http://espn.go.com/nfl/trainingcamp02/columns/texans/1408567.html Texans built their team the right way -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- By John Clayton ESPN.com HOUSTON -- In April, Dom Capers staked his future on a Carr. After months of reflection, he decided to drive it. David Carr will lead the expansion Houston Texans into their first season as quarterback, and why not? Having coached the most successful first-year expansion team in NFL history, Capers knows the odds. The only thing that expands for an expansion team is the loss column during that first season. Of the nine expansion predecessors, only Capers' Carolina Panthers, who were 7-9 in 1995, won more than four games. History projects a two- or three-win season no matter how well the foundation was built. Make no mistake, the Texans are the best thought-out expansion team. Not a single rookie is projected into the starting defense, and, except for Carr, there doesn't have to be a rookie starter on offense, although six will likely see significant playing time. It's unclear if Tony Boselli will be ready when the Texans begin the regular season. Here's the beauty of the plan put together by general manager Charley Casserly and Capers: They came in under budget. Through smart manipulation of the expansion draft and recognizing that free agency was light on top starters, the Texans' payroll will come in around $83 million, roughly 17 percent over the league's $71.1 million salary cap. Had they followed past expansion spending, their payroll would be about $108 million. The Browns went about 48 percent over the cap in 1999. The Jaguars and Panthers went about 40 percent over. The spending is natural because fans want production immediately, but unfortunately, NFL teams can't be winners in their first season. The starts of initial seasons are especially trying: In the nine previous expansion seasons, the best start was 1-4 by the 1961 Vikings. The earliest an expansion team ever got its second victory was Week 6. Money probably won't change that. "We've spent the least cash ever spent on an expansion team," Casserly said. "We feel that we have pretty good depth for a first-year team." Which is why it makes sense to start the Fresno State rookie. First of all, it's clear he's the best quarterback in training camp. Kent Graham was signed for his experience, but he's a little overweight and enters camp as the No. 3 quarterback. Mike Quinn is listed as Carr's backup. "In Carolina, we took the approach at the beginning that we wanted to go with a veteran guy (Frank Reich), and try to bring the young guy (Kerry Collins) along," Capers said. "After a slow start where we lost the first three games and had a hard time moving the football, it was a real struggle. We had a bye week. We figured that the best thing for the team was to go with Kerry and maybe it will bring us a little spark." Collins finished the season 7-6 as a starter, even though he lost his first two starts. The plan for now is to give Carr the edge, especially since he has earned it. Capers will let Carr start a scheduled scrimmage against the Cowboys, five exhibition games and handle the first snaps in 41 practices. "We stated at the time of drafting him that we were going to give David every opportunity to win the job," Capers said. "We felt that we are going to base our decision on the starting quarterback on who we think gives us the best chance of winning." So it's Carr's job to lose. He enters the NFL with a Brett Favre-type arm. Months of working with offensive coordinator Chris Palmer eliminated a tendency to let his right arm drop to a three-quarters, and sometimes almost sidearm, delivery during his final season at Fresno State. One tool that helped Carr in drills was having a six-foot ladder in front of him to remind him of his release point. "Last year, we got into a little shotgun the second half of the season, and I got a little loose with it," Carr said of his release point. "I got a little bit of Dan Marino-esque." Palmer corrects Carr like a golf pro aids a golfer, keeping the player honest with his mechanics. At Fresno State, Carr completed 64.8 percent of 477 passes, so his coaches there didn't correct anything. Nothing appeared to be broken. Carr faces two inevitabilities. Expansion quarterbacks rarely complete more than 50 percent of their passes, and those that do usually don't get more than 200 yards a game. Fran Tarkenton (Minnesota ), Mark Brunell (Jacksonville) and Tim Couch (Cleveland) were the only expansion starters to complete more than 51 percent of their attempts. Still, Carr has the belief of his teammates that should easily outlast the expected opening losing streak. Part of the reason is the meticulous way Casserly and Capers put this team together. Carr is afforded one of the best offensive lines ever given an expansion-team quarterback. He was afforded a better receiving corps than, say, Couch in Cleveland. Carr throws to Jermaine Lewis, Corey Bradford and rookie Jabar Gaffney. Gaffney worked with Carr at the pre-draft combine and almost got beheaded by a couple of his rockets. "He's strong," Lewis said of Carr. "I didn't know much about him in college, but once I saw him throwing passes around here, he impressed me a lot. He can get some balls in places I haven't seen quarterbacks get the ball to." Like Favre's Green Bay receivers, Lewis and the other Texan receivers occasionally use their bodies to aid in catches on the short passes. "You're not going to catch every pass with your hands," Lewis said. Perhaps the best feel for this expansion team is how successful Casserly was in acquiring veteran starters from winning teams. Virtually every projected defensive starter was on a playoff team recently. Lewis, Bradford, right tackle Ryan Young, tight end Rod Rutledge and halfback James Allen started for playoff teams last year. "That's very important because any time you see people that win, they have work ethic," Pro Bowl defensive tackle Gary Walker said. "They might not necessarily work as hard as anybody else, but it's something that they do differently than anybody else that separates them from the pack. Guys aren't late for meetings. Everyone is attentive. I've been in the locker room of a 14-2 team in Jacksonville. We didn't have as much talent on that team as we have on this team now." Walker and left tackle Tony Boselli are two of the cornerstones, but they start camp on the physically-unable-to-perform list. Walker is recovering from May groin surgery to a tear that he claims was worse than the one suffered by former Jaguars teammate Fred Taylor. Walker hopes to practice by mid-August. Boselli's status is less certain. Since November, he has had three shoulder surgeries, the last about a month ago. "Doctor says he will be playing," Casserly said. But no one knows when. It's probably more likely that Boselli won't start until October at the earliest. If that's the case, former Bears backup Jimmy Herndon or third-rounder Chester Pitts will fill in. Capers is prepared if that happens. His strategy would be to put tight end Rutledge, a 275-pound blocker, next to the left tackle and run the ball more with Allen. Despite the uncertainty of Boselli and Walker, Casserly and Capers are pinching themselves for how well this team came together. They have 97 players, but only four in their 30s. Carr, guard Fred Weary, left tackle Chester Pitts and fullback Jarrod Baxter might be the only rookie starters, but by next season two more could be starting on offense -- Gaffney at receiver and Jonathan Wells at running back. Pitts moved ahead of Herndon at Boselli's left-tackle spot. As long as the Texans don't have a winning season, they will have 15 draft choices next year -- including two second-rounders, three thirds and two fourths -- to improve depth. "We should be solid for next year, and depending on how our team plays will determine how active we will be in free agency," Casserly said. "If things go the way we should, we won't be real active." The Texans have built this expansion team the right way. John Clayton is a senior NFL writer for ESPN.com
prediction: The Texans will win a championship sooner than any other expansion team in history. Go Texans!!
....paging mrpaige I don't know, but I bet none have won a Super Bowl after just one season of existence. Houston 2003/2004 Go Texans!!
Well, if we limit it to Super Bowl Championships, I would guess the Dolphins would be the team. They were a 1966 AFL expansion team and won the Super Bowl after the 1972 season, in just their seventh season. The Jets would follow (ninth season) followed by the Chiefs (tenth season) and then the Cowboys (12th season) Of course, the Oilers won a championship in their first year, but charter members of a league probably don't count (somebody had to win an AFL Championship in 1960 and all the teams were brand new that year). [edited because I can't count]
Looking back at NFL Championships, it appears that the original Cleveland Browns hold the record for fastest from expansion to champion. The Cleveland Browns formed in 1946 (as part of the AAFL) and won the NFL Championship in 1950, which would've been their 5th season. I have decided that the Detroit Lions, Baltimore Colts and Washington Redskins are next in line. The Detroit Lions won the NFL Championship in 1935 in their 6th season, and the Washington Redskins won the NFL Championship in 1937 which was their sixth season. The Baltimore Colts won in 1958, which was also their 6th season. The Rams won an NFL Championship in their 10th season in 1945. So, the list would look like this: 1. Cleveland Browns - 5th Season 2T. Washington Redskins - 6th Season 2T. Detroit Lions - 6th Season 2T. Baltimore Colts - 6th Season 3. Miami Dolphins - 7th Season 4. New York Jets - 9th Season T5. Kansas City Chiefs - 10th Season T5. St. Louis Rams (then Cleveland Rams) - 10th season 6. Dallas Cowboys - 12th Season Of course, this ignores the Charter AFL teams winning AFL Championships. It also ignores Championships won before there was an actual championship game in the NFL (which started in 1933 even though the League was pretty well started in 1920). Technically, though, the Ravens would be tied for number one on the list, too, since they did win a Super Bowl in their fifth year. But the Ravens weren't really an expansion team when they moved to Baltimore. But anyway, it looks like 5 is the number to beat.
great leg work, ryan, though one small, possible quibble -- my AFL history is fuzzy, but the jets began life as the titans, right, which would make them a charter member of the AFL. or did they go bankrupt and the jets came about afterwards? anyway, in case anyone didn't catch it, no championships among the expansion teams since the AFL-NFL merger in '68. off the top of my head, that list includes the saints, seahawks, bucs, jags, panthers and "browns." more alarming, you look at that list and aside from a few years here and there, those have been, primarily, sad sack franchises with a lot of losing in their histories.
I only left out the charter AFL franchises as they related to AFL Championships. I included them in terms of Super Bowl victories since the Super Bowl included the NFL. I figured the original AFL Franchises were coming from about the same place as an NFL franchise in relation to the Super Bowl (but not in relation to their own AFL Championship).
You can even add the Bengals to that (AFL Expansion in 1968). Not to mention that a couple of earlier NFL expansion franchises haven't managed a Super Bowl win, either (The Vikings from 1961 and Falcons from 1966). But at least these three teams have some Super Bowl appearances (seven appearances between them). But the Falcons and Bengals could be considered to be mostly sad-sack franchises despite their three Super Bowl appearances. It's just so surprising to think that only one of the ten teams added to the league(s) after 1960 has won a Super Bowl. Also interesting to me is that just over 1/3 of the Super Bowls played so far have been won by teams that were formed in 1960. Of course, since nine teams were added in 1960, it's not that surprising, I guess. Super Bowls won by teams added in the '20s - 6 (Cards, Bears, Giants, Packers) Super Bowls won by teams added in the '30s - 8 (Eagles, Steelers, Lions, Redskins, Rams) Super Bowls won by teams added in the '40s - 6 (49ers, Browns/Ravens) Super Bowls won by teams added in the '50s - 1 (Colts) Super Bowls won by teams added in 1960 - 13 (Cowboys, Oilers/Titans, Chargers, Jets, Broncos, Chiefs, Patriots, Raiders, Bills) Super Bowls won by teams added since 1960 - 2 (Vikings, Falcons, Saints, Dolphins, Bengals, Seahawks, Bucs, Panthers, Jags, New Browns, Texans) (teams listed are all teams added in that time period. Teams in bold actually won at least one Super Bowl).
not really, when you consider there was no free agency and no salary cap for most of those teams; they had only the draft to build their fortunes, and that's a pretty dicey proposition. what's kind of odd, tho, is that, while most assume an expansion team is going to suck for many years, history says otherwise. i'm not gonna do research on this, but seattle, iirc, was pretty decent pretty quickly, maybe even a winning record within their first 3,4 years. tampa bay played for a super bowl berth in '79, their fourth year, and, of course, the jags and panthers played for a SB berth in their second year. and now it looks like the browns may be a legitimate playoff threat in year 4. the trick seems to be sustaining early success. 'course, with the cap, that's the trick for everyone these days...
Seattle had a winning record in their third year (9-7 - 1978) and fourth year (also 9-7 - 1979). They didn't make the playoffs either of those times, though (there were fewer playoff berths available then, too). They went on a slide for three seasons after that only to come back in 1983 with another 9-7 record and a Wild Card playoff berth. They would put up a 12-4 record the next season, but that was still only good for a Wild Card berth. After that, they wouldn't have a losing record until 1989 (after their first AFC West championship in 1988). The '90s were unkind to the Seahawks. Except for 1990 when they again went 9-7, they wouldn't have a winning record again until 1999. But yeah, they did have some early success, even earlier than Tampa Bay (The Bucs first winning record was in their 4th season - the year they went to the NFC Championship Game). And the Seahawks did a better job sustaining their early success than the Bucs did. Aside from 1979, the Bucs only had one winning record (9-7 in 1981 - good for a Wild Card) until 1997. The Panthers sort of have a similar situation. They went 12-4 in their season season but haven't had a winning record since. At least Jacksonville put together four consecutive winning seasons (2nd, 3rd, 4th and 5th) before falling apart the last two seasons.
I don't know, though. I mean, should that one year make such a difference in terms of a team like the Vikings who have never won a Super Bowl when compared to the Cowboys who have won five (and even appeared in twice as many as the Vikes have appeared in)? Seeing how many Super Bowls have been won by teams that formed in 1960 compared to those by teams formed after 1960 is what makes it surprising to me. Those nine 1960 teams have 13 Super Bowl titles (spread among six teams). The eleven post-1960 teams have 2 (from one team). Even when considering Super Bowl appearances, the 1960 teams have 30 Super Bowl appearances (and every 1960 team has gone to at least one Super Bowl), while the post-1960 teams have only 12 appearances from only four teams.
sorry, i misread your quote; i thought it said, "It's just so surprising to think that only one of the ten teams added to the league(s) after 1968 has won a Super Bowl."
