PDA

View Full Version : HPF: Quick slant - Walking the talk


U4ikrob
06-23-2005, 06:02 AM
http://www.houstonprofootball.com/slant/slant55.html

Good article and sums up many things I felt and have mentioned on this board several times this off-season in particular.

rittenhouserobz
06-23-2005, 06:25 AM
Not much upside with that writer. He sounds eternally pesimistic. I am not saying he is wrong about his comments, but the tone of article wreaks of a liberal scent.

ccdude730
06-23-2005, 08:07 AM
not to bash the guy, but i think he has got alot of things wrong.

to give a brief summary
-the team has no vision
-the texans are the least successful franchise in houston
-babin's performance wasnt worth the cost (i believe that is what he means)
-it was a mistake to let sharper and glenn go (sharper was no mistake)
-the best picks in all of our drafts have been carr, johnson, robinson, and davis
-we have not brought in 1 FA "impact player"

this guy decides to show you how bad we lost to playoff teams last year and thats all fine and dandy except he decides not to include 28 points we scored from the vikings game - yet he counted the points they scored on us. amazing...then he averages the score by 6 games. well we do play the colts twice. divide by a larger number and we get a smaller answer. this guys didnt spend 5 min on figuring this out.

someone needs to get their facts straight before putting it in writing. needless to say his opinion means nothing to me.

GO TEXANS! :)

Tailgate
06-23-2005, 08:57 AM
If a team IS WHAT IT IS... as this article states. Then according to our record the first 3 years... we are an improving team year after year. Can't ask much more of an expansion franchise.

Lucky
06-23-2005, 10:02 AM
this guy decides to show you how bad we lost to playoff teams last year and thats all fine and dandy except he decides not to include 28 points we scored from the vikings game - yet he counted the points they scored on us. amazing...then he averages the score by 6 games. well we do play the colts twice. divide by a larger number and we get a smaller answer. this guys didnt spend 5 min on figuring this out.
Well, that's true. The Texans were "only" outscored by playoff teams 209-107. Which means they were outscored by about 30-16 rather than 35-14. That difference means the writer could brush up on his math skills, or get a new calculator. But, his point was that good teams beat up on the Texans last year. And for the most part that's true.

Yeah, it's a "glass half empty" article, no doubt. But, what he's mainly saying is that this season is a crossroads year. In that if the team goes to the next level, the organization's moves will be validated. If not, they'll be questioned and McNair may find the answers wanting. Not that far-fetched, to me.

...but the tone of article wreaks of a liberal scent.

I'm not following your use of the word "liberal" in this context? Care to enlighten?

throwANDREtheBALL
06-23-2005, 10:28 AM
He had some good points.............and although he's a glass half-empty guy, he was dead on with the front office giving C-level performances.....I couldn't agree more.

TheOgre
06-23-2005, 10:30 AM
I'm not following your meaning of the word "liberal" in this context? Care to enlighten?

"Liberal" seems to be a four letter word in these parts. I guess anything that is counter to the common opinion is labeled with this cuss word. I find it comical. It makes no sense.

nunusguy
06-23-2005, 12:08 PM
I also have reservations about last season (to include some of last seasons draft picks), and other reservations about this years draft and FA activity
(or lack thereof), but I think all of that is now becoming ancient history as the
saying goes.
I'm thankful that Training Camp is now near when we can begin the new 2005 season. Therefor I don't really appreciate the tone of the article - as I've said these subjects are chapters in a book we should have closed. Time to look to the future - there certainly will be plenty of opportunities to complain and critisize player performance and coaching decisions.
For example, we are very soon gonna find out if Babin and Wand
pay dividends because the Texans started both of them last year instead of
letting them sit. And we are gonna find out very soon if Greenwood and Buchanan will be an upgrade over Sharper & Glenn.
In the meantime lets keep an open mind and a positive attitude - plenty of
time to complain if conditions warrant.

TexanTom
06-23-2005, 12:55 PM
Well, that's true. The Texans were "only" outscored by playoff teams 209-107. Which means they were outscored by about 30-16 rather than 35-14. That difference means the writer could brush up on his math skills, or get a new calculator. But, his point was that good teams beat up on the Texans last year. And for the most part that's true.


It is true that 0 for 7 against playoff teams is disappointing and I certainly would have liked a few closer games, but I think it goes to show that we were still not a playoff quality team. I think a more important stat (or perhaps just the one I choose to focus on) is that we were 7-2 against non-playoff teams. Everyone knows you've gotta walk before you can run and I think to make the playoffs and consider yourself a contender the first thing you need to do is CONSISTENTLY beat the teams you are supposed to beat. Now I was seriously disappointed by both of our losses to non-playoff teams last year (key turnovers and redzone performance is how we lost to Detroit and I don't even want to talk about the Cleveland game) but I think the fact still remains that the dichotomy between performance against playoff and non-playoff teams demonstrates a more consistent performance from a team at or near the edge of becoming a playoff team.

I think you generally play an average of 6 or 7 playoff teams a year (the more wins you get the less "playoff" teams you play so it is somewhat circular logic..but whatever). 10-6 doesn't get you in every year but it gets you pretty damn close so wins against one or two playoff teams puts you squarely into the playoffs if you take care of business against the lesser teams. I haven't crunched all the numbers on all the playoff teams but I believe their records will show that they didn't lose more than 1 or 2 games against non-playoff teams.

My main point is this: while it was great that we could say in 2003 that we beat one Super Bowl team and took the other to overtime and it showed that we had the talent to play with those guys, all it really did was show the inconsistency in our week to week performance because we weren't beating 'the teams you should beat if you're a playoff team'. I think the path to the playoffs is 1) get a little break from the schedule and only play 6 playoff teams 2) go no worse than 8-2 against the non-playoff teams and 3) beat the Colts (oh I mean pick up a win or two against playoff teams on your schedule)

Of course if you play in the NFC all you have to do is trip over yourself less than the next guy....

Vinny
06-23-2005, 01:33 PM
Personally, I like Ric's stuff. He speaks his mind and he knows football. I don't really agree with all the pessimism that our fan base has seemed to latch on to this year though. Itís pretty amazing how down many of you guys are on the team this year when it looks to me our best group yet. I just don't see all the gloom and doom everyone points to. I don't think Ric is down on the team but he is allowed to write something that isn't foo-foo. I find him pretty balanced over the years.

liberal is a word that is not used properly anymore. I wish people would try to use it less as an insult.

DRIFTAWAY
06-23-2005, 01:40 PM
I actually think this article was a good wakeup call. He struck some key points, even if it was in a moody kind of tone. He is right, this has been the least successful franchise in this city. He is also right about the C- grades. Everyone says CC is a master of the draft, he was right about having a top 10 pick makes your picks easier. Andre Johnson and David Carr were no-brainers. Dunta Robinson has been nice. Really the only steal he made was the DD pick out of the 4th round. While he has a bust to equal out with that steal in Joppru. Its year 4 and our O-Line is still a mess, we still don't have a legitimate downfield threat along with Johnson. And here in year 4 we are going on another youth movement, which might take 1-2 years to gel them maturely togethor and getting them to click. So i agree that this season will be a very decisive one for the past,present, and future of this franchise. If there is no improvement, I think you have to consider letting the coaches go. If our offseason moves dont pay off, or our draft picks, you might have to consider letting CC go.

U4ikrob
06-23-2005, 02:46 PM
Personally, I like Ric's stuff. He speaks his mind and he knows football. I don't really agree with all the pessimism that our fan base has seemed to latch on to this year though. Itís pretty amazing how down many of you guys are on the team this year when it looks to me our best group yet. I just don't see all the gloom and doom everyone points to. I don't think Ric is down on the team but he is allowed to write something that isn't foo-foo. I find him pretty balanced over the years.

liberal is a word that is not used properly anymore. I wish people would try to use it less as an insult.


Not intentionally trying to be a doom and gloom guy this year. Honestly I am not, but it's been really hard for me to get behing several of the decisions I have been seeing and have seen over the last 4 years from the front office.

This offseason - Honestly I felt The Glenn and Sharper releases were very bad calls by the front office and I would have never made the trade for P-buc over Glenn. IMO loosing both will really hurt us later in the year. Both Glenn and Sharper were solid producers on the field and have the stats and games to back up their play. Babin, Peek and Buchanon are all still very unproven and IMO the jury is very much still out. I hope they step up into the role and produce liek the guys we released or better - otherwise it's going to be a long year.

BTW - for those whom do not know - This is the staffs year #5 - they got a year early start in planning, scouting, setting up the franchise goals, plan and future. It's only the teams 4th year playing. My gut feeling is this is a make or break year. Vinny you know that - youve chimed in more than few times with your enthusiasm and candor to try and get me to lighten up and give em chance this year.

Honestly I guess I just recognize the writing on the wall for the Texans this year - It's put up or shut up year for everyone IMO.

IMO - Like the article mentioned It has looked alot at times this off-season in particular like the staff is scrambling for answers in spots they really should not have and has decided they have to step on the gas this year to save some jobs - otherwise the questions, media and fans will be right there waiting with a shovel next off-season.

Bottom line - I hope they win all their games this year, make me eat crow all year long, and make the playoffs. But, I would be remiss if I didnt question their logic at times and just sat here and ate everything the team PR machine spits out. IF I believed all of that hype - I would still be going back to the carter toole article that talks of how the O-line is great and how much faith they have in Wand and pitts coming into this year and ignoring everythign they said after it.

Vinny
06-23-2005, 02:52 PM
Hey if you believe it, say it, but I think we should recap this bad season after it's done...not before it happens. Most of you guys just talk like this year is lost....in June.

Htown34s
06-23-2005, 02:59 PM
but the tone of article wreaks of a
liberal scent.

Wow. I could say so many things, but none of them would be nice. Maybe this is needed instead:

lib∑er∑al adj.

1.
a. Not limited to or by established, traditional, orthodox, or authoritarian attitudes, views, or dogmas; free from bigotry.
b. Favoring proposals for reform, open to new ideas for progress, and tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others; broad-minded.
c. Of, relating to, or characteristic of liberalism.
d. Liberal Of, designating, or characteristic of a political party founded on or associated with principles of social and political liberalism, especially in Great Britain, Canada, and the United States.
2.
a. Tending to give freely; generous: a liberal benefactor.
b. Generous in amount; ample: a liberal serving of potatoes.
3. Not strict or literal; loose or approximate: a liberal translation.

infantrycak
06-23-2005, 03:00 PM
Andre Johnson and David Carr were no-brainers. ... Really the only steal he made was the DD pick out of the 4th round. While he has a bust to equal out with that steal in Joppru.

At least according to the pre-draft conjecture around here, and elsewhere on the internet, there were several other candidates for the #3 pick in 2003 prominently including Terrell Suggs, Jordan Gross, Terrence Newman and any of the 3 DT's taken in the 1st 12 picks. In hindsight it looks like the obvious pick.

It bogels my mind whenever I see anyone lay Joppru at CC's doorstep as a poor choice. He had an injury free history. Short of omniscience I don't see how anyone can say CC should have predicted his injuries.

U4ikrob
06-23-2005, 03:15 PM
Hey if you believe it, say it, but I think we should recap this bad season after it's done...not before it happens. Most of you guys just talk like this year is lost....in June.


Good point - I certainly hope my tone of cinicism and questioning didnt lead you and others into thinking my view is the season is lost and its a forgone conclusion - lets wrap it up and start throwing the dirt over it. I dont think that - I know we still have to PLAY the games. When the game comes on - i'll be right there cheering and screaming at my TV with the best of em cheering on my fav team - The Texans - Win or lose. But it is slow news season so thus the questions just keep rising. I will try to taper my cinycal view a bit more and try to keep the optomistic door open. Just tougehr to do this year than the last 3 by far IMO.

Vinny
06-23-2005, 04:36 PM
Hey, if these moves don't work out for the team we will have a common cause come December. I want to win now also, but I think that we really haven't been talented enough to win earlier unless we played very high risk football. I think we keep opening it up as we gain talent and experience. I think that the product you see take the field will be dynamic at times. I've stated in other threads that in the AFC only Peyton Manning, Trent Green, Jake Plummer and Tom Brady threw for more yards than David Carr last year. I think the Texans young line has some upside and it is not all about switching names every year.
This offseason - Honestly I felt The Glenn and Sharper releases were very bad calls by the front office and I would have never made the trade for P-buc over Glenn. I noticed (http://www.houstontexans.com/fan_zone/messageboards/showpost.php?p=63770&postcount=6) and commented in a game thread about Sharper's poor play early last year so there may not be as big a talent gap to Greenwood as you perceive. Talented guys who have lost a step and aren't bringing it with some passion get moved on sometimes. Time will tell if the Texans are better talent evaluators than us. :)

Htown34s
06-23-2005, 05:08 PM
Hey, if these moves don't work out for the team we will have a common cause come December.


Another point to make is that if these moves don't work out we are still in excellent shape cap-wise to keep working on building the team.

Things aren't really that dire. It could be worse, we could be making a bunch of changes and sacrificing our future. THAT is really cause for alarm. This is really a smart gamble that C&C are making.

jr0ck
06-23-2005, 05:36 PM
Originally Posted by U4ikrob
This offseason - Honestly I felt The Glenn and Sharper releases were very bad calls by the front office and I would have never made the trade for P-buc over Glenn.

i was pretty sure this horse was beaten beyond the grave at the time of the glenn/sharper departure's. they were technically released by us because, and only because, they didn't want to stay for the money/role's we offered. ironically both players got deals/role's similair to what our front office was percieved to have in mind for glenn and sharper if they had stayed. it's a two way road :brickwall !!!

about the article:
WOW, this guy and his expectations. frankly it blows my mind on daily basis when i visit this board and read some of the moaning chicken little's about how wrong CC and co. are wrong and how our team is doomed, but to discredit the franchise's progress thus far and writing off any glimpse's of the potential of our young nuclei of player's have shown is just to much for me to take. am i weird, as a fan, for not realistically expecting a super bowl every year? am i strange for thinking that, despite all the knowledge at my disposal, i know very very little about the texans compared to CC/caper's? is it odd of me to realize it would take more than a team name and a full roster for houston football to be a dominant juggernaut? if building an omnipotent football team was as easy as some make it seem, then why would there be teams like the bengals, cardinals, browns, etc? following the logic that we should already be a force in the NFL, the aforementioned teams should be equally talented and succesful because they've been around longer than 4 years, which is obviously the maximum amount of time that is required to be a dynasty in the NFL.

and how dare ric sweeney try and make the claim that our biggest moment is still 19-10? what about jacksonville as the seconds ran down? or our first winning streak last year when we hosted oakland? hell, i think KC last year deserve's mention right up there with the opener in miami in '03. last but not least, sweeping two of our three division rivals last year (4-2 in your divison isn't to shabby!). yes 19-10 was a great way to start things off as a franchise, yes is is cool to own d-town as much as it is to own the jags and tacks, but i guarantee that all the game's i mentioned above mean just about the same on a national stage (in terms of respect and attention garnered from said games)...next to nothing. it takes successful longevity (in this case, regular visits to the play-off's to start) to mean anything to anyone but the fans of the team, and i promise all of those accomplishments mean something to me. i think i just feel that the journey has been just as rewarding as our end results have been so far, and when i feel that i am witnessing the moves that will ultimately result in a lombardi in houston it just adds even more to it. disturbing, this lack of faith is....... :rolleyes: :cool:

HardKnockTexan
06-23-2005, 06:27 PM
If I remember correctly, and please correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that we didn't make the playoffs when Sharper and Glenn were on the team. Them leaving did nothing but open up spots for young talent to be displayed to our hungry fans. People need to jump off the Sharper/Glenn business. They were fun to have around but both were aging. Many times last year I saw Sharper get to the ball late and Glenn get beat on inside slants where in previous years he would of batted the ball down. Lets give these new guys a shot before we start critisizing. God the offseason is horrible.

Texansbacker
06-24-2005, 12:02 AM
Nice post jr0ck. The Texans have had some great moments since 19-10 indeed, although the Cowboy spanking was extra special with cheese.

The opener at Miami was great, as was strumming Jacksonville, the Titans, da Raidas, even the loss against Minnesota showed some progress and a possible glimpse of things to come.

The writer mentioned that the Texans have had no pass rush and that is true. He failed to account however for the fact that our D-linemen were all not 100% healthy. For our D to be effective the D-line needs to dominate and everything else will come together but it starts up front. Same on the O-line and I hope the experience gained by Wand last season will turn him into the player he is hoped for and provide the protection Carr needs.

If the Texans get good line play, then and only then will we get to see the talent and speed of our skill players on both sides of the ball.

Nighthawk
06-24-2005, 12:39 AM
I'm not here much and rarely post, but i agree completely with the assessment in the article. this team will probably not do so well again this year and then i hope we'll go out and look for a coach (and a GM?) that can light a fire under the players we have and acquire the players we need. So far it's been just a play dress up NFL team.

http://www.houstonprofootball.com/slant/slant55.html

Good article and sums up many things I felt and have mentioned on this board several times this off-season in particular.

rittenhouserobz
06-24-2005, 06:20 AM
I'm not following your use of the word "liberal" in this context? Care to enlighten?

It is hard to explain, but if you listen to a liberal commentary, then you will see what I mean. They are really good at pointing out the problems in the other guy. I will stop there before I :goodnight . :)

Anyway the article accentuated the bad and barely touched the good.

rittenhouserobz
06-24-2005, 06:37 AM
Wow. I could say so many things, but none of them would be nice. Maybe this is needed instead:

lib∑er∑al adj.

1.
a. Not limited to or by established, traditional, orthodox, or authoritarian attitudes, views, or dogmas; free from bigotry.
b. Favoring proposals for reform, open to new ideas for progress, and tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others; broad-minded.
c. Of, relating to, or characteristic of liberalism.
d. Liberal Of, designating, or characteristic of a political party founded on or associated with principles of social and political liberalism, especially in Great Britain, Canada, and the United States.
2.
a. Tending to give freely; generous: a liberal benefactor.
b. Generous in amount; ample: a liberal serving of potatoes.
3. Not strict or literal; loose or approximate: a liberal translation.

I apologize if I deeply offended anybody. My comment was not aimed at anyone. I was using the word incorrectly. Thanks for correcting me. :ouch: