View Full Version : David Carr should be traded..........
MadMax
10-18-2006, 01:48 PM
They're not excuses. You can dismiss them or be tired of them all you like, but they're FACTS. I'm sorry you're tired of it. FYI, we're *all* tired of the sucktitude. Some of us have a more accurate grasp of its cause than others.
you've assured me time and time again that your grasp is more "accurate." that your opinion is FACT. discussion on this issue is impossible with you. why do you keep engaging my argument? you know you're right. move along.
MadMax
10-18-2006, 01:52 PM
Biggio and Bagwell didn't hit in the playoffs before 2004.
T-mac has never won a post-season series.
Charles Barkley never won a championship.
The Astros haven't won a World Series game.
David Carr hasn't developed as a QB.
All of the previous statments can be made, and are 100% accurate. However, all of the statements contain circumstances beyond that player/team's control that HAVE to be taken into account when evaluating that statement.
But they also have to do with some criteria that is absolutely WITHIN their control.
Look..at the end of the day, you have accomplishment in sports, or you don't. That's one of the things we like about sports. The Astros haven't won a World Series game...THEY'VE ABSOLUTELY EARNED THAT!! Barkley never won a championship...OTHERS WON WITH FAR LESS THAN HE HAD IN PHOENIX! T-Mac has never won a post-season series...YEAH, NO KIDDING. Biggio and Bagwell didn't hit in the playoffs....WHOSE FAULT IS THAT???
In pro sports, you either get it done, or you don't. It's why Franchise went back to just being called Francis. It's why coaches get fired when their hitters don't hit. This is a results-oriented business.
At the end of the day...Barkley still doesn't have a ring. All the excuses in the world don't make him feel better about that, I assure you.
But they also have to do with some criteria that is absolutely WITHIN their control.
Agreed... I'm just saying that with Carr, the team's faults have been greater (and more contributory to the situation) than the actual faults of him as a QB(which are once again intertwined with the team).
The argument will hold true when people start clamoring for Andre Johnson to be traded because he doesn't catch the ball consistently enough when thrown to. Or when Dunta Robinson continues to regress, and continues to get picked on. Or when the entire o-line from 2002-2004 is eventually replaced in the span of 2 years (only Pitts remains currently, as McKinney will apparently never see the field again).
This team is awful... beyond awful... and when you consider that they started as an expanion team (ie - had no previous track record of success, or failure, or recovery from failure), they're abysmal. They've failed to build the fundamental cores of a team (o-line, d-line), they've failed to use the multiple draft picks they were given to gain depth, they've failed to maintain consistency with the coaches, and they've failed to have an impact free agent signing. (this is all pre-Kubiak regime).
And if Kubiak is deciding to turn this around by building up the o-line and d-lines FIRST.... before you even think about addressing the QB/RB/WR/TE/FS/CB positions... he has more foresight than the man picked to build this expansion team in 2002. If Carr doesn't pan out after those other areas have improved, throw him under the bus... I'm, however willing to give him a chance... something he hasn't had till this year started.
But to write him off after the last year and a half regressions... considering all the other problems this team had... is just as short-sighted as the people who ran this franchise in the first place. The same people who thought Steve McKinney, Todd Wade, and Seth Wand "weren't the problem." The same people who thought Jason Babin and Phillip Buchannon were worth multiple first day draft picks. The same people who thought that 7-9 team was "ready to make the playoffs."
MadMax
10-18-2006, 03:05 PM
Nick --
if it makes you feel better, i agree with MOST of what you just said! :D
i just don't believe carr is the answer at QB.
i just don't believe carr is the answer at QB.
That's fine... I just don't believe anybody could have seen enough to come to that conclusion, one way or the other.
And that's still not taking into account the improvement every year till last year (where everything fell apart for everybody), and the continued improvement at the start of this year.
MadMax
10-18-2006, 03:12 PM
That's fine... I just don't believe anybody could have seen enough to come to that conclusion, one way or the other.
And that's still not taking into account the improvement every year till last year (where everything fell apart for everybody), and the continued improvement at the start of this year.
you're a good man charlie brown...but 4.5 years is enough. teams make huge decisions on players with tons of money at stake with far less information than is gathered in 4.5 years.
you're a good man charlie brown...but 4.5 years is enough. teams make huge decisions on players with tons of money at stake with far less information than is gathered in 4.5 years.
This isn't a team... its a disaster. 4.5 years of disaster. A disaster that perpetuated with tons of money at stake with far less sense/knowledge/action than most disasters.
Disasters that have only been re-encarnated as a "team" in just the past 6 months need more time for evaluation. That's my only argument.
MadMax
10-18-2006, 03:16 PM
This isn't a team... its a disaster. 4.5 years of disaster. A disaster that perpetuated with tons of money at stake with far less sense/knowledge/action than most disasters.
Disasters that have only been re-encarnated as a "team" in just the past 6 months need more time for evaluation. That's my only argument.
we definitely agree on the state of the team! :) i'm just not willing to entirely seperate mr. carr from all of that.
tinman
10-18-2006, 03:16 PM
This isn't a team... its a disaster. 4.5 years of disaster.
Disasters that have only been re-encarnated as a "team" in just the past 6 months need more time for evaluation. That's my only argument.
the clippers were a massive hopeless 10+ year disaster,
then #10 came
that number is special
#10
#10 =2 Rockets Championships
#10 = BCS Championship
10
the clippers were a massive hopeless 10+ year disaster,
then #10 came
that number is special
#10
#10 =2 Rockets Championships
#10 = BCS Championship
10
10 = Spanoulis
10 = Bruntlett
you've assured me time and time again that your grasp is more "accurate."
No, that's the first time I've said that. I'm getting more and more frustrated with the "excuses" copout.
that your opinion is FACT.
BS. I have never referred to my opinion as fact. The FACTS have been listed by others over and over here--the objective facts from which I derive my opinion. My opinion is no better than anyone else's (despite my rant above which I regret).
discussion on this issue is impossible with you.
I feel the same way about your discussion in this particular argument. Myself and others have refuted your points over and over, and you've offered nothing new. Nothing. Just repeating the same BS about "tired of excuses".
why do you keep engaging my argument? you know you're right. move along.
I'm engaging you and anyone else in this discussion because I enjoy it. We typically agree on a lot of stuff, bro. I won't take it personal if you won't.
For example, I won't call your take on this "myopic and misguided" if you won't refer to my mountain of supporting evidence as "excuses".
oh lord, that's not arrogant, you have more of a grasp of the problems. maybe you're in the wrong business.
It was arrogant, and OTT. I'm sorry.
they're not all facts, I say carr holds the ball to long, you don't, that's a difference of opinion. not your grasp of a fact.
I agree, but couldn't that be measured? Would the fact that there are *far* fewer sacks, and a higher completion rate, this season, point out that perhaps he has improved in that area? If you say that he holds on to the ball too long (and I haven't seen *anyone* say that in this discussion), it's something at least quantifiable that can merit real discussion. Not this "he doesn't have 'it'; he's not a leader, the fact that the rest of the entire team wouldn't make other franchises's practice squads is only an excuse" BS.
In this entire discussion, I've seen one person post some real, observable criticism of DCarr's technique. Someone else came right behind him, however, and shot most of his points down. But at least what he talked about was tangible stuff.
At the end of the day...Barkley still doesn't have a ring. All the excuses in the world don't make him feel better about that, I assure you.
And if I'm trying to make my team better, I'm thinking Charles Barkley probably isn't my problem.
MadMax
10-18-2006, 03:22 PM
No, that's the first time I've said that. I'm getting more and more frustrated with the "excuses" copout.
BS. I have never referred to my opinion as fact. The FACTS have been listed by others over and over here--the objective facts from which I derive my opinion. My opinion is no better than anyone else's (despite my rant above which I regret).
I feel the same way about your discussion in this particular argument. Myself and others have refuted your points over and over, and you've offered nothing new. Nothing. Just repeating the same BS about "tired of excuses".
.
frankly, i'm doing a poor job of just trying to avoid your posts on here about this. it's hard not to take a personal jab personally. i'm not assigning the excuses to you...i'm not criticizing your performance as a QB. the excuses belong to David. my opinions which you've described as "wrong," "misguided", "myopic" etc. impart something about me, personally.
you believe you've refuted points. the fact you believe that tells me all i need to know. why in the world would you be so interested in refuting my opinion?? i'm ready for a change. i feel like 4.5 years is enough to see a guy play and make decisions on. i don't like what i see from david. period. the end. my favorite color is blue. i like the dave matthews band. the astros are my favorite sports franchise. get busy refuting.
MadMax
10-18-2006, 03:23 PM
And if I'm trying to make my team better, I'm thinking Charles Barkley probably isn't my problem.
apparently he wasn't part of the solution.
here's what i'm convinced of...i'm not going to change your mind. i didn't set out to try.
i'm not assigning the excuses to you...i'm not criticizing your performance as a QB. the excuses belong to David.
Actually, DCarr hasn't made any excuses for himself. Every time I hear the guy, he's taking blame for losses and saying he needs to make plays. Since DCarr is not involved in the discussion, it's entirely plausible for someone to infer that you said he was making excuses for DCarr--when they're not excuses.
my opinions which you've described as "wrong," "misguided", "myopic" etc. impart something about me, personally.
No, they don't. At least not in my book.
you believe you've refuted points. the fact you believe that tells me all i need to know.
Well, first of all others have refuted them far more and better than I have. And I could say, "the fact that you don't see it tells me all I need to know." I mean, statistic after statistic has been placed in this discussion, and tons of sound logic, and you never address any of it. All you say is, "the leader takes the blame. I'm tired of the excuses."
why in the world would you be so interested in refuting my opinion??
I'm not. It's a discussion. About five other people have refuted your opinion.
i'm ready for a change. i feel like 4.5 years is enough to see a guy play and make decisions on.
And after 4.5 years, I think he looks good and we can address other more (much more) serious deficiencies. You disagree. Fine.
my favorite color is blue. i like the dave matthews band. the astros are my favorite sports franchise. get busy refuting.
frankly, i'm doing a poor job of just trying to avoid your posts on here about this. it's hard not to take a personal jab personally.
You know, for whatever point in this discussion my takes on this took on a tone that sounded personal, I am deeply sorry. We're discussing a blooming game. You and I agree on a lot of stuff. I'm sorry I came across heavy-handed and arrogant. It doesn't feel good to know you've offended someone you've never met.
MadMax
10-18-2006, 03:42 PM
Actually, DCarr hasn't made any excuses for himself. Every time I hear the guy, he's taking blame for losses and saying he needs to make plays. Since DCarr is not involved in the discussion, it's entirely plausible for someone to infer that you said he was making excuses for DCarr--when they're not excuses.
No, they don't. At least not in my book.
Well, first of all others have refuted them far more and better than I have. And I could say, "the fact that you don't see it tells me all I need to know." I mean, statistic after statistic has been placed in this discussion, and tons of sound logic, and you never address any of it. All you say is, "the leader takes the blame. I'm tired of the excuses."
I'm not. It's a discussion. About five other people have refuted your opinion.
And after 4.5 years, I think he looks good and we can address other more (much more) serious deficiencies. You disagree. Fine.
You know, for whatever point in this discussion my takes on this took on a tone that sounded personal, I am deeply sorry. We're discussing a blooming game. You and I agree on a lot of stuff. I'm sorry I came across heavy-handed and arrogant. It doesn't feel good to know you've offended someone you've never met.
first of all...all good...apology accepted, and i'll say the same right back to you.
i don't see refutation in david carr's stats. do you mean from the 4 games he's played this season that didn't suck? i know you don't mean last year. i know you don't mean the second half of 2004.
i "get" the argument that he has had an awful team around him. that sucks for everyone. but me...personally..just me...i haven't seen enough from david carr to suggest i'd want him on my team as my starting QB. i'll fully admit, my opinion isn't worth much...no one pays me for my opinions on football.
i "get" the argument that he has had an awful team around him. that sucks for everyone. but me...personally..just me...i haven't seen enough from david carr to suggest i'd want him on my team as my starting QB.
Do you aknowledge that Carr's ability to show you something/lack of development could have been affected by the quality of the team around him thus far?
The team that until this year, has failed to give him adequate/consistent protection that does help somewhat in the development of adequate NFL QB skills.
MadMax
10-18-2006, 04:46 PM
Do you aknowledge that Carr's ability to show you something/lack of development could have been affected by the quality of the team around him thus far?
The team that until this year, has failed to give him adequate/consistent protection that does help somewhat in the development of adequate NFL QB skills.
yes..i absolutely acknowledge it....to a point. what changed in 2004, for example, from the 1st half to the 2nd half.
i knew david klingler, personally. i made these very same arguments for him. in the end, they didn't matter.
yes..i absolutely acknowledge it....to a point. what changed in 2004, for example, from the 1st half to the 2nd half.
I don't know what you were watching that year... but for me, the second half of 2004 included harder opponents, combined with the previous regime's coaching staff's inability to make adjustments to an offense that was seriously restricted by the lack of anything that could be confused for an offensive line (hence the quick outs, the dink and dumps to domanick... the lack of any downfield game whatsoever that was actually Carr's strength in college... teams figured out that offense pretty quickly).
Then, they had the audacity to say "the offensive line was not the problem... we were 7-9!!" after the season. Then, it all came apart in 2005. Looking at the team now, Chester Pitts (back then playing out of position at LT) is the only guy still remaining just 2 years later... from an offensive line that apparently was not the problem (McKinney is done... even if he's still on the roster). Offensive lines stay together for YEARS in this league... our non-problem line was disbanded in favor of free agents and 3rd round draft picks this year.
All those things were the first to come into my mind... before I considered whether or not Carr just mysteriously "lost it" after he was on track to make his first pro-bowl. Anything's possible... but certainly some things in this discussion are more probable as to what really happened in the second half of 2004.
(btw... Klingler never came into a condition as bad as Carr's... and in the end his numbers were WORSE than david's. Not a good comparison).
sorry; been at a conference all week, so it's a two-fer:
I realize your main goal here is the one-liner…
actually, that’s merely to deflect my growing apathy with fans overly anxious to anoint this guy or that one the next great whatever before they’ve actually done anything of substance to deserve such praise. leinart played well – not great. he was handed six turnovers and three drives starting inside the opponent’s 35-yard line. had YOU, clutch, merely fallen down 9 times and gained zero yardage, the team still would have been in position to kick 3 fgs. so, yes, i feel quite secure saying the vast majority of nfl qbs (including david carr) could have matched leinart’s td and 2 fgs, considering none of those three scoring drives gained more than 25 yards.
No matter how you slice it -- his RB ran for 4 yards a carry on one drive, he got good field position -- he still has to break the red-zone defense of the Chicago Bears.
leinart’s lone touchdown was 26 yards; not a red zone score. and it was a short pass that boldin (THE best wr in football) then took to the end zone on a nearly spectacular run. otherwise, he was 1/2 for 3 yards in the red zone on those three drives.
as for “elevating” teammates, etc – it doesn’t exist. if leinart was able to “elevate” the performance of those around him, neil rackers would have hit the game-winning field goal. it’s a silly, stupid, worthless measurement that no one can actually measure that has nonetheless taken on a mythic quality. what makes someone a “leader”? when it comes to nfl qbs, usually a wealth of great surrounding talent. name a great “leader” throughout nfl history, and i’ll likely name 3-4 hall of fame-level teammates and or coaches. about the only guy who defies this is elway and even he couldn’t win the big one until terrell davis showed up.
with regards to flip-flopping on carr and my apparent need to be alpha male, or whatever: proclaiming carr the least of our worries is a long way from proclaiming him a great qb. he’s shown marked improvement this year; enough to convince me that had chicago handed him three turnovers inside their own 35, he would have been able to generate leinart-like results.
1. because i don't see us developing a QB who's already been in the league 4 years.
well, it’s a good thing you weren't the oilers' gm in 1988.
in his first four years, warren moon threw 61 tds and 77 ints; had an average qb rating of 70.4 (which would have ranked 32nd last year) and led his team to 20 victories, two more wins than carr, who hasn't had the luxury of playing with rozier, white, highsmith, jeffires, munchak, matthews, steinkuler - all former first round picks on the oilers' roster in 1988.
in fact, carr is currently playing with 5 former first round picks... 4 of which are on defense.
2. it's moderately insulting to suggest that because of i have an opinion that differs from you, i'm a sheep.
so there’s no possibility vy is skewering your view of carr? none whatsoever? carr’s not being unfavorably judge by your deification of vy?
3. …frankly, i'm sure you, me and trained chimps could do a better job putting together a roster than the previous administration of this franchise did...
actually, the chimp wouldn’t need us.
4. …i've grown tired of the david carr years. i know you can offer up a 100000000000 excuses for david as to why that's not all his fault. but it's more than just a little bit his fault. i made my share of excuses for dave, as well. for a very long time. i'm tired of it.
i COMPLETELY understand where you’re coming from; i gave up on him last year. i no longer cared why he wasn’t performing; just that he wasn’t. i felt it was time to move on.
but i’m singing a different tune this year because a) i truly believe the organization abandoned him; b) thus far, i’ve seen enough improvement to be encouraged that if, god forbid, they surround him with talent, he can be aikman-good. i believe in kubiak.
you may ultimately be right; but for this season, if i don;t have carr's rehabilitation to root for, then i can't think of any other reason to even watch these games.
Groogrux
10-20-2006, 06:47 AM
in his first four years, warren moon threw 61 tds and 77 ints; had an average qb rating of 70.4 (which would have ranked 32nd last year) and led his team to 20 victories, two more wins than carr, who hasn't had the luxury of playing with rozier, white, highsmith, jeffires, munchak, matthews, steinkuler - all former first round picks on the oilers' roster in 1988.
in fact, carr is currently playing with 5 former first round picks... 4 of which are on defense.
Wow. That's a crazy comparison.
I'm still wondering why no one's bitching at AJ for dropping at least three first down passes that hit his hands.
pgabriel
10-20-2006, 06:52 AM
Wow. That's a crazy comparison.
I'm still wondering why no one's bitching at AJ for dropping at least three first down passes that hit his hands.
because carr is the quarterback and that's just the way it is, is it fair no.
MadMax
10-20-2006, 07:14 AM
ric --
i don't think i have the strength to continue this discussion! :D
great point about moon. no, i had not considered that. if david carr turns into a hall of famer i owe you a steak dinner...i'm guessing you wouldn't make that bet the other way around.
at some point there will be change for the sake of change. you can call that a good decision or a bad decision. but it will happen. maybe at the end of this season...we'll see.
Groogrux
10-20-2006, 07:17 AM
if david carr turns into a hall of famer i owe you a steak dinner...i'm guessing you wouldn't make that bet the other way around.
I don't think anyone's arguing that David Carr will be a Hall of Famer. The whole point to all of this is that he's about the last thing we need to be worrying about on this current team.
MadMax
10-20-2006, 07:21 AM
I don't think anyone's arguing that David Carr will be a Hall of Famer. The whole point to all of this is that he's about the last thing we need to be worrying about on this current team.
I don't disagree that there are bigger problems on this team.
at some point there will be change for the sake of change.
I agree. I'm hoping, however that that point has already come and gone--the change being Kubiak.
MadMax
10-20-2006, 07:23 AM
I agree. I'm hoping, however that that point has already come and gone--the change being Kubiak.
then they need to start winning.
then they need to start winning.
their offense could have been one of the most effiecient in the league... and their defense still would have lost games for them so far this year.
they've started all over again... year 1a all over again. I know some fans don't like to hear that for a franchise that's technically existed for 4 years before this, but when you see what's left of that "depth" we built up with all those "extra" picks that we kept around (10 of 19 are failed/gone)... but its the truth.
Groogrux
10-20-2006, 07:40 AM
then they need to start winning.
Of course they do, but the new regime is having to pick up the pieces from a completely terrible front office that made bad pick after bad pick.
Desert Scar
10-20-2006, 10:54 AM
so there’s no possibility vy is skewering your view of carr? none whatsoever? carr’s not being unfavorably judge by your deification of vy?
....
Hey, I am a big VY proponent, I think he is the best franchise QB prospect in some time, but that is neither here nor there for the current discussion. I also think Carr is a lot better and with more upside than people around here credit. I think Carr is well in the top half of the league QBs both current skill and in potential--a lot of QBs many consider better are just in much better situations (running game and defenses behind them that put them in low-risk passing situations), and the Texans should continue building around Carr at this point.
But I think I am on your ignore list so you may not know I am on your side here in defending Carr, and in the Texans rolling with David Carr for their future.
MadMax
10-20-2006, 11:52 AM
Of course they do, but the new regime is having to pick up the pieces from a completely terrible front office that made bad pick after bad pick.
none of us expected it to be THIS bad. they are a team playing with zero passion. they rank nearly dead last in offense and defense. i NEVER thought it would be this bad. before the season started my brother-in-law was joking with me about being a texans fan...my response was, "well, it's gotta get better right?" wrong.
none of us expected it to be THIS bad. they are a team playing with zero passion. they rank nearly dead last in offense and defense. i NEVER thought it would be this bad. before the season started my brother-in-law was joking with me about being a texans fan...my response was, "well, it's gotta get better right?" wrong.
New coach, new GM, new systems, new players... u had to account for some adjustment factor.
Once they didn't draft Reggie Bush, I definitely thought it could get worse before it got better. The drafting of Mario Williams signalled that they didn't care about immediate results... they were simply going to be laying the foundation that was never laid 4 years ago.
That being said, before Sunday the passing offense looked improved... and if it wasn't for the horrific running game, the offense as a whole would look to be at least making progress. As long as the offensive line can form a pocket... that's already more progress than they've had in any of the last 4 years.
Don't let 7-9 fool you again... that team was nowhere near that record, and likeley overachieved the first two years as well. Talent-wise, this has been a 2-14 team every year.
MadMax
10-20-2006, 12:06 PM
New coach, new GM, new systems, new players... u had to account for some adjustment factor.
Once they didn't draft Reggie Bush, I definitely thought it could get worse before it got better. The drafting of Mario Williams signalled that they didn't care about immediate results... they were simply going to be laying the foundation that was never laid 4 years ago.
That being said, before Sunday the passing offense looked improved... and if it wasn't for the horrific running game, the offense as a whole would look to be at least making progress. As long as the offensive line can form a pocket... that's already more progress than they've had in any of the last 4 years.
Don't let 7-9 fool you again... that team was nowhere near that record, and likeley overachieved the first two years as well. Talent-wise, this has been a 2-14 team every year.
ok..i was wrong. one person thought they would be worse.
the drafting of mario williams was sold a quick fix. the drafting of mario williams made us all believe they might finally get pressure on a the QB. and we were told that DE's don't take forever and a day to have an impact. we were told this was to show real improvement real quick. this isn't rocket science...get the freaking QB and tackle him.
progress?? they're at the bottom of the well in offense and defense. aside from the dolphins game, they haven't been within 2 TD's of an opponent.
carr has looked great in the 4th quarter of games where the texans are getting blown out. he's looked very good on scripted first drives that he's practiced all week. aside from that, it's all been very mediocre. if he could figure out a way to fumble less, that might be helpful, too. 8 fumbles in 5 games so far?? for his career, he averages better than a fumble a game. in the words of J.J. Walker: DYN-O-MITE!!!! but i'm sure that he bears none of the blame for that, as well.
7-9 is 7-9. at least its competitive. last year people said 2-14 really wasn't fair because they lost some close games. they still finished 2-14. now i'm hearing 7-9 really wasn't 7-9. man...i'm lost. you win a game or you lose a game.
this team utterly sucks. i'm pissed. i wouldn't hesitate to rework any of it. i wouldn't exclude anyone from the criticism. at some point there has to be improvement. at some point all the reasons/excuses/whatever you want to call them have to dry up and you have to win ball games. i know, i know...i'm unreasonable to expect them to be better than they were last year when they were absolutely freaking awful.
HillBoy
10-20-2006, 12:09 PM
Apologies for the long post. I've been patiently reading this and other threads here and would like to share my thoughts on the state of the Texans. As I look at their current state, I'm also looking back 20 to 30 years at the history of pro football in Houston in order to gain some perspective:
To me it all boils down to history - specifically the lessons of history. Now, Bob McNair did an incredible job of bring NFL football back to Houston especially considering the fact that the league really wanted to put a team in Los Angeles and not Houston. He put up over $700 million and got a first-class facility built. He basically did everything the right way with one exception: he forgot to consider the emotional impact from the history of pro football in Houston. By history I refer to the late lameted Houston Oilers - a team that more than once epitomized the definition of futility. The one thing that McNair failed to do was to study and learn from the Oilers' legacy of inept football. This was a franchise that suffered for years from an inept ownership and organization, bad personnel decisions, terrible coaching, horrible drafting and on and on. McNair had to understand that the potential fan pool for his Texans would be comprised of ex-Oiler fans - fans who, thanks to Bud Adams, had been left with a foul & bitter taste in their collective mouths. The last thing - THE VERY LAST THING he needed here was to make his fans relive the bad Houston Oiler football experience. Yet 5 years later, that is exactly what he's ended up giving doing. So you see, I really can't blame folks here for being fed up and angry because one can sustain geniune passion for a team only so long and for many here, time has run out on the Texans getting their act together.
McNair's two most critical hiring decisions were head coach & general manager. This is where he should have heeded the lessons of history. The prime reason that Oilers stumbled and bumbled for so long because their organization was horrendous. This team was horribly mismanaged at the top and over time, it was that mismanagement that ultimately doomed them. Above all else, McNair should have been cognizant of what had befallen the previous pro football franchise and taken concrete steps to avoid repeating their fate. What he should have done is look into the ranks of a successful football organization with a history and track record of solid football decisions for his GM. Instead, he chose Casserly as the GM to build this franchise from scratch - a guy with a checkered record who made numerous draft & personnel mistakes at Washington and, if memory serves, was out of football at the time. Well, we can all see how that did not work out as more and more of Casserly's picks are jettisoned from the Texans' roster with each passing day. All the advantages that were given the Texans - expansion draft, extra draft picks - have been squandered away and all because McNair made a poor choice in Casserly.
Next, his choice of Dom Capers also proved to be a poor one as well. While Dom had experience in successfully coaching a team from scratch (Carolina) he'd also been exposed as being unable to sustain that success which is why he was available on the recycled coaches heap. Again, given the legacy of bad coaches in Houston, McNair should have looked to the staffs of successful NFL organizations for his head coach. Instead, he made the safe choice and the easy choice in going with the good old boy network choice in Dom. Once things started to go wrong for the Texans, Dom was (once again) exposed as being unable to address the team's problems and find (and implement) the proper solutions to turn things around here. This is exactly what happened to him at Carolina so it should come as no surprise to anyone that it also happened to him here which is why he's no longer amongst us.
So now, after 5 years, the Texans find themselves back to the proverbial square one and it's going to one long slow march back to football respectability. In the NFL there is very little margin for error and teams can literally wander around for years before regaining the right path. All it takes is one or two years of bad management to set a franchise back for years and the Texans have gone through 4 straight years of bad management (both on and off the field). What Kubiak & Smith are left with is the fragments of a legitimate pro football franchise. That can't be changed over night and there are no freebies to be had and no easy buttons for them to push. No, this will have to be done the old-fashioned way: through the draft, trades and with good personnel moves. The cynics out there will point out that this has always been the case in the NFL and that other teams do it all the time and with great success. That's true but the previous regime conclusively showed us that it was incapable of carrying out that simple mantra. The Casserly & Capers roadshow has moved on and now it's up to the new guys to rebuild from the ashes they left behind. What's changed now is that the Texans finally have in place a management and coaching team with the determination, ability and most important of all A PLAN to properly build this franchise from scratch. All they need is time. In the interim, I would suggest that folks not invest too much passion in the Texans because for the next couple of years they are going to be really bad and expending passion on a bad team would only lead to more heartbreak and despair.
MadMax
10-20-2006, 12:11 PM
So you see, I really can't blame folks here for being fed up and angry because one can sustain geniune passion for a team only so long and for many here, time has run out on the Texans getting their act together.
.
i have tons of patience for the astros and rockets. i was born into rooting for those teams. different with the texans. i'm honestly surprised i work up as much passion for them as i do.
i have tons of patience for the astros and rockets. i was born into rooting for those teams. different with the texans. i'm honestly surprised i work up as much passion for them as i do.
Its because its in Houston... and its the NFL. We all know that nobody was born rooting in for the Texnas. Does that mean they will never generate a passionate fan base? No.
They need to start winning... but given that they pissed the last 4 years away, it will take time. Blame everybody u want... its still going to take time.
I'm going to follow them because I'd still rather have this football than no football at all. Also, a team's high is much more enjoyable if you've also experienced a team's low... I know u stuck by them all these years, but if you want to give up on them now (when they're at their lowest), I don't need to say much else (probably because I know you're more frustrated than anything else, and you're still going to support them in the end).
HillBoy
10-20-2006, 12:38 PM
Its because its in Houston... and its the NFL. We all know that nobody was born rooting in for the Texnas. Does that mean they will never generate a passionate fan base? No.
They need to start winning... but given that they pissed the last 4 years away, it will take time. Blame everybody u want... its still going to take time.
Exactly! Given the history of pro football in Houston, the only way the Texans will be able to generate the type of passionate, generational fanbase you see in other places (like Kansas City, Pittsburgh, Dallas, Denver and even Oakland) is going to be by what they manage to accomplish on the field. I still feel that they now have what it takes to get it done but it will may well take 2, 3 or 4 years before that becomes a reality.
the drafting of mario williams was sold a quick fix.
no, no - in fact, there's a quote somewhere from mcnair in which he point blank said, "if we wanted immediate results, we would have drafted bush." that's a paraphrase - i'm sure someone here can find it. williams was always viewed as a bit raw with a longer shelf-life and thus a longer-term, as opposed to shorter-term, solution.
he's looked very good on scripted first drives that he's practiced all week. aside from that, it's all been very mediocre.
that's actually a great point - here's a great question; why isn't more of the game scripted?
why can;t kubiak develop scenarios and run carr thru those drills?
7-9 is 7-9. at least its competitive.
they played 4 playoff teams in 5 weeks starting in week 8 and lost by a combined score of, iirc, 125-47; they were far from being competive. unfortunately, no one (within the organization) paid attention in 2004; the brown game was the wake-up call, but they convinced themselves it was an aberration. or casserly sold it to mcnair that way to save his ass. even justice cites it this morning.
regardless, when you lose to playoff teams by an average score of 31-12, you have a looooooong way to go and wins against the chad hutchinson-led bears or equally inept titans, or close games at home against the colts, who, 4 weeks earlier, had throttled you 49-14, do not (or should not) erase the distance left to travel. the texans wanted too much to believe it did.
this team utterly sucks. i'm pissed. i wouldn't hesitate to rework any of it. i wouldn't exclude anyone from the criticism. at some point there has to be improvement. at some point all the reasons/excuses/whatever you want to call them have to dry up and you have to win ball games. i know, i know...i'm unreasonable to expect them to be better than they were last year when they were absolutely freaking awful.
agree 100%.
Wow. That's a crazy comparison.
crazy how?
I'm still wondering why no one's bitching at AJ for dropping at least three first down passes that hit his hands.
his and dunta's regression has me FAR more worried than carr, though AJ's been better this year. still, for all this talk about playmakers, why does johnson not make more things happen? there are a LOT of wrs with far worse partners than eric moulds who consistently make things happen.
that's a component of carr, too, btw.
MadMax
10-20-2006, 12:51 PM
Its because its in Houston... and its the NFL. We all know that nobody was born rooting in for the Texnas. Does that mean they will never generate a passionate fan base? No.
They need to start winning... but given that they pissed the last 4 years away, it will take time. Blame everybody u want... its still going to take time.
I'm going to follow them because I'd still rather have this football than no football at all. Also, a team's high is much more enjoyable if you've also experienced a team's low... I know u stuck by them all these years, but if you want to give up on them now (when they're at their lowest), I don't need to say much else (probably because I know you're more frustrated than anything else, and you're still going to support them in the end).
i think it's a good sign that i feel anything for this franchise.
Major
10-20-2006, 12:58 PM
Don't let 7-9 fool you again... that team was nowhere near that record, and likeley overachieved the first two years as well. Talent-wise, this has been a 2-14 team every year.
This would imply that Dom Capers was a great coach, no?
i think it's a good sign that i feel anything for this franchise.
It just shows you that you're a good Houston sports fan... the type of sports fan that's a dime-a-dozen in Boston, Chicago, and even in the overhyped NY... but in Houston its a rare commodity.
If more people were like you, they wouldn't need a "Rockets Rowdies" section to promote cheering. They wouldn't need to "guarantee" sellouts for the first 5 years to get the NFL franchise.
MadMax
10-20-2006, 01:01 PM
It just shows you that you're a good Houston sports fan... the type of sports fan that's a dime-a-dozen in Boston, Chicago, and even in the overhyped NY... but in Houston its a rare commodity.
If more people were like you, they wouldn't need a "Rockets Rowdies" section to promote cheering. They wouldn't need to "guarantee" sellouts for the first 5 years to get the NFL franchise.
truthfully, i'm not buying tickets to the Texans, so don't pat me on the back too hard. i'd rather spend my money elsewhere, or save it up for baseball season! :)
This would imply that Dom Capers was a great coach, no?
Hey... I never had a problem with how he coached the defense. Talent acquisition, offensive strategy, and in-game adjustments were never his strong suit... but developing a defensive game-plan for the team they were playing on Sunday is what he was/and still is/ good at.
That Pittsburgh game they won during the expansion year was textbook of how to overachieve... no business winning that game.
In the long run, I'd rather have a team that wins when its supposed to... and not simply overachieves (which doesn't last forever).
I also think Dom was made the scapegoat... and that was in-part engineered by Casserly (who should have been the first to go). Once McNair felt the need to bring in Reeves to take a look at all of this, he knew that Casserly couldn't be trusted.
Groogrux
10-20-2006, 01:53 PM
crazy how?
http://i94.photobucket.com/albums/l94/giff420/brian_fellows_crazy.jpg
timwalters
10-20-2006, 04:17 PM
theres only 1 way to solve this matter and thats for carr to get hurt, and see what sage can do...Yes,Im going out on a limb and saying sage is better than carr. The only way I can prove it is for carr to be replaced by sage and see if Andre keeps dropping those passes(after all it could be the way carr throws) and lets see if the texans can score td's instead of fg's and lets see if theres more flow to the offense. Im not saying sage is starter material, Im saying carr is ni the same class with Trent Dilfer,Joey Harrington,Tim Couch,Bucky Richardson.
Im saying carr is ni the same class with Trent Dilfer,Joey Harrington,Tim Couch,Bucky Richardson.
His numbers, on teams that were worse than the ones you mentioned, prove otherwise... I can say the sky is really purple, but it doesn't mean its true.
Also, Dilfer is a Super Bowl winner, and has had a pretty long NFL career.... did you mean Heath Shuler?
gucci888
10-20-2006, 06:54 PM
Even if you think Carr should be traded...who would trade for him? What would be good value for him? Who would replace him?
I agree that the Texans need to start looking at replacing Carr, as of right now, the only constant we've had in the Texans franchise is Bob McNair and David Carr, and I don't think McNair will be going anywhere anytime soon.
I think Carr is just shellshocked from all the sacks the past 4 seasons. When you've been hit that much, it's natural to always look over your shoulder and to get rid of the ball quicker, even if you don't have to.
Not to beat a dead horse, but that's why I wanted VY. I thought the Texans needed a change at QB, but I also thought that Kubiak should at least get a shot at turning Carr around.
hatemavs4life
10-20-2006, 09:16 PM
theres only 1 way to solve this matter and thats for carr to get hurt, and see what sage can do...Yes,Im going out on a limb and saying sage is better than carr. The only way I can prove it is for carr to be replaced by sage and see if Andre keeps dropping those passes(after all it could be the way carr throws) and lets see if the texans can score td's instead of fg's and lets see if theres more flow to the offense. Im not saying sage is starter material, Im saying carr is ni the same class with Trent Dilfer,Joey Harrington,Tim Couch,Bucky Richardson.
The FLOW will happen when a running game evolves out of the ashes of what is so far albeit early of this season. I'll give you this, Carr is running out of chances to impress and prove he can be any kind of leader for this team. One more "meltdown a la Dallas" and I bet he gets benched for a long while.
TMac#1
10-20-2006, 10:05 PM
That Pittsburgh game they won during the expansion year was textbook of how to overachieve... no business winning that game.
Also. look at what they accomplished in yr. 2. They had an insane amount of players on IR, including Payne, Walker, Glenn, and Carr also was hurt with the shoulder twice. They played so well that yr. They went on the road and beat a 10-6 Miami Dolphin team, they beat the NFC Champion Panthers, they took SuperBowl champion New England to overtime and had them almost beat a couple of times, they had the lead on the Jets until the very end and almost scored at the end to win, the last 2 games of the yr, they had the 12-4 Titans beat until the very end, same with the Colts the next week. A few plays in a few games, and that team could have been 9-7 easily.
This team showed so much progression until the Browns game at the end of yr 3. After that it totally fell apart and hasn't improved since.
ima_drummer2k
10-22-2006, 02:04 PM
Another great game by Carr today against a pretty good J-ville defense.
25-34 for 73.5%, 224 yds, 2 TDs, 0 INTs, only 1 sack.
JeopardE
10-22-2006, 03:00 PM
Even if you think Carr should be traded...who would trade for him? What would be good value for him? Who would replace him?
I agree that the Texans need to start looking at replacing Carr, as of right now, the only constant we've had in the Texans franchise is Bob McNair and David Carr, and I don't think McNair will be going anywhere anytime soon.
I think Carr is just shellshocked from all the sacks the past 4 seasons. When you've been hit that much, it's natural to always look over your shoulder and to get rid of the ball quicker, even if you don't have to.
Not to beat a dead horse, but that's why I wanted VY. I thought the Texans needed a change at QB, but I also thought that Kubiak should at least get a shot at turning Carr around.
Shellshocked enough to have a 97.9 passer rating through six games against some of the toughest teams in the NFL. Trade Carr now!
DonnyMost
10-22-2006, 03:38 PM
I'm grinning so hard I'm about to crap my pants.
Matt Leinart came down to earth against the Raiders... my hopes for an 0-16 team are over.
rhester
10-23-2006, 05:44 AM
I admit I was wrong about David Carr. I have been critical of his leadership, playmaking, timing on passes, and reading of defenses.
1. He definately made plays at his position yesterday. The boot's were very effective. The decision making improved. Making plays as a QB is what sustains drives and scores touchdowns.
2. He showed poise and execution was crisp which is a sign of leadership. Raising his own play up a notch affected the whole offense, this is what a leader does.
3. Although he still locked in on receivers the execution of plays allowed him to make key completions.
4. He threw vertically to AJ which is a key to making big plays.
All in all Carr finally surpassed the 'statistical' success and performed at a level that results in leading the team to a win. He was definately the MVP of the game and he just kept completing big plays and executing the offense.
He responded well to the rush and he did not force passes and he did not botch plays with mindless fumbles. If he continues to improve and play at this level, making plays and executing his position he will lift the entire team. If he plays consistently at this level he will become a very good QB.
His play- good sound execution- opened up the running game in the 2 nd half.
This is also the first time in a very long time I have seen him step it up a notch after a so-so first half. He came out and played a very good 2 nd half.
Thank you so much Mr. Carr for making me eat my words. You looked like a playmaker out there yesterday.
Keep it up and we can win possibly 5 more games. I would be very surprised with 7-8 wins.
Uprising
10-23-2006, 01:02 PM
Stats don't lie....
Rank Player Team Yds Att Cmp TDs Ints Long Rating
1 Peyton Manning IND 1620 206 131 12 2 51 103.2
2 David Carr HOU 1217 172 121 9 4 53 97.9
3 Damon Huard KC 1163 163 104 7 1 78 96.7
4 Philip Rivers SD 1330 187 124 9 3 57 96.3
5 Chad Pennington NYJ 1450 190 125 9 6 71 91.3
6 Carson Palmer CIN 1418 196 122 9 4 51 90.9
7 Tom Brady NE 1226 189 106 10 3 35 86.9
8 Byron Leftwich JAC 1159 183 108 7 5 51 79.0
9 J.P. Losman BUF 1314 197 122 6 6 56 78.9
10 Culpepper MIA 929 134 81 2 3 52 77.0
11 Roethlisberger PIT 1045 143 87 5 7 50 74.5
12 Charlie Frye CLE 1188 201 124 6 10 75 67.3
13 Joey Harrington MIA 912 146 86 3 7 44 64.1
14 Steve McNair BAL 915 169 95 5 7 38 64.1
15 Jake Plummer DEN 984 169 88 4 7 83 60.4
16 Vince Young TEN 512 99 47 3 4 28 56.5
Yep let's trade Carr......
Stats don't lie....
No, but they can be used to lie. Stats give an incomplete picture. VERY incomplete. In this case, I concur with your premise that the stats bear out the DCarr is improved this year. But no way in hell is he better than Tom Brady. Stats must be tempered with observation (real stuff, not "he looks lost out there") for a really good picture to be painted.
During yesterday's game, several times I heard commentary about how well DC was reading the defense, good decisions he was making, etc. (Of course, that defensive *had* to be easier to read than most considering the injuries and all, but I'll take it!) That's the kind of stuff, coupled with the stats, that tell the objective thinker that DC turned in a decent performance yesterday.
Stats don't lie....
funny, the qb rating is often denounced for not being an accurate representation of what's REALLY happening on the football field (a theory many carr detractors are fond of), and yet, notice how, among these 16 qbs, the rating and the team's record are very often in sync:
01. manning (6-0)
02. carr (2-4)
03. huard (3-1 as starter)
04. rivers (4-2)
05. pennington (4-3)
06. palmer (4-2)
07. brady (5-1)
08. leftwich (3-3)
09. loseman (2-5)
10. culpepper (1-4 as starter)
11. roethlisberger (1-4 as starter)
12. frye (1-5)
13. harrington (0-2 as starter)
14. mcnair (4-2)
15. plummer (5-1)
16. young (1-1)
79.2 is considered "average;" everyone above that mark (#'s 1-7) are a combined 28-13; leftwich, at 79.0, is right on the “average” and his team is 3-3; everyone below "average," (#'s 9-16) are a combined 15-24.
carr (2), mcnair (14) and plummer (15) are the only discrepancies, but a quick check of the stats underscores the importance of a good-to-great supporting cast.
denver's 5th in rushing ypg, 4th in overall D and 1st in points allowed per game. baltimore is 2nd in overall D and 4th in points allowed per game. do either of these teams NEED their qb to be thriving?
by contrast, houston ranks 30th in rushing ypg, 31st in overall defense, and 28th in points allowed per game. denver and baltimore COMBINED have allowed fewer points per game than the houston D (21.1 to 25.7).
Uprising
10-23-2006, 03:28 PM
denver's 5th in rushing ypg, 4th in overall D and 1st in points allowed per game. baltimore is 2nd in overall D and 4th in points allowed per game. do either of these teams NEED their qb to be thriving?
by contrast, houston ranks 30th in rushing ypg, 31st in overall defense, and 28th in points allowed per game. denver and baltimore COMBINED have allowed fewer points per game than the houston D (21.1 to 25.7).
Exactly, that being said.....Carr's one of the only few bright spots on this team. The others off the top of my head, Ryans, AJ, and prehaps Williams.
Imagine where the Texans would be if he had a running game to support him, or a defense to back him up. We already have our QB who is excelling.
Now if he had a supporting cast that could put up some decent numbers.....
vBulletin® v3.0.17, Copyright ©2000-2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.