PDA

View Full Version : Take a Look at Ragone


profan
11-16-2005, 08:55 PM
I think the decisions on David Carr would be alot easier to make if we had a good indication of where Dave Ragone is at. I think it would be in the texans best interest to start ragone for a game or two and see what kind of numbers he put's up. If he out performs carr than maybe letting carr go is not a bad idea. If he really stinks it up, stay with carr. The coaches tend to replace other players when they are not performing, however, the qb is always the same unless he's hurt. I don't want carr to get hurt, but, when he is having an off game, he should be replaced just like other players at other positions.

Grid
11-16-2005, 09:04 PM
if the rumors are true and we are seriously considering letting Carr go.. then we would be very stupid if we didnt give Ragone some play time to see what we have there.

lately..no one has accused our coaches of being smart though.

Honoring Earl 34
11-16-2005, 09:13 PM
:texflag: If both Vince Young and Brady Quinn come out in 2007 ... I might give Raggone a shot in 2006 . If he stinks then maybe I'd have a shot at Quinn or Young .
If Carr is resigned is not the question . The question is why after 50 games is Carr not catching on . After 50 games if he is capable it seems he'd done it by now . I know coaching is important but after that many games he could have figured it out without a coach .

mean mark8
11-16-2005, 09:34 PM
I posted this in another thread but it seems more appropriate here.

What about splitting time in the next 3 games or so between Ragone and Carr? One plays the 1st qtr and gets to continue any drives into the 2nd qtr. The other gets the remainder of the 2nd qtr plus the 3rd with continuance of any drives into the 4th. Finally the one who started finishes up the 4th. On the next game the other starts. This will gave McNair a basis for determining if it's the rest of the offense that bites and we don't have a QB who could run it or if Carr is just too gun-shy and confused by the defenses to play well. It won't allow Ragone to just shine because we're playing more losing teams in the last 7 games either. I think the play of Carr through this point in the year has earned him some competition. I also think Ragone's done everything asked of him to this point and deserves an opportunity. Everyone knows that we only have about 5 or 6 plays that we run anyway so they'll be on a pretty even scale as far as that goes.:dangit:

I feel we've reached a point in the season where we can start looking at our future. I believe it makes good business sense to see everyone on your staff before you just award a large sum of money to anyone, currently on the roster or prospective draftees/FAs.

eriadoc
11-16-2005, 09:45 PM
I think the decisions on David Carr would be alot easier to make if we had a good indication of where Dave Ragone is at. I think it would be in the texans best interest to start ragone for a game or two and see what kind of numbers he put's up. If he out performs carr than maybe letting carr go is not a bad idea. If he really stinks it up, stay with carr. The coaches tend to replace other players when they are not performing, however, the qb is always the same unless he's hurt. I don't want carr to get hurt, but, when he is having an off game, he should be replaced just like other players at other positions.

THe coaches have him at 3rd string, which really tells you all you need to know about their assessment of his abilities. What we want is really irrelevant in that discussion.

For the record, I don't care one whit about RAgone, and I am convinced he'll never amount to much with the Texans. I'd much rather see them go after someone like Schaub or KItna, or similar, to challenge Carr and maybe take the job.

mean mark8
11-16-2005, 09:53 PM
THe coaches have him at 3rd string, which really tells you all you need to know about their assessment of his abilities. What we want is really irrelevant in that discussion.

For the record, I don't care one whit about RAgone, and I am convinced he'll never amount to much with the Texans. I'd much rather see them go after someone like Schaub or KItna, or similar, to challenge Carr and maybe take the job.

The coaches also had Riley as our starting LT and Mack as our starting RB in DD's first year. They don't have a stellar record as far as assessing talent.

Coach C.
11-16-2005, 10:55 PM
Ragone is a third string QB and likely nothing better than a backup in this league. He is not overly athletic, does not have a strong throwing arm, and the guy reads defenses worse than most of you think Carr does. Can he beat up on other third stringers and practice squaders a little but not really. Yeah he won whatever world bowl crap he won, but that is against third stringers and non-NFL leaguers. come on people Ragone should not see the field unless Carr and Banks gets hurt.

eriadoc
11-16-2005, 11:05 PM
The coaches also had Riley as our starting LT and Mack as our starting RB in DD's first year. They don't have a stellar record as far as assessing talent.

I don't necessarily disagree, but that just further cements my point - we won't be seeing Ragone unless a couple QBs go down to injury.

mean mark8
11-16-2005, 11:55 PM
Ragone is a third string QB and likely nothing better than a backup in this league. He is not overly athletic, does not have a strong throwing arm, and the guy reads defenses worse than most of you think Carr does. Can he beat up on other third stringers and practice squaders a little but not really. Yeah he won whatever world bowl crap he won, but that is against third stringers and non-NFL leaguers. come on people Ragone should not see the field unless Carr and Banks gets hurt.

People felt the same way about Kurt Warner and Jake Delhomme. Joe Montana was also a 3rd round selection with poor arm strength. Additionally, he beat out guys like Akili Smith who supposedly, at draft, was a no-miss QB.

Napa Auto Parts
11-16-2005, 11:59 PM
Actually im sorry to say this but i dont want ragone to get a chance to play we have a lock on our run at the 1st overall pick in next years draft. and may be just may be putting ragone in might mean we win a couple of games and i refuse to win im used to loosing now. and i dont want to give up the 1st overall pick:texflag:

Coach C.
11-17-2005, 12:01 AM
First Montana was not a 3rd stringer behind two guys who people feel are not getting the job done, neither was Delhomme who was the backup. Kurt Warner was undrafted and it took two guys getting hurt for him to get his chance and he made the most of it. So like I said when Carr and Banks get hurt then Ragone can have his shot, it just may be with another team.

blankfixation
11-17-2005, 01:00 AM
Actually im sorry to say this but i dont want ragone to get a chance to play we have a lock on our run at the 1st overall pick in next years draft. and may be just may be putting ragone in might mean we win a couple of games and i refuse to win im used to loosing now. and i dont want to give up the 1st overall pick:texflag:

it would suck if we win more games and green bay gets first round. im not willing to lose a 1st round either, and to be honest im so pissed at the team that it really doesnt matter to me if they win the rest of the games cause we would still have the beginning of the season as a monkey on our backs. mcnair wont stand for his team to be the last place team more than one year so capers fairwell and good riddance. by the way anyone else think that capers looks like a monkey with a scratchpad?:yahoo:
found the perfect smiley for buchanon too:play:

profan
11-17-2005, 10:35 AM
Actually im sorry to say this but i dont want ragone to get a chance to play we have a lock on our run at the 1st overall pick in next years draft. and may be just may be putting ragone in might mean we win a couple of games and i refuse to win im used to loosing now. and i dont want to give up the 1st overall pick:texflag:

No way we lose the rest of our games. The schedule is pretty lame the rest of the way and Capers will keep it close against against the remaining opponents and we will win some of these games. We will finish with three or four wins that amount to nothing. We will be fine with the draft as long as casserly does not try to get to cute and trade away a bunch of picks for some under achiever. Ragone was projected to be a top pick until his team fell apart in his junior year. Our coaches don't necessarily have the best players in the right order and i believe ragone should be over banks. I say play ragone because banks has no chance to be our future qb, where a younger ragone does.

infantrycak
11-17-2005, 10:41 AM
Interesting what happened up in Philly. McNabb went down and Reid has not gone to the guy that was listed at #2 on the depth charts, Koy Detmer, he has gone to #3 McMahon. I suspect one of the ways you keep guys like Banks and Detmer happy is to list them #2 on the depth chart even if you don't think they are the 2nd best QB on the roster.

Vinny
11-17-2005, 11:26 AM
Interesting what happened up in Philly. McNabb went down and Reid has not gone to the guy that was listed at #2 on the depth charts, Koy Detmer, he has gone to #3 McMahon. I suspect one of the ways you keep guys like Banks and Detmer happy is to list them #2 on the depth chart even if you don't think they are the 2nd best QB on the roster. Very true. I think that in this waste of a season it would be very sad if we didn't get Ragone in for a few quarters with the first team. To have season where you have zero chance for the playoffs and don't put in a few key reserves in first team action so you can conduct an honest review would be incredibly short sighted.

tsip
11-17-2005, 11:27 AM
Interesting what happened up in Philly. McNabb went down and Reid has not gone to the guy that was listed at #2 on the depth charts, Koy Detmer, he has gone to #3 McMahon. I suspect one of the ways you keep guys like Banks and Detmer happy is to list them #2 on the depth chart even if you don't think they are the 2nd best QB on the roster.


...good point. I've always liked McMahon and thought he kinda got looked over in Detroit--bet they'd like to have him back now. Is Houston doing the same thing with Ragone by keeping him on the bench? IMO, we shouldn't have to wonder 'what if' with either Carr or Ragone!!

humbleone
11-17-2005, 11:33 AM
As stated in a previous post, I like the idea of starting Ragone for the games after the Chiefs not because he is better than Carr but because our GM have invested a "3" in this kid and we need to get something for him.

So, if we play him the rest of the year and he wins a game or two (like Arizona or San Francisco) maybe we can trade him to a team for a pick in the '06 draft that we can use to put a player on the field. The '06 draft is perfect for the Texans with regards to needs (OL, OLB, TE, Safety)....we need all the picks we can get for the new GM to use as ammo.

TheOgre
11-17-2005, 12:18 PM
I'd like to see Ragone and Hollings get some p.t. I would hate to have overlooked them and have them go somewhere else and excel.

Frills
11-17-2005, 12:19 PM
Hollings excells on the trainer's table

Double Barrel
11-17-2005, 12:40 PM
As soon as we are "mathematically eliminated" from the post-season, we could see some playing time for backups. :heh:

I'm not convinced Ragone is all that, but I'd like to see him play just to answer some questions. And if he suffered the same fate as Carr has been the past 4 seasons, then I guess some answers about DC might be addressed, as well.

Personally, I think Ragone would look much, much worse than any perception people have of Carr's play. Carr is athletic, at least, being the third leading rushing QB last year behind Vick and McNabb. I'm afraid Ragone would be on his **** a good portion of the time without the ability to run away from trouble.

Plus, if Ragone was given some playing time, it would rest DC and prevent him from taking even more of a beating than he already has this season. We'll need him next season for the run on our first winning record. :thumbup

LOUD, PROUD, & TEXAN!! :texflag:

Vinny
11-17-2005, 12:54 PM
As soon as we are "mathematically eliminated" from the post-season, we could see some playing time for backups. :heh: Is this the "new math" my Father always complained about? We are toast and I think everyone knows it...except for Capers of course. :challenge

I'm not convinced Ragone is all that, but I'd like to see him play just to answer some questions. And if he suffered the same fate as Carr has been the past 4 seasons, then I guess some answers about DC might be addressed, as well.

Personally, I think Ragone would look much, much worse than any perception people have of Carr's play. Carr is athletic, at least, being the third leading rushing QB last year behind Vick and McNabb. I'm afraid Ragone would be on his **** a good portion of the time without the ability to run away from trouble.
Being a fast runner has zero, zero, zero, zero to do with avoiding sacks. Many of the great QB's of all time have been absolute statues. Guys who rely on their feet often make their blocking look worse than it is since if you aren't where your blocker expects you to be - how in the heck can he keep his body between the QB and the defender if he has no clue where you are? I'll tell you....he can't. Ragone may just have better pocket awareness than Carr or a better feel for picking up his secondary WR...but we just don't know.

Honoring Earl 34
11-17-2005, 01:36 PM
:texflag: Vinny you are right on . Know one remebers that the great QBs made their line look good and vice versa . You could say all RBs have to run a 4.4 but thats not true either . Great RBs set up their blockers by being patient . I watch QBs who get rid of the ball ...with accuracy with DL 2ft away ... and yes they get nailed . Instead its a reception or an incompletion but not a sack . If you are confused then the team knows it and you have a circus .

Double Barrel
11-17-2005, 01:50 PM
Being a fast runner has zero, zero, zero, zero to do with avoiding sacks. Many of the great QB's of all time have been absolute statues. Guys who rely on their feet often make their blocking look worse than it is since if you aren't where your blocker expects you to be - how in the heck can he keep his body between the QB and the defender if he has no clue where you are? I'll tell you....he can't. Ragone may just have better pocket awareness than Carr or a better feel for picking up his secondary WR...but we just don't know.

This is true, but, behind the current lack of protection that is afforded to the QB by this Texans offense, I think having some running ability might help a little. idonno:

While I agree with you 100% about running not being required to be a good QB (look no further than the man, Joe Montana), I think my statement that Ragone would get creamed behind this offense still has merit. Heck, even Joe Montana himself would probably look less than average on this offense right now.

It seems like our pocket is alway collapsing, and there is no consistency where the actual pocket will be in a given play. I know it's not all the fault of the o-line, as there have been some blown reads and blocks by position players, as well, especially on anything even resembling a blitz.

I think my overall point is that it is tough to truly judge DC at this stage, because he hasn't been given anything consistent to work with in four seasons. While I see certain tendencies that need to be addressed, I also understand that even the great QBs would be marginally effective on this 2005 Texans offense.

Vinny
11-17-2005, 01:51 PM
This is true, but, behind the current lack of protection that is afforded to the QB by this Texans offense, I think having some running ability might help a little. idonno: I broke down the snaps against the fierce Colts pass rush and saw time for the QB. Perhaps you aren't looking at the games as much as you are hanging on to your perceptions.

Double Barrel
11-17-2005, 01:57 PM
I broke down the snaps against the fierce Colts pass rush and saw time for the QB. Perhaps you aren't looking at the games as much as you are hanging on to your perceptions.

You could be right about perceptions, as I don't have the ability at the moment to re-watch games (wish I did!). I'll be the first to admit it. :)

But, is that time consistent? I mean, does he get that kind of pocket time on 50% of plays, 75%, 25%? idonno:

And this is what I'm talking about, the fact that DC is now conditioned to NOT trust his offensive protection.

What I want to see is some consistency before giving Carr a final grade. I completely understand a lot of the criticism leveled against him. But, after 160+ sacks in less than four seasons, he's developed some tendencies that seem to lean towards survival mechanisms more than anything.

Vinny
11-17-2005, 01:58 PM
Who's talking about final grades? All I want to see is a few quarters for Ragone so we know what we have.

Double Barrel
11-17-2005, 02:02 PM
Who's talking about final grades? All I want to see is a few quarters for Ragone so we know what we have.

Well, many folks have given Carr a final exam around here. Not being specific, as you've been more than willing to be analytical without being definitive. But there are many corners of the forum that truly consider DC a bust. I'm still sitting on the fence, to be honest.

But I agree about Ragone. Not as a punishment for Carr, but to get some real player evaluation during actual NFL game time. I want to see what the kid is made of and what he can do with the same offense that Carr has been struggling to control.

This season is a bust, so we might as well make something useful of it!

real
11-17-2005, 02:05 PM
D. Carr is done for...He never looks like he is in control of the anything... He looks like my little brother using him on Madden. His throws ar inconsistent, he's constantly rattled... they should put in Ragone and anyone else who wants a shot at it... Ragone certainly can't lose anymore games than Carr allready has

Honoring Earl 34
11-17-2005, 02:14 PM
:texflag: I don't know if folks think Carr's a bust as much as they think he's not worth the extention money .
When he could not get off the hail Mary in Cincy (yes he had time ) and throwing the ball away on a 2 point conversion convinced me that all was not right with Mr.Carr

thegr8fan
11-17-2005, 02:16 PM
the argument that Ragone would look/play worse than DC behind our current line is laughable at best. So what if he plays terrible and we lose. Oh wait, we are already doing that quite well already. I want to see Ragone behind our current line. I want to compare apples to apples. I want the exact same blockers, the exact same plays being called, and the exact same players playing. THEN I can judge for myself whether Ragone is better/worse/ same as Carr.

Some players just are able to focus on gameday and during the game. Perhaps Ragone is one of those. But until he gets on the field and under center we will never know. We already have a VERY good idea of Carr and his positives/negatives. Lets get some gametape on Ragone and a couple of others, like Armstrong, now. Not next year. No one believes the Texans are going to 'turn on the light switch' and make a run at the playoffs this season anyway. Lets use the remainder of the season to our advantage for NEXT season, IMHO.

infantrycak
11-17-2005, 02:20 PM
I broke down the snaps against the fierce Colts pass rush and saw time for the QB. Perhaps you aren't looking at the games as much as you are hanging on to your perceptions.

Hmmm, I would have described it as time for the QB to execute the game plan currently in place.

I meant to have a look at what % of plays the ball is out in 2 seconds or less--my impression is the majority are with a much smaller number out in 3 and almost no positive plays where the ball is held for 4 seconds prior to the throw. Not to say other O's are designed to have the majority of plays be 3 and 4 seconds, but a higher %. They also let their QB hold if he has good protection for longer to let things come open at times and don't direct a 3 second dump at all costs. Most of the time the OL is doing a good job of providing time for the Texans' system as it currently is, but it is oftenn failing as the ball is thrown meaning if they tried to hold it for .5 to 1 second more (possibly a more average NFL type distribution) we would be seeing quite a few more failures. None of this means Carr is using the time he has well, just a reflection on the state of the OL. I was getting a little optimistic about the line with Hodg in, McKinney at LG and without Riley on the field--oh, well.

Malloy
11-17-2005, 02:22 PM
Very true. I think that in this waste of a season it would be very sad if we didn't get Ragone in for a few quarters with the first team. To have season where you have zero chance for the playoffs and don't put in a few key reserves in first team action so you can conduct an honest review would be incredibly short sighted.

Agree, we should see at least a few quarters with Ragone. Possibly let Carr start and if we're tailing by more that say 21 points before the fourth quarter, put Ragone in.

real
11-17-2005, 02:26 PM
theyd probably put in Tony Banks, and just make everyone mad

Vinny
11-17-2005, 03:08 PM
Hmmm, I would have described it as time for the QB to execute the game plan currently in place.

I meant to have a look at what % of plays the ball is out in 2 seconds or less--my impression is the majority are with a much smaller number out in 3 and almost no positive plays where the ball is held for 4 seconds prior to the throw. Not to say other O's are designed to have the majority of plays be 3 and 4 seconds, but a higher %. They also let their QB hold if he has good protection for longer to let things come open at times and don't direct a 3 second dump at all costs. Most of the time the OL is doing a good job of providing time for the Texans' system as it currently is, but it is oftenn failing as the ball is thrown meaning if they tried to hold it for .5 to 1 second more (possibly a more average NFL type distribution) we would be seeing quite a few more failures. None of this means Carr is using the time he has well, just a reflection on the state of the OL. I was getting a little optimistic about the line with Hodg in, McKinney at LG and without Riley on the field--oh, well.We are seeing different things on the Colts first half then. I may be mistaken but I only remember one throw where Carr unloaded a pass right before he was about to get hit in the pocket in the first half (the pass to AJ on the sideline where he missed Gaffney in single linebacker coverage - and in lieu of the pressure I can understand that one). I'd characterize his time in the pocket as "all day" by NFL standards. I still haven’t gotten to the second half btw (but I still plan on it).

mean mark8
11-17-2005, 03:18 PM
We are seeing different things on the Colts first half then. I may be mistaken but I only remember one throw where Carr unloaded a pass right before he was about to get hit in the pocket in the first half (the pass to AJ on the sideline where he missed Gaffney in single linebacker coverage - and in lieu of the pressure I can understand that one). I'd characterize his time in the pocket as "all day" by NFL standards. I still havenít gotten to the second half btw (but I still plan on it).
Vinny, I think what he was saying is that our coaches have drilled Carr into throwing it after 2.5 seconds at all costs. Stupid as it may sound, if he were to hold it longer trying to find someone deeper, he might very well get chewed out on the sideline no matter if he gets sacked or throws a perfect ball to wide-open receiver. I don't recall where you stand on the Bradford throw, but he did get chewed out by the OC and a defensive lineman for making a perfect throw that if caught by Bradford running through the ball could have scored 6. Bradford just likes to dive for balls and let the ground defend him. JMO.

infantrycak
11-17-2005, 03:25 PM
We are seeing different things on the Colts first half then. I may be mistaken but I only remember one throw where Carr unloaded a pass right before he was about to get hit in the pocket in the first half (the pass to AJ on the sideline where he missed Gaffney in single linebacker coverage - and in lieu of the pressure I can understand that one). I'd characterize his time in the pocket as "all day" by NFL standards. I still havenít gotten to the second half btw (but I still plan on it).

Not necessarily seeing different things, but talking about different things. I am not talking about imminent contact with the QB at release. What I was trying to note was the state of the pass protection at release to try to get a feel for whether Carr could have held the ball or stayed uprite another .5, 1, etc. seconds. In that regard I noted when for example Brown was beaten and his man was clear at the time the ball was thrown--Carr isn't under immediate pressure but would be soon if the play had been designed to last longer. Seems pretty clear the Texans have set up a choppy short offense--seems rather overly charitable to the OL to say they are providing "all day" by NFL standards.

Vinny
11-17-2005, 03:27 PM
Vinny, I think what he was saying is that our coaches have drilled Carr into throwing it after 2.5 seconds at all costs. Stupid as it may sound, if he were to hold it longer trying to find someone deeper, he might very well get chewed out on the sideline no matter if he gets sacked or throws a perfect ball to wide-open receiver. I don't recall where you stand on the Bradford throw, but he did get chewed out by the OC and a defensive lineman for making a perfect throw that if caught by Bradford running through the ball could have scored 6. Bradford just likes to dive for balls and let the ground defend him. JMO.He is conditioned to get rid of the ball because he was just taking sacks without reason earlier in his career. Was the line bad? Yes, was the quarterbacking bad too? Yes. I think long throws on 4th down is not generally smart football. If that throw was on any other down he gets no flack.

Vinny
11-17-2005, 03:30 PM
Seems pretty clear the Texans have set up a choppy short offense--seems rather overly charitable to the OL to say they are providing "all day" by NFL standards.I agree with your point that the offense is a short bus offense due to many factors, including the line. It's overly charitable to say that he had "all day" if you are talking about the average protection he has received on balance this year, but not if you are talking about specific plays in that first half last Sunday.

infantrycak
11-17-2005, 03:33 PM
I agree with your point that the offense is a short bus offense due to many factors, including the line. It's overly charitable to say that he had "all day" if you are talking about the average protection he has received on balance this year, but not if you are talking about specific plays in that first half last Sunday.

Got it--he certainly did have all day on that one play right before the half. One of these days we will see an OL that can give that kind of protection 4 or so plays a game--hopefully we have a system and QB that will take advantage of it.

TheOgre
11-17-2005, 04:27 PM
I think long throws on 4th down is not generally smart football. If that throw was on any other down he gets no flack.

Thank you, Vinny. I guess I am not alone in this thinking. It seemed like I was the only one that thought that the other day when I "voiced" that very opinion.

Double Barrel
11-17-2005, 04:48 PM
I agree with your point that the offense is a short bus offense due to many factors, including the line. It's overly charitable to say that he had "all day" if you are talking about the average protection he has received on balance this year, but not if you are talking about specific plays in that first half last Sunday.

This is what I'm curious about, because I know what you're saying about individual plays that seemed to provide him with a pocket.

Is it possible that he's been conditioned to look for his escape plan instead of secondary receiver? I've noticed a tendency, and this might just be perception again, to telegraph. When his primary is covered, he looks for his option to get away.

There were instances during the Colts game that I saw pockets that required him to step into it, but instead, he takes off - sometimes running right into a blocked defender for a sack. Other QBs will step into it, and release the ball right before they take a hit. Carr doesn't seem to give it enough time before he escapes. Is this something you've noticed when analyzing the replays?

real
11-17-2005, 06:49 PM
This is what I'm curious about, because I know what you're saying about individual plays that seemed to provide him with a pocket.

Is it possible that he's been conditioned to look for his escape plan instead of secondary receiver? I've noticed a tendency, and this might just be perception again, to telegraph. When his primary is covered, he looks for his option to get away.

There were instances during the Colts game that I saw pockets that required him to step into it, but instead, he takes off - sometimes running right into a blocked defender for a sack. Other QBs will step into it, and release the ball right before they take a hit. Carr doesn't seem to give it enough time before he escapes. Is this something you've noticed when analyzing the replays?
has anyone seen Carr step into a pocket this year?

Has anyone seen him throw the ball right b4 he got hit?

Strong arm, good athlete+bad coaching= 1-8

real
11-17-2005, 06:50 PM
Having said that, does anyone think that our line might be better with better coaching?

infantrycak
11-17-2005, 07:01 PM
has anyone seen Carr step into a pocket this year?

Has anyone seen him throw the ball right b4 he got hit?

Strong arm, good athlete+bad coaching= 1-8

Having said that, does anyone think that our line might be better with better coaching?

Yes, within the last 5 games several times (have been looking at it more closely). Not always and wrong on some critical occasions but yes.

Yes many times.

Agree

Absolutely agree-should have hired Houck last year when protection was a priority but evidently meant Riley more than Houck.

thegr8fan
11-17-2005, 07:28 PM
Being in the Carr criticizer club, I have to say that lately he has been stepping into SOME of the pockets. He still is skitish and takes off early sometimes also. But he is much improved in trying to at least stay in the pocket verses running immediately, IMHO. Is this Pendry and closer more personal coaching with Carr, perhaps. Carr has improved lately, IMHO. But he still has alot of improving to do to warrent his picking up the option and earning his money. On the other side of the argument though is the thought that if we release him as an UFA, who is going to step in and be our starting QB. Hence the play Ragone idea. Lets see what the guy can do at least. He might, and probably will, fall flat on his face an fail miserably. But at least we will know.

I will end this with the thought that if Carr can continue to show improvement throughout the rest of the year, I would not be opposed to picking up the 2 year option for 5.5 mil and see how that goes. But I still want to see Ragone playing sometime this year, especially if its a game where we are decidedly losing late in the fourth QTR.

I do not want to see a 4th QTR, 5 minutes left, down by 21 points, run, run, run, punt play calling ever again. If the Texans have given up, which is the apparent reason for such pitifull play calling, at least get some value out of it and play Ragone.