What's the main reason the Texans don't suck this season?

Ric. I agree with everything you say about the Texans and love reading your posts, especially when you talk about "baby vince". I love it. But I disagree with you on this one. Carr was holding the team back and he was inhibiting the fans from seeing the potential this TEAM had and the progress it was making. You may have seen it, you are a bit deeper into it than most fans, but to the general fan, it wasn't visible. Carr was a dark cloud that shadowed this entire TEAM. To the casual fan, he was the crap you get on your windshield early in the morning when you wake up and it is cold outside. Schaub is the defroster, and now, even casual fans can see the big picture, more clearly.

msn, props to you for admitting you were wrong about Carr, that makes you a stand up guy for realizing and admitting you were wrong, that is a great trait to have.

 

Well, there seems to be more consistent play at the QB position, which is because of the O-Line...Of course, I think the D is really aggressive and good this year...

Too bad about AJ as without him, it'll be a tough day..

 

I disagree. Carr held onto the ball, had no pocket presence, ran out of bounds instead of throwing the ball away... etc. He made an average offensive line look really bad and the O-line got blamed when it was the pretty's boys problem all along.

 

who's this "you" individual? the GM? a GM should draft/sign players in accordance with the coach's wishes. and i don't think it's "severely limiting" because the draft's not the only means to acquire a QB.

preferring veterans to rookies, etc - i don't have a problem with that; where i struggle (and this is likely drawing a fine line, but oh well) is when a coach is so married to a system that he passes on talent because they don't "fit." i take that to mean: i'm incapable of coaching. when capers passed on peppers for that reason, i immediately pulled my doubt flag out of storage - that REALLY bothered me.

 

fair enough. i certainly understand that perspective; at the same time, though - it irks me.

imo, that kind of mentality is why talk of "leadership" bothers me so much - it comes from people who don't really watch the games. and i'm not criticizing people for that - watch, don't watch... whatever; i don't care. but don't not watch and then come here, or talk radio, or in your column in the chronicle and start spouting off about "leadership." vomit.

schaub is UNDOUBTEDLY an upgrade over david carr; no doubt. but i also think kubiak has grown as a coach; i think the run game is more dangerous than it's been since at least 2004, if not ever. the linemen have another year in kubiak's system under hteir belt and the defense is really living up to its potential. even with carr here last year, those things emerged as the season progressed.

schaub's "leadership" didn't initiate any of that, nor did his mere arrival (or carr's departure) - it's an easy story to write, so expect justice to rehash it repeatedly, but it's far more complicated than that, imo.

 

There is no MAIN reason. Lots of little ones.

 

I think this is a good point. Kubiak has installed a sense professionalism and the players have bought into his system.

I also think that the offensive line is emerging as a really good run blocking unit. They just smash people in the mouth and dare them to stop them. It's great!

 

I'll agree with you that leadership is overplayed. But to overcorrect by pretending it doesn't exist is incorrect as well. Leadership does *not* guarantee victory, for one thing. There *are* often good leaders on the losing side of the field.

But before we go on a three-page flamer, I am agreeing with you that it's way overplayed, especially by those you mention.

Which brings me to a re-quote.

True. But it *also* comes from people *inside* the game--players, GMs, coaches, etc. And I *don't* believe they're all just spinning something palatable for fans to hear. I believe at least some of what these folks say can actually be taken at face value.

It's still overplayed--perhaps even by those in the game (for example, Vince Young a great leader midway through last season when he barely had a grip on the NFL game if at all and had that whopping 40-someodd completion percentage), but that negates neither its existence or its impact.

All, of course, in my opinion.

 

espn just posted a superb piece on matt schaub; read it closely, as it contains many quotes from kubiak and smith and not a single mention of any form of the word lead........ except for the headline. see what i'm sayin?

what they DO mention is his talent; his poise; his confidence; his work ethic... if you tell me your vision of leadership incorporates those components, i'm with ya. but often, leadership is used as a tangible measuring stick, and to me, it's simply a manifestation of those quality garnering positive results.

did matt schaub have talent, poise, confidence, work ethic, etc., last year in atlanta? how did that work out for the falcons? oh, he wasn't playing?

win, and you're a "leader." that, to me, is the definition. we don't profile a lot of leaders of losers...

 

Hey the Texans are on the front cover of ESPN.com!!! Woohooooo!

Does anyone know how to take a snapshot of a screen? I've seen people do it, I just don't know how.

 

in case you wanted to know for next time:

maximize window
click 'print screen'
paste to Paint
save
upload
then insert as image

 

All I can say is "isn't it amazing how much better a team operates when the QB question is settled!"

The QB affects everything on the field whether or not he is physically on the field.

He is the field general mapping the opportunities for the conquest. When the QB has issues, so goes the team. Amazing!!!

Schaub is the #1 reason. He has guys in the huddle and on the sideline believing in him. He has guys hustling on both sides of the ball because, they NOW are no longer wasting their time and energy! Schaub makes the OL better because, he makes quick decisions and executes precisely. Thus, less pressure to hold contain for a QB who is indecisive and will only check down anyway! With an effective passing game, the RB actually have opportunities to make plays because the opposing D can't cheat up and bunch the line. The D is staying on the field less, thus their effectiveness and aggressiveness in play is further enhanced.

Like I said the QB position literally either makes or breaks the team.

 

Tough one. I voted defensive line. But equal credit should probably go to Schaub.

We probably would be 0-2 without both playing well. Hard to win with just one.

 

No? If one article doesn't mention it, it doesn't exist? How about this one:

http://bbs.clutchfans.net/showthread.php?t=134652

An article full of leadership quotes. Here are two of my favorites:


Said Daniels: "I was like, wow, we needed that kind of leadership, especially at that position."

...

"When he said that, it made everybody hang together," Texans cornerback Dunta Robinson said. "When you have a guy like that, stepping up like a leader, you want to play hard for him."


You said Dunta Robinson stepped up big time this year. He says he plays harder because of Schaub. Why? Who knows. But it happens. Over and over throughout the league, certainly people are called leaders. And it's not just correlated to winning. You never hear about how Rex Grossman or Philip Rivers or LT are leaders. You do hear it about Manning and Brady and Young and Schaub. And many times, you hear it before they become huge winners.

 

Lots of reasons as mentioned besides Shaub, but Shaub has been the primary reason...

 

if schaub has a career-ending injury next week...i'd like to think that we wouldn't limit our search for his replacement solely to free agents and trades simply because the coach doesn't like working with rookie QB's. i would say that is absolutely limiting your opportunities.

i agree about the system stuff....they passed on lots of talent because he "didn't fit the system."

 

See Major's post. Coaches, too, have mentioned it repeatedly (I'm speaking in general terms, not only of Schaub).

Indeed. An excellent quote from Fred Weary that speaks to leadership: "He makes plays, and he does not get rattled. And when the quarterback doesn't get rattled, nobody gets rattled."

Some people are certainly better leaders than others, but one can not measure it with wins and losses. I'm sure at this point the response is "wins and losses are what matters!" Indeed they are. Good leadership doesn't guarantee a win. But it doesn't hurt, and according to the guys who play along with good leaders (see Weary's quote), it makes a nice difference.

So? He was the backup. I guy can't have poise if he's a backup? Better call Bret Favre and let him know that last twenty years were a figment of his imagination. Evidently, according to his peers, he *did* have all of those things: "He was savvy beyond his years," says Buffalo Bills wideout Peerless Price, who played with the Falcons in 2003 and '04. "[Fellow receivers] Brian Finneran and Dez White and I always used to say it was just a matter of opportunity for this guy. Right from the start, we all thought he wouldn't be there long. He was too good." (same article)

Your definition is wrong. I understand that lazy media hacks make it sound that way, referencing your well-stated "vomit" post earlier (with which, if you'll remember, I agreed). But just because someone misapplies a concept doesn't mean it no longer exists!

Leaders lose all the time. Napolean was an outstanding leader, but he had his Waterloo. Bret Favre is a solid leader on the field. But his skills don't measure up anymore, and perhaps the team around him isn't as good (I don't follow them very closely). Like I said, leadership doesn't guarantee victory. The two are mutually exclusive concepts--as are *talent* and victory.

In fact, talent doesn't guarantee victory. Execution doesn't guarantee victory. Preparation doesn't guarantee victory. Nothing guarantees victory. That's why they play the games! So to dismiss the concept of leadership because the guy who's supposedly a leader didn't win is just stupid. To come against the "vomit", as you put it earlier, I have no problem with. It's pretending it doesn't exist that is an illogical overcorrection.

To make up a definition of leadership based on how it's misapplied by others and then carefully and passionately craft a resolute argument in order to dismiss it as nonexist is to me the equivalent of building up a strawman out of nothing, beating it soundly and skillfully to dust, and then turning to everyone else and screaming, "see, I TOLD you so!!!"

 

Was gonna reference this image as why I voted Shaub the main difference, thanks.

The guy at QB in front of Carr could go down at any minute or get benched for ineffectiveness. And he's there gloved-up, taped up and and hair long-locked like he's competing for the free safety spot, or gonna get a call in to make some special teams tackles.

Very interesting that LESS than 1% voted for the offensive line. Means that people knew the line wasnt that bad to begin with last year.

 

whoa shaub by a landslide. looks like he was love at first sight. i credit the defense. three turnovers a game!!!

you cant win without that.

 

It's being naive to understate the influence of leadership at the QB position.
On the defensive side, usually leadership is seen by someone who motives the intensity and effectiveness of play either through word and or action.

But on the offensive side unless you are Earl Campbell or Barry Sanders typically everyone is looking at the QB.

Don't think getting rid of Carr hasn't been a big factor in itself.

If Carr was still QB I assure you this team would not have a chance at the playoffs.

Under Schaub we are going to be contending for a playoff spot.

Why?

Leadership= Execution/Ability
Example/ Attitude
Encouragement/ Gut check

In other words- Schaub will perform better and smarter than Carr would, he will expect more from the whole team personally and he will carry himself and expect the team to carry a winning attitude.

David Carr had all the talent but lacked the leadership.
He hated losing but didn't know how to pull the team together, no chemistry.

You will not see Schaub rattled and fumbling and acting ho hum. He will manage his position and the team will rally around him.

The 2 best things that ever happened to this team was firing Casserly and dumping Carr.

Our record at the end of this season will prove this.

Sure Schaub has a talent upgrade this season, but it would have been handicapped if Carr were still here.

I would be sick to my stomach to see Carr leading this much talent to mediocrity.