I understood the nod at Hoyer for the starter, and I understood that O'brien was aware of Hoyer's faults. I feel like O'brien felt like Hoyer could limit his bad self in a lot of ways, but that would only be the case with a solid run game. Of which we don't currently have because that line is struggling with how bad LG is, They're trying to do way too much to hide LG and it's showing. The D game plan was bad from the start. Playing off of the WR was very poor decision that fed right into KC's ideal game. Having Dent in coverage at any single point is a mistake every single time. If it wasn't for Hoyer, I don't think they Chiefs would have scored more than the 13 they did on their own. Gifting them those turnovers and that ideal field position they capitalized on very easy offensive possessions. I however don't think Hoyer would have still one the game. Mallet clearly is the better player. He may not practice as well, but when it comes down to it, he steps it the **** up and plays. I can see how they may want to try Hoyer once more, because if they move on from him this early on, It doesn't make OB look good at all. Maybe he'll make the right decision and forgo the bruised ego and do what's right. Mallet's timing and accuracy was far better than Hoyer's. HIs ability to throw a fast ball allowed him to make throws Hoyer just simply isn't capable of making. Mallet also clearly has a rapport with Hopkins, of which you need to feed heavily until Foster gets back. Hoyer can't make the throw that you may need to get to Hop.
Don't worry, I don't blame Hoyer, I blame BOB for putting him in. Hoyer is what he is, so I'm not going to blame him for playing poorly....he's a poor player, of course he's going to suck. Without Hoyer gifting the Chiefs the ball in their red zone twice, this is a totally different game.
Two of the TOs from Hoyer were easily avoidable. Easily. One right to a rookie CB within your own 20 and another a silly fumble. So yes, he deserves most of the blame. While KC did well, they weren't exactly carving up the defense. Those two TOs decided the game.
Well it was probably one of the worst performances ever for a QB on a short leash. He threw a blind pass in his first attempt inside the 20. While Mallett may at times be worse, you can't win with steady bad play that Hoyer brings. The Texans didn't cover tight ends, sure, but Hoyer owns the biggest share of this loss.
:imaginary post game interview by b.o.b: Tania, I hate losing. But you've never competed at this level. Hoyer was out there competing, congratulating mallet, being the best teammate. A true professional. Hoyer is still my quarterback.
Looked to me like one of Hoyer's main problems (outside of the interception, fumble and continually making balls difficult to catch) was not targeting Hopkins enough.
We lost cause Hoyer turned the ball over inside the 20 twice leading to 2 scores. All the rest of the bull***** you typed doesn't even come close to making as much of a difference.
I haven't seen many bad starting QBs get yanked in the first game due to bad play. It just doesn't happen often. I guess the length of leashes are relative?
And then worse news.... <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Texans coach Bill O'Brien says he doesn't know for Brian Hoyer is still his starting quarterback. He'll have to... <a href="http://t.co/AJGxEenw2C">http://t.co/AJGxEenw2C</a></p>— Tania Ganguli (@taniaganguli) <a href="https://twitter.com/taniaganguli/status/643159120858578944">September 13, 2015</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Back in 2010, another team inserted a backup QB and made the game really close to what an early blowout. They lost with the same score 27-20. Those were the Eagles with Mike Vick coming in. Not saying that Mallet is as good as Vick but just something to look back on.
So the fact that Newton got pushed by his man all the way into Hoyer didn't do anything? Or the fact that our offensive line was getting blasted all game long didn't help? The Fumble only got the Chiefs 3 points. But the defense is allowed to not be held accountable because "**** Hoyer". Clearly Hoyer contributed to the loss, but to blame it all on him is just people looking for a scapegoat. Why isn't the Hoyer to Cecil shorts which should've put us in red-zone or the no call on the Nate Washinhton endzone call not the reason we lost?
Vick was a #1 pick wasn't he? Even so, Mallet is much better than Hoyer at actually playing the game. Maybe he's a lazy practice player I don't know... But it seems Mallet at the very least makes quick snap decisions which means he reads the field well. He can be a bit of a gunslinger at times from what little we've seen of him but meh I'd rather have a QB that tries to test the defense than one that throws INTs to the flats.
Andy Reid's play calling and design was pretty good. He nullified our pass rush advantage, ran out on the edges and got the coverage he wanted. Throwing counter to the motion left our LB's reeling. But the game was winnable without the turnovers deep. Hoyer will be the goat.
Well Hoyer gave the Cheifs 10 points and we lost by 7. So of course he is going to be the scape goat. Not to mention Mallet came in and drove the team down for a score like he was Peyton Manning in the 2 min drill. (No I'm not saying Mallet is anything close Manning). The OL sucks and the D looked vastly over rated. I'm not arguing that at all. But Hoyer will be the scape goat to everybody. That's how it works. Win games, QB gets credit.. You lose, especially with the horrendous QB play, the QB gets the scrutiny.
Well when one QB gifts the other team 2 possessions in the red zone and the other QB has a 110 QB rating....I mean that'll happen.
