Report: Brian Hoyer to be named Texans starting QB

[Playoffs]

Matt Hammond ‏@MattHammondShow

That's an 80% completion percentage and perfect 158.3 QB rating.

On those 4 drives, Hoyer was 16 of 20, 207 yards, 2 TDs. When CLE didn't score TDs, Cundiff hit go-ahead FGs.

NFL leader in 4th quarter comebacks last season: Matt Stafford, 5. Brian Hoyer was No. 2 on the list with 4.​

 

[kiwitexansfan]

I was excited when we got Hoyer, I thought he would give us an excellent safety net.

To bad we never had a first act.

 

[CloakNNNdagger]

Matt Hammond ‏@MattHammondShow

That's an 80% completion percentage and perfect 158.3 QB rating.

On those 4 drives, Hoyer was 16 of 20, 207 yards, 2 TDs. When CLE didn't score TDs, Cundiff hit go-ahead FGs.

NFL leader in 4th quarter comebacks last season: Matt Stafford, 5. Brian Hoyer was No. 2 on the list with 4.​

Were those four games the ones against Oakland, Tampa Bay, Atlanta and Tennessee?

 

[nut]

I hope Fitzhoyer plays better than he did last year.

 

[EllisUnit]

Honestly, the reason Hoyer got the nod was last weeks game. I was really hoping
Mallett would separate himself --because IMO, that's the only way this team improves
this year (if Ryan reached his potential, etc.)

But what I saw in that last game sealed it. The kid has no touch on short balls. He
looked really awkward trying to drop in a screen pass. And by my count it happened
three times this preseason. He's got a cannon, but there doesn't seem to be any
touch on the ball.

This jives pretty square with what some of my pats friends were telling me when we
signed the kid last year..

No touch on short balls ? I saw nothing but accurate short balls in every Pre season game from him. I was more concerned with his lack of going deep.

 

[Runner]

Can't talk to much noise about Cleveland considering who Mallett beat in the lone game everyone trumpets as a reason to start him

The cognitive dissonance is strong in this thread.

 

[Uncle Rico]

We led the league in passing with an even worse statue and the 30th rushing attack.

You really think Fitz is less mobile than Mallet?

 

[infantrycak]

The cognitive dissonance is strong in this thread.

Actually no. I get your 'we should have invested higher in a QB for a decade' position and somewhat agree. But that doesn't mean you need to slag every non 1st rounder who comes along. But for some partying in college (now apparently distant history) Mallett was a 1st rounder.

 

[infantrycak]

You really think Fitz is less mobile than Mallet?

Is your Texans knowledge really that poor?

Google 4770 or something.

 

[Uncle Rico]

Is your Texans knowledge really that poor?

Google 4770 or something.

You talking about Schaub?? Lol what does that have to do with this regime?

 

[infantrycak]

You talking about Schaub?? Lol what does that have to do with this regime?

What does regime have to do with it?

You claimed play action won't work without a rushing game and mobile QB. That is plainly untrue. The QB and OL selling it have far more to do with it.

 

[CloakNNNdagger]

Matt Hammond ‏@MattHammondShow

That's an 80% completion percentage and perfect 158.3 QB rating.

On those 4 drives, Hoyer was 16 of 20, 207 yards, 2 TDs. When CLE didn't score TDs, Cundiff hit go-ahead FGs.

NFL leader in 4th quarter comebacks last season: Matt Stafford, 5. Brian Hoyer was No. 2 on the list with 4.​

Took the time to research those 4 come-from-behind games.............imagine how surprised I was to find that my initial guess of the names of the opposing teams was exact!



Obviously not giving us the whole story as seen with the Falcons game.

Falcons game:

The Cleveland Browns beat the Atlanta Falcons, 26-24, on Sunday when Billy Cundiff hit a game-winning field goal as time expired. Cleveland was up late in the fourth when quarterback Brian Hoyer threw a pair of interceptions, giving Atlanta a one-point lead after a Matt Bryant field goal. Cleveland got the ball back with under a minute to go, and Hoyer redeemed himself by leading Cleveland into scoring position.

Hoyer hit multiple receivers for big gains and the Browns took their final timeout with 16 seconds remaining, despite being able to spike the ball. Hoyer hit Miles Austin again beyond the 20-yard line and the Browns managed to spike it there, with five seconds to go and in field goal range. Cundiff wound up making the 37-yard field goal for the win.

The other come backs were indeed against the Raiders (23-13) and the Titans (29-28) and the Bucaneers (22-17).

 

[badboy]

I am thinking O'Brien has decided that second half of last season was a confidence thing for Hoyer. I believe Coach thinks he can pump up Hoyer and with this roster potentially better than Cleveland's 2014, we will have an adequate QB. Hoyer IMO look good on his intermediate passes and can occasionally zip one deep. The Oline has to remain healthy and our eventual back up LG needs develop to give some rest to our starting LG.

My biggest disappointment so far is running backs. Going to predict that Bullock will have significantly more attempts at field goals.

 

[infantrycak]

we will have an adequate QB.

With a low bar for adequate, that does appear to have been the goal.

Anyone for a high five?

 

[Runner]

Actually no. I get your 'we should have invested higher in a QB for a decade' position and somewhat agree. But that doesn't mean you need to slag every non 1st rounder who comes along. But for some partying in college (now apparently distant history) Mallett was a 1st rounder.

I'm not slagging the non-first rounder. I'm commenting on the fact that Hoyer apparently came from a laughing stock franchise, and Mallett is great because he beat that same franchise. Two conflicting views held in the mind at the same time - cognitive dissonance.

For what it is worth I haven't slagged Mallett either, unless not crowning him the obvious starter is slagging him. I don't think I've ever said he is a bad player, although I've pointed out that the fans like him more than O'Brien does. I used to wonder why people think he is so darn good, although I've been educated since then that no one thinks he's "very good", he's just that unknown Christmas present that everyone wants to unwrap.

Here's to hoping he isn't a pair of socks, because he is going to get unwrapped at some point this season.

 

[badboy]

With a low bar for adequate, that does appear to have been the goal.

Anyone for a high five?

that guy missed on a high five and probably recovered. Is OBrien going to be standing in front of McNair at end of year and realize he missed on a high five?

 

[Mollywhopper]

I used to wonder why people think he is so darn good, although I've been educated since then that no one thinks he's "very good", he's just that unknown Christmas present that everyone wants to unwrap.

Here's to hoping he isn't a pair of socks, because he is going to get unwrapped at some point this season.

Great analogy. If he is a pair of socks then so what, that's only so much worse than a so-so new Clifford the Big Red Dog book that Hoyer is anyway and we're still just left waiting till next Christmas. But if Hoyer turns out to be that Clifford book that we already read last year and we're 2-5 when we open Mallett and he turns out to be a remote control fighter jet we're gonna be pissed that we didn't get that fighter jet sooner instead of having been staring all along at that some old stupid Clifford story.

And I happen to honestly think Mallett's somewhere closer to a fighter jet than socks anyway and it's not all just hope. Until then, go Clifford I guess.

 

[badboy]

Great analogy. If he is a pair of socks then so what, that's only so much worse than a so-so new Clifford the Big Red Dog book that Hoyer is anyway and we're still just left waiting till next Christmas. But if Hoyer turns out to be that Clifford book that we already read last year and we're 2-5 when we open Mallett and he turns out to be a remote control fighter jet we're gonna be pissed that we didn't get that fighter jet sooner instead of having been staring all along at that some old stupid Clifford story.

And I happen to honestly think Mallett's somewhere closer to a fighter jet than socks anyway and it's not all just hope. Until then, go Clifford I guess.

well a pair of socks can be warm and comforting. I have seen absolutely nothing to indicate Mallett or the other two are anywhere near a fighter jet.

 

[xtruroyaltyx]

It's going to be mighty interesting watching Hoyer this next game.

Honestly, while I prefer mallett, I think Hoyer has a chance to be good. I watched very little of hominem Cleveland though so he's almost like a complete unknown to me beyond the stats.

As I watch him more maybe I'll pick up in more things to either like or hate about his game. Just from what I've seen so far he looks ok. Not great.

I'll be happy to see him get some extended playing time.

 

[badboy]

It's going to be mighty interesting watching Hoyer this next game.

Honestly, while I prefer mallett, I think Hoyer has a chance to be good. I watched very little of hominem Cleveland though so he's almost like a complete unknown to me beyond the stats.

As I watch him more maybe I'll pick up in more things to either like or hate about his game. Just from what I've seen so far he looks ok. Not great.

I'll be happy to see him get some extended playing time.

hominem..is that anything like eminem?

 

[thunderkyss]

And I happen to honestly think Mallett's somewhere closer to a fighter jet than socks anyway and it's not all just hope. Until then, go Clifford I guess.

He's at least a pair of socks with fighter jets on them.

 

[Mollywhopper]

well a pair of socks can be warm and comforting. I have seen absolutely nothing to indicate Mallett or the other two are anywhere near a fighter jet.

No kid wants socks for Christmas, not even an eskimo kid. And football is sports Christmas that makes us kids again, so roll with it.

The point about Mallett is we won't really know for sure until we open him up. We know with Hoyer. His wrapping is book-shaped.

He's at least a pair of socks with fighter jets on them.

At least a kid can stare at those fighter jet socks and dream. A Clfford book just means mom & dad didn't try very hard.


This analogy has surprising legs ...

 

[thunderkyss]

The point about Mallett is we won't really know for sure until we open him up. We know with Hoyer. His wrapping is book-shaped.
...

Hoyer is a re-gift, even used the old, torn wrapping paper.

 

[infantrycak]

Hoyer is a re-gift, even used the old, torn wrapping paper.

The fruitcake of the NFL

He travels round the NFL until someone can't remember where he came from and becomes too embarrassed to attempt one more re-gift.

 

[Marcus]

Jeez, it's like some of you actually believe Hoyer is going to start all 16 games this season.

 

[dalemurphy]

While Hoyer doesn't fill me with optimism right now, I count 5 games on the schedule where we should expect to face superior QB play to our own. Considering how good the defense could be, I think this team could be a genuine Superbowl contender even if Hoyer mildly surprises consensus expectations.

 

[Mollywhopper]

Jeez, it's like some of you actually believe Hoyer is going to start all 16 games this season.

Who said that?

 

[xtruroyaltyx]

hominem..is that anything like eminem?

It's exactly like eminem.

 

[infantrycak]

While Hoyer doesn't fill me with optimism right now, I count 5 games on the schedule where we should expect to face superior QB play to our own.

Cam Newton just said 'damn I'm not all all that but you a funny man."

He then chest bumped Tannehil prior to laughing.

Mind boggling. Folks are acting like people are insane for wanting to see what potential Mallett may have while they are assuming/projecting a 20 point/massive improvement in Hoyer.

 

[Mollywhopper]

Tannehill is better than Hoyer.

 

[Marcus]

Who said that?

You're acting like it.

 

[Mollywhopper]

You're acting like it.

Since when does 2 + 5 = 16?

... and we're 2-5 when we open Mallett and he turns out to be ...

 

[infantrycak]

Tannehill is better than Hoyer.

I'm assuming his 5 are Luck x 2, Brady, Brees and Ryan.

Prior to actually performing at a much higher level than previously Hoyer also has to be ranked behind - Smith, Newton, Tannehil and Dalton.

The rest are basically unknown due to youth with Mariota x 2, Bortles x 2 and Winston.

That leaves the unknowns of the Bills and Jeta.

 

[Mollywhopper]

You already covered Cam. I was just giving benefit of the doubt on any given sunday against Dalton & Smith.

 

[Marshall]

Just so I'm clear, would you could consider these two players:

a) Bad
b) Adequate
c) Pretty Good
d) Good
e) Very Good
f) Franchise
g) Elite
h) I don't know, I just want to see them play

d plus or minus 1. I'm into range assessment based on probability rather than individual psychic forecasting. I'm well aware that there are always outliers and problems with the initial talent assessment.

Also, assessments of the QBs are like determining whether you are going up hill or down hill while driving. Some are obvious while in front of you, but most require a look in the rear-view mirror to accurately judge whether the initial perception was valid or not.

 

[Marshall]

The only one there was ever significant question about was Brady and that had ended after he had 17 starts and a SB ring.

And again, define above average?

Average Starting QB would be the mean average of the 16th and 17th rated Qbs in the league so above average would be better than the 17th best QB in any given year. For a career, it would be at that point in his average season with a minimum number of seasons to qualify.

 

[Marshall]

I totally get that. I really do and I kind of feel the same way (or rather my lack of feeling on this is from the same source) but...

I can't help but think "What have the Cleveland Browns ever done that would make me think they knew what a good QB looked like and how would a "good" QB look playing for that "fart in a jar" of an NFL team? Sure, they didn't want Brian Hoyer but consider this. They drafted Johnny Manziel.

We'll know after this season whether we're any better than they are at picking QB's. We might not like the answer to that questions but we'll definitely know.

I understand your aversion of anything tainted with the Browns, but I remember Browns (Now Ravens) with Jim Brown and Paul Brown who were extraordinarily good and A GREAT QB (Archie Manning) on a bad team (Saints) who could not succeed because of his situation. I'm hoping that we struck Gold as well and not Iron Pyrite. But it would be nice to at least see some of the glitter he had at the beginning of last season for the Browns as our Season Starting QB.

 

[Marshall]

You know, there is a sarcasm smiley you could use. You know, for courtesy.

Or my oft championed and seldom used ~sarcasm~ marks which are free and on every keyboard already.

ps what does a twisted S (sarcasm) fallen over on it's side look like? ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

[Marshall]

You know, there is a sarcasm smiley you could use. You know, for courtesy.

Or my oft championed and seldom used ~sarcasm~ marks which are free and on every keyboard already.

ps what does a twisted S (sarcasm) fallen over on it's side look like? ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

[sandman]

Average Starting QB would be the mean average of the 16th and 17th rated Qbs in the league so above average would be better than the 17th best QB in any given year. For a career, it would be at that point in his average season with a minimum number of seasons to qualify.

Actually it would be based on ranges and not absolute positions in a seriatim ranking. One only becomes "above average" when one displays a significant statistical difference. Positions 14-19 could all be considered average should there be small variances in ranking criteria outcomes. One is not an above average QB in the NFL simply based on being 15/32. It's not linear.

 

[Marshall]

Actually it would be based on ranges and not absolute positions in a seriatim ranking. One only becomes "above average" when one displays a significant statistical difference. Positions 14-19 could all be considered average should there be small variances in ranking criteria outcomes. One is not an above average QB in the NFL simply based on being 15/32. It's not linear.

Good point, but I was trying to be precise about a point (above mean average of a precise measurement of your choice) rather than a range in this instance. But your comment is certainly true in the statistical world.

It's like explaining differences in averages (Mean, Median and Mode) to the typical (average?) person with little understanding of the concepts. Sometimes it's easier not to confuse them and just go along without explanation. But the same concepts are basic and simplistic to the atypical math minded person. Moving between the two views is confusing and fraught with error. Thanks for the reminder.

 

[sandman]

Good point, but I was trying to be precise about a point rather than a range in this instance. But your comment is certainly true in the statistical world.

Well, 15 and 16 this past season were Eli Manning and Joe Flacco. Not sure that anyone is calling them average.

 

[sandman]

Oh look, there is Hoyer at #31, right behind Geno Smith, Derek Carr and above Blake Bortles.

 

[Marshall]

Oh look, there is Hoyer at #31, right behind Geno Smith, Derek Carr and above Blake Bortles.

And the variation of individual seasons from the individual careers is apparent so normalization and adjustment is to be expected. At what point were past greats able to break out above average? How many QBs had what appeared to be a breakout and never sustained the "greatness breakout?" At this point, the significance of the input formulating the adjustment begins to become an art as the sample size becomes too small for statistically significant data.

 

[welsh texan]

I'm just hoping we don't need to see Mallett this season, would be nice to think Hoyer might just grasp the opportunity with both hands and make the position his own.

I'm willing to put his failure in Cleveland down to being in a shitty situation, that club has been through a ton of highly rated QB's and all of them have failed miserably.

That being said, I am somewhat concerned that the situation here isn't particularly geared towards success. We're hoping that a couple of interior OL make a jump this season, we're hoping that our WR corps makes a huge jump, we're hoping that our TE group makes a huge jump, and we're hoping that a group of backup RB's can move the chains on the ground for us.

The D should be able to create some opportunities for this group, but even the best D will become gassed if we get a heap of 3-and-outs on O.

I have no problem with the decision on who starts at QB, and I think regardless we're in need of a whole load of starting players to all beat the ability they've so far demonstrated in the league, its going to be an uphill struggle for sure.

Hey, at least we've got a great punter!

 

[sandman]

I'm just hoping we don't need to see Mallett this season, would be nice to think Hoyer might just grasp the opportunity with both hands and make the position his own.

I'm willing to put his failure in Cleveland down to being in a shitty situation, that club has been through a ton of highly rated QB's and all of them have failed miserably.

That being said, I am somewhat concerned that the situation here isn't particularly geared towards success. We're hoping that a couple of interior OL make a jump this season, we're hoping that our WR corps makes a huge jump, we're hoping that our TE group makes a huge jump, and we're hoping that a group of backup RB's can move the chains on the ground for us.

The D should be able to create some opportunities for this group, but even the best D will become gassed if we get a heap of 3-and-outs on O.

I have no problem with the decision on who starts at QB, and I think regardless we're in need of a whole load of starting players to all beat the ability they've so far demonstrated in the league, its going to be an uphill struggle for sure.

Hey, at least we've got a great punter!

Not agreeing with the Cleveland QB assertion. Since their re-inception in 1999, they have had 22 starting QB's, and only two of them - Jeff Garcia and Trent Dilfer - have done anything of substance with any other team in the league.

 

[sandman]

And the variation of individual seasons from the individual careers is apparent so normalization and adjustment is to be expected. At what point were past greats able to break out above average? How many QBs had what appeared to be a breakout and never sustained the "greatness breakout?" At this point, the significance of the input formulating the adjustment begins to become an art as the sample size becomes too small for statistically significant data.

Or, it is as simple as stating that Hoyer, former Brady backup with starting QB experience in the previous two seasons, had a very rookie-like season. He played on par with two rookies in Carr and Bortles who were literally learning on the job with ZERO NFL experience for teams that were much more horrible than the Browns. And he is about to turn 30.

 

[Marshall]

Or, it is as simple as stating that Hoyer, former Brady backup with starting QB experience in the previous two seasons, had a very rookie-like season. He played on par with two rookies in Carr and Bortles who were literally learning on the job with ZERO NFL experience for teams that were much more horrible than the Browns. And he is about to turn 30.

So you are fine with just giving up on QBs who are drafted by teams with QBs like Brady, Manning, Bledso and Farve as secure starters because they didn't have the opportunity to start right away and learn on the job like David Carr?

"2000 season
Brady was selected with pick #199, a compensatory pick, in the sixth round of the 2000 NFL draft.[33] According to Michael Holley's book Patriot Reign, the Patriots were considering Brady and Tim Rattay, both of whom had received positive reviews from then-quarterbacks coach Dick Rehbein.[34] Ultimately, the Patriots front office chose Brady. Considering his later achievements, many analysts have called Brady the best NFL draft pick of all time.[35][36][37][38]

Brady started the season as the fourth string quarterback, behind starter Drew Bledsoe and backups John Friesz and Michael Bishop; by season's end, he was number two on the depth chart behind Bledsoe.[39] During his rookie season, he was 1-of-3 passing, for six yards.[40]

2001 season
The Patriots opened the season with a 23–17 loss at Cincinnati, with Bledsoe as the starting quarterback.[40] Their second game, and home opener, on September 23, was against their AFC East rival, the New York Jets. Bledsoe was again the starter, when in the fourth quarter he suffered internal bleeding after a hit from Jets linebacker Mo Lewis. Bledsoe returned for the next series, but was replaced with Brady for the Patriots' final series of the game. New York would hold on to win, 10–3, and the Patriots fell to 0–2 on the season.[41] Brady was named the starter for the season's third game, against the Indianapolis Colts. In his first two games as starter, Brady posted unspectacular passer ratings of 79.6 and 58.7, respectively, in a 44–13 victory over the Colts (in their last season in the AFC East) and a 30–10 loss to the Miami Dolphins.[42]"

 

[DocBar]

Well, 15 and 16 this past season were Eli Manning and Joe Flacco. Not sure that anyone is calling them average.

I would definitely call Eli Manning average. Luckiest QB in the game. Flacco is average in the regular season, but has managed to turn it up a notch in the post season. I've got to give him that.

 

[sandman]

So you are fine with just giving up on QBs who are drafted by teams with QBs like Brady, Manning and Farve as secure starters because they didn't have the opportunity to start right away and learn on the job like David Carr?

What is with everyone's absolute/binary positions today? This has nothing to do with any hypothetical anyone and everyone. What I said was HOYER has had NFL experience. HOYER supposedly learned from Brady. HOYER has played on three different teams. HOYER was a fill in starter in 5 games over two seasons before this past season. HOYER had the opportunity to learn a whole lot more than Carr or Bortles. HOYER at 29 with far more NFL exposure and experience than a couple of rookies, didn't perform better than them. And HOYER turning 30 in October doesn't have the runway left in his career to be treated like a rookie.

 

[thunderkyss]

What is with everyone's absolute/binary positions today? This has nothing to do with any hypothetical anyone and everyone. What I said was HOYER has had NFL experience. HOYER supposedly learned from Brady. HOYER has played on three different teams. HOYER was a fill in starter in 5 games over two seasons before this past season. HOYER had the opportunity to learn a whole lot more than Carr or Bortles. HOYER at 29 with far more NFL exposure and experience than a couple of rookies, didn't perform better than them. And HOYER turning 30 in October doesn't have the runway left in his career to be treated like a rookie.

I get what you're saying. But... isn't that what we're saying the difference is between a 1st round pick & an UDFA? A high first rounder like Bortles should be ready to go day one. An undrafted guy signed to a team, like Hoyer needs time to develop, he's a project.

You know I'm not a fan of Hoyer starting for our team (heck, I didn't even want him as a back up). But if we're being objective about it... would we be "ok" with a rookie who had a year like Hoyer did last season?

The only Browns game I watched from last season was against the Texans & really haven't made up my mind about his play. I watched some of it again the other day & nothing stood out at me, negatively. Looking at his game log... there's some good stuff in there, with some bad. Of course I compared it to the rookies... Bridgewater (stat wise, very strong at the end of the season), Bortles, Carr. Like you said, his numbers are comparable.

I even went back & compared his numbers to Andrew Luck's. Not that it meant anything. But if we're saying Andrew Luck was ready day one & he put up the numbers he put up... & Brian Hoyer wasn't "ready" until last season & he put up the numbers he put up...

Luck's completion percentage increased about 6%, his TD:INT ratio drastically improved... can we expect a comparable jump in Hoyer's 2nd year? Coming "home" to this system? Again, not a fan of the guy being on our team, but shouldn't it be "reasonable" to expect a similar type of improvement? 60% completion (up from 55%) 23 Tds to 9 Ints? I can see Hoyer tossing 20 TDs (up from 12) probably throwing 13 INTs (13 INTs in 2014).

Yeah, I vented earlier. I'm still not happy about the situation. Butwaddayagonnado? Time to make lemonade.

 

[Bulls on Parade]

When Brian Hoyer leads the Houston Texans to a victory in Super Bowl 50 at Levi's Stadium in Santa Clara, California on February 7 I'm not going to be the least bit surprised. I expect the Texans to win their first NFL championship this season.

I'm very excited about Hoyer who I believe will become the best quarterback in franchise history. It's all about winning Super Bowls and I see something truly special in Brian Hoyer that has me thinking that anything is possible. It's time to rally behind the Brian Hoyer era. This is going to be a fun ride.