Hasselbeck was a near-joke around the league until Holmgren started working with him on managing the game. Even today, he's not a major passing threat, but more of a guy who's stopped making mistakes by trying to play above his level. Same with Delhomme. It's a major facet of the position. Ben Roethlisberger has slid in the last two years because he's trying to air it out and make plays that are above his head. Even Brady got into trouble with that this past week. Carr is the same type of guy - it's been a complete change with Kubiak leaning on him to give up the home run mentality that he tried to get away with under Capers. Evan
come on, MM - none of us are simpletons; stop painting us as such. it's more complex than that, and we, at least, are willing to explore those complexities. re: 2004 - the texans played an easy schedule the first part of the year (combined record of HOU's first 7 opponents: 52-60, and that included a surprise 12-4 chargers; only two of those 7 teams finsihed with a winning record that year). accordingly, they were 4-3. they then played a six-game stretch against 5 eventual playoff teams (combined record that year of those 6 teams: 59-37 and that's with a 5-11 tennesee thrown in there). accordingly, they went 1-5 and were outscored, something like, 125-47 by the playoff teams. they were a bad team with an easy beginning and finishing schedule that allowed them to mask some inefficiences and put band-aids on some gaping wounds. from there, an arrogant and incompetent GM made some horribly misguided decisions and the rest is history.
you know, brady's a great example of not putting too much stock in #s. he's obviously a great, great QB; carr does not belong in the same sentence as tom brady. but look at brady's #s during his three SB seasons, just to get a glimpse of how unimportant #s can be. in 46 starts those three years, he threw for 200 or fewer yards 16 times - that's a third of his games. he threw 1 or no TDs in 21 of those 46 starts - nearly half. btw, NE's record when brady either threw for less than 200 yards and/or 1 or fewer TDs during those three seasons? 15-8. that's a 10-win pace. get the right personnel, design a competent game plan, and play to your QBs strengths and you can win a lot of games with the numbers carr put up sunday in new york.
Sage started the last game of '04, against Baltimore, and was terrible. Got one start in '05 against Cleveland and was terrible (got benched at halftime for an injured Gus Frerotte). Came into 2 other games in '05 - one he threw 37 times & overcame a 20-pt deficit - and played well, and won both games late. http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/235151/gamelogs/2005
Favre was in Atlanta for *one* year. The other guys are exactly my point - when they got a chance in the NFL, they ran with it. I want to see a guy who played full time for years and sucked and then suddenly improved. Because there are so few starting QB jobs around, not everyone gets an opportunity. Tom Brady was a backup and would have remained a backup for a while, but Bledsoe got hurt. Same with Warner w/ Green getting hurt. Those guys never sucked as NFL starters for multiple years and then suddenly improved.
Hasselbeck's first year as a starter, he threw for 2000 yards, 7 TDs, and 8 INTs. His 2nd year, he upped that to 3000 yards, 15 TDs, 8 INTs. His 3rd year, he went for 3800 yards, 26 TDs, 15 INTs.
I'm not blaming Carr - he is what he is. I have no ill-will towards him. But I have no loyalty towards him either. I think the organization should explore other options at QB as I don't see Carr being the solution, and the only way to do that is to see the team functionining in real-life situations with a different QB. Perhaps I'll be wrong, but right now it looks to me like he doesn't have it and I would like to find out.
Still, no one can answer two questions: 1. Why did they extend him for 3 years? It makes absolutely no sense. 2. Why not give Sage another chance, this year...for the sake of the team. r****ding David Carr's progress is itself r****ded. The only progress that matters is the team's. If it takes r****ding Carr's progress 1 game to be sure we haven't been r****ding the team's progress by playing Carr exclusively, then it's worth it. No one is saying Sage is the answer, either...only that if he can prove he can play at least as average as Carr, or even a little better, then Carr probably ISN'T the answer, regardless of if he improves from mediocre to mostly mediocre, with some slightly great games, over the next 2+ years (meaning slightly better than mediocre, but it takes another season plus to even get there). Why treat Carr as a rookie qb? He's not. If we wanted that, we should have traded down this year and picked a qb (leinart or cutler), both of whom are also "talented", but unlike Carr, actually are rookies, and don't come with all the problems associated with the fact that Carr isn't (overcoming old coaching staff, impact of so many years of poor protection, etc., etc.) It seems like Carr never improves over the year, either. If you graph his average quarterback rating as the year progresses, with the exception of 2005, where he started out with a 12 rating against Buffalo and then was up and down throughout, he generally tends to finish the year with a worse average rating then where he starts. Interestingly, his average yards/pass attempt also go down as the year progresses. Nothing really defined as far as TD/Int. ratio over the year...he has historically pretty much stayed right around 1x. It's certainly not all on Carr. But then, it certainly isn't all on the team. In the 19 games the Texans have won with Carr starting, his TD/Int. ratio has been greater than 1.0x in 8 of them. His quarterback rating has been greater than 85 in 8 of them (greater than 80 in 11 of them). Sometimes they have won because of Carr, sometimes in spite of him. To be fair, Carr has performed well in some loses. In 18 of his 49 loses, his rating has been over 85 (22 of 40 rating of over 80). They've lost games because of Carr and lost games in spite of him. Carr just seems average, because he is. That may mean that Kubiak can continue to work on turning average into slightly above average...which truly is enough to get to, and in some cases, with a great team, win Superbowls. It's not enough to be a great, hall-of-fame quarterback, winning multiple rings, etc. What is the end goal of all this. To make Carr an above average quarterback....awesome! All these years of complete sucking, top picks and we may end up with a better than average quarterback on the backside of his career. Joy. Like Major above, I have no hatred for Carr. I just want what will make the Texans into perennial Superbowl contenders, and as quickly as possible.
the goal is to build a winning team and somehow after this past week, i have to believe carr can contribute to that goal. what he cannot do is come out and any point and lay down like he did in tennesse.
AWESOME post, Buck. I had been waiting for this a long time. I couldn't find these stats myself. Nice read. It seems that no matter if CARR even has a good game, like this past weekend, or has a SUCKY game like against Dallas, and the team LOSES, it won't matter. The so-called "FANS" want to see wins... but it will ALWAYS be Carr's fault... 'cuz he could have led them to be better the entire game...
as usual, major, you're having to whittle your argument down to the finest point possible in order to stay in the discussion. let's take a look at what, exactly, you "want to see" has evolved. this was the original question you posted: interestingly, nowhere in the above post do you mention "full-time" QBs or QBs that "suck." when a half dozen or so legitimate players were named that fit your then-description and seemingly poked a hole in your theory on coaching, your question changed in order to discount those examples: as soon as someone correctly pointed out that players who were career back-ups and/or veterans of inferior leagues could indeed be considered "bad,” the criteria then changed again: quite a difference from, “Can anyone name a few QB's who have had coaches turn them into entirely different players several years into their careers?” isn’t it? and you know what – you finally got us: there are none. congratulations - coaching must be overrated.
Can't speak for everyone, but I think Major, MadMax and myself have made it clear we are not blaming Carr....we're just pointing out the obvious - he's an average quarterback that sometimes helps the team and sometimes hurts the team....no more, no less.
hasselbeck, compared to carr, first three years: MH: 2,023, 7/8 3,075, 15/10 3,800, 26/15 DC: 2,592, 9/15 2,013, 9/13 3,531, 16/14 one guy played for mike holgrem (who, as you've correctly proven, was very likely useless) and alongside shaun alexander, walter jones and steve hutchinson; the other, well, didn't.
and most of us would agree with that assessment; we're not recasting his first four years as anything beyond what they were and "average" is a pretty accurate description, imo. but, like kubiak, we saw enough either of carr, or the people around him, to truly believe his career his salvageable. i don't think he'll ever be an elite QB; i think his ceiling is troy aikman, which, actually, is the ceiling i've always had for him. for all this talk of him being nothing more than a game manager... well, aikman was the ULTIMATE game manager. he wasn't the best, or even second best offensive player on that team (in fact, you could argue smith, irvin, possibly novaceck and certainly allen were all better *players* than aikman), nor was he their leader. but he played within himself, made plays when needed, and relied on others to carry the team. no harm in carr becoming that.
Now everyone is saying Carr is the future again...all it takes is just one game which he could afford not to make any mistakes to screw up his team...it doesn't matter that the Texans still lost...the bar set for Carr is pretty low if you ask me.
Right on. I disagree on his future. But I don't fault you or Kubiak (who certainly knows more than I do about football....though, wasn't Casserly suppossed to be smarter than me there, too??) for thinking there's a chance for something great with Carr at the helm. But I still can't see why they extended him for 3 years, or why they won't throw Sage in there for 1 game.
Originally Posted by Major Can anyone name a few QB's who have had coaches turn them into entirely different players several years into their careers? … Are there any QB's that just transformed into a whole different playeer as a result of good coaching? Quote: Originally Posted by Major I'm looking for guys that actually were bad for several years in the NFL and suddenly became good with better coaching (or even a better team). I thought Jake Plummer fit this to a T. He went from a 70 rating QB with 24 more ints than TDs to an 85 rating QB with 27 more Tds than Ints (and a Pro Bowl) just switching teams/coaches.
Am I the only one who finds that statement hard to comprehend? You said Carr will never be an elite QB but he could become as good as Troy Aikman. Do you mean Troy Aikman is not an elite QB? The guy has only won 3 superbowls.
