Who's your QB next week...next year
 

So, how long is Savage out?
If he's available, does he get the start over Keenum?
Does Keenum get another shot for next year?
Does Fitz get another shot?

Me personally, I'm dropping Fitz...taking my chances on the Keenum, Savage, Mallet trio...

I can't see us drafting another mid round QB.

This team is a QB and a solid slot receiver away from a deep run into the playoffs.

Probably have to roll out Keenum versus the Jaguars, but next season I would much rather have Savage over Keenum.

I think this becomes Mallett's team in 2015. I don't know enough yet about any viable options early in the draft that could tempt the Texans, and there isn't really a potential veteran expected to be on the market that wows me either. And I agree, another mid-round QB who would be behind Savage in terms of development isn't going to do more than take up a spot on the practice squad.

Savage and Fitz are coming back to camp next year, though that does not mean either are guaranteed a roster spot.

Probably Mallett. His injury and missing out on enough time to judge him is probably the biggest downer of 2014.

I don't mind if Fitz comes back. I hope O'Brien falls in love with a QB in the draft.

After what happened this year with the QB injury bug, I think they gotta go with keeping three on the 53 next year with maybe a fourth on the PS.

I think Mallet has the inside track to be the starter going into 2015. I think Savage did nothing to discourage his chances of sticking around for future development. So, that leaves Fitz (more $$$, more experience) or Keenum (less $$$, less experience) as the #2. Keenum can certainly help himself with a good passing performance against the Jags..... so, maybe this can be better answered next week or during the off season...

I agree that Mallett should be re-signed and should go into the offseason at least competing for the starting job. Just based on how little they had to give up to get him I don't think he'd be a hot free agent despite his strong showing against the Browns, and if he's smart he'll recognize this is a good situation for him.

I don't think Keenum did anything yesterday that would put him back into the mix long-term. I think they're comfortable with Fitzpatrick as the veteran backup and his $3.8 million against the cap next year isn't unreasonable for a team that won't be spending much (relatively) on the QB position.

In free agency, there should be former first-rounders (Jake Locker, Christian Ponder, Blaine Gabbert) who could be viewed as reclamation projects available on the cheap and some guys who have had some success (Mark Sanchez, Brian Hoyer) but nobody really intriguing.

It'll be interesting to see how Savage progresses, and I agree that the wildcard is if there's some QB in the draft who they really like.

Didn't see the TV broadcast, so I don't know how evident this was to those viewing the game vs. the Ravens at home, but Mallett was active before the game talking to teammates, the during the game on the sideline. Wearing a sling, meeting guys coming off the field, talking them up... generally acting like someone who wants to be here and be a future leader of the team.

So I'm guessing that Mallett definitely realizes this is the best situation for him, and I doubt it will take top dollar to keep him around. I'd actually endorse signing him to more than just another 1- or 2-year deal. The cap is growing, and taking a gamble on a guy who is a vet and fits O'Brien's physical model of an ideal passer would be a huge win if Mallett really turns out to be the long-term starter and could play for a friendly cap value.

Never thought I'd ever say that about Mallett pre-trade. Brave new world.

I saw this during the game and had the same reaction you did. It's weird, 'smart' is not something the general consensus ascribes to Scantron Mallett but who knows? He looked damn good that one game. Savage also looked pretty good for a rookie rushed into action for the few plays we got to see him.

The worst quarterback to play a down for the team this year is also oddly the most likable.

Foster? :p

Seriously, I'd love for Keenum to have his T. J. Yates moment in Houston and then ride off into the sunset holding a clipboard.

Mallett is the most likely keeper but the one we have least control over. Do we keep Fitz for another year? Don't really see the harm unless we desperately need to cap relief or we draft/sign a genuine starter.

I honestly don't see them keeping Fitz. While he's not tying a lot money, the money he is earmarked for could be used elsewhere. Keep in mind, even though the cap will go up, and even if they cut AJ and JJoe or reduce their salaries, Watt's salary jumps to like $17MM and they have to sign Mallett, KJax (they HAVE to re-sign him. can't keep letting decent young players walk), and others. I think Fitz's money ends up going to someone else.

As for backup QB, I think Keenum really impressed BOB this last week in practice and the game with his leadership and I could see him being the #2 or #3 backup next year with Savage taking the other backup spot. This next game could go a long way in determining that. Even if Keenum's not here, I think I'd rather try to rebuild someone like Ponder or Locker than have another year of Fitz.

I doubt Ponder and Locker cost less than Fitz. Backup QBs get paid. It is tempting to go cheap at the backup QB spot, and it's a great idea until you need one.

As for Keenum, if he had impressed O'Brien in practice I would suspect he'd have been counted on to throw the ball versus half back passes and wildcat formations.

Fitz might be gone, but I sure hope we don't cut a $4 million QB for salary purposes unless it's to spend on another QB. This team played amazing and caught every possible break and without a QB we are nothing more than a feel good story happy to miss the playoffs by a bit.

If we come back with Mallett/Keenum/Savage I will descend to Chuck levels of frustration (I do understand your POV Chuck despite giving you a hard time lately, plus it's easy for me since I don't follow any other Houston teams and I have no Oilers history). That QB triad as a plan to enter the season would be a huge slap in the face to the fan base and other players on the roster.

This year we were 21st as a team in QBR. Every playoff team finished ahead of us (including Arizona). Every team we finished ahead of is a QB disaster. There is no way we can reasonably expect to win games without getting much better at QB.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/qbr/_/type/team-season

Mallett was actually worse than Fitz, and predictably Keenum and Savage were worse than Mallett. I may have enough faith in Mallett based on his first start to bring him back, but nowhere near enough to bet a playoff roster and season on Ryan Mallett (or Case Keenum obviously).

This team will go nowhere without a QB. That is obvious. What is not obvious is why anyone would bet a whole season that one of our bad/mediocre QBs might be just average enough to get from 9 to 10 wins next year.

I've been slapped so hard and often by this team that my face must be getting numb.

Bringing these three back is the path of least resistance. Yes, this team needs an Aaron Rogers, Andrew Luck... some super talented QB, but please let us know who that player is that will be reasonably available to the Texans this offseason.

That player seems to be a unicorn, at least this offseason.

Anyone think the Pats might make Tom Brady available? And if so, what's he worth to the Texans?

You bring up valid points, but I don't think BOB is so enamored with Fitz that he's a lock to be the backup, or, heaven forbid, the starter next year. If they don't make a change at starter and Fitz is the guy, it will alienate more fans than at least trying to tap into the potential of or resurrect Mallett/Savage/Ponder/Locker/Glennon/Plug-in-name-here. I can't imagine any of those guys would turn down ~$4MM-$8MM on a 1 or 2 year deal knowing that they might hit gold on a fairly good team who is as needy as the Texans are for an upgrade at QB. Again, I'm not saying I want any of these guys or that they're the answer. I'm just saying I don't think the percentages of Fitz being back are as high as some do.

EDIT: Sorry, Keith posted after barrett. This in reply to barrett's post.

I will be far more irritated with another zero-production draft than I will be with a Mallett/Keenum/Savage quarterback arrangement. I recognize that the quarterback play is holding the team back but as Keith says I just don't know where they can get an elite guy right now.

I have no idea where we could get a great QB. But I was under the impression we were paying millions of dollars to multiple people to expressly answer that question.

Additionally, I cannot give a pass to the logic, "it seems hard to get a QB right now so we better not try." At least not when said logic is applied year after year. I think BOB can really coach but it would be a gutless move to declare for a 2nd year in a row there was no QB answer out there. You're a head coach who got hired as an offensive mind and a QB guru. So go get your QB and start coaching him.

He may have already done that, which is why I'm not on the Get a QB at all costs train. If BOB believes in Mallett, that's good enough for me. If he doesn't, well, I guess you're trusting Rick Smith to find you a franchise quarterback.

If he believes in Mallett I don't know why it took as long as it did to replace Fitz. But maybe it was just patience.

If Mallett is BOB's guy than I want to hear that all offseason. Go all in with him or get a QB. And honestly I don't care if it is another mid round guy or a reclamation. Maybe we unearth a Russell Wilson or a Rich Gannon. I doubt it but I am okay with trying. I don't have to see a 1st round pick or a high priced FA. I just don't want to see a team with terrible QB production miss out on the playoffs and maybe more due to that lack of QB production, and then bring back the same guys who provided that lack of QB production and act like they expect something different.

Here's a thought. Maybe Clowney has a full recovery and plays 2-way and on offense becomes our franchise QB we so desperately need. I'm only saying this now to say it before the Chcukster says it, because he's been practically effusive in his praise for the Texans lately.

Most probable scenario: Texans choose between a limited Brian Hoyer and a fragile Sam Bradford on a two-year deal and hope for the best. They let Fitz go and sign Mallett as backup while they continue to develop him. If the Texans reach for Kyle Orton, you'll know there was no market out there.

I just don't see anything out there that makes me want any retread more than I want Mallett. Yes, we're working with a spectacularly small sample size but Mallett has a huge arm and in the game he was healthy he made all the correct decisions and quickly. If that's the real Mallett then why the hell would we want Sam Bradford? I mean, I MIGHT look at Nick Foles if the Eagles are foolish enough to let him go. No, you know, I would take Nick Foles. But that's about it.

I wouldn't go near Hoyer or Bradford. I have never liked Foles either. I think he is cursed to spend the rest of his career chasing the flukish half season he had in Philly last year. Not to mention Foles has probably been hurt more than Bradford.

What are the chances Kaepernick is available? I doubt any new coach wants to pay him $20 million per year and his contract has an easy out for SF. If big arm and big body are BOB traits he definitely has those.

But I like Mallett coming back, I just don't think one above average one and one bad one that was impacted by injury should be our whole plan.

So, you're Rick Smith and you have five options to fix your QB dilemma:

1) Retain Fitz, Savage and Keenum for 2015 and see what you can get.
2) Re-sign Mallett to a free agent contract and hand him the keys.
3) Sign another free agent QB, maybe Hoyer.
4) Trade for a QB. RG3 is probably available for less than you'd think.
5) Draft a QB knowing that Mariota and Winston are probably off limits and won't be ready next year.

Which way would you roll?

I'd go ask Bill O'Brien what he thinks?

I guess no obvious way forward at this time.

Open competition with whoever is here?

I don't really see this as a dilemma at all. This seems to me to be the only rational way forward - Mallett, Savage, late round rookie or scrap heap FA.

I bear no ill will towards Fitzpatrick. He seems to be a great dude and I will always remember his lighting up Reliant Stadium. As a Rams rookie. Good times. But that is and was a dead end and everybody knew it.

Sam Bradford may be available in trade:

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-...wants-him-back

1. Go get Payton Manning. He's stalling because he really doesn't want to play for Kubs. He would be perfect for this team, we have stud receivers , te's , a good run game and a stellar defense.
2. In the highly unlikely event 1. doesn't happen, I would draft Petty in the second round. Have Mallett start, but have a good, viable option in case he gets injured often. I honestly think Keenum and Fitz are a wash, keep the cheaper option.

I see 1 and 2 as our best options that are available, and the most likely to happen.
The only thing I don't see in #1 is Keenum being around. If I were him, I sure wouldn't resign here, I would latch on to another team that better suits his style in hopes of making the 53 out of camp. He won't be that here.

Interesting read on Bradford (and it's not pretty if you're a Bradford proponent):

http://www.sharpfootballanalysis.com/blog/

Not to go off topic, but I'm curious if the Texans use this kind of analytics - for any position. If not, they should.

Maybe it's this guy...

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2...eard-about-yet

Wouldn't mind taking a late-round flier on him.

Looks like Bonner will end up at some NFL teams training camp. who knows.

After seeing what the Brownies gave McCown, Mallet's agent is salivating. Can't believe they gave him that kind of scratch. Not sure that we would be able to compete with a Buffalo offer, which has a whole lotta room they have to spend.

I wouldn't be surprised if he doesn't end up getting something goofy in the neighborhood of 3 years, 20ish, with 9 gtd. That is a scary proposition for someone with such limited exposure to live action. Desperate times call for desperate measures, and we aren't the only QB needy team in the league.

It puts the Fitzpatrick deal so many complained about into perspective.

As for what it means for Mallet, not that much. Mallett is neither a veteran nor a mentor. That means no team is going to sign him to a deal bigger than (or even as big as) McCown, unless it is to be the starter. McCown got guaranteed money for the same reason Fitz did, if they start that's ok, but if they don't, they still fit and have value. Mallett is not going to mentor a young kid with his 50 career attempts. He plays or he has no value.

And nobody is likely to make him option 1A other than us. If you are another team you can draft a rookie on the 2nd/3rd day who is just as proven and gets paid nothing for the next 3-4 years.

Plus I think we are the only team running a NE offense except NE, and they are set at both QBs.

I seriously don't think Mallett has half as much value to anyone else as he has to us. I wouldn't be surprised by a 1-2 year deal where he bets on himself to win the job and get paid 5 times more a year from now.

Disagree with what it means for Mallett. McCown has zero upside. None, and just about every one knows it. Mallett is an unknown, similar to a draft pick but has a couple of years of league experience. In a QB starved league, I'd bet GM's would rather roll the dice with a Mallett than a McCown type.

Guessing we will see for sure in the next couple of weeks.

I think he has far more upside than McCown. I just don't think he will get top end backup money, that goes to caretaker/mentor types who can start but who can also be happy and productive in the background.

And I don't think any GM is going to hook their wagon to him in a big time deal when they could just go to the draft and spend a late pick and none of the money.

So he either signs a deal as part of a poo poo platter of QBs somewhere (a team gets 3-4 mediocre ones and lets them fight it out), or he re-signs here with an inside track. The guy was shopped for the whole preseason last year and we got him for a 7th because nobody else wanted him. Then he played one game and got hurt with a season ending injury that has a tendency to re-occur. It is a super thin QB market and guys worse than Rick Smith have jobs out there, so anything is possible, but I would guess he gets no more than McCown.

Cleveland just gave Josh McGowan 3 year, 14 mil, 6.25 guaranteed contract for 35 year old QB. so Mallett likely to get more than that .

I understand what Barrett is saying. I would probably offer Mallett a structured deal that allows him more money based on starts for probably a 3-yr contract. Start 12 or more games, we pay you x. Less than 12 because you got IR'd, we pay you y. Less than 12 but more than 8, we pay you z. Have some other incentives put in it and then a higher guarantee figure to make it marketable.

It would be tricky but it can be done. There has to be rewards for Mallett if he excels and safeguards for the Texans if he doesn't.

I'd go with Mallet (of course) and I expect to hear some breaking news within the next few days/week on his future.

I'd keep Keenum (cheaper than Fitz) and Savage as 2a and 2b and hope that Mallet stays healthy and neither sees the field. Although, if the Texans have their eye on an early round QB such as Petty, then it could be Mallet with Savage/Petty as the backups...

Like I said, McCown's deal meant nothing for Mallett. Veteran backups get paid. You only get paid for potential if a team is investing the future in you and it was obvious no team was going to do that for Mallett. I think this is the perfect deal for Mallett and for Houston.

I have mixed feelings on Hoyer. I think he's generally terrible and just does not have the accuracy to play NFL football. But he has the traits you want in your backup and BOB obviously likes him. Oh well.

One thing today's events do is probably make getting a QB in the draft a non-priority, in fact, they may just skip QB all together....

Yep, you were right, and I was wrong. Given the status of the available QB market, I assumed more people would be willing to gamble on an unknown than the slew of mediocre knowns. Not sure I agree with it, but that's certainly what happened.

I don't think it is necessarily smart what happened. I just think head coaches usually only get to miss on a QB of the future once. GM's usually get two chances.

If you sign a veteran backup it is not considered missing. He was never supposed to be the answer. Chip Kelly just paid Mark Sanchez a 2nd time after he was bad last year and he still won't be judged until he gets the QB he wants.

But if you sign a guy to actual money based on potential (or draft a guy with a valuable pick), you are making a public bet he is the guy and the clock starts running on you.

So while it would have been smarter for all those teams to go after Mallett vs known mediocrities like Fitz/Hoyer/McCown/Sanchez/etc... Self-preservation says you grab a vet and keep your options open. And I seriously think the majority of the moves in the NFL have as much to do with GM/HC reputation as they do actual talent. These guys know if they play by the rules and fail they get away with it for a while, but if they rock the boat and fail they get fired.