PDA

View Full Version : The new Texans


carrlover
03-26-2007, 08:59 PM
It seems like in the last few days all I have heard is who's gone, who's new. it sounds like to me that they have just deceided to clean house and start pretty much all over again, if your hurt you're gone, expecially if you are costing to much to sit on the bench. I hope that we can at least end the year a 500 team... we will see.

Specnatz
03-26-2007, 09:03 PM
It seems like in the last few days all I have heard is who's gone, who's new. it sounds like to me that they have just deceided to clean house and start pretty much all over again, if your hurt you're gone, expecially if you are costing to much to sit on the bench. I hope that we can at least end the year a 500 team... we will see.

I guess you would want your job to continue to pay you even if you cannot work? Yeah like that is going to happen, please leave and comeback when you checked into the real world.

carrlover
03-26-2007, 09:06 PM
no that is not waht i am saying, i agree that if you are hurt then we need to put the money into someone who can bring us results, all i am saying is that with all the players who have been there since day 1 that we can really turn this team around

DocBar
03-26-2007, 09:06 PM
At this point, I think it's more about change. Regardless of our record in '07, at least we won't be seeing the same old, tired mistakes we've been seeing. I'm personally happy to see lots of different arguements here on the boards. Some of us(I'm guilty at times) are still complaining about things that don't matter, but, overall, these threads are new and exciting. Great things could happen this year.

carrlover
03-26-2007, 09:08 PM
great things better happen this year!!!!!!

carrlover
03-26-2007, 09:21 PM
well it still pisses me off to hear it, the last time houston had a good football team is when we had the houston gamblers.... we need some wins

thunderkyss
03-26-2007, 09:53 PM
I guess you would want your job to continue to pay you even if you cannot work? Yeah like that is going to happen, please leave and comeback when you checked into the real world.

My job will pay me if I can't work... I can get full pay & everything for up to a year, then if I still can't work, I'd get a medical retirement. Not exactly 100% of my salary, but quite a bit, and I'm allowed to work as long as I'm not doing what I was medically unfit to do.

Texans Pride
03-26-2007, 09:56 PM
I don't care if you've been on this team a day or for five years, if you are not producing and are costing us money, it's time to go. I don't know any of these guys, they don't come to my house for poker. . . . I'm sure they are all fine people, but I want to win.

281
03-26-2007, 09:58 PM
well it still pisses me off to hear it, the last time houston had a good football team is when we had the houston gamblers.... we need some wins

honestly, i'm surprised you're still here. congrats.

DocBar
03-26-2007, 09:58 PM
well it still pisses me off to hear it, the last time houston had a good football team is when we had the houston gamblers.... we need some wins I guess the Oiler teams of the late 80's and early 90's escape your memory. This town knows what a winner is and tolerates nothing less.

My job will pay me if I can't work... I can get full pay & everything for up to a year, then if I still can't work, I'd get a medical retirement. Not exactly 100% of my salary, but quite a bit, and I'm allowed to work as long as I'm not doing what I was medically unfit to do.
You have a good job. A lot of people can't count on that. It's kind of galling to see a sports figure make the money he does, with all the garauntees and watch people like policemen and firefighters struggle and have to get scond jobs. Not trying to make political commentary, but that's how I see it.

shanden
03-26-2007, 11:52 PM
I think one of the reasons I can't stand baseball anymore is the guaranteed in full contracts.

Seriously how many players actually live up to those? The NFL system is a much higher motivator for staying on your game, due to releases, and guarantees being lower.

I think the only thing worse then baseball contracts are high level corporate America where the CEO's get amazing raises for the privilege of being fired or retiring. At least in baseball you actually have to play and if you get suspended or banned you lose salary.

cj5776
03-27-2007, 12:39 AM
I guess the Oiler teams of the late 80's and early 90's escape your memory. This town knows what a winner is and tolerates nothing less.


So how many superbowls did these "great" teams win?

dirty steve
03-27-2007, 12:58 AM
So how many superbowls did these "great" teams win?
the Bills of the early 1990's didn't win any Super Bowls but they were considered a great team because they consistently made and went far in the playoffs. the Oilers of the late 80's-early 90's were a fun team to watch with the great defense and offense they employed. they didnt win any Super Bowls, but that didn't change my commitment at all.

Sco-tai
03-27-2007, 01:21 AM
So how many superbowls did these "great" teams win?

Dirty Steve,

Thank you for responding to this idiotic message.

Many, MANY great teams missed the APEX of actually WINNING the SuperBowl.

Just ask the Cowgurls....they may only have a few ACTUAL SuperBowl wins...but if you ask their fans...they shoulda/coulda/woulda won 30+ IF so and so or this and that weren't out to get them.

:wild:

texun
03-27-2007, 08:25 AM
If you do something the same old way, you get the same old results.

The results of the Texans over the past 5 years are unacceptable - therefore, change is necessary. I like all the moves our FO is making, although only time will tell if Schaub is worth two second round picks. The talent upgrade has been significant.

Now if we just have a good draft to fill in some of the holes I can see us being very competitive this year. We are definitly moving in the right direction.

cj5776
03-27-2007, 12:36 PM
Dirty Steve,

Thank you for responding to this idiotic message.

Many, MANY great teams missed the APEX of actually WINNING the SuperBowl.

Just ask the Cowgurls....they may only have a few ACTUAL SuperBowl wins...but if you ask their fans...they shoulda/coulda/woulda won 30+ IF so and so or this and that weren't out to get them.

:wild:

Feel free to call my message idiotic, but I can not call the oilers teams of the 80s/90s great. The Bills teams were great, they won the confernce easily but never could quite pull it off in the superbowl. The oilers however, had more talent and skill than just about any team in the NFL but always collasped/ choked early in the playoffs and did it with dramtic flare. Some might put the two teams in the same category, but I am not one of them.

rafterticket
03-27-2007, 12:43 PM
It seems like in the last few days all I have heard is who's gone, who's new. it sounds like to me that they have just deceided to clean house and start pretty much all over again, if your hurt you're gone, expecially if you are costing to much to sit on the bench. I hope that we can at least end the year a 500 team... we will see.

Interesting post. I just don't find myself nostalgic or maudlin over the remnants of a 2-14 team. That was one filthy house.

Silver Oak
03-27-2007, 12:53 PM
I can't or won't put the Oilers of Pastorini, Campbell, Mauck, Johnson, Bethea in the same group as Moon, Givins, Jefferies, Jones.

To me, the older version was the best team to follow and be a fan of. The later version was gimmicky and full of "Me first" players. IMO.

DC got grief for dink and dunk, but the Moon-led Oilers were nothing but 5-7 yd routes.

OrangeCountyTexansFan
03-27-2007, 12:56 PM
It's kind of galling to see a sports figure make the money he does, with all the garauntees and watch people like policemen and firefighters struggle and have to get scond jobs. Not trying to make political commentary, but that's how I see it.
Somewhere, in an alternate universe, pro atheletes are driving mini-vans while school teachers roll in BMWs.:yahoo:

Roughnecks
03-27-2007, 01:16 PM
But they made the playoffs year in and year out and all you hear on here is this Texans team better make the playoff soon, so if they start making the playoffs but no Superbowl do you turn on them. Those Oilers teams made the playoffs what 7 years in a row and I remember the house of pain rocking, I would be happy if our Texans made the playoffs 7 years in a row.

HoustonFrog
03-27-2007, 01:39 PM
My theory is that Kubes and Smith realized that the attitude in the locker room was as much a part of the problem as the talent level. Sometimes you have to change that feeling of doom and dress it up a little. I mean you can take a loser slob and teach him all you want about how the female species works but when he goes out there he is still a loser slob with knowledge thinking to himself he still has no shot. Sometimes you just need to dress it up, change the scenario and play Pygmalion. You change up the dynamics and and give people a new hope. You bring in veterans who have been around winning. At least plant the seeds for a couple of years.

Texans Horror
03-27-2007, 02:02 PM
It seems like in the last few days all I have heard is who's gone, who's new. it sounds like to me that they have just deceided to clean house and start pretty much all over again, if your hurt you're gone, expecially if you are costing to much to sit on the bench. I hope that we can at least end the year a 500 team... we will see.

If they don't have a winning season, he wasn't worth the picks. If the team wins on the heals of the defense, with an insufficient quarterback, then it wasn't worth the picks.

If the Texans can't get a number two wide receiver, or the receiver they get blunders, and as a result AJ is ineffective and the pass offense stutters, then it wasn't worth the picks.

If the Texans have a great pass offense, but they still can't stop the run because the defensive tackles still stink up the house, then it wasn't worth the pick.

I know, you hate me because I'm a Carr homer. I'm not. But the Texans put all their eggs in one basket.

TexansTrueFan
03-27-2007, 02:04 PM
So how many superbowls did these "great" teams win?

i'm sorry but the colts have been called a great team for a while before they one the superbowl last year.

thunderkyss
03-27-2007, 02:41 PM
If they don't have a winning season, he wasn't worth the picks. If the team wins on the heals of the defense, with an insufficient quarterback, then it wasn't worth the picks.

I'll give the kid a little time(one year) to show that he can actually be the leader of our team. We spent less to acquire him than San Diego & The NYGiants gave to acquire their QBs. They win games based on their running game, & defense. And they were given a year(three in case of Eli) to prove themselves as team leaders.



If the Texans can't get a number two wide receiver, or the receiver they get blunders, and as a result AJ is ineffective and the pass offense stutters, then it wasn't worth the picks.

I like KW. with Owen in the middle, and with the sure hands of KW, they can double AJ all day, and we'll still have a pretty good passing game. AJ & KW is easily as good as Eddie Kennison & Sammie Parker, Eric Parker(I know, you're saying who the F@# is Eric Parker) & Kenan McArdell, or Chris Chambers, & Marty Booker

If the Texans have a great pass offense, but they still can't stop the run because the defensive tackles still stink up the house, then it wasn't worth the pick.

Still can't stop the run, but we did it better than Seattle, New Orleans, NYJets, Philadelphia & Indianapolis..

all play-off teams in '06.

I know, you hate me because I'm a Carr homer. I'm not. But the Texans put all their eggs in one basket.

I like that basket.

Texans Horror
03-28-2007, 07:09 AM
I'll give the kid a little time(one year) to show that he can actually be the leader of our team. We spent less to acquire him than San Diego & The NYGiants gave to acquire their QBs. They win games based on their running game, & defense. And they were given a year(three in case of Eli) to prove themselves as team leaders.

I'm tired of incremental change...

I like KW. with Owen in the middle, and with the sure hands of KW, they can double AJ all day, and we'll still have a pretty good passing game. AJ & KW is easily as good as Eddie Kennison & Sammie Parker, Eric Parker(I know, you're saying who the F@# is Eric Parker) & Kenan McArdell, or Chris Chambers, & Marty Booker

Until KW is a threat, he will do nothing to take pressure off of AJ. When AJ has no number 2, he can't get open. And KW is, IMO, a number three receiver, not a number 2. I think Matt will learn what David had to learn - the FO may demand you throw the ball to AJ, but if he has three sets of hands in his face, that doesn't mean he'll catch it.

Still can't stop the run, but we did it better than Seattle, New Orleans, NYJets, Philadelphia & Indianapolis..



all play-off teams in '06.

In order for the Texans to win, they have to find a way to stop the run (http://forums.houstontexans.com/showthread.php?p=574776#post574776). And I'm not satisfied with our inabilities just because a few play-off teams were able to overcome theirs. Seattle is in a weak division, Indianapolis obviously fixed their run problems, most of these teams had first-rate pass defenses, and all of these teams are overall much better than the Texans.

The Texans have so far have had a backwards offseason. They have fixed an area of least concern and done little to bolster areas that seriously need fixing. There is no way the Texans can get the dominant tackle, center, defensive tackle, wide receiver, and defensive secondary that they need. Not any more.

Erratic Assassin
03-28-2007, 07:40 AM
They have fixed an area of least concern and done little to bolster areas that seriously need fixing.

Next season is going to be a reality check for all those who thought all of our problems were David's fault. They can't blame him anymore. But then some people never learn. They will blame Schaub when everything goes to hell.

The draft will be sickening this year. There will be a ton of good wide receivers out there to complement AJ in the second round and guess who doesn't have a second round?

thunderkyss
03-28-2007, 08:36 AM
I'm tired of incremental change...

So??


Until KW is a threat, he will do nothing to take pressure off of AJ. When AJ has no number 2, he can't get open. And KW is, IMO, a number three receiver, not a number 2. I think Matt will learn what David had to learn - the FO may demand you throw the ball to AJ, but if he has three sets of hands in his face, that doesn't mean he'll catch it.

blah... blah.. blah.. blah.. blah...

Other teams do pretty well with a much less potent WR duo/TE combination than we have. San Diego, KC, Seattle.


In order for the Texans to win, they have to find a way to stop the run (http://forums.houstontexans.com/showthread.php?p=574776#post574776). And I'm not satisfied with our inabilities just because a few play-off teams were able to overcome theirs. Seattle is in a weak division, Indianapolis obviously fixed their run problems, most of these teams had first-rate pass defenses, and all of these teams are overall much better than the Texans.

that was a pretty good thread you pointed to. I stand by the argument I made there.

"The Colts obviously fixed their problems in the post season"?? But they made iit to the post season allowing 100+ yards in each & every single game.

The Texans have so far have had a backwards offseason. They have fixed an area of least concern and done little to bolster areas that seriously need fixing. There is no way the Texans can get the dominant tackle, center, defensive tackle, wide receiver, and defensive secondary that they need. Not any more.

"As David goes, so does the Houston Texans." Kubiak's been saying that since day one. He's the head of the team, he's not ready to start on an NFL team, but he's going to lead us to a winning season?? Please....

WIthout Spencer, we've got enough to get us to a winning season at left tackle. Same thing at Center. We don't have the future on the team, but enough to compete & win.

Another WR would be nice...

DT...... you're right, big problem.

Defensive secondary....... on 328 completions, we allowed 3444 yards. on 327 completions, Denver allowed 3418 yards. on 328 completions, Chicago allowed 3116 yards(which works out to 20 yards/game difference). One team made it to the SuperBowl, the other didn't get into the play-offs. There's not a lot of difference there, I think we're good enough to win 9 games. & that's our first year in a 4-3, compared to those teams playing their system for years. Sure we gave up 4 more passing TDs than the Bears... But that is something that can be improved upon without changing personnel. Not that I think we don't need to change personnel. I'm just saying it's not a dire need that we get a new Safety.

thunderkyss
03-28-2007, 08:42 AM
Next season is going to be a reality check for all those who thought all of our problems were David's fault. They can't blame him anymore. But then some people never learn. They will blame Schaub when everything goes to hell.

The draft will be sickening this year. There will be a ton of good wide receivers out there to complement AJ in the second round and guess who doesn't have a second round?

Again, there are many teams out there that don't even have 1 receiver of AJs caliber, and they manage to pass the ball just fine. Tampa Bay, Seattle, Philly, San Diego, Kansas City, Detroit, Pittsburgh, Baltimore, New England, Carolina.

I'll take AJ & Joe Blow against their receiver tandem any day. And when you add Owen as a threat in the middle of the field, it's a no brainer.

HuttoKarl
03-28-2007, 09:03 AM
Again, there are many teams out there that don't even have 1 receiver of AJs caliber, and they manage to pass the ball just fine. Tampa Bay, Seattle, Philly, San Diego, Kansas City, Detroit, Pittsburgh, Baltimore, New England, Carolina.

I'll take AJ & Joe Blow against their receiver tandem any day. And when you add Owen as a threat in the middle of the field, it's a no brainer.

AJ and Walter and Daniels could easily get the job done. This doesn't mean we won't target a WR in the third or fourth though. They don't stop after the second round..it's a fairly deep class.

I will say that Steve Smith's one of the top WR's in the league, so I'd probably not include Carolina on that list.

Texans Horror
03-28-2007, 09:59 AM
Other teams do pretty well with a much less potent WR duo/TE combination than we have. San Diego, KC, Seattle.

LT, LJ, and Shaun Alexander take pressure off their passing game. In order for this to work, Ahman Green, Ron Dayne, and Wali Lundy are going to have to step up their game.

that was a pretty good thread you pointed to. I stand by the argument I made there.

"The Colts obviously fixed their problems in the post season"?? But they made iit to the post season allowing 100+ yards in each & every single game.

Interesting point, but the offense has to be able to score big-time to overcome this deficit. The Colts have a very potent offense, especially in receivers. The jury's out on the Texans'.

"As David goes, so does the Houston Texans." Kubiak's been saying that since day one. He's the head of the team, he's not ready to start on an NFL team, but he's going to lead us to a winning season?? Please....

WIthout Spencer, we've got enough to get us to a winning season at left tackle. Same thing at Center. We don't have the future on the team, but enough to compete & win.

Another WR would be nice...

DT...... you're right, big problem.

Defensive secondary....... on 328 completions, we allowed 3444 yards. on 327 completions, Denver allowed 3418 yards. on 328 completions, Chicago allowed 3116 yards(which works out to 20 yards/game difference). One team made it to the SuperBowl, the other didn't get into the play-offs. There's not a lot of difference there, I think we're good enough to win 9 games. & that's our first year in a 4-3, compared to those teams playing their system for years. Sure we gave up 4 more passing TDs than the Bears... But that is something that can be improved upon without changing personnel. Not that I think we don't need to change personnel. I'm just saying it's not a dire need that we get a new Safety.


Denver and Chicago are also good at getting to the QB, but I agree they are small differences when it comes to yardage.

IMO, TK, you are making some good comparisons/contrasts. The major difference between the teams you've mentioned and the Texans is that those play-off teams are well-balanced. The Texans have been pretty deplorable when it comes to QB, run offense, pass offense, run defense, pass defense. So while all of those teams may stink up the field in one area, they are pretty sound in other areas. The Texans don't have that balance.

HuttoKarl
03-28-2007, 10:07 AM
IMO, TK, you are making some good comparisons/contrasts. The major difference between the teams you've mentioned and the Texans is that those play-off teams are well-balanced. The Texans have been pretty deplorable when it comes to QB, run offense, pass offense, run defense, pass defense. So while all of those teams may stink up the field in one area, they are pretty sound in other areas. The Texans don't have that balance.

But they're obviously working towards that balance. I've said more than once that you can't go from 2-14 keystone cop look-a-likes to Super Bowl champs in one offseason.

digitalswim
03-28-2007, 10:21 AM
If they don't have a winning season, he wasn't worth the picks. If the team wins on the heals of the defense, with an insufficient quarterback, then it wasn't worth the picks.

If the Texans can't get a number two wide receiver, or the receiver they get blunders, and as a result AJ is ineffective and the pass offense stutters, then it wasn't worth the picks.

If the Texans have a great pass offense, but they still can't stop the run because the defensive tackles still stink up the house, then it wasn't worth the pick.

I know, you hate me because I'm a Carr homer. I'm not. But the Texans put all their eggs in one basket.

Nice logic. I guess the FO didn't know that Superman was going to slip into the 2nd round. "With their 2nd round pick, the Texans could have taken Joe Stud, an amazing #2 wide receiver who also doubles as a dominating defensive tackle. Who would have thought he would slip into the 2nd round. The Texans screw up again by trading that 2nd round pick for Schaub..."

Lets not talk about the 2nd round pick next year since you are convinced that the trade was a complete bust if they don't have a winning season this year. Show me your 2nd round pick that we should have taken this year that can accomplish all the things you mention in your post.

Texans Horror
03-28-2007, 10:26 AM
But they're obviously working towards that balance. I've said more than once that you can't go from 2-14 keystone cop look-a-likes to Super Bowl champs in one offseason.

I have yet to see that happen, but in the age of free-agent acquisitions, many teams have reversed their fortunes in the time that it has taken the Texans to build/re-build.

The year the Texans started play, Green Bay ruled the NFC North, Cincinatti finished worse than the Texans, Chicago was a joke, and the Jaguars weren't much of anything. In 2006, Green Bay has bounced back from being a joke, Cincinatti has been to the play-offs, Chicago went to the Super Bowl, and Jacksonville has slipped from last year's play-off year. The Saints, Giants, and 49ers have rebuilt their teams since 2003. Baltimore and the Jets have both fallen and then risen from the ashes. So re-building through one off-season can be done.

tsip
03-28-2007, 10:43 AM
Next season is going to be a reality check for all those who thought all of our problems were David's fault. They can't blame him anymore. But then some people never learn. They will blame Schaub when everything goes to hell.

The draft will be sickening this year. There will be a ton of good wide receivers out there to complement AJ in the second round and guess who doesn't have a second round?

...talk about reality check, Carr was cut loose early to sign with someone but hasn't, maybe

1) no one signs him
2) signed as a back up
3) signed as a starter but gets cut

I agree that next year is going to be a 'show me' year...no more one side says this, other side says that. Will Carr become a starter for another team and 'blossom' into an all-pro? Will the Texans have a vertical passing game and have their first winning season?

JMO, but it won't take very long to settle this arguement...good luck!

thunderkyss
03-28-2007, 10:45 AM
IMO, TK, you are making some good comparisons/contrasts. The major difference between the teams you've mentioned and the Texans is that those play-off teams are well-balanced. The Texans have been pretty deplorable when it comes to QB, run offense, pass offense, run defense, pass defense. So while all of those teams may stink up the field in one area, they are pretty sound in other areas. The Texans don't have that balance.

I think we agree more than we differ. Mainly on what needs to be done, or on how to get those things done.

You don't like incremental change.... I see a solid foundation being built.

I have yet to see that happen, but in the age of free-agent acquisitions, many teams have reversed their fortunes in the time that it has taken the Texans to build/re-build.

The year the Texans started play, Green Bay ruled the NFC North, Cincinatti finished worse than the Texans, Chicago was a joke, and the Jaguars weren't much of anything. In 2006, Green Bay has bounced back from being a joke, Cincinatti has been to the play-offs, Chicago went to the Super Bowl, and Jacksonville has slipped from last year's play-off year. The Saints, Giants, and 49ers have rebuilt their teams since 2003. Baltimore and the Jets have both fallen and then risen from the ashes. So re-building through one off-season can be done.

There's been a lot of talk about the Giants, and they haven't really done much of nothing. If they were in the AFC, we'd have played them every year since 2002, as they would've been at the bottom of their division as well. NYJets hasn't been making the strides that the NYGiants have been, but they have made steady incremental strides none the less. While the Giants will swing from the bottom to the top of their division, and back door into the play-offs every now and again, I think the NYJets are a better football team, with a better foundation. They earned their spot in '06, and I do not doubt they'll earn a spot in '07, where I doubt the Giants get in in '07.

But the Jets, the 49ers, & the Bears have been building for a long time now, and only appear to be exploding...

And I completely agree. We beat the Cowboys in '02, because that franchise was in such bad shape, and now we drool over the talent that team has acquired since.

HuttoKarl
03-28-2007, 10:53 AM
I have yet to see that happen, but in the age of free-agent acquisitions, many teams have reversed their fortunes in the time that it has taken the Texans to build/re-build.

The year the Texans started play, Green Bay ruled the NFC North, Cincinatti finished worse than the Texans, Chicago was a joke, and the Jaguars weren't much of anything. In 2006, Green Bay has bounced back from being a joke, Cincinatti has been to the play-offs, Chicago went to the Super Bowl, and Jacksonville has slipped from last year's play-off year. The Saints, Giants, and 49ers have rebuilt their teams since 2003. Baltimore and the Jets have both fallen and then risen from the ashes. So re-building through one off-season can be done.

Green Bay is still a joke. They play in a relatively weak division (outside of Chicago). The Jags, Bengals, and Bears all got new coaching staffs and none of them went to the playoffs immediately. The Saints miraculous playoff run is the exception to the rule. And the Jets have been crappy for decades before finally picking up, also under a new coaching staff.

You've got something to learn about patience. Chicago hadn't seen a Super Bowl since Jim McMahon was their QB. The Bengals since Boomer. The Saints...never. The Ravens haven't won in years.

You've had to wait 5 years? Get over it. There are more teams than not who've waited much longer than that.

It takes time to make the coffee percolate. We tripled our win total last year. Let's see what kind of improvement happens this season. Why would you write off the season before training camp even breaks?

Marcus
03-28-2007, 11:01 AM
The draft will be sickening this year. There will be a ton of good wide receivers out there to complement AJ in the second round and guess who doesn't have a second round?

DeMeco Ryans spoil some of you, did he?

Let the good Dr. Marcus write a prescription of Tony Hollings pills for you. Your perspective should brighten up in no time.:lightning: :victory:

HuttoKarl
03-28-2007, 11:05 AM
DeMeco Ryans spoil some of you, did he?

Let the good Dr. Marcus write a prescription of Tony Hollings pills for you. Your perspective should brighten up in no time.:lightning: :victory:


Doctor, don't you think perhaps we should go with the bennie joppru's?

Marcus
03-28-2007, 11:41 AM
Doctor, don't you think perhaps we should go with the bennie jopprus?

Naaaa . . . they are about as effective as the Jabar Gaffneys.

Texans Horror
03-28-2007, 11:49 AM
Green Bay is still a joke. They play in a relatively weak division (outside of Chicago). The Jags, Bengals, and Bears all got new coaching staffs and none of them went to the playoffs immediately. The Saints miraculous playoff run is the exception to the rule. And the Jets have been crappy for decades before finally picking up, also under a new coaching staff.

You've got something to learn about patience. Chicago hadn't seen a Super Bowl since Jim McMahon was their QB. The Bengals since Boomer. The Saints...never. The Ravens haven't won in years.

You've had to wait 5 years? Get over it. There are more teams than not who've waited much longer than that.

It takes time to make the coffee percolate. We tripled our win total last year. Let's see what kind of improvement happens this season. Why would you write off the season before training camp even breaks?

Five years is a long time to wait for the coffee to percolate, and it looks like it will be another year or two before the caffeine hits...

Texans Horror
03-28-2007, 12:01 PM
Nice logic. I guess the FO didn't know that Superman was going to slip into the 2nd round. "With their 2nd round pick, the Texans could have taken Joe Stud, an amazing #2 wide receiver who also doubles as a dominating defensive tackle. Who would have thought he would slip into the 2nd round. The Texans screw up again by trading that 2nd round pick for Schaub..."

Lets not talk about the 2nd round pick next year since you are convinced that the trade was a complete bust if they don't have a winning season this year. Show me your 2nd round pick that we should have taken this year that can accomplish all the things you mention in your post.

They should have known he would be available. Metropolis U. Clark Kent, Quarterback, even...

I'm not going to follow an ab asurdum logic. No, I don't expect that at any point in the draft, even the second round, that there will be somebody available who can play wide receiver and defensive tackle. But there are holes to be filled. Many holes to be filled. The Texans did not make a move that would fill any of those holes. In fact, they took away opportunities to fill those holes. In order for the trade to be effective, it should work as well as any of those moves could have. If it does not, then the trade was bad.

srstex
03-28-2007, 12:12 PM
With all the changes, the LT is still the biggest question for me. Salaam, Black, Spencer, Winston, looks like a good place to pick up a stud. But Salaam is old, Spencer is 50/50 to come back, Black is okay but new to our system, and Winston hasn't taken a snap with us at LT in a game. Is Daniels healthy? Green, Dayne,Leach is better then we started with last year, but if Capers, sorry, if Kubiak is going to call the same plays as last year I don't know that it will have a different outcome. I find it odd that after playing six games last year and leading in QB rating, David was still being talked down to by Kubiak to the media, he wanted a leader but didn't give Carr any options, then blamed Carr for running the plays he called. I think this looks like a shot gun fix, move as much as possible so it opens opportunity to blame others, Kubiak trying to keep his job, and Rick Smith is with him. If we don't go at least 9-7 then all this was for nothing. One last item, if Schaub goes down, is Sage coming in?, is he still with us ?, is VanPelt the answer? what if, what if, what if?

The Pencil Neck
03-28-2007, 12:48 PM
Five years is a long time to wait for the coffee to percolate, and it looks like it will be another year or two before the caffeine hits...

Everyone thought the coffee was percolating for 4 years and then they realized they hadn't turned it on. The coffee pot got turned on last year but there was some old sludge in there they had to get rid of. This year, it percolates.

HuttoKarl
03-28-2007, 12:54 PM
Five years is a long time to wait for the coffee to percolate, and it looks like it will be another year or two before the caffeine hits...

You should wake up every day and be thankful you're not a Cardinals fan.

The Pencil Neck
03-28-2007, 12:56 PM
In order for the trade to be effective, it should work as well as any of those moves could have. If it does not, then the trade was bad.

"As well as any of those moves COULD have"? That's a pretty ridiculous standard. With that standard, it doesn't really matter what Schaub does, you can always argue that the two players we could have gotten would have been better. If we go to the playoffs and lose the first game, you could argue that we would have won that game with the two players we could have picked up without having any evidence at all.

I think a lot of this revolves around whether you believe we have to fill all our holes to be successful. You obviously believe that but didn't consider the QB position a hole. Considering that we finished 6-10 last year and were just a few plays here and there from finishing 9-7, I don't believe our holes are as gaping as you think they are and I considered QB the biggest hole we had. But don't turn this into a strawman argument where you interpret that to my saying that Carr is the only problem we had, because that's not what I'm saying.

Texans Horror
03-28-2007, 01:05 PM
You should wake up every day and be thankful you're not a Cardinals fan.

Every time they starting cutting the grass and laying the paint on the gridlines, brother...

FILO_girl
03-28-2007, 01:26 PM
My job will pay me if I can't work... I can get full pay & everything for up to a year, then if I still can't work, I'd get a medical retirement. Not exactly 100% of my salary, but quite a bit, and I'm allowed to work as long as I'm not doing what I was medically unfit to do.
AFLAC! That duck rules. :)


BTW carrlover....you changing your handle with the board change?

Texans Horror
03-28-2007, 01:33 PM
"As well as any of those moves COULD have"? That's a pretty ridiculous standard. With that standard, it doesn't really matter what Schaub does, you can always argue that the two players we could have gotten would have been better. If we go to the playoffs and lose the first game, you could argue that we would have won that game with the two players we could have picked up without having any evidence at all.

I think a lot of this revolves around whether you believe we have to fill all our holes to be successful. You obviously believe that but didn't consider the QB position a hole. Considering that we finished 6-10 last year and were just a few plays here and there from finishing 9-7, I don't believe our holes are as gaping as you think they are and I considered QB the biggest hole we had. But don't turn this into a strawman argument where you interpret that to my saying that Carr is the only problem we had, because that's not what I'm saying.

I don't think that's a ridiculous standard at all. The basis for the trade must be that getting Schaub is worth more than the potential of those two players. So adding Schaub should be more effective than those two could have been. So sure it matters what Schaub does. But if the Texans make the play-offs, you're not going to hear me saying that Schaub was a bad pick. Let me turn the tables on the statement I put out earlier.

If they have a winning season, he was worth the picks. If the team wins on the shoulders of the quarterback, with an insufficient offense, then it was worth the loss of picks.

If Matt gets the ball to a late-round, number-two receiver so that AJ can get open, or the receiver they do draft does well, and as a result AJ is effective and the pass offense rocks, then it was worth the loss of picks.

It the Texans run defense is horrible but it doesn't matter because the the pass offense is able to put up enough points to win games, then it was worth the pick.QUOTE]


[QUOTE=The Pencil Neck;645742]I don't believe our holes are as gaping as you think they are and I considered QB the biggest hole we had.

And here is the difference, cause I believe that the holes were much more gaping, and QB was the least of those holes. In fact, I'd argue that with a well-balanced offense and defense - with some of those holes filled - you could overlook the quarterback question.

sleepwalker
03-28-2007, 02:00 PM
I'm excited. If we don't take Peterson, then I hope we update the secondary with a saftey or corner.

The Pencil Neck
03-28-2007, 02:13 PM
I don't think that's a ridiculous standard at all. The basis for the trade must be that getting Schaub is worth more than the potential of those two players. So adding Schaub should be more effective than those two could have been. So sure it matters what Schaub does. But if the Texans make the play-offs, you're not going to hear me saying that Schaub was a bad pick.

OK. The way I look at the price is that Schaub is one of them. Let's say we were going to take Stanton or Kolb in the 2nd, would Schaub be more productive this year? I believe so. We get more production sooner. And we don't have to bring in a proven vet or take a risk on Sage being starter material. (I don't think Carr was ever in the equation as being our starter next year.)

I believe that we may well get the player at 10 that we would have picked at 8. So I'm considering that only a slight drop.

So it comes down to losing 1 player: the second round draft choice next year. Obviously, that has no effect on this next season but it just translates to 1 good player that we might have picked up next year.

That's not huge to me.

Let me turn the tables on the statement I put out earlier.

If they have a winning season, he was worth the picks. If the team wins on the shoulders of the quarterback, with an insufficient offense, then it was worth the loss of picks.

If Matt gets the ball to a late-round, number-two receiver so that AJ can get open, or the receiver they do draft does well, and as a result AJ is effective and the pass offense rocks, then it was worth the loss of picks.

It the Texans run defense is horrible but it doesn't matter because the the pass offense is able to put up enough points to win games, then it was worth the pick.

OK. If we had that ONE 2nd round pick this year, how many of these holes do you think we'd fill? We'd still have to use a pick on a QB and we'd get a QB that probably wouldn't be ready to play this year. Getting a QB that's ready to play with our 2nd round pick opens us up to draft other things in other rounds. This draft is deep in WR's so we should be able to pick up a really good WR in later rounds.

Our run defense was ranked 20th in run yardage last year with a ton of injuries? And frankly, the last half of the season we were only giving up 111 yards per game which would have ranked us 12th or 13th if we had been able to do that all season. I expect our run defense to improve this year. We've already made some solid moves to improve our D and I expect more.


And here is the difference, cause I believe that the holes were much more gaping, and QB was the least of those holes. In fact, I'd argue that with a well-balanced offense and defense - with some of those holes filled - you could overlook the quarterback question.

And of course, I argue that the quarterback question was unbalancing our team and that no matter how much we improve any part of our offense, it would have been irrelevant with that level of QB play. :)