I disagree. Only the center touches the ball as many times, and no one comes remotely close to making the number of decisions a quarterback makes during a game. They're generally the highest paid players on the team for a reason.
I ignore it because there's nothing to compare to. In the 7 games Schaub has taken every snap, the team is averaging 22 pts a game. Some of that is defensive and ST, certainly. But that's the case for every other team too. And the Texans don't have some fantastic defense or ST like Chicago that's scoring a ton of TDs for them. Minnesota scored as many Defensive and ST touchdowns last week as the Texans have all season. So, unless you have stats that compare only offensive results, I'll use total points as a reasonable indicator. I'm not going to compare 13.8 to other teams' total points. So yeah, they ARE one of the higher scoring teams in football. And they are 5+ points better than last year, when they scored Def/ST TDs at the same rate as this year. Well, that's just silly. Yards mean you're moving the ball. Which means you're not getting 3-and-outs. You're keeping your defense off the field. You're giving better field position to your defense. You're putting yourself in better field goal position. All sorts of things we didn't do last year. Yards are a far more meaningful statistic than TDs, which substantially depend on what kind of play you happen to call on 3rd and 1 at the goal line. Anderson is a definite bright spot. Garrard been in the league longer and basically started all of last year and half the year before that. Schaub had never thrown more than 70 passes in a season; Garrard had over 400 in the last two seasons combined. Cutler's season has been virtually identical to Schaub, and he cost a high 1st round pick. For all of those guys, their first 10-12 games of their career were worse than Schaub. Despite having loads of weapons surrounding them and many more games under their belt, Rivers and Manning are having worse seasons than Schaub. Kitna's is pretty similar - he's also had about 100 more starts in his career than Schaub along with a genius offensive coordinator. Of course he makes bad decisions - he's basically a rookie in terms of actual NFL experience. Given that, he's leaps and bounds better than what we had, and he actually provides major positive contributions on the field. He's also well above average as a QB in the NFL. You say he was expensive - certainly, the $$ amount is a lot, but 2-2nd rounders? Adding 2 "normal" 2nd rounders (ie, not DeMeco Ryans types) wouldn't have nearly the impact on this team's statistics that adding Schaub had. I have no idea what you were expecting from a QB that had started 4 games in the past 3 years, but "poor decisions" is going to be a part of it. The point is that he does a lot of good things to go along with those bad things, and that the bad things generally improve with experience. Could you have gotten a better value out of starting Sage Rosenfels? Possibly. But when many of us wanted to see last year what Rosenfels could do so we could make that decision, you and others insisted that it was unnecessary and that if Rosenfels was any good, he would've beaten out Carr in the preseason and all sorts of other craziness. The best thing the team could have done last year was start Rosenfels in the 2nd half of the season to see exactly how much of the problem was Carr vs. the pieces around him, but we missed out on that opporunity. You said if MadMax held Schaub to the same standard as Carr, he'd be all over him. I think if you gave Schaub as much rope as you gave Carr, you'd think he's the best QB in history. According to you, no QB could be successful with this running game or this O-Line or without more playmaking receivers. Everything you argued there about a QB's role and his impact on a game has been shown to be wrong - a QB, even two non-great ones like Schaub & Rosenfels - can make the offense work. Given that you defended Carr's performance after 60+ starts, its funny to see you critique Schaub as someone who you see nothing to impress you, despite him doing so much more having about 10-12 NFL starts in his career.
only in the way you/we choose to spin the "excuses." both QBs dealt/are dealing with deficiencies around them; one guy "flat-out sucked;" the other has " performed well in his very limited number of starts considering all that." in light of ben roethlisberger winning a SB in his rookie year; tony romo leading his team to the playoffs in his first year as a starter; watching derek anderson (likely) lead his team to the playoffs in his first year as a starter (neither of which, btw, started the year as the starter), makes me thinks schaub's "limited number of starts" sounds an awful lot like nothing more than an excuse. this, this right here is what bothers me, for several reasons. where is this kind of vitriol for schaub, who's on pace to post numbers that actually out-suck carr's? where are the endless threads on how his poor decision-making and lack of playmaking skills have cost them a legitimate chance to get into playoff contention? why are we not running him out of town? let me guess... only his 12th start? injuries? no running game? geez, sure as heck sounds like the past 5 years, doesn't it? so, remind me again: who, exactly, sucks? oh, right: david carr. same things are happening without him, but... secondly, carr sucked in 2005, along with the team. he did not suck in the three years prior to that, unless your definition of "suck" is "not as good as joe montana in his prime." i remain perplexed by virtually all 365 days of 2006; i don't understand what happened but it seems fairly obvious carr ran off the tracks at some point. when? where? who knows, but i will believe for the rest of my life that the texans were the culprit; they ruined whatever the guy had to offer. i could (and have) listed many, many reasons for this. and now we have QB#2 amazingly starting down an initially similiar path (cost a lot, handed the job outright with no competion, little, if any concern for beefing up the team around him), but hey! look at david carr in carolina!!! hahahahahaha!!!!!!
Exactly. Got to give him a chance. If in his 4th or 5th season he throws for negative yards, I'll be piling on him worse than carr
No - one has actually performed. Not perfectly, but leaps & bounds better than the other. One didn't. Despite 60 starts. The vitriol's not there because Schaub's numbers are better than Carr's. He moves the ball more. His team scores more. He converts 3rd downs better. He gets the ball to receivers more. He takes less sacks. Every single freakin' statistic is improved. QB rating. Yards. Yards per attempt. TD:INT ratio. Sacks. Every freakin' statistic is better, but you're saying he's on pace to out-suck Carr. Absolutely laughable. Same things are happening, except for the simple fact that they aren't. Unless you don't consider scoring and moving the ball to be "things". No one was b****ing about him before that either, because he was following the normal progression of a QB that, you know, doesn't have a lot of starts. As he improved, his team also did. Then he started sucking. And then people started b****ing about him. Then he started sucking really, really bad to the point where the coach refused to even let him throw the ball in the second half of a game because it was hurting th team. Then people starting b****ing even more about him. Then he got replaced. And the new guy did a lot better, and so did his team. And the b****ing stopped. See how this works?
fair enough. the question was, "who would you prefer to have over Schaub?" i don't understand how experience or cost is a factor in discussing who's better - those two guys are having better seasons. in river's first full year as a starter: 22/9; 3,388 yds; 92.0 rating; 14-2 record. he would, at this point, rate as "better." manning? kitna? like i said, i'd rate schaub at their level. the colts' starting LT was drafted in the spot immediately following what would have been houston's pick this year. would you deal schaub for two tony ugoh-like impact starters with rosenfels as your QB? most "normal" 2nd rounders - among the top 50 players available, given the texans' usual place among the draft's top 10 - are starters. and damn good ones. i'm just glancing at the '06 2nd round: ryans, lendale white, marcus mcneill, greg jennings, devin hester, maurice jones-drew.... major, this isn't about schaub; or even carr, for that matter. it's more or less me bathing in a pool of warm irony watching everyone fall all over themselves to "excuse" matt schaub while spending most of last year ripping me for essentially doing the same thing with carr. no running game? no playmakers? the offensive line is terrible? you don't say..... there are things about schaub that worry me but i haven't written him off - not by a long stretch, nor do i think he's having a bad season (nor a paticularly good one). i think he'll eventually be as good as the team around him. said the same thing the week before we drafted carr.
Don't worry...he'll keep ignoring that point. he took a position and he feels the need to defend it. no matter how silly it's gotten. the same thing happened with the crap about leadership.
who's making excuses for him, his passer rating is 87 in his first full year of starting. you falsely criticize, someone points out the inaccuracy of your criticism, and you call the defense an excuse. he doesn't need an excuse, the team is better than it was last year and he's better than carr ever was. you're the only one hanging on to this notion that carr was unfairly treated well we're all sure glad you haven't written him off yet how many arguments are you going to make, first you say he hasn't played well (false) then you say he hasn't played better than carr (false) now you're arguing about how much the texans paid for him. ignoring the point that one of the reasons they had to pay so much is because they couldn't give carr away.
Frankly, why are we even STILL discussing Carr at all? He's gone and now Carolina doesn't want him so I guess it wasn't ALL the OL's fault afterall? Ric, the stats don't lie. They may not always tell the WHOLE story but they certainly do not lie. Schaub over 60% completion 2 TDs, 1 Int for 293 yds vs NO. Sacked once. Carr 10 of 22 for 95 GROSS yards 0 TD, 1 Int. vs NO one week later. LOL! How many times was Carr sacked again? I lost track. Schaub's problem is doing a better job of executing in the red zone and getting points on a majority of our offensive drives. AJ loves the guy and they have chemistry ALREADY! Last week was an aberration. Those 7 weeks will take a few weeks of playing together to overcome the off time injury period. Still TOO many empty possessions for the Texans to be a legitimate playoff contender. Carr ... what are you kidding me? Steve Smith is ALREADY calling him out as a useless piece of garbage.
i overstated my position; i took it too far; i got caught up in minuate - and you've all done a nice job of letting me (deservedly) have it. i hope you all die painfully... (kidding) if you'll allow me to step back a bit: i don't think carr is better than schaub; and i do think (and recognize) that the team - THE TEAM - is better. my point, a round one which i probably tried to drive into a square peg, was only that if we changed absolutely nothing about this season other than "schaub" back to "carr" - i believe everyone would be teetering on the edge of shooting office workers and, shortly thereafter, themselves. schaub went 4 games w/o throwing a TD; in three divisional games, the texans were outscored thru the first 3Qs by a combined score of 75-26, and the only TDs they did score were courtesy of a KO return and a fumble return; they freaking lost to the falcons and needed a last-second; 57-yard FG to beat the winless dolphins - in those two games, against teams giving up 22 and 24 points/game, the offense managed a total of two TDs. and from there, things got filtered, torn apart, blown out of proposition - i never intended it to be a slap at the texans; i'm not using it to indict anyone - only to point out the inconsistency of how last year, a season very similiar to this one in terms of results was met with such vitriol while this one is being seen as a breakthrough or step in the right direction, or whatever. i find it... dubious. curious. and then in the middle of all that, i dropped the "unimpressed" line on schaub, which i have been, btw, but again, that was always (perhaps only in my head) against the backdrop of a) me understanding and recognizing the situation; b) the crap that flew around here last year. so heels dug in, et al. final point: i will NEVER back down from the leadership debate, MM - it was, is and will remain the domain of lazy, r****ded sportwriters. i remain stunned anyone buys into it. it's stupid and meaningless, a crutch - the titans are winning 8 of 11 games with vince young posting the 30th worst passer rating in football?.... by god, it's leadership! blurgh.
i can't imagine how anyone involved in team sports or anyone who has worked with/for an organization before in their lives would suggest that there is no such thing as leadership....that it has zero effect on outcome.
Is leadership overplayed? Indubitably, yes. Is leadership given more credit than is deserved for wins (especially by lazy mediots and undereducated fans)? Indubitably, yes. Does that mean leadership does not exist? Indubitably, no. Does that mean leadership should be disregarded as a factor in the quality of a player? Indubitably, no.
BTW, kudos for this. It's a rare thing for folks on the Internet to simply say, "yeah, I was wrong about that."
