Keep Texans Talk Google Ad Free!
Venmo Tip Jar | Paypal Tip Jar
Thanks for your support! 🍺😎👍
Chronicle: The Mallett/Hoyer Competition
- Thread starter Marcus
- Start date
From what I gather, everyone against Hoyer winning the job is in the "sooner we find our franchise QB the better" camp.
They know Hoyer isn't our franchise QB because he couldn't win the starting job or the back up job in Pittsburgh, Arizona, or Cleveland. & Cleveland hurts the worse, because they just signed the guy who failed in Tampa Bay to be their starting QB & their back up is shacking up with his highschool coach to keep him out of trouble.
They want to see if Mallett is it or not & just move on.
Worse case scenario is that Hoyer/Mallett is "good enough" like Schaub. Then we're stuck threading water for the next few years. Maybe good enough to get into the play offs. Too good to get a top 10 pick.
My only fear is that OB won't recognize "good enough" for what it is & do what needs to be done to get our QB when the team is ready for him. If we're good enough to get to the play offs with Hoyer/Mallett, but not a serious contender (say we get blown out in the divisional round) then we need to do what we need to do to move up & get the guy we want, if we don't expect him to fall. The Ravens were in that position & got their guy at 18. The Packers were as well, they got their guy at 24.
speedfreek
All Pro
They are identical in the most important way -- they are both Pats castoffs, and
that seems to be the largest determining factor in who BoB brings onboard..
(both players and coaches...)
Just hope coach is right, or he may just have given the pink soap guys new life..
that seems to be the largest determining factor in who BoB brings onboard..
(both players and coaches...)
Just hope coach is right, or he may just have given the pink soap guys new life..
If either guy had shown to be as good as pre-Lisfranc Schaub, very few here would be complaining. If either guy had shown to be as good as pre-Lisfranc Schaub, they would have cost a lot more $$$$ on the FA market.
We don't really know how good (or bad) Mallett is. We've seen Hoyer, and he's never shown to be as good as Schaub was. That's why in this instance, many prefer the unknown to the known. I don't know if O'Brien can be included in "the many".
So, what teams have a "franchise" QB these days? Out of the the 32, what teams have them? And why do we need a 'franchise' QB to get to the SB?
I know we've around this block before, but it seems like it never gets settled.
The Pencil Neck
Hall of Fame
Everybody's got their own definitions of all the terms and their own opinions on which players are good or bad and to what extent. It's something that can't be settled.
At least until everyone just agrees with me.
Because I'm right that Mallett is the next great franchise QB and guys like Peyton and Brady will fade into obscurity in the shadow of his greatness.
OK. That's a joke. I'm hoping it's the truth, but it's a joke until it happens.
Yeah... I'm not in the "sooner we find our franchise QB the better." camp.
I'm in the, "I hope OB doesn't think he has a franchise QB when he don't" camp.
Here's my list. 4 didn't make the playoffs last year.
By the divisional round last year, the only teams left were on this list.
The year before? 7 of 8 were on the list.
The year before that? 6 of 8 were on the list. One of those two was Houston.
Patriots
Packers
Colts
Steelers
Ravens
*Falcons
Broncos
*Saints
*Chargers
Panthers
Seahawks
Cowboys
*Giants
The answer to your question is that it's "possible" to get to the Superbowl w/o that Franchise QB, but it's pretty unlikely you'll even make the divisional round without him, much less advance.
Found an amusing comment on a pre-season QB ranking last year. http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000388688/article/quarterback-index-ranking-the-starters-132
Last edited:
infantrycak
Hall of Fame
Mallett is not a Pats castoff. He told them 2 years ago he would not re-sign with them.
Marshall
Not pretty, but ALIVE!
I prefer ~Sarcasm~ because of convenience, but it won't work unless it become well known and so far it hasn't.I just like blue.
I always use this
for sarcasm
Maybe because, in spite of your little disclaimer, you are doing it wrong...
sar·casm
ˈsärˌkazəm/
noun
noun: sarcasm; plural noun: sarcasms
the use of irony to mock or convey contempt.
Marshall
Not pretty, but ALIVE!
The definition isn't at issue. The method of communicating tone in a written forum is.Maybe because, in spite of your little disclaimer, you are doing it wrong...
sar·casm
ˈsärˌkazəm/
noun
noun: sarcasm; plural noun: sarcasms
the use of irony to mock or convey contempt.
You're brilliant. No tone.
You're
Marshall
Not pretty, but ALIVE!
Computer logged out in the middle of the ~Brilliant~ post.
Playoffs
Hall of Fame
(on what he is looking at in the decision to name a starting quarterback) “That’s a good question, that’s a very good question. We look at a lot of different things...
We look at how they are in the meetings, how alert they are in the meetings, and both these guys have been really good in our meetings, whether it’s a unit meeting, a team meeting, or a position meeting.
We look at how they practice out on the field. What type of decisions do they make? Are they good decisions? Are they poor decisions relative to what we’ve coached them? Are they decisions that are going to help the team, you know, help the team win the game, score a touchdown, kick a field goal, or just manage the game? Reserve the right to punt in some of these situations that we work on in practice.
I would say that both guys have shown us they can be the starter. I don’t think there’s a situation here where one guy has just been that much better on any given day than the other guy. They both practice very well.
I think it’s helped our team. Our team has practiced well because the ball comes out very well, very quickly and accurately.
These guys take command at the line of scrimmage.
Both these guys know how to run an offensive huddle in pro football.
They’re leaders, so I think it’s helped our team.
Like I said, when the timing is right, when I feel good about who that guy is going to be, we’ll make a decision.”
We look at how they practice out on the field. What type of decisions do they make? Are they good decisions? Are they poor decisions relative to what we’ve coached them? Are they decisions that are going to help the team, you know, help the team win the game, score a touchdown, kick a field goal, or just manage the game? Reserve the right to punt in some of these situations that we work on in practice.
I would say that both guys have shown us they can be the starter. I don’t think there’s a situation here where one guy has just been that much better on any given day than the other guy. They both practice very well.
I think it’s helped our team. Our team has practiced well because the ball comes out very well, very quickly and accurately.
These guys take command at the line of scrimmage.
Both these guys know how to run an offensive huddle in pro football.
They’re leaders, so I think it’s helped our team.
Like I said, when the timing is right, when I feel good about who that guy is going to be, we’ll make a decision.”
CretorFrigg
Fire Rick Smith
The more I think about this, I get pissed off. Why do I invest so much of my time caring about a team that has no desire to improve the QB position? I look at teams in the playoffs last year, and they all had a good, if not a franchise player at quarterback. The four teams with a first round bye (New England, Denver, Seattle, Green Bay) all have franchise quarterbacks. No, it's not a coincidence. A QB is the most important player on a team, and they're the player that makes a good team great.
And here we have two scrubs, two rejects in the NFL battling it out. There's no way Mallet or Hoyer are even top 15 in the league. What a damn joke.
And here we have two scrubs, two rejects in the NFL battling it out. There's no way Mallet or Hoyer are even top 15 in the league. What a damn joke.
Last edited:
corytx8
Rookie
The Pencil Neck
Hall of Fame
There's a huge desire between having no desire and having no opportunity, or at least, not recognizing the opportunity when it presented itself.
Every team in the league is trying to find that guy or to develop that guy. You can't just go down to the franchise quarterback store and pick one up. Very few people, including the Seahawks,thought they got a franchise quarterback when they nabbed Russell Wilson. No one thought Tom Brady or Tony Romo was going to be franchise quarterback when they were coming out of college.
Is this about Bridgewater?
Would you be content now if we had drafted Bridgewater & probably missed the playoffs last year just as well? Would you feel like "at least we're trying"?
Or is it because we didn't draft a guy this year? Bryce Petty maybe?
So if you were the GM, what move would you have made to get the Texans a franchise QB?
Marshall
Not pretty, but ALIVE!
Some people are never content. They believe everything is somebody else's fault. But it's actually a chosen lifestyle.
Every year there are 31 disappointed teams. Do all of them care nothing of winning? Which QB has taken their team to the championships the last couple of years in their first or second season. The only one I know of was Wilson and he was a third rounder rather than the messianic QB savior and he was surrounded by a great team.
Last edited:
I would've traded back into the 2nd and picked Garrapolo. That guy has one of the quickest releases I've seen and seems to be a good decision maker with good movement skill and a good enough arm. In other words a franchise QB that will be Brady's successor.
Decisions like these are what makes the Pats the Pats.
Decisions like these are what makes the Pats the Pats.
Honoring Earl 34
Something Witty !
How do we know Garrapolo is better than Mallett or Savage ?
Statistically speaking, a 3rd round QB is only as likely to succeed as a 4th or 5th round QB. & not more likely to succeed than the third rounder we already have.
OB spoke well of Savage before the draft, even had some speculating we would draft him in the second. I don't recall him saying much about the kid from Eastern Carolina.
Last edited:
Hervoyel
BUENO!
I'd have liked to had "polo" as well. At the same time I'm not all that upset about where we are. I really do think Mallett is going to surprise a lot of people, take this job over Hoyer, and run with it all the way to the postseason.
I also believe that if OB had chosen to just take a shot at Mallett earlier in the season we'd have made it to the playoffs in 2014. I'm not knocking him for not doing it though. I just don't think (in hindsight) that doing that is in OB's nature. Either way it was his call and he's going to approach this the way he wants to but I don't see him bringing Hoyer in as being necessarily an admission that Mallett isn't capable of great things. I think he's improved the position group when he had a chance to do so following a season where he needed 4 guys playing to get to the end. He learned a lesson about depth and he brought in a guy he knew with experience in his offense. Kubiak had a similar experience and went from regularly keeping only 2 QB's active to 3 for a while. If Hoyer can beat out Mallett then he should start but having said that I think it's more about less drop-off at the position if Mallett goes down. Letting Hoyer compete for the starting job is mostly about pushing Mallett and was probably a condition of Hoyer coming here to begin with. That he accepted the Texans telling him he'd get a fair shot to compete at starting says a lot about what he thinks of OB and how honest he'd be about that.
Mallett beats out Hoyer and has a Pro Bowl season (not one of those that just blows people away but one where he gets to go after a couple of bigger names pass due to "injuries" and other junk. Call it a borderline Pro Bowl season if you will.
I also believe that if OB had chosen to just take a shot at Mallett earlier in the season we'd have made it to the playoffs in 2014. I'm not knocking him for not doing it though. I just don't think (in hindsight) that doing that is in OB's nature. Either way it was his call and he's going to approach this the way he wants to but I don't see him bringing Hoyer in as being necessarily an admission that Mallett isn't capable of great things. I think he's improved the position group when he had a chance to do so following a season where he needed 4 guys playing to get to the end. He learned a lesson about depth and he brought in a guy he knew with experience in his offense. Kubiak had a similar experience and went from regularly keeping only 2 QB's active to 3 for a while. If Hoyer can beat out Mallett then he should start but having said that I think it's more about less drop-off at the position if Mallett goes down. Letting Hoyer compete for the starting job is mostly about pushing Mallett and was probably a condition of Hoyer coming here to begin with. That he accepted the Texans telling him he'd get a fair shot to compete at starting says a lot about what he thinks of OB and how honest he'd be about that.
Mallett beats out Hoyer and has a Pro Bowl season (not one of those that just blows people away but one where he gets to go after a couple of bigger names pass due to "injuries" and other junk. Call it a borderline Pro Bowl season if you will.
Hervoyel
BUENO!
We don't and we can't yet. Maybe New England has a handle on whether he's better than Mallett but who really knows. I'd would have liked to see us get him though.
Honoring Earl 34
Something Witty !
That's the bottom line . Until a QB gets into a real game after a team has a chance to watch film and game plan for him , gets popped in the chin a few times , it's speculation .
Marshall
Not pretty, but ALIVE!
The biggest difference is that Mallet was a FA in 2015 and Garropola is tied up until 2018. This makes the choice far more than simply who the best QB is.
Playoffs
Hall of Fame
Honoring Earl 34
Something Witty !
I would've drafted Aaron Rodgers with the 16th pick of the 2005 draft.
We had DFC .
markn
All Pro
The F is for Franchise, right?
Honoring Earl 34
Something Witty !
Never popped in my mind .
We don't, just like any QB that's drafted.
I'm just going by what I saw and his game looks a lot like Romo's to me.
markn
All Pro
Overrated and liable to make hilarious mistakes at the most costly moment?
(just a joke, I'd take Romo over our ragtag collection in a heartbeat)
Honoring Earl 34
Something Witty !
cland
Waterboy
I love the schizophrenic media coverage on the starter issue. First the report is "Holy Smokes, O'Brien's going to pick a QB in a day or two!!!," to now being reported, "Breaking News: O'Brien will choose his starter after a preseason game...trust us we're right this time!"
`
True, you could say that about Winston/Mariota/any rookie QB.
Although as I said above, I've seen enough of Garrapolo in All Star/Preseason to think he would be the best QB on the roster right now.
So it's like judging a chili cook off without taking a bite .
True, you could say that about Winston/Mariota/any rookie QB.
Although as I said above, I've seen enough of Garrapolo in All Star/Preseason to think he would be the best QB on the roster right now.
dalemurphy
Hall of Fame
Wow, really? I totally understand your skepticism regarding the Texan QBs. However, what has Garrapolo shown so far to give you more confidence in him than what Mallett showed at Cleveland last year?
I really think Mallett can be the answer at QB. (Top 15 next yr and eventually top 10) But I think Garrapolo has the ability to be Romo or better. (Top 5-10.) In short I think Garappolo has more upside due to better feet/release and accuracy. Although I will admit this is just speculation.
dalemurphy
Hall of Fame
Makes sense. I worry about Mallett's footwork... I think that will always be an issue for someone with his length.
Texan_fan_13
Needed: OL now that we have a QB worth it
I too think Mallett may be the answer, I actually think he is the answer. Each of these QBs were drafted to backup and or replace Tom Brady should the need arise. From what i can tell Mallett also has it between ears and also has a slight arrogant edge to him, which i think winning QBs need. It remains to be seen, but the guy has a moxie i don't see in Garrapolo or Romo for that matter.
Playoffs
Hall of Fame
610AM impromptu interview with former Oiler S Steve Jackson who also spent 12 years as an NFL defensive secondary coach(Bills, Redskins, Lions)... they covered a lot of ground, so trying to parse this into proper topics
***************************
Mallett -- all potential, don't see him putting a good product on the field
Hoyer -- intagibles, known quantity, steady, can get you to 9-7, first round of playoffs
Character/leadership/accountability/leading a team much more important than people know.
Q: So Hoyer would be your starter? SJ: Absolutely.
Q: 2015 Record for Texans? SJ: 8-8
Last edited:
Wow.... and I thought I was skeptical!
Sounds like he's as leery of Mallett's "upside" as I am.
Sorry - and I know it's just me - but I've been disappointed by "potential" too many times to put a lot of stock in it.
I agree. With the whole post. Doesn't really matter which guy wins, he'll do what OB wants him to do & if he has to go to plan B due to injury, it shouldn't stop us from getting to where we need to be.