I'm going with the promise of Mallet off of the one good game vs Cleveland. The tempo he ran the offense with was very Brady-esque and I loved it. Please, just keep him away from the weights DURING the season...
More than half the teams in the league have a guy who is primarily expected to help them win games rather than not screw things up. Manning, Manning, Luck, Brady, Wilson, Ryan, Flacco, Big Ben, Brady, Stafford, Romo, Tannehill, Rodgers, Brees, Rivers, Newton That's half the league. Then there's the guys like Kaepernick, Cutler, RG3, etc who are supposed to help their teams win but often don't. And then a bunch of young guys who are expected to become positive QBs in the future. Only a small fraction of teams really have a "don't mess this up" kind of QB, though you're right that's what the Texans are likely hoping for at this point. Mallett is enough of an unknown that he at least has the potential to fit into the "help do something positive" category, though.
Well that list isn't really the QB's capable of consistently helping their teams win games, one could argue that the Texans expect Mallett to help their team win some games on some level.
BTG is the only true Texans fan in this forum. The rest of us sleep in Andrew Luck or Andre Johnson jerseys.
What fans and fantasy football people want to know after Texans OTAs Excerpt (Please go to original sources if you want to read entire articles because that is the best way to ensure that you can still get outsiders covering practices. Thanks!) : http://blog.chron.com/ultimatetexans/2015/06/fans-and-fantasy-football-texans-otas/#33493101=0 Quarterback: 1. I know that there are a lot of people who think it is the end of the world if Brian Hoyer gets picked as the Texans starter this year over Ryan Mallett for a variety of reasons. I’m assuming most of those people do not attend practice. 2. Some years it is obvious who the starter should be in a competition as early as OTAs. I don’t think it is that sort of year for the Texans. Last year early, the Texans had four quarterbacks who didn’t know the system. One was chosen early in the offseason as the starter by the Texans for his smarts, experience and availability, one was drafted for development, and then the two other guys weren’t really good fits for trying to run the offense. None of the Texans quarterbacks looked good in the offseason last year. In 2015, there are two quarterbacks who know the system, and the developmental drafted guy. The two quarterbacks who know the system, for better or worse, do not look substantially different in running the offense during OTAs. They have good and bad sessions, neither look particularly accurate or distinguished themselves significantly during observed OTAs. 3. There are some people in the media that feel strongly that Hoyer or Mallett look better in the limited sessions that media members see. That they see a difference in accuracy between the players. I do not see that specifically, and I’m not there yet. 4. In general, this year’s quarterbacks in OTAs look better than last year’s, so we have that going for us, which is nice. I am trying to say something positive about Texans quarterbacks in item number 4. I’m being a bit snide, but this is actually a pretty important thing that I think is ignored by some analysts. If the Texans can run their actual offense the way it is supposed to be run, it won’t be miserable watching it and they will have a greater likelihood of beating more dynamic opponents. 5. Just based on observations from dealings with the media, Hoyer gives more thoughtful, less robotic answers than Ryan Mallett, but this is football and not a debating society. Neither really reveal anything of substance. I’m mentioning this if it ends up being that O’Brien has more trust in the brain space of Hoyer. Mallett seems to be aware of this view of him, and is quick to mention that his football awareness is one of his strengths. (Will be curious to see how much of their personalities we can see during HBO’s Hard Knocks, if behind the scenes they are allowed to be less robot like). 6. I’m not sure that “the answer” is on the roster at quarterback. Would be handy if he were because the offense is so complex and puts a lot on the quarterback. Can they develop that guy from scratch? I don’t know.
Half the league can't win lots of games since all these teams play each other, so that's true that all those players won't consistently help their teams win games every year - but it's about intent. Those teams put the ball in those players' hands with the primary expectation of them making plays to help win. On the flipside, you have teams like the Texans last year, where they attempted to minimize the QB's role and primarily focus him on not making mistakes. The most extreme example of this was the disastrous David Carr performance in his final year vs Oakland, where they handed the ball off on every single snap simply to prevent him from doing anything bad. That's not to say there's anything wrong with the strategy - you try to win with the personnel you have. But the goal of most NFL teams is have a QB that you try to use to your advantage rather than to minimize your disadvantage. The Texans last year were forced to the latter strategy. It remains to be seen what will happen this year. Hoyer likely fits into the latter category, but we simply have no idea about Mallett.
Other great examples of that are teams like the 49ers and Seahawks who limited their QB's to the fewest pass attempts in the NFL over the last 3 years.....it's worked out pretty well for them though. If the Texans manage to win a lot of games, or even a SB while limiting Mallett's passes, you'd have fans calling him an elite QB before long. It's just how the NFL works. Hell, you'd probably add him to the list of QB's that were "primarily expected to help them win games" When it comes down to Hoyer vs Mallett, we have one QB who has consistently shown that he's just terrible at football and one QB that we haven't seen a lot from. If the Texans go with the QB that has consistently shown that he's terrible at football, it'll be a bummer to Texans fans......and make people like Mr. Clutch, who want to see the Texans fail, very happy.
Anyone who wanted Fitz to be our QB is not a true Texans fan. We have better options this year at least.
Fitz was a better option than Hoyer, I'm sure you know that and no one was happy about Fitz being signed, me included. That doesn't change the fact that he was better than any of us thought he would be last year and he ended up having a decent season. Of course, that said, I do agree that Mallett is potentially a better option this year than Fitz was last year, so that's a positive. Of course, you've admitted to wanting Hoyer as the QB.....but we all understand why.
Fitz was a beast, bro. What are you talking about? If Fitz never got injured on that final Colts game, the Texans would of won, make the playoffs and make it all the way to the Superbowl.
I'm no cybrex but from what I hear Brian Hoyer has already established himself as a clubhouse leader.
I have absolutely no hope for the season is Hoyer is the starter. Mallet at least gives me something to root for.
Former Oiler DB and 12 year NFL secondary coach Steve Jackson weighed in on the subject over the weekend. In the link below he starts talking specifically about Hoyer versus Mallett at about the 13:30 mark... http://houston.cbslocal.com/2015/06/...hip-somewhere/ In Summary: - Hoyer has experience and intangibles - Hoyer has the ability to improvise - Mallett has raw ability - Add Mallett's raw potential with Hoyer's experience and intangibles = great QB - Hoyer is a known commodity; you know the quality and quantity you're getting - Because of Mallett's raw ability people will make excuses and outs for him - Doesn't think Mallett will ever put a good product on the field - Thinks Hoyer could lead the Texans to the playoffs and should be the starter Q (Nate): Is Hoyer your starting QB? A (Steve Jackson): Sure, sure, absolutely. Because I wouldn't want to learn, with my job on the line what a guy can do. I want to go with a proven commodity.
Of course, both of those teams gave those guys the ball on 100+ running plays too. And Seattle put the balls in the hands of their QB on the final play of the Superbowl - they expect Wilson to make plays and live with the results. Any of the QBs I listed would have potentially had an opportunity like that in a similar situation. If you put Fitz in there, there is zero chance the team is throwing the ball. That's the difference between the two groups.
