PDA

View Full Version : Odd that Carr hasn't been moved?


Pages : 1 [2]

My Hero
03-15-2007, 01:41 PM
You play like they played Oakland and Cleveland .



So we're back at 2-14 season,because you won't win many more like that.

HOU-TEX
03-15-2007, 01:42 PM
Ok so let's say we cut Carr and start Sage. Do we then go to Porter if Sage can't complete anything,throws too many int's,get's hurt?

You play like they played Oakland and Cleveland .

Yes, but when you play Sage, Porter or even Van Pelt it won't cost the Texans millions of dollars. At the same time you get the same amount of production, if not more.

real
03-15-2007, 01:42 PM
Ok so let's say we cut Carr and start Sage. Do we then go to Porter if Sage can't complete anything,throws too many int's,get's hurt?

Lets say we keep David. Do we go to Sage once he proves, once again, that he can't get-er-done ?

Mr. White
03-15-2007, 01:42 PM
Ok so let's say we cut Carr and start Sage. Do we then go to Porter if Sage can't complete anything,throws too many int's,get's hurt?

We'd try to bring in someone else by the end of the preseason. Worst case scenario (and an unlikely one) is that another QB and just have to watch the waiver wire like the Titans did with Kerry Collins. Someone will be there.

Mr. White
03-15-2007, 01:45 PM
So we're back at 2-14 season,because you won't win many more like that.

So you agree that we need a downfield passing game.

My Hero
03-15-2007, 01:48 PM
Lets say we keep David. Do we go to Sage once he proves, once again, that he can't get-er-done ?



Yes, I could live with that. If he can't provide more inspiring play by game 4 regular season, Then they should bench him,cut him. Hopefully we'll have Quinn or Kolb and if Sage can't pull it off in 3-4 games they get a shot just like Cutler,Lienart or Young.

See I can be reasonable.

real
03-15-2007, 01:58 PM
Yes, I could live with that. If he can't provide more inspiring play by game 4 regular season, Then they should bench him,cut him. Hopefully we'll have Quinn or Kolb and if Sage can't pull it off in 3-4 games they get a shot just like Cutler,Lienart or Young.

See I can be reasonable.

So you're willing to jeopardize 1/4 of of our season, tie our necks up financially, and risk team unity all for the sake of keeping a QB who threw 1 meaningful TD in the last 10 games of the season, -5 against Oakland and flat out looked awful for a majority of the season ?


Why?

I've never seen people clamour for such an underachieving player. It's really ridiculous IMO.

thunderkyss
03-15-2007, 02:01 PM
Yes, I could live with that. If he can't provide more inspiring play by game 4 regular season, Then they should bench him,cut him. Hopefully we'll have Quinn or Kolb and if Sage can't pull it off in 3-4 games they get a shot just like Cutler,Lienart or Young.

See I can be reasonable.

What I'd like to see, is for us to start Sage. Throughout the Preseason, we can start David as the #2 QB. If he can perform at a high level in those games, then he can be our starter for Week 1 of the regular season. If he looks like he is over his head, he sits on the bench.

If Sage stinks it up, for the first 3 weeks, David can come in & save our season.

HoustonFrog
03-15-2007, 02:03 PM
Yes, I could live with that. If he can't provide more inspiring play by game 4 regular season, Then they should bench him,cut him. Hopefully we'll have Quinn or Kolb and if Sage can't pull it off in 3-4 games they get a shot just like Cutler,Lienart or Young.

See I can be reasonable.


Well at least you are getting close. Why keep the black cloud at all? Carr isn't getting us any closer. If Sage is good enough to hold the position while a younger guy learns, then why not save the 5 mil for next year and get where we need to go?Carr doesn't have to be here to get a young guy and move forward. I've heard nothing but great things about how, post-injury, Sage worked with the other players and helped out in game planning. Sage, in my book could be as good or better than Carr and we would save the money. Again, why have Carr here, especially with the tension, if we know this year is going to be another learning year and we are looking for the future QB in the draft?

Plus it won't matter when Jake comes out of retirement;)

tsip
03-15-2007, 02:21 PM
Yipee! we can start this guy who has 2 less TD passes in his career than David Carr had last season. Yipee!# 18 Sage Rosenfels
Position: QB
Height: 6-4
Weight: 225
Born: 03/06/1978
College: Iowa State
NFL Experience: 7
Career Stats | Game Logs: 01 02 03 04 05 06 | Situational Stats | Team Roster



Passing
Year Team G GS Att Comp Pct Yds YPA Lg TD Int 20+ 40+ Rate
2001 Washington 0 0 0 0 0 --- 0 0 0 0/0 0 ---
2002 Miami Dolphins 4 0 3 0 0 0.00 0 0 0 0/0 0 39.6
2003 Miami Dolphins 2 0 6 4 66.7 50 8.33 21 1 0 0/0 0 131.9
2004 Miami Dolphins 3 1 39 16 41.0 264 6.77 76 1 3 3/16 1 41.0
2005 Miami Dolphins 4 1 61 34 55.7 462 7.57 77 4 3 0/0 5 81.5
2006 Houston Txns 4 0 39 27 69.2 265 6.79 28 3 1 1/5 4 0 103.0
TOTAL 17 2 148 81 54.7 1041 7.03 77 9 7 4/21 13 4 77.6

It tells a lot about you when you compare a player with 2 starts to a player with over 75! Your player, Carr, still has not done much in the NFL (12tds/yr and more ints than tds) but you want him for a 6th yr...

Sage's career avg's-especially the good stuff-are better than Carr's. He's thrown more tds than int/has a higher ypa/has a higher QB rating,etc. Carr only beats Sage in completion % and that is due to 1) Carr's 'dink and dunk' passing game and 2) Sage's limited play.

Too, if I were you, I wouldn't be too quick to compare any other Texan QB to Carr. First, no other QB on the team has been given a chance of any kind to show what they can do on a consistent basis but-when they have- their play has been better than David's.

In 2006 pre-season (that being the only time anyone gets to play besides Carr), every QB on the roster had better numbers than Carr-one had a QB rating of 100.9 and one had 95.6, while David was sitting at 69.3. The other 2 B's together were sacked once, while Carr was sacked 3 times with the lone interception. Too, all Carr's back ups have better stats than Carr during the regular season....

75 NFL starts out of the 76 games he has played in. Fair competition? None,Zippo. I can think of no other QB who has been given a 'cart blanche' to get so much playing time w/o earning it than Carr. Why? Since it's not about 'great' play- what is it about? He didn't earn either of the 2 bonuses last year but was given the 'best/more lucrative' one anyway. Why?

Potential has made the Texans the losingest team in NFL History, worse than even the Saints and the Bucs....:crazy: :wow:

Vinny
03-15-2007, 02:27 PM
75 NFL starts out of the 76 games he has played in. Fair competition? None,Zippo. I can think of no other QB who has been given a 'cart blanche' to get so much playing time w/o earning it than Carr. Why? Since it's not about 'great' play- what is it about? He didn't earn either of the 2 bonuses last year but was given the 'best/more lucrative' one anyway. Why? Marketing (the first few years marketing seemed to be more important than winning games) plus the fact that the Texans were LOUSY talent evaluators until last season. They missed on everyone else....why should we think they got Carr right? I tend to think of it as the Emperor's New Clothing era.

real
03-15-2007, 02:36 PM
They missed on everyone else....why should we think they got Carr right?

quoted for effect.

Arky
03-15-2007, 02:40 PM
..........
Potential has made the Texans the losingest team in NFL History, worse than even the Saints and the Bucs....:crazy: :wow:

Nope.

Team - Winning percentage - (Record first 5 yrs.)

1. New Orleans Saints - .273 - (18-48-4)
2. Dallas Cowboys - .281 - (18-46-4)
3. Tampa Bay Bucs - .293 - (22-53-1)
4. Houston Texans - .300 - (24-56)
5. Minnesota Vikings - .373 - (25-42-3)

HoustonFrog
03-15-2007, 02:51 PM
Nope.

Team - Winning percentage - (Record first 5 yrs.)

1. New Orleans Saints - .273 - (18-48-4)
2. Dallas Cowboys - .281 - (18-46-4)
3. Tampa Bay Bucs - .293 - (22-53-1)
4. Houston Texans - .300 - (24-56)
5. Minnesota Vikings - .373 - (25-42-3)

.300. Yippee.

Arky
03-15-2007, 03:12 PM
.300. Yippee.

How 'bout dem Cowboys! :yahoo:

Texan_Bill
03-15-2007, 03:14 PM
How 'bout dem Cowboys! :yahoo:

Right on Arky!! I'm with you on that one!!! :yahoo:

SESupergenius
03-15-2007, 03:16 PM
quoted for effect.

They sure got Chester Pitts right......I think....well.....kinda.....sorta.

Vinny
03-15-2007, 03:24 PM
They sure got Chester Pitts right......I think....well.....kinda.....sorta.

They did....just look at the 3rd round of that draft. He was the only real lineman worth taking...and this franchise needed a lineman more than anything then....kinda still do.

dirty steve
03-15-2007, 03:37 PM
They did....just look at the 3rd round of that draft. He was the only real lineman worth taking...and this franchise needed a lineman more than anything then....kinda still do.
are you talking about that pitts was good to get when they got him because there were none good to take in the 3rd rd? pitts was taken in the 2nd and weary in the 3rd.

ib4texans
03-15-2007, 03:41 PM
Well at least you are getting close. Why keep the black cloud at all? Carr isn't getting us any closer. If Sage is good enough to hold the position while a younger guy learns, then why not save the 5 mil for next year and get where we need to go?Carr doesn't have to be here to get a young guy and move forward. I've heard nothing but great things about how, post-injury, Sage worked with the other players and helped out in game planning. Sage, in my book could be as good or better than Carr and we would save the money. Again, why have Carr here, especially with the tension, if we know this year is going to be another learning year and we are looking for the future QB in the draft?

Plus it won't matter when Jake comes out of retirement;)



Just questions not criticizm;

1:Is it fair to assume we risk at least part of this amount will still be here?

2:Tony Banks was a s**t mentor for Carr,could Sage be any benifit to him in the offseason and preseason. I would think he should have some postive effects on him.

Vinny
03-15-2007, 03:43 PM
are you talking about that pitts was good to get when they got him because there were none good to take in the 3rd rd? pitts was taken in the 2nd and weary in the 3rd.
If we passed on Pitts he would not have made it to the 3rd round. The only offensive linemen taken on the first day of that draft after pitts was Langston Walker, Fred Weary and Jeff Hatch. It was a miserable year for offensive lineman and a miserable year for an expansion franchise to form the basis of their team.


18 50 Chester Pitts Texans G San Diego State

21 53 Langston Walker Raiders T California

3 1 66 Fred Weary Texans C Tennessee

13 78 Jeff Hatch Giants T Pennsylvania

My Hero
03-15-2007, 03:45 PM
dude, I was just having a laugh.....

anyways, you may want to review Proposition 215 which was passed by California voters in 1996...you will find that marijuana is legal although it does maintain controlled substance status (just like prescription medication; it requires a prescription)

but anyways, back to Carr talk errrrr football talk



Just thought you might find this interesting Second Honeymoon


Woman Denied Right To Use Marijuana As Life-saving Medication

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/heal...p?newsid=65293

TK_Gamer
03-15-2007, 03:45 PM
I thought Sage never started at QB until after he came here? how could he mentor anyone? on how to not start? tips for the 2nd string wannabees? how to stick around in the nfl without actually doing anything?

HoustonFrog
03-15-2007, 03:47 PM
Just questions not criticizm;

1:Is it fair to assume we risk at least part of this amount will still be here?

2:Tony Banks was a s**t mentor for Carr,could Sage be any benifit to him in the offseason and preseason. I would think he should have some postive effects on him.

1) Besides the cap hit this year which is the prorated portion of his bonus..correct me if I'm wrong we would be off the hook next season.

2) If that was the case, I'd think it would have happened last year. I know people think Sage is a career backup, and that is fine, but I think Kubes has alot of faith in him and thinks he really gets the offense and what needs to be done in it. I'm all for grooming someone. So if that is the plan, I'd rather do it with Sage and get the "speculation" of a QB controversy, the mistakes, etc out of here. I actually think it would benefit Carr too.

No one is expecting the guy to be a long term starter. Just to hold the keys while we bring in the heir apparent.

As for the post above saying he couldn't mentor anyone(Sage)..there are plenty of guys with QB smarts that aren't always going to start...Garrett is an example. BTW, Romo was pretty much one of these guys the last 3 years or whatever and he turned out to work out for the time being for the Boys.

HoustonFrog
03-15-2007, 03:50 PM
I thought Sage never started at QB until after he came here? how could he mentor anyone? on how to not start? tips for the 2nd string wannabees? how to stick around in the nfl without actually doing anything?

Well hell, Carr could mentor that too. Except his is the graduated version where you get paid millions.:)

Vinny
03-15-2007, 03:53 PM
I thought Sage never started at QB until after he came here? how could he mentor anyone? on how to not start? tips for the 2nd string wannabees? how to stick around in the nfl without actually doing anything?
Weak statment....Kubiak was a lousy NFL QB but he can mentor Elway, Steve Young, Jake Plummer or David Carr....most coaches weren't great players. How can Kubiak stick around the NFL without "doing anything"?

dirty steve
03-15-2007, 04:05 PM
If we passed on Pitts he would not have made it to the 3rd round. The only offensive linemen taken on the first day of that draft after pitts was Langston Walker, Fred Weary and Jeff Hatch. It was a miserable year for offensive lineman and a miserable year for an expansion franchise to form the basis of their team.
18 50 Chester Pitts Texans G San Diego State
21 53 Langston Walker Raiders T California
3 1 66 Fred Weary Texans C Tennessee
13 78 Jeff Hatch Giants T Pennsylvania
that's what i figured. i just wasnt sure of pitts' exact draft grade at the time. seems like the Texans received the best of that lot.

HoustonFrog
03-15-2007, 04:12 PM
Weak statment....Kubiak was a lousy NFL QB but he can mentor Elway, Steve Young, Jake Plummer or David Carr....most coaches weren't great players. How can Kubiak stick around the NFL without "doing anything"?

I completely glossed over the guy in our back yard when I mentioned Garrett above. Dead on.

SESupergenius
03-15-2007, 04:31 PM
They did....just look at the 3rd round of that draft. He was the only real lineman worth taking...and this franchise needed a lineman more than anything then....kinda still do.hmmm, I guess we were FORCED to take a Tackle/Guard/Tackle at that spot.......there really where no other choices.

thunderkyss
03-15-2007, 04:45 PM
I thought Sage never started at QB until after he came here? how could he mentor anyone? on how to not start? tips for the 2nd string wannabees? how to stick around in the nfl without actually doing anything?

As strange as it may seem, one of the reasons Sage was brought in, was to mentor David. I remember hearing or reading somewhere, Kubiak actually saying that Sage will help David get better, and not in the way of competition.

IMHO(meaning I could be wrong) but Sage was getting paid like a veteran backup($2million signing bonus, plus a $2million salary).. somebody let me know if I'm wrong, but I think that's pretty much the same thing Bledsoe got to play for the Cowboys.

I can't find a link, but if my memory is right(??) we got Sage for about what Dallas paid Bledsoe.

Brad Johnson just signed with the Cowboys for a 3 year deal worth $7.5 million. If you assume $2million a year, plus a $1.5million bonus, that's about what we paid Sage.

Not exactly "strictly backup" money if you ask me.

ib4texans
03-15-2007, 04:52 PM
As strange as it may seem, one of the reasons Sage was brought in, was to mentor David. I remember hearing or reading somewhere, Kubiak actually saying that Sage will help David get better, and not in the way of competition.

IMHO(meaning I could be wrong) but Sage was getting paid like a veteran backup($2million signing bonus, plus a $2million salary).. somebody let me know if I'm wrong, but I think that's pretty much the same thing Bledsoe got to play for the Cowboys.

I can't find a link, but if my memory is right(??) we got Sage for about what Dallas paid Bledsoe.

Brad Johnson just signed with the Cowboys for a 3 year deal worth $7.5 million. If you assume $2million a year, plus a $1.5million bonus, that's about what we paid Sage.

Not exactly "strictly backup" money if you ask me.



Makes Sense.

Vinny
03-15-2007, 04:58 PM
hmmm, I guess we were FORCED to take a Tackle/Guard/Tackle at that spot.......there really where no other choices.A first year expansion team with a line consisting of the best player being Steve McKinney? Boselli was still questionable and we had no viable back ups and Pitts could play G and T. Yeah, forced is a good word. You take the first day lineman if he projects to start. Frankly, I don't think Pitts has ever missed a game. Pitts was an astute pick coming from a team that has a history of rotten talent evaluation otherwise.

thunderkyss
03-15-2007, 04:58 PM
Makes Sense.

I think I messed up with my numbers. I was thinking we had Sage on a 3 year deal, but it's a 4 year deal worth $6.4 million according to these folks (http://www.fanball.com/football/playerProfile.cfm/pid.1586/Sage/Rosenfels/)

tsip
03-15-2007, 05:19 PM
How 'bout dem Cowboys! :yahoo:


...so what did the Cowboys play- 14 game season?...just imagine what we could have done with their 101 passing tds in 70 games, against Carr's 'whopping' ___________! Go ahead, fill in the blank...

SESupergenius
03-15-2007, 06:07 PM
A first year expansion team with a line consisting of the best player being Steve McKinney? Boselli was still questionable and we had no viable back ups and Pitts could play G and T. Yeah, forced is a good word. You take the first day lineman if he projects to start. Frankly, I don't think Pitts has ever missed a game. Pitts was an astute pick coming from a team that has a history of rotten talent evaluation otherwise.

That's not so astute considering Clinton Portis was there waiting for the taking. We were far from set at running back so we should have picked him, it's not like he was an unknown. Pitts has yet to see any real potential. He can't bull people over for a yard and whether you pin sacks on Carr or not, he's been here since day 1 on on the worst offensive lines in NFL history.

Vinny
03-15-2007, 06:13 PM
That's not so astute considering Clinton Portis was there waiting for the taking. We were far from set at running back so we should have picked him, it's not like he was an unknown. Pitts has yet to see any real potential. He can't bull people over for a yard and whether you pin sacks on Carr or not, he's been here since day 1 on on the worst offensive lines in NFL history.
What is Portis going to do behind DeMingo Graham, Jimmy Herndon, and Char-ron Dorsey? nothing, that's what.

Pitts has been a solid lineman on a bad line. If you say otherwise you are a fool or have no clue.

SESupergenius
03-15-2007, 06:24 PM
What is Portis going to do behind DeMingo Graham, Jimmy Herndon, and Char-ron Dorsey? nothing, that's what.

Pitts has been a solid lineman on a bad line. If you say otherwise you are a fool or have no clue.

Nobody was going to do anything behind them, not the QB, not the WR, not the TE and certainly not the RB. So then why pick an offensive player at all? Because you draft for the future and make your team better. Simple really.

I'm a fool then because once again, Pitts is no Pro-Bowl player and has anchored a record setting bad line.

9 out 10 people probably never even heard of Chester Pitts at the time of the draft, but they sure did know about Clinton Portis.

To even compare the value of Chester Pitts to Clinton Portis is plain silly and smells of dung when you try to present your case for him. Anyone who thinks Pitts is great needs to take off their David Carr game helmet, it still ringing from all the hits he takes.

Second Honeymoon
03-15-2007, 07:10 PM
That's not so astute considering Clinton Portis was there waiting for the taking. We were far from set at running back so we should have picked him, it's not like he was an unknown. Pitts has yet to see any real potential. He can't bull people over for a yard and whether you pin sacks on Carr or not, he's been here since day 1 on on the worst offensive lines in NFL history.

yeah its all Pitt's fault. He sucks. No ability at all. Our line is the worst in NFL history and if it wasnt so bad Carr would be Canton bound... Hooray for Carr the stupid freaking fairy and his parade of morons making excuses for him for 5 years running. you homers are a joke

whatever...

GO CARR....as in GO AWAY

dirty steve
03-15-2007, 07:13 PM
What is Portis going to do behind DeMingo Graham, Jimmy Herndon, and Char-ron Dorsey? nothing, that's what.

Pitts has been a solid lineman on a bad line. If you say otherwise you are a fool or have no clue.
that "Portis v. Pitts" argument got old a long time ago. Pitts was a great pick then, and our best 2nd rounder until DeMeco Ryans. solid, steady, healthy. i think you could do alot worse.

Texan_Bill
03-16-2007, 08:14 AM
What's with all the hate towards Pitts?

Look, I have been very critical of our O-line and moreso with the FO for never addressing and stock piling any depth at the line...

But one steady guy has been Pitts. Sure he gets occasional false starts, but this is a guy that has played in ALL 80 games of our existence. As Dirty Steve said he is "solid, steady, healthy". I would also add versatile considering he can be trusted to play guard or tackle... Not too shabby for a kid that didn't even play high school football, and was going to college on his own before walking on at SDSU. That tells me that after 5 years of playing in the NFL, he will get even better...

If you want to call out O-lineman, call out McKinney or someone else.

Second Honeymoon
03-16-2007, 10:36 AM
What's with all the hate towards Pitts?

Look, I have been very critical of our O-line and moreso with the FO for never addressing and stock piling any depth at the line...

But one steady guy has been Pitts. Sure he gets occasional false starts, but this is a guy that has played in ALL 80 games of our existence. As Dirty Steve said he is "solid, steady, healthy". I would also add versatile considering he can be trusted to play guard or tackle... Not too shabby for a kid that didn't even play high school football, and was going to college on his own before walking on at SDSU. That tells me that after 5 years of playing in the NFL, he will get even better...

If you want to call out O-lineman, call out McKinney or someone else.

/signed

SESupergenius
03-16-2007, 05:04 PM
Pitts is our Pro-Bowler......hold on let me laugh.

Vinny
03-16-2007, 06:37 PM
To even compare the value of Chester Pitts to Clinton Portis is plain silly and smells of dung when you try to present your case for him. Anyone who thinks Pitts is great needs to take off their David Carr game helmet, it still ringing from all the hits he takes.
Pitts was a need pick and it worked out very well for us. Butch Davis coached Portis in College and passed on him twice...and the Browns needed a back that year. Every team in the NFL passed on Portis...stuff like this happens in sports (if you care to admit it). Are you going to cry about us passing on Marques Colston because the entire league passed on him too?