What do you mean by to weak? Austin is a small town, not a big major city like Houston. Do you hate the town of Austin, the school, or just Vince?
but isn't that the kind of thinking that put us in this mess originally - they started with a QB instead of focusing on, say, the interior lines...? i think short-term memories and hindsight have blinded the extension process. which isn't to say they did the right thing, but at the time, you could make a very compelling case for keeping carr. and several prominent, experienced NFL personnel men and coaches confirmed it - again, at the time. no one is trying to justify any of that; just discuss it more objectively. i think the perceived expectation of a QB, especially in today's NFL, is greatly overblown. everyone complains carr's nothing more than a game manager... and yet, i look at the last 10 super bowl-winning QBs, and i see two legitimate playmakers among the bunch: favre and warner. if you want to toss in brady's two most recent SBs, ok - but certainly not his first. so 4 of 10 QBs were playmakers - the rest? game managers. if that. i think carr would have been more productive than roethlisberger; johnson; dilfer had he played for those teams. carr isn't leading anyone to the super bowl; nor is any other QB all by his lonesome. manning can't do it w/o the defense stepping up; the eagles may do it with the back-up... i think too much emphasis is being placed on the qb position. the game has changed; every unit has to be up to par or you will get exposed week-to-week. that's why this white-hot intensity over carr is out of control. maybe, probably, they are better off moving on. but it solves 1 of roughly 22 problems on the team. and if they don't address those other 21 sufficiently, no qb is going to succeed here.
This is so true. I, for one, was staunchly in favor of keeping and extending Carr. I thought he'd be an above-average QB. Lots of NFL execs and scouts agreed. 16 games later, all I can say is, "Damn." I understand the arguments you make here. True. But before the season began, you, I and many others were arguing that this was the *least* of the 22 problems, if it was a problem at all. It still might not be the greatest of the 22 problems, and they need to address the other 21, but they need to fix this one.
Ric- you are obviously a Texan fan and a knowledgeable one. I am interested in the success of the team. Not any one player. I don't think we have a solid QB, although I readily admit that Carr is serviceable under the right circumstances (like a much better OL, a good RB and a solid defense) and I understand that Carr could improve his pocket presence and playmaking ability though I think it is unlikely (my opinion). I think Sage R. would be more successful in W-L than Carr. I understand the weaknesses the team has at other positions and their impact on the success of the team. My point about the QB position is not that I am a Carr hater, my opinion is that we weren't going to be a Super Bowl contender with Carr anytime soon (it would take too much upgrade everywhere else to overcome his play) The QB's in the 2006 draft provided us a very unique opportunity to upgrade one position and move significantly closer to becoming a contender. It is not that often that just upgrading one position can impact a team like the opportunity the last draft presented. We missed that because we didn't evaluate the opportunity properly. I don't care if Dan Reeves, Kubiak, Bum Phillips, Jimmy Johnson, Mel Kiper and Tex Schram all thought DC should be extended, if they did they were wrong and NFL experts often are. I was very much for drafting VY because I believed at the time he was a once in a lifetime player who was going to impact the game in a very special way. (my opinion hasn't changed) The burr under my saddle is that Mr. McNair seems to speak as the personnel decision maker (and he is the owner so that is fine) but I think he made a huge blunder extending Carr- I would feel much more confident about our future if he would stop defending the whole fiasco. Just be quiet about it and let Kubiak evaluate the team. I really hope Kubiak can make an objective evaluation of the situation. The burr under my saddle will go away when we stop making the kind of blunders that I think are so bad that even I could look at it and tell it wasn't going to work. (Babin, T Johnson, Ragone, Buchanon etc etc) Demeco Ryans Spencer Owen Daniels those kind of draft choices excite me to no end. If they keep making those kind of decisions we will get there. But I can't stand the defenses built for Carr. He was a #1 overall pick QB to build the franchise around and he didn't work out. I will gladly eat crow burrito for breakfast crow sandwich for lunch and fried crow for dinner........If Carr leads us to the playoffs next season. If Carr is not starting we might suffer some in the short term but I think we will be closer to getting to the playoffs long term.
W/L is not a true measure of an individual's worth. i thought you were the forgiving type? really, seriously, it's nearly a year old. and while yes, both had flashes of greatness, let's slow the roll on erecting leinart and/or young statues in canton. both have a ways to go, as do their teams. the titans won three of their 8 games on fortituous happenstances; the texans, meanwhile, lost two games on the final play - let's please not assume young (or leinart) would have brought the good fortune to houston. fair enough, if a tad overblown. and time may prove you right. the texans, however, thought carr could return to '04 form, which was quite good, and they could add a needed pass rusher. again, it is HARD to argue against that. do you want him to throw david carr under the bus? there's at least a 50/50 chance carr could be back next year; why do any more damage to an already delicate sitch? he's getting out there, trying to be "accountable;" - it's an ugly scene; he recognizes that, he's trying to put as happy a face on it. what he says publically, however, doesn't necessarily have anything to do with what's going on behind the scenes. nor does he want to potentially kill carr's trade value, btw. you keep preaching distance and patience... and showing none yourself. the season hasn't ended yet and you seem upset with their progress in evaluating carr... understood, but i don't think people are defneding as much as trying to push for more level-headedness... unlike this. so carr is keeping the team out of the playoffs? you keep deflecting how much blame carr deserves, then heap it all on him. they're closer by how much? how many games is carr costing the team? i think that kind of thinking is unrealistic. no, is unfair - it MAY be true, but it might not. like you, i'm content to let kubiak and smith make that determination; i don't think mcnair is fudging it.
ric- i'm not trying to be a jackass. i do a pretty good job without trying. but i have to point something out here. the comment you responded to with the post i quoted above was when rhester said, "The QB's in the 2006 draft provided us a very unique opportunity to upgrade one position and move significantly closer to becoming a contender." this is what i mean when i say it's difficult to talk to you about things because you constantly move the target. no where in there was he suggesting that these guys were HOF bound. he suggested that it appears there were 3 QB's in that draft that would have upgraded the position, thus moving us closer to becoming a contender. that's it. that's all. not "VY is the greatest man who ever lived!!!" when you consistently restate the position you're arguing with in the guise of some extreme, it is confusing at best. it just makes it very difficult.
W/L is not a true measure of a Quarterbacks worth.??? I can sort of see why the Sabremetricians say that W/L isn't a good stat in baseball cause of run support, defense etc. But if you are saying Carr is worth more than the amount of wins he has I can buy that argument. But if Sage or Vince or Kolb or my aunt Ethyl can win more with the same talent around him what combination of completion percentage, arm strength, QB rating makes Carr better if he loses more.
i appreciate the sentiment, MM. but in the same post, he later says this: (emphasis mine) i wasn't the one who took it to an extreme; i was the one trying to haul it back from the nether reaches of extreme... that is, and continues to be my beef. i appreciate yours, rhester's and everyone else's opinion of vy; i enjoy discussing sports. but if your side [for lack of a better term] is going to blur the line with their own version of reality, i feel compelled to stand up to it. this group tosses around A LOT of absolutes, and quite a few of them have been, and continue to be flat-out wrong. an example just from this thread includes (not meaning to pick on you, rhester): he hasn't even played six seasons, let alone NOT shown any progress. if i'm on an extreme, i can promise, it's to balance someone else's extreme. i'm someone who tries to deal in "facts;" tangible evidence that proves or disproves X. i'm not perfect; i'm not above screwing up; i try and be forthcoming on both fronts. but let's be honest - he started it.
fair point, ric. i still agree with his statement. both of them, actually!! the first one i feel is bordering on fact. the second one is my wild opinion...that he is a special, once-in-a-generation player. but his first statement wasn't VY exclusive. it included leinart and cutler, either of whom i'd rather have on my team than david carr.
i might, as well, all things being equal. but MM, as has been pointed out countless times, things have never been equal in this equation. if you take young, leinart or cutler over carr, you also have to give up williams (or bush, had they drafted him instead) - the #1 pick and carr are a package deal; joined at the hip. in that light, the texans made the right, responsible, and safe call (up to actually drafting the player) at the time. to assume 2005 was the norm, and that three years of quantifiable progress was the exception, all to gamble on a college athlete knowing the failure rate of draft choices, would have been irresponsible.
and i'll agree to disagree. i'd rather have young, cutler or leinart than david carr and mario williams. i completely disagree that taking a chance on talent would have been irresponsible...they took a chance on mario williams, and we still don't know how that will pan out. it's all a gamble. when you have the #1 pick, you take the best available talent on the board. i have a hard time believing that was mario williams. i think time will prove i'm right on that. the safe call isn't always the right call. particularly when you have very little to lose.
more than david carr and reggie bush? remember, we're only stuck with mario williams (which sounds more negative than i intended) because the texans selected him. but when the decision on carr had to be made, bush was still very much a fixture in the discussion, if not the overriding element. so you'd trade carr and bush for young, leinart or cutler? which is why i qualified with, "up to actually drafting the player". i, too, advocated BPA; the consensus BPA was bush. i still think he was the right choice for so many reasons; but let's not forget: mario williams was graded VERY highly; and STILL would have been picked ahead of vy, by, of all teams, NO, the franchise everyone keeps holding up as an example of where the texans SHOULD be right now. but as i've also pointed out numerous times, the rockets passed on jordan, too. point being, williams merely has to live up to expectations; the rest is irrelevant.
yes, i said then i would rather have VY than Bush and Carr. i'll scream that even louder today. the only reason NOLA would have passed on VY is because they had already answered their QB question with Drew Brees. we do not know what they woudl have done had they not already invested that much money at the QB spot with Brees.
They probably would have taken Vince and done the same thing they did to the last highly touted UT product they drafted:
in all seriousness, they were either going MW, aj hawk, or d'brick; that was pretty much set in stone based on pre-draft, bush-still-going-to-houston chatter. VY wasn't in their plans. and MM, with the second pick, they could have saved money on brees, knowing one of the "one in a lifetimers" was gonna be there... but they didn't. so signing brees meant they weren't enamored with any of them. it's funny how a rather pedestrian individual season (and that's being generous) has become the fuel for "i told you so" in vy camp. he had a fine rookie season; at times, he was great (including a certain 39-yard run), but, really? you would have traded carr and bush for vince young?....
dude, who are you even addressing this to? no one in this thread is pleading for another year of david carr.
