Why are some people so blinded by david carr

[exclude]

I really do not understand why people hang on to the David Carr argument, he needs this, he needs that...YES, we need an O-line but despite that there were still MANY opportunitites over a 4 year span to show his "potential".

Give me a break! This guy has not proven himself, even throwing in all the EXCUSES, you can't be sane and think This guy is Franchise material???

He has pulled the bag over everyone's eye - except me- This guy will turn up to be an average QB that no one will remember in a few years. But the Texas EGO can't admit you made a mistake.. Learn how to correct and move on.

I'm not Carr fan, but I also not a VY nuthugger. I want Bush and if we draft VY we won't get Bush so I'm left trying to defend why we have to give Carr another chance.

He has shown his potential, although not as frequently as we've liked.

And I agree with you that he hasn't shown that he's franchise material, but I think Bush is and if we get that guy I'm sure we would improve from last year's performance.

But why is he a mistake??? Has he lost his touch, like Joey Harrington?? Now that guy can't throw and drafting him at #2 was a mistake. Carr can at least hit a slant route, Harrington can't.

I'll give you that Carr regressed this year, but a confluence of events(or EXCUSES, as you'd like to call them) makes it hard to pinpoint if his regression was due to those events or to his lack of talent, although I can guess where you side on this issue.

If we draft Bush and some good OL help, we at least don't give Carr an out, if his play continues the way it is.

 

[Double Barrel]

I really do not understand why people hang on to the David Carr argument, he needs this, he needs that...YES, we need an O-line

You pretty much answered your own question and defeated your own logic.

Pocket protection is the key to any successful QB. It's Football 101.

 

[TheOgre]

Our defense played into this 2-14 season too. Against Cinci we had 6 possessions that didn't start in the last 2 minutes of a half. Not many teams are going to win games like that.

 

[Texan Gal 312]

Attention Carr lovers, attention. It is no surprise that the OL looks bad. It is Carr himself that makes them look worse than they are.

That is a fact. There is no way you can blame it all on the OL for this guy being sacked that many times.

Carr holds the ball to long.
Carr can't read a defense.
Carr stares down his primary receiver.
Carr runs out of bounds for losses (sacks).
Example: 1-10-HOU32 (2:27) (Shotgun) D.Carr sacked ob at HST 30 for -2 yards (R.Colclough). PATHETIC. You could throw the ball 20 yards out of bounds but not this guy. He will take the sack. Of course, it's the OL's fault that he is too dumb to throw the ball away.

Carr......

And why exactly should I rely on your opinion more than Dan Reeves ? And I saw Tom Brady take that exact same sack this past weekend

 

[Mr. White]

And why exactly should I rely on your opinion more than Dan Reeves ?

As an aside, as a VY supporter, I find it it a little easier to swallow when Dan Reeves says he'd rather stay with David Carr than when Casserley says it.

 

[dml923]

i like carr, but he is getting worse but that is becasue a bad o line only holds for a very short time. that causes him to create bad descisions on throws and he probally thinks that he should carry the team.

 

[Grid]

the pointless arguement continues. For every positive thing you can say about Carr..there is something that someone can say to counter it.

If they say prove that Carr isnt a complete bust, and you show them his good stats.. they say "its not all about stats"

Show them the times when Carr has carried the team, or proved that he could run the offense, and they will claim that Carr isnt a leader like VY, and quote Gary Walker or someone to prove it.

Tell them that the line is the biggest problem and that no QB has ever done well behind a bad Oline.. and they will claim that the sacks are more Carrs fault for holding the ball and staring down recievers.

Tell them that bad coaching was the problem, and that Carr wasnt given enough freedom.. and they will claim that a true leader would have stood up to the coaches and taken control of the team.

blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah.

Dont waste your time. They will want VY no matter what.. and if we dont take him.. every bad play Carr makes will be met with 100 "why didnt we take VY?" posts. And if Carr plays great and goes to the pro bowl, they will reply with 100 "we would have been in the superbowl with VY".. and if Carr turns out to be a bust and we have to replace him.. 1000000s will make "fire the coaches! fire Casserly! we should have taken VY!!!!" posts.. and if we get a new QB and he comes in and does well and we make it to the playoffs.. there will be 100s of "We would have been here last year with VY" posts.

There is no winning.. the only way to win with these people is to draft VY. And then when VY plays poorly.. they will say "Why did we take VY? I didnt support this bum..I wanted Bush".. and then when we get laughed at for drafting a bust while Reggie Bush and the Titans run all over us.. they will reply with 100s of "Our staff is weak for listening to their fans. Everyone knows that a good front office will make the best decision for the team, and not let the fans sway their judgement".. of course.. if VY plays well.. they will be insufferable with all of their "HAH! What did I say? UT FO LIFE PLAYA!" posts.

No matter what happens.. expect that it will be years before this board is free of this stupid and annoying arguement. This place is gonna be a drag for a good long time.

 

[tulexan]

No the Vince fans have said several times that they would be proud to watch him even if he turns out to be a bust because he is from Houston.

 

[HoustonFan]

I still think Carr has potential. Let's see how he does w/ - I HOPE - an improved O-line.

This was a bad season for the whole team. He has been hella quiet amongst all this talk of VY.

 

[Xman]

I think the commentators summed it up during the Ravens games this year. They pointed out that Carr only had enough time to look at one WR - then he either had to throw it away or be sacked (or dump it off if the first guy missed).

One of the KEY requirements of a good QB is the ability to "check off your WRs". If AJ is covered, check Bradford, if covered then check TE/RB or throw it away.
With our OL, their is no time to check Bradford. It it AJ and then either a sack/dump off/throw away.

Carr has shown a good attitude and personality, an accurate arm (better than most), a strong arm, and decent ability to read defenses. On the down side, he is not the most mobile and could adjust better after the snap. But, the key factor is making the reads. IF he shows the ability to make the reads, then I think he moves into the top 10 qbs (which is good enough to win).

If Carr had more time (the announcers pointed out that Carr got almost 2 seconds less than other QBs to throw) and then couldn't make the reads, then I would say dump him. But, we don't know that. The way it is (especially during the Ravens game), the opposing secondary reads Carr and collapses to whichever WR he looks at. So, as of now, we just don't know how good he is.

 

[dat_boy_yec]

What I see most of the time is ppl come on here being bias. It is a team game and if you say Carr sucks it's because you don't understand the meaning of team. People who say, oh it's all the o-lines fault don't seem to understand that the RB has to pick up blitzes sometimes and if he doesn't do it right the QB will go down. They don't understand that if they keep Carr they have a huge cap hit and drafting Young and trading Carr one yr. from now would not solve anything. Because if you pay 2 first pick QB's in one yr. you don't have money to spend. You won't be able to upgrade the line because you won't have money to offer. I support the team, but alot of fans coming on here don't really understand that the team has to share the blame and blaming Carr is pointless.

 

[HJam72]

What I see most of the time is ppl come on here being bias. It is a team game and if you say Carr sucks it's because you don't understand the meaning of team. People who say, oh it's all the o-lines fault don't seem to understand that the RB has to pick up blitzes sometimes and if he doesn't do it right the QB will go down. They don't understand that if they keep Carr they have a huge cap hit and drafting Young and trading Carr one yr. from now would not solve anything. Because if you pay 2 first pick QB's in one yr. you don't have money to spend. You won't be able to upgrade the line because you won't have money to offer. I support the team, but alot of fans coming on here don't really understand that the team has to share the blame and blaming Carr is pointless.

DD doesn't help the line. Carr can't throw from his back. FOOTBALL IS A TEAM SPORT. That was great post.

 

[thunderkyss]

What I see most of the time is ppl come on here being bias. It is a team game and if you say Carr sucks it's because you don't understand the meaning of team. People who say, oh it's all the o-lines fault don't seem to understand that the RB has to pick up blitzes sometimes and if he doesn't do it right the QB will go down. They don't understand that if they keep Carr they have a huge cap hit and drafting Young and trading Carr one yr. from now would not solve anything. Because if you pay 2 first pick QB's in one yr. you don't have money to spend. You won't be able to upgrade the line because you won't have money to offer. I support the team, but alot of fans coming on here don't really understand that the team has to share the blame and blaming Carr is pointless.

Brunnel, Leftwich. how much money did that tie up?
Brees, Rivers?? How much??
Montana, Young?? Okay, that was a long time ago.
But don't tell me you can't do it. We can take Carr with a two year extension. $5mill. We play him next year, if we let him go for the 2007 year, it'll cost us $2.5mil that we won't be able to pay an offensive lineman. We can keep him that year $2.5 million is pretty sweet for a 1st round quarterback. It won't cost us any more, to sign Young, than it would to sign Bush. We can ditch Tony Banks, what's he still doing around.....

speaking of which, every argument we can make for Carr, we can make for Tony Banks, Jeff Blake, and a whole Gamut of Quarterbacks that have shown potential, but didn't get 4 years to prove themselves.

 

[thunderkyss]

Wow, I just checked the sats on Leftwich. His numbers are pretty poor compared to David Carr's, but we wouldn't be having this discussion if he were a Houston Texan. Interceptions are the same too, except 2005, when they dropped by more than half............. for Leftwich that is.

He played in 15 games his rookie season, 13 games started.

hmmm... he's 6-5 240lbs... good size for a quarterback. Interesting.

 

[thunderkyss]

Hmmm... McNabb sat on the bench his first year, only started 6 games.

He was their starter for the next 4 years. He was sacked 265 times...... that's more than car.... 50 sacks more than carr in his first four years.
Threw for 12,000 yards those first four years. would've been more, but he missed six games in 2002. Of course, he had thos awesome recievers....you know, uh.... for the life of me, I can't remember their names. But I'm sure they were both ProBowlers between 2000, and 2003.

He threw about as many ints as Carr, but that's just Donavan....

hmmm. He avg 3000yrds per year... 10 picks a year...

But we wouldn't be talking about Young, if McNabb was Our QB.

 

[thunderkyss]

Wow, Drew Brees was drafted in 2001, didn't play one game. Started all the games in 2002, missed 5 in 2003, 1 in 2004. Threw 79 touchdowns, and 53 picks. David has thrown 43 touchdowns, and 53 picks. over the same time more or less. Of course, SanDiego has that future hall of fame Wide reciever.... no, that's another team. He's thrown for three thousand (3000) yards every year he started except 2003, when he missed 5 games. That year, he looked more like Carr...... he only got sacked 93 times though. So that's definitely part of that. His numbers are an awful lot like Carr's, his first two years........ but they drafted a QB anyway..... what were they thinking??

 

[thunderkyss]

Joey Harrington... Started all games, in 2003, and 2005. Threw for 3000 yards both years......... almost. Started 12 Games in 2002, threw for 2200 yards. Started 11 games in 2005, threw for 2000 yards. 60 touchdowns, but 62 ints to go with them. man he averaged one touchdown a game.

I can't believe they are already looking for another QB.

 

[thunderkyss]

If you don't mind, I'm having a hard time finding another Quarterback of Carr's Caliber that has had 4 years before they were successful.

 

[profan]

Brunnel, Leftwich. how much money did that tie up?
Brees, Rivers?? How much??
Montana, Young?? Okay, that was a long time ago.
But don't tell me you can't do it. We can take Carr with a two year extension. $5mill. We play him next year, if we let him go for the 2007 year, it'll cost us $2.5mil that we won't be able to pay an offensive lineman. We can keep him that year $2.5 million is pretty sweet for a 1st round quarterback. It won't cost us any more, to sign Young, than it would to sign Bush. We can ditch Tony Banks, what's he still doing around.....
.

But, what happens if carr has a great year. Then what do you do? Can't keep a high priced vince young on the bench or What if carr has a few bad games and is replaced by young. Then his value drops. If young comes here we have to trade carr and get what we can now. This is going to be a very difficult decision. How about trading carr for another pick this year. I don't see leinart playing for the saints. I could see him going to the titans. Then where would that leave Steve McNair. Maybe in Houston to help his good freind Vince Young? This is really going to be interesting.

 

[tulexan]

If you don't mind, I'm having a hard time finding another Quarterback of Carr's Caliber that has had 4 years before they were successful.

Steve Young.

Jake Plummer.

 

[tulexan]

Hmmm... McNabb sat on the bench his first year, only started 6 games.

He was their starter for the next 4 years. He was sacked 265 times...... that's more than car.... 50 sacks more than carr in his first four years.

McNabb has been sacked 234 times in his 7 year career.

I don't know where you got him being sacked 265 times in the first 4 years.

 

[texplayer2]

...

But we wouldn't be talking about Young, if McNabb was Our QB.

What? If Mcnabb was our QB UT ALUMS would be throwing him under a rug to get to Vince. Talk would center around where his Mom was getting that soup. New York City!? Get a Rope!

 

[eriadoc]

If you don't mind, I'm having a hard time finding another Quarterback of Carr's Caliber that has had 4 years before they were successful.

Steve Young
Jake Plummer
Doug Williams
Jim Plunkett

There are other examples of QBs that have been on poor teams, bounced around and landed on a good team, and subsequently made the Pro Bowl and/or Super Bowl with good performances:

Chris Chandler (on terrible teams (IND, TB, PHO, HOU), then goes to ATL and performs well. Made Pro Bowl two years in a row and Super Bowl in 1998.

Doug Flutie is a guy that has bounced around, has shown considerable potential throughout his career, and when he's been on poor teams, his stats have reflected it. When he has a surrounding cast (and gets a chance to play), he's actually put up some good full seasons.

Rich Gannon was drafted by a bad Minnesota team. He never amounted to much, yet people kept saying he was a better QB than people gave him credit for. Once he got to a good team, you know the rest.

Steve McNair is a guy that sat on the bench to learn. All the learning in the world didn't help at all until the team around him was fixed. He put up pretty pedestrian numbers and ran a lot. When the team around him improved, he went tot he Pro Bowl, Super Bowl, and won co-MVP (not in that order). If the Titans had lost patience with him and shipped him off .......

Anyway, if you're having problems finding another QB, perhaps you should work on your methodology. There are plenty more stories of QBs that were drafted by bad teams and went on to make a solid career for themselves once that team (or a different one to which they were traded) improved around them. It's a team sport and the QB, whoever it is, always gets too much blame when things are going poorly and too much credit when things are going well.

 

[Kaiser Toro]

Steve Young
Jake Plummer
Doug Williams
Jim Plunkett

There are other examples of QBs that have been on poor teams, bounced around and landed on a good team, and subsequently made the Pro Bowl and/or Super Bowl with good performances:

Chris Chandler (on terrible teams (IND, TB, PHO, HOU), then goes to ATL and performs well. Made Pro Bowl two years in a row and Super Bowl in 1998.

Doug Flutie is a guy that has bounced around, has shown considerable potential throughout his career, and when he's been on poor teams, his stats have reflected it. When he has a surrounding cast (and gets a chance to play), he's actually put up some good full seasons.

Rich Gannon was drafted by a bad Minnesota team. He never amounted to much, yet people kept saying he was a better QB than people gave him credit for. Once he got to a good team, you know the rest.

Steve McNair is a guy that sat on the bench to learn. All the learning in the world didn't help at all until the team around him was fixed. He put up pretty pedestrian numbers and ran a lot. When the team around him improved, he went tot he Pro Bowl, Super Bowl, and won co-MVP (not in that order). If the Titans had lost patience with him and shipped him off .......

Anyway, if you're having problems finding another QB, perhaps you should work on your methodology. There are plenty more stories of QBs that were drafted by bad teams and went on to make a solid career for themselves once that team (or a different one to which they were traded) improved around them. It's a team sport and the QB, whoever it is, always gets too much blame when things are going poorly and too much credit when things are going well.

Good stuff Eriadoc. Goes to my point that you should not draft a QB at #1. This is what we wrestle with in the corporate world, paying to train a workforce that may move on to another company. QB's take time to develop and to invest #1 money in them is foolish.

 

[Vinny]

Good stuff Eriadoc. Goes to my point that you should not draft a QB at #1. This is what we wrestle with in the corporate world, paying to train a workforce that may move on to another company. QB's take time to develop and to invest #1 money in them is foolish.

It's not foolish...it's a risk. There are hundreds of players coming into the league and only a handful of players capable of being a great QB in a given year. If you need a QB and you think you have a shot at a good one, you got to take him.

 

[Kaiser Toro]

It's not foolish...it's a risk. There are hundreds of players coming into the league and only a handful of players capable of being a great QB in a given year. If you need a QB and you think you have a shot at a good one, you got to take him.

Big risk in my opinion, which is foolish. A return on investment calculation from a football standpoint does not bear out championships in the salary cap era. From a marketing standpoint, to capture revenue streams, it is not so risky - Vick, Manning, Manning, etc.

 

[Vinny]

Big risk in my opinion, which is foolish. A return on investment calculation from a football standpoint does not bear out championships in the salary cap era. From a marketing standpoint, to capture revenue streams, it is not so risky - Vick, Manning, Manning, etc.

When you don't have a decent qb the bigger risk is not taking an elite prospect. The money isn't that big an issue. Carr has not played up to his money but his contract isn't killing us...it's his bad play.

 

[Double Barrel]

It's not foolish...it's a risk. There are hundreds of players coming into the league and only a handful of players capable of being a great QB in a given year. If you need a QB and you think you have a shot at a good one, you got to take him.

Part of me thinks drafting Young could be a great thing. Carr has never been challenged for the starting job. In four years, the QB position has been his to lose.

Granted, I'm not as down on DC as a lot of folks, because I think he's been playing on a bad team. But regardless, he does show troublesome tendencies that he has not grown out of since college. I'm sure a beating of 200+ sacks in four seasons can stunt some growth, but it can't be all that.

Bringing in Young, to sit and learn, does not mean Carr is out the door. If DC rises to the occassion and becomes a great QB, then fantastic! Young still has great potential and would be worth a lot to other teams. However, if we learn that DC is just not all that even with a great cast around him, then we have a potential superstud QB waiting in the wings.

I'm not on the Young bandwagon, but the moment they draft him (if it happens), I'll be a huge supporter. However, I do see the upside of him being on our team.

Bush or Young, Bush or Young...either choice is a good thing, IMO.

 

[Kaiser Toro]

When you don't have a decent qb the bigger risk is not taking an elite prospect. The money isn't that big an issue. Carr has not played up to his money but his contract isn't killing us...it's his bad play.

I agree to an extent, but it is a prodcutivity per head calculation. Any CEO would be hesitant to spend so much money knowing that any ROI would not kick in until year two or three if at all. I just think we are better off taking a QB in the late rounds and develop them at a small price tag or bring in a veteran QB that has been in the league and just needs to be tweaked.

Once I am only speaking in football terms, not licensing, tickets, etc.

 

[Vinny]

I agree to an extent, but it is a prodcutivity per head calculation. Any CEO would be hesitant to spend so much money knowing that any ROI would not kick in until year two or three if at all. I just think we are better off taking a QB in the late rounds and develop them at a small price tag or bring in a veteran QB that has been in the league and just needs to be tweaked.

Once I am only speaking in football terms, not licensing, tickets, etc.

Carr will cost us big when we pick him up. We aren't spending less money if we take Young or take any other first round pick. I see your argument though. It's not a bad one, and I think it has a bit of merit...here are a few words from Keith at HPF...I consider Keith one of the brightest football minds regardless of team affiliation on the net...

David does not need to be the best quarterback in order for the Texans to reach the Super Bowl. Aside from guys like Tom Brady, John Elway, and Brett Favre, just look at some of the names that have played for the Lombardi in recent years.

So fine, keep Carr and build around him better this time around. But realize that the Texans are going to be paying Carr like he was one of those elite quarterbacks, probably for the next three years, based on potential, not his performance, and a long list of excuses (expansion team, bad coaching, bad OL, etc.) Iirc, his base salary alone will rank him around 8th or 9th in 2006, higher once guys like Steve McNair and Kerry Collins re-work their deals or get cut.

Keeping Carr around for the next 2-3 years sounds like the safe pick, one that wouldn't require "starting over" (whatever that means for a 2-14 team), but it isn't necessarily the most cost-effective option, either, unless you think he will perform like a top 10 QB or better.

 

[MorKnolle]

Part of me thinks drafting Young could be a great thing. Carr has never been challenged for the starting job. In four years, the QB position has been his to lose.

Granted, I'm not as down on DC as a lot of folks, because I think he's been playing on a bad team. But regardless, he does show troublesome tendencies that he has not grown out of since college. I'm sure a beating of 200+ sacks in four seasons can stunt some growth, but it can't be all that.

Bringing in Young, to sit and learn, does not mean Carr is out the door. If DC rises to the occassion and becomes a great QB, then fantastic! Young still has great potential and would be worth a lot to other teams. However, if we learn that DC is just not all that even with a great cast around him, then we have a potential superstud QB waiting in the wings.

I'm not on the Young bandwagon, but the moment they draft him (if it happens), I'll be a huge supporter. However, I do see the upside of him being on our team.

Bush or Young, Bush or Young...either choice is a good thing, IMO.

In general I would agree with you and I also think we need to bring in someone that is more capable of pushing and mentoring David Carr than what Tony Banks has done, however, I don't think you use the #1 pick in the draft on a 2nd option at QB. Sure Vince could turn into a great QB, but any QB in the league has the potential to turn into something special. I think Carr's two biggest problems have been coaching and lack of surrounding talent. The coaching aspect covers both the horrendous play calling for the majority of the last four years (remember, Carr still put up over 3500 yards a year ago) in addition to the lack of a good QB coach/offensive coordinator helping him improve his skills on the practice field and during the offseason, and the lack of talent aspect is obvious enough. I think if a team is put into position to either fill several of the holes on the team out of one pick (obviously trading it), or add a good playmaker to assist their QB (drafting Bush, which I'm still not real high on but I'd prefer over taking Vince) then you have to take one of those options, rather than using the 1st pick in the draft and all that money on bringing in a 2nd option at QB to hope that one of the two works out (that's the impression I'm getting from your post, maybe I'm misunderstanding it).

 

[Jottoz]

I agree with you Morknolle.

 

[Kaiser Toro]

Carr will cost us big when we pick him up. We aren't spending less money if we take Young or take any other first round pick. I see your argument though. It's not a bad one, and I think it has a bit of merit...here are a few words from Keith at HPF...I consider Keith one of the brightest football minds regardless of team affiliation on the net...

I agree and understand the idea that a release of Carr and pick up of VY could be considered a wash on the books. But then we are back to square one on the development of a QB and ROI on the field is possibly slapping us in the face again.

We want to win and we all have different ideas on how to get there. I take more of a financial approach to how the make up of the team should look like (which does not make me right) ala the Patriots.

 

[tsip]

I agree to an extent, but it is a prodcutivity per head calculation. Any CEO would be hesitant to spend so much money knowing that any ROI would not kick in until year two or three if at all. I just think we are better off taking a QB in the late rounds and develop them at a small price tag or bring in a veteran QB that has been in the league and just needs to be tweaked.

Once I am only speaking in football terms, not licensing, tickets, etc.

First, Carr is going into year 5 with no ROI. Second, you want another QB with the talent/ability to push Carr's play to a higher level, not just someone to sit around and draw a paycheck. We've already got later round QB's and a veteran QB--what we haven't had so far is a winning combo.

 

[Vinny]

I agree and understand the idea that a release of Carr and pick up of VY could be considered a wash on the books. But then we are back to square one on the development of a QB and ROI on the field is possibly slapping us in the face again.

We want to win and we all have different ideas on how to get there. I take more of a financial approach to how the make up of the team should look like (which does not make me right) ala the Patriots.

It's not a wash if you don't think Carr is an elite QB and you think Young will be. We are more than one year away in any case.

ala the Patriots? They did the same thing we did...they drafted a QB with the first overall also. The Patriots had their own 1st overall pick that didn't work out and his name is Drew Bledsoe. They were ready to move Bledose and his dissapointing play but he got injured and Brady came in and played better than their first overall pick. Nobody thought Brady would turn out like he has...or he wouldn't have been picked late in the second day of the draft.

 

[tulexan]

It's not a wash if you don't think Carr is an elite QB and you think Young will be. We are more than one year away in any case.

ala the Patriots? They did the same thing we did...they drafted a QB with the first overall also. The Patriots had their own 1st overall pick that didn't work out and his name is Drew Bledsoe. They were ready to move Bledose and his dissapointing play but he got injured and Brady came in and played better than their first overall pick. Nobody thought Brady would turn out like he has...or he wouldn't have been picked late in the second day of the draft.

OK, then lets take a QB in the 6th round. The Pats didn't take Tom Brady with the #1 overall pick and give him $55-60 million.

That's the major difference

 

[El Tejano]

rather than using the 1st pick in the draft and all that money on bringing in a 2nd option at QB to hope that one of the two works out (that's the impression I'm getting from your post, maybe I'm misunderstanding it).

Plus it eliminates the QB controversy once Carr makes a bad throw.

 

[Kaiser Toro]

It's not a wash if you don't think Carr is an elite QB and you think Young will be. We are more than one year away in any case.

ala the Patriots? They did the same thing we did...they drafted a QB with the first overall also. The Patriots had their own 1st overall pick that didn't work out and his name is Drew Bledsoe. They were ready to move Bledose and his dissapointing play but he got injured and Brady came in and played better than their first overall pick. Nobody thought Brady would turn out like he has...or he wouldn't have been picked late in the second day of the draft.

A wash as far as the books are concerned (dollars spent).

My take on the Patriots is on their current front office on how they have built and continue build this team. Your take on Bledsoe amplifies my point on the development of a QB selected with the #1.

 

[Kaiser Toro]

Second, you want another QB with the talent/ability to push Carr's play to a higher level, not just someone to sit around and draw a paycheck.QUOTE]

The time for that has come and passed in my opinion. You should know how I feel about Carr.

 

[MorKnolle]

Didn't Brady take over when Bledsoe got hurt? The Patriots weren't disappointed with Bledsoe's performance, he had some great seasons there, but the team never went anywhere. I don't think the team's success had so much to do with Brady being the QB vs. Bledsoe, I think much more of it had to do with bringing in the new coaching staff and building up the rest of the team, and I also agree that this is different because Brady was a 6th round pick that was meant to be a backup, not a #1 overall that was going to get paid $60 million to sit the bench for a year or two and everntually was supposed to replace their starting QB, he was supposed to be the backup, got an opportunity because of an injury, and he took full advantage of the situation he was put in, not to mention he had a great team around him within a year or so and had one of the best coaching staffs ever leading the way.

 

[Vinny]

My take on the Patriots is on their current front office on how they have built and continue build this team. Your take on Bledsoe amplifies my point on the development of a QB selected with the #1.

If you think the odds are low with the elite prospects...just try building your QB stable by waiting on the lesser prospects later in the draft. The odds of finding a franchise calibler QB are much much lower and your wait will likely be much much longer.

 

[Kaiser Toro]

If you think the odds are low with the elite prospects...just try building your QB stable by waiting on the lesser prospects later in the draft. The odds of finding a franchise calibler QB are much much lower and your wait will likely be much much longer.

I kind of feel like I am in a Ratt video right now, Round and Round. I'm exhausted, we both know what we each would like to do and we are most likely not going to sway one another. Que sera sera and I will be a fan regardless.

 

[thunderkyss]

Steve Young
Jake Plummer
Doug Williams
Jim Plunkett

There are other examples of QBs that have been on poor teams, bounced around and landed on a good team, and subsequently made the Pro Bowl and/or Super Bowl with good performances:

Chris Chandler (on terrible teams (IND, TB, PHO, HOU), then goes to ATL and performs well. Made Pro Bowl two years in a row and Super Bowl in 1998.

Doug Flutie is a guy that has bounced around, has shown considerable potential throughout his career, and when he's been on poor teams, his stats have reflected it. When he has a surrounding cast (and gets a chance to play), he's actually put up some good full seasons.

Rich Gannon was drafted by a bad Minnesota team. He never amounted to much, yet people kept saying he was a better QB than people gave him credit for. Once he got to a good team, you know the rest.

Steve McNair is a guy that sat on the bench to learn. All the learning in the world didn't help at all until the team around him was fixed. He put up pretty pedestrian numbers and ran a lot. When the team around him improved, he went tot he Pro Bowl, Super Bowl, and won co-MVP (not in that order). If the Titans had lost patience with him and shipped him off .......

Anyway, if you're having problems finding another QB, perhaps you should work on your methodology. There are plenty more stories of QBs that were drafted by bad teams and went on to make a solid career for themselves once that team (or a different one to which they were traded) improved around them. It's a team sport and the QB, whoever it is, always gets too much blame when things are going poorly and too much credit when things are going well.

If any of those guys were traded inside of 4 years, they don't count. That goes to prove my point. None of those guys were starters for 4 years, performing like Carr, and not getting traded. None except for Plummer, who was given a fifth year to get his stock up, like I think we should give Carr.

If you like Carr, and want him to succeed, all these examples in your post is evidence that we need to trade him. It would be the best thing to do for David, and it'll be the Best thing to do for the Texans.

 

[Double Barrel]

Carr will cost us big when we pick him up. We aren't spending less money if we take Young or take any other first round pick. I see your argument though. It's not a bad one, and I think it has a bit of merit...here are a few words from Keith at HPF...I consider Keith one of the brightest football minds regardless of team affiliation on the net...

You make a very valid point, along with that article by Keith at HPF. When looked at through the perspective that Carr will be one of the top paid QBs in the league, it definitely makes you have to stop and think for a second.

In spite of being on a really bad team, the key is determining if Carr has what it takes to eventually be an elite QB worthy of that paycheck. It's tough to sift through the evidence, because so many things work in tandem with each other on a team sport.

But if you asked me point blank, does Carr deserve elite QB money, at this point and seeing what we have seen, I'd have to give an honest answer of "no" right now.

It's a gamble no matter what we do. But it does appear that keeping Carr/drafting Bush has higher stakes at the poker table, because the amount of money tied up in two players can really hinder a team's ability to acquire more talent around them. And without those key pieces being added, no amount of potential is going to win games.

 

[thunderkyss]

I agree to an extent, but it is a prodcutivity per head calculation. Any CEO would be hesitant to spend so much money knowing that any ROI would not kick in until year two or three if at all. I just think we are better off taking a QB in the late rounds and develop them at a small price tag or bring in a veteran QB that has been in the league and just needs to be tweaked.

Once I am only speaking in football terms, not licensing, tickets, etc.

RonDayne, Cedric Benson, Ricky Williams, Marshall Faulk..... none of them did as good as Dominik Davis his Rookie season, or the three years following. None of them.
You can't gaurantee any of your first round picks are going to pay off their rookie season, unless he's on Defense.

Byron Leftwhich, Daunte Culpepper, Donavan Mcnabb were all very impressive their rookie year. At least they bought the organization at least two years to get it right.

 

[GoBlue]

If you could trade Carr right now for any QB in the league OUTSIDE OF THE TOP TEN, who would you rather have? I just don't have that much of a problem paying him the 9th or 10th highest salary because I think the potential is still there. Exclude these top ten QB's then tell me who you would rather have:

1. Peyton Manning
2. Carson Palmer
3. Donovan McNabb
4. Tom Brady
5. Ben Rothlesberger
6. Michael Vick
7. Eli Manning
8. Daunte Culpepper
9. Jake Plummer
10. Byron Leftwich

who wants Kyle Boller? anyone for Rex Grossman? how about a slow footed Drew Bledsoe behind our line?

I just think Carr has the ability to do more once more weapons arrive (Bush) and maybe our defense can improve so they don't have to score 30 pts to win every week.

 

[stevo3883]

RonDayne, Cedric Benson, Ricky Williams, Marshall Faulk..... none of them did as good as Dominik Davis his Rookie season, or the three years following. None of them.
You can't gaurantee any of your first round picks are going to pay off their rookie season, unless he's on Defense.

Byron Leftwhich, Daunte Culpepper, Donavan Mcnabb were all very impressive their rookie year. At least they bought the organization at least two years to get it right.

Culpepper didnt play any his rookie year
mcnabb threw for 948 yds and 8td 7int
leftwich was decent with 2800yds 14tds

 

[eriadoc]

If any of those guys were traded inside of 4 years, they don't count. That goes to prove my point. None of those guys were starters for 4 years, performing like Carr, and not getting traded. None except for Plummer, who was given a fifth year to get his stock up, like I think we should give Carr.

If you like Carr, and want him to succeed, all these examples in your post is evidence that we need to trade him. It would be the best thing to do for David, and it'll be the Best thing to do for the Texans.

Actually, it's evidence that once the team improves, you'll see better numbers from Carr. McNair's numbers were not good for his first four years and the team didn't trade him, because they recognized that the team sucked. Doug Williams had a season or two out of several (6 or 7, I think) with the Bucs and the team never improved, so they traded him. He went on to QB a Super Bowl team while the Bucs still sucked for the next 10 years. Flutie's another example of a guy that's posted pedestrian numbers with his current team and then had great years with the same team before he was traded. There are plenty more examples.

 

[Porky]

If you could trade Carr right now for any QB in the league OUTSIDE OF THE TOP TEN, who would you rather have? I just don't have that much of a problem paying him the 9th or 10th highest salary because I think the potential is still there. Exclude these top ten QB's then tell me who you would rather have:

1. Peyton Manning
2. Carson Palmer
3. Donovan McNabb
4. Tom Brady
5. Ben Rothlesberger
6. Michael Vick
7. Eli Manning
8. Daunte Culpepper
9. Jake Plummer
10. Byron Leftwich

who wants Kyle Boller? anyone for Rex Grossman? how about a slow footed Drew Bledsoe behind our line?

I just think Carr has the ability to do more once more weapons arrive (Bush) and maybe our defense can improve so they don't have to score 30 pts to win every week.

Ok, I will take the bait. Yes, I would take Grossman. I will add Jake Delhomme, Matt Hasselbeck, Marc Bulger, Drew Brees, Chad Pennington, and Jake Plummer. A couple of others I might think about, such as Mark Brunell, but age is a concern.

 

[MorKnolle]

If you could trade Carr right now for any QB in the league OUTSIDE OF THE TOP TEN, who would you rather have? I just don't have that much of a problem paying him the 9th or 10th highest salary because I think the potential is still there. Exclude these top ten QB's then tell me who you would rather have:

1. Peyton Manning
2. Carson Palmer
3. Donovan McNabb
4. Tom Brady
5. Ben Rothlesberger
6. Michael Vick
7. Eli Manning
8. Daunte Culpepper
9. Jake Plummer
10. Byron Leftwich

who wants Kyle Boller? anyone for Rex Grossman? how about a slow footed Drew Bledsoe behind our line?

I just think Carr has the ability to do more once more weapons arrive (Bush) and maybe our defense can improve so they don't have to score 30 pts to win every week.

I would even rather have Carr than a couple guys on this list, I'd rather have Carr than Leftwich, Culpepper (he seems pretty useless without having the best WR in the league to throw balls at and is turnover prone), probably rather have Carr than Michael Vick, and for now I'd rather have him than Eli, maybe that will change in a couple years as Eli develops, assuming David doesn't develop as well under Kubiak. Hasselbeck and Brees could be added to this list and give Carr a run in my books.