I said "pretty much" insignificant.... that softens it. Maybe I should've used italics instead of quotations.
Doesn't matter; I never said or implied that the game was insignificant. Use all the qualifiers you want, you've still grossly misrepresented my opinion. Or read the post earlier in this thread where I called the loss "so frustrating" and then re-thought trying to mis-characterize my opinion. I've been posting on this board a looooong time, and I have never posted, nor believed, that conference games were insignificant, save for perhaps in comparison to division games. Frankly, it's a stupid take - so I don't appreciate you trying to jam that into the discussion by attributing it to me.
Believing conference is the ONLY thing infuriating about that game basically deems it insignificant, as there was other GLARING cons; i.e.- point-diff, primetime. This franchise has pretty much NEVER blown out any good team in its entire existence, yet the franchise has managed to be on the receiving end of SEVERAL massacres, many primetime. Consider the "BCS" mentality "insignificant", but given those 2 facts, there's no surprise we've never won an SB, much less appeared in one, much less winning or appearing in a conference championship game. We 1) don't dominate and 2) get dominated. This is BEFORE mentioning who played QB Thursday. Playoffs are primetime, a situation the Texans constantly wet the bed in. When someone mentions the few times NE has gotten blown out, mention the MANY they've dished, then consider their postseason success. "BCS" matters because it shows dominance... and dominance is what wins championships.
No. Please stop. All of it. I never, ever, never said or implied it was insignificant. No, winning three games in January win championships. The regular season has no bearing on those outcomes; if it did, the #1 seeds would routinely roll to the Super Bowl each and every year, and that rarely happens. Case in point - the Texans, who you claim have never destroyed a good team - beat the eventual SB champion Ravens in '12 by 30 points. That's just a remarkably silly outlook.
We'll just agree to disagree. #1 and #2 seeds usually make the SB. The last 5 seasons have featured high seeds 8/10 chances. No sir... I said "pretty much NEVER" blowout any good team. The Ravens game was the only I could remember. Now, I bet you can name 10x we've been blown out.... during seasons we've been "good/decent".
No. This isn't an agree-to-disagree situation. I did not say or imply that the game was insignificant - that isn't up for interpretation. No games, when you only play 16, are insignificant. There are games that are more significant - but I would never call a game insignificant. Please stop it.
No, you said the only thing "so frustrating" was the fact it was conference. We'll agree to disagree. So, when a team locks-up their playoff positioning, and rests their starters... that game is "significant"?
a) that doesn't in any way, shape or form imply that it was insignificant. In fact, it underscores the point I'm making, that conference games *are* significant; b) more importantly, that's not what I said: It was frustrating that they didn't take advantage of an under-manned Patriot team because - follow along - conference records often break important ties when it comes to divisions and homefield advanatge. And that makes conference games... what do you think? Significant? Or insignificant? Hmmmm.... Agreeing to disagree means you lack a basic fundamental understanding of the NFL. But, by all means, carry on in blissful ignorance...
I understand most teams that get dominated and don't dominate don't win championships. I understand the Texans are mostly a headcase in primetime and in big games. That crap Thursday couldn't have helped their mind frame. So yeah, AGAIN.... if you dismiss all that and claim "conference" being the only problem, you're severely undervaluing that game.... PRETTY MUCH deeming it as insignificant.
And if you think blowout losses in the regular season and prime time games carry any significance, then, let's agree you have no idea what you're talking about when it comes to the NFL.
Did you read the portion you deleted? I said, "most teams that get dominated and don't dominate". Mentioned that earlier, too. Patriots dominated PLENTY that season. Bad/weak example anyways considering our debacle was against a 3rd string rookie.
The Vikings game went not as I hoped but as I expected. The DBs were roughing up the Texans receivers. The Texans D couldn't turn the ball over, The run game is still broken. That crowd was loud. They REALLY need to turn things around and beat the Colts at home. That's a game they can't afford to lose. Luckily they haven't lost at home yet. I don't want to hear anything about Texans unable to win in primetime.
really not feeling to good about the colts game. For some reason I believe we will find a way to lose
It will tell us if Bob still has the locker room or if guys are frustrated with him already. I recall last year we started turning things around when he apologized to the team for the QB mess--Hoyer to Mallett to Hoyer. He may be starting to lose the fan base.
The thing I don't want to have happen is to lose O'Brien only to have him go elsewhere and be successful. Quarterbacks get coaches fired. We get that. Maybe Osweiler is not the guy. But what we can't excuse is if BOB uses this experience as a learning opportunity and doesn't shy away from developing young QB's--with good protection and a simple gameplan that scales up as the QB demonstrates the ability to process more information--at the next coaching job he gets. It really, really sucks to gamble on a QB and lose the bet. But we can't compound one mistake with another. Let O'Brien demonstrate his ability to be self-critical, and give him another chance.
I know Joe Thomas said he would not request a trade but I would love to see the Texans offer a 2nd rounder for him. His contract is very team friendly and reasonable and you would have him for another 2+ years. An oline of Thomas, XSF or Allen, Mancz or XSF, Newton, Brown would do wonders for this offense. It would take some creativity to make it work under the cap.
