PDA

View Full Version : If WE Get Kubiak then whats the point on drafting Reggie!


Reggie_2006
01-07-2006, 09:49 PM
Kubiak has proved to be able to make not so good RB into Great ones. Im not saying that DD isnt good but I think kubiak could make our running game a lot better. So I dont see why we dont get VY when he can make our Running game GREAT!!! What do yall think?

tulexan
01-07-2006, 09:53 PM
Because Kubiak really likes David Carr and wants to win right now not in a few years.

Tulip
01-07-2006, 09:54 PM
I agree. But then you would have to change your username. :)

Marcus
01-07-2006, 09:55 PM
Because unlike 99.999999999% of posters on this MB, Kubiak thinks he can take Carr to the next level.

So let me be the first .....

FIRE KUBIAK!

lol:

Reggie_2006
01-07-2006, 09:56 PM
Well with VY great leadership I think that and kubiak making DD better could turn this team around.

texan279
01-07-2006, 09:56 PM
Yeah, if Kubiak does get hired, we could trade down and load up on defense and the offensive linemen he wants...

Ryan71780
01-07-2006, 09:59 PM
We're gonna take Bush with the first pick. I think he and VY will be great, so taking either one won't be a mistake.

run-david-run
01-07-2006, 09:59 PM
what an idea, i cant believe it hasnt been suggested before... just kidding, if we draft reggie or VY i will boycott the texans, not really, but at least i thought about it, does that count for anything?

run-david-run
01-07-2006, 10:00 PM
We're gonna take Bush with the first pick. I think he and VY will be great, so taking either one won't be a mistake.
just becasue CC says we will draft Bush does not mean we will. he could just be saying that to make a team desparate enough to give the farm..

texan279
01-07-2006, 10:04 PM
just becasue CC says we will draft Bush does not mean we will. he could just be saying that to make a team desparate enough to give the farm..

Cass has not said we will draft Bush, all he said the day of the Rose Bowl is that we are not drafting Leinhart. Cass cannot talk about junior ball players.

tulexan
01-07-2006, 10:07 PM
Actually he said before the Rose Bowl that we would not be drafting Leinart. He said after the Rose Bowl that we would not be drafting a quarterback but will be drafting a playmaking running back.

Grid
01-07-2006, 10:09 PM
the Denver offense works with a pocket QB.

Marcus
01-07-2006, 10:11 PM
He did NOT say anything about drafting a "playmaking running back"!

He said they wouldn't be drafting Matt Lienart. Period.

tulexan
01-07-2006, 10:15 PM
Bob Glauber said it. I remember hearing those exact words come out of his mouth.

It was on Cold Pizza the morning after the Rose Bowl.

Hervoyel
01-07-2006, 10:37 PM
That's an excellent question and one that I'd like to take a shot at.

If Gary Kubiak brings the Texans what basically amounts to the entire Denver Broncos playbook then it's impossible to miss the fact that the Broncos get good yardage out of most every back the insert. Let's look at the backs they've used since Shanahan got there.

1995: 237 attempts for 1117 yards and a 4.7 average (Davis)
1996: 345 attempts for 1538 yards and a 4.5 average (Davis)
1997: 369 attempts for 1750 yards and a 4.7 average (Davis)
1998: 392 attempts for 2008 yards and a 5.1 average (Davis)
1999: 276 attempts for 1159 yards and a 4.2 average. (Gary)
2000: 297 attempts for 1487 yards and a 5.0 average. (Anderson)
2001: 342 attempts for 1379 yards and a 4.0 average. (Davis + Anderson)
2002: 273 attempts for 1508 yards and a 5.5 average. (Portis)
2003: 290 attempts for 1591 yards and a 5.5 average. (Portis)
2004: 275 attempts for 1240 yards and a 4.5 average. (Droughns)
2005: 411 attempts for 1935 yards and a 4.7 average. (Anderson + Bell)

That's a lot of running and a lot of yards. I'd love for my team to have a series of backs and a running game like that for a decade. One thing you can't ignore though is that that many carries and that much mileage tends to wear down your RB. Terrell Davis had injuries, Mike Anderson missed 2004. The Broncos plug a lot of backs into their "system" because they go through a lot of backs. Davis alone will drop dead from this kind of workload. Obviously if you look at the list the Broncos generally get more out of more talented backs. Davis and Portis did better than Gary, Anderson (except for one great year), and Droughns.


Add Bush to Davis, Wells, and Morency and you have a kick butt backfield. We do need running backs in the Denver system. We do not need Vince Young. As Grid already mentioned the Denver offense doesn't require the next Mike Vick.

Kubiak and this system helped make Jake Plummer a winner, David Carr should prove to be no obstacle.

Fiddy
01-07-2006, 10:43 PM
Kubiak and this system helped make Jake Plummer a winner, David Carr should prove to be no obstacle. I know I'll get ripped but who cares: Jake Plummer, however, use to win in the clutch in Arizona when they sucked and had nobody before except Mr. Steriod. He lead the league in 4th quarter comebacks when he was in Arizona. Carr has one or two games trailing in the 4th. People think Plummer sucked horribly in Arizona and the Denver system brought him from total garbage to Pro Bowl level. He was never garbage, in my opinion he was just a guy who tried too hard because he had no one and wanted to win. When the game was on the line, Plummer stepped up. Carr hasnt done that here.


COMEBACK JR. — Denver is used to seeing comeback wins. John Elway made a career out of late heroics, tying or winning a game in the fourth quarter or overtime a record 47 times.

Plummer is creeping up on his storied predecessor, however.

With the win over the Panthers, Plummer completed his 24th career game-winning or tying fourth-quarter comeback. http://www.coloradoan.com/news/coloradoanpublishing/Football2004/Broncos/season/101104_droughns.htm

That's after the Carolina/Denver game last season....

texan279
01-07-2006, 10:43 PM
That's an excellent question and one that I'd like to take a shot at.

If Gary Kubiak brings the Texans what basically amounts to the entire Denver Broncos playbook then it's impossible to miss the fact that the Broncos get good yardage out of most every back the insert. Let's look at the backs they've used since Shanahan got there.

1995: 237 attempts for 1117 yards and a 4.7 average (Davis)
1996: 345 attempts for 1538 yards and a 4.5 average (Davis)
1997: 369 attempts for 1750 yards and a 4.7 average (Davis)
1998: 392 attempts for 2008 yards and a 5.1 average (Davis)
1999: 276 attempts for 1159 yards and a 4.2 average. (Gary)
2000: 297 attempts for 1487 yards and a 5.0 average. (Anderson)
2001: 342 attempts for 1379 yards and a 4.0 average. (Davis + Anderson)
2002: 273 attempts for 1508 yards and a 5.5 average. (Portis)
2003: 290 attempts for 1591 yards and a 5.5 average. (Portis)
2004: 275 attempts for 1240 yards and a 4.5 average. (Droughns)
2005: 411 attempts for 1935 yards and a 4.7 average. (Anderson + Bell)

That's a lot of running and a lot of yards. I'd love for my team to have a series of backs and a running game like that for a decade. One thing you can't ignore though is that that many carries and that much mileage tends to wear down your RB. Terrell Davis had injuries, Mike Anderson missed 2004. The Broncos plug a lot of backs into their "system" because they go through a lot of backs. Davis alone will drop dead from this kind of workload. Obviously if you look at the list the Broncos generally get more out of more talented backs. Davis and Portis did better than Gary, Anderson (except for one great year), and Droughns.


Add Bush to Davis, Wells, and Morency and you have a kick butt backfield. We do need running backs in the Denver system. We do not need Vince Young. As Grid already mentioned the Denver offense doesn't require the next Mike Vick.

Kubiak and this system helped make Jake Plummer a winner, David Carr should prove to be no obstacle.

I agree with what you say here. I just don't know about taking Bush with the 1st overall pick. I agree that if you bring Kubiak here and have a backfield with Bush/Davis we would have a helluva 1-2 punch. However I have heard some scouts say that Bush will be a 10-15 carry a game back in the NFL. IMO using the 1st pick and paying Bush #1 overall pick money would be a bit hefty for a back who splits time in the backfield and is not used as a primary back. I would be curious to see a Davis/Morency backfield behind a Kubiak offensive line. One thing is for sure, this will probably be the most interesting offseason to date. I honestly can say I have no idea what I really want to see happen draftwise for us, yet.

Grid
01-07-2006, 10:47 PM
From what ive heard... Bush will be a 10-20 carries a game back.. but you can also get 5-7 catches a game out of him too.

So yah, he will be splitting carries with DD.. but that isnt all we could use him for. Davis and Bush both are capable backs when it comes to catching the ball.. it would be interesting to see what kind of plays we could run with two backs that can do that so well.

Hervoyel
01-07-2006, 10:51 PM
I know I'll get ripped but who cares: Jake Plummer, however, use to win in the clutch in Arizona when they sucked and had nobody before except Mr. Steriod. He lead the league in 4th quarter comebacks when he was in Arizona. Carr has one or two games trailing in the 4th. People think Plummer sucked horribly in Arizona and the Denver system brought him from total garbage to Pro Bowl level. He was never garbage, in my opinion he was just a guy who tried too hard because he had no one and wanted to win. When the game was on the line, Plummer stepped up. Carr hasnt done that here.


Nobody has done that here. Our offense has baby stepped for four years and just when we thought that it would pick it up a little bit following 2004 it collapsed and went so far back into it's collective shell that 2002 was starting to look good again. How many times have the Texans "gone for it" late in games here? How many times have we marched out to a 3, 7, or every once in a while a 10 point lead just to sit on it through the entire second half? I've seen bad things from Carr so I don't think he's above criticism. Don't get me wrong about that. I just think that almost nobody on this team has been put into a position to win or even improve.

Give him one season in a system that isn't the complete abomination that resulted from mixing Capers "peanut butter" with Palmers "chocolate". If he can't get it done then fine, we go in a different direction. There's always going to be another possibility at QB out there.

It doesn't really matter though because the Texans are going to give him his bonus and are committed to making him work. Kubiak, if he's the new coach will do what the Texans tell him to do. He's going to try and turn Carr's career around. I hope he succeeds.

Grid
01-07-2006, 10:55 PM
I honestly think that if Carr fails after getting another shot with a new coach, and an improved line.. the fans will stop supporting his being here (those that sitll do), and we will see a change.

If the rest of the team is working out good.. and Carr is a noticable flaw.. his days will be numbered. Face of the franchise or not.

texan279
01-07-2006, 10:56 PM
From what ive heard... Bush will be a 10-20 carries a game back.. but you can also get 5-7 catches a game out of him too.

So yah, he will be splitting carries with DD.. but that isnt all we could use him for. Davis and Bush both are capable backs when it comes to catching the ball.. it would be interesting to see what kind of plays we could run with two backs that can do that so well.

I agree with this as well. Bush can line up as a WR, or we could run 3 WR sets with Carr in the shotgun and have DD and Bush lined up in the backfield next to Carr. These are all reasons I am torn on what to do in the draft.

Fiddy
01-07-2006, 10:58 PM
Nobody has done that here. Our offense has baby stepped for four years and just when we thought that it would pick it up a little bit following 2004 it collapsed and went so far back into it's collective shell that 2002 was starting to look good again. How many times have the Texans "gone for it" late in games here? How many times have we marched out to a 3, 7, or every once in a while a 10 point lead just to sit on it through the entire second half? I've seen bad things from Carr so I don't think he's above criticism. Don't get me wrong about that. I just think that almost nobody on this team has been put into a position to win or even improve.
I agree somewhat but I just believe that if Capers and Palmer/Pendry had more faith in Carr, he would have been given more leeway with a lead and we wouldnt have sat on leads. They saw him in practice, they saw what he was capable of, he was capable of throwing the ball without making dumb mistakes or taking dumb sacks, they would have let him.
Give him one season in a system that isn't the complete abomination that resulted from mixing Capers "peanut butter" with Palmers "chocolate". If he can't get it done then fine, we go in a different direction. There's always going to be another possibility at QB out there. That's the thing, they'll never get another chance to get a QB from Houston with the national media attention that VY will have and a QB that will convert some Cowboy fans for the simple reason of VY. If Carr fails and we didnt take Young, this franchise will lose so many fans. It was already shown last year that patience has ran out. If Carr fails, we didnt draft VY, and we have to draft a different QB, the franchise will be in trouble. Of course it is all 'ifs."

swtbound07
01-07-2006, 11:04 PM
even if CC is saying we will draft a play making running back....CC might not have as much authority as he thinks he does in the matter. We will see who is pulling the strings come draft day

texan279
01-07-2006, 11:05 PM
even if CC is saying we will draft a play making running back....CC might not have as much authority as he thinks he does in the matter. We will see who is pulling the strings come draft day

Or it could be the whole smokescreen thing.

tulexan
01-07-2006, 11:08 PM
even if CC is saying we will draft a play making running back....CC might not have as much authority as he thinks he does in the matter. We will see who is pulling the strings come draft day


I'm pretty sure that Casserly is going to say something that McNair is on board with.

J-Man
01-07-2006, 11:10 PM
I think Fiddy said it right, "it's all ifs".

Carr may very well turn things around with a new coach, the offensive line might learn how to preform consistently, maybe Bradford will start hanging onto passes (well...ok, that's a stretch).

Maybe we trade Care and he becomes a regular at the Pro Bowl. Or maybe he sucks worse than he does here.

It also applies to Vince Young...what if he just can't translate his game to the pro's? How many Heisman Superhero's have we seen come into the NFL and had average or marginal careers? How many incredibly talented QBs have we seen drafted that imploded for any number of reasons.

I honestly think that we go with what we know, have a quality offensive coaching staff work with Carr, bolster the line and add some additional weapons. Let the 2yr extension playout. I know that Young has incredible potential and yes, he is a local guy. I think we try to win now...to do that our best chance is Carr.

Hervoyel
01-07-2006, 11:18 PM
I agree somewhat but I just believe that if Capers and Palmer/Pendry had more faith in Carr, he would have been given more leeway with a lead and we wouldnt have sat on leads. They saw him in practice, they saw what he was capable of, he was capable of throwing the ball without making dumb mistakes or taking dumb sacks, they would have let him.
That's the thing, they'll never get another chance to get a QB from Houston with the national media attention that VY will have and a QB that will convert some Cowboy fans for the simple reason of VY. If Carr fails and we didnt take Young, this franchise will lose so many fans. It was already shown last year that patience has ran out. If Carr fails, we didnt draft VY, and we have to draft a different QB, the franchise will be in trouble. Of course it is all 'ifs."


First of all what makes you think that Capers and Palmer had the first clue about what they were looking at in practice? How many completely inexplicable things happened in the last four years? I've lost count of them and I no longer think these guys could run a corn dog stand in the mall much less an NFL team or an NFL offense.

As for this fantastic quarterback from Houston with all this national media attention I say what was wrong with all the national media attention that Reggie Bush got? It was, up until Vince pulled out the Rose Bowl win, arguably some of the most overwhelming national media attention I've ever seen in my life for a football player.

Do you really think that a large number of fans will be affected by the status of Vince Young? I find that idea laughable because fans are so ridiculously fickle about who they like and why they like them that there's no way Vince Young is going to permanently convert any significant number of Cowboys fans. Those he does convert will be gone the first time he strings together a couple of bad games.

Every year there's a player who's going to change everything. They almost never do and Vince Young has no more or less chance of doing it for us than David Carr did or Reggie Bush will.

Fiddy
01-07-2006, 11:32 PM
First of all what makes you think that Capers and Palmer had the first clue about what they were looking at in practice? How many completely inexplicable things happened in the last four years? I've lost count of them and I no longer thing these guys could run a corn dog stand in the mall much less an NFL team or an NFL offense. lol, I guess but I still think that some of their game moves were made because they were trying to hide the deficiencies of Carr. Palmer wanted to take away the long drops to stop the sacks, good idea...until they couldnt do it because Carr threw way too many INTs on 3-step drop, timing routes. So they go back to the long drops and it Carr shows off his poor pocket awareness. And then the Palmer had to be the scapegoat and Pendry and Capers introduce an offense where Carr cant get sacked and doesnt have to think: The hitch offense.

As for this fantastic quarterback from Houston with all this national media attention I say what was wrong with all the national media attention that Reggie Bush got? It was, up until Vince pulled out the Rose Bowl win, arguably some of the most overwhelming national media attention I've ever seen in my life for a football player. I really dont have an answer for this except for a franchise QB brings more national attention than a franchise RB: Vick gets more pub than Shaun Alexander. But yeah, Reggie would bring just as much media attention.

Do you really think that a large number of fans will be affected by the status of Vince Young? I find that idea laughable because fans are so ridiculously fickle about who they like and why they like them that there's no way Vince Young is going to permanently convert any significant number of Cowboys fans. Those he does convert will be gone the first time he strings together a couple of bad games. I think it will. There were many Austin fans here you complained that the Texans games in Austin werent showed. Do you think Austin allows the Young-led Texans not to be on Austin television??? If the Texans were 2-14 with Young at QB next year they'd still be on TV in Austin. McNair is losing the battle of Texas to Jones. VY could help him get more love around the state of Texas.

Hervoyel
01-07-2006, 11:45 PM
One more thing Fiddy

On the Jake Plummer thing you made some points about how Plummer didn't just go to Denver and become a Pro Bowl QB. I think you said the following:


People think Plummer sucked horribly in Arizona and the Denver system brought him from total garbage to Pro Bowl level. He was never garbage, in my opinion he was just a guy who tried too hard because he had no one and wanted to win. When the game was on the line, Plummer stepped up. Carr hasnt done that here.


I wonder what you base that on. Prior to going to Denver Plummer never reached 60% completion percentage, He only once threw more TD's than picks, and his record in Arizona was 34-62. I can find nothing about his time in Arizona that makes me think he was any better a QB while there than David Carr has been here. More TD's sure, but also more INT's as well. He threw the ball a lot and he usually had an average to crummy running game. Sounds like DC to me.

The difference in what he did in Arizona vs what he did in Denver is dramatic. What appears to have changed is the system he was put in and the fact that the Broncos have a running game. I think his career is a perfect argument for seeing what Kubiak can do with David Carr. In fact I'm pretty excited about him as a HC candidate now.

tulexan
01-07-2006, 11:54 PM
You know you are right. I just looked at his career stats out of curiosity from your post and the change was very dramatic. In fact, Plummer never had a QB rating as high as Carr's last season before going to Denver. Plummer also cut down his sacks once he went to Denver in addition to increasing his touchdowns and decreasing his interceptions.

Fiddy
01-07-2006, 11:57 PM
I wonder what you base that on. Prior to going to Denver Plummer never reached 60% completion percentage, He only once threw more TD's than picks, and his record in Arizona was 34-62. I can find nothing about his time in Arizona that makes me think he was any better a QB while there than David Carr has been here. More TD's sure, but also more INT's as well. He threw the ball a lot and he usually had an average to crummy running game. Sounds like DC to me.

The difference in what he did in Arizona vs what he did in Denver is dramatic. What appears to have changed is the system he was put in and the fact that the Broncos have a running game. I think his career is a walking, talking argument for seeing what Kubiak can do with David Carr. In fact I'm pretty excited about him as a HC candidate now. I firmly believe the reason his stats were just plain horrible in Arizona was because he tried too hard and didnt care about them. It wasnt that he was stupid or couldnt play but was because he thought that if he didnt do anything amazing, his team had no chance so he did anything he could, took all the risks he could just hoping that a couple would work and he'd help his team pull out a victory.

For example, everyone knows that toss on a handoff when he was about to tackled and he threw behind his back or something. He knows that's dumb, he probably never did it in his life before that but he wanted to win and needed to make a play and he tried to somehow. Every QB knows you don't do that, that's why I dont think he is stupid. I just think he thought that he was on a team that never was gonna win unless he, himself, made a big play. He didnt care if he threw the INT, he was trying to make a play. If an INT showed up on his stat line, he didnt care, he was trying his hardest to win so he never got down on himself. Sometimes I wonder if Carr worries about his stats. I think there were 3 times at the end of games/half where, instead of throwing a deep one, he just took a sack because he feared getting an INT on his stat sheet.

The biggest difference I feel for Plummer is not the system as much as the talent. Now he doesnt have to win the games by himself, he can lean on a defense, on a running game, on his recievers. He couldnt do that in Arizona.

edo783
01-07-2006, 11:57 PM
lol, I guess but I still think that some of their game moves were made because they were trying to hide the deficiencies of Carr. Palmer wanted to take away the long drops to stop the sacks, good idea...until they couldnt do it because Carr threw way too many INTs on 3-step drop, timing routes. So they go back to the long drops and it Carr shows off his poor pocket awareness. And then the Palmer had to be the scapegoat and Pendry and Capers introduce an offense where Carr cant get sacked and doesnt have to think: The hitch offense.

Fiddy, that just isn't correct. The previouse year he did pretty well then our CRACK squad of coaches decide they should shift nearly every player on the O-line to a place they hadn't played before (because we did ZIP in the offseason) and had a human turnstile at LT, and then seemed surprised it couldn't hold water much less a pass rush. Think about what was going on, they had a line that could hold a pass rush for a max of 1.5 seconds, a horn going off at 2 seconds and trying to institute a scheme of timing routs for the first time. See any problems? David wasn't the only one having a problem with the new timing routs, so were the recievers. They wern't hitting their spots. With everthing based on a RUSHED tempo and format with a new scheme and an incompetent line there should be NO expectation of coherency of execution.

Hervoyel
01-08-2006, 12:03 AM
The biggest difference I feel for Plummer is not the system as much as the talent. Now he doesnt have to win the games by himself, he can lean on a defense, on a running game, on his recievers. He couldnt do that in Arizona.


Ok, well I can understand that. I think Carr has none of the above either but he responds to it differently. Instead of just doing anything he can to make a play as you gave the behind the back example for Plummer I think Carr just keeps trying to make the mess he's been given work. I don't see Carr as a big freelancer like that. I think he sticks to what the gameplan is. That's just an opinion based on seeing him play. I don't see the confidence in him to do that. I haven't really seen it since that night in 2002 when the Texans beat Dallas. By the end of the next game at San Diego (9 sacks) it was gone.

I can't help but believe that some of the negative things we're seeing in Carr result from his record setting sack pace.

Now completely aside from whether it's Carr's fault or the lines fault the sacks happened and he's got to be something of a different player because of them. Maybe he didn't see this coming and maybe it's a result of his bad habits and at the speed of the NFL that's catching up to him but either way it's there.

Fiddy
01-08-2006, 12:04 AM
Fiddy, that just isn't correct. The previouse year he did pretty well then our CRACK squad of coaches decide they should shift nearly every player on the O-line to a place they hadn't played before (because we did ZIP in the offseason) and had a human turnstile at LT, and then seemed surprised it couldn't hold water much less a pass rush. Think about what was going on, they had a line that could hold a pass rush for a max of 1.5 seconds, a horn going off at 2 seconds and trying to institute a scheme of timing routs for the first time. See any problems? David wasn't the only one having a problem with the new timing routs, so were the recievers. They wern't hitting their spots. With everthing based on a RUSHED tempo and format with a new scheme and an incompetent line there should be NO expectation of coherency of execution. Look at the Tampa Bay game: The line held, it's just that Carr telegraphed all his throws and the Bucs jumped them. After that game, I read and heard from many places that Carr even threw too many INTs in practice with the timing routes because the defense could telegraph them pre-snap.

Also remember Buffalo, the line was only responsible for 1 sack, Carr and the backs were responsible for the other 6, I think it was 6. At times, the line was bad but most of the time it was Carr and his poor pocket awareness.

The coaching staff were losers however for not figuring out sooner that Pitts was our best LT.

Fiddy
01-08-2006, 12:06 AM
Now completely aside from whether it's Carr's fault or the lines fault the sacks happened and he's got to be something of a different player because of them. Maybe he didn't see this coming and maybe it's a result of his bad habits and at the speed of the NFL that's catching up to him but either way it's there. I fully agree...

travfrancis
01-08-2006, 12:09 AM
I honestly think that if Carr fails after getting another shot with a new coach, and an improved line.. the fans will stop supporting his being here (those that sitll do), and we will see a change.

If the rest of the team is working out good.. and Carr is a noticable flaw.. his days will be numbered. Face of the franchise or not.

yeah and it would be too late, we would already passed on Vince Young.

Grid
01-08-2006, 12:13 AM
Yah i know.. its hard to pass on the last QB to ever play the game...




oh thats right... there will be other QBs coming out of college. Whew... dodged a bullet on that one didnt we?

*EDIT* im sorry :)..sarcasm doesnt help the situation hehe. Suffice to say that while I understand the whole thing with Young looking good, and being from Houston.. im more interested in what is best for the Texans. Right now we have a QB which MIGHT be good.. but is definatly a lot cheaper, and fits better in the Denver offense (if Kubiak comes here).. Young looks promising.. but he, at this point, has just as much chance of carrying us to a championship as carr does. This is the Lone Star State in name, not in practice.. it takes more than one player for a team to succeed.

tulexan
01-08-2006, 12:19 AM
Yeah if we are wrong about Carr and he is bad next year and we still have no success then we will be in the hunt for Brady Quinn or Brian Brohm. Two prospects who will most likely be better NFL QB's than Vince Young.