Hopefully the Sanchez talk is just to tell New England we don't "have to" have Mallet.
I don't think it's a good fake, but...
Death to Google Ads! Texans Talk Tip Jar! 🍺😎👍
Thanks for your support!
Sanchez
- Thread starter blitz90
- Start date
Hopefully the Sanchez talk is just to tell New England we don't "have to" have Mallet.
I don't think it's a good fake, but...
DX-TEX
#TomSavageDontCare
Could also just be Ian Rappaport pulling **** out of his ass since he is the only person saying it
The1ApplePie
Hall of Fame
So the team should tank next year for a chance to be in position to draft Winston out of FSU? A player that this organization probably wouldn't take in a millions years?
Don't get the hate for Sanchez (except for the Buttfumble). Not a great NFL QB, but he is an actual NFL-caliber QB, unlike Keenum or Yates. Dude will be a placeholder for Bridgewater/Manziel/Bortles anyways
infantrycak
Hall of Fame
I don't hate Sanchez. I just think it is pointless, a waste of money and not an upgrade over Keenum who I also do not think is a future starter. I also don't put much faith in the ability of a QB coming off shoulder surgery to make it through a season.
Of course I remember it well.
However, that experience does not mean it will always end in failure.
Troy Aikman was a rookie that played his first season. Peyton Manning, too. Recently we saw Russell Wilson. Andrew Luck. Joe Flacco. Matt Ryan. Matthew Stafford. And these are just off the top of my head.
The Texans did it wrong with David Carr. It was a brand new franchise with an untested offensive line, and they did not give him a dedicated QB coach to teach him how to prepare and study for the position.
But, if they have to keep the rookie QB on the bench, then just keep Matt Schaub instead of wasting a season on some chump like Sanchez. The dude does not have football in his heart. He cares more about his image and after-football-career than he does the game itself. He would be a horrible role model for a rookie QB learning the ropes of the NFL.
infantrycak
Hall of Fame
Folks should consider this - who would you better take "expert" lessons from, a guy who overachieved in the NFL or a guy who flopped in the NFL?
My thoughts exactly
It's hard to say, even with hindsight. I loved watching David Carr in 2002 & 2003. I thought we made the right decision, not only to get him, but to start him. It wasn't until sometime in 2004 that I started to sour on Carr. He stopped looking down-field, stopped taking chances, stopped trying to win, imo.
That's when the Texans should have started holding him accountable for his play, he was causing as more issues than he was solving. I say "it's hard to say." because I don't know what those conversations were like after the game, Monday through Thursday... but I felt like he didn't own his own shortcomings...... just hard to say looking through that tube.
But I don't think starting David was ever the problem. Continuing to let him start was.
infantrycak
Hall of Fame
Game 9 of 2004 was the weather change. Look at the 1st 8 games and then the remainder of his time in Houston. The contrast is stark.
To me there was a clear coaching change at that point but Carr was flawed from day 1 and was not very coachable or dedicated. I think he could have been more but his flaws were his own.
I think Carr had the raw talent and potential to be developed by an established team that could allow him to mature on the bench for a couple of seasons. Who knows if he could have been a consistent game manager or a QB that could actually carry a team, but I think his experience in Houston was the worst possible situation for his undeveloped talent and untrained work ethic.
There is certainly a case to be made to sit a rookie QB. A lot depends on the player and the team/coaches/starting QB. So I'm not arguing against it. Just don't make Sanchez the starting QB who the rookie learns from. I think that sets it up for failure.
Scooter
Funky
first, no way to buttfumble.
as for carr, i never hated the pick, though i personally wouldnt have chosen a quarterback first. i just thought it was stupid to throw him into the situation. you have tony banks, an experienced veteran and someone much more likely to adjust to capers' offense. let him take his lumps on a team that has never played together tries to get their feet under them. instead we said "ok kid, everybody's trying to figure it all out, try not to die until then".
regardless of carr's situation, i'm a big proponent of letting the rookie sit at least a year. that time is well spent being coached instead of learning on the job. teach the rookie how to practice and how to work before putting him to work. it's also the best time to work on holes and flaws in the rookie's game, where as putting him straight into a starting role focuses his attention elsewhere, allowing those holes to create other bad tendencies.
as for carr, i never hated the pick, though i personally wouldnt have chosen a quarterback first. i just thought it was stupid to throw him into the situation. you have tony banks, an experienced veteran and someone much more likely to adjust to capers' offense. let him take his lumps on a team that has never played together tries to get their feet under them. instead we said "ok kid, everybody's trying to figure it all out, try not to die until then".
regardless of carr's situation, i'm a big proponent of letting the rookie sit at least a year. that time is well spent being coached instead of learning on the job. teach the rookie how to practice and how to work before putting him to work. it's also the best time to work on holes and flaws in the rookie's game, where as putting him straight into a starting role focuses his attention elsewhere, allowing those holes to create other bad tendencies.
The1ApplePie
Hall of Fame
So, no Sanchez, no Schaub... who would be the veteran backup?
infantrycak
Hall of Fame
Keenum and Yates are no longer rookies.
Some of the placeholders being mentioned are not substantially different:
Keenum - 8 starts, 254 att.
Yates - 7 starts, 221 att.
McGloin - 6 starts, 211 att.
Hoyer - 4 starts, 192 att.
What's the point?
