Nomad said:
on3m@n@rmy said:
jmdirt said:
Nomad said:
I'm OK with this decision.
I also am okay with Osweiller getting the start. To an extent I am also in agreement with Adam Shefter they need to find out more about Paxton Lynch, but only if they are out of playoff contention. Going into playoffs it would be unwise to hand the starting job to Lynch unless Brock and Trevor are dead.
I agree with you on Osweiler, and he did do remarkably well in relief of Manning for that 7 game stretch back in 2015, though it's a much different O-line now (4 out of the 5 starters from that SB O-line are gone).
What do you think about the situation with Lynch? Let's assume it's Osweiler the rest of the way, playoffs or not, and Lynch sees no playing time this season. Does he get traded next year as he's going into his 3rd season as a 1st rd QB that has sat the bench his first 2 yrs? And if he stays around next year and is given a chance to compete for the starting job but doesn't win it (was beat out fair & square by Seimein the last 2 seasons), does Elway keep a 1st rd QB hanging around on the bench for a 3rd consecutive season?
Tough question. Not an easy answer & there will be lots of opinions. A lot will depend on what the coaches see that we don't see, and the most important thing is whether or not Lynch is showing steady improvement & increasing understanding & command of the offense. The dagger in any player's career is for their development to plateau before they have become developed enough.
The other factor is just how much patience will Denver's coaches, front office including Elway show? Elway SHOULD have a grip on that. But we have seen just how impatient NFL teams can be in recent years, when there's so much pressure to produce now. So let me set up my take with a few examples from the past.
Seattle (cuz I know that history) 1988-1992. Kelly Stouffer, 1st round pick by Arizona in 1987 but held out the entire year in contract dispute. Seattle to his rescue picks him up in 1988. He started out as the #3 QB, but found himself in starting role due to injuries to the other QBs. Underperformed 4 years ending in his release by Seattle in 1992. Bust.
Again Seattle, 1993-1996, enter 1st round, 2nd overall pick Rick Mirer. Won ROY honors, then fell apart. Lasted nearly 10 years in the league, underperforming as a starter, but lasting as journeyman backup.
Both QBs were given about 4 years by Seattle to prove their worth. Keep in mind that was an era when college programs ran pro-style offenses. Spread offenses, RPO, & the current college no-huddle offenses did not exist. By comparison, many of today's college prospects played college under those new offensive schemes, therefore the learning curve for many of today's college QBs is much, much steeper than it was back in the day.
Considering today's learning curve and how much patience teams like Seattle used to show back in the 80's-90's, you would think teams today would show the same amount of patience. I don't know, but teams should. But again, it depends on how much improvement the player is showing, day in day out. What's the work ethic like, etc.
Now lets assume Lynch is really underperforming but showing steady improvement. Does that mean Denver should put total trust in him to become their franchise guy, and not look to other players? Not in my opinion. I say always be looking for that franchise guy, keep looking until you know you've got him, and always compete. But also keep Lynch on the roster another year or two as long as he's improving.
On the flip side, Not Improving == Gone. Done. See ya.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram