well, i'm a part of the fringe on the fringe of the local media, and i picked 'em to go 4-12. the point, besides, of course, that i'm borderline football savant of some kind, is that very few people among this local media know what they're talking about. MM, they're starting back at square one; that's what happenes when you spend 4 years rearranging deck chairs on the titanic. the DC con man and his band of merry idiots ruined this franchise; left it bereft of any talent. i'm no longer even on the andre johnson bandwagon; by my estimation, they landed exactly one legitimate playmaker, dunta, in 4 years and he has the weight of an atrocious secondary weighing him down. this is an awful football team. as far as i'm concerned, it's year 1. rigoddamdiculous, but that's the bed we're all forced to sleep in. it doesn't mean we can't be upset, but it's not kubiak's fault. he's doing what he can and he at least has the qb pointed in the right direction. think about it: he's made bigger strides with carr in a single offseason than the old regime did in four offseasons. he's looked better in two games than at any other point in his career besides the first 8 games in 2004. think of poor kubiak as the coach who took over a program that then promptly had a list of ncaa sanctions dropped on it. he has to clean up a mess and build a team. that's a tall task. i think, though, we found the right guy to do it.
On a positive note, David Carr isn't the only Texan breaking top 5 stats categories in the NFL this season: Demeco Ryans is #4 on the tackles list.
Ric -- i'm not blaming it on kubiak. i agree with your entire assessment. i just think there were some raised expectations. i think we expected this team to look better than they did last season. after you go 2-14, i don't think that's asking too much. and it was certainly communicated that they would be. so far...they're not. and yes, i recognize it's only been 2 games. but the reaction is merely off those 2 games...it's all we've seen. i'm not real sure what we're arguing about, if anything. i just don't think people should be surprised when others are angry or upset over the product.
again, i would disagree. did ever describe one of carr's games last year as "fine." he was horrible; he's shown marked improvement. i wrote about this last week; we're a fan base dealing not with four years of ineptness, but 12 years. montana in 94, followed by 2 lame duck season, followed by five years of no football, followed by four years of terrible football. this year is about three things: 1) saving carr (or cutting the cord); 20 mario williams; 3) adrian peterson. if 1 and 2 develop sufficiently, and we still land 3, we're going to be a very dangerous team next year.
you're talking about improvment in a player. i'm talking about improvement in a team. if we continue to have carr's good performances in the context of blowouts, i can not say we've improved from last year.
Well, according to many here, Carr's lack of improvement was reason #1 why this team was bad. I never bought into that, and still don't... but people were under the assumption that any other QB could come in here and turn water into wine, and we should part ways with Carr because he's holding back this team's future. I've been arguing O-line vs. David Carr since year two. I also agree with you that it doesn't matter if Carr looks amazing, or Carr continues to get sacked every possesion... this team won't start winning until the two FOUNDATIONS of football (the o-line and the d-line) are both clicking.
pam anderson wasn't built in a day. beyond the fate of carr and williams, what did you honestly expect to see from the team this year? last year, it had the worst secondary in football and added exactly no one to it, losing a starter in training camp; it had the worst group of LBs in football and added a rookie; the DL was atrocious last year, too, though they did takes steps to address it. offensively, they lost their starting RB for the year in august and had another untested, inexperienced rookie starting at LT when the previous regime's LT of the future" proved to be, like a lot of the previous regimes acquisitions, no good. they did add moulds, putzier and flannigan, but, i mean you thought they'd improve the team that much...? on top of that, they opened the year playing 4 playoff teams from last year among their first 8 (IND, WAS, JAX, NYG); two more everyone thought would be playoff teams this year (MIA, DAL) and another that prior to last year, went to three consecutive championship games and got everyone healthy (PHI). lack of talent, new system, brutal schedule......
Ric - so you think people were asking too much to expect improvement? we looked better against the colts last year than we did this year. at least the score was closer! you don't think the tone of the offseason in the media and otherwise was that we would see very real improvement this season? i remember thinking, "it can't be worse than last year." yes, it can. a repeat of last year is worse than last year...because it's a year later AND NOTHING HAS CHANGED! i don't think people were outrageous to expect some improvement, ric. i think they'd be outrageous to expect us to BEAT the colts. but outrageous to suggest that we could just play competitively with them??? not at all. can't you tell that people are disappointed? you can laugh and scoff at those who are disappointed...but it doesn't change the fact. we don't all certify ourselves as pro football experts...but we would like to be able to buy tickets or tune in a game and expect it to be fun...to be competitive. it's not, so far.
Everybody deserves to be dissapointed... what Ric is saying is that none of this should suprise anybody who has actually followed this team from the beginning (which I assume you have). Want to blame someone? Use the following guide: a.) Blame Bud Adams for taking away our established franchise... as can be seen, they weren't that far away from rebuilding and going to a SB . b.) Blame the city for hating Bud Adams enough to let him leave... he's not going to live forever, and eventually he's either going to sell the team, or die... that being said, the city is still better off without him when its all said and done. c.) Blame the NFL for changing the expansion rules thanks to the Panthers and Jags early success... hell, both those teams have had early success, floundered, re-builded, and are now both perennial playoff threats again... all in the same amount of time it took Houston to get the #1 pick in the draft again. Brilliant. d.) Blame the powers that be for selecting Casserly to build this franchise... the Redskins still hadn't recovered from the mess he left there, when we handed him the keys to a brand new, nice and shiny, billion dollar franchise... and gave him carte blanche. e.) Blame the local media for apparently biasing a lot of people on the state of this franchise. After the 7 win season, they all just looked at the record and said the playoffs should be the next logical step. After last year, they bought into Kubiak's success, and said he can work miracles. You can blame the homers at 610 (Vandemeer is paid by the Texans, after all), you can blame the homers at ABC 13 (also paid by the Texans), you can blame John McLain (who still may be basking in the "honeymoon" of getting to cover NFL football again in houston), and you can blame the Texans PR department for all of that. My honest opinion... after 2004, I considered this team no better than before it was even in existance. They finally attempted to draft some foundation pieces this last off-season... something they should have done in year 1... except this time, they have no expansion draft to bridge the gap until those pieces start succeeding. This team hit the "reset" button... I encourage everybody here (for your own sanity) to do the same with your expectations.
nick - i'm one of the guys who said they'd be bad. even i'm surprised just how bad they really are. i really thought we'd see some improvement. bad to me was 4-5 wins. i think they'll be reaching, now, to get 5 wins.
I agree, but I submit to you that the D-line would look a whole lot better if we had a CB or 2 who could cover a WR every once in a while. I'll forgive Dunta because he was going against the best WR in the league and one of the best ever. But I saw our line putting more pressure on Peyton than they did McNabb in Week 1. Problem is Peyton was getting rid of the ball so fast because his WR's were basically WIDE OPEN on every play.
I know now, more with the NFL than any other sport, that the "win total" doesn't always paint the picture. The 7 wins in 2004 made everybody happy, but we all see now that it didn't actually indicate progress, or team improvement... and it probably kept this team from making some much needed moves that could have averted the 2-14 record from last year. 4-5 wins won't mean anything this year as well... unless they're finding a way to beat some of the better teams in the NFL (and look good doing it). But, if they somehow find a way to beat the Titans twice, Browns, and Raiders... and still look like a team making the same fundamental mistakes... I won't consider that "improvement", despite the 4 wins on the board.
MM, i'm picking on you because we need you; the IQ of the average sports fan has dropped significantly and those fans that are both rational and loyal, like you, are few and far between in this "spew vitriol loudly to be heard" culture of ours. we all have every right to be extremely disappointed and upset for years 2002-2005, and that anger extends from mcnair all the way down – the first 4 seasons were marked by almost universally inept decisions save for perhaps the logo. seriously. think about that. unfortunately, the DC con man and his merry band of idiots left the cupboard barren for kubiak and smith. if the media and offseason activity somehow wiped 2005 from your memory bank, then that's something else the team has gotten right: they've built the best pr department in all of football because they were a very bad football team last year. in fact, the worst team in the nfl. they made some improvements; they also lost some key contributors. i’d say in terms of personnel, they very nearly broke even this summer. the biggest upgrade was on the sidelines. in the second half of the year, when the schedule settles down, you’ll see the improvements. but its going to take kubiak time. i mean, my god, his running backs are wali lundy, ron dayne and sam gado. my guess is that next year, more than half the guys who started yesterday’s game will be gone. it may be closer to 2/3. or they’ll be here in back-up roles until the team can find more depth. it's a pitiful football team. so yes, until then, incremental improvement is about all you can realistically expect. if that bores or upsets you… the rockets start in a few weeks, right? me? i’m hoping carr takes a 90+ rating into week 9 and that williams breaks out in the second half and begins to announce his presence with authority. anything beyond that'll be gravy.
Exactly. F*ckers. Me too, MadMax. I NEVER b**** about nothin'. I am sad, yes, but never b**** about it. You didn't see my question in the "Carr's Fault" thread, did ya?
1. i'm saying i WILL be b****ing about it. i can almost guarantee i will be b****ing. 2. i did...but i thought my response to ric's post answered your question.
small point of clarification: if, by city, you meant "mayor," ok. the people of the city never had a say in keeping the oilers.
