[Chron] Bob McNair: Carr's future remains in limbo

I certainly don't, based on career results alone.

Now, an argument has been made that cap considerations, etc. make the small upgrade that is Jake Plummer not even worth the trouble--and I have no beef with that argument. Despite my opinion that it's best if Carr moves on, I will trust whatever decision the Texans come to.

 

My view is that Carr's reasonable best (what you realistically hope he can be) is probably Plummer's worst. Plummer's upside is much higher (pro-bowl QB) while his downside is a Carr-like game manager.

From my understanding, it would cost a $2MM cap hit each of the next two years to release Carr. So, if you can sign Plummer for $6MM, you're breaking even. If you're signing him for $8MM, you're basically paying $2MM for the upgrade. I can't imagine him making more than that at this point, and probably less. If, by some miracle, the Texans make the playoffs next year, you also have the benefit of not having a QB starting his first-ever playoff game so you get a little bit of veteran leadership there.

That tradeoff for $2MM is completely worth the potential performance upgrade in my mind. Plus, just the boost you get from a change, even if its for the sake of change, is worth something as well.

 

how many others feel like Carr is a better QB than Jake Plummer?

That would be me.

 

I get that based on cap considerations there might be concerns.

But I haven't seen Carr come remotely close to what I've seen Plummer do. I realize not all of that is Carr's fault. But I can only tell you what I've actually seen. The rest is guesswork as to how Plummer would do with what Carr has had to work with...or how Carr would do with what Plummer has had to work with.

 

I'm surprised theres that many that think Carr's potential is more than Plummers.

Personally, I think Carr has had enough chances (maybe not the best, but enough) to show what kind of QB he is and its time to move on. Bringing in Plummer for a few years is fine while we find a new franchise QB.

Trade Carr to Miami for Ricky.

 

When the schedule was posted, I said we'd have a 4 or 5 wins season, and someone said.. so you think we're going to decline and not have a good season.

So yeah.. the Texans are not going to improve. Our team just isn't good enough to compete in the AFC.

 

I DO.

 

ok. why?

 

I do, but I know I'm in a pretty distinct minority on that, and I also think it's irrelevant because it sounds to me like the Texans have already made that decision.

 

I dont. Plummer has his flaws to but he gets the job done and wins games. This may sound crazy but I feel David Carr is a worse decision maker. He just doesnt know how to lead a team. Plummer has more of a winning mentality and is not afraid to make a play if necessary even if it results in a mistake.

 

And, that's a fair question. Plummer ws the same thing Carr was: a smashing college success and a flat disappoinment in the NFL. Only, Plummer was disappointing while with Carr it may now be safe to say, "bust". If it's too early to say, "bust" about Carr, one can certainly say that his career is in need of "reviving" or "saving" at this point.

Plummer's career may also need reviving, but he's been a major contributor to teams that won games, including a playoff game.

I'd be interested to see folks who know more than myself list vital QB skills and compare Carr and Plummer side-by-side in each.

 

and while he certainly had far better talent than Carr has had...Plummer has had some really good years in this league. he won a playoff game with Arizona over the Cowboys in 1998...and he won a playoff game with the Broncos. he was instrumental in both, if i remember correctly.

as my friend from Denver says...you can WIN GAMES with jake plummer. Jake Plummer will absolutely win you some games. He will also lose you some games. But (his words -- though I agree) David Carr isn't going to win you any games. He's not going to be the resounding reason why you win a ball game.

Here's what McLain has to say about Plummer in today's paper:

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/sports/4543685.html

FOR those of you who think Jake would be a mistake for the Texans, here's the lowdown on Plummer's performance at Denver when Gary Kubiak was his offensive coordinator from 2003-05.

Plummer, 32, had a 32-11 regular-season record under Kubiak, going 9-2 in 2003, 10-6 in 2004 and 13-3 in 2005.

Last season, when Mike Heimerdinger returned to Denver to replace Kubiak, Plummer didn't play well and was benched after 11 games. But he was 7-4 as a starter.

In his four seasons with the Broncos, Plummer was 39-15 in the regular season and 1-3 in the playoffs.

When he played for Kubiak, Plummer's touchdown-to-interception ratio was 15-7 in 2003, 27-20 in 2004 and 18-7 in 2005.

That's 60 touchdown passes and 34 interceptions.

Under Kubiak, Plummer had the best passer ratings of his career: 91.2, 84.5 and 90.2.

Denver fans are down on Plummer, who'll be traded or released at some point during the offseason. Remember that Broncos quarterbacks aren't judged on the same scale as Texans quarterbacks.

Fans and media in Denver compare their quarterbacks to John Elway. It's Super Bowl or bust. That's why Jay Cutler is on the front page, and Plummer is yesterday's news in the Rocky Mountains.

 

No smilies?

 

am i the only one who remembers jake plummer before he landed in denver, the NFL's most successful franchise the past 10+ years? he was a borderline awful QB with one good year and loads of unrealized potential who was jettisoned by the cardinals, arguably a worse franchise than the texans.

and now, after losing his job last year to a rookie during a playoff run, he's a 32-year old who's "upside" is the pro bowl even though he's never made one previously?...

i'd rather take my chances with carr (who's 4-5 years younger) unless plummer came at a substantial costs savings, and even then, i'd rather let sage rosenfels start next year while we look for a better option. besides, if i'm plummer and the broncos release me, there are several more viable teams out there than houston, namely chicago. maybe miami. minnesota. i mean, it's not like houston's the only team that needs a QB.

 

Ric, those are compelling arguments. How do Plummer's AZ statistics compare with Carr's Houston statistics?

 

this entire post perplexes me - did you think plummer got the job done and won games in arizona, where the team was 34-62 during his tenure as a starter there? where was his winning mentality then? and how does a "mistake" translate into making a play? isn't that the very reason rex grossman is being driven out of chicago (to abruptly change gears to another famously underachieving QB).

there are certainly better options out there than david carr; but let's not, in our hatred/frustration/impatience/desperation with david carr allow ourselves to recast jake plummer as some poor man's joe montana. good night.

 

good point, I would think if he comes it would be either for the money (hopefully not too much) or to be reunited with Kubiak

 

Ric,

Do you see a contradiction on your part when you argue that Plummer was terrible in Arizona, but you are willing to give Carr a pass in part because of the team that was placed around him? You even acknowledge that the Cardinals are probably a worse franchise than the Texans.

The guy won games in Denver. When he was benched in Denver, it was after a game that was better than the majority of the games started by Carr this year and Denver was still a playoff team with a winning record. Shanahan will never admit it publicly, but I'm guessing he thinks he should've stayed with Plummer a little longer than he did.

 

...wish for a lateral move that would cost cap space and not make much of a difference? I see your point.

Unless you're referring to the post that implied Plummer could make a Pro Bowl, no one's doing this. Some of us think he might turn in a better performance than David has. One certainly doesn't have to be a poor man's Joe Montana to do that!

I would seriously love to see Plummer's first 5 years and Carr's first 5 years, statistically, side by side.