My brain wants to commit suicide… Matt Schaub has no postseason track record. He’s a blank slate. He might be perfectly capable, he might be perfectly incapable – we don’t know. So that zero has no consequence in this discussion; it’s a zero in absence of any data – it’s the same as thing as… Andrew Luck’s current NFL winning percentage being 0% - it's not earned, it's simply empty. I’m not trying to be caustic; I’m sincerely trying to explain myself here. The mistake that you, and many others, are making is that you’re wielding that zero against Matt Schaub when ite doesn’t actually mean anything in relation to postseason performance. It’s as predictive as Luck’s current 0% winning percentage is in terms of his NFL success. Keep in mind - we’re not arguing which QB gives the Texans the best chance of making the playoffs - if we were, I never would have jumped into this thread because Peyton Manning is a playoff-making machine and that big, fat zero on Matt Schaub’s resume absolutely, positively becomes a giant factor. This is about what happens *after*making the playoffs. So once we concede that they’re both equally capable of leading this team to the playoffs… It becomes a debate of what we know Manning has done vs what we think Schaub will do; a known against an unknown. Peyton Manning has a very long and monumentally undistinguished postseason resume. We know this. Unequivocally. Eleven appearances, with him more or less the one constant, and the results have been, relative to their regular season success, awful. So if you think Manning increases our chances of making the Super Bowl then you are, by extension, arguing that Matt Schaub – who has never played in a playoff game – will experience greater degrees of failure than Peyton Manning. And that, absence of data, is a specious conclusion. You’re also arguing that Manning’s past failures are not in any way predictive of his future playoff performance, and that’s hard to outright dismiss as irrelevant. This isn’t a discussion about the regular season; everyone on planet Earth concedes that when it comes to the regular season, Peyton Manning is alone on an island of awesome QBs. Arguably the greatest regular season QB of all-time. This is the other issue I’m having – do you think the offense isn’t currently insane? You’re arguing degrees – it’s a top 5 offense as is – does it need to be the top offense? Wasn’t that, more or less, *exactly* where we were when Schaub got hurt? We were 7-3, the AFC’s top seed, and had just put the finishing touches on a 4-game sweep in which we outscored our opponents 132-42. He *is* better. Inarguably. But his postseason record is terrible. Peyton is a better QB than Eli, too, BTW – who would you rather have under center in the postseason? These can be mutually exclusive ideas. We’re not talking about a small sample size – Manning has been to the postseason 11 times; he’s played 19 games. He has lost more than he has won. His team has been eliminated in their first game seven times. He failed to reach the Super Bowl nine times. His numbers are, across the board, worse in the postseason than they are in the regular season. If you want to argue he’s better than Matt Schaub, it’s an argument you’ll have by yourself. But if you want to argue he increases our chances at making the Super Bowl, then you’re going to have to address his past shortcomings, prove to us those are a thing of the past, and additionally prove to us that Matt Schaub will actually be worse.
I kind of feel like Indiana Jones – he’s fought off the last Nazi, secured the plane, and then the big, bad bald dude decides he wants a piece of the action, so poor, worn-down Indy has to climb off the plane and do it all over again… Those are all terrible QBs. Peyton Manning and Matt Schaub are not terrible QBs. So your question is silly nonsense. If I had any energy for it, I’d also take time to point out that trotting those guys out, btw, invalidates the idea that you have to sell out for Peyton Manning to achieve postseason success but… I don’t have it, so… let’s just move on. Fact: Manning hasn’t won very many playoff games late. Or very many playoff games in general. And what does lateness have to do with this discussion anyway? Why is everyone so obsessed with time? Why is a 23-21 last second victory more meaningful than a 41-7, 4Q throttling? That will never make sense to me. You’re stripping mounds of context from this discussion. In a bubble? … Manning, I guess – although I’ve seen him in this circumstance and he sorta, kinda failed spectacularly. But would I pick Manning if I have to give up five years of age? If I had to throw away five years of Schaub being in the system and developing pinpoint chemistry with his offensive teammates? Give up whatever cash differential and salary cap casualties Manning’s signing would create? Trade a serious but far more predictable recovery from foot surgery for a wildly unpredictable wait-and-see recovery from 4 neck surgeries and nerve regeneration? Makes it a harder decision for me...
"Us"?? you seriously may be a true delusional, because you have clearly been getting closer and closer to an island of 1. now twice you have shirked an obviously unanswerable question because your silly statement made no sense: matt schaub gives us an equally good chance as any other possible qb in the league, right? a "super bowl contender is a super bowl contender", and there is no higher level. correct? and finally, t.j. yates has a 50% winning record in the playoffs. is he a better option than peyton manning once a team gets into the playoffs?
you clearly lost this "debate" pages and pages ago, but, for future reference, coming up with make believe facts in attempt to strengthen your argument will only hurt your credibility. free advice.
Getting the thread back on track: Manning now saying that he hasn't closed the door on meeting with other teams, and he is willing to work out for any other team that he considers a finalist. Is it me, or is he speaking directly to Bob Mcnair?
With the weak O-line I don't see why you wouldn't bring in a QB like Manning that an read defenses and attack them accordingly. He's a coach on the field that has had success with far less of a line in Indy. His brain is superiour to Schaub's as a QB and even Hey now can't deny that. He gets rid of the ball and That doesn't allow teams to sack him. Schaub "runs" a little bit and eventually takes a stupid unnessesary sack twice a game.
I post in front of a live studio audience. It’s fun for them… You've already dipped into this pool of stupid, cardpire: They're not a Super Bowl contender with TJ Yates under center, thus negating your flaccid "gotcha!" tactic. As we saw this year, they're roughly a .500 team that struggles to score 20 points a game. (And now here’s me, anticipating your silly response of "Oh yeah? They were a play away from being in the AFC Championship game with TJ Yates, you buffoon!!!!!": Yes, they were - after Schaub spotted him a 7-3 head start. With Yates, they were 4-4 and an appreciably worse offense with a turnover machine under center.) So, as has been your custom throughout this thread, you are again incorrect. You also again failed to understand the parameters of our discussion; drew yet another randomly specious conclusion devoid of even an ounce of relevance, and continued to show a lack of even a most basic level of common sense. But cheer up, because….. "Mom! Dad - you're never gonna guess what I did today... proclaimed myself winner of an internet fight!!!........." Congrats, cardpire. No one’s ever gonna question your playoff resume, that's for sure!
wow...you just jammed to unrelated points together, spun them around in your likely drug or alcohol-saturated mind, and shat out threw your mouth another unintelligible response that has nothing to do with anything. you are mixing t.j. yates points up, and, ....ah well, what's the use? can't really argue or rationalize with you anymore. you are either illiterate or incapable of understanding what anybody besides yourself is saying. seriously. it's just gotten more and more bizarre. Go Texans!
This post reminds me of a dog barking at that ugly dog in the mirror because it isn't developed enough to see it as its own reflection.
sorry for not splitting my replies up into zillions of individual sentences and hoping you'd be able to decipher the breaks and separate paragraphs addressing the different points and arguments. you combined two of them together. tj yates comment had nothing to do with the super bowl contender comment, which was in response to you proclaiming that once you are (deemed by hey now) a super bowl contending quarterback, there is no higher level. schaub = manning = brady = whoever else meet your imbecilic and arbitrary requirements of "super bowl contending qbs". for that point, i just wanted confirmation that you were dumb enough to think that there was no qb that gives a team a better chance of winning a qb once you arrive at a certain "heynow" level, of which matt schaub is currently at. for the second comment: if we had peyton manning and tj yates as our qbs on our roster, and peyton manning took us to the playoffs, which qb would you want as our qb once the playoffs started and why? you have backed yourself so far into a corner, that it is impossible for you to answer this. but you will try with a combination or insults and desperate attempts to justify and not run over every other senseless point you made with regard to the importance of playoff winning percentage, since, make no mistake about it, you placed ALL the importance on playoff winning percentage, removing every other possible surrounding factor from the equation. and after you make your last-gasp effort to use sample-size as a reason for not giving credence to yate's winning % over manning's, please replace him with joe flacco.
awesome edit. make sure you get that just right. you satisfied with it, or are there any more tweaks that you can do?
Maybe not my place, justtxyank - but I would pass it threw another round of proofing. Up to you - just my to cents.
