The extra four wins is distinction enough, whether one recognizes it or not. What are underlying factors? Name them. And, be sure to note if there's been any change in the factors you name.
and it was applied retroactively to his downfall - "in hindsight, they never gave him any competion...." and that concern, apparently, is no longer relevant - you'd think, once bitten and all. but apparently, lack of competion concerns are exclusive to david carr. it just speaks to the depth of people's... dislike of david carr, and i find it interesting that they're unquestionably embracing the era of "not david carr" - could come back to bite 'em...
i like how you start with a declarative statement: hedge a little bit: and then fully declare the jury still out: ... all in one post. skepticism is understood; no one here is handing this regime a free pass - the bitter aftertaste of the brain-dead r****d is still present. at the same time, we're not so quick to condemn the new regime, either. had we not witnessed genuine progress last year - both tangible and intangible - then we'd be all over smith and kubiak, too. our patience is thin. the problem, perhaps, stems from you not fully recognizing how horrible the team was in 2005. they've essentially ripped it down, save for two guys: AJ and dunta - everyone else from the previous regime is merely a placeholder. unfortunately, things were so bad, not only did the team lack talent at the top of its roster, but lacked any form of depth behind. 2006 was, very nearly, the expansion year all over again - that's how awful the previous regime was. i posted this in another thread, but in their first four drafts, they made 14 selections in rounds 1-3... and have six players to show for it. they found as many pro bowlers on day 1 (1) as they did on day 2 and this was with them drafting in the top ten 3 of those 4 years, plus having extra picks thru the expansion process. 4 of their day 1 picks - FOUR! - aren't even in the league anymore, including one who couldn't make the roster during its expansion year. and that's not counting the 4 day 1 picks they used to acquire babin and buchannon. i posted it earlier, i'll say it again; the texans should schedule casserly's execution at halftime of the home opener - i can't believe there was a worse-run franchise than this one between 2002 and 2005.
That is a fair observation. Your description above of the epic ineptitude and complete incompetence of the previous regime is well-done.
Ric, you don't seem to grasp the point that what you and I consider progress are two different things. From reading your posts, you place an enormous amount of blame on Casserly & Capers and that's OK with me. They were stupid, incompetent dimwits who were paid handsomely for the mess they left behind. I go one step further and place the majority of the blame on McNair because he allowed this fiasco to grow and develop into the mess you so ably describe. In my world, McNair did the unthinkable: he recreated the sorriness of the Houston Oilers. Now, you are the type of person who looks at numbers, etc. in an to quantify improvement and again, that's OK with me. Where you see substantive progress, I see only marginal signs that could be progress. We'll just have to agree to disagree on this issue. Now you are being unreasonable and a bit closed-minded. Nowhere have I ever said as much to anyone here because I respect everyone's opinions. I am not here to prove myself right and everyone else wrong, I am just stating what I see and feel as is everyone else here. The facts are that yes they had a shot at 8 wins but fell short so they won 6 games. The year before they won 2 games. My reaction is so what? Two wins or six wins, this is still a bad team and as I have posted above, I have seen many many bad teams over the years do the same thing only to remain bad in the end. My hope is that the Texans can somehow escape that fate. If they go 6-10 again then they go 6-10 again. They could also go 5-11 or 4-12. They could also go 8-8. That's just the way it is with bad teams. Once again you accuse me of something of which I'm not. We simply disagree on the issue of progress. You say it exists and is significant while I say in my opinion it's not. It's nothing personal. Also, the issue is not one of personal satisfaction for me because as I have posted earlier, I have come to expect nothing from the Houston professional teams. I'm simply not as emotionally vested in the Texans as are you and the others here. I must confess that I am somewhat amazed that this is so troubling to you because I really enjoy reading your posts and visiting your website.
thanks - it staggers me; i mean, flat-out floors me. 14 picks and four of them are out of football???! just five years later! those guys should be 26-27 years old and entering the prime of their careers... and i sincerely believe, given another year, that the numbers will only get worse. pitts and weary seem like, at best, nice back-ups; neither has really asserted themselves or stood out and are 2/3 of the only constant with the worst OL in nfl history. and i assume johnson's days are numbered; babin's too, probably - they're undoubtedly on their last legs. johnson will be luck to make the team. so in five years, we could be starring at having 2 - TWO! - first round picks left on our roster from our first five drafts... i mean - it's nearly impossible to be that bad.
Again, I have to ask the question: Why is is so important for me to agree with your definition of progress? That fact that I make no distinction between 2 wins and 6 wins should not matter to you and Ric (or anyone else) in the least. This is what I feel. You guys feel differently. Cool. I'm Ok with that and I admire the strength of your convictions. I'm not saying that everyone else should feel the same way as do I. That would be rude.
fair enough. but if the object of the game is to win...how do you measure progress other than wins? it seems to me that's the penultimate way to measure real progress..but everything else is subjective and speculative.
i've pointed my finger in mcnair's direction many times. he bungled casserly's resignation, letting him not only hang around far too long, but also by failing to make a declarative "you're fired, now get out!" statement to the team and fans. instead, he let the sorry SOB slink out of town in the dead of night w/o having to answer for his failings. he also bungled the draft last year - it was a public relations nightmare that he allowed - mario may or may not have been the right pick, but their handling of the entire process was, irrefutably, awful. as a whole, mcnair's been much too passive in running the team. plus, of course, he takes the blame for hiring the guys in the first place. at the same time, he trusted the guys to do their job and that's what an owner's supposed to do. if casserly earned a F-(infinity), then I'd give mcnair a D+. well, yeah - you kinda did here: "Especially when they blew a chance at two more wins but guys like Ric keep pointing to this as evidence that something real was accomplished last season." no one is arguing six wins, in and of itself, is anything to celebrate. it IS still a bad team... but at least now it's a bad team with some reason for optimism. because six wins on the heels of two is, by any measure, progress. again, you have to walk before you can run - what would you consider "progress"? it's troubling because, frankly, times have been better for professional football in this town. i don't think a single one of us, six years ago, would have EVER anticipated the franchise turning into what it has indeed become - not just a bad team (which is it) but a bad team that inspires ridicule beyond city limits and (most amazingly) apathy within it. so to constantly revisit an idea that, everyday, (we hope) becomes more and more a part of the past makes an already impatient, frazzled, disappointed fan base that much more agitated. yeah, we get it: THEY SUCK! no one here will dispute that, but to continue to bring it up, over and over, is too easy and has long-ago grown tiresome. why not, instead, be original and embrace the sliver of hope they're starting to provide? isn't that far more refreshing?
I stand by my belief as expressed in that 1st statement. I did not "hedge" at all - I really did see something positive from Rick Smith on camera talking about the salary cap mess. I found it encouraging but that in and of itself does nothing to change my opinion that this is a bad team. The jury, for me at least, is still out about these guys. Skepticism is indeed warranted here and for good reason. But how you approach this situation depends a lot on your personal experiences and beliefs. There are a lot of things wrong with the Texans and much remains to fix. It will take time and patience is indeed wearing thin in Houston where rightly or wrongly, pro football fans haven't been given much of a reason to believe in this team. Guys like MSN & yourself are true believers who want to see good things happen and as I said before, that's OK. What you perhaps need to understand (and come to accept) is that not everyone is a true believer. Actually I do understand all too well. You see, this is why I really like your posts. In a few short paragraphs, you have summarized the sorry existence of the Houston Texans far better than I ever could. Am I ever onboard with that. You have no idea how infuriating I found it watching Casserly on CBS last year being described as the "General Manager". Ha! Scheduling an epileptic baboon would have been a better choice.
Boy, are you ever an angry guy... Well, to be honest, you do feel something real was accomplished last year in their getting to 6 wins. This was not intended to be a slap at your position. I save my insults for Cowboys fans... Progress? I'm forced to agree with what Jesse Solomon wrote today: progress will be when I can see evidence of a successful team: Quality players on the roster, salary cap room available and draft picks to work with. When the Texans can be described as a team that is positioned to succeed, that, to me, will be evidence of progress. Hmmm, apparently you missed the Bill Peterson regime with the Houston Oilers. You can catch it on the first volume of the NFL Football Follies... And that's the real shame here because things really didn't have to end up that way. A truly golden opportunity was squandered and for what? Houston got another pro football team on a fluke circumstance - the league wanted to put this team in Los Angeles. They bucked the odds and paid some serious money to get football back in what should have been a fresh start for everyone. All McNair had to do was study the history of the Houston Oilers and learn from the mistakes of others. In hindsight, was that really too much to ask?
i have no idea who jesse solomon is, but he/she is, frankly, a moron if you've accurately captured their opinion in your post. salary cap and draft picks are not, in any way, shape or form a measure of success. they could help you achieve success, certainly, but let's ask the titans how ample cap room and numerous picks has worked out for them this offseason of zero significant acquisitions and a texans-equaling D grade for their draft from SI. in terms of quality players, the team is indeed short in that area, thanks to the horrorfic drafting of casserly. but here's where the position begins to lose steam: in 2005, how many quality players would you say the texans had? johnson and robinson, of course. maybe mathis. davis. but both guys showed ample signs of being brittle. now, just a year later? add ryans, williams and okoye, certainly, meaning you doubled the # of quality players in 12 months. pam anderson wasn't built in a day, and the texans won't be, either. more encouraging, imo - you've at last found some middle-ground guys to fill some gaps - green, flannigan, weaver. plus landed some youngsters with potential - schaub, daniels, spencer and winston. again, go back to december 2005 - what did the team have moving forward? this isn't night and day-like improvements? just in a year?
Solomon is a blogger in the Chronicle. He's been called worse. Actually, his article in today's Chronicle is quite fair. I have to disagree with you here. To me, they are a great measure of the franchise itself because this speaks directly as to how smartly it conducts its business. To me that is the key element that separates winning franchises from losing ones. Solomon is talking about the Patriots in his article but the same could be said of the Colts as well. I believe that a well run franchise should always have ample amounts of both. The Texans have neither and that alone should tell you all you need to know about this franchise. You have put far better than I ever could in earlier posts. Think about it for a second: this team is a bad team yet they have severe cap problems (read dead money taking up valuable cap space) AND a dearth of draft picks. That is almost a perfect storm of misfortune. And you have already described how they have literally wasted past picks on guys who couldn't play and are out of the league. Again, this is not the fault of Regime #2 but it's the reality under which they must operate and the legacy they must somehow live down. OK, here's my take: Ryans is a player, I give you that. Kid's got skillz. Williams and Okoye look to be developmental players - that is players who will require a few years before they start producing at a high level. Williams was a reach pick at #1 in the 2006 draft. To explain: while I feel he was a first round talent, I don't consider him the overall best player in that draft. It's one year later and I'm still seeing the "IF" word being used to describe his production potential and that gives me pause. My philosophy is that a guy picked that high should not come with an "IF" to describe his play. I would have preferred they had picked a QB with that pick but that's just me (and no, I did not mean you-know-who). As for the offseason body swaps (my description), I suppose they are OK more or less. Something had to be done, right? It's just that I plan to wait to see how well they perform against live competition before I start signing the Texans' praises. I have no real expectations in this matter all - I won't be looking for specific wins and losses. Instead I'll be looking at how these players and this team perform against the opposition.
RM95 served up a wicked bit of hyperbole last month that had me doubled over with laughter. Your hyperbole is top shelf as well. DaDakota's scares me at times. And speaking of hyperbole, did you catch the Fran Blinebury Internet Chat yesterday? Some of the stuff he said about Tmac was outright funny. For example: Enjoy Game 5. And if you see Tracy McGrady, tell him it starts at 7. Meoooow!
