Well, we did have the option of sticking with Fitz, but we chose Hoyer instead. But, it is a weird comparison.
It is very unlikely. Hoyer has a stronger arm that Fitz, but he doesn't have a gun and he really lacks touch.
This sounds like a sour feedback. Look I respect how you like to see Sports as a means for you to look for family funs and a way to keep a better relationship with your kids, but you can not justify your personal feeling for the simple standard of a sport franchise, which is winning. Sports is all about competition, and the main goal is to win. People got excited to see their teams winning, of course there will be only one team can be the champ each year, but to keep the fans exciting, even their team will not be the favorite, there should be at least some kind of hopes for the underdogs, in worse case, if not now, at least will be the future. I am glad that you like the dollar hot dog night or 50 cents beer night so that you can enjoy the ball game, but meanwhile, there is reasons for people would rather like to watch the grass to grow in their lawn rather than watching those Astros games in that era, there is nothing wrong about it. Imagine if there is a gay Astros fan likes to go to the games because whenever he will see Springer batting, he will get high so that he can go to the restroom to jerk off, well with all due respect, good for him. But it doesn't mean everyone will need to lineup and go to the restroom after a Springer at bat.
It would still be in Fitz's favor, I think we just have to deal with the fact that at least to start the season, we'll very likely have worse QB play than we had last year....with no Foster.....and possibly no Duane Brown. The WR corps is better and the defense should be better too, so there's hope that we can have a WR turn a dink and dunk pass into a TD like happened in the first preseason game or we can have Randy Bullock and our defense outscore the other teams.
As has been pointed out, not by very much (and neither were good). In fact, they're remarkably similar. Ryan Fitzpatrick was never better than with BOB and this coaching staff. It defies common sense to not at least hold out a small sliver of hope that Hoyer, who is younger and much less set in his ways - will see a similar spike.
Fitzaptrick y/a 6.6 David Carr y/a 6.4 Hoyer y/a 7.2 (7.6 last year, first as starter) If anything, we got rid of the dink and dunk guy.
Ah yes, the 30 year old Hoyer is "much less set in his ways" than the 32 year old Fitz was. I like the optimism though, I just wish I could fool myself into thinking it was more justified. Anyway, my statement still stands, even with a "spike" in his numbers Hoyer will still very likely be an inferior QB to the guy we started last season with (if only slightly inferior...if we buy that) and the Texans are likely to struggle without Foster even with the better WR corps unless Bullock and the defense can out-score opposing offenses.
It doesn't stand when you look at actual statistics. Fitzpatrick was basically a slightly better David Carr. Not exactly a huge leap to overcome.
Not sure how much it held over the course of the season, but at one point (about halfway into the season) Hoyer led the league in yards coming from deep passes (16+ yards in the air). He was also leading the league in completion % on deep passes. Again, I don't know how he ended the season, but at least for a decent stretch, he was statistically the best deep passer in the league. Now, we know that's not the reality, but it shows that he's not a dink and dunker and can be effective in the deep game.
They're actually 3 years apart - but who cares how old they are? How about Fitz's 1,969 more NFL passing attempts? Which of the two's bad habits would you guess would be easier to break? If it's the same spike, then he'll be roughly be the *same* QB we started last year. Obviously, the deck is not equal - losing Foster is a huge blow. But as well as Fitz played last year (relative to our expectations), he was not an appreciably good QB. He was much too quick to tuck (which too often killed any downfield threat); he was slow to move through his progressions (or, too impatient), he forced too many passes (he was as much lucky as good, in terms of cutting down his turnovers) and he was allergic to TEs. He certainly didn't set the bar terribly high; it won't take a drastic step forward for Hoyer to equal his performance. If he can settle in and be as good as he was the first nine games of last year, the team should be OK.
Hoyer? Fitz? Mallet? At this point, they are all mediocre. Pick your choice, the results are going to be similar.
Don't worry. BTG won't be standing by that statement for very long. Next year, he'll be butthurt that we are replacing incumbent starter Hoyer with unproven Savage. He'll even go as far to say that if Hoyer were released, he would be immediately be picked up by the Browns, who had recently signed journeyman QB Mallett to backup incumbent Manziel, but was thrust into action after Manziel gets his arm broken by a fellow teammate. Next year's drama should be good.
