Fair enough... not random, just uninspired. You go to the fridge and choose the thing that tastes average. I'd rather choose the thing that might taste horrible, but might be the best thing ever. In a world where QB value is so far and away more important than value of any other position, and the team is in the bottom third of the league in talent at that position, I prefer them to take more risk. Only time will tell with Teddy. Then we can revisit. This is not Teddy love... I could care less about him, except for the fact the Texans had shots to get him and passed, when their QB play is horrible, and the team was in a perfect position to grow with a player like him. Yes... says me... lol... we get it Ric, you're ok with mediocrity and think the guy who wants more is somehow misguided. got it. Yes, seriously. It's a good thing you're not interested in such a discussion since you're going in circles. You claimed the Packers got lucky. They didn't get lucky. They drafted Rodgers when no one else would take the risk. The Seahawks didn't get lucky. They drafted Wilson when no one else would. You call it cherry picking. I call it the team management doing their job effectively. But wait... why didn't I point out the busts the Texans also didn't draft??? Because the fact that top picks don't always turn out to be amazing QBs doesn't negate the other fact that it's not pure luck. Why wallow in negativity? Oh, I don't know... maybe to get ownership and management to act like they are competent?? The team still has it's original GM, who has proven to be a horrible drafter, average salary cap manager, and has generally fielded mediocre at best teams. Your ho hum attitude is why he's still there. La di da, I guess he's trying hard, let's be happy and positive!! The problem with Mallet and Hoyer is that it is a continuation of the same sort of thinking that resulted in Schaub. I'm interested in Superbowl - appearances, wins. I actually really like Bob Obrien, I really like the general direction he's taking the team, etc. I'm not amazed by going from 2-14 to 9-7. The team the year before was much better than a 2-14 team. But I still like Bob thus far. I am just increasingly pessimistic that the path to Superbowl is happening any time in the near-term. I've been called out for not providing a better solution. That's not my job as a fan. My job as a fan is to demand a level of competence that justifies my fandom, my consumption and spending on the product. My job as a fan is akin to my job as a patient. I don't know HOW the doctor should do better, but a mediocre doctor should be called out as mediocre.
Doctors don't need to win Super Bowls every year to keep patients like yourself. Likewise, there can be only one Super Bowl winner in the NFL... the only thing you can ask as a fan is that are they consistently trying to improve the team. You're also advocating they take tons of risks with the possibility of high rewards... not sure what sort of doctors you go to, but that would be the worst possible type as it invariably leads to complications (much like going for boom/bust players in the NFL).
And you go to the fridge expecting that a food fairy has delivered a filet mignon when most of us realize that food fairies don’t exist. First and foremost, respect that people are using aliases for a reason, “JayZ750,” cool? I don’t accept mediocre; I accept reality. The Texans have posted three winning seasons in four years, including two playoff wins. That’s decidedly not mediocre, and a record *a lot* of teams would love to have. Yes, they did; 23 teams passed on Aaron Rodgers. Green Bay had no control over that process; if any of those teams knew definitively how good Rodgers was going to be, he goes 23 picks earlier. That’s the very definition of luck, JayZ750. Yeah, sure – the Seahawks knew exactly what they were doing; the team that, a month earlier, had handed a huge contract to Matt Flynn because they OBVIOUSLY knew a great QB when they saw one, uh-huh…. With hindsight, which none of the teams have access to, unfortunately. Every team has busts, JayZ750 – you’re acting like the Texans are the only team that makes mistakes on draft day. Check the Patriots’ recent draft history; not terribly good. No they don’t. Funny enough, if my attitude had *any* bearing on the Texans’ choices whatsoever, Smith would have been fired in 2013. Man, let’s hope so… No wonder you’re perpetually disappointed; the standard is ridiculous. The only fair expectation should be winning consistently. The fact Peyton Manning has as many Super Bowl victories as Joe Flacco is proof that it’s a lot harder than fans like you seem to want to accept. Obviously… There should also be some expectation of fans, given the increase in available resources and content – including a lot of really patient, thoughtful posters in this forum, of being more informed. But too many are content to be every bit as mediocre as the team they follow. And when challenged to be a better fan, you choose to bury your head in the sand instead, and continue to perpetuate LCD fandom.
Yeah, the doctor analogy isn't perfect. Of course, a doctor does have to be consistently good, all the time. But the risk part is a bit different. To be clear, I'm advocating for more risk... not illogical risk. I am not advocating the Texans give up three first round picks to try and move up and get Winston or Mariotta. I am Tom Savage over Brian Hoyer. I'm not sure why they need 3 quarterbacks anyway at this point in their evolution... but whatever... Ok, no need for anymore back and forth. You don't believe in good drafting or personnel decisions. You believe that any move that turns to out well is luck, and any move that turns out badly is luck. Signed a free agent that really works out? Lucky you... nobody else paid him more! Drafted a great player?? Lucky you, that guy could have turned out to be a bust just as easily! There's no point arguing anymore if you are going to attribute it all to luck. Trust me, I am not embarrassed by your opinion of me as a fan, given the track record of your opinion on moves the team has made.
So your only play here is to literally make up things I've said?... We weren't discussing "any move;" we were specifically discussing two moves that you refuse to examine critically. The Packers didn't have the #1 overall pick and, therefore, had no control over Aaron Rodgers' destiny. Even if you want to give them every ounce of credit for recognizing his potential, they were still *lucky* no other team with access to him earlier did. The Colts getting the #1 pick the year Andrew Luck was available is lucky; the Texan getting the #1 pick with no Andrew Luck available is unlucky. That doesn't mean the Texans are excused from making sound decisions; it just cancels this idea that teams have absolute control over a process that is borderline chaos. Building a team - and then executing on that team's potential - is hard. It's why, each and every year, far more teams have losing records than winning records. Again, that's reality. I wish the Texans had a Rodgers or a Luck to build around - but they don't. So my expectations are set accordingly.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>Texans traded QB Case Keenum back to the St. Louis Rams for a 7th-round pick in 2016, per league sources.</p>— Adam Schefter (@AdamSchefter) <a href="https://twitter.com/AdamSchefter/status/575411967176896512">March 10, 2015</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> Well one QB is gone...
So, for a team trying to win now... you advocate throwing in a 4th round "journey-man" QB (look at his college track record) and trying to see if he's the next Tom Brady "miracle" story? I'd actually consider that to be more illogical than trading a king's ransom to get one of the top rookie QB's this year. Savage is a project... some of them turn out to be serviceable or career backups, but most end up with the plethora of past late round QB failures. We just saw a first-hand example of one in T.J. Yates. For a team trying to win now, with no lucky franchise QB's falling right into their laps, Hoyer provides starting experience and a reliable backup in case a situation like last year happens where ALL QB's get injured and they are still in playoff contention.
I just disagree with the "win-now" decision. I know it's the NFL, of course. So I'm not saying "tank-now" either. I am saying the team has a near 0% chance of winning the Superbowl next year. Not 0%, but close. I think Vegas odds are around 50:1... so 2%. I get that there's not much to do now that would meaningfully obviously improve the QB position. If the thought on Savage is what you lay it out as, I don't think he needs to be kept on the roster at all. Free up a space from someone else if he has no chance of every amounting to much. I get it, he's third string, doesn't matter... so dump him. If alternatively there's still hope, then you kind of have to find that out...
Ah Ha! It all makes sense now. We are tanking this year so BOB can get his guy Christian Hackenberg in 2016.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>Bill Polian: I don't know what all the fuss is all about w/Brian Hoyer. Good backup. I hear he's going to <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Texans?src=hash">#Texans</a>.</p>— Zig Fracassi (@ZigFracassi) <a href="https://twitter.com/ZigFracassi/status/575472814423076865">March 11, 2015</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
We're gonna win 10+ games next season. Could easily been 10 this past season if Mallett didn't hide his injury.
Hmm. Judging by the contentious and polarized tone of the posts here all I can say is that if (when?) this season gets derailed due to mediocre QB play, things are going to get VERY ugly around here.
Part of this is schedule-related. There were 6 teams last year with 4 wins or fewer . The Texans got to play 6 games against them and went 6-0. On average, in a 32 team league, you'd get 3 games against the 6 worst teams. On the flipside, there were 5 teams that went 12-4 or better. On average, you'd play 2.5 of those teams. The Texans played 1 and went 0-1. If you expand that to 11-5, you have 8 teams. Should play 4 on average. The Texans went 0-3 against them. So the Texans basically beat all the bad teams, lost to the great ones, and were mixed against the others (3-4). But they got to play many more terrible teams than average, and fewer good teams, tilting their record on the good side. According to Sagarin, they had the easiest schedule in the NFL last year. Comparatively, they had the #6 schedule the previous year. Fortunately, they potentially have a similarly terrible schedule next year, with 6 teams again against the worst 6 teams from this year and only 1 game against the top 5 (3 against the top 8). The schedule is arguably even easier with moving from the NFC East to the NFC South, all of whom had losing records this year. Though with the ever-changing NFL, its hard to predict how this year's crappy teams will be next year.
You keep right on living on those could have's, gonna's and mights. If Clowney had developed laser beams that shot out of his eyes to incinerate o linemen, he could have set the single season sack record in one quarter. But he didn't. There are scenarios where they win 10 games. There are scenarios where they win 5. For instance, Ryan Mallett has had a season ending injury in 50 percent of his career starts for the Texans. What happens if he breaks a leg in the preseason and Hoyer get injured in game 2 and we end the season with 14 starts from Tom Savage. Still getting gonna win 10? If you think **** can't go bad fast, you haven't been a Texans fan very long. In fact, I'm pretty sure if you graphed Texans' fan optimism, every time it breaks new highs has been when the bottom has fallen out.
