I don't know what happened to this team, but it was promising right up until that Jacksonville game in 2012 where we had to go to OT. Ever since that game, the team started declining. Schaub looked promising, but until that game, I don't know, but some mind****ing was in place with this team.
They definitely got ahead of themselves that year, coming off of the high of the 2011 season. They beat up on mostly bad teams, with only one quality win against the Broncos and another tough, gritty win against the Bears. I think after that Bears game, they were physically exhausted as a team. They squaked by the Lions and Jags, then the letterman jackets happened and the Patriots game pushed us into oblivion. I think that game is definitely the most significant moment of the demise of the Kubiak era Texans.
I liken that patriots game to the 61-7 drubbing Sam Wyche put on Glanville's Oilers back in the day. The Oilers were never the same after that game and neither were the Texans.
In 2012 the most significant thing happened in week 5 when Cushing went down. The Texans' D is completely different without him in the game. He's a player that simply can't be replaced. If you look at how the Pats beat the Texans that season they exploited the sorry excuse for a LB corps that we put out on the field due to numerous injuries and that's how they beat us up as bad as they did.
They trashed the Colts (11-5) a week after the supposed franchise-killing letterman jacket fiasco and then thoroughly dominated the Bengals (10-6) in the wild card game (defense = 0 offensive TDs; >200 total yards; offense = 420 yards against #8 defense). Altogether, they were 5-5 in games against teams with winning records that year, including a 43-13 d---stomping of the eventual SB champs. Oh yeah, that one... (It's always *only* about Green Bay, isn't it?............) The depth of their 2012 demise has always been slighted exaggerated (likely because the last image most of us have that season was the Patriot game - and even that... I mean, if Manning scores on the opening kick and/or Casey catches an easy 6 on the opening drive... that *might* be a different game.) The big, inexplicable loss, really, was the clunker against the Vikings which, even now, makes zero sense. They held AP to 86 yards - he was *averaging* 165/game in his previous 8, including 200+ in 2 of the three games before coming to Houston - and they lost. The defense wasn't perfect - but it was still a very good defense.
I was impressed with his speed in the preseason game against Philly. Obviously he is not a speedy guy but better athleticism than I remember from college. He threw well on the run on bootlegs too. He threw several deep passes that were a tad bit overthrown which is much better than underthrowing them ala Fitz and Schaub. He was playing against 2's and 3's but it was still pretty promising. His release is pretty quick too which will help in the screen game and short passes to TE's/slot guys. Hopefully he creates a nice competition and if he has to play he can prove his worth. We may need him simply to throw the ball down the field this year since Fitz will most likely be incapable of throwing deep which will probably be his downfall.
I'll give you the Bengals playoff win and the Colts game as quality wins, but Baltimore had a decimated o-line due to injury and no Ray Lewis IIRC, similar to us almost beating a decimated Seattle o-line last year until Matt Schaub happened. Our pass rush dictated both of those games against scrub offensive lines. It doesn't matter though because they then crapped the bed against Minnesota and the Colts with a chance to secure home field in the playoffs. I don't have any doubt that the New England MNF game took a huge psychological toll on them that in many ways killed their confidence (even among the coaching staff). They bounced back against familiar foes in the Colts and Bengals, at home, but those two New England losses effectively killed all momentum the franchise had built up and then Matt Schaub finished putting the nail in the coffin last year.
It's always something, isn't it?... You beat a team 43-13 and the "yeah buts" still come dropping from the rafters...... The Ravens were 5-1 when they played the Texans, and the "decimated o-line due to injury and no Ray Lewis" was apparently so significant, they promptly won four in a row afterwards. Their five non-Texan losses that year, btw, were by 1, 3, 3, 17, 6, which, when added together (30) equals Houston's margin of victory. "Yeah, but...!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"
Am I the only one who thinks Mallet can be good??? The Texans will lead with the running game and a strong defense. The coach and Mallet obviously have a good relationship, and Mallet was never going to play with Tom Brady still remaining healthy. Not to mention that O'Brien has been after this guy for months. This is a recipe for success. Why is everybody sooo down on Mallet, sometime success is based on opportunities more than overwhelming talent.
Success is making the playoffs and at least the divisional round. Virtually every team that makes the divisional round is good enough to contend for a Super Bowl. At some point you break through to win it all (i.e. Baltimore with Flacco). Unless the Texans get the worst record again so they can have their pick of QBs, the next best thing is hoping Mallet becomes good Schaub 2.0. Instead of Kubiak wasting 4 years of Schaub and Andre by hiring unqualified buddies to lead the defense, BoB at least has a legit defensive staff to start off with plus more talent on that side of the ball than Kubiak ever had sans 2011.
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/_Z0uBItsSJI" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe> Kid's got a cannon.
The texans finished the season 1-3 and got manhandled in all of their losses. Texans were playing for a 1st round bye so it wasn't like they let off the gas pedal. Beating the Bungals in the Playoffs? They have always sucked in the Playoffs and they were the easiest team to play that year. Plus that game could have been different if Dalton/Green connected on that TD pass. Then they got manhandled again in embarrassing fashion the next week to the pats. 2-5 in the last 7 games including 5 absolute drubbings for a team that started 11-1. That's a big demise no matter how you look at it.
Fine. We beat the **** out of the Ravens in week 6. Woohoo. When it really mattered, we couldn't beat the Vikings or Colts to secure a bye and home-field in the playoffs and then the Patriots proved that they were better than us. I don't even know why we're arguing about it -- quality wins don't mean **** if you win in the playoffs. It's Super Bowls or bust for me. Now back on topic, I'm intrigued by Ryan Mallett but my biggest fear is that he plays this year and does a decent enough job that we don't draft a QB of the future in round one, assuming one is there for us to take, in the next draft.
I get it... anything that even remotely chips away at the set-in-concrete narrative must be dismissed... IOW, all losses are obviously significant; all wins are subject to intense scrutiny and "yeah but"ing. Got it. How very convenient of you. 7? Nope - they were 3-4 in their final seven; 2-4 in their final six, which is what you probably meant. I'm not suggesting it was a *good* finish; it was certainly disappointing. But they beat two teams that combined to win 21 games that year; and the defense played well enough to beat the Vikings and maybe even the Colts (only gave up 21 points, including a fluky 70-yarder; Luck only had 121 yards otherwise. Schaub was - surprise! - awful with two INTs).
Never mind it invalidates your original post... remember? They beat up on mostly bad teams, with only one quality win against the Broncos and another tough, gritty win against the Bears. Five of their 12 wins - nearly half! - came against teams that won at least 10 games in 2012. But, sure - go ahead and bury your head in the sand and claim it was 1.5 and that the others don't count. Much easier. "Woohoo, I was really wrong but can't bring myself to admit it..." "...to me." Funny, if they hadn't smashed the Ravens ("Woohoo"), or won any of the other games that apparently didn't matter... they wouldn't have been playing for anything against the Vikings and Colts. Every game counts. Equally. To arbitrarily move the goal posts in hindsight is remarkably disingenuous. It was an unquestionably disappointing end; and the very end, specifically, was crushingly bad. And while they didn’t look like a 12-4 team during the final 6 games, they didn’t look like a 2-14 team, either. That’s just retro-fitting the narrative to support specious reasoning.
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/8krw-XmK0lo" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe> These guys like him.
I'll admit that I phrased it wrong. I should have said that the only elite teams that they beat were the Bears and Broncos. Obviously the 2012 Ravens were a success. Yes, they had a good record going into our matchup, but they had also lost Ledarius Webb and Ray Lewis, arguably there two best defensive players, going into our matchup - the week before our game, no less. They were not elite when we played them. The Patriots were -- both times. And we lost. I don't know what else you want me to say. I'm disappointed in how the Kubiak era ended, as we all should be, and I'm not going to go give them credit because they beat some winning teams when I wanted to see them become elite and get to the Super Bowl, which was within reach.
No one doubts his ability to chuck the ball downfield, it's everything else that is lacking for him. I hear Rex Grossman is out of a job, maybe he can come in and teach him the art of "F' it, I'm goin deep" I mean, it worked for the Ravens that one year, why can't it work for us?
