How much longer before Ryan Mallet becomes the starter?

Fitz isn't the answer but the team is 3-1 and he's done enough to help them. And God help us if we get to a point where we're actually begging for Mallet to start.

 

The offense has been horrible. I'm not advocating for Mallet because I don't know his game. Obviously they didn't give up much for him... But some. Why trade for him at all? Much rather have the pick back if the consensus is Mallet is worse than Fitzpatrick.

 

I don't think he has done anything to help them. He hasn't done a lot to hurt them with the exception of the giants game. He hasn't screwed up enough to cost them more than one victory. I wouldn't call that "helping"

 

Yea I'm confused here too, what's the QB plan then, if Mallet isn't the answer. Is it actually going with Fitzgerald and looking for a QB next year? Or is Savage the long term option?

In general, none of our rookies have done jack **** this year, besides Blue being forced to step up and of course Clowney is injured. For the team with the 1st pick of every round, you'd expect a little more noise.

 

I hope Mallet gets a chance to start 2-3 games at the end of the year so everyone can see that we desperately need to draft a QB next year in the 1st round. Trade up if need be, but this offense is missing a real QB to run it.

Yo McNair! Go get us a superstar QB!!!!! Hire Morey to find that QB with metrics if you have to =)

 

We're 3-1, chill out.

I trust BOB to know if its Mallet-time or not

 

We have a 5 game stretch before the bye with Dallas, Indy, Philly, Tennessee and Pittsburgh. If Fitz goes 1-4 or 0-5 he might be in trouble, but 2-3 or better will keep his job secure through the bye week.

 

I don't think Mallett is the answer.

I don't think Fitzpatrick is the answer.

I think 2QB systems are stupid.

With that said... I think we're in a unique situation where it might make sense to implement a 2QB system.

Unlike most QB's, I really haven't noticed Fitzpatrick needing to establish a rhythm to get going. He just plays his sloppy game. He doesn't have a strong rapport with any particular WR in my opinion. Anyone can lob balls up and let Hopkins make a catch.

If we play Mallett for a few series a game I think it keeps the defense on its toes, forces them to prepare for 2 guys who bring different skills to the table and adds a dimension to the offense.

I think the blueprint for this idea would be Louisville circa Lefors/Brohm.

I'd do it. Not much to lose.

 

Mallet is doing his best to get the start... almost injured Fitz not once, but twice celebrating on the sideline... ;-)

 

I think it is relevant to post the analysis of PFF:

"Breakdown: Outside of a fumbled snap that led to an easy stop on third down, Fitzpatrick played pretty well. Although the stat sheet shows two interceptions, he cannot be blamed for the batted pass turned interception, and the other was an outstanding play by Leodis McKelvin. He had a couple good passes dropped, but was able to get first downs when needed in the second half. He also scrambled to pick up two third-down conversions.

Signature Stat: Fitzpatrick finished the game with an overall Accuracy Percentage of 77.1%, and 66.7% when pressured."

Sounds like a pretty accurate analysis to me.

 

This. I'm actually kinda scared of the Cowpokes now. They have found a solid run game (read: Garrett is actually calling run plays) and their defense has showed to be a bit better than expected. All a team has to do is stop the Texans on the ground...and sit back and wait for Fitzy to throw them the ball.

 

What a weird time to make this thread.

Fitz had a good game yesterday with two absolute fluke interceptions.

I'd have no problem replacing him with someone who was a definite upgrade of course, but there is no reason to believe Ryan Mallet is that.

 

They traded for Ryan Mallet because Case Keenum was terrible and Tom Savage isn't ready to run an NFL offense.

BOB needed a QB that if he had to go to a backup he could at least count on to run his system and neither Keenum nor Savage proved they could do that.

They are at least hopeful that Tom Savage has an NFL future but there is nothing to suggest that they think Ryan Mallet is anything more than a backup.

The plan is to develop Tom Savage this year while Fitzpatrick starts and then determine by the end of the season whether they have seen enough from Savage in practice to think he is the future. If they don't then they will take a QB early in the draft.

 

While I thought Fitz had a reasonably good game and I really give him kudos for toughness (scrambling and going for the first down markers) and for leadership (seems always cool in huddle and sidelines), I don't agree that he should be given a pass for the INT resulting from the tip at the line. Seems lots of his INTs are due to line of scrimmage tips. Seems QBs are downgraded for being short (due to the possibility of tips) or for throwing sidearm (same reason).

I'd probably give him more of "free pass" on the Nuk INT, as the ball was in Nuk's hands and taken away by the CB. But even then... a better pass would not have been at risk.

In fact... one of my biggest criticisms of Fitz is he doesn't put the ball in a good places for the receiver. But given he is often rushed due to pressure I understand he doesn't always have a chance to place the ball better...

 

I hope the Texans will make the change if and when Mallet shows in practice that he can be better than Fitzpatrick. I doubt it will happen, because I think Mallet sucks. But Fitzpatrick is not the type of player you stick by simply because he's the vet and he's the de facto starter.

 

The Hopkins/McCelvin interception was in a bad position because Hopkins slowed up and jumped for the ball instead of taking another step.

The one at the line was fluky, but either way it was a bad decision to make the throw.

Still, he played well yesterday, especially considering he was pressured a fair amount AND the running game was a disaster.

 

Everyone who "knows" BOB says the same thing: If OBrien thinks Player X is better, he will play him.

 

I don't see why the decision was necessarily bad. Yes the outcome was bad, so I guess you can say the decision to throw was bad in hindsight. But at the time, the defender had 2 guys on him and was pretty well covered up by the texans o-line. He just made a good play getting his hands up.

 

It was a bad decision because it was a low throw (barely would have cleared the line if the guy HADN'T put his hand up on time) and the back wasn't really open for it anyway.

Like I said though, I thought he played well. Four games in Fitz has looked perfectly fine for a fringe playoff team.

 

That was crazy; I am surprised the video isn't on the board. I don't know where to get that clip.