PDA

View Full Version : The moment you realized that Carr was not it


number1stunner
02-24-2007, 03:10 AM
Just wanted to see when those in favor of getting a new QB in here next year finally came to realize that Carr wasn't the answer. I was a big Carr apologist and said Kubiak would make him better until........................


.................that first game with the Titans last season when first he threw into triple coverage and got picked off. But the final straw was at the end of the first half he got hit, fumbled, and it got taken the other way. Then the very first play of the second half Carr fumbled again. After that I was convinced that Carr wasn't the answer.

Any thoughts?

HOOK'EM
02-24-2007, 04:29 AM
Going into last season, I also was excited for Carr. I think it was that Tenn. game for me too. I live in Austin and because they quit showing the Texan games about mid season, I ordered the season ticket on Direct TV. After the Tenn. game it when really down hill (the Raider game was horrible) till by the end of the season they took the ball out of his hands. It was run or bust and we actually won a couple. (Indy & Cleveland) A pray we get rid of Carr I could not stand watching another season go down the drain!

Navy_Chris
02-24-2007, 06:57 AM
Honestly, I realized that Carr wasn't going to be it as soon as his name was called on Draft Day in 2002. The guy had 1 good season in college and got rewarded by being selected #1 and paid around $40 million.

Also, I don't like the idea of becoming the Houston Broncos? Do you guys?

http://texans.aolsportsblog.com/2007/02/19/your-2007-houston-broncos/

HJam72
02-24-2007, 07:38 AM
Honestly, I realized that Carr wasn't going to be it as soon as his name was called on Draft Day in 2002.

I don't mean to be offensive, but I really doubt the sincerity of that statement. Very few people really didn't like him as our QB before about mid-season 2004.

aj.
02-24-2007, 07:58 AM
I don't hold it against Carr that he was taken #1 overall. That wasn't his fault. It was the fault of the people who scouted him and decided to pay him $35 million over the first 5 years of his NFL career.

Troughout history, the NFL draft is littered with QBs who were Top Ten picks that shouldn't have been first day picks, e.g., Tim Couch, Heath Shuler, Akili Smith, Rick Mirer, Todd Blackledge, Chuck Long, Kelly Stouffer, Andre Ware, David Klingler Trent Dilfer, Jim Everett, Jeff George, Art Schlicter.

Now with the benefit of hindsight, Carr and Harrington were highly overrated going into the '02 draft which - now that the book is almost closed on that draft class - was a terrible year for QBs.

Just because a guy was a top ten pick, doesn't guarantee that player will succeed in the NFL. It could mean that it was a bad year for QBs where some borderline guys rose to the top of an inflated talent pool based on a monster year stat-wise or posters on sides of buildings or a new owner/misguided GM with model citizen QB fever.

People are still holding on to some hope that Carr will flip the switch or "if we only surround him with..." without thinking that it's quite possible that he is what he is regardless of the situation you put him in.

Personally, I think Carr and Harrington are Couch and Akili Smith three years removed. They are Boller and Volek... or Dilfer ... even behind the Ravens 2000 OL.

Didn't Carr redshirt in his junior year because he coudn't beat out Volek for the starting job at Fresno?

ArlingtonTexan
02-24-2007, 08:08 AM
Very few people really didn't like him as our QB before about mid-season 2004.

This is the point where I thought Carr would always be an average inconsistent QB who when chips were down you could not trust. I did think that Carr had the ability to put together a really strong statistical year looking like he got "it". I just did not think he would string together several years of outstanding play. Unfortunately, Carr really has not strung together more than a relative handful of good games which is not enough for even that one really good season to happen.

Honoring Earl 34
02-24-2007, 08:22 AM
I don't hold it against Carr that he was taken #1 overall. That wasn't his fault. It was the fault of the people who scouted him and decided to pay him $35 million over the first 5 years of his NFL career.

Troughout history, the NFL draft is littered with QBs who were Top Ten picks that shouldn't have been first day picks, e.g., Tim Couch, Heath Shuler, Akili Smith, Rick Mirer, Todd Blackledge, Chuck Long, Kelly Stouffer, Andre Ware, David Klingler Trent Dilfer, Jim Everett, Jeff George, Art Schlicter.

Now with the benefit of hindsight, Carr and Harrington were highly overrated going into the '02 draft which - now that the book is almost closed on that draft class - was a terrible year for QBs.

Just because a guy was a top ten pick, doesn't guarantee that player will succeed in the NFL. It could mean that it was a bad year for QBs where some borderline guys rose to the top of an inflated talent based on a monster year stat-wise or posters on sides of buildings or a new owner/misguided GM with model citizen QB fever.

People are still holding on to some hope that Carr will flip the switch or "if we only surround him with..." without thinking that it's quite possible that he is what he is regardless of the situation you put him in.

Personally, I think Carr and Harrington are Couch and Akili Smith three years removed. They are Boller and Volek... or Dilfer ... even behind the Ravens 2000 OL.

Didn't Carr redshirt in his junior year because he coudn't beat out Volek for the starting job at Fresno?

I've posted this before and I'll say it again . Mel Kiper ( take it for what it's worth ) said that if Drew Brees was in the 2002 draft he would be the 1st player taken not Carr .

He said this at the 2002 draft show .... this was not recent .

ArlingtonTexan
02-24-2007, 08:22 AM
People are still holding on to some hope that Carr will flip the switch or "if we only surround him with..." without thinking that it's quite possible that he is what he is regardless of the situation you put him in.


In fact, for me the surround him argument only proves the point that he is just another guy. There are 50 guys in the NFL who can play good QB when they have everything i.e. quality WRs, pass catching TE, above average protection, a solid run game, and a defense that provides turnovers. Usually, this also leads into the point that Carr can't be evaluated until he has all of that stuff. This point is equally poor. NFL scouts and coaches are paid to do exactly that, evaluate a player despite his surroundings.

kfranco_utexas
02-24-2007, 08:23 AM
One of the replies of one of the posters:



10. You Houston fans have short memories. You gave up the TOP OVERALL PICK last year for Mario Williams, and now think that giving up the 8th overall pick for a starting RB, a starting QB, (each of whom knows the offense that's been installed in Houston) and a first day Broncos' pick is a disaster?

This is why Texans fans are so miserable. They just don't know football.






Great:yes:

HJam72
02-24-2007, 08:31 AM
Still though, I think we have to admit that the first coaching regime muffed up the O-line badly (in more ways than one) and had terrible play-calling many times as well. That leaves us wondering whether we can judge Carr by one year with Kubiak, who hasn't even had time to really get the right players in place.

I didn't even mention Bradford, who shouldn't have started at wide-out all that time.

I don't want to make excuse after excuse for Carr; I'm just reminding everyone of the obvious.

HJam72
02-24-2007, 08:42 AM
Well, I'm not saying Carr needs to stay, at least not permanently. I think he's shown that he is unreliable. I guess I just don't see him as the answer; nor do I see him as being just absolutely horrible like some say either. I think what we have is a guy who is always going to be in the bottom half of the NFL starters in terms of OVERALL performance; but, he doesn't have to be puke-your-guts-out terrible if he gets the right protection, etc.

I don't think we have rush like mad men to get rid of him, but I don't want him getting any more contracts either (obviously).

ArlingtonTexan
02-24-2007, 08:53 AM
Still though, I think we have to admit that the first coaching regime muffed up the O-line badly (in more ways than one) and had terrible play-calling many times as well. That leaves us wondering whether we can judge Carr by one year with Kubiak, who hasn't even had time to really get the right players in place.

I didn't even mention Bradford, who shouldn't have started at wide-out all that time.

I don't want to make excuse after excuse for Carr; I'm just reminding everyone of the obvious.

For, the most part QBs who have started 75 games for 5 years don't become different players. What is pretty clear is that Carr is not a difference maker, either way, not bad enough or good enough for you to just throw him out or rally around. The hope of the Texans is to improve the situation and thus improve the QB play, but my expectation is that Carr will still be an average inconsistent player who flaws can be hidden more by having a good team around him. At the end of the day, though normally a team can only hide this type of Qbing for so long (see the Da Bears).

In short, I am of the belief that a player will eventually play his way into whatever type of player he truly is. Carr is what he is, because this is the type of player he is.

Doom Capers
02-24-2007, 09:13 AM
I have always like and supported David Carr. But the Titans game also did it in for me too. I saw Sage come in and avoid sacks by moving around the pocket. I had never seen David do anything like that before. Sage bought himself more time to make plays and move the chains.

afcman
02-24-2007, 09:23 AM
It was this last season when Sage stepped in. Not because of Sage so much as the rest of the team seemed to kick it up a notch.

The season before last I could tell the team seemed to not even pay any attention to Carr. I would watch very closely when they were on the sidelines and the other players would just shrug Carr off. Also when Carr was on the sidelines the coaches would come up to him with photos taken of the plays and Carr would not even pay attention. (Hello?) What do you see when Payton goes to the sidelines? He's always studying the photos to find a way to beat the other team.

I was hoping for more improvement this last season and wasn't impressed. And when Sage stepped in it was like the rest of the team got a breath of fresh air and said 'OK let's roll'. Again, this is not a 'Sage is the man' response.

Wharton
02-24-2007, 09:52 AM
Itís been a while, but two years ago I taped the Texans games and studied the hell out of them. Granted you canít see the whole field and that is a major set back TV film. But, I was watching a preseason game and during a busted play, David (as I yelling for him not too) throws the ball back across the field for an interception. A few weeks later on what looked like the exact same play David did it again. Now, I agree mistakes happen, but this was a rookie mistake being made by a 3rd year starter. At that point, I knew David was not studying game film the way he should. This was the start of my doubt.

Its done nothing but grow ever since.

thunderkyss
02-24-2007, 10:21 AM
I'm still not at the point that I think we should bring another QB in to Houston. Main reason is that I don't like the QBs that will be available in the Draft, or in FA.

This idea of drafting a QB & grooming him doesn't make sense to me, if you don't see anyone special in the draft. I can see getting Jamarcus or Quinn, and grooming them... they are special enough, but those aren't the guys that people are talking about.

Now if that Brohm guy would have came out...

I'm not pleased with David, and I think consistency is not his biggest problem. If he were to improve his consistency, he'd be consistently avg.... & that's not good enough to be a franchise QB.

I think we should make him our back up.... don't worry about what he's getting paid in '07, what's done is done. But start Sage.

If Sage makes our offense look like an NFL offense..... then we're good. We can ask David to restructure, we could trade him, or we can cut him before 08.

If Sage looks like Crap.... we know the problem isn't David. We can put David back in somewhere around mid season. If we don't look better, if David looks just like the lifetime back-up, we get rid of both of them before '08.

blockhead83
02-24-2007, 10:57 AM
I'm with the first poster, it was the first Titans game this year where Kubiak finally put his confidence in Carr to try and lead a last minute drive at the end of the half, and he fumbled the ball and the Titans ran it in for a touchdown. That was the last straw for me, and I think I said as much in a post I made that afternoon. That's not to say I hate the guy or anything, just that I'd rather see someone else get a chance at this point. If he goes on to be successful here, or somewhere else, great. I'm really going to be disappointed if we don't bring in someone via FA or the draft to atleast compete with Carr and Sage. I don't want Carr's job handed to him on a silver platter anymore if he stays.

aj.
02-24-2007, 11:14 AM
Still though, I think we have to admit that the first coaching regime muffed up the O-line badly (in more ways than one) ...

I'm always the first to admit that Tony Marciano had no business coaching an o-line. I said that 5 years ago and wrote about it numerous times. Steve Marshall wasn't much better. But that really doesn't apply in '06 and beyond and it's now an overused crutch. Somehow they managed to go 7-9 in 2004 with that 'terrible' OL. Carr regressed with the team in '05 and he struggled mightily in a QB friendly system in '06 - notwithstanding the injuries at left tackle and at RB which hurt the offense a bunch.

For me there wasn't a moment - there were many - but it was mainly a gradual thing with his benching against VY at TN in '06 the final straw.

SamuraiSword
02-24-2007, 11:17 AM
Honestly, I realized that Carr wasn't going to be it as soon as his name was called on Draft Day in 2002. The guy had 1 good season in college and got rewarded by being selected #1 and paid around $40 million.

Also, I don't like the idea of becoming the Houston Broncos? Do you guys?

http://texans.aolsportsblog.com/2007/02/19/your-2007-houston-broncos/

Yeah I know what were our front office people thinking when they picked David? he didn't even beat Texas or USC. If I remember correctly???? We screwed up bad in my opinion. BTW i gave him a chance and when he played against the Raiders was when I couldn't stand no more. I mean come on -5 yards passing???? He is now just milking the gravy train on the Texans.

afcman
02-24-2007, 11:59 AM
I can see getting Jamarcus or Quinn, and grooming them

If we pick Quinn I may just throw in the towel. :francis:

NATHANHALE
02-24-2007, 01:21 PM
Still though, I think we have to admit that the first coaching regime muffed up the O-line badly (in more ways than one) and had terrible play-calling many times as well. That leaves us wondering whether we can judge Carr by one year with Kubiak, who hasn't even had time to really get the right players in place.

I didn't even mention Bradford, who shouldn't have started at wide-out all that time.

I don't want to make excuse after excuse for Carr; I'm just reminding everyone of the obvious.

The concern I have is that all the :homer: 's justify Carr's poor play with excuses(circumstances) that the entire team experiences but only Carr gets the 'slack' while everyone else gets the blame.

OL had significant improvement in '06 but Carr threw fewer TDs--why?...talk about stepping up, how many more games could we have won if David had matched his '04 total of 16 (which still would have been near the bottom of the 'totem pole')?

HomeBred_Texan
02-24-2007, 01:47 PM
The concern I have is that all the :homer: 's justify Carr's poor play with excuses(circumstances) that the entire team experiences but only Carr gets the 'slack' while everyone else gets the blame.

OL had significant improvement in '06 but Carr threw fewer TDs--why?...talk about stepping up, how many more games could we have won if David had matched his '04 total of 16 (which still would have been near the bottom of the 'totem pole')?

Because the Coach called for running plays when inside the 20???

Carr threw for something like a record of consecutive passes in a game last year didn't he? And we still lost... WHY? I will tell you why, no stinking running game... That's why!!!!!

Navy_Chris
02-24-2007, 01:54 PM
I don't mean to be offensive, but I really doubt the sincerity of that statement. Very few people really didn't like him as our QB before about mid-season 2004.


I'm not everybody else, I guess. This guy did jack **** until his senior year in college. Come on....!!!

TwinSisters
02-24-2007, 02:10 PM
Very few people really didn't like him as our QB before about mid-season 2004.

same here.

We lose to Buffalo.
We then get shalaqued by a pathetic Titans team.
Then Holmgren routs us.

It was too much. I have seen worse QBs do more when they were fighting for their jobs.

NATHANHALE
02-24-2007, 02:41 PM
Because the Coach called for running plays when inside the 20???

Carr threw for something like a record of consecutive passes in a game last year didn't he? And we still lost... WHY? I will tell you why, no stinking running game... That's why!!!!!

OK, so Coach called for running plays and we had no stinking running game...hmmm. Why didn't Coach let Carr throw the ball?

The Pencil Neck
02-24-2007, 02:48 PM
Because the Coach called for running plays when inside the 20???

Carr threw for something like a record of consecutive passes in a game last year didn't he? And we still lost... WHY? I will tell you why, no stinking running game... That's why!!!!!

What? We ran for 188 yards in that game! How do you go 20+ consecutive completions without getting one into the endzone?

The Pencil Neck
02-24-2007, 03:02 PM
For me it was a cumulative thing over the year. The first Titans game was a big blow to me with those two huge fumbles. But the string of the Buffalo, Jets, and Raiders games is what killed me.

In the Buffalo game, he tied the completion record but couldn't get it in the endzone and couldn't get the completion to win the game. The defense put us in the hole but then helped us getting out of it. In the end, he didn't step up and win the game when he had an easy opportunity.

In the Jets game, he threw for over 300 yards for the only time in the season but it was just 5.4 yards per attempt and over 50 attempts. And most of those yards came when it didn't count during the last 2 drives of the game where we needed some long completions to get back into the game quick... and instead we had long ball control drives. That was just bad.

But then, the killer for me was the Raider game. After that, I would have been happy to see Sage or Porter or Van Pelt start instead of Carr. Yeah, the Raiders were a tough defense and we knew we were going to have problems but I don't think anyone had a worse day against them than we did. Didn't Charlie Frye and the Browns go for about 200 yards and 3 TD's/2 picks in the air against these guys? I think that our day was probably the worst passing performance by a team in a LONG time.

That killed it for me. If our team can win that game with our passing game being that bad, that meant to me that the problem isn't the rest of the team.

Mr. White
02-24-2007, 03:13 PM
If we pick Quinn I may just throw in the towel. :francis:

I don't really get all the Quinn hate. Kinda reminds me of the VY hate last offseason.

I think he's an above average QB on a team that was highly overrated.

I've seen people say they think he may be another Carr...idonno: I don't see that. So far, Charlie Weis has a better track record with QB's than Jeff Tedford.

On to the topic....

While I was all for VY coming in last offseason, I still thought that Carr could be a good QB. I just thought that Vince would be a lot better. Once Casserly said Vince was out last April, I decided that I could live with it and threw my support behind Carr.

My realizing that Carr was not "it" started with the Titans game at Nashville. He kept throwing for 3-and-outs, taking sacks, and fumbling the ball. We all know how Sage moved the ball in that game.

Then it just got worse the rest of the season. By the Raiders game where he threw for -5 yards, I figured that it was time for a change. He certainly did nothing to change my opinion since that time.

Nighthawk
02-26-2007, 02:25 AM
I don't mean to be offensive, but I really doubt the sincerity of that statement. Very few people really didn't like him as our QB before about mid-season 2004.

I was one of them.

Somewhere in the first season when I realized that he had no pocket awareness and moved like a robot and acted like a little girl. Right in there.