The damage has already been done... the Texans failed to address the o-line from day ONE, and made the mistake of drafting a QB with the first overall pick for an expansion team. They then failed to acquire one single player on the line that would have been an above average starter for any other team... not one. I don't CARE who was playing QB back there... it could have been Joe Montana, and this team still wouldn't have sniffed playoffs. (and if you think they would, you are clueless). They finally start addressing one of the most fundamental aspects of a football team in year 5? Give me a break... by that time, they wasted the first 5 years no matter who they had back there. If it were up to me, I'd have started with the o-line or d-line REGARDLESS... who cares about being 4-12 or 5-11 in years one and two... they needed to build the lines from day one, and didn't really commit to it till year 5. The short-sightedness that pervased throughout the team (from the top to the bottom) was mind-boggling. The only thing that would have made it worse was if this was actually an established team with any semblance of depth... and Casserly came in here and revamped it to what it was when he was canned. But, alas it was an expansion team... so he got out with using the excuse that they were trying to build something for the future, and it never got going (IMO, it never got started). Multiple first/second/third round picks (designed to help build depth) WASTED on Babin, Jopporu, Buchannon. FA acquisitions WASTED. None of this is really new... its just hillarious to think that Carr was the end-all/be-all of this failure. He wasn't... and I refuse to make the same mistakes again (and they likely won't be made, as long as there isn't some bizzaro honeymoon expansion period where the team can do no wrong... and Casserly isn't in charge).
no one - not a single soul - is saying this. we don't think he's the bestest; we (or, i) think he's the best option available. that's it.
I'm not for getting rid of carr at this point either, but I do expect him to have to compete if he is here. I don't feel change for the sake of change is going to improve this organization. just draft a project and let the chips fall where they may. part of the problem is no matter what side of the fence you're on, we don't have enough info to know how much we can blame on carr and how much we can blame on team. its just another ramification of the stupidity of the previous regime.
sage competed last year. this is overtly simple. he took the ball out of carr's hands in some games due to his poor play; true. but the OL was decimated by injuries; no one beyond AJ stepped up and established themselves as a viable playmaker (and even AJ struggled with that role) and (at last) the running game slowly but surely emerged. it wasn't simply: carr plays bad = take ball away from carr. football is not ever that black and white.
Lets just say that EVERYTHING the previous regime did was idiotic, and everything the newer regime has done is what should have been done from day ONE. Drafting a stud d-lineman (Peppers), using multiple early round picks to build up an offensive line, spending wisely in free agency on good/solid playmakers (not simply overpaying for players that only fit one system, and one system only)
I don't really hold drafting Carr against them. They had to establish a face for the franchise. You can't do that if you pass over a QB to take a DE, no matter how much football sense it may or may not make at the time. Key phrase being "at the time".
Sage was not given a legit chance to compete for the starting job last year. It was all carrs from the start. Remember - it was an evaluation year of Carr under the new regime. Towards the end of the year, the evaluation was that they needed to take the ball out of his hands. imo, sage would have seen significantly more playing time towards the end of the season had he not got hurt.
I heard Bob McNair pooped close to Dallas. That means he might be in talks with them to trade for Carr.
I keep seeing a post in this thread and I think IT HAPPENED! No one in the Texan organization said that. It wasn't during training camp, didn't happen in pre-season... The only time I remember them going head to head in a competitive situation was the game at Tenn.- Carr started as the starter and it was handed to him and it wasn't even his job to lose until he began to have some embarrassing fumbles that angered Kubiak. I agree True My favorite Carr excuse- All bad OL's become pro bowlers when the backup comes in the game. Playmaker? Playmaker? When has DC ever been a playmaker? I know- you can't be a playmaker without players. Castoff stiffs like Jabar Gaffney even make plays when your QB is a playmaker. - Kubiak said they were going to focus on getting the running game going right after Carr was struggling- 'translation' we are going to throttle off the passing game and try to win by putting more focus on the running game. No is was that simple. They stopped looking to him to make plays downfield in the passing game and THEY placed the emphasis on the running game and short passing game. They changed their offensive strategy to try to stay in games and reduce the key fumbles and lack of good decisions Carr was struggling with. Once he was pulled in Nashville it was obvious and stated that the leash was shortened. Kubian himself said they were going to make changes to give themselves a better chance to win.
if so, then they severely underestimated their audience. first of all, we would have been fired up if they had drafted bo jackson's artificial hip first overall at that point. secondly, and more importantly, we were all smart enough to see the logic in peppers over carr - hell, they were able to sell us on MW over RB and VY and get nearly 100% buy-in; we all would have loved peppers, especially given that carr, while mightly impressive, was not the certified best prospect in that draft; many didn;t even think he was the best QB. remember, we're the same fans who watched the oilers draft "boring" lineman for consecutive years in the first round back in the early 80s, some guys named mun-something and clay matthews......... just footnotes these days. what happened to those guys?
I'm saying we should of... the drafting of Mario this year was parallel to what they should have done in year one... draft Peppers.
That's exactly what they did... they got a face for the franchise. It was entirely STUPID because at the time, they didn't really need a face to sell tickets/merchandise. People were buying jerseys with the #32, and the name "NFL" on the back (to signify the 32nd team). When the honeymoon was finally over, they were left with a crap-tastic overall team, and the same "face". I never thought Carr would be a dominant superstar (you simply can't assume that about any NFL player)... but I thought he could have been a helluva lot better if they had built the team like most teams are built (starting in the trenches).
this is complete conjecture; you have absolutely no idea what was happening during camp, on the practice field, behind closed doors, during preseason games. as noted: moving the football becomes infinitely easier when teams build a lead and go vanilla. huh? kubiak's offense is set-up to put running backs and receivers in position to break games open. his top priority this offseason was to find playmakers - why? because they currently have none. QBs are glorified playmakers; idolized by a growing mass of casual fans who want quick, easy analysis and answers. football is not quick or easy. no QB does it by himself. kubiak's focus is ALWAYS on the running game; it's the foundation of this system. it didn't change and take on more priority as the season wore on. don't mistake it finally getting on track as being a component of kubiak not making it a priority. so losing 3 of your five starting OL had absolutely no influence on them changing their offensive philosophy? the lack of running game the first 9 weeks of the season wasn't in any way, shape or form hurtful to what they were trying to do? carr struggled the second half last year; he reverted to form after a fairly decent first half. his shortcomings were fairly evident, but so, too, were the contributing factors. why are the contributing factors always ignored and/or conveniently dismissed? do you think we're making them up? glorifying them? are the injuries figments of our imagination? did they maybe not rush for 15 yards on 11 carries against the jets (one of several abysmal performances fro mthe backs last year)? i mean, you guys act like we're making up or embellishing things.
Im ready to go to war one more year with Carr. I dont like the other options. Im jumping big on the Joe Staley bandwagon...with his size and quickness, I think he can be a perfect fit into our line. And with a healthy Spencer, we've got our bookends. Only problem is that I dont see how we can get Staley unless we trade down...Our #8 to NE for their 24 and 28...or #8 to Chicago for their 31, 37, and 4th rounder. If we trade with NE, imagine drafting... 24. Robert Meachem 28. Joe Staley 39. Brandon Merriweather or 24. Reggie Nelson 28. Joe Staley 39. Sidney Rice or 24. Reggie Nelson 28. Joe Staley 39. Marcus McCauley Damn, I can play this game with myself all day...
I'm not saying I think they did the right thing, I'm just saying I (sort of) understand the mindset they had at the time they drafted Carr. And I'm CERTAINLY not condoning ANY of the moves they made (or didn't make) AFTER drafting him.
