Not having Mario the first four games of the season with Cushing out would really hurt this team. Looks like we are destined to grab Schrobel
I like Richard, but to insinuate even the thought that losing Mario isn't as critical as losing Antonio Smith is beyond silly. It's incredible how virtually everyone with a UT background goes complete looney tunes when it comes to trying to analyze Mario Williams. Like Rhino, I read the first line and skimmed through the rest because I knew the tired, inane crap that was about to come.
I don't get the attitude that he should be a HOF or something. Not every 1st pick is guaranteed to be one. He is a lock to get 9-13 sacks a year, and he plays the runs well. It is often difficult to point to a DE and have that run and pass defensive ability.
I like how he said that until Antonio Smith emerged late last year, the Texans didn't have another dominant pass rush threat. What? Antonio Smith looked much better in the second half than the first half last season, but he was never a DOMINANT pass rush threat. Does Dick J proof read this stuff before he submits it?
I finally read the whole thing and I have a few points to make -The first four paragraphs are nothing but cliches and shows he obviously knows very little about the Texans. -He refers to Antonio Smith as both a dominant pass-rusher and more essential to the team than Mario -What exactly is Dick's expectations of Mario? Does he want him to be the all-time greatest DE? (He mentions he does not have the dominating presence of Lawrence Taylor or Reggie White...wtf!?!?!) Last time I checked, Mario was a top 5 DE in the NFL, I am quite happy with that -He acts as if Mario is Yao and has had a horribly injury plagued career and almost blames Mario Williams for this -His overuse of stats is a clear sign that he does not watch games, but simply looks at the box scores. Low sack numbers = poor play to him. He disregards the fact that Mario played the run better than he ever has in his career last season (at least imo). -The entire piece is nothing but incoherent drivel. It essentially says absolutely nothing. Where did they get this schmuck and what gives the Chron the impression that he is a competent writer? -Once again, Dick Justice writes something simply for shock value and for people to read. Pathetic, get a life Dick, learn how to write....
Not every 1st pick is guaranteed to be a HOF like you said, but I don't see what's wrong with having the attitude that he should be one. A ton of resources were put into Mario so there should be high expectations for him. I'm not saying he needs to be in the HOF, but I would like to see Mario have more impact on a more consistent basis.
the sad thing, Richard really is a great reporter when he tries to be. His connections truly are by far the best of any media member in this town. He just has certain players/areas, Mario Williams at the top of the list, where either emotion or the potential ****storm he can stir up overrides his sense of objectivity. It sucks, because he's quite good when he's focused.
I've read about 100 RJ articles. And I've read about 5 good RJ articles. You can be **** because you're lazy or **** because that's all the capacity you have, but in the end you're still **** regardless.
Ugh, I hate this spin. Not that I agree with Justice, but the point of stats in this instance is that Mario has done it, has put up those numbers that indicate what he is capable of. The problem is there is no consistency. Let's be honest here: there's a reason both Kubiak and now McNair have touched on the question of Mario's production. And when Kubiak 'has a talk' with Mario and then Mario goes off that game....well, then maybe there's something to it. It's not a matter of 'he should get X stats.' It's a matter of he does get X whatever....but only every once and a while. Mario is good (and thinking he matters less than Antonio Smith is a bit nuts) but I just can't help but shake the feeling he could be great.
The problem with that is that expecting a defensive lineman's statistics to be relatively level from game to game is COMPLETELY unrealistic and unfair given the nature of the position. In 2006, Dwight Freeney had one of the better seasons I've seen a DE have in a long while, and I'd argue was the Colts' best player on their road to their only Super Bowl (win). He had 5.5 sacks, three of which came in ONE GAME. It's simply too easy to prevent a defensive end from getting numbers in an individual game because the offense can commit multiple blockers, make quicker QB drops, or run the ball more. Now, over the course of a SEASON, these things usually even out with a bigger sample size, and you can somewhat have a "target range" of where a player should be, statistically. But from an individual game standpoint, a DE isn't like a QB or RB - there are simply too many external factors to judge their effectiveness in a given game by sack numbers. I've seen Mario have games with ZERO sacks where I'd argue he was more disruptive than games in which he had two or three. It's simply how the position is. But columnists desperately need/want to quantify things for the sake of arguments, and can overuse statistics when it comes to certain positions. Defensive end is certainly one of them. (For the record, Rokkit, I agree - I do think Mario has inconsistency issues with his motor. But they don't directly correlate to whether he had sacks in a given week. That's where many of us take issue with how Justice evaluates him.)
for me it was with the increase of the requirement to "blog". his work, for me, was pretty much always sub-par; but it went from "man, that's embarrasingly bad" to "holy crap, how does this guy draw a paycheck from a supposedly reputable rag??" in the last decade or so. the market saturation has created a requirement for these guys to constantly produce. nobody could produce that much quantity with very much quality. especially a guy like Justice, who never had much quality in the first place.
