggle and throws a lot of picks or something, he's going to command something close to the $15 M a year that Matt Cassel got going to the Chiefs. If the Broncos won't pay it, some other team will.

Remember that the AVERAGE of the top 32 starting QBs is Tom Brady. AVERAGE, not top salary. He earns $14.4 M a year. Sam Bradford earns $13 M a year with the Eagles and he's the 17th highest paid QB in the league.

But, Brady gave the Pats a discount. As an unrestricted FA, Osweiler will get at least $10 M a year just for what he's done so far.

With every win, especially if he wins in the playoffs, his salary demands are going to go up.

He's going to probably wind up with all of Manning's $15 M a year salary. Naturally, if the Broncos wind up going to the SB or winning it, those demands will be even more.

[BroncoWave]

Is it a coincidence that Brock is in the last year of his contract and Elway needed to see him to evaluate an extension. Now he will get his 4th start of the season.

Conspiracy, but was in the plan all along to "rest" Manning for part of the season so that Brock could be evaluated?

Hard to groom a guy for 3 years to see him walk. No idea of his value or what he can do.

So putting his foot in a cast was just a giant ruse? Let me guess, they asked him to really sell it with the game he had against KC. Do you honestly believe any of that?

[Davii]

So putting his foot in a cast was just a giant ruse? Let me guess, they asked him to really sell it with the game he had against KC. Do you honestly believe any of that?

He was playing possum!

[Ravage!!!]

I think if we plan on bringing Manning back into the starting lineup before the playoffs, then we'll see him on the field by week 15...so that he has 2 games to get back into rythme. That could be a good thing. That could tell the Broncos if he's healthy, and, if he's good to go. If he's not, they can "blame" it on injury, and still have enough time to decide on Brock.

Manning's football mind and experience would still be extremely valuable in the playoffs. Even this last week, Vegas wouldn't give any difference in points had Manning been the starter, and Vegas is usually dead-on.....which is why they are a bazillion dollar industry.

[Ravage!!!]

Is it a coincidence that Brock is in the last year of his contract and Elway needed to see him to evaluate an extension. Now he will get his 4th start of the season.

Conspiracy, but was in the plan all along to "rest" Manning for part of the season so that Brock could be evaluated?

Hard to groom a guy for 3 years to see him walk. No idea of his value or what he can do.

Yeah.. I'm not buying this. I think it is a coincidence. We drafted Oz as plan B in case Manning's neck didn't hold up after coming back from his surgeries. Now, that 40yr old QB is showing the break-downs that people expected 3 years ago. There is no conspiracy here.

[SR]

Manning will start against Cinci I bet

[TXBRONC]

Manning will start against Cinci I bet


That's seems logical because weeks 16 and 17 are at home. However, maybe they hold off until week 17 when they play the Chargers.

[Mike]

I think if we plan on bringing Manning back into the starting lineup before the playoffs, then we'll see him on the field by week 15...so that he has 2 games to get back into rythme. That could be a good thing. That could tell the Broncos if he's healthy, and, if he's good to go. If he's not, they can "blame" it on injury, and still have enough time to decide on Brock.

Manning's football mind and experience would still be extremely valuable in the playoffs. Even this last week, Vegas wouldn't give any difference in points had Manning been the starter, and Vegas is usually dead-on.....which is why they are a bazillion dollar industry.

I just don't like making changes in the midst of a playoff run with homefield advantage on the line. If Denver loses to Oakland or Pittsburgh then I could see them considering it for Cincy. But if they win both of those games and are still in the #1 hunt, then I can't imagine they would start him against Cincy. In that case, maybe you start him vs SD, but that's iffy if we have to have that game to lock up the 1 seed. I think there is a good chance Denver loses the Chicago, NE, and SD games with Manning at the helm. People can point to the injury all they want, but his play was crap before the injury.

Manning's mind hasn't been the same this year (see interception #s) and his experience in the playoffs or cold weather is not something that I am sure I'd count as a positive.

[I Eat Staples]

My fear is that Manning returns for the PIT or Cincy game and we lose, blowing our shot at the #1 seed.

[Ravage!!!]

I just don't like making changes in the midst of a playoff run with homefield advantage on the line. If Denver loses to Oakland or Pittsburgh then I could see them considering it for Cincy. But if they win both of those games and are still in the #1 hunt, then I can't imagine they would start him against Cincy. In that case, maybe you start him vs SD, but that's iffy if we have to have that game to lock up the 1 seed. I think there is a good chance Denver loses the Chicago, NE, and SD games with Manning at the helm. People can point to the injury all they want, but his play was crap before the injury.

Manning's mind hasn't been the same this year (see interception #s) and his experience in the playoffs or cold weather is not something that I am sure I'd count as a positive.

Yeah.. its a tough one.

I'm just speculationg. But my guess is, that IF they are wanting Manning to be back for the playoffs, they would want him to have a couple games under his belt with the crew. If Manning isn't able to get those couple games in before the playoffs start, I can't see them really making the change once the playoffs start.

Don't know what's going to happen. I know there are a lot of veteran players that have all been giving their opinions on radio/tv, and many have stated that they...as a player... would want Manning behind center going into the playoffs. This last game showed, to me, some obvious limitations with Brock and his reads.

I'm with you as far as feeling Manning just wasn't "manning" before the foot injury, anyway. But it's an easy decision when you are sitting at the couch and don't have to actually deal with the 'people' themselves. So it's a pretty simple answer for me, but then, I wouldn't want to be in Elway's shoes.

[Slick]

I don't think Kubiak is in a hurry to scrap his offense now that he's finally able to run it. Manning will have to wow them in practice at this point. I still don't think he's going to be healthy enough to do that.

As far as announcing Brock as the starter for the rest of the season? No, there's no hurry. I don't blame them for playing it out like they are.

[turftoad]

Yeah.. its a tough one.

I'm just speculationg. But my guess is, that IF they are wanting Manning to be back for the playoffs, they would want him to have a couple games under his belt with the crew. If Manning isn't able to get those couple games in before the playoffs start, I can't see them really making the change once the playoffs start.

Don't know what's going to happen. I know there are a lot of veteran players that have all been giving their opinions on radio/tv, and many have stated that they...as a player... would want Manning behind center going into the playoffs. This last game showed, to me, some obvious limitations with Brock and his reads.

I'm with you as far as feeling Manning just wasn't "manning" before the foot injury, anyway. But it's an easy decision when you are sitting at the couch and don't have to actually deal with the 'people' themselves. So it's a pretty simple answer for me, but then, I wouldn't want to be in Elway's shoes.

Great post!
Manning is considered one of the best regular season QB's of all time. That said, we have been waiting for him to be healthy for the playoffs to make a playoff run. If he's healthy I love to see him in there for week 16 & 17 and ready for healthy playoff football.
Same as you Rav, we saw some limitation from Brock in the last game. I'm not sure he has enough experience to take a team into the playoffs yet. Not as much as Manning anyway.

[BroncoJoe]

I am happy to admit I have no idea or clue or opinion as to what the Broncos will do re: Brock vs. Manning.

Thank goodness Kubiak stopped texting me.

[NightTerror218]

So putting his foot in a cast was just a giant ruse? Let me guess, they asked him to really sell it with the game he had against KC. Do you honestly believe any of that?

I just thought it out there. Random thought is all.

What I do think is that one way or another Brock was going to get playing time. Which if was not for the injury Kubiak probably would have called it resting Manning for the playoffs with the record that we have. I think Brock would have made a couple starts this season no matter what.

[LawDog]

Let's assume Peyton does get healthy and comes back either week 16 or 17. There is no guarantee that he lasts throughout the post-season without suffering some sort of injury regression. Better to have Brock get as much experience as possible so he can, if needed, step right back in and keep the team playing at a competitive level. I think that balancing act is a harder question.

[Cugel]

I just don't like making changes in the midst of a playoff run with homefield advantage on the line. If Denver loses to Oakland or Pittsburgh then I could see them considering it for Cincy. But if they win both of those games and are still in the #1 hunt, then I can't imagine they would start him against Cincy. In that case, maybe you start him vs SD, but that's iffy if we have to have that game to lock up the 1 seed. I think there is a good chance Denver loses the Chicago, NE, and SD games with Manning at the helm. People can point to the injury all they want, but his play was crap before the injury.

Manning's mind hasn't been the same this year (see interception #s) and his experience in the playoffs or cold weather is not something that I am sure I'd count as a positive.

His MIND??? :eek:

He's in a system which profoundly clashes with what he's done the last 8 years. He's old and slow and has a weak arm. His OL is horrible at pass-blocking and they haven't been able to protect the QB all year. He was getting hit on almost every pass play, and suffered multiple injuries, culminating in a torn tendon as a result of which he couldn't even throw it 5 yards in the KC game.

The question isn't anything about his MIND. He's throwing picks because he's been injured, and before that because defenders have been getting right in his face and forcing him to throw in under 2 seconds.

He's also playing in a system that emphasizes the run game, but they've been unable to run the ball with Peyton in the pistol. At all. So the defense just tees off on Peyton, and he gets immediate pressure.

It has NOTHING to do with his mind. NOTHING. This is a 39 year old body breaking down under constant hits.

I question whether he can be effective even if he's 100% healthy in this offense, because the OL hasn't improved any since he left. And we don't really know if he can be 100% healthy. He thought he could play against the Chiefs and we all saw what happened there.

The one game this season where Peyton was really effective was the Packers game, which came right after the bye week. So, the OL got a week off to get healthy and Peyton got a weak off to recover. Result? The OL blocked so well that the Broncos ran for 150 yards and 3 rushing TDs and Peyton threw for 340. But, when Peyton comes back completely healthy, he might be fresh and ready to roll, but his OL won't be. They're beaten up and injured at almost every position and they're not getting any time off to heal.

They shouldn't even consider putting Peyton back in there unless it's an emergency (Brock is injured) or they are going to somehow be better able to protect him than they did.

[BroncoJoe]

Uh, wasn't he one of the least sacked QB's before his injury?

Has nothing to do with the hits. Has to do with his mind not being able to keep pace with his body. Your only accurate comment is "a 39 year old body".

EDIT: I meant to say his body can't keep up with his mind, which is what I've been saying since week 2 or 3.

[Cugel]

Let's assume Peyton does get healthy and comes back either week 16 or 17. There is no guarantee that he lasts throughout the post-season without suffering some sort of injury regression. Better to have Brock get as much experience as possible so he can, if needed, step right back in and keep the team playing at a competitive level. I think that balancing act is a harder question.

I'd say you're right, but what about Brock getting injured? People forget about that.

There's nothing particularly special about Peyton getting hurt. He might recover more slowly at 39 than Brock does, but he's not more likely to be hurt. And Brock has been taking a LOT of hits.

It's quite possible that Osweiler's performance is beginning to decline because he's beaten up by the defense every week. He's been sacked 11 times in 3 games so far. And he's been hit about 5 times for every sack, so he's taken a huge pounding in only 3 games.

How long can he possibly last at this rate?

[Cugel]

Uh, wasn't he one of the least sacked QB's before his injury?

Has nothing to do with the hits. Has to do with his mind not being able to keep pace with his body. Your only accurate comment is "a 39 year old body".

Your post just shows you haven't been paying attention at all. It has EVERYTING to do with the hits.

Peyton was sacked an ENORMOUS # of times this season - 15 times in 9 games, compared with only 17 times all last season.

And this was despite Peyton having maybe the quickest release in the NFL plus playing in the shotgun the entire time so he can see the pass rush coming the whole time. But, sacks are only the tip of the iceberg. He was hit at least 5 times for every sack, but got rid of the ball. Those hits still hurt.

Your comment that there was something wrong with his mind is just the dumbest idea I've heard in years. NOBODY but you believes that because it's pure nonsense. His mind is the one thing that hasn't gotten worse.

Old players don't become unable to think, they don't forget how to play, their bodies break down under the hits. Peyton is INJURED. His shoulder is injured. His legs are injured, he's got a torn tendon, and his ribs are bruised. All this was reported in every news outlet in the country. Keep up.

And the OL didn't get any better when Osweiler came in because he's been sacked 11 times on top of that in only 3 games.

[BroncoJoe]

Your post just shows you haven't been paying attention at all. It has EVERYTING to do with the hits.

Peyton was sacked an ENORMOUS # of times this season - 15 times in 9 games, compared with only 17 times all last season.

And this was despite Peyton having maybe the quickest release in the NFL plus playing in the shotgun the entire time so he can see the pass rush coming the whole time. But, sacks are only the tip of the iceberg. He was hit at least 5 times for every sack, but got rid of the ball. Those hits still hurt.

Your comment that there was something wrong with his mind is just the dumbest idea I've heard in years. NOBODY but you believes that because it's pure nonsense. His mind is the one thing that hasn't gotten worse.

Old players don't become unable to think, they don't forget how to play, their bodies break down under the hits. Peyton is INJURED. His shoulder is injured. His legs are injured, he's got a torn tendon, and his ribs are bruised. All this was reported in every news outlet in the country. Keep up.

And the OL didn't get any better when Osweiler came in because he's been sacked 11 times on top of that in only 3 games.

Ok, Cugel. You know everything and no one elses opinion matters.

And, tell me where I said there's something wrong with his mind? That's confusing. I said his body can't keep up with his mind.

After reviewing my earlierr post, I did swap mind and body, so I see why you'd take issue with that.

I have said since game 2 that his body is breaking down and can't do what his mind wants it to do.

[Cugel]

Ok, Cugel. You know everything and no one elses opinion matters.

And, tell me where I said there's something wrong with his mind? That's confusing. I said his body can't keep up with his mind.

After reviewing my earlierr post, I did swap mind and body, so I see why you'd take issue with that.

I have said since game 2 that his body is breaking down and can't do what his mind wants it to do.

OK, if you put it like that then I agree with you. :wave:

But, his body isn't breaking down because he's 110. It's breaking down due to injury. And he's injured because his OL can't protect him. They haven't been able to pass-block all season, nor could they run the ball with Peyton in the pistol, so defenses have been teeing off on him.

Combine Peyton and Brocks' sack totals (36 in 12 games) and that comes out 3rd most in the NFL behind Alex Smith and Russell Wilson. That's just horrible OL protection when you consider how difficult it is to sack Peyton Manning his entire career. 17 in 2014, 18 in 2013, 21 in 2012, 16 times in 2010 and how quick his release is, and the fact that he's standing there in the shot-gun and can see the rush coming the entire time.

The problem for Peyton is not how many sacks he's taken, it's how many times he was hit. And that number was a LOT more than 15. More like 15 times a game.

[Cugel]

The real problem isn't Peyton. If he can get completely healthy, we'd see the exact same Peyton we saw in the Packers game when he threw for 340 yards and was able to complete passes deep downfield.

The problem is this: "How long can he stay healthy if he immediately starts taking kills shots on every passing down like he did before?"

Because in that Packers game the biggest factor in the Broncos success was that the OL had a week off to get healthy. They won't get another unless they get the #1 or #2 seed and get a week before their first playoff game. Right now the OL is more banged up than ever.

Evan Mathis and Vasquez are hurt. Mathis wasn't even supposed to play but they were forced to use him anyway due to Vasquez's groin injury. Supposedly, his hamstring is just one long purple bruise that's ugly to look at. No wonder he can't be effective.

Michael Schofield has been terrible at pass-blocking all season long, and Harris is a RT, not a starting LT in this league. Using him and Tyler Polumbus at LT is like patching a hole in the bottom of a boat with duct tape.

I don't know what's wrong with Matt Paradis, other than that he's never started in the NFL before. But, he got thrown right on his butt by a DL. I don't know that I've ever seen a play like that where the C is in his stance, and the defender just shoots his arms out and knocks Paradis over onto his butt and runs right up the middle past him to the QB.

Pro-football focus has documented plays where the Broncos OL kept 3 extra blockers in to pass-protect and were still beaten 4 on 8.

It's been better with Brock in there because he's rolling out and throwing on the run, so the LBs can't get the same jump they do against Peyton. But, this OL is just flat BAD when it comes to pass-protection.

[Northman]

Packers are overrated, they have it worse than us in terms of Oline and lack of wideouts. Even their running game sucks worse than ours. We dominated them because we are just a better team than them.

[Ravage!!!]

Packers are overrated, they have it worse than us in terms of Oline and lack of wideouts. Even their running game sucks worse than ours. We dominated them because we are just a better team than them.

Their running game "shouldn't" be worse than ours, though.

[Simple Jaded]

The Broncos ZBS lineman have never been any good in pass pro, makes me wonder how much better we can expect them to get in the future.

I hope there's an OL coaching change in off season.

[Cugel]

The Packers and Seahawks are struggling with poor OL play. Russell Wilson is the most mobile QB in the NFL yet he's been sacked 38 times, leading the league.

And the Packers are 8-4 and the Seahawks 7-5. Both are struggling to win their divisions, and the Seahawks are trailing theirs by 3 games.

And neither of those teams is going to win any SBs. Neither are the Broncos unless they get a lot better pass protection from their OL in the playoffs.

[TXBRONC]

Packers are overrated, they have it worse than us in terms of Oline and lack of wideouts. Even their running game sucks worse than ours. We dominated them because we are just a better team than them.

You got that freaking right.

[TXBRONC]

The Packers and Seahawks are struggling with poor OL play. Russell Wilson is the most mobile QB in the NFL yet he's been sacked 38 times, leading the league.

And the Packers are 8-4 and the Seahawks 7-5. Both are struggling to win their divisions, and the Seahawks are trailing theirs by 3 games.

And neither of those teams is going to win any SBs. Neither are the Broncos unless they get a lot better pass protection from their OL in the playoffs.

Unless the Cardinals fall completely apart the Seacows are not winning that division. The Packers will more than likely still win their division.

[Al Wilson 4 Mayor]

Unless the Cardinals fall completely apart the Seacows are not winning that division. The Packers will more than likely still win their division.

The Seahawks will probably get some cupcake in the wild card game. Nobody in the NFC will want to face them in the playoffs. Well, at least they will have to play all of their games on the road.

[Ravage!!!]

The Seahawks will probably get some cupcake in the wild card game. Nobody in the NFC will want to face them in the playoffs. Well, at least they will have to play all of their games on the road.

Sooo many teams have bad OL's right now. I can't think of a team in the NFL that is considered to have a 'good' one. The Cowboys were supposed to have had one.

[Slick]

The Seahawks will probably get some cupcake in the wild card game. Nobody in the NFC will want to face them in the playoffs. Well, at least they will have to play all of their games on the road.

Their defense isn't nearly as good without Quinn coaching. Like you said, they'll be on the road too.

[Al Wilson 4 Mayor]

Their defense isn't nearly as good without Quinn coaching. Like you said, they'll be on the road too.

They seem to be improving. I know Minnesota has a very generic offense, but Seattle just shut them out in Minnesota. The only touchdown the Vikings got was a kick return.

[TXBRONC]

The Seahawks will probably get some cupcake in the wild card game. Nobody in the NFC will want to face them in the playoffs. Well, at least they will have to play all of their games on the road.

I don't know I think the Cardinals and the Panthers are confident they could beat them in respective houses.

[Al Wilson 4 Mayor]

I don't know I think the Cardinals and the Panthers are confident they could beat them in respective houses.

I agree, I think it will be Carolina or AZ.

[SR]

Carolina will shit the bed in the playoffs.

[NightTerror218]

They seem to be improving. I know Minnesota has a very generic offense, but Seattle just shut them out in Minnesota. The only touchdown the Vikings got was a kick return.

Viking defense is very banged up and missing key players against Seachickens