Should Bob listen to this?

[Second Honeymoon]

wow it is freaking laughable


top 5 payroll ( based on link that was shown on this thread)

and yet .average to lower NFL average in ticket prices



http://www.khou.com/sports/Texans-ticket-prices-to-go-up-in-2010-81815172.html


you'd think it would be top 5 ticket prices and average to below average in NFL salary if Bob was so cheap and was so greedy

oye.

take away Schaub's $10 million dollar bonus that he got after the season and they drop to middle of the road. take away Dunta's $10 million franchise tag (which they have now released him) and they drop to the bottom 1/3 of payroll.

but yes, counting Schaub's 10 million bonus and Dunta's 2009 figure, they are top 3.

yall keep pointing to 2009. i don't care about last year. they did spend money last year by signing Smith and tagging Dunta. i am talking about this year, and even the most kool-aid addled fan has to realize they have been cheap this offseason.

Bob is being cheap this year. last year he had to pony up to retain Schaub and he did franchise Dunta. this year, no Dunta money and no Schaub bonus will drop us to about 20th in payroll.

also spending money isn't going to get you a win. spending nearly $5million on Orlovsky isn't helping the team. its just wasting money. we need to spend it on players that actually play...

but continue to think that the Texans are 3rd in payroll right now...because we all know they aren't. that was last years # and it changed drastically with over $20million off those books in just Matt and Dunta alone.

Once again, Bob is being cheap this offseason and you can't spin it any other way

after all, the team went 9-7 missed the playoffs and the fans still acted like they won the Super Bowl or did anything of consequence. and the owner goes and re-signs and extends the contract of a .500 coach over a 4 year period.....screw that.

take off the rose colored glasses....bob is cheap in 2010. last year he paid $$ and we had our best year. don't expect a repeat in 2010. we have taken steps back and we are in a precarious situation with little to no depth at critical positions. thanks Bob.

 

[The Pencil Neck]

To those asking what I would have done...

I would have tried my hardest to trade Dunta before last season. The sticky issue is that his leg was questionable, as to how it holds up over the yet-to-be-played 2009 season. So he wasn't very tradeable. But I would have tried.

And you know that this didn't happen... how?

I would not have franchised him. Worst-case scenario, for me as the pretend-to-be-a-GM is that I can't trade him. So I let him go. I play my drafted CBs, maybe get a street free agent or some other team's camp cut (Pollard shows that it IS possible, OK?). I essentially concede that we're letting a good, TACKLING/RUN SUPPORT cornerback get away. I limp by until I can get past the 2009 season.

But I do NOT spend $10 million for one year of Dunta Robinson. Never. Ever.

I disagree.

You have to decide who to franchise LONG before the draft. And so you don't know if you're going to get good rookie CBs in the draft or not. You don't want to put yourself in a position where you have to reach to get starters.

And you don't know if you'll be able to come to terms with the guy. Lots of times, guys get franchised and then later sign a contract.

Forget the $10,000,000 dollars because at this point, it's not relevant. What's relevant is that you've basically just got Jacques Reeves, Fred Bennett, and Antwaun Molden and Bennett and Molden are question marks at best.

If McCain and Quin hadn't produced, I'm sure we would have franchised Dunta again.

It's being made out as if we suddenly become infinitely worse without Dunta last season, if my scenario had been played out. We wouldn't have been THAT much worse. He's not THAT good at pass coverage. And his tackling skills were spotty, at best, all season long in 2009.

Just my two cents.

To me, it's not that we would have been infinitely worse without Dunta last year. It's that we would have had the possibility of being infinitely worse without him. From a strategic point, it was the safest play even though there was some risk in it.

 

[Wolf]

take away Schaub's $10 million dollar bonus that he got after the season and they drop to middle of the road. take away Dunta's $10 million franchise tag (which they have now released him) and they drop to the bottom 1/3 of payroll.

but yes, counting Schaub's 10 million bonus and Dunta's 2009 figure, they are top 3.

yall keep pointing to 2009. i don't care about last year. they did spend money last year by signing Smith and tagging Dunta. i am talking about this year, and even the most kool-aid addled fan has to realize they have been cheap this offseason.

Bob is being cheap this year. last year he had to pony up to retain Schaub and he did franchise Dunta. this year, no Dunta money and no Schaub bonus will drop us to about 20th in payroll.

also spending money isn't going to get you a win. spending nearly $5million on Orlovsky isn't helping the team. its just wasting money. we need to spend it on players that actually play...

but continue to think that the Texans are 3rd in payroll right now...because we all know they aren't. that was last years # and it changed drastically with over $20million off those books in just Matt and Dunta alone.

Once again, Bob is being cheap this offseason and you can't spin it any other way

after all, the team went 9-7 missed the playoffs and the fans still acted like they won the Super Bowl or did anything of consequence. and the owner goes and re-signs and extends the contract of a .500 coach over a 4 year period.....screw that.

take off the rose colored glasses....bob is cheap in 2010. last year he paid $$ and we had our best year. don't expect a repeat in 2010. we have taken steps back and we are in a precarious situation with little to no depth at critical positions. thanks Bob.

who is acting like we won the superbowl?

this isn't madden where you can spend spend spend.. I imagine if Bob became Daniel Snyder and spent a whole bunch of money and raised your ticket prices, still not make the playoffs, you'd still find something to say about Bob.

I need to look back to last years post , I imagine you said Bob was cheap also that year too before the season started (or I would be surprised if you didn't)

why don't you wait till after the draft and all the dust is settled to find out the sum of the whole so that you know if the Texans took a step backwards? me .. D-rob didn't do much for this franchise last season ...no INTS, 1 FF and a few tackles ...is that worth 12 million?

 

[infantrycak]

but continue to think that the Texans are 3rd in payroll right now...because we all know they aren't. that was last years # and it changed drastically with over $20million off those books in just Matt and Dunta alone.

Once again, Bob is being cheap this offseason and you can't spin it any other way

There isn't any need to spin it because you can guarantee if they get new deals done with OD, DeMeco and Pollard it is going to eat up all or most of that $20 mil. Oh and actually it is $17 mil since they spent at least $3 mil this year on Smith, wait make that $13 mil since they spent $4 mil on Walter. Even if they all played on their RFA tenders it would be over $9 mil or $4.5 mil more than last year and they are actively trying to sign all three to long term deals.

 

[Wolf]

for the record, when I think of "cheap"

I think of an owner that doesn't want to spend the money when there is a player to spend the money on


this offseason. IMO there is no one to spend the money on .
.we tried with the cornerback from NE (name escapes me)

 

[b0ng]

What I find funny about the "cheapskate" argument is that the Texans have always been one of the bigger spenders in terms of player salaries. Not all of the highly paid players were actually good, but they spent the money.

I mean nobody was calling McNair cheap when Asserly was spending Uncle Bob's money like it was going out of style, and now that we have somebody who's more uh. . . fiscally conservative in Smith, people think it's the owner handing down ultimatums of not spending money in FA ever. I haven't seen anything to suggest Bob puts his hands in the pie since the David Carr extension.

The best part though is when you actually have evidence pointing to the contrary people will still spin and try to assert their very wrong point that Bob is now a cheapskate (since Smith has arrived anyway).

 

[infantrycak]

The best part though is when you actually have evidence pointing to the contrary people will still spin and try to assert their very wrong point that Bob is now a cheapskate (since Smith has arrived anyway).

And they'll do it even though in some cases they complained the Texans were overpaying when they signed Reeves or Smith.

 

[otisbean]

i know my facts. and the fact is that there is no cap and there are no massive ramifications to franchising a player even though you act like its somehow going to upset the cosmic balance.

before you start calling people out, maybe start being a little more realistic and objective.

as for Mario being overpaid, my point was that players get overpaid. almost every player is overpaid, but stop acting like they got rid of Dunta so they wouldn't have to pay Ryans or Cush or whoever more....do you actually believe that?

they got rid of Dunta because it became personal between Dunta and Smith and because McNair is in profit-mode. 500 million wasn't enough profit.

our team is worse today than it was in Week 17. if you want to spin that to make your peepee hurt less, that is your prerogative. i am just being honest and objective about our team, our owner, and our talent level.

dunta was a good player. he acted like an asshat but he was a good player. Reeves is now our #1 corner and if you think that is a good think and worth it because McNair got to keep more of his money, that is fine by me. Just don't try and crucify or belittle me because I think it was a bad football move. you don't let your #1 corners just walk. if dunta was so bad, how bad was reeves, mccain, quin, or anyone else on our squad. the Falcons (and many other teams) were more than happy to pay Dunta...and you know why? because they are trying to take steps forward...not backwards.

you don't have to agree with me, but don't act like I am way off in left field....because I am not.

the Texans and some of their fans have let this become personal and have clouded their judgement on Dunta. when OD holds out of camp, I wonder if the fans will crucify him and hold grudges like they are doing with Dunta.....something tells me they won't. after all he is one of the 'good guys'.

We disagree on a couple points:

1) Dunta wasn't a good player, he was OK. He was in no way worth 10mil, and he certainly wasn't worth 12 mil. I have nothing against Dunta, I hoped we would have found a way to sign him long term last year. Once I heard the contract that we offered and he turned down I knew he was delusional and his time here was finished. Don't say because Atl paid him he was worth money, every team makes good and bad decisions.

2) Just because there is no cap, there are ramifications to overpaying players. Once you set that precedent it will come back to bite you in the a$$, guaranteed. Lets say for example, we paid DR 12 mil, and he had similar numbers to last year. Lets say that Quin has similar tackles and 5 ints, what do you think his agent is going to ask for in his next negotiation? What should they pay Cush after his season or Pollard for that matter? Pollard outplayed DR, should we pay him 12 mil? Where does it stop?

Bob does spend money, just because they didn't overpay mediocre FAs this offseason doesn't mean they aren't trying to win. The Redskins have shown very clearly that stupid spending doesn't guarantee you anything.

 

[steelbtexan]

What I find funny about the "cheapskate" argument is that the Texans have always been one of the bigger spenders in terms of player salaries. Not all of the highly paid players were actually good, but they spent the money.

I mean nobody was calling McNair cheap when Asserly was spending Uncle Bob's money like it was going out of style, and now that we have somebody who's more uh. . . fiscally conservative in Smith, people think it's the owner handing down ultimatums of not spending money in FA ever. I haven't seen anything to suggest Bob puts his hands in the pie since the David Carr extension.

The best part though is when you actually have evidence pointing to the contrary people will still spin and try to assert their very wrong point that Bob is now a cheapskate (since Smith has arrived anyway).

Never really thought about the Casserly angle.

After McNair got burned on the Casserly spending spree. I could see why he would be reluctant to spend $ in FA. You really cant blame him.

But the odds are against you winning without spending $ in FA.

Everybody points to Snyder as the FA example.

I would point to the Vikings (Wilf) and Jets (Johnson as examples of spending in FA paying off big time.)

I agree that although this isn't the year to be spending big $ in FA. 2 yrs 5 mil really isn't spending alot and wouldn't have made picking a RB high in the draft such a necessity

 

[b0ng]

Never really thought about the Casserly angle.

After McNair got burned on the Casserly spending spree. I could see why he would be reluctant to spend $ in FA. You really cant blame him.

But the odds are against you winning without spending $ in FA.

Everybody points to Snyder as the FA example.

I would point to the Vikings (Wilf) and Jets (Johnson as examples of spending in FA paying off big time.)

I agree that although this isn't the year to be spending big $ in FA. 2 yrs 5 mil really isn't spending alot and wouldn't have made picking a RB high in the draft such a necessity

Counter-point: The Raiders.

edit: To elaborate, if people made the argument that Rick Smith was the cheapskate there would probably be less vehement denial of the claim because lets face it, Rick Smith didn't bring the Texans to Houston and he didn't help build the Reliant. One could also say that with how unceremoniously Dunta was let go, and the foot dragging of the re-signing of Ryans, Daniels and Pollard could all point to this as well.

But people point the finger at Bob like he's in the negotiation room or making the decisions about what players are worth. Sure, Smith and Kubiak probably go to Bob with huge decisions (Schaub, Dunta, Carr, to a lesser extent (cause only half of them were there at the time) Mario) but he's a relatively hands-off owner. The franchise takes the face of whichever GM is in charge (Casserly was not afraid of the salary cap) and right now we spend a ton less on free agents than we did, and don't make that many moves on draft day.

 

[ChampionTexan]

Never really thought about the Casserly angle.

After McNair got burned on the Casserly spending spree. I could see why he would be reluctant to spend $ in FA. You really cant blame him.

But the odds are against you winning without spending $ in FA.

Everybody points to Snyder as the FA example.

I would point to the Vikings (Wilf) and Jets (Johnson as examples of spending in FA paying off big time.)

I agree that although this isn't the year to be spending big $ in FA. 2 yrs 5 mil really isn't spending alot and wouldn't have made picking a RB high in the draft such a necessity

Counter-point: The Raiders.

Additional Counter-points: The Colts, Steelers, Giants, and Patriots (when they were winning 3 of 4 Super Bowls).

 

[HOU-TEX]

take away Schaub's $10 million dollar bonus that he got after the season and they drop to middle of the road. take away Dunta's $10 million franchise tag (which they have now released him) and they drop to the bottom 1/3 of payroll.

but yes, counting Schaub's 10 million bonus and Dunta's 2009 figure, they are top 3.

yall keep pointing to 2009. i don't care about last year. they did spend money last year by signing Smith and tagging Dunta. i am talking about this year, and even the most kool-aid addled fan has to realize they have been cheap this offseason.

Bob is being cheap this year. last year he had to pony up to retain Schaub and he did franchise Dunta. this year, no Dunta money and no Schaub bonus will drop us to about 20th in payroll.

also spending money isn't going to get you a win. spending nearly $5million on Orlovsky isn't helping the team. its just wasting money. we need to spend it on players that actually play...

but continue to think that the Texans are 3rd in payroll right now...because we all know they aren't. that was last years # and it changed drastically with over $20million off those books in just Matt and Dunta alone.

Once again, Bob is being cheap this offseason and you can't spin it any other way

after all, the team went 9-7 missed the playoffs and the fans still acted like they won the Super Bowl or did anything of consequence. and the owner goes and re-signs and extends the contract of a .500 coach over a 4 year period.....screw that.

take off the rose colored glasses....bob is cheap in 2010. last year he paid $$ and we had our best year. don't expect a repeat in 2010. we have taken steps back and we are in a precarious situation with little to no depth at critical positions. thanks Bob.

 

[GP]

And you know that this didn't happen... how?

Look, smarty pants...I all but stated that I DON'T know if they tried to trade him. Must I account for every person's inability to infer the obvious? I said that he probably wasn't AS trade-ready as he might have been without the leg injury in 2008. I figured that would suffice. Sorry I didn't s-p-e-l-l it out for everyone.

My main point, Pencil-Neck, was that if a trade doesn't happen...I'm good with letting him walk and get his "Look out for #1" on with another team. I'll save the $10 million and write that check for someone else.

---------------------------------

You have to decide who to franchise LONG before the draft. And so you don't know if you're going to get good rookie CBs in the draft or not. You don't want to put yourself in a position where you have to reach to get starters.

And you don't know if you'll be able to come to terms with the guy. Lots of times, guys get franchised and then later sign a contract.

Forget the $10,000,000 dollars because at this point, it's not relevant. What's relevant is that you've basically just got Jacques Reeves, Fred Bennett, and Antwaun Molden and Bennett and Molden are question marks at best.

If McCain and Quin hadn't produced, I'm sure we would have franchised Dunta again.

Yeah, I would essentially make-do with what I had. Oh the horror of sticking with what you drafted and making it work until you can address it in the next year's draft. I don't think we end up any worse without Dunta's midget frame manning one side of the field. Ask Drew Bennett.

---------------------------------

To me, it's not that we would have been infinitely worse without Dunta last year. It's that we would have had the possibility of being infinitely worse without him. From a strategic point, it was the safest play even though there was some risk in it.

From a strategic point, this defense became better because of three people: Frank Bush, Brian Cushing, and Pollard. I might even throw in David Gibbs since he's likely the real person responsible for the Pollard signing.

When Richard Smith left the team, it took about 2 games for Frank Bush and the players to stop the reindeer games and get serious about things.

I don't think my line of reasoning is crazy. We don't become worse WITHOUT Dunta Robinson last year. But we did use $10 million for him. Not a good trade-off, in my opinion.

 

[The Pencil Neck]

Look, smarty pants...I all but stated that I DON'T know if they tried to trade him. Must I account for every person's inability to infer the obvious? I said that he probably wasn't AS trade-ready as he might have been without the leg injury in 2008. I figured that would suffice. Sorry I didn't s-p-e-l-l it out for everyone.

You were asked what you would have done and the implication was that they didn't try to do that.

Now, let me explain something real quick. If you think you're implying something and no one picks up on the implication, the problem isn't with people's ability to infer from what you're writing. The problem is with what you're writing is actually inferring. You're not communicating as clearly as you think you are.

It seems to be a common thing in discussions that people are thinking you're saying something you don't think you're saying.

So stop with the attitude on this. There's really no use for it.

My main point, Pencil-Neck, was that if a trade doesn't happen...I'm good with letting him walk and get his "Look out for #1" on with another team. I'll save the $10 million and write that check for someone else.

Except it doesn't work that way. We're not strapped for cash. If Dunta walks, we're not going to have a revenue sharing check passed out among the players with that money. We're not going to apply it to Demeco's or OD's contracts. We're offering those guys what we think is a market value for them. That value doesn't change just because we suddenly got $10 million handed to us.

Yeah, I would essentially make-do with what I had. Oh the horror of sticking with what you drafted and making it work until you can address it in the next year's draft. I don't think we end up any worse without Dunta's midget frame manning one side of the field. Ask Drew Bennett.

Smithiak wanted that potential security blanket. Nothing wrong with that.

From a strategic point, this defense became better because of three people: Frank Bush, Brian Cushing, and Pollard. I might even throw in David Gibbs since he's likely the real person responsible for the Pollard signing.

When Richard Smith left the team, it took about 2 games for Frank Bush and the players to stop the reindeer games and get serious about things.

I don't think my line of reasoning is crazy. We don't become worse WITHOUT Dunta Robinson last year. But we did use $10 million for him. Not a good trade-off, in my opinion.

My point is that you're looking at it in hindsight instead of foresight. You know NOW that the defense improved because of Cushing and Pollard. But if you're facing Peyton Manning with Jacques Reeves and Fred Bennett with Molden on IR and a couple of rookies that didn't develop like you'd hoped, you're going to have a problem. So you might as well keep your most experienced CB on the team.

It's ONLY $10,000,000 and to someone like McNair, that's pocket change. It's about at the limit of what you'd like to spend on a player of DR's caliber but as a security blanket, there's nothing wrong with that.

 

[GP]

You were asked what you would have done and the implication was that they didn't try to do that.

Now, let me explain something real quick. If you think you're implying something and no one picks up on the implication, the problem isn't with people's ability to infer from what you're writing. The problem is with what you're writing is actually inferring. You're not communicating as clearly as you think you are.

It seems to be a common thing in discussions that people are thinking you're saying something you don't think you're saying.

So stop with the attitude on this. There's really no use for it.



Except it doesn't work that way. We're not strapped for cash. If Dunta walks, we're not going to have a revenue sharing check passed out among the players with that money. We're not going to apply it to Demeco's or OD's contracts. We're offering those guys what we think is a market value for them. That value doesn't change just because we suddenly got $10 million handed to us.



Smithiak wanted that potential security blanket. Nothing wrong with that.



My point is that you're looking at it in hindsight instead of foresight. You know NOW that the defense improved because of Cushing and Pollard. But if you're facing Peyton Manning with Jacques Reeves and Fred Bennett with Molden on IR and a couple of rookies that didn't develop like you'd hoped, you're going to have a problem. So you might as well keep your most experienced CB on the team.

It's ONLY $10,000,000 and to someone like McNair, that's pocket change. It's about at the limit of what you'd like to spend on a player of DR's caliber but as a security blanket, there's nothing wrong with that.

LOL.

(sigh)

One last time:

1. It was not wisdom to spend $10 million on Dunta Robinson, no matter what panic-mode or hysteria you assume was going to exist without him.

2. I chalk up the two Colts game, every year, as games we're going to lose. And that's on Kubiak, IMO. He can't outcoach them. Our players are scared of them. It's psychological and got nuthin' to do with who plays cornerback. That is weak sauce, my friend. If we win one game, then that's gravy for me. But I, nor any SANE Texans fan, is going to truly believe that we can beat them until it happens, and happens in convincing form. And Dunta Robinson is not going to influence that situation whether he is here, or not. Dunta doesn't factor in this ONE BIT. And you know it.

It really is hard for me to understand how you can say $10 million is chump change to Bob, and that it's what you would pay someone of Dunta's "calibre." Are you serious? Are you really serious? Maybe I misunderstood your ranking system of our players and their worth.

Lastly, I don't have a problem communicating in a better way. In fact, I probably OVER-communicate, and I've been trying to cut out things that I think most people would understand on their own. Been trying to shorten my posts.

I think you have a problem twisting what I say and attacking what I say, and basically being a real jerk to me. That's been the pattern, pal, and that's why I rarely reply to your posts any more. I should have known better than to fall for your bait, btw. Alas, here I am.

Note to self: Avoid certain topics with certain people. Self-imposed ban on discussing things with you beginning in 3...2...1.......

 

[The Pencil Neck]

LOL.
Self-imposed ban on discussing things with you beginning in 3...2...1.......

I don't know which poster you think I am.

I have noticed you in disagreements with other posters saying that they weren't understanding what you were saying or twisting your points.

But I think it's been a while since you and I had one of those disagreements.

But if you don't want to discuss things with me, that's fine.

 

[Texan_Bill]

For the record, Schaub's $10,000,000.00 bonus is pro-rated over three years. If Dunta would've accepted the Texans offer before being franchised, he still would've earned over $6,000,000.00+ last year. So, SH your math is a little shaky..

 

[playa465]

This thread is a and the only way to fix it is with this so get on with it already so we can

since we are all

 

[Texan_Bill]

This thread is a and the only way to fix it is with this so get on with it already so we can

since we are all

Where's the fun in that Playa??

 

[Joe Texan]

Look Bob McHair is a great Owner who spends money he needs to when the coaches and GM ask him too. He is not cheap even though SH is stuck on Stupid calling him that. We have a great season coming up and you can either Hold on to the rope or fall off the Bull. Playa was just saying what needs to be said in hopes we can indulge in some intellegent Football talk instead of Lets Kill Bob talk.

 

[V3rm0nt3r]

I'm not going to lie. I agree with a lot of what Second Honeymoon is saying. Not all of it. But a lot of it. The fact that this FO has been unable to come to terms with OD, DeMeco, Pollard, or with Dunta is, in my mind, a little absurd. They gave Winston his deal which proves that they will extend good players but what i still have to question is the fact that they told us that they were going to build through the draft and retain their picks but now that the first set of Kubiak's picks are up for new contracts they seem unmotivated to keep them. I'm not going to say that it's Bob's fault because I don't know how much control he gives Smith but it's still disturbing.

 

[JB]

I'm not going to lie. I agree with a lot of what Second Honeymoon is saying. Not all of it. But a lot of it. The fact that this FO has been unable to come to terms with OD, DeMeco, Pollard, or with Dunta is, in my mind, a little absurd. They gave Winston his deal which proves that they will extend good players but what i still have to question is the fact that they told us that they were going to build through the draft and retain their picks but now that the first set of Kubiak's picks are up for new contracts they seem unmotivated to keep them. I'm not going to say that it's Bob's fault because I don't know how much control he gives Smith but it's still disturbing.

Understand what you are saying, but I think it is way too early for the gloom & doom. OD and Ryans are Texans for 2010.

I think they will try to lock up Ryans after the draft, if they can so so on a reasonable contract (certainly top 5 MLB money).

They will probably wait on OD and see how he responds after the injury.

They want both players here or they would not have tendered them so high. What is the rush to sign them early? Before the draft? Before OTA's? Why? Makes no sense to me.