Originally Posted by sandman
Just because a QB is better than what the Texans have on the roster doesn't mean I would want them on the roster.
For example, for most of Eli Manning's career, he has been closer to Matt Schaub than to Tom Brady. 81% QBR for his career, poor TD:INT ratio, poor completion %, missed playoffs four out of last five years.
Matt Schaub has as many 12-win seasons as Eli, and both lost in the Divisional round of the playoffs. Eli has averaged 9 wins a season over his career, while Schaub averaged 8.
But he twice in 10 years rode a playoff hot streak to two fluke Super Bowls, and everyone points to him as a clutch QB who "just wins".
...in that fifth year he took his team to the Super Bowl and beat Tom Brady in the process.
When the bright lights came on and he was on the biggest stage in the NFL, Eli delivered. (with very possibly the luckiest damned catch since the Steeler's "Immaculate Reception")
Can we say that about Schaub...?
And I said "we" because I am
a Schaub fan.
Still am. (well as much as I can be a fan of a non-Texan
But the original post was in response to ThunderKyss's implication that there were 11 teams on our schedule that we have a 50-50 chance of beating because they're in a similar state of "rebuild" to us.
My point was four of those teams have "established" starting QBs. And by "established" I mean they've been there and taken their teams to winning seasons and/or playoff land.
The naked truth is as of this moment
We. Do. Not.
As such - and this is the only point I was making - that gives them something of an edge that we would be unwise to overlook.