Who doesn't want Bush now?

[TexansLucky13]

Wait on sec. I never said I didn't like Carr. I just don't like his production at the QB position. I dislike the Cowboys!

You don't like his production at QB? Maybe he should kick next season then.

Carr has a big extension on his contract and he will play a large role in the "revival Texans" of '06-'07. Drafting VY would seal his fate. But personally, I have a little faith in the guy. It isn't "completely" his fault that he had little pass protection or pass blocking last season. Ask Todd Wade.

 

[kbourda]

"The decision to pick Bush, was made before GK left Denver"??? How do you know this? Who made this decision? If I understand this logic correctly, you are saying that someone? (Either McNair, Casserly? McClain? Justice? Who?) went to Kubiak and said, "come here and coach but we are picking your players, and you will just have to not only live with it, but also lie about it to everyone that asks". Let me ask you.... would you take the job under those circumstances?

And just another little question.... how did Kubiak (and any of those that had already chosen Bush) know they were going to get all those players? They didn't know they were even getting Sherman (or, maybe they did, and had already got Sherman to lie about it too) who helped to get Flannagan. And what about all those other players that put us in this position? I'm sorry, it just doesn't seem to hold up to scrutiny, does it.

And, if "you were the QB coach, and wanted Vince Young", why would you take to job....just to set yourself up for disappointment and failure? Maybe I just don't understand your logic. Please feel free to enlighten me.

Well, well, well, look who's back. I was wondering how long it would take you to get back here with Bush coming on board. Hey, I happen to agree with Kyss. The brass are looking at VY as a "public service". We all know I stand a better chance of getting drafted by the Texans than VY does.

 

[TexansLucky13]

We all know I stand a better chance of getting drafted by the Texans than VY does.

100% True.

 

[Huge1]

Does anyone here have the NFL Network? I am watching Total Access as of this post and they covered the USC pro day extensively. After watching their resident analyst's (Mayock, Adam Scheffler(?) Rich Eisen, etc.) quotes along with those of Casserly and Kubiak.....If todays program does not put an end to who we are definetly drafting then nothing will. It is Reggie Bush by a landslide people. Casserly and Kubiak said they have NEVER seen an athlete with the kind of rare strength, speed, agility, etc. combination that he posseses. They said he WILL be an absolute nightmare for any linebacker or DB in the league. And (LISTEN TO THIS) they ALL agreed that he runs with MORE power than his teammate, White (who has rapidly fallen after his fat *** disappointed the scouts at pro day). Did not make this up...watch the comments for yourself.

Oh yeah, BTW.....The majority of scouts agreed that Lienert's pro day was just okay. They said (as I've stated many times) that he displayed a WEAK arm on the 18-20 yard routes. 18-20 yards? Some are now comparing him to Chris Simms. Mayock thinks he is a second round talent who (if the Titans are smart enough to pass on him) could fall out of the top 10 after his weak performance. It included many balls that hit the ground at his receiver's feet and threw few tight spirals. He has Jay Cutler and Vince Young as the top two QB prospects, as do I.

Edit: One more thing, according to this program RB did 25 reps not 24....

 

[TexanFan881]

Does anyone here have the NFL Network? I am watching Total Access as of this post and they covered the USC pro day extensively. After watching their resident analyst's (Mayock, Adam Scheffler(?) Rich Eisen, etc.) quotes along with those of Casserly and Kubiak.....If todays program does not put an end to who were are definetly drafting then nothing will. It is Reggie Bush by a landslide people. Casserly and Kubiak said they have NEVER seen an athlete with the kind of rare strength, speed, agility, etc. combination that he posseses. They said he WILL be an absolute nightmare for any linebacker or DB in the league. And (LISTEN TO THIS) they ALL agreed that he runs with MORE power than his teammate, White (who has rapidly fallen after his fat *** disappointed the scouts at pro day). Did not make this up...watch the comments for yourself.

Oh yeah, BTW.....The majority of scouts agreed that Lienert's pro day was just okay. They said (as I've stated many times) that he displayed a WEAK arm on the 18-20 yard routes. 18-20 yards? Some are now comparing him to Chris Simms. Mayock thinks he is a second round talent who (if the Titans are smart enough to pass on him) could fall out of the top 10 after his weak performance. It included many balls that hit the ground at his receiver's feet and threw few tight spirals. He has Jay Cutler and Vince Young as the top two QB prospects, as do I.

Edit: One more thing, according to this program RB did 25 reps not 24....

I saw that just now too
What's funny is that when the staff gets asked questions they try and act like they're have no idea who their going to pick.

It seems like a lot of reporters ask the same questions and get the same answers. Basically, here's an outline of what's being said:

Reporter: Who are you going to pick with the 1st overall draft choice?

Kubiak/Casserly: I don't know.

It's gotten so obvious now it's almost like it's an inside joke

 

[infantrycak]

Wait on sec. I never said I didn't like Carr. I just don't like his production at the QB position. I dislike the Cowboys!

To clarify, I didn't mean you don't like him as a person, just not as the Texans' QB of choice.

 

[thunderkyss]

IMHO, Lienart is the top QB in a week QB draft....... much like Carr. Only Carr's got a stronger arm, and is more mobile, so you are loosing quite a bit to go with Matt. If he was rated as high as Carson Palmer, I'd be surprised.

People seem to keep forgetting this, he is one of the more mobile QBs in the league and is capable of making some plays with his legs and escaping the pocket, not as well as Vince, but plenty well enough for Denver's offense.

When David Carr leaves the pocket, he needs to be thinking one of two things. First down, & Sideline...... If he can pick up the first, go get it. If he can make it to the sideline, go for it......... but get rid of the ball, or cross ahead of the L.O.S.
David isn't nearly as accurate as Jake Plummer, and his head isn't in the game as much as Vince's in while he is on the move....... watch the highlights, Vince is rarely looking at the guy in front of him, he's usually looking for his recievers as he moves, and using his periphial(sp) vision to identify and locate defenders close to him.....

Excellent work on this post. Elway was definitely a scrambler in his prime but by the time he won his two Super Bowls he was predominantly a pocket passer. You are right on about successful QBs being the ones that have the ability to stay in the pocket (move around in the pocket if they have to) and wait for plays to develop. Certainly the ability to make plays with your legs if you absolutely have to is a bonus, but Vince Young still gives up on plays and looks to run too early (from all the games I saw this year and the tapes I borrowed and re-watched) similar to Michael Vick. Both of them need to work on that and stay in the pocket longer if they want to preserve their careers longer and probably to have greater success.

I, and most people I know, sees Vince developing as we speak into a McNabb, Culpepper way........ pretty similar to Elway... Both are more mobile/athletic than Elway, and are well on thier way to becoming true pocket passers. Like McNair.... I for one, feel Vince is much closer to this than David Carr. Vince may give up on a play too early, and leave the pocket, but he's still looking for the play downfield, till he crosses the L.O.S.
Carr on the other hand, is either hitting the turf, running into a Defensive End, or trying to do the same thing Vince does so easily........ of course, it may/may not be so easy for Vince in the NFL...

But I tell you this. If there is any team in the NFL that is perfect for Vince Young right now, it's Denver. If I were Shanahan, I'd be itching to deal those two #1s for Vince....... heck, I'll give Houston Both #1s, and Ron Dayne. I can't see why Kubiak would look at it any differently.

Nice hating with no basis in fact. Carr has had more TD's than INT's and over 60% completions each of the last two years.

He's also had more sacks..... if he was getting rid of the ball, instead of eating it, both these numbers would mean something. As is, those sacks could've been the play's we were looking for. They could've led to more points... they could've given us a chance to win.

 

[MikeMc]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Big B Texan Fan
You left off David Carr.

I hate David Carr just write that from now on.

Big B, the difference is those QBs are no longer in the NFL (exception being Joey Harrington)..........so, no, I did not leave off David Carr...he is the Texans' starting QB.

 

[Maddict5]

Can anyone name a good running back Duo that has lasted more than 3 years?? The only one I can think of is WD40, but that was actually supplemented with other halfbacks, while Tampa was trying to make up their mind what they were going to do.

My point is, no one has two franchise backs........ I think DD is ours, and it would be crappy of the Houston Texans as an organization to replace him. Yeah they can play together...... it just doesn't happen that way.

its not really a very relevant point because RB is the best receiving back in a long time but look around-teams are using 2 backs-KC have 2 elite players(and priest is injury-prone remind you of any1), dolphins have 2backs, TB has 2 backs with pittman a receiving rb(a beggars RB) and caddy their main rb, pittsburgh used 2 rb and will probably do so again this year, titans have 2 rbs(henry for when the injury-prone chris brown goes down remind you of any1), and of course denver uses the 2 back system aswell as the cowboys etc

the 2 back system is relatively new and therefore there havent been many long term tandems yet

 

[infantrycak]

He's also had more sacks..... if he was getting rid of the ball, instead of eating it, both these numbers would mean something. As is, those sacks could've been the play's we were looking for. They could've led to more points... they could've given us a chance to win.

Nice jumping in with an off-topic Carr bash. I pointed out Carr has not thrown a bunch of INT's the last 2 years. Bringing up sacks is a BS response to that fact. What, you want him to have thrown the ball into ill advised INT's instead of take a sack?--brilliant.

 

[BeReal]

But I tell you this. If there is any team in the NFL that is perfect for Vince Young right now, it's Denver. If I were Shanahan, I'd be itching to deal those two #1s for Vince....... heck, I'll give Houston Both #1s, and Ron Dayne. I can't see why Kubiak would look at it any differently.


He's also had more sacks..... if he was getting rid of the ball, instead of eating it, both these numbers would mean something. As is, those sacks could've been the play's we were looking for. They could've led to more points... they could've given us a chance to win.

LOL.... That's why we're all here on MB's rather then in NFL FO's. That would be a horrible move for Denver AND for Houston.

Denver would get VY, a player who's a top 10 player that might slip into the middle 1st. And Houston loses on a top elite prospect in turn for role players?? I'll say it again, You CAN'T leave this draft with out either Bush or M. Williams.

I'll admit Carr was responsible for a few sacks last year. However, the majority of them fall at the feet of the coaches and offensive scheme. I'm sure he wanted to get rid of the ball but if you don't have open receivers or if there's a guy in your face before you even make your first progression, you're going to do one of two things...

1) get sacked.
2) run for you life.

 

[jerek]

Nice jumping in with an off-topic Carr bash. I pointed out Carr has not thrown a bunch of INT's the last 2 years. Bringing up sacks is a BS response to that fact. What, you want him to have thrown the ball into ill advised INT's instead of take a sack?--brilliant.

Any football coach will tell you turnovers are worse than lost yards.

If Carr throws too many INTs, he is careless. If he takes too many sacks, he doesn't have balls. If he does neither and throws the ball out of bounds to avoid the LB blitz that no one picked up for the fourth time that game, his long flowing hair blurred his vision. Better yet, he was too busy reciting Bible verses or wondering what the wife was cooking for dinner that night.

Damned if he does, damned if he doesn't.

It is sad how we can't go more than three posts on this board w/o blind praise/hatred for Carr/Young/Bush.

 

[thunderkyss]

its not really a very relevant point because RB is the best receiving back in a long time

My point is, even though people are saying we can have both Reggie & DD, I'm saying if Reggie succeeds, DD is on his way out. may not be next year, or the year after..... but three years from now, he won't be a Texan any more.

but look around-teams are using 2 backs-KC have 2 elite players(and priest is injury-prone remind you of any1)

I maintain, that DD is not injury prone....... there are very few running backs that have started their first three years in the big boy league, playing more than 40 games........ wether they were starting, or coming off the bench.
DD has managed to do it starting for a very poor team, and has managed to rush for 1000 yards, 2 out of three seasons, missing the third, by 30 yards. We've had four other half backs come through Houston over the time that DD has been here. None have been able to match what DD puts on the field.
This Injury prone garbage, is a convenient argument Pro-Bush folks like to focus on........ much along the same vane as David Carr's fetus position, sacking himself, behind the L.O.S., can't throw on the run, etc.......
LJ will get his big contract when the get rid of Holmes.... He played like a feature back, but he wasn't getting paid like one. He was also not brought in to replace Holmes, he was brought into KC to fill in for Holmes & Blalock..he took the opportunity to try to win the starting job.

dolphins have 2backs, TB has 2 backs with pittman a receiving rb(a beggars RB) and caddy their main rb,

Caddy was brought in to replace Pittman... they haven't been together three years, and they won't be. Except, CW's already missed 2 games, and he's only a rookie...... they may keep Pittman around, because CW is injury prone...... maybe they'll draft another RB this year, since they obviously haven't solved thier Running back problem.

pittsburgh used 2 rb and will probably do so again this year,

well, since the Bus is gone, they won't make three years. Pittsburgh has been looking to replace Bettis since they picked up Duece Staley....... Jerome all of a sudden started playing a little better.

titans have 2 rbs(henry for when the injury-prone chris brown goes down remind you of any1), and of course denver uses the 2 back system aswell as the cowboys etc

In your arguments, anyone with a back up is a two back system.....

the 2 back system is relatively new and therefore there havent been many long term tandems yet

No...... everyone is looking for that one back....... put DD in Denver's system, and he will be that one back....... Tatum Bell was brought into replace Mike Anderson, who was brought in to replace Olandis Gary..... who was the man after Clinton Portis was traded for something Denver desperately needed.

&, Tatum Bell may be the featured back in 2006, but he wasn't a franchise back in 2005.

Nice jumping in with an off-topic Carr bash. I pointed out Carr has not thrown a bunch of INT's the last 2 years. Bringing up sacks is a BS response to that fact. What, you want him to have thrown the ball into ill advised INT's instead of take a sack?--brilliant.

It's not getting off the subject at all....... look at your last sentence... if his sack numbers were down, we'd have more ints....... if we had another QB, maybe we can get both, less sacks, less ints, more FDs, more TDs.....

 

[jerek]

It's not getting off the subject at all....... look at your last sentence... if his sack numbers were down, we'd have more ints....... if we had another QB, maybe we can get both, less sacks, less ints, more FDs, more TDs.....

If his sack numbers were down (you remember, the 40-some the OL was responsible for: was it 48?) we might have more TDs.

Your last sentence is the most imporant as it makes your true point: "another QB." Then again, I suppose Carr could have put up 40 TDs last year and we'd still have some people on here clamoring for Vince Young.

It is perfectly okay to make an argument for your favorite player without inventing things to be upset with Carr about. The best part about your spiel is that the inverse is far more readily applicable to VY ("if Young didn't have an all-world supporting cast, if he didn't play an O-for-dummies playbook, if he didn't do that against an unranked defense, if, if, if ...) I know we're all about hypotheticals on the MB but yours is a stretch I don't read often.

 

[infantrycak]

if his sack numbers were down, we'd have more ints.......

This one has such non-merit it deserves standing on its own.

That one has to be in the running for most creative perversion of logic and fact to try to construct an argument against a player.

By the way, if you want a much better correlation try this one on for size--less sacks leads to less QB fumbles.

 

[HJam72]

...less sacks leads to less QB fumbles.

Have the scientists had a chance to test this hypothesis yet?

 

[thunderkyss]

It's not getting off the subject at all....... look at your last sentence... if his sack numbers were down, we'd have more ints....... if we had another QB, maybe we can get both, less sacks, less ints, more FDs, more TDs.....

If his sack numbers were down (you remember, the 40-some the OL was responsible for: was it 48?) we might have more TDs.

It is perfectly okay to make an argument for your favorite player without inventing things to be upset with Carr about.

This one has such non-merit it deserves standing on its own.

That one has to be in the running for most creative perversion of logic and fact to try to construct an argument against a player.

By the way, if you want a much better correlation try this one on for size--less sacks leads to less QB fumbles.

Ummm...... I'm not the one who correlated(made up) the relationship of sacks & Ints.......

Nice jumping in with an off-topic Carr bash. I pointed out Carr has not thrown a bunch of INT's the last 2 years. Bringing up sacks is a BS response to that fact. What, you want him to have thrown the ball into ill advised INT's instead of take a sack?--brilliant.

Any football coach will tell you turnovers are worse than lost yards.

If Carr throws too many INTs, he is careless. If he takes too many sacks, he doesn't have balls.
Damned if he does, damned if he doesn't.

That was you two geniuses......

I said I want him to stop eating the ball.

He's also had more sacks..... if he was getting rid of the ball, instead of eating it, both these numbers would mean something. As is, those sacks could've been the play's we were looking for. They could've led to more points... they could've given us a chance to win.

 

[infantrycak]

Ummm...... I'm not the one who correlated(made up) the relationship of sacks & Ints.......

Are you being intentionally obtuse or can you seriously not remember or even think to reread what transpired. Your cute little quotes are one step removed from telling the story.

Nice hating with no basis in fact. Carr has had more TD's than INT's and over 60% completions each of the last two years.

This was my original post. See anything in there about sacks?--nope.

This is your response--oh my god, look it mentions sacks:

He's also had more sacks..... if he was getting rid of the ball, instead of eating it, both these numbers would mean something. As is, those sacks could've been the play's we were looking for. They could've led to more points... they could've given us a chance to win.

Sorry, but you're bought and paid for the let me come up with a silly theory connecting less sacks with more INT's.

Oh look, here it is again:

.. if his sack numbers were down, we'd have more ints....

More sacks generally means more turnovers, not the other way around. Bottom line, this was another off-base reach to take a swipe at Carr.

 

[TexansLucky13]

look at your last sentence... if his sack numbers were down, we'd have more ints....... if we had another QB, maybe we can get both, less sacks, less ints, more FDs, more TDs.....

I would advise you to look at your own last sentence. Unless you were birthed by the Virgin Mary... there is no way that you can support that statement. It is this typical anti-Carr sentiment that has fed the VY frenzy. Maybe UT has some unstated hatred for Fresno State, and that fuels it? Carr has shown that he is growing more patient, and dealing with the line from last year.... that was extremely impressive.

By the way.... We would never be replacing DD. He is useful for a handful of things that Reggie could never accomplish on his own. No, DD isnt injury "prone", but at least having another back on the field will reduce his wear, and give us more years with him.

Just give Carr this last season. If he can't make it work... then I will be here with you when we look for a QB next year. Give the guy some respect... he managed to keep his INT's below TD's, and his rating wasn't terrible enough to want to oust him.

 

[TexansLucky13]

Also... are you aware that David has thrown for 10,000+ yards in 4 years? He stands beside John Elway in this. Hmm... what a coincidence. This may not sound too outstanding to you... but under Capers, David really didnt get much of a chance to throw like he did at Fresno. Elway started to gain his strength when Kubiak arrived.

Only time will tell if that may happen again.

 

[thunderkyss]

Are you being intentionally obtuse or can you seriously not remember or even think to reread what transpired. Your cute little quotes are one step removed from telling the story.



This was my original post. See anything in there about sacks?--nope.

This is your response--oh my god, look it mentions sacks:



Sorry, but you're bought and paid for the let me come up with a silly theory connecting less sacks with more INT's.

Oh look, here it is again:

Originally Posted by thunderkyss
.. if his sack numbers were down, we'd have more ints....

More sacks generally means more turnovers, not the other way around. Bottom line, this was another off-base reach to take a swipe at Carr.

Okay...... take a deep breath. read what I wrote... You mentioned he had more touchdowns than ints.... I said but he has more sacks, he should try to get rid of the ball more. Then you said, if the ball left his hand he would get intercepted. In the quote above, I was paraphrasing you..... my point was that those possible ints were also possible TDs, or first downs, or just incomplete passes(ok, I didn't say incomplete passes).

Maybe I should have put question marks in there,

.. if his sack numbers were down, we'd have more ints??....

maybe that would help. But you said if the ball left David's hand, it would surely(or most likely) be intercepted, because it was an ill advised pass(I'm assuming you came up with that from what you've seen Carr do in those situations..... I don't know). Again, I'm paraphrasing.

Maybe that quote from David Carr about taking sacks instead of throwing ints is stuck in your head everytime you mention his TD/Int ratio.......

But don't be putting that on me.

You said he has a favorable TD/Int ratio... I said he also have more sacks.... if he didn't have those sacks, then the TD/Int ratio would be more meaningful to me.

 

[thunderkyss]

I would advise you to look at your own last sentence. Unless you were birthed by the Virgin Mary... there is no way that you can support that statement.

I don't have to support anything........ Maybe..... look it up.

 

[thunderkyss]

Also... are you aware that David has thrown for 10,000+ yards in 4 years? He stands beside John Elway in this. Hmm... what a coincidence. This may not sound too outstanding to you... but under Capers, David really didnt get much of a chance to throw like he did at Fresno. Elway started to gain his strength when Kubiak arrived.

Only time will tell if that may happen again.

So what you're saying, is that Joey Harrington is on his way to being the next Elway??

hmmm.

 

[TexansLucky13]

So what you're saying, is that Joey Harrington is on his way to being the next Elway??

hmmm.

Huh? Harrington doesn't have Kubiak. Did I stutter? Haha, and Carr played better than him last year. Kinda pathetic.

 

[infantrycak]

Then you said, if the ball left his hand he would get intercepted.

No then I questioned what seemed to be your position--hence the question mark you have quoted but ignored.

But you said if the ball left David's hand, it would surely(or most likely) be intercepted, because it was an ill advised pass(I'm assuming you came up with that from what you've seen Carr do in those situations..... I don't know). Again, I'm paraphrasing.

No you are making things up completely. Once again, see the question mark at the end of the question about what seemed to be your position.

You said he has a favorable TD/Int ratio... I said he also have more sacks.... if he didn't have those sacks, then the TD/Int ratio would be more meaningful to me.

The problem is this goes counter to conventional thinking. Generally speaking more pressure means more turnovers, not less. No not all the sacks or even a majority are Carr's fault so conventional wisdom still applies--less sacks on Carr should improve his TD/INT ratio if anything.

 

[LikeABoss]

How many running backs have we had so far?? How many of them have performed like DD has for us??

There is not that many talented running backs on this roster to begin with. So Domanick outplaying all the other talentless running backs we've had on previous rosters is not speaking such huge volumes.

Marshall Faulk past his prime>>>Domanick Davis

@ people thinking 1,000 yard seasons is something to brag about

 

[thunderkyss]

He's also had more sacks..... if he was getting rid of the ball, instead of eating it, both these numbers would mean something. As is, those sacks could've been the play's we were looking for. They could've led to more points... they could've given us a chance to win.

I said he could have thrown a touchdown, or made a play for us.

Nice jumping in with an off-topic Carr bash. I pointed out Carr has not thrown a bunch of INT's the last 2 years. Bringing up sacks is a BS response to that fact. What, you want him to have thrown the ball into ill advised INT's instead of take a sack?--brilliant.

You are stating here, it's a sack, or an INT......

even with the question mark. You're asking the question..... "would you rather David take a sack, or throw an INT?" Jerek's post affirms that......... he too thinks David is more likely to throw an int.........

I'm saying if Vinny Testeverdy(sp) would have held the ball a little more often, he would have a better TD/INT ratio.....

David's TD/INT ratio is meaningless, in light of the sacks...... that's the way I see it.