Death to Google Ads! Texans Talk Tip Jar! 🍺😎👍
Thanks for your support!

David Carr says Osweiler didn’t get a fair shake?? GMAFB

ObsiWan said:
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....
Click to expand...

Savage was a 4th rounder, he was approached as "did we get lucky? hopefully at least a capable backup". Nobody was grooming Savage. We kept trying to add a veteran who had enough experience not to Ufck up Kubiak's team as O'Brien did his thing. O'Brien didn't want to build a player, he already had a team that was capable of 12 wins without him, he wanted that one young veteran that could turn his 'I learned from Belichick' delusions into reality.
 
ArlingtonTexan said:
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.
Click to expand...

You're falling for the FitzMagic. Similar to his experience with the Jets. The longer Fitzpatrick is your QB, the worse he and your team will perform. You cannot win with Fitzpatrick and that's why in a league starving for good QBs, he's been on six teams and only lasted more than two years on one of those six teams.

Seeing the contract, the Bears gave Glennon, I'm wondering if they should have gone after Glennon instead of Osweiler.
 
Earl34 said:
You're falling for the FitzMagic. Similar to his experience with the Jets. The longer Fitzpatrick is your QB, the worse he and your team will perform. You cannot win with Fitzpatrick and that's why in a league starving for good QBs, he's been on six teams and only lasted more than two years on one of those six teams.

Seeing the contract, the Bears gave Glennon, I'm wondering if they should have gone after Glennon instead of Osweiler.
Click to expand...

My post was more anti-Hoyer than pro "FitzMagic." Hoyer had not played as well as average FitzMagic at his best. A team does not want either to be the starter for long.
 
ObsiWan said:
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....
Click to expand...


Savage was never drafted as some for sure future franchise guy here. THey had to draft at least one QB in rounds 1-5, and he was it. He was nothing but a "dice roll" guy for the roster to see if he would develop.

Thats why it is so hilarious seeing the typical Houston homers screech his name out still as if he has all this potential to be a pro bowler one day. You know those same guys that still think that Keenum could turn this team around.
 
Scooter said:
Savage was a 4th rounder, he was approached as "did we get lucky? hopefully at least a capable backup". Nobody was grooming Savage. We kept trying to add a veteran who had enough experience not to Ufck up Kubiak's team as O'Brien did his thing. O'Brien didn't want to build a player, he already had a team that was capable of 12 wins without him, he wanted that one young veteran that could turn his 'I learned from Belichick' delusions into reality.
Click to expand...

2-14
 
Earl34 said:
You're falling for the FitzMagic. Similar to his experience with the Jets. The longer Fitzpatrick is your QB, the worse he and your team will perform. You cannot win with Fitzpatrick and that's why in a league starving for good QBs, he's been on six teams and only lasted more than two years on one of those six teams.

Seeing the contract, the Bears gave Glennon, I'm wondering if they should have gone after Glennon instead of Osweiler.
Click to expand...

Our very own Hookem has studied Glennon and liked him a lot.
 
steelbtexan said:
2-14
Click to expand...

Isn't it interesting that he always brings up that team as if they were some SB contender, when they won 2 whopping playoff games (first round) against the same team in that time span, but he completely ignores the existence of the 2-14 ending that it became? OB inherited a SB bound squad though. :spit:
 
Looks like we all miss the good old days when we had placeholders like Fitzmagic and Hoyer.

The fact that we're throwing names around like Fitzpatrick, Hoyer, and Carr is proof how god-awful the FO's strategy has been when it comes to the position from day one.
 
Double Barrel said:
Carr, by his own admission, did not put in the work to be a good QB. Or really even a decent QB.


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.
Click to expand...

Carr had more than his fair chances with the Texans and ok in that first year the O-line wasn't the greatest but he didn't help himself. There were a number of people who stuck up for Carr through thin and thinner.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top