Chronic: Texans coaches deserve much blame; Carr being Carr

Your words by themselves are plenty to convict your lame argument; I don't need to add to them at all.

You sure didn't. You've avoided that one since it was mentioned. Yet he fits perfectly in this conversation. If you're going to judge Mario by that standard, then why not judge others by it?

I'm sorry; others said "bust". You said, "failure".

You said he's "sucking right now".

I'm going to take your statements to their logical ends, whether you like it or not. Do you have the acumen to answer or just cry about it? If crying doesn't work, why don't you revert to the name-calling and nasty talk you fell back on last week when your stupid take was picked apart? Or was it Solomon's stupid take that was picked apart?

You, too!

 

you are really having to much of a reaction about a small mention about mario's play, which was terrible in that game. seems to me you just want a paper that always pumps up the home team. the texans knew they had to rely on the defense that game. it let them down, mario included, case closed.

the d line has to be the stallwart on this team. its where their greatest investment is. the stupidity of the cornerback argument is that we know the corners are subpar because they didn't spend a lot on them. they spent on the d-line.

 

i don't know anything about freeney this year, i'm not going to argue about ever de iin the league.

what are freeney's and peppers' sack totals their first years

he is, go read the carolina papers even though i know you know more than them.

and you're the guy who needs ric to make your arguments

 

dude, not trying to jump all over you (I disagree that Mario is sucking), but because Jerome Solomon has paid his dues and has worked for the Boston Globe, we shouldn't disagree with his takes? I disagree with him all the time...almost as much as Justice.

He usually writes about his opinions (a columnist, not a reporter) and half the time I laugh. He may know a lot of facts about sports (which is part of his job), but that does not make his opinions correct

 

He usually writes about his opinions (a columnist, not a reporter) and half the time I laugh. He may know a lot of facts about sports (which is part of his job), but that does not make his opinions correct[/QUOTE]

Reminds me of Woody Page!

 

you're right, that's why I said he should be respected, not he should always be agreed with

 

gotcha. I'll let you guys go back to arguing in circles now

 

I understand people hate some media guys, i would be a hyporcrite is I said I don't. i probably took it to personally.

 

nah, no worries. tends to happen when you are arguing against multiple people in a thread over a week.

 

I don't care how folks outside of Houston view the Texans. I think I've stated many a time I'm not really a Texans fan. But I do think folks outside of Houston, coaches and managers on the team and Mario himself will care if he does not get sacks. They drafted him #1 to be a pass rushing DE and sacks typically go along with that, especially when you are drafted #1.

You may not care about individual players but I would hope you would expect people to live up to their draft position and salary. If not, then what is the point of drafting them ahead of others, or paying them so much money? Mario is being paid a "gamechanger" salary. Yesterday he had a game changing play, which just happened to be a sack (which is how rushing DE's typically have their game changng plays).

And for those listing out other DE's and their poor numbers for this season with "they must suck too" comments, it's quite fine to say they are sucking/not producing like they should now. Those guys typically get sacks and now they aren't coming. Visit their message boards or team papers and I'm pretty sure you will see fans saying that they need to step it up. And to clarify, I don't think Mario has sucked this season...I just think he needs to get some sacks.

 

he has 3 through 5 games. he'd finish at about 11...in his second year...if he kept on this pace.

then it will be..."yeah, but the sacks really aren't because of him...they're because he's just getting lucky in positioning."

 

who cares what people outside of houston think? and no, if mario is positively impacting the team's defense, especially its pass rush, then they don't care about his sack total.

that's **** for agents and media people to worry about and keep track of.

last year against these same dolphins, he had a game-changing play: he deflected a two-point conversion that would have tied the game late... does that not count because he was apparently ONLY drafted, and will ONLY be evaluated by the number of sacks he collects?

its myopic and silly. it's like judging andre johnson ONLY on the # of TDs he scores, which would make him, given his draft position and salary, a giant bust.

 

I don't think I have ever tried to discredit the positive contruibutions Mario has made. He has been solid...not great. An 11 sack season is pretty darn good.

 

I would think most fans care what folks outside of Houston think. It impacts how many national games the Texans get to play, what the media says about them, etc. Ya know, that thing called "respect level".

You think no one on the team cares what folks outside of Houston think (pro-bowl voters, endorsement givers, etc)? I'm going to go out on a limb and assume sometime in the past 5 years you have made some type of post with a link to a media site outside of Houston, and gave props to or highly disagreed with what someone had to say about your team. The whole city of Houston seemed to care when SI dissed us after our first title. Folks are still sensitive about all the heat the team/city took after last year's draft (check the current Bush threads). I would say you care somewhat.

We have nothing to support either side of this argument but I still stand by the team caring if Mario isn't getting sacks when they invested so much in him. They could have found someone in round 3 to positively impact the team defense. Mario was drafted to be a big difference maker.

Who said to only judge him by sacks? I said it's silly not to use sacks in your analysis...to act like it doesn't matter if he gets them or not. The game changing play against the Dolphins last year was nice. Did I say DE's only made game-changing plays via sacks, or that is how they typically make them?

No, it's like trying to judge Andre Johnson and dismissing the # of receptions he gets...and saying he is performing up to his draft status because the Texans as a whole have a nice passing attack.

I think you are quite confused by what I'm trying to say. Sacks matter. You can't dismiss them from your analysis. They aren't all that matters but it's silly to say it doesn't matter if he gets them or not. If someone says Mario isn't living up to the task because he has 4 sacks for the year then they are correct. One of the main reasons he was drafted was to put the QB on his butt. You don't draft pass-rushing DE's #1 to hold the line, etc. You draft them to get after the QB.

 

What exactly are you disagreeing with? I see you're pretty worked up in this thread - I wasn't trying to get in the middle of all that.

You do understand, though, that it really doesn't work to take one or two players out of fairly large number of them and use that as the basis for your argument, right?

I didn't really say anything bad about Mario - in fact, I am fairly positive on him right now - but you are acting as irrational as the posters you are trying to criticize.

Definitely. I think the improvement is obviously there. I do however, feel that the idea that he has been downright 'great' this season is off base.

I still believe that Mario can be consistently great, though. I look forward to that.

 

This idiotic notion that the only way to evaluate a DE is by looking at sack totals. That's the only thing I've argued. Whoever brought up Freeney brought up a fantastic example of an outstanding DE who doesn't have a bunch of sacks the last 21 games. That's a great example of what I'm talking about. Mario's not Freeney yet; he's not a pro bowler yet, but to say he's a "failure" because of sacks is stupid. That's all I'm saying.

I'm pretty worked up. Go back and check who's been dishing out insults left and right to multiple people. I've posted a lot in this thread, but I've stuck to the subject matter.

Indeed I do. In fact, the fact that the style of play for defensive ends varies so much supports my argument. You can't take one number, look at it exclusively, and declare a failure or a success. It's just irresponsible.

Honestly, I don't remember any post you've made in this thread.

Because of my using the Freeney example to my advantage? If what you're saying is, "Dude it's a dead horse, let it go" then I hear you. But I'm not the only to keep arguing it, and I haven't dished out one insult or profanity-laced tirade.

This is reasonable. I've heard several say this, and frankly I'm sure everyone who's said this--even pgabriel--knows the game better than I do. But what I'm waiting for, and it's not too much to ask, is an intelligent analysis of how MW has actually played. What has he inconsistent in, specifically? I'm not denying that he's been inconsistent. I think he's been playing great. But I can be persuaded by some intelligent analysis. (Just not by some idiotic recitiation of one number in a box score.)

 

I'm still trying to figure out how Solomon got into this mix. On page 2, you said, "If Mario doesn't get ten sacks he's a failure". I said that's stupid. That's all I've said.

Somehow along the line, you have attributed that take to Jerome Solomon, in some column I haven't read. (Which is amazing, considering how you make fun of me for using Ric's example. Now we learn that the take you defend so hard all week wasn't even your own. Not the first time I've seen someone on a UBB hold himself to one standard and everyone else to another.)

My take on the paper has been the same for years. For years I've called out the Houston "Comical" with much the same language I used in the post you quote. It's *not* about "pumping up the home team", it's about giving us something beyond what any sports radio caller can drone out or any idiot on a UBB (myself included) can type when he should be working. These guys have a level of access that the rest of us will never enjoy. They have a degree in journalism, in which they studied and rehearsed creating prose that has some quality to it--not just sarcastic smack talk that any of us can come up with. It's not about always talking "nice" about the home team. It's about excellence, and the Chronicle sports section has long been devoid of excellence. Jerome saying something as stupid as this is only the most recent in a long, long line of examples.

 

What exactly, do you feel is the best way to evaluate a DE? And I'm talking numbers, yes...because if you are trying to tell me that numbers are not a primary method of evaluation in sports I think I, and many sports fans out there, will have to agree to disagree with you there.

So what number is best in your opinion for helping with that evaluation?

Also, I certainly never said it was the 'only' way. Not at all. But if you're trying to honestly tell me that it has not been one of the major stats - if not THE major - for a DE over the years and among the majority of National Football League fans, historians, players and media members well - again, you're probably going to find yourself in the minority.

That's because I've only made three, I believe. And yet you've quoted two of them. Might want to get that memory checked, it might help with your evaluation ability.

And that's fair. I'm just not sure it will help, though. I don't mean to knock you on this - but weren't you one of the ones who pretty regularly defended Carr? There were many, many MANY threads listing what people thought were his faults and analyzing Carr and our team.

That was another case where two people were watching the same game...and saw something completely different.

So I kind of think you guys are beating a dead horse, at least with the parties present. I'm not really sure anyone is going to convince anyone else in here.

 

You judge a DE primarily by watching the game.

 

Let's just do that. I think numbers absolutely must be taken in context of what happens on the field, and by themselves they simply cannot tell the story of what happened, including who made a major impact (especially where defense is concerned).

Indeed, the majority of this conversation has been with others. That's why I don't remember what posts you had made.

Oh, do knock away as I've earned it. The thing with Carr, people were actually telling me (and others) things they *saw* on the field of play that betrayed that he didn't get it, and I didn't listen. Not until like week 5 last year. I'm still happily eating my crow. In that situation, I was actually throwing out numbers while others were telling me what they *saw* on the field. I should have known better.

I think you're right. Cheers!