Discussion in 'Texans Talk' started by Double Barrel, Apr 21, 2007.
This is one reason I support the Texans trading out of the 1st round this season.
Lower expectation probably. Mario was playing well until he got hurt and played hurt. The defense played better after the 1st 6 games. I guess i'm still missing the reggie bush deal. I mean if you want a receiver, draft one, but drafting a back that plays like a reciever that avg 3.5 a carry and longest run from srimmage is 12 yards thats another.
I think Mario is going to be a damn good player that will always be compared to Reggie and Vince.
But since this year, because the Texans have lost some picks beacuse of the Schaub deal. (they overpaid in my opinion) they should trade down and get more picks.
i agree. i think if you look at the depth the texans have built this offseason i think its pretty good. I think they did the right thing and eveluated Carr themselves before dumping him. I do like the instant leadership Matt has shown early on. People smirked at Jordan Black,Barber,Davis and Fletcher signing, but i think they were low cost smart moves. If the pats, or eagles make these moves they're called great, but the texans make then and hardly no mention. I could break down the benefits of the moves they've made and people would probably think none really matter.
Do not forget he got all that money to be a decoy and a return specialist.
teams are built through the draft. most often from rounds three to five. usually these guys have something to prove and very little guaranted
Yeah like a 1600yd guy like duece reallly needed help. Its a trip how when the game is close or the team reggie is on have the lead, he's on the bench with his helment and mouthpiece.
It's all about the money. Stop giving unproven rookies insane amounts of money. Let them stay hungry and have to earn the big bucks. Then you'll see more 1st rounder shine.
This should be the next big move in the NFL--moving toward and NBA model of defined rookie salaries that limit or eliminate hold-outs and have even the best prospects paid less than the best proven players. There is no rational reason for Bush making more than LT.
Yep. The Colts had 22 of 24 starters (incl. kicker & punter) last year through the draft. That speaks volumes about the quality of front office analysis and decisions. Hopefully we're building something like that, but only time will tell.
I've never cared for paying guys on potential. It seems counter-productive to give someone the reward before they have a chance to earn it.
After last year the Texans should trade out of the first round annually!
Maybe if Mario can keep from breaking his neck in his new set of wheels, he might have a better year, and get better press. How does he get his big butt in and out of that car anyway?!!!
Mario really needs to come out and have a pretty big year to silence the critics . (10 1/2 sacks would be nice) . The debate will rage on until he either makes or breaks himself in the next couple of years. I still have faith in the guy .
Sopranos in 5 minutes ..........
Take it a step further and pay the winning teams more money. That will keep everyone in the organization hungry. The current socialist system promotes mediocrity.
Yeah, there's a good idea. Let's give the already best team more money so they can stay best and no one else has a good chance. This has nothing to do with political systems and how you run a government. You want your country and government to be the best. You want sports to be competitive and non-predictable, i.e. each season isn't a repeat of last year.
How about a performance based pay system? You get a base salary and then get incventives if you play well(a la Demeco) and no incentives if you dont(TJ)?
Your thoughts, sir?
For rookies or everyone? Generally, I have no problem with folks negotiating whatever they can get. The NFL is awash in money. The only problem I have is rookies getting more money without playing a down at the same position as the best in the league. Somehow the rookie system has gone whack. There is no excuse for a rookie coming in and earning 50% more than the league MVP at the same position. A defined rookie system would also eliminate hold outs.
A system that limits what rookies make I assume would be an issue the player's union would be involved in. Doubt they would make any concessions in that matter. The owners ofcourse would support it.
I could see this leading to a player's strike. My season tickets are spent to see pro's, not scabs.
But I like the idea of limiting the money rookies with no expeirence make; that's make as in not earned.
Separate names with a comma.