Monday Morning QB (5/5/08)

[b0ng]

So, Peter King decided to do a power ranking this morning, and I think some of the results are interesting. Mr. King's rankings of NFL football franchises 1 - 32.

Originally Posted by Peter King *****

19. Houston. Logic says an 8-8 team that finished 3-1 with a young quarterback and maturing defense should be ready to take the next step, particularly with a salty old hand like Alex Gibbs taking an underachieving running game into his capable hands this spring and summer. But Matt Schaub -- efficient (.664) but inexperienced in his half season at the helm -- is really still an unknown, as is the 28-year-old offensive coordinator who will mentor Schaub, Kyle Shanahan, the youngest coordinator in the league. We'll have to see the progress first to believe the Texans are much improved, particularly in a division and conference as tough as the one they have to conquer if they hope to play in January.

Well fiddlesticks. Looks like our O-Coordinator is too young.

Here's another that you mind find interesting:

Originally Posted by Peter King the Patriot Homer

1. New England Patriots. . .Some might read into New England's draft approach as arrogant. Quarterback in the third round, dealing another third-round pick for a 2009 second-rounder, no offensive linemen. I view it as a confident team doing what's best for the long haul. The Patriots' response to almost getting Brady killed in the Super Bowl -- basically, doing nothing on the offensive line in free-agency or the draft -- tells me Dante Scarnecchia, New England's offensive line guru since the Hannah years, will figure out a way to seal the cracks.

Yeah, and people think that posters on this board are crazy homers.

[PapaL]

I read that article yesterday and I can't say I agree with 19 but then again if we win people will notice that. Since when does the age of the coordinator impact his talent? Guess Peter wants us all to be middle aged.

[ledzeppelin229]

Peter King worships everything from Boston. What a surprise, he's from Massachussetts.

I can't stand him.

[b0ng]

Originally Posted by PapaL

I read that article yesterday and I can't say I agree with 19 but then again if we win people will notice that. Since when does the age of the coordinator impact his talent? Guess Peter wants us all to be middle aged.

I'm not really surprised by it, because the media thinks we've had a poor draft, and have only acquired other teams cast-offs (Brown, Reeves) in the off season. Couple that with the fact that this is the Houston Texans, and I could see him ranking us all the way into the lower 20's.

I think the best part of the article is when he talks about how the Patriots O-line was a big glaring weakness in the Super Bowl, but they fixed the line by doing nothing, and this will work. I LOVE IT I LOVE IT I LOVE IT YUM YUM.

[hadaad]

In King's defense, while I haven't looked at the schedule yet, it's not likely that they play the Giants a whole lot this season. And really, nobody's going to try and pressure them the way the Giants did, are they?

[b0ng]

Originally Posted by hadaad

In King's defense, while I haven't looked at the schedule yet, it's not likely that they play the Giants a whole lot this season. And really, nobody's going to try and pressure them the way the Giants did, are they?

You're right, they did go 16-0 and rolled through at least one tough D-line in the playoffs. The way Peter King writes (and has always written) about the Patriots just makes me want to gag. I can only imagine what the articles will be like if Brady gets hurt on some sort of cheapshot from a D-lineman this year, as King's (and that other no-talent Bill Simmons) articles will probably call for a public execution.

In short, I hate Peter King.

[badboy]

Originally Posted by b0ng

So, Peter King decided to do a power ranking this morning, and I think some of the results are interesting. Mr. King's rankings of NFL football franchises 1 - 32.



Well fiddlesticks. Looks like our O-Coordinator is too young.

Here's another that you mind find interesting:



Yeah, and people think that posters on this board are crazy homers.

#19 King's point seems to be accurate to me.

[b0ng]

Originally Posted by badboy

#19 King's point seems to be accurate to me.

I disagree as our QB play last season seems to have been much better than in seasons past.

What's the definition of progress?

EDIT: I love having Mondays off.

[badboy]

Originally Posted by b0ng

I disagree as our QB play last season seems to have been much better than in seasons past.

What's the definition of progress?

EDIT: I love having Mondays off.

I interpreted his comments to say he would wait to see if this coming season will be better than last in regards to QB. I think that is correct.

[b0ng]

Originally Posted by badboy

I interpreted his comments to say he would wait to see if this coming season will be better than last in regards to QB. I think that is correct.

Wouldn't that be true for 90% of the NFL? Specifically with teams who don't have a QB named Manning or Brady?

[Lucky]

Originally Posted by badboy

#19 King's point seems to be accurate to me.

On the surface, maybe. But, the Vikings, Bills, and Jets all have shakier QB situations, all finished below the Texans in record, but now are ranked ahead of the Texans. And I'm not even considering the ranking he gave the Packers, when he acknowledges that his opinion of Aaron Rodgers is based upon one half of football.

So maybe Matt Schaub isn't as good as his half season in '97 showed? He's still better than anything the Vikings, Bills, Jets, and Packers can roll out on Sundays. I firmly believe that the Texans & the Titans are better than any of the teams King ranks #13 - #18.

[b0ng]

Yeah or pretty much what he said.

EDIT: Actually, if he bagged on the defensive play, and ranked the Texans 19 I'd be a lot more understanding of it. Our defense wasn't so horrible that it was unwatchable, but it was definitely cringe-worthy at times. Watching old ass Jamaal Lewis rip us up for 10 and 15 yard gains in the 3rd quarter of the Brows game just made me sad.

Our outside linebacking and secondary were definite albatross's on defense, and an article pointing that out, I'd be firmly in tune with.

But seriously, just say you don't know anything about said team if you're not willing to do your job and investigate a team. I think all last season proved was that our backup and our starter weren't too far apart in talent that it'd be a huge deal if we lost our starter (unlike the Colts and the Pats).

[BigBull17]

Originally Posted by Lucky

On the surface, maybe. But, the Vikings, Bills, and Jets all have shakier QB situations, all finished below the Texans in record, but now are ranked ahead of the Texans. And I'm not even considering the ranking he gave the Packers, when he acknowledges that his opinion of Aaron Rodgers is based upon one half of football.

So maybe Matt Schaub isn't as good as his half season in '97 showed? He's still better than anything the Vikings, Bills, Jets, and Packers can roll out on Sundays. I firmly believe that the Texans & the Titans are better than any of the teams King ranks #13 - #18.

Um, Carolina? No way they are better than us. Im also kind of skeptical of Clevland at 9. But, what do I know?

[Lucky]

Originally Posted by BigBull17

Um, Carolina? No way they are better than us. Im also kind of skeptical of Clevland at 9. But, what do I know?

Well, Anderson had a very good season. And Delhomme has a track record. I just felt that if King was to make a big deal about Schaub's unproven track record, he should be consistent from team to team. I think the QB position is among the least of my concerns for the '08 Texans.

[Specnatz]

Originally Posted by Lucky

Well, Anderson had a very good season. And Delhomme has a track record. I just felt that if King was to make a big deal about Schaub's unproven track record, he should be consistent from team to team. I think the QB position is among the least of my concerns for the '08 Texans.

That is the problem with most national sprts writers there is no way that they are consistant. the only one I can think of at the time that is sonsistant is Michael Smith of espn.

[Thorn]

As with any set of predictions about the whole league by a sports writer, you can ignore them. It was an interesting read though, and as far as the Texans go, I consider them a little above the middle of the pack compaired to the rest of the NFL, so 19 is to low and 13 is to high.

It was nice to see someone rating us above the Titans though.

[DBCooper]

Don't ya just love rankings in May.

[Second Honeymoon]

Originally Posted by b0ng

So, Peter King decided to do a power ranking this morning, and I think some of the results are interesting. Mr. King's rankings of NFL football franchises 1 - 32.



Well fiddlesticks. Looks like our O-Coordinator is too young.

Here's another that you mind find interesting:



Yeah, and people think that posters on this board are crazy homers.

When the Patriots were irrelevant and ****te, he was a huge Giants homer. I think he just ties up the current East Coast bandwagon (even when they all suck) and lets it fly.

i do like the guy but to put the Pats at #1 is dubious. The Giants need to be #1. No question. I was never a huge wrestling guy, but I do remember one saying that Ric Flair used to say. 'You gotta beat the man, to be the man.'

The Giants also lost little talent and added some quality in the draft especially with Kenny Phillips supplementing their defensive back corps...at #31 no less.

[Second Honeymoon]

Originally Posted by hadaad

In King's defense, while I haven't looked at the schedule yet, it's not likely that they play the Giants a whole lot this season. And really, nobody's going to try and pressure them the way the Giants did, are they?

if you don't think anybody is going to send the heat at Brady like the Giants did, you got another thing coming. The Giants showed a blueprint to beat the Pats and teams in the NFL are always copying other teams. The big question is whether other teams have the personnel and fire to put that consistent pressure on Brady. They certainly won't play the Giants unless its in the Super Bowl...but why not throw the kitchen sink at them? We already know what happens if you don't....

[Second Honeymoon]

Originally Posted by b0ng

I'm not really surprised by it, because the media thinks we've had a poor draft, and have only acquired other teams cast-offs (Brown, Reeves) in the off season. Couple that with the fact that this is the Houston Texans, and I could see him ranking us all the way into the lower 20's.

I think the best part of the article is when he talks about how the Patriots O-line was a big glaring weakness in the Super Bowl, but they fixed the line by doing nothing, and this will work. I LOVE IT I LOVE IT I LOVE IT YUM YUM.

I dont think the media has taken us to task over our draft. The Brown pick somewhat but it did address a position of need, even if not the most critical in need by some estimations.

The media has widely praised us for Moulden and Adibi, and you gotta figure we have to count 1/2 of a Matt Schaub as part of this draft as well.

Most grades I have seen have been decent with no fails (like Tennessee). Of course its all speculative until they put the pads on.