infantrycak
Hall of Fame
So long as the dates for the roster bonuses are post trade then the new team is responsible.
Keep Texans Talk Google Ad Free!
Venmo Tip Jar | Paypal Tip Jar
Thanks for your support! 🍺😎👍
Case Keenum grabs early edge in Texans backup QB (Yates named #2)
- Thread starter legacy_gt
- Start date
So long as the dates for the roster bonuses are post trade then the new team is responsible.
Whom does Yates start for? Besides possibly Oakland. I think much of the Texans 2nd string could start for Oakland.
What QB who was traded for more than a 5th do you compare Yates to?
badboy
Hall of Fame
Good info. I had been told that but could not verify in CBA. That makes the savings $5.5 m cap.
badboy
Hall of Fame
Today no one but dynamics can change as season progresses with QBs getting hurt. His value should increase especially if he does well in regular season. I don't think it should be a compare him to who got what in past but what another team will be willing to offer based upon their situation; add to that his salary/cap is just over 1/2 million. Good thing is we don't have to trade him. Personally, I would not trade him for a fifth and maybe not a 4th.
Sort of like Rockets trading Lin or Asik. Right deal, snap it up.
Scooter
Funky
i wouldnt trade within the division, but both the jags and titans are void of talent. when rex gets fired after this year the jets will be looking for someone.
i dont know how the backup situation is in most cases, but the chargers, cardinals, cheifs, vikings, and buccaneers have bleak futures at starter. there is also an influx of very young running quarterbacks that will need real backups (if not replacements) if injury or failure to develope show. the elites (brady, manning and brees) are also getting older with manning already 37.
combined with the inevitable turnover at head coach, there could be a lot of changes made at quarterback in the next year or two.
ChampionTexan
Hall of Fame
Geno Smith is Idzik's guy, so even if/when Rex is gone, I don't see them giving up on him that soon.
Scooter
Funky
most likely correct, though probably not the best idea for a gm to handcuff a new coach to a quarterback who may need a few years to develop. i'd want to bring in a guy like yates or another who has shown NFL skills, but then again it is the jets ... idzik may perpetuate the circus.
Vinnie
with an I E
That doesn't surprise me. There's lot's of hideous backup QB play around the league from what I've seen from other team's preseason games so far.
paycheck71
Hall of Fame
Can you post some links? Would be interesting to see what other people think.
http://houston.culturemap.com/news/sports/08-19-13-case-keenum-gets-help-from-important-friend-in-texans-qb-fight/
I don't care who's writing, I just want the information.
In summary:
Keenum and Jean worked together in the off-season;
that's a good thing to hear.
Jean likes Keenum's ball placement;
That's also good to hear.
I don't care who's writing, I just want the information.
In summary:
Keenum and Jean worked together in the off-season;
that's a good thing to hear.
Jean likes Keenum's ball placement;
That's also good to hear.
BullNation4Life
All Pro
Nah, they will sign a veteran and put Keenum on the PS.
I see what you did there Sir Stirrer of the Pot....
CloakNNNdagger
Hall of Fame
Nah, they will sign a veteran and put Keenum on the PS.
It's always good to see chemistry in the making.
PapaL
Loose Screw
It wasn't intended for you, haha!
Before we draft the next Pat White, Colt McCoy, Brian Brohm, Chad Henne, or Drew Stanton, I want to see Tj and Case in a real game.
If I were Kubiak & I thought my future at QB is a problem worthy of a 2nd or 3rd round draft pick, I would find a way to get Tj/Case into a game. They're both talented, they're both pretty sharp, they've both had plenty of time to learn the system.
If I felt like my QB situation is fine, with a combination of Schaub, Yates, & Keenum.... I wouldn't. Yates/Keenum would get in a game if something happened to Schaub, that's it. I'm expecting to win a championship in 2013. I think Schaub is going to be a big part of that. His contract will most likely be extended through 2018, expecting him to be our starting QB through 2016 when he'll be 35.
Schaub's 2014 cap hit will be $14.5M If we cut or trade him his cap hit would be $13.5M, we'll save $500K if we cut him.
His 2015 cap hit will be $17M, if we cut or trade him his cap hit would be $7M, we'll save $10M
His 2016 cap hit will be $19M, if we cut or trade him, his cap hit would be $3.5M
Matt Schaub becomes tradeable after the 2013 season. He becomes very tradeable after the 2014 season. Assuming there is a market for someone of his skill level...
paycheck71
Hall of Fame
He's tradeable assuming someone is willing to take on his contract ($12.5MM in 2014 + $1MM roster bonus, $14.5MM in 2015 + $1MM roster bonus)
GuerillaBlack
Hall of Fame
I just don't see it. Schaub is who hs is. Schaub is 32 now and I doubt all of a sudden he will turn elite. If our running game is going and defense is good, we can win with him. Schaub won't carry this team on his back tho.
Tom Brady hasn't won a Super Bowl since he began carrying that team, & I seriously doubt Aaron Rodgers would have carried that team to a Super Bowl without the #2 rated defense getting healthy at the right time.
Matt is who is he is & that's not the guy we saw at the end of the 2012 season. Of course he isn't the guy that led the league in passing in 2009, he's somewhere in between.
That guy that helped us win in Denver, Detroit, & yes.... Jacsonville. That guy can help us win a Super Bowl. & if he shows up for the greater part of the play offs, we'll win a Super Bowl.
I hope so. I'm putting a few $k on the Texans this year to win it all.
That "elite" tag is somewhat misleading. How many people consider Eli Manning to be "elite" when most of his season totals are pretty pedestrian. Luck has as much to do with being called "elite" as straight up talent does. It took two incredibly lucky passes for Eli to win 2 SB's and be named MVP in them. Football is more team-oriented than any other team sport. You simply don't see a single player who can take a team on his back and take over a game, a series or a season very often in the NFL. I know that's just one example, but there are plenty of others to be found at different positions.
GuerillaBlack
Hall of Fame
Brady went to two more though and was a helmet catch away from winning one of those. And Rodgers was balling. He is elite and carried that team. We saw what he did the year after that. Detroit and Jacksonville were weak teams and showed signs of the fall of the team after those games. I remember people saying that even though those games were won, they still felt like losses. Then the losses actually came. I don't think we can look to Matt to carry us against elite teams when we have to in the playoffs. Hope we are firing on our other cylinders.
paycheck71
Hall of Fame
I think TJ looked just as good as a #3 QB vs Miami as Case did vs Minnesota as #3.
All the QBs played fairly well.
None were perfect, but they were effective with the respective group they ran.
When the scheme helps the QB such that the receiver gets wide open, the QB still needs to make the correct read and a good throw, but by no mean can they be called great (see Rosenfels' reference.)
That's not to say Yates didn't have a couple of good plays by himself.
It was a solid effort by all three QBs.
The Pencil Neck
Hall of Fame
I think the goal is to build a team, like the Steelers with Roethlisberger when they won their SBs, that don't rely on the QB having to be "on". Roethlisberger had bad days and they won; Peyton is notorious for having bad days in the playoffs and he won when his team didn't rely on him. I mean, it's nice if your relatively average QB can catch fire and get on a hot streak (like Flacco, or Eli) and help drive you to the SB but there's no QB around that can win a SB without a bunch of other pieces in place. If they could, Brady and Peyton would have won every SB the last 12 years.
b0ng
Bad Hombre
This is my conundrum:
After the first Minny PS game, I felt as though if Case were forced to be playing with the dregs, that he would probably be PS-stashable again this year. He looked decent, but I wasn't really convinced that the rest of the NFL would really want to take on a guy like that.
However after the second PS game against Miami has now happened I have to say that he looked just as good if not better, than when he did against Minny's garbage department. However, Yates looked pretty good against Miami's garbage so now what do you have. You have two guys with basically identical stats throughout pre-season:
Yates: 20 for 30, 235 yards, 66.7% comp, 7.8 yards/att, 2 TDs, 0 INTs, 112.5 rating
Keenum: 24 for 36, 275 yards, 66.7 comp, 7.6 yards/att, 2 TDs, 0 INTs, 108 rating
So now it just seems like these guys are really close or am I being some kind of Yates homer here?
After the first Minny PS game, I felt as though if Case were forced to be playing with the dregs, that he would probably be PS-stashable again this year. He looked decent, but I wasn't really convinced that the rest of the NFL would really want to take on a guy like that.
However after the second PS game against Miami has now happened I have to say that he looked just as good if not better, than when he did against Minny's garbage department. However, Yates looked pretty good against Miami's garbage so now what do you have. You have two guys with basically identical stats throughout pre-season:
Yates: 20 for 30, 235 yards, 66.7% comp, 7.8 yards/att, 2 TDs, 0 INTs, 112.5 rating
Keenum: 24 for 36, 275 yards, 66.7 comp, 7.6 yards/att, 2 TDs, 0 INTs, 108 rating
So now it just seems like these guys are really close or am I being some kind of Yates homer here?
I'm not worried about it.
It's a nice problem to have.
Good competition always make you strive harder.
The situation will solve itself; I would rather look at other positions (if I was the GM and the coaches) to try to weigh the pluses and minuses of keeping this certain OLB or this certain RB and so forth.
Both of them seem to be able to handle what they were given, with relative ease. However, I still think Tj took two sacks that he shouldn't have.
But I don't know how much of the playbook they are being trusted with & that's most likely how Kubiak will make up his mind. For all we know, Yates had 45% of the book while Keenum had 80%. Even though the numbers look similar, Keenum would be way ahead.
Outside of the starters I'm going to say everyone is running the same plays.
You have more than a qb on the field. Yates nor keenum is out there running a bunch of advanced plays that their wr's, rb's and OL can't handle. They've both run with about the same personnel. It's not all about them when it comes to the plays that are and aren't being run.
Every year, you scale back and start jover anyways. Maybe the starters that have been here for a while can run a play that they haven't practiced since late last year, but even if Schaub is the qb with third stringers you wouldn't expect him to be running any play.
They are all more than likely running what they've worked on from this year. You expect everyone that's been here since camp to know the plays they've been working on.
they may look similar on paper but Keenum has less balls batted down, Keenum also had a clutch throw on 4th, not to mention Yates has had way more experience than Case but Case shows more excitement, inspires the team better, shows quicker and faster releases, seems to have better control of the pocket and footwork.
I do want to see these last games though.
Go Coogs right?
go Texans and coogs! lol
drs23
Veteran
I do, as well. I've always pulled for Yates since the 2011 season where he showed a lot of guts taking the reins after the Schaub/Leinart injuries. I couldn't pass him on the depth chart from what I've seen thus far in the preseason. By the same token, I couldn't waive Keenum based upon what I've seen in the preseason. They are both 2 of the 40 players on this team, much less top 53.
I have to give a lot of credit to Kubiak. We've been waiting for Kubiak to get an opportunity to develop a young QB from the ground up. Now he has two, and he has done a heck of job with these kids. Mike Holmgren once had a reputation for developing young QBs and creating trade value with them (Hasselbeck, Brunell, Brooks to name a few). It's possible Kubiak could do the same here given the chance. I think they should draft a QB at some point every year.
I don't think that we should be quick to give Kubiak the credit for Keenum's development. He has shown his ability in both high school and college. Keenum is a winner with or without Kubiak's development.
Lots of winners in the college ranks can't make it in the NFL.
I watched a lot of Keenum in college, also. He's a baller. But if you look at his footwork and play action skills from taking the ball under center, that's all Texans WCO. He didn't have that at UH. He also never had to play against a base defense in college (that's a quote from Keenum). Clearly, Keenum has developed new skills since coming to the Texans.
I'm not suggesting that Keenum isn't sharp and couldn't have developed skills under another coach. But, he did develop these skills under Kubiak. I'm not Gary's biggest fan or a member in good standing in the Sunshine Club. But, give credit where credit is due.
eriadoc
Texan-American
Yep. Whatever warts Kubiak may have, he's a good QB coach for sure.
There's also a growing number of UDFA's excelling in the NFL while highly drafted players are proving to be busts.
It's a matter of being flexible enough to make yourself fit or be fit. That goes for both players and coaches. A coach that is good enough to tweak his system to fit player's strengths will, generally speaking, be more successful than a coach who has to have "system players" or ideal prospects. The same goes for players who can learn to adapt to different systems. They will succeed more often than a "prototype" position player. One trick ponies get the gate more often than multiple trick ponies. AD or AF would be on the sidelines or privately employed if they couldn't pass protect. Jared Allen and Dwight Freeny would not have the accolades they have if they couldn't be serviceable against the run. They would be pass rush specialists that would be no good in non-pass rush situations.
Case Keenum has shown a very high NFL IQ and an ability to learn and be coached up. Couple that ability to learn with his natural passing ability (weak arm my ass) and you have tremendous upside. Intangibles plus talent is a hard combination to beat. Keenum is showing both in spades. I like the young man and definitely think he has a future in the NFL. Intangibles plus talent> measurable and combine stats.
The Pencil Neck
Hall of Fame
One thing to take into consideration is that the draft used to be a LOT longer. In 1973, the draft was 17 rounds long. And guys in the 17th round actually made teams and played on them. All these UDFA's would have been drafted if there were more rounds.
The players union hates the draft and would prefer for all the players to be able to come out of college and negotiate their own deals so they've been shortening the draft and shortening the draft.
So way back in the 70's, 80's, and 90's, there were a lot fewer UDFA's making teams but over the years, as there are fewer and fewer draft rounds, more and more UDFA's make teams and actually make careers.
I mean... Deacon Jones was a 14th round draft choice. Bart Starr was taken in the 17th round. Those guys would have been UDFAs.
I kind of like the idea of eliminating the draft. Give the teams their rookie pools (the bad teams get more money), and let them negotiate with the players on an individual basis. If a team wanted to throw their entire pool at a Luck or RG3, OK. That means they're worth that $$$. You couldn't televise it, but it would place an emphasis on money management and talent identification.
BTW, Deacon Jones (186th overall) and Bart Starr (200th overall) would have been drafted in the current draft system (256 picks). What you have to remember is that there were fewer teams (12-14) in the NFL in the 50's and 60's, so the rounds were much shorter.