PDA

View Full Version : HWSNBN Historically Revisited


CloakNNNdagger
12-09-2012, 12:02 PM
Please refrain from throwing eggs, but with his name being brought up in another TT thread (where he was made to practice with ladders by Chris Palmer), I came across this piece in SI Vault. We know that he never put football in the NFL as a top priority, and that he must take responsibility in large part for his "demise." But, this article, I believe, demonstrates the totally "ignorant" approach from the top down regarding his path to Houston..........We like everything about making you our top pick and the first pick of the Draft........BUT..........We need to change everything about you if you are going to be a great NFL quarterback............


September 02, 2002
Take It From The Top, Kid (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1026556/1/index.htm)
THOUGH CRITICS QUESTION THE DROP IN HIS THROWING MOTION ROOKIE DAVID CARR HAS THE TEXANS DROOLING OVER HIS ACCURACY AND QUICK RELEASE
Josh Elliott


His name is now buried deeply in a period which most of us long time fans want to appropriately forget. However, this piece serves as a very important historical reminder as to how far we have come from the "good old days."

eriadoc
12-09-2012, 03:23 PM
The David Carr era needs to be divided into two parts, IMO. From the start until about mid-2004, he was a different QB than what he ended up as. That's not to say that was great, but there was potential. I think a combination of injuries (esp. that shoulder) and bad coaching killed whatever potential was there. The work ethic would have killed whatever else there was probably, but we've seen QBs get coached up from that situation before.

HJam72
12-09-2012, 03:39 PM
He'd've been a star if they'd o' just let him audible to passes.

:jk:

Sorry, I had a flash-back or something.

Honoring Earl 34
12-09-2012, 04:20 PM
Chester Pitts said that DC played because he was good not because he loved it . He also had the distraction of the cling ons from Fresno .

CretorFrigg
12-09-2012, 04:43 PM
Maybe I'm just ignorant, but why is an overhand approach preferred? If a defensive lineman wants to swat it down, they're going to be jumping up (a la Watt). Even if the QB was 6'5" and throwing overhand, it would still be swatted down.

Isn't it about finding the passing lanes? That's why short quarterbacks like Drew Brees and Russell Wilson still find success. They can find the passing lanes and still deliver a rocket to their WRs.

infantrycak
12-09-2012, 04:43 PM
The David Carr era needs to be divided into two parts, IMO. From the start until about mid-2004, he was a different QB than what he ended up as. That's not to say that was great, but there was potential. I think a combination of injuries (esp. that shoulder) and bad coaching killed whatever potential was there. The work ethic would have killed whatever else there was probably, but we've seen QBs get coached up from that situation before.

Carr had some consistent problems throughout his career - poor work ethic, not real football smart, basically blind in between the hashmarks, etc. But there was a dramatic change dead middle of the 2004 season and some of it I think was a new coaching philosophy.

First 8 games - 2162 yds, 270.25 ypg, 8.65 ypa, 9 TD's, 4 INT's
Last 8 games - 1369 yds, 171.12 ypg, 6.34 ypa, 7 TD's, 9 INT's

Plus the long ball just disappeared from his repertoire.

The 9th game of 2004 was against Indy and Carr threw 3 bad INT's - after that it was like the offense shut down.

Honoring Earl 34
12-09-2012, 06:19 PM
Carr had some consistent problems throughout his career - poor work ethic, not real football smart, basically blind in between the hashmarks, etc. But there was a dramatic change dead middle of the 2004 season and some of it I think was a new coaching philosophy.

First 8 games - 2162 yds, 270.25 ypg, 8.65 ypa, 9 TD's, 4 INT's
Last 8 games - 1369 yds, 171.12 ypg, 6.34 ypa, 7 TD's, 9 INT's

Plus the long ball just disappeared from his repertoire.

The 9th game of 2004 was against Indy and Carr threw 3 bad INT's - after that it was like the offense shut down.

That was the year where they could have beat the Browns the last game to go 8-8 IIRC , he laid an egg and someone tossed a beer on his wife .

mussop
12-09-2012, 08:58 PM
Chester Pitts said that DC played because he was good not because he loved it . He also had the distraction of the cling ons from Fresno .

I thought cling ons were from Qo'noS. Seriously, I couldn't believe we were drafting Him instead of Peppers and bringing in a veteran QB. Especially when Eli was going to be available in the next draft. Manning vs Manning 2x's a year just seemed like a no brainer to me.

ChampionTexan
12-09-2012, 10:23 PM
I thought cling ons were from Qo'noS. Seriously, I couldn't believe we were drafting Him instead of Peppers and bringing in a veteran QB. Especially when Eli was going to be available in the next draft. Manning vs Manning 2x's a year just seemed like a no brainer to me.

Eli was two drafts out, 2003 was Carson Palmer (and Andre of course).

Speedy
12-09-2012, 11:49 PM
Eli was two drafts out, 2003 was Carson Palmer (and Andre of course).

And assuming the Texans would have still had the 3rd pick in '03, Palmer wouldn't have been available. They'd be looking at Leftwich, Boller and Grossman if they went QB in year 2.

In '04 however, Roethlisberger would have been sitting there at 10, again assuming that's the position they would still be picking from.

HJam72
12-10-2012, 08:34 AM
That was the year where they could have beat the Browns the last game to go 8-8 IIRC , he laid an egg and someone tossed a beer on his wife .

Only one reason you would still remember that. :foottap: :)

Honoring Earl 34
12-10-2012, 12:15 PM
Only one reason you would still remember that. :foottap: :)

I wouldn't have wasted a beer and I don't take it that serious . :smiliedance:

Double Barrel
12-10-2012, 12:32 PM
Starting a rookie QB for the first game of a franchise...dumb.

Not giving that rookie QB a QB coach for the first couple of years...dumb.

Not doing the homework to reveal that said rookie QB had horrible study habits...dumb.

Expecting a rookie QB to take a helluva' beating and not develop fright or flight tendencies...dumb.

I have no animosity toward David Carr. That stuff is so buried in the past that it really means nothing to me.

I am thankful for two Carr memories, though: the Cowboys (19-10) game, and that Christmas eve game in 2006 where we finally beat the Colts.

Beyond that....meh...no. 8 belongs to Matt Schaub now, and hopefully that number will hang in the rafters as a retired one because of the glory Schaub brings to this franchise over the next few years.

qqert
12-10-2012, 01:00 PM
8 belongs to Matt Schaub now..

alex smith is looking to leave the niners after this season, i think.
would bringing him in to compete for QB be a bad idea?
just like at the other positions where you have to compete for the spot.

thunderkyss
12-10-2012, 01:30 PM
alex smith is looking to leave the niners after this season, i think.
would bringing him in to compete for QB be a bad idea?
just like at the other positions where you have to compete for the spot.

Maybe not a bad idea, but pointless.

Schaub just signed a long term deal. He is the QB of the future until further notice.

I think we are happy with our back up QB situation, may even need to cull a little fat, but we'd be looking to bring in young boys. Kubiak likes to look at young boys every now & then.


I mean arms, young arms.

TexanSam
12-10-2012, 01:34 PM
Starting a rookie QB for the first game of a franchise...dumb.

Not giving that rookie QB a QB coach for the first couple of years...dumb.

We didn't have a QB coach after drafting Carr? Please tell me that's not true. If it is, Casserly and Capers were more inept than I thought.

CloakNNNdagger
12-10-2012, 02:16 PM
We didn't have a QB coach after drafting Carr? Please tell me that's not true. If it is, Casserly and Capers were more inept than I thought.

Chris Palmer was the OC and also acted as the QB coach. AFTER Palmer was dismissed here in 2005, he went immediately onto specifically be QB coach of our favorite Cowboys for 1 year, then for the Giants for 2 more years.

Double Barrel
12-10-2012, 04:26 PM
We didn't have a QB coach after drafting Carr? Please tell me that's not true. If it is, Casserly and Capers were more inept than I thought.

yep. Like CnD mentioned, Palmer was so egotistical that he did not think a rookie QB behind a Swiss cheese offensive line needed a dedicate position coach.

The Texans used their first pick on a guy they believed would be a franchise quarterback, and then they did almost everything wrong. They failed to put a quality offensive line in front of him. They failed to put enough good receivers and running backs around him.

The Texans never even hired a real quarterbacks coach. Here was this strong-armed, raw-boned kid out of Fresno State, this kid with such a good heart, this kid who wanted to do everything right, and much of the incompetence that defined the Texans in those early years can be summed up by their care and handling of Carr.

Source (http://www.sfgate.com/sports/article/The-Texans-never-gave-David-Carr-a-chance-3196632.php)

Lucky
12-13-2012, 12:46 AM
First 8 games - 2162 yds, 270.25 ypg, 8.65 ypa, 9 TD's, 4 INT's
Last 8 games - 1369 yds, 171.12 ypg, 6.34 ypa, 7 TD's, 9 INT's

Plus the long ball just disappeared from his repertoire.

The 9th game of 2004 was against Indy and Carr threw 3 bad INT's - after that it was like the offense shut down.
I think the league went to school on how the Colts were defensing Carr (basic cover-2 shell). Playing cover 2 forces the QB to throw to the middle of the field, and Carr was never able to do that consistently. Whether it was his sidearm motion, or that he just couldn't anticipate when a receiver would come open, or both, the cover 2 was Carr's kryptonite.

infantrycak
12-13-2012, 10:06 AM
I think the league went to school on how the Colts were defensing Carr (basic cover-2 shell). Playing cover 2 forces the QB to throw to the middle of the field, and Carr was never able to do that consistently. Whether it was his sidearm motion, or that he just couldn't anticipate when a receiver would come open, or both, the cover 2 was Carr's kryptonite.

Carr was always miserable to the middle of the field. Teams already had 2 years of tape on him when 2004 started. I am not making excuses for Carr as I believe he was never going to make it but I think there was a coaching philosophy change as well.

thunderkyss
12-13-2012, 11:23 AM
Carr was always miserable to the middle of the field. Teams already had 2 years of tape on him when 2004 started. I am not making excuses for Carr as I believe he was never going to make it but I think there was a coaching philosophy change as well.

My opinion is that Car was at his best when he was allowed to take chances. Give Andre & his play makers a chance to make plays. He got to the point where it looked like he was being coached not to take chances.

Nobody is going to succeed at the QB position if they don't take chances.

Hervoyel
12-13-2012, 05:23 PM
My thoughts are that Carr was at his best when he wasn't a Houston Texan. The pick was an enormous mistake.

2002 first overall should have been Julius Peppers. I said it then and I was far from alone.

Then you start Tony Banks who was better than Carr in every single game he got into for the Texans. Chester Pitts starts at LT and stays at LT.

2003 you get Andre Johnson which was obviously the best player available. Continue with Tony Banks and keep playing Chester Pitts at LT.

2004 you grab Ben Rothlisberger before the Steelers get him. If there's a QB in existence who can handle whatever early issues the Texans OL had and still get it done then Rothlisberger is the guy.

Epic Texans success begins...

Speedy
12-13-2012, 07:03 PM
My thoughts are that Carr was at his best when he wasn't a Houston Texan. The pick was an enormous mistake.

2002 first overall should have been Julius Peppers. I said it then and I was far from alone.

Then you start Tony Banks who was better than Carr in every single game he got into for the Texans. Chester Pitts starts at LT and stays at LT.

2003 you get Andre Johnson which was obviously the best player available. Continue with Tony Banks and keep playing Chester Pitts at LT.

2004 you grab Ben Rothlisberger before the Steelers get him. If there's a QB in existence who can handle whatever early issues the Texans OL had and still get it done then Rothlisberger is the guy.

Epic Texans success begins...

Easy to say now. The 1st pick in 2002 is the only one you can say for sure they would have had. From that point you don't know if they'd have the 3rd pick in '03, 10th in '04 and so on.

With a veteran QB, what if they win a couple more games in '02? 4 games they lost that season by 7 points or less. Then they're picking 6th, 7th in '03 and they don't even get AJ then.

I agree that Carr shouldn't have been the pick, but you can't go on to say "then they could have gotten AJ, then big Ben" and so on because you just don't know how it would have turned out.

Kaiser Toro
12-14-2012, 06:55 AM
David Carr was historical suckage. F him and his softness, it was an embarrassment to call him a Texan.

thunderkyss
12-14-2012, 08:48 AM
David Carr was historical suckage. F him and his softness, it was an embarrassment to call him a Texan.

Really?

I'm far from a David Carr fan. I was very "vocal" about it on the original board. I pointed out his flaws & argued for his replacement before the 2005 draft.

But embarrassment?

I mean I rooted for the guy for two years, he looked the part, strong arm, athletic, a gamer in my mind.

Then all that was whipped out of him. I think there were too many "I'm going to get mine" players on that team at the time & he fell into it. The coaches didn't help. He was very, very talented.

I think it's an embarrassment for the club that he turned out the way he did.

Hervoyel
12-14-2012, 09:55 AM
Easy to say now. The 1st pick in 2002 is the only one you can say for sure they would have had. From that point you don't know if they'd have the 3rd pick in '03, 10th in '04 and so on.

With a veteran QB, what if they win a couple more games in '02? 4 games they lost that season by 7 points or less. Then they're picking 6th, 7th in '03 and they don't even get AJ then.

I agree that Carr shouldn't have been the pick, but you can't go on to say "then they could have gotten AJ, then big Ben" and so on because you just don't know how it would have turned out.

Of course not. It's nothing but mental masturbation at best. Still, taking Carr was a huge mistake and if the win/loss record had not changed that would have been the obvious move (even without the benefit of hindsight where Rothlisberger is concerned).

If you don't take Carr and go with Banks but still win 4 games that's fine. You're an expansion team in your first year. The next year you obviously do what we did originally and grab AJ

By year 3 it's find a QB time most likely and Ben is perfect for a team with a less than stellar OL because he's so big and so good at shaking off would-be tacklers. What's really scary is if you follow this possible scenario up to this point and then don't get a shot at him your next QB off the board was Losman, then..... Matt Schaub.

But it's all just talk. Doesn't mean anything.