Death to Google Ads! Texans Talk Tip Jar! 🍺😎👍
Thanks for your support!
David Carr says Osweiler didn’t get a fair shake?? GMAFB
- Thread starter Marcus
- Start date
bigmck
Rookie
Link
OK, this is a joke, right? You youngsters that weren't around here on Day 1 might not grasp the hilarity of this, but ....
How in the hell does one of the most colossal busts in NFL history become an "NFL analyst"?
Breaking, Breaking.........Ryan Leaf says David Carr didn't get a fair shake.
b0ng
Bad Hombre
Honestly I had this opinion as well but he's not a bad analyst and has said numerous times that he did not put in the work in Houston to be a good QB (which is more self awareness than most guys *cough* Dilfer *cough* have).
He's an ok analyst and can explain nuances of the game in a manner where the average fan can understand what he's trying to say.
I don't agree with this take as the NFL is a cutthroat league and if a guy is that bad you probably aren't cutting a superstar lol
He's an ok analyst and can explain nuances of the game in a manner where the average fan can understand what he's trying to say.
I don't agree with this take as the NFL is a cutthroat league and if a guy is that bad you probably aren't cutting a superstar lol
PapaL
Loose Screw
HWSNBN is an ass. Fair shake my ass. He was given great money to come here and be the man. It took a season to learn that he wasn't who we thought he was. As legit as Derek looks, it's worth it not having Roger or David around. They live in their own little world. Props to Derek tho.
michaelm
vox nihili
Y'all are letting your David Carr butt hurt influence your reasoning.
Just because he was a shitty QB, it doesn't necessarily mean he's a bad analyst, or that he is wrong about Brock.
HOWEVER, he is wrong about Brock.
Osweiler got more than a fair shake here to prove he sucks and he proved it beyond doubt.
Going back to Carr, he has a better background for being an analyst than any of us, but that doesn't stop us from spouting our opinions about football like we know what the **** we're talking about lol
Just because he was a shitty QB, it doesn't necessarily mean he's a bad analyst, or that he is wrong about Brock.
HOWEVER, he is wrong about Brock.
Osweiler got more than a fair shake here to prove he sucks and he proved it beyond doubt.
Going back to Carr, he has a better background for being an analyst than any of us, but that doesn't stop us from spouting our opinions about football like we know what the **** we're talking about lol
It may not have been a fair shake but it's all the "shake" Osweiler was going to get under BOB, especially after that little ahh... "discussion" took place at half time when Savage had his concussion and BOB told Brock he would play the 2nd half. BOB has a short fuse and volatile temper and I have to believe if that altercation took place, and I believe it did, then that was the final nail in Brock's coffin. Whether Brock got a "fair shake" or not he was gone after that incident. JMO.
ChampionTexan
Hall of Fame
Exactly! I'm in complete disagreement with him on this specific opinion, but overall, I believe he's a better analyst than most former players employed by NFLN or ESPN.
Well, if ANYONE should know about receiving a "fair shake" it's David Carr. He probably thinks it's normal to get 5 years of rope no matter how you produce on the field.
Brisco_County
Apples and roadmaps
What is GMAFB?
sandman
Brexit Advisor
You don't know what GMAFB means??? GMAFB...
jradMIT
Veteran
OS is not a spring chicken, this was his fifth season, right. He got 15 starts, that is more than enough to know what he's got or if there is potential lying in wait. What gets missed is how bad he was, his season was probably one of the worst season of a starting qb with that many starts in the last 5 years. The guy had multiple years in the league and he didn't flash something better at all. Its not as if he was up and down and lacked consistency, if Brock was one thing, it was consistent, consistently terrible.
PapaL
Loose Screw
WolverineFan
Hall of Fame
Of course he got a fair shake. Personally, I don't normally agree with jettisoning a guy after only one year in a new offense with new teammates. Guys need time to adjust and then grow. But the Brock situation was unique. He was so bad and his contract was so awful that you couldn't justify giving him the time that you would have given to another player (like Savage for instance).
That contract raised the stakes.
That contract raised the stakes.
Unlike his starting job for the Texans, David Carr earned his job with the NFL. He did commentary at the college level for a couple of years, I think, & obviously impressed someone.
I don't know about that. It's easy for me to believe Osweiler was forced on O'Brien. There's normally a method you can see as an OC/HC make a concerted effort to get their inexperienced QB comfortable, settled in. I don't think I ever felt as though they tried to help Osweiler get into a rhythm, get comfortable.
That's not to say I wish Osweiler was still here, take more like me saying I'm worried about any young QB we bring in. A veteran who knows how to play, no problem. A young guy who doesn't know what he doesn't know... not so much.
EVOLVIST
Kid A
"Ifs" and "buts," right?
The fact is, there wouldn't have ever been a Brock Osweiler if OB hadn't taken the interim tact with Fitzpatrick. To me, that is OB's real mistake, aside from the normal growing pains as a head coach.
Of course I really don't know if Fitz was on OB, Rick, or a combination of the two. I lean toward OB. However, mistake #2 was not drafting a quality QB late in the 1st or in the 2nd round.
Hindsight, right? Yet nearly every one of us was barking for a QB in those rounds.
If the fans can see it, why not an NFL head coach, who is only going to go as far as his choice at QB can take him.
David Carr has a good point, though it should have never gotten to this point.
The fact is, there wouldn't have ever been a Brock Osweiler if OB hadn't taken the interim tact with Fitzpatrick. To me, that is OB's real mistake, aside from the normal growing pains as a head coach.
Of course I really don't know if Fitz was on OB, Rick, or a combination of the two. I lean toward OB. However, mistake #2 was not drafting a quality QB late in the 1st or in the 2nd round.
Hindsight, right? Yet nearly every one of us was barking for a QB in those rounds.
If the fans can see it, why not an NFL head coach, who is only going to go as far as his choice at QB can take him.
David Carr has a good point, though it should have never gotten to this point.
maverick512000
Hall of Fame
Tough to say, I both agree and disagree with him. On one hand Brock was brought into a new team with a mostly new offense and an entirely new coaching style.
Any other time I'd say a guy needs at least a year before you can say he's not the man to lead your team. However, as Wolverinefan said Brocks contract made all the difference here. If you get paid like a star QB then you better be prepared to back it up.
If we had brought Brady or Rogers or Manning in under those same conditions they may not have had a banner year but their talent and skills would have at least let their team have a fighting chance.
Brock was not and is not in the same class as those guys, maybe someday who knows, but we paid him like he was. That's on the FO as much as it is on Brock. If he had only been getting say 10 million a year and still put up those numbers we would have been pissed but maybe willing to give him another season to gel. Getting nearly double that means that most were screaming for his head on a pike
In the end I think I agree that Brock didn't get a fair shake because the stakes and expectations were to high for someone that for all intents and purposes was a rookie. That being said though Brock brought it on himself because he went for the big paycheck without knowing if he could deliver the goods. Basically he bet on himself and came up snake eyes. Which is also a good description of his ability to read the field.
Any other time I'd say a guy needs at least a year before you can say he's not the man to lead your team. However, as Wolverinefan said Brocks contract made all the difference here. If you get paid like a star QB then you better be prepared to back it up.
If we had brought Brady or Rogers or Manning in under those same conditions they may not have had a banner year but their talent and skills would have at least let their team have a fighting chance.
Brock was not and is not in the same class as those guys, maybe someday who knows, but we paid him like he was. That's on the FO as much as it is on Brock. If he had only been getting say 10 million a year and still put up those numbers we would have been pissed but maybe willing to give him another season to gel. Getting nearly double that means that most were screaming for his head on a pike
In the end I think I agree that Brock didn't get a fair shake because the stakes and expectations were to high for someone that for all intents and purposes was a rookie. That being said though Brock brought it on himself because he went for the big paycheck without knowing if he could deliver the goods. Basically he bet on himself and came up snake eyes. Which is also a good description of his ability to read the field.
xtruroyaltyx
Hall of Fame
Was he running out of bounds behind the LOS when he gave this inspiring take?
If he wasn't then there's no way I could take him serious.
If he wasn't then there's no way I could take him serious.
powda
The bridge between stupid and useless is short.
Carr, by his own admission, did not put in the work to be a good QB. Or really even a decent QB.
Why should I believe that he would put in the work to be a good analyst?
That said, I've given him more than enough time on my TV, and he's just a pretty boy talking head with very shallow takes. He actually has the audacity to talk about having a Super Bowl ring. HE NEVER PLAYED A DOWN OF FOOTBALL THAT SEASON. (Sorry for yelling, but I couldn't help it with such a ridiculous act by Carr.) I guess getting Eli's donuts and coffee qualifies for something.
And let's talk about butt hurt. Carr has, on at least two occasions, publicly dissed the Texans and the city of Houston because he feels like he was not treated fairly. He did thank Bob McNair in one of those segments for paying him a helluva' lot of money. . .so at least he's somewhat honest. . .
And yeah, "he has a better background for being an analyst than any of us", but he gets paid for his takes. Our takes are just friends chatting at the local [virtual] bar. Huge difference, my friend.
Brock was given plenty of rope to hang himself. Carr's obvious distaste for Houston and the Texans is influencing his objectivity, which by itself, makes him a shitty analyst.
jradMIT
Veteran
Exactly, none of this he was basically a rookie stuff, he was on his second contract with 4 off seasons, not to mention all the in season prep. No mulligan on this one, reminds of that line from pulp fiction where Marcellus tells Butch "You came close, but you never made it, and if you were gonna make it, you would have made it before now."
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
powda
The bridge between stupid and useless is short.
Well said db as usual.
infantrycak
Hall of Fame
To be clear, Oz was WCO 2012 & 2015, E-P 2013-4. He had 26 attempts in E-P, 279 in WCO.
Thorn
Dirty Old Man
Whatever Carr and assinheimer says is of no relevance, they're both crappy QBs that the Texans cut. Let's face it, the Cleveland Texans, no wait, the Houston Browns, damn it, the Houston Texans have such a horrible history with QBs it's likely we'll draft a 6th round rated QB in the 2nd round and then get all angsty about it when it doesn't work out again. Or we can pay Romo a **** ton of money to be injured so Savage can play so he can get injured as well.
When we see the offense working again like it did under Good Schaub, it probably won't be with anyone we're thinking of right now. And quite possibly with another HC. I would say count on that, but more properly it would be wait on that instead.
When we see the offense working again like it did under Good Schaub, it probably won't be with anyone we're thinking of right now. And quite possibly with another HC. I would say count on that, but more properly it would be wait on that instead.
I don't know about the overall quality of his NFLN analyst work, but he's on point about this....Link
OK, this is a joke, right? You youngsters that weren't around here on Day 1 might not grasp the hilarity of this, but ....
How in the hell does one of the most colossal busts in NFL history become an "NFL analyst"?
Speedy
Former Yeller Dweller
If Brock could put the ball on a receiver, see the field, he would have been a lot better in this offense. Maybe learning a new system (and as some have point out, it wasn't really new) played a small part, but Brock still could have been decent in it had he just been a better QB.
The problem is, Brock wasn't even a good QB in Denver. Much has been made of Hopkins numbers falling this past season with Brock under center. Nuk had a career catch rate of 58.3% coming into 2016, with Fitz, Hoyer and a hodge podge of others throwing him the rock. With Brock in 2016, that catch rate dropped to 51.7%.
In Denver, in an offense he was supposedly more familiar with, it was the same story with their top receiver, Demaryius Thomas. Thomas' career catch rate is 60.7%. In 2015 with Brock at QB, DT's catch rate dropped to 49%. In that same season with a bad Peyton Manning at QB Thomas' catch rate was 65.2%. And of course, this past season with Trevor Siemian, his rate was back up to 62.5%.
Brock can't get his team's top receiver in the game. He didn't here with Hopkins, he couldn't in Denver with Thomas.
So yeah, Carr is right in that QBs haven't lasted very long around here under OB, but that's because the Texans suck so bad at QB evaluation.
jradMIT
Veteran
The thing that is getting missed is just how bad OS was. There are orders of magnitudes bad. He was 2 or 3 magnitudes away from being a competent QB. So yes he didn't have much time, and you could expect a certain level of improvement. But even with size able improvement he would still have been a below average QB. So it wasn't a matter of more time or familiarity, his ceiling was below a competent NFL quarterback so there was no use in keeping him.
Texecutioner
Hall of Fame
WTF is Carr talking about? He should realize that the Texans are the one team that should be off limits for him to speak ill of after he himself admitted that he didn't put the necessary time in that it took to become a great QB in this league. Osweiller was one of the top 5 worst QB's in the entire league this year. Carr really doesn't want to go down this road and should know better. Keep it moving Mittens.
The QB needy Browns trading for Os and then rumored to cut him should speak volumes to HWNSNBM.
Texecutioner
Hall of Fame
And for good reason he hasn't. Not a single one of them has proven him wrong somewhere else after the fact either. His impatience helped us get into the playoffs by shaking things up and not allowing poor QB's to hurt the team without ramifications which likely spread to other position battles as well. It made other players step up at other positions like they had to.
Completely inaccurate comparison. Schaub was hurt off and on in his first two seasons here to where Rosenfels played in plenty of games. Schaub finally got a full season underneath his feet and got into a groove. It could have easily happened in his first season at some point. You don't know. He didn't come here and struggle until year 3. He just couldn't stay on the field long enough to build chemistry. OB's QB's are either hurt half the time or failing for other numerous reasons when they aren't injured. Some of that is his fault as well. But don't sit here and act like OB has had another Schaub sitting on this depth chart that he refuses to play every time he has an incomplete pass. OB's had a ton of trash in here and they're still not doing anything to get a big time guy right now.
TexansSeminole
Hall of Fame
If a QB shows that he deserves more time, I'm sure he'll get it. I'm not going to fault OB for moving on from QBs who have little to no future in the league.
I understand moving on from Mallett. And I sort of understand moving on from Hoyer after he folded on the playoff stage.
But I don't get why Fitzpatrick had to go after only one season. One more year with him running the offense while continuing to prep Savage to be the future starter would have made more sense to me. And, after seeing him in camp, if he thought Savage was 'iffy', then draft someone else in 2015 (Bryce Petty lasted until the 4th) to push him or give Weeden an honest chance to win the job in camp.
TexansSeminole
Hall of Fame
In hindsight, it would have been better to keep Fitz, but again, I don't think he provides what you need to win the championship and he's not someone to build the team around. I don't fault them for moving on from Fitz, but I do fault them for how they moved on.
I still think it would have been nice to see Fitzpatrick in year two (though he did shat the bed year two with the NYJets). Some people think we should have got to year two with Hoyer. & while I understand the apprehension to seeing Osweiler year two, chances are he'd have played more like the guy they thought they were getting simply for being more settled in "the system."
Again... don't take this as being apologetic of Osweiler, or an argument saying we shouldn't have cut him. Doesn't matter who the guy is to me, but we've got to get past year one.
As far as QBs with little to no future in this league... stop picking them. I still don't understand signing Fitzpatrick to $5M/yr when Tennessee just cut him from a smaller contract. Or Brian Hoyer for $6M/yr when he got beat out by JFF.
His first year with the Jets was great... his second not so much.
Yes..I never got the need to move from Fitzpatrick to guy whose upside seemed to be Fitzpatrick (Hoyer). If the longer term answer were Mallet or Savage, neither Fitz not Hoyer were going to start for more than a season or two, so why change for the sake of change, unless there is a "more to story" situation with Fitzpatrick that we never heard.
Number19
Hall of Fame
Interesting. But do you notice, compared to Thomas, Nuk's drop off was much better, that is, less than Thomas'.
sandman
Brexit Advisor
Right. His second year in 2016 was bad.
I was going off the premise that ObsiWan made of keeping Fitz for ONE more year, which would have been 2015 and was a great year for him statistically.
I guess you might be saying that even if he had stayed in Houston, Fitz would have reverted in 2015 for us like he did in 2016 for NYJ? Kind of like a Year 3 Wade Phillips Defense?
TxnsJuggernaut
Veteran
Give Me An F-ing Break
TxnsJuggernaut
Veteran
I can't wait to come back to this thread in a year or two.
Speedy
Former Yeller Dweller
Thomas had 3 good years of Peyton Manning throwing to him where his catch rate in those 3 years was 63.3%, and overall, including 2015 with bad Manning, it was 63.7%. Nuk has a lower career catch rate but he's had Fitz, Hoyer, Mallett, etc. So it's understandable that DT's rate would be a little higher than Nuk's.
But you're right about Thomas' drop off. Before Manning DT's catch rate was 50%. Then again, he had Tebow and Orton throwing the rock.
I do think it says something about Nuk that he has the numbers he has with what he's had at QB his entire career thus far.
TheMatrix31
Hall of Fame
Carr is probably right.
But it doesn't matter because in this situation the coach is going to stay and the quarterback is going to go.
But it doesn't matter because in this situation the coach is going to stay and the quarterback is going to go.
Scooter
Funky
Fitz was 4-5 and had lost 4 of the previous 5 games when benched during the bye. He only came back because of Mallett's injury, and his stats only seem interesting because of his impossible game against the Titans that included 6 touchdowns. Fitz was crap, yet one game changed his stats - therefor his perception.
Fitz was a place-holder when he was signed. And I think he knew that. He was to 'hold down the fort' until Savage was ready to start. I thought that was O'Brien's plan in year one. After a year or two of Fitz, O'Brien should have had Savage ready to be our starter.
Hoyer and Osweiler should have been unnecessary signings.
But what's done is done, so....
Hoyer and Osweiler should have been unnecessary signings.
But what's done is done, so....