PDA

View Full Version : you think he wants to throw all those dump off's


utahmark
01-02-2007, 12:35 AM
this is the same guy everyone critized for going deep to bradford at the end of a game when andre was open short. he's being told(imo) to take three steps and throw. his coaches are telling him this cause they know his line wont hold up.

earlier in the year he looked pretty good. he was going down field some. then injuries forced a new aproach and i think he did pretty badly at times. carr has showed me he is not a good qb if he is not protected. he hasnt had much of a chance to show me anything else. but for a few games early this year when the line was playing well and he started to get comfortable he looked good. some guys were even starting to change their opinion of him.

hes already paid for next year. why not keep him. im not insane i do want a quality back up. i dont want him to be our only option. but their are not 3 or 4 qb's in the league who can get it done with an o-line like we have had. so do we hope to get one of these few guys our do we fix the o-line. my guess is they our gonna keep improving the o-line. and why get rid of someone who still wants to be here and can possibly be the answer for just anyone we happen to find.

6 out of ten guys we might get will be hurt in 3 or 4 weeks behind the line we ended the season with. then what. how did sage get hurt? was he holding for pat? im not sure. you think he will last behind our line this year.

here is the thing. i usually hate when people say this. but i think i will go with whatever kubes decides. i mean he's the one that knows what hes been telling carr. is he coaching him to get rid of the ball. is he just telling carr to be careful because our defense can keep us in it untill our line starts improving. maybe carr just isnt seeing the open guys cant tell from my tv. if if it were capers i wouldnt just trust this decision to him. but kubes was my choice and someone must of heard me cause he's here. and i dont think no one know's qb's better than him.

i guess we will see what happens but if carr goes i hope we get someone of his character. as much as i like carr i do want this team to win. and i predict playoffs next year so i hope we get this one right.

mods, i know this is just another carr thread and i started to put it with the other carr thread at this time but since carr is our hottest topic and i havent seen where his opting for the short pass has been discussed much i thought it deservered a new thread. if not combine it up.

thunderkyss
01-02-2007, 01:04 AM
this is the same guy everyone critized for going deep to bradford at the end of a game when andre was open short. he's being told(imo) to take three steps and throw. his coaches are telling him this cause they know his line wont hold up.

It's not just that he doesn't go downfield often...... it's that when he does, he screws it up. With recievers like Andre & Moulds, there are a dozen places where David can put the ball & let them make a play. David puts it in the one place that gives them no chance.

earlier in the year he looked pretty good. he was going down field some. then injuries forced a new aproach and i think he did pretty badly at times.


That's not exactly true... first eight games, I'd imagine he was sacked on aVg.. 4 times a game.

Last 8, somewhere closer to 2...

carr has showed me he is not a good qb if he is not protected. he hasnt had much of a chance to show me anything else. but for a few games early this year when the line was playing well and he started to get comfortable he looked good. some guys were even starting to change their opinion of him.


we can't protect him. That's part of the problem. We've played musical lineman for the fifth year running. we can't protect him. We need to put someone else back there, and see if they can produce.

hes already paid for next year. why not keep him. im not insane i do want a quality back up. i dont want him to be our only option. but their are not 3 or 4 qb's in the league who can get it done with an o-line like we have had. so do we hope to get one of these few guys our do we fix the o-line. my guess is they our gonna keep improving the o-line. and why get rid of someone who still wants to be here and can possibly be the answer for just anyone we happen to find.

Letting David go would benefit David more than it will benefit the Texans. Letting him go would be a favor.

That said, I don't advocate getting rid of him. I say we start someone else, till we can say the OL is fixed...... then throw David back in there.

6 out of ten guys we might get will be hurt in 3 or 4 weeks behind the line we ended the season with. then what. how did sage get hurt? was he holding for pat? im not sure. you think he will last behind our line this year.

Sage Tackled a guy trying to return a bothced Field goal kick.

If another guy get's hurt behind our line..... then that would mean you were right. I'd be all for it if I were you.

here is the thing. i usually hate when people say this. but i think i will go with whatever kubes decides. i mean he's the one that knows what hes been telling carr. is he coaching him to get rid of the ball. is he just telling carr to be careful because our defense can keep us in it untill our line starts improving. maybe carr just isnt seeing the open guys cant tell from my tv. if if it were capers i wouldnt just trust this decision to him. but kubes was my choice and someone must of heard me cause he's here. and i dont think no one know's qb's better than him.

especially on three step drops, things are happening too fast for you to wait for someone to get open. In this situation, you're looking for man coverage on your best reciever.

before the snap, you look at the defense....locate the safeties, then locate the corners. locate your linebackers...... call out the rushers.

As you call out your cadence... pay attention to what the safeties/CBs are doing. hike the ball.

on your first step, look towards your first option. You're looking at the defense, not your reciever. You already know what he's going to do, because you've been watching him all year in practice.

on your second step, Turn your head and look towards your second option...... again, looking at the defense.

on your third step, turn your head, and look at your third option.... again, looking at the defense.

now, did you have man coverage on your first read?? If yes, when you step forward, you step towards that reciever and unload the ball. if the coverage was underneath with safeties on the inside, you throw over the top to the outside. If the coverage is outside & on top, you throw the ball inside.. where your reciever is between the ball & the defender.

When your QB continues to pull the ball down after his 3 step drop, again & again, and again... taking sack after sack.... you've got to wonder what is going on in his head. Or when he continues to dump down even though you're getting the coverage & mismatches you want.... you've got to wonder.

Ibar_Harry
01-02-2007, 01:05 AM
I've said for a long time I believe Carr is doing exactly what he is told to do. Kubiak has said time and time again he does not allow his QB's any leaveway. He does not allow audibles and the play is of a designated nature. Many different looks, but basically the same play.

Equally talked about, but seldom discussed at any length is why our receivers seem not to be able to get separation from their defenders. A lot of problems start with the O-line and the running game.

The NFL learned a lot in the 1st season game that Carr played in when we beat the Cowboys. SD started that trend in the next game and it has been repeated over and over again. That was simply you can not let Carr sit in the pocket because he will beat you. Since that time every team has evoked that stategy and to this date the Texans have never really done anything to counter it. Folks, it is as simple as that.

utahmark
01-02-2007, 01:18 AM
pretty much i think we see eye to eye.

i cant do those partial quotes like you do ill mess with that one day.

the first quote you had is the one i disagree with the most. we havent seen him go downfield lately enough to form a good opinion. you have just started posting a lot lately and you seem to know a lot. i dont know if you watched him the whole 5 years he's been here but he is very accuarte even downfield when given time. i dont think thats a concern with him. its more of a question about his pocket presence and just his general football decesions.

the second quote is that he was sacked earlier in the begining of the year and thats probable true. he had a better line and they were trying to open it up more thats why he started producing(imo). he was still getting sacked but he was making some plays. i said the line was better it still wasnt a quality nfl o-line. it was just good enough to give him some time to do his thing.

the next quote you agree we cant protect him and thats true. i just dont think there are many qb's who can produce in that situation and i think it isnt worth the gamble trying to find one of the elusive guys. although vince is looking like he might of been one of these guys thats the past and if you think someone like him is just laying around then you dont think much of him.

the other quotes i cant say anything against. again from reading your post's we see a lot of the same.

Hervoyel
01-02-2007, 01:30 AM
That's not exactly true... first eight games, I'd imagine he was sacked on aVg.. 4 times a game.

Last 8, somewhere closer to 2...

My numbers could be wrong but I went to NFL.com and looked up the game stats for each of our games this season and counted the sacks. Maybe those aren't the most accurate or something but they say our opponents sacked us 42 times this year.

Again I could have counted wrong or something but assuming I got it right (or close) then it looks to me like things went like this

Eagles (L) 5 sacks
Colts (L) 4 sacks
Redskins (L) 1 sack
Dolphins (W) 5 sacks
Cowboys (L) 0 sacks
Jaguars (W) 1 sack
Titans (L) 4 sacks
Giants (L) 1 sack

That's 21 sacks in our first 8 games for an average of 2.6 sacks per game. The second half of the year went like this

Jaguars (W) 3 sacks
Bills (L) 2 sacks
Jets (L) 4 sacks
Raiders (W) 5 sacks
Titans (L) 2 sacks
Patriots (L) 4 sacks
Colts (W) 0 sacks
Browns (W) 1 sack

Again that's 21 sacks in 8 games for an average of 2.6 sacks per game.

I don't know what that means really. When we lost Spencer, Weigert, and Flannagan we didn't really drop off all that much. At least that's what these numbers seem to show.

That's 42 sacks. It's not good by any stretch of the imagination (and it might not even be completely accurate) but it's not the most horrible performance in the history of the NFL. I know because we saw it back in 2002. 42 sacks isn't good but it's a lot better than 76 sacks. People down on the Texans line always seem to be obsessed with our record setting sack numbers but in 2003 we dropped to 36 sacks. In 2004 I know we went back up to the mid 40's but I don't remember what we gave up last year. The point is that while Carr has been sacked a lot he hasn't been taking a 76 sack beating every year since he got here.

Edit: Took me a moment to find it but this appears to be what our sack numbers look like for the last 5 years

2002: 76
2003: 36
2004: 49
2005: 68
2006: 42 (I think)

Ok, 2002 and 2005 were just brutal years and there's no way to get around that. Even when you factor in how often David sacks himself it's still too many sacks. 2003 and 2006 though aren't maulings and we somehow managed to have our best season in 2004 (7-9) when our QB's were sacked 49 times. Carr didn't take all of those because 2004 was the year he missed time with injury and Banks got some starts.

Texian
01-02-2007, 01:37 AM
I've said for a long time I believe Carr is doing exactly what he is told to do. Kubiak has said time and time again he does not allow his QB's any leaveway. He does not allow audibles and the play is of a designated nature. Many different looks, but basically the same play.

Equally talked about, but seldom discussed at any length is why our receivers seem not to be able to get separation from their defenders. A lot of problems start with the O-line and the running game.

The NFL learned a lot in the 1st season game that Carr played in when we beat the Cowboys. SD started that trend in the next game and it has been repeated over and over again. That was simply you can not let Carr sit in the pocket because he will beat you. Since that time every team has evoked that stategy and to this date the Texans have never really done anything to counter it. Folks, it is as simple as that.


You are about the smartest, sanest read I found on this entire message board. You and the Chick that is. 1 rep for you coming your way.

Ibar_Harry
01-02-2007, 01:46 AM
pretty much i think we see eye to eye.

i cant do those partial quotes like you do ill mess with that one day.

the first quote you had is the one i disagree with the most. we havent seen him go downfield lately enough to form a good opinion. you have just started posting a lot lately and you seem to know a lot. i dont know if you watched him the whole 5 years he's been here but he is very accuarte even downfield when given time. i dont think thats a concern with him. its more of a question about his pocket presence and just his general football decesions.

the second quote is that he was sacked earlier in the begining of the year and thats probable true. he had a better line and they were trying to open it up more thats why he started producing(imo). he was still getting sacked but he was making some plays. i said the line was better it still wasnt a quality nfl o-line. it was just good enough to give him some time to do his thing.

the next quote you agree we cant protect him and thats true. i just dont think there are many qb's who can produce in that situation and i think it isnt worth the gamble trying to find one of the elusive guys. although vince is looking like he might of been one of these guys thats the past and if you think someone like him is just laying around then you dont think much of him.

the other quotes i cant say anything against. again from reading your post's we see a lot of the same.

Unfortunately, its not just sacks that count. The object of the defense is to put pressure on the QB even if you don't sack him. In our case I think the sacks are down, but not the pressure. David just never seems to have the time the opposing QB has in the pocket. I would just say to people go back and read how many posters are upset because we do not get pressure on the opposing QB. The reason they are upset is they no pressure leads to bad things. Well, guess what, that is true of our QB as well. Again, does Carr do some bad things, yes. But I think they have a lot to do with the pressure he has been under.

The real question was do I believe he has the right to go down field and I said no. I believe Kubiak makes that call and it is seldom granted. If you listen to what Kubiak says he says there are only a few opportunites in each game where you get chances to make big plays. I believe David has been given a very strict set of guidelines as to when he can go for it. I believe he has the green light on only certain plays and they are infrequently called. This has to do with as much of the style of play Kubiak is use to as it does the QB.

whotex8
01-02-2007, 01:47 AM
I've said for a long time I believe Carr is doing exactly what he is told to do. Kubiak has said time and time again he does not allow his QB's any leaveway. He does not allow audibles and the play is of a designated nature. Many different looks, but basically the same play.

Equally talked about, but seldom discussed at any length is why our receivers seem not to be able to get separation from their defenders. A lot of problems start with the O-line and the running game.

The NFL learned a lot in the 1st season game that Carr played in when we beat the Cowboys. SD started that trend in the next game and it has been repeated over and over again. That was simply you can not let Carr sit in the pocket because he will beat you. Since that time every team has evoked that stategy and to this date the Texans have never really done anything to counter it. Folks, it is as simple as that.

I Totally agree! I think that's why Kubes stated today that part of the QB problem this year was in the coahing and should be changed. If the HC is saying that, then it must be true.

thunderkyss
01-02-2007, 01:48 AM
pretty much i think we see eye to eye.

i cant do those partial quotes like you do ill mess with that one day.

It's easier than it looks... I set this up one time..
/quote

QUOTE=markbeth;559772

and just copy & paste it where ever I want to make a break, then type my reply in between the two lines.(I took out the brackets so that it would show up right.

the first quote you had is the one i disagree with the most. we havent seen him go downfield lately enough to form a good opinion. you have just started posting a lot lately and you seem to know a lot. i dont know if you watched him the whole 5 years he's been here but he is very accuarte even downfield when given time. i dont think thats a concern with him. its more of a question about his pocket presence and just his general football decesions.

I've watched all five years.... but I don't have the kind of memory where I can recall this pass, or that pass... I remember that we beat the Cowboys in our first game ever... but I wouldn't remember the score if we didn't talk about it so much here.

I never thought David had a problem with accuracy, or ball placement, I don't know if I didn't ever see it before, or if I just don't remember. Guys like Vinny have questioned his accuracy since the beginning.. so I have to wonder.

the second quote is that he was sacked earlier in the begining of the year and thats probable true. he had a better line and they were trying to open it up more thats why he started producing(imo). he was still getting sacked but he was making some plays. i said the line was better it still wasnt a quality nfl o-line. it was just good enough to give him some time to do his thing.

I don't think the play of the offensive line was the problem. I think our Line was playing better at the end of the season than it was at the beginning of the season.

David was showing progress..... progress I was happy to see.... up until the benching. He had been fumbling damn near every game up till then, & Kubiak just had enough.... I don't agree with that benching,(I agree David should have been benched for fumbling, just not during that game)..... but it seems that ball control took precedence over all else since then.

I had just been complimenting David on his progress in the Miami game where David did a good job finding holes in zone coverage, and the Washington game, where David actually challenged CBs & Safeties, and presented opportunities for our recievers to make plays.

He stared down AJ on that one INT against Dallas..... but other than that, he was doing well looking off coverage..... or at least you could see he was trying to develop the skill.

After Tennessee, he stared down his recievers on a consistent basis....... one read, then dump.

the next quote you agree we cant protect him and thats true. i just dont think there are many qb's who can produce in that situation and i think it isnt worth the gamble trying to find one of the elusive guys. although vince is looking like he might of been one of these guys thats the past and if you think someone like him is just laying around then you dont think much of him.

I don't think it makes any sense to let David get pummeled week in & week out...

Why don't they run the option in the NFL??

Because we pay the QBs too much.

We pay Carr on avg $8 mil/year to play tackling dummy.

Let's put Bradley Van Pelt back there until we can see something that looks like protection.

Right now we know the QB doesn't have enough time to do what he needs to do........ why not?? is it because the QB needs more than the 2.5 seconds most QBs need?? or is it because our line can't provide 2.5 seconds on a consistent enough basis??

We could time them, with a stop watch....... & we'll see they provide 2.5 seconds worth of protection on most occasions.

Ibar_Harry
01-02-2007, 01:48 AM
I've watched David longer than 5 years.

thunderkyss
01-02-2007, 01:53 AM
The real question was do I believe he has the right to go down field and I said no. I believe Kubiak makes that call and it is seldom granted. If you listen to what Kubiak says he says there are only a few opportunites in each game where you get chances to make big plays. I believe David has been given a very strict set of guidelines as to when he can go for it. I believe he has the green light on only certain plays and they are infrequently called. This has to do with as much of the style of play Kubiak is use to as it does the QB.

That's about as stupid as saying that David should be calling his own plays.

do you not see David staring at his first read then dumping down?? Is the coach telling him to do that as well??

TexansSeminole
01-02-2007, 01:55 AM
I Totally agree! I think that's why Kubes stated today that part of the QB problem this year was in the coahing and should be changed. If the HC is saying that, then it must be true.

Or he is having to take a backseat to SOMEONE like Capers had to.

Honestly...its hard for me to take anyone seriously that still thinks David Carr is right for this team.

Hervoyel
01-02-2007, 02:02 AM
There's one thing I've never been able to explain but it's been consistent now for the entire time we've had the Texans. When anyone other than David Carr is under center the entire offense appears to slow down. I saw it happen in 2003 when Tony Banks played for us in a few games and I saw it that same year when Dave Ragone played as well. That was the year that it seemed like everyone got hurt. Now granted Ragone didn't accomplish much but he also didn't get Domanick Davis (also hurt at the time). Things still slowed down when he was in there.

This year in the short amount of time Rosenfels got to play we saw the same thing. The offense seemed to settle down. It's not that these guys didn't get pressure, they absolutely did. At the same time they made plays.

The difference is hard to miss. When David is taking the snaps everything seems to be happening in fast forward. When he sits down and someone else comes in they appear to often have plenty of time to let the play develop. I've sat there and timed (crudely, counting out loud) them and it's not like Banks or Rosenfels was getting seconds longer than Carr did. It was pretty much the same thing.

I can't explain it, I just know I'm sick of watching it.

Ibar_Harry
01-02-2007, 02:06 AM
That's about as stupid as saying that David should be calling his own plays.

do you not see David staring at his first read then dumping down?? Is the coach telling him to do that as well??

As you obviously know I'm a firm believer of the QB calling his own plays. I think there are a lot of QB's in the NFL who are a lot better play callers than their coaches. For openers, Payton's younger brother would probably be a better play caller than his HC. Yes, and Kubiak is a big part of what is happening. A gun slinger is going to make mistakes, but if he can't make mistakes then he's not going to be a gun slinger.

utahmark
01-02-2007, 02:14 AM
It's easier than it looks... I set this up one time..
/quote

QUOTE=markbeth;559772

and just copy & paste it where ever I want to make a break, then type my reply in between the two lines.(I took out the brackets so that it would show up right.

I've watched all five years.... but I don't have the kind of memory where I can recall this pass, or that pass... I remember that we beat the Cowboys in our first game ever... but I wouldn't remember the score if we didn't talk about it so much here.

I never thought David had a problem with accuracy, or ball placement, I don't know if I didn't ever see it before, or if I just don't remember. Guys like Vinny have questioned his accuracy since the beginning.. so I have to wonder.

I don't think the play of the offensive line was the problem. I think our Line was playing better at the end of the season than it was at the beginning of the season.

David was showing progress..... progress I was happy to see.... up until the benching. He had been fumbling damn near every game up till then, & Kubiak just had enough.... I don't agree with that benching,(I agree David should have been benched for fumbling, just not during that game)..... but it seems that ball control took precedence over all else since then.

I had just been complimenting David on his progress in the Miami game where David did a good job finding holes in zone coverage, and the Washington game, where David actually challenged CBs & Safeties, and presented opportunities for our recievers to make plays.

He stared down AJ on that one INT against Dallas..... but other than that, he was doing well looking off coverage..... or at least you could see he was trying to develop the skill.

After Tennessee, he stared down his recievers on a consistent basis....... one read, then dump.

I don't think it makes any sense to let David get pummeled week in & week out...

Why don't they run the option in the NFL??

Because we pay the QBs too much.

We pay Carr on avg $8 mil/year to play tackling dummy.

Let's put Bradley Van Pelt back there until we can see something that looks like protection.

Right now we know the QB doesn't have enough time to do what he needs to do........ why not?? is it because the QB needs more than the 2.5 seconds most QBs need?? or is it because our line can't provide 2.5 seconds on a consistent enough basis??

We could time them, with a stop watch....... & we'll see they provide 2.5 seconds worth of protection on most occasions.

the accuracy part i would argue with anyone with. imo the guy is as accurate as they come when given the time. imo he has all the physical tools its the mental part that he has trouble with. but the thing is he does exactly as he is told. and with the right coaching(which i think kubes is) he could be good. really good. but only with a line.

but i really disagree with you stating the line was playing better at the end than the begining. it seem the whole offense changed just to make up for the poor line play. the whole scheme changed to getting rid of the ball before the sack. early on we were letting carr play a little and the line was doing an ok job. later in the year it seemed or whole game plan was to protect our weak offensive line. some people would say it was to protect our week qb play. thats pretty much the question only kubes can answer and the whole reason for the thread. was the short dumpoffs protecting week qb play or week oline play. we can debate all we want but only kubes knows. and i think he will tell us by either keeping carr or letting him go.

jayjordan
01-02-2007, 02:47 AM
Im pretty sure DC is told what to do but as a QB you have the option to hot route your receivers and check off the defense thats why you watch game film. If you notice something in their defense audible or hot route a receiver or back.

NATHANHALE
01-02-2007, 02:52 AM
Carr's first 3 yrs--avg 39 completions over 20 yds
next 2 yrs--avg 24 " " "

jdog
01-02-2007, 11:17 AM
It sounds like the consensus is as follows:

1. Carr needs to sit in the pocket to excel.

2. Opposing teams are going to pressure him.

3. Our line can not resist the pressure.

Therefore, we need the following:

1. A quarterback who can perform well under pressure and/or scramble.

or

2. An offensive line that can prevent the pass rush.

Perhaps, through coaching, we can transform Carr into the option one, or perhaps, through coaching, we can transform our offensive line into the option two.

Otherwise, we need to acquire option one through the draft or free agency which might require trial and error, or we need to build option two through the draft and/or free agency which might require more than one player and trial and error.

We should find the problem area on which we can agree and identify the available solutions.

Now we can discuss the merits of possible solutions rather than possible problems which results in progress.

Hulk75
01-02-2007, 11:23 AM
I've said for a long time I believe Carr is doing exactly what he is told to do. Kubiak has said time and time again he does not allow his QB's any leaveway. He does not allow audibles and the play is of a designated nature. Many different looks, but basically the same play.
Equally talked about, but seldom discussed at any length is why our receivers seem not to be able to get separation from their defenders. A lot of problems start with the O-line and the running game.

The NFL learned a lot in the 1st season game that Carr played in when we beat the Cowboys. SD started that trend in the next game and it has been repeated over and over again. That was simply you can not let Carr sit in the pocket because he will beat you. Since that time every team has evoked that stategy and to this date the Texans have never really done anything to counter it. Folks, it is as simple as that.

Let me help you out and say that your right, more right then you know.:secret: :shades:

jdog
01-02-2007, 11:29 AM
Let me help you out and say that your right, more right then you know.:secret: :shades:

Are you suggesting that Carr would excel if given more freedom on the field? If we agree that Carr need to sit in the pocket to excel and if we agree that opposing teams are not giving this to him and if we agree that our line is not giving this to him, then I do not see how giving Carr freedom will help.

real
01-02-2007, 11:31 AM
As you obviously know I'm a firm believer of the QB calling his own plays. I think there are a lot of QB's in the NFL who are a lot better play callers than their coaches. For openers, Payton's younger brother would probably be a better play caller than his HC. Yes, and Kubiak is a big part of what is happening. A gun slinger is going to make mistakes, but if he can't make mistakes then he's not going to be a gun slinger.

I think it has more to do with the teams limitations than it does with Kubiak being a control freak...

I've heard Carr and Kubiak comment on this subject numerous times, and both say the same thing...."we're not at that point YET"....

To me this means that Kubiak doesn't trust the offense to go out and do it right now, but maybe in the future they may allow the QB to call some of his own plays....

Roughnecks
01-02-2007, 11:35 AM
Carr has the arm to go dowm field he just does not have the time to do it. There has been times I have seen his face on tv and you could see he is tiried of the dink and dunk. They have let him throw a littlr deeper the last two weeks if he is here next year and I feel he will they will take more chances down field for the fact that they have a year under the new system and a person who really knows the zone blocking scheme. We have another tuff schedule but I think they will be better.

The Pencil Neck
01-02-2007, 11:55 AM
Carr has the arm to go dowm field he just does not have the time to do it. There has been times I have seen his face on tv and you could see he is tiried of the dink and dunk. They have let him throw a littlr deeper the last two weeks if he is here next year and I feel he will they will take more chances down field for the fact that they have a year under the new system and a person who really knows the zone blocking scheme. We have another tuff schedule but I think they will be better.

On most plays, you've got several options: some long, some medium, and some short. I don't think Carr is making the right reads. I think sometimes he glances at the long options and doesn't think they're open and/or doesn't want to try to force it in... when they are open enough to throw to. I think the same is true of the medium reads. So, Carr ends up taking the short dink and dunk.

He may have the arm to go deep but I haven't seen it in a while. All his deep throws for the past couple of years (that I can recall) have been rainbow/jump balls and not the on-a-rope sort of throws that you need to make sometimes. This year, I've seen Pennington make better long throws than Carr has made and Pennington's only supposed to have a pop-gun for an arm.

And I don't think it's about the line. There have been plenty of times this year when he's had plenty of time to throw. Now, maybe some of those times everyone was covered but there have to be SOME times that someone was open deep. It's just not possible that someone like a Pennington or a Leinart or a Harrington can find guys deep but Carr doesn't have anyone to go long to.

old football fan
01-02-2007, 11:57 AM
Are you suggesting that Carr would excel if given more freedom on the field? If we agree that Carr need to sit in the pocket to excel and if we agree that opposing teams are not giving this to him and if we agree that our line is not giving this to him, then I do not see how giving Carr freedom will help.

He already has against the Rams last year or the year before. 1st half Carr called the plays and we scored 24 pts. 2nd half coaches called plays and we didn't score and we lost the game. I truly believe that the coaches and FO will elavuate each player fairly and decide which way to go, if that means Carr is done here so be it.

A Texan
01-02-2007, 12:04 PM
Carr just needs to be replaced. As long as he is starting, we will be getting the same old tired excuses. The offensive line will never be good enough no matter who the Texans bring in, and the RB's will continue to get blamed too. Obviously the RB's have done well the last few games, but Carr is no better.

HoustonFrog
01-02-2007, 12:06 PM
Man the excuses get deep in here. I'll repeat what I've said all along.

1) The line could blame Carr as much as he can blame them. He takes a ton of unnecessary sacks. I can point out 2 just from the last Titans game where he was outside the pocket and basically cowered with a lineman 5 yards from him. The guy still hasn't learned how to react in 5 years.

2) No line will cure a QB who stares down receivers and throws into triple coverage. That is called having rocks for brains after 5 years.

3) He dumps off because that is all he can do after all these years unless they give him all day. Ask yourself something. If this is a rebuilding year and you are trying to see what type of driver you have for your race car are you doing to just start out slow and see if 6-8 wins are enough or are you going to let them go all out to see what you have for later on?I'd pick the latter. Kubes realized he couldn't give Carr too much and he realized that he had to run the ball and not let Carr lose the game for them. That isn't a vote of confidence or someone you want leading the team down the road.

4) I'll say this until I'm blue in the face but there isn't a team in the NFL, especially with parity these days that has the perfect line, RB, receivers, TEs, etc all together. People last year said he didn't have a second receiver or TE and we got him one. The constantly want a new line. The now want a new RB. I mean do you want him to be able to play inside a perfect bubble?

Please stop the excuses. This team will never move forward until he is out of town. He probably would do better elsewhere too.

Texans_Chick
01-02-2007, 12:11 PM
The Denver style offense is designed to make stuff open up after you are killing them with the run.

Our running game for most of the season was missing.

I thought the offense looked better when different guys were getting the ball--different WR, TEs, RBs, FB. Sometimes it seemed like the game plan was to force it to AJ instead of doing what the flow of the game was giving you.

There seemed to be a total disconnect between the running game and the passing game--more than what is supposed to happen with the offense. I still wonder about the way the offensive line is being coached--how do you run a Denver offense with blocking that is not the Denver style, at least as far as my fan eyes are telling me?

OzzO
01-02-2007, 12:12 PM
Cool, so Carr is tired of the dink/dunks, Carr's brother is tired of the d/d's, the recievers are tired of the d/d's, the fans are tired of the d/d's.... so - let's do some 12 yard passes when we need 10 yards and not 7. Let's see some leading the recievers with the pass, whether long or short, and having a nice touch that they turnaround and the ball is already there and not having to stretch out, slow down, reach backwards for the pass. Let's utilize the player's strengths - they're here for a reason... let's not have the Capers plan of square peg in a round hole system.

Jdog noted above that one option was to have a scrambling QB (that can perform under pressure) - wasn't that what Carr was doing at the beginning of the season? The rollout? What happened with that? Yeah, he can't do that all the time - but it seems to have gone by the wayside. What about stepping up and out when the pocket is collapsing? I want to say someone noted a while back he was not a pocket passer in college - if not, why make him one in the pros?

Agree with Herv above, it did seem to slow down when other QB's were in - maybe it's just because they didn't have multiple steps when they were behind the line (like tkyss noted on the reads) - Carr seems to have this still, if he does hang around, hope that can be corrected.

It's the offseason - time for some players to be called out and made to step up their play for the team. If you don't contribute, you're gone.... welcome to our offseason. Interestingly, not sure if others saw this in the chronic yesterday, but after halftime of the Browns game - Kubiak had personalized folders for each player on the team in their locker noting that the 2007 season starts now with their strengths / weaknesses for that player and what they need to work on during the offseason. So that folder was there when the players came back in after the game. THAT'S impressive.

May have an early offseason, but betcha it's still full swing with Kubiak and Smith (and all involved Texans) already planning for 2007. :marionaner: Carr is wanting to stay on the team as he sees the upswing coming, another hopefully quality offseason draft and FA - man I'm optimistic for next season already.

Hulk75
01-02-2007, 02:11 PM
Are you suggesting that Carr would excel if given more freedom on the field? If we agree that Carr need to sit in the pocket to excel and if we agree that opposing teams are not giving this to him and if we agree that our line is not giving this to him, then I do not see how giving Carr freedom will help.

Never said that, I just said that he does what he is supposed to do, you wonder why you see all these quick throws, HAVE any of you figured that out yet? It was pretty much our running game for the last 85% of our season. The Line is still bad, cut it anyway you would like, they are not good. AND WHY!!!!!!!! In the Good Lord we stuck with Wali Lundy for practicaly the whole season I have no clue.............Hey Dave we got you a Rookie Running Back that we drafted in the 6th rd, I know you have been here 5 years but this was the best we could do, and we got you the most fatest out of shape center we could find in Mike Flanagan ( He got hurt and our Running Game picked up, kinda funny)

He will be the starter next season as the Texans QB, dont be shocked.

hollywood_texan
01-02-2007, 02:21 PM
I'll say this until I'm blue in the face but there isn't a team in the NFL, especially with parity these days that has the perfect line, RB, receivers, TEs, etc all together.

I have been saying the same thing over and over.

The way I put it is, with 32 teams, free agency, and 4 to 5 year rookie contracts, a team is going to have to be successful with less, not more.

A Texan
01-02-2007, 02:37 PM
Never said that, I just said that he does what he is supposed to do, you wonder why you see all these quick throws, HAVE any of you figured that out yet? It was pretty much our running game for the last 85% of our season. The Line is still bad, cut it anyway you would like, they are not good. AND WHY!!!!!!!! In the Good Lord we stuck with Wali Lundy for practicaly the whole season I have no clue.............Hey Dave we got you a Rookie Running Back that we drafted in the 6th rd, I know you have been here 5 years but this was the best we could do, and we got you the most fatest out of shape center we could find in Mike Flanagan ( He got hurt and our Running Game picked up, kinda funny)

He will be the starter next season as the Texans QB, dont be shocked.

Wali Lundy at no time during the season was at bad as a rookie RB as Carr was as a 5th year QB. And say what you will about Flanagan, but he's been to a pro bowl which Carr will never see. The running game has a fine future. It's the QB position where we need a new starter.

HoustonFrog
01-02-2007, 03:00 PM
Wali Lundy at no time during the season was at bad as a rookie RB as Carr was as a 5th year QB. And say what you will about Flanagan, but he's been to a pro bowl which Carr will never see. The running game has a fine future. It's the QB position where we need a new starter.

And to add to your points, what was Carr's excuse when we had a running game in other years...that's right a coach and line. Always excuses for Dave. When are we going to finish that QB bubble for him?:rolleyes:

HoustonFrog
01-02-2007, 03:02 PM
I have been saying the same thing over and over.

The way I put it is, with 32 teams, free agency, and 4 to 5 year rookie contracts, a team is going to have to be successful with less, not more.

Exactly and people who expect to wait until we have the ideal situation for Carr will be waiting a long time. It amazes me how much better a line looks, etc when they have a QB who knows how to work the pocket.

Honoring Earl 34
01-02-2007, 03:42 PM
Hulk ... why is it Ok for you to bash the line and Lundy but you cry like a baby when somebody says something about #8 ?

You can slice and dice it anyway you want but at the end of the day 85 yds is 85 yds , 12 ints and 11 tds are still not so hot , and 1 td in 9 games is pretty bad .

Hervoyel
01-02-2007, 04:22 PM
The part I find mysterious is how the play at QB seemed to actually get worse as the running game improved. The "dink and dunk" wasn't our running game over the last 85% of the season. Ron Dayne (and at the end Chris Taylor) was our running game over the last 5 weeks and that running game was quite respectable. It wasn't "Earl Campbell Running Wild" (well, ok against the Colts it was pretty sweet) but it was a solid running game.

Adding it didn't seem to do a thing for the passing game. Adding it didn't make David Carr one iota better. I'm sorry it just didn't make any difference. The Texans gave up 42 sacks (I'm seeing 41, 42, and 43 depending on where I find the number so I'm going with the middle) and while that's high it's not something that a QB simply cannot overcome. 12 out of 32 NFL teams gave up 40+ sacks this year. Of those 12 teams two are going to the playoffs (Seattle and Kansas City) and half of them finished with a better record than the Texans (even if only by a game or two).

jdog
01-02-2007, 04:36 PM
Hulk75, I am simply trying to identify the problem and propose solutions.

You have introduced some new problems other than the offensive line as follows:

1. Carr has his hands tied by the coaching staff.

However, he has worked under different coaches without great success.

Also, as has been previously mentioned, Kubiak is not comfortable with giving Carr more control until Carr can keep from turning the ball over.

I think you are making the point that Kubiak is calling the dink's and dunk's due to the offensive line, and I agree would mean that this is not a new problem. It falls under the offensive line and pass protection.

2. A struggling running game has hurt our passing game.

Domanick Davis had success running in the past which did not translate into success for Carr.

Against the Colts, which was an ideal situation for evaluating the effect of a strong running game on Carr's performance, I think Carr still faced pressure and still left some plays on the field as Kubiak says.

I think this problem falls under the offensive line protection as well. If we can not stretch the field, we will face problems in the running game.

But, let's add a third problem area relating to the dink and dunk which is the lack of a strong running game.

The solutions to this problem include the offensive line, which is already listed, and a running back through free agency or the draft.

TPIMP
01-02-2007, 05:49 PM
There's one thing I've never been able to explain but it's been consistent now for the entire time we've had the Texans. When anyone other than David Carr is under center the entire offense appears to slow down. I saw it happen in 2003 when Tony Banks played for us in a few games and I saw it that same year when Dave Ragone played as well. That was the year that it seemed like everyone got hurt. Now granted Ragone didn't accomplish much but he also didn't get Domanick Davis (also hurt at the time). Things still slowed down when he was in there.

This year in the short amount of time Rosenfels got to play we saw the same thing. The offense seemed to settle down. It's not that these guys didn't get pressure, they absolutely did. At the same time they made plays.

The difference is hard to miss. When David is taking the snaps everything seems to be happening in fast forward. When he sits down and someone else comes in they appear to often have plenty of time to let the play develop. I've sat there and timed (crudely, counting out loud) them and it's not like Banks or Rosenfels was getting seconds longer than Carr did. It was pretty much the same thing.

I can't explain it, I just know I'm sick of watching it.

It's easy to explain...when a QB gets hit he begins to change. The more punishment he takes the more he changes. To make matters worse the genius Joe Pendry thought it would be a good idea to put a 3 second whistle on David in practice. That caused David to regress big time last season. Your right about Rosenfels and Banks. But remember, Banks broke his hand when he was hit and Rosenfels took a beating in the Tennessee game. If those guys had played more they would suffer the same problem as David...it's called "happy feet". The big question is: Can it be fixed?

TPIMP
01-02-2007, 06:01 PM
The part I find mysterious is how the play at QB seemed to actually get worse as the running game improved. The "dink and dunk" wasn't our running game over the last 85% of the season. Ron Dayne (and at the end Chris Taylor) was our running game over the last 5 weeks and that running game was quite respectable. It wasn't "Earl Campbell Running Wild" (well, ok against the Colts it was pretty sweet) but it was a solid running game.

Adding it didn't seem to do a thing for the passing game. Adding it didn't make David Carr one iota better. I'm sorry it just didn't make any difference. The Texans gave up 42 sacks (I'm seeing 41, 42, and 43 depending on where I find the number so I'm going with the middle) and while that's high it's not something that a QB simply cannot overcome. 12 out of 32 NFL teams gave up 40+ sacks this year. Of those 12 teams two are going to the playoffs (Seattle and Kansas City) and half of them finished with a better record than the Texans (even if only by a game or two).


Woooo! 85%? Try 25%. Dayne didn't start and produce until the Raider game. The running game was horrible before that.

the wonger need food
01-02-2007, 06:04 PM
Never said that, I just said that he does what he is supposed to do, you wonder why you see all these quick throws, HAVE any of you figured that out yet? It was pretty much our running game for the last 85% of our season. The Line is still bad, cut it anyway you would like, they are not good. AND WHY!!!!!!!! In the Good Lord we stuck with Wali Lundy for practicaly the whole season I have no clue.............Hey Dave we got you a Rookie Running Back that we drafted in the 6th rd, I know you have been here 5 years but this was the best we could do, and we got you the most fatest out of shape center we could find in Mike Flanagan ( He got hurt and our Running Game picked up, kinda funny)

He will be the starter next season as the Texans QB, dont be shocked.

It's time to start asking yourself why every player we pick up has to make Carr better. He was a number 1 overall pick... when does he have to start making the players around him better? He gets worse every year and makes the entire offense look worse.

HoustonFrog
01-02-2007, 06:22 PM
It's time to start asking yourself why every player we pick up has to make Carr better. He was a number 1 overall pick... when does he have to start making the players around him better? He gets worse every year and makes the entire offense look worse.

Could not have said it better and it goes to what some of us have been echoing lately....with parity it is impossible to give a guy everything he needs to win..sometimes he just has to win. If we have to get a perfect line, RB, WR and TE just to make a guy effective why are we paying him and why isn't Ryan Leaf still around asking for the same things..lol. I don't think that people really get the concept that most QBs that get drafted have talent. It is what they make of it that makes the difference. I've never seen a guy get so much leeway. ALL QBs would be good if they had the perfect pocket and time to throw.

shansmacker
01-02-2007, 07:15 PM
5 years and counting of bad o-line play.Maybe Carrs not the guy but if we ever want to sniff the playoffs we better get this thing fixed.I'd bet beer money thats Kubiaks top priority.

TexansSeminole
01-02-2007, 07:42 PM
5 years and counting of bad o-line play.Maybe Carrs not the guy but if we ever want to sniff the playoffs we better get this thing fixed.I'd bet beer money thats Kubiaks top priority.

Yes but also the Oline needs to know that if their protection breaks down the play is not immediately a negative one.

Hervoyel
01-02-2007, 08:59 PM
Woooo! 85%? Try 25%. Dayne didn't start and produce until the Raider game. The running game was horrible before that.


I never said that 5 weeks equaled 85% of the season. I'm sorry if that's what you got from my post but it's not what I meant. I was just pointing out that over the last 5 weeks of the season David Carr had a decent running game and his play did not elevate in the slightest.

thunderkyss
01-02-2007, 09:32 PM
counting only the rushing yards of our running backs,

Philly.......... 45 yards.
Indy........... 98 yards.
Washington...58 yards.
Miami........... 67 yards.
Dallas.......... 19 yards.
Jacksonville........130 yards.
Tennessee.........132 yards.
NYG........ 57 yards.
Jacksonville........101 yards.
buffalo...............130 yards
NYJ..........15 yards.
Oakland.............128 yards.
Tennessee.........101 yards.
New England......105 yards.
Indy.................177 yards.
Clevland............102 yards.

We ran for more than 130 yards 5 times since week 7(10 weeks).
We ran for over 100 yards in 10 of 16 weeks(I'm counting the 98 yards).

It's not exactly 85% of the season, but we've been running pretty well for more than just 5 weeks. well enough, I think, if our passing game was more than just empty stats.

Hervoyel
01-02-2007, 09:55 PM
Excellent post thunderkyss, positive rep delivered already for that one. I was lazy and just looked at the well documented 5 game span that Dayne started producing in. I should have looked further back because looking at this we clearly did run the ball "relatively well" the majority of the season. Was it reliable? No, not really. It was a darn sight more reliable than our passing game though.

NATHANHALE
01-03-2007, 12:00 AM
The Denver style offense is designed to make stuff open up after you are killing them with the run.

Our running game for most of the season was missing.

I thought the offense looked better when different guys were getting the ball--different WR, TEs, RBs, FB. Sometimes it seemed like the game plan was to force it to AJ instead of doing what the flow of the game was giving you.

There seemed to be a total disconnect between the running game and the passing game--more than what is supposed to happen with the offense. I still wonder about the way the offensive line is being coached--how do you run a Denver offense with blocking that is not the Denver style, at least as far as my fan eyes are telling me?

Read post #44

utahmark
01-03-2007, 12:09 AM
I never said that 5 weeks equaled 85% of the season. I'm sorry if that's what you got from my post but it's not what I meant. I was just pointing out that over the last 5 weeks of the season David Carr had a decent running game and his play did not elevate in the slightest.


yes but if you look at his first 5 or six games before his offensive line started getting decimated by injuries he had 9 td's to only 4 int's and he had one of the best passer ratings in the league.

Hervoyel
01-03-2007, 12:11 AM
yes but if you look at his first 5 or six games before his offensive line started getting decimated by injuries he had 9 td's to only 4 int's and he had one of the best passer ratings in the league.

Built almost entirely on statistics accumulated during garbage time in our early season losses. I know that grounds been well covered but "it is what it is" and David Carr played some great QB early in the year when it didn't make much difference to the outcome of the games. 4 of those 9 passes were completed against prevent defenses trading yards for time. That leaves him at more like 5 TD's and 4 INT's.

utahmark
01-03-2007, 12:11 AM
go back and look at thunderkyss's chart and you will see an inverse relationship between carr's play and our running attack. how that be?

utahmark
01-03-2007, 12:16 AM
Built almost entirely on statistics accumulated during garbage time in our early season losses. I know that grounds been well covered but "it is what it is" and David Carr played some great QB early in the year when it didn't make much difference to the outcome of the games.

you may be right not saying your not. but it does have to be considered that the only time in his career he put up good numbers was when his o-line was starting to play well. and since it basically cost's the same next year to keep him or let him go why risk letting him go and finding out later that he can play with good protection. just get a quality back up in here and let carr and whoever battle it out. nothing to lose(except a couple mil in 2008), lots to gain.

thunderkyss
01-03-2007, 12:30 AM
you may be right not saying your not. but it does have to be considered that the only time in his career he put up good numbers was when his o-line was starting to play well. and since it basically cost's the same next year to keep him or let him go why risk letting him go and finding out later that he can play with good protection. just get a quality back up in here and let carr and whoever battle it out. nothing to lose(except a couple mil in 2008), lots to gain.

why do you think the OL was playing better at the beginning of the year than they were at the end of the year?? I think someone pulled the numbers earlier, and he got sacked 21 times over the first 8 games, and 21 times over the last 8 games.

Plus we haven't had any 4 week stretch with the same 5 guys starting at all 5 positions. Not the first 4 weeks, not the second 4 weeks, not the third 4 weeks, and not the last 4 weeks. At the beggining of the season we never started the same 5 guys in back to back games.

& we've already got a quality back up who would've beat Carr out for the starting job this year.

I, like you, think Carr is worthless. I don't see us getting a second day pick for Carr, unless we sweaten the pot with someone like Porter, or Faggins.

I don't think there is much risk involved in letting him go either... there isn't a team in the league that will pick Carr up as their starting QB. Veteran backup maybe.... allow him to compete for the job...... maybe.... but chances are that we won't have to worry about Carr beating us for a long while to come......... unless we start him that is.

Let's put another QB back there, as our unquestioned starter. Let's put Kubiak's guy back there and see what happens.... if the line starts to look decent..... put David back there, and let's see what he's got.

Then, let's move on from there.

utahmark
01-03-2007, 12:44 AM
the first couple of games we had spencer in their. and for a few weeks after that we still had all our starters minus spencer(although our center position probably improved once that starter was replaced). once a few weeks after spencer went down kubes could tell that he couldnt protect carr and thats when they started to change the offense(imo) and went to the short passing game. kubes took away most chances for carr to go downfield by coaching him to get rid of the ball. thats could be what happened anyway.

what you are sugesting(letting carr compete for a job and not be the starter) is fine by me. i just think we have to much invested in him to give him away unless the coaches are 100% sure he cant play. if thats the case let him go. if not might as well not let him just walk away. i doubt we get much in a trade for him either.

thunderkyss
01-03-2007, 02:03 AM
the first couple of games we had spencer in their. and for a few weeks after that we still had all our starters minus spencer(although our center position probably improved once that starter was replaced). once a few weeks after spencer went down kubes could tell that he couldnt protect carr and thats when they started to change the offense(imo) and went to the short passing game. kubes took away most chances for carr to go downfield by coaching him to get rid of the ball. thats could be what happened anyway.

what you are sugesting(letting carr compete for a job and not be the starter) is fine by me. i just think we have to much invested in him to give him away unless the coaches are 100% sure he cant play. if thats the case let him go. if not might as well not let him just walk away. i doubt we get much in a trade for him either.

Spencer played one game. RonDayne ran over his leg in the first possession of the Indy game(his second). Flanagan also got hurt(on the next possession I think) and didn't start the next two games. When Flanagan came back two weeks latter, McKinney got hurt. then three weeks later Wiegart went down.

David was doing well, until he got benched. He was going through his progressions, he was challenging the defenses, he was playing football.... He was still fumbling the ball way too much. Tennessee was our 7th game of the season. week 8. David had fumbled in all but three games at that point, for a total of 10 fumbles.


I think it was after that Tennessee benching, that we realized we couldn't protect David. Tennessee's pass rush isn't all that, and they were all over David.

he came back and played well against the NYG, but he started the one read and dump...... or one read and run thing. And really started to stare down his receivers.

Buffalo, Jets, Oak, Tenn, NE was a string of games where David was completing less than 10 yards/completion. games that were mostly three step drops..... dump offs..... lateral, and not vertical.

outside of those games, we ran just as many play action passes(which work out to about a 5 step drop), 5 step drops, and 7 step drops... well we mixed them up enough.....

I don't think we ever implemented a short passing game. a 3 step drop works out to be about 2.0 seconds. in 2 seconds, guys like AJ, Moulds, Walter can run 15 yards. Owen, Bruenner, & Putz can make it out to about 10 yards, and your backs can get about 5 yards pass the LOS.

David just has this thing were the guy has to be wide ass open before he throws the ball to whatever reciever(except on slants..... he's got that down pretty good). Defenses were just keeping everything underneath..... allowing the shorter throws....... when you only have to defend between 5 & 15 yards from the LOS, you fill the field up pretty good.... there isn't a lot of space to pick up YAC... you'd think if David was completing 70% of his passes then we'd pick up first downs... but for some reason it didn't work that way.

I've watched the game again, & I think the Indy game at reliant was David's best game of the year. nothing spectacular, but most everything was thrown 10 yards down field..... he looked good on the bootlegs.... and he didn't turn the ball over.

If he were a rookie, and I were Kubiak, I'd bring him back next year as the starter...... no questions asked.

which is why I think he will be brought back next year, and we are getting our selves worked up about David leaving the team for no good reason. Kubiak has treated him like a rookie all year long, and I believe he will continue to treat him as if this was his rookie year.

I do believe David has done everything Kubiak told him to do.. he's responded to everything Kubiak has said to him. I don't think this means that Kubiak told him to throw the ball 5 yards when we need 17. There's at least one receiver out there beyond the first down marker, and David has to do something to get the ball to him. If that means he has to leave the pocket, step up into the pocket, pumpfake to the flat...... whatever... David needs to take the initiative to get it done. I think that is what disappoints me..... and most likely Kubiak. more than anything. His lack of initiative..

anyway........ I'm rambling.

NATHANHALE
01-03-2007, 02:13 AM
you may be right not saying your not. but it does have to be considered that the only time in his career he put up good numbers was when his o-line was starting to play well. and since it basically cost's the same next year to keep him or let him go why risk letting him go and finding out later that he can play with good protection. just get a quality back up in here and let carr and whoever battle it out. nothing to lose(except a couple mil in 2008), lots to gain.

Carr's best year was 2004 and he was sacked 49 times, which is more than he was sacked this year....several play off teams have QBs that were sacked more than Carr this year also...Carr was sacked about 1 more time per game than all the play off teams as an average...

utahmark
01-03-2007, 02:54 PM
Carr's best year was 2004 and he was sacked 49 times, which is more than he was sacked this year....several play off teams have QBs that were sacked more than Carr this year also...Carr was sacked about 1 more time per game than all the play off teams as an average...

and are these teams changing their offense and using 1 and 3 step drops to keep protect their qb's. if you dont see our line has a problem then your not watching.

utahmark
01-03-2007, 02:58 PM
Spencer played one game. RonDayne ran over his leg in the first possession of the Indy game(his second). Flanagan also got hurt(on the next possession I think) and didn't start the next two games. When Flanagan came back two weeks latter, McKinney got hurt. then three weeks later Wiegart went down.

David was doing well, until he got benched. He was going through his progressions, he was challenging the defenses, he was playing football.... He was still fumbling the ball way too much. Tennessee was our 7th game of the season. week 8. David had fumbled in all but three games at that point, for a total of 10 fumbles.


I think it was after that Tennessee benching, that we realized we couldn't protect David. Tennessee's pass rush isn't all that, and they were all over David.

he came back and played well against the NYG, but he started the one read and dump...... or one read and run thing. And really started to stare down his receivers.

Buffalo, Jets, Oak, Tenn, NE was a string of games where David was completing less than 10 yards/completion. games that were mostly three step drops..... dump offs..... lateral, and not vertical.

outside of those games, we ran just as many play action passes(which work out to about a 5 step drop), 5 step drops, and 7 step drops... well we mixed them up enough.....

I don't think we ever implemented a short passing game. a 3 step drop works out to be about 2.0 seconds. in 2 seconds, guys like AJ, Moulds, Walter can run 15 yards. Owen, Bruenner, & Putz can make it out to about 10 yards, and your backs can get about 5 yards pass the LOS.

David just has this thing were the guy has to be wide ass open before he throws the ball to whatever reciever(except on slants..... he's got that down pretty good). Defenses were just keeping everything underneath..... allowing the shorter throws....... when you only have to defend between 5 & 15 yards from the LOS, you fill the field up pretty good.... there isn't a lot of space to pick up YAC... you'd think if David was completing 70% of his passes then we'd pick up first downs... but for some reason it didn't work that way.

I've watched the game again, & I think the Indy game at reliant was David's best game of the year. nothing spectacular, but most everything was thrown 10 yards down field..... he looked good on the bootlegs.... and he didn't turn the ball over.

If he were a rookie, and I were Kubiak, I'd bring him back next year as the starter...... no questions asked.

which is why I think he will be brought back next year, and we are getting our selves worked up about David leaving the team for no good reason. Kubiak has treated him like a rookie all year long, and I believe he will continue to treat him as if this was his rookie year.

I do believe David has done everything Kubiak told him to do.. he's responded to everything Kubiak has said to him. I don't think this means that Kubiak told him to throw the ball 5 yards when we need 17. There's at least one receiver out there beyond the first down marker, and David has to do something to get the ball to him. If that means he has to leave the pocket, step up into the pocket, pumpfake to the flat...... whatever... David needs to take the initiative to get it done. I think that is what disappoints me..... and most likely Kubiak. more than anything. His lack of initiative..

anyway........ I'm rambling.


i didnt realize flanagan went down so quick. still doesnt change the fact that i dont think they changed their philosiphy till later. when weigert went down is when things really started getting bad. as i said we were probaly better without flanagan.

im not convinced carr is the guy. i just dont think we should dump him for nothing. it seems dumb to me to get rid of the guy after 5 years then finally fix the o-line.

tulexan
01-03-2007, 03:39 PM
counting only the rushing yards of our running backs,

Philly.......... 45 yards.
Indy........... 98 yards.
Washington...58 yards.
Miami........... 67 yards.
Dallas.......... 19 yards.
Jacksonville........130 yards.
Tennessee.........132 yards.
NYG........ 57 yards.
Jacksonville........101 yards.
buffalo...............130 yards
NYJ..........15 yards.
Oakland.............128 yards.
Tennessee.........101 yards.
New England......105 yards.
Indy.................177 yards.
Clevland............102 yards.

We ran for more than 130 yards 5 times since week 7(10 weeks).
We ran for over 100 yards in 10 of 16 weeks(I'm counting the 98 yards).

It's not exactly 85% of the season, but we've been running pretty well for more than just 5 weeks. well enough, I think, if our passing game was more than just empty stats.

Lets see how that compared to the rushing defense of each team

Philadelphia...136.4 (Below average)
Indianapolis...173.0 (Below average)
Washington...137.3 (Below average)
Miami...101.1 (Below average)
Dallas...103.7 (Below average)
Jacksonville...91.3 (Above average)
Tennessee...144.6 (Below average)
NY Giants...114.4 (Below average)
Jacksonville...91.3 (Above average)
Buffalo...140.9 (Below average)
NY Jets...130.3 (Below average)
Oakland...134.0 (Below average)
Tennessee...144.6 (Below average)
New England...94.2 (Above average)
Indianapolis...173.0 (Above average)
Cleveland...142.1 (Below average)

You have to look at both sides of the coin, i.e. what defense we ran against. And the evidence shows that there were only 4 games where we ran for more yards than what that defense was averaging giving up to the rest of the league. I realize that other factors like play calling, but when you look at yards per carry...

Our Average in Bold

Philly...4.5 3.8 (Below average)
Indianapolis...5.3 4.7 (Below average)
Washington...4.5 3.4 (Below average)
Miami...3.5 2.0 (Below average)
Dallas...3.9 2.0 (Below average)
Jacksonville...3.5 3.9 (Above average)
Tennessee...4.6 5.7 (Above average)
NY Giants...4.0 3.1 (Below average)
Jacksonville...3.5 3.5 (Average)
Buffalo...4.7 7.0 (Above average)
NY Jets...4.6 1.8 (Below average)
Oakland...4.0 4.0 (Average)
Tennessee...4.6 3.6 (Below average)
New England...3.9 4.8 (Above average)
Indianapolis...5.3 4.5 (Below average)
Cleveland...4.4 3.6 (Below average)

A little better, but we still had 11 games where our YPC was below average, 2 games where we were average, and 4 games where we were above average.

DoCt3rJ
01-03-2007, 04:14 PM
The running game won us like 1 or 2 games this year. That's not cause Ron Dayne is a good back, the few games he did good the line was actually producing. Dayne wasn't good enough to compete with Broncos RB's that why he was let go. The only reason he did good in Denver is cause of their system, and ofcourse if our oline starts opening holes hes gonna run through them. If we had Dom or Bush it would of been a whole lot diff running game this year.

I do think David Carr could succeed if he had time to throw, and I do believe he gets ancy back there from being pressured so much and when he does have time to throw he messes up. If you put David Carr on the Colts, they would still be good, now, not AS good, cause ofcourse Manning is awesome. If you watch those games where the Colt's lost in the playoffs, he got pressured and had a bad game. Carr can succeed, but I think it's time to let him do it elsewhere. Wev'e already ruined him here. Keep in mind we have like 2 people on the offensive line that have been with us when David got sacked a million times, we had a rookie, a washed up veteran pro bowler..... it's time to build the offensive line.

kenneth24
01-03-2007, 04:27 PM
why do you think the OL was playing better at the beginning of the year than they were at the end of the year?? I think someone pulled the numbers earlier, and he got sacked 21 times over the first 8 games, and 21 times over the last 8 games.

I don't know the numbers but I'd be willing to bet they attempted more passes in those first 8 games than they did in the last 8 games.

Did anybody here Moulds on his show radio show last night? Not exactly a ringing endorsement of Carr. Two things he said Carr needed to work on and one was being a more of a leader by being more vocal and when there isn't a lot of time to throw he needs to check to the backs and tight ends more often. That kinda surprised me a little bit about dumping off more because he did complete 68% of his passes and most people are constantly complaining about him dumping the ball off.

TexansSeminole
01-03-2007, 05:32 PM
I don't know the numbers but I'd be willing to bet they attempted more passes in those first 8 games than they did in the last 8 games.

Did anybody here Moulds on his show radio show last night? Not exactly a ringing endorsement of Carr. Two things he said Carr needed to work on and one was being a more of a leader by being more vocal and when there isn't a lot of time to throw he needs to check to the backs and tight ends more often. That kinda surprised me a little bit about dumping off more because he did complete 68% of his passes and most people are constantly complaining about him dumping the ball off.

Thats because he dumps it off alot of the time when there is not much pressure (or much less than normal). When he gets pressured is when he needs to dump it off...not on a play where he has enough time to find a receiver downfield.

Pretty sure that is what he means.

kenneth24
01-03-2007, 05:41 PM
Thats because he dumps it off alot of the time when there is not much pressure (or much less than normal). When he gets pressured is when he needs to dump it off...not on a play where he has enough time to find a receiver downfield.

Pretty sure that is what he means.

Hopefully thats what he meant because I figured he had plenty of practice at it and didn't need much more!

thunderkyss
01-03-2007, 06:09 PM
You have to look at both sides of the coin, i.e. what defense we ran against. And the evidence shows that there were only 4 games where we ran for more yards than what that defense was averaging giving up to the rest of the league. I realize that other factors like play calling, but when you look at yards per carry...

A little better, but we still had 11 games where our YPC was below average, 2 games where we were average, and 4 games where we were above average.

I understand those stats... I understand how our stats compare to the defenses we played. I don't understand what point you are trying to make.

If your argument is that the RB situation is far from locked up... I agree, and that is a very good argument. I understand a Clinton Portis..... DW... or AD would have improved our running game quite a bit. I also understand that once our offensive line starts producing better we'd get the same net effect. I don't believe anyone is arguing that point though.

If your argument is that our game wasn't enough to open up the passing game, or wasn't enough to help David Carr....... I have to disagree. Against Oakland & Indy our running game got David Carr two wins as a starting NFL QB.

Was our game enough to change the opposing teams game plan?? I doubt it. The QB is still the focus of our offense. & if he is easily rattled, we're going to need a 2000 yard/year rushing game for him to be successful.

But if we had a 2000 yard/year rushing game.... who cares who the QB is?? He could be Michael Vick, and we'd win as many games on his arm as we would David Carr's.

thunderkyss
01-03-2007, 06:22 PM
Hopefully thats what he meant because I figured he had plenty of practice at it and didn't need much more!

What game was that when Cook caught the ball, then turned around & got hit by a LB as soon as he turned around(then fumbled the ball)??

If you can look at that play again, you can see Owen Daniels clear that LB(facing the QB) with no one on top of him. If David would have thrown the ball to Owen instead of Cook(over Owen's head) that LB would have been way behind, and most likely would never have caught up. It would have been a big gain, it would have been the first down & then some, instead of the game ending fumble short of the first down anyway.

Then against NewEngland, David's second INT. That corner watched David Stare down our TE. He let our WR(I think it was Moulds) go so he could jump the TE route. If David was watching the defense, instead of our players(because he has no reason to watch our players.... after a week of practice, he should know what our players are going to do) he should have seen the Corner sitting on that route, he should have known Eric was wide open...... he should have made the play, and beat that corner, instead of getting beat.

Coaches help slow QBs by stacking routes like that. the QB should be able to read two routes at the same time. David can't even do that. Those are just two examples off the top of my head.....

the problem with David dumping down so often is that he is staring at one reciever then dumping down.... it was silly the number of times we had wide open recievers in that game against INdy that David didn't even see.

utahmark
01-04-2007, 10:36 PM
you are wrong carr homer:carr sux

thanks to whoever gave me neg rep with that comment for stating my opinion. mucho class!!

The Pencil Neck
01-04-2007, 10:53 PM
you are wrong carr homer:carr sux

thanks to whoever gave me neg rep with that comment for stating my opinion. mucho class!!

Same thing happened to me just a day or two ago. First time I've gotten a negative rep.

I was actually almost kinda psyched about that. :aikido: