I think Moulds <i>may</i> want to go to Philly over Houston b/c: 1. He's been a #1 receiver throughout his career and he (like most good NFL receivers) has quite the ego. He'd easily be the go-to guy in Philly, while being a supplement here to a young receiver. 2. Philly is a lot closer to where he's been his entire career than Houston. I can't tell if he's interested in winning (even at this point in his career) b/c it's clear that Philly is <i>not</i> going to win much this year. We are one of the more attractive up-and-coming teams in the league, while the eagles have nothing to show for this offseason thus far. So the fact that he's wanting to go there over Houston is a bit suspect. He's not the classiest player, but there is talent there for sure.
Bills 22 Texans 7 (15) Steelers 27 Texans 7 (20) Bengals 16 Texans 10 (6) Titans 34 Texans 20 (14) Seahawks 42 Texans 10 (32) Colts 38 Texans 20 (18) Texans 19 Browns 16 Jaguars 21 Texans 14 (7) Colts 31 Texans 17 (14) Chiefs 45 Texans 17 (28) Rams 33 Texans 27 (6) Ravens 16 Texans 15 (1) Titans 13 Texans 10 (3) Houston 30 Cardinals 19 Jacksonville 38 Texans 20 (18) 49ers 20 Texans 17 (3) The average margin of defeat for the Texas was over 13 ppg. Nearly 2 TD's. They won one game by 3..another by 11. In 8 games we lost by 14 points or more. Our defense was ranked among the league worst in yards and points allowed. Our offense was ranked among the league worst in yards and points scored. We were 2-14.
In their loss to Baltimore, the Texans outgained the Ravens by 60 yards and the turnover battle was even. In most situations, that's a win. In their loss to St. Louis, I don't even need to say anything... in 99.9 percent of game situations, that's a win. The games against San Francisco, Tennessee, even Jacksonville... this team had chances and opportunities they should have taken advantage of to win more games. I'm not claiming you should be excited about that, but I think most reasonable NFL observers would not put this among the worst 2-14 teams in NFL history. For example, even though the Niners were 4-12, I think almost everyone would agree they have more work to do than we do. There are a lot of holes, but I think they've found adequate stopgaps. Like you said, none are overwhelming, but compared to what they had last year, it is overwhelming to an extent. It's legit talent. If Carr, Bush and Johnson play to their potential, this team can do some things, which is more than we could say for last year. Carr and Johnson could play their absolute best, and it still wouldn't have made much of a difference at all. I also don't think a secondary receiver is as much of a need as you think. First, there's the Moulds possibility. But, even if that doesn't come through, Bush is going to be split out wide a good bit. Putzier is a tremendous option over the middle. Walter has the size to develop into a solid #2 or #3. Davis is good catching out of the backfield. This team has a lot of versatility among its backs and tight ends - much moreso than the average NFL team - and it makes the role of a #2 receiver, whoever it may be, slightly less than it would be on a different team.
We're not exactly the Bengals or anything. Obviously we should be an up-and-coming team since we basically can't get any worse. But it is a stretch to call us "one of the more attractive up-and-coming teams" IMO. While the Eagle's offseason hasn't been stellar, their franchise is light-years ahead of us in terms of winning. To me, it's the exact opposite, if he signed here, it would be pretty clear that he isn't interested in winning because it is clear we won't win much this year either, most likely less then the Eagles. Signing here at his age leads me to a pretty clear conclusion-he wants $$ (which I have no problem with).
6 point loss to Cincinnati on the road. 1 point loss to Baltimore on the road. 3 point loss to Tennessee on the road. Overtime loss to St. Louis. 7 point loss to Jacksonville on the road. The Texans were in all of those games in the fourth quarter, and if they played those games again, I'd wager they would win at least 2 of those 5. The luck just went against them. I know a lot of you guys judge everything by wins and losses and tend to ignore the luck factor of the game, but it's a very real factor. Sometimes the better team doesn't win. See the 2005 season of the San Diego Chargers. The Texans were a bad team, but their talent makeup heading into the offseason was more of a 4-5 win team, not a 2-14 team. We just fortunately had a few breaks go against us and got the #1 pick, and for that I'm thrilled.
Anyone that doesn't think we're 2-14 by choice needs to watch the 2nd half games again. We were trying to lose. Of course I can't prove it, but feel strongly about it. The bottom line is that we ended the season 2-14 and you can't feel good about that. I can't see drafting a #2 receiver.
I just disagree. We lost because we're not as good. We lost because our defense was among the league's worst and our offense was among the league's worst. It's no surprise that teams like that finish with a record like 2-14. When they had to step up and make plays they didn't...there's a reason why they have that scoreboard there.
so you honestly believe that the players on the field...all of whom have contracts based on their performance and will sign future contracts based on performance...you believe they all TOOK ONE FOR THE TEAM and lost on purpose so a franchise they may or may not be with next year or the next could have a higher draft pick? you honestly believe that the coaches, all with their jobs and incomes on the line, decided it was better to lose than win down the stretch???
The personnel for a 4-5 win team - that people were billing as an 8-9 win team last offseason. You can cite the statistics from losses all you want - I mean I'm sure the steelers, sehawks, colts et al had 1-2 games out of 16 where they barely won or got statistically outgained by their opponents. But the facts are pretty simple - look at almost every position on the field, with the exception of maybe kick returner, and the Texans' personnel is mediocre or among the very worst in the league. Both lines were/are crap - adding in a stop gap or two might help but major league help is required (a franchise player on each line would help, i.e. a D. Ferguson or Mario Williams). LB's are/were nothing special. DB's had one decent player who had a disinterested season and a bust (buchanan) plus some adequate yet not outstanding safeties. WR's outside of Johnson were/are scrap heap players. RB - Davis was adequate at best, maybe Bush will make them above average if he works out. Even if the new coaches are better, which by all accounts they are - they've got a huge job to do with this sad sack crew. How many years of Wand/Weary/Pitts/Mckinney/Weigert & co. giving up sack after sack will it take to invest in a major line upgrade? We're at 4 years and counting. Sure, that Flanigan guy might be a good addition - but let's face it, having a decent center doesn't help much when you have turnstile tackles. I hope the Denver blocking scheme includes a healthy dose of magic. Personnel wise, they're applying band-aids. They need reconstructive surgery.
Somewhat agreed. But where do you pull the "surgeries" out of? I mean, yeah, we can draft up top..maybe you're suggesting trading down and getting 2 or 3 solid players. Still won't be 2 or 3 franchise guys. They're going for FA's, but the young stud guys won't want to come out here unless we pull an ATL-with-joe-johnson and severely overpay someone to make them come somewhere less attractive. I mean, we're signing at least some young guys who are among the better guys available at their position (Weaver, Putzier) and targeting some others. Flannigan isn't young, but he's very good.
I would def. trade down, AND try to augment with a veteran or two, and I would focus on each line primarily, but mostly OL since the DL they've spent money on it just hasn't worked out.
Absolutely. I think the coaches saw the writing on the wall and with the limited amount of talent on the team, it wouldn't take much. I'm not saying that all players were involved. I definately think that the QB's were part of it. I know it seems like a conspiracy theory, but some of those losses were beyond questionable.
The coaches lost games, got themselves fired, and forfeited milions of dollars and uprooted their family - to improve the draft position of a team they were going to get fired from? No.
I'm not trying to change anyone else's opinion. If you think that they did everything in their power to not lose, that's fine. Perhaps it seems too impossible to fathom, but that missed field goal in Tenn was very unlike Kris Brown. The throw that Banks made at the end of the SF game was a gimme and their tackling after the catch was beyond pathetic.
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/wire?section=nfl&id=2386347 BUFFALO, N.Y. -- The Houston Texans have emerged as the team most interested in trading for disgruntled Bills receiver Eric Moulds, who has vowed he won't return to Buffalo. "I've had a great conversation with Charley Casserly, and it's intriguing," Moulds' personal adviser Greg Johnson said Monday, referring to the Texans' general manager. "I'm not saying he's definitely going to Houston, but I'm saying that Houston is definitely a player." Moulds, who has two years left on his contract, has the Bills' permission to seek a trade after he twice rejected the team's request to take a pay cut. A 10-year veteran, Moulds ranks second on the team in several career receiving categories. He's scheduled to make $7.1 million next season. With bonuses, he would count about $10.85 million against the salary cap, a figure Buffalo deems too expensive. Johnson said he's already discussed reworking his client's contract with Casserly should a trade be made. Texans spokesman Tony Wyllie declined comment. Releasing or trading Moulds would save the Bills at least $5.5 million in cap space. Buffalo would likely settle for a fourth-round pick or higher in a deal for Moulds. Johnson said he's also had conversations with Philadelphia Eagles president Joe Banner and New England Patriots personnel director Scott Pioli. However, the Patriots, who have lost three receivers to free agency this month, are considered an unlikely trade candidate because they play in the same division as Buffalo. Johnson added others who've expressed interest include Kansas City, San Francisco, Denver and Seattle. Johnson said Moulds would be interested in playing for Houston, even though the Texans are coming off an NFL-worst 2-14 finish and haven't had a winning record in their five seasons. Houston is close to Moulds' native Mississippi, which would allow his family to see him play more often. Moulds would complement a Texans offense that already has a solid receiver in Andre Johnson and has the opportunity to draft USC running back and Heisman Trophy winner Reggie Bush with the No. 1 pick in next month's draft.
If you are a player or coach in the NFL you try to win every game, you're either trying to keep your current job or interviewing for the next. I think Brown hurt his leg a little earlier when he ran on a fake field goal. I don't think anything was ever said about it but when he got up from the tackle you could see he wasn't walking normal.
i'm not asking you to change my opinion. help me understand what the motive would be for a coach to do that, though?
I don't believe that they intentionally threw games, despite appearances, but I do believe that close games tell you all you need to know about coaching staffs. Evan
Maybe the coach wasn't a part of it, but a few key players might make costly mistakes at a crucial time. I seem to recall "Reggie Bush" chants during the last few home games. It's not even worth much debate, because no one ever know what happened. Brown could have injured his foot. Carr really could have been hobbled in the last game. Banks could have thought he was making a good pass. Who knows?