Gosselin's Off Season Rankings

[Texans_Chick]

Link

He has the Texans rated 31st:

31. Houston Texans

The decision to pass up offensive playmakers Reggie Bush and Vince Young in the 2006 draft will haunt the Texans for years to come. After finishing 28th in offense, Houston canned QB David Carr and traded for untested Matt Schaub.

Final 2006 rank: 25

Though a new QB means hope for many, the reality is that the Texans have a:

1. New untested QB.

2. A absolutely new offensive hybrid scheme that has never been tested and is new to the players.

3. Lots of really young players and then some oldish players and few in their career primes.

4. Few established playmakers.

I have some optimism for the uncoming season but realize that nobody's preseason evaluations of the Texans are likely to be very positive given the team's track record and the question marks for the team.

I do hope that with the new offensive scheme that the regular season doesn't end up looking like a protracted training camp like it seemed to last year. For most of the season, the offense looked like they were experimenting with different stuff each week. I don't want another experimental season. I want a team that has an offensive philosophy, that looks like they know what they are doing, and doesn't only look competent with their first rehearsed drive.

I hope this is the year where we get to watch more entertaining football than ugly football.

[Second Honeymoon]

Originally Posted by Texans_Chick

Link

He has the Texans rated 31st:



Though a new QB means hope for many, the reality is that the Texans have a:

1. New untested QB.

2. A absolutely new offensive hybrid scheme that has never been tested and is new to the players.

3. Lots of really young players and then some oldish players and few in their career primes.

4. Few established playmakers.

I have some optimism for the uncoming season but realize that nobody's preseason evaluations of the Texans are likely to be very positive given the team's track record and the question marks for the team.

I do hope that with the new offensive scheme that the regular season doesn't end up looking like a protracted training camp like it seemed to last year. For most of the season, the offense looked like they were experimenting with different stuff each week. I don't want another experimental season. I want a team that has an offensive philosophy, that looks like they know what they are doing, and doesn't only look competent with their first rehearsed drive.

I hope this is the year where we get to watch more entertaining football than ugly football.

that guy's an *****. we have greatly improved this offseason. this guy must be from the Rod Woodson school of NFL research.

[Texans_Chick]

Originally Posted by Second Honeymoon

that guy's an *****. we have greatly improved this offseason. this guy must be from the Rod Woodson school of NFL research.

To be fair, we don't know how much the Texans have improved. You can guess, but there are a lot of untested parts of both the offense and defense.

For example, the teams he has at the top of his list are teams that have proven schemes and key playmakers.

We can guess that Schaub is going to be a much better player than Carr, but given we haven't seen him play extensively as a starter for the Texans.

We can guess that Green is going to be the Green of old, but we don't know that.

We can guess that having a lot of money invested on the defensive line will pay off eventually, but we haven't seen that yet.

Etc with all parts of the team.

Until the Texans actually play better and more consistently, most off season rankings are going to look like this.

[nunusguy]

Dang ! Why do I have the feeling that Gosselin is now on ESPNs payroll ?
Could it be because he's still dwelling on the 2006 Draft after its been more than a month since we've completed the 2007 Draft ? And we may regret passing on VY for years, but 2006 2nd round pick/running back Maurice Jones-Drew had a better rookie season than Bush. Lamenting on not drafting Bush sure sounds like one of ESPNs favorite refrains to me.
I like your take much better than Gosselins, TC. Smith & Kubiak have brought a lot of new people in, some young and some not so young. And I'm also a little anxious about another learning curve, maybe just a mini-curve, but still some differences with the offense under new OC Sherman.
But its all about Schaub. We really don't know what we've got here. We've got some clues, but not much beyond that considering Matts very limited experience of regular season play in the league the last 3 years. Having said that, I still totally approve of stepping up the way they did, making the trade, and taking the chance.

[Brando]

If we ranked 25th with David Carr last year we should only IMPROVE with Matt Schaub.

[OzzO]

I think after his 9th selection, the rest was just filler. Besides, to drop us from his 25th to his 31st after this offseason acquisitions, then talk about the '06 draft? Yep, filler.

[HJam72]

Originally Posted by Texans_Chick

For example, the teams he has at the top of his list are teams that have proven schemes and key playmakers.

That makes it awfully elementary and trivial to make his decisions, just ignoring what happens in the off-season and focusing on past win/loss records. How good can you be at grading the off-season if you are ignoring the off-season? Why not just give us the win/loss record for every team over the last 4 or 5 years?

Seems to me that he would be better at grading offseasons from 5 years ago, since he's so big on speaking the obvious and not big on predicting something a 2nd grader couldn't do for themselves.

[Porky]

I am not one normally given to delusions of grandeur or pie in the sky unbridled enthusiasm. I think anyone who knows me, or has read my ramblings for the past few years knows that.

It's in that context that I wish to say - this guy is full of ****. He sounds just like these other talking heads who all copy each other.

Ya, it's true we passed on Bush and VY. But, so what? 30 other teams don't have them either, and somehow I think those other 30 teams will probably be allright. At this point, we should be judged on who we did take, and who we signed as FA, rather than on who is not here.

Is Schaub unproven? Sure, but you can see that the pieces are there for him to be an above average starter. I mean, we could ask that to a dozen teams each year? Why wasn't Tennessee asked is Vince unproven? Or Denver asked is Cutler unproven? Or Green Bay asked is Favre unproven? It's a fallacious argument to just single out the Texans on this one.

In the case of both Green and Schaub, it's hard to imagine a scenario where they are not better than their predecessors. They don't have to be all-pro to meet that modest goal. Simply be better than what we had, and that makes the team better. How adding these two (just to single those two out) somehow makes us worse is delusional at best, and frankly just plain ignorant.

To sum up, I am more excited about the upcoming season than any since the first (for obvious reasons). I don't think it is likely we make the playoffs, but I think it's at least 50/50 we have a non-losing season, and for the first time, I honestly cannot rule out the playoffs. Sure, it's a longshot, but it sure beats a no shot, which has been my feeling for the first 5 years of this teams existence.

[infantrycak]

Originally Posted by Texans_Chick

To be fair, we don't know how much the Texans have improved.

True, on the other hand I think it is fair to ask why he actually demoted us from last year. We were the 8th worst team last year. Maybe we shouldn't move up on speculation but it seems like he moved us pretty far down based on ... ?

[TD]

Originally Posted by infantrycak

True, on the other hand I think it is fair to ask why he actually demoted us from last year. We were the 8th worst team last year. Maybe we shouldn't move up on speculation but it seems like he moved us pretty far down based on ... ?

It almost reads like he's penalizing us yet again for 2006 since waiving DC makes our decisions then appear even worse now.

[ATX]

I don't even want to say anything......but he will be eating some crow and that's all I will say.

[TK_Gamer]

What it seems to me is he is rating us based on some fantasy football idea. and in that respect he is probably right, using a combination of fantasy and vegas odds we are pretty close to the bottom because we have so so many unknown elements. would you bet your life savings on a winning record? no, and that appears to be what alot of people are gauging us by. once we have some tangible elements the story will change accordingly IMHO. I think we will be fine and improve substantially from last year personally. but alot of things are up in the air, then throw in a new hybrid offense like he said and you just cant bank on it. I feel positive though. GO TEXANS!

[Lucky]

Originally Posted by Porky

Why wasn't Tennessee asked is Vince unproven? Or Denver asked is Cutler unproven? Or Green Bay asked is Favre unproven?

Favre?

Forget it, he's rolling.

[RTP2110]

So he is basing the 2007 season off of the 2006 draft, and players who aren't even on the team? Yeah, that'll earn him a lot of credibility.

[Overalls]

Not that I think we should be ranked in the top 20 or anything, but this guy writes for a DALLAS newspaper.

[Texans Horror]

No way are the Texans anything less than a top-10 team this year. They have Salaam (who is easily in his prime) and Flanagan (a pro-bowl center) anchoring what will be proven to be one of the greatest lines in the NFL now that Carr is gone. Add to that Walter/Jones backing up AJ and being serviced by an unproven QB who won't go running off the field, and how can anyone expect anything less? This analyst is clearly an id10t.

[Texans_Chick]

Originally Posted by infantrycak

True, on the other hand I think it is fair to ask why he actually demoted us from last year. We were the 8th worst team last year. Maybe we shouldn't move up on speculation but it seems like he moved us pretty far down based on ... ?

Good point.

Though I'm guess that he cared more for the top of his rankings, and then for the bottom gave his list a big WGAS.

[maddogmrb]

Originally Posted by Texans Horror

No way are the Texans anything less than a top-10 team this year. They have Salaam (who is easily in his prime) and Flanagan (a pro-bowl center) anchoring what will be proven to be one of the greatest lines in the NFL now that Carr is gone. Add to that Walter/Jones backing up AJ and being serviced by an unproven QB who won't go running off the field, and how can anyone expect anything less? This analyst is clearly an id10t.

Top 10!! Are u kidding? More like top 2!! The Colts, Pats, & really anybody else will have a hard time staying on the field with us this year .........

[Double Barrel]

Originally Posted by Texans_Chick

Link

He has the Texans rated 31st:



Though a new QB means hope for many, the reality is that the Texans have a:

1. New untested QB.

2. A absolutely new offensive hybrid scheme that has never been tested and is new to the players.

3. Lots of really young players and then some oldish players and few in their career primes.

4. Few established playmakers.

He's got a point and I can understand his perspective. But I've got a little more optimism for the team, just as a chosen perspective. We've got a lot of untested parts and systems, so I don't blame anyone for uncertainty. (Negativity is a different story, though.)

[Texans Horror]

Originally Posted by maddogmrb

Top 10!! Are u kidding? More like top 2!! The Colts, Pats, & really anybody else will have a hard time staying on the field with us this year .........

What can I say? You're probably right. I guess my lack of exuberance is due to the old regime. Top 2. Why aren't we asking the real question: which team will be competing with the Texans this year? I know the Pats are a popular pick and that it's easy to think the Chargers won't be there because of new coaching, but what about Pittsburgh and the Jets? Will they be able to contend with the Texans this year?