Sure it does; it means the OL wasn't "****" last year. It was fine and anyone with an ounce of sense can see the clear path to it likely being better in 2020, given Tunsil didn't have an offseason (or, even, preseason) with the team and they started two rookies, one of which missed 8 games. They had five games of 1 or 0 sacks; one with 2; and four with 3, which, given Watson's tendencies, is likely more norm than any significant issue with the offensive line. But, sure - let's keep talking about the 7 sacks against Buffalo (a very good defense that played an exceptional game) and the 5 sacks in the game in which the team was *literally* outscored 51-7 and our QB threw 52 passes because that's totally normal and not at all an incredible outlier. I understand the point. It makes sense. We're seeing young QBs develop without elite WRs - it's very possible a player like Hopkins is a crutch. It might not be true; it might not be harmful - but I can see what he means. People who possess intellectual curiosity welcome differing perspectives because it provides greater insight and deeper understanding. I get what he's saying. I have no idea it's validity - but I get it. It's an interesting point. There are a lot of QBs, especially young ones, thriving without elite WRs. Conversely, there are very few elite WRs playing with elite QBs. I don't know what that means - if anything - but Warner's idea provides a possible explanation. You're the only person I've seen describe Watson's 2019 season in that context ("running for his life"). The Texans, for instance, graded very high in pass block win rate, which measures specifically how long an OL holds their blocks. Also, they allowed 18 sacks in their first four games; 26 in their final 11 (with Watson). They dropped from 4.5 sacks/game to just 2.4. And, again, they traded for Tunsil *after* the preseason and started two rookies. It actually *does* matter. If you'll relax your heels, you'll see that, more and more, people are starting to understand - and accept - that Watson, specifically, has a *tremendous* impact on the OL's effectiveness. QBs that move and improvise are *very* hard to protect. QBs who hold the ball longer to break bigger plays are *very* hard to protect. Watson does both of those things. The Ringer wrote a very insightful article about it - but you were still stick in 2018 and didn't read it. But, sure - keep call me pig-headed. I'm legitimately starting to wonder if you watch games or just spend your time in an echo chamber so you don't have to evolve and grow as a fan. Step back and realize that this is ALL you have. Two playoff games, one of which included a 51-7 stretch in which the QB dropped back 52 times, which was +19 his 2019 average of 33. Wait a tic-toc, my name isn't- oh! I get it! HILARIOUS! Hey WRONG!!!!!!!!! So, sooo good.
Yeeeeep that would do it. BOB thinks he's coaching a college team. These are grown men. If Hopkins wants to have 20 baby mamas that's his thing, he'll be broke when he leaves the NFL but BOB is a PROFESSIONAL football coach managing a SPORTS team of GROWN men. This is not a college team where he can give guys life advice and expect them to listen. This is insane.
Well, those in the know know. But does who don't know don't know and guess. We be guessing all about why this lopsided deal happened. Guessing here but either said GM values all current players not only for on field performance but other stuff and once he decides said player does not fit, he will get rid of player and doesn't matter for value. Also, he likes running backs. Or he is just one complete idiot and shouldn't be a GM. I am actually guessing both..
The trade sucks. The idea of trading Hopkins does not necessarily suck if you have a competent front office. The Texans do not have a competent front office. I do not lack the intellectual capacity to hold both opinions. This isn't hard.
My comment in that fan incident thread was that the 'leader'/ coach can't do something like that. There is no telling what he does when goes into 'tea pot' mode. It's an issue. I believe bob would say that in the heat of the moment to poke the bear. we've seen with him do it with other players, exploiting their personal situation, for Case it was his confidence. Brooks wanted to never play football again.
In defense to O’Brien he does have the right to say what he wants around the team so if he told Hopkins he don’t want all his baby mamas around the team that’s his right. BUT man this is a very very bad look one we might never come back from. Unless we fire O’Brien immediately and if not FOR SURE after the season and hire a real players coach like Dabo.
I did not hear it live - but heard the audio replayed this morning on 610. Clarify a quick point: did Irvin claim Hopkins told him that? Or another player? I'm not making any judgments on it - it just wasn't clear to me. (I came in late; audio had started.) Regardless, I 100% agree. It is an alarming revelation and, yes - if true (and why would we give BO'B the benefit of the doubt at this point?), an absolute fireable offense.And not just BO'B but Easterby, too. Man, if religion has infiltrated this organization in a way in which it's being used to make decisions...... (Easterby is a former pastor and now "culture" coach, which is the genesis of my reference there, FYI...) I've been ambivalent about BO'B as a head coach (he's fine). But his (still brief!) tenure as a GM has been incredibly abysmal. I've officially joined the FIRE BO'B crowd. He needs to go.
Tom Brady has a baby mama. I'm starting to worry it's not the baby mama'ing that's bothering him............
organization is trash. Glad Hopkins is letting the truth out. Hopefully Watson isn't too far behind him
