Why are so many people convinced Ryan Mallett isn't the answer? I understand skepticism, etc. And I'm not arguing he *is* the answer. But has he done anything of merit to make you think he's a dud? He was a top prospect, undone, it seems, by some personal demons/immaturity, that he has seemingly moved past. He spent years in one of the NFL's best locker rooms, working with one of the NFL's best QBs and some of its brightest offensive minds. He has more credentials, IMO, than Schaub did when he came over and, I know it's a wildly unpopular position, but Schaub was pretty doggone good for 4-5 years here. I'd be thrilled if Matt Schaub, '08-(most of)'12, walked into the locker room this morning.
I don't understand this logic. Part of the evaluation process is seeing people in game action. For any other position, this is easy because you rotate snaps and have multiple players at most positions. So at those positions, players can earn jobs through limited performances - and you see backups outperform starters all the time, even though coaches started the other guy because he looked better in practice. At the QB position, it's not possible to do that type of evaluation, so you tend to go with a starter and stick with him - but that doesn't change the fact that a backup may realistically outperform the starter even if he isn't doing so in practice. There are HoF QBs that may have never seen the field if not for being forced into duty due to injuries to worse starting QBs. And that ignores the fact that Fitz is not going to be the starting QB next year so you're getting no value from throwing him out there - you're losing with him and can just as easily lose without him. While Mallett probably won't be a starting QB either, there's no reason not to evaluate him and at least see what you have. The only real exception is if you think the Texans are likely to make a run to the playoffs, in which case you can't take that risk. But the last part of a season where a team is unlikely to make the playoffs is a perfect time to try something different. It happens at every other position - why not QB?
Everyone knew what Fitzpatrick was but O'Brien hand picked him and people thought he could play the Russell Wilson role which is easier said than done.... And O'Brien probably wants to make sure Mallet is ready before he throws him out there... There is really no rush to see what he can do now because more than likely he will have all next year to prove himself as well.
*A* person thought that because said person has an irrational bias. No one else thought Ryan Fitzpatrick could play the Russell Wilson role. We all inherently understood that, even at his best, he was limited. And I would argue weeks 1-7 *was* Ryan Fitzpatrick at his best. He was not costing the team games; at least, not explicitly. They won last week, in spite of him, and I think his limitations did play a large factor in yesterday's loss. He's inching closer to liability. The TO floodgate... I fear it's ready to burst if he keeps trotting out there......
Texans have exceeded my expectations so far this year. Of course they have been very lucky to lead the league in take aways. Looks like they won't be getting a top draft pick this year. Wish we could get a do over on last years first pick, but it is what it is. Kind of a boring year for the Texans. Zero chance to compete for a championship. Not really building for the future. Probably won't get to draft a franchise QB.
Offensive line has been bad. Holes at tight end, slot receiver. Fitz isn't good enough to overcome these flaws. Defense has been pretty good under the circumstances. Holes are DT, ILB in a big way. Safety play has been abysmal. Swearinger isn't a starter. Well, not for a good team. Coaching has had its share of growing pains. Zero rookie production.
I see this sentiment quite a bit... TOs are *not* luck; they're created through schemes, positioning and execution. You don't create 21 TOs in 9 games through luck. Turnovers have always been an integral part of Crennel's system - he ranked 8th in '01; 2nd in '03; 3rd in '04 in TOs while with the Patriots. Even with Kansas City, he was 24th in his first season and 14th his second.
You may be right about *that* person... I was just going by the thread where people voted on how many games they thought the Texans could win this year. But with that offensive line and AJ out there dogging it _ I'm not sure Mallet would do much better. I'm not sold on O'Brien at this point either.
If you think QB is the reason why the Texans are losing, you must not be watching the games. Fitzpatrick outplayed Foles/Sanchez and the Texans still lost. Dude seemed to be always running for his life. Pass-protect anyone?
That's just the thing, Fitz IS playing the Russell Wilson role, he's just not doing as good a job at it and he doesn't have the wheels RW does. If you look at it, their pass attempts are comparable, though Fitz has a few more, their passing yards are comparable, though Fitz has more, their completion percentages are comparable, though RW's is a bit better, their yards per attempt are comparable, but Fitz is a bit better, they both have passed for 11 TD's, their QB ratings are comparable, though RW's is a bit higher. Really what separates them is that Fitz has had more interceptions, though for the most part they have come on tipped passes or routes where the intended receiver ran the wrong route so that's a luck thing and obviously the major thing that separates them is that RW is a much better RB than Fitz is.
No, he didn't. He's a (I'm guessing) ruptured Achillies away from logging the same point total (7) as our defense, who forced four turnovers and three punts. Foles and Sanchez both made winning plays throughout the game. They completed 70% of their passes; averaged 9 YPA and threw 3 TDs. And their team converted 9 of 16 3rd downs, a far better % than the Texans (56% to 38%). The Texans punted six times. I've defended Fitzpatrick - but he has been terrible the past two weeks. Or, rather, about what I expected.
You think they suck because you think average is bad. They are 4-5, in the middle of the pack with a favorable schedule ahead; I'm guessing they finish 8-8 provided they can field 4 guys to play DB. It's not fun but it doesn't suck.
What separates them is what separates the good quarterbacks from the bad ones _ Russell can make a play when the team needs him to and Fitzpatrick can't.
They are 4-5 but they aren't in the middle of the pack. There are 11 teams in the AFC with winning records. The Texans are currently ranked 12th out of 16 teams.
It's the GM. I've met the guy and has great communicability, but he's made too many mistakes that have crippled our cap and future. He's gotta go.
You do realize Wilson has played in only eight games to Fitzpatrick's 9? And he's still significantly outpacing him in TDs (14 total) and INTs (3). The biggest discrepency is YPA - Wilson is having his worst year; Fitzpatrick his best - but I have a feeling they'll level out by year's end with Wilson firmly in the lead.
Perhaps you should read what I wrote again in order to better understand it. What I said is that their numbers are comparable....and they are. I mentioned that Fitz has more picks and that Wilson is a much better RB if you read closely....or at all.
