If that's the case, then I bow out of the discussion. I honestly think Carr has more upside in his career at this point than Plummer. Everything aside, if the Texans really improved their OL this season and Carr was our QB, I think he'd be Plummer. But if you add in having to listen to annoying fans (and yes, I know I don't have to) who think they know more about football than guys who are actually paid to run teams and the possibility that Carr will never be comfortable here regardless of upgrades in talent, I think it's best for both parties to move on. I just don't think Plummer will be any significant upgrade at all.
I was making fun of your earlier comment where you said if Jake Plummer's as bad as David Carr has been, you've lost or gained nothing. I happen to think he would be, so I would consider that losing something considering we'd be back having this same discussion next offseason.
I agree with this except for the Schaub part. Not picking on you, but I don't get all the Schaub hype. The guy's career QB rating is 69.2....6 TD's and 6 INT's in 3 years as a backup. Sage's numbers are just the same as his, basically. Career QB rating of 77.6, 9 TD's 7 INT's. But....Sage's rating was 103.0 last year and he had 3 TD's vs 1 INT. If we're going to develop a backup into a starter, either as a stop-gap or permanently, why not just go with Sage? Matt Schaub = Rob Johnson
Yeah, considering we'd have to give up something for Schaub, I'd much rather go with Sage. I'm just saying I'd rather go for Schaub over Plummer.
I don't think he's likely to be either. But the one thing he WON'T be, in my opinion, is a downgrade. And he *might* just be an upgrade. And he'll cost the same or less (in my opinion). If your options are Carr and Plummer, there's absolutely ZERO reason to favor Carr in my opinion.
Except we don't know - that's why there's the "if". In the worst case, they are similar and you've gained or lost nothing. In the best case, Plummer is better and you've improved. There's NO downside there. The discussion goes back to the fact that Ric's logic was that Plummer improved in his 6th year, so why not Carr? The fact is we KNOW Plummer improved. You HOPE Carr might.
Obviously, it depends on what exactly he costs. If he costs $6MM+, I'm not interested. If he costs a first day draft pick, I'm not interested. If he costs more than a 2-3 yr deal, I'm not interested. I don't believe there's any way in hell he costs any of those things, though. And he can't cost all of them. If he's traded, his base salary next year is something like $600,000 (Denver eats the signing bonus). If he's released and we have to sign him to a deal, we don't pay a draft pick.
That's where we should agree to disagree. I really think that Carr could be a successful QB if the talent around him is improved. Even though you think it's an excuse, there is no arguing the fact that no other QB has played five seasons behind a worse OL than David Carr. Given that I expect the Texans to improve dramatically over the next couple of years, I think that Carr would improve along with them. But for other reasons, I think it's best for us to part ways. I just don't want it to be for Plummer.
why is plummer being an upgrade more of a certainty than carr improving? aren't they both equal "risks"? and if so, shouldn't you then make an evaluation based on what will cost you the least?
Understood, but if I had my druthers (now that I know what a druther is), I'd like to see us go with Sage and a rookie next year. Trade Carr (if possible), don't sign Plummer or Schaub, use the saved money/resources to build the O-line and defense.
No, they are not equal risks. Because we know Plummer is pretty good with good talent around him. We have no idea if that's the case with Carr. At best, you're hoping it will be. If they have crappy talent around them, they probably will both suck, though there's an outside chance Plummer learned something in Denver and would be better now in that scenario.
No, because they are proven commodities. But before we drafted them and saw them perform, yes, I'd have traded those picks. That's like saying the Rockets shouldn't trade a 2nd round pick for a proven NBA player because we wouldn't trade Mobley for them. If you start valuing draft picks based on the best players to come from those spots, no team should ever trade any draft pick. Terrell Davis was a 6th round draft pick. If you had the option to trade your 6th round pick for a legit NFL player, would you not do it because of that?
i'd be ok with that, too, but i think people are vastly overrating sage rosenfels. i don't think he's a competent nfl qb, and in terms of evaluating risks, expecting him to hold up and be even mildly effective over 16 weeks is the longest of all these long shots.
carr was very good - at times, flat-out great - in 2004. so hoping plummer "learned something" in denver - what, in terms of translating this supposed new wisdom to playing for a lesser team, i have no idea - is a smaller risk than giving carr another year under the guy who would've taught plummer whatever it is he may have learned? well, unfortunately, we can't hold the draft, stage a few seasons, and THEN decide whether or not we'd like to deal a #4 for jake plummer. given that our last 4 4th round picks have produced DD, glenn earl, jerome mathis and owen daniels, it's a risk i'd rather not take.
no, what it's saying that history strongly suggests the fourth round is likely to produce a productive NFL player, something this team needs in spades.
Oh, don't get me wrong, I'm not saying he's the answer either. But there's only one way to find out. I just think too much emphasis has been put on the QB spot instead of the other 21 spots around him. If we don't find "the answer" at QB this year, just use him as a stop-gap until we do and don't waste money on the QB spot until we find someone who is worth the money (ie. not Plummer or Schaub).
sing it, brospeh. i've been saying this for... who knows how long now. where i differ, i guess, is that i still see value (read: potential) in carr. if there's not a certifiably better upgrade, why not give him another year? would jake plummer posting similiar results really make a difference for anyone here? "yeah, he sucks, but at least he's not david carr!" what's the point? maybe i'm too protective; maybe i'm too invested; maybe i'm too close to the situation. but i would hate for carr to go to minnesota and thrive with better protection and a better team around him. that would really piss me off and make me hate charley casserly, dom capers and chris palmer that much more. how much is holding on to that potnetial worth to me? well, let's say more than jake plummer. let him go drive fans in chiacgo crazy the way he did arizona and denver.
