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

Ryan Mallett traded to Texans

infantrycak said:
Not sure how you can claim to know this when 2/3rds of the QBs on the roster have no NFL track record.
Click to expand...

Its the revolving door of pain that many Houston fans have been caught up in, so thirsty for a winner that ANYONE can fit that bill.

The hoodie isn't giving away talent. Mallet has been dissected and put under the microscope by the very organization that HOU is trying to emulate, so just because they throw us their scraps we are supposed to be happy and proclaim that we got a 'steal'? If Mallet was anything close to a franchise QB he's the #2 in NE, regardless of having to pony up money. Instead he was outplayed by Garropolo and then we get some shining examples of Mallet doing well against 3rd stringers and hooray! We don't need to address the position anymore we have our QB!!! Stinks of Carr all over again.
 
Uncle Rico said:
Its the revolving door of pain that many Houston fans have been caught up in, so thirsty for a winner that ANYONE can fit that bill.

The hoodie isn't giving away talent. Mallet has been dissected and put under the microscope by the very organization that HOU is trying to emulate, so just because they throw us their scraps we are supposed to be happy and proclaim that we got a 'steal'? If Mallet was anything close to a franchise QB he's the #2 in NE, regardless of having to pony up money. Instead he was outplayed by Garropolo and then we get some shining examples of Mallet doing well against 3rd stringers and hooray! We don't need to address the position anymore we have our QB!!! Stinks of Carr all over again.
Click to expand...

You don't understand an nfl roster if you are still pouting off this non sense. Its ok, not everyone can understand the complex system of the "roster" :chef:


No one is saying Mallett is an all star, but what we are saying is, Fitzpatrick is not our future, will not win us a super bowl and is just impeding our future by not allowing the organization to determine if Mallett or Savage are the guys. No reason to waste this season with Fitz, next year with mallet or Savage and then have to draft one and waste a third year on a rookie. Its stupid
 
The Pencil Neck said:
It all comes down to who you think the best QB is on this team.

I think it's Mallett. So I'm going to be pushing for Mallett to get on the field as quickly as possible.

But if someone doesn't think it's Mallett, if they think that Mallett is just a backup with no experience who's worse that Fitzpatrick, I'm cool with them believing that... even if I don't agree with them about the most important part of that assessment.

If Fitzpatrick and what we saw from him yesterday is the best we can expect from him, then we'll be lucky to get 5 wins.
Click to expand...


What if it's the worse we'll see from him? :thinking:
 
Uncle Rico said:
... hooray! We don't need to address the position anymore we have our QB!!! Stinks of Carr all over again.
Click to expand...

With statements like this it's clear you're arguing with yourself. No one is saying our search for a QB is over. We're saying Fitzpatrick is bad.

That's all.

Let's get Mallett in there soon so we can scratch him off the list then throw Savage in so we can scratch him as well. No excuses going into next year's draft.


You'd think you were related to Fitzpatrick.
 
thunderkyss said:
With statements like this it's clear you're arguing with yourself. No one is saying our search for a QB is over. We're saying Fitzpatrick is bad.

That's all.

Let's get Mallett in there soon so we can scratch him off the list then throw Savage in so we can scratch him as well. No excuses going into next year's draft.


You'd think you were related to Fitzpatrick.
Click to expand...

I don't think I'm as down in fitz as many, but he's not good. He'd be a decent back up to have though.

I'd roll with mallett though because I think he could at least bring what fitz brought to the table. Except with the ability to make more throws and with a higher ceiling.
 
Uncle Rico said:
What is more annoying ... the Mallett Mob or the Keenum Klick?

Not sure why anyone would make the statement that Mallett is 'better' than Fitzpatrick. Based on what? LOL at least Fitzpatrick has real tangible NFL experience and not the tired "potential" argument. I too hope Mallet gets his shot at some point this year so that people can come back from Neverland and realize that the QB to pop champagne is not on this roster.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying Mallett is better, but Fitzpatrick is not the solution at QB for us. I would rather find out if Mallett is any good now before letting him walk in free agency and then see him light the league on fire next year with another team while we're still looking for our QB.

thunderkyss said:
With statements like this it's clear you're arguing with yourself. No one is saying our search for a QB is over. We're saying Fitzpatrick is bad.

That's all.

Let's get Mallett in there soon so we can scratch him off the list then throw Savage in so we can scratch him as well. No excuses going into next year's draft.


You'd think you were related to Fitzpatrick.
Click to expand...

Exactly.
 
xtruroyaltyx said:
I don't think I'm as down in fitz as many, but he's not good. He'd be a decent back up to have though.

I'd roll with mallett though because I think he could at least bring what fitz brought to the table. Except with the ability to make more throws and with a higher ceiling.
Click to expand...

Give Fitz a chance. Mallet is just now getting familiar with new teammates when ready, O'Brian will use him if need be.
 
xtruroyaltyx said:
I don't think I'm as down in fitz as many, but he's not good. He'd be a decent back up to have though.

I'd roll with mallett though because I think he could at least bring what fitz brought to the table. Except with the ability to make more throws and with a higher ceiling.
Click to expand...

We know it's only a matter of time before FitzCrapTrick shows up. When we need him most, he'll turn into badRomo.

It's that other shoe... you know it's coming.
 
With our team relying so heavily on the running game, and Foster, there's one thing about Mallet that I find interesting - he is excellent at the play-action. He was described as having one of the best play-fakes in the league, which admittedly would have to be based on his collegiate career and his limited pre-season appearances.
 
amazing80 said:
This is just a garbage take on the qb situation. The qb needs to be able to carry his team and be able to come from behind on occasion. To say he does not need to win games is bullshit and infuriating.
Click to expand...

I take it you do not understand the concept or term of "game manager". Ryan Fitzpatrick was brought in as a game manager. He was never hyped up by this staff as anything more than a game manager. He was never hyped up by anyone on this board as more than a placeholder or game manager.

Would I like a QB who could carry the team? Absolutely. But I'm also a realist and so is Bill O'Brien. Tom Savage is not ready and Ryan Mallett has thrown 4 NFL passes. Ryan Fitzpatrick may not be the future, but he gives us the best chance to win right now. If it was your job on the line, which of those 3 would you entrust your job with? What's the point of starting Mallett or Savage the next 2 years if you don't think they are ready? So you can get fired and the next coach can realize that those guys aren't the answer? No. You play a guy like Fitz and keep your head above water until you find somebody that you can believe in to lead this team.

Bill O'Brien doesn't care if Fitzpatrick is the future or not. He cares that Fitz gives him the best chance to win football games at this moment. Despite all the negativity this fanbase has heaped on Fitz during this offseason look at what happened in week 1. Guy went out there, did his job, and got the W.

He's not going to carry this team. It's been tried before and he failed dramatically. OB is going to ask him to manage the game and not make mistakes and he's more up to that task than a 4th round rookie or a guy who has as many completions as interceptions in his NFL career. His role on this team is to go out there, rely on his defense and running game, and not **** it up for the other 50 guys on the team like Matt Schaub did for the last year and a half of this Texans tenure.

You don't have to like it, but it would be easier for you if you just came to terms with it. This is what we have right now. So we're not going to trot out some young QB who's in way over his head and ask him to save us. We'll give the veteran the reins, tell him to play it safe, and rely on a bruising defense that has 6-7 first round picks on it.
 
Uncle Rico said:
Its the revolving door of pain that many Houston fans have been caught up in, so thirsty for a winner that ANYONE can fit that bill.

The hoodie isn't giving away talent. Mallet has been dissected and put under the microscope by the very organization that HOU is trying to emulate, so just because they throw us their scraps we are supposed to be happy and proclaim that we got a 'steal'? If Mallet was anything close to a franchise QB he's the #2 in NE, regardless of having to pony up money. Instead he was outplayed by Garropolo and then we get some shining examples of Mallet doing well against 3rd stringers and hooray! We don't need to address the position anymore we have our QB!!! Stinks of Carr all over again.
Click to expand...

I will trust BOB, 1 yr of working with Mallet and Godsey 3yrs of working with Mallett evals over yours. BTW, I don't know that Mallett is the answer. Neither do you.
 
Interesting argument: Has Mallet shown the same type of promise that Matt Schaub did while a backup in Atlanta? If some of you believe that, then lets say that Mallet gets some time and performs at a mediocre level while showing some 'flashes' .... at that point do you shell out a Matt Schaub type contract for him? Do you allow him to test the market? Or do you draft the best QB available in the draft?
 
Uncle Rico said:
Interesting argument: Has Mallet shown the same type of promise that Matt Schaub did while a backup in Atlanta? If some of you believe that, then lets say that Mallet gets some time and performs at a mediocre level while showing some 'flashes' .... at that point do you shell out a Matt Schaub type contract for him? Do you allow him to test the market? Or do you draft the best QB available in the draft?
Click to expand...

Schaub played more than Mallett when Vick got dinged up or had to miss time. I mean Mallett has had 4 total snaps.
 
Uncle Rico said:
Interesting argument: Has Mallet shown the same type of promise that Matt Schaub did while a backup in Atlanta? If some of you believe that, then lets say that Mallet gets some time and performs at a mediocre level while showing some 'flashes' .... at that point do you shell out a Matt Schaub type contract for him? Do you allow him to test the market? Or do you draft the best QB available in the draft?
Click to expand...

No Mallett doesn't have enough play time to have shown anything yet. If he gets several starts then you just have to look at the play and consider what he's worth to try to keep. Too soon to tell.
 
Uncle Rico said:
Interesting argument: Has Mallet shown the same type of promise that Matt Schaub did while a backup in Atlanta? If some of you believe that, then lets say that Mallet gets some time and performs at a mediocre level while showing some 'flashes' .... at that point do you shell out a Matt Schaub type contract for him? Do you allow him to test the market? Or do you draft the best QB available in the draft?
Click to expand...

That's what worries me. I want him signed to a decent deal that pays him better than a backup for two years then possibly pay off in year three. I'd even throw in a signing bonus to sweeten the deal a bit $9 over 4 years or something like that.

I don't want to be the team paying him an average over $10 after 8 pretty good games.
 
EllisUnit said:
Schaub played more than Mallett when Vick got dinged up or had to miss time. I mean Mallett has had 4 total snaps.
Click to expand...

Matt played in 4 games before we traded for him in 2007, sight unseen we paid him $8M/yr to start for our team.

OB coached Mallet for a year as a rookie. Godley worked with him for the last three years. If Chris Olsen can work out a contract that locks him in for four years, but gives us an out after two, I wouldn't have a problem with an $8M/yr deal.
 
Uncle Rico said:
Interesting argument: Has Mallet shown the same type of promise that Matt Schaub did while a backup in Atlanta? If some of you believe that, then lets say that Mallet gets some time and performs at a mediocre level while showing some 'flashes' .... at that point do you shell out a Matt Schaub type contract for him? Do you allow him to test the market? Or do you draft the best QB available in the draft?
Click to expand...

What would you do?

Mallett hasn't played AT ALL so there's no way to make that Judgement. Although I feel as though you have already passed judgement. Am I correct.

Tell me other than Mariota which QB do you like in the draft. It's obvious that you like a mobile QB. Does Petty running a 4.6 qualify as mobile enough for your taste.

I personally like Winston and Cook the most of all of the QB's in this draft. But that's just the style of QB play that I prefer. See: Manning/Brady/Rodgers/Brees. You know the SB winning style. It's true that Wilson has broken the QB mold but he's the exception to the rule. Mariota has a chance to be a Wilson type player. However he will have to be put in a situation to limit his mistakes because Mariota is still very raw/talented.
 
WolverineFan said:
I take it you do not understand the concept or term of "game manager". Ryan Fitzpatrick was brought in as a game manager. He was never hyped up by this staff as anything more than a game manager. He was never hyped up by anyone on this board as more than a placeholder or game manager.

Would I like a QB who could carry the team? Absolutely. But I'm also a realist and so is Bill O'Brien. Tom Savage is not ready and Ryan Mallett has thrown 4 NFL passes. Ryan Fitzpatrick may not be the future, but he gives us the best chance to win right now. If it was your job on the line, which of those 3 would you entrust your job with? What's the point of starting Mallett or Savage the next 2 years if you don't think they are ready? So you can get fired and the next coach can realize that those guys aren't the answer? No. You play a guy like Fitz and keep your head above water until you find somebody that you can believe in to lead this team.

Bill O'Brien doesn't care if Fitzpatrick is the future or not. He cares that Fitz gives him the best chance to win football games at this moment. Despite all the negativity this fanbase has heaped on Fitz during this offseason look at what happened in week 1. Guy went out there, did his job, and got the W.

He's not going to carry this team. It's been tried before and he failed dramatically. OB is going to ask him to manage the game and not make mistakes and he's more up to that task than a 4th round rookie or a guy who has as many completions as interceptions in his NFL career. His role on this team is to go out there, rely on his defense and running game, and not **** it up for the other 50 guys on the team like Matt Schaub did for the last year and a half of this Texans tenure.

You don't have to like it, but it would be easier for you if you just came to terms with it. This is what we have right now. So we're not going to trot out some young QB who's in way over his head and ask him to save us. We'll give the veteran the reins, tell him to play it safe, and rely on a bruising defense that has 6-7 first round picks on it.
Click to expand...

Well said. I agree 100 percent. O'Brien even said it in his press conference yesterday: Fitz did what we wanted him to do.

I don't think anyone has any grand expectations about Fitz. He's a placeholder. Period. I think even he knows that.

I also agree with you that a first time head coach is not dumb enough to risk his career on an unknown. He's better off doing what he's doing now: getting a game manager in there to tread water until the qb situation gets sorted out.

Blake Bortles and Johnny Manziel are sitting because they're not ready, and their first year head coaches have to look at the big picture, which is winning.

No, it's not pretty, but, we don't have much of a choice.
 
steelbtexan said:
What would you do?

Mallett hasn't played AT ALL so there's no way to make that Judgement. Although I feel as though you have already passed judgement. Am I correct.

Tell me other than Mariota which QB do you like in the draft. It's obvious that you like a mobile QB. Does Petty running a 4.6 qualify as mobile enough for your taste.

I personally like Winston and Cook the most of all of the QB's in this draft. But that's just the style of QB play that I prefer. See: Manning/Brady/Rodgers/Brees. You know the SB winning style. It's true that Wilson has broken the QB mold but he's the exception to the rule. Mariota has a chance to be a Wilson type player. However he will have to be put in a situation to limit his mistakes because Mariota is still very raw/talented.
Click to expand...

I prefer a mobile QB. Someone who can stretch out a play or even turn a negative into a positive with his legs. Wilson,Kap,Luck,Cam,RG3 are the future of the position. Drop back passers are slowly becoming extinct with the speed of the defenses causing more and more problems. Mariota,Winston,Petty (if his back isn't broken), Hundley and I really like Anthony Jennings from LSU (wont be available this year). Cook needs more time. Hogan comes from a pro offense as does Mannion but that doesn't guarantee success. Not that a mobile QB does, only that you have to think one step ahead, and not remain stuck in the past trying to win with outdated skillsets and philosophies. If you must have a 'traditional' QB I'd say Hackenberg is a better prospect than Cook.

Mallet would have to have nothing less than a pro-bowl type year in order for this team NOT to take a QB #1 if it was up to me. If I'm going to tie up money, I'd rather spend less on a college QB who could have as much, if not more talent than Mallet.
 
Uncle Rico said:
I prefer a mobile QB. Someone who can stretch out a play or even turn a negative into a positive with his legs. Wilson,Kap,Luck,Cam,RG3 are the future of the position. Drop back passers are slowly becoming extinct with the speed of the defenses causing more and more problems. Mariota,Winston,Petty (if his back isn't broken), Hundley and I really like Anthony Jennings from LSU (wont be available this year). Cook needs more time. Hogan comes from a pro offense as does Mannion but that doesn't guarantee success. Not that a mobile QB does, only that you have to think one step ahead, and not remain stuck in the past trying to win with outdated skillsets and philosophies. If you must have a 'traditional' QB I'd say Hackenberg is a better prospect than Cook.

Mallet would have to have nothing less than a pro-bowl type year in order for this team NOT to take a QB #1 if it was up to me. If I'm going to tie up money, I'd rather spend less on a college QB who could have as much, if not more talent than Mallet.
Click to expand...

The tall less than mobile QB will never totally fade out of the NFL thanks to the Bradys, Mannings, Lucks of the NFL. There will always still be a spot for those type of guys, plus is quickly as Rushing QBs get hurt you might as well have a less mobile QB.
 
Uncle Rico said:
I prefer a mobile QB. Someone who can stretch out a play or even turn a negative into a positive with his legs. Wilson,Kap,Luck,Cam,RG3 are the future of the position. Drop back passers are slowly becoming extinct with the speed of the defenses causing more and more problems. Mariota,Winston,Petty (if his back isn't broken), Hundley and I really like Anthony Jennings from LSU (wont be available this year). Cook needs more time. Hogan comes from a pro offense as does Mannion but that doesn't guarantee success. Not that a mobile QB does, only that you have to think one step ahead, and not remain stuck in the past trying to win with outdated skillsets and philosophies. If you must have a 'traditional' QB I'd say Hackenberg is a better prospect than Cook.

Mallet would have to have nothing less than a pro-bowl type year in order for this team NOT to take a QB #1 if it was up to me. If I'm going to tie up money, I'd rather spend less on a college QB who could have as much, if not more talent than Mallet.
Click to expand...

How many of these mobile QB's have won SB's? Wilson won with the help of one of the greatest defenses of all time. I put Wilson in the Eli/Cam/Ryan/Romo group of QB's.

The best thing about Wilson's game is he doesn't turn the ball over and makes the 3-4 plays a game to help the defense win the game. You know, the type of QB the Texans need. I don't see any of the draftable QB's coming in and making the kind of impact Wilson did right away.
 
EllisUnit said:
The tall less than mobile QB will never totally fade out of the NFL thanks to the Bradys, Mannings, Lucks of the NFL. There will always still be a spot for those type of guys, plus is quickly as Rushing QBs get hurt you might as well have a less mobile QB.
Click to expand...

Luck is much more mobile than Brady and Manning. He is the prototype. Can easily stay in there in the pocket, but his quick on his feet and can get you ten yards for a 1st down.
 
Vance87 said:
Agreed, there is no reason at this point to pull Fitz.
Click to expand...

If he thinks mallett can give the team more, absolutely.

I don't want a coach that waits until the fit hits the shan before making things happen. That was one downfall of the previous staff IMO. We should be proactive and constantly look to adress things and get better. There is no question fitz can and will be upgraded at some point. Do we have the horses behind him to do it sooner rather than later? I'll comfortably defer to obrien's opinion at this point.

I'm cool with fitz next week I think. I'd prefer mallett, but I'm not going to piss and moan about it. I don't think it's so obvious you go with mallett that on is asking for trouble if he doesn't.
 
Damn a win just blinds people. But for one blind ass luck play that still almost got bungled by Fitz the offense put up 3 points. That isn't game manager even. The guy is a pale shadow of Sage.
 
infantrycak said:
Damn a win just blinds people. But for one blind ass luck play that still almost got bungled by Fitz the offense put up 3 points. That isn't game manager even. The guy is a pale shadow of Sage.
Click to expand...

What play are you talking about, the Hopkins TD? Protection was good and the WRs ran around until one was open and Fitz threw it to him. How did Fitz almost mess that up?

If our defense holds teams to 17 PPG or something like that and Fitz is not throwing picks and we're winning, OB won't pull him.

Those are some big "ifs" there, though.
 
infantrycak said:
Damn a win just blinds people. But for one blind ass luck play that still almost got bungled by Fitz the offense put up 3 points. That isn't game manager even. The guy is a pale shadow of Sage.
Click to expand...

Agreed. But until Mallet signs a Texans friendly deal, I don't care to see him. If he's determined to be a FA at the end of the season so be it, he can wait until Fitz gets hurt to see the field... & that probably won't happen before Savage is ready to play.

Until he signs on the dotted line, Ryan Mallet is plan B.
 
Vance87 said:
What play are you talking about, the Hopkins TD? Protection was good and the WRs ran around until one was open and Fitz threw it to him. How did Fitz almost mess that up?

If our defense holds teams to 17 PPG or something like that and Fitz is not throwing picks and we're winning, OB won't pull him.

Those are some big "ifs" there, though.
Click to expand...

That's Johnny Manziel football you're talking about. What I want from my game manager is someone who knows the plays, can read a defense & be able to identify which routes will expose which weakness in the defense.

Fitzpatrick completely misread that play as he locked on to the go route that never opened up while Deandre's slant was open almost from the get go. If not for that DB totally overplaying that blown route (that DB was not assigned to DeAndre, he was covering another route but saw DeAndre wide open, & ran to cover him late. He over ran DeAndre's position, which is why Hopkins was still open so late into the count. But Hopkins should have been hit much earlier in the route, which was just as surely a TD because the guy he had to juke wasn't in any position to make a play, if it were thrown when it should have been thrown).

Anyway, it was a blown play because Fitz didn't recognize the poor defensive mismatch, & he wasn't going through his progression.
 
thunderkyss said:
That's Johnny Manziel football you're talking about. What I want from my game manager is someone who knows the plays, can read a defense & be able to identify which routes will expose which weakness in the defense.

Fitzpatrick completely misread that play as he locked on to the go route that never opened up while Deandre's slant was open almost from the get go. If not for that DB totally overplaying that blown route (that DB was not assigned to DeAndre, he was covering another route but saw DeAndre wide open, & ran to cover him late. He over ran DeAndre's position, which is why Hopkins was still open so late into the count. But Hopkins should have been hit much earlier in the route, which was just as surely a TD because the guy he had to juke wasn't in any position to make a play, if it were thrown when it should have been thrown).

Anyway, it was a blown play because Fitz didn't recognize the poor defensive mismatch, & he wasn't going through his progression.
Click to expand...

Is your argument that Fitz didn't make it through his progression because he locked onto his first option but threw a TD to a different option?
 
PapaL said:
Is your argument that Fitz didn't make it through his progression because he locked onto his first option but threw a TD to a different option?
Click to expand...

We got lucky. There's another thread talking about a QB should only expect around 3 seconds of clean pocket to do his job. He got almost seven seconds on that play.

My argument is that if the play is designed to work in that 3 seconds, I'd like to have a QB competent enough to make it work in that 3 seconds.

It was the first game of the season, not really a big deal. One of those things that needs to be worked on & hopefully improve over the course of the season.
 
thunderkyss said:
We got lucky. There's another thread talking about a QB should only expect around 3 seconds of clean pocket to do his job. He got almost seven seconds on that play.

My argument is that if the play is designed to work in that 3 seconds, I'd like to have a QB competent enough to make it work in that 3 seconds.

It was the first game of the season, not really a big deal. One of those things that needs to be worked on & hopefully improve over the course of the season.
Click to expand...

yeah but don't that # change when it is a fake along with a slight bootleg to the left ? Not to mention if that's the case, Manning, Brady, Luck get lucky as hell all the time. Not saying Fitz is like any of them...
 
Number19 said:
With our team relying so heavily on the running game, and Foster, there's one thing about Mallet that I find interesting - he is excellent at the play-action. He was described as having one of the best play-fakes in the league, which admittedly would have to be based on his collegiate career and his limited pre-season appearances.
Click to expand...

And the play fake is one of Shitztastic's most glaring inadequacies.

It was painful to watch him hand the ball off Sunday.
 
thunderkyss said:
We got lucky. There's another thread talking about a QB should only expect around 3 seconds of clean pocket to do his job. He got almost seven seconds on that play.

My argument is that if the play is designed to work in that 3 seconds, I'd like to have a QB competent enough to make it work in that 3 seconds.

It was the first game of the season, not really a big deal. One of those things that needs to be worked on & hopefully improve over the course of the season.
Click to expand...

I don't think you can use a blanket criteria like that. We've seen Brady and other QB's not have anyone open and slide in the pocket or step up...Or their oline just forms a seemingly impenetrable wall...and they hold the ball for what seems life forever before a WR finds a hole in the defense and the QB makes them pay.

And we don't view any other QB as a lesser player because they capitalize off the defenses mistakes.

I haven't looked at that play again...and if I did I still wouldn't know what he was coached to do there. But regardless, it's possible to make a mistake and do something good on the same play...
 
Because of the coverage they were in, it left DeAndre on a LB. Fitzpatrick should have recognized that & hit DeAndre when he initially came open. He didn't.
 
thunderkyss said:
It was the first game of the season, not really a big deal.
Click to expand...

You have gone out of your way to not only fail to give Fitz credit for the play, but to go as far as to say that he was a total cluster on the play. Emphatically. Seems like it is a pretty big deal to you...
 
thunderkyss said:
You should look up some of my posts.... I get criticized because I say he's yet to prove himself a true NFL QB.
Click to expand...

I know you have, just saying that luck sometimes goes QBs way, we as fans should just accept it. Especially with how unlucky we were last season.
 
thunderkyss said:
Because of the coverage they were in, it left DeAndre on a LB. Fitzpatrick should have recognized that & hit DeAndre when he initially came open. He didn't.
Click to expand...

How do you know? How do you know he wasn't coached to do something else on that play? To look somewhere else given that look....

What you would have liked for him to do, and what he should have done may not be the same thing.

And then we don't even know if what you would have liked for him to do is even the right thing.
 
I would think the last thing a team gels on when learning a new system is passing. I would expect that area to improve slowly as the weeks go by.
 
EllisUnit said:
I know you have, just saying that luck sometimes goes QBs way, we as fans should just accept it. Especially with how unlucky we were last season.
Click to expand...

I'm fine with getting lucky every now & then, I think we deserve it, it's our time, at least it's about time, or past time... we need to get lucky.

I'm ecstatic about that touchdown, I was jumping up & down, screaming at the top of my lungs, high fiving everyone in the stands saying, "That's my dawg, that's MY dawg!!!" I was refering to DeAndre, but if some of the fans thought I was talking about Fitz... I'm fine with that.

A lot of good in that play, same game, we saw RGIII give up too early & run himself into a sack.

I'm just saying it wasn't all good. Not to dwell on the bad, but at least to temper some of the new found hope some of us have over beating a team in worse shape than we are.
 
sandman said:
You have gone out of your way to not only fail to give Fitz credit for the play, but to go as far as to say that he was a total cluster on the play. Emphatically. Seems like it is a pretty big deal to you...
Click to expand...

It's not a big deal. It's a conversation. And nothing Fitz did well resulted in that play. The coverage was blown and then Fitz miserably under threw the ball. We got lucky and that isn't something which can be counted on to happen again. What can be counted on is the remainder of the game which was meh and won't get us many wins.
 
Fitz looked horrible before that touchdown to Hopkins. I was wondering if O'Brien was going to pull Fitz, but when he threw the touchdown pass, I knew OB wasn't going to pull him.

Fitz was playing bad that OB had to rely more on the run in the first half.
 
Its the 1st game folks...with a new offense, HC and qb no less. I pretty much expected that they'd look like they did. I think we'll get better as the season goes along mainly b/c the vets will get more comfortable playing with each other.......since they didn't play much together in TC and preseason. I'm not saying we'll evolve into the greatest show on turf, but we'll look much more competent than we did sunday.....that includes Fitz.

I suspect we'll be just good enough offensively to be in every game but not quite good enough to compete with the big boys and able to handle shootouts...
 
Mr teX said:
Its the 1st game folks...with a new offense, HC and qb no less. I pretty much expected that they'd look like they did. I think we'll get better as the season goes along mainly b/c the vets will get more comfortable playing with each other.......since they didn't play much together in TC and preseason. I'm not saying we'll evolve into the greatest show on turf, but we'll look much more competent than we did sunday.....that includes Fitz.

I suspect we'll be just good enough offensively to be in every game but not quite good enough to compete with the big boys and able to handle shootouts...
Click to expand...
The Texans had double-digit home leads over the Seahawks, Colts and Patriots last season - three of the biggest boys on the planet - despite having key injuries. Granted they found a way to choke all of those games. I only recall the Rams coming into our house and spanking us. We should be able to beat any team at home. It's the road games, particularly against a good team, that I worry about.
 
infantrycak said:
It's not a big deal. It's a conversation. And nothing Fitz did well resulted in that play. The coverage was blown and then Fitz miserably under threw the ball. We got lucky and that isn't something which can be counted on to happen again. What can be counted on is the remainder of the game which was meh and won't get us many wins.
Click to expand...

Of course you can't count on luck. That is why it is called luck. ;)

I'm not sure that anyone is saying that the play was textbook and should be shown to every middle school QB in the Houston area. Maybe I'm just not one of those guys that feels the need to critique every wrong decision or action on a given play. Especially when that one play was the only offensive TD scored in the game.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top