PDA

View Full Version : The Official "WE DONT WANT JAKE PLUMMER!" thread


Grid
12-12-2006, 09:47 PM
I just thought id get a head start on this topic.

There are all kinds of rumblings about us getting Jake Plummer to replace Carr. NO.. I do NOT want to replace Carr with his older twin.

Plummer would be a band-aid, I want the whole shabang.

The only way I would be alright with getting plummer is:

A) He comes cheap
B) We trade Carr for a good pick
C) We draft a young QB to start grooming while Plummer holds down the fort.

HJam72
12-12-2006, 09:47 PM
I'm with Grid.

gwallaia
12-12-2006, 09:49 PM
C.) Take in Plummer, draft Kolb in the 3rd round. Trade Carr for whatever we can get.
And oh yeah, try to get Joe Thomas with the first pick.

bah007
12-12-2006, 09:49 PM
Plummer is even worse than Carr.

Let me put it this way:

Plummer got benched for a rookie who isnt ready & isnt playing well.

Carr isnt benched yet & his back-up is a veteran player who has done well when he has stepped in.

Jake "the Mistake" Plummer is not what we need in Houston. Carr is an upgrade over this guy.

MrMeToo
12-12-2006, 09:54 PM
Bring in Vick;)

Mr. White
12-12-2006, 09:56 PM
A) He comes cheap
B) We trade Carr for a good pick
C) We draft a young QB to start grooming while Plummer holds down the fort.

I choose C also. And get Joe Thomas.

thunderkyss
12-12-2006, 09:59 PM
Damon Huard....

Drew Bledsoe.....

Brian Griese...

Fiddy
12-12-2006, 10:00 PM
I'll take Jake Plummer over David Carr any day, especially since Plummer is a proven good QB under Kubiak.

kocian1
12-12-2006, 10:04 PM
Maybe we sould keep Carr for one more year and groom a new QB to our system. No one seems to realize that this is still new to every player on the field that DIDN'T play for the Broncos last year. We need to draft a RB who can give us a chance to pound the rock and run the clock, beef up our O-Line, get some real safeties in here, and then I think the Texans will have it made. One more year people. thats all I ask.

big homey
12-12-2006, 10:08 PM
C) We draft a young QB to start grooming while Plummer holds down the fort.

If we do that then we might as well keep Carr and spare a big cap hit.

TexansLucky13
12-12-2006, 10:16 PM
Count me in on this thread.

Grid
12-12-2006, 10:24 PM
If we do that then we might as well keep Carr and spare a big cap hit.

Well when I listed those three things.. I meant that ALL of them need to happen.

Plummer needs to come cheap, Carr needs to be traded for a good pick, and Plummer needs to be a temporary solution while we groom our starter.

I dont want to just bench Carr and bring in Plummer.. that isnt going to fix anything.

Second Honeymoon
12-12-2006, 10:27 PM
I just thought id get a head start on this topic.

There are all kinds of rumblings about us getting Jake Plummer to replace Carr. NO.. I do NOT want to replace Carr with his older twin.

Plummer would be a band-aid, I want the whole shabang.

The only way I would be alright with getting plummer is:

A) He comes cheap
B) We trade Carr for a good pick
C) We draft a young QB to start grooming while Plummer holds down the fort.


great post, i dont want plummer either
a) possible
b) doubtful
c) probable

i think Carr will be back next year irregardless of his performance the rest of the season. it wont be popular, but because of the mistake last offseason (the contract not the passing on VY) its more practical. They will draft in the 3rd-5th round for a QB and you never know, Troy Smith could still be around in the 3rd (early 3rd). You then have Sage, Carr, and Smith compete to be starter. Insert Plummer's name in place of Carr if he is indeed traded/released but if we release Carr expect little to no Free Agent acquisitions of any consequence...Joey Porter is getting old but he could come in and give us a good pass rushing LB with coverage skills but he wont come cheap.

Goldeagle
12-12-2006, 10:30 PM
No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake!
No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake!
No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake!
No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake!
No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake!
No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake!
No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake!
No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake!
No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake!
No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake!
No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake!
No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake!
No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake!
No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake!
No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake!
No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake!
No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake!
No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake!
No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake!
No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake!
No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake!
No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake!
No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake!
No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake, No Jake!

gtexan02
12-12-2006, 10:33 PM
Why exactly don't we want him? Under Kubiak, he was a pretty good QB. Over the last 3 years, heres how his numbers looked:

03 - 11 games, 62.6% completion, 2182 yards, 7.23 avg, 15 TD, 7 INT, 91.2 rating

04 - 16 games, 58.2% completion, 4089 yards, 7.85 avg, 27 TD, 20 INT, 84.5 rating

05 - 16 games, 60.7% completion, 3366 yards, 7.38 avg, 18 TD, 7 INT, 90.2 rating.

It wasn't until Kubes left that he started falling into old habits. Why not give him a shot. He knows the system well enough, and last year he led his team deep into the playoffs.

Just for comparison sake, heres how DC's season is projected to play out:

16 games, 69.4% completion, 2943 yards, 6.36 avg, 12 TD, 9 INT, 87.5 rating

I think Plummer would at least be a cheaper upgrade

HomeBred_Texan
12-12-2006, 10:33 PM
Keep Carr, forget Plummer, and draft Adrian Peterson with our 1st pick...

Plain and simple. We need a running back more than a new QB...

bah007
12-12-2006, 10:35 PM
Why exactly don't we want him? Under Kubiak, he was a pretty good QB. Over the last 3 years, heres how his numbers looked:

03 - 11 games, 62.6% completion, 2182 yards, 7.23 avg, 15 TD, 7 INT, 91.2 rating

04 - 16 games, 58.2% completion, 4089 yards, 7.85 avg, 27 TD, 20 INT, 84.5 rating

05 - 16 games, 60.7% completion, 3366 yards, 7.38 avg, 18 TD, 7 INT, 90.2 rating.

It wasn't until Kubes left that he started falling into old habits. Why not give him a shot. He knows the system well enough, and last year he led his team deep into the playoffs.

Just for comparison sake, heres how DC's season is projected to play out:

16 games, 69.4% completion, 2943 yards, 6.36 avg, 12 TD, 9 INT, 87.5 rating

I think Plummer would at least be a cheaper upgrade

He didnt lead them deep into the playoffs.

They made it deep into the playoffs despite the fact that Plummer was the QB.

TEXANRED
12-12-2006, 10:35 PM
I say trade Carr, start Sage and draft Troy Smith.

But that is just my opinion.

gtexan02
12-12-2006, 10:39 PM
Actually, JP was a huge reason they got the 1st round bye going into the playoffs, and despite the INT at the beginning of the NE game, he played a good game that game.

True he played poorly at Pitt, but so did the entire team.

Goldeagle
12-12-2006, 10:42 PM
Ahhhh...
Subliminal messaging.



Nice lol

Texan1
12-12-2006, 10:44 PM
Plummer would definetly come cheap. Can't see anyone else ponying up too much for him.

Plummer doesn't seem to add any value over Carr - other than he is not Carr.

If we go the 2/3/4 rd QB pick route in the next draft; I can't see any other option than to keep Carr and ride out his contract for another year and try to get the young guy some PT behind Carr.

That would probably put the Texans on track for another losing season next year - but Kubes would still have another year after that with the new QB before the sandman comes calling.

Second Honeymoon
12-12-2006, 10:46 PM
Ahhhh...
Subliminal messaging.

that makes my eyes bleed and my monitor cry

TEXANRED
12-12-2006, 10:49 PM
Plummer would definetly come cheap. Can't see anyone else ponying up too much for him.

Plummer doesn't seem to add any value over Carr - other than he is not Carr.

If we go the 2/3/4 rd QB pick route in the next draft; I can't see any other option than to keep Carr and ride out his contract for another year and try to get the young guy some PT behind Carr.

That would probably put the Texans on track for another losing season next year - but Kubes would still have another year after that with the new QB before the sandman comes calling.

My question is why would we pick up Plummer if he is not our future. Start Sage. He is cheaper, and already know the system and its players.

Besides, if you need a QB to start ahead of your rookie Kurt Warner is your guy and is probably going to be available soon.

bayshorebevo
12-12-2006, 10:50 PM
We ought to just change the name to the Houston Broncos or Denver Texans. Take your pick. The heck with the Broncos.

Kaiser Toro
12-12-2006, 10:52 PM
Plummer at minimum salary with performance kickers only. Does he really invest in Plummer and Sage? It would most likely cost us more to cut Sage than to keep him since he is signed through 2009.

I say we let Carr go and let Sage and Van Pelt go at it with a rookie in the wings next year. Develop the O line while the rook carries the clipboard.

Texan1
12-12-2006, 10:54 PM
My question is why would we pick up Plummer if he is not our future. Start Sage. He is cheaper, and already know the system and its players.

Besides, if you need a QB to start ahead of your rookie Kurt Warner is your guy and is probably going to be available soon.

I agree - Sage and Carr going into next year is better than Plummer. And Warner, for that matter. IMO.

thunderkyss
12-12-2006, 10:56 PM
There are going to be a lot of upset fans in Houston come Sept '07.

If Spencer is healthy, and we draft a Center, or a guard.... David will start, no questions asked, no competition..... & David will not be benched unless he is not protecting the ball, or making dumb throws(something he doesn't normally do).

If Spencer won't be coming back, and we take a LT with our first round pick.. David is most probably going to start........

IF we take a DT, and a LB or Safety/Corner on the first day, third round center/guard, David will "win" the #2 spot, and he'll have to wait for an opportunity to prove that he should start. Sage or VanPelt will start, and will be pulled for almost any reason.

thunderkyss
12-12-2006, 10:58 PM
Plummer at minimum salary with performance kickers only. Does he really invest in Plummer and Sage? It would most likely cost us more to cut Sage than to keep him since he is signed through 2009.

I say we let Carr go and let Sage and Van Pelt go at it with a rookie in the wings next year. Develop the O line while the rook carries the clipboard.

I thought Sage only got a $2mil signing bonus, paid in full..... it won't cost us anything to trade him.

Texan1
12-12-2006, 11:00 PM
There are going to be a lot of upset fans in Houston come Sept '07.

If Spencer is healthy, and we draft a Center, or a guard.... David will start, no questions asked, no competition..... & David will not be benched unless he is not protecting the ball, or making dumb throws(something he doesn't normally do).

If Spencer won't be coming back, and we take a LT with our first round pick.. David is most probably going to start........

IF we take a DT, and a LB or Safety/Corner on the first day, third round center/guard, David will "win" the #2 spot, and he'll have to wait for an opportunity to prove that he should start. Sage or VanPelt will start, and will be pulled for almost any reason.

I'm not sure I follow your logic on this....

Kaiser Toro
12-12-2006, 11:00 PM
I thought Sage only got a $2mil signing bonus, paid in full..... it won't cost us anything to trade him.

The nature of a signing bonus is money up front to the player. How the team accounts for it is another matter. Most often, and according to the limited data, it is deffered over years.

bah007
12-12-2006, 11:02 PM
Plummer would definetly come cheap. Can't see anyone else ponying up too much for him.

Plummer doesn't seem to add any value over Carr - other than he is not Carr.

If we go the 2/3/4 rd QB pick route in the next draft; I can't see any other option than to keep Carr and ride out his contract for another year and try to get the young guy some PT behind Carr.

That would probably put the Texans on track for another losing season next year - but Kubes would still have another year after that with the new QB before the sandman comes calling.

I bet the Raiders would pony up to get him.

They probably arent gonna draft a QB so they are gonna want to go after a veteran guy.

Texan1
12-12-2006, 11:03 PM
I bet the Raiders would pony up to get him.

They probably arent gonna draft a QB so they are gonna want to go after a veteran guy.

They can have him, IMO

bah007
12-12-2006, 11:04 PM
They can have him, IMO

I agree.

I want no part of him.

He is no upgrade over anything we have.

mexican_texan
12-12-2006, 11:07 PM
Uh...Plummer is coming. I'd bet my life savings.

TEXANRED
12-12-2006, 11:10 PM
I assume that you mean, "Start Sage next year..."
Since he's injured.
Isn't He???
Or am I thinking of somebody else???
I mean, it's not like we have hurt players or anything.

Yes sir I do mean next year.

Carr has to finish out his beating, er, playing this year.

TEXANRED
12-12-2006, 11:12 PM
Uh...Plummer is coming. I'd bet my life savings.

So you'll bet me your Juicy Fruit gum against my slightly bruised :bananasplit:

gtexan02
12-12-2006, 11:19 PM
No one seems to have responded to my earlier post:

Other than this year without Kubiak, Plummer has been a Good-Very good QB over the past 3 years. So why wouldn't we want him as an instant upgrade oveer Carr while we work a new guy out.

Kaiser Toro
12-12-2006, 11:21 PM
No one seems to have responded to my earlier post:

Other than this year without Kubiak, Plummer has been a Good-Very good QB over the past 3 years. So why wouldn't we want him as an instant upgrade oveer Carr while we work a new guy out.

Market value, cap space and long term need.

mexican_texan
12-12-2006, 11:22 PM
So you'll bet me your Juicy Fruit gum against my slightly bruised :bananasplit:
My 1994 rusted penny for a naner? You're on.

blockhead83
12-12-2006, 11:30 PM
I'd be ok with Plummer as a stop gap only. If we drafted a QB with a first day or early 2nd day pick and let him hold the clip board while Plummer played the guinea pig for a while, I'd be ok with that. I don't think Plummer's very good, but he has had success with Kubiak.

TEXANS84
12-12-2006, 11:52 PM
I'm all for Jake Plummer.

Sorry, that's just the way I feel. Someone's gotta do something.

El Amigo Invisible
12-12-2006, 11:54 PM
I like Jake but no thanks.

Bullpen Drew
12-12-2006, 11:55 PM
We ought to just change the name to the Houston Broncos or Denver Texans. Take your pick. The heck with the Broncos.

Or the South Denver Broncos....

Grid
12-13-2006, 12:16 AM
Im fine with plummer too, as long as the requirements i listed in the first post are met.

Plummer isnt an answer, but he would make a fine band-aid while we groom a rookie QB.

gtexan02
12-13-2006, 01:29 AM
He's an upgrade over DC however you look at it. i don't see how that could be a bad thing.

swoldier
12-13-2006, 05:26 AM
Bring in Vick;)


Do you really think we can get him? I think that would be really good if we could and did.:hides: :marionaner: :hides:

houstonhurricane
12-13-2006, 09:47 AM
No thanks.

Yankee_In_TX
12-13-2006, 10:21 AM
I just thought id get a head start on this topic.

There are all kinds of rumblings about us getting Jake Plummer to replace Carr. NO.. I do NOT want to replace Carr with his older twin.

Plummer would be a band-aid, I want the whole shabang.

The only way I would be alright with getting plummer is:

A) He comes cheap
B) We trade Carr for a good pick
C) We draft a young QB to start grooming while Plummer holds down the fort.

I agree with A, B and C. Cause I think he's Carr's twin seperated at birth.

Grid
12-13-2006, 12:36 PM
He's an upgrade over DC however you look at it. i don't see how that could be a bad thing.

Its only a bad thing if we dont have a long term plan to go with him. If we bring him in to be "the guy".. its a mistake.. he will make mistakes just like Carr makes..and he is getting really up there in years for a football player.

Plummer is fine if he is only a temporary solution while we groom a rookie.

Tx'nFanLostInSkinCountry
12-13-2006, 01:06 PM
Just something I heard on the radio during the Dev. game the other night.
The Dev. Broncos are 34w and 15l in the three years JP has been in Dev. So I looked up Hou. Texans record in the same three year period and we a 14w and 34l. Just food for thought. I'm not saying JP is better than DC or vice versa. Just struck me funny that you would pull a starting QB with that kind of record for a rookie with the team still in the play-off hunt.

kenneth24
12-13-2006, 11:08 PM
We've got enough snakes in the bayou city

HOOK'EM
12-14-2006, 01:39 AM
I would take one more!

Janus3
12-14-2006, 05:47 AM
yeah we need another teams trash who was benched in favor of a rookie WHEN THEY HAD A WINNING RECORD! gtfo if anyone really wants plummer.

threetoedpete
12-14-2006, 06:38 AM
How about this: I want whoever Kubiak wants. If that's Jake the snake, so be it.

TheOgre
12-14-2006, 10:44 AM
Im fine with plummer too, as long as the requirements i listed in the first post are met.

Plummer isnt an answer, but he would make a fine band-aid while we groom a rookie QB.

My feelings exactly. I think we are at a point where Carr has to go and we need a stopgap until a rookie is ready. Plummer would be a nice fit for that role. He would also let us wait until 2008 to draft a QB if we aren't in position to get a good one in the 2007 draft.

jerek
12-14-2006, 10:51 AM
I can't fathom why anyone would want a less accurate, more turnover prone edition of what we already have.

Tkyss -- Drew Bledsoe? Are you effing joking?

thunderkyss
12-14-2006, 11:45 AM
I can't fathom why anyone would want a less accurate, more turnover prone edition of what we already have.

Tkyss -- Drew Bledsoe? Are you effing joking?

No.... that was a list of guys I'd rather have than Jake Plummer... if we were going to go after a vet. type player. then yes, I'm dead serious about taking Bledsoe over Plummer.

But I'd rather stick with David than go with Plummer.

DC Texan
12-14-2006, 11:58 AM
We should go after Damon Huard, KC or Matt Schaub, ATL. Plummer is a parrallel move, Bledsoe is a down grade. Matt Schaub would be a better choice since he hasn't had his time to shine we could probably get him a little cheaper.

infantrycak
12-14-2006, 12:00 PM
Matt Schaub would be a better choice since he hasn't had his time to shine we could probably get him a little cheaper.

Schaub comes with both a contract price and the price tag of draft picks. He will undoubtedly be high tendered which carries 1st round and 3rd round picks as compensation. Yes the teams can negotiate less but by all reports the Falcons have no interest in losing him so count on giving up at least a 1st to get him.

HOU-TEX
12-14-2006, 12:05 PM
Schaub comes with both a contract price and the price tag of draft picks. He will undoubtedly be high tendered which carries 1st round and 3rd round picks as compensation. Yes the teams can negotiate less but by all reports the Falcons have no interest in losing him so count on giving up at least a 1st to get him.

I agree. I believe there's been previous attemps by other teams to lure him away from the Falcons, but to no avail. As much as people dislike it, I truly believe Plummer will be here next year. Sorry, but the signs are obvious.:)

Texans Front Row Crew
12-14-2006, 12:10 PM
I'd be ok with Plummer as a stop gap only. If we drafted a QB with a first day or early 2nd day pick and let him hold the clip board while Plummer played the guinea pig for a while, I'd be ok with that. I don't think Plummer's very good, but he has had success with Kubiak.



That is the point. Jake Plummer is successful with Kubiak and Carr is not. DC might do better with another team, and hopefully we can get a high draft pick for him (I'm aiming for 3rd- because no-one should give a 2nd and 3rd for anyone)

Good luck David.....



It time to turn the page..........