PDA

View Full Version : Monday Morning QB (5/5/08)


b0ng
05-05-2008, 09:35 AM
So, Peter King decided to do a power ranking this morning, and I think some of the results are interesting. Mr. King's rankings of NFL football franchises 1 - 32 (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/writers/peter_king/05/02/rankings/index.html).


19. Houston. Logic says an 8-8 team that finished 3-1 with a young quarterback and maturing defense should be ready to take the next step, particularly with a salty old hand like Alex Gibbs taking an underachieving running game into his capable hands this spring and summer. But Matt Schaub -- efficient (.664) but inexperienced in his half season at the helm -- is really still an unknown, as is the 28-year-old offensive coordinator who will mentor Schaub, Kyle Shanahan, the youngest coordinator in the league. We'll have to see the progress first to believe the Texans are much improved, particularly in a division and conference as tough as the one they have to conquer if they hope to play in January.

Well fiddlesticks. Looks like our O-Coordinator is too young.

Here's another that you mind find interesting:


1. New England Patriots. . .Some might read into New England's draft approach as arrogant. Quarterback in the third round, dealing another third-round pick for a 2009 second-rounder, no offensive linemen. I view it as a confident team doing what's best for the long haul. The Patriots' response to almost getting Brady killed in the Super Bowl -- basically, doing nothing on the offensive line in free-agency or the draft -- tells me Dante Scarnecchia, New England's offensive line guru since the Hannah years, will figure out a way to seal the cracks.

Yeah, and people think that posters on this board are crazy homers.

PapaL
05-05-2008, 09:39 AM
I read that article yesterday and I can't say I agree with 19 but then again if we win people will notice that. Since when does the age of the coordinator impact his talent? Guess Peter wants us all to be middle aged.

ledzeppelin229
05-05-2008, 09:40 AM
Peter King worships everything from Boston. What a surprise, he's from Massachussetts.

I can't stand him.

b0ng
05-05-2008, 09:41 AM
I read that article yesterday and I can't say I agree with 19 but then again if we win people will notice that. Since when does the age of the coordinator impact his talent? Guess Peter wants us all to be middle aged.

I'm not really surprised by it, because the media thinks we've had a poor draft, and have only acquired other teams cast-offs (Brown, Reeves) in the off season. Couple that with the fact that this is the Houston Texans, and I could see him ranking us all the way into the lower 20's.

I think the best part of the article is when he talks about how the Patriots O-line was a big glaring weakness in the Super Bowl, but they fixed the line by doing nothing, and this will work. I LOVE IT I LOVE IT I LOVE IT YUM YUM.

hadaad
05-05-2008, 10:14 AM
In King's defense, while I haven't looked at the schedule yet, it's not likely that they play the Giants a whole lot this season. And really, nobody's going to try and pressure them the way the Giants did, are they?

b0ng
05-05-2008, 10:28 AM
In King's defense, while I haven't looked at the schedule yet, it's not likely that they play the Giants a whole lot this season. And really, nobody's going to try and pressure them the way the Giants did, are they?

You're right, they did go 16-0 and rolled through at least one tough D-line in the playoffs. The way Peter King writes (and has always written) about the Patriots just makes me want to gag. I can only imagine what the articles will be like if Brady gets hurt on some sort of cheapshot from a D-lineman this year, as King's (and that other no-talent Bill Simmons) articles will probably call for a public execution.

In short, I hate Peter King.

badboy
05-05-2008, 10:31 AM
So, Peter King decided to do a power ranking this morning, and I think some of the results are interesting. Mr. King's rankings of NFL football franchises 1 - 32 (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/writers/peter_king/05/02/rankings/index.html).



Well fiddlesticks. Looks like our O-Coordinator is too young.

Here's another that you mind find interesting:



Yeah, and people think that posters on this board are crazy homers.#19 King's point seems to be accurate to me.

b0ng
05-05-2008, 10:36 AM
#19 King's point seems to be accurate to me.

I disagree as our QB play last season seems to have been much better than in seasons past.

What's the definition of progress?

EDIT: I love having Mondays off.

badboy
05-05-2008, 10:54 AM
I disagree as our QB play last season seems to have been much better than in seasons past.

What's the definition of progress?

EDIT: I love having Mondays off.I interpreted his comments to say he would wait to see if this coming season will be better than last in regards to QB. I think that is correct.

b0ng
05-05-2008, 10:56 AM
I interpreted his comments to say he would wait to see if this coming season will be better than last in regards to QB. I think that is correct.

Wouldn't that be true for 90% of the NFL? Specifically with teams who don't have a QB named Manning or Brady?

Lucky
05-05-2008, 10:59 AM
#19 King's point seems to be accurate to me.
On the surface, maybe. But, the Vikings, Bills, and Jets all have shakier QB situations, all finished below the Texans in record, but now are ranked ahead of the Texans. And I'm not even considering the ranking he gave the Packers, when he acknowledges that his opinion of Aaron Rodgers is based upon one half of football.

So maybe Matt Schaub isn't as good as his half season in '97 showed? He's still better than anything the Vikings, Bills, Jets, and Packers can roll out on Sundays. I firmly believe that the Texans & the Titans are better than any of the teams King ranks #13 - #18.

b0ng
05-05-2008, 11:22 AM
Yeah or pretty much what he said.

EDIT: Actually, if he bagged on the defensive play, and ranked the Texans 19 I'd be a lot more understanding of it. Our defense wasn't so horrible that it was unwatchable, but it was definitely cringe-worthy at times. Watching old ass Jamaal Lewis rip us up for 10 and 15 yard gains in the 3rd quarter of the Brows game just made me sad.

Our outside linebacking and secondary were definite albatross's on defense, and an article pointing that out, I'd be firmly in tune with.

But seriously, just say you don't know anything about said team if you're not willing to do your job and investigate a team. I think all last season proved was that our backup and our starter weren't too far apart in talent that it'd be a huge deal if we lost our starter (unlike the Colts and the Pats).

BigBull17
05-05-2008, 11:36 AM
On the surface, maybe. But, the Vikings, Bills, and Jets all have shakier QB situations, all finished below the Texans in record, but now are ranked ahead of the Texans. And I'm not even considering the ranking he gave the Packers, when he acknowledges that his opinion of Aaron Rodgers is based upon one half of football.

So maybe Matt Schaub isn't as good as his half season in '97 showed? He's still better than anything the Vikings, Bills, Jets, and Packers can roll out on Sundays. I firmly believe that the Texans & the Titans are better than any of the teams King ranks #13 - #18.

Um, Carolina? No way they are better than us. Im also kind of skeptical of Clevland at 9. But, what do I know?

Lucky
05-05-2008, 11:42 AM
Um, Carolina? No way they are better than us. Im also kind of skeptical of Clevland at 9. But, what do I know?
Well, Anderson had a very good season. And Delhomme has a track record. I just felt that if King was to make a big deal about Schaub's unproven track record, he should be consistent from team to team. I think the QB position is among the least of my concerns for the '08 Texans.

Specnatz
05-05-2008, 11:49 AM
Well, Anderson had a very good season. And Delhomme has a track record. I just felt that if King was to make a big deal about Schaub's unproven track record, he should be consistent from team to team. I think the QB position is among the least of my concerns for the '08 Texans.

That is the problem with most national sprts writers there is no way that they are consistant. the only one I can think of at the time that is sonsistant is Michael Smith of espn.

Thorn
05-05-2008, 11:51 AM
As with any set of predictions about the whole league by a sports writer, you can ignore them. It was an interesting read though, and as far as the Texans go, I consider them a little above the middle of the pack compaired to the rest of the NFL, so 19 is to low and 13 is to high.

It was nice to see someone rating us above the Titans though.

DBCooper
05-05-2008, 12:17 PM
Don't ya just love rankings in May.

Second Honeymoon
05-05-2008, 12:17 PM
So, Peter King decided to do a power ranking this morning, and I think some of the results are interesting. Mr. King's rankings of NFL football franchises 1 - 32 (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/writers/peter_king/05/02/rankings/index.html).



Well fiddlesticks. Looks like our O-Coordinator is too young.

Here's another that you mind find interesting:



Yeah, and people think that posters on this board are crazy homers.

When the Patriots were irrelevant and shitte, he was a huge Giants homer. I think he just ties up the current East Coast bandwagon (even when they all suck) and lets it fly.

i do like the guy but to put the Pats at #1 is dubious. The Giants need to be #1. No question. I was never a huge wrestling guy, but I do remember one saying that Ric Flair used to say. 'You gotta beat the man, to be the man.'

The Giants also lost little talent and added some quality in the draft especially with Kenny Phillips supplementing their defensive back corps...at #31 no less.

Second Honeymoon
05-05-2008, 12:21 PM
In King's defense, while I haven't looked at the schedule yet, it's not likely that they play the Giants a whole lot this season. And really, nobody's going to try and pressure them the way the Giants did, are they?

if you don't think anybody is going to send the heat at Brady like the Giants did, you got another thing coming. The Giants showed a blueprint to beat the Pats and teams in the NFL are always copying other teams. The big question is whether other teams have the personnel and fire to put that consistent pressure on Brady. They certainly won't play the Giants unless its in the Super Bowl...but why not throw the kitchen sink at them? We already know what happens if you don't....

Second Honeymoon
05-05-2008, 12:24 PM
I'm not really surprised by it, because the media thinks we've had a poor draft, and have only acquired other teams cast-offs (Brown, Reeves) in the off season. Couple that with the fact that this is the Houston Texans, and I could see him ranking us all the way into the lower 20's.

I think the best part of the article is when he talks about how the Patriots O-line was a big glaring weakness in the Super Bowl, but they fixed the line by doing nothing, and this will work. I LOVE IT I LOVE IT I LOVE IT YUM YUM.

I dont think the media has taken us to task over our draft. The Brown pick somewhat but it did address a position of need, even if not the most critical in need by some estimations.

The media has widely praised us for Moulden and Adibi, and you gotta figure we have to count 1/2 of a Matt Schaub as part of this draft as well.

Most grades I have seen have been decent with no fails (like Tennessee). Of course its all speculative until they put the pads on.

Second Honeymoon
05-05-2008, 12:27 PM
On the surface, maybe. But, the Vikings, Bills, and Jets all have shakier QB situations, all finished below the Texans in record, but now are ranked ahead of the Texans. And I'm not even considering the ranking he gave the Packers, when he acknowledges that his opinion of Aaron Rodgers is based upon one half of football.

So maybe Matt Schaub isn't as good as his half season in '97 showed? He's still better than anything the Vikings, Bills, Jets, and Packers can roll out on Sundays. I firmly believe that the Texans & the Titans are better than any of the teams King ranks #13 - #18.

gotta agree with the QB point but he is probably thinking about the 2008 schedules and giving us a big downtrend for that. I don't agree with Peter.

Ill say we should be above the Bills and Jets, no doubt, but the Vikings had a pretty strong offseason and based on their division, will probably finish with a better record than the Texans. Oh and they have two proven and young NFL RBs whereas we have zero. The Packers is based purely on the fact they made it to the NFC Championship. Losing Favre is disastrous but you can't discount the rest of the squad because one guy left. They should be above us. The Jets and Bills.....not so much. The Bills are a joke and we have twice the talent and the Jets are well the Jets.

badboy
05-05-2008, 12:34 PM
I am not interested in any ranking now. I do think what King said about Texans is dead on. Like was said last season before game 1, we could have a better team and a worse record than year before. I am focusing on the guys selected in draft and FA and those returning from injury. We also may pick up someone after June 1 cuts. I'm optimistic but not picking Ws yet.

GP
05-05-2008, 12:43 PM
Don't ya just love rankings in May.

LOL. Agreed.

It's playing football before football is even played...proof that us fans are not the only ones who will dream up ways to "talk football" until it gets here.

That's not a jab at the person who started this thread. Thank you for sharing the info...I was just saying that football is the greatest sport of all time, and even media guys find a way to make sure it stays on or plate 24-7-365.

b0ng
05-05-2008, 12:54 PM
LOL. Agreed.

It's playing football before football is even played...proof that us fans are not the only ones who will dream up ways to "talk football" until it gets here.

That's not a jab at the person who started this thread. Thank you for sharing the info...I was just saying that football is the greatest sport of all time, and even media guys find a way to make sure it stays on or plate 24-7-365.

Oh I know that these power rankings at the beginning of May are for entertainment value only. I happen to disagree with the way he ranks teams, but it's still something to yell about when the news is slow.

Besides, who can't have fun making long winded rants devoted to the stupidity of national sports writers.

TexanSam
05-05-2008, 01:16 PM
Oh I know that these power rankings at the beginning of May are for entertainment value only. I happen to disagree with the way he ranks teams, but it's still something to yell about when the news is slow.

Besides, who can't have fun making long winded rants devoted to the stupidity of national sports writers.

I always have liked Peter King (and Bill Simmons). I know some people don't which is fine. We all have our preference. But I do think King knows his football. And Simmons knows his basketball although his articles are typically supposed to be laced with sarcasm.

TexanAddict
05-05-2008, 01:17 PM
I definitely do not agree with his placement of the Texans below teams like the Jets, Bucs, and Saints (for many of the reasons already stated). However, I could see him getting away with putting the Patriots at the top (which, I'm sure he was dying to do) if he simply mentioned the Pats cream puff schedule next fall. I mean they play the both the AFC West and NFC West, along with their own soft division (which King may have been trying to mask by inflating the ranking of the teams within), and only face a total of four playoff teams from last year.

hadaad
05-05-2008, 01:23 PM
if you don't think anybody is going to send the heat at Brady like the Giants did, you got another thing coming. The Giants showed a blueprint to beat the Pats and teams in the NFL are always copying other teams. The big question is whether other teams have the personnel and fire to put that consistent pressure on Brady. They certainly won't play the Giants unless its in the Super Bowl...but why not throw the kitchen sink at them? We already know what happens if you don't....

I'm sorry. My wife tells me I'm terrible at sarcasm. I have a moral objection to using the sarcasm smiley, so I guess I come off as a moron.

Of course, didn't Pittsburgh use pressure from the outside to beat Manning too?

GuerillaBlack
05-05-2008, 01:41 PM
When does minicamp start so I can see some new video? I am having to look at 2007 game highlights and interviews, as well as videos of all our draft picks. Why do the Texans start minicamp so late?

Maddict5
05-05-2008, 02:35 PM
I always have liked Peter King (and Bill Simmons). I know some people don't which is fine. We all have our preference. But I do think King knows his football. And Simmons knows his basketball although his articles are typically supposed to be laced with sarcasm.

i question kings football knowledge tbh and it has nothing to do with this article (agreed that the SG knows his BB though even if he loves (to write about) the celts which is understandable)..

king seems to get something in his head and runs with it for some reason..
eg.
in 06- i remember he had a running 'am i the only one who thinks david carr is playing excellent?' segment in his article (obviously just looking at stats and not factoring in carr-bage time

in 07 he had a running 'we're witnessing reggies bushes emergence' segment eventhough it was pretty obvious he was tapering off)

btw, im delighted to be @ #19 in his rankings and hope it stays that way until the season starts. every year its the 'out of nowhere' teams (cleveland, titans, jets 2 yrs ago etc) that do well and usually make the playoffs not the ones with the pre-season hype (cards, saints, SF, jets last yr, miami 2 yrs ago etc)

that why i really liked our FA and draft.. they weren't flashy (ala the jets and panthers) so the national media discounts us but most of us who follow the texans closely know they've filled alot of our needs/weaknesses from last year that mean we should improve on last year.

id take being discounted over being hyped all day every day

When does minicamp start so I can see some new video? I am having to look t 2007 game highliights and interviews, as well as videos of all our draft picks. Why do the Texans start minicamp so late?


ive been doing that too.. its good to refresh yourself on how good (and not so good) we were at times last year (CAR especially/DEN/NO)... just need to stay healthy and develop more consistency

BigTimeTexanFan
05-05-2008, 04:08 PM
if you don't think anybody is going to send the heat at Brady like the Giants did, you got another thing coming. The Giants showed a blueprint to beat the Pats and teams in the NFL are always copying other teams. The big question is whether other teams have the personnel and fire to put that consistent pressure on Brady. They certainly won't play the Giants unless its in the Super Bowl...but why not throw the kitchen sink at them? We already know what happens if you don't....
I think he meant that there's not another team that can put that kind of preasure on Brady. The
Giants didn't lay out a "blue print", they just have the personnel to execute it. I remember all season long last year while Brady was having his record setting season, people were saying just about any QB could put similar numbers up if they had the type of pass protection that Brady had. The Pats have a tremendous offensive line, the Giants have a tremendous Dline. But yeah, teams are gonna try to do what the Giants did, that doesn't mean they will have similar results.

DBCooper
05-05-2008, 04:30 PM
that why i really liked our FA and draft.. they weren't flashy (ala the jets and panthers) so the national media discounts us but most of us who follow the texans closely know they've filled alot of our needs/weaknesses from last year that mean we should improve on last year.



You know if we were a perennial playoff team, our draft would be considered great.

Ckw
05-05-2008, 04:39 PM
That is the problem with most national sprts writers there is no way that they are consistant. the only one I can think of at the time that is sonsistant is Michael Smith of espn.

Isn't it funny how he is getting less and less camera time on BSPN as well?

rickyb
05-05-2008, 08:20 PM
Don't ya just love rankings in May.

Exactly. I ran few copies off to the printer, just in case I run out of toilet paper.

DocBar
05-05-2008, 08:39 PM
In King's defense, while I haven't looked at the schedule yet, it's not likely that they play the Giants a whole lot this season. And really, nobody's going to try and pressure them the way the Giants did, are they? Someone else might've beat me to it, but I would think EVERYBODY will try copy the Giants gameplan in the SB.

Specnatz
05-05-2008, 10:18 PM
Exactly. I ran few copies off to the printer, just in case I run out of toilet paper.

Ouch that might leave a rash.

kiwitexansfan
05-05-2008, 10:40 PM
Someone else might've beat me to it, but I would think EVERYBODY will try copy the Giants gameplan in the SB.

Not many, if any have the DL talent that the Giants can muster. There front 7 is special.

Other teams may try but they will just get lit up as blitzers are picked up and Brady goes down field into sparse coverage.

ObsiWan
05-06-2008, 05:56 AM
Exactly. I ran few copies off to the printer, just in case I run out of toilet paper.

two words of warning:
"paper cuts"
:)

V3rm0nt3r
05-06-2008, 06:32 PM
That is the problem with most national sprts writers there is no way that they are consistant. the only one I can think of at the time that is sonsistant is Michael Smith of espn.

Smith is a true form Texan fan and when it came up at the draft who would take the AFC south Houston didn't come into the picture until he said we were on the rise, and even then the conversation switched right back to the Colts/Jags debate.

Now, as you can see, i'm a fan and his segment on McFadden was in-depth segment rather than the judgemental bull we saw in the preceeding weeks, but calling him the only consistant writer is a little short sighted for i've seen quite a few good segments on ESPN (of course they are outweighed by complete crap but come on.

ATXtexanfan
05-06-2008, 07:18 PM
i wonder where he'll rank us after we beat the steelers?

Dallas_Texan
05-07-2008, 11:31 AM
Peter King worships everything from Boston. What a surprise, he's from Massachussetts.

I can't stand him.

Peter King predicted the Giants to beat the Patriots in the SuperBowl. That's pretty impartial.

Texaninlild
05-07-2008, 03:34 PM
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/writers/peter_king/05/02/rankings/2.html

19. Houston. Logic says an 8-8 team that finished 3-1 with a young quarterback and maturing defense should be ready to take the next step, particularly with a salty old hand like Alex Gibbs taking an underachieving running game into his capable hands this spring and summer. But Matt Schaub -- efficient (.664) but inexperienced in his half season at the helm -- is really still an unknown, as is the 28-year-old offensive coordinator who will mentor Schaub, Kyle Shanahan, the youngest coordinator in the league. We'll have to see the progress first to believe the Texans are much improved, particularly in a division and conference as tough as the one they have to conquer if they hope to play in January.


I think this is pretty low, especially when you look at some of the teams in front of them.

Texans_Chick
05-07-2008, 04:21 PM
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/writers/peter_king/05/02/rankings/2.html

19. Houston. Logic says an 8-8 team that finished 3-1 with a young quarterback and maturing defense should be ready to take the next step, particularly with a salty old hand like Alex Gibbs taking an underachieving running game into his capable hands this spring and summer. But Matt Schaub -- efficient (.664) but inexperienced in his half season at the helm -- is really still an unknown, as is the 28-year-old offensive coordinator who will mentor Schaub, Kyle Shanahan, the youngest coordinator in the league. We'll have to see the progress first to believe the Texans are much improved, particularly in a division and conference as tough as the one they have to conquer if they hope to play in January.


I think this is pretty low, especially when you look at some of the teams in front of them.

Basically what he is saying is that this isn't a team ranking from best to worst, better teams beating worse teams. Rather the low rankings of the Texans and (the Titans for that matter) are a reflection of the difficulty of their division.

Yawn.