What's the difference between Carr and P. Manning?

[real]

The basic premise that ANY QB needs at least average to good protection to be successful is sound. Where many of the arguments break down is the assumption that a better QB would NOT perform differently with similar surroundings. The idea that Manning or (insert favorite QB) would have, as some of the posters imply, led this team to a 2-14 record with poor offense production is silly. The argument nearly becomes that all QBs are the same and the surrounding casts are all that matter.

exactly.......

 

[Trap_Star]

Nothing. When they have the defense in their face, the line's broken down....they're no different. We've seen this in the playoffs every year with Manning and we see it far too regularly during the Texans' season with Carr.

Carr has yet to throw his o-line under the bus when protection breaks down, which is always:brickwall
compared to once in a blue moon w/ manning

 

[infantrycak]

It isn't an Anti-Carr agenda. It is an anti-Carr excuse agenda that has become an epidemic around here.

Glaringly absent is a denial that the discussion I described is what you were initially talking about. Pot, meet anti-Carr agenda.

 

[HoustonFrog]

Glaringly absent is a denial that the discussion I described is what you were initially talking about. Pot, meet anti-Carr agenda.

That was not the discussion I heard. And from what you explained, it isn't like he "named" him as a leader either. Why was there a glaring omission there?Now would you please stop stalking me. Your opinion is no better than mine or anyone elses on here so stop acting like a know it all. I'm going off stories that I HEARD. Which is basically all we go off of through the media in print and on the air. I'll post it a third time but obviously someone else closer to the team shares the same opinion. Is it about time to wash David's car now?

"After he hires his assistants, Kubiak will have to spend a lot of time with Carr. For about a month, they'll spend more time with each other than they spend with their wives.

Kubiak is a former quarterback who coaches quarterbacks. He knows that analyzing a quarterback takes so much more than simply watching tapes of games and practices.

Kubiak has to find out what Carr is made of - if Carr is willing to pay the price off the field as he is on the field. Can Carr be consumed with becoming one of the NFL's best - a process that requires 24/7 dedication during the season and something close to it in the offseason.

Kubiak has to decide if Carr can become a dynamic team leader - a trait he hasn't developed in his first four seasons."

 

[infantrycak]

That was not the discussion I heard. And from what you explained, it isn't like he "named" him as a leader either. Why was there a glaring omission there?Now would you please stop stalking me. Your opinion is no better than mine or anyone elses on here so stop acting like a know it all. I'm going off stories that I HEARD. Which is basically all we go off of through the media in print and on the air.

If you look back, I didn't start off denying your story--I asked for someone to confirm it. Funny that with all the regular 610 am listeners on here no one has come forward to confirm the direct statement by McKinney you are relating. You didn't even deny the McKinney discussion I heard was the real source until directly confronted on it.

I'll post it a third time but obviously someone else closer to the team shares the same opinion. Is it about time to wash David's car now?

I haven't responded to this because it is worthless to the issue--have whatever opinion you want about Carr and his leadership, but don't make up stuff to support it. Fine say McClain is questioning his work ethic and leadership--he is, but converting "the offense doesn't need a leader" into McKinney says Carr isn't a leader and posting it is misleading people.

 

[Double Barrel]

The basic premise that ANY QB needs at least average to good protection to be successful is sound. Where many of the arguments break down is the assumption that a better QB would NOT perform differently with similar surroundings. The idea that Manning or (insert favorite QB) would have, as some of the posters imply, led this team to a 2-14 record with poor offense production is silly. The argument nearly becomes that all QBs are the same and the surrounding casts are all that matter.

Word. No doubt our record would be better than 2-14 if Manning was QB of the 2005 Texans. How much better is up for debate, but his ability to read defenses and adjust on the fly, much less his quick release and consistent pinpoint accuracy, would have won some of those closer games.

Most QBs, even the great ones, have games where the protection broke down and caused them to have some bad games. But I've got to consider the ability of the truly great QBs to elevate everyone's game around them. A good leader inspires his teammates to play better most of the time. This intangible is probably the biggest difference between Manning and Carr right now.

 

[infantrycak]

The basic premise that ANY QB needs at least average to good protection to be successful is sound. Where many of the arguments break down is the assumption that a better QB would NOT perform differently with similar surroundings. The idea that Manning or (insert favorite QB) would have, as some of the posters imply, led this team to a 2-14 record with poor offense production is silly. The argument nearly becomes that all QBs are the same and the surrounding casts are all that matter.

For some reason many people want to make everything black and white as if Manning and Carr swapped either the records would remain exactly the same (only the surrounding cast matters) or they would bring their records with them to their new teams (only the QB matters). Of course neither would happen. Manning would have found a way to win more than 2 games here and Carr would have had much gaudier stats and better results (but not 13 wins) in Indy. Both the QB and the surrounding cast affect the the W/L column and each others' performance/stats.

 

[Big B Texan Fan]

If you look back, I didn't start off denying your story--I asked for someone to confirm it. Funny that with all the regular 610 am listeners on here no one has come forward to confirm the direct statement by McKinney you are relating. You didn't even deny the McKinney discussion I heard was the real source until directly confronted on it.

He did say it. It went some thing like this (it was around week 10ish)
When asked about Carr and his leadershi or lack thereof
David is not the team leader (then after he realized what he had said, maybe the body language of John or Lance struck him to clarify) I don't need a leader, I need a guy who can convert 3rd downs or make the right throws. If we needed or wanted a leader on the field then we do not deserve to be professionals. So to answer the question no he isn't, he leads by example with his toughness and will to not give up.

That was para-phrased but it did happen. LS Pittman said that he isn't either on radio with rich and marc during season around the same time as the above mentioned. Go back and read my post a few pages back. Alot of us hear these things but don't think to write it down but those two things did happen on air. It may be on a 610 archive or something.

 

[chuckm]

anyone having deja vu again today?

 

[Big B Texan Fan]

anyone having deja vu again today?

I haven't slept since 1/4

 

[infantrycak]

That was para-phrased but it did happen. LS Pittman said that he isn't either on radio with rich and marc during season around the same time as the above mentioned.

Y'all seem to have a different definition for paraphrasing. The testimonial was almost working until you added the Pittman bit. I heard that interview several times and Pittman did not affirmatively say Carr was not a leader.

Whatever--no point arguing about this. Y'all "heard" what you wanted.

 

[HoustonFrog]

He did say it. It went some thing like this (it was around week 10ish)
When asked about Carr and his leadershi or lack thereof
David is not the team leader (then after he realized what he had said, maybe the body language of John or Lance struck him to clarify) I don't need a leader, I need a guy who can convert 3rd downs or make the right throws. If we needed or wanted a leader on the field then we do not deserve to be professionals. So to answer the question no he isn't, he leads by example with his toughness and will to not give up.

That was para-phrased but it did happen. LS Pittman said that he isn't either on radio with rich and marc during season around the same time as the above mentioned. Go back and read my post a few pages back. Alot of us hear these things but don't think to write it down but those two things did happen on air. It may be on a 610 archive or something.

I wrote 610 to clarify. The conversation you just said above is what I heard. I wrote Lance and John and as to what McKinney said and they said "He never said he was the leader and never said he wasn't." I'm not sure if that is a cop out or just the way they heard it. I heard it as above. Their reply seems to make it seem that the above statements could be taken in different contexts. I never heard anything regarding the Pittman thing.

As for the work after practice. The response I received was, "While David's work after practice has been questioned, I've never personally heard anything from any of his teammates that they have a problem with it. Maybe some coaches did though."

I'm not sure if that clarifies anything but I can at least say that I wasn't dreaming up these conversations as their answers attest to. I think one thing learned is that we all hear different things in the media and for the most part you can form your own conclusions off of them. Considering I always held Carr in high esteem until this year, I don't think I am twisting it to fit my agenda. I am just using the philosophy that where there is smoke there is fire and that when you hear things enough times you start to wonder how they got out there.

As to "I haven't responded to this because it is worthless to the issue--have whatever opinion you want about Carr and his leadership, but don't make up stuff to support it. Fine say McClain is questioning his work ethic and leadership--he is, but converting "the offense doesn't need a leader" into McKinney says Carr isn't a leader and posting it is misleading people." I am not sure how you can say that considering that McClains statements go right to the heart of his putting in the extra practice.

 

[Big B Texan Fan]

Y'all seem to have a different definition for paraphrasing. The testimonial was almost working until you added the Pittman bit. I heard that interview several times and Pittman did not affirmatively say Carr was not a leader.

Whatever--no point arguing about this. Y'all "heard" what you wanted.

I believe when asked by Marc "so would you say Carr is the leader as the QB" Pittman said no.

 

[infantrycak]

"He never said he was the leader and never said he wasn't."

I'm not sure if that clarifies anything but I can at least say that I wasn't dreaming up these conversations as their answers attest to. I think one thing learned is that we all hear different things in the media and for the most part you can form your own conclusions off of them.

That is what I recall as a fair paraphrase of the conversations McKinney has had. The only point I was trying to clarify was McKinney did not affirmatively state Carr was not a leader. I can see where people could infer that from his statements, but it was not a direct statement. Same with Pittman. I was harsh in trying to make that distinction clear, but IMO it is significant.

 

[infantrycak]

I believe when asked by Marc "so would you say Carr is the leader as the QB" Pittman said no.

No he did not--he failed to identify Carr when asked who the leaders were. It was an omission not an affirmative statement.

Here you go from the actual day of the interview: Link

On my way home today I caught a replay on 610 of an interview from earlier at Hooter's tonight, with our deep snapper Bryan Pittman. When asked about who the team leaders were he immediately said Payne and Wong.

Then he was asked about offensive leaders and his reply was"......(silence with Hooters noise in background).............uh............uh.......... ..maybe Zach Weigert"

--from YellerLotDweller

 

[chuckm]

will the winner of this argument have actually made a point salient to the Texans/Vince Young/Reggie Bush/ or God forbid ... Peyton Manning?

 

[HoustonFrog]

That is what I recall as a fair paraphrase of the conversations McKinney has had. The only point I was trying to clarify was McKinney did not affirmatively state Carr was not a leader. I can see where people could infer that from his statements, but it was not a direct statement. Same with Pittman. I was harsh in trying to make that distinction clear, but IMO it is significant.

As I said, I'll take it like a man if I paraphrased wrong. I just took the conversation to mean just that. I'm not trying to be a harsh jerk or anything. I just formed the opinions from all of these things I heard and from what I saw on the field. I have no hard feelings towards those who oppose it because that is what the message board is for. Chuckm, I have no clue what post this is I'll go find more FAs I like now or think of more movie titles for VY and McClain.

 

[Kaiser Toro]

Well after reading all of these posts there does not seem to be much difference between the two. So I consulted with a cohort of mine who dabbles in astrology. I showed her this thread as well as Manning's and Carr's bio on nfl.com and you would be surpised on what she found:

Manning was born on 3/24/76 he is an Aries:
ARIES The Ram people are born between March 21 to April 20. Their keywords are I am, and their ruling planet is Mars.

According to the Chinese Calendar he was born in the Year of the Dragon.

Carr was born on 7/21/1979 and he is a Cancer:
CANCER The Crab people are born between June 22 to July 22. Their keywords are I feel, or I nurture, and their ruling influence is the Moon.

According to the Chinese Calendar he was born in the Year of the Sheep.

She said Manning was born to lead and Carr was born to follow.

I ususally defer to people of the astrological inclination when having to make these type of tough decisions. To quote Ron Burgundy, "Its science."

 

[Big B Texan Fan]

No he did not--he failed to identify Carr when asked who the leaders were. It was an omission not an affirmative statement.

Here you go from the actual day of the interview: Link

--from YellerLotDweller

That was the just the beginning. I'll try to find it and paste it to a new thread or you can move back here (doesn't matter to me if you move it)
Maybe I'll see that I'm wrong, but like frog sez, I took it for what it sounded like. Fans like/tend to read between the lines. Are you a sports reporter in training or something (most are afraid to go on record with an opinion until after the fact). It's one thing for us to make stuff up but if there's smoke there's fire. That's why we visit these MB's, to get our opinions off our chests, to see what the pulse of the masses are thinking, not state just only to the facts. If that were the case then we'd all read box scores and call it a day. Then all you modifiers would be modifying other modifiers modificated posts. I guess I'd call that a Mod-House. LOL, get it.

 

[Big B Texan Fan]

According to the Chinese Calendar he was born in the Year of the Sheep.

Not a good thing when you get drafted by a team in Texas.

 

[infantrycak]

Fans like/tend to read between the lines. Are you a sports reporter in training or something (most are afraid to go on record with an opinion until after the fact). It's one thing for us to make stuff up but if there's smoke there's fire.

It is just a precision thing. Everyone is free to make their own inferences and have their own opinions--that is the purpose of the MB. But IMO it is important to be accurate in reporting events so others can make their inferences and opinions. I have no problem with you or HoustonFrog believing the statements made by Pittman or McKinney implied Carr wasn't a leader. I just want it clear for readers who didn't hear the shows that it wasn't actually a direct statement and the comments could have been interpreted different ways.

 

[Double Barrel]

I ususally defer to people of the astrological inclination when having to make these type of tough decisions. To quote Ron Burgundy, "Its science."

I use a Magic 8 Ball. It says Manning is "Yes, Definitely" a leader, and Carr is "Ask Again Later" regarding his leadership. Sounds about right.