But if we started Sage (or drafted then started VY) the Texans would have easily gone 10-6, ignoring the fact they could not control either the OL or the DL. Anyone else remember when the Oilers let go of their LT and started a rookie and what impact that had on Moon's performance (before he got hurt and the Cody Carlson Era started). Also does anyone here think that Rex Grossman is a great QB or is better than DC? Dude may get a ring this year, thanks to the Bears controlling the line of scrimage on both sides of the ball.
that's a bit harsh, imo (re: dallas and NE) - were weren't going to beat dallas and/or NE with a better QB. no way. so he cost us losing with dignity, maybe. i mean, i'll freely admit, he was wretched in both games. so when they lose, its his fault; when they win, it's accidental? all true; but it was a terrible play call to begin with, and, ftr, there was nothing "gimme" about it - clements was draped all over AJ. but during the course of every game, teams are going to leave plays on the field. the bottom line is that, in spite of them, they were still in position to win; all the defense had to do was stop jp losman. reread this - what, exactly, did david carr do wrong here? no. well, yes, that was me, but that wasn't my contention at all. and no one here is apologizing for carr; but we also can't snap our fingers and make him disappear - there are ramifications for doing so, and to properly chart a course moving forward, you can't just dismiss them. are you willing to pay jake plummer $8+M to play QB next year? i'm certainly not. i'd rather just keep carr, who's five years younger.
The Texans were a far cry from controlling the line, but both lines improved. David did not. It's not all his fault, but almost the entire team and the entire coaching staff have seen turnover in the name of finally winning. It's Dave's turn.
By the end of the year, DC was no longer a 3 step and pass quaterback, really? I will say that the OL did get better run blocking by season's end.
I didn't say they controlled the line (I said they were a far cry), but they got better. David had a few more times this year where he had more than the nanosecond we'd all grown accustomed to. He did, well, *nothing*.
i totally agree with you. by the end of the year, the OL was not nearly the problem it had been. i don't mean to indicate it was stellar. it wasn't. but as John McClain pointed out during the NE game, of DC's 4 INT's that day, only one of them came when he had pressure on him. the play where he threw the ball into QUADRUPLE COVERAGE vs. the Titans was a no pressure play. remember the criticism for VY coming in was that he wouldn't be able to go through his progressions. the same thing Vick does...he'd just tuck and run before going through his progressions...without seeing if receiver 3 was open or not. that criticism is very aptly applied to DC...because he stares down 1 receiver and then checks down to the dump off (as opposed to just getting ready to run). that's what i see anyway...and it should come as no surprise, then, that Moulds seemed invisible. and truth be told...DC is responsible for some of those sacks, too. how many?? i'm not sure. but when pressure comes and you just collapse into it, you're not helping anyone.
My day's as a Carr supporter are just about all behind me...BUT this idea of Quadruple coverage is generally wrong. I'd have to see the play again to give a better opinion on it. It's very possible that they where in a zone and there ended up being four defenders in the area..BUT To think that a defense would put four defenders on one WR is plain dumb, that would leave only seven players to account for the ten offensive players...just doesn't happen. Hopefully most people realize this. In no way is this suppose to be a defense of Carr on the play, just a lil injection of common sense.
Maybe I misspoke. I didn't mean to imply that the Titans put 4 men on one receiver on purpose. But just because you draw up a defensive scheme one way, doesn't mean it actually plays out that way. At the time Carr threw the ball to the receiver (AJ, I think), there were 4 guys surrounding him. It was honestly one of the worst passes I have EVER seen. I remember the commentators making the same comment. That, of course, was the game that Carr was benched. I'm guessing there are more than a few folks here who can remember the play as well.
The ball was definitely thrown into quadruple coverage. The only worse pass I saw all year was McNair's throw into triple coverage against Indy in the playoffs.
Buffalo game, the offense though they did come back, there were a couple of drives late in the game where either Carr didnt get first downs to elongate drives or get opportunities to get some extra points. Yes, the D all in all laid an egg yes, I'm just saying that once again Carr was not a factor in the game when it mattered most. The Dallas and NE game, whether or not you think the Texans were going to win these games or not, Carr's play was a direct result of OUR inability to even compete much less win. The Tenn game here, hello? I was at that game and one QB was playing not to lose and one was playing to WIN! Bottom line. Carr should have at least tried to convince Kuby he could at least lead a drive to get a FG at the end of the half, not just sit on the ball. Add that and duh, we win no OT! The Jag games and NYG, I meant he was playing with some attitude, like he cared. Something of late we have rarely seen. Evenstill, Carr's play was a forward assist in leading to victories in the Jag game but wasnt the deciding factor. NYG, Carr was fighting to make plays probably because of the fire lit up under him from the debacle in Tennessee. Should have won the game with NYG, that fumble call on Jameel Cook was simply awful. Say what y'all want about Plummer, even money Plummer is much better than Carr. As I have said before, Plummer has chemistry with Kuby and played his best, most competitive ball when under Kubiak's tutledge. The stats dont lie. Think of the ramifications if you DON'T trade Carr (hopefully), I think alot of people in that locker room would do more than chirp. At least highly upgrade the competition for QB for the upcoming season. Smitty and Kuby I believe know this, they know that even with everything potentially set up for Carr, sadly he probably STILL would not be able to remotely lead this team into the playoffs and THAT is what it is all about. The bottom line.
One guy in grossman has played 20 games and the other guy has played 50. I still think signing jake, trading for turner or jones, drafting the okoye kid at 8 would upgrade this team.
I missed this one earlier. Grossman is the model of the average QB that CAN win when all the other pieces are great. Two other teams have done this recently - Tampa Bay and Baltimore. None of them modeled their team around it. Tampa Bay and Baltimore got rid of their Superbowl QB at the first opportunity because they knew they needed it to have a chance to sustain their success. Chicago intends Grossman to be a playmaker QB - he was an MVP candidate at midseason - and had to back off because they had no other choice when he started screwing up so much. The long-term goal for Grossman is not as an average QB that's just there to not screw up. As is, Chicago fans are scared to death of only one thing on their team - Grossman failing. There is no "model" that builds around a crappy QB. If you have the best defense in football (as all three of these teams did), yes, you can win with the right circumstances. But that doesn't mean you try to win that way. That's like tying one hand behind your back going into a fight. There are two teams that have been consistently successful over the past 4 or 5 years - New England and Indy (Philly as well if you discount 2005 due to the injuries and TO mess). Is it a coincidence that they have the two best QB's in football? Maybe, maybe not. But it's a whole lot harder to build & maintain a model franchise if you start with the prospect that you'll just stick with a known crappy/average-at-best QB because you don't want to take a $4MM cap hit. Unless you have a plan to rebuild the defense to one of the league's best with that $4MM, you'll have a whole lot more impact upgrading from Carr ot Plummer than anything else you do with that money. (of course, if there are other cheaper QB options, that should be considered too; I'm just discussing the idea of keeping Carr for financial reasons) Not to mention, unless you plan to keep Carr for *two* more years, you're still going to have a cap hit next year if you cut him then, so really, you're talking about $2MM unless you're saying you want Carr as your QB of the future.
This, of course, also assumes that an up-and-down Jake Plummer will command the same $8MM a year that #1 pick Carr does. If he gets just $6MM, then the salaries are a net wash if you cut Carr and sign Plummer.
That is exactly it. That is the flaw with David Carr and the mentality of some people on this board that still support him. You cant just have your qb in there to not lose. Your qb has to do what it can to WIN and play like it. Even Rex Grossman, (who although has been in the league a while has not played many game) has shown some signs. He has his off games, but when he has to get it done, he can more often then Carr. He can throw for 300yds+ and he is only an average qb. Most qbs, even mediocre ones have the will to win and it just seems like DC is in there to not screw up.
