PDA

View Full Version : [Chronic] Coming in '09 for Texans: No Sage Rosenfels


Texans34Life
01-01-2009, 11:34 AM
http://blogs.chron.com/jeromesolomon/2008/12/coming_in_09_for_texans_no_sag.html

Don't expect it to happen quickly, but before the Texans crank it up again next season, they will have a new backup quarterback.

The Sage Rosenfels Fan Club might be upset, but this needs to happen, and Gary Kubiak should be smart enough to figure that out. (Or he's at least smart enough to know I'm usually right about these things.)

For one, Rosenfels isn't happy as a backup, so he does stupid things like trying to win the Super Bowl in Week 3 (a la John Elway) against the Colts. Loss.

Secondly, Matt Schaub has proved beyond reasonable doubt even to a California jury that he is the better quarterback.

Finally, despite what you have read so many times in so many places, Rosenfels isn't the best backup in the NFL. He just played as well as any backup the year he got to play some. It was a career year and the Texans should have cashed in on it then, especially when the Vikings offered a third-round pick.

You talk about Kubiak being slow to pull the trigger on Richard Smith (bad decision), and slow to hand over the reigns of the offense to Kyle Shanahan (good decision), he and Rick Smith were just flat wrong about not moving Rosenfels when they had the chance.

This isn't hindsight. Were that the case, we would wait until Rosenfels moves on to point out how little the Texans got for him compared to the third-round pick they were offered. Plus, didn't I tell them to take the money and run a year ago?

"... A hard line against trading Sage Rosenfels for a third-round pick is shortsighted thinking, or at least it's conservative thought that could cost the team an opportunity to improve. If Schaub is what they think he is - all indications are if he stays healthy (key word) he is going to be an above average quarterback, who puts up Pro Bowl numbers in a couple of years - Rosenfels isn't as vital as the Texans are making him out to be." - The King, Feb. 29, 2008

With so many washed-out starters in the NFL, experienced backup quarterbacks are not that hard to find. Would the Texans' record have been any worse than 8-8 had they snatched up that third-round pick last year for Rosenfels? Thank you.

They blew that opportunity last offseason; now they'll get less for Rosenfels in a down market.

The last time Rosenfels was traded he went for a seventh-round pick. The Texans will be darn lucky to get a fifth for him, but they have to move him.

I think they owe him that, but you don't make many business decisions for that reason alone. Rosenfels would be so unhappy not getting to compete for a starting spot that he wouldn't be much good here anyway.

He gave all he had, and maybe he deserved more (like starting in front of El Ocho Viejo), but his days as a Texan are done.

thunderkyss
01-01-2009, 12:01 PM
I'm not seeing the reason that Sage has to go.

If he is worthless.. I mean if we won't get anything for him, then all the more reason to let him stay. I'm sure Kubiak was thinking we have an opportunity to get to the post season, if we have someone who can come off the bench and get results.. why go to the well for a former QB who will have to learn a system.

All I want from my back-up, is the desire to be a starter, and the ability to do so. Once he's satisfied with being the back-up, it's time for him to go.

Now if I were Sage, I'd want to stay, unless someone offered me a bonafied opportunity to compete for a starting job. Where is that going to happen?? Tennessee?? SF?? KC??

Barring that, I'd stay in Texas, and wait for my opportunity to showcase what I could do in a system that works for me.

Lucky
01-01-2009, 12:54 PM
I'm not seeing the reason that Sage has to go.

I'm not, either (I'm agreeing with thunderkyss - a sure sign of the impending apocalypse). Sage doesn't hold the meager value he carried into last offseason. The Texans haven't developed a young QB to replace him. Sage isn't a starter, nor is he horrible. And he's still under contract.

Sage is a backup NFL QB, and the Texans need a backup NFL QB. Oh, the "wisdom" of Solomon.

Brando
01-01-2009, 01:29 PM
I'm not, either (I'm agreeing with thunderkyss - a sure sign of the impending apocalypse). Sage doesn't hold the meager value he carried into last offseason. The Texans haven't developed a young QB to replace him. Sage isn't a starter, nor is he horrible. And he's still under contract.
Sage is a backup NFL QB, and the Texans need a backup NFL QB. Oh, the "wisdom" of Solomon.


Agreed. It's also nice to have a back up capable of coming in and having your offense not skip a beat. I'm just afraid that the Rosencopter game might have hurt his confidence because he didn't seem like the same QB after that. It was like he had a concussion after that hit but I never heard if he had one or not. Although in the Baltimore game(his worst game as a Texan) he did go against one of the best defensive schemes in the NFL. To not bring him back would be a little silly to me. He is a quality back up and should be here for one more year.

Vinny
01-01-2009, 01:57 PM
He'll be here next season...this is just the first of endless mindnumbing articles speculating on all sorts of weird roster moves this off season.

GP
01-01-2009, 01:57 PM
Well, he wasn't the same after the Colts game.

Couple that with how well Schaub played in the last part of the season? I think it's time to move Sage. Before the Colts game, there was a feeling that maybe Matt didn't have what it takes. I think Sage picked up on that. I think Sage was trying too hard to seal the deal (moving in for the goodnight kiss on the first date), and he was trying to capitalize off of Matt's absence.

To keep Sage, IMO, would be silly. Even if he has to come into the game, whether it's reg season or playoffs, he's not in the same frame of mind anymore. A lot of piss and vinegar got taken out of him after the Colts game.

It sucks that we refused a 3rd rounder. And, Sage would be starting for the Vikes right now...in a playoff game. I'm sure he's thinking about that. A lot of "what ifs" and "only ifs" and the best thing to do is move the guy.

Maybe we could ship Sage, Greenwood, Reeves, and Weaver for a third. [/sarcasm]

False Start
01-01-2009, 02:29 PM
That 3rd round pick would be real nice right about now.

Hervoyel
01-01-2009, 02:45 PM
He'll be here next season...this is just the first of endless mindnumbing articles speculating on all sorts of weird roster moves this off season.


I'm not saying that Solomon's mind isn't "numb" (because it is) but keeping Sage isn't a good idea IMO. He's crossed a line or a point if you will that has brought him to the place he is today which is basically "backup QB that you can't trust". When Kubiak decided he couldn't win with David Carr he moved quickly to ditch him and find someone he could win with. That someone wasn't Sage Rosenfels which tells us all something about what Kubiak thought of Sage. Now Rosenfels has proven that he can't be trusted to make good decisions when asked to step up and start. Hold on a second, check that. Sage has "confirmed beyond any doubt" that he can't be trusted to make good decisions.

I think Kubiak is and has been looking to replace him. Sure he'll keep Sage if there is no reasonable alternative out there but he's looking for one. Jared Zabransky and Alex Brink were both "pet projects" of Kubiaks. I think he's trying to find a guy who he can coach up into that spot. He doesn't want to spend a lot of money on him or waste a first day draft pick on him but he's looking for a new backup QB. I think Sage's play this year probably added some urgency to that.

Also, as has been pointed out by a couple of people up above this post Sage is now forever "Rosencopter". That isn't going to go away. That's him from now on and I have big doubts as to whether he could ever again crank out a run of games like he did in 2007. He's not the same player following that total humiliation in four minutes. He's changed clearly for the worse.

Texans_Chick
01-01-2009, 02:45 PM
He'll be here next season...this is just the first of endless mindnumbing articles speculating on all sorts of weird roster moves this off season.

McClain agrees in his chat, FWIW.

I disagree with the premise of the article. Even if you got a third round pick for Sage, he did have value last season despite not being able to win like he did the year before.

Here's the value:

1. Not having to learn up a backup. There's only so many hours in a day for the coaches, so not having to spend time to learn up Quinn Gray or whomever had a value.

2. They were able to carry only 2 QBs on the roster for a good portion of the season because they were good with Sage.

3. Good lockerroom guy. Unlike some backups, like Quinn Gray for example. Yeah he wants to start but he wasn't going to make it hard on anyone.

We will never know what the alternative history would be with Sage for a third round, but it doesn't seem to merit a told ya so blog post. But yeah, the offseason is long.....

DBCooper
01-01-2009, 03:36 PM
We need a capable backup QB.

Schaub still gets hurt too often.

dickieb
01-01-2009, 05:48 PM
I liked Boyd. I know we didn't see much of him - but what I did see was encouraging. Maybe they could bring him back into camp?

LonerATO
01-01-2009, 05:54 PM
I'm not saying that Solomon's mind isn't "numb" (because it is) but keeping Sage isn't a good idea IMO. He's crossed a line or a point if you will that has brought him to the place he is today which is basically "backup QB that you can't trust". When Kubiak decided he couldn't win with David Carr he moved quickly to ditch him and find someone he could win with. That someone wasn't Sage Rosenfels which tells us all something about what Kubiak thought of Sage. Now Rosenfels has proven that he can't be trusted to make good decisions when asked to step up and start. Hold on a second, check that. Sage has "confirmed beyond any doubt" that he can't be trusted to make good decisions.

I think Kubiak is and has been looking to replace him. Sure he'll keep Sage if there is no reasonable alternative out there but he's looking for one. Jared Zabransky and Alex Brink were both "pet projects" of Kubiaks. I think he's trying to find a guy who he can coach up into that spot. He doesn't want to spend a lot of money on him or waste a first day draft pick on him but he's looking for a new backup QB. I think Sage's play this year probably added some urgency to that.

Also, as has been pointed out by a couple of people up above this post Sage is now forever "Rosencopter". That isn't going to go away. That's him from now on and I have big doubts as to whether he could ever again crank out a run of games like he did in 2007. He's not the same player following that total humiliation in four minutes. He's changed clearly for the worse.

Good point of trying to find a QB that can be coached up, but by who? I think the person that will choose that QB will be Kyle and not Gary

Thorn
01-01-2009, 05:56 PM
I liked Boyd. I know we didn't see much of him - but what I did see was encouraging. Maybe they could bring him back into camp?

I liked what little I saw of Boyd also. If they can swing a 4th round pick for Sage, I wouldn't care if he left. The problem as others have mentioned, is having to get a good backup up to speed. If this did happen, and I don't think it will, there will probably be some aging QBs looking for a paycheck that we could pick up.

Dread-Head
01-01-2009, 07:23 PM
Sageregation now! Sageregation tomorrow! Sageregation FOREVER!

HoustonFrog
01-01-2009, 07:31 PM
Well, he wasn't the same after the Colts game.

Couple that with how well Schaub played in the last part of the season? I think it's time to move Sage. Before the Colts game, there was a feeling that maybe Matt didn't have what it takes. I think Sage picked up on that. I think Sage was trying too hard to seal the deal (moving in for the goodnight kiss on the first date), and he was trying to capitalize off of Matt's absence.

To keep Sage, IMO, would be silly. Even if he has to come into the game, whether it's reg season or playoffs, he's not in the same frame of mind anymore. A lot of piss and vinegar got taken out of him after the Colts game.

It sucks that we refused a 3rd rounder. And, Sage would be starting for the Vikes right now...in a playoff game. I'm sure he's thinking about that. A lot of "what ifs" and "only ifs" and the best thing to do is move the guy.

Maybe we could ship Sage, Greenwood, Reeves, and Weaver for a third. [/sarcasm]

Glad you've come around :)

Just like the Astros, the Texans are always a year late on getting top value for what assets they might have, Sorry I was one that was on board for getting the 3rd last off season. I know Sage is a professional but we all know he doesn't want to sit as a backup.

Goldensilence
01-01-2009, 10:27 PM
I'm not seeing the reason that Sage has to go.

If he is worthless.. I mean if we won't get anything for him, then all the more reason to let him stay. I'm sure Kubiak was thinking we have an opportunity to get to the post season, if we have someone who can come off the bench and get results.. why go to the well for a former QB who will have to learn a system.

All I want from my back-up, is the desire to be a starter, and the ability to do so. Once he's satisfied with being the back-up, it's time for him to go.

Now if I were Sage, I'd want to stay, unless someone offered me a bonafied opportunity to compete for a starting job. Where is that going to happen?? Tennessee?? SF?? KC??

Barring that, I'd stay in Texas, and wait for my opportunity to showcase what I could do in a system that works for me.

I think there is a real value in having a QB that knows he's going to be a backup and is ok with that role. I think it's a real bonus that the guy might have starter experience or can start spot, but there should be a clear difference if a guy is starter material.

Sage just hasn't been that guy whether it is bad luck or not learning to play within his abilities. I don't think it is a good idea to keep him around and I said when The Vikings offered the third for him we should've took it and laughed, however barring someone offering something for Sage I don't see us breaking contract unless someone good comes along.

Hervoyel
01-01-2009, 11:08 PM
I think there is a real value in having a QB that knows he's going to be a backup and is ok with that role. I think it's a real bonus that the guy might have starter experience or can start spot, but there should be a clear difference if a guy is starter material.

Sage just hasn't been that guy whether it is bad luck or not learning to play within his abilities. I don't think it is a good idea to keep him around and I said when The Vikings offered the third for him we should've took it and laughed, however barring someone offering something for Sage I don't see us breaking contract unless someone good comes along.

The thing that creeps me out about Sage is that "confidence" and "success" are kind of his two worst enemies. He plays safer when he's scared of screwing up. He's a guy who is going to say all the right things and try to be the player you need as a backup but in his heart he's wanting to be a starter and he's going to play like a guy trying to impress and audition for other teams.

I do not want Sage on this team so technically I'm coming down as a hater. I know everybody says the right things but I can't imagine that there aren't some Texans players who know they'd be 9-7 if Sage hadn't pulled that crap against Indy. I saw how the team played for him later in the season and they didn't respond like last year when they rallied around him. He was different after he blew that game and the team was different towards him. We need to be working on his replacement right now. Backups with Rosenfels skills are a dime a dozen.

mussop
01-01-2009, 11:25 PM
Don't expect it to happen quickly, but before the Chronicle cranks it up again next season, they will have a new sports columnist.

The Jarome Soloman Fan Club (both of em) might be upset, but this needs to happen, and the chrons editors should be smart enough to figure that out. (Or at least be smart enough to know the readers are usually right about these things.)

Really, when are we going to get some real sports writers around here. All of the hacks at the Chron need to go with the exception of LZ. I say hire TC, Keith, Warren and a few others and the coverage will improve 110%.

Hooston Texan
01-01-2009, 11:57 PM
A couple of thoughts on Sage.

As a preliminary matter, Solomon's claim that Sage would sulk his way to uselessness if not given an opportunity to compete to start is hogwash. By all accounts I've read (except Solomon's fantasies), Sage's attitude has never been an issue.

To me, the key game in Rosenfels' ill-fated 2008 campaign was not the Rosencopter but the Cleveland win. After the Indy debacle, he came back to play pretty well in Minnesota (the offense was more consistent in the second half than it was in the first with Schaub) aside from the dumb pick. He did well at Indy until the pick on the final drive, but, as with the Viking pick, we were trying to get back into the game. Baltimore's defense is, of course, top notch, and his flurry of picks (aside from the first one) all came with us significantly behind.

Sage's undoing was Cleveland. He started out well, and the whole team, for once, looked really good. But then he did the unforgiveable--turned the ball over in the second half with his team leading. Twice. A good QB should almost never throw a pick in the second half when his team is ahead, and Sage did it twice against the Browns. The D completely bailed him out, but he lost the trust of his coaches at that point. The two Indy fumbles could no longer be excused as a freak occurrence (as if they could be before that).

The next week against Jacksonville, he threw a pick on the second series (again, with a lead), and you could see Kubes throw the chains on him the rest of the way.

That said, I have no problem with us keeping him if we cannot get good value for him. Unlike many teams (cough, Dallas, cough), our offense did not go inert when the backup QB played. But, I think we've missed the opportunity to maximize his value. Oh, well.

Shaft75
01-01-2009, 11:58 PM
Solomon knows that we got the next Tom Brady in the 7th round last year, but is just too hesitant to write it.

This Solomon guy is a genius. I can only hope the Chron locks him up for 10 more years. It would only validate his drivel as top notch sports journalism.

Polo
01-02-2009, 03:34 PM
If I'm Sage Rosenfels, am I still as confident in finding another team that wants me as their starting QB ?

I'm pretty sure he still would like to be a starter, but I'm willing to bet he's a little more content with backing up Schaub after this year's performance...

What team is going to trade for Rosenfels to come in a be their starter?

I don't get the article...

Sage is a good back-up for this team. I don't think he'll ever be better than a guy who throws just as many picks as the starter with less chances to do so, but can perform competently enough for a team to win...

If our defense improves like we're all hoping with new coaches and players then Sage is even less of a risk IMO because we'd have a defense that could off-set some of his mistakes...

I don't see the Texans wanting to get rid of him, and at this point I don't think Sage realistically sees himself starting for another team next yr...JMO...

He knows the system and he's steady enough for us to not have to carry 3 QB's...I don't see why the Texans would want to get rid of him and I don't see him wanting to leave at this point...

Hell...Sage may even decide to re-sign...:hide:

Hervoyel
01-02-2009, 03:51 PM
If I'm Sage Rosenfels, am I still as confident in finding another team that wants me as their starting QB ?

I'm pretty sure he still would like to be a starter, but I'm willing to bet he's a little more content with backing up Schaub after this year's performance...

(1)What team is going to trade for Rosenfels to come in a be their starter?

I don't get the article...

Sage is a good back-up for this team. I don't think he'll ever be better than a guy who throws just as many picks as the starter with less chances to do so, but can perform competently enough for a team to win...

If our defense improves like we're all hoping with new coaches and players then Sage is even less of a risk IMO because we'd have a defense that could off-set some of his mistakes...

I don't see the Texans wanting to get rid of him, and at this point I don't think Sage realistically sees himself starting for another team next yr...JMO...

He knows the system and (2)he's steady enough for us to not have to carry 3 QB's...I don't see why the Texans would want to get rid of him and I don't see him wanting to leave at this point...

Hell...Sage may even decide to re-sign...:hide:

Two points (highlighted in bold above).

1. Nobody would give anything for Sage Rosenfels today. That ship has sailed and "good value" for Sage is a box of Twinkies and a Dr. Pepper.

2. How steady or unsteady he is has no bearing on whether or not we need 3 QB's in a season. You could have Peyton Manning as your starter and Peyton Manning as your backup (clone him) and if Jared Allen had his way with you one week you would still need a 3rd QB to backup Peyton2 once Allen took out your starters knee.

Keeping 2 QB's is just something Kubiak does to give himself a little flexibility with his roster and it makes him feel clever to think he's saved himself a roster spot. It's a calculated risk but it's worth it because how often do teams really lose two QB's? It happens but not so often that you can't play it close to the edge usually.

Polo
01-02-2009, 03:55 PM
If I could clone Peyton, no way am I stopping at one....

Goldensilence
01-02-2009, 05:32 PM
If I'm Sage Rosenfels, am I still as confident in finding another team that wants me as their starting QB ?

I'm pretty sure he still would like to be a starter, but I'm willing to bet he's a little more content with backing up Schaub after this year's performance...

What team is going to trade for Rosenfels to come in a be their starter?

I don't get the article...

Sage is a good back-up for this team. I don't think he'll ever be better than a guy who throws just as many picks as the starter with less chances to do so, but can perform competently enough for a team to win...

If our defense improves like we're all hoping with new coaches and players then Sage is even less of a risk IMO because we'd have a defense that could off-set some of his mistakes...

I don't see the Texans wanting to get rid of him, and at this point I don't think Sage realistically sees himself starting for another team next yr...JMO...

He knows the system and he's steady enough for us to not have to carry 3 QB's...I don't see why the Texans would want to get rid of him and I don't see him wanting to leave at this point...

Hell...Sage may even decide to re-sign...:hide:


I think some people are making way too much of the "well he knows the system here". If A guy like Chad Pennington can go over to a team and learn a playbook in the offseason and TC then go to starting, any half competent Qb can do that and be a backup. I think we could find a suitable backup, and I wish we would, because how much can you really trust Sage knowing he's a Rosenchopter meltdown away from losing you a game?

ChampionTexan
01-02-2009, 05:46 PM
I think some people are making way too much of the "well he knows the system here". If A guy like Chad Pennington can go over to a team and learn a playbook in the offseason and TC then go to starting, any half competent Qb can do that and be a backup. I think we could find a suitable backup, and I wish we would, because how much can you really trust Sage knowing he's a Rosenchopter meltdown away from losing you a game?

Actually, Pennington didn't have any portion of the offseason, and he had a truncated TC, since he didn't get released by the Jets until after the Favre trade sometime in August.

What he did have going for him is that the NFL doesn't really have very many significant variations of offense throughout the league, and the offense that Dan Henning is running with the Dolphins is very similar to what Chad was running with the Jets.

Favre on the other hand went to a completely different offense with the Jets than he was used to with the Packers. I think Mangini and Brian Schottenheimer did as much dumbing down of it as they could, it was probably difficult for him the entire year.

Lucky
01-02-2009, 06:13 PM
To me, the key game in Rosenfels' ill-fated 2008 campaign was not the Rosencopter but the Cleveland win.
There is no key game for Rosenfels. Sage was, is, and will be a turnover machine. I mean even in his greatest game as a Texan, the 38-36 near win in '07 at home vs, the Titans, Sage had 4 turnovers. He is what he is.

eriadoc
01-02-2009, 07:33 PM
I think some people are making way too much of the "well he knows the system here". If A guy like Chad Pennington can go over to a team and learn a playbook in the offseason and TC then go to starting, any half competent Qb can do that and be a backup. I think we could find a suitable backup, and I wish we would, because how much can you really trust Sage knowing he's a Rosenchopter meltdown away from losing you a game?

A guy like Chad Pennington has always been one of the smartest QBs in the NFL. His body is what fails him, not his head. He could probably go to just about any team and pick up the offense quicker than damn near any QB. So the comparison is faulty, IMO. Pennington is like the polar opposite of VY.

leebigeztx
01-05-2009, 01:55 AM
i thought it was a bad idea when they kept sage instead of getting that 3rd for him. They got the guy for a 7th and a team was offering a 3rd in a deep draft, you shouldve made the move. It was so many backup qb's availiable like mccown,harrington,leftwich,gray, to name a few. They could've used that 3rd and taken another prospect. Buy low,sell high is the oldest principle in the book.

Goldensilence
01-05-2009, 11:57 AM
A guy like Chad Pennington has always been one of the smartest QBs in the NFL. His body is what fails him, not his head. He could probably go to just about any team and pick up the offense quicker than damn near any QB. So the comparison is faulty, IMO. Pennington is like the polar opposite of VY.

Maybe Pennington wasn't an apt example but the point I am trying to get across is if "knowing the system" is our best reason for keeping Sage then I've got a concern. I'd love to hear something more along the lines of he's got a good arm, makes good decisions, can manage a game and trust the rest of his team mates to make big plays, and most importantly knows that once the starter gets healthy it's HIS team.

If Matt goes down again, especially during the heat of a playoff run, how much do you trust Sage to not play outside himself and manage this team after the Rosenchopter game? I know why we kept Sage last year because the team was, due to injury, still trying to evaluate if Matt Schaub was that GUY. I think when Matt was upright and on the field this year he proved that he is that guy moving forward. If Sage has it in his head that he wants to be a starter still, this isn't the team to do it on, and we should ship him out for what we can. I don't want another meltdown game at a critical junction of the season because he's trying to make a push to start.

Polo
01-05-2009, 12:19 PM
Maybe Pennington wasn't an apt example but the point I am trying to get across is if "knowing the system" is our best reason for keeping Sage then I've got a concern. I'd love to hear something more along the lines of he's got a good arm, makes good decisions, can manage a game and trust the rest of his team mates to make big plays, and most importantly knows that once the starter gets healthy it's HIS team.

Not too many teams run the offensive system that we do. One of the bonuses in going after Schaub was that he was very familar the system. And you may disagree, but I don't think "knowing the system" is Sage's only positive. He can make plays.

If Matt goes down again, especially during the heat of a playoff run, how much do you trust Sage to not play outside himself and manage this team after the Rosenchopter game?

I wouldn't bet on Sage doing that again. He's a turnover machine, but I wouldn't consider him brain dead. The Rosencopter moment can be classified as a brain dead, or selfish moment though. But last year this time Sage was looking like one of the top back-ups in the NFL. There's even a thread somewhere about that. He can win games in this leauge.

And for the record, I don't care if they get rid of Sage if they feel like the have a competent enough back-up to take his spot...If they feel like there is a rookie out there or a veteran on another team that can get the job done better than Sage, then I say ship his ass off...

Goldensilence
01-05-2009, 12:48 PM
Not too many teams run the offensive system that we do. One of the bonuses in going after Schaub was that he was very familar the system. And you may disagree, but I don't think "knowing the system" is Sage's only positive. He can make plays.



I wouldn't bet on Sage doing that again. He's a turnover machine, but I wouldn't consider him brain dead. The Rosencopter moment can be classified as a brain dead, or selfish moment though. But last year this time Sage was looking like one of the top back-ups in the NFL. There's even a thread somewhere about that. He can win games in this leauge.

And for the record, I don't care if they get rid of Sage if they feel like the have a competent enough back-up to take his spot...If they feel like there is a rookie out there or a veteran on another team that can get the job done better than Sage, then I say ship his ass off...

I disagree, we run a variation of the WCO, what's different is the way the OL is built and philosophy behind blocking. I'm not saying "knowing the system" is Sage's only attribute, but if that's the best attribute you can name then I am concerned. Maybe after this year he won't be pushing for a starting role and if he can accept a backup role and start learning to play within himself great! But if he honestly wants a shot at starting then we owe it to him and the team, more importantly, to let the man get that out of his system.

Polo
01-05-2009, 01:48 PM
I disagree, we run a variation of the WCO, what's different is the way the OL is built and philosophy behind blocking.

What are you disagreeing with ? Sage is familar with our "variation" of the WCO. Can you name some other QB's that run any variation of the WCO that you'd want to bring in?


I'm not saying "knowing the system" is Sage's only attribute, but if that's the best attribute you can name then I am concerned.

Doesn't matter whether or not it's his best attribute...The point is that it's an attribute that gives him a leg up on possible replacements. Discount it all you want, but familiarity with a system gives you a leg up; especially when talking about QB's. Sage has a good arm and he's mobile and he's is capable of making plays. His decision making is terrible at times, but if he was an excellent decision maker he'd probably be a starter and not a back-up. Sage doesn't have a lot of weaknesses albeit poor decision making is a major one....

But I think that Sage's weaknesses are highlighted more than some other back-ups because of how often he has to play...If Matt took about 90% of the snaps then Sage would be more than adequate...If you're not planning on Matt taking a lions share of the snaps then Sage isn't the problem...

Maybe after this year he won't be pushing for a starting role and if he can accept a backup role and start learning to play within himself great! But if he honestly wants a shot at starting then we owe it to him and the team, more importantly, to let the man get that out of his system.

I don't "owe" Sage anything...He is being paid as an employee and he signed a contract that didn't include the terms "You are going to be given a legit shot at starting". If getting rid of Sage makes us better then I'm all for it. But there aren't too many back-ups I can think of that make me want to run out and go sign them over Sage. Can you?

The problem with Sage is that he plays too much. The back-up QB gets too much air time around here. He's played too much since becoming a Texan.

gtexan02
01-05-2009, 01:52 PM
But if he honestly wants a shot at starting then we owe it to him and the team, more importantly, to let the man get that out of his system.

We gave him a shot at starting. He blew it. End of story, IMO

Errant Hothy
01-05-2009, 02:31 PM
We gave him a shot at starting. He blew it. End of story, IMO

And even worse, we weren't the first team to give him his shot at starting.

eriadoc
01-05-2009, 02:34 PM
Rosencopter was the defining moment, but other games after that were just as bad (BAL and CLE games comes to mind).

infantrycak
01-05-2009, 03:02 PM
They got the guy for a 7th and a team was offering a 3rd in a deep draft, you shouldve made the move.

They did not trade for Sage--he was a UFA. The 7th was RFA compensation for Walter.

I wanted the 3rd for him as well.

Sal Rosenberg
01-05-2009, 03:04 PM
That 3rd round pick would be real nice right about now.

AMEN!:fans:

Texanmike02
01-05-2009, 04:23 PM
Next time we have a big debate (like this or the 06 draft) we need to open two threads. One in support and one in opposition. Then just post your name in whichever one you agree with. Then we can go back and look and see who was on what side of the fence because I know there were a couple of people who implied I didn't know what I was talking about when I said we should jump on the trade. I have, however, seen very few people come out and say woah, I was wrong... we should have taken a 3rd or a 4th or a 5th. I mean really, would we have lost another game or two with Boyd as our QB? Would we be picking 11th or better and have a shot at Mays?

Mike

ObsiWan
01-05-2009, 04:30 PM
Next time we have a big debate (like this or the 06 draft) we need to open two threads. One in support and one in opposition. Then just post your name in whichever one you agree with. Then we can go back and look and see who was on what side of the fence because I know there were a couple of people who implied I didn't know what I was talking about when I said we should jump on the trade. I have, however, seen very few people come out and say woah, I was wrong... we should have taken a 3rd or a 4th or a 5th. I mean really, would we have lost another game or two with Boyd as our QB? Would we be picking 11th or better and have a shot at Mays?

Mike

so you want us to lose so we'll have a better drafting position?

Texanmike02
01-06-2009, 01:43 AM
so you want us to lose so we'll have a better drafting position?

After an 0-4 start would I have been distraught over 7-9? no. If it brought us Mays who would instantly upgrade us at a position of need? I'm not saying I would have rooted for us to lose a game, only that we would be in the same situation and we could look to be much improved over next year.

Mike

Goldensilence
01-06-2009, 02:44 PM
What are you disagreeing with ? Sage is familar with our "variation" of the WCO. Can you name some other QB's that run any variation of the WCO that you'd want to bring in?




Doesn't matter whether or not it's his best attribute...The point is that it's an attribute that gives him a leg up on possible replacements. Discount it all you want, but familiarity with a system gives you a leg up; especially when talking about QB's. Sage has a good arm and he's mobile and he's is capable of making plays. His decision making is terrible at times, but if he was an excellent decision maker he'd probably be a starter and not a back-up. Sage doesn't have a lot of weaknesses albeit poor decision making is a major one....

But I think that Sage's weaknesses are highlighted more than some other back-ups because of how often he has to play...If Matt took about 90% of the snaps then Sage would be more than adequate...If you're not planning on Matt taking a lions share of the snaps then Sage isn't the problem...



I don't "owe" Sage anything...He is being paid as an employee and he signed a contract that didn't include the terms "You are going to be given a legit shot at starting". If getting rid of Sage makes us better then I'm all for it. But there aren't too many back-ups I can think of that make me want to run out and go sign them over Sage. Can you?

The problem with Sage is that he plays too much. The back-up QB gets too much air time around here. He's played too much since becoming a Texan.


The problem is not that we run a real complex variation of the WCO. The good thing about a WCO style is that you don't need a big arm, you just need to intelligently distribute the ball. Sage has proved he's spotty on that and thinks his arm can throw into holes and that gets him in big trouble. He is mobile and that buys him time to make some plays downfield. There's other QB available that have those qualities but again my problem is that if "knowing the system" is his best leg up on the competition that doesn't inspire myself, not that it matters at all, as a reason alone to keep him on the roster.

Owe him might've been too strong of sentiment, I should've stuck owe it to the team. I want a backup that understands completely he is a backup unless called upon to spell the starter or injury. I think we'll see Sage here next year but lingering in the back of my mind is there another rosenchopter game in him. It cost us a winning season this year. Next year, looking forward to what looks like a favorable schedule and the possibility of a new DC making big improvements it could be a special year. Hopefully nothing bad happens, but If Matt does go down how much does this staff and offense trust him to not melt down again?

Polo
01-06-2009, 02:51 PM
I want a backup that understands completely he is a backup unless called upon to spell the starter or injury.


I don't think there are too many football players in the NFL with that kind of defeatist attitude.

I think a lot of back-ups if given the opprotunity would want to start and not relish in merely being a back-up.

I think that there were several factors leading to Sage pushing really hard to being a starter:

1) Matt was often injured
2) Sage was considered amongst the top back-ups in the league last year and even coming into this year
3) When Matt did play he hadn't shown himself to definitively be THE guy

He sensed an opprotunity and he tried to jump on it. I'm not going to be the one to tell him he should just be happy to be a back-up.

And just to clarify again: I could care less what happens to Sage. I just don't think anything will happen to him as the article suggest.

Goldensilence
01-06-2009, 03:08 PM
I don't think there are too many football players in the NFL with that kind of defeatist attitude.

I think a lot of back-ups if given the opprotunity would want to start and not relish in merely being a back-up.

I think that there were several factors leading to Sage pushing really hard to being a starter:

1) Matt was often injured
2) Sage was considered amongst the top back-ups in the league last year and even coming into this year
3) When Matt did play he hadn't shown himself to definitively be THE guy

He sensed an opprotunity and he tried to jump on it. I'm not going to be the one to tell him he should just be happy to be a back-up.

And just to clarify again: I could care less what happens to Sage. I just don't think anything will happen to him as the article suggest.


I don't think it is defeatist as much as understanding your role on a team. Are the backups behind Peyton and Eli Manning,Tom Brady(prior to this year), Big Ben, Matt Hasselbeck and other fairly well entrenched starters display defeatist attitudes?

Sage might've sensed an opportunity that was never there. You don't trade two 2nd round picks for a QB and leave the position open for competition. Better or worse Smith and Kubiak hung their entire careers(up to this point) on Matt Schaub starting. What should've been clear to Sage and some of his fan club members is that with that trade any chance Sage had of starting were coming off the bench or due to injury. Even then he'd be a place warmer for Matt. I want a backup that understands and accepts his role as a backup. I don't think we'll see Sage leave the team this offseason but if he's still interested in being a starter then I'd prefer we get what we can for him if he's going to continue to try and push for the starter role.

Polo
01-06-2009, 03:49 PM
I don't think it is defeatist as much as understanding your role on a team. Are the backups behind Peyton and Eli Manning,Tom Brady(prior to this year), Big Ben, Matt Hasselbeck and other fairly well entrenched starters display defeatist attitudes? .

That's my point....

Matt Schaub hasn't proven to be the caliber of the elite level QB's in this leauge. If Sage were behind Peyton Manning we wouldn't be having this discussion because we'd see sage so rarely that we'd forget what he looked like. Moreso, those guys would have so far distanced themselves from the back-up, talent wise, that the back-up would have no choice but to conceed the position.

The problem here in Houston was that Matt hadn't solidified himself as our golden goose at that position therefore Rosie smelt blood and decided he'd go in for the kill. If you want back-ups that are o.k with their roles such as the back-ups of Peyton Manning and Drew Brees, you first need a starter that performs like Peyton Manning or Drew Brees. Their back-ups don't try to do to much because they know beyond a shadow of a doubt who's job it is.

Look at Matt Cassell in NE...He knows what the deal is....He knows that as soon as Tom Cat is healthy he's out of the starting line-up...That's probably why he didn't try to play outside of himself and make plays that weren't there.


Sage might've sensed an opportunity that was never there. You don't trade two 2nd round picks for a QB and leave the position open for competition. Better or worse Smith and Kubiak hung their entire careers(up to this point) on Matt Schaub starting. What should've been clear to Sage and some of his fan club members is that with that trade any chance Sage had of starting were coming off the bench or due to injury. Even then he'd be a place warmer for Matt. I want a backup that understands and accepts his role as a backup. I don't think we'll see Sage leave the team this offseason but if he's still interested in being a starter then I'd prefer we get what we can for him if he's going to continue to try and push for the starter role

I don't know that to be true.

I seriously doubt that if Schaub would have obviously been a worse QB than Sage the team would've continued to trot Schaub out there. The fans aren't that stupid. I don't know about you, but you can't pee on my head and tell me it's raining.

I think that if Sage would have played lights out ball when given the opprotunity he'd have a legit chance of starting somewher if not here.

mussop
01-06-2009, 05:22 PM
i thought it was a bad idea when they kept sage instead of getting that 3rd for him. They got the guy for a 7th and a team was offering a 3rd in a deep draft, you shouldve made the move. It was so many backup qb's availiable like mccown,harrington,leftwich,gray, to name a few. They could've used that 3rd and taken another prospect. Buy low,sell high is the oldest principle in the book.

Yep imagine Cliff Avril opposite Mario or Tashard Choice backing up Slaton, 2 of the players that were available with that 3rd.

Polo
01-08-2009, 09:53 AM
Sports

Charley Walters: New quarterback would be costly for Minnesota Vikings
Pioneer Press

Before Sunday's playoff loss to the Philadelphia Eagles, Tarvaris Jackson was expected to be the Vikings' top quarterback heading into training camp next season.

Now, though, Jackson's status is unclear. The Vikings might have options to find a starting quarterback, but those, too, are unclear.

If team owner Zygi Wilf, who invested $60 million in guaranteed contracts this season, is willing to guarantee an additional $30 million or so, the team might be able to pry Matt Cassel away from the New England Patriots.

Besides a new contract for Cassel, 26, the price of a trade would be high — perhaps first-round and second-round draft picks. It's unclear whether New England would be willing to trade Cassel, an unrestricted free agent who is expected to be designated a franchise player, thus guaranteeing him about $14.5 million for the coming season.

But the Vikings were able to trade with Kansas City last year for defensive end Jared Allen, who also had been franchised, for a first-round and two third-round draft picks.

Cassel would provide hope for Vikings rooters, retain the team's visibility and might even enhance Wilf's effort for a new stadium.

A more realistic and practical objective, though, might be to trade with Seattle for Matt Hasselbeck, 33, who probably would be available for a second-round draft pick. The Seahawks, 4-12 this season, need to rebuild.

Hasselbeck has run a pure West Coast offense, which Vikings coach Brad Childress likes to run.

Houston's Sage Rosenfels, 30, for whom the Vikings were rumored to have offered a third-round draft pick last season, might be a third option and seemingly would compete with Jackson in training camp.

http://www.twincities.com/sports/ci_11389386

disaacks3
01-08-2009, 10:26 AM
The problem here in Houston was that Matt hadn't solidified himself as our golden goose at that position therefore Rosie smelt blood and decided he'd go in for the kill. I definitely agree with this, but it's also the problem. Sage has had SEVERAL chances in the NFL to make his mark and keeps failing everytime he tries "pushing the envelope" and going into Brett Favre mode.

Kubiak's offense relies more on letting receivers get YAC and taking what's there, not forcing the ball into bad situations.

Sage is still an adequate backup for us, but will NEVER be the QB he thinks he can be.

The line from the beginning of Top Gun sums it up pretty nicely. "Son, your EGO is writing checks your body can't cash!"

HOU-TEX
01-08-2009, 10:28 AM
http://www.twincities.com/sports/ci_11389386

If they're still willing to give up a 3rd for him........I'd jump on it like a moron does a booger.

Polo
01-08-2009, 10:44 AM
If they're still willing to give up a 3rd for him........I'd jump on it like a moron does a booger.


I believe that would be the appropriate move as well...