Keep Texans Talk Google Ad Free!
Venmo Tip Jar | Paypal Tip Jar
Thanks for your support! 🍺😎👍

Chronicle: The Mallett/Hoyer Competition

bah007 said:
I understand why comments like this are being made. Y'all are defending your guy against what I agree is as an unfair criticism.

But are we really going to act like the difference in the sample size between 11 throws and an entire season doesn't exist?
Click to expand...

The difference between 11 throws and an entire season is a lot. The difference between 11 throws and 4 is not.

Mallett = 8.2 ypa
Hoyer = 16.8 ypa

Looks like we found our starter fellas!!
 
95% of qb's look good when the pocket is clean & I think Bob has been comfortable with either of these guys in his system for some time. I think the issue is that Bob knows what he has in Hoyer but he still has concerns about Mallet and his ability to feel and get away from the rush along with his ability to keep his mechanics, footwork and accuracy in check when the pocket isn't clean. Everyone here talks about the Cleveland game like it was some glowing, breakout performance by Mallet, but statwise it was mediocore & he got a little shaky with his mechanics and footwork towards the end when they started getting after him which nearly cost us a few times. & I know everyone wants to blame his performance in the Bengals game mostly on his undisclosed pec injury, but if you look closely, you saw alot of the same issues with his footwork and mechanics when the Bengals got pressure on him in that game too...........which actually did cost us.

With the broncos having blitz happy Wade calling defensive plays & them having 2 of the more premier edge rushers in the game in Doom and Miller, I think Bob has known all along that this was the game he wanted to see Mallet in & it's hard for me to believe that him naming Mallet as the starter this week was a coincidence....especially with him keeping everyone in suspense up to the last minute about the starter at the qb position last week. He's probably planned it this way from the get go & he wanted it that way to see if he'll see those same issues crop up again with Mallet when Miller and Doom or someone else eventually does put pressure on him in the same type of circumstances.
 
Last edited:
ObsiWan said:
Well, as I said before, if O'Brien's objective was to have Mallett focus on the short/touch throws, then Mission Accomplished. Mallett definitely showed he's learned not to break our receivers' fingers off by throwing fastballs when change-ups are what's required.

Fact is, I/we don't know if all those "dink & dunks" were purely Mallett's reads/decision or due to mandate from O'Brien (Thou shalt NOT throw deep).
Offensive objective mandated by the HC is as important as stats put up.

O'Brien, himself, said that Hoyer's objective was to maintain a successful drive. When that was accomplished, Hoyer sat out the rest of the game.
So, again, maybe the objective for Mallett was demonstrate touch on underneath guys in such a way that they could (a) catch the ball and (b) do something with it after the catch. Savage's objective - totally my guess BTW - was to demonstrate a better understanding and command of the offense than he showed last year. Again, I think Mission Accomplished.

So I think all three guys were successful when one looks at their performances in terms of specific objectives.
Click to expand...

If OB/Godsey wanted him to throw deep, we'd have seen more 7 step drops. That's how we know a little bit of what they were thinking.

& again, I don't think it was any more dink & dunk than what we normally see Brady do.
 
The Pencil Neck said:
For me, this game just confirmed what I already felt: we're OK at QB. At the very worst, we're better than we were last year.
Click to expand...

Not just the QB, but the whole team is light years ahead of where we were this time last year. Most likely because we have Hoyer & not Fitzpatrick. Now we can have an "A" team, "B" team & a remedial team, where last year we had remedial team A, remedial B, & remedial C through training camp.

There were still mistakes made, but nothing so obvious s last year.
 
Mr teX said:
95% of qb's look good when the pocket is clean & I think Bob has been comfortable with either of these guys in his system for some time. I think the issue is that Bob knows what he has in Hoyer but he still has concerns about Mallet and his ability to feel and get away from the rush along with his ability to keep his mechanics, footwork and accuracy in check when the pocket isn't clean. Everyone here talks about the Cleveland game like it was some glowing, breakout performance by Mallet, but statwise it was mediocore & he got a little shaky with his mechanics and footwork towards the end when they started getting after him which nearly cost us a few times. & I know everyone wants to blame his performance in the Bengals game mostly on his undisclosed pec injury, but if you look closely, you saw alot of the same issues with his footwork and mechanics when the Bengals got pressure on him in that game too...........which actually did cost us.

With the broncos having blitz happy Wade calling defensive plays & them having 2 of the more premier edge rushers in the game in Doom and Miller, I think Bob has known all along that this was the game he wanted to see Mallet in & it's hard for me to believe that him naming Mallet as the starter this week was a coincidence....especially with him keeping everyone in suspense up to the last minute about the starter at the qb position last week. He's probably planned it this way from the get go & he wanted it that way to see if he'll see those same issues crop up again with Mallet when Miller and Doom or someone else eventually does put pressure on him in the same type of circumstances.
Click to expand...
How much blitzing are you expecting the Broncos to do? It's week 2 of preseason and a new coaching staff. I doubt they'll get too exotic, unless Kubes and Wade want to really stick it to their old team. I would be careful about that because the Texans have THE premier passrusher in the NFL and, after seeing OB's reaction to the fights against the 'Skins, I doubt he'd take that sitting down. Turnabout being fair play and the Texans D is much more familiar with RAC's system than the Bronco's are with Wade's.
 
Mr teX said:
95% of qb's look good when the pocket is clean & I think Bob has been comfortable with either of these guys in his system for some time. I think the issue is that Bob knows what he has in Hoyer but he still has concerns about Mallet and his ability to feel and get away from the rush along with his ability to keep his mechanics, footwork and accuracy in check when the pocket isn't clean. Everyone here talks about the Cleveland game like it was some glowing, breakout performance by Mallet, but statwise it was mediocore & he got a little shaky with his mechanics and footwork towards the end when they started getting after him which nearly cost us a few times. & I know everyone wants to blame his performance in the Bengals game mostly on his undisclosed pec injury, but if you look closely, you saw alot of the same issues with his footwork and mechanics when the Bengals got pressure on him in that game too...........which actually did cost us.

With the broncos having blitz happy Wade calling defensive plays & them having 2 of the more premier edge rushers in the game in Doom and Miller, I think Bob has known all along that this was the game he wanted to see Mallet in & it's hard for me to believe that him naming Mallet as the starter this week was a coincidence....especially with him keeping everyone in suspense up to the last minute about the starter at the qb position last week. He's probably planned it this way from the get go & he wanted it that way to see if he'll see those same issues crop up again with Mallet when Miller and Doom or someone else eventually does put pressure on him in the same type of circumstances.
Click to expand...

I Agree with everything you've said here. Except what was so great about that Cleveland game, was that it was his first start ever. & I never made a big deal about his stats (I'm sure some have), what sold me was his command of the offense. He looked like the field general I've always wanted.
 
Mr teX said:
I think the issue is that Bob knows what he has in Hoyer but he still has concerns about Mallet and his ability to feel and get away from the rush along with his ability to keep his mechanics, footwork and accuracy in check when the pocket isn't clean.
Click to expand...

That all sounds very logical, except the knock on Hoyer is he falls off the map when pressured.

DocBar said:
How much blitzing are you expecting the Broncos to do?
Click to expand...

I don't know if it was blitzing, but the Broncos had 7 sacks against the Seahawks this weekend.
 
infantrycak said:
That all sounds very logical, except the knock on Hoyer is he falls off the map when pressured.



I don't know if it was blitzing, but the Broncos had 7 sacks against the Seahawks this weekend.
Click to expand...
Brown and Newton can struggle against speed rushers, but looking at only the stat line, I'd say a lot of sacks were back ups vs. back ups. Look at how good K. Brown and Covington looked against the 49r's back ups. If the Bronco's plan to get crazy with the blitzing against the starters, I fully expect OB and RAC to respond in kind. The Texans can probably handle losing Mallett or Hoyer a lot better than the Bronco's can with losing Manning for any significant time. Again, this is week 2 of preseason. Last week was week one. I expect to see coaches wanting to see the 40 or so guys on the bubble moreso than the guys that are already entrenched. Week 3, as we all know, is when game planning and having starters play significant time becomes a factor. After a bit of fact checking, Miller is the only starter that got a sack. Everyone else seems to be fringe players. Scrubs on scrubs. That's based on the NFL.com depth chart. No other sack was registered by anyone higher than 3rd on the NFL.com depth chart.
 
infantrycak said:
That all sounds very logical, except the knock on Hoyer is he falls off the map when pressured.



I don't know if it was blitzing, but the Broncos had 7 sacks against the Seahawks this weekend.
Click to expand...

If this is the knock on Hoyer then I hope the Broncos bring the house! The Texans need to know now if Hoyer can handle the pressure or not. If he can or can't then it may answer the QB question. Only problem is he may only be playing with and against 2nd and 3rd stringers which might not show us enough.
 
Insideop said:
If this is the knock on Hoyer then I hope the Broncos bring the house! The Texans need to know now if Hoyer can handle the pressure or not. If he can or can't then it may answer the QB question. Only problem is he may only be playing with and against 2nd and 3rd stringers which might not show us enough.
Click to expand...

Even if this happens, it will demonstrate how HE reacts to pressure. In fact, it may show it more clearly and quicker if our 2nd and 3rd stringers play the El Toro game. It wouldn't surprise me that the Broncs coaches, being familiar with his years of known wilting tendencies in the face of pressure, tell their D to get after Hoyer hard and often.
 
Last edited:
CloakNNNdagger said:
Even if this happens, it will demonstrate how HE reacts to pressure. In fact, it may show it more clearly and quicker if our 2nd and 3rd stringers play the El Toro game. It wouldn't surprise me that the Broncs coaches, being familiar with his years of known wilting tendencies in the face of pressure, tell their D to get after Hoyer hard and often.
Click to expand...

Wade is going to bring pressure, and he's going to be as creative with it as he can within the confines of a pre-season game. This will be good for us.
 
CloakNNNdagger said:
Even if this happens, it will demonstrate how HE reacts to pressure. In fact, it may show it more clearly and quicker if our 2nd and 3rd stringers play the El Toro game. It wouldn't surprise me that the Broncs coaches, being familiar with his years of known wilting tendencies in the face of pressure, tell their D to get after Hoyer hard and often.
Click to expand...
I don't think Hoyer's presence in this game has anything to do with how much Wade blitzes. His M.O. is to send pressure from unexpected places no matter who he faces. And, logically, it should be part of evaluating which of his guys can work effectively in his scheme to send blitzers from different positions.
It's not a Hoyer thing.
It's a Wade thing.


...then there's the fact that the Texans didn't even interview him to replace Kubiak might ....Might.... be a factor too.
:D
 
WolverineFan said:
The difference between 11 throws and an entire season is a lot. The difference between 11 throws and 4 is not.

Mallett = 8.2 ypa
Hoyer = 16.8 ypa

Looks like we found our starter fellas!!
Click to expand...
After a fair warning about sample size, you immediately jump on a sample of FOUR?
 
thunderkyss said:
If OB/Godsey wanted him to throw deep, we'd have seen more 7 step drops. That's how we know a little bit of what they were thinking.

& again, I don't think it was any more dink & dunk than what we normally see Brady do.
Click to expand...
We must also expect that quick reads will lead to more short and intermediate passes where the long ball has not had a chance to develop yet.
 
infantrycak said:
That all sounds very logical, except the knock on Hoyer is he falls off the map when pressured.



I don't know if it was blitzing, but the Broncos had 7 sacks against the Seahawks this weekend.
Click to expand...

Well I-cak you know as well as i do that all qb's are bothered by pressure, it's just a matter of how much pressure bothers them and how much it affects their game. For as bad as Hoyer played last year amongst the circus that was the Cleveland Browns, they were a 6-3 ball club when we met up with them last year & Hoyer had 5 4th qtr comebacks for them last year. And from the perspective of fans wanting Mallet to win the spot over Hoyer & BoB giving him every possible chance he can to seize the starting spot, I'm sure it's still somewhat of a comfort for BoB knowing that 1 guy can get away from the rush a little & knowing his limits in terms of how much pressure he can deal with......versus another guy whom he knows likely ain't getting away from anything & still doesn't really have a feel for the limits of pressure he can take. Furthermore with Arian down for at least the 1st part of the season, teams won't have a reason to not blitz and you need a guy who can dodge a little bit and still be accurate & both those attributes favor Hoyer over Mallet. Saturday should be a good test for Mallet.
 
Mr teX said:
Furthermore with Arian down for at least the 1st part of the season, teams won't have a reason to not blitz and you need a guy who can dodge a little bit and still be accurate & both those attributes favor Hoyer over Mallet. Saturday should be a good test for Mallet.
Click to expand...

Nothing to do with Hoyer v. Mallett but I think handling pressure is far more in the head than it is in the wheels. Fans are always caught up with the wheels. Carr had great wheels and was a human pinata. Schaub was a 3 toed sloth and halved the sacks (from a 'good' Carr season).

Less generally, this is something Fitz and Hoyer have in common. Both are capable of stretches of getting the ball out on program and then...all the sudden the ball becomes stuck to their hand and bad things start to happen.

But to your point, I'm not suggesting Mallett shouldn't be examined under duress. I'm saying both should be. I really don't understand Savage getting anything but minimal playing time until a starter is decided.
 
infantrycak said:
Nothing to do with Hoyer v. Mallett but I think handling pressure is far more in the head than it is in the wheels. Fans are always caught up with the wheels. Carr had great wheels and was a human pinata. Schaub was a 3 toed sloth and halved the sacks (from a 'good' Carr season).

Less generally, this is something Fitz and Hoyer have in common. Both are capable of stretches of getting the ball out on program and then...all the sudden the ball becomes stuck to their hand and bad things start to happen.

But to your point, I'm not suggesting Mallett shouldn't be examined under duress. I'm saying both should be. I really don't understand Savage getting anything but minimal playing time until a starter is decided.
Click to expand...
Agree on all fronts..i still remember Marino slow ass evading the rush by taking little half steps to the side and firing bullets down the field. Hopefully Mallet has a little of that in him
 
infantrycak said:
Nothing to do with Hoyer v. Mallett but I think handling pressure is far more in the head than it is in the wheels. Fans are always caught up with the wheels. Carr had great wheels and was a human pinata. Schaub was a 3 toed sloth and halved the sacks (from a 'good' Carr season).

Less generally, this is something Fitz and Hoyer have in common. Both are capable of stretches of getting the ball out on program and then...all the sudden the ball becomes stuck to their hand and bad things start to happen.

But to your point, I'm not suggesting Mallett shouldn't be examined under duress. I'm saying both should be. I really don't understand Savage getting anything but minimal playing time until a starter is decided.
Click to expand...

Unless, it's actually a three horse race instead of two.
 
infantrycak said:
It's not. OB said it the 1st day of TC.
Click to expand...

Unless OB fibbed.

20140103_lbm_at5_007.0_cinema_1050.0.jpg
 
infantrycak said:
But to your point, I'm not suggesting Mallett shouldn't be examined under duress. I'm saying both should be. I really don't understand Savage getting anything but minimal playing time until a starter is decided.
Click to expand...
Yeah, this is really starting to annoy me. You want to talk 'upside', I'd say Savage has more than the other two. Unless it's a sucks-in-practice thing by Savage, I don't get it.
 
ObsiWan said:
Yeah, this is really starting to annoy me. You want to talk 'upside', I'd say Savage has more than the other two. Unless it's a sucks-in-practice thing by Savage, I don't get it.
Click to expand...

We may be saying opposite things. Seems pretty clear to me OB is picking between Hoyer and Mallett for this season's starter - he said as much. Whether he should be considering Savage is another matter. Under that circumstance, IMO he should play Hoyer and Mallett until he makes a decision on the starter. Savage can take every rep after the decision is made.
 
ObsiWan said:
Yeah, this is really starting to annoy me. You want to talk 'upside', I'd say Savage has more than the other two. Unless it's a sucks-in-practice thing by Savage, I don't get it.
Click to expand...
I'm fine with either Savage or Mallett. What I don't agree with is having Hoyer play the whole season. I just see him as a good backup and nothing else.
 
infantrycak said:
We may be saying opposite things. Seems pretty clear to me OB is picking between Hoyer and Mallett for this season's starter - he said as much. Whether he should be considering Savage is another matter. Under that circumstance, IMO he should play Hoyer and Mallett until he makes a decision on the starter. Savage can take every rep after the decision is made.
Click to expand...
Oh it's obvious that this is a two-horse race for the #1 QB job.
And I suppose this is all part of the 'we re-tooling', not 'rebuilding' mantra. If we can just pop an experienced, effective QB in our line-up we're good. right.

...but IF we were rebuilding, I'd sure give Savage a good, hard, long, fair look.
 
ObsiWan said:
You're the only one who's made that comparison.
Congratulations.
:)
Click to expand...

Exactly. Nobody else has said that besides kingtexan (whose optimism I find refreshing and admirable). Decent showing against third and fourth stringers doesn't translate into Brett Freaking Favre. It translates into "Interesting. I'd like to see more".
 
Last edited:
Marcus said:
Hmm.. I'd think of it, as "unless he re-evaluated, based upon what he has seen since then".
Click to expand...

That would make sense to me. I think we all understand that he's choosing between Hoyer and Mallet. It's up to Savage to practice and play his way into consideration with them.
 
Hervoyel said:
That would make sense to me. I think we all understand that he's choosing between Hoyer and Mallet. It's up to Savage to practice and play his way into consideration with them.
Click to expand...

Well, if OB is truly having an open mind about it, (and I'm not saying he doesn't) you'd think that he also would be thinking "Interesting. I'd like to see more".

So, I'd say based upon that, if say, he plays Mallet in the first half against Denver, and Hoyer is in for the 2nd half, I'd say, yeah, it's between Hoyer and Mallet.

But if he sticks Savage in there, especially in the first half, (and he plays well) all bets are off.
 
I'm 1 of the few that liked the Savage pick-up pretty much from the start..I think he shows great promise as a future starter for us. But i also know that BoB isn't really looking at him as a contender for the starting spot in 2015 no matter what he says. Perhaps next year he will if 1 of the other 2 we have now flame out (pretty much a certainty), but not this year. Savage just needs to keep quietly progressing and make the most of his opportunities.
 
Marcus said:
Well, if OB is truly having an open mind about it, (and I'm not saying he doesn't) you'd think that he also would be thinking "Interesting. I'd like to see more".

So, I'd say based upon that, if say, he plays Mallet in the first half against Denver, and Hoyer is in for the 2nd half, I'd say, yeah, it's between Hoyer and Mallet.

But if he sticks Savage in there, especially in the first half, (and he plays well) all bets are off.
Click to expand...

Savage getting some playing time in the 2nd half signifies nothing. That's standard.
 
I'm expecting a quarter for Mallett, a quarter for Hoyer, and then the half for Savage, again. I was expecting the inverse of that against the Niners (1Q Hoyer, 2Q Mallett, 2H Savage), and I was surprised to see Hoyer pulled after only 1 drive.

If Savage sees time in THE FIRST HALF? I'd be shocked.
 
Savage looked good.

I am not sure if he will be given the opportunity to prove he should be the starter though.

But who knows...coaches are human too so like the Seahawks did with Wilson he may see things he likes and elevate the guy.

But just going by what ob has said and what he's done so far I think that'd be very unlikely. A strong camp this year probably equates to being in the mix for back up and/or starter next year.
 
Hervoyel said:
Exactly. Nobody else has said that besides kingtexan (whose optimism I find refreshing and admirable). Decent showing against third and fourth stringers doesn't translate into Brett Freaking Favre. It translates into "Interesting. I'd like to see more".
Click to expand...
It translates into better than the 49er third QB.
 
xtruroyaltyx said:
But who knows...coaches are human too so like the Seahawks did with Wilson he may see things he likes and elevate the guy.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that'd be something if OB pulled a Pete Carroll, but that's just wishful thinking on my part.
 
Why is Savage still being discussed? He isn't even relevant to the QB situation at all. He is just our third string back up and he isn't taking anyone's job. Move on.
 
Texecutioner said:
Why is Savage still being discussed? He isn't even relevant to the QB situation at all. He is just our third string back up and he isn't taking anyone's job. Move on.
Click to expand...

He's being discussed because some of us happen to believe he has the most upside of the 3 quarterbacks. Now, I know you're afflicted with 'TJ-Yates-itis' disease and think if he sucked as a rookie, that means he will always suck, thereby prohibiting you from evaluating his play objectively, but that doesn't mean the rest of us see it that way.
 
  1. Jayson Braddock ‏@JaysonBraddock 4h4 hours ago
    Mallett will face a deadly defense. If he can go out & have a good game against this defense. There's no way you can keep the job from him.
    Click to expand...
    [*] DXTex ‏@DXTex 4h4 hours ago
    @JaysonBraddock Not the QB we need but the one we deserve
    Click to expand...

  2. Jayson Braddock ‏@JaysonBraddock 4h4 hours agoMallett will face a deadly defense. If he can go out & have a good game against this defense. There's no way you can keep the job from him.
    Click to expand...







 
Marcus said:
He's being discussed because some of us happen to believe he has the most upside of the 3 quarterbacks. Now, I know you're afflicted with 'TJ-Yates-itis' disease and think if he sucked as a rookie, that means he will always suck, thereby prohibiting you from evaluating his play objectively, but that doesn't mean the rest of us see it that way.
Click to expand...

Yates? Lol! The faith in him sure ended well.

Savage was never some hot prospect. He'll make a low budget starter at best one day, and likely is a career back up. Hoyer and Mallet aren't going to both play bad enough for Savage to take their spot. Even if he was to do that, his ceiling is so low. Why would you want that?
 
Texecutioner said:
Yates? Lol! The faith in him sure ended well.

Savage was never some hot prospect. He'll make a low budget starter at best one day, and likely is a career back up. Hoyer and Mallet aren't going to both play bad enough for Savage to take their spot. Even if he was to do that, his ceiling is so low. Why would you want that?
Click to expand...

Did you even watch the 1st pre-season game?
 
Texecutioner said:
Yates? Lol! The faith in him sure ended well.

Savage was never some hot prospect. He'll make a low budget starter at best one day, and likely is a career back up. Hoyer and Mallet aren't going to both play bad enough for Savage to take their spot. Even if he was to do that, his ceiling is so low. Why would you want that?
Click to expand...
So with your philosophy, you would have totally missed out on Kurt Warner, Warren Moon, Tom Brady, Joe Montana, hell even Tony Romo. Don't recall them being "hot prospects" when they came out either.

On the bright side, you probably would have drafted Ryan Leaf or Jeff George; them being "hot prospects" and all.
:)
 
ObsiWan said:
So with your philosophy, you would have totally missed out on Kurt Warner, Warren Moon, Tom Brady, Joe Montana, hell even Tony Romo. Don't recall them being "hot prospects" when they came out either.

On the bright side, you probably would have drafted Ryan Leaf or Jeff George; them being "hot prospects" and all.
:)
Click to expand...


But come on Obsi, all those guys ceilings are so low....... :thinking:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top